# Surround speakers, bipole/dipole?



## fusseli

I'm looking at buying a couple pairs of bookshelves to go to 7.1 and retire my old surrounds. I'd like to keep it to the $100/pair range and I'd like to get something that will sound good enough to stay in my system a long time. I would do usually prefer DIY but I don't want to take the time for making 4+ speakers, and surrounds don't really get that much activity. They will go on speaker stands, not the wall.


----------



## theJman

*Re: Surround speakers*



fusseli said:


> I'm looking at buying a couple pairs of bookshelves to go to 7.1 and retire my old surrounds. I'd like to keep it to the $100/pair range and I'd like to get something that will sound good enough to stay in my system a long time.


"$100 a pair" and "sound good enough to stay in my system a long time" is a pretty big ask, so depending upon the level of sound quality you're looking to achieve you might want to consider used. BTW, in your poll are you referring to the Dayton B652-AIR which just came out? That might be better then the 'regular' B652.

I can't vouch for any of these, but a few others that might be worth considering are...

Premier Acoustic PA-4.0
Streem SR-290
Yamaha NS-6490
Boston Acoustics RS-230


----------



## phillihp23

*Re: Surround speakers*

The Pioneer Andrew Jones speakers have really good reviews. They are highly rated for the price. I read some reviews and recommended the 5.1 setup that comes with two tower Front L/R to a friend and he is pleased. I know there are at least a few on this forum that have them.


----------



## fusseli

I am liking the idea of bipole speakers and I think that would stand the test of time better as a purpose built surround. Fluance has two models that are decently priced compared to others. Otherwise decent bookshelves would have to do.


----------



## fusseli

*Re: Surround speakers*



theJman said:


> "$100 a pair" and "sound good enough to stay in my system a long time" is a pretty big ask, so depending upon the level of sound quality you're looking to achieve you might want to consider used. BTW, in your poll are you referring to the Dayton B652-AIR which just came out? That might be better then the 'regular' B652.
> 
> I can't vouch for any of these, but a few others that might be worth considering are...
> 
> Premier Acoustic PA-4.0
> Streem SR-290
> Yamaha NS-6490
> Boston Acoustics RS-230





phillihp23 said:


> The Pioneer Andrew Jones speakers have really good reviews. They are highly rated for the price. I read some reviews and recommended the 5.1 setup that comes with two tower Front L/R to a friend and he is pleased. I know there are at least a few on this forum that have them.


You are right Jim, maybe I should double the budget and just get one pair at a time. I had noticed those Yamahas on Acc4L but I don't feel very good about their likely off-axis response for surrounds since they are 3-ways and have the odd driver arrangement.

Any thoughts on the slightly nicer Fluance XLBP?


----------



## zieglj01

*Re: Surround speakers*

Boston speakers with their dimple dome tweeters, will give good response.

I am one, who would prefer monopole (bookshelf) speakers.

However if you can swing it, and desire bipole and dipole switch options - look at HTD
http://www.htd.com/Products/level-two-speakers/Level-TWO-Surround_2

As far as Yamaha - look at this one
http://www.accessories4less.com/mak...-150-watts-bookshelf-speaker-pr.-black/1.html

From your original list and a tight budget - the MTX 5i bookshelf can work


----------



## tcarcio

*Re: Surround speakers*

All good reviews for the Pioneer speakers so you can't go wrong for the money.


----------



## theJman

*Re: Surround speakers*



fusseli said:


> You are right Jim, maybe I should double the budget and just get one pair at a time. I had noticed those Yamahas on Acc4L but I don't feel very good about their likely off-axis response for surrounds since they are 3-ways and have the odd driver arrangement.
> 
> Any thoughts on the slightly nicer Fluance XLBP?


I don't have any personal experience with Fluance but I have seen more than one post saying that for the money they're nice speakers, so they might be worth considering. If off-axis response is a priority I'd be cautious of getting any speaker with a waveguide on the tweeter though. They're intended to 'corral' the high frequencies and focus them more tightly, which ultimately limits how wide the dispersion pattern is. If you're sitting directly within their window, or even slightly off-axis, a waveguide has a lot of benefits, but for those sitting off to the side there is a penalty to pay.


----------



## fusseli

*Re: Surround speakers*



zieglj01 said:


> Boston speakers with their dimple dome tweeters, will give good response.
> 
> I am one, who would prefer monopole (bookshelf) speakers.
> 
> However if you can swing it, and desire bipole and dipole switch options - look at HTD
> http://www.htd.com/Products/level-two-speakers/Level-TWO-Surround_2
> 
> As far as Yamaha - look at this one
> http://www.accessories4less.com/mak...-150-watts-bookshelf-speaker-pr.-black/1.html
> 
> From your original list and a tight budget - the MTX 5i bookshelf can work


Thanks for the HTD link, those look pretty nice. From quick scrutiny I can see that the woofer frames are the same as those on the Fluance bipoles, so they are probably of the same driver quality (made in China as usual). The port being located on the bottom of the cabinet is a bummer since I need them to be stand mountable. I really like how they add the bipole/dipole switch, but it seems to me that anyone motivated enough could modify a bipole speaker to be the other way, and vice versa.



theJman said:


> I don't have any personal experience with Fluance but I have seen more than one post saying that for the money they're nice speakers, so they might be worth considering. If off-axis response is a priority I'd be cautious of getting any speaker with a waveguide on the tweeter though. They're intended to 'corral' the high frequencies and focus them more tightly, which ultimately limits how wide the dispersion pattern is. If you're sitting directly within their window, or even slightly off-axis, a waveguide has a lot of benefits, but for those sitting off to the side there is a penalty to pay.


Good point, that's important. Off-axis is desired for surround speakers since not all listening locations are ideal with respect to speaker placement. So for surrounds, Butterworth slopes, no three ways, and no waveguides. This is the growing surround speaker selection criterion :bigsmile:

Right now I'm leaning towards the nicer of the two Fluance bipoles at $200/pair.


----------



## jamesfrazier

I own Boston Rs-260s, the bigger brother to the 230s. The bostons surprised me with their sound quality. They get very loud and stay clear with great definition without being forward at all. I got mine for a great deal seeing as they used to retail at 800 for a pair, so you should have no problem getting a similar discount on the 230s. I


----------



## fusseli

*Re: Surround speakers*

The BIC Acoustech PL-66 look interesting. They aren't a bipole/dipole but they are built for surround duty.


This article suggests that dipole/bipoles aren't really necessary anymore... Hmmm.


----------



## theJman

*Re: Surround speakers*



fusseli said:


> This article suggests that dipole/bipoles aren't really necessary anymore... Hmmm.


I would contend that it depends upon your circumstances, mounting options and preferences more than anything else. There is no generic answer to anything in HT I'm afraid, it's all relative.


----------



## fusseli

*Re: Surround speakers*

I've never heard a bipole/dipole before which is why I'm curious but also hesitant. I'm not sure what the diffuse sound field they are supposed to produce is like. Mounting options is a deterrent with all of the models I've seen so far. What I need now is something that I can place on stands, I plan to re use the SS-SAT I already have.


----------



## willis7469

How bout something like these? Vogels vlb-200. (Yeah,I use them) Sonnie posted some I'll try to find the pics. I think they'll be better up higher(5-6')
Fwiw, I'm a fan of direct radiators/monopoles. IMO, they're much better for music. I also prefer their accuracy for movies. If not them, maybe bipoles.


----------



## willis7469

I just voted pioneer btw. Lol


----------



## RTS100x5

*Re: Surround speakers*

With the pre assembled "knock down cabinets from PE , for my hard earned money is always going to go with DIY and get some bang for the buck speaker parts ...They might not win the beauty pageant but they ARE going to have an excellent sound quality and provide me with a rewarding DIY experience...

So +1 for DIY anyways....


----------



## fusseli

*Re: Surround speakers*

Leaning back toward the bipoles now, the Fluance XLBP. The reason is now that I think back, it was a gripe of concern with my old surrounds being point-sources. The person on the end of my couch has the surround in their ear, while the other locations don't. The bipoles would solve that since the side surrounds should be above listening height, and the inherent angling of the drivers would mean nobody gets a driver in the ear.


----------



## RTS100x5

*Re: Surround speakers*

That price is almost too good to be true :scratch:


----------



## fusseli

*Re: Surround speakers*

The Def Tech SR-8040BP and Polk Audio FXi A4 look nice too, but they are a little too spendy for me.

I also see that the Fluance SX setup is a best budget buy on c|net for 2014, that is a good sign for the brand quality.


----------



## fusseli

Interesting, the Klipsch Synergy S-10 are about the same price a pair as the XLBP at $200. They use a single 4" woofer and plastic enclosure whereas the XLBP have MDF and two woofers. The Klipsch use aluminum tweets which would in theory be a better match in timbre for my mains that are also aluminum.


----------



## GranteedEV

fusseli said:


> I'm looking at buying a couple pairs of bookshelves to go to 7.1 and retire my old surrounds. I'd like to keep it to the $100/pair range and I'd like to get something that will sound good enough to stay in my system a long time. I would do usually prefer DIY but I don't want to take the time for making 4+ speakers, and surrounds don't really get that much activity. They will go on speaker stands, not the wall.


How about the JBL LSR305:

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LSR305

Aside from the customer reviews at sweetwater, here's one with some measurements:

http://noaudiophile.com/JBL_LSR305/

Plus they're powered, so the power supply on your receiver isn't "spread out" to power surrounds.


----------



## fusseli

GranteedEV said:


> How about the JBL LSR305:
> 
> http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/LSR305
> 
> Aside from the customer reviews at sweetwater, here's one with some measurements:
> 
> http://noaudiophile.com/JBL_LSR305/
> 
> Plus they're powered, so the power supply on your receiver isn't "spread out" to power surrounds.


Those look impressive. Reminds me of the Behringer B2030P craze. I see some other interesting reviews on that guy's site, thanks for the link.


----------



## Blainetsuds

A little late but I thought I would weigh in. I have a set of Fluance XLBP surrounds, had them for a few months now. I think they are awesome especially considering the cost and lifetime warranty. When I first got these I used them as front mains to give them a good listen to. They performed very well even in a spot they were not intended for. As surrounds they are great and even look good. I do not hesitate to recommend these speakers.


----------



## zieglj01

*Re: Surround speakers*



fusseli said:


> Thanks for the HTD link, those look pretty nice. From quick scrutiny I can see that the woofer frames are the same as those on the Fluance bipoles, so they are probably of the same driver quality (made in China as usual).


Do not get caught up in that thinking - all woofers are not alike, even if 
they look the same on the outside. There is more to the build quality of
a woofer, than just the front appearance.

Your call, enjoy the adventure.


----------



## |Tch0rT|

fusseli said:


> Those look impressive. Reminds me of the Behringer B2030P craze. I see some other interesting reviews on that guy's site, thanks for the link.


I have a pair of those JBL LSR305's I use for my desktop PC speakers. They're great. They have a wide sweet spot and vocals are dead center. I don't know how JBL made a speaker that sounds that good for that cheap. I'm listening to some tunes on them right now.


----------



## GranteedEV

|Tch0rT| said:


> I don't know how JBL made a speaker that sounds that good for that cheap


Very intelligent cost-cutting ;P

I bet you can improve their sound even more by opening them up, wrapping the waveguide in rope caulk, adding a few more dowel braces, lining the walls in roofing felt and rigid fiberglass, and adding more stuffing.


----------



## theJman

GranteedEV said:


> Very intelligent cost-cutting ;P
> 
> I bet you can improve their sound even more by opening them up, wrapping the waveguide in rope caulk, adding a few more dowel braces, lining the walls in roofing felt and rigid fiberglass, and adding more stuffing.


But other than that, they were made properly?


----------



## fusseli

I really like the look and review on the JBL LSR305, but I don't think I will be getting those for surrounds. It would be cool if they had a passive version for even cheaper! I haven't ordered anything yet and I'm not really in a hurry. I think I've decided to go the bipole/dipole route, it's just a matter of picking a pair. Minor upgrades to cheaper speakers like fill, bracing, lining, can be fun side projects anyway


----------



## fusseli

I've been doing a lot of reading. It seems like the general consensus is that bipoles are the only "acceptable" configuration. Seating locations should be off-axis from either face of the bipole speaker, which should be mounted high and on the wall. All of the system requirements of Dolby, DTS, etc. specify monopoles and there is even some criticism of THX out there for using or allowing bipole designs. To avoid ear-blasting of whoever is sitting in a spot beside the speaker, I'll just mount the speakers higher :duh:

I haven't ordered anything yet but I'm getting close. Right now I'm looking at the Fluance SX6 over the Pioneer SPBS-22, here is an interesting review. The Pioneers are tried and true but I kind of like the idea of going with an underdog brand like Fluance.


----------



## zieglj01

fusseli said:


> I've been doing a lot of reading. It seems like the general consensus is that bipoles are the only "acceptable" configuration.


What is the definition of acceptable?


----------



## fusseli

zieglj01 said:


> What is the definition of acceptable?


There are inherent issues when the same content is played on two drivers physically separated, which gets worse at higher frequency leading to comb filtering. This can't be avoided with any bipole or dipole. Bipoles have all drivers play in phase, whereas dipoles have either set out of phase. Supposedly dipoles are not recommended since they are very picky with placement. Some notes on the attached PDF on page 28. "If the standards for the studio mixes don't use bipole/dipoles, why use them in the home environment" seems like a good argument. The sounds field created may be more enveloping, but perhaps to an unrealistic degree, and it also makes "localization more difficult." According to the literature.


----------



## zieglj01

fusseli said:


> "If the standards for the studio mixes don't use bipole/dipoles, why use them in the home environment" seems like a good argument. The sounds field created may be more enveloping, but perhaps to an unrealistic degree, and it also makes "localization more difficult."


To each their own - bipole and dipole are not for me.

Good off axis monpole speakers are for me - and there is still alot of
music in movies.

However - you still seem to desire Fluance.

The Philharmonic AA bookshelf (modded Pioneer) is a good speaker.
Dennis did a good job with the new tweeter and the rework crossover.
No mass market budget entry sound here.
http://philharmonicaudio.com/aa.html

Your call - enjoy the adventure


----------



## fusseli

zieglj01 said:


> To each their own - bipole and dipole are not for me.
> 
> Good off axis monpole speakers are for me - and there is still alot of
> music in movies.
> 
> However - you still seem to desire Fluance.
> 
> The Philharmonic AA bookshelf (modded Pioneer) is a good speaker.
> Dennis did a good job with the new tweeter and the rework crossover.
> No mass market budget entry sound here.
> http://philharmonicaudio.com/aa.html
> 
> Your call - enjoy the adventure


I'm just intrigued by alternative brands than the mainstream and I occasionally favor buying from North American based companies.

Thanks for the Philharmonic AA link, I didn't know those existed! I had seen some of the Philharmonic original designs a few years ago when they came out and remember them being impressive looking. At $165/pr that's not too bad of a deal considering it has a new crossover and tweeter. Very interesting indeed :bigsmile: That really must be a decent woofer in the newer Pioneer SP-BS22-LR and it is interesting to see that the stock tweeter varies widely with QC.


----------



## waynestead33

Wow I'm really amazed at the knowledge that you guys have , as you can see I'm new here but I'm enthusiastic about HT and I want to learn as much as possible ( as well as get 5 posts)


----------



## fusseli

I decided to go with a pair of the Philharmonic AA monitors. They are redesigned Pioneer BS22s with new tweeters and crossovers, and presumably some other minor changes. For the somewhat small cost difference, I think it adds a lot of certainty to the equation


----------



## theJman

Congrats! Be sure to come back and post your thoughts on those speakers. I've seen them mentioned in a few posts, so I'm curious to know how they perform.


----------



## zieglj01

theJman said:


> Congrats! Be sure to come back and post your thoughts on those speakers. I've seen them mentioned in a few posts, so I'm curious to know how they perform.


I can tell you that they are some serious good sounding speakers for the price.


----------



## zieglj01

fusseli said:


> I decided to go with a pair of the Philharmonic AA monitors. They are redesigned Pioneer BS22s with new tweeters and crossovers, and presumably some other minor changes. For the somewhat small cost difference, I think it adds a lot of certainty to the equation


A good decision


----------

