Surround (RS-7) Placement

[anarchist]

Usparc,

The rooftop scene where Neo turns to face the agent, right? The agent fires his first bullet, sound initially comes from center channel, transitions to left front speaker, begins transitioning to left S6 surround, bullet appears to be coming towards you on the left, sound completely transitions to left surround, passes by you, and proceeds to carry into the distance on the left. The second bullet fired does the exact same thing on the right. The bullets do not get lost in space but rather fade out in the direction they appeared to be going. I performed this test several times on this scene and then had my wife sit in and describe to me what she heard. There was no difference in our perspectives.

I dare say my 'sprayer' makes the bullet go far more into the distance behind you than a monopole. I can actually test this as I also have a set of monopoles I can use if it suits me. There is not an abundance of reflections however and such 'uncontrolled' spraying would be a function of your room and processing and not the speakers. In reality my S6's simply provide the same results in a 5.1 system which now require 7.1; of course anyone could see a S6 is simply two monopoles aimed in different directions - just like side surrounds and rear surrounds.

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

The move to separates is coming, I can feel it.

[decibel man]

As far as the whole 6.1 / 7.1 propaganda, it seems like a lot of marketing hype. I would take the extra money for the extra speakers, processing, and amplification and put it towards more DVD's or anything else that I may enjoy. To do it correctly the extra cost of a 6.1 or 7.1 system will be anywhere from $700 to $3000. The film industry is not at all convinced that the extra channel is advantagous. That kind of cash would be better spent elsewhere. Now again this is just my opinion, but it does make sense. It is next to impossible to find a medium to small movie theater with back wall surrounds. If there was a large benefit, the theaters would be installing these speakers quite rapidly. I think we get so passionate about this stuff that we forget to put benefits into perspective. I have seen systems with extra speakers and expensive accessories surrounding older uncomfortable furniture. I would have bought a nicer couch before a rear center. The extreme joy from a rear center won't aleviate the back pain from a bad couch and a three hour movie. Enough ranting for now, my pillow awaits my arrival.

JT

------------------

Enjoy and Happy Listening!

[whell]

At the risk of beating this subject to death:

I've got a 5.1 setup currently. For better or worse, my room does not allow for the addition of a center-rear channel (I've got a huge picture window across the back of my listening room!).

However, I am using RB-5's as my rears, and have them positioned to slightly to the rear and slightly above the listener's ear. The overall effect on movies is quite good.

I have toyed with the idea of replacing the RB-5's with RS-3's (to accompany my RF-3 L/R and my RC-3 center). What stops me every time is that I also listen to music on my home theater system (don't have the $$$ or the room for a dedicated 2 channel system). With the specter of multi-channel music potenitally gaining popularlity, I can't justify a speaker designed primarly for diffuse rear effects being used as a discrete channel for music.

In fact, I own a few DTS surround disks. The 5.1 effect, for me, is not a "realistic" presentation of the soundstage, I often find myself listening to my 5.1 DTS music disks in 2 channel! There are a few disks that are somewhat convincing on 5.1 channel (Diane Krall's "Love Scenes" comes close). Therefore, the RB-5's remain in place for now.

------------------

Mike - Livonia, MI

Klipsch RF-3 L/R

Klipsch RC-3 Center

Klipsch RB-5 rears

HSU Research VF-2 Sub

Marantz SR-19EX receiver

Marantz MM-9000 Amp

NAD T550 DVD

Adcom GCD 700 CD

[avman]

in my room the ksps-6's do a wonderful 'direct' rendition for music.my rear wall is painted,plastic-covered fiberglass panels which may not be very reflective? anyway, 7 bridges road-eagles h.f.o. in dts gives me good 'crowd noise' and direct-sounding vocals from tim schmidt and bob walsh. my simulated rear center is very 'localizable' i.e. t-2 m.b.e.in 6.1

1st scene terminator turns toward camera and fires, it sounds just like there IS a rear center(a rather large,full range-sounding one at that).

while on the subject, a wdst center rear would seem to be a BIG mistake unless your room was rediculously wide,and even then,2 monopoles would be better as ctr rear.

avman.

This message has been edited by avman on 05-13-2002 at 11:28 AM

[boa12]

there really is hardly any 6.1 discrete material out there yet but it's coming (horned says thx is working on a discrete rear surround format). i've yet to get an upgrade for the prepro that contains the dts es 6.1 discrete decoder too.

but like i said the rear center carrying matrixed is a nice touch to tie together the surrounds & u never know til u try it w/ your set-up.

when i can get the truely discrete rear center i think it'll be really cooo for those mixers that use it for such as fly over effect (jet flying straight over your head from front to back or vice versa).

as for my cost it's hard to say as my pre/pro & amp already had the capability anyway. so really the cost was just around $300 for another C7 center & cable. beware the dif between benefit analysis & rationalization.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[avman]

...

This message has been edited by avman on 05-13-2002 at 01:59 PM

[USparc]

Hey guys,

My bad experiences were with the RS-3's.

I actually never owned and used them in my place.

My dealer has more then 5 dedicated HT systems to audition.

One system is with RS-3's as rears another is with RB-5's as rears. Back then the dealer showed me the differences I told you all. It was so much better with the RB-5's as rears. Maybe it was the placement of the speakers, but RS-3's makes the sound so unnatural.

That was for movies. The dealer convinced me rather very quick that they where useless for 5 channel music. So the end result was 4 RF-3's and a RC-3 (it does its job very good with the RF-3's).

crash827, I'm really happy for you if you heard it all just like you described it. You have probably found a good place for them and they match your system (including the place) very well (not to much reflections). (But still, can you do the test also with an extra pair of your mains??)

So probably the placement is an important factor for these speakers. So lets get back to the subject of this post.(not for me, I would never buy WDST speakers (or non monopoles) ).

... (going to enjoy my HT system now) later

[T2K]

whell, no damage done. The subject HAS ALREADY been beat to death!

USparc, I've got some beachfront property in Florida for sale cheap. Do you believe that too?

Crash, my buddy's Premiere set up sounds great with the S-6 rears only. Of course, mine sounds better! :^)

Keith

[anarchist]

Keith,

I believe it. Really, right now my system simply rocks. We are always looking for marginal improvement though, right?

About their musical ability: I am amazed everytime I get the chance to sit down and crank this baby up. 6.1, 7.1 for music - who cares? I switch off everything and listen to 2 channel with no DSP's, crank up the volume to 100+ dBs and sit there mesmerized by the stage in front of me. Close my eyes and the stage is so broad, deep, and precise. You would swear the singer was standing directly in front of you with the drums behind. Tambourine off one side and keyboard off the other. Guitar passing from one side of the stage to the other. The speakers simply disappear and the band takes the stage. It is what music is about and these speakers make it loud and clear. I would NOT give them up if I could get a set of RF-7s for free.

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

The move to separates is coming, I can feel it.

[T2K]

Crash,my buddy is a muscian and has played for years. After we got his system a'crankin the other night he mumbled, 'to sound better you'd have to have the band playing here in the room with us...but then, they may not sound this good'.

Keith

[HornEd]

KLF 30 36-825Hz

SVS Ultras 16-80Hz

Back again from my mountain hideaway where I have yet to hook up to the Internet.

Crash827, thanks for your up-front reply. By the time you reach California this year I shall be in another audio environment. I had a relative that I used to visit in Kentucky who was Chief of Research for Brown & Williamson... in the days when results were suppressed. He died of lung cancer. I have another friend there who was a pallbearer for Adoph Rupp (who considered him the finest pure shooter he ever coached), Louie Dampier, a non-smoker and a favorite of mine with the Kentucky Colonels in the ABA and the Spurs in the NBA.

The Dennis Sands quote makes a good case for the prevalent 5.1 standard... but does not directly address the speaker configurations he uses or that he anticipates others will use. That, of course, would make it a far more revealing piece. I would agree with him that relatively few consumers have taken full advantage of the 5.1 format. Also, I believe there are positive psychoacoustics benefits from 6.1 with front effects that clearly exceed the 5.1 offerings with proper gear, well placed and calibrated. BTW, I did the A/B tests of WDST and KLF-30's with a Denon 5800 that did not suffer from a lack of speaker controls. On balance, my aging ears (and those of my mother for whom this system was built) preferred the Yamaha KLF-30's (with Front Effects) to the Denon KLF-30 front array and WDST rear array. The test was done not to prove a theory, but to find out what made my mother most happy. But, at least I did take a week out to test both the Denon and the WDST approach.

As to your four-corner subwoofer approach, I have used as many as five subwoofers in a room with good effect. Multiple subs tend to fill in the peaks and valleys that can create standing waves. In my tests, the better the quality of subwoofer(s) the less localization became an issue... frankly, it seems that using adequate gear in a relatively closed listening area where standing waves are not a factor, sounds below about 80 Hz may be produced by multiple generators or a single adequate one with little or no perceived effect. That is why my guests perceive sub-80Hz sounds coming from KLF-30's across the room from my 7' SVS Ultra Tower... which is the true source.

The issue of "discrete" sound and "matrixed" sound seems like a bit of a mixed metaphor. By "discrete" sound I mean sound that was intended to be radiated from a particular direction in relation to the sweetspot. By "matrixed" sound I refer to sounds from two or more discrete sources that are mixed in a special way to create a new position from which the matrixed sound will be radiated.

In effect, any surround sound speakers that reflect sound from both sides to a rear wall have created a mechanical matrix of the projected sound to be reflected to the sweetspot. To some degree, when my receiver creates a matrix of 5.1 rear channels and broadcasts it from the rear effects speaker, a similar effect is created. Only in my case, the tone and timbre of the three rear speakers more closely matches that of my three front speakers.

Since modern recording methods use many microphones and "matrix" their result into defined channels to create a "contrived" overall effect... all of the commercially produced sound that comes out of our systems is, in effect, a "matrix" whatever speaker types are used.

We also agree that the KSP-S6's are essentially two monopole speakers aimed at diverse angles to create a wide surround effect (with a smaller "null" area superior to bipoles and dipoles that restrict their "spray" to fore and aft with an absolute null toward the sweetspot. As you correctly surmised, the greatest problem I have with them is that they do not match the tone and timbre of the KLF-30's IMHO.

The problem I have with Keith vitriol toward my posts is that his position is that anyone who doesn't agree with his KSP-S6 or WDST approach is full of BS or, worse, deliberately misleading people. That runs across my grain of how I have served my fellow residents of this planet... and I find that style of posting patently offensive. Frankly, as a life-long maverick, having an honestly held dissenting opinion is a healthy stimulation to better understanding for all. I respect Keith many ways... and have said so in previous posts... but "verbal arson" is not one of them.

BTW, I think Klipsch did an outstanding job of matching the KSP family of speakers and, therefore, understand the source of their owners' enthusiasm. I have heard similar comments from M&K enthusiasts who have the M&K Tripole that can be switched between dipole and tripole configurations. Part of my problem with the WDST approach is that they do not have the raw cubic inches to produce the robust sound I crave. The closest one to matching my personal preference has been the RS-7.

Boa, Except for disassembling the 7' SVS Twin-Ultra Tower and hauling it downstairs for a test... and then reversing the process to return it to the upstairs HT... I have been running the music system without a bass most times. I have other subwoofers (which I should probably sell) but they cannot keep pace with the K-Horns family like the SVS Tower can. Since I will be moving soon and have been spending less than three days a week at home, I have put off adding an adequate subwoofer until I can test it out in my new digs.

As to cutting off the rockin' sound potential of the KLF-30's at 80Hz... or cutting off the pure, quick and overwhelmingly powerful SVS Tower at 50Hz is better can be a dilemma! Is it not just as much an "audio crime" to cut off the subwoofers where they do a magnificent job as it is to cut off the KLF-30's where they do a magnificent job? IMHO, cutting off the about 45Hz from the bottom of the KLF-30's produces a better result by my twelve 12" woofers in the 80-825Hz range. For the sake of argument, if the SVS Tower more than adequately replaces the 36-80Hz and the KLF-30's produce better 80-825Hz sounds when freed of the bass responsibility... it would seem that I have gained benefit from the KLF-30's rather than have wasted benefit.

As indicated in a previous post, Boa, I expect that I will have the time and inclination to experiment with more precise bass management when I get settled into my new digs. I also have some notions about building a custom KLF-30 surround sound unit with a multiple surround sound horn array. Until then, I will be content to "suffer" with what I have. -HornED

PS: I realize some of these comments are redundant but they are based upon issues raised on this thread subsequent to my last post. And, now that I understand your a musician, Crash, I should add that when it comes to recreating the sound of a live musical performance, I much prefer the K-horns, Belle and Cornwalls over six KLF-30's... especially when supplemented by the custom SVS Tower. And when it comes to "stereo"... I prefer the arrangement that PWK had in his own home... corner K-horns with a Belle in the middle.

This message has been edited by HornEd on 05-14-2002 at 06:46 AM

[boa12]

ed, know u're not suffering anymore than i am w/o the klf-30hec. u probably need no sub for the khorn room assuming that's for music only, but i'd love to have that set-up for my main sys & sure u'll try incorporating a sub in there too.

a more flexible crossover mgmt w/ the 30s & a great sub

i've found is a pareto optimal situation. iow, makes it so that a more perfect balance can be struck between

the sub & other speaks. you've probably seen that new ultra (w/ new ss drivers) review (link under the sub section) & he uses a 50hz cross w/ apparently excellent

results. of course he's using a theta pre/pro that like mine has small increments & even adjustable slopes

(f.e., u could use 50hz & give the ultra a smoother slope like 6db/octave).

your best bet would be to get a good power amp to better drive those 30s when handling lower bass & insert an external box like the outlaw icbm before the power ins.

maybe outlaw or someone else will come out w/ a more flexible approach like most pre/pro that allow for finer increments & slope adjustments (the icbm goes from 40 to 60hz in its steps).

btw, your yammy at 90hz i imagine starts off at a 12db/octave slope on the low pass if it's trying to follow thx. that means the ultra are getting pretty good output on above 90hz. then again for 5.1 ht material this is probably no biggy, but i listen to a lot of music w/ my main sys.

just a fine tuning toward perfection tweak really. like if i moved to a klf-30hec. not a high priority but would be a nice if i had the room.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

This message has been edited by boa12 on 05-14-2002 at 11:32 AM

[anarchist]

Ok,

In an attempt to find information about another subject, I came across this on the THX/Lucasfilm site. This is what the creators state, unequivocally, to a question about a recommendation frequently made here:

I have heard that 5 matched loudspeakers are recommended for 5.1. Why does THX recommend something different?

In a movie theatre, the surround speakers and the front speakers are different because they do different jobs. The front speakers provide clear dialogue and are designed to localize sounds to match the picture. The surround speakers create diffuse and enveloping surround ambiences with occasional effects like pans or "fly-overs...THX Dipole Surround designs psychoacoustically match the best surround sound performance of a movie theatre or mixing stage."

Of course, the wonderful thing about standards is they are frequently ignored.

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

The move to separates is coming, I can feel it.

This message has been edited by crash827 on 05-14-2002 at 12:34 PM

[HornEd]

Ah, yes, Crash now you are getting to the heart of the matter. The original THX criteria is featured in the now outdated Video Essentials set-up disk which featured dipole and NOT WDST or K&M Tripoles which compromise the THX format... as do monopole surrounds and the rear effects speakers of 6.1 and 7.1 configurations.

In point of fact, a bit of continuing research will show you that LucasFilms, Inc. and Dolby Digital have joined forces (as reported earlier) to make a new attempt at creating a standard. You can read about it in http://www.thx.com/consumer_products/surround_ex.html and follow that with a web search. The newly proposed standard is called THX Surround EX and is certified for dipoles and monopoles... but in-between solutions like WDST and Tripoles are not addressed.

A "non-commercial" account of THX Surround EX can be found at http://www.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=search.php&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhometheater.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fweekly%2Faa061400a.htm%3Fiam%3Dhowstuffworks_SKD%26terms%3DTHX%2BS urrou>http://www.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=search.php&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhometheater.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fweekly%2Faa061400a.htm%3Fiam%3Dhowstuffworks_SKD%26terms%3DTHX%2B Surrou nd%2BEX which will also lead you to the excellent, easily read, "How Stuff Works" take on various HT technology.

Personally, I much prefer the WDST and Tripole approaches to the THX "approved" dipole preference. The many folks who prefer direct radiating speakers for surrounds seems to have forced including them in the official "THX" standards. While I appreciate that the effect of the heavy handed "THX" promotions has tended to bring the HT industry together, I am not in full agreement with the home standards as being in the interest of the avid HT buff with quality Klipsch based equipment... new or old.

BTW, LucasFilms, Inc., represents that over thirty DD EX films are compatible with the new format and Denon is one of the companies including the THX Surround EX decoder in their newer products.

As for me, I expect to stick with a matrixed 6.1 from 5.1 progressively scanned sources. I have several of the 30+ referenced EX titles in my DVD collection (they are fairly common) and am quite satisfied as to how they come across in my current HT system.

Hopefully, by helping our fellow Forum members separate fact from fiction, be aware of new trends and their potential combine to make this Forum a small but increasing force in a vast "Boze-0-fied" audio sea. -HornED

This message has been edited by HornEd on 05-14-2002 at 02:49 PM

[anarchist]

Hi,

Just to beat a dead horse: another directive from Lucasfilm/THX.

AIM the null of the surround speakers at listening position.

Take it for what its worth but where would you point a monopole to comply with this?

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

The move to separates is coming, I can feel it.

[HornEd]

Careful, Crash827, you may be about to crash into an audio epiphany!

The question you pose fits WDST speakers that delete the null requirement by putting a woofer in that area of a speaker that already violates the "THX" standard by having the horn tweeters mounted at an angle to the side wall rather than at 90° to it (such as the KSP-S6).

Although the KSP-S6 does have a small null area between the angled speakers that can be pointed at the sweetspot, I do not recommend it! The more the KSP-S6's are used as dual monopoles covering a wider area and converging on the back wall to, in effect, create a matrixed phantom rear effects channel... the better they sound to me. I just wished they matched the tone and timbre of any of my three Klipsch based systems.

Obviously, I disagree with the "Null toward the sweetspot" approach to surround sound... as do many higher end consumer speaker manufacturers. Apparently you do too as evidenced by your support of WDST. Now your question has revealed the "dark side" of THX... and there is more.

Personally, I think the new THX Surround EX modification of the "Dolby Digital Surround EX" format is lame at best... even though they do allow direct radiating speakers as rear effects (surround) speakers. It should be noted that although the new standard is billed as a 7.1 system it actually uses six discrete tracks plus LFE... which I tend to think of as a 6.1 system. Essentially, THX Surround EX puts two speakers on a single rear effects channel.

Frankly, having a parade of four "THX Approved" dipoles along my sidewalls is not attractive... for one thing, I couldn't buy a current Klipsch home audio surround speaker that meets the criteria! All of the Klipsch home audio speakers that conform to "THX" standards have been discontinued. The KSP-S6 is one of the innovations that broke away from the "THX Approved" standard... and for that I applauded Klipsch.

As long as significant misunderstandings of how "standards" and speaker types exist... this horse is not likely to be dead. And as long as the spirit of Darth Vader seems to be behind emerging THX standards... I think I'll join with Klipsch and pass. -HornED

This message has been edited by HornEd on 05-14-2002 at 04:08 PM

[boa12]

so everybody's happy, why don't u guys point 1 side of the S6 directly at that sweet spot then have the other side firing into the rear corner & reflecting around to the sweet spot? then direct rear centers tie it all together.

didn't av say he had his s6 positioned this way but using the phantom rear center mode? anyway the point is the s6 can be moved & positioned in dif ways.

ed, i recall that thx & dolby started out in cahoots on EX but now dolby has their own. anyway EX has beeen around a while (at least the collaboration between dolby & thx). i thought you meant thx was coming out w/ a new discrete rear channel(s) format. if not then it's that same old matrixed rear center(s). not much dif than dts es matrix w/ 2 rears.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[anarchist]

Ok,

THX Surround EX is not a sound format. THX designates licensing requirements and implementation requirements to hardware manufactureres same as they always did. Dolby EX specifies the use of a single or dual back surrounds. From Dolby:

Unlike Dolby's focus on soundtrack formats, THX develops standards for the playback environment, regardless of film format.

THX can't have EX without Dolby Digital EX - they are mandating post processing for licensing purposes - oh, and it can be turned off in the processor if you don't want it. It is basically a DSP mode like Jazz, Hall, etc.

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995 (Current)

Bryston 9BST (On the horizon)

Bryston SP1.7 (A little further on the horizon)

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

Ella PP EL-34 (Coming soon)

This message has been edited by crash827 on 05-14-2002 at 04:36 PM

[HornEd]

Boa, if you follow the URL's you will find that the "newly refurbished" Dolby to THX Surround EX uses a proprietary DSP that decodes the single rear channel in a more effective way. Yamaha has a similar DSP that is used to create a matrixed rear effects channel to create 6.1 from 5.1 sources (DD or dts).

When the new "Star Wars" episode was first shown, only a relatively few saw it in "THX Approved" digital theaters using the full blown "THX Surround EX" version. Most saw it in its analog film version. It is interesting that Roger Ebert gave the film a thumbs down and remarked that in his opinion "THX Surround EX" was not sufficiently "digital glitch" free to be ready for the big screen.

But, like you, Boa, I am going to stick to my Cornwall surrounds and may even add a rear effects Cornwall on my main (music) system. Soon I will enjoy setting up a new system for the fall... that will likely include better bass management on all systems. -HornED

This message has been edited by HornEd on 05-14-2002 at 04:26 PM

[avman]

boa, that's exactly what i mean...the front 'wedge' faces my sweet spot like two toed-in monopoles would,while the back wedge reflects off the back wall(about 2 1/2 ft behind the s-6's.) i get both direct and reflected sound. in MY room they sound GREAT!! avman.

------------------

1-pair klf 30's

c-7 center

ksps-6 surrounds

RSW-15

sony strda-777ES receiver upgraded to v.2.02 including virtual matrix 6.1

sony playstation 2

sony dvpnc 650-v 5-disc dvd/cd/SACD changer

dishnetwork model 6000 HD sat rcvr w/digital off-air tuner

sony kv36xbr450 high-definition 4:3 tv

sharp xv-z1u lcd projector w/84" 4:3 sharp screen

Bello'international Italian-made a/v furniture

panamax max dbs+5 surge protector/power conditioner

monster cable and nxg interconnects/12 gua.speaker wire

Natuzzi red leather furniture set

KLIPSCH-So Good It Hz!