AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/)
-   -   Official Rythmik Audio Subwoofer thread (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/1214550-official-rythmik-audio-subwoofer-thread.html)

JimP 03-09-2010 01:05 AM

Don,

You raise an interesting question.

If you use only your receiver/prepro for bass management, does it apply only to bass or does it also apply to the LFE channel? In other words, if you set your crossover to 80 hz., does a 110 hz LFE signal still reaches the sub?

I think there may be a test tone for the LFE channel only on Avia. When I get a chance, I'll try it.

stevec325 03-09-2010 06:40 AM

Crossover in the pre/pro/avr is for bass. LFE is seperate and there is usually a (mis)labeled adjustment for LFE. If you have your speakers (bass management) set to cross at 80Hz, then bass content below 80Hz will be redirected to the SW.

All LFE content always goes to SW (if enabled/detected). You can choose (usually) where that content rolls off. It is generally recommended to set the LFE filter to 120Hz. If you do that, then all LFE content up to 120Hz will go to the SW - regardless of where your speaker (bass management) crossovers are set.

There is often LFE content above 80Hz, but it dwindles down significantly at 100Hz. The spec for the LFE channel content,I believe, allows content up to 120Hz - hence the recommendation to set the pre/pro/avr LFE filter at 120Hz.

As I said,this is often mis-labeled as a "crossover",which is confusing and wrong.

Rythmik 03-09-2010 06:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimP View Post

Don,

You raise an interesting question.

If you use only your receiver/prepro for bass management, does it apply only to bass or does it also apply to the LFE channel? In other words, if you set your crossover to 80 hz., does a 110 hz LFE signal still reaches the sub?

I think there may be a test tone for the LFE channel only on Avia. When I get a chance, I'll try it.

Jim,

The answer should be "no". Google and one can find a few pages actually show the implementation of 5.1 channel "decoding" methods. The LFE sums with front channels first and then filters the subwoofer out again (www.beussery.com/pdf/beussery.dolby.pdf ). However, there have been quite a few AVR manufacturers adds nonstandard playback mode such as "LFE+main" in Denon 3805 I use. Also the terminology is not clear. One of the subwoofer modes in Denon is called "LFE", giving us the impression that the sub only plays LFE channel. Then when you go to the actual explanation, then it says :
"Selection of the "LFE" play mode will play the low frequency signal range of the channel selected with LARGE from that channel only. Therefore, the low frequency signal range that are played from the subwoofer channel are only the low frequency signal range of LFE and the channel specified as SMALL in the setup menu. That low frequency signal range is set up by crossover frequency point we select.

As being an engineer, an actual block diagram is an indisputable specification.

BTW, the reason it is called crossover because it actually uses Linktwitz-Riley filters (2nd order and 4th order) to separate out low frequency signals from a channel. It is just like regular electronic crossover method. In other words, if the crossover is 80hz, any signal between 80hz and 120hz in LFE will play back from front speakers. Nothing is lost.

In the above reference pdf file, the figures we should be interested is Figure 3-2 and 3-3. The former will cause lost of signal and the latter will not.

sdurani 03-09-2010 09:36 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

In the above reference pdf file, the figures we should be interested is Figure 3-2 and 3-3. The former will cause lost of signal and the latter will not.

Brian, those are the two bass management diagrams on page 35 of PDF you linked to in your previous post?

The first bass management method sums the low frequencies from all 5 main channels into the subwoofer, where it is combined with discrete LFE content. The second bass management method sums the filtered low frequences from the centre and surrounds into the front L/R channels, where it is combined with discrete LFE content (use of a subwoofer down stream is optional).

Assuming you choose appropriate crossover points, why would the first method cause loss of signal?

DonH50 03-09-2010 09:42 AM

Jim, I think you should listen to Brian over me on this any day... And, study those two figures he referenced very closely (ooh, pictures!) The document is a very good read overall, but Brian zeroed in on two key figures (no surprise!) Note the Dolby Digital Only boxes, though I have noticed several AVRs use a similar block diagram to manage the bass from any source.

In the first scheme, everything (all 5 channel inputs) is summed with the LFE signal, low-pass filtered (LPF), and passed to the subwoofer (after the gain block to compensate for the difference in LFE amplitude). High-pass filters (HPF) are applied to all the other channels (L/R mains, center, and surrounds). In this case, with 80 Hz cut-off (and ideal filters), all LFE content above 80 Hz is lost as Brian says because it is filtered out everywhere (HPF to the mains and LPF to the subs means the LFE signal above 80 Hz is lost; this may or may not matter in a practical sense).

In the second case, only the center and surrounds are initially summed (no L/R signals) with the LFE, filtered (LPF), then this signal is passed to the L/R channels (with gain adjustment) and the final L/R signals are sent out. There is no filtering on the L/R mains; the center and surrounds have HPFs. At the outputs, the L/R signals are summed again and passed through another LPF to an optional subwoofer. In this case, the L/R mains get full-range L/R signals plus the LFE content and all low-frequency content from the center and surrounds, great if you have full-range mains. If the LFE output filter is set high enough, no LFE content is lost since it also goes to the mains. And, you can set your sub's crossover to 80 Hz, minimizing directionality while preserving the higher LFE content.

In either case, there is a LPF (or two) in series with the sub so if you tell it to use an 80 Hz cutoff, that's what it will be. Note that the filters will still allow some upper-frequency content dictated by their roll-off. A 12-dB (second-order) filter will put a 160 Hz signal about 12 dB down, or below the half-loudness point.

A long winded way of saying "no" to your second question, but look at the figures Brian called out to see how your AVR is handling bass for the other channels in answer to your first question.

HTH - Don

edit: I was writing as Sanjay posted; I think I might have answered his question... Note that the THX spec calls for 80 Hz roll-off but content to 120 Hz so they must have been thinking of the second scheme.

vantagesc 03-09-2010 09:58 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

The LFE sums with front channels first and then filters the subwoofer out again (www.beussery.com/pdf/beussery.dolby.pdf ).

My understanding is that whenever you are summing LFE back into a main channel, or even when you divide a center channel into L/R when running a "phantom center", you necessarily run into some level of compression. Are you looking at page 34 of the PDF you posted? Neither of those diagrams show the LFE being mixed back into the mains, but it's highly possible that I don't know how to read the diagram.

sdurani 03-09-2010 10:01 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

I was writing as Sanjay posted; I think I might have answered his question... Note that the THX spec calls for 80 Hz roll-off but content to 120 Hz so they must have been thinking of the second scheme.

Don, I can see where a THX set-up could lose LFE content from 80-120Hz IF those frequencies aren't re-routed to the main channels. But in most cases, crossing over your main channels at 80Hz would mean that content below that frequency would end up in the subwoofer along with the entire LFE channel (up to 120Hz). To lose LFE channel content, you'd either have to set the LFE low pass filter on the receiver below 120Hz or set the crossover knob on the back of the subwoofer below 120Hz.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vantagesc View Post

My understanding is that whenever you are summing LFE back into a main channel, or even when you divide a center channel into L/R when running a "phantom center", you necessarily run into some level of compression.

OK, so you lose dynamic range. But that's not the same as losing content (losing a portion of the soundtrack).

Bigred7078 03-09-2010 11:02 AM

just got my F12SE in yesterday Quick iPhone picture...


DonH50 03-09-2010 12:53 PM

I'll take a stab at this, but Brian's the expert. I am a hairy-knuckled design engineer and my day job involves much higher frequencies than subs put out...

@ vantagesc: Figure 3.3 on page 35 of the paper shows the LFE signal fed into the main L/R outputs. As for compression, the LFE signal is recorded at a lower level than the rest of the channels, then boosted at the end into the sub. There's more to it than this (and I am still reading about LFE in general) but this was done to prevent excessive compression that might otherwise occur with a very high-level bass signal. That is, a large bass signal could "use up all the bits" so there aren't any (or few) left for the important upper frequencies riding on the large bass signal. The LFE spec was designed to prevent that, and thus the various gain blocks sprinkled around the diagrams.

If you are talking about routing low-frequency content to your mains and they (L/R main amp and speakers) don't have the dynamic range, then yeah you could get compression, but that's a problem anytime you head for 11 on the gain knob...

@sdurani: As stated, you are exactly right and I agree. However, the dozen or so AVRs I was able to find out about (reading the literature and/or measuring) in the $1k'ish range and below tend to use the first diagram for "small" fronts and second for "large". They set the HPF at 80 Hz for the "upper" speakers and LPF at 80 Hz to the sub automatically for you ("it's a feature" -- especially with the lower-end receivers). Thus, since the LFE signal is sent only to the sub if you select "small" mains, LFE content between 80 and 120 Hz is lost. (Not completely because the filters have finite roll-off but you get the idea.) Some, but not all, of the AVRs had the ability to tweak the subwoofer setting independently of the mains, and the higher-end AVRs offer much more flexibility in setting both points. So, if you have the control you can correct the issue just as you say, assuming your sub has high enough bandwidth (higher than I care for, but that's a personal thing). Of course, that same control means you could lose information but setting them wrong... Disclaimer: Some of the AVRs I checked are older ones I am using at home, so it could well be all the newer ones allow you to set the sub's LPF to 120 Hz. I have noticed some do.

I much prefer full-range L/R speakers but am also much more music- than video-oriented (so far, anyway). As for my kids, well, the opposite, natch!

Again, Brian or someone with more experience/knowledge will hopefully step in and correct my mistakes. - Don

DonH50 03-09-2010 12:56 PM

Hey Bigred, are you going to change to "Bigblack" now? Gorgeous sub, btw.

Aside: I was born and went to college in Columbia, MO -- small world! Still go back to visit the inlaws in Columbia and Fulton every year.

sdurani 03-09-2010 01:47 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

They set the HPF at 80 Hz for the "upper" speakers and LPF at 80 Hz to the sub automatically for you ("it's a feature" -- especially with the lower-end receivers).

OK, that makes sense. IF that's how bass management works on those receivers, then LFE content from 80-120Hz would indeed be lost.

BTW, I was asking more out of curiosity than anything (my pre-pro has a dedicated LFE output that is separate from the L/R subwoofer outs).

fyzziks 03-09-2010 03:05 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

Jim,

The answer should be "no". Google and one can find a few pages actually show the implementation of 5.1 channel "decoding" methods. The LFE sums with front channels first and then filters the subwoofer out again (www.beussery.com/pdf/beussery.dolby.pdf ). However, there have been quite a few AVR manufacturers adds nonstandard playback mode such as "LFE+main" in Denon 3805 I use. Also the terminology is not clear. One of the subwoofer modes in Denon is called "LFE", giving us the impression that the sub only plays LFE channel. Then when you go to the actual explanation, then it says :
"Selection of the "LFE" play mode will play the low frequency signal range of the channel selected with LARGE from that channel only. Therefore, the low frequency signal range that are played from the subwoofer channel are only the low frequency signal range of LFE and the channel specified as SMALL in the setup menu. That low frequency signal range is set up by crossover frequency point we select.

As being an engineer, an actual block diagram is an indisputable specification.

BTW, the reason it is called crossover because it actually uses Linktwitz-Riley filters (2nd order and 4th order) to separate out low frequency signals from a channel. It is just like regular electronic crossover method. In other words, if the crossover is 80hz, any signal between 80hz and 120hz in LFE will play back from front speakers. Nothing is lost.

In the above reference pdf file, the figures we should be interested is Figure 3-2 and 3-3. The former will cause lost of signal and the latter will not.

Figure 3-2 has done a lot of damage to understanding how bass management works. It's an authoritative source, so it's got to be right, right? Well, yes of course it reflects what Dolby implemented in their decoders at one time in the past, but modern AVRs (and probably even more recent Dolby decoders, perhaps) are more flexible. The standard diagram for how things used to work (and how a few AVRs, such as Marantz, still do) is one like your figure 3-2, called image002 below - note however, the crucial point that the summer is the last thing in the chain before the output, not the low-pass filter. This allows the full range of LFE to get to the sub, even though the rest of the channels send only stuff below 80 Hz.

Modern AVRs generally have crossovers settable by pairs, except for the center, so the second figure (subwoofersfigure5) more accurately describes how bass management works these days. Note the flexible architecture and clean design - and that the summation is again the final step before sub output. I like this figure a lot, since it clearly shows how simple bass management really is.
LL
LL

sdurani 03-09-2010 03:16 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by fyzziks View Post

...it reflects what Dolby implemented in their decoders at one time in the past

Why didn't I think to check the date of the document? It's 10 years old (©2000)

lewdogg 03-09-2010 03:35 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigred7078 View Post

just got my F12SE in yesterday Quick iPhone picture...


Oooh, sexy!

DonH50 03-09-2010 03:59 PM

@fyzziks -- Thanks for the update! However, almost all the AVRs I tested (ranging from 1 to 5 years old, Yamaha, Denon, and Sony) didn't allow enough flexibility in the filters. Yes, they did allow each pair to be set separately, but when I set the the main L/R crossover to 80 Hz, it set that frequency for both the mains (HPF) and the sub (LPF). It wasn't as much a problem of where the LPF was, but the fact that I couldn't set it and the mains HPF independently where I wanted. A higher end model I looked at this year (Pioneer Elite) allowed independent settings, so now maybe most AVRs allow that (i.e. independent settings and a more flexible crossover point)? Of course, that's also the main reason I have a new AVR on the way...

I have a newer Dolby paper at home (that includes 7.1) but not the latest (with the new TrueHD etc. formats) -- I need to grab some newer reference material.

stevec325 03-09-2010 04:09 PM

Don, almost every mid-range and up Denon that I have owned allows this independent selection of cross-over for speakers and LPF for LFE.

In my current config, I cross my mains at 60Hz and funnel everything below that to SW for music (LFE/LPF = 120) and I cross my mains at 80Hz and funnel everything below that for BD (LFE/LPF = 120).

That was one of the reasons I am very interested in the new PEQ amps on the F12SE. I don't want the big roll off at 100, with the older amp.

DonH50 03-09-2010 04:18 PM

Thanks Steve,

I'll check my Denon's manual when I get home (or later this week -- I have a rehearsal tonight and must travel on business tomorrow). It is a few years old (e.g. no HDMI) and that may be the problem. I am not using the sub output on my current AVR (Sony 3400ES) in my current setup, but I may go back to it as it will be easier to set up and manage the bass (though Magnepan argues against using the sub output). What you are describing is something I would like to be able to do. Maybe when my new (Pioneer SC-27) AVR arrives...

In any event, it seems the technology has moved forward rapidly so my comments are now invalid. IOW, I was wrong!

Thanks guys - Don

Bigred7078 03-09-2010 04:23 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

Hey Bigred, are you going to change to "Bigblack" now? Gorgeous sub, btw.

Aside: I was born and went to college in Columbia, MO -- small world! Still go back to visit the inlaws in Columbia and Fulton every year.

haha I could change it to that, but its a pretty small sub

Definately a small world! I'm actually going to school here at Mizzou, but i'll be moving in May after graduation to Charlotte, NC Thanks for the compliments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lewdogg View Post

Oooh, sexy!

It definately is! The picture doesnt do it any justice

porksoda 03-09-2010 05:42 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by lewdogg View Post

Oooh, sexy!

Yes indeed... if i do go with the rythmik i may spring for the se variety.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

OK, that makes sense. IF that's how bass management works on those receivers, then LFE content from 80-120Hz would indeed be lost.

BTW, I was asking more out of curiosity than anything (my pre-pro has a dedicated LFE output that is separate from the L/R subwoofer outs).

Sorry, I don't understand.

"They set the HPF at 80 Hz for the "upper" speakers and LPF at 80 Hz to the sub automatically for you ("it's a feature" -- especially with the lower-end receivers)."

If hpf is at 80 and lpf also at 80.


wouldn't mains take care of everything above 80, and sub everything below 80?

stevec325 03-09-2010 05:44 PM

Brian,

I was reviewing the F12SE feature page and found this:


Crossover options

To suit different setups, we provide a 12 db and 24 db/octave crossover. If you are using sealed main speakers without any high pass filtering (speakers set to "small" on a receiver), then we recommend the 12 db/octave option. If your main speakers are vented, then the 24 db/octave option is best. If you use the small setting on your receiver for your mains, then we recommend the 24 db/octave option, whether they are sealed or vented. To understand more about how to correctly integrate your subwoofer, read our phase alignment article.


Seems like a mixed message, or am I reading it incorrectly?

alphaiii 03-09-2010 07:31 PM

There seems to be alot of confusion about bass management and LFE when using an AVR.

This is how I understand it...and please correct me if I'm wrong...

Let's take a 3.1 example...

Say I set the fronts to 60Hz, and center to 80Hz crossover. High pass filters send the signal above 60Hz and 80Hz to the front main and center speakers, respectively. Bass below 60Hz and 80Hz in the front main and center channels are directed to the sub via the low pass filters.

LFE is a distinct channel which carries bass content separate from the other channels. It can contain bass content up to 120Hz.

So, when using an AVR with front and center speakers set to small, the sub receives the low pass filtered bass below 60Hz and 80Hz that is redirected away from the front main and center channels, AND the LFE channel which has bass content up to 120Hz.


My Denon 788 AVR allows for setting the LFE/LPF for the sub separately from the front and center crossovers. In my system, I set the LFE/LPF to 120Hz, and the crossovers for the fronts and center to 80Hz.

My Panasonic XR55 AVR, on the other hand, only allows for a single "universal" crossover setting. But, as I understand it....there still shouldn't be any info lost because the crossover redirects bass away from the speakers set to small...but shouldn't have any effect on the distinct LFE channel's content, correct?

Of course, if the subwoofer itself can't play up to 120Hz, or the crossover on the sub's plate amp is set to say 80Hz, then information from the LFE channel could be lost...

Rythmik 03-09-2010 09:11 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by fyzziks View Post

Modern AVRs generally have crossovers settable by pairs, except for the center, so the second figure (subwoofersfigure5) more accurately describes how bass management works these days. Note the flexible architecture and clean design - and that the summation is again the final step before sub output. I like this figure a lot, since it clearly shows how simple bass management really is.

The implementation of my Denon is closer than the Figure 3-3. The so-called optional 120hz LFE filtering is there. The LFE+main is there (ie, the LFE is duplicated via front left/right and sub to create a more spacious bass, haha). If we set the front speakers small, just stick a HPF right at the output of front speakers, instead of swapping between Figure 3-2 and 3-3. For any software/firmware/hardware designer, there is no point of devising two completely different schemes and switch between them (not to mention, it will introduce different latency and hard to compensate them so that all channels arrives at the same time). These flows are actually implemented in digital domain. In Figure 3-2, subwoofer is mandatory. Therefore this scheme is closer to systems with subwoofer built in such as Bose

BTW, we only look at the decoding side, how about encoding side? I bet the movie companies (actually the sound engineers) already figure out a way to encode it so that it decodes robustly across all different implementation. It is for their own interest to make it sound right.

[EDIT:] My denon can xover as low as 40hz. I wonder who would use that (or should I say who would design that) as he may lose the signal from 40hz to 120hz? That is almost two octaves !!

stevec325 03-09-2010 09:20 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaiii View Post

There seems to be alot of confusion about bass management and LFE when using an AVR.

This is how I understand it...and please correct me if I'm wrong...

Let's take a 3.1 example...

Say I set the fronts to 60Hz, and center to 80Hz crossover. High pass filters send the signal above 60Hz and 80Hz to the front main and center speakers, respectively. Bass below 60Hz and 80Hz in the front main and center channels are directed to the sub via the low pass filters.

LFE is a distinct channel which carries bass content separate from the other channels. It can contain bass content up to 120Hz.

So, when using an AVR with front and center speakers set to small, the sub receives the low pass filtered bass below 60Hz and 80Hz that is redirected away from the front main and center channels, AND the LFE channel which has bass content up to 120Hz.


My Denon 788 AVR allows for setting the LFE/LPF for the sub separately from the front and center crossovers. In my system, I set the LFE/LPF to 120Hz, and the crossovers for the fronts and center to 80Hz.

My Panasonic XR55 AVR, on the other hand, only allows for a single "universal" crossover setting. But, as I understand it....there still shouldn't be any info lost because the crossover redirects bass away from the speakers set to small...but shouldn't have any effect on the distinct LFE channel's content, correct?

Of course, if the subwoofer itself can't play up to 120Hz, or the crossover on the sub's plate amp is set to say 80Hz, then information from the LFE channel could be lost...

Yup - that's pretty much it Except that if the crossover (filter) on the SW is set to 80Hz, as you exampled, then not just the LFE information above 80Hz would be lost - any redirected bass from other channels, above 80Hz, would be lost.

The assumption on your Panny AVR may or may not be correct. Unless they specifically explain how the LFE channel is handled, the only way to know for sure would be by using LFE test tones.

The term "crossover" should never be used in context with LFE in an AVR. Sadly, most AVR documentation still refers to it in that manner.

Rythmik 03-09-2010 09:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevec325 View Post

Brian,

I was reviewing the F12SE feature page and found this:


Crossover options

To suit different setups, we provide a 12 db and 24 db/octave crossover. If you are using sealed main speakers without any high pass filtering (speakers set to "small" on a receiver), then we recommend the 12 db/octave option. If your main speakers are vented, then the 24 db/octave option is best. If you use the small setting on your receiver for your mains, then we recommend the 24 db/octave option, whether they are sealed or vented. To understand more about how to correctly integrate your subwoofer, read our phase alignment article.


Seems like a mixed message, or am I reading it incorrectly?

You are correct, it is mixed message. I need to correct that.

stevec325 03-09-2010 09:27 PM

Thanks Brian... if using small on AVR does it matter if the speakers are vented or not for using 12/24/db/octave? And which should be used?

BTW, days away from ordering the F12SE... still hoping you'll be able to advise a way to make the internal connections to force auto-on. Any thoughts? Doable?

sdurani 03-09-2010 10:14 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by porksoda View Post

wouldn't mains take care of everything above 80, and sub everything below 80?

Not for the .1/LFE channel. When LFE is low passed at 80Hz, the rest of the content (from 80-120Hz) is usually not re-routed to the mains. Hence Brian pointing out a bass management scheme that combines the LFE channel with the main channels before low passing to the subwoofer. This way, the rest of the LFE content is already in the mains.

JimP 03-09-2010 10:18 PM

Considering that some manufacturers don't follow the spec., I'd think it'd be best to determine what you're receiver/prepro is doing and work around it.

Bigred7078 03-09-2010 10:47 PM

Ok advice needed...

My setup integrates both a HT system and a 2-channel system. I have a pre-amp with HT bypass that I will be using (emotiva usp-1). The sub will be used for both music and HT.

Any ideas how to properly set up the sub for my needs?

porksoda 03-09-2010 11:08 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Not for the .1/LFE channel. When LFE is low passed at 80Hz, the rest of the content (from 80-120Hz) is usually not re-routed to the mains. Hence Brian pointing out a bass management scheme that combines the LFE channel with the main channels before low passing to the subwoofer. This way, the rest of the LFE content is already in the mains.

Ah i understand.

In my case.. i usually do all speakers small (i have full range towers). So depending on how bass management is handled i "may" lose freq above the xover from lfe channel only.

For stereo mode i have option of sub+sat or large+sub or large.

I will have to give a read over my manual.

and the manual says:

Cross-over Freq.: This setting defines the frequency at which bass redirection begins.
Frequencies below this level are redirected from ‘small’ speakers to the Fronts or to
the subwoofer; frequencies above this level are not redirected.
The value for this
setting depends on your speakers, environment and taste, and is best determined by
experimentation.
The adjustment can be made in increments of 10Hz between 40Hz and 130Hz.

So it kinda hints that lfe is NOT redirected to "large" speakers, so hence losing info above the xover.

So what brian initially said and what is recommended is to set l/r to large and everything else to small and use lfe. How would one know which method is being use for bass management for which manufacturer?
In a way it would be a hit n miss scheme no?

ddgtr 03-09-2010 11:13 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigred7078 View Post

Ok advice needed...

My setup integrates both a HT system and a 2-channel system. I have a pre-amp with HT bypass that I will be using (emotiva usp-1). The sub will be used for both music and HT.

Any ideas how to properly set up the sub for my needs?


Good question, I'd love to see what Brian's take is on this since I'm in the same boat as Bigred and am seriously considering one of the Rythmik's subs.

The way I have mine setup is: in the AVR set mains to large, then preouts to the preamp, out to an external crossover (dbx223xl) from there on to the sub and amp. I have it crossed at 70 hz. My fronts are Monitor Audio GR20.

It seems that this has been working pretty well for me, except for I need a more "musical" sub. I care much more about music than movies...

Regards
Danny

DonH50 03-10-2010 12:26 AM

Bigred -- The emotiva web site has a PDF of the manual you can download. It has a good description of their bass management and how to use it. I would start by hooking the sub up using the emotiva's LPF function and the LFE input of the Rythmik, then use the HT bypass when running in HT mode (using the LFE management in the AVR). This assumes the LPF in the emotiva is better than that in the Rythmik, something Brian may be able to address. The advantage of doing it this way is that LFE is still handled by your AVR.

Danny -- FWIW (not much), I liked most of dbx's pro equipment, but in the past a lot of their gear was fairly noisy (N.B. times have changed and I have not listened recently). I know the old professional (600-series?) crossover I used briefly was OK, but the 2xx "consumer" unit was a disappointment. Your setup should work fine, I would think, and while I don't know what you have for a sub, I can say I was unprepared for how much better my system sounds with the new Rythmiks in place of my last sub (Infinity PSW212). My older sub was a custom servo design (long before everybody and their dog had one) and was very good in its day; I think the Rythmik is a better unit than that. Memory fades, but often tends to make things better than they were, so thinking the Rythmik is better than my custom job is a bit shocking and somewhat annoying since it was my design, but there you go...

ddtgr -- I measured the response of the outputs for a few AVRs and thought my findings had been obviated by newer receivers (see discussion above), but maybe not... Your experience sounds like what I found on some of my older units.

Bigred7078 03-10-2010 06:14 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

Bigred -- The emotiva web site has a PDF of the manual you can download. It has a good description of their bass management and how to use it. I would start by hooking the sub up using the emotiva's LPF function and the LFE input of the Rythmik, then use the HT bypass when running in HT mode (using the LFE management in the AVR). This assumes the LPF in the emotiva is better than that in the Rythmik, something Brian may be able to address. The advantage of doing it this way is that LFE is still handled by your AVR.

Yes I understand that. Im talking more about the actual subwoofer setup with both systems.

porksoda 03-10-2010 06:53 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigred7078 View Post

Yes I understand that. Im talking more about the actual subwoofer setup with both systems.

a while ago i had my avr and my integrated on the same system... for sub i used two sets of cable one out of integrated for stereo listening and when i had to switch to avr i would switch the cables at the sub for lfe.

my understanding in my avr was if ht bypassed for stereo then stereo was only audible though the speaker out of my integrated, and there was no signal out of avr's l/r. So i had to use the sub from my integrated.

When ht was not bypassed then avr's lfe and l/r were used.

---

you should confirm when ht is bypassed and you play 5.1 material if you get lfe signal.

also when ht is bypassed and you are listening to stereo if there is any info on lfe (depending on your speaker selection there maybe signal)

if answer is yes/yes then use the sub at lfe
if answer is yes/no then you may have to use two sets of cables for stereo sub and lfe setup.

Zmaximus 03-10-2010 07:01 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigred7078 View Post

Ok advice needed...

My setup integrates both a HT system and a 2-channel system. I have a pre-amp with HT bypass that I will be using (emotiva usp-1). The sub will be used for both music and HT.

Any ideas how to properly set up the sub for my needs?

Bigred

I have done this setup with both Proceed Pre and RSP-1 and preferred PRE since pushing a button led to unity gain...was not possible with RSP-1 since you have to swing the vol to 2/3 up and is a bit hit and miss.

I have always played the main speakers as full and taken the rca (xlr to amp) out of the preamp to sub l/r in...the trick has been using SMS to calibrate the system (I dont use it for eq but just to get realtime feedback to what I am doing to fr response etc)...I have been able to play with crossover, phase and volume on sub to blend it perfectly and address room issues alongwith mixing it with main speakers. The biggest surprise was how even volume on sub could induce peaks and nulls on fr! I use SMS to play with phase on lfe subs prior to running AUD Multi XT and gets me a far better way of integrating into my system...Just so you know have tried everything out there and ended up with this!

rick240 03-10-2010 07:21 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

BTW, you guys keep coming up with new idea I cannot keep up with . I have in my hand FV15, TH, class D servo, ... not to mention I still owe Rick some answers about 8" or 10" servo... help!

You're going to need a clone or two to explore all of the product ideas

sdurani 03-10-2010 07:33 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by porksoda View Post

How would one know which method is being use for bass management for which manufacturer? In a way it would be a hit n miss scheme no?

Yes, it would, since there is no standardization across the board. One way around it would be to do the old fashioned sub/sat configuration. Set your receiver to no subwoofer, small centre, small surrounds. All the low frequencies (including the discrete LFE channel) will end up in your large L/R speakers.

Run speaker wire from your receiver to the speaker inputs on the Rythmik sub, then out from the Rythmik to your front speakers. Dial in the subwoofer (using Level, Crossover and Delay/Phase knobs on the plate amp) to take over juuust where your L/R speakers naturally roll off. No part of the signal is lost and the Rythmik ends up handling the lowest frequencies of the entire system.

ddgtr 03-10-2010 08:03 AM

DonH50,

l bought the dbx from a local store being almost sure I was going to bring it back, I even told the salesman that it might be the case. To my surprise, it has introduced no noise/artifacts as far as my ears can tell. I had to keep it.

I have an older Velodyne sub (CT150), and another benefit the crossover introduced was that it completely eliminated a slight hum in the sub. Before I got the dbx, I had it wired like Sanjay recommends above, which essentially uses the sub's internal crossover but in my case there was a ground loop somewhere which I could not find and the dbx took care of it. There is definitely something about using all balanced connections, I didn't believe in it before but now I'm sold. My next sub will definitely have balanced connections.

Regards,
Danny

DonH50 03-10-2010 08:42 AM

Bigred -- Sorry, must have misunderstood. I would set up the sub for music using the LPF in the emotiva and tweak everything in, then let the receiver handle it in HT bypass mode for HT. That would bypass the LPF in the subwoofer (though I think you give up phase control as well) and you set up the sub as for conventional audio system. When you go to HT, put the emotiva in bypass mode so it doesn't touch the analog signal passing through it, and let the AVR control basss management (for sub and mains, including LFE). If you are using you AVR as a (or the) primary source into your emotiva, you'll want to set the AVR in two-channel direct mode (or the equivalent) for music so it doesn't do any processing of the audio before the emotiva.

ddgtr -- That's great! I know some of their latest pro sound stuff is much better than in the "old days" so they must have brought everything up to snuff. (My early use was a stack of noise control units for various tape decks, though I am using a dbx EQ/processor at our church.) And yeah, after decades of doing live sound I can affirm balanced is a huge benefit. Too bad most AVRs (including every one I own ) don't have balanced I/O...

Bigred7078 03-10-2010 09:52 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

Bigred -- Sorry, must have misunderstood. I would set up the sub for music using the LPF in the emotiva and tweak everything in, then let the receiver handle it in HT bypass mode for HT. That would bypass the LPF in the subwoofer (though I think you give up phase control as well) and you set up the sub as for conventional audio system. When you go to HT, put the emotiva in bypass mode so it doesn't touch the analog signal passing through it, and let the AVR control basss management (for sub and mains, including LFE). If you are using you AVR as a (or the) primary source into your emotiva, you'll want to set the AVR in two-channel direct mode (or the equivalent) for music so it doesn't do any processing of the audio before the emotiva.

Thats kind of what I was thinking too. But I do not use my AVR for anything 2-channel Thats what the turntable is for going into the pre-amp

Bigred7078 03-10-2010 09:55 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmaximus View Post

Bigred

I have done this setup with both Proceed Pre and RSP-1 and preferred PRE since pushing a button led to unity gain...was not possible with RSP-1 since you have to swing the vol to 2/3 up and is a bit hit and miss.

I have always played the main speakers as full and taken the rca (xlr to amp) out of the preamp to sub l/r in...the trick has been using SMS to calibrate the system (I dont use it for eq but just to get realtime feedback to what I am doing to fr response etc)...I have been able to play with crossover, phase and volume on sub to blend it perfectly and address room issues alongwith mixing it with main speakers. The biggest surprise was how even volume on sub could induce peaks and nulls on fr! I use SMS to play with phase on lfe subs prior to running AUD Multi XT and gets me a far better way of integrating into my system...Just so you know have tried everything out there and ended up with this!

Well the RSP-1 was different since it did not have a true HT bypass. Fortunately for me the USP-1 does and I wont need to mark a matched gain level on the pre-amp.

I've thought about using a SMS-1, but I want to see If I can be happy without it for now. Thanks.

fyzziks 03-10-2010 12:50 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

The implementation of my Denon is closer than the Figure 3-3. The so-called optional 120hz LFE filtering is there. The LFE+main is there (ie, the LFE is duplicated via front left/right and sub to create a more spacious bass, haha). If we set the front speakers small, just stick a HPF right at the output of front speakers, instead of swapping between Figure 3-2 and 3-3. For any software/firmware/hardware designer, there is no point of devising two completely different schemes and switch between them (not to mention, it will introduce different latency and hard to compensate them so that all channels arrives at the same time). These flows are actually implemented in digital domain. In Figure 3-2, subwoofer is mandatory. Therefore this scheme is closer to systems with subwoofer built in such as Bose

[EDIT:] My denon can xover as low as 40hz. I wonder who would use that (or should I say who would design that) as he may lose the signal from 40hz to 120hz? That is almost two octaves !!

You're right, a bass management architecture that mixes the LFE into the L and R channels, then crosses over the whole LR+LFE pair from the L/R to the sub will not lose any of the LFE, regardless which frequency is chosen. The virtue of such a scheme is that frequencies that are sent to the sub are directly limited by the LP part of the crossover, which makes life easier for the sub designer. The problem is that you now have a potentially significant part of the LFE in the LR, which now must be able to handle the additional 10dB of headroom in that channel. If you set the crossover to 40Hz, for example, your mains would have to handle that +10dB from 40-120Hz. That could be a challenge.

On the other hand, if you follow the scheme in the diagrams I included, you see that the whole LFE goes to the sub, which presumably and historically is designed precisely to handle the extra headroom requirements. Unfortunately for you, the subwoofer designer, it also requires you to have frequency response up to 120Hz, if nothing is to be lost from the LFE channel.

It should be relatively easy to find out which of these is running in any given AVR using a source sending a sweep to the LFE only. Doesn't the Avia test disc have this?

DonH50 03-10-2010 03:30 PM

My Sony AVR allows me to set the LFE gain to +10 or 0 dB so I can compensate the dynamic range issue. (I haven't looked at other receivers to see if they can also do that.) But, does that mean everything is OK, or that if I set 0 dB the LFE output would be too low? For now I have it left on "auto" (whatever that means to Sony). Based on my measurements (test tones and SPL meter) and listening, my system sounds OK, implying the AVR is handling the bass (regular and LFE) OK for music and movies in my situation (main L/R and subs in parallel so the AVR essentially sees a pair of very full range L/R speakers and no sub). I agree the mains must still handle all the low frequency content, a potential issue.

Good posts, thanks! - Don

palofex 03-10-2010 04:47 PM

I just ordered my D15SE and I can't wait till they're back in stock and shipped. I was notified my Ascend Audio that they should be receiving their shipment late March. Proud to be part of the Rythmik family after a lot of research into many different subs.

stevec325 03-10-2010 04:55 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

My Sony AVR allows me to set the LFE gain to +10 or 0 dB so I can compensate the dynamic range issue. (I haven't looked at other receivers to see if they can also do that.) But, does that mean everything is OK, or that if I set 0 dB the LFE output would be too low? For now I have it left on "auto" (whatever that means to Sony). Based on my measurements (test tones and SPL meter) and listening, my system sounds OK, implying the AVR is handling the bass (regular and LFE) OK for music and movies in my situation (main L/R and subs in parallel so the AVR essentially sees a pair of very full range L/R speakers and no sub). I agree the mains must still handle all the low frequency content, a potential issue.

Good posts, thanks! - Don

Ugh - you stumbled upon a huge can of worms. You'll have to check the AVR threads and see if your Sony handles the LFE +10dB boost correctly. There were some (many/few) that did not correctly apply the required 10dB boost and even if you manually applied it (assuming your AVR had that function), it then resulted in the sub being 10dB "hot" for other than LFE sources.

DonH50 03-10-2010 05:22 PM

Yeah, been there, done that... I think it is actually working OK now, though I haven't been able to measure it yet with a video test DVD, because I am running the sub as part of the mains (so far as the AVR knows) instead of using the sub output from the AVR. At least my initial trials with a couple of CDs and a movie seem OK.

I am learning a lot about LFE in the process, not a bad thing. Hopefully.

In the meantime, I am going to go down after supper, watch the snow, and listen to the system for a while

Zmaximus 03-10-2010 05:59 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by fyzziks View Post

You're right, a bass management architecture that mixes the LFE into the L and R channels, then crosses over the whole LR+LFE pair from the L/R to the sub will not lose any of the LFE, regardless which frequency is chosen. The virtue of such a scheme is that frequencies that are sent to the sub are directly limited by the LP part of the crossover, which makes life easier for the sub designer. The problem is that you now have a potentially significant part of the LFE in the LR, which now must be able to handle the additional 10dB of headroom in that channel. If you set the crossover to 40Hz, for example, your mains would have to handle that +10dB from 40-120Hz. That could be a challenge.

On the other hand, if you follow the scheme in the diagrams I included, you see that the whole LFE goes to the sub, which presumably and historically is designed precisely to handle the extra headroom requirements. Unfortunately for you, the subwoofer designer, it also requires you to have frequency response up to 120Hz, if nothing is to be lost from the LFE channel.

It should be relatively easy to find out which of these is running in any given AVR using a source sending a sweep to the LFE only. Doesn't the Avia test disc have this?

In this debate is it being assumed that there is full content between 80-120Hz? The LFE has a brick wall at 120Hz (no content at 121) and the engg designed a smooth roll off from 80Hz to 120Hz which means there is not that much useful info there anyway and thus the THX recommended 80Hz for LFE.

porksoda 03-10-2010 10:40 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmaximus View Post

In this debate is it being assumed that there is full content between 80-120Hz? The LFE has a brick wall at 120Hz (no content at 121) and the engg designed a smooth roll off from 80Hz to 120Hz which means there is not that much useful info there anyway and thus the THX recommended 80Hz for LFE.

so basically if this is confirmed that means its ok to xover at 80hz regardless of the dd scheme for bass management.

Rythmik 03-11-2010 01:12 AM

Normally, I will have photo of new products professionally done. But I bet some are very eager to see the photos. So I decide to provide some that are done by me, an amateur.



From left to right, F15, E15, and F12. E15 is as narrow as we can get. To keep as much internal space, I keep the height same as F15 and depth 1" shorter. The tall and narrow front baffle further makes it look not as large.



Here is the driver DS1510. It weighs 30lbs net.




Here is the amp. U571 is not included. The 18000uF/63v caps are from Panasonic and I purchased in US and air ship to my supplier. They cannot find anything as volume efficient as these Panies.



Zmaximus 03-11-2010 05:06 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by porksoda View Post

so basically if this is confirmed that means its ok to xover at 80hz regardless of the dd scheme for bass management.

Yes since your LPF at 80 is going to match the smooth roll off anyway...

Zmaximus 03-11-2010 05:25 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by porksoda View Post

so basically if this is confirmed that means its ok to xover at 80hz regardless of the dd scheme for bass management.

Here are couple of articles I found in archives to shed some light on the discussions...

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/techn...equencies.html

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/techn...und-sound.html

Zmaximus 03-11-2010 05:28 AM

Brian

Picts look great! any sepcs on the d1510/

Thanks

Tank45 03-11-2010 07:37 AM

Wow Brian... those are sweet! I noticed that my F-15 shipped yesterday... is that one in the picture mine?

porksoda 03-11-2010 08:20 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmaximus View Post

Yes since your LPF at 80 is going to match the smooth roll off anyway...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmaximus View Post

Here are couple of articles I found in archives to shed some light on the discussions...

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/techn...equencies.html

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/techn...und-sound.html

thanks... i usually xover at 70 or 80hz myself so this is a good re-assurance. I find with my "full range" towers if i use them as large i seem to get a bit of boomyness out of them and the highs and mids kinda get lost so i prefer to use them as small.. i have not done a rew in my room and various equipment but i will soon.

porksoda 03-11-2010 08:22 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

Normally, I will have photo of new products professionally done. But I bet some are very eager to see the photos. So I decide to provide some that are done by me, an amateur.

looks good. which amp is that.. is that the new peq2 amp?

I will soon take my pics and post them

AcuraCL 03-11-2010 08:56 AM

Can someone tell me where these units are built/assembled?

And why did they leave the first "h" out of Rhythmic?

enricoclaudio 03-11-2010 08:56 AM

Brian:

You recommend to turn OFF the subwoofer when is not in use or may be left ON all the time, say for up to a week or more time?. I ask this because with the new A370PEQ2 amplifier was removed the auto-on funtion.

Tank45 03-11-2010 10:46 AM

The units are assembled in central Texas. Rythmik is a brand name, kind of like Krispy Kreme, Toys R Us, etc.

Bigred7078 03-11-2010 11:17 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuraCL View Post

And why did they leave the first "h" out of Rhythmic?

Why do some brands spell extreme like "Xtreme"...

Zmaximus 03-11-2010 11:56 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by porksoda View Post

looks good. which amp is that.. is that the new peq2 amp?

I will soon take my pics and post them

Guess its H600PEQ, the one that uses those Pannies

fyzziks 03-11-2010 12:34 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmaximus View Post

In this debate is it being assumed that there is full content between 80-120Hz? The LFE has a brick wall at 120Hz (no content at 121) and the engg designed a smooth roll off from 80Hz to 120Hz which means there is not that much useful info there anyway and thus the THX recommended 80Hz for LFE.

OK, first of all, you're right that 80 Hz should be basically fine, since most of the content in the LFE is below 80 Hz. But there are a few more points you may want to consider.

1. The THX 80 Hz value is predicated on old data. A guy with handle "filmmixer" who of course, mixes films in Hollywood for a living, I think said that recently (in the last few years) more and more content was being added in the 80-120Hz region, mainly sparingly, but for dramatic effect.

2. When you add an 80 Hz LP filter to an already filtered roll off, you get a much greater loss at any given frequency since you are cascading filters, and so are changing the sound mixer's (and the director's) intent in that band, e.g. if both you and the engineer are using a 24 dB/octave filter, then at 80 Hz what you hear is -6 dB instead of -3, and at 120 Hz you are down 24 dB instead of 12, etc. Different sound.

3. This is not technical, but social - one of the founding fathers of THX, Tom Holman, is also a principal at Audyssey, and he and Chris Kyriakakis seem to know each other well. ChrisK has very strongly advocated letting the full 120Hz through, which I don't think he would say if Tom had convinced him that THX had it right all along. I think the opposite may be true. Of course, this is all conjecture and maybe irrelevant.

So I think the bottom line is 80Hz LPF is probably OK, but if it doesn't cost too much, or you are a stickler for getting as much of the director's artistic intent as possible, then you may want to try putting the full LFE through.

Zmaximus 03-11-2010 01:42 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by fyzziks View Post

OK, first of all, you're right that 80 Hz should be basically fine, since most of the content in the LFE is below 80 Hz. But there are a few more points you may want to consider.

1. The THX 80 Hz value is predicated on old data. A guy with handle "filmmixer" who of course, mixes films in Hollywood for a living, I think said that recently (in the last few years) more and more content was being added in the 80-120Hz region, mainly sparingly, but for dramatic effect.

2. When you add an 80 Hz LP filter to an already filtered roll off, you get a much greater loss at any given frequency since you are cascading filters, and so are changing the sound mixer's (and the director's) intent in that band, e.g. if both you and the engineer are using a 24 dB/octave filter, then at 80 Hz what you hear is -6 dB instead of -3, and at 120 Hz you are down 24 dB instead of 12, etc. Different sound.

3. This is not technical, but social - one of the founding fathers of THX, Tom Holman, is also a principal at Audyssey, and he and Chris Kyriakakis seem to know each other well. ChrisK has very strongly advocated letting the full 120Hz through, which I don't think he would say if Tom had convinced him that THX had it right all along. I think the opposite may be true. Of course, this is all conjecture and maybe irrelevant.

So I think the bottom line is 80Hz LPF is probably OK, but if it doesn't cost too much, or you are a stickler for getting as much of the director's artistic intent as possible, then you may want to try putting the full LFE through.

I am not sure what you intended to imply in point 2? LPF at 80Hz does not do anything to 80Hz! The 12/24db would reduce it by that much at 160Hz but there is no content there... The roll off is between 80-120Hz and still exists to date in all iterations...there is no full signal from 80-120 in all my readings, the roll off is not down to zero but more than enough to make that sector functionally not relevant...in addition you are adding a directional event to your sound field (sub would be localizable at that freq)on top of taxing it in a segment where pay off is minimal unless the satellites are very miserable (-3db over 100db). The front three should have information on the the segment 80-120 to compensate fairly well for any perceived loss in that area.

alphaiii 03-11-2010 02:40 PM

Any chances of a E12 version, that like the E15, is a slightly small (narrower) version of the F12/F15?

DonH50 03-11-2010 04:14 PM

Filters aren't perfect, at least real ones... Filters are (typically) specified at the -3 dB point, so the -3 dB point of an 80 Hz LPF is 80 Hz. If you cascade two of them, then at 80 Hz it is -6 dB, with more roll-off up to that point and of course faster roll-off after. This is not true for all filters, particularly various equiripple types (elliptical, Chebyshev, etc.), but hopefully you get the idea.

Fatawan 03-11-2010 04:28 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

Normally, I will have photo of new products professionally done. But I bet some are very eager to see the photos. So I decide to provide some that are done by me, an amateur.



From left to right, F15, E15, and F12. E15 is as narrow as we can get. To keep as much internal space, I keep the height same as F15 and depth 1" shorter. The tall and narrow front baffle further makes it look not as large.



Here is the driver DS1510. It weighs 30lbs net.




Here is the amp. U571 is not included. The 18000uF/63v caps are from Panasonic and I purchased in US and air ship to my supplier. They cannot find anything as volume efficient as these Panies.



Excellent Brian. Those are very nice. I love the look of the black 15" drivers!

Rythmik 03-12-2010 07:00 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaiii View Post

Any chances of a E12 version, that like the E15, is a slightly small (narrower) version of the F12/F15?

I would like to know the demand. It is possible to do that. All I have to do is to swap the GR12-4 driver's voice coil and put in on DS1200 cone/motor. Please note that the parameter of current DS1200 has been like that for 7 years now. I found it to be almost right at the sweet splot, providing more output around 30-50hz than other drivers. If I do go with E12, the output below 20hz should be the same, but the output between 30-50hz can drop by 1-2db depending on BL value.

Rythmik 03-12-2010 07:01 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmaximus View Post

Guess its H600PEQ, the one that uses those Pannies

Yes. That is the H600PEQ.

BTW, I will put out some spec on DS1510 driver this weekend.

For those who eagerly want to order E15 with H600 option, please wait till next Monday when I catch up a bit. I know everyone is eager. But .....

Rythmik 03-12-2010 07:04 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by castaño View Post

Brian:

You recommend to turn OFF the subwoofer when is not in use or may be left ON all the time, say for up to a week or more time?. I ask this because with the new A370PEQ2 amplifier was removed the auto-on funtion.

Yes. I would recommend them to be on. The ON state only consume 8W without signal. It is really low. Put an auto-on feature can save only 2W. BTW, I recommend everyone to get a "kill-a-watt" meter. It is really useful.

JimP 03-12-2010 08:13 AM

So....which of the Rythmik subs are the most musical?

mcreyn 03-12-2010 08:50 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

I would like to know the demand. It is possible to do that. All I have to do is to swap the GR12-4 driver's voice coil and put in on DS1200 cone/motor.

I would be interested in an E12, would be more interest in a D12!!!!

porksoda 03-12-2010 01:48 PM

anyone here compare the f12 or f15 with a seaton or empire?

Tank45 03-13-2010 07:32 AM

Can anyone tell me... cannot find any info anywhere.... should I plug my new 600w f-15 into a high voltage surge protector or just straight into the wall?

Rythmik 03-13-2010 08:02 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimP View Post

So....which of the Rythmik subs are the most musical?

They are all very musical. They all have the same articulate, transparent, effortless, and coherent bass sound. You can tell the difference only when you place them side-by-side and listen very carefully. I contribute their distinct sound to 1) low intrinsic Q value (only 0.33, 3x lower than nonservo), and 2) extremely low memory effect. The latter is only possible via servo.

If one does not play very loud, then F12G with SW12-4 paper cone driver is very good and has slight edge in that area. Very dynamic at low level signals. This is particularly good if it is a pure 2ch system and when the background noise can be very quiet. The shortcoming of paper cone is it is not stiff enough. In HT, when huge short spurs of bass is often, the metal cone performs better to overcome the air spring (in both sealed and vented subwoofers) to stay in control. One can use a simple cone push test in sealed box. Our metal cone is very hard to press. Other similar paper cone sealed subs are still pretty easy. This test will not work in vented subs, because a slow push is equivalent to exercising the cone with a very low frequency signal and we know at close to 0hz frequency, vented sub behaves like in free air and very easy to push. One actually needs to push exactly right to emulate a 20hz stimulus to feel the reaction force.

I designed SW12-4 too and therefore I have access to 15" paper cone. I cannot get them to play right even with servo. That is the main reason, we don't see 15" paper cone from our line-up. It is possible to work in OB/IB application, but I don't want to step in IB cult community, and for OB, the 12" OB drivers fits in Danny's application perfectly.

So again, if one can comfortably crossover at lower frequency, the 15" is actually a better choice, having even better dynamic headroom. Between D15 and F15, I would say F15 is slightly more musically if one cannot xover at 60hz or below. I know a lot of customers like its furniture look and its appeal to spouse. But knowing the trick for them to work is also very important. Also don't put D15 on wood subfloor.


Allen and his friend (Mike?) in San Antonio came over to my house and I demoed the D15 with my 340SE fronts, Denon 4802 (hand modified to use first order RC to front channels), and an Ayre CX5xe. I crossover at 80hz and it is a music only system. My HT system is in my great room, but they are less interested. My interconnects are Kimber KCAG for the subwoofer and Discovery Signature for others. My power cables are Black Sand (from Canada). My 2ch room is upstairs with wood sub-floor, not a very ideal situation for D15, but he insisted on it. So,.. I have no problem with that. The trip was reported in Emotiva forum. He brought his own CDs. He was very surprised by the details in the sound (as compared with his own system). He contributes that to the CD players (I understand, it is 4k or more in retail). After he has gone through all his listening, I suggest that we lay the D15 side way so that the cone faces us and he immediately hears the difference. I was busy entertaining both and I didn't listen carefully. Besides, I am not really familiar with the CD he brought.

If there is enough demand by show of hands, I may be able to get some in for D12. But I basically like the idea that the cone should be facing us as much as possible to produce a strong direct sound energy. It is the cleanest sound. Anything that bounds off the boundary will mix with the resonance caused by the boundaries.

Rythmik 03-13-2010 08:10 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by porksoda View Post

anyone here compare the f12 or f15 with a seaton or empire?

That would be interested. I think it is fair to compare two F15-600 configuration with one Seaton. If we do that the total amplifier output is about the same (I am pretty sure Seaton is very accurate in spec rating, I admire his technical knowledge).

I had a plan for dual 15" system that I called F25. I will show a drawing later for a public concept review. I wasn't very enthusiastic about it because it will be big and more expensive to transport. In the end, one can probably save a couple of hundreds after considering the possible discount for a pair of F15 vs one F25. But there seems to be a growing interests in dual. I will have those dual system coming in end the this months. A matching enclosures can move the sales faster. That would be a good motivation for me to get that going.






It is different from Submerssive or Empire. All drivers face forward. There is a divider between them so that there is no interference between two drivers (that is, push one driver and the other driver won't comes out). Depth 20.8", height 33", and width 19" to preseve the largest volume for efficiency.

Iain- 03-13-2010 08:12 AM

"Can anyone tell me... cannot find any info anywhere.... should I plug my new 600w f-15 into a high voltage surge protector or just straight into the wall?"


You may want to consider this:
http://www.tripplite.com/en/products...xtModelID=3980

Zmaximus 03-13-2010 08:27 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

They are all very musical. They all have the same articulate, transparent, effortless, and coherent bass sound. You can tell the difference only when you place them side-by-side and listen very carefully. I contribute their distinct sound to 1) low intrinsic Q value (only 0.33, 3x lower than nonservo), and 2) extremely low memory effect. The latter is only possible via servo.

If one does not play very loud, then F12G with SW12-4 paper cone driver is very good and has slight edge in that area. Very dynamic at low level signals. This is particularly good if it is a pure 2ch system and when the background noise can be very quiet. The shortcoming of paper cone is it is not stiff enough. In HT, when huge short spurs of bass is often, the metal cone performs better to overcome the air spring (in both sealed and vented subwoofers) to stay in control. One can use a simple cone push test in sealed box. Our metal cone is very hard to press. Other similar paper cone sealed subs are still pretty easy. This test will not work in vented subs, because a slow push is equivalent to exercising the cone with a very low frequency signal and we know at close to 0hz frequency, vented sub behaves like in free air and very easy to push. One actually needs to push exactly right to emulate a 20hz stimulus to feel the reaction force.

I designed SW12-4 too and therefore I have access to 15" paper cone. I cannot get them to play right even with servo. That is the main reason, we don't see 15" paper cone from our line-up. It is possible to work in OB/IB application, but I don't want to step in IB cult community, and for OB, the 12" OB drivers fits in Danny's application perfectly.

So again, if one can comfortably crossover at lower frequency, the 15" is actually a better choice, having even better dynamic headroom. Between D15 and F15, I would say F15 is slightly more musically if one cannot xover at 60hz or below. I know a lot of customers like its furniture look and its appeal to spouse. But knowing the trick for them to work is also very important. Also don't put D15 on wood subfloor.


Allen and his friend (Mike?) in San Antonio came over to my house and I demoed the D15 with my 340SE fronts, Denon 4802 (hand modified to use first order RC to front channels), and an Ayre CX5xe. I crossover at 80hz and it is a music only system. My HT system is in my great room, but they are less interested. My interconnects are Kimber KCAG for the subwoofer and Discovery Signature for others. My power cables are Black Sand (from Canada). My 2ch room is upstairs with wood sub-floor, not a very ideal situation for D15, but he insisted on it. So,.. I have no problem with that. The trip was reported in Emotiva forum. He brought his own CDs. He was very surprised by the details in the sound (as compared with his own system). He contributes that to the CD players (I understand, it is 4k or more in retail). After he has gone through all his listening, I suggest that we lay the D15 side way so that the cone faces us and he immediately hears the difference. I was busy entertaining both and I didn't listen carefully. Besides, I am not really familiar with the CD he brought.

If there is enough demand by show of hands, I may be able to get some in for D12. But I basically like the idea that the cone should be facing us as much as possible to produce a strong direct sound energy. It is the cleanest sound. Anything that bounds off the boundary will mix with the resonance caused by the boundaries.

Brian,

Is this recommendation esp cutoff freq for F15 any different with the new 1510 with H600? I plan 80hz with 24db roll off

rick240 03-13-2010 09:00 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

If there is enough demand by show of hands, I may be able to get some in for D12. But I basically like the idea that the cone should be facing us as much as possible to produce a strong direct sound energy. It is the cleanest sound. Anything that bounds off the boundary will mix with the resonance caused by the boundaries.

So how go the thoughts on a possible F8 or F10?

KLee 03-13-2010 09:23 AM

What will the price of the E15 be and will it perform as well as the F15?

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 10:00 AM

Brian

In a 4600 cubic foot room what would be the best choice for a DIY sealed enclosure and amp if the size of the enclosure was not a concern using 15" drivers? All drivers would be front firing and if duals they would be stacked in a vertical plane or opposing. 50%/50% music and HT. Sub would have about a 25' interconnect to my processor.

What configuration will be available in the near future using the 600 watt amp?

Any way to add one mono xlr input to the 600amp? For room on the board I would not need the RCA Stereo inputs or high level in. The PEQ would be nice though.

Will the DS1510 be available in 8 ohm and will a single 600w drive a pair with out clipping?

Just looking at all the options before pulling the trigger. Thanks

One idea was combining two sand boxes like what Danny did but scaled for two of the 15" driver's that would be front firing stacked vertically. That would give me a box 20.5"w x 19"d x 45"h. That would give me 3.631 Cu Ft per speaker with all the interior baffles in place. There would be four braces spaced 3.2" apart with a .75 wall between the two compartments. The front and rear baffle are 1.5" thick and all other walls are 1.5" thick Outer 3/4 MDF-3/8 sand-3/8 MDF.

Having a modified 600PEQ Amp with a mono XLR input in place of the RCA or High level inputs driving both speakers.

Rythmik 03-13-2010 04:01 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmaximus View Post

Brian,

Is this recommendation esp cutoff freq for F15 any different with the new 1510 with H600? I plan 80hz with 24db roll off

Their cutoff frequency would be same. I have designed the two drivers to have almost same T/S parameters. 80hz is good for either of them.

Rythmik 03-13-2010 05:17 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Van Belkom View Post

Brian

In a 4600 cubic foot room what would be the best choice for a DIY sealed enclosure and amp if the size of the enclosure was not a concern using 15" drivers? All drivers would be front firing and if duals they would be stacked in a vertical plane or opposing. 50%/50% music and HT. Sub would have about a 25' interconnect to my processor.

What configuration will be available in the near future using the 600 watt amp?

Any way to add one mono xlr input to the 600amp? For room on the board I would not need the RCA Stereo inputs or high level in. The PEQ would be nice though.

Will the DS1510 be available in 8 ohm and will a single 600w drive a pair with out clipping?

Just looking at all the options before pulling the trigger. Thanks

One idea was combining two sand boxes like what Danny did but scaled for two of the 15" driver's that would be front firing stacked vertically. That would give me a box 20.5"w x 19"d x 45"h. That would give me 3.631 Cu Ft per speaker with all the interior baffles in place. There would be four braces spaced 3.2" apart with a .75 wall between the two compartments. The front and rear baffle are 1.5" thick and all other walls are 1.5" thick Outer 3/4 MDF-3/8 sand-3/8 MDF.

Having a modified 600PEQ Amp with a mono XLR input in place of the RCA or High level inputs driving both speakers.

First, if enclosure size is not an issue, I would recommend dual 8ohm 15" drivers driven by H600PEQ amp. If you'd like to have XLR, you have limited option, instead of using H600+ 2xDS1500, you need 2xA370XLR+2xDS1500. If you can go with vented sub, you can also do that. You can use A370XLR and DS1500 in vented sub. It definitely has more output than sealed sub (3-4db more). It is very odd, most of our CI customers don't pick vented sub. Our vented subs also sound more musical than nonservo vented sub.

XLR amp is in the planning. I would like to see if anyone has objection if I drop speaker level inputs completely.

DonH50 03-13-2010 05:25 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

I would like to see if anyone has objection if I drop speaker level inputs completely.

Not I. Running speaker lines is a hassle, wastes power, and potentially causes more problems with hum and noise coupling. Given the proliferation of AVRs with a sub output (do any not have one?) it's hard to see how anybody needs speaker-level inputs now, and of course you can always use a Y from the preamp output if desired. I haven't needed them since the 80's (if then).

FWIWFM - Don

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 06:28 PM

"First, if enclosure size is not an issue, I would recommend dual 8ohm 15" drivers driven by H600PEQ amp. If you'd like to have XLR, you have limited option, instead of using H600+ 2xDS1500, you need 2xA370XLR+2xDS1500. If you can go with vented sub, you can also do that. You can use A370XLR and DS1500 in vented sub. It definitely has more output than sealed sub (3-4db more). It is very odd, most of our CI customers don't pick vented sub. Our vented subs also sound more musical than nonservo vented sub."

But a sealed servo sub sounds more musical than servo vented sub in overall conditions correct?

I think everyone likes the sealed sub overall.

Dropping the speaker level and adding the XLR in and out with the PEQ would be a killer amp.

It would give the flexability in todays world.

1- Be able to use with or without a processor.

2- Be able to use as full range with L & R speakers using L & R RCA inputs.

3- Be able to use RCA for short runs or XLR for long runs from Preamp/Processor to Sub

4- With PEQ with either short or long interconnects Be able to tune sub for room conditions.

Just seems like a winner combination to me.

Any thoughts?

I would be the first to purchase one to try out and post a report on my findings even if it was a modded amp with writing and holes that should not be there.

Rythmik 03-13-2010 07:58 PM

I have customers explain that they still have 2ch system and HT system two systems in one room. I don't blame them. If I have invested over 5 grands in a high end tube preamp and solid state power amp, I would do the same. I don't remember the exact details. But this seems to be how it works. The 2ch system has a dedicated expensive power amplifier driving their front speakers full range. A 2ch preamp feeds HT receiver with bypass enabled and the HT front channel pre-out goes to dedicated power amp. This is in 2ch mode. In HT mode, however, the 2nd preamp is not active. The customer wants to share subwoofer in both systems. So that presents a problem. The solution I am thinking is to change those two High pass filter RCA output to two inputs for HT sub connection, as shown



The idea is this. All phase and xover control will be available to regular 2ch system line inputs. The front speakers in this case run full range. So customer should use low pass filter setting and cover/phase control to get the best tuning for their 2ch setup first. Once this is done, the next step is tune the HT system. Since HT menu has xover and delay time adjustment, it does not need xover adjustment and phase. So those two controls will be bypassed. Next the level control. Since there is a level control menu for subwoofer in HT, the customer will use that to set up the correct level for subwoofer in HT mode. This way, we can save space for one level control. Since we have two inputs and in order to increase adjustment range, one input has x1 gain and another has x4 gain. The customer can use x1 gain by default and if the gain is insufficient, then he can then plug in x4 input.

Let me know if this will work.

Rythmik 03-13-2010 08:00 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by KLee View Post

What will the price of the E15 be and will it perform as well as the F15?

E15 in black oak is $1099. Piano finish is $150 more. The decrease in output from E15 is very small (less than 1db) and only limited to below 25hz or so.

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 08:40 PM

Would HT and Line in be totally isolated?

Is the HT a mono input with either a 0DB or 12DB gain?

In this way with a "Y" adapter from the L&R front outputs of the processor the two sets of interconnects will go to the L&R channels inputs of the main amp and L&R inputs of the Sub amp. You would have full range going to the L&R inputs of the main amp and have full range going to the Sub inputs. The sub PEQ controls and crossover will level the sub to the room.

In HT the mono sub output from the processor will go to the 0Db or 12Db mono input of the Sub depending on the gain needed and the processors crossover and parametic sub equalizer will take care of the duties of balancing the sub.

Am I correct?

Now to get rid of the speaker level inputs and replace with the XLR Master and Slave and you would have an unbeatable combo of an amp!

Your thoughts?

BRADH 03-13-2010 08:45 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

E15 in black oak is $1099. Piano finish is $150 more. The decrease in output from E15 is very small (less than 1db) and only limited to below 25hz or so.

Brian

What is the size of the E15.

Thanks
Brad

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 08:59 PM

E15

17" Wide
19" High
18" Deep
Add 1" for griil
Add 1" for rear knobs on amp

BRADH 03-13-2010 09:17 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Van Belkom View Post

E15

17" Wide
19" High
18" Deep
Add 1" for griil
Add 1" for rear knobs on amp

Thanks for the the info. One last question. This is a servo 600 watt amp
and ready for ordering Monday?


Thank

Brad

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 09:28 PM

It is a Servo Amp but you need to talk to Brian about availability.

ddgtr 03-13-2010 09:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

... a 2ch preamp feeds HT receiver with bypass enabled and the HT front channel pre-out goes to dedicated power amp. This is in 2ch mode.

I think you meant the opposite: the HT receiver's pre-outs should go to the preamp's "HT bypass inputs"... The preamp then feeds the amp. It doesn't make sense to have the preamp feed the receiver...

BTW, I think you are doing a great job coming on this forum and answering all our questions, considering suggestions and overall putting up with us. We're not an easy bunch, you know...

I also really appreciate your interest in 2 channel integration. Thanks!

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 10:07 PM

ddgtr

No he is correct. the output of the 2ch preamp goes to a L&R analog input on the Processor.

When in Bypass it goes straight to the L & R front outputs of the processor.

For PC audio you can do the same thing going from the PC to a DAC and the DAC's L & R analog out's going to the L&R analog inputs on the processor.

In Direct mode you are feeding both the main and sub L&R inputs so you have the sub working in direct mode. Sweet!

ddgtr 03-13-2010 10:11 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post

I have customers explain that they still have 2ch system and HT system two systems in one room. I don't blame them. If I have invested over 5 grands in a high end tube preamp and solid state power amp, I would do the same. I don't remember the exact details. But this seems to be how it works. The 2ch system has a dedicated expensive power amplifier driving their front speakers full range. A 2ch preamp feeds HT receiver with bypass enabled and the HT front channel pre-out goes to dedicated power amp. This is in 2ch mode. In HT mode, however, the 2nd preamp is not active. The customer wants to share subwoofer in both systems. So that presents a problem. The solution I am thinking is to change those two High pass filter RCA output to two inputs for HT sub connection, as shown



The idea is this. All phase and xover control will be available to regular 2ch system line inputs. The front speakers in this case run full range. So customer should use low pass filter setting and cover/phase control to get the best tuning for their 2ch setup first. Once this is done, the next step is tune the HT system. Since HT menu has xover and delay time adjustment, it does not need xover adjustment and phase. So those two controls will be bypassed. Next the level control. Since there is a level control menu for subwoofer in HT, the customer will use that to set up the correct level for subwoofer in HT mode. This way, we can save space for one level control. Since we have two inputs and in order to increase adjustment range, one input has x1 gain and another has x4 gain. The customer can use x1 gain by default and if the gain is insufficient, then he can then plug in x4 input.

Let me know if this will work.



I'm not sure I completely understand, and for that I apologize in advance.

Could you please clarify this a bit?

Here is how my system is set up:

HT receiver's front preouts go to my preamp's HT bypass inputs. The preamp has an HT bypass selector which when enabled, surrenders volume control to the receiver and completely disables the preamp's volume control.

My fronts are set to large on the receiver.

In 2 channel mode, the receiver can be turned off.

From the preamp the signal path goes to an external crossover. It crosses at 70 Hz, sending to the sub and 2 ch amp.

Some of us 2 ch people do not have "true" full range fronts - enter a musical sub.

Given this setup, how would the mods you proposed above improve this configuration?

Thanks!!

ddgtr 03-13-2010 10:13 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Van Belkom View Post

ddgtr

No he is correct. the output of the 2ch preamp goes to a L&R analog input on the Processor.

When in Bypass it goes straight to the L & R front outputs of the processor.

For PC audio you can do the same thing going from the PC to a DAC and the DAC's L & R analog out's going to the L&R analog inputs on the processor.

In Direct mode you are feeding both the main and sub L&R inputs so you have the sub working in direct mode. Sweet!

Ed,

I'm afraid I still do not understand...

Why would I take the signal from my tube preamp and run it through my Onkyo receiver? The notion of "HT bypass" implies the preamp has a feature that lets you watch movies while making use of your 2 ch. system, and not the other way around. So I go through all the trouble to follow a pure signal path: Bryston DAC, tube preamp only to revert back to the receiver? The whole idea is to send it directly to the amp and on the fronts...

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 10:49 PM

ddgtr

Let me try a different way.

I am getting a Emotiva UMC-1 processor.

The outputs are 7.1. Front L&R, Center, Surround L&R, Rear L&R and Sub out.

In the Processors direct mode the analog front L&R inputs go directly to the L&R outputs bypassing any DSP processing.

Now I have full range output to my L&R front speakers but no sub output.

By using a "Y" adapter and connecting the L&R front outputs of the processor to both the main amp inputs going to the L&R front speakers and the L&R front inputs of the Sub amp using the Sub crossover and EQT to have only the low freq's go to the Sub's speaker, I can have the Sub work in direct mode of the processor.

When I use the processor in 7.1 mode the mono sub output of the processor goes to one of the Sub mono input jacks for either a 0Db or 12Db gain depending on what jack you use.

This way I can use the sub in both configurations and have the best analog sound as it is bypassed by the processor but still have the sub working in this configuration.

Does that make sense now?

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 11:10 PM

ddgtr

The problem is that any DSP will affect the sound and for 2Ch you want to avoid that. By having the processor in bypass is just like it is not there. Instead of having a crossover you send the full range analog to both the sub and main front speakers. You can add a high pass filter to the main L&R front input of the amp so they do not get the LF signals. The Sub crossover and EQ will take care of the low end. Now you just reduced the electronics along the way by one by getting rid of the crossover.

DonH50 03-13-2010 11:11 PM

While what Ed says makes perfect sense, most people with high-end preamps and amps are not going to pass that signal through anything else. For example, if and when I return my tube rack to its glory days, my $1k AVR will feed one of the inputs of my audio research pre and power amps, not the other way around. I suspect a lot of people will feel the same way. In that case, the AVR's L/R outputs go to the preamp, which them directly connects to the L/R power amp and speakers.

In Ed's case, I am guessing the emotiva represents the high end component and thus the last thing before the power amp and speakers. In both cases, if that is true, the best component has the most direct path to the speakers, yes?

However, I think the issue somewhat moot in that both require a way to provide HT and stereo inputs to the subwoofer, thus it seems to me Brian is on the right track. The catch to me is that if you connect your high-end preamp's outputs to the sub via a Y or second pair of outputs (like my old arc SP3), then use it in pass-through mode, it is (or may be) the same set of wires to the sub so it has no way of knowing if the signal is HT or not. You'd have to throw a switch on the sub to let it know. However, for those cases when two sets of outputs are used, e.g. one from the preamp and one from an AVR, then the HT input is a plus. I do not know how often that is the case. Of course, there are probably other outputs you could use for the HT mode, e.g. the tape loop outputs (assuming the pre has them).

Since IIRC the LFE signal requires a 10 dB boost if not compensated, then a 10 dB rather than 12 dB boost may be more appropriate(?) Acoustically 10 dB is also 2x louder, though of course 3.1623 is not a nice ratio like 4 (or 3.981 if you want to be picky about it).

My microcent - Don

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 11:22 PM

ddgtr

In your setup you can just connect the crossover sub out to the sub input L&R .

There are many ways to configure this.

You can have a HT processor and connect the mono Sub out to the 0Db or12Db mono input.

Then you can have a seperate 2CH stereo preamp outputs going to a "Y" connector and feed the Sub L&R inputs that way.

You would have two seperate systems using the sub for the low end just not both at one time.

Hope this helps.

Ed Van Belkom 03-13-2010 11:36 PM

DonH50

Yes you are also correct. My processor 7 channel ouputs go to my power amp.
The Sub output goes to the Sub input.

Bypass is straight thru so no sub output.

Bypassing the processor for 2Ch would be great if I had a seperate preamp but I do not.

The only thing in the way is the volume control so not pure high end but I can live with it.

I just go for the best bang for the buck and this sub is getting there. IMHO

sanjaygolf 03-13-2010 11:54 PM

Is it possible to have both HT inputs and high level inputs/outputs? This way you can still utilize the high pass filters in the sub for those w/o full range speakers. I have both 2 ch and HT in the same room using the same sub but with no HT bypass in my preamp so both rigs act independently.

ddgtr 03-14-2010 08:49 AM

Ok, it makes sense now. I was thinking in terms of a totally separate preamp. Thanks, Ed and Don!

Now, with the two sets of inputs on the sub and let's say two separate systems, a 2 ch and HT: would some sort of safety feature be implemented in the event of both systems accidentally being on at the same time?

I would be very interested because although my preamp has HT bypass, I would like to separate it completely from the HT. The reason is I don't want to burn my tubes watching movies... So if the sub can take two inputs, a "switch" like Don said above would be beneficial.

What do you all think?

Thanks!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.