Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Rears for music-heavy HT

Hi everyone,
Currently, I own the M22's up front, the Merak/Axiom center channel, and a rockin' SVS sub. I'm using an old set of Bose 301's as rears, which obviously must go. I listen to a high % of music, including DVD-A's. My dilemma is whether to go with a true surround speaker, such as the QS-4, or will I be happier with, say, the M3's for better music reproduction, if that is indeed a true asessment of the two speakers. Help me decide. Thanks!

From what i've discovered recently, i'm not a big fan of the direct surrounds. My QS8s will be coming later this week and i will post a review on my thoughts of the dipole surrounds vs. the M22s which i'm using presently.

Well, I tend to prefer direct-radiating speakes. I've never been a big fan of taking the "recreate the movie theater experience" approach too far, because movie theaters are designed to be loud and to sound OK from a variety of seating positions. Accurrate sound reproduction is not the overriding concern.

A lot of it will depend on room layout and speaker distance, though. I've got plenty of room so that my l/r surrounds are a good 10 feet away, so localization isn't so much of a problem. Also, much of the back of my living room is open to either the kitchen or dining room, and I think that dipolar/quadpolar speakers would be less than optimal since there's no wall for them to reflect off of.

I also just generally prefer the more precise soundstage of direct-radiators, and I think it's also a better way to go if you think multi-channel music is in your future.

The one place I did go with the quadpolar speaker was for the center back; due to room layout there was no way I could mount two center back speakers, so I felt that with a single back speaker the more diffuse sound would work better. I feel that I have the best of both worlds with this setup: a surround soundstage that provides both accurrate imaging and an eveloping experience, and flexibility to get the most of out multi-channel music in the future.

Thanks so far. One thing, my rears are only a few feet to the direct sides of the wall from my couch (and a few feet above ear level). But I've always preferred direct radiating speakers. I've been an audio enthusiast for quite a while and my least favorite speaker designs have been the ones dependent on some sort of "reflected" sound (Bose and DCM time windows I've both owned). But Cheeseroo, I'd be very interested to hear your results. I trust Axiom does the bi-polar thing well. So my mind is still open on either the M3's or QS4's--It's a small room. Any other comments on the QS4 or 8's in a music-oriented home theater?

I should be able to do a quick test later this week once the qs8s come in. I can compare the qs8s to the M22s before i send the M22s back.
I'll be sure to let you know how it goes.
Now i just have to find a quality dvd to rent for the listening test.

Hi jkohn and all,

Just a few thoughts and facts here: The final sound mix for a Dolby Digital or Dolby Surround movie is done in a mixing theater--an almost full-size movie theater with a big screen, lines of surround speakers down each side wall (plus a couple at the rear) and a big mixing console smack in the middle of the theater. I've been present for a final mix in the Alfred Hitchcock theater in L.A. at Universal. The point is that the movie sound is mixed for envelopment, as well as for directional effects. Like you say, direct radiators work well in big domestic rooms and in movie theaters, but in smaller rooms and typical living rooms, multipolar radiators are usually more effective at creating envelopment, are less fussy to position to achieve the latter effects, and, in my experience, give up nothing in terms of precise directional cues when needed.

Certainly direct radiators are the only choice for home theater main speakers, but bipolars have their place for stereo music reproduction. The stereo illusion is intrinsically flawed because in stereo music reproduction, the direct sounds AND the ambient sounds are thrown at you from the front, which is not the way it happens in real life. That's why bipolars can be highly effective (in stereo) for recreating a more realistic mix of direct and ambient information, albeit at the expense of precise imaging.

What I have discovered using multipolar radiators at the sides for DVD-A and Dolby Digital/dts music is that the "sweet spot" is remarkably generous compared to using direct radiators as surrounds. In demos of DVD-A and SACD, as well as other experiments in which I participated using full-range direct radiating speakers, the sweet spot was incredibly critical. Moving the listening chair even a foot or so made the illusion collapse to the speaker nearest the listening position.

I'd be interested to hear about others' experience with multichannel music and bipole/dipole/quadpole surrounds vs. direct radiating surrounds.

Regards,

In reply to:

---

The final sound mix for a Dolby Digital or Dolby Surround movie is done in a mixing theater--an almost full-size movie theater with a big screen, lines of surround speakers down each side wall (plus a couple at the rear) and a big mixing console smack in the middle of the theater. I've been present for a final mix in the Alfred Hitchcock theater in L.A. at Universal.

---

But is this the case when they are mixing a soundtrack for DVD release, or are you talking about the sound mix for the theatrical release? It's my understanding that although they used to just put the theatrical release soundtrack on DVD's (hence the need for some type of Cinema EQ/Re-EQ since the mixes designed for large theaters were somewhat "bright"). But I had heard that nowadays the DVD releases are getting their own remixed soundtracks, which are mixed with the home theater in mind.

In reply to:

---

One thing, my rears are only a few feet to the direct sides of the wall from my couch (and a few feet above ear level).

---

If the speakers are only a few feet away, you might be better off with the quadpolar design, since localization could be more of an issue, especially if you're talking about a 5.1 setup, as opposed to 6.1 or 7.1. It's a tough call since you also place a priority on music, but the Axiom quadpolar speakers are actually a compromise between direct radiating and bi/di-polar, so they might work well for you. At least with Axiom you always have the 30-day return period if you decide you want to go the other way.

I ordered the QS4's today, based on everyone's help. We shall see. Thanks all.

Just hold your knickers for a couple of more days.
I'm getting the QS8s on thursday or friday and i will pair them up against the m22s (before i send them back) and let you know my impressions of the quadpoles vs. direct radiating for both music and movies.
Then you can chop up the review into little bits.