No announcement yet.

Narrow HF dispersion for ATMOS height speakers?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Narrow HF dispersion for ATMOS height speakers?

    I am thinking about adding front height speakers to our HT setup. The kids are old enough to enjoy cheesy flicks with overdone surround effects and we're all watching more movies with the current travel and recreational restrictions in place.

    Due to room restrictions, I can't mount these at the ceiling and would have to use angled cabinets atop my front left and right speakers with the sound bouncing off the ceiling towards the listening position.The room is relatively large (24 ft by 30 ft with 9.5 ft ceilings), but the couch is only ~12 ft from our TV.

    If I do go down this route, my thinking is that a larger diameter HF driver may be beneficial. Would the beaming of a single full range driver (e.g. PM 180) be an advantage to localizing the height channels?

    For any of you using bouncy-bounce height channels, any thoughts on whether they are effective or worthwhile? I am not expecting the same performance as ceiling mounts, but wouldn't take on the project if the effects are really marginal.


  • #2
    While not as effective as a ceiling mount, up firing ATMOS is a very convincing concept when done properly. Your thoughts are correct with drivers with a narrow dispersion pattern. Thinking on concepts like comb filtering, 4 small format fullrange drivers arranged in a square will further narrow the pattern beginning at the freq who’s quarter wavelength matches the center to center distance of the driver.

    The spec frequency range for overhead channels is 100-10khz so when selecting a fullrange driver take that into consideration.
    Four of these guys in a square should do a fine job given their response curve and strong on axis peak at 10khz.


    • #3
      Thanks for the response! I had not considering using multiple, smaller full range drivers, but will try modeling the response and playing with layouts. I know from past experience that the NS3's would cover that range pretty well and are tolerant of being overdriven in undersized (Q 0.8 to 0.85) sealed cabinets. I would probably have to include a notch for the nasty cone break-up ~ 6500 hz if I went that route.

      Looks like the tympany P830986's rising response over might be addressed by the ATMOS HF filter. That's pretty clever and much appreciated.