I'm just learning the lingo and such so please excuse me if I sound moronic. Is it safe to assume that music is best heard with direct firing speakers and movies are best heard with bi/dipolar? Or is it more a matter of front vs. surround?
Direct are more accurate for music. The debate is over preference for rear or surround channels in a multi-channel set-up. Some prefer bipolar/dipolar, others go with direct radiators all around. Listen and decide for yourself which you like better. Cheers!
Direct radiators are better for multichannel music and dvd concerts while bipolar and dipolar's are generally better for movies. This is of course assuming the speaker is a quality speaker to begin with. Last year I bought a newq system and went with direct radiators for surrounds because I really love concert dvd's. I have found that they work very well for movies also so I fo one am very happy with that setup.
elitefan, how do you have your direct surrounds set up? for optimal movie performance, is it necessary to install them up high? my choice is either bipolar surrounds, up high on the back wall behind the couch, or direct firing on stands to either side of the couch. (monitor audio sfx or s1, respectively - as i recall you have s1's?)
dropping in
Unregistered guest
Posted on
I'm sure you'll get plenty of arguments, but, my sense is that bi/dipolar surrounds have seen there better days as slowly but surely, more and more people are seeing the wisdom of going direct, even for movies.
For me, it is harder to localize ambient sounds with bipolar/dipolar speakers, it is more...encompassing. But I think it would be dependent on how well or poorly mixed the source recording would be. I've tried both and I prefer the direct radiators, seems clearer. I compared the QS8 and M22Tis from Axiom. Again i think this is also a matter of preference. cheers