Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Rear surrounds for 7.1 setup: Same as sides?

Are you meaning the rear center, though. Or should a center channel speaker be used there.

If not a center channel speaker, why not.

In a 7.1 system you have TWO channels in the rear. Most people opt for two direct radiating rears. It's mostly for effects rather than immersion.

Personally I've not found the extra two channels in the rear to be that big of an improvement. I'm even kicking around the idea of selling the rear speakers and the extra amp I bought and putting that money towards a kick ass DVD player, or into my "new TV fund".

A center speaker is not the ideal answer. The purpose of a horizontal center channel is so that it sits comfortably on top or below a TV. Most people, in an ideal world would not buy a center speaker for the center channel and would get the exact same speaker as the front left and right channels. Since there is no TV in the rear, a center speaker would not be necessary.

I personally run three QS8's in 6.1. The surround field is great, but it is not an amazing step forward. I think, depending on your room size, you should be happy with the M2's.

Hi Michaeld,

Spiffnme and JohnK more or less nailed it. In an average-size listening room (20 x 15 x 8), I would call the addition of the two rear surround channels a "modest improvement," although this can be rather room-dependent. Big spaces will get much improved coverage if you run four QS8s.

Certainly two M2i's will work fine at the back with QS8s at the sides, although if you take a purist point of view, it makes sense to use surrounds at the rear that have identical frequency response and dispersion characteristics as those at the sides. In many installations I don't believe it's all that critical.

Regards,

Thanks very much, Alan, Spiffnme and John. I appreciate your advice.

If you're going for similar frequency response, shouldn't you use the M3ti's instead of the M2's? The M2's only go down to 60 Hz, whereas the M3's go to 50 Hz like the M22ti's. I'm also thinking of going this route for my rear surround channel. Anyone else have some input?

Hi Cyprest,

I understand what you mean about "same frequency response", and you do have a point.

However, in most surround sound setups, all the main and surround speakers are crossed over at 80 or 100Hz, so having surrounds that play down to 50Hz isn't all that important.

Plus, even though the M22s are rated to play "down to 50Hz", they won't do so with any authority. Yeah, you'll get a 50Hz tone out of them...but nothing like a 50Hz tone out of a 15" Shiva with a 800 watt amp on it.

80Hz/24db oct is the commonly used cutoff for the M22s (AFAIK)

I do plan on getting a second set of QS8s for my rear surrounds.

Also, the M3s are not as similar sonically to the M22s as the M2s and QS8s are. From all I've read, the M3s are best used by themselves in a small stereo setup.

In reply to:

---

I do plan on getting a second set of QS8s for my rear surrounds.

---

You may want to consider getting direct radiating speakers for your rear surrounds. It is my understanding that the rear channel signal is meant for direct speakers, and does not benefit from dipole/bipole/quadropole speakers.

Additionally, DVD-A/SACD multi-channel tracks are mixed using 5 direct radiating speakers, and therefore sound best when all the speakers are monopole. What you can do is hook up your multi-channel inputs so your left and right surround channels from your DVD-A/SACD player are connected to the left and right rear surround inputs on your receiver, which would output the signal to your monopole rears.

If you don't care about multi-channel music, then go with QS8's x 4, but if you are interested in DVD-A or SACD, I'd go with QS8's x 2 for L and R surrounds, and M2's x 2 for rear surrounds.

Mark