Hello,

My home theater is in a family room that is 12' wide by 19' long. The couch is at 8' from the TV.

My LCR speakers are Paradigm monitor 7 v3 speakers and CC-390 v3 center. Subwoofer is a PS-1000 v3

I currently have Paradigm titans v3 hanging from the ceiling as surround (5.1 configuration) but I want to replace them with dedicated side surround speakers that will be positionned on the wall at 3' from each side of the couch.

The receiver is a Yamaha RX-V667 and I do not want to change it.

I would like to know with the size of the room which surround (QS4 or QS8) will be sufficient for the room size. On the Yamaha, I usually go from -40 to -30 sound level when watching a movie.

Could I use on wall speakers (like the M3) instead of dedicated surround speakers for the home theater?

Thank you for your help,

Are you ever going to consider Atmos or dtsx?

Since you say you dont want to change your receiver i dont think atmos is on your radar. I started with QS 4's and moved them to a smaller room and went with QS8's which in my 15x15 room work great. I have found having them up close to the ceiling works best.They are great surround speakers.

Since you have nice tower speakers, I would think that you would want to go with larger surrounds. QS8s would be my pick honestly. There is more depth and capability with the QS8s that you will appreciate.

My room is relatively the same size. QS8's nuff said
Also, for DolbyHD or IIx/z
defiantly go with QS8, if not at least QS4. You will see immediate improvement in sound.
Currently I sold my v2 QS8 to my son, put a set of QS8's on layaway. While I am waiting I have a set of direct speakers there. I cannot stand that every time a sound comes from the side rears I can localize the sound directly. It's like listening to music and hearing the singer in both left and right speakers.

Well, I'm going to tell you something you don't want to hear. Get rid of the receiver. Not right away, but when HDMI 2.1 becomes standard you'll have no choice. That's coming sooner than later. Then you'll have a receiver with Atmos capability.

My room is near identical in size, maybe a touch larger, but qs8's are the way to go for you right now.

Killer is, if a year or two from now you do want to try Atmos...you got the wrong speakers. The on walls would be better. Just something to keep in mind.

Hello to all,

Yes, right now I do not have any intention to change my receiver or use Atmos.

However I will go from 5.1 to 7.1 at some point. Back wall is around 10 feet behind the couch. I guess that the on-wall M3 could be on the back wall and the qs8 will be on the side walls.

What about QS10's? They also have the driver that fires directly into the room. While it's the larger driver and there presumably won't be much content for surrounds below the lower crossover range, it might help a bit with the back wall distance. If QS10 not in your range, then go QS8. Again, only for traditional 5.1 or 7.1. Atmos and the object oriented surround formats want direct firing speakers to work best.

FWIW, my in-laws have an all Paradigm system with ADP surrounds - I'd take my QS8 over the ADP's any day. The QS8's have an uncanny ability to be both diffuse and precise when needed. I find the ADP's somewhere in between without excelling at either.

Saw the qs10 and it is really a budget reason. Will probably buy a b-stock qs8

The QS speakers really do a great job on delivering a difuse area sound into a room. I don't know why you would want M3 on the back wall where a QS would do just as well in not better job.

The one and only reason that Atmos spec calls for direct firing speakers is that the implementation of the tech allows for the head unit (receiver) to simulate a more defuse sound by firing out multiple speakers but then as well be able to give the pinpoint accuracy when needed.

If you are not springing for a fancy Atmos setup with 11 speakers then you are far better off sticking with the QS.

Welcome to Axiom. At the relatively short listening distance you'll be using, surround effects and music ambience will be better with wide dispersion surrounds such as the QSs. Although the QS4s should be adequate at that distance, if your budget can support B-stock QS8s, they'd be advisable.

One suggestion is to mount the QSs about 2' above ear level and about 2' back, rather than directly to the side, to add a bit of "back" effect in the absence of actual back surround speakers. Enjoy.

As for why the M3 wall speakers as surround back, well I was under the impression from reading articles on the Internet that people prefered monopole speakers from the surround back because sound could be better localized.

As for putting the QS8 speakers behind the couch to cover for surround back, well there is not space on the wall for that (unless the couch is very near the TV) and I prefer using specific speakers for the surround back. What I could do is buy the qS8 for the side surrounds and use the Paradigm Titans V3 while I get enough money to buy surround back speakers.

Here are some pictures of my home theater;

[img]https://rcn3na-dm2305.files.1drv.com/y3m...p;cropmode=none[/img]

[img]https://tpjydg-dm2305.files.1drv.com/y3m...p;cropmode=none[/img]

[img]https://tpjzdg-dm2305.files.1drv.com/y3m...p;cropmode=none[/img]

no no no no just my 2 cents but you do not want localized surrounds

If you have a decent amount of distance from the seating position to the rear surrounds then a direct radiating speaker will work but if you are too close the sound will be localized and will detract from the experience. I know the QS's are expensive but ultimately worth the money imho. You could probably bet by with QS4's for the rear surrounds. I used M2's for rear surrounds suspended from the ceiling and it worked quite well, they blended nicely with the side surrounds.

In this case I'd try with the tv on the long wall.
4's or 8's would be just behind you.
You might even be able to walk behind still.

Finish your space. Buy a ceiling.

Yes I know I have to finish the ceiling:p. Been redoing the whole basement since last year ad really want to have fun with my home theater

Back to the subject, I will not change the room orientation.

Measured the distance between the couch and the back wall this morning. The distance is 8 feet so in practice, distance between the couch and the back speakers will be 7´ to 8 '.

I know now that the side surrounds will be qs8 now just need to decide for the back surrounds.

For the side Surrounds I would do QS8s and about 32" to 36" above seated ear level height.
For the rears again I would have QS8's and mount them from the ceiling with the Full Metal Ceiling Bracket.
My room is the same size almost. Same think the stairs come down behind, but I got anal and built a wall up, just because I could :0 also I didn't want them ceiling mounted so needed something. Plus it gives another buffer of sound proofing than room.
Also, ceiling is open make sure you put a board in the area incase you do, so you can have something to screw into solid

Been there. Just teasing.

Just another question for you guys,

I read a little bit more about Atmos and DTS-X. At first I tought this stuff would be a gimmick but from my reading:

a) It looks like more and more movies are coming with Atmos or DTS-X.

b) For somes, it seems like a big upgrade compared to the traditionnal 5.1 or 7.1

c) Not sure how my receiver will react when putting a movie that sends Atmos / DTS-X signal.

d) I have my speakers since 2004 and I am not the kind of person that change speakers just because of changing speakers. The only ready I will change my receiver is a) Broken or b) buying a 4K tv (currently have a plasma HDTV).

e) I like the having sound around me when watching TV, a movie or playing video games.

So considering all this, I really like the idea of the QS8 and I am sure they can do a great job it is just really a consideration of what I do in the future. Really, not sure that Atmos is that much of an upgrade / just hope that a home theater with QS8 surrounds will continue to be fun even if more and more movies are going to ATMOS / DTS-X.

Atmos and DTS-X is like putting cream onto a baked apple pie. The movies are now being mixed at the post-production using objects and encoded in ATMOS and/or DTS-X so that modern cinema's have something better to offer the movie goer. Think, they are loosing customers to Netfix and people just not going out to the movies.

Your 5.1 is about 88% as good as a home ATMOS / DTS-X
Your 7.1 is about 93%

So Atmos and DTS-X does add something, but it is not an revolutionary that much better experience. The average home theater is not perfect and unless you are throwing hours and thousands towards getting to that next level, you are not going to find it that much better.

I watch movies at home to escape for a bit and enjoy the entertainment.

But the cream is the best part!

Hey pidg dont feel bad your not the only one torn between 5.1/7.1 and ATMOS. I argue with myself daily about the cost vs sonic improvement. It is a huge outlay of cash and without hearing it in action i suspect my internal wrestling will continue. If you listen to some reviewers you would swear we have been listening to a tin can with a string connected to it ,the improvement is that great. I just wonder is they are trying to convince us or convince themselves. At present i have QS8's and it is a great experience but i just cant help wondering LOL. Maybe one day but the house needs a roof.

Fwiw movies encoded with atmos sound better anyway. There is a benefit even without atmos speakers.
Nail 5.1 or 7.1 first and enjoy.

As a lover of Atmos, I am also a realist. Atmos is quite good, but you have to also keep in mind that it still relies on the person doing the sound mix. Some people/companies are better at it than others. Also some movies just don't lend themselves to getting much value. An example would be a romantic comedy. Heck, even the first DTS:X title (Ex Machina) really didn't seem improved as they only added subtle environmental elements. Something that a lot of people would miss unless they could do an A/B test of the material. Based off of movies like that, it would be completely not worth it.

That being said, there are a lot of movies that really do capitalize on it. Heck, even movies that you would never think would benefit do. Age of Adeline has a spectacular car crash scene that is very Atmos worthy. It last about a minute. The rest of the movie doesn't hardly touch the overheads, so you aren't getting an immersive effect beyond regular 5.1 or 7.1 at that point.

So even movies with really good native Atmos content probably still only effect 10-15% of the whole movie as a norm, others will have longer sequences (imaging the ridiculously long cars chasing down the military plane scene in Fast & Furious 6 where the runway must have been 100 miles long or something silly). That chase scene lasted a long time. IF it would have been in Atmos, then that would have made that movie exceed that number. It isn't in Atmos, but just saying. It is possible.

So you have to decide if that really great improvement for only a small portion of a movie is worth it. Now, upmixed movies do utilize overhead speakers more, but usually it is very subtle through the whole movie until any action scenes or ones where the volume increases and then you notice it more.

So you have to figure out if that is worth the price of admission so to speak. Is Atmos really the next generation in sound? Absolutely. Does it come cheap? Not really... You can get a fairly inexpensive receiver, but usually are limited to 5.1.2 or maybe 5.1.4/7.1.2 but you will pay a little more. Then you need more speakers, and don't think that you can skimp on the speakers. Bose Cubes won't cut it. The more "full range" the speaker is, the better. That costs money too. Plus you need to run more wires, maybe get speaker mounts for the ceiling depending on your room, etc.

Again, choice is up to everyone. I bought an Anthem MRX-1120, traded in my four QS8 surround (which I got credit for, but not a ton), and bought eight on-wall M3s... You do the math and that is almost $2000 in speakers (might have been around $1500 after trade in), and a $3500 MSRP receiver. I get a lot more benefit than just Atmos and DTS:X with the Anthem receiver, but 7.2.4 Atmos all in one single box was the primary driver. Money certainly does not grow on trees in our back yard. I had to do some of the purchases over time, like swapping out the QS8s for M3s for regular 7.2 over a year before doing anything else, and I had to work some side jobs to fund the upgrade, plus a small bonus from work certainly helped (came the exact time that I wanted to make the receiver purchase. I hadn't had an opportunity for a bonus in over 15 years, so it was unexpected.)

Worth it for me? Absolutely. I am so happy that I did it, but the pain of the price tag has been gone for a year now, so it is easier to say that.

Well, right now I really want to improve my surround experience compared to my Paradigm Titan and probably go 7.1 later this year with surround backs (or use the Paradigm as surround backs for now).

After reading all your comments and thinking about it, Atmos may be the best new thing but really I do not have the money to add a new receiver and a lot of speakers for that 15% more experience Thank a regular 5.1 or 7.1 setup.

yes, where and when does it end. Atmos, DTS:X, Auro 3D Now in a couple years will be ATMOS II ,,,,,,,,,
I was seriously thinking upgrade, but the more and more I think about it, thats a whole lot of money and research. DO I go with inwalls or onWalls or those SVS Primes ......
That there is $1000 extra costs. Then its upgrading the Pre/Pro or receiver, another $2000 entry level. Yes, you can go cheaper $1000 but really at 7ch they were pushing the wattage ratings now they are adding an extra 4 channels ???? I believe thats ok if you add atleast a 3 channel external amp to run the front three. Let is do the rears and heights. So now your up $3000 - $4000 more for ATMOS.
Also, my room is 11.5 x 15.5 x 7.5, I think it is on the small side for ATMOS. I could just add front heights and maybe use the extra money and grab a couple of EP500 and go with four and I'd have a kick ass system.

As nick said ATMOS only comprises a small portion of the movie and is totally dependent on how it is mixed which makes me wonder even more if I really need it vs want it. Troy i dont think your ceiling height is all that bad, maybe a bit low but positioning the overhead speakers a little closer to the LP and aimable tweeters would overcome the limitation.

I too have done the math. Send pre/pro for upgrade 900 american, New amp with 6 channels 1800 american and 4 in ceiling speakers another 400 thats a lot of change so maybe just get a projector which i will enjoy more and call it a day.

I think it's safer to wait for hdmi 2.1 spec amps. I don't think they are out yet? It's too close now to buy anything else.

Nic is right, and my experience with Atmos is that it works really well, but it depends completely on how the studio used it. Which is like any movie really. Right now it seems most studios haven't a clue what to do with it. It's getting better. I know Deep water Horizon was superb. But a lot of movies still don't get it. Tom Cruise's new Jack Reacher movie absolutely sucked for Atmos. Both movies out around the same time, one excellent, the other sucked. Now with Atmos you really need to drop everything you know and understand about Dolby Digital. 3d Positional sound is a lot more than just ceiling speakers. So a movie like San Andreas, which hardly used the ceiling speakers, still sounded great in Atmos...but it also sounds great in 7.1. So.. worth it? To me yes.
The upmixing for non Atmos is good, but not exactly a game changer, even music sounds a little better with Atmos vs Pro logic or other DTS modes but I still prefer good old 2 channel for music. When Atmos is done right, you will smile, and you will want more. That's what I remember about the switch from pro logic to DD.

Atmos came out around the same time I also got a bonus, and I suddenly lost an amp. Add a black Friday sale and I had my ceiling speakers as Axiom just came out with them too. The timing just fell into place. Otherwise I would have waited...this was two years ago.

But it didn't take long to realize the days of having those crazy good QS8's up high in the back were long gone and I tried lowering them, which helped a lot, but still I need direct firing on wall M3's. Which, if they ever hit the B Stock store I'm going to grab a set in black in case ANYONE at Axiom is reading...daddy just worked a lot of overtime in the past week, maybe I can sneak another set in the house! lol. Plus I need to trade in my vp150/qs8's to get a second set later on.

Stop pushing me back over the fence man, sheesh

All I can say is movies, even non Atmos encoded, sound unbelievably better than my previous setup. Also, I don't think the Dolby ATMOS movie list is accurate. I've watched a few blurays lately that show ATMOS on the display. The experience is blowing me away.

Yeah, you came over to the "next level" side of audio processing. It is a big leap in cost, but the Anthem line-up is pretty dang amazing.

Also, upmixing into an Atmos configuration is pretty darn cool for non-native mixes too.

What model # avrs did you guys come from before the Anthem change?

Ok OK You two
Your suppose to stop encouraging. I think though at the least I will be running the wiring. You Know just incase

Yeah, Atmos was initeresting to learn about but was clearly off my plate due to cost and installation. Now you have me thinking about re-looking at my ceiling construction as a just in case...the Anthem was on my future hit list anyway. I have to stop spending my time money here! You guys are a bad influence.
Hopefully the M5HP's coming soon will cure me for a while.

I went from an Onkyo TX-NR709 that I owned, temporarily to an Onkyo TN-NR646 just to get a taste for Atmos in my room, and then made the big jump to the MRX-1120.

The TX-NR709 was no slouch on specs, which is why I bought it originally for powering my 7.1 system at the time of purchase. Solid bang-for-the-buck back then.

I looked at Yamaha, Denon/Marantz, and even Onkyo's weak offering for getting me to 7.2.4 before landing on the Anthem.

Again, tough "cost pill" to swallow, but oh so good sounding.

I've been trying to get away from buying the great big receivers and going with power amps and the cheapest receiver that has pre-outs and gives me the processing I need. Killer is power amps aren't exactly cheap either but once you have them...one would hope they last. A receiver will never do what a proper power amp will do either.

Has anyone compared the on wall m22 to on wall m3? for surround duty? I have M22's on my living room setup, with m2's and quite frankly I can't stand the m22's. They are just too flat, no bass, almost harsh I bought them from the refurb store and should have sent them back but were an xmas gift so I kept them. They are v3's but with the older style tweeter. The M2 on walls I have, and vp150 are v4 and I have no complaints about them. Hoping V4M3's are better than the M22's I have, more bass, better tweeter etc.

But I want to trade my QS8's in another room for on walls and part of me is thinking going with on walls m3's which I have never heard or m22's v4's and seeing if they are better than my v3's which if they are I'd swap the ones I don't like out and go all v4 in the living room eventually. I'm needing 4 in my theater and trying to keep them all the same obviously, so all m22 or all m3....I don't know what I'm saying....just thinking...

my 2 previous AVRs were a Denon 3808ci and Denon 2805 before that...

I never went to Anthem, but there was a similar experience when I changed AVRs. There seems to be a correlation between upgrades to simpler platforms and user satisfaction. I dont know if its as much about the hardware anymore as it is about the software behind the scenes in modern dsp centric products. It would be interesting to get together as a group and take an out of the box product and tweak the settings to attain better performance. The simpler, less featured products may be inherently "better" because they dont trip over themselves with buggy yet functional code (from multiple vendors) or the end user implementation of their complicated product.

Anyway, its great to hear about your success with the upgrade.

Another interesting item is the miniDSP. Full Dirac in a little box. Wonder if using that would make a lesser cost Processor/A.V.R. comparable. As the Dirac is supposedly second to A.R.C. though the unit looks more like a processor to power amp. Bypass, so not sure if it is compatible with regular A.V.R.s.

I myself have no intention on going Atmos yet though the blueray coding through my current 7.1 is somewhat fantastic, seems to have more surround content than previous 5.1 releases.

Plus having the actual processing for Atmos with all content. must be sending a lot more to those ambient channels I would suspect.

Another congrats on your successful upgrade Mr. Quack

your talking minidsp . that's not Dirac
In order to get the DIRAc processor etc your out $1500cdn
http://solen.ca/?s=minidsp&post_type=product
the minidsp2x4 will do auto corection on the subs. You can auto correct with the minisp10x10 but your up $900.

I am playing with that now for EQ my EP350 with a DSP1124P and REW
but, I am already $400 in with the DSP1124 $120 and $155 for a measurement mic. Another $50 for usb to midi cable.
It is fun playing around and yes, you really can notice a difference with the sub.

However, once I upgrade to the AVM60 or MRX720 this will all be moot.

oh and most would put DIRAC above ARC but at a cost

oh and or if in the USA minidsp.com
the processor is $999
https://www.minidsp.com/products/dirac-series/ddrc-88a

When i first read Brendo's post i thought , hell no Dirac is better than ARC but then i thought about it. I have not heard ARC but i know ARC handles the subs much better than how Dirac does it so really i think they are both great RC programs but for bass which needs the most attention ARC gets the nod. I have Dirac and i still use a minidsp 2x4 to get the subs right.

But if your using the minidsp 2x4 your using the proprietary 2way Advanced 12 program not DIRAC.
Unless your receiver of course has DIRAC

With the DIRAC if your using one of the minidsp processors you have to purchase it for $500us.

or the DDRC88A with bass management at like $1425cdn at solen.

Sorry Troy, i guess i wasnt quite as clear as i thought i was being. My pre/pro has Dirac but it doesnt handle dual subs correctly . Audyssey subeq polls each sub separately to get the positions then analyzes each sub and then sums them but Dirac treats 2 subs as one. This isnt a problem for me now since my subs are at the front and symetrical but when i had the subs in different parts of the room i used a minidsp.I have never had 4 subs but the problem would be exacerbated .With subeq i think you could at least make 2 groups of subs to allow it to analyze the subs.

My self I haven't tried either of those. Dirac or the A.R.C. being in a larger Canadian city can easily find Anthem but not Emotiva or a dirac unit.

Just in my reading have found those to be the top 2 at the moment. Along with high praise for the minidsp units.

I had Audyssey xt and never really liked what it did, so i left it off. Dirac is another story entirely, it really brings the whole package together , its really hard to put into words, it just makes everything seem more cohesive. I have heard good things about ARC and how they do bass is good as well if i had the money. I have no money and i want PJ.

ah ok, I just don't clue in unless it's really spelled out sometimes

Love ARC, it is awesome both in sound and configurationable ( if that is even a word )

Hello to all,

I am reopening the subject because I still have not bought the surround speakers. One thing that was missing from my room’s description was that my home theater is opens at the back to a stairwell that goes from the basement to the main floor of the house.

I am putting here the specs of the room:

My home theater is in a family room that is 12' wide by 19' long. The couch is at 9’ from the TV and the wall is at 3’ from each side of the couch

So considering that the room is open at the back, should I use QS8 speakers or M3 on-wall speakers

Both will likely work well.
The QS8 is pretty forgiving when the placement can't be "ideal".

Distance behind the listener is also key. The farther back a speaker is, the less you will really detect its exact location. If the distance is shorter, go with the QS series, otherwise i say it matters less.
Odd configurations would fare better with the QS as well.

Unless your intent is to put the speakers on the side walls and in such case, QS series, which by your earlier post, it sounds like this is the intent.

For side walls, go with QS8s. If you are putting any on the rear wall, go M3s.

You know there are also QS10HPs and M5HPs?