Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 81 of 95 1 2 79 80 81 82 83 94 95
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416919 02/07/16 11:44 PM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
axiomite
OP Offline
axiomite
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
Thanks JBG for the tips. I won't be going with in-ceiling speakers mainly because my room is sound isolated (new term for soundproofed). I have 2 layers of 5/8" drywall, attached to hat channel, isolation clips, and then to the ceiling joists.

1) I would probably end up cutting through the drywall and right into a piece of hat channel, or in line with a ceiling joist.

2) I am not too eager to put 4 holes into my ceiling for sound isolation reasons.


So for me, I am looking at somehow surface mounting on-wall M3s on to the ceiling. It will be a while yet before I get to that point, but I am just prepping now while I had some time home by myself.


Farewell - June 4, 2020
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416920 02/07/16 11:50 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
J
JBG Offline
devotee
Offline
devotee
J
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
ok...

passing the wire was one heck of a feat... I used http://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=4039 was a easier to pass 2 wires runs instead of 4

Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416922 02/08/16 12:33 AM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
axiomite
OP Offline
axiomite
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
I'm using the same stuff but just the single pair version. Good wire. It is amazing how much time and effort was and will be spent to just move the wires about 16 inches tops.

For the record, I soldered and added heat shrink to each connection for maximum effectiveness. I not only put shrink wrap on each individual wire, but then a larger piece over the entire section, including the white outer casing on both ends. Should be good for as long as we own this house and beyond.


Farewell - June 4, 2020
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416926 02/08/16 04:47 AM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
axiomite
OP Offline
axiomite
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
I should also mention that I have not yet leveled the side speakers, and the acoustical panel will be moved at a later date when I add 2 more panels to the room. The current 3 panels on each side will end up being centered under each of the 3 wall sconces on each side. The new panels will go up front next to the screen wall (the current wall panels are a specific design, so when I add to that design, I will put it up front.)


Farewell - June 4, 2020
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416929 02/08/16 04:04 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
J
JBG Offline
devotee
Offline
devotee
J
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
did you swap out the qs8s because they don't meet the Atmos specs?

it seems I might have to do the same as you...

read it here; http://hometheaterhifi.com/technical/tec...nd-the-reality/


7.1.4 * MRX1120 * M100s * 180HP * 4x M3-on walls * 4x M3-IC * dual XV15se * Shakers
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416931 02/08/16 08:31 PM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
axiomite
OP Offline
axiomite
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
Short answer, yes... I went to CEDIA 2014 where they formally announced Atmos and had several demos set up. I specifically asked about surround speakers, and was told several times, including right from Dolby reps, that monopole speakers are what Atmos was designed to use since it provides the best pin-point imaging. Not that you can't use bi/di/quad-pole speakers, but you won't get the full effect...

That was September 11, 2014 that I was there. 2 months later, Axiom had a killer sale, and I bought the on-wall M3s.

I will have the QS8s and even my older VP150 center channel. Just need to decide what to do with them. I want to use whatever proceeds from the sale or trade-in towards the ceiling speakers. I really want to get 4 more on-wall M3s and turn them in to on-ceiling, but haven't thought up a good mounting option for that yet (haven't really put much thought into it either). If I don't do that, then I will probably go with something like the Volt-6 in one of its configurations from the DIY Sound Group.

I really like the M3s though.


Farewell - June 4, 2020
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416932 02/08/16 08:59 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
J
JBG Offline
devotee
Offline
devotee
J
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
Just got off the horn with Debbie @ axiom... wow they really can customize speaker for ya... on the M3 on wall they can put binding posts on them & have the full metal bracket screw for the back even have them horizontally oriented .... give Debbie a call i'm sure they can find a solution for you, having a matched ceiling speaker would seem a must... they have me convinced they can do almost anything


7.1.4 * MRX1120 * M100s * 180HP * 4x M3-on walls * 4x M3-IC * dual XV15se * Shakers
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416933 02/08/16 09:01 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
J
JBG Offline
devotee
Offline
devotee
J
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
for my end I will need to do some tests with a pair of m3 bookshelves and the QS8s for surrounds with the atmos and dts-x


7.1.4 * MRX1120 * M100s * 180HP * 4x M3-on walls * 4x M3-IC * dual XV15se * Shakers
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416934 02/08/16 09:29 PM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
axiomite
OP Offline
axiomite
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,422
Oh, I know that they can customize it. I visited the Axiom shop in person almost exactly 1 year ago. GREAT experience. We talked about "un-skinned" on-wall M3s so that I could paint them to match the ceiling (I believe that this is a standard option anyway, but was good to talk about). I don't want to use found FMBs for a couple of reasons, 1) they would make the speaker hang down too low. I actually have a FMB from way back in 2004 when I have my VP150 mounted above my projector screen that I had at the time. Too much bulk for this application. (I want just a slight angle on them, but as close to the ceiling as possible.) 2) At $44 a pop, they start to add up.

Again, I just need to think of the design that can work with whatever Axiom can create for me for a back plate. I could create an angled piece of wood at the correct angle, but then I would have to be able to mount that to the ceiling (not hard) and somehow get the on-wall M3 to mount to that piece of wood in a manner that would hold it in place.

Enter the Axiom "Power Bracket"...



Really, the big question comes down to if the Power Bracket can hold up an M3 that is facing downward instead of facing into a room. If it can, without a doubt, do that, then all it would take to prevent it from coming off of that bracket and crashing to the floor would be a couple of pieces of Velcro. Then it would mount really flush, but not come off of the bracket. I just know that it is a lot more stress on that bracket as it not only has a downward force that is different than designed, but since it is closer to the top of the speaker, there is a twisting force as well due to the "bottom" of the speaker not being supported.

I guess that I could always ask for a 2nd power bracket per speaker, and a 2nd set of connection "ears" on the bottom part of the speaker that wouldn't actually connect to anything. Then I would have something that holds up both the normal "top" and "bottom" to provide more strength. Then again just couple of strategically placed pieces of Velcro would prevent it from ever working its way off.

See, now you have be thinking through it all.

The only other advantage to the DIY speakers would be cost. They are 1/2 the cost of the M3s, which at Qty 4, is a not-so-negligible $500. Knowing me, I will go that route anyway. I am sort of a "do it right" person whenever possible.

I am open to other suggestions for mounting. The way I look at it, the front overheads will nee to be flush on one side, and the other side will be something like 2 inches (I haven't done the calculations yet). I was planning on having them so that the tweeters for each pair (front pair and rear pair) point towards each other, and thus towards the middle of the room, vs having them closer to the front or back of the room, but that too is up for debate.


Farewell - June 4, 2020
Re: Maybe I should start a v4.0 build thread somewhere
nickbuol #416950 02/10/16 12:38 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
J
JBG Offline
devotee
Offline
devotee
J
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 485
I was reading about dipoles in a sound & vision artical ....

this is quoted from that artical;

Dipoles have NEVER been the right speakers for surround sound systems with 5.1 or 7.1 discrete channels except for ONE case...

If your room is on the smaller side and you can't place the side or rear surround speakers more than 5 feet from the main seat(s), you don't necessarily want "normal" speakers. When you are that close (5 feet or less) to the side or rear speakers, you want to use speakers that don't project directly at the listening position, so dipoles would be good to use in that case. For every other case, you WANT directional speakers in the side and rear (and height for newer surround modes). Reason being, discrete surround can and will place specific sounds in specific locations. For example, there might be a scene where a sound like dropped keys happens in the right rear. The "image" of those keys dropping will be specific with directional speakers. With dipoles in medium to large rooms, you'll get a huge, out of proportion and not well-localized "image" of the sound of the keys dropping.

Dipoles for surround sound were the right thing to use way way way back in the days of Dolby Surround were there were no discrete sounds in surround channels, you only would get ambience in the surround channels (wind, crickets, etc.). In those days there was never any "imaging" of sounds in the surround channels. Dipoles helped spread out that ambient sound. Dolby Surround (and other surround options from that time period) extracted surround sound from stereo mixes. When 5.1 and 7.1 came into existence with Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS 5.1, each channel could be encoded uniquely with very specific information from ambience to very localized sound. Dipoles will eliminate the ability of the system to localize sounds in medium to large rooms, but in small rooms, dipoles avoid the problems you have if the speakers are too close to the listener(s).

And... there is a convention for describing the channels in home theaters with height speakers... they are listed like this "ground level" channels.subwoofers.height channels. I have 7.2.5 using that naming convention. So 7.2 isn't a Dolby Atmos configuration and won't benefit from using Dolby Atmos. You have to at least have 7.1.2 for Dolby Atmos, though Pro Logic IIz and DTS Neo:X will do 7.1.2 also so, again, 7.1.2 isn't "much" of a system for Atmos... you really want at least 7.1.4 to get into Atmos. This may be referred to as 11.1 in home theater AVR-speak.


Read more at http://www.soundandvision.com/content/direct-or-dipolar-speakers-dolby-atmos#dzxdqpADV2BEJRp2.99


7.1.4 * MRX1120 * M100s * 180HP * 4x M3-on walls * 4x M3-IC * dual XV15se * Shakers
Page 81 of 95 1 2 79 80 81 82 83 94 95

Moderated by  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Link Copied to Clipboard

Need Help Graphic

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics24,940
Posts442,457
Members15,616
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
Top Posters
Ken.C 18,044
pmbuko 16,441
SirQuack 13,840
CV 12,077
MarkSJohnson 11,458
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 145 guests, and 4 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newsletter Signup
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4