AVS Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm debating the merits of going 2.1 vs my current 2.0 setup. My 2.0 setup is a pair of paradigm studio 10 bookshelf speakers driven by a Denon 3311ci (for audyssey) . Although they have a great bass extension I wonder how they'd do if they had a little more breathing room by crossing them over at 60 hz with a small sub. (considering SVS SB12-NSD). I would define this desire as tinkering as opposed to any percieved weakness in the Pardigms. I love their sound.


Another option I'm considering is just going with a set of towers which have a lower bass extension and just staying 2.0. Prime candidate is a set of Salk Song Towers, B&W 683, or Paradigm Studio 60.


Any thoughts? Use is 95% music. I care most about this and will get what I get for movies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
730 Posts
I'd say yes towers better than bookshelves but also add the sub. Short of incredibly rare speakers even towers can benefit from adding a sub and then crossing over somewhere between 80 and 50.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Unfortunately this is not an and proposition, but an either or. I go back and forth on this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,444 Posts
How big is your room? I had the SVS SB12-NSD in a smallish 2.1 music room with Sierra-1 bookshelves and it was outstanding. If I had more room (and money) I would've gone with the Salk Songtowers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
I was on the same boat when I was about to buy my current system. In the end, I didn't get 2.1 and used the subwoofer money towards a pair of towers that has more bass than the original ones I wanted to get. I've talked to a number of people and I was told that sub placement in a 2.1 system is crucial, with the center being the best position for the subwoofer. I didn't want a subwoofer sitting right in front of my equipment rack so I settled with 2.0 and I'm completely happy with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
I've found that a 2.1 setup can be very nice to music and that the placement of the bookshelf speakers becomes very flexible. Far more flexible than full sized towers can be. The sub placement can be problematic but in many cases not as important as one can imagine. Experimentation is the word here.


I have two 2.1 setups and both are radically different from each other. The "Lab" 2.1 is a computer driven setup with the bookshelves pointed at a very small sweet spot. Me. Sub placed in corner. Sound is wonderful.


"Living Room" is for general listening and the couch facing it is the sweet spot since that is the sweet spot for TV. Sub is in the center of a wall and works well. Only time that the balance is off is when one wanders around the room. If I'm doing critical listening, then I am not moving around. It's all about trade-offs and compromises to get what you want, anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by holt7153 /forum/post/20857435


How big is your room? I had the SVS SB12-NSD in a smallish 2.1 music room with Sierra-1 bookshelves and it was outstanding. If I had more room (and money) I would've gone with the Salk Songtowers.

I have a pretty large room. About 15x25 with a vaulted ceiling and an open area to the kitchen/breakfast room. The actual seating area is pretty small though centered around a 9x12 area rug with the entertainment center in front of the rug. The seating area is not in the center of the room but offset bordered by 2 walls. The velodyne select a sub program says the minivee 8 should be enough. In the seating area the studio 10s are.


I leaning toward the sub option, however, by saving a little longer the songtowers would sure be nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by junglist1996 /forum/post/20857601


... I settled with 2.0 and I'm completely happy with it.

Yea, I know. I am right now. Its just the neverending desire to tweek (upgrade)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhardyman /forum/post/20857899


I've found that a 2.1 setup can be very nice to music and that the placement of the bookshelf speakers becomes very flexible. Far more flexible than full sized towers can be. The sub placement can be problematic but in many cases not as important as one can imagine. Experimentation is the word here.


I have two 2.1 setups and both are radically different from each other. The "Lab" 2.1 is a computer driven setup with the bookshelves pointed at a very small sweet spot. Me. Sub placed in corner. Sound is wonderful.


"Living Room" is for general listening and the couch facing it is the sweet spot since that is the sweet spot for TV. Sub is in the center of a wall and works well. Only time that the balance is off is when one wanders around the room. If I'm doing critical listening, then I am not moving around. It's all about trade-offs and compromises to get what you want, anyway.

I'm kind of hamstrung for space in that area. The studio 10s sit on the entertainment center beside the LCD, not on separate stands so I don't have much flexibility in placing them. If I got stands that would take up the area on one side where I'd put a sub. (after that the fireplace gets in the way). Towers will also take up the sub area, and limit addition of a sub later on.
 

·
The Village Idiot
Joined
·
9,748 Posts
Since your studio 10s roll off at 62hz + or - 2db at the low end you are missing music at the low end. Adding a good sub with your Denon's capability to manage the crossover very well you should notice quite an improvement in low end performance. Crossing over at 80hz should help clean up the already good performance of your studio 10s at the low end - let the sub do the heavy lifting down low - its what it was built for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,655 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by glangford /forum/post/20856516


I'm debating the merits of going 2.1 vs my current 2.0 setup. My 2.0 setup is a pair of paradigm studio 10 bookshelf speakers driven by a Denon 3311ci (for audyssey) . Although they have a great bass extension I wonder how they'd do if they had a little more breathing room by crossing them over at 60 hz with a small sub. (considering SVS SB12-NSD). I would define this desire as tinkering as opposed to any percieved weakness in the Pardigms. I love their sound.


Another option I'm considering is just going with a set of towers which have a lower bass extension and just staying 2.0. Prime candidate is a set of Salk Song Towers, B&W 683, or Paradigm Studio 60.


Any thoughts? Use is 95% music. I care most about this and will get what I get for movies.

Have you considered 2.2 with Y-connectors? I mean, decent 10" subs are small and not that expensive.


Your above idea of a decent floor standing speaker is the one other solution, and likely a better one than 2.2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
If the OP is really concerned with musical quality then I'd suggest the following for consideration:

* best sound quality usually means positioning the mains for best mid/high freq response and stereo imaging etc. while placing bass woofers/subs where they measure and sound best. Most times these aren't the same position in the room. So, thinking that upgrading to a better pair of mains (your 2.0 solution) may not bring you the better bass you seek or if it does they you'll likely shortchange your mid/high freq imaging.

* don't add one sub, add TWO. If you have 2 or more seating positions for other folks to enjoy the music then two subs will provide for a better bass experience across more seats than a single sub will.

* add bass trapping and other acoustical treatments to your room to further improve the sound.

* add parametric EQ to tame the bass peaks.


My experience involves a pair of $9,000 speakers pulled out from the wall for best mid/high freq stereo imaging and reduction of SBIR and comb filtering effects. While they sound very good the bass became lean the more the speakers were pulled away from a boundary (i.e. wall). The measurements using Dayton Audio's OmniMic confirmed what my ears were hearing in terms of reduced bass output below 100Hz. I added two subs to my 21'*14'*7' sealed room (your room is larger and not sealed, so two subs should be a mimimum with 3 or 4 being better) and the sonic impact is amazing. The bottom 2-2.5 octaves are really important.


So in short, taking a best-in-breed approach should give you the sonic nervana you seek by treating mid/high and bass frequencies differently. The same approach goes for treating a room with acoustical absorption/diffusion/reflection, but that's for another day . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
glangford - if your are listening to 95% music, then 2ch is the way to go. I'm currently running B&W 804d's through a Marantz SR7005, which is very similar in performance to your 3311. I personally found that running Audyssey made my system sound MUCH worse, despite proper calibration using a tripod. I didnt like the impact it had on the bass response and I really felt it degraded the overall imaging.


Before you buy I would suggest talking with your local dealer to see if you can demo anything in-home. I would also recommend trying your existing speakers - and floor standers if you get them - with and without the Audyssey since it can have such a drastic impact on the sound.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Thanks for all the feedback from everyone. I'll try to answer everyones thoughts here in one post. (I should learn multiquote)


As far as multiple subs go, that is out of the question (WAF). It is also our living room/great room, not my man cave. With our current furniture set up there also isn't many places I can put subs. One compact good sub is all I'm going to be able to accommodate. i don't need worry about multiple seating positions, we are a household of 2. If I tailored one sub to my position she wouldn't care. (She'd actually prefer it!)


Yes, the Studio 10s roll off to -2db at 62 hz, but have a damn good bass extension down to 37 hz. (review http://www.goodsound.com/equipment/p...tudio10_v5.htm )

I did some critical listening yesterday with my current 2.0 set up (Diana Krall SACD Girl in the other Room). I'm still amazed at the bass response these little speakers output. Would a sub help, sure. Do I feel like I'm missing much? Not so sure but a sub crossed over at 60 hz would sure give the studios a little breathing room.


Still up in the air. If I had a pair of B&W 804s (nice!) I'd be inclined to agree with sounddude that 2.0 is all I'd need. I'm close to there with my studio 10s, loving the sound I currently get. Just feel the desire to tweek. Considering Audyssey, I'm of the opinion that it helps greatly. After calibration I thought it just took a slight shrill edge off. it didn't seem to affect the bass much. Its easy to try again, by just cutting audyssey on/off. I"ll give it another critical listening test.


Have I decided anything? Well no. Still up in the air. I budget around 300/month for my hobby. So I'll just save up for a few months and see where I go. I don't need to decide today. In three months I'll either pick up a small sealed sub (SVS, Velodyne or Rythmic) or in 6 months a set of Song Towers. After my listening test yesterday I'm leaning toward the songtowers. Also in the cards is to replace my source. I currently use an Oppo BDP-83 feeding the reciever via HDMI and analog to my headphone rig. I've contemplated upgrading to the BDP-95 to improve the analog input to the headphone rig.


If you have any more suggestions, keep them coming. Thanks!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
I found the same thing. I have an Onkyo TX-SR805, also with the MultiEQ XT. When I had very mediocre mains, Audyssey seemed to be beneficial. When I added higher quality mains, Audyssey simply sucked the life out of music.


I remember reading somewhere that MultiEQ XT has a target curve that is not flat - whereas some of the new Audyssey versions have a choice of target curves, including a flat one. I don't have a practical way of comparing with other versions of Audyssey, but I'm curious about it. I have simply disabled Audyssey altogether now, even though it does seem to do good things to movies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sounddude03 /forum/post/20859842


glangford - if your are listening to 95% music, then 2ch is the way to go. I'm currently running B&W 804d's through a Marantz SR7005, which is very similar in performance to your 3311. I personally found that running Audyssey made my system sound MUCH worse, despite proper calibration using a tripod. I didnt like the impact it had on the bass response and I really felt it degraded the overall imaging.


Before you buy I would suggest talking with your local dealer to see if you can demo anything in-home. I would also recommend trying your existing speakers - and floor standers if you get them - with and without the Audyssey since it can have such a drastic impact on the sound.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by holt7153 /forum/post/20861727


Looks like you've made some fine choices. Take your time building the system--it should be awesome.

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by baniels /forum/post/20861764


I found the same thing. I have an Onkyo TX-SR805, also with the MultiEQ XT. When I had very mediocre mains, Audyssey seemed to be beneficial. When I added higher quality mains, Audyssey simply sucked the life out of music.


I remember reading somewhere that MultiEQ XT has a target curve that is not flat - whereas some of the new Audyssey versions have a choice of target curves, including a flat one. I don't have a practical way of comparing with other versions of Audyssey, but I'm curious about it. I have simply disabled Audyssey altogether now, even though it does seem to do good things to movies.

I checked my Denon manual. The 3311ci has MultEq XT. It has three settings to use after calibration. Audyssey, Audyssey Byp L/R (bypass mains, optimize satellites and woofer), and Audyssey Flat (optimize response of all speakers to flat response).


When I do some more extended critical listening tests, I'll include audyssey flat in with audyssey and audyssey off. Thanks for the heads up, I had forgotten about the flat response curve. (Damn manual a pain to get through)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
Interesting. It looks as though the flat target is something Denon has added, as I have the same version of Audyssey, but no such choices. I get Audyssey on or off
I would really love to be able to bypass it just for the mains. The Audyssey Reference target is rolling off the higher frequencies.

This Q/A article on the Audyssey site explains it well. Near the bottom it indicates that some newer Onkyo's have a flat option as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by glangford /forum/post/20862098


I checked my Denon manual. The 3311ci has MultEq XT. It has three settings to use after calibration. Audyssey, Audyssey Byp L/R (bypass mains, optimize satellites and woofer), and Audyssey Flat (optimize response of all speakers to flat response).


When I do some more extended critical listening tests, I'll include audyssey flat in with audyssey and audyssey off. Thanks for the heads up, I had forgotten about the flat response curve. (Damn manual a pain to get through)
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top