I'm at a loss when it comes to this. I'm looking at bi-polars, di-polars, quad-polars - trying to figure out what is ideal. I'm sticking with 6.1 for now, and have been thinking of using di-polars or quads on the side as rear surrounds. I 'could' put bi-polars in the rear if I run some long cables. Anyone have experience with this? Curious as to what results to expect.
-
-
Quad polars are useful in a 7.1 setup to provide 5.1 or 6.1 coverage. That's the suggestion I got from the THX guys at the last CEDIA show I went to.
Di vs Bi, is a personal choice IMHO. Do you like direct sounding surrounds? Do you like diffuse sounding surrounds? Usually di or bi would be on the side of the listening position, with the drivers facing forward and backwards, to bounce and fill the back sound scape. I don't have a 6.1 setup myself, so that's how I have it. I'm not familiar with center surround placement. I suppose you could use quads and do the 6.1 setup (both rears are center surround, each forward firing driver is it's own side surround). -
It doesn't make sense for me to do 7.1 - I don't think my living room is large enough to justify it... and I don't really care anyway. I'd rather have it less directional... immersion is the goal.
Is it just me, or does THX mode on receivers suck? It seems to over-utilize the center channel - I guess it is supposed to, but to me it doesn't sound as good.Comment
-
Bi and Di polars were really designed to work well with the original dolby pro-logic. There were no discrete surrounds in DPL, so the goal was to make a diffuse soundfield, which the bi and di polars excel at.
With Dolby 5.1, 7.1, DTS, etc etc, the surround channels are discrete. Most people seem to prefer conventional speakers in this application, since the diffuse soundfields the polars produce detracts form the neato sound effects you can hear from the direct-radiating speakers. Polars will give you a larger and more diffuse soundfield, but will not do as good a job reproducing detailed surround info. Personally, I think the polars are more suited to the front channels. I have a pair of Mirage M5si bipolar speakers (not the new-style Mirages, ugh) and the soundstage they throw up is phenomenal.
And, in movie playback, the majority of the sound is supposed to come from the center channel. Thats why its important to match the fronts to the middle, with the rears not being nearly as important.
EDIT: You can always try running a phantom center. As long as you are in the middle, it'll sound fine. The center channel is really for off-axis listening. If you have your speakers placed correctly, you should get solid imaging when listening to music, and it should be the same with movies. In fact, the word "stereo" is derived from the Greek word for "solid" in reference to the way the speakers should create solid localizations of sounds. It just requires that you do the ol' sitting at the point of the triangle kind of listening.Comment
-
Ah... so get bookshelves perhaps?Originally posted by SteelratComment
-
Originally posted by Miscue
Thats my preference, and frankly, its a lot cheaper, especially since its not as critical to match them. Don't get me wrong, the polars are nice, it really depends on what you are looking for in sound quality. I just know that the recommendations I have seen have been for direct radiators, and thats my personal preference too.Comment
-
Heres a nice little explanation I just got form the Polk website:
First some history. The earlier types of surround decoders, like Dolby Surround and Dolby Pro Logic, have one little problem, the rear channel information is mono. And a mono signal does not do a great job of creating an enveloping, surround sound experience. In order to create the illusion of such an enveloping sound field, many people promoted the use of speakers that have diffuse sound dispersion, such as Dipolar and Bipolar radiating speakers. These types of speakers have speakers on two sides of the cabinet in order to direct much of the sound away from your ears. The sound bounces around the room and gets to your ears indirectly. That creates an enveloping and life-like sound field. We recommend that you do not consider diffuse sound-field speakers that sell for less than $400/pair, because the basic audio quality will suffer too much for the sake of the diffuse polar pattern feature. Under $400, get the best sounding speaker you can get which fits the location you have chosen and is easy to mount. Click here for more information on Dipolar and Bipolar speakers.
The new digital decoding systems such as Dolby Digital (AC-3) and DTS are "discrete" systems. That means the surround channels are stereo and there's a lot less need for bouncing sound around the room. Some experts argue that a direct radiating speaker gives the most precise imaging with discrete digital decoding systems. Others maintain that diffuse sound dispersion speakers are better for discrete digital decoding systems too. Our feeling is that the speaker placement is the critical determining factor. For example, if you need to place the surround speakers very close to your listening position, a direct radiating (conventional forward firing) speaker is not your best choice. See Surround Speaker Placement Tips for more information.Comment
-
Ah... thanks!Comment
-
The advantage of a 7.1 system is that you can reconfigure the drivers to provide 4.1 (DPL) 5.1 or 6.1 on the fly depending on how you mix the output. Since there is no 7.1 conent out there (and very little 6.1 really) it's just a handy setup from that perspective. Personally I'm not planning an upgrade from 5.1 any time soon. I may pick up some used ES9000 gear (5.1 Sony) from a friend who is putting together a new 7.1 system.Comment
-
Well, after some more research - looks like it is still appropriate to use bi/dipolars on the side... according to Crutchfield and some others: http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/IS...placement.html
My receiver does 7.1, but I think that's way overkill. 5.1 is my goal. I don't understand the logic of having more speakers behind you, than in front of you - when your ears can't really distinguish stuff from behind very well - an idea I learned from rear-fill and car audio.
However, I just decided to add the .1 to my system first. I figure that 3.1 is better than 5.0 at the moment, particularly for music. VTF-2 inbound! http://www.hsuresearch.com/vtf2_soundvision.pdf
Looks like Klipsch has some decent surrounds that aren't freakin' expensive... what the heck happened to Polk? They used to be cheaper - no longer a bargain.Comment
-
Wow, and I thought I was slumming visiting the polk website. Crutchfield? I mean, the stuff is okay, but don't take anything they say as being 100% accurate.Originally posted by MiscueWell, after some more research - looks like it is still appropriate to use bi/dipolars on the side... according to Crutchfield and some others: http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/IS...placement.html
My receiver does 7.1, but I think that's way overkill. 5.1 is my goal. I don't understand the logic of having more speakers behind you, than in front of you - when your ears can't really distinguish stuff from behind very well - an idea I learned from rear-fill and car audio.
However, I just decided to add the .1 to my system first. I figure that 3.1 is better than 5.0 at the moment, particularly for music. VTF-2 inbound! http://www.hsuresearch.com/vtf2_soundvision.pdf
Looks like Klipsch has some decent surrounds that aren't freakin' expensive... what the heck happened to Polk? They used to be cheaper - no longer a bargain.Comment
-
Neither do I. But I found a few other places that were in agreement - as well as some with different opinions. That was the only link I could remember!Originally posted by SteelratComment
-
Yeah, that makes sense then. It really depends on what you are looking for in sound quality. Same thing goes for front speakers, thats why there are direct radiators, dipolars, and bipolars.Originally posted by Miscue
Good luck in your search! Out of curiosity, what do you run for your fronts?Comment
-
My toys:Originally posted by Steelrat
Axiom M60ti - I was going to get Klipsch RF35s, but these are more musical and are just as good with movies.
<img src="http://www.axiomaudio.com/global/images/products/main/M60BlackPairGrillOff.jpg">
Klipsch RC25
<img src="http://www.klipsch.com/media/Photos/RC25_large.jpg">
Yamaha RX-V2500
<img src="http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/prod_images/rxv2500_main.gif"><img src="http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/prod_images/RXV2500_SM.jpg">
HSU VTF-2 MK 2
<img src="http://store1.yimg.com/I/hsusubs_1831_336992">Comment
Comment