Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Help w/ Awkward Layout for 5.1.2?

I think I’m leaning towards a 7.1 setup w/ 4x Q4s for surrounds, 2 in-wall M3s for L+R, and a V100 on a stand. I will disconnect the V100 and move it to a closet when I have guests over, so the fireplace isn’t blocked - it’s a glass fireplace and you can see through it to the adjacent master bedroom, plus it’s nice to be able to use the fireplace in Seattle’s rainy weather. I can’t change the room, I just moved into one of the most expensive downtown areas in the country (my wallet is hurting!) and plan on staying put for the next 10-15 years. I bought the only place in my budget with a floor plan that would work with a projector. Unfortunately, it happens to be the 50 Shades of Gray tower haha 😆 My Denon at 105W RMS per channel should be sufficient for these speaker choices, it seems. I think the in-walls and on-walls will help preserve my views (floor to ceiling windows) and free up some clutter, compared to my current bookshelf Q100s on bulky stands. I would prefer M3 in-walls for surrounds, for aesthetic reasons, if you think they would work okay as laid out in the diagram in my original post. Would they be too directional for the awkward 7.1 placement?

I’ll probably get another SVS sub unless Axiom offers a better price:performance value - their offerings do look nicer and aesthetics are important to me. I have a couple SVS SoundPaths which work well to make any sub wireless. I might consider an in-wall sub if my HOA would approve it - doubtful. An architectural committee has to approve any in-wall speakers or other modifications to the unit.

Thanks everyone for your input so far, I appreciate you lending your experience and expertise to my problem!

Aye, that sarsaparilla sure does a number on me.

What do you perceive is weak with M2s for your set-up that you want M3s? I expect the M2s will give you improved midrange and highs over the M3s. The low end will likely integrate better with your room because they don't have the bass bump the M3 has. The M3s are great when you're not using a sub and want a more relaxed and less accurate sound.

I highly recommend two QS10s over four QS4s. They will provide much improved sound and fill the space better than QS4s. Your Denon won't have a problem driving them.

5.1 is plenty for your space. You'll have better sound, less clutter and more money in your wallet.

I would tend to agree with Mojo in it's far better to get a pair of M2 for the front. I would only go 5.1 as to be totally honest, your room is not perfectly acoustic so the subtle additions you'd get from 7.1 will be lost.

However, I would say that the QS4 will likely do fine for the surround. I would put the most money into getting a good sub like the EP500. The only downside I will give is that sub can produce a deep sound that if turned up too much might annoy the neighbours. The QS for surrounds with the wider dispersion will be far more forgiving giving you the surround feeling without and annoying unwanted out of place direction. The M2 will give the perfect mid-frequency and paired with an EP500 a lower smooth base. It is not likely that you will be booming and pushing the speakers really loud to even get close to the breaking distortion point.

Glutton, go ahead and get the QS4s because unless you listen to the QS10s, you won't know what you're missing anyway.

If you go with on walls all around you can possibly bypass your Strata council a little easier. As it would be more similar to securing large pictures to beams. As opposed to putting holes in walls and altering layout, also without lengthy permissions.

QS4's were my first Axiom purchase.
They have a unique sound and are great surround speakers.
If you're going M2's upfront QS4's make perfect sense to me.

You could probably fit 2 QS4's inside a QS10.

Have you considered squaring the sofa up with the tv and speakers?

His missus said he'd have to part with one of his 'nads if he did that.