Planning to pull the trigger on my four surround speakers for a dedicated basement theatre room running 7.2. I do NOT plan to run ceiling speakers for Atmos (or DTS:X, if they end up being required for that) because there was just not enough ceiling space in the proper locations to fit them in.

The room is just over 10W x 19L x 8H. There is a 5' deep elevated tier for second row seating across the rear of the room. Primary viewing position will be about 11-12 ft from the screen and 7-8 ft from the rear wall. Rear seat viewing will only end up being about 1-2 ft from the rear wall.

I have already picked up three M22 in-walls for my LCRs, which will be installed behind a 100" AT screen. Subs will be two Monitor IWS-10 in-walls. When I ran my cables, I had initially planned on doing either four M2s or four M22s for the side and rear surrounds (space being somewhat at a premium given the width of the room, and I like the look of clean/flush walls).

A friend and fellow Axiom advocate has all but sold me on the QS8s, but I'm still debating. There is so much discourse about direct/monopole vs. dipole/bipole for surrounds it could make your head spin.

Does anyone have any thoughts or opinions to offer based on experience with your Axioms (or others)? Basically, I'm down to making a decision between three different layouts:
4 x QS8
2 x QS8 (sides); 2 x M2 (or M22) (rear)
4 x M2 (or M22)

One the one hand, the THX experts recommend dipole/bipole side surrounds with direct firing rears; Dolby appears to push all monopole/direct - this seems to be particularly the case with Atmos. There are also recommendations floating around that all speakers match exactly (hence making the case for seven M22s).

Anyone able to help me give Axiom more $$?

QS8s on the sides. M22s on the rear.

agree.

I like these no nonsense replies! Any others welcome!

GJ,welcome. With the second row being that close to the wall, it would be difficult to create an effective rear surround field for those listeners. The QS8s would come closer to the goal than would any direct firing speaker and would also be very effective for first row listeners, so I'd suggest that they be used at all surround positions.

M2's either or M22's , I have M2's in a room pretty much the same size hanging from the ceiling above and behind my couch and they are super good . I am contemplating getting another set to replace my QS4's. I use 2 way direct radiating for my bedroom setup as well and prefer them myself for side surrounds.

I should perhaps also note that this space will be used almost exclusively for movies/TV - little to no music listening.

I vote QS4's.
My second choice would be the in wall M2.
And...I would have my rear surrounds inline with the knees of the back row viewers/listeners and approx 5' off the floor. The surrounds would be inline with the front row users knees at the same approx height.
This has worked in my narrow rooms very nicely.
The QS8 works beautifully too.

Johnk has a point. I was thinking about the first row seating being far enough from the back wall for the M22s to work.

If you go into a movie theater circa 1990~2000 you can see the speakers hanging on the walls and get an idea as to how they are put together.

The room that you are making isn't much different. The back row of people are very much like the back row at the theater. With the omni directional radiating speakers that the QS4 or QS8 give, the surround sound gives the enveloping sound that worked in the design of those theaters. I could sit at the back and still got the surround experience even though I had most if not all of the speakers located infront of my seating position.

You have to look at the way your brain assembles the sound it hears and processes it. Most people seem to think in single sound waves hitting our ears and conclude that surround speakers need to be at a certain location behind you to give the correct effect. Reality is that you hear hundreds of echo/reflections of the sound in your room and your brain assembles all that info to give you placement. But omni speakers break the sound dispersion rules in they send sound out in a much wider wave so those echo/reflections from the speakers get to more easily bounce off the back wall, front walls as well as top/bottom/sides so your ear gets more emersive sound timing data and not an overload of direct sound hitting one ear before the relection sounds have had a chance to reach both ears.

Next you need to look at how ATMOS and DTS-X are working to see why they are suggesting going to a directional speaker over an Omni. They take all the sound as an object inside the room and sort of do like a ray-trace of how sound should hit the listener calculating the timing reflections and amplitude. Then send that sound from all the required speakers so that your ears her the direct and first reflection to let your brain figure out it's location of where the sound would be located. It is very interesting science. If you however put that into a omni directional speaker the math used to make the sound will all be off as the sound it not coming from that speaker in a direct radiating pattern, but more of a diffuse bubble. So for ATMOS / DTS-X is will not sound as good.


For the OP, he has said that he is not planning on going with that ATMOS/DTS-X technology so the need for direct radiating surround speakers is not required. He would get a better effect for the second row listeners with an omni speaker combination for surround.


A bit long winded reply but just thought that I would give my take on the matter.

I have a similar layout to yours ,my theatre is about 10'wide x 22' long 7'8" high
And have a platform 2nd row seating about 1' from rear wall( my room opens up to a billiard room as well which is 22' x 30' overall with theatre,a bit of challenge sound wise)
I have 4- Qs8 -2m80's and vp150 and have switched back and forth several times from conventional 7.2 with side surrounds and rears to 5.2 plus front heights ( current set up) and I have to say that the Qs8's do such a good job on sides that either setup has not made much of difference ....at least to my ears any way and in my room....their are a few movies that benefit a bit from both setups( only a few) but not enough to justify the upgrade unless you already have speakers. IMO GO 5.1 or 5.2 with qs8s as surrounds and spent the rest on sub(s)....wish I had done this