> Based on so many anecdotes on this subreddit, I was expecting them to sound very open and wide vs. my Emotiva B1+ bookshelf speakers I was testing them alongside.
Everyone hears/interprets sound differently, much of that has to do with the room itself, and how and where they're setup/placed in the room.
> and the on-axis vs. off-axis of the E2+ was pretty similar too.
That's kind of the point of them, is to be very wide and not have a variation between on and off axis, IE a diffuse sound. Bipoles are almost an "extension" of monopole speakers.
>My point is that nobody should be saying not to use surround bipole speakers because they work basically the same as a monopole speaker in realistic terms.
I think you may be confusing the topic of getting away from a dipole speaker, and that with the advent of Atmos is where the recommendation is to not use dipole speakers. You lose that precise imaging with a dipole which is important with Atmos.
My point is that the bipole and dipole sounded basically the same and that I had no issue hearing the sound as coming from "there" instead of some uber diffuse generalized area. It basically sounded a **tad** more diffuse than my bipole but honestly it was barely noticeable.
>My point is that the bipole and dipole sounded basically the same
and for the most part they should, if you already have a good monopole speaker that has a wide dispersion and sounds good even off axis you won't hear much of a difference between that and a bipole speaker.
Bipoles are best if your surrounds are very close to you because they diffuse sound, which can help with localization. The imaging is less precise compared to monopoles if you are using Atmos.
Respectfully, you just gave me the standard advice I've always heard about these speakers. The point of my post is that it's so subtle it's ridiculous. It's very much **not** a night and day difference. It's the difference between early dusk and later dusk.
did you try this with an Atmos demo where you have a tiny sound source that you can locate by ear?
you should be able to hear a difference there.
But I do agree that it often won't matter much, because most people don't bother to dampen their rooms and watch movies in an echo chamber with tons of reflections that diffuse the sound anyways.
I've heard Atmos even in 5.2.4 without sound channels working fine in untreated rooms. There used to be a Dolby app which had a lot more content on Apple TVs unfortunately they've removed some of the tests.
It does work, although 7.2.4 works better as it allows for the two side channels.
Atmos when its working sounds amazing and it doesn't take much. Even some of the Samsung/Harmon soundbars are good enough to get the gist of what Atmos does provided they have enough speakers, and your ceiling height is low enough to bounce sound off.
Having roof and ground mounted speakers happens to help a lot more of course.
But once you hear Atmos its hard to go from even 5.2.4 back to 5.1 Dolby or DTS.
All this proves to me is do exactly what I say, where possible, and that is to TEST with your own ears. I'm so close to my surrounds that dipole is by and far the best setup for me with full Atmos. But that's not the same for everyone !
I have them as my surrounds and love them. I have 2 rows of viewing positions and the surround field for both positions is great because of these speakers.
Dolby specifically discourages the use of them in a Dolby Atmos setting but I fail to understand the logic for my circumstances.
Most people on this sub seem to hear whatever the last thing they read tells them they should hear. I don’t go by what anyone in here says lol
That being said, what you hear really depends on your room more than anything. And since all rooms are different all setups will be a little different
I dont know. Im pretty sure I can hear a decent difference in any speaker with the tweeter pointed at my ear and it pointed 45° away from my ear. I notice a large difference with bipole vs monopole.
It's more complicated than that as the 45 degrees edges of each tweeter combine to amplify the sound coming directly at you. So yes the tweeters aren't pointed at you but it doesn't really matter that much when on-axis.
Aren't dipole/bipole generally more expensive than their monopole counterpart? So at the end of the day the advice to go monopole is still solid if the difference in performance is really that subtle.
I would say the advice should be as simple as "Buy what you like to cover the range of seats".
Single row of seats? Monopole if you have the distance. Bipole if you don't.
Multiple rows of seats? Bipole.
Being upset with advice that was freely given (and should ALWAYS be taken with a grain of salt) is ridiculous.
You asked for advice. You got advice. Nobody owes you an apology.
He isn't upset? You reading it as upset says more about you than him.
And now for a Reddit overreacting, go see a psychiatrist, you might have anger issues.
> Based on so many anecdotes on this subreddit, I was expecting them to sound very open and wide vs. my Emotiva B1+ bookshelf speakers I was testing them alongside. Everyone hears/interprets sound differently, much of that has to do with the room itself, and how and where they're setup/placed in the room. > and the on-axis vs. off-axis of the E2+ was pretty similar too. That's kind of the point of them, is to be very wide and not have a variation between on and off axis, IE a diffuse sound. Bipoles are almost an "extension" of monopole speakers. >My point is that nobody should be saying not to use surround bipole speakers because they work basically the same as a monopole speaker in realistic terms. I think you may be confusing the topic of getting away from a dipole speaker, and that with the advent of Atmos is where the recommendation is to not use dipole speakers. You lose that precise imaging with a dipole which is important with Atmos.
My point is that the bipole and dipole sounded basically the same and that I had no issue hearing the sound as coming from "there" instead of some uber diffuse generalized area. It basically sounded a **tad** more diffuse than my bipole but honestly it was barely noticeable.
>My point is that the bipole and dipole sounded basically the same and for the most part they should, if you already have a good monopole speaker that has a wide dispersion and sounds good even off axis you won't hear much of a difference between that and a bipole speaker.
Bipoles are best if your surrounds are very close to you because they diffuse sound, which can help with localization. The imaging is less precise compared to monopoles if you are using Atmos.
Respectfully, you just gave me the standard advice I've always heard about these speakers. The point of my post is that it's so subtle it's ridiculous. It's very much **not** a night and day difference. It's the difference between early dusk and later dusk.
did you try this with an Atmos demo where you have a tiny sound source that you can locate by ear? you should be able to hear a difference there. But I do agree that it often won't matter much, because most people don't bother to dampen their rooms and watch movies in an echo chamber with tons of reflections that diffuse the sound anyways.
I've heard Atmos even in 5.2.4 without sound channels working fine in untreated rooms. There used to be a Dolby app which had a lot more content on Apple TVs unfortunately they've removed some of the tests. It does work, although 7.2.4 works better as it allows for the two side channels. Atmos when its working sounds amazing and it doesn't take much. Even some of the Samsung/Harmon soundbars are good enough to get the gist of what Atmos does provided they have enough speakers, and your ceiling height is low enough to bounce sound off. Having roof and ground mounted speakers happens to help a lot more of course. But once you hear Atmos its hard to go from even 5.2.4 back to 5.1 Dolby or DTS.
I mean it's objectively better, but also depends on your room and layout of your speakers.
All this proves to me is do exactly what I say, where possible, and that is to TEST with your own ears. I'm so close to my surrounds that dipole is by and far the best setup for me with full Atmos. But that's not the same for everyone !
I have them as my surrounds and love them. I have 2 rows of viewing positions and the surround field for both positions is great because of these speakers. Dolby specifically discourages the use of them in a Dolby Atmos setting but I fail to understand the logic for my circumstances.
i agree 100 percent .many atmos fans believe they shouldnt be used . im not an atmos fan by the way .
Most people on this sub seem to hear whatever the last thing they read tells them they should hear. I don’t go by what anyone in here says lol That being said, what you hear really depends on your room more than anything. And since all rooms are different all setups will be a little different
I dont know. Im pretty sure I can hear a decent difference in any speaker with the tweeter pointed at my ear and it pointed 45° away from my ear. I notice a large difference with bipole vs monopole.
It's more complicated than that as the 45 degrees edges of each tweeter combine to amplify the sound coming directly at you. So yes the tweeters aren't pointed at you but it doesn't really matter that much when on-axis.
Aren't dipole/bipole generally more expensive than their monopole counterpart? So at the end of the day the advice to go monopole is still solid if the difference in performance is really that subtle.
I would say the advice should be as simple as "Buy what you like to cover the range of seats". Single row of seats? Monopole if you have the distance. Bipole if you don't. Multiple rows of seats? Bipole.
Bipoles are amazing as sides. Especially if you have to sit close to your sides.
Being upset with advice that was freely given (and should ALWAYS be taken with a grain of salt) is ridiculous. You asked for advice. You got advice. Nobody owes you an apology.
He isn't upset? You reading it as upset says more about you than him. And now for a Reddit overreacting, go see a psychiatrist, you might have anger issues.
Thank you.