Just starting a thread since I'm surprised no one else did.
The ceiling in my basement is too low, but maybe I'll end up with some of these at some point just because. I'd love to have a room that would make sense for Dolby Atmos, but these might work better than the Algonquins I bought for the bathroom if I decide I want more storage options on the walls.
In any case, it's a product I'm glad they made, even if I have no immediate use for them.
Ah , I didn't get the memo . Usually we get some advanced tidbits ,this is totally out of character. I did post about 4 weeks back asking about atmos based speakers. Here
Never did get a reply but they were obviously in the works.
Brent told me that they were in the works a couple of months ago when I mentioned that I was looking to get some for a games room which I wanted to wire up for surround sound for playing video games. However, there were no sign of them when I went up to Axiom to pick up my new LFR's. It is certainly good that they are now available!
Maybe someday I will jump on these speakers and do an Atmos setup, but I am not ready to scrap my decent receiver for a $1200+ Atmos ready one, and toss another $800 with of speakers into the room. My wife would absolutely kill me, plus it just isn't in the "responsible" cards right now.
Starting from scratch sure opens up some possibilities, especially with the lower introduction price until August 11. Of course, if you are going to pay a premium for the receiver already to get Atmos, why not go with 4 in-ceilings for the optimum experience?
Maybe someday I will jump on these speakers and do an Atmos setup, but I am not ready to scrap my decent receiver for a $1200+ Atmos ready one, and toss another $800 with of speakers into the room. My wife would absolutely kill me, plus it just isn't in the "responsible" cards right now.
Starting from scratch sure opens up some possibilities, especially with the lower introduction price until August 11. Of course, if you are going to pay a premium for the receiver already to get Atmos, why not go with 4 in-ceilings for the optimum experience?
Nick, that's what accidental power surges are for!
"I really don't want to spend more money honey...but we took a hit and what can we do?"
Maybe someday I will jump on these speakers and do an Atmos setup, but I am not ready to scrap my decent receiver for a $1200+ Atmos ready one, and toss another $800 with of speakers into the room. My wife would absolutely kill me, plus it just isn't in the "responsible" cards right now.
Starting from scratch sure opens up some possibilities, especially with the lower introduction price until August 11. Of course, if you are going to pay a premium for the receiver already to get Atmos, why not go with 4 in-ceilings for the optimum experience?
Nick, that's what accidental power surges are for!
"I really don't want to spend more money honey...but we took a hit and what can we do?"
Andrew Jones concentric speakers with the bandwidth limited up-firing driver or a variation of that type of setup is the only way Dolby Atmos is coming into my home. There is a 0% chance of even the idea of punching holes in the ceiling for speakers.
I continue to read from the 'experts' on some other forums who continue to trash horizontal CC speakers because of supposed comb filtering & lobing problems with these designs. IMO these anomalies are minimal at best in most HT rooms but they are a big & nasty deal for some.
I wonder if the technology that Axiom has developed in the M3 Ceilings with co-located drivers could be implemented into a smallish cabinet for yet another CC speaker that would be more easily placed into many HT Stands (like the VP100) vs the large cabinets above that model. Would this design largely eliminate these perceived problems?...
I continue to read from the 'experts' on some other forums who continue to trash horizontal CC speakers because of supposed comb filtering & lobing problems with these designs. IMO these anomalies are minimal at best in most HT rooms but they are a big & nasty deal for some.
I wonder if the technology that Axiom has developed in the M3 Ceilings with co-located drivers could be implemented into a smallish cabinet for yet another CC speaker that would be more easily placed into many HT Stands (like the VP100) vs the large cabinets above that model. Would this design largely eliminate these perceived problems?...
TAM
In theory, if you're only using 1 driver?
Curious what some of those haters are going to say when they work more speakers into their systems when upgrading to Atmos, Auro, UHD, etc.
It would seem to me that its a non issue in all but the largest rooms (which you'd expect to have matching front speakers).
I really like the concept and the potential of the new in ceiling M3.
I guess I'm going to do it. The sound barrier is going get a few new holes, hopefully in time for my 2 weeks off at Christmas. I can't go all Atmos, the bill is too much right now (baby in Nov.)but 5.1 sounds really good so I'm going to install a pair in the top front locations with my current AVR. I drew it out tonight and was shocked to see the in ceilings will be the same distance from my ears as my surrounds when installed as recommended by dolby. Ceiling height be dammed...
Will I always get better Dolby Atmos sound with overhead speakers?
Dolby Atmos enabled speakers produce slightly diffuse overhead audio that is quite lifelike and, in some cases, preferable to the sound that comes from overhead speakers.
If your ceiling is low or you have to mount your loudspeakers on overhead trusses or brackets, the overhead speakers will be closer to the listening position. The audio may be distracting because you’ll hear exactly which speaker is producing the sound instead of feeling immersed in an atmosphere in which sounds occur naturally overhead.
In this environment, Dolby Atmos enabled speakers may better reproduce the Dolby Atmos sound you would hear in a movie theatre, where the overhead speakers are high in the auditorium, creating a more diffuse experience. Audio experts who have heard Dolby Atmos enabled speakers agree that the sound these produce can be preferable to the sound that overhead speakers produce.
I don't really want Dolby Atmos enabled speakers, either, since it means switching my ceiling tiles back to something reflective as opposed to absorptive. Since the sound from the ceiling speakers are supposed to be somewhat diffuse as described, I wonder if Axiom could come up with a model for people in my situation. Low ceiling, still wanting the Atmos experience without resorting to the Atmos enabled compromise. Even better for me, specifically, would be 2'x2' panels pre-made for mounting the speakers in and dropping into a standard suspended ceiling grid.
FYI. General statement but, "Atmos Enabled" speakers are actually manufactured to meet a higher set of specifications specifically for Dolby Atmos than regular speakers mounted in/on your ceiling. Not that you can't get better speakers that work on the ceiling, but there isn't much in the way of "needs to meet these Atmos specs" out there. I heard A/B/C demos of 7.1, 7.1.4 with ceiling speakers, and 7.1.4 with Atmos enabled. Couldn't really tell much difference in the good ceiling speakers vs. the Atmos Enabled, but like mentioned above, you need a reflective and flat ceiling.
Height does not HAVE to be 8' and the Dolby guys at CEDIA mentioned that they wished that they left that minimum spec out. It will just be less effective the lower the ceiling, but they said that around 7' you start to lose effectiveness. 6'7" will be tricky.
FYI. General statement but, "Atmos Enabled" speakers are actually manufactured to meet a higher set of specifications specifically for Dolby Atmos than regular speakers mounted in/on your ceiling. Not that you can't get better speakers that work on the ceiling, but there isn't much in the way of "needs to meet these Atmos specs" out there. I heard A/B/C demos of 7.1, 7.1.4 with ceiling speakers, and 7.1.4 with Atmos enabled. Couldn't really tell much difference in the good ceiling speakers vs. the Atmos Enabled, but like mentioned above, you need a reflective and flat ceiling.
Height does not HAVE to be 8' and the Dolby guys at CEDIA mentioned that they wished that they left that minimum spec out. It will just be less effective the lower the ceiling, but they said that around 7' you start to lose effectiveness. 6'7" will be tricky.
Nick,
During the Atmos demos did anyone comment on aiming tweeters when ceiling height was less than ideal? The earliest information provided by Dolby suggested speakers should fire straight down.
My ceiling M3s finally showed up. Hoping to try them out tomorrow or the next. You can tell its a new product- no manual. Looks pretty straightforward though, once I figured out how to remove the grill. Feels very substantial for a plastic enclosed speaker. I bought these for an Atmos setup. I'm considering these for the surrounds as well.
Okay, got a chance to compare these a bit to my outdoor M3s. This was the easiest/quickest way I could do a direct A/B comparison. This is not high end audio equip, this is my shop music system. Cheapo Sony AVR, two outdoor M3s (v4), and a cheap 10" sub. The M3s are the most expensive part of the setup. I'm NOT an audiophile, but I like my Axiom speakers (M60s/VP150/EP500 previously) and can appreciate how much better they sound compared to others I tried. I figured the plastic outdoor speakers would be a good comparison to the plastic ceiling speakers.
I have these on a shelf, about 6' up, about 8' apart, and I stood about 10' from the speakers in the center. I used some music from Fireflight, a Christian metal band, with a female (breathy) vocalist and some classical accompaniment, which gave me a wide range of sounds to compare in just a couple of songs. (this is way overkill for ceiling speakers isn't it?).
Trial 1- speakers set to large, sub off. Here the ported regular M3s obviously won with lower end punch. Vocals were still very clear and airy (listen to me [sarcasm]) and the imaging always amazes me. It's like she's singing directly in front of me, I'm looking there, and my eyes don't see a speaker, but my ears and brain tell me she's right in the middle. I was curious how the different tweeter would compare, and it was maybe just a hair less 'real' sounding compared to the regular M3s, but the difference in the vocals was very subtle. The tell, though, was the much more anemic low end- understandably so without a port. Not much punch at all. There was also a good deal of 'plastic' sounding tone with the lower end. I imagine this would go away once these were mounted in a ceiling. Admittedly these were not made to just sit on a bookshelf, so I really can't hold that against them.
Trial 2- set speakers to small, sub on, crossover about 80 (dial on the back of the sub goes from 40-240 without any other marks, so I do my best to get it around 80). Here it was nearly impossible to tell any difference between the two. The plastic tone was gone. The regular M3s still sounded a bit fuller, vocals were more 'real', but I could easily listen to the ceiling speakers in that setup on a regular basis sitting on a shelf. The sound was MUCH closer to the regular M3s with the sub.
So there you go, a very unprofessional review of the new speakers. I think they will do great for my use, overheads in an Atmos setup and will complement my other speakers well. I don't think anyone would use these for main speakers unless you just had to with WAF. Now I just need to decide if I use these for the surrounds as well or in-wall M3s or on wall M3s...
Just to note, the frequency response on the low end will change significantly once they are ceiling mounted. The "plastic" tone could have been caused by vibration- again remedied by mounting. Its hard to do an apples to apples comparison if they are not on the same plane I know.
Did you get a chance to mount them up yet? I am considering my choices and wonder what you thought about the mounting process and how the sound changed. If they still seem to fall off at 70ish hz I'll check out other options I guess. Pics?
I have not. Drywall crew finished today. I won't have any time off until next week to try them out, and right now it's a big echo chamber with 4 walks and concrete floor.
I'm confident they will work as surrounds/tops supported by a subwoofer. I think you would not ideally use these as front L and R main speakers. I get the impression they aren't designed for that anyways.
I went with on wall M3s for surrounds and these for overheads. I couldn't put them in the walls where I wanted for surrounds due to structural supports that couldn't be easily moved.
Once I get the room a little more finished I'll compare the ceilings to the on walls.
Gotcha. Thanks for the update. I'm looking to use them as the atmos component (like you I think) of a 7.2.4 setup. Anxious to see what you think once your room is finished. I'm months away from Drywall the way things are going so no biggie.
Got a start on painting these bad boys. Using an airbrush and my ceiling color. Two light coats tonight. Hoping to get them installed next week assuming I can get the rest of the room painted this week.
I have been considering these as well for atmos but I am unsure of if I should wait and see if there are options specifically for Atmos whereas these seem to be just ceiling speakers. I am thinking these would be the obvious choice with the rest of my Axiom setup though. They do seem to be priced high considering they have no cabinet though.
Was hoping more people would have tried these for Atmos.
They are fully enclosed in the back, but they are not ideal for Atmos. They need to be able to be angled towards the listener instead of pointing straight down.
My understanding is that they only need to be angled if they fall outside of the recommended listening angles. They may not be 'ideal' Atmos but I wanted something that would match all my other Axiom drivers.
Hoping to get the ceiling painted tonight and I'll install them and give them a try. The room will be functional minus acoustic treatments next week. I'll have a better idea how they sound as a part of an Atmos system.
Dolby specifically recommends angled speakers for overhead though, so I just thought I would comment about it. When I was at CEDIA, the question came up several times at various booths, and I specifically talked to one of the Dolby "engineers" (not sure if they really send engineers, but he seemed knowledgeable) and he too told me that they should be slightly angled towards the middle of your listening area. If you have 4 speakers, then they form a "box" just outside of your seating area, and the speakers angle towards the middle of that seating area. Straight down was "less than ideal," whatever that means.
I have two different "less than ideal" issues for me. My ceiling is less than 8 feet tall, and I don't have direct radiating surround speakers. Both are "less than ideal."
I agree that matching the speaker drivers is super critical too for a consistent effect though.
Maybe Axiom can make a box to mount the M3 In-Ceilings in that will allow easy angling of the speakers? It might be at significant extra cost, but it would be nice to have the option.
Dolby specifically recommends angled speakers for overhead though
Where? In the Dolby specs I've read this is only true if the speaker doesn't cover the listening area.
There's lots of people only stating otherwise but that doesn't make it true.
From pages 7 and 8 of Dolby's installation guide released in Sept.
"Most high-power, full-frequency conventional overhead speakers with wide dispersion characteristics will work in a Dolby Atmos home theater."
&
"If the chosen overhead speakers have a wide dispersion pattern (approximately 45 degrees from the acoustical reference axis over the audio band from 100 Hz to 10 kHz or wider), then speakers may be mounted facing directly downward. For speakers with narrower dispersion patterns, those with aimable or angled elements should be angled toward the primary listening position."
It came straight from the Dolby "engineers" at CEDIA, and was specifically a talking point when they talked about "proper overhead speaker placement." Their demo, which you would sure think would be all about proper setup, had overhead speakers angled inward. The idea as they put it is that it creates more of a "dome" of sound, vs. a "box" with speakers pointing straight down.
Get out your time machine and meet me at CEDIA. Bring an audio recording device (cameras were only "allowed" for press, although I snuck some photos) and you can hear it and document it yourself. I documented it in my "right after CEDIA" comments in different threads here and elsewhere. I pointed out specifically that Axiom's In-Ceiling M3s don't angle like Dolby recommends.
It isn't like I am making this stuff up. Keep in mind though that these things were stated at CEDIA a few days before anything was written up for their website downloads or datasheets. They already were backpedaling on their "8 foot - 14 foot ceiling" requirement stating that it is more about filling a sound field than being specifically in that ceiling height range. Maybe their final print says otherwise, but just like the 8ft - 14ft "requirement," if they ever revise it and remove that requirement doesn't mean that 8ft-14ft isn't ideal or what they designed for. Maybe the angled speaker piece was like that and they didn't want to alienate people who want to buy speakers that can't angle, or for people with ceilings less than 8ft or greater than 14ft.
I wonder if an Axiom folks can comment on the 'wide dispersion pattern' of these speakers. Mine are each about 30 degrees front and back which are within the white paper specs.
It wouldn't be super hard to make a wedge shaped disc that you could rotate around to aim these. I'm Going to see how they sound 'as is.'
In a couple of webcasts recapping the CEDIA event they talked about straight down vs angled atmos implementation.
Straight down caused hot spots directly under the speakers in the listening room and dead spots on the further side away. Central seating was the exception obviously.
The concensus was the best ATMOS demo at the show was the Golden Ear setup, by Sandy Gross. (Founder of Polk, Definitive tech and now Golden Ear.) considered even better than Dolby's own! In a recent HTGeeks podcast he explained why all speakers need to be angled towards the MLP slightly to create a uniform soundfield, Specifically ATMOS setups. He goes into some detail about the choices made in their demo room.
It seems the best final arrangement is a blend of science and artful placement. Fodder for us to scrutinize until ATMOS is properly vetted in homes.
While GoldenEar's demo was REALLY good (better than even ones that I flagged ahead of time as being the "must experience" demos), the best absolutely went to another group. Lyngdorf Steinway hands down had THE best demo of all of them. Of course, when you have $126,000 (dealer cost, NOT retail) in speakers and audio processing, it better be good.
Even at the Dolby booth, they were telling people about the Lyngdorf Steinway demo. In a few on-site discussions, L/S came up as "WOW, did you experience that demo?" At the AVS after party, L/S was mentioned as a favorite, with GoldenEar second. I guess if you factor in price, maybe GoldenEar's demo WAS the best after all.
But yes, for people with real budgets (even though GoldenEar isn't inexpensive), I would agree that they had arguably the 2nd best demo there overall, and maybe the best when price was factored in.
Honestly, I do not. It was a dark room with about 24 seats in it. They had a number of products on display outside the listening/watching area that were well lit, but used flashlights to show people to their seats. You couldn't even see the main speakers until they shined the flashlights on them.
I do, however, know that the speakers were "outside" the listening area, meaning that *IF* they were pointing straight down, they would be pointed at empty carpet, and not directly over someone's head. So either they are REALLY wide dispersion, or they were angled. I know this because they were put on to a shiny metal truss system that you could see. It was at least 2-3 feet to the front, back, left, and right of the seating area.
While I can't imagine it NOT being angled inward, it would just be my speculation and not hard fact because, like I mentioned, I couldn't actually see the speaker angle, although I could just barely make out where they were located on the truss system.
I finally got a chance to test these. For stereo sound, obviously, they aren't s great choice for 2.0 listening. As a non- ported speaker, with a much smaller cabinet than the full blown M3 they are a bit thin sounding. They would be great in a 2.1 setting though. Very clear and crisp. Great imaging, which should serve me well for Atmos. My AVR (Marantz 7009) set the crossover for these at 100, my on wall M3s were set to 60 by Audessey.
I haven't had a full blown Atmos movie yet, but the Atmos demo disc and using Dolby Surround (Desolation of Smaug, at the end in the mountain with all the falling coins and running from Smaug) has been nothing short of impressive. I also recommend the bonus short from the Frozen 3D blu ray. Mickey flies a plane around the room and it's just crazy.
These sound seamless with my other Axiom speakers. I wouldn't use them as LCR but wouldn't hesitate to use them as surrounds or tops. With door and stud placement in my room I couldn't use them as surrounds- thus the on wall M3s.
Got mine today. I posted in the wrong thread earlier...
Originally Posted By: newf
Got mine today. Canada post delivered them at 6pm on a Sunday?!?!?
Anyways
They sound thin compared to my M3's, of course I'd expect some improvement once installed into ceiling. Looking at the tweeter, I can not see why Axiom can't allow or add some sort of ability to slightly turn and aim the tweeter which is what some people need for atmos.
Couple of other things I noticed as well. The two I have are not identical. The black piece that surrounds the woofer on one is textured, the other one is smooth and flat and has a few marks and glue on it from assembly. They both came in one box btw, and no instructions. There are some extra speaker terminals?, stick on Axiom badges, a proper template, and wrenches for assembly etc. I guess they are still working out some details with these as there are some quality things I am seeing like glue and plastic not lining up that are odd given the absolute perfection I am used to seeing from Axiom. The screens are magnetic again but very difficult to get off. They aren't falling off once mounted, lets put it that way.
With a sub they actually do not sound bad at all. I was considering ordering two more for Atmos 5.1.4 but I am not sure. Very hard to test these properly given you have to really mount them to hear them as intended and by then you might as well keep them since you have the holes in your ceiling.
In my setup I can mount them pretty close to my mlp for atmos so angling them isn't needed for these two, but for the other two it might be.
I agree they seem to be a work in progress. I ordered a pair in July when they were on sale, planning on 7.2.2 setup. Then I decided to go for 7.2.4. No instructions with either set, but there are videos at the website. I do like the Allen wrench they included I could chuck up in my drill. The first set had no labels, no banana plugs. The second set did. I like the idea. It was a bit hairy holding a heavy speaker, with no grill in one hand, and trying to wire the posts with the other, all over my head. With the banana plug, you just plug it in and install. It's s nice touch.
Get your plans figured out before you cut holes. Most folks recommend the Top Middle Layout (directly over MLP) for one pair, but if you're using two pair they recommend Top Front and Top Rear, which would be slightly forward and behind the MLP. Don't get hung up on angling the driver. These aren't spotlights, you can hear them off axis. The Dolby white paper recommends straight down as long as your within the recommended angles. My rear speakers aren't angled at the MLP. They are flat on the wall. So are my side surrounds.
Well, call me a sucker, I'm going to order two more ceiling m3's. I spent the evening sizing up my ceiling and if I am going to dive into this Atmos thing, I'd rather go for four now and be done. I guess I will be one of the first few with Ceiling M3's for atmos.
I gotta feeling it'll be years before we see regular Atmos content but from what people are telling me the upmixer for Atmos is really impressive.
Too dark now for decent shot. I had to do some compromising as to where they went due to two HVAC pipes and a joist. Will put the other two up next weekend maybe. They should be here Wednesday.
I took a listen to them via plain old 2 channel stereo with no sub. Sounds pretty good for ceiling speakers. Obviously the right decision as they match well with the rest of the Axiom's in the room.
They would be even better with aim'able tweeters. I would not doubt to see an updated version of them at some point....then I'll regret getting mine so early. I am lucky that my mlp is pretty much right where it needs to be so my 4 ceiling speakers should work out fine without aiming tweeters for Atmos. I hope. I ideally wanted the two speakers further apart. But obstacles prevented that.
I gotta say, after spending some time listening to them, you could totally use these as a nice 2 channel setup for easy listening and just a small sub in the corner of the room.
Do you think a system containing only in ceilings (at proper locations, heights and orientations) would work? It would be less than $10,000 for 17 pair.
I just realized I hadn't posted my finished, painted M3s. Here you go.
Here's a panoramic of the on walls and in ceiling setup before the room was finished. It's so dark in there now photos don't show the ceiling very well (which is the point).
Nice Job. That's how you mount Atmos speakers. My ceiling did not permit it.
Brwsaw: Not sure my little room with two little speakers makes me qualified to answer that question. I can't see why you couldn't do it, maybe someone else could chime in. I'd imagine proper in/or on walls would sound superior if you are talking for a surround system?
I wouldn't hesitate to use these for all the surrounds/heights/ceiling in a theater setup. I personally want full range, multiple driver, big cabinet speakers for my front LCR. If only for 2.1 and 2.0 music, and a center to match the fronts. I don't think a single in ceiling speaker would make a great center channel.
I wasn't thinking of placing all 34 speakers in the ceiling but rather using 34 in-ceiling speakers for a 24.1.10 Atmos layout with 4 subs. Each speaker would be located exactly as specified by Dolby. I'd like to hear them.
34 in-wall/in-ceiling speakers and 4 subs WOULD be pretty cool, but think about how many speakers wires that is. I say just go with this for a "full-on" experience:
Wire is cheap, relatively speaking. The Trinnov Pre/Pro needed would cost more than all the equipment currently in my room combined.
It's just a pipe dream but I'd want all matching speakers, either all in wall or in ceiling or not. Regular M2's are looking pretty good too. The cost of the mounts add up fast though.
The reality of that GIF would be that you'd ever need to worry about the nuances in music any more, you'd be lucky if the ringing ever stopped and you could understand basic conversation after.
Pretty sure the Trinnov is the only commercially available unit that can do 34 channels and he needed processing at the moment. There are others that are close behind.
I'm pretty sure most AVR's are limited to less than 13 channels when using a separate amp to power the channels the AVR can power. This should change in the near future, I'd assume quite a few manufacturers are considering building AVR's with more pre-outs.
I can't jump in this round, stuck on the sidelines watching it all unfold.
Pretty sure the Trinnov is the only commercially available unit that can do 34 channels and he needed processing at the moment. There are others that are close behind...
I was actually thinking of commecial theaters. To do Atmos would they need a Trinov processor, or are their commecial systems with similar channel management to our home units?
Good questions, I haven't seen clarification posted online yet. I would assume there are other brands/units available and most likely daisy chain able multi channel units. Sounds like the Trinnov is limited to only 32 channels, including subs. Commercial Atmos maxes out at 64 locations, not sure if that includes subs. I wonder how long it will be before we see a truely capable processor with 34 outputs and LFE management.
My understanding is that the Trinov system is used a lot in post processing in the movie industry (think I'm using the right term).
Wasn't it Emotiva that tried to put the Trinov chipset into a pre-pro? It never made it to market.
I'm not sure how much of a market there really is for that many channels in a consumer market. Trinov processors are/were(??) expensive enough that I suspect most theater chains could not make a good business case for the investment.
So I got my four M3's installed and experienced my first Atom movie. Quite impressed. Although I really have to move my ceiling mounted QS8's now as its impossible to hear the difference between my QS8's or Top Rears from the MLP. The M3's sound really good for Atmos, but I can't help but think that aim'able tweeters would help even more.
So, now I need to find some older mounts for these QS8's TI's. Put them at ear level on the wall, run more cables....etc.
From a speaker output perspective, the in-ceiling M3s are enough "full range" to work very well. The current question out there is if they have a wide enough dispersion to fill a wide area of sound and not "spotlight" sound straight below. I am not saying that they are not "wide" enough, I just don't think that anyone knows yet.
Dolby themselves recommend slightly angling the speakers towards the listening area, and any in-ceiling speaker with doesn't have tiltable tweeters (at least) may have a problem in being "ideal." Again, I am NOT saying that the in-ceiling M3s won't work. The ability to tilt is to allow all speakers to work, so it is a general guideline that is more critical for speakers with a narrow dispersion. Is that the M3? I don't know, and there are only a few people on here that have them, and they haven't answered that question.
I've been super happy with mine. I have a 7.2.4 setup with on-wall M3s and in-ceiling M3s, driven by a Marantz 7009. I actually hooked just two up and sat in between them and listened to some music in stereo. They image very well without any angling. The processor is using all the surrounds to 'place' sound objects in the room. I honestly haven't worried about angling the drivers. It would be easy enough to come up with a wedge shaped ring- but I'd be worried that the surround would become too focused. Between 4 speakers on the wall and four in the ceiling you'd be hard pressed to locate a singe speaker from the MLP. Actually none of the surrounds point straight at the MLP- that's kind of the point. You don't want to be able to pick out individual drivers.
Disclaimer: the only true Atmos tracks I have are the demo material. I'm not interested in any if the current releases with Atmos. But the Dolby up mixer is great. Watched plenty of action films and I've had plenty of jets and helicopters buzz in from overhead.
I'd say try them flat. If you feel like it's lacking then you could engineer up something to tilt them. I think it's a waste of time based on my results. Axiom, with their CNC machines could whip up a ring/wedge for tilting purposes fairly easy I imagine. Might have to rework the mounting brackets a bit.
Can you post up some pics of your room and atmos install? At this stage in the game any info or images can be very helpful. Is your setup in dolby's ideal layout? Trying to learn as much as possible from people with boots on the ground.
I don't doubt the reps said that. The white paper, however, only recommends it for narrow dispersion speakers. Maybe angled would be better. How much better for how much effort. I'm in the 'leave well enough alone' camp.
I have some sketchup models of the room. I'll look for them tomorrow. Just under 9' ceilings. Two speakers 30 degrees in front of MLP and two more 30 degrees behind. I tried to stick within the Dolby recommended angles in the Atmos white paper.
Nick- don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to argue with you. You were there and spoke with the reps. I'm just going by what I've read online and what the white paper says. "If we were cross, I don't think I could bear it"
Posting schematics is easier than photos, my ceiling and M3s are painted black and it's really hard to get good photos of where everything is. I highlighted the drivers yellow so they would stand out. The red sphere is the MLP. The room is very close to these diagrams. The only major change is that the side surrounds are just behind the MLP. These pesky things called load bearing studs/door frames got in the way. The ceiling speakers are all equidistant from the MLP. 30 degrees front/back, and pretty close to that side to side.
Freaking fantastic! Great schematics. We can probably agree that if your plan closely reflects the actual build, there is definitely a great wide dispersion pattern on the in ceiling M3s. I often wonder in my current layout if I used the front ceiling ATMOS locations with angled drivers, and the rears down firing, if I could get away with assigning them as wide channels. I have heard that wide with 2 overhead aids in the immersion moreso than 4 as overhead.
Great rendering of schematics, I have the exact setup up front with two XV15se subs and towers (m100's) and have 2 pairs of m3's in-ceiling on the way. I'm waiting before I upgrade the amp to see what DTS-X will come up with this march, so far I like what I see with the Denon x7200
Nick- don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to argue with you. You were there and spoke with the reps. I'm just going by what I've read online and what the white paper says. "If we were cross, I don't think I could bear it"
I'm not upset at all. I just wanted to point out what Dolby reps (and a few of the speaker reps from different demos) said in person both during demos, and Dolby reps said when I specifically asked about it after the demo.
They told me things that they said would not show up on a white paper because they don't want to be "too limiting" which to me said that they didn't want to be so picky that it turned people away from the technology. Another example of this was that they want monopole speakers all around (sorry QS series). Not that bi/di/quad pole surround speakers wouldn't work, but it wasn't what they wanted as it is more difficult to create the correct imaging.
I have not looked to see if that made it in to the white paper or not, or is in any revised ones. They just said that it wasn't specified in the white paper that was coming out in the midst of CEDIA.
Also, I did say, "Sounds to me like the dispersion of the in-ceiling M3s is wide enough to not matter, which is great to hear."
To me, white papers and even what the reps say is good, but real world practice is better. White papers and verbal information is intended to make things work for the most broad of audiences. If the Axiom in-ceiling M3s work, then great. Not saying that they couldn't potentially be even better at a slight angle, but to implement the angle may not be worth whatever reward (big or small) it may yield.
Personally, I am going to experiment with both. Flat and angled, but I am doing on-wall (on-ceiling) to keep my soundproofing intact. That, however, won't be for a long while, so I won't know which works best.
All in all, I think that we can agree that they are working for you. Would an aimable tweeter be a nice enhancement to the product either way, sure... But it is working for Atmos per your experience, so that is good for me.
Real world practice from people with current hands on experience is extremely valuable. I wish more people would post up pics and practices.
BTW, you both are completely wrong!
Especially now that Alan has retired, the collective experience is really the best resource for real world implementation advice on immersive. I know I'm not totally lost in all of this.... but come on. My stuff has been in boxes for over a year. I don't even know if I can hear in surround anymore!
Can someone update the product specs and maybe add a link to a manual. i would like more info on the mounting depth. Curious how they will fit in my backer boxes.
I think nick was hinting that the new in ceiling speaker had a advance feature which I suspect is a moveable tweeter. Last time I thought I was wrong , I was.
I think nick was hinting that the new in ceiling speaker had a advance feature which I suspect is a moveable tweeter. Last time I thought I was wrong , I was.
I think nick was hinting that the new in ceiling speaker had a advance feature which I suspect is a moveable tweeter. Last time I thought I was wrong , I was.
That way you can read whatever you want "between the lines."
For the record, I have not stated any specific detail. Until Axiom makes some sort of announcement on anything at all, things should be taken with a grain of salt... or two grains...
I'm curious what will happen with the price of all of them. IMO the swivelling Bryston's were/are very reasonably priced. I was shocked actually, expecting there to be a larger difference in price between the current in ceilings.
That way you can read whatever you want "between the lines."
For the record, I have not stated any specific detail. Until Axiom makes some sort of announcement on anything at all, things should be taken with a grain of salt... or two grains...
Just the sort of reaction I would expect from someone who let the cat out of the bag. HMMMMMMMMMMMM
I hope they have a 15 degree or more tilted/driver tweeter combo. Straight down firing are for whole house audio applications. Not so great for home theater IMO. Havent heard the M3 in ceilings though. my rear heights could be down firing, but front heights really should be angled towards the mlp in my room. Talking 7.2.4 atmos not auro. Many interpretations of front heights I guess now.
I'm curious what will happen with the price of all of them.
Me too. The ~500$ pricepoint puts them up against other offerings with much more to offer in terms of driver adjustability, db trim switches etc. I've looked at a lot of options, and these look similar to a monitor audio design. The plastic back surround is very similar. To be honest, once you subtract a wood cabinet there really isnt much to them. Yet they are close to regular M3 pricing. I guess we are paying more for the fresh R&D and tooling? Dunno.
I would think that they are made right there in Canada. They make their own injection molded plastic parts onsite in Dwight. In fact, there is push to make more and more things onsite as it is less money going out to other companies, better quality control, etc.
From my tour and conversations, there are a few things that will stay overseas, but those are things like the drivers which are made by Axiom in their Axiom facility in China (not a 3rd party group making them, but actual Axiom controlled facility), and the circuit boards made by a 3rd party group. That is why Ian and Debbie spend so much time in China. Many months of the year involves one of them being in China to monitor the processes.
Ya know, it was mentioned back on November 3rd that aimable in-ceiling were more ideal for Atmos. Not sure when you got yours as I haven't gone back and looked...
Seriously though, didn't you say that you thought that they worked great as is? Then don't worry about it and enjoy it. I bet it sounds amazing.
Hey Nick, Aim-able M 3 ceiling speakers for Atmos application , did this ever come about? I have looked at the product page for M-3 s but did not see this feature mentioned. thanks, Jeff
this brings about a good question, why is it so important to have tweeters that can be aimed? I was under the impression that with so much emphasis I keep hearing about "pinpoint accuracy" with ATMOS, why are the ceiling mounted speakers simply straight down and with the ATMOS mix, they just don't pan across each other and move as needed to convey say a helicopter moving across the ceiling area.
is this something that dolby said is a requirement or is it just something that people are saying they prefer? I've not seen it mentioned at the dolby site so, I'm just wondering. I mean, for the most part, with the exception of the traditional placement of the front L & R and height for tweeters with them, most folks don't "aim" tweeters per say.
I'm just wondering, not challenging anyone about it before some of you get started, I'm just trying to understand the importance of it.
All channels should be aimed with consideration for the center of the soundfield. This ensures people sitting off axis dont get all of one speaker and not the others. It is possible to create a realistic and centered soundfield for all listeners if this approach is used. Here is a vid that explains the details. Its kind of old now, but still very relevant.
I recall Dolby stating straight down in the early anouncements, then it seemed to get twisted and I don't recall Dolby ever correcting the aimers in the crowd. The sounds are being passed from speaker to speaker through the sound field. IMO you wouldnt want aimed speakers for this specific application.
From April's HT guide... "If the chosen overhead speakers have a wide dispersion pattern (approximately 45 degrees from the acoustical reference axis over the audio band from 100 Hz to 10 kHz or wider), then speakers may be mounted facing directly downward. For speakers with narrower dispersion patterns, those with aimable or angled elements should be angled toward the primary listening position."
All channels should be aimed with consideration for the center of the soundfield. This ensures people sitting off axis dont get all of one speaker and not the others. It is possible to create a realistic and centered soundfield for all listeners if this approach is used. Here is a vid that explains the details. Its kind of old now, but still very relevant.
what I like about this guy as a professional installer of ATMOS systems is that they use methods outside of what some say is written in Dolby stone for their clients and they love it. they use many bi-pole speakers in their setups depending on the size of the rooms. they have at times used bi-omini pole speakers on the ceilings. they base everything on the room. they say the proper mix of those types of speakers really fills the room in certain areas that makes for great atmosphere (see what I did there! )
they do follow a lot of Dolby ATMOS cannon as well. gives me hope for what I plan to do and how I now feel sooooooooo much better about keeping my QS8's in the mix.
that was a very good and very informative video with a lot of thinking in and out of the box. thanks for posting it.
The whole idea of the aimable tweeter came up because there was no hard number on the dispersion of the in-ceiling M3, and elsewhere it mentioned that if you don't have a wide dispersion overhead speaker, that you need to angle the speaker towards the listening area. Well, since that would mean a much more complex M3 housing design to be able to angle the entire speaker (woofer and tweeter) it was mentioned that being able to aim the tweeter (where most of the frequencies that are easily "locatable" to human ears comes from) would be a positive step. Also, if you have lower ceilings, it was determined by others that had done testing on it that if you had a lower that recommended ceiling, you would put the speakers further away (further in front, or behind, and further out to the sides if possible) to allow the speaker to disperse the sound more, but then you would have to be able to point the speaker towards the whole listening area. So you are using speaker aiming-ability to compensate for the lower ceiling by pushing the speakers further away (like if you had a taller ceiling).
So in an ideal situation (correct ceiling height and correct speaker dispersion), you would want the speakers pointing straight down as spec'd by Dolby. It is when you are trying to overcome some limitation that things get a bit "wonky."
On a particular DIY speaker site, a very popular ceiling speaker option for Atmos is an on-ceiling (basically an on-wall speaker) that it's cabinet comes with an angled option (as well as a regular box that they call their "Atmos" box). I don't know what the dispersion is for the coaxial speakers that they use, but they offer both options specifically for Atmos due to demand (their words, not mine).
The whole idea of the aimable tweeter came up because there was no hard number on the dispersion of the in-ceiling M3, and elsewhere it mentioned that if you don't have a wide dispersion overhead speaker, that you need to angle the speaker towards the listening area. Well, since that would mean a much more complex M3 housing design to be able to angle the entire speaker (woofer and tweeter) it was mentioned that being able to aim the tweeter (where most of the frequencies that are easily "locatable" to human ears comes from) would be a positive step. Also, if you have lower ceilings, it was determined by others that had done testing on it that if you had a lower that recommended ceiling, you would put the speakers further away (further in front, or behind, and further out to the sides if possible) to allow the speaker to disperse the sound more, but then you would have to be able to point the speaker towards the whole listening area. So you are using speaker aiming-ability to compensate for the lower ceiling by pushing the speakers further away (like if you had a taller ceiling).
So in an ideal situation (correct ceiling height and correct speaker dispersion), you would want the speakers pointing straight down as spec'd by Dolby. It is when you are trying to overcome some limitation that things get a bit "wonky."
On a particular DIY speaker site, a very popular ceiling speaker option for Atmos is an on-ceiling (basically an on-wall speaker) that it's cabinet comes with an angled option (as well as a regular box that they call their "Atmos" box). I don't know what the dispersion is for the coaxial speakers that they use, but they offer both options specifically for Atmos due to demand (their words, not mine).
you mean something like this one coming out from SVS?
After living with 4 in ceiling m3's for a year now and Atmos. I wish I could aim the tweeter. There is no other way to put it. Otherwise they are excellent, well built, easy to install and sound good. But with 8' ceilings, I wish I could aim the tweeter. Looking at how the tweeter is mounted, it would not take much to add a little swivel capability to it.
The whole idea of the aimable tweeter came up because there was no hard number on the dispersion of the in-ceiling M3, and elsewhere it mentioned that if you don't have a wide dispersion overhead speaker, that you need to angle the speaker towards the listening area. Well, since that would mean a much more complex M3 housing design to be able to angle the entire speaker (woofer and tweeter) it was mentioned that being able to aim the tweeter (where most of the frequencies that are easily "locatable" to human ears comes from) would be a positive step. Also, if you have lower ceilings, it was determined by others that had done testing on it that if you had a lower that recommended ceiling, you would put the speakers further away (further in front, or behind, and further out to the sides if possible) to allow the speaker to disperse the sound more, but then you would have to be able to point the speaker towards the whole listening area. So you are using speaker aiming-ability to compensate for the lower ceiling by pushing the speakers further away (like if you had a taller ceiling).
So in an ideal situation (correct ceiling height and correct speaker dispersion), you would want the speakers pointing straight down as spec'd by Dolby. It is when you are trying to overcome some limitation that things get a bit "wonky."
On a particular DIY speaker site, a very popular ceiling speaker option for Atmos is an on-ceiling (basically an on-wall speaker) that it's cabinet comes with an angled option (as well as a regular box that they call their "Atmos" box). I don't know what the dispersion is for the coaxial speakers that they use, but they offer both options specifically for Atmos due to demand (their words, not mine).
you mean something like this one coming out from SVS?
Keep in mind though that these things were stated at CEDIA a few days before anything was written up for their website downloads or datasheets. They already were backpedaling on their "8 foot - 14 foot ceiling" requirement stating that it is more about filling a sound field than being specifically in that ceiling height range. Maybe their final print says otherwise, but just like the 8ft - 14ft "requirement," if they ever revise it and remove that requirement doesn't mean that 8ft-14ft isn't ideal or what they designed for. Maybe the angled speaker piece was like that and they didn't want to alienate people who want to buy speakers that can't angle, or for people with ceilings less than 8ft or greater than 14ft.
In a recent HTGeeks podcast he explained why all speakers need to be angled towards the MLP slightly to create a uniform soundfield, Specifically ATMOS setups. He goes into some detail about the choices made in their demo room.
