Need Advice on good 5.1 speaker purchase - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 19 Old 03-16-2013, 09:45 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Rsmith115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am new to this forum and until I started doing some research I was pretty sold on purchasing the Energy Take Classic 5.1 system for use in my family room. When I went to purchase today online I noticed that the Energy RC Micro speakers were being sold at the same price. I have ready numerous threads today regarding which of these two systems are better (not sure I really have a good answer as to what is better for my needs). Upon reading further it sounds like the V Mini's and the RC mini's might be a better purchase for a bit more money. I am hoping someone can help steer me in the right direction. I am putting these in a family room that is approx. 20x15 with 12ft ceilings. They will be paired with a 60" Samsung 3D TV and a Onkyo TXNR616 receiver. I am looking for something that can be mounted on the walls in the front and rear. They will be used for movies and music (50/50 mix) with a decent amount of regular HD TV watching. Looking to stay at or around $600 for a 5.1 (glossy black) system. Your input and suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
Rsmith115 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 19 Old 03-17-2013, 11:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JimWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Somewhere in New Joisey
Posts: 4,628
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked: 359
None of those setups are going to work I'm afraid. Your room is 3600 cubic feet, which simply can't be filled with a 5.1 system costing only $600. Any of your proposed systems is more than likely going to be completely overwhelmed. You'll probably need at least $600 just for a subwoofer to fill that much space.

If you take yourself too seriously expect me to do the exact opposite
JimWilson is online now  
post #3 of 19 Old 03-17-2013, 03:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bladerunner6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

None of those setups are going to work I'm afraid. Your room is 3600 cubic feet, which simply can't be filled with a 5.1 system costing only $600. Any of your proposed systems is more than likely going to be completely overwhelmed. You'll probably need at least $600 just for a subwoofer to fill that much space.

I agree, that is way too big of a space for any of the systems you mentioned.

You might want to consider starting with something like three of these and then adding a sub and surrounds later.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882325029&cm_mmc=AFC-dealnews-_-NA-_-NA-_-82-325-029
bladerunner6 is offline  
post #4 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 09:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
Robert Cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Diego County, CA, USA
Posts: 985
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rsmith115 View Post

I am new to this forum and until I started doing some research I was pretty sold on purchasing the Energy Take Classic 5.1 system for use in my family room. When I went to purchase today online I noticed that the Energy RC Micro speakers were being sold at the same price. I have ready numerous threads today regarding which of these two systems are better (not sure I really have a good answer as to what is better for my needs). Upon reading further it sounds like the V Mini's and the RC mini's might be a better purchase for a bit more money. I am hoping someone can help steer me in the right direction.

Between these systems, the RC/V-Minis are definitely the better deal now--a bit larger and also superior in sound quality. However even they are still quite small speakers, almost what are commonly called "satellite" speakers, and whether they would suffice depends in part on how far away you'll be sitting. Where will your seats and your TV be in the room? Do you like to play very loudly or pretty much at a volume that most people, including the rest of your household, would be willing to tolerate? Do you require very small speakers for aesthetic reasons, or would you be willing to use much larger speakers? How flexible are you with regard to your budget?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

None of those setups are going to work I'm afraid. Your room is 3600 cubic feet, which simply can't be filled with a 5.1 system costing only $600.

Well, no subwoofer in a system of that size and price is going to pressurize the room, for example, but I don't think it is absolutely impossible to be satisfied to a significant degree, even with a small system in a room of that size. Larger would be better, sure, and we'll see how flexible the OP is willing be, but even the current systems being considered would be FAR superior to the TV's built-in speakers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Any of your proposed systems is more than likely going to be completely overwhelmed. You'll probably need at least $600 just for a subwoofer to fill that much space.

If the OP would be willing to spend that much just on the subwoofer, then great, I would highly recommend that, too, but if not, then I wouldn't want to imply that it's hopeless and that he should just stick with his TV's speakers! We could still help him get MUCH better sound quality than he'd have otherwise and the most out of his equipment regardless.
Robert Cook is offline  
post #5 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 10:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JimWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Somewhere in New Joisey
Posts: 4,628
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

Well, no subwoofer in a system of that size and price is going to pressurize the room, for example, but I don't think it is absolutely impossible to be satisfied to a significant degree, even with a small system in a room of that size. Larger would be better, sure, and we'll see how flexible the OP is willing be, but even the current systems being considered would be FAR superior to the TV's built-in speakers.

If the OP would be willing to spend that much just on the subwoofer, then great, I would highly recommend that, too, but if not, then I wouldn't want to imply that it's hopeless and that he should just stick with his TV's speakers! We could still help him get MUCH better sound quality than he'd have otherwise and the most out of his equipment regardless.

While I'm certain any of those systems would be better than TV speakers I highly doubt he would be "satisfied to a significant degree" by spending his entire budget on an inadequate setup. It may be better to start with a solid 3.0 system and get the extra pieces as finances allow.

Unfortunately the subwoofer situation is pretty much hopeless. Something like the Rythmik LV12R would probably do well, as might the SVS PB1000, but you aren't going to get usable bass in 3600 ft^3 with anything less than those. The subs in the packages he's looking at will be completely overwhelmed by that much space.

Were it me, and I had just $600 to spend, I would get the Andrew Jones SP-PK52FS system. That would do better than any of the other systems the OP was contemplating. The sub would still be anemic, but at least the front 3 channels will be able to hold their own. It might not work anyway though, because he wants to wall mount the speakers.

If you take yourself too seriously expect me to do the exact opposite
JimWilson is online now  
post #6 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 01:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
Robert Cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Diego County, CA, USA
Posts: 985
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

While I'm certain any of those systems would be better than TV speakers I highly doubt he would be "satisfied to a significant degree" by spending his entire budget on an inadequate setup.

I would be--even a pair of cheap bookshelf speakers would be a huge improvement over the TV's speakers (modern flat-panel TVs typically have absolutely horrible speakers), and that alone would be significant. If all I had to spend was $600, total, that's all folks, then I'd be satisfied with getting the most for my money. As for what the truth really is, that's what my questions to the OP are meant to find out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

It may be better to start with a solid 3.0 system and get the extra pieces as finances allow.

I agree, but it depends on whether the OP would be willing to eventually spend a lot more, and I wouldn't want to discourage anybody by saying it'll take a lot more than that and then leave it right there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Unfortunately the subwoofer situation is pretty much hopeless. Something like the Rythmik LV12R would probably do well, as might the SVS PB1000, but you aren't going to get usable bass in 3600 ft^3 with anything less than those. The subs in the packages he's looking at will be completely overwhelmed by that much space.

The bass will still be "usable" even if it's not palpable--not up to your standards for home theater or to mine, for that matter, but it would still be significantly better than nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Were it me, and I had just $600 to spend, I would get the Andrew Jones SP-PK52FS system. That would do better than any of the other systems the OP was contemplating. The sub would still be anemic, but at least the front 3 channels will be able to hold their own. It might not work anyway though, because he wants to wall mount the speakers.

That's why I asked whether larger speakers would be acceptable, and it is possible to wall-mount larger bookshelf speakers. If the SP-BS22-LR would suffice, if barely, for the left & right fronts (cross them over to the sub at 100 Hz if you have to), then I might recommend the following system (just an example):
2 x Pioneer SP-BS22-LR = $127
1 x Pioneer SP-C22 = $95
2 x BIC DV-32B = $50
1 x Klipsch RW-12d = $300
2 x VideoSecu MS56B = $35
Total = $607 (includes shipping and mounting brackets for the left & right front speakers)

The RW-12d is in all probability still not "enough," but it's a lot better than the Pioneer SW-8.
Robert Cook is offline  
post #7 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 03:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JimWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Somewhere in New Joisey
Posts: 4,628
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

I agree, but it depends on whether the OP would be willing to eventually spend a lot more, and I wouldn't want to discourage anybody by saying it'll take a lot more than that and then leave it right there.

I wouldn't want to encourage him to buy an insufficient solution either, then he would have done nothing more then waste his money. To me that would be the least desirable outcome, but to each his own I suppose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

2 x Pioneer SP-BS22-LR = $127
1 x Pioneer SP-C22 = $95
2 x BIC DV-32B = $50
1 x Klipsch RW-12d = $300
2 x VideoSecu MS56B = $35
Total = $607 (includes shipping and mounting brackets for the left & right front speakers)

The RW-12d is in all probability still not "enough," but it's a lot better than the Pioneer SW-8.

Other than the sub, this system gains him nothing over the ones he suggested because it doesn't address the inherent issues; trying to get usable output from 4" midranges in a 3600 ft^3 is futile. The BIC's you suggested are even worse, with their tiny 3.5" drivers. That will sound weak and thin, at best, so I honestly don't see the point. Is it better than the TV' speakers? Of course it is. But is it a wise way to spend the money he does have? I certainly don't think so.

If you take yourself too seriously expect me to do the exact opposite
JimWilson is online now  
post #8 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 03:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bladerunner6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rsmith115 View Post

I am new to this forum and until I started doing some research I was pretty sold on purchasing the Energy Take Classic 5.1 system for use in my family room. When I went to purchase today online I noticed that the Energy RC Micro speakers were being sold at the same price. I have ready numerous threads today regarding which of these two systems are better (not sure I really have a good answer as to what is better for my needs). Upon reading further it sounds like the V Mini's and the RC mini's might be a better purchase for a bit more money. I am hoping someone can help steer me in the right direction. I am putting these in a family room that is approx. 20x15 with 12ft ceilings. They will be paired with a 60" Samsung 3D TV and a Onkyo TXNR616 receiver. I am looking for something that can be mounted on the walls in the front and rear. They will be used for movies and music (50/50 mix) with a decent amount of regular HD TV watching. Looking to stay at or around $600 for a 5.1 (glossy black) system. Your input and suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

You have a pretty big room.

I would go for some towers like a couple of P363 and a PC351 Center for $600 then add a sub and surrounds later.

http://www.crutchfield.com/shopsearch/primus.html

You can save some money on the above order if you use coupons and break it into two orders.

http://evreward.com/store/go/608

While the Energy Take would be better than TV speakers, the value added would not be that good.

Having a decent 3.0 system in the room would be a more efficient use of your money in terms of giving you more performance and more options for growth in the future.

That is just MHO.
bladerunner6 is offline  
post #9 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 04:01 PM
Advanced Member
 
Robert Cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Diego County, CA, USA
Posts: 985
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

I wouldn't want to encourage him to buy an insufficient solution either, then he would have done nothing more then waste his money. To me that would be the least desirable outcome, but to each his own I suppose.

I guess some folks see such matters in black & white, and others in shades of gray. Would you rather that the OP stick with his TV's speakers (the least desirable outcome, in my view) than, say, spend a small amount of money on decent bookshelf speakers and a basic amp to get much better sound quality? Things might have been different back when TVs actually had enough internal volume to include speakers of decent size and marginally acceptable quality, but built-speakers today are extremely poor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

2 x Pioneer SP-BS22-LR = $127
1 x Pioneer SP-C22 = $95
2 x BIC DV-32B = $50
1 x Klipsch RW-12d = $300
2 x VideoSecu MS56B = $35
Total = $607 (includes shipping and mounting brackets for the left & right front speakers)

The RW-12d is in all probability still not "enough," but it's a lot better than the Pioneer SW-8.

Other than the sub, this system gains him nothing over the ones he suggested because it doesn't address the inherent issues; trying to get usable output from 4" midranges in a 3600 ft^3 is futile.

They don't have to fill the whole room, they just need to reach the viewers, which is why I asked what the OP's viewing distance is. They won't sound as full as larger speakers, and that is a tradeoff, but the improvement over his TV's speakers will be tremendous, and I'm not going to ignore this merely because it's a compromise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

The BIC's you suggested are even worse, with their tiny 3.5" drivers. That will sound weak and thin, at best, so I honestly don't see the point.

They're for surround duty. I'd be the first to recommend surround speakers that are just as capable as the fronts, as well as matched in timbre, but sometimes compromises must be made, and this would be the best place to do it. 3.5" drivers are still large enough to reproduce most surround content sufficiently to put the effect across. I guess for some people everything has to be THIS good, otherwise forget it and stick with TV speakers, but I think that this sort of determination should be up to the OP, given the proper guidance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Is it better than the TV' speakers? Of course it is. But is it a wise way to spend the money he does have? I certainly don't think so.

OK, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this, then.
Robert Cook is offline  
post #10 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 07:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
cel4145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 11,740
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 767
I agree with both Jim and Robert smile.gif

For your budget, you can greatly improve on TV speaker sound.

At the same time, if you spend a little more, you can put together a system that can give you about as much pleasure as the the sound in the average movie theater. It's a matter of choosing speakers with bigger drivers & greater sensitivity while going with a sub that can fill that large room. The Klipsch RW-12d is the minimum I'd recommend on a sub that would be capable of producing good bass for that size space. Given that it runs for about $300, I'd recommend starting with 2.1 and building out from there as you can afford it.

Your questions are answered:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

HT: Energy RC-50, RC-LCR, Veritas VS Surrounds | Dual CHT SS 18.1s | Denon AVR-888 | modified Dayton SA1000 | Antimode 8033C
Desktop: CBM-170 SE | SVS SB-1000 | Audio-GD NFB-11 | HK 3390
Headphone & Portable HE-400 | K612 Pro | HP150 | DX50 | E12
cel4145 is online now  
post #11 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 07:29 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Rsmith115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I appreciate all the feedback. I am not looking for earth shattering sound or bass just a decent system to improve on what I currently have from the TV. Based on what I have looked at I have decided to go with (3) v-mini centers as my fronts and (2) take classics as my rear. I just need to find a decent sub now to pair with this set up. Thanks for the feedback.
Rsmith115 is offline  
post #12 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 07:29 PM
Member
 
All-Or-Nothing's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
For the budget I would go with the BIC DV62si speakers for all the channels. Then get an F12 for the sub.

These are my surrounds but they work just as well as front mains.

All-Or-Nothing is offline  
post #13 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 08:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
cel4145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 11,740
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rsmith115 View Post

I appreciate all the feedback. I am not looking for earth shattering sound or bass just a decent system to improve on what I currently have from the TV. Based on what I have looked at I have decided to go with (3) v-mini centers as my fronts and (2) take classics as my rear. I just need to find a decent sub now to pair with this set up. Thanks for the feedback.

With those small speakers, you will definitely need a good sub for two reasons: (1) the size of your room and (2) those speakers depend on a sub to produce much of the midbass. Because of (2), while a budget sub that is more thump than good, tight bass can sound OK with more full range speakers that can produce the midbass because it's only filling in the low end, the SQ issues with a budget sub would be more noticeable with the speakers you are purchasing. And a small, weak sub won't be able to keep up in that big room.

Your questions are answered:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

HT: Energy RC-50, RC-LCR, Veritas VS Surrounds | Dual CHT SS 18.1s | Denon AVR-888 | modified Dayton SA1000 | Antimode 8033C
Desktop: CBM-170 SE | SVS SB-1000 | Audio-GD NFB-11 | HK 3390
Headphone & Portable HE-400 | K612 Pro | HP150 | DX50 | E12
cel4145 is online now  
post #14 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 09:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JimWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Somewhere in New Joisey
Posts: 4,628
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing View Post

For the budget I would go with the BIC DV62si speakers for all the channels. Then get an F12 for the sub.

Ya know, that's not a bad setup. Start with a pair of those for the L/R and the matching DV62CLR center, and then toss in an F12 or the RW-12d. That would give him a solid 3.1 system that should do pretty good in his room. Those speakers can't be wall mounted though -- because of the rear port -- so that may be an issue.

If you take yourself too seriously expect me to do the exact opposite
JimWilson is online now  
post #15 of 19 Old 03-18-2013, 10:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
Robert Cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Diego County, CA, USA
Posts: 985
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing View Post

For the budget I would go with the BIC DV62si speakers for all the channels. Then get an F12 for the sub.

Yes, that could work cool.gif:
4 x BIC DV62si = $220
1 x BIC DV62CLR-S = $100
1 x BIC F12 = $200
4 x VideoSecu MS56B = $70
Total = $590

And you could make offers on the BICs that they may accept. If you could stretch your budget by $100 to accommodate the Klipsch RW-12d subwoofer instead of the F12, then this would be highly recommended. You could also save $95 by going with the much smaller BIC DV32 for the surrounds ($60 less for the speakers + $35 less because you'll only need one pair of the large mounts).
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Those speakers can't be wall mounted though -- because of the rear port -- so that may be an issue.

All the rear ports need is a couple of inches of clearance, which the recommended mounts will provide. There won't be all that much bass coming out of the ports when they're crossed over at 80 Hz, anyway, so I think these speakers will work alright (especially with room correction). By the way, the V-Mini and V-Mini-C would probably suffer more because they are also rear-ported but tuned much higher in frequency, so there may be plenty of bass output from their ports unless they're crossed over very high, which would cause even worse problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rsmith115 View Post

I appreciate all the feedback. I am not looking for earth shattering sound or bass just a decent system to improve on what I currently have from the TV.

That's what I was thinking, although I thought I'd ask questions and make other recommendations anyway. wink.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rsmith115 View Post

Based on what I have looked at I have decided to go with (3) v-mini centers as my fronts and (2) take classics as my rear. I just need to find a decent sub now to pair with this set up. Thanks for the feedback.

Well, the V-Mini-C is a higher-quality speaker than the others suggested, even though they'll be lacking in some ways due to their small size (even the center version), so it's a matter of which compromises you'd be more willing to live with. It seems as though you've made your choices in this regard, and I for one will not say that they're wrong as long as you're getting what you want. Here are the best deals I could find (probably the same ones you're looking at wink.gif):
http://www.rakuten.com/prod/energy-veritas-v-mini-c-center-channel-speaker-black/224524775.html?listingId=237747233
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ENERGY-TAKE-CLASSIC-SATELITTE-SPEAKERS-PAIR-BRAND-NEW-BY-KLIPSCH-/330820496473?pt=Speakers_Subwoofers&hash=item4d06702c59

That comes to $404 total--not bad. The subs we've discussed are pretty much the best at their price points, so take your pick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

With those small speakers, you will definitely need a good sub for two reasons: (1) the size of your room and (2) those speakers depend on a sub to produce much of the midbass. Because of (2), while a budget sub that is more thump than good, tight bass can sound OK with more full range speakers that can produce the midbass because it's only filling in the low end, the SQ issues with a budget sub would be more noticeable with the speakers you are purchasing. And a small, weak sub won't be able to keep up in that big room.

I agree in principle, but the OP seems to realize what you're saying and knows what he wants, and in my view that's OK.

As for the mid-bass, I've never installed a V/RC-Mini system for anybody myself, but I've done a fair amount of reading about them recently, and the general consensus seems to be that they can be crossed over at 100 Hz in most situations. This is for the V-Mini, while the OP plans to use the dual-midwoofer V-Mini-C for his LCR, which can only help. Maybe 100 Hz will work for him, or maybe he'll have to cross them over at 120 Hz (definitely has to for the Take Classic surrounds), which will start to strain largish subwoofers in his general price range, but at least it's not the 150+ Hz that smaller satellite speakers used at the front would require.
Robert Cook is offline  
post #16 of 19 Old 03-19-2013, 06:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JimWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Somewhere in New Joisey
Posts: 4,628
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

All the rear ports need is a couple of inches of clearance, which the recommended mounts will provide. There won't be all that much bass coming out of the ports when they're crossed over at 80 Hz, anyway, so I think these speakers will work alright (especially with room correction).

Based upon what, a conversation with the manufacturer or is this assessment based purely on conjecture? If it's the latter, which is most likely the case, then you may have just given the OP bad advice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

I agree in principle, but the OP seems to realize what you're saying and knows what he wants, and in my view that's OK.

Charlie; looks as though logic and reason aren't going to fly here, so I'm gone. If you choose to stay good luck my friend...

If you take yourself too seriously expect me to do the exact opposite
JimWilson is online now  
post #17 of 19 Old 03-19-2013, 08:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
cel4145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 11,740
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

I agree in principle, but the OP seems to realize what you're saying and knows what he wants, and in my view that's OK.

As for the mid-bass, I've never installed a V/RC-Mini system for anybody myself, but I've done a fair amount of reading about them recently, and the general consensus seems to be that they can be crossed over at 100 Hz in most situations. This is for the V-Mini, while the OP plans to use the dual-midwoofer V-Mini-C for his LCR, which can only help. Maybe 100 Hz will work for him, or maybe he'll have to cross them over at 120 Hz (definitely has to for the Take Classic surrounds), which will start to strain largish subwoofers in his general price range, but at least it's not the 150+ Hz that smaller satellite speakers used at the front would require.

Actually, there hasn't been discussion about crossovers, midbass, and subwoofer SQ in this thread. So while I would agree that the BIC F12 would be the best sub option for this size room at $200, the SQ could be a little disappointing.

Your questions are answered:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

HT: Energy RC-50, RC-LCR, Veritas VS Surrounds | Dual CHT SS 18.1s | Denon AVR-888 | modified Dayton SA1000 | Antimode 8033C
Desktop: CBM-170 SE | SVS SB-1000 | Audio-GD NFB-11 | HK 3390
Headphone & Portable HE-400 | K612 Pro | HP150 | DX50 | E12
cel4145 is online now  
post #18 of 19 Old 03-19-2013, 10:10 AM
Advanced Member
 
Robert Cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Diego County, CA, USA
Posts: 985
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

All the rear ports need is a couple of inches of clearance, which the recommended mounts will provide. There won't be all that much bass coming out of the ports when they're crossed over at 80 Hz, anyway, so I think these speakers will work alright (especially with room correction).

Based upon what, a conversation with the manufacturer or is this assessment based purely on conjecture?

It's based upon personal experience, experimentation, and how bass reflex speakers work. Which part of what I said do you question, and on what basis?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

If it's the latter, which is most likely the case, then you may have just given the OP bad advice.

Why do you assume that this is most likely the case? Are you so certain that rear-ported speakers cannot be wall-mounted, as you categorically stated? Mine are and they still sound great as long as they are crossed over at 80 Hz. And they're not bad even when running full-range, although there is noticeable bass reinforcement from the wall, which would be true for all speakers (perhaps a little more for rear-ported ones, but the difference the latter makes is minor, from my experience).
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

I agree in principle, but the OP seems to realize what you're saying and knows what he wants, and in my view that's OK.

Charlie; looks as though logic and reason aren't going to fly here, so I'm gone. If you choose to stay good luck my friend...

So where is your logic and reason? I could give you explanations for my claims if you'd like. I hardly know everything, so if you can prove that anything I've said is incorrect (despite my direct observations) and explain why for the benefit of all, then I would be happy to learn. No sarcasm here, by the way--I am always happy to learn from others and correct my own misconceptions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

I agree in principle, but the OP seems to realize what you're saying and knows what he wants, and in my view that's OK.

As for the mid-bass, I've never installed a V/RC-Mini system for anybody myself, but I've done a fair amount of reading about them recently, and the general consensus seems to be that they can be crossed over at 100 Hz in most situations. This is for the V-Mini, while the OP plans to use the dual-midwoofer V-Mini-C for his LCR, which can only help. Maybe 100 Hz will work for him, or maybe he'll have to cross them over at 120 Hz (definitely has to for the Take Classic surrounds), which will start to strain largish subwoofers in his general price range, but at least it's not the 150+ Hz that smaller satellite speakers used at the front would require.

Actually, there hasn't been discussion about crossovers, midbass, and subwoofer SQ in this thread. So while I would agree that the BIC F12 would be the best sub option for this size room at $200, the SQ could be a little disappointing.

Right, which is one reason that I highly recommended the RW-12d, but it's not my money to spend. Even this sub won't do real well in the mid-bass, however, so those V-Mini-Cs had better be able to handle a lower crossover than typical satellites, which reportedly they can. That's all I can say, with the source--just anecdotes from this and other forums--fully disclosed for the OP to accept or reject.
Robert Cook is offline  
post #19 of 19 Old 03-19-2013, 10:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 9,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post

It's based upon personal experience, experimentation, and how bass reflex speakers work. Which part of what I said do you question, and on what basis?
Why do you assume that this is most likely the case? Are you so certain that rear-ported speakers cannot be wall-mounted, as you categorically stated? Mine are and they still sound great as long as they are crossed over at 80 Hz. And they're not bad even when running full-range, although there is noticeable bass reinforcement from the wall, which would be true for all speakers (perhaps a little more for rear-ported ones, but the difference the latter makes is minor, from my experience.
Your experience is backed up by engineering facts. Most of the output of a port occurs within 1/2 octave of the tuning frequency of the cab, which means by and large below 80Hz. Whatever response problems that may arise by having the cab too close to the wall, which can alter the cabinet tuning frequency, will also occur below 80Hz, so if you're crossing over at 80Hz or higher it's really a non-issue.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is online now  
Reply Speakers

User Tag List

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