Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Re: QS4s or M2s for surrounds
#110011 09/06/05 07:29 PM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
local
OP Offline
local
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
And now for your amazement and amusement - the kitchen area in this God-forsaken 7'x20some' room

Same link as earlier


M22s, QS4s, M2 center, Hsu stf-1.
Re: QS4s or M2s for surrounds
#110012 09/06/05 07:30 PM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
local
OP Offline
local
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
I guess I always though music coming from behind you wouldn't be heard well - ear structure is in the way.

????????????????


M22s, QS4s, M2 center, Hsu stf-1.
Re: QS4s or M2s for surrounds
#110013 09/07/05 03:45 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 353
devotee
Offline
devotee
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 353
I had used full range speakers in the past as surrounds. I had Mirage M3-si speakers for mains and Mirage 895is for surrounds. The only difference between the front and rear speakers was that the rear speakers lacked the 10" driver and were physically smaller. Otherwise they were all full range bi-polar speakers.

Part of the issue I had with bipolar speakers for home theater was the inability to "pinpoint" where the sound was coming from. When I first auditioned the M5-si (smaller brother to the M3-si) I loved what it did for the music in a two-channel setup. However, in a home theater setup the sound became a little too "vague".

I should mention that they were in a small room and likely dipole speakers would have performed better, however I was unjustifiably put off at the price of such a small speaker compared to the full range speaker. I couldn't fathom paying the same money for a speaker that could not produce the same range of sounds. My inexperience at the time.

I tend to agree with Bridgman's advice on small full range speakers for the rears (if you have the distance) with the disclaimer of the smaller "sweet spot" of the direct radiating speakers.

Unfortunately since almost every room construction and layout differ to some varying degree, there appear to be no formulas for a specific installs. Best to experiment. Perhaps you can also use the listening experience of a high quality movie theater as your reference when selecting speakers to try and achieve "that type of sound".

Re: QS4s or M2s for surrounds
#110014 09/09/05 01:45 PM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
local
OP Offline
local
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
quote:

"I should mention that they were in a small room and likely dipole speakers would have performed better, however I was unjustifiably put off at the price of such a small speaker compared to the full range speaker. I couldn't fathom paying the same money for a speaker that could not produce the same range of sounds. My inexperience at the time."

Sounds like my room and question and inexperience almost exactly. Thanks.

Small room = need dipole (or quad pole)


M22s, QS4s, M2 center, Hsu stf-1.
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Link Copied to Clipboard

Need Help Graphic

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics24,946
Posts442,491
Members15,617
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
Top Posters
Ken.C 18,044
pmbuko 16,441
SirQuack 13,841
CV 12,077
MarkSJohnson 11,458
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 296 guests, and 4 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newsletter Signup
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4