Monitor 40's or fxi3's for surround

Posts: 198
edited August 2009 in Speakers
Hey people currently I have a monitor setup
mon50's. Front
cs2 cent
and mon 40 surrounds
I want to buy the fxi3's for surround and sell 40's
but I haven't really heard any dual tweeter surrounds and was wondering if you guys think it makes for better ht experience
Thanks
Post edited by jojomgee on

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Comments

  • Posts: 10,636
    edited August 2009
    I just hooked up some fx's, and if you can place them right for dipole use (at the sides aligned with the listening position), they make a nice improvement over normal speakers. At least they did for me.
    _________________________________________________
    ***\\\\\........................... My Audio Journey ............................./////***

    2008 & 2010 Football Pool WINNER
    SOPA
    Thank God for different opinions. Imagine the world if we all wanted the same woman
  • Posts: 3,702
    edited August 2009
    I don't know how well the FXi3's will be trimbre matched to the Monitor series. It is usually suggested to stick with the same series for all your speakers and not stray to a different line, although I guess the least important in this suggestion would be the surrounds. Any reason why you are wanting to replace the 40's? I use them in my setup and have been very pleased with their performance.

    -Jeff
    HT Rig
    Receiver- Onkyo TX-SR806
    Mains- Polk Audio Monitor 70
    Center- Polk Audio CS2
    Surrounds- Polk Audio TSi 500's :D
    Sub- Polk Audio PSW125
    Retired- Polk Audio Monitor 40's
    T.V.- 60" Sony SXRD KDS-60A2000 LCoS
    Blu-Ray- 80 GB PS3


    2 CH rig (in progress)
    Polk Audio Monitor 10A's :cool:

    It's not that I'm insensitive, I just don't care.. :D
  • Posts: 198
    edited August 2009
    Honestly just curious if bi/dipole makes a difference
    i really don't have any complaints about the 40's
  • Posts: 2,686
    edited August 2009
    I use the FXi3s as surrounds with my Monitor 70s and CS2.

    I love them... No issue as far as them flowing with my Monitors and I like the dipole/bipole option since I had to put them on the sides in my new house (old place they were behind the seating).
  • Posts: 6
    edited August 2009
    I was recently faced with a decision of RTI A3s or FXI A6s for surround in a 5.1 system. Right now I am auditioning the FXI A6s with the option to return them in exchange for the A3s, so I can share some experiences with the FXI A6s that should apply to your situation.

    My room setup is an open floorplan with a combined living room/dining room that opens to a kitchen with the couch against the back wall. That leaves one FXI A6 on a stand in a corner by one side of the couch and another FXI A6 on a stand to the other side of the couch. The A6 positioned in the corner sounds great. The sound is not super directional like a monopole, which I like. Also, with an angular positioning of the A6, the sound hits me both directly and reflected off of the side wall. This seems to work pretty well.

    The second A6 that is facing away from the dining room/kitchen is providing adequate sound, but I am still trying to find a sweet spot for placement. Given my couch placement and room constraints, the sound produced by the speaker does not have that much time to disperse before reaching my listening position. Initially I tried a placement more toward the back wall first with the speaker front aimed in line with the couch and later with the speaker front toed in toward the back wall to try to produce more of an angled back surround effect. Both of these positionings seemed pretty lackluster, particularly given the good surround effect I was getting from the speaker positioned in the corner. Now, I have brought the second FXI A6 more forward so that it is directly in line with my listening position and the sound is a little better.

    I am still looking for a sweet spot on the second FXI A6. However, I will likely keep the FXI A6s because I think the dipole sound is a little better given my room layout and the fact that the surrounds essentially have to be positioned up in my face in my room layout and having monopoles positioned in my face might be more distracting and overpower the fronts.

    Hope this helps your decision.
  • Posts: 198
    edited August 2009
    I have a similar room setup, so thanks for the replies I think I'm gonna try the fxi's
    polk direct has them purty cheap but in white
  • Posts: 8
    edited August 2009
    I am going to replace my Monitor 30 side surrounds and I have been considering fxi speakers as replacement surrounds but my room arrangement dictates the main seats are within 2 feet of the rear wall. So the side surrounds are mounted less than two feet from a corner.

    I suspect for that reason Monitor 40 may be a better choice for me verses the fxi,

    Can anyone tell me if I am correct in this assumption or would the fxi speakers work.
  • Posts: 3,602
    edited August 2009
    I have a pair of f/x 500i's I use for surrounds, kinda by accident though, I bought them on CL for $55.00. They are mounted about 1.5 ft behind the main seating area, I think it sounds great. As you can tell from my sig I have a frankenstein set-up of sorts, it can rock though!
    Polk Audio Surround Bar 360
    Mirage PS-12
    LG BDP-550
    Motorola HD FIOS DVR
    Panasonic 42" Plasma
    XBOX 360[/SIZE]

    Office stuff

    Allied 395 receiver
    Pioneer CDP PD-M430
    RT8t's & Wharfedale Diamond II's[/SIZE]

    Life is one grand, sweet song, so start the music. ~Ronald Reagan
  • Posts: 699
    edited August 2009
    jojomgee wrote: »
    Honestly just curious if bi/dipole makes a difference
    i really don't have any complaints about the 40's

    They make a pretty significant difference IMO. The dipoles create a better sense of spaciousness, and create a more immersive surround sound effect. They sound a lot better than matrixed 7.1 systems to me....dipoles provide a very 'full' sounding rear channel without it getting needlessly loud (that was my main complaint with my old 7.1 set-up). You do lose a bit of the directionality of a monopole system, which is good thing most of the time. Dipoles just seem to disappear into your system.
    My System Showcase!

    Media Room
    Paradigm Studio 60 - Paradigm CC-690 - Paradigm ADP-390 - Epik Empire - Anthem MRX300 - Emotiva XPA-5

    Living-room
    Paradigm MilleniaOne - Rythmik F12GSE - Onkyo TX-SR805 - Adcom 5400

    Headphones
    Sennheiser Momentum Over-Ear - Shure SE215 - Fiio E18 Kunlun
  • Posts: 2,686
    edited August 2009
    mystik610 wrote: »
    They make a pretty significant difference IMO. The dipoles create a better sense of spaciousness, and create a more immersive surround sound effect. They sound a lot better than matrixed 7.1 systems to me....dipoles provide a very 'full' sounding rear channel without it getting needlessly loud (that was my main complaint with my old 7.1 set-up). You do lose a bit of the directionality of a monopole system, which is good thing most of the time. Dipoles just seem to disappear into your system.

    I agree 100%, watching Band of Brothers with them is crazy. :eek:
  • Posts: 481
    edited August 2009
    Fxi3 sound awsome for surround, i did a comparo with M40 preferred the fx for surround sides on a 7.1

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.