Surround channels with Atmos

[Mr_Gadget]

Hi guys, I'm itching to upgrade some aspect of my Lounge/HT room. Currently using some Krix in-ceilings in a 5.1 setup but looking to move to Atmos in future.  I originally put the in-ceilings with Atmos in mind but turns out they are not ideally placed for top rear configuration. After some comments in a another thread, it was suggested that a 'top middle' setup could be used for Atmos (with Denon/Marantz AVR's) and that got me thinking about going for a 5.1.2 or even a 7.1.2 setup (hooray the in-ceilings would still be useful in an Atmos setup!).

 

Anyway, so now I've been looking at surround speakers for now (my AVR is pre Atmos) to improve my 5.1 setup and possibly go to 7.1 until perhaps next year when I'll buy an Atmos AVR, (this will render my ceilings speakers useless until then).

So I've brushed up my knowledge on surround speakers and have never been more confused about an HT related topic. So it seems that there are 3 main types (monopole, bi-pole and di-pole),  My research suggests that monopole positioned 90 degrees and at (or slightly higher) than ear level is the go  with modern Atmos setups however the bi and di poles may be better if sitting close to the side walls. If going for 7.1, it seems that monopoles work best for rear surrounds.

 

My room is a little under 4m wide so perhaps monopole is not the best in this situation for side surrounds. I have about 1.5 metres of space behind me so I could go 7.1 to improve the rear effects.

 

I want a fairly discreet setup so initially researched in-wall speakers like the Krix Ecliptix and SYMMETRIX (since I already have Krix Hemispherix AS in ceiling speakers) but am not sure how these compare to on wall models like the Dynamix Mk2 (or other brands of on-wall). Also not sure I like the idea of cutting big sections of plaster and perhaps finding that in-walls don't fit or their is a stud or noggin in the way.

 

So now i'm thinking that on-walls with shallow depth would give me better sound for less/same money and give me more options. I've come across Krix Dynamix Mk2 (might be too deep 20cm), VAF DC-3 MKII, Monitor Audio Soundframe and Silver FX (bipole/dipole speaker).

 

I'm after some suggestions/recommendations on the above products and/or other alternatives. Budget would be around $1000 for side surrounds and perhaps the same for rears if I include those.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

[Quark]

I've just done a HT room build and couldn't go in-wall due to cavity sliding doors. Used Krix Dynamix Mk2 for the surrounds and surround backs and very pleased with the sound plus appearance. I've got Krix Atmospherix for the 4 Atmos overheads and the Dynamix integrate seamlessly during panning effects.

 

I would have preferred in-wall and if you're still open to that just buy a decent stud detector to find out what your placement options are.

 

IMO dipoles/bipoles for surrounds are only suited to when you're trying to cover two rows of seating. Probably not such an issue using dipoles/bipoles with older lossy surround codecs, but Atmos etc really do place sounds quite precisely and IMO much better suited to monopoles.

[Mr_Gadget]

22 minutes ago, Quark said:

Krix Dynamix Mk2 for the surrounds and surround backs

Hi Quark, how high on the wall have you placed these? Do they sit flush on the wall?

23 minutes ago, Quark said:

I would have preferred in-wall

Would you have gone Krix if you were able to go in-wall?

[Quark]

12 minutes ago, Mr_Gadget said:

Hi Quark, how high on the wall have you placed these? Do they sit flush on the wall?

Would you have gone Krix if you were able to go in-wall?

I've mounted them much higher than ideal (1.9m), as the room is a bit narrow and I wanted to fit five seats across (odd number, so one seat is in the sweet spot for stereo) while still leaving space to squeeze past to the back of the room. They sit about 1-2mm off the wall - they have a single metal bracket with a keyhole shape to take a screw head - get the screw head in the wide part and then push down. There are 4 adhesive pads included that you apply to the back of the speaker - these are 1-2mm thick (hence why the speaker sits off the wall) and "grippy" on your wall so the speaker can't be knocked off its mount with a casual whack.

 

Yes, I looked long and hard at ways to make some Krix in-walls work, but the cavity slider couldn't be moved to a suitable spot. FYI, I'm running some Osborn Eclipse towers and C3 for the LCR speakers and the integration for panning effects is quite acceptable.

 

 

[davewantsmoore]

1 hour ago, Mr_Gadget said:

My research suggests that monopole positioned 90 degrees and at (or slightly higher) than ear level is the go  with modern Atmos setups however the bi and di poles may be better if sitting close to the side walls.

This.

 

Dipole and bipole surround speakers intentionally aim nulls at the listeners.    This is not a good plan, unless the intention is to hide problems caused by a poor speaker layout.      The oft-cited benefit of a "diffuse sound field", is not a benefit, contrary to popular belief....   That is, unless it happens to be the lesser of two evils.... but if you are in that situation is would strongly consider reducing the channel count until you can fit a decent monopole layout.

 

 

You can read a lot of advice contrary to the above, but as the risk of causing offence, it is from manufacturers who just want to sell you stuff.

 

 

EDIT:  Bottom of Page 6.

https://www.dolby.com/us/en/technologies/dolby-atmos/dolby-atmos-home-theater-installation-guidelines.pdf

 

 

Edited August 24, 2018 by davewantsmoore

[davewantsmoore]

1 hour ago, Mr_Gadget said:

Also not sure I like the idea of cutting big sections of plaster and perhaps finding that in-walls don't fit or their is a stud or noggin in the way.

In walls are a great idea, especially if you are grappling with the problem of the listener being too close to a speaker.

 

A stud finder, or some professional help will get you there.... but it sure is a big commitment.

 

1 hour ago, Mr_Gadget said:

VAF DC-3 MKII

Something like this would be a good choice.

 

Remember also that the height of the rear speakers should be the same height as the front speakers.   You will see this commonly ignored by people who think the surrounds should be up high, aimed down, or some-such.   It hasn't been this way since discrete multi-channel formats started in the late 90s.

[davewantsmoore]

1 hour ago, Quark said:

Probably not such an issue using dipoles/bipoles with older lossy surround codecs

Dipoles/bipole have been the wrong choice since discrete multi-channel formats (beginning with Dolby Digital in the ~mid 90s).

 

They have persisted, because they mitigate the poor effects of a bad layout - eg. a listener sitting too close to a speaker  (which is obviously quite a common issue in sane-sized homes)

[Mr_Gadget]

When discussing the height of the surround speakers, is it specifically the tweeter position?

[davewantsmoore]

30 minutes ago, Mr_Gadget said:

When discussing the height of the surround speakers, is it specifically the tweeter position?

Yeah, almost always that is close enough.

[betty boop]

3 hours ago, Mr_Gadget said:

Hi guys, I'm itching to upgrade some aspect of my Lounge/HT room. Currently using some Krix in-ceilings in a 5.1 setup but looking to move to Atmos in future.  I originally put the in-ceilings with Atmos in mind but turns out they are not ideally placed for top rear configuration. After some comments in a another thread, it was suggested that a 'top middle' setup could be used for Atmos (with Denon/Marantz AVR's) and that got me thinking about going for a 5.1.2 or even a 7.1.2 setup (hooray the in-ceilings would still be useful in an Atmos setup!).

 

Anyway, so now I've been looking at surround speakers for now (my AVR is pre Atmos) to improve my 5.1 setup and possibly go to 7.1 until perhaps next year when I'll buy an Atmos AVR, (this will render my ceilings speakers useless until then).

So I've brushed up my knowledge on surround speakers and have never been more confused about an HT related topic. So it seems that there are 3 main types (monopole, bi-pole and di-pole),  My research suggests that monopole positioned 90 degrees and at (or slightly higher) than ear level is the go  with modern Atmos setups however the bi and di poles may be better if sitting close to the side walls. If going for 7.1, it seems that monopoles work best for rear surrounds.

 

My room is a little under 4m wide so perhaps monopole is not the best in this situation for side surrounds. I have about 1.5 metres of space behind me so I could go 7.1 to improve the rear effects.

 

I want a fairly discreet setup so initially researched in-wall speakers like the Krix Ecliptix and SYMMETRIX (since I already have Krix Hemispherix AS in ceiling speakers) but am not sure how these compare to on wall models like the Dynamix Mk2 (or other brands of on-wall). Also not sure I like the idea of cutting big sections of plaster and perhaps finding that in-walls don't fit or their is a stud or noggin in the way.

 

So now i'm thinking that on-walls with shallow depth would give me better sound for less/same money and give me more options. I've come across Krix Dynamix Mk2 (might be too deep 20cm), VAF DC-3 MKII, Monitor Audio Soundframe and Silver FX (bipole/dipole speaker).

 

I'm after some suggestions/recommendations on the above products and/or other alternatives. Budget would be around $1000 for side surrounds and perhaps the same for rears if I include those.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

Have a chat to Krix direct If getting their speakers,

 

mono poles are great slightly behind 5.1  or rear in 7.1. But mono poles are not great firing in your ear at the side of you

 

thats where bipoles work great, works a treat in my setup and happily suggest to anyone going side surrounds either side of seating 

 

height differential is key with atmos abd 3D audio. Ie creating enough height difference between lower bed 5.1/7.1 and inceiling heights

 

so slightly higher is fine as long as say 900mm to  1m differential so the height speakers add height 

 

don’t use dipoles they rely on out if phase tweeters to create null zones between and array useful for old legacy pro logic but not needed in current audio codecs

[davewantsmoore]

Depending on the specifics, bipoles also create nulls to a certain degree as the frequency rises.     It's that high frequency content (eg. > 2khz) that our brains use to determine location.

Edited August 24, 2018 by davewantsmoore

[Mr_Gadget]

From my photos you can see that if I put the side surrounds where the gap is between the door opening and BTTF poster, the tweeter will be slightly behind my ears (15-20cm at a guess) so this would lead me to monopole speakers?

 

Also if I went for rear surrounds as well I'd have to remove my left and right absorption panels.

[betty boop]

putting where the absorption panels are would be a little close together am thinking ? probably need to go where the photos are with the panels staying where they are  and i would go mono poles there.

 

as to sides, upto you but if putting where the back to the future poster is or anywhere near there id be going with bipolar myself, but if want to go mono pole there go for it. 

[Mr_Gadget]

8 hours ago, al said:

putting where the absorption panels are would be a little close together am thinking ? probably need to go where the photos are with the panels staying where they are

Hmm, I thought they'd be too far apart there and too close to the side wall. I haven't seen a recommended distance for rear speakers so have no idea.

 

8 hours ago, al said:

and i would go mono poles there.

 

8 hours ago, al said:

putting where the absorption panels are would be a little close together am thinking ? probably need to go where the photos are with the panels staying where they are  and i would go mono poles there.

 

as to sides, upto you but if putting where the back to the future poster is or anywhere near there id be going with bipolar myself, but if want to go mono pole there go for it. 

Might need to go to a store to hear the difference and try to simulate same positioning as home.

[davewantsmoore]

15 hours ago, Mr_Gadget said:

this would lead me to monopole speakers?

Yes, absolutely.

 

It's a little hard to see in the pic.  How far is the BTTF poster from the listener?  Looks like at least 1.5?

 

5 hours ago, Mr_Gadget said:

Hmm, I thought they'd be too far apart there and too close to the side wall.

 

It's a fine balance.  I would have thought about where inside edges of the posters are..... but if you measure the angles from the dolby guide, then you'll know for sure.

 

Quote

I haven't seen a recommended distance for rear speakers so have no idea.

The key is not to have them too close to the listener(s) .... if you do, then the the inter-channel changes too much with seating position, and the levels are unbalanced for all but a tiny sweat spot.    This is obviously less of an issue the few seating positions you have.

 

Also, as you move closer to a multi-driver speaker, you increase the risk that you are sitting in a lobe of "poor quality sound" from the speaker.    Having the speaker positioned correctly at ear level addresses this issue quite a lot.

 

15 hours ago, Mr_Gadget said:

I'd have to remove my left and right absorption panels.

Perhaps.   Don't worry about the absorption for now.  Place the channels properly, and add treatment back later.

 

5 hours ago, Mr_Gadget said:

Might need to go to a store to hear the difference 

This may sound quite counter-intuitive, but I would not do this - as it sounds like you are then going to second guess (choose to disobey) the setup guidelines based on "what you heard".   This is a mistake.   Follow the Dolby guidelines to the letter.    If you side channel are poorly placed (they don't look too bad to me), then I would strongly consider 5 channels at ear level.    If you have the 5 channels setup optimally, it can render the audio much better than a 7 channel layout which has issues.    

Edited August 25, 2018 by davewantsmoore

[betty boop]

6 hours ago, Mr_Gadget said:

Hmm, I thought they'd be too far apart there and too close to the side wall. I haven't seen a recommended distance for rear speakers so have no idea.

very hard to say without knowing actual distances and the angles between as per dolby spec the suggested is 130-150 deg to listener. 

 

its not so critical the placement as if measure and eq the timing(delay) will be correctly calculated even if say one speaker different distance or something  

 

but distance between is important as too close and not really enough distance between channels to keep discrete. think about it like stereo signal where bring speakers together there will be a point where everything is on top of each other and stereo. wiht heights for instance they specify between 0.5-0.7x room width

 

https://www.dolby.com/us/en/technologies/dolby-atmos/dolby-atmos-home-theater-installation-guidelines.pdf

 

 

we have lost distance between over the years, with focus more on the angles... to allow more for varying rooms I would suspect. In my setup for instance seated at 1.8m ahead of rear surrounds and have my surrounds 1,8m apart. I based this on a old recommendation that suggested 1.8-2.2m apart for your “typical” room homely setting, I remember this from thx days. This places it at happens at the very minimum ie the 150 deg rather than 130 deg which would have them further apart again on The wider end of the recommendation. Not that I could have wider in my setup anyways. But it works works enough to pin point sound in space even in the back and that’s the main thing.

 

Talking about angles, just one thing to be careful off, and I haven’t seen how you had your side surrounds for 5.1 prior,

 

but it it’s something to keep in mind going 5.1 to 7.1 people make the mistake sometimes thinking recommendation for both is the same when comes to the sides. Ther is some overlap, but it’s not the same exactly. 

 

The recommedation for 5.1 is 110-120 deg so in essence not with speakers as such on the sides

 

but 7.1 recommedation is infact 90-110 deg for sides

https://www.dolby.com/us/en/guide/surround-sound-speaker-setup/7-1-setup.html

 

just a subtlety and something to be aware off. Going from 5.1 to 7.1

 

[davewantsmoore]

5 hours ago, Mr_Gadget said:

Hmm, I thought they'd be too far apart there and too close to the side wall. I haven't seen a recommended distance for rear speakers so have no idea.

The first thing is to strictly  follow the angles in the Dolby guide.    Second is place all speakers an equal distance from the listener as much as that's possible (use delay in the processor where not possible).  This is to ensure each speaker has a reasonably consistent ratio of direct to reflected sound.

 

Reflections which come from the front of the room are always bad.   Reflections which come from elsewhere (back/side) need to be delayed long enough (as long as possible for a home sized room).   This is where the recommendation to not sit too far back comes from (especially true in a narrow room).

[Mr_Gadget]

13 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

How far is the BTTF poster from the listener?  Looks like at least 1.5?

About 1.8m