Speakers for Theater vs. 5.1 Music

soiset
soiset Posts: 724
edited April 2006 in Speakers
I understand that while theater surround sound is better with bipole/dipole speakers, 5.1 channel music is better with all identical direct radiating speakers. Is this the consensus?

To get great listening for both, I am considering the following setup:

Theater:
LS50's front left and right
PSW1200 front left and right, behind the LS50's
LS/fx side and rear surrounds
CS350LS stacked (above and below the screen) front center

5.1 Music
LS50's front left and right (same for theater)
LS50 center (would be immediately behind projector screen when not used)
LS50 left and right surround, directly beneath the side surround LS/fx's
PSW1200 front left and right, behind the LS50's (same for theater)

Should the 5.1 music speakers all be at the same height?

I would need some kind of speaker selection switch, and I could definitely use some pointers in that direction. Currently I am using a Yamaha RXV-2500 seven channel, 130 WPC receiver, but I think I should move up to as many as four stereo amps, and let the 2500 remain as the preamp/processor. Any pointers?
Post edited by soiset on

Comments

  • soiset
    soiset Posts: 724
    edited April 2006
    I have at least partly answered my questions with this series of articles:
    http://stereophile.com/musicintheround/854/index.html
  • kingkip
    kingkip Posts: 401
    edited April 2006
    Bi-poles/di-poles are not necessarily better for HT. Many polkies around here use direct radiators for it, myself included. It depends on your room. I found that I only like di-poles better when I am sitting against the back wall and the speaks are right above my head. If there is room behind me for direct radiators (towers preferably) I find that to be much more convincing for surround sound, and also fits for 5.1 music without the need for speaker switching.
    There are two ways to argue with women. Both of them are wrong.
  • kingkip
    kingkip Posts: 401
    edited April 2006
    I forgot, why 4 stereo amps? There are plenty of great 5 and 7 channel amps out there and would reduce rack space/interconnect clutter. The yammy, I think, works great as a pre. Definately not the high end solution, but that is how I use my 2400 and I like it a lot.
    There are two ways to argue with women. Both of them are wrong.
  • soiset
    soiset Posts: 724
    edited April 2006
    1 stereo amp: 2 centers
    1 stereo amp: Front left and right
    2 stereo amps: side and rear surrounds.

    There are great multi-channel amps out there, for great amounts of money. I can find good stereo amps on the cheap, and I can replace two-channel amps more easily. I'm not too worried about rack space.

    I'll also use the Yamaha to drive ever-decreasing numbers of speakers as I gradually find amps.

    As for direct vs dipole, I think it depends on the material. We watched The Constant Gardener last night, and I think that's a dipole kind of movie. Action flicks are probably more exciting with direct radiating.

    The problem, though, is that for music, all the speakers should be at the same height, but for movies, the surrounds should be well above the ears.