SURROUND SPEAKERS - Bipole, Dipole, Quadpole, Omnipole... WHICH ONE? - Page 14

Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis

Toole has a point. They're certainly rarely needed... yet are still often desired, as bipoles can often be too direct at the sides with 5.1.

Good point about not wanting surrounds bouncing off your front wall and hurting the soundstage.
Although I guess it really comes down to the room and how it reacts.

Always a good idea to test your surrounds as fronts to see how they measure up, as you've done.
Too many folks never do this.

Those ADP-170's are a seriously old-school dipole design, with next to no angling, and everything you hear is way off-axis.
I used to have surrounds like that and they were horrible.

A design like the Monitor Audio BXFX or RXFX can be worthwhile, as the woofer faces forward (and is in phase), the angling of the tweeters isn't too severe, and they're dipole/bipole switchable.
Having a larger 6-inch woofer is also nice....

http://www.monitoraudio.co.uk/products/bronze-bx/bxfx/
http://www.monitoraudio.co.uk/products/silver-rx/rxfx/


Have you considered Axiom quadpoles or Mirage omnipoles?


.

Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis

I'd suggest having a good read through the thread, but for starters...

* In ceilings will be OK for rears if that's all you can manage.

* Dipoles are OK for the sides, but are not to everyone's taste (as you'll find throughout this thread.) For that reason, dipole/bipole switchables are preferred.

* My preferences in order would probably be...

1. 4 x Mirage OMD-5

2. 4 x Axiom QS8 quadpoles

3. 4 x Monitor Audio bipole/dipole switchables


... or 2 of the above, with in-ceilings at the rear.
Any of these should work fine with the Proteges, especially after EQ correction with Audyssey or similar.

Originally Posted by Timothy91

I agree. Although I advocate dipole dispersion to simulate the 'movie theater effect' as Lucasfilm recommends. I happen to think that the Mirage Omni-polar speakers achieve the effect PLUS giving you some 'direct' sound which gives off a more satisfying/solid 'imaging' that many like from monopole/bipole speakers while also imparting the ambiance and 'surround' effect desired by Lucasfilm. If you have the choice between bipole/dipole, try dipole first and only use bipole if you really absolutely have a strong preference for it.

That's my opinion based on years of casual interest followed by months and months of intense research and personal testing to come up with the perfect speaker selections based on room size and figuring in different listening preferences from different people, while still adhering to the scientific principles laid down for home theater reproduction by Lucasfilm.

Originally Posted by Timothy91

I agree. Although I advocate dipole dispersion to simulate the 'movie theater effect' as Lucasfilm recommends. I happen to think that the Mirage Omni-polar speakers achieve the effect PLUS giving you some 'direct' sound which gives off a more satisfying/solid 'imaging' that many like from monopole/bipole speakers while also imparting the ambiance and 'surround' effect desired by Lucasfilm. If you have the choice between bipole/dipole, try dipole first and only use bipole if you really absolutely have a strong preference for it.

Originally Posted by blipszyc

In my old theater, I had DefTech's all around. I've moved recently and will be building a new theater and was wondering if there a recommendation to have matching speakers all around? I was leaning toward PSB Image T6 and C5 for fronts and center, but didn't know if their S5 bipole would be good for side and rears and if they would cancel each other out depending on their spacing?

Originally Posted by Kimwyn

Hey guys, i have been reading the thread and have a couple of questions. here is some additional info before i ask my questions. I have the paradigm signature s4 and c3 as LCR and no speakers at the moment for surround duty. I am debating between adding 2 or 4 surrounds. As most of the movies i own and most of the movies i watch are in 5.1 i am thinking 2 is enough. My placement is a bit "weird" to say the least though. my room is about 21' long and 16' wide but one wall of the two 21' walls stop at about 10 ft and opens to a kitchen. I sit about 11' away from the front.

Question 1: If i set up a 5.1 system, where should i put the surrounds, at the side or at the back?

Question 2: If i do decide to put them on the side, is it ok to have 1 side surround 1ft behind my listening position and the other 1ft in front of my listening position due to the wall not extending all the way back?

Question 3: Should i just go 7.1 and have the 2 side surrounds 1 ft in front of my listening position and rears on the back wall?

Question 4: If i go 5.1, what are the best side surround options, bipole or dipole?

Question 5: If i go 7.1, what are the best surround options altogether, bipole, dipole or omnipole?

Question 6: What are the best surround speakers for 200-400 per pair at the moment?

Question 7: What processor option can i use to up mix 5.1 movies to 7.1 if i decide to go 7.1?

Originally Posted by HAMP568

I select #3, and use them in bi-pole mode. Just about any entry level and mid level AVR will process audio from a 5.1 to 7.1

Originally Posted by blipszyc

Would you suggest all 4 in bipole mode, or just the sides? Or another way to put it - which would you recommend out of the following:

1 - Side and rear bipoles?
2 - Side bipoles and rear directs (are these the same as monopoles?)?
3 - Side monopoles, rear bipoles?
4 - Other?

Originally Posted by blipszyc

Would you suggest all 4 in bipole mode, or just the sides? Or another way to put it - which would you recommend out of the following:

1 - Side and rear bipoles?
2 - Side bipoles and rear directs (are these the same as monopoles?)?
3 - Side monopoles, rear bipoles?
4 - Other?

Originally Posted by mtbdudex

I want to thank Paulsons for hosting Paradigm/Integra yesterday (Wed 2/22).
I was there early 4:25-4:45pm (6pm formal start time), and had chance to speak with the Paradigm rep's (Keith D, forgot the other name).
Nice to see the Signature S8, being early they were just finishing set-up to the mono amps, so could not listen.
I'll stop by later tomorrow to listen, hopefully they are still there.

They are V3, here are the 2 Paradigm regional reps in the dedicated 2-channel listening room.
(sorry for crappy picts, iPhone4)


Also had Monitor 9's in a 5.1 set-up in another room:


I further asked Keith why the Monitor line dropped the ADP surrounds and went to Bi-poles.
His reply: "we found the majority of Monitor customers used the set-up NOT in a dedicated HT situation, rather in a family/living room environment.
In that case, lots of the surrounds location were not symmetrical or in the best placement relative to the MLP.
Hence, bi-directional is the better choice for them.
In a dedicated HT room, where placement can be correctly done, then the ADP's (Adaptive di-pole) is the better solution"

Originally Posted by Kimwyn

Wow, i find that quite interesting now because everyone was saying dipoles are best....regardless...... wonder where this leaves me?????

Originally Posted by Bing

People shouldn't confuse reflected sound as this out-of-phase hollow sound. For those who don't know what dipole sounds like, just experiment with your fronts. Wire one speaker with + to - and see what that sounds like. It's annoying.

Bi/Tri/Quad or Omni can give you a big sound without resorting to dipole.

Comment to that Paradigm rep:

He said what the company wanted him to say. Here's me reading between the lines.

"We (Paradigm) have long invested in the ADP design. It made sense back in the day of Pro-Logic. However, we can't simply admit that we're outdated but we do recognize that other forms of multi directional speakers are better for discrete channels. Tell you what we'll do. We'll take our best selling line (I'm guessing) and convert them to bipoles. Give the customers some market-speak about how bipoles work for non-ideal layouts but still say ADP is best. But! If the bipoles sell like hotcakes, then we'll revamp the Reference line and says it's customer demand. That way, we'll never have to admit we were wrong not to switch years ago.

Originally Posted by mtbdudex

You are probably not far off from the truth.

I actually started to engage him into the whole history of surrounds, from the initial THX recommendation of di-pole and how/why that was "good" back then.....and what is "best" for dedicated home theatres now that we have true discrete surround channels mixed that way.....
Started to discuss "what speakers are used in todays mixing" viewpoint and how that carries over into HT design and usage, but did not take it too far.

Problem was, he was trying to get his Signature S8's up and running, and I was heading off to Ash Wed 5pm family service, so did not get into the discussion so much.

So - which one?
For me, the ADP-390's I have "seem" to work fine in my dedicated HT.
The monopole front firing bass with the side di-pole does give ambience soundfield. Yet, on discrete sounds I can also localize them...bullets, etc.
Could I "get better"? Well, these are paid for....

Now, if I knew in 2008 what I've learned thru 2012, I'd seriously look at other options. I like the switchable ones, like the ones my brother in law bought last year.
Gives flexibility. Monitor Audio Gold GX-FX Di-pole, mono-pole.
http://www.monitoraudio.co.uk/products/gold-gx/gxfx/

Originally Posted by HAMP568

I just seen the pics of your theater, and if that was mine, I would go di-pole all around.

Originally Posted by blipszyc

If you clicked the link in my Sig - that was my old theater, and I had Def Tech Bi-poles all around and liked the immersive sound that those gave out.

I went and auditioned the RX6 and RX8 yesterday and was not impressed at all. I thought they sounded very flat. What I did like were the Paradigm Studio 60s. Looks like Paradigm makes a di-pole speaker as well, so perhaps I'll go with those.