Dipole Suround vs. Monopole Surround

[SlumpBuster]

I'm sure this topic has come up before so I appologize in advance if its old hat.
But, I'm finishing up a dedicated HT room (really my basement which had been previously unfinished ). While construction has been going on I've been acquiring a new matched speaker set, specifically one of Paradigm's recommended systems: http://www.paradigm.com/Website/Site...11_System.html

Now that the basement is almost finished, I realize that I have more space than I thought I would. The only speakers have left to get are surround speakers, but now I'm thinking about using another set of tower speakers rather than the dipoles for surround. I listen to 50/50 split of music and movies. Also, this will also be the primary (only) television watching area. To be honest, I'm leaning towards Monitor 11's in the back too, if anything just because it will look bad azz.

But what are the pros/cons of using dipole/bipole type surrounds vs. regular speakers as surrounds?

[Tarheel_]

i think its pretty much a given that a full range rear speaker is ideal for most situations. You can run all speakers (ex.center) on 'Large' and that will allow your speakers to reproduce bass from all directions.
If you have the room and the budget, go with the tower rear speakers. Dipoles are great for movies, but i personally don't like them for TV, CD's etc.
Since you are 50/50 music/movies and watch TV in this room, i feel like you should lean toward monopoles.
Plus, if you feel your rear towers are missing cohensioness, you can always add two small monopoles for 7.1.

Four towers, center and sub is one formible system.

Negatives are loss of floor space, children bumping them and tweeter height, but your thread doesn't mention this as a problem. Also, small bookshelve speakers are easier to move around to find the right height/angle from your listening position.

If you go rear towers, experiment with placement, you can achieve max. results by doing some extra work. Even a foot here or there makes a huge difference.

[eqm]

i think its pretty much a given that a full range rear speaker is ideal for most situations. You can run all speakers (ex.center) on 'Large' and that will allow your speakers to reproduce bass from all directions.
If you have the room and the budget, go with the tower rear speakers. Dipoles are great for movies, but i personally don't like them for TV, CD's etc.
Since you are 50/50 music/movies and watch TV in this room, i feel like you should lean toward monopoles.
Plus, if you feel your rear towers are missing cohensioness, you can always add two small monopoles for 7.1.

Four towers, center and sub is one formible system.

Negatives are loss of floor space, children bumping them and tweeter height, but your thread doesn't mention this as a problem. Also, small bookshelve speakers are easier to move around to find the right height/angle from your listening position.

If you go rear towers, experiment with placement, you can achieve max. results by doing some extra work. Even a foot here or there makes a huge difference.

Absolutely agreed!

I've got the exact same front speakers as surround back speakers. I use my dipoles as the surround speakers for movies and have them disconnected when doing SACD or DVD-Audio (hooked up the 6 analog wires to everything but the dipoles.

This setup, to me at least, sounds better than any other setup I've ever used.

Have fun!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

i think its pretty much a given that a full range rear speaker is ideal for most situations. You can run all speakers (ex.center) on 'Large' and that will allow your speakers to reproduce bass from all directions.

And in the process you can create huge acoustical nighmares for yourself. You can set the exact same full range speaker in a 5.1 array, and get 5 different frequency responses from them. Especially in the bass region where each speaker will interact with the room quite differently.

If you have the room and the budget, go with the tower rear speakers. Dipoles are great for movies, but i personally don't like them for TV, CD's etc.
Since you are 50/50 music/movies and watch TV in this room, i feel like you should lean toward monopoles.
Plus, if you feel your rear towers are missing cohensioness, you can always add two small monopoles for 7.1.

Four towers, center and sub is one formible system.

It may seem formidle on paper, but without eq on all channels to smooth out the response, it is a acoustical nightmare. Setting up this kind of system is alot more than just proping down a bunch of speakers and then sit and listen. This is much more complex than setting up a 5.1 system based around bookshelf speakers.

[plextor guy]

A dipole or bipole is easier to place and offers a more realistic sound field in my opinion. I've tried both monopoles and dipoles and find that the dipoles do best what surround speakers are supposed to do: provide a credible sound field in the rear which is mostly intended to enhance what you hear from the front, not play a lead role.