I'm in the framing stage of my basement remodel / HT project. On a suggestion from a relative I opened up the back wall (instead of having just a door) between the main HT room and where I will be having a small bar. I like the look and feel that it is adding but it screwed up mounting options for a pair of rear surrounds (for 7.1).

Checkout the floorplan here.

I screwed a couple of boxes to the wall where I'm thinking about putting the rear surrounds. So use your imagination while you are laughing.
Example 1
Example 2
Example 3

My dilemma is, what speaker should I plan for and how would I mount it? I have a pair of QS4's that I have been using for side surrounds. I'm looking for a reason to upgrade to QS8's since this room is decent sized but most say direct radiating speakers are preferred for the rear surrounds. So considering that I think I'm left with M2's but I'm not sure how well those would mount up there near the ceiling. I guess I could always look at ceiling mounted speakers but that's not the best performing solution. So I'm looking for some feedback.

I don't think that it is most would prefer to have direct radiators for the rears, it is just that most would prefer to spend less money on the rears, as they aren't supported by most soundtracks.

I use Prologic IIx for everything. I can't wait to get my Q8s all around.

Okay, Ben; I studied the floor-plan and pictures. It appears that the back surrounds would be about 8' behind your ears. Although direct speakers would have room to disperse at that distance, there's certainly nothing wrong with using QSs there also. I'd suggest QS8s on the side and probably move the QS4s to the back. They should be separated a little more widely than shown, especially by moving the right back out farther, to get maybe the same 8' separation as the distance they're behind you.

Ya the spacing and mounting options for the rears is not ideal. With the door leading to the stairs it limits my ability to move the left rear surround much farther over. I thought the rear surrounds, since they are basically mono in 7.1, didn't need to be too far from each other? I always look at these things being symmetrical but perhaps since the right side of the room has more space to be filled it would benefit by having that right rear surround over farther to the right than the left. From a pure cosmetic standpoint I wonder if putting the two surrounds directly over the opening between the two rooms would function well enough from a sound standpoint?

My other concern using my QS4's there would be that they have the top firing speaker. They are going to be mounted so close to the ceiling I'm not sure what impact that would have on the sound.

My plans for rear surrounds, so far, are to use in-ceiling speakers that will be mounted a couple of feet behind the seating area.

What JohnK said.

You can mount the QS series pretty close to the ceiling. Axiom has some ceiling-mount brackets specifically for this purpose, and Sirquack made some pretty cool brackets by repurposing some Menard's hardware.

I have QS8's all around and am very happy with that arrangement.

In my version 3 of the Plex, my rear Qs8's are going to be wall mounted with included T bracket pretty much right behind the 2nd row of seats and 3ft above their heads. The sides will be mounted with a full metal bracket and moved forward somewhat. This is all to a accomodate me adding a rear and side wall to enclose in everything. It is not ideal, but should work fine.

For DTS ES, and DD EX the rear channel was mono, but for the 7.1, discrete mixes on blu-rays, the each rear channel is completely separate. Even the 7.1 expansion of 5.1 mixes via Dolby Prologic IIx/z delivers a stereo rear.

You don't have to use a QS for your rear speakers. You were just under the assumption that they are not suited, and in general monopoles are better. But that's not the case, the QS series can work very well as rears, just as they do to the sides. But if they don't fit your room/budget, they don't fit.

I'm open to the idea of using the QS4's for the rear. That gives me the excuse I need to buy the QS8's for the sides. I assume even on the new HD audio standards the side surrounds are still more important than the rears?

So how important is the placement of the rears to be behind and centered? I would believe that may be more important with monopoles than if I used the QS4's, no?

I updated the drawing with the rears being slightly offset. Honestly it would probably look better this way but I'm a stickler for precision on certain things. Not having the two speakers equal distance worries me. But of course the rear dimensions of the room are not perfectly ideal anyway for a HT.

Updated Floorplan

The channel trims and delays in the receiver will easily deal with small asymmetries, so no big worry there.

Yeah, the sides are more important than the rears, but on most 7.1 discs, and with PLIIx there's plenty of content coming from my two rears. So if you go that route, they won't be unused.

I can think of 3 positions to mount the QS4's:


Option 1



Option 2



Option 3



I think I'm favoring Option 2 and 3 right now. My worry about 3 would be one speaker not having a wall behind it to reinforce the sound, since it would be dangling from the ceiling. I'd also have to go take a look to see if I think it would be a headroom problem since that is sort of a traffic area. But it's the only option that helps get that rear sound over to the folks sitting on the left side of the room. I really appreciate the feedback from everyone on this.

Ben, I think you'll be totally fine with that scenario.

I'd agree that - with your asymmetrical layout and that little notch on the rear left - the QS4's might be even better than monopoles.

The location of the subs on the drawing might be ideal, but it also might not. While the walls are open, I'd be tempted to run some cable to the middle of the side walls and maybe the back right corner just in case.

I would consider combining options 2 and 3, with the left rear on the near wall, and the right rear on the farther wall. You can always turn the near one down and the far one up to balance the volume.

That's an interesting idea about combining option 2 and 3. I know AVRs can adjust for distance and volume but I always thought that would be best utilized for smaller differences.

As for the subs, I have the same concerns. Once I complete the framing I was going to do a bass test in the room (I did one before I started the project as well). I haven't done it with two subs thou, and thus I am concerned about cancellation. I also just want to see what rattles so I can attempt to tighten the room up. I've tried my best to not tie the side walls into the ceiling, thou the back wall is a load bearing wall for the house.

Ever the worrier I'm starting to second guess my idea for the cabinets on each side of the room (front). I had been considering building some bass traps on the sides of the cabinets, but I wonder if building the cabinets at an angle facing the center listening position would work... but I'm not sure how good that would look. I am addicted to looking at the display on my AVR since I do all my video switching on the TV (no OSD doing it that way). Oh and I was thinking about building a small stage between those cabinets as well.

I may just need to spend a day and setup a portion of the HT down there including surrounds to get an idea on how it would perform. I say a day because once I set it up I have a feeling that I won't be in a hurry to tear it back down.

Ben, my immediate thought was Option 2 with the left back a little farther to the left. After thinking about Brian's suggestion of the left back as in Option 3 and the right back as in Option 2, however, that looks good. The left back would be a bit close to the main listening spot(about 4' back), but should be okay with QS dispersion. Distance and level will be calibrated on the receiver, of course.

As Chris points out, stereo back surround fields are provided by DPLIIx, and if possible there should be a speaker to the back left and back right of the listening positions.

I think I've settled on this, unless anyone has concerns about the left rear being too close compared to the right rear. (Using QS4s)

As I said before, distance isn't really an issue with modern receivers. Angle is more important, and it looks like you've got that looking good.

Should work well, Ben.