SURROUND SPEAKERS - Bipole, Dipole, Quadpole, Omnipole... WHICH ONE? - Page 31 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!



View Poll Results: There are many surround speakers out there now, but the ones below would have to get my highest reco
Mirage OMD5 (or any other Mirage Omnipole) 43 21.50%
JBL P520WS / Infinity ES-250 / Infinity Classia C255ES (Dual-monopole for 4 channels from 2 speakers, but also Bipole & Dipole switchable) 14 7.00%
Axiom QS8 or QS4 (Unique Quadpole design) 52 26.00%
Paradigm ADP (Many models available with this design, where the tweeters run Dipole, but the woofers are Bipole) 36 18.00%
Monitor Audio BXFX or RXFX (Single woofer, but the tweeters can switch to either Dipole or Bipole) 21 10.50%
Monitor Audio GXFX (6 drivers, including a ribbon. (Monopole / Dipole switchable) 21 10.50%
KEF 26/2DS (Dipole only, alas... but with two 6.5 inch side woofers and a front-firing 8 inch!!! ) 17 8.50%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 200. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
 21Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #901 of 934 Old 03-25-2015, 03:57 AM
Member
 
mekump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
If you haven't seen it already, this post is pretty good:

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=170720
Thank you for the link.

Think I will try the surround speakers on the back wall, maybe starting at 6' high from the floor.

I am looking at using either the DefTech SR8040BP or the Klipsch RP-240S.
mekump is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #902 of 934 Old 04-06-2015, 06:13 AM
Newbie
 
pongaselo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Ca. wine country
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis View Post
<p>I think it's time to start a thread discussing &amp; promoting the use of DIPOLE surround speakers in 5.1 and 7.1 systems.<br><br>
I've used many different types of speakers as surrounds. But until recently, I always thought that regular front-firing speakers were better for the surrounds, as they were a closer match to the fronts.<br><br>
Damn... was I wrong!<br><br>
After trying out a few types of dipoles and bipoles, I wonder why everyone doesn't have dipoles in their system. I'm also amazed that more hi-fi shops don't sell or push them... or even KNOW about them, as is all too often the case here in Australia !<br><br>
Quick Definitions....<br><br>
BIPOLE :<br>
A good bi-pole speaker will have two sets of drivers facing away from each other, firing sound out into the room. This sound will then cover a wider area, and bounce off the side and back walls, helping to create a bigger sound that allows more people in the room to "get surrounded".<br><br>
DIPOLE :<br>
The same as bi-pole , but the drivers on either side of the speaker will run out-of-phase with each other. THX recommend this. The advantage is that it's harder to tell exactly where the speaker is as it sounds more diffuse. It's also harder for you to get ear-bashed by one of the surround speakers if you're stuck sitting off to one side. So opens up the "sweet spot".<br><br>
So here are some advantages...<br><br>
1. A wider, bigger sound - much closer to the result you get from multiple surround speakers in a movie theatre.<br>
2. A much wider listening sweet spot for everyone in the room.<br>
3. They're easy to wall-mount.<br>
4. They're often more compact than a regular bookshelf speaker, and a lot more wall-friendly.<br><br>
Here's an interesting shoot-out between dipoles and front-firing speakers. There are six pages with pictures. This will link to the summary...<br><a href="http://www.hometheatermag.com/bootcamp/25/index5.html" target="_blank">http://www.hometheatermag.com/bootcamp/25/index5.html</a><br><br>
Here's some more blurb: "The Case for Dipole surrounds":<br><a href="http://www.paradigm.com/en/pdf/dipolar_confusion.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.paradigm.com/en/pdf/dipolar_confusion.pdf</a><br><br>
One issue dipoles can have compared to bipole or front-firing speakers, is reduced bass. This is because the bass drivers are running out-of-phase with each other. Be aware though, that several manufacturers make dipoles that avoid this problem....<br><br>
PARADIGM really know how to make great surround speakers. Their ADP190 would have to be my favourite all-round surround speaker for the majority of people. Paradigm design all their surround speakers so that the deeper bass is kept in phase....<br><a href="http://www.paradigm.com/en/paradigm/speaker-type-surrounds.paradigm" target="_blank">http://www.paradigm.com/en/paradigm/...ounds.paradigm</a><br><br>
MONITOR AUDIO also make nice surround speakers. The less expensive models have only one bass driver, but they can be switched between dipole and bipole, like this one...<br><a href="http://www.monitoraudiousa.com/product.php?range=3&amp;product=21" target="_blank">http://www.monitoraudiousa.com/produ...e=3&amp;product=21</a><br><br>
JBL make some THX-approved models...<br><a href="http://www.jbl.com/home/products/category.aspx?CatId=SSS&amp;Language=ENG&amp;Count ry=US&amp;Region=USA" target="_blank">http://www.jbl.com/home/products/cat...=US&amp;Region=USA</a><br><br>
INFINITY make a unique speaker called the ES250. I own a pair of these. They can be switched between dipole, bipole and dual-monopole, where they operate as two separate speaker channels in one wall-mounted unit. Handy for 7.1 where you can't mount rear-wall speakers....<br><a href="http://www.infinitysystems.com/home/products/product_detail.aspx?prod=BETAES250BK&amp;cat=SAS&a mp;ser=BET&amp;Language=ENG&amp;Region=USA&amp;Cou ntry=US" target="_blank">http://www.infinitysystems.com/home/...USA&amp;Country=US</a><br><br>
JBL now make one just like the Infinity...<br><a href="http://www.jbl.com/home/products/product_detail.aspx?prod=P52OWS&amp;Language=ENG&a mp;Country=US&amp;Region=USA&amp;cat=SSS&amp;ser=P ER" target="_blank">http://www.jbl.com/home/products/pro...at=SSS&amp;ser=PER</a><br><br><br>
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR SUGGESTIONS?</p>
I only use dipoles when speaker location for the rears is limited. In small or narrow rooms they give a depth to the rear audio information. When I am not dealing with acoustic issues due to location, geometry of the room etc. I always use a conventional rear and my favorite will surprise you. I absolutely love the Paradigm Stylus 370s but not the newest ones. The highs are hard with them. They are versatile to mount, efficient, can be run as a "large" speaker and have a nicely balanced voicing with respectable midbass. They also, and this you only get from a monopole speaker, give a beautiful sense of location for rear action or well engineered surround music. Probably my favorite speaker from Paradigm. I am not a fan of how they voice speakers in general. Too Klipschy on the top end.
pongaselo is offline  
post #903 of 934 Old 04-12-2015, 08:29 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Electric_Haggis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,018
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
From what I've read on the newer, upcoming object-oriented audio formats (like Dolby Atmos and DTS Multi-dimensional Audio... it really looks like exact timbre matching monopoles are the surround speakers of choice due to the type of mixing done.
FYI
The highly directionalized height/depth/width metadata rendering "cues" are embedded in the track and these codecs work with more speakers (true overhead height quadrants included), so it appears dipole surrounds would improperly introduce an added smearing effect to these types of advanced soundtracks.
FYI
True with Dipoles. In that respect, their day is over.

But not Bipoles.

The question you always have to ask is this... How many surround speakers does a commercial cinema or mixing theatre have, and how many surround speakers are you using at home?

This is the single question that too many people forget when sorting out their surrounds.

I also want to reiterate that having 2 pairs of surrounds (side & rear), then using Prologic IIx to convert all 5.1 material to 7.1 is the single biggest improvement most people can make to their surround soundstaging. Period.






By the way, very fond of these Paradigm's when it comes to sheer quality, design, build, driver arrangement, looks, and sheer bang for buck.
These are surround speakers that I'd recommend to many folks....

Paradigm Surround 1

Paradigm Surround 3

GLBright likes this.

Last edited by Electric_Haggis; 04-12-2015 at 08:41 PM.
Electric_Haggis is offline  
post #904 of 934 Old 04-12-2015, 08:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 12,413
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3135 Post(s)
Liked: 1594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis View Post
True with Dipoles. In that respect, their day is over.

But not Bipoles.

The question you always have to ask is this... How many surround speakers does a commercial cinema or mixing theatre have, and how many surround speakers are you using at home?

This is the single question that too many people forget when sorting out their surrounds.

I also want to reiterate that having 2 pairs of surrounds (side & rear), then using Prologic IIx to convert all 5.1 material to 7.1 is the single biggest improvement most people can make to their surround soundstaging. Period.

By the way, VERY font of these Paradigm's when it comes to sheer quality, design, build, driver arrangement, looks, and sheer bang for buck.
These are surround speakers that I'd recommend to many folks....

Paradigm Surround 1

Paradigm Surround 3

However, you can (over time) have more speakers than 7.1 or even 9.1 with the scalability of Dolby Atmos and DTS:X (they can have arrays just like in a commercial theater). Bipoles may not be too bad if you're sitting extremely close to the surrounds, but monopoles are still recommended for the 3D object based formats if possible.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #905 of 934 Old 04-12-2015, 08:48 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Electric_Haggis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,018
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
However, you can (over time) have more speakers than 7.1 or even 9.1 with the scalability of Dolby Atmos and DTS:X (they can have arrays just like in a commercial theater). Bipoles may not be too bad if you're sitting extremely close to the surrounds, but monopoles are still recommended for the 3D object based formats if possible.
Again, the thing is that you're supplanting entire speaker arrays with just 1,2 or 3 pairs.

I've spoken to a couple of pro film soundies, who agree that Bipoles (NOT Dipoles) are a good solution even with Atmos at the domestic level


Also worth noting that the vast, vast, vast minority of material available to us all is actually Atmos-encoded.
(and a mere fraction of that is actually worth watching, even if it is good demo material: )


But, be it an A-List mega-blockbuster or a foreign indie rom-com.... ALL 5.1 material will benefit from doing what I describe above.
GLBright likes this.

Last edited by Electric_Haggis; 04-12-2015 at 09:16 PM.
Electric_Haggis is offline  
post #906 of 934 Old 04-23-2015, 07:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
blazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 3,495
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 716 Post(s)
Liked: 522
This thread needs to be un-stickied and replaced with a single informative post...

Surround monopole speakers should be used with all modern codecs and should be placed an adequate distance from your head. The exact positioning would benefit from conforming as closely as possible to rules laid out Dolby Atmos and DTS X.

In the long run, speaker placement for surrounds will be about putting in as many speakers as possible while covering the surface area of hemispheric area as evenly as possibly around the main listening position.

Anyone building today should wire for around 24 speaker locations or more. Wire is cheap.

A plan for pointing the speakers toward the main listening position is reasonable although not 100% necessary if the speaker has reasonable off axis response.

I would recommend 3 layers of speakers: one set at ear level, another set high on the wall, and another set on the ceiling. You could also compromise by choosing the height+vog OR ceiling layer. Honestly, if you are wealthy enough or care enough to do this right, do 3 layers and be done with it. You will have a lifetime of enjoyment out of this setup. No need to get stingy at this point.

If you love surround sound, object oriented audio is well worth the effort. "7.1" will sound obviously inferior once you are used to 15+ channels.

Past object oriented surround, doing "more" within our lifetimes doesn't seem particularly very likely. Speakers are commodity objects with a fixed cost and the laws of physics would suggest that we are unlikely to change their general design too much more... Object oriented audio is what we have all been silently been waiting for... go for it!

Blazar!
blazar is offline  
post #907 of 934 Old 05-11-2015, 02:07 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazar View Post
This thread needs to be un-stickied and replaced with a single informative post...

Surround monopole speakers should be used with all modern codecs and should be placed an adequate distance from your head. The exact positioning would benefit from conforming as closely as possible to rules laid out Dolby Atmos and DTS X.

In the long run, speaker placement for surrounds will be about putting in as many speakers as possible while covering the surface area of hemispheric area as evenly as possibly around the main listening position.

Anyone building today should wire for around 24 speaker locations or more. Wire is cheap.

A plan for pointing the speakers toward the main listening position is reasonable although not 100% necessary if the speaker has reasonable off axis response.

I would recommend 3 layers of speakers: one set at ear level, another set high on the wall, and another set on the ceiling. You could also compromise by choosing the height+vog OR ceiling layer. Honestly, if you are wealthy enough or care enough to do this right, do 3 layers and be done with it. You will have a lifetime of enjoyment out of this setup. No need to get stingy at this point.

If you love surround sound, object oriented audio is well worth the effort. "7.1" will sound obviously inferior once you are used to 15+ channels.

Past object oriented surround, doing "more" within our lifetimes doesn't seem particularly very likely. Speakers are commodity objects with a fixed cost and the laws of physics would suggest that we are unlikely to change their general design too much more... Object oriented audio is what we have all been silently been waiting for... go for it!
Hi,

I've ordered two Focal Electra SR 1000 BE surround speakers. They will go on the back wall, about 2 feet above ear height and placed about 1 1/2 feet behind my sofa. let's say the perfect spot when placed behind.
They can be used as Bipole or dual monopole.
Which would bring me the best result? setting them in Bipole and create a 5.1 system or setting them in dual monopole and creating a 7.1 system.
Placement on de side walls is not an option.
The surround on the left of me will be close to the side wall.
The surround on the right of me is about 7 feet away from the side wall.
The "back wall " is not really a wall. It's a low wall of about 3 feet high, above is open to the ceiling.
Wide open space behind the surrounds and the low wall.
Any thoughts?
BlackLace is offline  
post #908 of 934 Old 05-11-2015, 02:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 12,413
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3135 Post(s)
Liked: 1594
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackLace View Post
Hi,

I've ordered two Focal Electra SR 1000 BE surround speakers. They will go on the back wall, about 2 feet above ear height and placed about 1 1/2 feet behind my sofa. let's say the perfect spot when placed behind.
They can be used as Bipole or dual monopole.
Which would bring me the best result? setting them in Bipole and create a 5.1 system or setting them in dual monopole and creating a 7.1 system.
Placement on the side walls is not an option.
The surround on the left of me will be close to the side wall.
The surround on the right of me is about 7 feet away from the side wall.
The "back wall " is not really a wall. It's a low wall of about 3 feet high, above is open to the ceiling.
Wide open space behind the surrounds and the low wall.
Any thoughts?
Bipole. 5.1

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #909 of 934 Old 05-11-2015, 08:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
blazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 3,495
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 716 Post(s)
Liked: 522
I have never been that impressed with the dipole ambience phenomenon even though that is what THX recommended long ago for rear surround speakers. Now, in the 21st century, I can safely say monopole or maybe bipole for a slightly more diffusive sound should be considered.

Blazar!
blazar is offline  
post #910 of 934 Old 05-12-2015, 07:25 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 0
ok guys, thanks for the advice
BlackLace is offline  
post #911 of 934 Old 05-20-2015, 11:55 PM
Senior Member
 
richmagnus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: St Albans , England
Posts: 387
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 217 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazar View Post
I have never been that impressed with the dipole ambience phenomenon even though that is what THX recommended long ago for rear surround speakers. Now, in the 21st century, I can safely say monopole or maybe bipole for a slightly more diffusive sound should be considered.

Try tripole

Denon 7200,Lyngdorf TDAi 2170, Lyngdorf SDA 400's, MK MP300 LCR,MK S300T's, MK S150mk2 FH,S150T TM,Dual MK X10, Oppo 103,Sonos ZP90, Sony 65XD9305
richmagnus is offline  
post #912 of 934 Old 05-24-2015, 04:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DanHouck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Lake Chapala, old Mexico
Posts: 4,152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner View Post
If you haven't seen it already, this post isTha pretty good:

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=170720
That is excellent! I'm trying to decide if your bipoles you are selling will work in my situation. There is no "back of the room" as shown in the drawings, rather they would sit on or above a bookcase unit, above which is an opening to the great room below. I hadn't considered the possibility of facing them forward as shown in some of the schematics. If I did so, they would not be any higher than the listener.

I'm wondering if bipole option 1 or 2 would work here.

My HT is an oldie but goodie!
DanHouck is offline  
post #913 of 934 Old 07-14-2015, 03:22 PM
Member
 
KitKatHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Dothan AL. , and Zachary LA.
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I know you are going to think I am just a silly heart! I kid you not, although Tru-Audio is mostly junk, and btw that junk, the CT 55A is not so bad at $15-$25 when shipping is local, they are really not so bad as surround speakers on a small system/

Now here is the deal. The PHT SUR is really a great di-pole, bi-pole, switchable speaker. The build quality is quite good, fiber cones, not metal like the CTs, they have an 8" front firing woofer, on each side, a 4" cone and a quality 1" dome. They are marked left and right, so when you switch, you have the correct one, facing close to the rear wall switching phase. The build quality is very high and I swear these will best Axiom QS8 speakers!

Now the deal here is they have a retail at $1500, but as I read here, they have no effective market strategist system, given this, I picked up a pair for $350 shipped!

I had a better pair of di-pole speakers, do not recall the name, but high-end and these did not outperform the SUR! I sold them off for over a grand and now am happy with these.

Mainly I prefer B&W speakers, also Martin Logan; yes, I know they are different sounding and have a different appeal, then I like ML speakers for music and the midrange quality B&W for HT. I use the B&W CDM 7NT, and the CDM NT center with these seemingly odd matched Tru-Audio; I find the mating of the two brands to be near theater quality!

Ok, the gear has much to do with this and that is high-end; the SUR speakers are powered by an Anthem MCA 20 and this does well with the Bryston amplifier I use for the other speakers.

Little Denon system, Denon 2808ci
Polk M40, front and surround, CS2 center.Yamaha subwoofer
Sony 222 es SACD/CD player
Panasonic Blu-Ray player
Sony dual DVD and VCR player.
LG 46" HDTV.
KitKatHT is offline  
post #914 of 934 Old 07-27-2015, 06:38 AM
Member
 
DeePDiSHeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 2
I've always used bookshelf's for side surrounds. I think I'm finally going to try some bipoles to see if I like them.
DeePDiSHeD is offline  
post #915 of 934 Old 07-28-2015, 05:17 AM
 
fatbottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 5,916
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1420 Post(s)
Liked: 518
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeePDiSHeD View Post
I've always used bookshelf's for side surrounds. I think I'm finally going to try some bipoles to see if I like them.
I recommend bipoles if you are close to the side/surround speakers. When I used monopoles for side/surrounds I just didn't like them.
fatbottom is offline  
post #916 of 934 Old 08-27-2015, 12:18 PM
Senior Member
 
jsb75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Grand Rapids MI
Posts: 214
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I'm thinking of changing my 16 x 11 room around.right now mlp is with couch on the long wall,but I want to change it so mlp will be 6' from the rear short wall. I'm doing 5.1 and my rear speakers will have to be about 5'or so away because the room is so narrow. Would bi-poles be advised in this situation? And if so,would they work best directly to left and right of mlp,elevated about 2' from sitting position? Or back a foot or so but still on the long walls,also if I move them back they would have to be mounted near the 8'ceiling because of a window. Thanks for any opinions
jsb75 is offline  
post #917 of 934 Old 12-27-2015, 07:17 AM
Member
 
EmulousTrigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Moved

Moved

Last edited by EmulousTrigger; 12-28-2015 at 12:47 PM.
EmulousTrigger is offline  
post #918 of 934 Old 01-11-2016, 10:19 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 1
I have a post in the KEF thread, I now believe firmly in the Bipole solutions in smaller rooms.
I have just converted my KEF Q2ds from Dipole to Bipole as I now think with current information Monopole or Bipole is better with newer sound sources eg Atmos.
It was over 10 years ago I was faced with the Dipole/Bipole/Monopole issue and went Dipole due to THX influence at that time (and a typically english smallish room)
So far seems better sound placement (without being too direct as from a monopole)
And the Yammi 3040 YPAO doesn't pick up the out of phase units.

Next am gonna try a 130mm full range KEF Uni-Q in place of the downward firing woofer - seperately wired to the amp for rear presence/atmos.

Infocus SP8600 DLP, Yamaha RX A3040, Yamaha BD S1067 Blu Ray, Toshiba ET-35 HD, Kef 104.2 Main, 200C Center, Q2DS Surround, HTS 2001 Rear Surround, MA Radius 45 Front Presence 2x Kenwood SW-X1 12" Subs fitted DLS DS3004BP plate amps.
Vinyl - Technics SL1210, Goldring 1020GX, Rotel RQ870BX
aviaction is offline  
post #919 of 934 Old 01-29-2016, 09:49 AM
Member
 
ToppDogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 22
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have been running the Energy RVSS's since aound 99 and still dont see a reason to upgrade them. Bipole that old still sounds good.
ToppDogg is offline  
post #920 of 934 Old 02-26-2016, 05:54 AM
Senior Member
 
Cyberathlete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 261
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Sooooo if I currently have matching bookshelves for the surround and surround rear (7.2 setup currently). All being definitive technology SM 45. And I want to upgrade for Atmos/DTS:X. Which configuration would you suggest.
Fronts are definitive technology SM65
Center: SM65 (but just ordered the CS-8040HD to see if there is a difference)

Please quote reply with an underline for the suggested speaker:

Room dimensions:
Front row seating: 9-10 feet from screen (8-9 feet from front/center speakers)
Second Row: Seated area is 4-5 feet behind the front row
Room width: 13 feet
Room length (distance from speakers to seating has been averaged above but there is no back wall)
Height (drop ceiling): 7.5 feet
Backwall: non existent as it's the basement and that's just open space.

My two schools of thought:
If the Bipolar speaker is an option as a surround (not rear surround) speaker then I should and could place it between the two rows so neither row is in a dead zone. But there will be no back wall to bounce sound off of for the immersive effect.

If the Bipolar speaker is an option as a rear surround speaker, then the drivers can utilize the left and right walls to bounce sound off of it and use monopoles for surround.

Which options to go with:
Surround: SR-8080BP or SM 45
Rear surround: SR-8080bp or SM 45
Front height (above the Front left and right): SM 45 or SM 65
Ceiling speaker (just two of them since I have no space for 4, and thus going with Front Highs instead): DT6.5R or DT6.5STR

Thanks!

Last edited by Cyberathlete; 02-26-2016 at 06:38 AM.
Cyberathlete is offline  
post #921 of 934 Old 05-12-2016, 05:55 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 7
This is interesting. I wonder what will be next.
Marc McWilliams is offline  
post #922 of 934 Old 05-13-2016, 03:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
BuGsArEtAsTy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AVS Forum
Posts: 7,832
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 279 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis View Post
True with Dipoles. In that respect, their day is over.

But not Bipoles.

The question you always have to ask is this... How many surround speakers does a commercial cinema or mixing theatre have, and how many surround speakers are you using at home?

This is the single question that too many people forget when sorting out their surrounds.

I also want to reiterate that having 2 pairs of surrounds (side & rear), then using Prologic IIx to convert all 5.1 material to 7.1 is the single biggest improvement most people can make to their surround soundstaging. Period.
Some would argue that 5.1.2 Atmos is a much bigger upgrade than 7.1 is, when coming from 5.1.
BuGsArEtAsTy is online now  
post #923 of 934 Old 05-19-2016, 09:41 AM
Member
 
na_rsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 6
So can I use the Fluance XLBP speakers for front highs if my receiver allows it, I have the Sony 850DN and its in one of the configurations below. I don't have a sealed living room, its pretty open and connects to the back dining room and kitchen. Do't want to mount them in the rear, so think I'd get good sound in a 7.1?

See here it says you can use as rear surrounds or front high:



So it will look like this in the end

na_rsx is offline  
post #924 of 934 Old 05-25-2016, 05:45 PM
Senior Member
 
DCMlover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 299
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Do the fluance speakers sound good?
DCMlover is offline  
post #925 of 934 Old 05-25-2016, 06:28 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 12,413
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3135 Post(s)
Liked: 1594
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCMlover View Post
Do the fluance speakers sound good?
What is your budget? I'd go with SVS's Prime Series or the EMP Tek Impression Series before I went with Fluance.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #926 of 934 Old 05-25-2016, 09:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CherylJosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 579 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis View Post
I also want to reiterate that having 2 pairs of surrounds (side & rear), then using Prologic IIx to convert all 5.1 material to 7.1 is the single biggest improvement most people can make to their surround soundstaging. Period.


Comparing pliix/z 7.1 synthesis with neo:x 11.1 synthesis on my system (the receiver supports both) I can state with authority that nothing works as well as even more speakers to create the immersion effect, even if their content is all synthesized. Compared to neo:x, pliix/z also sounds boxy and bassy on my system and it seems more prone to compression artifacts from low bitrate streaming along with distortion from old damaged LPs, causing odd sounds from it too. Neo:x synthesis can be downright spooky in how accurately it decodes ambiance and steers it with a good recording.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Bipoles may not be too bad if you're sitting extremely close to the surrounds, but monopoles are still recommended for the 3D object based formats if possible.
My experience with neo:x has been that the more channels you have, the worse dipoles and bipoles will sound. I had six of them at one time (high/side/rear) and got rid of all of them because they just muddied up the sound stage. I sit no farther than 8' from any speaker and the rears are all 5' away and I still prefer the sound of side and rear towers over dipoles. So my experience runs counter to the usual and customary.

Dipoles come from an era when movie theaters had rows of speakers along the side and rear walls to create a diffuse surround stage from far fewer channels than they have today, and everyone was trying to emulate same in a small home theater or living room with bipoles and dipoles. Those days are over. More channels are where it is at today and you must use monopoles to preserve the original intent of the recording. Object oriented sound is designed to be discrete and concisely imaged from many monopole channels, not derived off room reflections from fewer channels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blazar View Post
Surround monopole speakers should be used with all modern codecs and should be placed an adequate distance from your head.
I think, respectfully, that this distance-to-head thingy is a myth, based on my own experience. What matters far more is that the listener is properly centered between all the speakers and that the room acoustics are conducive to a good listening experience. The smaller the space, the fewer good seats there will be, but there is always at least one. Yes you lose some of that ambient feel but the imaging is actually superior when the speakers are closer, much like headphone stereo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHouck View Post
That is excellent! I'm trying to decide if your bipoles you are selling will work in my situation. There is no "back of the room" as shown in the drawings, rather they would sit on or above a bookcase unit, above which is an opening to the great room below. I hadn't considered the possibility of facing them forward as shown in some of the schematics. If I did so, they would not be any higher than the listener.

I'm wondering if bipole option 1 or 2 would work here.
You need to decide if you are trying to fill in the ambient field or if you are trying to cover more seats. If you are just setting them on top of a bookcase you have the option of moving them around until you like what you hear, so just do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyberathlete View Post

Please quote reply with an underline for the suggested speaker:

Room dimensions:
Front row seating: 9-10 feet from screen (8-9 feet from front/center speakers)
Second Row: Seated area is 4-5 feet behind the front row
Room width: 13 feet
Room length (distance from speakers to seating has been averaged above but there is no back wall)
Height (drop ceiling): 7.5 feet
Backwall: non existent as it's the basement and that's just open space.
You might want to consider moving your rear speakers farther away if they are very close to the rear seats. Nothing you do with the sound processing or monopole/bipole/dipole can undo the fact that they are going to be firing right into the ears of the rear listeners but far from the front listeners, except to move them farther away so the proportional distance and thus relative loudness is more similar. Doing so will also allow the sound to disperse more and then you don't need the bipole/dipole at all back there.

Quote:
My two schools of thought:
Quote:
If the Bipolar speaker is an option as a surround (not rear surround) speaker then I should and could place it between the two rows so neither row is in a dead zone. But there will be no back wall to bounce sound off of for the immersive effect.
They will be bouncing off every wall as well as floor and ceiling, but that ambiance will be delayed. Later reflections can muddy the surround image if they are not quite late enough and come from many randomized directions. You did not mention room treatments but you should be considering them if you are going through this much effort and your choice of speaker plus placement and room treatment should be considered a package deal.

Quote:
If the Bipolar speaker is an option as a rear surround speaker, then the drivers can utilize the left and right walls to bounce sound off of it and use monopoles for surround.
I have found that dipoles on the rear wall of my apartment seemed to not be audible, or too loud. They were very close and above my head, but no matter how I repositioned, they just sort of vanished into mud or blasted through. On the sides they seemed to have better sound.

It just seems that the poor localization capacity of human hearing to the rear, combined with dipoles, made for an 'all inside the head' headphone-like sound with rear dipoles that made them unintelligible and blanketed the surround image with that 'all inside the head' sound. Audyssey Dynamic EQ surround boost did not help any with that since it overboosts the surrounds and swamps the dialog.

Indirect radiating speakers seem to fight with the synthesis algorithms IMO that are supposed to be filling in the ambiance with synthetic ambiance not room reflections. Basically, unless you have a huge room needing wide dispersion all around and crave that auditorium sound, I would not use bipole or dipole in the rear. Typical room has longer front-rear dimension requiring more dispersion from the side speakers especially with two rows of seating so I would be much more inclined to go with bipoles on the side walls and use monopoles to the rear but if you can, try it both ways. Get a pair of each and swap them around. Then if you need to, buy a second pair of one or the other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuGsArEtAsTy View Post
Some would argue that 5.1.2 Atmos is a much bigger upgrade than 7.1 is, when coming from 5.1.
Given the much more available 7.1 titles and the vast improvemement of filling in a larger portion of the space (assuming the front-rear dimension is along the longer sidewall vs. a short front-rear room) the original comment is probably more accurate. My impression of height vx rear speakers is that rear speakers are much more immersive. Overhead speakers maybe more immersive, but your 7.1 titles are not going to decode well for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by na_rsx View Post
So can I use the Fluance XLBP speakers for front highs if my receiver allows it, I have the Sony 850DN and its in one of the configurations below. I don't have a sealed living room, its pretty open and connects to the back dining room and kitchen. Do't want to mount them in the rear, so think I'd get good sound in a 7.1?

See here it says you can use as rear surrounds or front high:
The receivers I own have extra terminals so you can choose which set of speakers to activate by choosing the sound mode. If you are having trouble deciding, try mounting both and switching back and forth between them to see how they compare. Personally I would go with the rear speakers before the height speakers but if Atmos is involved you might want speakers directly overhead for a more 3d sound field. Remember that rear speakers of 7.1 can be ceiling mounted so there is no problem with a missing wall.
CherylJosie is offline  
post #927 of 934 Old 05-26-2016, 06:46 AM
Senior Member
 
DCMlover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 299
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
What is your budget? I'd go with SVS's Prime Series or the EMP Tek Impression Series before I went with Fluance.
NOt sure of a budget. Experimenting now with floor standing vs. wall mount.
DCMlover is offline  
post #928 of 934 Old 05-31-2016, 11:28 AM
Member
 
na_rsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by CherylJosie View Post
The receivers I own have extra terminals so you can choose which set of speakers to activate by choosing the sound mode. If you are having trouble deciding, try mounting both and switching back and forth between them to see how they compare. Personally I would go with the rear speakers before the height speakers but if Atmos is involved you might want speakers directly overhead for a more 3d sound field. Remember that rear speakers of 7.1 can be ceiling mounted so there is no problem with a missing wall.
Gotcha, only reason I ask is because I already have bookshelves mounted in the rear, also already drilled some massive holes to install them mounts. My rears are almost 15lbs each lol. So this is why I was thinking front highs...


na_rsx is offline  
post #929 of 934 Old 05-31-2016, 11:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CherylJosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 579 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by na_rsx View Post
Gotcha, only reason I ask is because I already have bookshelves mounted in the rear, also already drilled some massive holes to install them mounts. My rears are almost 15lbs each lol. So this is why I was thinking front highs...


If those are your 5.1 rears, they are already behind the listener. The added benefit of 7.1 rear surrounds would be best if you put them all the way on that rear wall instead of hanging them off that covered beam with red arrows pointing to it. That will give you a much more ambient sound from the rears.

Front high is not going to add much to the ambiance. It helps with the 3D-ness but to get more ambiance you have to illuminate more room with sound waves. That is the primary benefit of rear surrounds IMO due to the poor directional perception behind the head anyway, and when rear speakers are too close to the listener they don't help with that ambiance nearly as much regardless of how close the rear wall is.
CherylJosie is offline  
post #930 of 934 Old 06-21-2016, 05:55 AM
Senior Member
 
JonasHansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Denmark
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I would like to add my experience to the whole bipole vs dipole vs monopole question.

For a long time, I had a home theater which used monopole surround speakers. I recently moved to a new apartment where I had to setup the theater in a much smaller room (10 feet wide). The width of the room made me wonder if I should upgrade my surround speakers.

I read tons of forum posts about which surround speakers and found very different opinions about which route to go, and especially now with Atmos, more and more people recommended monopole speakers.

My preference when watching movies is, that the surround speakers should never become localizable/dominating/annoying. Because of this, I chose to buy two sets of dipole speakers (http://www.jamo.com/search/?sku=D600SUR).

My impression so far:

Pro's
No localization issues. Sound field is very diffuse.
Room sounds much bigger than it is.
Panning of sounds are smooth.
Anonymous (Which is what I prefer)

Con's
Precise pin-point not as good as monopoles. Pannings are smooth and audible but more diffuse and can sound like it melts together.
Anonymous (which some people would say is a limitation)
Does not sound as dynamic as monopoles.

My verdict
I personally think that the dipole solution in my new much smaller room, sounds better than monopoles in my previous room which was bigger. They provide exactly the big sound field I prefer with no hint of where the speakers are placed.

I have not yet installed Atmos in my room, but I tend to believe that it would provide a better result in a small'ish room.

Hope you can use my input if you are in the same situation.

JBL Synthesis | Crown | BSS Soundweb
JonasHansen is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Tags
Infinity Es 250 Bipole Dipole Dual Monopole Surround Speaker



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off