[Tallen234]

I am going to try changing my standard 5.1 HT by adding front heights to the equation. From what I have read, there appears to be three different audio formats available, DD PLiiz, DTS Neo X and Audyssey DSX. From what I have read, the first two suggest placing the heights over the L and R fronts at 30 degrees from the center line. Audyssey recommends 45 degrees. Has anyone faced this dilemma about where to actually place the heights? I am thinking about fudging it and placing them at 40 degrees or so. I know this may be over-analyzing, but I just wanted to get some advice before I go drilling holes

.


Also, although I may be limited in placement, how "high" should I place the speakers? I know Audyssey recommends 45 degrees up from the listening position (how can you actually measure this?).


Thanks!

 

[Tulpa]

They're not hard and fast rules that you have to get exactly, just optimal placement guidelines that the companies have found by their testing. As you can see, they don't always have the same guidelines.


If you can, have something or someone hold them up while you listen to see if you can't find your own optimal placement before committing to them. But IMO, 40 degrees should be okay.


As for how high, 45 degrees is another "optimal placement" as deemed by Audyssey, but even they acknowledge it isn't always possible depending on your room.

http://ask.audyssey.com/entries/1575...eight-speakers

 

[schan1269]

I use height in my room. I didn't follow Dolby or Audyssey rules, cause for me to do so would have resulted in me tearing down a wall with a custom made wall unit from 1957. I "varied" the width. The height itself is just about right. The width for me was the "adjustment".

 

[Tallen234]

Thanks for the responses! I will probably fudge the heights to 35 to 40 degrees (in between the DSX and DTS recs).


I am thinking about using the following:


LCR - Ascend Acoustics Sierra 1's

RearLR - Ascend CBM 170's

Heights - Ascend HTM 200's.


THE CMB 170's are much more robust than the 200's, so I am not sure how I should place them. Is it more important to have a more robust speaker as a rear or as a height?

 

[Tulpa]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallen234 /forum/post/20766946

Is it more important to have a more robust speaker as a rear or as a height?

I honestly don't think it matters too much to get hung up about it, but since heights are derived from the front, I think I'd put the more robust ones there. But I think the argument can be made for them in the surrounds, too. If they can be easily moved, try them both ways.

 

[Mpray1983]

Listening position to front wall is A

Front wall to speaker is B

Speaker to listening position is C


A^2 x B^2 = C^2


If I remember correctly from algebra


If a and b are equal distances that should equal a 45 degree angle.


Say you sit 10 ft away

Then put the speakers 10 ft above that point on the front wall.


I'm sure there is an audyssey help section for this somewhere.

 

[walbert]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallen234 /forum/post/20766946


THE CMB 170's are much more robust than the 200's, so I am not sure how I should place them. Is it more important to have a more robust speaker as a rear or as a height?

When you say "rears", do you mean the surrounds for a 5.1 system? I would probably put the more robust speakers in that position - they're discrete channels. Unless by more robust you mean more efficient, and you have to cover a large distance from the heights to the seating area.


With Yamaha's presence/height scheme, the channels are band-passed, so having substantial speakers installed doesn't make a lot of sense. Since they are derived/interpolated from discrete channels (in any scheme), I wouldn't worry about extreme LF extension or similar (but also remember, for the most part a 5.1 system doesn't require surrounds with extreme LF extension either).


Ultimately, as long as you set-up bass management, even if LF extension is needed, there shouldn't be any "huge gaping holes" - so if one set of speakers is easier to mount or looks better in a given position, I'd probably just go that route (I know, so technical).

 

[Tallen234]

Wow. Thanks for the help.


I will put the "better" speakers for the surrounds and use the "smaller" speakers as heights.


I will probably put the heights at 40 degrees (which is a good thing as there is actually a smoke detector at 30 degrees!).

 

[bguzman]

This is from Dolby

PLIIz Diagram


This is what I did.

I like the larger front stage that front heights give me in my set up.

 

[schan1269]

I think you are the first person I've ever seen use Dipoles for Height...


Talk about a "bent rule"...

The Pepsi sign is a nice touch.

 

[bguzman]



Quote:
Originally Posted by schan1269 /forum/post/20774693


I think you are the first person I've ever seen use Dipoles for Height...


Talk about a "bent rule"...

The Pepsi sign is a nice touch.

They used to be my surround back speakers. I tried KSB 1.1, standard two ways, and these and I liked these better in my situation, what else can I say

. They sound really nice for football, crowd noise and such.

 

[schan1269]

I didn't say anything was wrong with it, all I said was it was a bent rule...


Rules in audio are always bent. Show me a home theater with the "perfect set-up" and I'll show you the way to the SINGLE La-Z-Boy in the room...

 

[bguzman]

No worries man. I don't really think about rules when trying out new things. I will try combinations of what is available, evaluate, and chose the one I think is best.