Bipole/Dipole Kits?

[jeffsg4mac]

Any of you guys know of some nice bipole/dipole surround kits or projects that would go good with the Usher fronts I am going to build?

 

[lsiberian]

Any of you guys know of some nice bipole/dipole surround kits or projects that would go good with the Usher fronts I am going to build?

Honestly I'm not a fan of dipole surrounds and bipoles are something different. Why don't you just have 2 sets of monopoles? It would give you better sound.

But if you are doing a 2-way build. You could just double the volume and that normally does the trick be sure to verify with a modeling program.

Seriously just build 4 speakers instead of 2. I think you will like the sound better.

 

[j_garcia]

I am not a big fan of bi/dipoles either. GR offers a kit that is a little different - it fires up and uses the walls/celing to reflect sound out. I've heard them and they sound quite impressive.

http://www.gr-research.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=113

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Honestly I'm not a fan of dipole surrounds and bipoles are something different. Why don't you just have 2 sets of monopoles? It would give you better sound.

But if you are doing a 2-way build. You could just double the volume and that normally does the trick be sure to verify with a modeling program.

Seriously just build 4 speakers instead of 2. I think you will like the sound better.

I actually tried that once with my two sets of Atoms. It sounded fine and gave good coverage for both sets of seats. I have never seen Dolby labs or DTS mention this sort of arrangement for a home theater. I wonder why that is?

For a rectangular room such as mine what about making a special surround that is long and thin and contains two or more pairs of 4" two ways spaced a couple of feet apart? Understand what I mean? Picture a box about 5" wide x 3" Deep x 5 feet long with a woofer and tweeter at each end or at each end and one in the middle. It could be even angled a little just like theater surrounds are. Wedge shaped that is. It would look like a long surround bar but contain several sets of small two ways. Is that not essentially what a theater is doing with the array of surrounds they use?

 

[skyline_123]

I'm interested in hearing a little more about why you guys don't like bi/dipoles.

I've never heard any myself but what could I expect the differences in sound to be, compared to a regular set of speakers?

 

[GranteedEV]

Dipoles give a fake effect of spaciousness.

Surround is recorded to be played back by many monopoles in a theater. The different time of arrival of the different monopoles around you contributes to the spaciousness, but at the end of the day the monopole nearest us gives directional cues as well.

What dipoles do is fire in opposite directions, out of phase with one-another.

Since they're mounted to our sides, the "direct" sound is actually canceled out as a null. So the only thing we're hearing is the reflections of the front and rear wall.

It's very spacious, but far from a realistic presentation of the surround recording. Sure, with stuff like rain or chirping crickets it's all well and fine. It's the other surround sounds which get "lost" in the dipole "effect"

The above is all my opinion and should be taken with a grain of salt.

It could be even angled a little just like theater surrounds are. Wedge shaped that is. It would look like a long surround bar but contain several sets of small two ways. Is that not essentially what a theater is doing with the array of surrounds they use?

A few things to note

-Theaters are extremely treated, so there aren't as many reflections contributing as you would get in most home theaters, except the most unnaturally padded down ones.

-The horns used for surrounds are very controlled directivity, so again, reflections are reduced, and even lobing is somewhat avoided. The direct sound is "beamed" towards you through one set of surround speakers, though you do hear bits and pieces of the other surround speakers in a desired manner. Your everyday dome tweeter and 6" midrange are going to have a wider dispersion pattern, meaning more reflections adding to the soundfield.

-the combined acoustic response should be evenly distrubuted and its total level considered. You may have difficulty making it "just right" in SPL as a single speaker, because the sounds are now coming from many directions, and when they arrive, it's not at the exact same time since it's not a point source. So it may start to sound really loud when it's level matched well, like some more acoustically live rooms can be. Tapering might be necessary to get it right.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Dipoles give a fake effect of spaciousness.

Surround is recorded to be played back by many monopoles in a theater. The different time of arrival of the different monopoles around you contributes to the spaciousness, but at the end of the day the monopole nearest us gives directional cues as well.

What dipoles do is fire in opposite directions, out of phase with one-another.

Since they're mounted to our sides, the "direct" sound is actually canceled out as a null. So the only thing we're hearing is the reflections of the front and rear wall.

It's very spacious, but far from a realistic presentation of the surround recording. Sure, with stuff like rain or chirping crickets it's all well and fine. It's the other surround sounds which get "lost" in the dipole "effect"

The above is all my opinion and should be taken with a grain of salt.



A few things to note

-Theaters are extremely treated, so there aren't as many reflections contributing as you would get in most home theaters, except the most unnaturally padded down ones.

-The horns used for surrounds are very controlled directivity, so again, reflections are reduced, and even lobing is somewhat avoided. The direct sound is "beamed" towards you through one set of surround speakers, though you do hear bits and pieces of the other surround speakers in a desired manner. Your everyday dome tweeter and 6" midrange are going to have a wider dispersion pattern, meaning more reflections adding to the soundfield.

-the combined acoustic response should be evenly distrubuted and its total level considered. You may have difficulty making it "just right" in SPL as a single speaker, because the sounds are now coming from many directions, and when they arrive, it's not at the exact same time since it's not a point source. So it may start to sound really loud when it's level matched well, like some more acoustically live rooms can be. Tapering might be necessary to get it right.

So if done correctly an array of some small two-ways maybe two or three depending on room size could work and might work better than just one set of monopoles. I am thinking two 4in two-ways for my room on each side.

 

[jostenmeat]

So if done correctly an array of some small two-ways maybe two or three depending on room size could work and might work better than just one set of monopoles. I am thinking two 4in two-ways for my room on each side.

Hm. I'd be worried about comb filtering. Perhaps Grant can lead you the way, but my guess is that this path will not be worth it. I'd rather do a 7.1 system, whether the extra speakers are the rears (even if on side walls, if they can be close to 135-150 degrees). Or, if they need be in front of you, you might consider DSX wides, but I am under the impression that you will need a rather wide room for it to be worth it. (Of course there are the heights instead, or both.)

I use bipoles, they work fine. I don't think they are a must have with a single row situation. My biggest concern in recommending them to most people is if it limits the budget they can spend on the front three, as I often find the bipoles of any given line are more expensive than the bookshelves, sometimes by double. After all, double the drivers. It was actually the AH setup/build that got me thinking to change to bipoles, as Gene chose them for better coverage over two rows.

The biggest proponents of bipole side surrounds seem to argue that is has the best of both worlds; directional cues as well as spaciousness. Me, I just shrug, and I was personally hoping for better, even if I do hear a difference. Just more subtle than I thought it was going to be.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Hm. I'd be worried about comb filtering. Perhaps Grant can lead you the way, but my guess is that this path will not be worth it. I'd rather do a 7.1 system, whether the extra speakers are the rears (even if on side walls, if they can be close to 135-150 degrees). Or, if they need be in front of you, you might consider DSX wides, but I am under the impression that you will need a rather wide room for it to be worth it. (Of course there are the heights instead, or both.)

I use bipoles, they work fine. I don't think they are a must have with a single row situation. My biggest concern in recommending them to most people is if it limits the budget they can spend on the front three, as I often find the bipoles of any given line are more expensive than the bookshelves, sometimes by double. After all, double the drivers. It was actually the AH setup/build that got me thinking to change to bipoles, as Gene chose them for better coverage over two rows.

The biggest proponents of bipole side surrounds seem to argue that is has the best of both worlds; directional cues as well as spaciousness. Me, I just shrug, and I was personally hoping for better, even if I do hear a difference. Just more subtle than I thought it was going to be.

I do have it setup 7.1 now with side and surround backs. It's works ok but I think it could be improved which is why I was considering changing the sides out. Bi-poles might be the best choice then cause I know first hand that di-poles suck really bad on 5.1 music material.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Anyone ever hear these?

http://axiomaudio.com/surroundspeakers.html

 

[just-some-guy]

my RVSS's work great for movies (never tried em with 5.1 music = i don't have any), very diffuse and enveloping sound. but, can be very direct when called upon. if that makes an sense .

i tried a few different monopoles. and the sound field was not desirable, imo.

as it is now, i think these would be ideal, but i have never heard them.

 

[jostenmeat]

I do have it setup 7.1 now with side and surround backs. It's works ok but I think it could be improved which is why I was considering changing the sides out. Bi-poles might be the best choice then cause I know first hand that di-poles suck really bad on 5.1 music material.

Jeff, there are some bipole speakers out there that have a toggle to switch between bipolar and dipolar, so if you find you prefer one setting for a certain kind of material, you could do so. I don't know if the Axioms could, and I'm interested to know.

I think they are very likely to be too expensive (but maybe you could get lucky on a classified), but I think you'd be interested in the existence of the PSB Platinum S2 because not only can they be set to bipole, and dipole, but also dual-monopoles (or just monopole for that matter). There are two sets of binding posts. What I mean by dual-monopole is that you can run two different channels to each speaker. I think they are not pretty whatsoever, and they are quite heavy from what I recall. Ok I looked it up, 31lbs is a pretty decent weight for a wall mounted side surround.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Jeff, there are some bipole speakers out there that have a toggle to switch between bipolar and dipolar, so if you find you prefer one setting for a certain kind of material, you could do so. I don't know if the Axioms could, and I'm interested to know.

I think they are very likely to be too expensive (but maybe you could get lucky on a classified), but I think you'd be interested in the existence of the PSB Platinum S2 because not only can they be set to bipole, and dipole, but also dual-monopoles (or just monopole for that matter). There are two sets of binding posts. What I mean by dual-monopole is that you can run two different channels to each speaker. I think they are not pretty whatsoever, and they are quite heavy from what I recall. Ok I looked it up, 31lbs is a pretty decent weight for a wall mounted side surround.

Yeah I know there are some that have the switch, but I had di-poles in the past and did not like them even for movies. I used to have a pair of Mirage Bi-poles about 12 years ago but that was when I only had a Pro-logic setup. I guess right now I am looking for the best compromise because I am not all that happy with just the mono-poles on movies.

 

[GO-NAD!]

The Energy RCR can be switched monopole/bipole/dipole and has level adjustment for the side-firing drivers. I'm perfectly happy with mine. I know it's not a kit, but you might be able to find these for a good price.

 

[GranteedEV]

I am not all that happy with just the mono-poles on movies.

What exactly would you say is missing? How exactly do you have it set up right now?

 

[jeffsg4mac]

What exactly would you say is missing? How exactly do you have it set up right now?

I would say the rear effects are just not as noticeable as they should be. Some material you can hear them but on other stuff it almost seems like they are not even there at all yet when I walk back there they are on and stuff is playing. I just don't think I am hearing everything I should. They are set up exactly like this. Two pairs of Atoms side and rear. The sides are about four feet behind the main seating area and even with the last row, and the rears are about 11ft back.

 

[GranteedEV]

Perhaps there's lots of lobing and lost HF info...

A full range or coaxial aimed even lower (directly at the LP... a sloped baffle perhaps?) may be an option worth considering.

 

[jostenmeat]

So the theater seats six? I am having issues with the surround placements, which of course is not a perfect art. One of the first things to think about IMO is how often it's just you with SO, and/or how often with how many other people and how much you do or don't give a damn about how it sounds at the extremeties.

I can't quite tell the angles from the pic, but my guess is that the side surrounds could possibly be moved up all the way to the point of 90 degrees to captain's seat.

The rear speakers are too close together. I think mine are too close together, but yours are way closer, at least by angle. My guess for where it could be ideal would be right behind where the present SIDE surround speakers are. Closer to a 135 degree angle. Ideally, they could phantom image as well as your fronts could, just behind you. You could route stereo music to the two rear speakers, and experiment with placement until you have the best phantom image.

If considering ceiling mounts, I am using Omni and I can tell you what I think about them (they are just ok, and they won't hold all that much). If you lack the proper holes/mounts on the speakers themselves, I would definitely consider just drilling right into the speakers and using some buff HTD mounts like the ones rmk uses. He drilled into his, and I could do it all over again, I would kept my larger PSB bookshelves and done likewise, instead of buying the smaller and inferior PSB Alpha B1s just for the mounting ease. edit: of course you have no problem mounting them, they're already mounted, duh. But ok, in case the holes don't line up or something, but then I guess there are brackets. Ok I'll stop there haha.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

I could move the sides up a little or try and angle them more towards the front. The rears are about 3ft tweeter to tweeter and I think they are less of an issue. One of those other surrounds mentioned though may be the best option for my room.

 

[Alex2507]

Not sure if you saw these.