# Advice for placement of Surround speakers



## Mr Fujisawa (Mar 25, 2013)

Hello.

I'm placing speakers for a 7.1 setup. The SL and SR will be at 90degrees to listening position but need to be mounted right next to the ceiling due to doors. They will be approx 2-3m away from the listening position. For SB and RB however I have a full wall to use but they will be around 1m from listening position. Should I place these 2 at the reccomended 2ft above listening position or mount then at the same heigh as the SL and SR? Also, how far apart should I put them? I'm thinking about 1meter due to the proximity to the listening position.
Any advice would be appreciated.

Many thanks


----------



## fbov (Aug 28, 2008)

First off, bad idea to sit too close to walls, but 1m isn't close... 

Second, bad idea to sit too close to speakers, but depending on size; you're fine as long was you're beyond the fusion distance for the drivers of a multi-way design to blend. Small speakers have short fusion distances, so you're OK here. 

I would put all the surrounds at the same high level, but aimed down toward the seating area, so you're still on-axis. I will note that I use front wide speakers, but my screen's on the long wall. 

Have fun,
Frank


----------



## robbo266317 (Sep 22, 2008)

To get a good starting point it is hard to go past Ethan Winer's setup guide which can be read here:-
http://www.realtraps.com/art_room-setup.htm


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

That close to the back wall, I would stick with a 5.1-speaker layout, with the surrounds in the back corners of the room (at least 2-3 feet above ear level). 

If you are determined to do 7.1, then keep in mind that the rear speakers could be distracting. To minimize that, spread them about 1.2-1.5m apart and raise them a couple feet above above ear level.


----------



## Mr Fujisawa (Mar 25, 2013)

thanks for the tips guys. I can't change the distance to the back wall, so I'm considering getting bi-poles so that the sound is spread out a bit there.


----------



## AVoldMan (May 15, 2011)

Mr Fujisawa said:


> Hello.
> 
> I'm placing speakers for a 7.1 setup. The SL and SR will be at 90degrees to listening position but need to be mounted right next to the ceiling due to doors. They will be approx 2-3m away from the listening position. For SB and RB however I have a full wall to use but they will be around 1m from listening position. Should I place these 2 at the reccomended 2ft above listening position or mount then at the same heigh as the SL and SR? Also, how far apart should I put them? I'm thinking about 1meter due to the proximity to the listening position.


Your 7.1 speaker/room setup is similar to mine. I have my SL/SR speakers about 6.5' off the floor, because I have a hall walkway near my SL speaker. This raises it to clear my head when walking pass it. The matching SR is at a similar height on the otherside of the room to clear a portion of a sofa. However, the back BR and BL speakers are on a 42" bookshelf (about ear height) and 4' behind the listening position, at approximately a 120 degree angle from the front center position. After calibrating SPL and distances of each speaker the sound is better than my previous 5.1 system. Better filling of both side and back effects. If I alter anything in the future it would be to raise the back speakers slightly to get a better sound panning effect for effects moving from left to right along the back wall. The goal would be to have all surround speakers at the same hieght. In my case, that means they would have to be higher than I want due to room walkway restrictions. 

As for as mono vs. bipolar, my preference would be for a mono polar (normal) speaker. I believe it keeps the sound field that was recorded more coherent and acurrate. Look at any recording studio and the speakers are alway ear height and monopoles.

Make sure that the surrounds are facing directly at the main listening position. For higher locations a significant angle is required for best results. Hope this helps?


----------



## Mr Fujisawa (Mar 25, 2013)

AVoldMan said:


> Your 7.1 speaker/room setup is similar to mine. I have my SL/SR speakers about 6.5' off the floor, because I have a hall walkway near my SL speaker. This raises it to clear my head when walking pass it. The matching SR is at a similar height on the otherside of the room to clear a portion of a sofa. However, the back BR and BL speakers are on a 42" bookshelf (about ear height) and 4' behind the listening position, at approximately a 120 degree angle from the front center position. After calibrating SPL and distances of each speaker the sound is better than my previous 5.1 system. Better filling of both side and back effects. If I alter anything in the future it would be to raise the back speakers slightly to get a better sound panning effect for effects moving from left to right along the back wall. The goal would be to have all surround speakers at the same hieght. In my case, that means they would have to be higher than I want due to room walkway restrictions.
> 
> As for as mono vs. bipolar, my preference would be for a mono polar (normal) speaker. I believe it keeps the sound field that was recorded more coherent and acurrate. Look at any recording studio and the speakers are alway ear height and monopoles.
> 
> Make sure that the surrounds are facing directly at the main listening position. For higher locations a significant angle is required for best results. Hope this helps?


thanks for the tips. I thought the speakers weren't meant to be pointed at the listening position (for movies)?


----------



## AVoldMan (May 15, 2011)

Mr Fujisawa said:


> I thought the (surround) speakers weren't meant to be pointed at the listening position (for movies)?


In the past (5-10 years or more), I to have heard similar suggestions regarding movie background sound effects (like rain, wind, rustling leaves). These types of sounds are not coherent and non-directional. These types of sounds may benefit from a nondirectional speaker. However, many of today's movies and musical soundtracks depend on the listener to locate the sound for maximum immersion. Especially, when panning effects or voices are to the side and back of the main listening position. This would require a coherent source and mono-pole (normal) speakers are better at that criterion. 

Once again, of all the photos and articles that I have seen about movie or music mixing studio setups they use a ear level mono-pole speaker surrounding the listener (see Dolby and DTS suggested 5.1 or 7.1 surround speaker locations).

In other words, if mono-pole speakers can do the complete job accuractely, then why would bipole or dipole speakers be needed? It seems to me that dipoles would only compromise the sound field and restrict the type of source material that they could accurately produce.


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

AVoldMan said:


> Once again, of all the photos and articles that I have seen about movie or music mixing studio setups they use a ear level mono-pole speaker surrounding the listener (see Dolby and DTS suggested 5.1 or 7.1 surround speaker locations).


I've seen that for music mixing studios but never for movie mixing studios (which are essentially smaller versions of commercial movie theatres, complete with arrays of surround speakers along the back and side walls).


AVoldMan said:


> In other words, if mono-pole speakers can do the complete job accuractely, then why would bipole or dipole speakers be needed?


Dipoles come closest to mimicking the arrays of surround speakers you hear at movie theatres.


----------



## AVoldMan (May 15, 2011)

sdurani said:


> I've seen that for music mixing studios but never for movie mixing studios (which are essentially smaller versions of commercial movie theatres, complete with arrays of surround speakers along the back and side walls). Dipoles come closest to mimicking the arrays of surround speakers you hear at movie theatres.


My question: Is the sound mix for the movie theater the same as the DVD/BluRay 5.1/7.1 mix? I don't know. I thought that these were different. Why does Dolby and DTS suggest monopole systems on the websites?

Are we talking about the difference between apples and oranges?


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

AVoldMan said:


> Is the sound mix for the movie theater the same as the DVD/BluRay 5.1/7.1 mix?


Depends on the studio. Lionsgate, for example, will re-mix soundtracks (e.g., from 5.1 to 7.1 or from 7.1 to 11.1). Sony tends to re-master soundtracks (equalize for nearfield listening in a small room). Paramount typically ports their theatrical mixes to home video.


AVoldMan said:


> Why does Dolby and DTS suggest monopole systems on the websites?


I wasn't aware they were. Do you have a link to where those sites actively suggest monopole speakers instead of dipoles or bipoles?


----------



## Mr Fujisawa (Mar 25, 2013)

Hmm, now im not sure what to get  I'm considering monitor audio bronze brfx if I go for bi-poles, otherwise another pair of mass 10s. However if i get the later they will obviously be sticking out further from the wall.


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

Since your back wall is only 1m away, I would use the BXFX there (more diffuse, less directional, not as distracting when placed nearby). A switch on the speaker lets you choose between bipole and dipole to see which works better in your situation.


----------



## Mr Fujisawa (Mar 25, 2013)

sdurani said:


> Since your back wall is only 1m away, I would use the BXFX there (more diffuse, less directional, not as distracting when placed nearby). A switch on the speaker lets you choose between bipole and dipole to see which works better in your situation.


yeh that's what im thinking. thanks!


----------



## tony s (Mar 14, 2013)

Hi. This may have been covered elsewhere, but I successfully adopted a suggested use for my surround back speakers in a less than ideal room, by directing that signal to high front (in my case in-wall mounted and down-facing) speakers to add to the front 'presence'.


----------



## AVoldMan (May 15, 2011)

sdurani said:


> ... Do you have a link to where those sites actively suggest monopole speakers instead of dipoles or bipoles?


Well, the only reference that I have seen is in their pictorial descriptions for speaker placement that both DTS and Dolby have on their websites. This one is for Dolby Labs: http://www.dolby.com/us/en/consumer/setup/connection-guide/home-theater-speaker-guide/index.html

I have seen pictures of Dolby's sound lab. I believe they were all monopole speakers and greater than 7.1 sound (more speakers for experimentation).

So, I don't think I have seen anything in writing suggesting monopoles. It's just my inference from those two sound labs. It also makes the most sense to me coming from my stereophile hobby background of more than 30 years.

It probably comes down to a personal preference of the type of sound the listener wishes to recreate. This is yet another topic that manufacturer's refuse to educate the users on making choices or create a standard for the optimum performance results (similar to a calibrated HDTV display problem).


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

AVoldMan said:


> Well, the only reference that I have seen is in their pictorial descriptions for speaker placement that both DTS and Dolby have on their websites.
> 
> So, I don't think I have seen anything in writing suggesting monopoles. It's just my inference from those two sound labs.


IF you're going to make assumptions about _speaker type_ based on a _speaker placement_ graphic at the Dolby website, then you can logically infer a whole bunch of things from that same drawing and ask more questions similar to your previous one, such as: 

Why does Dolby suggest placing the surrounds at ear level rather than elevated? 
Why does Dolby suggest using speakers stands for surrounds rather than wall mounting? 
Why does Dolby suggest placing the surrounds nearby rather than at room boundries? 
Why does Dolby suggest using 2-way bookshelf surrounds rather than floorstanders? 
Why does Dolby suggest a single subwoofer rather than multiple subs? 

And so on. Does the fact that all 7 speakers in that diagram look uncannily like B&W models imply that Dolby is suggesting a particular brand of speaker? 

All I'm saying is be careful about relying on a graphic of suggested speaker angles for anything more than speaker angles.


AVoldMan said:


> It probably comes down to a personal preference of the type of sound the listener wishes to recreate.


Agreed, but understand that what you just said is very different than your previous assumtion that _"mono-pole speakers can do the complete job accuractely"_.


----------



## AVoldMan (May 15, 2011)

sdurani said:


> IF you're going to make assumptions about _speaker type_ based on a _speaker placement_ graphic at the Dolby website, then you can logically infer a whole bunch of things from that same drawing and ask more questions similar to your previous one, such as:
> 
> Why does Dolby suggest placing the surrounds at ear level rather than elevated?
> *... for the same reason that R/L front and center speakers are at ear level.*
> ...


The information in these suggested speaker setup diagrams is consise and compete. Is this a standard? NO. Is there any other information regarding this information from any other highly regarded sources? I've been looking for years and this is the best I've found. These labs do extensive listening and measuring tests. I'm sure the diagrams were not arbitrary in nature. In my Onkyo AVR User Manual, they indeed suggest surround speaker locations several feet above the listener. Is this correct? It may have been a decade or so ago, when home theater systems first were introduced to consumers. These systems multichannel decoding schemes were not what they are today. They were only good at ambient (non-coherent) sound. Today, systems are much more accurate at coherent sound fields and monopoles reproduce these fields better.

_There is a sound philosophy difference between us!_ In my mind, the Bose 901 speakers of yesteryear no matter how expensive or high quality they were would never be speakers that I could live with because the design of 1 forward/9 rear facing speakers would never give any accurate coherent sound field. Similar, any bipolar/dipolar would violate my requirement for this coherent sound field.

BTW, substitute "bipolar" or any other speaker in your above questions and you have the same proplem of explaining your choice. My assumption and choice for accuracy includes a coherent sound field source. Therfore, monopole speaker design agrees with both Dolby and DTS Labs.

If there are any definitive standards with regard to this topic I would really like to read them!


----------



## sdurani (Oct 28, 2010)

You missed the point of my rhetorical questions: Dolby doesn't suggest any of the things I listed, but those things can be inferred by misinterpreting their speaker placement diagram. If you have been to any of the Dolby demos at trade shows, their surrounds are elevated and at room boundries (contrary to the diagram). Likewise, in Dolby-equipped commercial theatres, surrounds are elevated and at room boundries. 

So the graphic is a simple representation of suggested speaker angles. Anything else you're inferring is something coming from you, not Dolby. The DTS site used to have a placement graphic with speakers floating in the air, but that doesn't mean they're suggesting anti-gravity speaker mounts. 

As for your comment about why there is a single subwoofer in the diagram, you're confusing channels with speakers. The diagram is showing the latter (subwoofer), not the former (.1/LFE). Dolby doesn't actively recommend using a single sub, any more than they recommend placing the subwoofer left of centre (as in the diagram).


AVoldMan said:


> I stand by that statement with *my* performance critieron.


Then that's *your* personal preference, not anything to do with accuracy, as you previously claimed. Movies are mixed using arrays of surround speakers; a single monopole does not sound like an array of monopoles, otherwise movie theatres wouldn't need to use more than one on each side of the auditorium. Single surround speakers, while it might be *your* preference, doesn't reproduce the original experience "accurately" (accurate = faithful to the original).


AVoldMan said:


> There is a sound philosophy difference between us!


No, just a difference in justification. I justify my choices based on my subjective preference and/or what works in a particular situation (like suggesting the OP use more diffuse speakers because they will be so close by). You're justifying your recommendations based on some notion of accuracy, without demonstrating what you're being accurate to (commercial theatre? dubbing stage?).


----------

