Direct firing or dipole/bipole for surrounds

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Marc_E, Jun 21, 2002.

  1. Marc_E

    Marc_E Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2001
    Messages:
    769
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi,
    I currently have CSW 5.1 surrounds and am moving into upgrade mode. I will be buying new mains and want to come somewhat close to timbre match the surrounds. Who uses direct firing and who uses dipole/bipoles?

    I like the effect of the dipoles but am concerned that a direct firing will not give the same broad soundfield that you cant pinpoint the sound's origin.
    Just wanted to get an opinion on the matter.

    Thanks
    Marc
     
  2. Marc_E

    Marc_E Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2001
    Messages:
    769
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No opinions?
     
  3. Ken Smith

    Ken Smith Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2001
    Messages:
    100
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have 7 Def. Tech. speakers and think they sound great. Just a matter of preference.
     
  4. John H

    John H Second Unit

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 1998
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Preference should dictate speaker type choice.

    I use bipolar mains, surrounds and rears in my system.

    John
     
  5. Brian Burgoyne

    Brian Burgoyne Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2001
    Messages:
    325
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It also kind of depends on what kind of room you have to work with. I have direct rears in the back of the room and dipoles on the sides of my seating position and up about 7 feet.
     
  6. Marc_E

    Marc_E Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2001
    Messages:
    769
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My room is rectangular 11x15. Seating is about 12ft. Rears are about 1 ft from seating position and about 3-4ft above. Surrounds are 5ft from seating pos. 3 ft above.

    Marc
     
  7. felix_suwarno

    felix_suwarno Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2001
    Messages:
    1,523
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    my preference is direct radiating. if every house in united states had living rooms with walls on each side, then i would consider dipoles. but i just browsed the net for houses, and most of them dont have living room that is ideal for ht...no side wall = no dipole for me.
     
  8. felix_suwarno

    felix_suwarno Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2001
    Messages:
    1,523
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i found a nice article about it here :
    http://www.hometheatermag.com/fullarchives.cgi?25
    "All things considered, I'd go with the monopole side surrounds and dual dipole back surrounds, as this setup offers more flexibility. And, if you can switch your speakers like the M&Ks, all the better.—"
     
  9. Dave_Olds

    Dave_Olds Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    A large portion of surround material is ambient sound - wind, rain, etc.....the larger soundfield of dipoles, etc will help that felling of "immersion" in the scene...

    Very little is direct sound material....If you had an explosion on the screen and it came out of the side surrounds, you would either get confused or vomit from the feeling of being "out of orientation" - of course, that is just an extreme generalization....

    The basic premise being very little direct sound from HT applications is mixed into surrounds - this coming from a HT professional on another forum and alot of the arguments for "frequency extension" and "directional sound" are not applicable...

    What *is* applicable is what sounds best to you. If you prefer one over the other - than that is the correct decision for yourself....Everyone's ear is different, people can hear things differently and as such prefer one type over the other....
     
  10. Newton

    Newton Auditioning

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I use the wall mounted Magnepan MGMC1s for my surrounds. I can have them set up to point at me like direct firing speakers, or swing them alittle and they go into dipole mode. At first, I had them facing me in direct-firing mode. I did this because a lot of people said that you have to for 5.1 and that dipoles were only good for Pro-Logic. But, I have playing with them a lot to see what I prefer in my setup and I keep coming back to dipole mode. Every movie does seem to have mostly ambience in the surround channels and dipole mode works much better than direct firing for this. Dipole speakers seem to disappear and not call attention to themselves at all like a direct firing does. And I was also surprised that front to back effects seemed to be smoother with dipole than direct-firing. The one thing that I do like about direct firing is that, the speakers have more higher end detail this way. It's probably just do to the high frequency roll-off you get from listening to the speakers ~90deg off axis with dipole setup.

    And then I found a few articles, such as that HometheaterMag article someone mentioned above, in which they found similar results with dipoles. Dipoles work well with Pro-Logic AND Dolby Digital/DTS. I think one of the articles was in Sound and Vision and I don't remember where the other one was. In one of the articles, the only place they didn't like dipoles was for surround music that was recorded where you are in the middle of the band. But for me, I hate those multichannel recordings that do that anyway. I prefer to listen from the audience which is where they did like dipole for multichannel music.
     

Share This Page