or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › What's the smallest room you've tried 9.2 or 11.2 channels in?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What's the smallest room you've tried 9.2 or 11.2 channels in?

post #1 of 37
Thread Starter 
I'm eying a couple of receivers for my HT renovation. My room is only about 14' x 14' 9'. Most new receivers are 9.2 and some 11.2. I have enough speakers and budget lying around, just wondering if 9.2 or 11.2 is too ridiculous for this room?
post #2 of 37
My room is 16'Lx12'Wx10'H and barely accomodates my 7.1 system. The back surrounds are the problem.
post #3 of 37
Thread Starter 
Are your seats pretty much back against the wall? Mine are and I'm wondering if back surrounds would work. I have a nice DT BPX surround that I'd like to put to use. You also have nice tall ceiling, have you consider a front height channel?
post #4 of 37
If the OP is planning to pull speaker wire, it's probably worth taking a look at the future surround sound speaker locations envisaged in SMPTE2036-2-2008.

NHK claims that you can get 'the majority' of the benefits of 22.2 channel sound from downmixes to as few as 10 speakers (presumably a 'well chosen' subset of the 22.2...?!). While I doubt I'd ever want to use the full 22.2 configuration, some of the additional speaker locations look like good candidates for inclusion in home configurations, e.g., the Top Front Center (borrowed from IMAX), the Front Left/Right Center pair (borrowed from SDDS), and the Back Center (maybe from rumored DTS Advanced Neo) would be low cost pre-wirings in any existing home theater renovation project. [With speakers added as needed in 2015 or later...?! ]




LL
LL
post #5 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimluu View Post

Are your seats pretty much back against the wall? Mine are and I'm wondering if back surrounds would work. I have a nice DT BPX surround that I'd like to put to use. You also have nice tall ceiling, have you consider a front height channel?

Listening position is about 3.3' from the back wall.

That's the height to the middle of the ceiling. Ceiling slopes up from about 8' to 16'. I have no interest in height/wide channels.
post #6 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimluu View Post

I'm eying a couple of receivers for my HT renovation. My room is only about 14' x 14' 9'. Most new receivers are 9.2 and some 11.2. I have enough speakers and budget lying around, just wondering if 9.2 or 11.2 is too ridiculous for this room?

Are you referring to the new Height and Width Channels? I don't think the room size (at least width and length) would have much effect on Height since the speakers are simply mounted above your fronts. Both effects are fairly subtle, to me Height gives more bang for the buck than Width. If you've got the speakers and budget, why not give it a try?

John
post #7 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Robert View Post

Are you referring to the new Height and Width Channels? I don't think the room size (at least width and length) would have much effect on Height since the speakers are simply mounted above your fronts. Both effects are fairly subtle, to me Height gives more bang for the buck than Width. If you've got the speakers and budget, why not give it a try?

John

Why do you feel height offers better bang? Audessy says it is the opposite.
post #8 of 37
Just what I've read anecdotally and played around with in my own 12 X 20 room as I try and decide the return on upgrading my Onkyo 885 (Integra 9.8) pre/pro. The Height was easier to pull off and seemed (at least to me) to have greater effect. Both effects were subtle and fell more in the "didn't notice it until it went away category". My wife claimed she couldn't hear it while the Height channels were on but noticed "something different" when they were removed. YMMV...

John
post #9 of 37
I have a very small room...12 x 10. I've added ''height'' speakers and there is a difference...not ''night and day'' but a difference nonetheless. Of course much depends on the DVD being played
post #10 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by abba1 View Post

I have a very small room...12 x 10. I've added ''height'' speakers and there is a difference...not ''night and day'' but a difference nonetheless. Of course much depends on the DVD being played

My home-office is 12'x12' and I've had a Yamaha 6.1 + 2x Front Presence[Height] speaker configuration for 3+ years. Depending on the source material, the DSP/Presence/Height effects can sometimes make a (very positive!) "night and day'' difference; however, as with all post processing, the results vary wildly with the source material! and can sometimes be truly dreadful. But this is nothing new: If Audyssey 'Height' or DPLIIz sounds 'bad' in a particular soundtrack, disengage the height processing, and stick to in-horizontal-plane post processors, e.g., DPLIIx, (or none) for that particular soundtrack...
post #11 of 37
Thread Starter 
Wow! 22.2 speakers!
post #12 of 37
I couldn't see needing more than 5.1 or maybe 7.1 in a 14'x14' room. My room is 15' square and I barely have the room to stuff 7.1 into it, so I am sticking with 5.1 for now. I can't imagine needing a 9.2 or 11.2 for a room that small. Get the receiver but I wouldn't use all of the channels.
post #13 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samsung-Guy View Post

I couldn't see needing more than 5.1 or maybe 7.1 in a 14'x14' room. My room is 15' square and I barely have the room to stuff 7.1 into it, so I am sticking with 5.1 for now. I can't imagine needing a 9.2 or 11.2 for a room that small. Get the receiver but I wouldn't use all of the channels.

Fortunately (or maybe unfortunately), as a surround aficionado ("addict") since the 1980s (when everything came as separates!), I already have on-hand 24 speakers and 7 power amps (20 channels) available for the two systems I use to watch movies and tv. And as I will probably run out of wall space by the time those two systems are upgraded to, perhaps, 8/8.x and 8/6.x, I only need to acquire (at most) another 6 speakers by 2015 (or more likely 2020 thru 2025 - 'cos it looks like the US will trail Europe and Asia on the changeover to SHV! )
post #14 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

Fortunately (or maybe unfortunately), as a surround aficionado ("addict") since the 1980s (when everything came as separates!), I already have on-hand 24 speakers and 7 power amps (20 channels) available for the two systems I use to watch movies and tv. And as I will probably run out of wall space by the time those two systems are upgraded to, perhaps, 8/8.x and 8/6.x, I only need to acquire (at most) another 6 speakers by 2015 (or more likely 2020 thru 2025 - 'cos it looks like the US will trail Europe and Asia on the changeover to SHV! )

Is there a 12 Step plan to wean you from this extra channel addiction ???

John
post #15 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Robert View Post

Just what I've read anecdotally and played around with in my own 12 X 20 room as I try and decide the return on upgrading my Onkyo 885 (Integra 9.8) pre/pro. The Height was easier to pull off and seemed (at least to me) to have greater effect. Both effects were subtle and fell more in the "didn't notice it until it went away category". My wife claimed she couldn't hear it while the Height channels were on but noticed "something different" when they were removed. YMMV...

John

I see nothing regarding DSX in 885 reviews? Was this a firmware upgrade?
post #16 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Robert View Post

Is there a 12 Step plan to wean you from this extra channel addiction ???

John

...that should probably be: "Is there a 22.2 Step plan...?"
post #17 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimluu View Post

Wow! 22.2 speakers!

Actually, I think the change in the display standards will likely have a bigger impact on most homes than the addition of few more bookshelf/surround speakers [plus you can always stay with an audio mixdown into fewer than 22.2 channels]...



Not shown: However, I believe it will also be possible to get SHV tv sets with a 'reduced' resolution of 3840x2160. [And I believe that the 3480x2160 signal can be carried over (the existing standard of) HDMI 1.4...?!]
LL
post #18 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesky636 View Post

I see nothing regarding DSX in 885 reviews? Was this a firmware upgrade?

Nope. Friend brought over his new 4810 and we played with it for a couple of days...

John
post #19 of 37
Glad I found this thread smile.gif
I know its old but good topic. My new place right now is smaller than before (15' x 23') (house) which I had a 7.1 and it was awesome. Now a smaller place is 17.5' x 18' condo with Living room/kitchen together open concept. Currently I still have my 7.1 but now I am thinking of going for the 9.2 or 11.2. The only thing I'm weary about the Height is that where to put it exactly, I don't want to start mounting a speaker in the front wall and I don't have an entertainment unit that I can put it. I may just use the Wide but from what I have been reading the Height is better.
post #20 of 37
I have 9.2 (DSX heights plus wides) in a 16 long x 13 wide by 9 high room. No back surrounds as my seating is up against the back. Side surrounds are bipoles to make the best of the surround situation. 100% movies and all inwalls other than the surrounds.

Wides are definitively more impactful than heights - it's not even close.

If your ceiling is low and/or your seating is closer to the screen, you may need to place the height speakers on the ceiling to get the correct angle recommended by Audyssey. That is what I had to do.
post #21 of 37
My ceiling is 8' and the seating is around the middle, closer to the TV and this weekend I am going to pick up a BP surround. I will need to find a way to make the height work if I go to 11.2 route.
post #22 of 37
The smallest room I've seen a 9.2 (7.1 + heights) set-up in was only 9' wide by 16' long. The main row of seating was about 5' from the back wall, so there was clear side-vs-rear separation in the surround field. Heights were in the front tri-corners of the room (where the front corners meet the ceiling). Toggling between PLIIx and PLIIz made the contribution of the height speakers pretty obvious: the soundstage went from a line of sound across the front wall to more of a bubble of sound in the front hemisphere.
post #23 of 37
I have a 34' x 13.5' room, but the ceiling is only 7'5".. is that too short to try a 11.x setup?
post #24 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by 06S2k View Post

...the ceiling is only 7'5".. is that too short to try a 11.x setup?
Depends on where you place your speakers. If you can place the height speakers at the ceiling and your main speakers around ear level, then you will have enough separation to make the height channels work (i.e., you're not going to confuse sounds coming from in front of you with sounds coming from above you).
post #25 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by 06S2k View Post

I have a 34' x 13.5' room, but the ceiling is only 7'5".. is that too short to try a 11.x setup?

No, it can work but you should put the height speakers on the ceiling and closer to the listening position to achieve the suggested 45 degree (give or take) angle of inclination from the listener. Your height speakers may be 8-10 feet closer to the listener than the screen wall.
post #26 of 37
Thanks Davecraze & sdurani,

However, if I place the ceiling heights that close, would they be in close interference with the sides, which will be about ear level.
post #27 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by 06S2k View Post

However, if I place the ceiling heights that close, would they be in close interference with the sides, which will be about ear level.
I would split the angle between your fronts and sides and place the height speakers there (as close to the ceiling as possible). There are no other speakers at those locations (or that angle), so the contribution of the heights will be unique (won't be confused with fronts or surrounds).
post #28 of 37
My theatre is 12' x 18 1/2'

I am very excited to try my new Marantz AV8801 in my theatre. My friend has one and I love how his sounds.

Full 11.2

I had wired for heights when I built the room three years ago, and made room to grow with easy integration for way more, but 22.2? That seems awesome and wrong at the same time.







Two chairs in the front row, and four in the second row.
Edited by zuluwalker - 3/7/13 at 9:29am
post #29 of 37
I am reporting good results so far. The wides have truly added an amazing sense of width to the soundstage.
post #30 of 37
Some people seem to be talking about the home decorating impact of lots of speakers and others about the aural impact. For the latter, I don't see any difficulty with lots of speakers, provided the room is not too reverberant. I have 11 speakers in a space of around 12x18x7 -- it's not a problem.

I can't use front heights and front widths simultaneously, but I can easily compare them using one button on my remote. They sound very different. Front widths put me up close to an ensemble, and front heights put me in a larger room.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Audio theory, Setup and Chat
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › What's the smallest room you've tried 9.2 or 11.2 channels in?