This is true but the off axis is already pretty good though and arguably better than the on axis. I think it should still be fine regardless if its angled or not. I agree that an angled design makes sense, but I think these should be fine regardless of placement, the only thing that could be better is if the bass response was tipped up a little more instead of rolled off, for atmos channels Its not the biggest issue, but it sure would be nice if they did.I hate to rain on everybody's parade...but allow me to rain on the parade just a little bit.
This is indeed a very nice speaker. Unfortunately, no amount of excellence from a speaker can make up for the fundamental problems caused by pointing it the wrong way. There are very good reasons virtually nobody in the industry recommends not aiming atmos speakers at the audience. Doing so will reduce sound quality significantly.
The first issue is if the speaker is EQ'd for flat direct sound at the MPL, it will be sending elevated HF energy into a large portion of the room. Yes, the direct sound is the most important, but when so much HF energy is sent into the room (especially with 4 or 6 of them) that can be too much. The recommendation is typically to not try and get flat direct sound at the MLP but to strike a compromise, living with duller direct sound at the MLP to keep from overwhelming the room with HF energy (also a common issue for wide channels).
The second issue is covering the audience with similar sound from the speaker. Multichannel/immersive is typically aimed at being capable of providing a good experience to more than one person. If this speaker was pointed at the MLP, think about what happens when you move to different seats--you go from 0 degrees to 10, 20, 30 degrees off axis and...almost nothing happens! You still get great sound! Very slightly lowered HF but not much, and you still get pretty good, pretty flat direct sound. That would be fantastic.
But when the MLP is already starting at 40 degrees off axis, movement has much larger consequences. You are now moving to 50, 60, 70 degrees off axis. This results in a pretty massive drop in the HF giving a very dull sound for that seat. But if you move the other way, you're going to 30, 20 and 10 degrees giving you significantly elevated highs and a shrill sound. That's not what you want.
That's a massive difference in the sound of the speaker depending where you sit. Not ideal. Not even good.
I implore KEF to make a version of these with an angled baffle--something similar to the Andrew Jones setup shown earlier. Yes, that will probably screw up the spin, making it look much less pretty. But it will sound so much better in the real world when used as a ceiling speaker for immersive audio.
They already do, it looks quite extreme
, the alleged -6db point is a little lower at 28hz as well, Not 100% sure but it looks like maybe its a 3 way coaxial design? We'll have to see if anyone ever does a high end build w/ them and sends em in for measuring.
us.kef.com
If no one is sitting there, then it is not that material. The floor in many theaters is carpeted which means it absorbs a lot of the on-axis high frequency energy. What will bounce around will be off axis response which would be similar to what the seating area gets.
. Just arguing on basis of theory.
Yeah, but it's getting close to something of a "reach."
Unless it's a one seat theater, somebody will be at least closer to on-axis and somebody is going to be farther off axis. When the starting point is 40 degrees, they'll get a much larger variation from the MLP than if the starting point was 0 degrees.
Same issue exists and then some with surround speakers which in smaller rooms, are much closer to some people than others. Cross firing is the classic intensity trading method so I can see why they praise it.
So what is the best way to install them on the ceiling?Same issue exists and then some with surround speakers which in smaller rooms, are much closer to some people than others. Cross firing is the classic intensity trading method so I can see why they praise it.
The problem with angled drivers is not that they are angled. It is that by doing so, they create reflections/comb filtering. And have poor on-axis response to boot. Take the KEF in this review and angle it and you have a proper version of that. Here is the response of Klipsch I recently measured:
That on-axis response in red/blue is not great and off axis is horrible.
Why not just mount regular speakers? That's always going to be better than ones that were designed to fit in a tight space, all else equal.
Yeah, I agree with all that. It's a very difficult application for a speaker. In order to perform well, it really needs to be pointed at the listeners. But by doing so, you're generally going to have to live with poorer performance. I think this KEF would be fantastic for this application if angled--but it would likely measure worse. However, the tradeoff would be worth it for the best overall performance.
Hopefully sooner than that!
Looked at this one, $2,500 per in-ceiling speaker is more than Ci3160 in-walls cost ($2K ea). Even discounted, hard to understand the pricing. Also, the KEF reference theaters I’ve found online all use the Ci200RR, haven’t found one yet that even mentions this Ci250RRM. I’m sure it’s great, with a 10” woofer and meta materials, but 2.5x the Ci200RR seems pretty niche.
Probably makes more sense when not using a subwoofer! But in a home theater with four subs these might be overkill!
