Okay, last time I'll ask for advice on this subject, I promise...
I'm still debating to go with either a 6.1 or 7.1 set-up and which rear speakers to go with. My HT room is 13.5 feet wide and 19.5 deep with 8 foot ceilings. Currently I have two M60's, two QS8's, a VP150 and a mighty EP500. There's about 4 feet of space behind the listening position. In a few months I'll be buying a Denon AVR-3808CI and want to add one or two rear speakers. I'm leaning toward getting a single QS8 for a 6.1 set-up, but I keep reading that 7.1 will sound better. Personally I think two QS8's would be over kill, but today I read in an old post that two M2's would be a great set of rears. Because of the room layout, one rear will be wall mounted and one will be ceiling mounted, but being no more than 3 feet apart, will I hear a huge difference in a 7.1 set-up?
I've also read that one reason to go with two rears is that a single speaker can actually make the sound appear to be coming from in front of the listener. Wouldn't a single QS8 overcome this?
Bayne,
You may be doing this, but you should check out the Sounds Around yearly liquidation sale (I think in October or November). That is where I bought my RX-V659 last year (I went to the NW Sounds around), I got it for $499 (List price at the time was $699). They will for sure have all the flagship models of all the major electronics. When I went they had the RX-V2600 for $980 CAD...which was about how much it was on Ebay at the time from the states. Just letting you know, Mabey look at some Yamaha's because Sounds around will for sure have the RX-V2700 on clearance again I think.
I should let you know that I camped in front of the store for 2 hours before it opened, the line was already pretty big when I got there too...
-Hutz
My room is 13' wide by 18' long with 7' ceilings. I have the exact same setup that you do except that I am already using 7.1 with two side and two rear QS8's. The sound will not appear to come from in front of you...that is hog-wash! The rear surround channel is mono so the benefit of having two rear surrounds is that the sound is spread out from one side to the other. I only have about 2' of space behind my couch where the QS8's hang and I think it sounds great. I think if you limit the rears to one QS8 you will be able to localize that rear diffuse mono channel too much.
Quote:
The sound will not appear to come from in front of you...that is hog-wash!
Actually, when utilizing a single direct radiating speaker for your rear 6.1 surround, the sound from the speaker will travel to the front of the room and bounce off the front wall before reaching your ears. I think that is what he is referring to. The Quadpolar design of the QS series eliminates this effect. I think using 1 QS8 would be enough, but its up to you bayne 
Another option would be to use 2 M2s in the back for your rears, with mounts I think it still comes to around the same price as 1 QS8...If I were to complete my theatre in the basement with 7.1, I personally would use a pair of direct radiating speakers like the M2.
Well, I think I've at least settled one of my issues: I'll either go with one QS8 or two M2's. The price of each is relatively close, it really comes down to deciding on which configuration works best. The deciding factor may very well be whether or not I can successfully mount an M2 on the ceiling. My wife, the engineer, and I will have to do some measurements tonight.
If you’re only four feet from the back wall, I’d go with Q’s over direct radiating. My M3’s are only four feet behind me and I am wishing I would have gone with Q’s. I had to angle them in quite a bit towards the center of rear couch and down to sound right, which looks sorta funny. Definitely go with 7.1, which ever you do.
But honestly, don’t fret over which speaker you put up in back – just do it and go with two. Make sure they are four to six feet apart in your room.
You might even think about going with the QS4's as your rear surrounds. I'm debating right now if I want to replace my direct rear speakers with the QS4's.
Why do many of you guys go with direct radiating speakers for 7.1? Is it just cost? If you take cost out of the equation, what is the sound difference from using QS8's or M2's as your 7.1 speakers?
I have a 5.1 system in my office which is 15'x17'x10'.
I have a 7.2 system in my HT. Anyway the 5.1 uses the fabulous Sony TAE9000ES processor. I have a pair of M60 like michaura M665s up front, a modded Merak center with twin Axiom 6.5" drivers and a tweeter and x-over (modded) from the Reference 3a de Capo mm speaker, a pair of Mission DS77 surround speakers ahead of at ear level. My chair is against the back wall opposite the front and center speakers. The TAE9000ES has the 2.50 firmware upgrade. There's a 15" Dahlquist sub in here also.
Anyway, I leave the proceesor set at Virtual Matrix 6.1. Today, I was listening to cable news and a bell went off somewhere ... right behind my head!! Clear as a ... well, a bell. Now, some speakers do well at reproducing the sonorous ringing of a bell, but there it was ... perfectly real sounding, right behind my head ...
All this to say, here's an alternative to 6.1 or 7.1 and all the cables and speakers and expense ... a superb 5.1 with a Virtual Matrix 6.1 ... the illusion is perfect.
I'll recommend the Sony TAE9000ES processor to any music HT lover. I believe that different amps impart different sound quality to the music and sound reproduction, and I recommend a nice Anthem PVA5 amp to go with the Sony. (or a Sony TAN9000ES. gotta go, will continue later
Quote:
Why do many of you guys go with direct radiating speakers for 7.1? Is it just cost? If you take cost out of the equation, what is the sound difference from using QS8's or M2's as your 7.1 speakers?
The thought around using direct radiating speakers as back surrounds is basically centered around multi channel music, not so much for HT. From my experiments with my set up, I had to point the M3’s to where I usually sit for them to sound ‘right’. When they were pointed straight ahead something was just off. If my room was deeper I suspect they would not need to be pointed to the listening position. Even though they sound great at the main listening position, other seating areas suffer. Doesn’t matter much in my room because no one but me notices but it might in larger rooms with more seats. I went with M3’s because I was planning ahead. I had planned to use the M3’s for another room and buying a set of Q’s to replace them but just haven’t gotten around to doing anything with that room. If my room was anther six feet or so in depth, I’d leave the M3’s up and not give it a second thought.
I don’t think it’s as important to which speaker you throw up behind you until you start running out of realestate. When your backs are getting closer than around 8’, that is when you should consider going with Q’s over directional speakers.
Not many people have heard discrete 7.1 sources, because there is very small number available and they ain’t movies….they’re PS3 games. Even though I’m not a game player, my son is and I can tell you that discrete 7.1 sounds way cool. Discrete 6.1 sounds pretty friggin cool when that sixth channel get’s sent to both rear surround speakers too. I have a few 6.1 Blue Ray disks and they sound downright amazing. After hearing this discrete channel coming at me from directly behind me, I’d be Jones’n for it if I suddenly lost those back channels.
Bayne,
A single QS8 will work very well. I have watched Blade 3 which is recorded in 6.1 with both of my rear QS8s as well as a single QS8 and there is no difference that I can hear. My room is much wider than yours.
All I can say is that even with my poor corner lay out, the sound improvement from 5.1 to 6.1 for HT was very noticeable and I wouldn't have wanted a direct radiating for the rear as the QS's spread the sound so well.
Bayne, there're two advantages spoken of for using two back surround speakers, even if there's only one(or no)back channel: a well-established psychoacoustic effect in which sounds intended to be imaged directly behind the listener appear to instead come directly from in front of him; when applying modes such as DPLIIx to 2 or 5 channel material, a stereo back signal results which can give both a left and right rear effect. It's said that using a single very wide dispersion speaker such as the QSs can make the reversal effect less likely. You don't explain why the back speakers couldn't be separated more than about 3', but unless you have one both to the left and right of the listeners, the stereo advantage won't be present and one QS might be a better choice.
Here's a quick photo of the back of my room. The yellow line represents the centre of the room. As you can see rear speaker placement is limited, however after doing some number crunching I believe that I can ceiling-mount two M2's and have close to 5 feet between them. Next spring I'll be getting four home theatre recliners, but the centre two seats will be used the most. I'm leaning toward two M2's for the rears becasue they're mounted sideways on Axiom's ceiling brackets. I'll tilt them down and in a bit. From the speakers to the seating position will be about 5 feet.
[image]
[/image]
Probably 5' separation and 5' back should work well.
Quote:
Quote:
Why do many of you guys go with direct radiating speakers for 7.1? Is it just cost? If you take cost out of the equation, what is the sound difference from using QS8's or M2's as your 7.1 speakers?
The thought around using direct radiating speakers as back surrounds is basically centered around multi channel music, not so much for HT. From my experiments with my set up, I had to point the M3’s to where I usually sit for them to sound ‘right’. When they were pointed straight ahead something was just off. If my room was deeper I suspect they would not need to be pointed to the listening position. Even though they sound great at the main listening position, other seating areas suffer. Doesn’t matter much in my room because no one but me notices but it might in larger rooms with more seats. I went with M3’s because I was planning ahead. I had planned to use the M3’s for another room and buying a set of Q’s to replace them but just haven’t gotten around to doing anything with that room. If my room was anther six feet or so in depth, I’d leave the M3’s up and not give it a second thought.
I don’t think it’s as important to which speaker you throw up behind you until you start running out of realestate. When your backs are getting closer than around 8’, that is when you should consider going with Q’s over directional speakers.
Not many people have heard discrete 7.1 sources, because there is very small number available and they ain’t movies….they’re PS3 games. Even though I’m not a game player, my son is and I can tell you that discrete 7.1 sounds way cool. Discrete 6.1 sounds pretty friggin cool when that sixth channel get’s sent to both rear surround speakers too. I have a few 6.1 Blue Ray disks and they sound downright amazing. After hearing this discrete channel coming at me from directly behind me, I’d be Jones’n for it if I suddenly lost those back channels.
OK, I'm back. I listen to multichannel music on my big HT system, so I took JohnK's advice and picked up a pair of M2s for the back surround position speakers and used my QS8s as the side surrounds. Didn't like it. Swapped the M2s for a pair of modded Michaura M55s laid on their sides. This worked much better.
Nevertheless, I'd say that a single QS8 in the back would be a wonderful choice for either music or HT.
What really surprised me was how excellent the phantom Virtual Matrix 6.1 works - excellent back speaker performance without any speaker! Top that!
BTW, here's a picture of some M55s in a fooling around 2 channel system.
[image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v192/2x6spds/AXIOM.jpg?t=1186631847[/image]
what?
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v192/2x6spds/AXIOM.jpg[/IMG]
Guess I forgot how to post a picture. [image]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v192/2x6spds/AXIOM.jpg[/image]
Quote:
so I took JohnK's advice.... Didn't like it.
The veils be thin.
pmbuko, I see from your profile that you have a pair of M22s and some non-axiom surrounds. You've been free with your advice to folks here about the various Axiom speakers and how well they perform in various positions.
I have M2s, M3s, QS8s, VP100, Merak MC634s, MC6Hs, have had M22s, M50s, and convinced various friends to pick up M60s. I have Michaura M665s, M66s and M55s.
I took someone's advice about the M2s without even asking whether John ever had a pair, or auditioned a pair in the back surround position he recommends.
Nevertheless, I took a chance, picked up a pair of M2s, replaced a pair of Mission DS77 surround dipoles, and can tell you without reservation that the Missions performed better than the M2s in the back surround position for both music and HT.
You can keep giving people advice based on your limited experience but enormous audio engineering background, and you can keep sniping at my posts.
But I don't think you know what you're talking about, and right or wrong, my impressions are based on my experience of these Axiom speakers at work in varous systems.
So, keep up your stalking ... but I don't think you're helping this fella with his audio questions.
Maybe this picture will work - M55 on its side.
OK, OK, M2s retired from back surround duties.
M665s with Frankencenter, Merak MC634, Axiom 6.5s" and Reference 3a de capo mm tweeter
More Michaura M55s with modded T-Amp 2 channel, Titanic 10" sub, yadayada
So, some pix, show and tell
Thiels, Frankenhorn center with twin Axiom 6.5s, Merak horn loaded tweeter, 3 Yammies an Onk, the DTC 9.4 and Toshiba SD9200, some supertweets
And for those of you who have never seen a Michaura M66, here's a pic of an M55 in the foreground and an M66 in the background.
Ray Adkins at audioholics.com did a review of an epic 80-600 system but added and extra vp150 to have dual center channels, an extra ep600 and dual m80's for the surround rears. I guess you could call it a 8.2 system.
Link:
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/floorstanding/axiom-audio-epic-80-600/page-5 Reading this review convinced me that this would be the system to shoot for in the distant future. However, most people cannot afford having m80's for the rear surrounds so I thought that m22's or even m2's would be a great substitution. But, most folks around here who have tried this haven't been very impressed. It sounds like having 2 qs8's in the rear seems to be what everyone thinks sounds best. Even Axiom is pushing qs8's for the rear surrounds when demoing the new amp in Florida this coming October, so they must be convinced that is the best sound. This is obviously the case since very few people can afford the system that they are demoing, having 4 ep600's added into the epic 80-600 package and the new $3,000 amp. If they were convinced that having 7 m80's all the way around would sound the best then that is what they would demo. Think about it that would only be about another $1800 on top of an already priced $13,000 system. It doesn't make much of a difference.
So, I guess to sum it up, going with qs8's in the surround rear positions sound like the safest way to be happy. But, some people like having direct radiating speakers there instead. Or, if you have the money to put m80's there and already have m80's up front then by all means put m80's in there. The rest of us will be very jealous.
- Nick
Bayne,
If you are doubting the M2 rears, I would say, at the most, your room only needs QS4 rears, not QS8s. If I were to get rear surrounds, they would probably be QS4s (not QS8s).
This is turning out to be a very hard decision, indeed.
I really like the idea of going with two M2's. They'd fit nicely tucked up high in my HT room. QS8's or even QS4's would probably be too large due to the room layout, however just one QS8 centered is my second best bet. I find if hard to believe that having direct firing speakers for just the rears would make that much of a difference besides maybe not sounding as good outside of the centre sweet spot. Surrounds yes, but rears? I dunno. I really think it's going to come down to a choice between either two M2's or one QS8. Fortunately I won't be buying my new receiver until just after November 20th and don't have to make a decision on my rear speaker set-up until a week or two before, so any more advice or comments would be much appreciated.
After reading this post I decided to spring for a couple QS4's to replace my direct radiating speakers in rears, because of my open room layout I think this may be a better choice for me.
When they arrive in a couple weeks I'll let everyone know if they made a differnce in my setup.
M80s front and rear, twin VP150s up front and a pair of QS8s, twin EP600s ... could it get much better than that?
If you go with two M2's you'll be happy. Just plan to point them down and toe them in a bit. In all reality, matrixed 7.1 isn't much more than a bunch of gargled noise anyway. After hearing it you feel naked without it, but when you listen to it with all with all other speakers disconnected, you'll understand what I'm saying. Discrete 6/7 channel has defined sounds as well as some multi channel music cds / dvds, but that's the only exceptions. If you don't like the M2's, you can always upgraid.
Quote:
M80s front and rear, twin VP150s up front and a pair of QS8s, twin EP600s ... could it get much better than that?
Crown on the rocks with a drop of bitters in one hand and a firm breast in the other...
Crown on the rocks with a drop of bitters ... is that a Canadian thing? Whazzat? Good?
Actually, mdrew lives in Alaska...
Canada... Alaska...
Bayne, yes it is a difficult decision and unfortunately someone else's personal experience may not be very relevant to your situation. There are reports of great satisfaction with either option, some preferring a somewhat more specific ability to locate some movie effects which are intended to be imaged in the rear, although the QSs certainly do at least an acceptable job with even that. Your money, your call, of course.
Quote:
Your money, your call, of course.
You forget, JohnK, we excell at spending other people's money.