Hey, all.

I'm just curious...has anybody tried a pair of QS speakers for the fronts as well as surrounds for HT use? I find they add so much more of a 3-D effect in the back, I wonder if the same can be accomplished up front.

This may very well be a suboptimal setup for music, but I just shiver at the thought of the lobby scene in the Matrix in full 3-D glory.

Bad idea. The front channels are directional audio. Scattering it around the room would give you the effect of people talking everywhere when one person was in front of you.

No.

fhw:

I am going to respectfully disagree with Semi. I think you might be on to something here. The voice issue he mentioned could be overcome by staying with a VP model in the center. As you said, with QS models all around, musical performance might be less than ideal but the surround envelopment should be spectacular.

Essentially this is exactly what Mirage is trying to achieve with their new Omnisat. To quote Mirage, "The main goal of the new OMNISAT series was to provide a product with the most natural, accurate performance and seamless, home theater blending. This was accomplished by using Mirage's proprietary Omnipolar technology in 5 identical satellites. Omnipolar technology produces the same amount of direct and reflected sound as live events, for the most realistic experience in music and home theater. Five identical satellites for the front, center and surround channels guarantee the same tonal and timbre characteristics to further enhance the life-like Omnipolar experience." As you can tell, they don't seem to be worried about the center being a surround.

I am looking for a small sub/sat combo for my family room. My wife has already vetoed the M1's as "too big". My only choice in the Axiom line is now the Epic Micro. Like you, I am considering replacing the fronts (MZero's) with surrounds (QS2's) up front to get a better surround experience. I think a QS4/QS4/VP50/EP125 combination might be just what I need.

I would be interested in other thoughts on this issue, especially those of Mr. Lofft.

I must note that I heard a dahlquist setup using 4 of their surround speakers, a center, and a sub. Their surround speaker has a switch on the back, on for direct, one for surround. When listening with the front two in direct, it sounds like two regular speakers. In surround, it did have better dspersion of sound, however it sounded rather hollow. Like if you never knew exactly where things were in front of you.

It was an interesting experience, but due to this, I must say that I prefer direct speakers for fronts, and surrounds for surrounds.

Hi ValueCanuck1,

Mirage will never admit it, but using omnipolar or bipolar speakers for the front left, center, and right front in home theater or stereo results in a vagueness of imaging and a lack of image specificity. I know. I own large Mirage Bipolar monolith slabs (2001 Space Odyssey) that I use in my stereo-only system--I can switch between those and the M80ti's, and the results are quite revealing.

If we're speaking of accuracy, and fidelity to the movie director and sound engineer's intentions, movies for commercial transfer to DVD or theatrical exhibition are NOT mixed with bipole or multipole speakers in the front channels. Bipole/dipole surrounds are used at the sides of the recording studio control room to recreate the sense of envelopment that rows of side-wall-mounted surrounds produce in a large movie theater.

Of course you can try using multipolar speakers at the front and it will produce a spectacular spaciousness--but at the expense of precise imaging. And it's an effect that wasn't intended by the director or sound engineer. That said, you still may like the overwhelming spaciousness even if it isn't accurate.

I've tried my Mirage Bipolars in my home theater system and while the spaciousness is very seductive for largely music programs, there is a loss of precise imaging, particularly when on-screen sounds pan off-screen to the left or right. Moreover, depending on the postioning of the bipolars, when there is off-screen dialog to the left or right, the bipolar radiation of the speakers can introduce a kind of hollow coloration that is quite different from the same actor's voice from the center channel.

In stereo, depending on the music I'm playing, the Mirages bipolar radiation can be very flattering and seductive, especially with classical orchestral and choral works and jazz, and I still enjoy them with that kind of program. Even with chamber music--say, violin and piano--I'm more apt to switch to the M80ti's, because I like the exactness of the image: you can close your eyes and point to the piano or the violin's location.

On pop music, the center vocals are not as precisely located as on the M80ti's, nor are backup instruments. And that hollow coloration on vocals is noticeable on immediate comparisons with the M80ti's. It's not that offensive--I'd call it a minor foible, but Mirage will never acknowledge these liabilities of bipolar main speakers. After all, the bipolar approach is Mirage's thing, and it's been very successful for them.

Regards,

I'll agree with what the others say about omnipolar speakers giving a big, enveloping sound, but lacking in imaging and accuracy. This would be especially noticeable when compared against the Axiom bookshelf and tower speakers, which are known for their very precise imaging. Then again some people like the sound of omnipolars; I know people who have mirage speakers and love them.

Even if you were going to use omnipolar speakers for your mains, I wouldn't recommend using the QS speakers because they have pretty limited bass extension, the -3db point is at 95hz, which is totally unacceptable for main speakers IMHO. Also, the driver configuration on the QS speakers woudln't be very good for mains; omnipolar mains usually have drivers firing foward and back, not up and down.