AVS Forum banner

101 - 120 of 438 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,244 Posts
Have a question on what speakers to add to my 9.1 In-ceiling speakers and where to put them behind or in front listening area, or RH? I have 9.1 with FH and want to go to 11.2. Also would it sound funny if I have 2 as FH and add 2 in-ceiling.
Having Front Height and Rear or Middle Overhead would be fine, but if you can do ceiling speakers, I'd strongly suggest doing front/rear overhead and removing your front height.

When looking at any upgrade you need to keep in mind where you want to be in the future and plan for that final configuration.

Atmos speakers can be:

Front Overhead
Middle Overhead
Rear Overhead

Whatever your current configuration, the end goal is this:



Any step you take, make sure the end result is on that graphic. ;)

Dolby 7.1.6 Speaker Guide
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
So If I decided to keep the FH. Would you recommend the rear in-ceiling or the RH? If the rear ceiling would I do the #8 or #9 position on the chart above. Also would the sound be off if they are in the ceiling for the rears as apposed to the walls.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,244 Posts
So If I decided to keep the FH. Would you recommend the rear in-ceiling or the RH? If the rear ceiling would I do the #8 or #9 position on the chart above. Also would the sound be off if they are in the ceiling for the rears as apposed to the walls.
Optimal is 4 ceiling speakers at 7 & 9.

I'd suggest putting 2 in position 9. If anything, you will like the ceiling speaker effects much better and will buy 2 more and put them in position 7.

These are just effects speakers. You don't need to go crazy. Polk RC80i's are only $150/pair and will sound great. That's why I suggest doing 4, it's cheap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Optimal is 4 ceiling speakers at 7 & 9.

I'd suggest putting 2 in position 9. If anything, you will like the ceiling speaker effects much better and will buy 2 more and put them in position 7.

These are just effects speakers. You don't need to go crazy. Polk RC80i's are only $150/pair and will sound great. That's why I suggest doing 4, it's cheap.
Agree....

7.1.4

dont go over board on ceiling speakers....seen people in england spending like £500 pair on em....no point IMO unless your set up is like £10000 lol

usual 5.1 or 5.2

then front top with rear top

remember, u can always adjust the frequencies and volume of the tops accordingly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,012 Posts
Decided to toe in my heights(Volt 6's) and I think I'm actually liking it more than them aiming straight out.
Wondering if I have to re run audyssey now though. Really like to avoid that if possible lol
Think it'll be fine though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,354 Posts
The reason I don't aim mine at the MLP is two fold:
- Since I'm using only Heights, I like the tweeter first reflection point to be slightly farther out on the ceiling (not way out) to help with the illusion that the sound is farther away from the wall and out in the room more. (But this could also be why my system sounds better to me, set as TF/TR instead of FH/RH)
- Since moving sounds around the room requires the blending of multiple speakers, I don't want one of those to be out of spec (spec is straight out) and possibly throw off the accuracy of the positioning by the renderer by having that one speaker in a group or pairing be more prominent than the others that are positioned correctly, to me this works the same way with actual in-ceiling speakers that also aren't supposed to be aimed.
ALtlOff,
You seem appear to be a proponent of heights for atmos and wanted your thoughts on a proposed setup. I currently have in wall front heights (polk rc55i) with aimable tweeters and surrounds mounted on rear wall also relatively high. The in wall heights used to be main L/R and installed high for aesthetic reasons which is why the wall mounted rears are also high. The rears are polk owm3 which are curved. Right now they are mounted upside down so tweeter is aimed down. Both front heights and rear surrounds are about 6.5 ft off ground with 8 ft ceilings. MLP is about 16ft from front heights. Rears are about 7 ft behind and 4-7ft off to sides. Would like to re purpose front in wall heights and rear wall mounted surrounds as 4 atmos heights. Would then get stand mounted surrounds and place in rear corners under what would become rear heights. Can't do side surrounds in my room. Would get a Denon X4300 to handle the setup. So you think that would work? Would 6.5 ft be high enough for the front and rear heights? How would you aim the tweeters on the in wall fronts and position the curved face rear on-walls? What would you suggest as the height for the new surround satellites on stands? The linked thread below, which is a similar question, has pics of the room. Thanks for your input.

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/89-speakers/2837761-help-transition-atmos-setup.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,349 Posts
ALtlOff,
You seem appear to be a proponent of heights for atmos and wanted your thoughts on a proposed setup. I currently have in wall front heights (polk rc55i) with aimable tweeters and surrounds mounted on rear wall also relatively high. The in wall heights used to be main L/R and installed high for aesthetic reasons which is why the wall mounted rears are also high. The rears are polk owm3 which are curved. Right now they are mounted upside down so tweeter is aimed down. Both front heights and rear surrounds are about 6.5 ft off ground with 8 ft ceilings. MLP is about 16ft from front heights. Rears are about 7 ft behind and 4-7ft off to sides. Would like to re purpose front in wall heights and rear wall mounted surrounds as 4 atmos heights. Would then get stand mounted surrounds and place in rear corners under what would become rear heights. Can't do side surrounds in my room. Would get a Denon X4300 to handle the setup. So you think that would work? Would 6.5 ft be high enough for the front and rear heights? How would you aim the tweeters on the in wall fronts and position the curved face rear on-walls? What would you suggest as the height for the new surround satellites on stands? The linked thread below, which is a similar question, has pics of the room. Thanks for your input.

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/89-speakers/2837761-help-transition-atmos-setup.html
While 6.5' isn't really high enough to give you decent separation between the layers, the aimable tweeters and flipping them so that the tweeter is high and can be aimed upward may be your saving grace, it's at least worth some experimentation.
And while you could certainly try and raise the Rear Heights, I'm thinking consistent height with the Front Heights may actually be a better choice in your situation.

Also because of this I'd keep the surrounds as close to seated ear height as possible, just to have them as low as possible, without going to low, to help with separation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,354 Posts
While 6.5' isn't really high enough to give you decent separation between the layers, the aimable tweeters and flipping them so that the tweeter is high and can be aimed upward may be your saving grace, it's at least worth some experimentation.
And while you could certainly try and raise the Rear Heights, I'm thinking consistent height with the Front Heights may actually be a better choice in your situation.

Also because of this I'd keep the surrounds as close to seated ear height as possible, just to have them as low as possible, without going to low, to help with separation.
Thanks, really appreciate the input. Need to think about this. It's a bit of a risk if it doesn't work well as the Denon X4300 (minimum to get 4 atmos) is no cheap AVR. As you may already know SVS pushes their prime elevation speakers for atmos heights but clearly they are designed to be direct radiating, aimed toward the MLP. Are you recommending aiming tweeters at ceiling for reflection downwards primarily to give the effect of better layer separation in this particular situation or you recommend that even if they were mounted at ceiling height? In your proposed upward aimed tweeters what type of speakers do you tell AVR you have?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,349 Posts
Thanks, really appreciate the input. Need to think about this. It's a bit of a risk if it doesn't work well as the Denon X4300 (minimum to get 4 atmos) is no cheap AVR. As you may already know SVS pushes their prime elevation speakers for atmos heights but clearly they are designed to be direct radiating, aimed toward the MLP. Are you recommending aiming tweeters at ceiling for reflection downwards primarily to give the effect of better layer separation in this particular situation or you recommend that even if they were mounted at ceiling height? In your proposed upward aimed tweeters what type of speakers do you tell AVR you have?
As far as the tweeters, I'm thinking that the "ability" to aim them up, (plus having them higher in general) is a better option since they're are not right up against the ceiling.
You'd set them as Front Heights.
 

·
Bass and Hi-Fi Enthusiast
Joined
·
3,173 Posts
Just wanted to chime in and ask a question. I recently got a Marantz SR-6011 and after a long time of having to switch between PLIIz with my front heights and 7.1 for the rear heights (using a Pioneer VSX-44 7.2ch AVR before), I can finally have real Atmos. My setup is 5.2.4 with the atmos speakers being front and rear heights. Pics in sig if interested. Anyways, I'm loving it both during Atmos and matrixed Dolby surround.

I have my heights all angled and facing my MLP. I believe this is recommended.

My first question is whether I should upgrade those heights or not. They are currently cheaper Polk T15s. They are considerably lower SQ speakers then my main 5.2. My 5.2 speakers are B&W for the Fronts, Center, and Surrounds and Rythmik FV15HP for subs. His important is it for the heights (Atmos speakers) to be higher SQ speakers?

Second question, can someone link me to where Dolby says front/rear heights are an approved Atmos config. I figure it is since my SR-6011 had it as configurable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,349 Posts
Just wanted to chime in and ask a question. I recently got a Marantz SR-6011 and after a long time of having to switch between PLIIz with my front heights and 7.1 for the rear heights (using a Pioneer VSX-44 7.2ch AVR before), I can finally have real Atmos. My setup is 5.2.4 with the atmos speakers being front and rear heights. Pics in sig if interested. Anyways, I'm loving it both during Atmos and matrixed Dolby surround.

I have my heights all angled and facing my MLP. I believe this is recommended.

My first question is whether I should upgrade those heights or not. They are currently cheaper Polk T15s. They are considerably lower SQ speakers then my main 5.2. My 5.2 speakers are B&W for the Fronts, Center, and Surrounds and Rythmik FV15HP for subs. His important is it for the heights (Atmos speakers) to be higher SQ speakers?

Second question, can someone link me to where Dolby says front/rear heights are an approved Atmos config. I figure it is since my SR-6011 had it as configurable.
Couple of things:
-Actually they shouldn't be aimed at the MLP, the algorithm for the formats is designed to use multiple speakers at the same time in order to attempt place sounds where speakers aren't, therefore having individual speakers stand out by aiming them at you may throw off the effect.

-I personally feel like Height or Overhead speakers should be treated as any other surrounds when it comes to sound quality, just to keep sound as seamless as you can. If you're swapping them in stages, do the fronts first.

-I don't have the link, but most of the diagrams will actually show the Front and Rear Heights still as in-ceilings, this is another reason not to aim speakers at you. Remember, positioning has more to do with angles than anything, as long as the proper angles are achieved for those labels, the accuracy should be there, Heights or In-ceiling, In-ceiling will just give you better "direct overhead" effects instead of "above you" effect.
 

·
Bass and Hi-Fi Enthusiast
Joined
·
3,173 Posts
Couple of things:

-Actually they shouldn't be aimed at the MLP, the algorithm for the formats is designed to use multiple speakers at the same time in order to attempt place sounds where speakers aren't, therefore having individual speakers stand out by aiming them at you may throw off the effect.



-I personally feel like Height or Overhead speakers should be treated as any other surrounds when it comes to sound quality, just to keep sound as seamless as you can. If you're swapping them in stages, do the fronts first.



-I don't have the link, but most of the diagrams will actually show the Front and Rear Heights still as in-ceilings, this is another reason not to aim speakers at you. Remember, positioning has more to do with angles than anything, as long as the proper angles are achieved for those labels, the accuracy should be there, Heights or In-ceiling, In-ceiling will just give you better "direct overhead" effects instead of "above you" effect.


Thanks for the reply. I've been told by various folks to aim the front and rear heights at MLP and not to "according to the Dolby Spec". I've never seen a spec saying either that came from Dolby though so I would love to see. The only thing I have to go off of is the photo from the Marantz setup screen in which the heights are aimed towards the listening area. Arguable, the MLP

 
  • Like
Reactions: blatz8

·
Registered
Joined
·
952 Posts
...My first question is whether I should upgrade those heights or not. They are currently cheaper Polk T15s. They are considerably lower SQ speakers then my main 5.2. My 5.2 speakers are B&W for the Fronts, Center, and Surrounds and Rythmik FV15HP for subs. His important is it for the heights (Atmos speakers) to be higher SQ speakers?

...
I used to think that you can use almost anything for surrounds/rears/heights etc. Then I upgraded my surrounds from T15s to NHT SuperZeros. I no longer think that you can use anything. The T15 is just really, really poor and you're definitely losing out on some detail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blatz8

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
Thanks for the reply. I've been told by various folks to aim the front and rear heights at MLP and not to "according to the Dolby Spec". I've never seen a spec saying either that came from Dolby though so I would love to see. The only thing I have to go off of is the photo from the Marantz setup screen in which the heights are aimed towards the listening area. Arguable, the MLP

Well going by that photo, the front heights are actually slightly pointing away from the MLP, deffo not at the MLP, front heights are actually meant to point straight ahead, to fill up height from front to rear.
 

·
Bass and Hi-Fi Enthusiast
Joined
·
3,173 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
952 Posts

·
Bass and Hi-Fi Enthusiast
Joined
·
3,173 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
952 Posts
They're not outrageously expensive. Maybe I'll get 4 of them. How do they compare to the T15s in size?
They're a bit smaller than the T15s.
 

·
Bass and Hi-Fi Enthusiast
Joined
·
3,173 Posts
I asked a question relevant to this in the Marantz SR-6011 Thread here.

Basically I am unsure if having my speakers as they are and configured in my AVR as they are, whether I am getting the atmos channel info sent to the front and rear heights or if the AVR is doing something else since they aren't technically upward firing or in ceiling atmos speakers. Anyone here know?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
430 Posts
I have a fairly deep bi-polar speaker that sits about 2 feet from the wall. The distance away from the wall plus the depth of my cabinet will put my front heights a couple feet deeper from MLP than my L/C/R speakers.

Is this something the AVR's room calibration can account for? Or will I be doing more harm than good adding height speakers?
 
101 - 120 of 438 Posts
Top