or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Bookshelf versus tower when using a good sub
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bookshelf versus tower when using a good sub - Page 2

post #31 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

As has already been pointed out, you don't have to go to a tower to get dual woofers. I discovered a LCR solution that IME can't be beat for focus and timbre matching anywhere near the price in the form of 3 each Primus PC 351s. They have 2 5 inch woofers and 2 3 inch midranges each. Audyssey decided that they are good down to 60 Hz based on its in-room testing. Being center channel speakers their design is optimized for lying on their side and minimal height. They have less height than many sound bars.

The usual wisdom is that a true MTM speaker is not ideal for side-mounting. The more expensive center channel speakers usually have the tweeter mounted above the midrange, and the midrange(s) between the woofers:
Are you suggesting 3 351s all placed horizontally for LCR?
post #32 of 211
Sound and Vision was for the older version of HSU

This is the series 2 HSU speakers - and measured
http://www.stereomojo.com/HSU%20HB1%20Mk2%20Speaker%20Review/HSUHB1Mk2SpeakerReview.htm
post #33 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

No, I adjust the sub by ear.

It's hard to imagine how you're not running into cancellation and reinforcement problems.
post #34 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

It's hard to imagine how you're not running into cancellation and reinforcement problems.

Perhaps I am. But it sounds great to me.
post #35 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by smasher50 View Post

I know they are good speakers as I had 5.1 setup of the original hb-1s about 5 yrs ago until I got divorced and they went with my ex. have not heard the newer version or had 5.1 system in my home since, just a few 2.1 systems(except in my garage for when the grand kids come over and watch movies with their friends 5 Dayton audio b652's and a Dayton sub120. didn't want nothing to expensive with all the balls and other objects flying about with all the horse playing its survived for a few years now and they really enjoy it which helps them stay busy and out of the house) in different rooms as I don't really watch that many movies anymore like I use to. mostly music and the once in a while netflix movie . was just seeing if it would be ideal for the extra cash to go with the hc-1's as I recommended a hsu 5.1system to a friend

I think it'd sound great! The HB-1 mk2 has been praised for its virtues over the mk1. The HC-1 obviously is basically an HB-1 plus a driver, it is great with dialogue too. My dad hasn't had to rewind to catch something he missed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Are you suggesting 3 HC-1s all placed vertically for LCR?
It's ideal but not mandatory.
post #36 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by zieglj01 View Post

Sound and Vision was for the older version of HSU

This is the series 2 HSU speakers - and measured
http://www.stereomojo.com/HSU%20HB1%20Mk2%20Speaker%20Review/HSUHB1Mk2SpeakerReview.htm

Missed that one...😎
post #37 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

Yes. If anything it would not work as well. Does a 250HP engine give better performance when in a 2dr coupe or when in a two ton pickup truck?
An analogy that proves Bose Cubes to be superior to all else... makes me question the analogy.

The reality is that a given driver needs a given volume to operation properly. That volume tends to go up as the frequency goes down and driver size goes up. There are variables based on ported vs sealed vs TL and whether you are willing to do active correction... but the basic physics stays the same.

Generally speaking though: Extra cabinet space tends to relate to lower frequencies which mean lower crossover points. Usually not necessary when the size change we are discussing is "bookshelf" vs "tower". Despite Bill's assertion, there's not an automatic down-side to towers either (I use mostly but not completely towers right now).

Find the speaker you like and use them. Don't try to imagine what *should* sound good, go find out what actually does. The individual speaker means more than the form factor.
post #38 of 211
It does not take a lot to beat the SuperZero in the bass

Also, look at Definitive Tech
post #39 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Are you suggesting 3 HC-1s all placed vertically for LCR?
That would be best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Are you suggesting 3 351s all placed horizontally for LCR?
Bad idea. Even when a speaker is as well engineered as possible for horizontal placement it still won't work as well as vertical.
post #40 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

That would be best.
Bad idea. Even when a speaker is as well engineered as possible for horizontal placement it still won't work as well as vertical.
Thanks. Thats exactly the kind of info I was looking for.
post #41 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

It's hard to imagine how you're not running into cancellation and reinforcement problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

Perhaps I am. But it sounds great to me.

In my experiences those two are mutually exclusive.

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/how-diy-audio-measurement?page=0%2C0
post #42 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambesolman View Post

I think it'd sound great! The HB-1 mk2 has been praised for its virtues over the mk1. The HC-1 obviously is basically an HB-1 plus a driver, it is great with dialogue too. My dad hasn't had to rewind to catch something he missed.
It's ideal but not mandatory.

I dont understand how the HC-1's would not cause cancellations and lobing effects when its a MTM design to be placed horizontally. From the picture the tweeter is not very close to the woofers and it sure is a fail. Expect some bigass dips from these.
post #43 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post


In my experiences those two are mutually exclusive.

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/how-diy-audio-measurement?page=0%2C0
I think what hes saying is that it doesnt have to be textbook to sound good.
post #44 of 211
biggrin.gif
post #45 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by NAIM101 View Post

I dont understand how the HC-1's would not cause cancellations and lobing effects when its a MTM design to be placed horizontally. From the picture the tweeter is not very close to the woofers and it sure is a fail. Expect some bigass dips from these.
I dont see a problem with mtm design. You dont know how far and angle his listening position is so your assumtion is meaningless.
post #46 of 211
So, is the general consensus that you should not use towers AND a sub? I keep hearing amazing things about the Ascend Sierra towers, but I also was planning to build a system that includes a sub (my primary interests are moves and gaming, with music a distant third).
post #47 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony_nsc View Post

So, is the general consensus that you should not use towers AND a sub? I keep hearing amazing things about the Ascend Sierra towers, but I also was planning to build a system that includes a sub (my primary interests are moves and gaming, with music a distant third).

There's no inherent disadvantage to using towers with a sub.

The specific speaker will matter far more than the tower/bookshelf discussion.

Given the common characteristics, you may not be making use of the (likely) lower bottom end of the tower; but that doesn't stop the parts you are using from being good.

Go buy the best speaker... don't worry about form-factor.
post #48 of 211
I don't think the general consensus would say you "should not" use towers and a sub, but rather, if you have a sub there are few (many would say no) advantages to having towers over bookshelf speakers. They might even go further and say for the same budget you can usually get better quality bookshelf speakers than towers, which kind of makes it less a sound quality argument and more of a best-use-of-money argument.

Personally I would qualify the idea as only applying to a certain quality level sub. I don't think it's true for most of the cheaper (under $400) subs - a little too woofy/blurry/muddy in the crossover range. But IMO it is true for any of the $600 - $750 subs from the more popular ID manufacturers like Rythmik, SVS, HSU, Power Sound, Outlaw, etc. Almost all these subs have excellent detail/clarity/accuracy all the way up into their higher ranges wink.gif

Worth mentioning though this context is largely for HT listening. For primarily music listening many forum members prefer nice stereo towers, often with no sub. HT digs into "sub-bass" (below 35-40Hz) range regularly, while most music only goes down into the "bass" range which nice towers handle fine on their own.
post #49 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicardoJoa View Post

I dont see a problem with mtm design. You dont know how far and angle his listening position is so your assumtion is meaningless.

Even D'Appolito states the dips in power response in a MTM Design. I never said there was a problem with MTM design when positined vertically, the problem happens when its positioned horizontally.
post #50 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony_nsc View Post

So, is the general consensus that you should not use towers AND a sub? I keep hearing amazing things about the Ascend Sierra towers, but I also was planning to build a system that includes a sub (my primary interests are moves and gaming, with music a distant third).

If you have ever decide to go for 2.0 HT and music, then thats the only reason you should go towers. Far better going with bookshlevs and seperate sub if you are going 5.1.
post #51 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post

There's no inherent disadvantage to using towers with a sub.

The specific speaker will matter far more than the tower/bookshelf discussion.

Given the common characteristics, you may not be making use of the (likely) lower bottom end of the tower; but that doesn't stop the parts you are using from being good.

Go buy the best speaker... don't worry about form-factor.
Completely agree. This is just a general discussion.
If someone can afford it I would always suggest a good tower over a good bookshelf. But if not then I would rather have a good bookshelf over a cheap tower.
The title of the thread does say "when using a good sub".
post #52 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

[
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Are you suggesting 3 351s all placed horizontally for LCR?
Bad idea. Even when a speaker is as well engineered as possible for horizontal placement it still won't work as well as vertical.

PC351 Speaker design = horizontal


Projected placement = horizontal - "...placed horizontally..."

??????????????
post #53 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

PC351 Speaker design = horizontal


Projected placement = horizontal - "...placed horizontally..."

??????????????
lol Are you agreeing or disagreeing?
3 351s. Horizontal or vertical for LCR?
post #54 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

As has already been pointed out, you don't have to go to a tower to get dual woofers. I discovered a LCR solution that IME can't be beat for focus and timbre matching anywhere near the price in the form of 3 each Primus PC 351s. They have 2 5 inch woofers and 2 3 inch midranges each. Audyssey decided that they are good down to 60 Hz based on its in-room testing. Being center channel speakers their design is optimized for lying on their side and minimal height. They have less height than many sound bars.

The usual wisdom is that a true MTM speaker is not ideal for side-mounting. The more expensive center channel speakers usually have the tweeter mounted above the midrange, and the midrange(s) between the woofers:
Are you suggesting 3 351s all placed horizontally for LCR?

Yes. The PC351 is not a classic MTM. It's a hybrid MTM with midranges placed diagonally below the tweeter.

Yes. Seems obvious - a speaker designed for horizontal placement, placed horizontally. One of the nice things is that if you put a center channel speaker above or below a screen, there's likely going to be room for L & R speakers placed the same way. The space is likely to be wasted otherwise.

Another way to look at 3 centers as LCR is that its like a soundbar whose length you can adjust and also change the orientation of the individual speakers.

I was just thinking about this - if you put a bookshelf style speaker on a bookshelf, it will probably only fit horizontally, yet it appears that many of them are designed for vertical placement. Of course designing for horizontal placement seems like the tougher design problem.
post #55 of 211
Thanks, arnyk
Many speakers, as you know, suggested as center channels are not designed specifically to be used horizontally. Since the PC351 is, I was just wondering if you would still use it horizontally for LR. Thats why I asked my original question.
Bill seems to think that ALL speakers are best used vertically regardless of design. That seems stange to me but I dont know enough to argue to argue the point.
post #56 of 211
http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages/products/speakers/cmt340c/cmt340c.html

I cant help but wonder how critical all this really is though. The Ascend 340s are supposed to be some great speakers but the "center" looks the same as the LR. They dont suggest using it vertically as far as I know.
post #57 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages/products/speakers/cmt340c/cmt340c.html

I cant help but wonder how critical all this really is though. The Ascend 340s are supposed to be some great speakers but the "center" looks the same as the LR. They dont suggest using it vertically as far as I know.
I was wondering the same thing. with the hsu hc-1s the horn would have to be rotated for proper dispersion but with a soft dome tweeter don't know if it has to be rotated or a different crossover is used or both
post #58 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Thanks, arnyk
Many speakers, as you know, suggested as center channels are not designed specifically to be used horizontally.

Agreed, and it mystifies me, because there are plenty of center channel speakers.

Of course not all center channels speakers are not the same. Some are W-T, some are MTM and some are hybrids.
Quote:
Since the PC351 is, I was just wondering if you would still use it horizontally for LR. Thats why I asked my original question.

Yes, I use the PC351 horizontally for all three positions, LCR. That was the point!
Quote:
Bill seems to think that ALL speakers are best used vertically regardless of design.

I'm not sure that is his position. I think that he and I agree that speakers usually have a built-in preferred orientation, and they are best used that way.
Quote:
That seems strange to me but I don't know enough to argue to argue the point.

The story I see is at least partially historical.

Hi Fi started out repurposing speaker components built for use in theatres, which included horn tweeters. Horn tweeters were often used in home audio through the 60s but they are expensive to build right, which runs against the need of a mass market. Dome tweeters with very wide dispersion entered the market in the late 1950s were commonplace in the 1970s and dominant in the 1980s and later. Home audio doctrine favored speakers with broad dispersion.

Speakers tend to have dispersion that has the opposite orientation of the drivers in the speaker. You want a speaker with broad dispersion? Build a tall, narrow column!

Hence a preference for speakers being used vertically.

A relatively new trend is speakers with controlled directivity. This seems to me to be a natural line for improvement. First we learned how to build speakers that had a desired response on-axis and now we are learning how to build speakers that have the desired response off-axis. This begs the question as to what off-axis response should look like.

So far people seem to agree that off-axis response should be constant over the area where the listeners sit. I think that most agree that off-axis response should be smooth and probably dropping more rapidly off axis of the area where the listeners sit.

Horn speakers (waveguides) have been able to be designed since the 1980s to have a natural tendency towards constant directivity, but direct radiators tend to become more directional as the frequency rises. One way to somewhat even out the directivity of a direct radiator based speaker is to build a multi-way speaker that has drivers whose diaphragm diameter decreases with rising frequency. Another way to control the directivity of direct radiators is to put them in a waveguide.

Several studio monitor speakers put direct radiators into waveguides with good results. They include Klien and Hummel, Genelec, Mackie, and Behringer. Even the relatively inexpensive Berhingers have amazing directivity plots in the form of lines that radiate from a common point and have more rapidly decreasing response as you move further off axis.



FWIW, the Hsus seem to be direct radiator drivers in a wavegude:



and have been praised for their directivity control in reviews already mentioned in this thread.
post #59 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony_nsc View Post

So, is the general consensus that you should not use towers AND a sub?
You may, but it makes no sense, either sonically or financially.
Quote:
Bill seems to think that ALL speakers are best used vertically regardless of design.
Not exactly, but close enough. Even if you have the drivers spaced close enough to overcome comb filtering issues what you cannot overcome is that the horizontal angle of dispersion is inversely proportional to the width of the source, the vertical angle of dispersion inversely proportional to the height of the source. A speaker should have wide dispersion on the horizontal plane, with narrow dispersion on the vertical plane. You get that with vertically aligned speakers, you get the exact opposite with horizontally aligned speakers.
post #60 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

You may, but it makes no sense, either sonically or financially.
Not exactly, but close enough. Even if you have the drivers spaced close enough to overcome comb filtering issues what you cannot overcome is that the horizontal angle of dispersion is inversely proportional to the width of the source, the vertical angle of dispersion inversely proportional to the height of the source. A speaker should have wide dispersion on the horizontal plane, with narrow dispersion on the vertical plane. You get that with vertically aligned speakers, you get the exact opposite with horizontally aligned speakers.
Makes sense that you would not want a majority of your sound being directed towards the floor and ceiling.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Bookshelf versus tower when using a good sub