6.1 now . . . upgrade to 7.1?

[supervij]

Hi all. I did the search, I did the googling, and for the most part, came up with opinions that might be outdated, I dunno. And most of the search results were about 5.1 vs 6.1/7.1, not 6.1 vs 7.1, which is what I'm looking for. There were some VERY technical discussions that gave me a nosebleed. So if anyone can help, in plain and simple terms, I'd be most grateful:

I presently have a 6.1 setup, and while it sounds groovy and all, I've been wondering lately if I should have gone for a 7.1 setup.

My rear centre (I'm actually using a dedicated centre speaker, the Athena C1) is about eight feet directly behind the prime listening position, so there's plenty of room for two rear speakers.

I know all that stuff about the brain incorrectly placing sounds that come from directly behind you, but I have yet to experience that with my setup.

I know that HD-DVD and Blu-Ray do support discrete 7.1, but I don't plan on getting into either until there's a clear and definite winner. So . . .

Is there a definite sonic improvement of 7.1 over 6.1? Has anyone tried both in their setup and noticed a difference? Is it worth it to upgrade from 6.1 to 7.1?

cheers,
supervij

 

[Tomorrow]

The short of it....YES.

I had a 6.1 setup like yours, but went to a 7.1 for my large room. I seemed to have a lot of the directionality from that the rear center. No more. The purists may want that 5.1 DD or DTS and ditch the idea of processed 6.1 or 7.1....but I really like my PLII+ in 7.1 (7.2, actually). And...you might as well be prepared for 2035 or whenever they quit screwing around and give us hungry consumers the discrete 7 channel surround.

 

[mtrycrafts]

How wide is your back wall? Are the side speakers at the sides or a bit back?

 

[supervij]

2035, eh, rjbudz? You . . . always the optimist!

I never really noticed much in the way of directionality from my rear centre. I guess with it being well behind me, it's difficult to pinpoint exactly where the sound is coming from. But thanks for your opinion. I'll mark that as one vote for yes.

mtrycrafts, my back wall is about 10' 8". My side speakers are at 110 degrees to the front centre; in other words, they're to the sides, but back just a little bit. They're also elevated to about 30" above seated listening position.

Any other opinions?

cheers,
supervij

 

[Jack Hammer]

...

Any other opinions?

cheers,
supervij

IME 7.1 offers a better soundfield over 6.1, especially in a larger room. I have some friends who have 6.1 setup in a small room and it sounds fine. I'm in a small awkward room w/ 7.1. I prefer the sound of the 7.1 setup to 6.1 and think it sounds better. I think the speakers used can also make a difference.

I originally used a small speaker (one 4" driver, one 1" tweeter) in 6.1, adding the extra channel really filled out the sound for me. You are using a center channel speaker for your 6th channel, I don't know how much of an improvement you might get from adding the extra speaker.

One idea is to set the speaker on top of a ladder or something and just leave the speaker cable laying in the middle of the floor and listen for a day or two to how an extra channel sounds to you. Then you can decide if its worth it to you.

 

[Nomo]

I have 7.1, but the main reason I went to 7.1 is simply because I could. That and the fact that the speakers only come in pairs.
I was going to say that there probably wasn't much difference between 6.1 and 7.1. Before I did so i experimented with my set-up. I moved one of the rears more toward the center of the half wall they sit atop, reconfigured my set-up in my RXV1500 and reran YPAO.
There is a difference. Not a huge one, but the sound is a bit fuller.
My room is 17 X 20, vaulted ceiling, with a half wall behind (where the rears sit).
Like everything, it's a matter of money. Personally, I'd throw another $100 or $200 bucks at it to get the improvement in sound I just heard.

 

[supervij]

Jack, I'm not sure whether or not my living/dining room should be considered large or small. It's roughly 300 square feet, not including the kitchen, entrance and hallway (there are no doors closing off these areas from the living/dining room). Is that large or small?

My feeling is that my space can definitely accomodate 7.1 without any problems or awkwardness. In terms of what speakers I'd use, I suppose I'd start looking for some more Athenas: either a pair of B1s or B2s. But my current rear centre, the Athena C1, has a 1" Teteron tweeter and dual 5.5" injection molded polypropylene woofers. I never thought of it this way, but seeing as I already have two woofers there (albeit separated by only ten inches), is that enough?

Nomo, your post is totally helpful too, thanks for posting! Knowing that you did hear a fuller sound is good to know, even if it wasn't a huge difference. Yeah, I'm willing to throw some money at making the sound better, but I want to be smart about it too. I hate throwing money at something if it's only marginally better.

cheers,
supervij

 

[mtrycrafts]

mtrycrafts, my back wall is about 10' 8". My side speakers are at 110 degrees to the front centre; in other words, they're to the sides, but back just a little bit. They're also elevated to about 30" above seated listening position.
Any other opinions?
cheers,
supervij

With the width of that back wall, I'd stick to one speakers, 6.1.
Yep, great location for the sides; that is what I meant a bit back from the 90 position.

 

[supervij]

Really? I mean, I know that Dolby recommends that rear surrounds be at 150 degrees of the front centre, which would place my rear surrounds pretty much at the edges of the wall. In other words, that I should stick with 6.1.

But from everything else I've read, they should be about a meter (about 40") apart, which obviously can be easily done on my wall. So which is it?

Just out of curiousity, what I mentioned earlier, about using a centre speaker with dual woofers that are 10" apart, does that help compensate a bit?

cheers,
supervij

 

[JAD2]

The expansion of the 5.1-channel standard was born in the moviehouse, where it’s easier to cover a large space with surround effects if you add a back channel served by speakers in the back of the house.

As far as home usage, I just dont see the point in even 6.1. The room sizes most have just dont have a fill problem if the 6th is split between the rear 2 in a 5.1 setup. Really you dont even know it exists and having 2 extra in the rear and I've seen a few setups in average sized room, only rearward sitting people know there, there and then dont even hear the ones mid set in the rooms. Its just too much unless you have a long room and 20 feet isnt long for the power decent receivers put out.

I got a 12x17 living room and a 6.1 system which wasnt by choice, just couldnt find a newer 5.1 with the features. I built my own speakers and have extra's lying around to make a 6th which I did. Adding the 6th didnt really change the sound field as most say it does, all it did was add volume. Volume as in loudness, which using mine as a 5.1, I can allready go deaf, so the 6th just doesnt get driven up to the same volume setting. Using the few movies out coded for 6 channels, going between 5.1 and 6.1 really didnt even begin to show itself unless I odd placed the rear center and then it was minimal. Placed at the same height as the rear 2, it wasnt there, much higher or lower, it added very little to the sound field, but did add a tad, probably because its odd placement.

So movie theater, yes, home usage leans me to believe its a gimmick to get you to spend more!

 

[supervij]

Isn't everything a gimmick to make us spend more? I mean, 11.2 with little stands to keep the speaker wire off the floor and stones scattered around the room to enrich the sound?

I dunno, JAD, I popped in the movie Saw, with 6.1 DTS, and that rear centre definitely added a lot. In the opening scene, having Cary Elwes' voice coming exclusively from the rear centre certainly sounded cool, and was appropriate to his physical placement in the room. If his voice came out of the two side surrounds, I don't think I would have "placed" his location as directly behind me.

I agree that 5.1 can certainly seem enough, and probably is with a smaller rooms. When I listen to a 5.1 soundtrack and forget to turn on EX/ES encoding, I don't perceive a sound "hole" at all. So maybe 6.1/7.1 is over-rated. But in cases like Saw, it's way more preferable. There are probably other movies that make the case; they're just not coming to me at the moment.

5.1 is great. But I wouldn't give up my 6.1 at all. For me, it does add something to the experience.

cheers,
supervij

 

[Jack Hammer]

... Adding the 6th didnt really change the sound field as most say it does, all it did was add volume. Volume as in loudness, which using mine as a 5.1, I can allready go deaf, so the 6th just doesnt get driven up to the same volume setting. Using the few movies out coded for 6 channels, going between 5.1 and 6.1 really didnt even begin to show itself unless I odd placed the rear center and then it was minimal. Placed at the same height as the rear 2, it wasnt there, much higher or lower, it added very little to the sound field, but did add a tad, probably because its odd placement.

It really depends on the movie. On some movies, there is absolutely no difference that I could detect. If you watch Pearl Harbor, the extra channel really makes a difference, not just louder, in the movie experience. I was impressed with that movie in 7.1 vs 5.1.

So movie theater, yes, home usage leans me to believe its a gimmick to get you to spend more!

A lot of studio's use multiple surround speakers in there 5.1 setup to enhance the surround effect. Adding more surrounds can give you more of what the sound engineers were going for. So on some movies I would say it might be a gimmick. Again, on the movies out so far that it does make a difference, it can be rather nice.

Jack

 

[Jack Hammer]

Really? I mean, I know that Dolby recommends that rear surrounds be at 150 degrees of the front centre, which would place my rear surrounds pretty much at the edges of the wall. In other words, that I should stick with 6.1.

But from everything else I've read, they should be about a meter (about 40") apart, which obviously can be easily done on my wall. So which is it?

Just out of curiousity, what I mentioned earlier, about using a centre speaker with dual woofers that are 10" apart, does that help compensate a bit?

cheers,
supervij

IIRC the layout suggested by dolby (or dts) has you in dead center of an imaginary circle formed by the speakers around you. Actual room layout doesn't always allow for this ideal setup. I've seen different recommendations too. I believe the norm is to put the surround backs (7.1) equidistant from the rear corner and equal to the sides (5.1). ie. if the sides are three feet from the back corner, then the rears would be about three feet in from the corners. You can play with the location to see what works best for you.

Again, if it were me, I'd temporarily put the 7th channel in on top of a ladder or something and run the cable off to the side (on the floor leading up to it) and listen for a few days to decide if you like/need/prefer the extra channel at this point. That's really the only way for you to 'know' if its right for you. When you do, listen to movies that will make a difference, like the opening scene from Saw, the attack in Pearl Harbor , most Schwarzenegger films, etc.

Another idea is if you have some other surrounds (smaller speakers) laying around, put those in place of the current speaker. See how using one of those vs two sounds, then compare that with the single center speaker you are using. My biggest improvement (and most noticeable) came when I took the two small speakers (4") I was using as rears and replaced them with bigger rears (5 1/4"). To be honest, it really isn't neccessary, but I like how it sounds now better. That is, when I can actually hear it.

My main reason for adding the extra channels originally was curiosity and I had some speakers laying around. I decided I might as well use them and get something from them other than dust collection.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Really? I mean, I know that Dolby recommends that rear surrounds be at 150 degrees of the front centre, which would place my rear surrounds pretty much at the edges of the wall. In other words, that I should stick with 6.1.

But from everything else I've read, they should be about a meter (about 40") apart, which obviously can be easily done on my wall. So which is it?

Just out of curiousity, what I mentioned earlier, about using a centre speaker with dual woofers that are 10" apart, does that help compensate a bit?

cheers,
supervij

Reading this:

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/AudysseyProPrimer2.php

The 150deg max is a 5.1 setup, for one standard.


Further down, it talks about 6 ft apart for the back speakers. I think that on a 10ft back wall, that may be too far or too close to sides?

I wonder if you can experiment?

 

[supervij]

mtrycrafts, thanks for that link. It says that the rear surrounds should be at 150 degrees max, but could be at 170 degrees in a pinch, and in my case, that translates to three feet apart, certainly doable on my rear wall. But it says right after that they should be spaced at least six feet apart. That last bit is in italics, so I assume that trumps the 170 degree placement. Six feet apart would indeed be too far apart, too close to the sides, to really have an impact, methinks. But it may be worth experimenting some.

Jack, thanks for the idea of using the ladder. If I ever do have an extra speaker at my disposal, I think I will give this a try. Certainly can't hurt. When you say to put the rear surrounds equidistant to the corner as the surrounds, well, that would mean using a rear centre rather than two speakers, since my side surrounds are at roughly 100-110 degrees. So no good there.

But thanks for the suggestions, guys. I will give it a try when I get my hands on an extra speaker. But for now, I guess I'll stick with my 6.1.

cheers,
supervij

PS: Happy Thanksgiving Day to all my fellow Canucks!

 

[mtrycrafts]

mtrycrafts, thanks for that link. .. But it says right after that they should be spaced at least six feet apart. That last bit is in italics, so I assume that trumps the 170 degree placement. Six feet apart would indeed be too far apart, too close to the sides, to really have an impact, methinks. But it may be worth experimenting some.

!

That is my feeling as well. Either one directly behind you if the back wall is narrow, I would place yours as that, or their recommendation when it is much wider.

 

[supervij]

Thanks for the confirmation, mtrycrafts. Yeah, it's gonna be 6.1 for this kid. Were I to go through with putting up two rears, I feel like it would be a lot of trouble for something that would yield little, if any, improvement. I guess if Dolby recommends against it -- for MY room, that is -- then there must be a reason for it.

Thanks to everyone for their advice!

cheers,
supervij

 

[ChrisRA]

Whats your thoughts on 7.1 in a smaller room? Some ask why have more speakers behind than you have in front? This makes sense when you stop and think of it. My problem is that I have two rows of seating and my surrounds are ceiling mounted in between rows. Makes me feel like I'm missing something when I sit in the back...any comments are welcome.