or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › SURROUND SPEAKERS - Bipole, Dipole, Quadpole, Omnipole... WHICH ONE?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SURROUND SPEAKERS - Bipole, Dipole, Quadpole, Omnipole... WHICH ONE? - Page 17

Poll Results: There are many surround speakers out there now, but the ones below would have to get my highest recommendation for the most remarkable & effective design Which of these have you had a positive experience with?

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 25% (20)
    Mirage OMD5 (or any other Mirage Omnipole)
  • 3% (3)
    JBL P520WS / Infinity ES-250 / Infinity Classia C255ES (Dual-monopole for 4 channels from 2 speakers, but also Bipole & Dipole switchable)
  • 26% (21)
    Axiom QS8 or QS4 (Unique Quadpole design)
  • 15% (12)
    Paradigm ADP (Many models available with this design, where the tweeters run Dipole, but the woofers are Bipole)
  • 13% (11)
    Monitor Audio BXFX or RXFX (Single woofer, but the tweeters can switch to either Dipole or Bipole)
  • 10% (8)
    Monitor Audio GXFX (6 drivers, including a ribbon. (Monopole / Dipole switchable)
  • 6% (5)
    KEF 26/2DS (Dipole only, alas... but with two 6.5 inch side woofers and a front-firing 8 inch!!! )
80 Total Votes  
post #481 of 628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylinestar View Post

Anyone place their side surround speakers at 60-80 degree? How does it sound?
ITU spec states that surrounds for 7 channel setup can be placed between 60-150 degrees. With the side surrounds at 60-80 degree, it'll be closer to the arrangement of Audyssey DSX Front Wide. Problem is I'm not sure if Klipsch WDST design can work out for that placement. What say you?
576

First I've seen of that.
Personally, I wouldn't even bother trying anything less than 90 degrees.

Surrounds aren't mixed to come from the front!
Having my dipole/bipole switchables at around 90 degrees and 2 rears at around 150 works beautifully.

Front speaker width has a big effect on front/back blending, though.

My front left/right are around 3 metres apart, and listening distance is about 3 metres back.
Side-Surrounds are about 4 metres apart, and rears are about 2 metres apart, and 2 metres back from listening position.
These relative distances are the best I've yet heard biggrin.gif
post #482 of 628
My 9.1 setup is comprised of all direct radiator speakers. I'm currently using GoldenEar Supersat 3's for my side surrounds (monopoles). The problem is that due to my setup, they must be at ear level and directly to either side of the listening position. In the sweet spot they sound great but to listeners who are not dead center they tend to hear one side speaker too much. So, I was hoping that a bipole or a quadpole (Axiom Qs8) might be a better candidate for those side locations. The ceilings are 17' high and the room is open in the back. Also I thought that if I went with bipoles, a model with identical drivers on both sides might be better than one with only the tweeters firing to the sides and the woofer firing directly ahead. Do you think that this type of setup would minimize this effect? If so, which type (bipole or quad)?
post #483 of 628
I have a quick question: What do you do if you have no immediate back wall? Can you mount two sets of bipoles along your side walls?

My room is 13' wide and about 26' long. The viewing area is along the first 14 feet and opens up to a bar area behind the theater seats. I really can't put monopoles on stands behind the seats (they'd be in the way)....

Would it work to have two sets of bipoles along each side wall (a total of 4 bipole speakers)? One set acting as side surrounds and another set acting as rear surrounds? Or should I be using a set of monopoles for my rear surrounds mounted on the walls but angled forward?

This mono/bi/di/omni pole stuff can drive you crazy!

Any advise / help would be greatly appreciated!

Chris
post #484 of 628
^^^

FWIW, I'm running a pair of Klipsch, KSP-S6 bipoles which are an earlier version of Klipsch's RS-62 II's and for the make-up of our lvrm, the bipoles are the best solution because we're not able to place the surrounds in an ideal position. And FWIW, the WAF has pretty much bottomed out on the issue of speakers, speaker placement and what the speakers are doing to the symmetry of "HER" living room.

The problem with the speaker placement is, one surround "HAS" to be on a side wall as opposed to tucked into the corner of the left back wall and the other is more appropriately placed to the back right of the seating area on the back wall. The point, my opinion, bipoles make up for a multitude of architectural sins when the ideal is just not possible.

-
Edited by BeeMan458 - 7/31/12 at 10:39am
post #485 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylinestar View Post

576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Scarpelli View Post

If you are a sad, lonely, pathetic little man who sits in his solitary, cushy theater chair, five identical direct-radiating speakers, equidistant from your ears, can provide an absolutely holographic movie experience, allowing you to momentarily forget that you are lonely and unliked, with no friends.

I just read the first page of this thread, and I think a quote from Paul Scarpelli matches up beautifully with that picture!
post #486 of 628
I have read thru this thread, but still a little confused. I have a smaller office, about 12x12, in which i have recently bought energy speakers (rc-lcr center- rc 30 front, outlaw lfm-1 plus sub), and was trying to use rc-10's as my surrounds in a 5.1 set up. The couch is up against the wall, and the Rc10s were only a few feet to each side of the couch but produced a direct sound. So last night, I decided to order a pair of energy Vs surrounds, which I believe a switchable from bipole and dipole. Ideally I would like to mount these 2 vs speakers on the back wall, towards the corners of each wall. I do have the ability to mount to the sides of each couch, but already had satellite speakers mounted on back wall, and hate to mess with custom paint job. any thoughts on these speakers, my setup ? Should receive the vs surrounds by tommorrow.

Here is the link.. http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/reviews/542021944/energy-vs-surround-speaker
post #487 of 628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucknuts07 View Post

I have read thru this thread, but still a little confused. I have a smaller office, about 12x12, in which i have recently bought energy speakers (rc-lcr center- rc 30 front, outlaw lfm-1 plus sub), and was trying to use rc-10's as my surrounds in a 5.1 set up. The couch is up against the wall, and the Rc10s were only a few feet to each side of the couch but produced a direct sound. So last night, I decided to order a pair of energy Vs surrounds, which I believe a switchable from bipole and dipole. Ideally I would like to mount these 2 vs speakers on the back wall, towards the corners of each wall. I do have the ability to mount to the sides of each couch, but already had satellite speakers mounted on back wall, and hate to mess with custom paint job. any thoughts on these speakers, my setup ? Should receive the vs surrounds by tommorrow.
Here is the link.. http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/reviews/542021944/energy-vs-surround-speaker

Do you mean that you already have RC10 satellites on the rear wall? Sounds like you want to go 7.1.

If so, have the VS surrounds to either side of the couch, perhaps on stands if you don't want to hurt the walls.

Looking at the VS, to be honest, I'm not crazy about their design.
I'm pretty sure that having only the midrange drivers firing out the sides and the tweeter front-firing wouldn't be diffuse enough.
I could be wrong, though.
If, in Dipole mode, the midranges are out of phase with the front drivers, rather than just each other, that might work quite well. I guess we'll find out soon...
post #488 of 628
Electric, just looking to run 5.1, not sure what I'll do with the almost new rc10s. In the energy thread people seem to really like the Vs surrounds. Currently I have rc10s about 3 feet from each end of couch on sides . Figured the vs surrounds would be farther from my ear since I can wall mount. I can mount each across from each other to the sides of the couch, but I had some small htib speakers wall mounted near the corners or the back wall , that I was hoping I could put the vs there , and sound good. Any thoughts ?
post #489 of 628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucknuts07 View Post

Electric, just looking to run 5.1, not sure what I'll do with the almost new rc10s. In the energy thread people seem to really like the Vs surrounds. Currently I have rc10s about 3 feet from each end of couch on sides . Figured the vs surrounds would be farther from my ear since I can wall mount. I can mount each across from each other to the sides of the couch, but I had some small htib speakers wall mounted near the corners or the back wall , that I was hoping I could put the vs there , and sound good. Any thoughts ?

The VS shouldn't go in the rear corners.

Having had pretty much every possible configuration over the years, here's what I've found unbeatable:

* Run 7.1 rather than 5.1.

* Use ProLogic IIx on ALL surround soundtracks to matrix the extra 2 surround channels.
You will swear that the 5.1 films were mixed that way... Much better 3D spread of sound, a wider sweet spot, better 360-degree pans, better depth.
(Remember that cinemas & mixing theatres use multiple arrays of speakers down the sides and rear - not a single pair !)

* In your case, lose the HTIB speakers and put the RC10s at the rear wherever convenient (but ideally a little further in from the side walls).

* Wall-mount the VS directly to either side of the couch. Dipole mode will probably work best.

* Mount all four surrounds a foot or so above ear-level.

This will give you really sensational results, especially if the VS aren't as diffuse as some other dipole designs (as I suspect).

It's also worth finding out from that Energy thread how the dipole phasing works with the VS.
Are the 2 side midrange drivers out of phase with each other, or out of phase with the front tweeter/woofer as well? (Hopefully the latter).

Let us know how you go...
Edited by Electric_Haggis - 8/23/12 at 3:03pm
post #490 of 628
I prefer dipoles to monopoles or bipoles. I used to have a pair of small Kenwood dipoles that I enjoyed very much. While the overall quality of the drivers can be debated, they did an excellent job of spreading the sound and creating a diffuse atmosphere. One thing I've noticed is that many of the speakers that are sold as dipoles today are not labeled left or right where as my Kenwoods where. The kenwood did have one big driver facing forward but the other drivers on the sides faced forward and back.

When I moved to a set of Definitives I also got their BP bipole surrounds thinking that those would be just as good if not better than the Kenwoods. Well, they did spread the rear sound out but I felt that there was something missing. There were too many times when sound from movies was plain awkward and annoying because I could tell were it was coming from. When I got a pair of iQ8 dipoles to go with my KEF set I was expecting to experience the sound I had with the Kenwoods. The iQ8s weren't labeled left/right but I figured that since they were "dipole" it wouldn't matter. I was wrong. While they too could spread out sound like the Definitives they still didn't have that nice diffuse sound like the Kenwoods. I was pretty disapointed again. Later I learned that dipole speakers should have one driver set in-phase facing forward to the front speakers and the other one out-of-phase facing back. So, why is it that companies are selling dipoles that aren't marked left/right? My guess is that it's to make manufacturing more easy. I found a post by Paul Scarpelli here at AVS where he said that it matters. I agree. http://www.avsforum.com/t/792578/do-dipole-surrounds-come-with-left-and-right-option#post_9550575

I haven't been able to find many dipoles that are labeled and even the Energy dipoles I'm looking at don't seem to be labeled. I did check out Atlantic Tech's 2400 and 1400 dipoles and they are labeled left and right, probably, as they should be. So what's up, are these companies that are selling unlabeled dipoles actually selling pseudo-dipoles? It would be nice to see some documentation from the people that developed the design.
post #491 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucknuts07 View Post

I have read thru this thread, but still a little confused. I have a smaller office, about 12x12, in which i have recently bought energy speakers (rc-lcr center- rc 30 front, outlaw lfm-1 plus sub), and was trying to use rc-10's as my surrounds in a 5.1 set up. The couch is up against the wall, and the Rc10s were only a few feet to each side of the couch but produced a direct sound. So last night, I decided to order a pair of energy Vs surrounds, which I believe a switchable from bipole and dipole. Ideally I would like to mount these 2 vs speakers on the back wall, towards the corners of each wall. I do have the ability to mount to the sides of each couch, but already had satellite speakers mounted on back wall, and hate to mess with custom paint job. any thoughts on these speakers, my setup ? Should receive the vs surrounds by tommorrow.
Here is the link.. http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/reviews/542021944/energy-vs-surround-speaker

I have almost the same space you have and my couch is against the back wall just as yours. I am searching for the best option for surrounds. The only place I can mount the surrounds are the corners at about 7 feet high. My roof is 9 feet. Does anyone have an input that can help us??? Monopoles, bipoles, dipoles......??????
post #492 of 628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOMV View Post

I have almost the same space you have and my couch is against the back wall just as yours. I am searching for the best option for surrounds. The only place I can mount the surrounds are the corners at about 7 feet high. My roof is 9 feet. Does anyone have an input that can help us??? Monopoles, bipoles, dipoles......??????


In that situation, I'd go for Mirage OMD5 omnipoles.
post #493 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis View Post

In that situation, I'd go for Mirage OMD5 omnipoles.

Much appreciated!!. They look nice!!! Any reason to choose those in particular?.

Ps:
I want my rear speakers to be "invisible" in a way that makes it dificult to point them as many of the guys say. That is why I was looking for dipoles. Maybe is ignorance by my part but that is what I used to believe. cool.gif
post #494 of 628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOMV View Post

Much appreciated!!. They look nice!!! Any reason to choose those in particular?.
Ps:
I want my rear speakers to be "invisible" in a way that makes it dificult to point them as many of the guys say. That is why I was looking for dipoles. Maybe is ignorance by my part but that is what I used to believe. cool.gif

Yup. Me too. Really, most of us on this thread are chasing that kind of diffuse sound.

Most find that Omnipoles are best at disappearing, especially when placement options are limited and you're not able to run 7.1 (always preferable).

Have a read back a few pages, and you'll see more discussion on the Omnipoles.

Unfortunately, the OMD5 is the biggest omni that Mirage make. A 6", 6.5" or even 8 inch version would be pretty wonderful...
post #495 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis View Post

Yup. Me too. Really, most of us on this thread are chasing that kind of diffuse sound.
Most find that Omnipoles are best at disappearing, especially when placement options are limited and you're not able to run 7.1 (always preferable).
Have a read back a few pages, and you'll see more discussion on the Omnipoles.
Unfortunately, the OMD5 is the biggest omni that Mirage make. A 6", 6.5" or even 8 inch version would be pretty wonderful...

6.5" or 8" would be sweet!!.. I'll read a few pages as you suggested. Thanks!
post #496 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by levy07 View Post

should i mount these to sides of wall? Can I do a 7.1 in this room with two speakers behind and overhead? Currently using Optimus LXII on sides. Thanks.
525x525px-LL-f12ea1c1_vbattach247667.jpeg
525x525px-LL-019aecd5_vbattach247668.jpeg
525x525px-LL-dd582c21_vbattach247669.jpeg

Yeah. You'll want to mount those to the side walls just a bit above ear height and angle them downward slightly. See if you can give a least a few inches of clearance from the rear of the tweeter and the wall so that it can reflect off the wall. The magic of that setup is the big image those dipole tweeters can throw up.
post #497 of 628
You might not like this suggestion. Based on those images, my suggestion would be to tear the room apart, set your speakers and then move the furniture back into place to suit the speaker placement. The point, too often our thinking gets locked by furniture placement as opposed to speaker placement.

(It's just a suggestion.)
post #498 of 628
This thread is very confusing......for a simpleton like myself. I think we should add to the front page, a list of the best surround speakers in order.....thats just my opinion.
post #499 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimwyn View Post

This thread is very confusing......for a simpleton like myself. I think we should add to the front page, a list of the best surround speakers in order.....thats just my opinion.

Two problems, "best" at best, is subjective and "best" for a room, is also quasi at best.

(And FWIW, no, I'm not playing on the word "best.")

Depending on the room and how the walls and opening are laid out, direct radiating might be best as the wall is open, away from the listening position. Then you have wide surrounds, vs back surrounds and in this case, a 7.1 system, in use together, for me, both is the correct answer. So the point, the best answer, when it comes to which is the best to use is, it depends, and I'm not trying to give a cute or flaky response. In the simple, in my opinion, there is no correct answer as to which is "best" because "depends" is the correct answer.

(We don't travel further than local; 1,200 mile, local road trip radius. Barbados sounds like a beautiful, peaceful place we'd love to come visit.)
post #500 of 628
Hi,i'm in the same dilemma about surround.My room size is 11.5' x 15' and 11.5' height.Now i'm using 5.2 set up,is it necessary i add 2 surrounds to make it 7.2?
post #501 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by sherr127 View Post

Hi,i'm in the same dilemma about surround.My room size is 11.5' x 15' and 11.5' height.Now i'm using 5.2 set up,is it necessary i add 2 surrounds to make it 7.2?

In doing so, many report a noticeably larger sound field and see the improvement in a very positive fashion. What's your room set up, as in, furniture placement and walls to hang speakers on? Will the room handle two more speakers hanging around. Our room won't. A word to the wise, after so many speakers, if the room is not a dedicated home theater room, the place starts looking more like a speaker demo room then a living room.

I not trying to discourage you from adding another pair of surround speakers, I'm just sharing as to how this additional pair of speakers will affect the overall look feel of the listening room.
post #502 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by sherr127 View Post

Hi,i'm in the same dilemma about surround.My room size is 11.5' x 15' and 11.5' height.Now i'm using 5.2 set up,is it necessary i add 2 surrounds to make it 7.2?
Even your 5.2 set-up isn't "necessary", but adding 2 surround speakers does have some noticeable advantages: greater wrap-around envelopment, better rear-vs-side separation, more stable imaging in the surround field. The only way this works is if your seating area is a few feet away from the back wall. If your seating is at or near the back wall, then better to stick to your current 5.2 layout.
post #503 of 628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Even your 5.2 set-up isn't "necessary", but adding 2 surround speakers does have some noticeable advantages: greater wrap-around envelopment, better rear-vs-side separation, more stable imaging in the surround field. The only way this works is if your seating area is a few feet away from the back wall. If your seating is at or near the back wall, then better to stick to your current 5.2 layout.

Agreed.
But even when you're butted up against the back wall, having 4 surrounds will still improve things.

In my previous room (which you can see by clicking on my signature below), I had a pair of dual-monopoles wired for 4 channels (I wasn't able to have speakers at the sides).
This was way better than 2 channels in either bipole or dipole, which I initially tried with the same speakers.

If I did it again in that room, a row of 4 Mirage OMD5's would be ideal !
post #504 of 628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimwyn View Post

This thread is very confusing......for a simpleton like myself. I think we should add to the front page, a list of the best surround speakers in order.....thats just my opinion.

There's certainly no order of preference, but I've listed my personal favourites at the top of the page in the form of a Poll.

CAST YOUR VOTES ABOVE !!!!

biggrin.gif
post #505 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis View Post

There's certainly no order of preference, but I've listed my personal favourites at the top of the page in the form of a Poll.
CAST YOUR VOTES ABOVE !!!!
biggrin.gif

Thanks for at least trying to assist. It is much appreciated.
post #506 of 628
I did not read the whole thread, but I thought there was some agreement that dipoles are no longer required. Dipoles were used initially because Dolby Surround was frequency limited and it was a monaural channel. Dipoles were used to give the illusion of spaciousness. Today our surround systems are designed with full range frequency response in addition to being discrete. IOW, the need for dipole is not as great as it once was. A mixer can do phase tricks between the channels if they want to hide the origination point of the sound. That doesn't mean that dipoles are wrong, but as others have pointed out, finding a true dipole speaker today is hard.

I have used bipolars for surround, but I have recently moved to all direct radiators and personally I find that I am liking that setup more.
post #507 of 628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toknowshita View Post

I did not read the whole thread, but I thought there was some agreement that dipoles are no longer required. Dipoles were used initially because Dolby Surround was frequency limited and it was a monaural channel. Dipoles were used to give the illusion of spaciousness. Today our surround systems are designed with full range frequency response in addition to being discrete. IOW, the need for dipole is not as great as it once was. A mixer can do phase tricks between the channels if they want to hide the origination point of the sound. That doesn't mean that dipoles are wrong, but as others have pointed out, finding a true dipole speaker today is hard.

To a point.
Mixers can do a certain amount to dodge localisation - but the point people always seem to forget is that a mixing theatre or cinema has multiple speakers at the sides and rear.

A home setup will usually only have 2 or 4 speakers.

One of the goals of di/bi/quad/omni-poles is to help overcome this, as well as providing a larger sweet-spot.
post #508 of 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeMan458 View Post

Two problems, "best" at best, is subjective and "best" for a room, is also quasi at best.
(And FWIW, no, I'm not playing on the word "best.")
Depending on the room and how the walls and opening are laid out, direct radiating might be best as the wall is open, away from the listening position. Then you have wide surrounds, vs back surrounds and in this case, a 7.1 system, in use together, for me, both is the correct answer. So the point, the best answer, when it comes to which is the best to use is, it depends, and I'm not trying to give a cute or flaky response. In the simple, in my opinion, there is no correct answer as to which is "best" because "depends" is the correct answer.
(We don't travel further than local; 1,200 mile, local road trip radius. Barbados sounds like a beautiful, peaceful place we'd love to come visit.)

You make a vital point. Room acoustics add such a variable to it all that flat out statements regarding what is best are really impossible.

I think it's possible to judge speakers on how the drivers, crossovers and cabinet perform...in other words, the quality of a particular speaker.

In a highly reflective room it might be safe to say that direct radiators would be best.
post #509 of 628
Are the mirage omd5 being closed out? I would like to get these to replace my current bookshelf speakers that I am using as rears. Ideally I'd like to get 4 of them to go to 7.1.

My couch is about a foot away from the back wall and I do not have a wall to the left of me.

Would I benefit from placing 2 omd5 on behind the couch on some stands and then the other 2 mounted on the wall with the tweeter facing down to the sitting area?


post #510 of 628
i have finally decided (and bought) my rear speakers in a 7.1 set up which are the Energy CR-10s. The price was great and i was VERY sure thats what i wanted for the rears. Now i still have not purchased any sides as yet and was wondering if the OMD 5s could work in my case. My LP is about 9ft away from where the side surrounds will be, are the OMD-5s good enough for a case like that?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › SURROUND SPEAKERS - Bipole, Dipole, Quadpole, Omnipole... WHICH ONE?