Is there documentation that the Klippel mode mentioned in the review effectively simulates a 2 pi in-wall mount? I recall that when Harman tested a popular bookshelf in wall and on wall, they built a decent sized wall in an anechoic chamber, and even then there were some concerns about how accurate the data was (though apparently good enough to valid the predicted result). Just curious. Your results suggest the speaker was designed to account for increased bass, and I don’t see how this would have anything to do with the high frequency problems.If you mean the edges of the baffle I built, Klippel NFS eliminates that effect. If you mean that of the speaker itself, yes, that would be there.
I bolted four JBL LSR305s to adjustable brackets on the ceiling and never looked back.Sometimes I think it would be enough to take sue elac dbr62 for the same amount and attach them to two wall mounts pointing downwards.
Atmos speakers almost never have the quality commensurate with their cost.
Thanks for the review
Both the tweeter and mid-woofer are angled in this case. That’s very different from examples where only the tweeter is designed to be angled and rotated independently from the mid-woofer. With a speaker like this JBL where it is designed to be listed to with the speakers aligned toward the listener at 15 degrees, how can Klippel account for that when the baffle is at 90 deg?Indeed. I think a lot of these in-ceiling speakers are designed for rear 5.1 setup when ceiling mounted. There, I guess angling the tweeter makes sense. For height speakers, I think "shower" design may be better with non-angled drivers. I should say there is a non-angled version of this speaker as well.
This seems to be a very reasonable approach that I have seen others use as well. Either a quality in wall or in ceiling speaker and build an angled baffle in ceiling.They sound pretty decent to my ears. Looking forward to see the tests.
That’s what I used on my system. At 45 degrees they behave excellent and even at 60 degrees they are perfectly useable. I tilted them about 10 degrees using a custom frame, which helped even more.
Here is the SPINORAMA of their top of the range model that I use for LCR. I use this model on the ceiling.
I may be on my own island here, but I do not expect much from my surrounds and heights beyond being convincing noise makers. I do expect the front three to be high fidelity.
If helicopter blades sound like helicopter blades, fireworks sound like fireworks, and raindrops sound like raindrops, I do not expect any more than that. That said, I rarely listen to multichannel music.
No, you are not.
I only owned two DVD-Audio discs when I had Paradigm Studio 40s and a CC470 up front and whatever Paradigm in-ceilings the sales guy recommended for 5.1 in 2003. The layout of the only room in our home that could be used for home theater precluded anything but in-ceilings for the surround. One was a Steely Dan disc and it sounded pretty good in surround. The other was a Doobie Brothers that had been remixed to put the listener in the center of the band. The bass player ended up in the right rear surround. That was not good.
I am aware of the difference in approach and requirements. The results are very much the same for me, however.The difference is between Atmos and legacy Dolby Digital/DTS tracks is that Atmos "is mixed using discrete, full-range audio objects that may move around anywhere in three-dimensional space. With this in mind, overhead speakers should complement the frequency response, output, and power-handling capabilities of the listener-level speakers". So the requirements are definitely different for Atmos surrounds vs legacy Dolby/DTS surrounds.
Funny how opinion and experience can differ On something like this. I am using a combination of 7 JBL 6332/ LSR32 (3 way, 12 inch ported woofer) crossing over at 50/60hz and my opinion couldn’t be more different. Watching dynamic movie content has never been better. For example something like the John Wick movies with gunshots coming from all over. My experience has tracked that the better the speakers at each location, the better the overall experience has been.I am aware of the difference in approach and requirements. The results are very much the same for me, however.
I have a pair of Revel M106s in reserve. I have used them in place of my Polk 65-RT in-wall side surround speakers for comparison testing with Atmos films. Once fully integrated with Audyssey, I could not really tell any difference. They were still just short-term noisemakers. Test films were Dune, Fury Road, Spectre, and The Force Awakens.
That said, it is possible the Polks meet the requirements. They do have 6.5" woofers, 1" tweeters, full frequency response down to below 60Hz, and are rated for >100W.
The point is, I do not see the need to spend a lot of money on surrounds nor heights, even for Atmos. I just let Audyssey have its way with the surrounds and heights and love the fact that I spent $99 each on all of them with very similar results to speakers costing much more. And, mine are all in-walls painted to match their respective surfaces, so the lovely lady approves (even from the kitchen!).
Again, I do not listen to much multichannel music, where a definite difference may be heard.
Indeed. I imagine your system sounds amazing! I also imagine this JBL ceiling speaker is good enough for 95% of people once DRC is applied.Funny how opinion and experience can differ On something like this. I am using a combination of 7 JBL 6332/ LSR32 (3 way, 12 inch ported woofer) crossing over at 50/60hz and my opinion couldn’t be more different. Watching dynamic movie content has never been better. For example something like the John Wick movies with gunshots coming from all over. My experience has tracked that the better the speakers at each location, the better the overall experience has been.