|
Bronze Member Username: Ward2400Post Number: 12 Registered: May-06 | I am putting together a 5.1 system for a medium size room that will mostly be used for movies. I have a Yamaha HTR-5850. Because of room layout I need to go with bipole/dipole surrounds. I am thinking about one of the following combinations. Any/all opinions would be most welcome (including other options in same quality/price range). 1) Polk rti4 FL & FR Polk csi3 Center Polk fxi3 surrounds Polk psw303 sub 2) Ascend CMB-170 FL & FR Ascend CMT-340 Center Polk fxi3 surrounds Hsu STF-1 sub |
|
Gold Member Username: KanoBC Canada Post Number: 1045 Registered: Oct-04 | I'd go for #1 as I believe in having the speakers timbre matched all around. However this does not apply to the sub, so I would sub in the HSU STF series for the psw303, I own the PSW404 and wish I didn't, while it gives all around ok performance it lacks finesse and definition between notes. You should try different speakers hooked up to your receiver to see what type of presentation you prefer. I would characterize both the Yamaha and Polks as being a little on the bright side, I would suggest comparing Polk and Paradigm with your receiver to aid in your decision. (Ascend are considered neutral FYI) |
|
Silver Member Username: Rysa4Post Number: 502 Registered: Jul-05 | First off- your comment about having to go with Diploe/bipole surrounds is odd. These are two totally different speaker configurations, and a diploe solution working doesnt mean a bipole will as well. Do you really understand the difference and what you are trying to achieve? You sound like you do-- so explain it more please-- and do you understand the difference between the two? Timbre matching and out of phase audio signal throws arent always a must when happening at the same time as much as one would think- especially with surrounds. But--go ahead-- I am all ears. |
|
Silver Member Username: TdogroederDes Moines, IA Post Number: 131 Registered: Sep-05 | I've heard great things about Ascend speakers, so I would go with #2. I have JM-Lab's for LCR and Polk FXi3's as side surrounds. I think a complete timber match doesn't matter that much. I use to have Polk RTi6's and CSi5 for center, I am much more happy with the JM-Lab's than the Polk's, know comparison between the two. I have the Polk's in my bedroom hooked-up to a Pioneer receiver and I don't think they sound that good, maybe I got use to hearing the great quality of JM-Labs. |
|
Gold Member Username: Project6Post Number: 8376 Registered: Dec-03 | I vote for the Ascend Audio. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Ward2400Post Number: 13 Registered: May-06 | Thanks all for your thoughts. Marc - I don't know all that much but am trying to learn. I realize bipole/dipole are different (in-phase vs out of phase) but most non-direct firing surrounds that I have seen provide a switching mechanism between the two which is why I refered to them as bipole/dipole. My current room layout which is driving the need for non-direct firing surround can be seen here: http://people.musc.edu/~wardd/room.jpg |
|
Bronze Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 69 Registered: Jun-06 | Since its on a angle, I would think that dipole, nondirect radiating speakers would be a better choice, and I also think you should stick with one brand. When you go with mix and match, the speakers can have different frequency ranges, and respond differently, you dont want a movie where a guy is walking and talking from the left to the right, and have ti sound liek he hit spuberity when hjes talking from the center. And I agree with Kano, take a look at paradigm, there excellent speakers, and a great price. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Ward2400Post Number: 14 Registered: May-06 | Thanks Jeffrey. Any suggestions on where to buy Paradigm. There are no authorized dealers in my area. Are they available online? Thanks |
|
Silver Member Username: PraetorianCanada Post Number: 237 Registered: Dec-05 | DM, keep in mind that when asking for opinions, you're getting what you paid for. I own Polks myself, and love the sound. My comparisons did not stop after the purchase either; I have auditioned several other brands both before and after, and still feel absolutely no buyer's remorse. I really love my set up and enjoy it immensely. Here's the rub though: I LIKE THEM. That does not mean that you will. BTW I agree with Kano 100%, go for the HSU (or maybe a Velodyne, they seem to match well for me) as opposed to the Polk Sub, its just not their forte. |
|
Bronze Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 71 Registered: Jun-06 | Paradigm doesnt deal online, so, I guess your out of luck. Now, I bought my paradigms (jsut picked them up today) from a store that has been in town, well, since my parents parents. There not on the paradigm list, however I hear that thoese lists arnt updated. They told me they are authorized, and if I have any problems, to go to them, theyll send them back. So, you might want to talk to some well know stores, but, make sure there well known. |
|
Silver Member Username: Rysa4Post Number: 505 Registered: Jul-05 | OK- I looked at you diagram. I am going to assume that the majority of folks watching movies will be sitting on the couch or the chair closest to the couch. After having auditioned many many speakers in many many home theaters and set ups at Electronic shows to demo home theaters, I can tell you that I dont recommend dipole or bipole speakers in your configuration. They do work in 7.1/7.2/9.1/9.2 set ups in a rectangle for the middle surrounds. And tahst where it stops and starts for me. Two reasons why I dont like them are two fold; 1. Music DVDs never sound right. I watch and collect a ton of them and play in a band as folks here know. I am picky on live recordings of bands on stage and how it sounds. The sound engineers dont mix with dipoles/bipoles in mind. 2. I like surrounds and their audio signal comin right at me. It seems most effective. Diploe/biploes dont sound as realistic as that train or helicopter go by. Anyway- Any speaker you buy will have horizontal and vertical dispersion characteristics reported as angles ( obviously)-- I suggest that be a big part of your consideration. It is true that with your seating against the wall like that ( can you move the stuff out a little)--you cant truely get that 20 degrees behind you that is oft-talked about in the various white papers. That being said-- I'd go with one direct radiating surround to the left of the couch and the other on the right and be done with it. The majority of your listeners will be in the thick of it and you can use an SPL meter to adjust the DB levels from each speaker at the couch area for equal effect or even up the surrounds a bit if you want ( Thats what I do). You could also actually point the surrounds straight up and get an in phase dispersion effect. I dont care for this approach in my little HT room but it does work. You lay them flat pointing up and crank the surrounds a bit. AS far as brand-- I have no recommendation out of your choices except try them all in your house and keep the best one and return the rest. Then you know you will have the best result for you. Good Luck. PS-- I'd also bag the Polk sub. Many other better choices. |
|
Silver Member Username: Rysa4Post Number: 506 Registered: Jul-05 | Wait. I looked at your room. Lets move some furniture. Put the TV in the right upper corner to the left of the fireplace. Place the couch and chairs in the middle of the room or back slightly leaving space behind you. Couch faces to the corner to the TV but now folks can enjoy the fireplace as well. Surrunds on stands off at 20 degree angles behind. Be sure to not be shy about distance between mains for HT audio. Center channel in usual spot, Sub placement has to be done in room frankly for best spot. Furniture doesnt always have to go against a wall. The room looks like its designed for TV viewing and now you can use the fireplace too and still sit around and talk as well. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4293 Registered: Mar-05 | DMW, I would be strongly in favor of #2. Not because I'm generally a big proponent of Ascend (which I am, due to their outstanding bang for the buck compared to both retail speakers and other Internet-direct speakers) but because a few days ago I spent about 2 hours in Tweeter just playing around with different speakers and receivers. Most of that time was spent listening to the Polk LSi7s and 9s, the JBL Studio bookshelves, and the Focal bookshelves. I did out of curiousity switch over to the Polk RTi4 and RTi6 a few times just for the hell of it---and whew, the contrast was really striking. I mean, before that time I had never been much impressed with either RTi bookshelf, but on that day I was really appalled at how consistently THIN and anemic they seemed in comparison to the others, and even the Pioneer Elite receivers couldn't breathe much life into them. But don't take my word for it, seriously order a pair of the 170s and take them into a shop to demo against the RTi4s. I would be shocked if you decided in favor of the Polks. |
