Bipole/dipole vs direct surround speakers?

[bigblue235]

I've recently spent far too long reading about bipole/dipole surround speakers. I'm now more confused than I was when I started reading. From reading numerous AV sites (forums, manufacturers, THX, Dolby, etc) there seems to be a rather large difference of opinion on whether these types of speakers, or direct models, are best.

I had been thinking of Monitor Audio RX speakers, and they recommended their FX range for all surround channels. I don't mind going for 7.1, so I had been thinking of FX on the side wall with direct radiating at the back, but they said I should go with 4xFX. However, my local hi-fi dealer, who has always advised me well, is quite adamant that I'd be better served with direct speakers. Funnily enough, MA sell bipoles, the dealer normally doesn't!

Could anyone please put me out of my misery and give me a sensible explanation as to the benefits or otherwise or bipole/dipoles?

For info, I'm just about to have an garage/extension built and I'll be using it for a cinema (although I imagine when we sell the house it will be returned to a garage!) so the room will be, well, kinda garage sized and shaped. I don't mind 5.1 or 7.1, whatever would work best. The speakers can be bolted anywhere, no partner-friendly compromises need to be made (she gets control of the living room!).

Thanks

 

[Lost Angeles]

bigblue235:

I've recently spent far too long reading about bipole/dipole surround speakers. I'm now more confused than I was when I started reading. From reading numerous AV sites (forums, manufacturers, THX, Dolby, etc) there seems to be a rather large difference of opinion on whether these types of speakers, or direct models, are best.

I had been thinking of Monitor Audio RX speakers, and they recommended their FX range for all surround channels. I don't mind going for 7.1, so I had been thinking of FX on the side wall with direct radiating at the back, but they said I should go with 4xFX. However, my local hi-fi dealer, who has always advised me well, is quite adamant that I'd be better served with direct speakers. Funnily enough, MA sell bipoles, the dealer normally doesn't!

Could anyone please put me out of my misery and give me a sensible explanation as to the benefits or otherwise or bipole/dipoles?

For info, I'm just about to have an garage/extension built and I'll be using it for a cinema (although I imagine when we sell the house it will be returned to a garage!) so the room will be, well, kinda garage sized and shaped. I don't mind 5.1 or 7.1, whatever would work best. The speakers can be bolted anywhere, no partner-friendly compromises need to be made (she gets control of the living room!).

Thanks

The best advantage of Bipole/Dipole speakers and the main reason I bought mine is that they sit flat on the wall behind and above the settee and only stick out 6ins from the wall. With ordinary speakers you may need stands and they may need to be a foot off the wall.
He dosen't sell them so there is no profit in it for him.

 

[Anonymous]

bigblue235:

I've recently spent far too long reading about bipole/dipole surround speakers. I'm now more confused than I was when I started reading. From reading numerous AV sites (forums, manufacturers, THX, Dolby, etc) there seems to be a rather large difference of opinion on whether these types of speakers, or direct models, are best.

I had been thinking of Monitor Audio RX speakers, and they recommended their FX range for all surround channels. I don't mind going for 7.1, so I had been thinking of FX on the side wall with direct radiating at the back, but they said I should go with 4xFX. However, my local hi-fi dealer, who has always advised me well, is quite adamant that I'd be better served with direct speakers. Funnily enough, MA sell bipoles, the dealer normally doesn't!

Could anyone please put me out of my misery and give me a sensible explanation as to the benefits or otherwise or bipole/dipoles?

For info, I'm just about to have an garage/extension built and I'll be using it for a cinema (although I imagine when we sell the house it will be returned to a garage!) so the room will be, well, kinda garage sized and shaped. I don't mind 5.1 or 7.1, whatever would work best. The speakers can be bolted anywhere, no partner-friendly compromises need to be made (she gets control of the living room!).

Thanks

Just to confuse you more , and depending on budget , how about Tripole speakers?

 

[radovantz]

Public cinemas use direct speakers for surround channels.

I think Audyssey setup could help

 

[Sorreltiger]

You may be correct, radovantz, but they use a lot of them, so the overall effect is more like dipole speakers!

 

[Frank Harvey]

You are correct Sorreltiger - cinemas use a bank of surround speakers all along the side walls. MK's Tripole speakers are direct firing speakers, but also have side firing speakers which fire up and down the room, recreating the effect of multiple speakers in cinemas.

 

[bigblue235]

Tripoles are probably out, not due to any dislike of the technology, more due to the fact that (as I should have mentioned earlier!) this system will probably be used for music as much as movies, so I'm looking at ranges which have large-ish floorstanders available for the front pair (B&W 683, MA RX8, etc.). Also, I presume tripoles would be M&K, and a decent M&K set-up is probably going to be too costly for my wallet!

David- If you don't mind me asking, if you were going to do an install of the MA RX range in the sort of garage-type space I've got, what speakers would be your first choice for the surrounds?

 

[Anonymous]

If you go with the MA RX range, definately go with the RXFX, they sit nicely on the side walls and the sound effects / immersion of sound from these in bipole configuration is excellent.

 

[Anonymous]

bigblue235:

I've recently spent far too long reading about bipole/dipole surround speakers. I'm now more confused than I was when I started reading. From reading numerous AV sites (forums, manufacturers, THX, Dolby, etc) there seems to be a rather large difference of opinion on whether these types of speakers, or direct models, are best.

I had been thinking of Monitor Audio RX speakers, and they recommended their FX range for all surround channels. I don't mind going for 7.1, so I had been thinking of FX on the side wall with direct radiating at the back, but they said I should go with 4xFX. However, my local hi-fi dealer, who has always advised me well, is quite adamant that I'd be better served with direct speakers. Funnily enough, MA sell bipoles, the dealer normally doesn't!

Could anyone please put me out of my misery and give me a sensible explanation as to the benefits or otherwise or bipole/dipoles?

For info, I'm just about to have an garage/extension built and I'll be using it for a cinema (although I imagine when we sell the house it will be returned to a garage!) so the room will be, well, kinda garage sized and shaped. I don't mind 5.1 or 7.1, whatever would work best. The speakers can be bolted anywhere, no partner-friendly compromises need to be made (she gets control of the living room!).

Thanks

As tripoles are out ,back to the original question, I have been using Polk Ls/Fx speakers for about 10yrs and found that proper surround speakers are fantastic , so good you dont actually hear them as they are seamless just as they should be a bit like a Sub.

As you propably know If mounted on the sides at 90-110deg you should have them in dipole mode , If at the back select Bi-pole

As the Monitor Audio speakers are a proper FX design I would bet they are great , cant recommend proper designed surrounds enough.

Regards

Andy