Bipole for 7.1

[teloiv]

I am building a new HT. The room is a rectangle 25' x 17' with a single entrance on one of the long sides. I have wired for a 7.1 and can place speakers per Dolby specs. I was planning to use monopoles all around, but then some suggested I use bipoles all around.

I read all kinds of varying info on this. Is there any consensus?

 

[TLS Guy]

I am building a new HT. The room is a rectangle 25' x 17' with a single entrance on one of the long sides. I have wired for a 7.1 and can place speakers per Dolby specs. I was planning to use monopoles all around, but then some suggested I use bipoles all around.

I read all kinds of varying info on this. Is there any consensus?

You certainly don't want dipoles all round that would be a dreadful mistake. Some favor dipoles for surrounds, I don't, and favor good monopoles.

 

[Grador]

I agree with TLS, you do not want to really want to use monopoles for the backs. For the surrounds it's up to preference and to a large extent room configuration. The way I've come to get a grip on it is that monopoles are always a good choice, but if your room is set up ideally for dipoles they might be slightly better.

 

[shadyJ]

Dipoles/bipoles might have their place, but it's not in a 7.1 system. They have a deliberately vague soundstage, meant to recreate ambient environments. 7.1, on the other hand, has directional surround channels, and with dipole/bipoles there isn't much in the way of directionality at all, your entire surround soundstage would turn into a blur by going all dipole/bipoles for surround channels.

 

[Cos]

It's really subjective, and there is no right answer in my opinion. While I definitely don't have the expertise of a lot of the people on the forum, I know what I prefer. My room is no where near as big as your room 17x15. I went with dipoles for my surrounds because I like the effect it has in my listening environment. I am one the of the few people who probably listens to music in multichannel. When I am listening to a live "In concert" CD, I prefer my music from my surrounds to be dipole, because to me, it better simulates a live concert arena. It also has to do with the fact that I am in a smaller listening environment.

I also like the effect they have on movies, as I originally had direct speakers. I wanted very diffuse and enveloping surround sound effect. Again, with a room your size you do have some more options. In a room your size I would probably go direct for the rears depending on your room set up

 

[afterlife2]

It's really subjective, and there is no right answer in my opinion. While I definitely don't have the expertise of a lot of the people on the forum, I know what I prefer. My room is no where near as big as your room 17x15. I went with dipoles for my surrounds because I like the effect it has in my listening environment. I am one the of the few people who probably listens to music in multichannel. When I am listening to a live "In concert" CD, I prefer my music from my surrounds to be dipole, because to me, it better simulates a live concert arena. It also has to do with the fact that I am in a smaller listening environment.

I also like the effect they have on movies, as I originally had direct speakers. I wanted very diffuse and enveloping surround sound effect. Again, with a room your size you do have some more options. In a room your size I would probably go direct for the rears depending on your room set up

I totally agree I loved dipoles as sides when I had them. I too am in a small room.

 

[Pyrrho]

It's really subjective, and there is no right answer in my opinion. While I definitely don't have the expertise of a lot of the people on the forum, I know what I prefer. My room is no where near as big as your room 17x15. I went with dipoles for my surrounds because I like the effect it has in my listening environment. I am one the of the few people who probably listens to music in multichannel. When I am listening to a live "In concert" CD, I prefer my music from my surrounds to be dipole, because to me, it better simulates a live concert arena. It also has to do with the fact that I am in a smaller listening environment.

I also like the effect they have on movies, as I originally had direct speakers. I wanted very diffuse and enveloping surround sound effect. Again, with a room your size you do have some more options. In a room your size I would probably go direct for the rears depending on your room set up

I also listen to music in multichannel (when I can get it), and I agree that the dipole/bipole/monopole issue for surrounds is subjective, though I have had dipoles and I prefer monopoles in my surround system. Of course, this sort of thing is not fairly compared, as one does not get speakers that are otherwise identical and then switch back and forth for comparison. I like having identical speakers for all channels (other than subwoofer, obviously).

But in my main two channel system, I use dipoles.

To the OP:

There is no consensus about what type of surround speakers one should use, or, for that matter, what type of main speakers one should use. With, for example, a Magnepan system, one would have dipoles for all channels (other than subwoofer). Many brands make monopoles for the front channels while making dipole or bipole speakers for surround use. Still others make just monopoles for all channels.

You should try to listen to a variety of systems and decide what you think is best for yourself. Of course, the quality of the speakers may affect your selection, as well as the acoustics of the space in question. Ultimately, this is a matter of preference more than anything else.

 

[3db]

Its a question o subjective preference and their is no right or wrong. I'm in the monopole camp and prefer them to bipoles.

 

[teloiv]

I guess I kind of implied the use of bipoles in all locations. I was just looking at them in the rear / surround locations. (Of course, Def Tech makes Bipoles for LCR, too, so it must not be too crazy.) I could understand the use of di or bipoles in a 5.1 to simulate more of a surround, but it seems like with a 7.1, the source or receiver could effectively blend rears and surrounds to position sounds - just like with LCR. If I start putting di or bipoles there, I would think this becomes very unmanageable.

 

[GlocksRock]

I have a 9.1 system and every speaker except for the center channel is bipolar and it sounds great.

 

[Hobbit]

For home theater I prefer the bipoles, and have them all around (except the center). IMO, what others call as vague I call being more submersed in real life scene. The sound is more natural and theaterlike to me. I also prefer the bipoles over monopoles when I'm just playing ambient music. In this case they do a better job in filling the area with music. However, when I'm critically listening to music - seated in the sweet spot - I prefer my 2.0 system with has monopole speakers. Obviously it's all a matter of opinion...

 

[afterlife2]

Monopoles(Tripoles?) seem expensive from the search I did, which brand makes a less expensive model for $200-300 range?

Here is a good article: http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=1210747&postcount=1

 

[teloiv]

Monopole is just a traditional speaker firing in a single direction (typically at the listening area) compared to bi / dipoles with drivers firing in different directions (generally not directly at he listening area) in our out of phase with each other. AFAIK