I have been using my 950/7100 with 5 channels only. I would like to know from those who are using 7 channels if it is worth adding the extra two speakers and what program material/movies are best with 7 channels.

Raider,

Yes it's worth it - but it's not a huge improvement. Not subtle either. Somewhere in between.

Any program material that sounds good in 5.1 should translate well to 7.1. And of course DD EX and DTS ES source material will show it off the best.

Since you only need to add two speakers to make a go of it, if you have some old "cheap" ones kicking around you could try them first. A pair of old RS Minimum 7's for example. (Don't we all have a pair or two of them tucked away somewhere?) If you then like the effect, jump in with something to match your other surrounds (or compliment them - whichever works best for you. ie. I won't get into the whole di vs bi vs mono-pole discussion.)

Have fun.

Jeff Mackwood

7 is great for large rooms, so so for smaller ones.

That's a concern I have too. How big is the listening area for everyone? With a smaller room, you just won't need it.

HOLD ON, DO I HAVE SOMEONE THAT AGREES WITH ME!!!!!!!!!! TAKE IT BACK NOW BEFORE MY COMPUTER EXPLODES!!!! LOL

As long as you have a decent amount of room behind your seating area, the size of the room isn't important when considering a 7.1 set-up. For example: you could be in a very large room but have your couch against the back wall; a situation which wouldn't lend itself to a 7.1 set-up. Is it worth going 7.1? I think so. There are three advantages to going beyond a 5.1-speaker set-up: localization, stability and envelopment.

Having speakers at your sides and separate speakers behind you means you can get more exacting localization in the surround field than you can with 2 surround speakers. Some surround content sounds better at your sides (e.g., ambient effects, like rain) while other surround effects sound better when they end up behind you (e.g., front to back fly-overs). Not so easy to do with only 2 surrounds.

The best part about the improvement in localization is that it comes better stability. For example: no matter where you're sitting on your couch, sound intended to come from behind you will always appear to come from there; not some side-ish, rear-ish direction. No magic involved, just a pair of speakers physically located behind you (makes it hard for those sounds to come from any other direction). Again, it's difficult, if not impossible, to get this level of stability with just 2 surround speakers.

Finally, 4 speakers will 'surround' you better than 2 speakers can. If you listen to music in surround, you'll notice the difference in envelopment. Also, movement around the surround field will will be smoother with the additional speakers.

As for movies to listen to in 7.1, the most obvious choices would be ones with EX/ES soundtracks, where a surround-back channel has been specifically encoded into the mix. There are about 120 or so movies with EX encoding; enough to keep you busy for a while. Here's a link to a thorough and well updated list of EX/ES DVDs.

Best,
Sanjay

if you dont have enough space between the 4th/5th and 6th/7th speakers, then there is no point. where you are seated is obviously key. you can use bi-pole, di-pole speakers in a position beside you to create sound behind, in front, and through your listening area. so 7.1 is like i said, only worthwhile for larger rooms where the greater seperation between speakers allows for a more natural recreation of soundtrack.

that is contradicting, because if you had a small room you could never have a decent amount of space behind your seating area and therefore would be wasting money on 2 more speakers.

The amount of space you have behind you depends on how close you set to the front. And by the way what is a "large" room.

When we say "size" obviously the spacial arrangement should be considered with that. There needs to be a separation between the rear and side speakers, otherwise it is kind of a waste. Take a look at the front 3. You have to spread the mains out wider for the center channel, right? If the mains are only a few ft apart what's the point of the center? It'll help some, but is it really worth the money? When the mains are spread out there will be a more obvious hole inbetween them, so the center channel will really help out. The same idea applies to the side speakers.

I don't see it as contradictory at all -- the living room at my old house wasn't very big, but the way it was laid out I had the couch perpendicular to the long axis and about nine feet from the rear wall. It was a narrow enough space that it didn't lend itself to 7.1, but I was able to get a pretty nice 6.1 arrangement working because of the distance from rear wall to seating position.

------------------
gonk -- 950 Review | LFM-1 Review | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | Saloon Links

Obviously the room wasn't all that small. It really depends on the arrangement of the room. For some it just doesn't add much. Actually, that statement does help. gonk went with 6.1 instead of 7.1 because the room wasn't large enough to warrant it.

hopefully no one is in a tiny little theatre room with 7.1. you shouldnt nit pick, large or small, but just know that adequate space is needed for better seperation of channels.

I think curegeorg's third post in this thread hit on the key factor for deciding if moving up from 5.1 is worthwhile: distance between surround speakers. If you identify the best locations in the room for the sixth or sixth and seventh speakers and find that the surrounds are ending up clustered together to the point where it just looks sort of odd (i.e. a speaker every couple of feet across the back of the room), it's typically not going to be worthwhile.

------------------
gonk -- 950 Review | LFM-1 Review | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | Saloon Links

Example, a monstrosity such as this . Yes it's a computer system, but that helps with the point of spacial arrangement. Who really puts their computer speakers more than like 3-5 ft away? I have a 5.1 setup spread a little around the room and it's borderline as to whether the center channel is really needed. Like we're kind of coming to. There should be a gap to fill before you try to fill it.

[This message has been edited by JT Clark (edited May 17, 2004).]

The only reason I mentioned room size vs seating location is because I didn't want the original poster to automatically assume that his room was too small for a 7.1 set-up. Besides, the point of adding surround-back channels is to have rear vs side localization in the surround field and to fill the sonic hole behind listeners that occurs with traditional side placement of the surrounds.

As I mentioned earlier, I've seen large rooms that were poor candidates for 7.1 because the couch was against the back wall. Likewise, I've seen small rooms that were able to pull of 7.1 very well: a friend of mine converted a spare bedroom into a recording studio. All 7 speakers were a little further than arms length away (TDL nearfield monitors). Since they were nowhere near the room boundries, the imaging was superb.

So, irrespective of room size, seating location is the important factor in determining whether a room is a good candidate for 7.1 or not.

As for distance between the two pairs of surround speakers; it's a balancing act. You want side vs rear separation for distinct localization when watching movies; but you also want side and rear blending for better envelopment when listening to music. Requires listening and experimentation, but the results are worth it.

Best,
Sanjay

as i posted earlier, you can achieve a lot by using bi-pole/di-pole speakers as your 4th and 5th, a lot of times, so much so that 6th and 7th are not that noticeable (unless you have a lot of space between the 2 sets). dont, you, draw me into posting anymore on this topic. lol

Does it matter if the surrounds are bi-amped or not?

I think Jeff's reply was very common sense. One can debate endlessly about some things, as JT, tongue-in-cheek, might have us do based on his last remark, but if you have access to or can borrow another one or two speakers, even relatively inexpensive ones, for a test, you can experiment to find out whether 6.1 or 7.1 makes a difference to you in your setting. Not to put anyone's opinion down, but the debate is largely moot.

yes largely, for large rooms, completely for small ones.

I have a 16' x 14' Theater room. My 4 & 5 diplar surrounds are in the ceiling 3 and 1/2 feet from the rear, and 2 feet in from the sides. The couch is 2 feet from the rear wall, and the large screen (55")TV is on the 16' long wall. The 6 & 7 dipoles are one the rear wall 2 and 1/2 feet from the ceiling, and equidistant from the 4 & 5.
This arrangement is trully fine for 7 channels. All speakers are Monitor Audio Silver's.