bookshelf vs surround sound - Page 2

I think what we have here is HAMP sort of took Shadys post in the wrong way...kind of like how people can read text messages the wrong way...

Anyways back to the OT, I've heard dipoles and IMHO I prefer Monos .

Going back and forth with someone like yourself being biases trying to make it seem as if they speak fact is getting nowhere.

It's very simple, each has it's own advantages and dis-advantages. Depending on the person preference with which they prefer will be the one they use. Oh, when I brought that part up, you didn't comment, but yet you wanted to keep some B.S. going with grabbing certain words.


Well, maybe, because that was your first comment in this thread or are you just going to start lying now?

I haven't mis-read or mis-understood the OP posting. I simply mentioned what I thought of his question.

It's the others who came at me, as if I was wrong, and they making post as if all direct is the way to go as fact, and not opinion.

Like you stated, you prefer monos., I prefer di-poles

Yeah, that's exactly right. And I said that right after cschang said had already said this:

And several people in the thread (myself included) went on to present much more rationale besides "only reason you guys have given to buy monopole over surrounds is that they can be re-sold easier" in support of the use of standard, direct-radiating monopoles for surround speakers as opposed to surround-specific speakers. And the (yes, admittedly arguable) reasons presented in favor of monopoles are more than simply an opinion or a preference. Did you even read Post#18?



How old are you, HAMP568?

There is a bonus track on the Eagles Hell Freezes Over dvd (seven bridges road) audio only and recorded in 5.1 dts. If you have the same 5 matching speakers it sounds pretty amazing. I am not sure how that would sound with dipoles or surround only speakers. I should mention that in the recording each of the members of the band take one of 5 channel's and sing their part. When you sit in your room and play that track it sounds like you are in the middle of them being sung to.

No, how old are you? Because the number of people in the particular thread who opinion is towards mono, does not make it fact.

Are you retarded or something, and just don't know the difference between fact and opinion?

Each has it's own characteristic, that some people want and other don't want.

I for one love di-pole, I'm not trying to make the idea of di-pole is being better.

You are trying to make it seem as if mono is better all around, It's not a fact like you want to post.

Wow, all these post going back and forth, I now know how you feel. Not having a life is miserable. I know what you can try to do with your hands besides type on a keyboard, if that helps.

This is a different subject. although I still do like di-pole with multi-channel music, it is not recommended. You should use all direct in this case.

Using di-pole in a theater setting is different.

If a person is using the theater room for more then one function, then they should use direct, but if it's just for movies, then bi/di-pole are great for having that encompassed ambient sound.

Nice.

I loves teh monopoles. That better?

Ahh!! You finally calmed down. What'cha do, go visit one of your porn sites and relaxed yourself?

Knock it off guys...

False. Movie soundtracks are mixed for COMMERCIAL MOVIE THEATERS, not home theaters. The rear channels in a commercial theater are arranged around the audience to deliver a diffused effect so that more people in the theater experience a surround effect from any seat. Diffuse speakers at home are STILL recommended by Lucasfilm THX.

The "ideal" setup is narrow vertical yet wide horizontal dispersion from the front and wide/omnipolar/reflective sound from the sides of the room. I've outlined this many times in my recommendations on here. Point source on the front L/C/R and dipole or omnipole on the surrounds.

Just to throw in more confusion into the subject, what are surround speakers with tweeters and/or woofers oriented in a 45°/90° horizontal configuration (such as the Klipsch RS-42/RS-52) and ones with woofers on the top/bottom and tweeters at 45° angles (like the Axiom QS-4/QS-8) classified as?

Could be dipole or bipole depending on how the phase is set for each set of drivers. It's still in spirit of the basic principle in trying to create a diffuse/ambient field of sound.

What is "false"? Are movie soundtracks not remixed for DVD and/or BD release using, specifically, direct-radiating monopole surround speakers?

Tim, this statement is not exactly true either. Many movies released to disc are remixed for the home environment.


True, but that also takes into account how the movie is expected to mixed...ie. THX mixing standards...correct? Also, I don't believe Dolby or DTS have the same recommendation.

A couple of studios (Lionsgate, Disney) do remixes, as evidenced by the discrete 7.1 tracks for movies that were released theatrically in 5.1 (or fewer) channels. More often the soundtrack is remastered for the home environment, where it is equalized for nearfield listening, but not actually remixed. In either situation, it doesn't mean that during those remixing/remastering sessions the studio replaced the surround arrays with two monopole speakers.

So dipoles may still have the advantage, even on soundtracks that were redone for the home video release. Keep in mind that THX originally recommended dipole surrounds because they more closely mimicked the surround arrays found in commercial theatres and mixing stages. IF that sort of playback is your goal, then dipoles will get you closer to those results than a couple of monopoles.
THX has mixing standards?

Direct radiating monopoles are more directional than dipole/bipole surrounds, so 4 bookshelf speakers will 'get you there' (give you the effect you're looking for) better than using diffuse surround speakers.

Thanks for the clarification Sanjay.

So they don't? I was assuming if you have playback standards, you would have recording standards as well.

Don't know, which is why I was asking. Their standards specify certain performance criteria for gear and rooms, in order to have at least some measure of predictability from recording to playback, but I don't know if that would fall into the category of mixing standards. Could get into a semantic gray area.

BTW, Happy New Year.

I believe the "guideines" do actually specify or recommend that direct-radiating monopoles be used.

What guidelines?

Right. Which is exactly why I put it in quotes.

So there are no guidelines that recommend studios use a pair of monopoles for a home video mix?

This is the reason I like di-pole and recommend them. Here is more reasons I like them

* Dipolar create a more open space of sound without the listener being able to pinpoint the source of the sound.

* Unlike bipolar speakers, the drivers in dipoles aren’t moving in and out at the same time. One driver pushes air while the other pulls. So when the dipoles are placed properly, at 90° from the screen, directly to the left and right of the listener, they create a null zone—an area in which the sound coming from each speaker effectively cancels itself out, usually in the off-axis middle area facing the listener. The sound coming straight toward the listener’s ears is effectively dampened, and instead the listener hears virtually nothing but reflections from the room boundaries. So instead of perceiving sounds as coming from the speaker itself, the result is a diffuse sound-field.

* This design offers a more diffuse, spacious sound than a direct-radiating model. This is what surround speakers should do, after all. They are intended to reproduce ambient effects.

* Dipolar models are favored for THX-certified designs specifically because of their diffuse sound, which more accurately resembles what you would hear in a real movie theater.

* According to Dolby Laboratories: “Surround speaker placement, room acoustics, and personal preference are as important as the speakers’ radiating characteristic. These factors vary greatly, so Dolby Laboratories cannot recommend a particular speaker for home theater use.”

* Dipoles are a closer match to the surround speaker arrays found in movie theaters.

* Ambience and envelopment are the goals of surround speakers, not the 3D holographic rear stereo images. Dipoles do a better job at envelopment due to the sound being directed away from the listener. Having the forward and backwards firing sounds out-of-phase makes the speaker harder to pinpoint.

* Dipoles have a bigger surround sweet spot than direct radiating surrounds have.

No. Movies are not "remixed". Movies are simply re-encoded & "possibly" remastered (ie, slight EQ) but the movie's foley effects, vocals, etc are NOT normally "remixed" unless we're talking about an older movie where the producer/and/or/director come in to approve any new changes to the soundtrack. "Remix" insinuates new sounds are added also. The ONLY modern movie which I'm aware of that was "remixed" for home release was TRON: Legacy, where the producer and sound engineer didn't think the theater release had everything they wanted in the "mix". This is very rare. The VAST majority of the time the original 6-track master analog tapes are converted DIRECTLY to digital and not changed one bit. The mixing levels are all preserved as closely as possible.


Dolby & DTS don't control the soundboard, mixing and or mastering stages. These stages are all copied from standards set down by Lucasfilm many years ago. There is a reason the movie industry owes it's whole quality standard in post-production to Lucasfilm's company that blazed a trail that was FAR ahead of the rest of the industry in the 70's & 80's. I trust the engineers at Lucasfilm when they set down the standards for movie soundtrack production in the home. One of the major speaker design standards was for dipole speakers on the sides of the room radiating a diffuse soundfield. This wasn't suggested without reason. I want to stress that only THX has a "formal" requirement for diffuse sound dispersion from the rear channels. It's certainly not "required" but if you want to hear a professional quality movie theater sound at home, it is. Dolby Labs and DTS have no formal requirements and neither do many speaker manufacturers. THX pretty much stands alone in this respect (requiring the front channels to have narrow vertical yet wide horizontal dispersion, and the rears to be diffuse and highly ambient/reflective, using the room's reflections to give the impression of a very wide, difficult to pinpoint soundfield).

I happen to think the best is a combination of direct and reflected sound, with mostly reflected sound. The Mirage Omnipolar speakers are the ONLY affordable mass-market speakers which offer this kind of dispersion. I've done my research and the only other omnipolar speakers available are rare, expensive and exotic designs. Mirage, IMO has the best speakers possible for surround duty, bar none. That includes any THX rated dipoles. This of course is my opinion but a very well researched one.

I would assume that there ARE "guidelines". There is certainly conventional wisdom.

Not that the type of speakers used to rework the soundtrack should necessarily dictate how the soundtrack should be reproduced, btw.

Movie studio mixing stages from what I've seen still use multiple monopole speakers around the listener just like in a commercial theater, but scaled down. This is impractical to duplicate at home, so that is the reason for recommending two dipolar speakers which is the best possible way two speakers can emulate multiple monopole arrays.

Humm, this seem to have changed.... lol
Do you like being proven wrong?

Because more at that time were in favor of monopoles does not mean it's the way to go, but as a preference like I have always stated.

I still cannot believe someone with as many post as you would make that kind of statement.

My bad. Fixed it.