i also talk about the listening position as important as well. i guess you missed that.

i do not think that people can get good surround sound from the speakers being too close together.

7.1 is "generally" for larger rooms, but that does not in any way mean that it is NOT for normal sized rooms. ill concede that much, as i have before.

also I have not touched upon the lack of 7.1 material available, last time i checked it was only BEGINNING to be produced with 6.1. thus, most titles are 5.1 and the 6th and 7th channels are duplicates of the 4th and 5th, which lends itself to stadium type of seating (or multiple rows) in which there is a larger listening area. if there is no difference between the 1st and 2nd surround sound "row", there will be no "side" sounds and no "rear" sounds, instead it will be all rear. hearing the same sound coming from two different places in a room as an effect will not enhance the experience (in fact, if not properly setup, has a greater chance to lessen it), and definitely would not be a big improvement over 5.1 speakers. and if the material is encoded for 6.1, then the "rear center" channel is split between the 2 rears which is not ideal, seeing as the sound was intended to come from the middle rear.

its so easy to get off topic, but the jist of what i have been saying is that 7.1 is fine and dandy, BUT the cost vs reward right now is low. if i was wiring, i would wire for anything possible. if i was buying, i would not buy 7.1 unless i had a large enough room (or listening area) to appreciate it, and i planned on scouring dvds for discs encoded with the likes of es or ex.

i am talking from personal experience as well as audio knowledge, and i have found that what i said holds true.

i guess if sound could travel the speed of light placement wouldnt matter, but alas the laws of the universe make it travel a slower and that enables us to detect its movement.

------------------
This post has been brought to you by curegeorg, thanks for reading.

to answer your question murphy, no i wouldnt bother with 6.1, and no you wouldnt gain much. if you are considering more than 5.1, 7.1 is the better choice for the future (for now you wont see much of a difference though).

------------------
This post has been brought to you by curegeorg, thanks for reading.

What does source material have to do with it? I've been running a 7.1 set-up for the last 8 years. In fact, the 7.1 processes I mentioned earlier (from Lexicon, Meridian, Fosgate) all existed before consumers had access to discrete 5.1 DD and DTS material. Discrete 7.1 source material has never been a prerequisite for 7.1-speaker playback. No offense, but this makes no sense at all. What in the world gave you the idea that the two pairs of surround speakers are playing "duplicates" of the two surround channels? 5.1 to 7.1 surround processing, such as Pro Logic IIx, results in unique content in each of the four surround speakers. Heck, even simple EX/ES decoding puts sounds behind you that are not otherwise heard at your left or right, and vice versa. This definitely enhances playback, at least on my system. Some surround content (ambient sounds: rain, traffic, room reverb) sound better coming from my sides while other surround effects (back-to-front flyovers) appear more natural when they disappear behind me. How does this "lessen" the experience? "Ideal" playback of the surround-back channel is through two speakers, not one speaker. The surround-back channel is not a "rear center" and was definitely not "intended to come from the middle rear". I just finished detailing the reasons why in my first post in this thread. The rewards seem low to you because you're approaching it from multiple false premises. For people who actually understand how 7.1 systems work, the experience is highly rewarding. I've described real world advantages that 7.1 has over 5.1, advantages that are easily audible. If you feel that any of the information I posted is not factual, please point it out.

Best,
Sanjay

otay- so 6.1 is NO improvement. What if my back(preferred) seating area is basically against the wall? can I still benefit from 7.1?
BTW - my surrounds (M&K 150's) are tripoles.
Next- does that mean that I should swith them to dipoles if adding two(2) more back surrounds.
Stumped.

------------------

Personally, I wouldn't bother with a 7.1 speaker set-up if my couch was against the back wall. you really do need some space behind the listening area for proper speaker placement, since the surround-back channel(s) should image from behind you.

However, if you're determined to go 7.1, here's a suggestion. Place the side speakers on the side walls, directly to the sides of the listening area. In yor situation, this will mean the side speakers end up in the rear corners of the room. Elevate them above ear level so that all listeners have a clear line of sight to the speakers.

Move the couch forward a few inches and place the rear speakers on the floor behind the couch, pointing up. This should bathe the back wall in a wash of sound. Will it sound like it's coming from behind you? Kinda, sorta. But, at the very least, they won't sound like they're coming from your sides. Not optimal, but at least you'll have some side vs rear (quasi-rear) imaging in the surround field.

I've only heard a set-up like this once, in the living room of a friend who insisted on a 7.1 set-up despite having his L-shaped sectional in one of the rear corners of the room. He had originally tried ceiling mounting the rear speakers and that didn't sound as good as spreading them out behind the couch.

Like I said, with the couch against the back wall, I'd personally stick to 5.1. With the speakers so close to the back wall, the tripole setting will probably work better than dipole. However, you should try them both ways, and choose what sounds better to you. After all, you're the one that's going to have to live with the set-up, not us. The resulting sound should be one that pleases you most. Experimenting with both settings is the best way to find out which one sounds better in your set-up.

Good Luck,
Sanjay

[This message has been edited by sdurani (edited September 25, 2004).]

I can't agree with that. I had a 6.1 system and disabling the center rear was instantly noticeable and worse. With the center rear on surround information was clearly localized behind the listening position. But the listening position was almost equi-distant between front center and rear center speakers. I suspect a very near rear wall would degrade your experience significantly.

As for the research showing front-rear reversal, OK, whatever. For me, in my setup, with the visual and audible cues in the movies I was watching, it was never an issue. All the speakers were perfectly matched, so maybe that helped.

I'm reasonably sure 7.1 is better, but 6.1, IMO and experience, is worth it over 5.1. For sure.

My couch is about 6 feet from the rear wall so I opted for a 6.1 setup. I just didn't have room for two speakers since the room is a little narrow. I think that it sounds better than 5.1 and don't have any problems with the back-to-front reversal mentioned. I knew about it when I set up the system and was worried, but no problems.

tm