|
Re: QS4s or M2s for surrounds
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
local
|
OP
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
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
local
|
OP
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
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 353
devotee
|
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
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 274
local
|
OP
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.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,946
Posts442,492
Members15,617
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
0 members (),
629
guests, and
2
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
|