Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
1) No, I would say this is not correct. My theater setup is in one corner of a larger 8,000 cu ft room. I have 4 Qs8's and they work perfect. The purpose of the surround speaker is to wrap or envelope you in the experience. For a direct radiating speaker this experience only comes for the person in the sweet spot. With the Q's, everyone is in the sweet spot.
Your room is not unusual, and actually more common.
2) No matter what speakers you use, your going to hear them throughout the house, direct or not. Again, the purpose of the surround channels is to envelope you in the sound, not be to a pinpoint location. In theaters, the walls are "lined" with many direct radiating speakers, the Q's simulate these many speakers in one package.
3) I don't have a problem with 4 Qs8's, but some people will go with Q's for the "side" surrounds, and use direct radiating for the "back" surrounds because they say they are better for muli channel music listening. Personally, I think the Q's do great for both music and movies.
4) It is best if the top/bottom driver have at least 4+ inches to breath a little. Maybe if you provide a drawing/picture of your situation we can give you options. The Q's are very forgiving on placement, because they "do" wrap you in the sound, so they are not as picky on placement. They don't have to be symetric with each other. They can be wall or ceiling mounted with the right bracket... Man, the more I read about the QS8's the more I want to find a way to make them work. I was concerned about their performance with multi-channel music, so glad to hear that you are happy with it. As long as it doesn't sound too bad I won't mind. I will try and get a floorplan up today. If I build a box for the recessed area then I won't need to worry about clearance. My room is far from ideal and symmetrical placment of speakers is not an option, so it is music to my ears to hear you say that the QS8's are very forgiving when it comes to placement!
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,840 Likes: 13
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 13,840 Likes: 13 |
I don't listen to a lot of multi channel music, but I do have a few concert DVD's and the surrounds to great...
M80s VP180 4xM22ow 4xM3ic EP600 2xEP350 AnthemAVM60 Outlaw7700 EmoA500 Epson5040UB FluanceRT85
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 10,420
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 10,420 |
From the description I would go with QS8s as surrounds and possibly even the rears
Jason M80 v2 VP160 v3 QS8 v2 PB13 Ultra Denon 3808 Samsung 85" Q70
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,786
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,786 |
So, what exactly is the tradeoff between the QS and a direct radiator like the M3? Is there ever an advantage to using a direct radiator??
Fred
------- Blujays1: Spending Fred's money one bottle at a time, no two... Oh crap!
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
I don't listen to a lot of multi channel music, but I do have a few concert DVD's and the surrounds to great... Excellent, I was worried about that but no longer.
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
From the description I would go with QS8s as surrounds and possibly even the rears Yup, I think I'm going QS8 all around .
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
So, what exactly is the tradeoff between the QS and a direct radiator like the M3? Is there ever an advantage to using a direct radiator?? IIRC direct speakers are, well, more directional (ie. easier to pinpoint or locate) while the QS creates a seamless (can't think of the right word right now) surround field. Probably not explained well, sorry. Also I think the directs are usually less expensive.
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,458
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,458 |
I'll throw out a quick reply that I too find the QS-series great for multichannel music. If I ever go 7.1, I wouldn't even consider direct radiators, and would only use QS-*s I like them so much!
::::::: No disrespect to Axiom, but my favorite woofer is my yellow lab :::::::
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
htnut
Unregistered
|
I'll throw out a quick reply that I too find the QS-series great for multichannel music. If I ever go 7.1, I wouldn't even consider direct radiators, and would only use QS-*s I like them so much! Awesome! Sounds like a winner, makes me feel dumb for even asking now.
|
|
|
Re: QS8 or M3 for surrounds?
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 10,420
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 10,420 |
I know at Mojo's his rears get a little lost, not much impact compqared to his side surrounds and even then not a lot of impact, but all of of his surround speakers are at least 8-10 ft away. I think his system would sound even better with direct radiating speakers for surrounds and rears.
Jason M80 v2 VP160 v3 QS8 v2 PB13 Ultra Denon 3808 Samsung 85" Q70
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,484
Members15,617
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
0 members (),
1,228
guests, and
6
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|