Official JTR speaker thread - Page 1208 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews

Forum Jump: 
 7549Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #36211 of 36232 Old Yesterday, 05:52 PM
Senior Member
 
theblackangus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 446
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 193 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landmonster View Post
What is the difference between 212 HT, and 212 HTR? (it's a $700 price jump!)

How do either of the 212 models compare to the 210 RT?


Edit:
212 HT = $1599 ea
212 HTR= $2299 ea
210 RT = $2299 ea
The 212 HT is 2 way and the 212HTR is 3 way with a better compression driver for the high-end. This translates into better sound quality over all.
The sound quality between the 210RT and 212HTR should be pretty comparable on the high-end, but the 210RT's low end is much better.

The 212HTR was designed to be run with powerful sub for home theater as a result you really need subs for (some) 2 channel music. The 212HTR has the highest output level of any JTR speaker.
The 210RT is near full range speaker which can to music very well w/o subs - and we are talking bass pumping music too. Has a bit less output but reaches much deeper than the 212's. When Jeff released the 210RT it quickly became a crowd favorite among alot of us. Nice size, crazy good output.

If you don't have a large room the 228HT and 228HTR are great choices as well, but again need a pretty competent sub to keep up (Like the 212's). By going to these you are really trading cost for max volume/watt (212HT/R) and bass extension (vs. 210RT), your not really loosing much sound quality (if any).

Also I would think about where you are using them. If you are doing this in your living room home theater with a TV, anything bigger than the 228 needs a good amount of space for the center, and even the 228 isn't small.

If you are not listening at anywhere near reference all of these speakers would be easily powered by an AVR.
If you are at reference level and about 12' from the speakers then the AVR would need to be a pretty beefy one (120+ watts/channel) for full dynamics with the 210RT, but would work. Just slightly closer or slightly below reference would be easy for most AVR's. In the same conditions the 228 or 212 would be powered easily by under 100 watts.

But for the record, if you *like* listening to music I would get the 210RT's as many have said. You could get LRC and not need subs right away.
If you are really going for best home theater and can spend 1-2k on a good sub (or two) then the 212's are a good option.

If you call Jeff and explain your situation (room layout, etc) he's very willing to help you make a choice about whats good for you.
He actually tried to help me save money by avoiding overkill for my room, but I was shooting for overkill. =)

Oh an yea - Take THXMAN up on his offer... for sure.
thxman and DRC3 like this.

Last edited by theblackangus; Yesterday at 06:38 PM.
theblackangus is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #36212 of 36232 Old Yesterday, 08:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
asoofi1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NoVA
Posts: 1,718
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 921 Post(s)
Liked: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landmonster View Post
A question for you JTR guys....


after owning JTR speakers for a while, do you get bored with them?

Do they just become a "new normal" for you, that you take them for granted while watching movies? Or... are they so amazing on a level where they "wow" you every time you get to listen to them?
Never. I'm not exaggerating either. I am utterly satisfied on so many different levels every time I listen to my setup...and even without fine tuning further by a more knowledgeable person than me. Each session I hear something unique that I know I would miss and never experience with many other products. I do get frustrated though because I have so much to do still with the room itself, and I know that is distracting and holding back the quality of what I hear. The dynamics is where a lot of the magic happens though...and you can never get bored of that.
asoofi1 is offline  
post #36213 of 36232 Old Yesterday, 10:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,755
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1118 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landmonster View Post
Awesome. I think the 210s are almost the same exact size too, as the RF 7. I was pleased with that size, but I just wanted better quality, and better bass.


So what is the huge deal with high db efficiency then? I don't care about playing at ear-bleeding levels anyway.... does having super high efficiency help with other factors that I'm not aware of?

(The RF-7iis I had played well beyond my comfort level on a standard Denon recever at about 50% volume. I live in a tract house in Texas, and you could hear the music from the street in front of my house. )

Right now, I'd lean towards getting the 2 main speakers + a nice AV receiver to start with. I'm leaning towards either the 210 RTs, or the 212 HTRs for my L&R speakers. The sub will have to wait a while, due to funds.... as will a center channel... so the main 2 speakers would have to be sufficient for movies and music for probably a year. This probably makes a difference in your recommendations.
If you plan to run without sub(s), that narrows the choices to 210RTs or 215RTs.
I agree that the 210RTs sound like the best choice for you.
For the center, you would want a 210RM or a 3rd 210RT, depending placement issues.

Last edited by rcohen; Yesterday at 10:08 PM.
rcohen is offline  
post #36214 of 36232 Old Yesterday, 10:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HTPCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Citrus Heights, CA
Posts: 1,873
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 380 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by thxman View Post
If you have yet to hear how effective dynamic speakers are in a HT environment, you are welcome to demo my Alcons.



I love the room, especially the seating. What brand, model are your seats?
thxman likes this.

HTPCat
"I have a need to feed the hole with more Audio & Video toys"
HTPCat is online now  
post #36215 of 36232 Old Yesterday, 10:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
thxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: North TX
Posts: 2,013
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTPCat View Post
I love the room, especially the seating. What brand, model are your seats?
Thank you.

Seating -Tactical/Motion Effects (MFX)
thxman is online now  
post #36216 of 36232 Old Today, 02:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,274
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 557 Post(s)
Liked: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post
Of course you are correct about the efficiency advantage of the 212's but having heard the 210RT's they are a great choice for a reasonable sized, full range music speaker. IMO, they need dedicated subwoofer support for movies but even that might not be necessary for someone who isn't as bass hungry as many here seem to be. If I were putting together a system in a common living space (e.g. living room, family room) the 210RT would be my speaker choice.
I am sure RMK is correct. He is the reason I got into JTR to begin with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by raynist View Post
I would choose the 210RT every time if you have amps to power them. I noticed no difference in dynamics. I don't think you would unless you are listening at over 120db.
Given that in real tests, the 212s are rated by data-base to be actually 105dB vs the 95dB of the 210s, you'll need 8 times the amplifier power to get to the same SPLs... I would think that at listening position, say 10-12 feet away, the 210s will not be able to get to reference without an external amp whereas the 212s will easily go there and more with just a receiver... Now, of course this all depends on application.. if one were sitting much closer, have a smaller room, and have great need to always listen to 2 channel music, then the 210s might be the route to go.. but for someone more into HT, have a big room, the 212s can't be beat for sound quality and efficiency and easy of setup (without additional amps).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Landmonster View Post
What is the difference between 212 HT, and 212 HTR? (it's a $700 price jump!)

How do either of the 212 models compare to the 210 RT?


Edit:
212 HT = $1599 ea
212 HTR= $2299 ea
210 RT = $2299 ea
The HTR has a better Compression driver and is actually a 3-way design.. if you want absolutely the smoothest voices, go for the HTR.. this is the new version of the one I have... The HT is basically a cheaper version of the HTR... I haven't heard the HT yet... I have auditioned literally dozens and dozens of commercial speakers, some costing 10x more than the HTRs and I have yet to find one I like better... I do not know why, but there's a magic to 'female vocals' on the 212s.. i have a feeling that it's because of the compression driver that goes down to 380hz (covering most of the female vocal cord)... But I could be wrong here... but whenever I hear these speakers with female vocals, I get chills... i never get this with any other speakers...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Landmonster View Post
Are you saying the 210 RTs are difficult to power? They are listed at 95db efficiency.

Just wondering, because i couldn't really afford to start with more power than just a single AV receiver.

Edit: how much difference does the 95db efficiency of the 210 matter compared to the 101db efficiency of the 212 HTR?
Although the 212s are listed as 101dB, they are actually 105dB (measured by data-base), and you'll need 8 times the power or wattage to get the 210s to the same volume...

For example, to get the 210s to 120dB, you'll need 250 watts of power (no receiver can give you that much per channel, all channel driven, you'll need extra expensive external amps)... To get to 120dB, the 212s only need a measly 32 watts... almost any receiver can get it there...

But as RMK says, it all depends on your application... if you're already going to get a subwoofer, and if your main priority isn't 2 channel music listening, then i see no reason why the 212s wouldn't be a better option.. of course, it's all subjective...

Last edited by coolgeek; Today at 02:52 AM.
coolgeek is offline  
post #36217 of 36232 Old Today, 05:00 AM
Senior Member
 
theblackangus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 446
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 193 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
For example, to get the 210s to 120dB, you'll need 250 watts of power (no receiver can give you that much per channel, all channel driven, you'll need extra expensive external amps)... To get to 120dB, the 212s only need a measly 32 watts... almost any receiver can get it there...

But as RMK says, it all depends on your application... if you're already going to get a subwoofer, and if your main priority isn't 2 channel music listening, then i see no reason why the 212s wouldn't be a better option.. of course, it's all subjective...
120db is way over reference tho.
If my understanding is correct 105db is the max needed for reference (a couple db headroom on that could be desired =))
So really about 160 watts max at 12 ft for dynamic peaks for the 210RT's which is a bit shy of the AVR range.
However at 104db only 127 watts would be needed which is in the range of some AVR's.
And at 103DB only 101 watts are needed so well with-in many AVR's.
So very close to reference peaks w/o any issue on an AVR.

That said, I would think about getting a nice amp for the 210RT's as a later purchase item. The inuke 6k can be had for less then 400$ and power both 210's to max with headroom for the amp. And you can get the DSP model to fool around with the sound if that is your thing =)
Then you can run them to max power w/o worry of clipping from the amp.
theblackangus is online now  
post #36218 of 36232 Old Today, 05:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,274
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 557 Post(s)
Liked: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblackangus View Post
120db is way over reference tho.
If my understanding is correct 105db is the max needed for reference (a couple db headroom on that could be desired =))
So really about 160 watts max at 12 ft for dynamic peaks for the 210RT's which is a bit shy of the AVR range.
However at 104db only 127 watts would be needed which is in the range of some AVR's.
And at 103DB only 101 watts are needed so well with-in many AVR's.
So very close to reference peaks w/o any issue on an AVR.

That said, I would think about getting a nice amp for the 210RT's as a later purchase item. The inuke 6k can be had for less then 400$ and power both 210's to max with headroom for the amp. And you can get the DSP model to fool around with the sound if that is your thing =)
Then you can run them to max power w/o worry of clipping from the amp.
I was saying 120dB at 1m... at listening position could be down 12dB... so, 108dB (with a few dB headroom). Yes, without headroom, you can squeak by with an AVR... but sometimes you wanna let loose to 'wow' some friends with 5dB or more above reference...

BTW: I tried using my S8s with 96dB sensitivity and i could not get them to hit the volume level i want to for movies at my listening position... so, if the 210s have similar efficiency, then I would think they too would leave me wanting..

My logic is simple:

If one were to get a Subwoofer ANYWAYS... and if one were to use it mainly for HT.. then why, for the same price, not get a speaker with 10dB more efficiency and not sound any worse (paired with the subs)... Also, don't forget all the AVRs are rated for 2 channel driven... they quickly lose their power when you add 7 channels or even 11 channels... you might then not be able to reach reference at all...

But if ONE's desire is for 2 channel music listening, then logic would dictate the 210s would indeed be a better buy...

In the future I might just get a pair for my own room for music... but i'll never switch out the 212s in my theater for these... no way, not after the ease and sheer power of the 212s...

As for the Inukes.. do they have fan noise? In my silent as a grave HT room, I could not tolerate any fan noise... I also have the LAB 10,000 clone, and i tried connecting that to power my 212s... when the fan turns on, gods.. no... also, with the 212s.. there was no need for the 2000 watts per channel... i believe i am ever only using something like 30 watts or less from the AVR... Last week, i turned up my AVR about 5-6dB above the loudest i have ever played the 212s, and as a result I damaged my ear a little.. i started getting Tinnitus.. (they are subsiding now)... This showed me that the 212s can be played way, way above reference by power of an AVR alone...

Last edited by coolgeek; Today at 05:34 AM.
coolgeek is offline  
post #36219 of 36232 Old Today, 07:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,755
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1118 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Another important difference between the 212s and the 210s is that the 210s are floor standing, while the 212s are not.
The 212s are ideal for placement behind a screen on in a wall, while the 210s are ideal for a floor standing setup.
That said, Jeff makes matching stands for 210s at various heights, and you can always wrap cinder blocks with velvet for a budget approach.
That's good for behind the screen, but if they will be visible, the 210s will look nicer.

If your plan is to run them without subs, the 210 is clearly the way to go. Nothing stops you from adding sub(s) to the 210s later.

It's worth noting that the 215s are basically 210s with built in high-end subs. That would require a powerful amp, though, and they take up more space and cost more to ship. Based on what you've said, it seems like the 210s make more sense for you.
rcohen is offline  
post #36220 of 36232 Old Today, 07:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,357
Mentioned: 375 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2283 Post(s)
Liked: 1647
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcohen View Post
Another important difference between the 212s and the 210s is that the 210s are floor standing, while the 212s are not.
The 212s are ideal for placement behind a screen on in a wall, while the 210s are ideal for a floor standing setup.
That said, Jeff makes matching stands for 210s at various heights, and you can always wrap cinder blocks with velvet for a budget approach.
That's good for behind the screen, but if they will be visible, the 210s will look nicer.

If your plan is to run them without subs, the 210 is clearly the way to go. Nothing stops you from adding sub(s) to the 210s later.

It's worth noting that the 215s are basically 210s with built in high-end subs. That would require a powerful amp, though, and they take up more space and cost more to ship. Based on what you've said, it seems like the 210s make more sense for you.

Pretty much sums it up. On top of that, if his Klipsch rf7's were plenty loud for him then the same will be true for the 210's so the extra sensitivity of the 212's would go unused and wouldn't matter.
carp is offline  
post #36221 of 36232 Old Today, 07:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,755
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1118 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post
Pretty much sums it up. On top of that, if his Klipsch rf7's were plenty loud for him then the same will be true for the 210's so the extra sensitivity of the 212's would go unused and wouldn't matter.
If you decide you want more output from the 210s, you can always add amplification and/or subs down the road.
They would probably be the last speakers you ever need.
rcohen is offline  
post #36222 of 36232 Old Today, 07:42 AM
Senior Member
 
theblackangus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 446
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 193 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
I was saying 120dB at 1m... at listening position could be down 12dB... so, 108dB (with a few dB headroom). Yes, without headroom, you can squeak by with an AVR... but sometimes you wanna let loose to 'wow' some friends with 5dB or more above reference...
Yeah sure, one may like to show off, but he has said he doesn't listen crazy loud and doesn't have any subs presently. He also stated he would like mains with more bass than the Klipsch's he had.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
BTW: I tried using my S8s with 96dB sensitivity and i could not get them to hit the volume level i want to for movies at my listening position... so, if the 210s have similar efficiency, then I would think they too would leave me wanting..
Are you saying on your AVR or on the LAB couldn't get the S8's up to the volume you wanted?
So was the AVR just not powerful enough to handle 4 8's + LCR, or did the S8's just not have enough power for your room? (Would be a pretty big room?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
My logic is simple:

If one were to get a Subwoofer ANYWAYS... and if one were to use it mainly for HT.. then why, for the same price, not get a speaker with 10dB more efficiency and not sound any worse (paired with the subs)... Also, don't forget all the AVRs are rated for 2 channel driven... they quickly lose their power when you add 7 channels or even 11 channels... you might then not be able to reach reference at all...

But if ONE's desire is for 2 channel music listening, then logic would dictate the 210s would indeed be a better buy...

In the future I might just get a pair for my own room for music... but i'll never switch out the 212s in my theater for these... no way, not after the ease and sheer power of the 212s...
All depends on your goal's and how you want to spend your money.
You would need less sub's for equal coverage with the 210's helping power the base down to 32Hz, so there is a trade off there, with the bonus of full range for music.

If the owner is never going to play them at reference then an AVR should easily be able to power to pretty high levels w/o issue.
Not everyone is crazy like us =)

If this is a dedicated room and he knows he will have the budget for a couple of very good subs later then I totally agree that the 212's are a pretty awesome setup.
TBH tho, when I heard the 212HTR's + Subs it didn't sound as good to me (musically) as the 210RT's w/o subs, and the 212HTR setup was setup right with some very nice subs.
For home theater duty the 212's were awesome, and to be fair pretty good for music, but I did like the 210RT's a small bit better.

In the end when I made my choice, I chose full range (215RT) mains with less subs, as I knew I wouldn't be able to do a dedicated music setup.
I did run the 215's from my AVR for a while before I chose the amp, and was able to play -5 at MLP(12') no problem for a 7.1 setup (215's + S8's). (I was breaking them in so I didn't
try reference before I got my amp.) My AVR is a 140WPC Onkyo.

If you think about it most of the time when running at reference you are at "low" volumes and using only 2-16 watts at 95db sensitivity, only when there is a loud sound on the movie so you jump into the 100's of watts and most time's when that happens its very briefly and most amps can burst to a higher wattage for a small period of time.
When you drop to just a few db below reference the power requirements go down rapidly.

For example:
The 210RT's from a 12' listening distance at 80db volume would use 1 watt per channel.
When this burst up to 100db for "peaks" in the content the 210's would be using 51 watts per channel.

Same scenario at reference would be:
85 db using 2 watts per channel with peaks up to 105db using 160 watts per channel.

Yes the 212's are much more efficient but this should only be a huge factor if you are look for reference + volumes with a lower power AVR.

So if you are watching MadMax the AVR will struggle, but for most content it would be fine just 3 or 4 db off reference. Obviously YMMV based on the AVR chosen.
This is still louder than most people listen, besides us crazy's =)


Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
As for the Inukes.. do they have fan noise? In my silent as a grave HT room, I could not tolerate any fan noise... I also have the LAB 10,000 clone, and i tried connecting that to power my 212s... when the fan turns on, gods.. no... also, with the 212s.. there was no need for the 2000 watts per channel... i believe i am ever only using something like 30 watts or less from the AVR... Last week, i turned up my AVR about 5-6dB above the loudest i have ever played the 212s, and as a result I damaged my ear a little.. i started getting Tinnitus.. (they are subsiding now)... This showed me that the 212s can be played way, way above reference by power of an AVR alone...
They do have a little noise, not much for a "normal room" with them tucked away - But that depends on your tolerances and habits.
Mine was always off until I was using it then the fan noise wasn't noticeable to me.
For a dead silent room yeah I would totally agree too much noise.
For my theater my gear is in a closet, so I don't hear it. I also had one running in my living room and it wasn't bad. (Wasn't perfect either!)
Great point though, as some people would likely hate the noise.
But there are other good amps that are quiet and not much more expensive.
coolgeek likes this.
theblackangus is online now  
post #36223 of 36232 Old Today, 07:52 AM
Member
 
DaveyK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NW Ohio
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landmonster View Post
Awesome. I think the 210s are almost the same exact size too, as the RF 7. I was pleased with that size, but I just wanted better quality, and better bass.


So what is the huge deal with high db efficiency then? I don't care about playing at ear-bleeding levels anyway.... does having super high efficiency help with other factors that I'm not aware of?

(The RF-7iis I had played well beyond my comfort level on a standard Denon recever at about 50% volume. I live in a tract house in Texas, and you could hear the music from the street in front of my house. )

Right now, I'd lean towards getting the 2 main speakers + a nice AV receiver to start with. I'm leaning towards either the 210 RTs, or the 212 HTRs for my L&R speakers. The sub will have to wait a while, due to funds.... as will a center channel... so the main 2 speakers would have to be sufficient for movies and music for probably a year. This probably makes a difference in your recommendations.


Here's another vote for the 210's. I bought mine from @raynist when he moved up to the 215's a while back. I often listen to mine basically how you plan to--without subs in a 2.0 (or 4.0) setup. My wife doesn't care for a lot of bass with normal tv viewing, so I leave the subs off when she's in the room to appease her. When listening without subs, I still get plenty of bass down to around 40 Hz or so and sometimes have to look to see if I left the subs on. They are also great on their own for music. The only difference between my setup and yours is that I have a separate amp (Crown XLS2500) powering mine, but I don't think it is essential to get great sound out of these at decent listening levels. With EQ, the 212's are capable of good midbass, but the 210's dig a little deeper without too much fiddling. With the high quality of both the 212's and 210's, you will be very pleased either way in the long run if you eventually get subs. The 210's will just give you a little more in your "temporary" setup, which I think many of us can relate to. Good luck!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
DaveyK is online now  
post #36224 of 36232 Old Today, 09:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,274
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 557 Post(s)
Liked: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyK View Post
The only difference between my setup and yours is that I have a separate amp (Crown XLS2500) powering mine, but I don't think it is essential to get great sound out of these at decent listening levels.
Does anyone here own a 210 without a separate amp and just power them off of a receiver and never ever thinks of getting more power to them?

So far, as much as ppl loves their 210s, i see most of you guys have an extra amp...

I have a feeling that for HT use, unless someone is very, very modest in their listening habits with very, very small rooms, he/she will get the itch to add an amp with their 210s down the road...
coolgeek is offline  
post #36225 of 36232 Old Today, 10:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
raynist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,179
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1163 Post(s)
Liked: 1100
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyK View Post
Here's another vote for the 210's. I bought mine from @raynist when he moved up to the 215's a while back. I often listen to mine basically how you plan to--without subs in a 2.0 (or 4.0) setup. My wife doesn't care for a lot of bass with normal tv viewing, so I leave the subs off when she's in the room to appease her. When listening without subs, I still get plenty of bass down to around 40 Hz or so and sometimes have to look to see if I left the subs on. They are also great on their own for music. The only difference between my setup and yours is that I have a separate amp (Crown XLS2500) powering mine, but I don't think it is essential to get great sound out of these at decent listening levels. With EQ, the 212's are capable of good midbass, but the 210's dig a little deeper without too much fiddling. With the high quality of both the 212's and 210's, you will be very pleased either way in the long run if you eventually get subs. The 210's will just give you a little more in your "temporary" setup, which I think many of us can relate to. Good luck!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I found the 210RT's better for movies than the 212's. I could tell a differnce in midbass even crossed to subs at 80hz. Each 210 and 212 was run off of the same amps. I used a bridged inuke 3000 dsp on each LCR speaker. The 210RT's replaced the 212's which are now in my living room. The 215RT's replaced the 210RT's. My 212's are now run off of a denon 4520.
raynist is online now  
post #36226 of 36232 Old Today, 10:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
raynist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,179
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1163 Post(s)
Liked: 1100
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
Does anyone here own a 210 without a separate amp and just power them off of a receiver and never ever thinks of getting more power to them?

So far, as much as ppl loves their 210s, i see most of you guys have an extra amp...

I have a feeling that for HT use, unless someone is very, very modest in their listening habits with very, very small rooms, he/she will get the itch to add an amp with their 210s down the road...
I only ran my 212's and then the 210's on separate amps because the inukes had DSP control. Like carp said if he is satisfied with the volume in the klipsch, the 210's are more sensitive so he should get all the volume he needs. Later (year or so?) when he gets subs that will put even less strain on the amps.

If he is not going to have subs the 210 is the only option. Otherwise I would just wait and buy the 212 and subs at the same time and keep what he has for now.
raynist is online now  
post #36227 of 36232 Old Today, 10:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,274
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 557 Post(s)
Liked: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by raynist View Post
I found the 210RT's better for movies than the 212's. I could tell a differnce in midbass even crossed to subs at 80hz. Each 210 and 212 was run off of the same amps. I used a bridged inuke 3000 dsp on each LCR speaker. The 210RT's replaced the 212's which are now in my living room. The 215RT's replaced the 210RT's. My 212's are now run off of a denon 4520.

Now you make me want to get the 210s..

Since you had both the 210s and now the 215s, can you describe the difference between them? Do they differ in sound signature or just a matter of one having a larger sound stage?

Someone once said they actually preferred the 215 RM vs the RT... I can't remember who now...
coolgeek is offline  
post #36228 of 36232 Old Today, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,357
Mentioned: 375 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2283 Post(s)
Liked: 1647
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
Now you make me want to get the 210s..

Since you had both the 210s and now the 215s, can you describe the difference between them? Do they differ in sound signature or just a matter of one having a larger sound stage?

Someone once said they actually preferred the 215 RM vs the RT... I can't remember who now...

I would think the difference in sound between the 215's and 210's would be determined by how the position of the drivers interacts with your room and seating position. Jeff says that they sound identical down to 38 ish hz.
coolgeek likes this.
carp is offline  
post #36229 of 36232 Old Today, 10:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,274
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 557 Post(s)
Liked: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by carp View Post
I would think the difference in sound between the 215's and 210's would be determined by how the position of the drivers interacts with your room and seating position. Jeff says that they sound identical down to 38 ish hz.
What about Mid Bass slam in the chest feel? Would the 15 inch drivers add something there?
coolgeek is offline  
post #36230 of 36232 Old Today, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
raynist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,179
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1163 Post(s)
Liked: 1100
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
Now you make me want to get the 210s..

Since you had both the 210s and now the 215s, can you describe the difference between them? Do they differ in sound signature or just a matter of one having a larger sound stage?

Someone once said they actually preferred the 215 RM vs the RT... I can't remember who now...
It wasn't a major differnce. Mostly some added midbass feel. They sounded very similar.

I have the 212 with the metal horn (like yours). They are a bit brighter than the 210's were. The newer model might be different with the wooden horn (and more midbass per Jeff). I thought about replacing my 2014 212's with the new model but mine have a nice veneer and I like the full grill covers on the older models

I don't think you could tell the difference between the 210 and 215 with most music. The 215's physically work better for my situation because my screen frame blocked the bottom woofer on the 210. The 215's drivers are perfectly centered on my AT screen.
raynist is online now  
post #36231 of 36232 Old Today, 11:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
carp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,357
Mentioned: 375 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2283 Post(s)
Liked: 1647
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
What about Mid Bass slam in the chest feel? Would the 15 inch drivers add something there?
No, both speakers are the same sensitivity and both can take 2000 watts so same headroom above 40 hz and above.

The 212's are even with both of them in the low 60hz range but then pull ahead by a wide margin as you go higher. this is because the 212 is more sensitive but can also take 2000 watts.

Here's the catch. If you have the older 212's (before Jeff started adding more midbass) you have to EQ in the mid bass or the 215's and 210's will seem to have more mid bass capabilities.
carp is offline  
post #36232 of 36232 Old Today, 07:33 PM
Member
 
DaveyK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NW Ohio
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
Does anyone here own a 210 without a separate amp and just power them off of a receiver and never ever thinks of getting more power to them?

So far, as much as ppl loves their 210s, i see most of you guys have an extra amp...

I have a feeling that for HT use, unless someone is very, very modest in their listening habits with very, very small rooms, he/she will get the itch to add an amp with their 210s down the road...
I admittedly never tried running them off my AVR. In fact, once my dedicated theater is built, I will throw even more power at them. I'm currently running 2 off a Crown XLS2500 in stereo (~775 watts/channel) and will eventually run 3 off 3 bridged XLS2500's (~2400 watts/channel). I don't know I'll need it, but the extra headroom will be nice for spirited listening sessions. I'm also hoping it will allow the amps to better tolerate EQ tweaks I make, for instance if I increase the bass for 2 channel music. I just want to get as much as I can out of the 210's!
DaveyK is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Tags
215RT , 228ht , captivator , Jtr , Jtr Noesis 212ht 212ht Lp , noesis

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off