Quote:
Originally Posted by mvp2005fan 
This question comes up a lot, so please bear with me as I go on for a bit in the hopes this might help some....
The issue really isn't a matter of which speakers are bigger or have a fuller range. This is because while in theory 7.1 can have full range surrounds, the fact is that the vast, vast majority of surround signals from movies are not full range. (this is even more true of 7.1 sources--the rear surrounds often carry surprisingly little information). They exist mostly to add ambience and sometimes directionality. Therefore, using a full range speaker (some have even suggested putting an array of STS/ST's back there (!)) as a surround is probably not the best use of limited home theater resources. In addition, the amount of surround signal you hear is largely due to your calibration, much more so than how large the speaker is.
The question then becomes: direct radiators or bipoles/dipoles or both. This debate has raged ever since the advent of multiple channel HT setups. I would refer you to this excellent summary of the issues: http://forum.blu-ray.com/speakers/66...-speakers.html involved. Traditionally, dipoles were the way to go when it came to surround speakers--they are difficult to localize when set up well and add ambience without drawing attention to themselves. When discrete surround speakers are used, one tends to sacrifice ambience for the ability to localize rear sound effects.
Interestingly, please see this THX surround speaker setup guide: http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-ent...peaker-set-up/ For 7.1 material, they recommend the hybrid approach: bipoles on the sides, and directs in the rear. This gives a very nice combination approach. Since most material is 5.1 (that can be extracted to 7.1), the side surrounds do the heavy lifting, thus provide the ambience--while the rears are there for back to front pans. I opted for this hybrid approach (UIW RSSII on the sides and 8's in the rears), and have found it very much to my liking. Sort of a best of both worlds approach.
While all 3 options can be employed successfully, an important caveat is that regardless of which approach you take, it is generally thought to be a good idea to make sure that you timbre match your surrounds with your mains and center (and with each other). However, it is perfectly possible to get great results even with mismatched surrounds and mains--it just takes a bit more care.
Also, in many home theaters, the surround signals are set way, way too high. In general, if you find them calling attention to themselves while watching movies, the calibration is likely off. Sure, you're going to notice them, but sticking out is not generally desirable. Best way to get around this is to use an SPL meter or an autocalibration program (although I always double check manually with the meter, just to be sure). Remember, the main goal of surround is to mimic the multiple speaker array in a commerical theater. Ambience, not presence, is the overall aim of surround fields.
Finally, all of the above is general advice given based on various standards that folks have published or recommended, with the aim to as closely recreate the films soundstage as the director intended. That said, the ultimate arbiter of how your surrounds should be is YOU. If you happen to like surrounds that scream: "Look at me!!!", more power to you. As always, since you are going to be the one who has to live with and love them, YMMV.
I hope this helps a little.
This question comes up a lot, so please bear with me as I go on for a bit in the hopes this might help some....
The issue really isn't a matter of which speakers are bigger or have a fuller range. This is because while in theory 7.1 can have full range surrounds, the fact is that the vast, vast majority of surround signals from movies are not full range. (this is even more true of 7.1 sources--the rear surrounds often carry surprisingly little information). They exist mostly to add ambience and sometimes directionality. Therefore, using a full range speaker (some have even suggested putting an array of STS/ST's back there (!)) as a surround is probably not the best use of limited home theater resources. In addition, the amount of surround signal you hear is largely due to your calibration, much more so than how large the speaker is.
The question then becomes: direct radiators or bipoles/dipoles or both. This debate has raged ever since the advent of multiple channel HT setups. I would refer you to this excellent summary of the issues: http://forum.blu-ray.com/speakers/66...-speakers.html involved. Traditionally, dipoles were the way to go when it came to surround speakers--they are difficult to localize when set up well and add ambience without drawing attention to themselves. When discrete surround speakers are used, one tends to sacrifice ambience for the ability to localize rear sound effects.
Interestingly, please see this THX surround speaker setup guide: http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-ent...peaker-set-up/ For 7.1 material, they recommend the hybrid approach: bipoles on the sides, and directs in the rear. This gives a very nice combination approach. Since most material is 5.1 (that can be extracted to 7.1), the side surrounds do the heavy lifting, thus provide the ambience--while the rears are there for back to front pans. I opted for this hybrid approach (UIW RSSII on the sides and 8's in the rears), and have found it very much to my liking. Sort of a best of both worlds approach.
While all 3 options can be employed successfully, an important caveat is that regardless of which approach you take, it is generally thought to be a good idea to make sure that you timbre match your surrounds with your mains and center (and with each other). However, it is perfectly possible to get great results even with mismatched surrounds and mains--it just takes a bit more care.
Also, in many home theaters, the surround signals are set way, way too high. In general, if you find them calling attention to themselves while watching movies, the calibration is likely off. Sure, you're going to notice them, but sticking out is not generally desirable. Best way to get around this is to use an SPL meter or an autocalibration program (although I always double check manually with the meter, just to be sure). Remember, the main goal of surround is to mimic the multiple speaker array in a commerical theater. Ambience, not presence, is the overall aim of surround fields.
Finally, all of the above is general advice given based on various standards that folks have published or recommended, with the aim to as closely recreate the films soundstage as the director intended. That said, the ultimate arbiter of how your surrounds should be is YOU. If you happen to like surrounds that scream: "Look at me!!!", more power to you. As always, since you are going to be the one who has to live with and love them, YMMV.
I hope this helps a little.
I enjoyed your post. My local audio store recommended the BP1.2x surround speakers, which is what I went with. They give the feeling that you're in the action. For example, the first thing that happens in The Dark Knight is a window gets blown up. It sounsd like the window is falling to pieces around me instead of in front of and behind me. It's an enveloping sound field. Because they don't have a presense, as you put it, many have asked me if anything was coming out of the surround speakers. I had to explain that they're their for surround effects and not always on. Even when sound is coming out of them, they are not directional (direct radiating), and therefore, you won't hear the sound coming from where the speaker is hanging on the wall. I see that as a good thing most of the time. I have Mythos 2s as my front speakers and love the sound.
). The Mythos and the BP lines are both great series of speakers--you can't go wrong with either, really. I would just avoid mixing/matching them, unless you really have a specific reason for doing so.
