Animo
Emo VIPs
Gotta Love Me!!
Posts: 2,662
|
Post by Animo on Feb 15, 2010 10:49:46 GMT -5
Simple point, if di/bipole odd driver configed speakers are so great, then why not use em for the front main speakers or center channel too? Simple logic. Martin Logan, Def Tech, Linkwitz, Emerald Physics, Jamo, Salk, Nighingale, Nola, Magnepan, Mirage, Ohm just to name a few. There are many companies that specialize in electrostatic, planar, and open baffle designs. All of these will have a dipolar radiating pattern. Def tech and Mirage are Bipolar. To the best of my knowledge, all of these manufacturers make these as main speakers.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Feb 15, 2010 15:22:33 GMT -5
Simple point, if di/bipole odd driver configed speakers are so great, then why not use em for the front main speakers or center channel too? Simple logic. Martin Logan, Def Tech, Linkwitz, Emerald Physics, Jamo, Salk, Nighingale, Nola, Magnepan, Mirage, Ohm just to name a few. There are many companies that specialize in electrostatic, planar, and open baffle designs. All of these will have a dipolar radiating pattern. Def tech and Mirage are Bipolar. To the best of my knowledge, all of these manufacturers make these as main speakers. OK, most of those openbaffle designs are still 180 degree radiating(full range no less). The ERD's are not and they do not radiate 180 degrees on axis. You have a single small 5.25" driver on the face, and 2 opposing tweeters angled off axis from the midrange driver. Again the ERD's do not have the same full range abilities or response curve as say a 6.2.
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Feb 15, 2010 15:27:50 GMT -5
This is true, but they do what they do very well and in smaller rooms in particular and especially with lower budgets they may well be a better option than e.g. a similarly priced/easy to install fully direct/larger speaker. It may also be that some folks PREFER a more diffuse sound from their sides.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Feb 15, 2010 15:45:53 GMT -5
This is true, but they do what they do very well and in smaller rooms in particular and especially with lower budgets they may well be a better option than e.g. a similarly priced/easy to install fully direct/larger speaker. It may also be that some folks PREFER a more diffuse sound from their sides. Im smaller rooms do you really need to diffuse the sound? The logic here is that we are only talking about basically a row or 2 of couches or chairs. Again I can see some limited use for them, like budget(as mentioned)and lack of placement issues, but if the budget and placement issues isnt a concern, there is no reason to go with them over a traditional monitor, and they won't have any advantages. See what I am getting at? Since we are dealing with full lossless 5/7 channel discreet sound output I really wouldnt want to go from a a pinpoint sound(especially for an encoding that requires it) to the front left, then pan back to the rear left and have the sound diffused when it should literally be pointed to the rear somewhere. If the sound needs to be diffused to the left of your or left back etc. then your going to be getting information from both the front left and rear left/back surround channels in differing amplitude levels mixed together to create the effect.
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Feb 15, 2010 16:23:15 GMT -5
I again have to agree 100% with ntran on this one I have tried different types of speakers for surrounds and fond that at least all four speakers L&R fronts and L&R surround should be the same direct radiating speakers for all the same reasons ntran has stated there just is no comparison in SQ control imaging and realism that a matching direct radiating surround speaker can do if you do not believe ntran or me then try it your self and let your ears decide if where wrong I think you will be surprised though, but I`m not saying di/bipole are not good or can`t sound good just direct will in most cases sound/do better
|
|
Animo
Emo VIPs
Gotta Love Me!!
Posts: 2,662
|
Post by Animo on Feb 15, 2010 16:42:44 GMT -5
I said, when Quad was in vogue. that would put it at the early 70s to early 80s Even when I got my first home theater, and added the 5th speaker, it was no where near as good as it is today. Again, I mention the fact that it blends better and seems far more seamless, than it did back then....now there are better speakers, better electronics, better technology. OK, so what your basically saying is that these 5 3 way speakers were done up in the late 70's/80's during the time when there was no dedicated surround format movies? As there wasn't back in the 70's and early 80's. Pro Logic encoding was poor at best. And Pro logic encoding became widespread available to the mass market home enthusiast when? Your "3 way" speakers didnt "blend" well because of: A. Poor speaker design and implementation. B. Poor materials, drivers and parts. C. Poor encoded media D. Poor electronics E. All of the above? So are you telling me all these new IMAX and stadium commercial movie theatres with up to date electronics and direct radiating speaker arrays don't blend well when you pay your $20 bucks for popcorn and movie ticket pass? Trying to compare experience and technology from the 70's and 80's to today is absolutely 100% absurd. Agreed comparing old technology to today's technology is like comparing an oil lamp with a laser. Your points about my original speakers, the answer could easily be all of the above, based on the advances in technology. Don't get me wrong, I thought at one time, possibly stoned off my ass, that listening to Edgar Winters' Frankenstein jumping around sporadically from speaker to speaker, was pretty awesome. But using recollection, and looking back from what I have now, to what I had then, and it is definitely night & day. Don't forget, 40 years ago, it was difficult at best to get matching tolerances on drivers, magnets, coils, capacitors, inductors, etc. Today, it's almost, but not quite, the norm.
|
|
|
Post by buckethead on Feb 15, 2010 21:38:04 GMT -5
Ok placed my order got 3 erm 6.3 and 3 upa-1's in the mail. Will let you guys know what i think when they arrive
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Feb 16, 2010 12:02:56 GMT -5
This is true, but they do what they do very well and in smaller rooms in particular and especially with lower budgets they may well be a better option than e.g. a similarly priced/easy to install fully direct/larger speaker. It may also be that some folks PREFER a more diffuse sound from their sides. Im smaller rooms do you really need to diffuse the sound? The logic here is that we are only talking about basically a row or 2 of couches or chairs. Again I can see some limited use for them, like budget(as mentioned)and lack of placement issues, but if the budget and placement issues isnt a concern, there is no reason to go with them over a traditional monitor, and they won't have any advantages. See what I am getting at? Since we are dealing with full lossless 5/7 channel discreet sound output I really wouldnt want to go from a a pinpoint sound(especially for an encoding that requires it) to the front left, then pan back to the rear left and have the sound diffused when it should literally be pointed to the rear somewhere. If the sound needs to be diffused to the left of your or left back etc. then your going to be getting information from both the front left and rear left/back surround channels in differing amplitude levels mixed together to create the effect. In this case I mean diffused so it is not blasting straight in your ear, not that it is spread so far as to cover multiple rows of seating - in the case of small rooms, this is a plus. I do not find the ERD-1 (in bi-pole mode) to lose any positioning of defined effects. Rain is very ambient/surrounding, gun-shots and panning effect are precisely positioned and smooth.
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Feb 16, 2010 12:07:58 GMT -5
I again have to agree 100% with ntran on this one I have tried different types of speakers for surrounds and fond that at least all four speakers L&R fronts and L&R surround should be the same direct radiating speakers for all the same reasons ntran has stated there just is no comparison in SQ control imaging and realism that a matching direct radiating surround speaker can do if you do not believe ntran or me then try it your self and let your ears decide if where wrong I think you will be surprised though, but I`m not saying di/bipole are not good or can`t sound good just direct will in most cases sound/do better I'm not disagreeing either, I am quite sure that in a suitable room where mounting is possible and there is enough space between the listener and the speaker it will be better. But it is not always practical and certainly in the Emotiva raange will cost you in the order of $250 more per pair which is not a small amount for many folks. I may well go for more 6.3s or maybe 6.2s when I get my dedicated theatre, but in the current room, matched size (to fronts) direct speakers are not going to work. I believe this is also the case for many folks and that the price/practicality benefit outweighs the potential improvement in SQ. Or as mentioned, some people may even prefer a less localised sound even if it is not "correct" or as the director intended. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Feb 16, 2010 12:12:49 GMT -5
Ok placed my order got 3 erm 6.3 and 3 upa-1's in the mail. Will let you guys know what i think when they arrive Are you Mr. Buckethead featured in the video or a fan therof? Nice riffs/guitar.
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Feb 16, 2010 15:34:40 GMT -5
I again have to agree 100% with ntran on this one I have tried different types of speakers for surrounds and fond that at least all four speakers L&R fronts and L&R surround should be the same direct radiating speakers for all the same reasons ntran has stated there just is no comparison in SQ control imaging and realism that a matching direct radiating surround speaker can do if you do not believe ntran or me then try it your self and let your ears decide if where wrong I think you will be surprised though, but I`m not saying di/bipole are not good or can`t sound good just direct will in most cases sound/do better I'm not disagreeing either, I am quite sure that in a suitable room where mounting is possible and there is enough space between the listener and the speaker it will be better. But it is not always practical and certainly in the Emotiva raange will cost you in the order of $250 more per pair which is not a small amount for many folks. I may well go for more 6.3s or maybe 6.2s when I get my dedicated theatre, but in the current room, matched size (to fronts) direct speakers are not going to work. I believe this is also the case for many folks and that the price/practicality benefit outweighs the potential improvement in SQ. Or as mentioned, some people may even prefer a less localised sound even if it is not "correct" or as the director intended. ;-) That`s a very good point and probably why most people chose that route (di/bipole )
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Feb 16, 2010 15:53:43 GMT -5
I again have to agree 100% with ntran on this one I have tried different types of speakers for surrounds and fond that at least all four speakers L&R fronts and L&R surround should be the same direct radiating speakers for all the same reasons ntran has stated there just is no comparison in SQ control imaging and realism that a matching direct radiating surround speaker can do if you do not believe ntran or me then try it your self and let your ears decide if where wrong I think you will be surprised though, but I`m not saying di/bipole are not good or can`t sound good just direct will in most cases sound/do better I'm not disagreeing either, I am quite sure that in a suitable room where mounting is possible and there is enough space between the listener and the speaker it will be better. But it is not always practical and certainly in the Emotiva raange will cost you in the order of $250 more per pair which is not a small amount for many folks. I may well go for more 6.3s or maybe 6.2s when I get my dedicated theatre, but in the current room, matched size (to fronts) direct speakers are not going to work. I believe this is also the case for many folks and that the price/practicality benefit outweighs the potential improvement in SQ. Or as mentioned, some people may even prefer a less localised sound even if it is not "correct" or as the director intended. ;-) I agree with the budget and mounting options available for choosing ERD's, even if thats what you want in sound(ie: washed out)even if its not the way the channel is encoded. Never disagreed with any of those points. But if the space/mouting options and budget permit it, I do feel matching identical speakers for all channels are the best route without question.
|
|
|
Post by buckethead on Feb 16, 2010 20:53:23 GMT -5
Ok placed my order got 3 erm 6.3 and 3 upa-1's in the mail. Will let you guys know what i think when they arrive Are you Mr. Buckethead featured in the video or a fan therof? Nice riffs/guitar. lol no its not me just a fan for along time
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Feb 17, 2010 6:09:36 GMT -5
Are you Mr. Buckethead featured in the video or a fan therof? Nice riffs/guitar. lol no its not me just a fan for along time ;D
|
|
|
Post by buckethead on Feb 19, 2010 21:14:17 GMT -5
Picked up my 3 6.3s and 3 upa1s today from fedex everything was in good order. Build quailty is pretty nice for the price range. Could not hook up the amps(rca cable are still lost in the mail) but they sound very nice just with the h/k 254 pushing them. Big upgrade over my klipsch fronts and center. No more nose bleeds from the horns at high volume!!!
|
|
|
Post by Dan Laufman on Feb 19, 2010 21:33:41 GMT -5
buckethead, Build quality is only pretty nice for the money??
That hurt! Man, you're tough.
Happy listening! Big Dan
|
|
|
Post by buckethead on Feb 20, 2010 0:22:28 GMT -5
buckethead, Build quality is only pretty nice for the money?? That hurt! Man, you're tough. Happy listening! Big Dan Ok ok its pretty damn nice . I might move to a more 50/50 music/movie stance after listening to these things stretch their legs a bit. Very impressive front stage. I cant wait to get the upa1s piped in.
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,921
|
Post by hemster on Feb 20, 2010 0:46:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Indycolts on Feb 20, 2010 9:53:57 GMT -5
I loved the ten commandments!!!
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Feb 20, 2010 10:46:32 GMT -5
Ok ok its pretty damn nice . I might move to a more 50/50 music/movie stance after listening to these things stretch their legs a bit. Very impressive front stage. I cant wait to get the upa1s piped in. >:(No respect. We should charge twice as much. Our competitors do...often for half as much product. Some people still associate price with status... Yes, the FOOLISH ones. It really pains me to hear people bragging about how MUCH they paid for something rather than how little. Backwards! I think the build quality is super solid by any measure, factor in the price and it is incredible value.
|
|