Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners VP100 on-wall for surround back center channel?

howdy, i am thinking of using the VP100v3 as a back surround center creating a 6.1 system; i'm curious if anyone is using this center in this manner and if they like it or not. i am looking at it because i like the look of it as a surround back center (or 1 speaker/channel for surround back) and i think it would work out nicely in that capacity.

i currently have 2 M2v3's in a 7.1 but want to move the M2v3's to a different location for 2 channel only music. I would really like to hear from anyone who has used any of the VP centers as a single surround back channel and also from anyone who uses any of the VP on-wall centers to chime in on how they sound.

i do so like the idea of having my VP180v3 center complimented by it's baby brother the VP100 as the surround back channel center.

time to sound off fellow Axiom owners.

Please be civil in your responses and be mindful and respectful of others.

Please & Thank You!

Please keep one thing in mind, i do NOT want suggestions on using any other speakers for a single surround back channel. I only want to hear about the VP100v3 center for said use with the pros & cons.

Please & Thank You!

A single speaker directly behind your head will often cause the illusion of the sound coming from in front of you. So in that case it's better to not have the rear center, as it creates a completely wrong sound field.

If you don't sit directly in front of it, but instead have two seats to either side, then the rear center can provide a more connected surround effect.

It's hard to say how well it will work. As long as it's not too much effort, you should probably just try it, and see how you like it.

There are really no "cons" to this idea. If you wish to use it as a single back surround it would probably do quite well. For years before the days of PLllX, I used a single back surround speaker and even in a particularly long room like mine, the single speaker did its job. I have since gone to the double speaker arrangement, however, since those back speakers are primarily "fill", if you ask me if I can hear a noticeable difference between having one or two speakers in a back surround configuration, I can honestly say, not really. I would suspect that perhaps in a smaller room where the back wall is much closer to the listener, then one might hear a difference.

It is interesting to note that even the latest model AVR's have the capability of hooking up a single back surround in the manner you describe so it is obvious many, because of other issues, or maybe just space limitations and wiring want the flexibility of doing just that.

I know you don't want to go with a different speaker suggestion but I don't really get why you want to stick to the VP100. If you want to go to 6.1, a single QS8 is pretty much the same price and would work better in dispersing the sound IMO.

thanks, i currently have a 7.1 and don't get that sensation sound wise. they are less about 4-5 feet apart. how then does the sixth channel work as i would gather most folks with a sixth channel speaker has it centered in back of them and it should only be active (when used as a genuine surround back channel for one speaker) when watching or listening to a program that is recorded in either 6 or 7 channels (not including any matrixing)

logistically, it will be about 4' behind me and about 7'+ off of the floor in height so it's not directly in back of me, just centered.

thanks for the input as it was quite interesting and i'd like to see your responses. very good points you brought up!

yeah, i did, but, that's an excellent point you bring up. most places i have read that it's best to have direct firing speakers for the back surrounds and bi-di or quad polar speakers for the sides (and i have QS8v3's for that).

this brings about another good question, how many folks use a single Q series speaker in a 6.1 fashion? I do know that they do an incredible job as side surrounds.

again, another really good suggestion that i hadn't thought of. so, people, feel free to chime in on a single QS8v3 or a VP100v3 speaker for a 6.1 system doing surround back duties and please include your for & against points.

edit: i would like to add this in the mix, one, this is going to be a new installation as i'm moving from where i currently am and secondly, there is a big opening where a wall was removed between rooms and there is a small 8" section left of that wall before it hits the ceiling and that is where i was gonna put the VP100v3. the height of the existing QS8v3's would be almost 2' lower than the surround back. just thought i'd mention that should it be important to anyone who is giving me suggestions. yeah, i know that's what calibration is for but just thought i'd throw that in there! end edit!

this is great, this is one of the best things about these forums!

thanks to everyone!

SD, if you happened to have a spare VP100, it certainly could be tried in back, preferably oriented vertically. Buying one just for that purpose isn't a good idea in my view. The short distance of 4' behind you is marginal for setting up a rear sound field, and speakers of very wide dispersion, such as the QSs, would be advisable at that distance.

Note that actual discrete 6 or 7 channel material isn't necessary to benefit from rear surrounds, since processing such as DPLIIx can be applied to 2 and 5 channel source material to send appropriate back ambience to them.

thanks for your input johnk, the QS8v3 might just be the best solution and yeah, if you notice i mentioned not including matrixing so I knew about it, i also mentioned that i already have a 7.1 system but was going to repurpose the 2 M2v3's i have that currently do channels 6 & 7. but it's sounding like the Q's are gaining momentum and since i have a pair of QS8v3's and know how effective they are, perhaps that just might be the way to go!

again, thanks for the input, great advice as usual and it's given me something to think about.

Oh, I thought you had a VP100 somewhere. If you're buying, get the QS8. It's pretty much guaranteed not to suffer from the inverted sound field, because it won't be firing into the back of your head.

thanks buddy, i think i might be headed in the direction of a 3rd QS8v3 to make up a 6.1 system.

I ran a 6.1 with full QS8's all around as the surrounds and it was great, but I was also corner loaded with the mains and TV in one corner of the room and the rear channel helped fill the void from LSurround to RSurround.

thanks jakewash, i'm pretty sure it's gonna be a 3rd QS8v3 for my needs.

after lots of thinking and careful reviewing of all submitted recommendations and of course my previous experience with this axiom product i have decided to go with the single QS8v3 speaker for my center back channel to create a 6.1 system.

i realized that after loving the quality and effectiveness of the speaker for side surround duties that it would make an incredible channel 6 and it would completely match and effortlessly flow sound with the other two QS8v3 speakers to keep continuity within my surround field.

thanks to everyone who gave their 2 cents in this thing.

I have just placed my order and am hopeful to perhaps have the speaker before the 4th of July holiday weekend.

this will make 13 axiom speakers that i will have in my home and this is one of the few things that the number 13 will be considered a good thing!

keep in mind that this will not be installed until sometime in the first half of August as I'll be moving around the end of July so i won't install it until then. I will test the speaker to ensure it works, of course.

i'll keep you all posted.

please & thank you!

i got a tracking number and email stating that the speaker was shipped today. i'll keep you all posted!

Wise choice!

thank you sir, and yes, i know your right about that!

ok Axiomites, here is your chance to help me out with your valued opinions. i have a choice of 2 locations for placement of my 6th channel speaker (QS8v3) and wanted to know which one is liked best. remember this is a surround back center channel to create a 6 channel system.



1 - in relation to the side surrounds, distance back about 3' *


2 - in relation to the side surrounds, distance back about 9' **



please pick one (and yes, these are the only two options) and state why you went with the one you did.

*so it is understood, there is an arch way across the room that bumps down about 8" from the ceiling and that is where option 1 would go with the given distance from the side surrounds.

** this location is the rear wall of the house in relation to the side surround speakers location.

thank you in advance for your help. i look forward to your responses.

Probably the best answer is going to be, "whichever sounds the best". I would mount it temporarily in both positions, if possible, and try it one way for a day or 2 then try it the other way of a day or 2.

can't mount it temporarily, no way to just hang it from walls that are almost 9' off the floor to test it. not to mention that one is in the middle of the room. i know it's always whichever sounds the best, i just wanted to get some actual opinions based on the 2 scenerios i put up.

but thanks anyway.

Can it be assumed that your main listening position is in line with your side surrounds, so 3 and 9 feet back are also in respect to the listening position?

If so, based on my mental picture of what you describe, I am thinking the 3 foot position. Might the arch interfere/block the back sound field if the 9 foot position is used?

How about hanging them off of ladders?


Way to shoot down someone trying to help. If you know "it's always whichever sounds the best" how can anyone help you without standing in your room?

At least post photos if you want some educated guesses.

My thoughts is there must be someway to temporarily hang it from both positions, even if that means putting some holes in the walls for anchor screws in both places. Then it should be a small-ish matter to fill in the holes and paint over it later. Just run the wires over the floor for now.

understood completely and already thought of that. my thought is that there are folks who probably have a 6 or 7 channel system and some have the surround backs either as close or as far as the 2 options i mentioned. i was hoping those folks would chime in on how they like what they have. i was also hoping that some of them would be QS8v3 users for the 6 & 7 channels for some real true insight.

this would be real food for thought from folks who actually have it both near and far and there feedback would help be decide without the holes; if possible.

if i got enough folks that have the same speaker and is used for the same channel(s) and can say they liked it better farther away because it created a much deeper sound field for the back channels OR that the speaker could not create the sound field they wanted back there and they moved it closer towards the side surronds that would be a great help in my thinking.

again, thanks for your quick reply and suggestions.

FYI, I have a 7.1 QS8 v2 installation. My back surrounds are ~3-4 feet behind my listening position. I find the surround field fantastic and makes my back wall disappear (or at least sound way further back than it is). I have not listened to the QS8's further back than that.

thank you so much for your input, it's very helpful to me.

SD, when similar questions have arisen in the past, my view has been that the back surrounds(yes, even with QSs two should be better and allow for a "stereo" back effect on some passages)should be at least 4' behind the listening position to give room for a rear sound field to form. Because of the exceptionally wide dispersion of the QSs, even 3-4' back would give a reasonable effect, but twice that distance should be better if available.

As Dan pointed out, you've given distances behind the side surrounds, which may not be the same as distances behind the listening position if the side surrounds are farther back than the listening position. Be that as it may, placing the QS8 about 9' back on the rear wall and about 3' above ear level should give a deeper back surround effect(assuming that the path is unobstructed)than would result from placing it on that 8" partition about 8' up and 3' back.

the side surrounds are exactly positioned at the sides of the main listening area which is exactly 4' away from where option 1 is and approximately 8 - 9' from option 2.

i was a little concerned about the back surround being so far away from the listening position placing it at twice the distance of the front soundstage from the main listening position.

i'd also gathered that calibration should compensate and take care of that distance. of course i wanted to hear from someone who had a setup like i described in options 1 & 2 to hear what they had to say. i could envision how good it might sound if i could place that center back channel that far away and what an incredible effect it would have on the movie experience especially 6 or 7 channel discrete movies as well as matrixed 5 channel events too. (i only matrix DD or DTS lossy, never lossless--that's just me)

so johnk, i'll gather you vote for the farther back position for the center back channel!?! thanks for your insight and recommendation. i think that the further back postioning of the center back channel will have a hugh positive effect on the audio events!

I would vote for the closer position for the Q series and if you wanted to run a direct radiating speaker I would have said the farther position as there would be ample room for sound dispersion. I feel the farther away the Q's are from the listener you loose some impact from them due to their design, 3-4 ft is ideal for a QS and that 9' mark just might be too far, IMO.

Like the others have stated I would try to test it out at the various positions with a ladder and/or someone holding the speaker if necessary.

I have a pair of v2QS8's in a 7.2 system that set almost 8' in back of the primary listening position that I feel do an excellent job of getting the sound to the listening area. I did experiment with a pair of M60v2's as back surrounds but personally felt the QS8's did a better job ... but of course what works for me may not suit other's personal taste.

again, you bring up very valid points. i believe with proper calibration the QS in the back even at that distance will still make a good impact. yeah, i might have to raise the level of that channel a bit but the intent is to not necessarily have blairing sound firing out of the thing but to ensure that it's enough sound and it makes you get a true sense of depth in the surround field. yes i have no doubt that a direct radiating speaker would have done a great job. i do believe that what the QS offers is a much wider sound field overall.

i will try to do the test you mentioned and there is a way that i can temporarily hang the QS at the 4' mark to do the test. i promise to let you know which i like best and why.

thank you rickF for your input especially since you are a user of more than 5 channels and you use the QS series as back's so your opinion carries some real weight in my decision making.

i'll have to wait until after i move and get settled to actually do any installation and testing so thanks to all this feedback i'm getting i think my heads gonna blow up with anticipation!

the speaker will be here today.

Anticipation - it is both a good thing and bad thing at the same time but really worth the wait!!!

here is a quick update. i received the QS8v3 about a week and some odd change ago and took it out of the box to inspect for damage (it was undamaged, always a good thing!) then put it back in the box till later. well, i had some free time so i connected it up to my front left (removing my M2v3) for a power test and it sounded great; so I now don't have to worry about it not working when powered!

i am not going to be able to test it in the new place until around the second week of August. I have listened to many of you and think i will do what was recommended to me by many. i'll place it temporarily in both locations at 4' and at 14' (yes, it turns out actually 14' away from the surround side QS8's than i first realized) then using a 6 or 7 channel movie i'll test several things and see which i like best then do a full calibration with the pre-amp and call it a day!

keep one thing in mind, i know that 14' might be a hike for the QS8v3 speaker, but, i believe it's possible with the proper calibration and adjustments that even at that distance i might be able to get what i want. which is not necessarily a hugh sound but if i can create enough audio that will constantly make me and my quess turn (or think to turn) our heads to look in back of us wondering what that noise is then i'll be thrilled. i can always compensate for loudness by raising the level after Audyssey has completed it's calibration. so what i'm saying is that the farthest distance between the two (14') is by no means not possible.

i'll supply results and pictures at that time. thanks to everyone here at the forum and to everyone at Axiom for your help and the great products i love so much!

i'll keep you all posted.

howdy and i know it's been a while with this old thread. but, after having the speakers for quite a while, i have decided to audition a pair of M2v3 on-wall speakers for my surround backs. first i want to make sure everyone understands that there is nothing wrong with the QS8v3's i am currently using and they are great speakers.

i want to see if i get a better forward projection with the M2v3 on-walls as they are directional. my seating from the current rear wall is between 12' & 15' away and while the speakers create a great soundfield i think it's just too far back for me to hear the effects well enough. even with good calibration, and the nature of the way that the QS line works the rears have to be almost "super hot" to really get what i want out of them and at that point they are drowning out the sides. with the rears i feel i do need some directionality and front facing drivers will give it to me.

my daughter is all for it because she will get the QS8v3's if this works out for her which she will have a 5 channel system with the 2-QS8v3, 2-M2v3 and a VP-100v2 and a small sub (she's a college student and got it for free so she is well ahead of the curve!)

i'll install them and try them out on movies that i've listend to already with 7 channel sound using the QS8's. i feel that (as some have indicated) the use of front firing (directional) speakers are best for surround backs. i've seen this mentioned many times from Dolby or DTS speaker setups; the rears were always front firing.

i'm sure if my room wasn't as deep as it is that the QS speakers would be perfect. as they are i think the M2v3 on-wall's will work as i want them too.

i'll keep you guys posted and of course, i can always send them back! my daughter will not be very happy to hear about that!

people, feel free to chime in. i hope to have the speakers by or before the end of next week. i just ordered them about 1 hour ago!

My experience is that with that much distance behind you direct radiating speakers will likely work better. In my rooms I’ve found the sweet spot for using QS8s as rear speakers is about 5-7 feet however, I’m sure that is also room (i.e. wall ceiling seating etc. . .) dependent. The only way you will know is to compare them.

Also IMO take general recommendations from Dolby, DTS and Audyssey with a grain of salt. Their recommendations are a good starting point but what really works best for a given situation is very dependent.

I’ve been considering trying out my M2s again on the back wall because with the depth of my room the panning of destrete sounds like voices in video games isn’t moving as smoothly across the back as around the rest of the room. They don’t quite jump from the left to the right side but the pan across the back is pretty quick. However, it might be just as simple as bumping up the sound level of the rear speakers a little.

The one problem I do find with using direct radiating speakers as rears is the its difficult to tell if a sound that’s supposed to be directly behind you actually is and not in front of you. When something pans like in a video game that’s not a problem because you hear it moving across the back OTOH if the sound starts there or stays there it’s hard to tell it’s behind you and not directly in front.

thanks for your input Grunt. how have you been buddy? i only referenced Dolby & DTS because they both do recommend for SB use that direct radiating speakers were best. i also see other folks with really deep rooms do the same and probably for the same reasons i am moving to them.

the QS8's i'm using for sides will of course stay as those incredible creatures create the best surround field i've ever heard. however from almost 15' from the listening position, i need directionality!

i'll keep ya posted buddy!

I second what grunt said and I am looking forward to your thoughts on the differences you find.

tracking says my M2v3 on-wall speakers should be here tomorrow. if they do, i'll install them over the weekend, slap in a couple of 7 channel movies (Transformers 3, Prometheus, Thor, Avengers) and get back to you guys with a full review of the speakers themselves and how I think they sound in relation to the QS8v3 at the given long distance i have from the back wall.

i got the speakers friday. i was able to simply swap them for the QS8v3's since the power/mounting is the same and that took all of 1 minute or so!

while i haven't re-calibrated the system yet, i did put on a couple of movies that were 7.1 and tried it out and the difference was immediate. i could hear channels 6&7 better than before and the effect was better given their distance from the main listening location.

i'll probably won't do a calibration for a while. we've got a lot of stuff upstairs from out of the basement because of the storm Sandy here along the East Coast. we have had flooding before and were being extra careful.

so hopefully in the next couple of weeks i'll do a re-calibration of the system and get back to you guys with a full report. with the brief testing i did with the movies i mentioned in the previous post, i am very happy with what i have heard!