[oOOBillO0o]

Since 5.1 or Multi-channel audio has full-range channels and a LFE channel, Who chooses to run full range speakers for each channel and a subwoofer(s) for LFE?


OR subwoofers for each channel, i.e. 5.1 would have 6 or more subs, one sub for each channel ( line level or pre out ) plus however many for the LFE channel-- treating each channel as a 3 or 4 way speaker.


Cost-effectively 5 small speakers with bass management to a subwoofer that has to play bass and the LFE channel works.. but wouldn't electing NOT to use bass management capture a greater effect of sound reproduction?

 

[tvrgeek]

I can't stand "base management". I do the best I can with the room and crossovers.

I run full range out of the AVR into an external electronic crossover ( modified Behringer), then to my mains and subs. There is no bass to speak of in the center and rears. No need for subs there anyway. ( check the spec, but last I saw, rears were limited to 80 Hz anyway, and a decent center can get to 60. I am more interested in best stereo music, so LFE is not that important to me.

 

[GregLee]

I used full range speakers for fronts and surrounds for a year, though I did use bass management and 3 subwoofers. But a couple of weeks ago, I went back to smaller speakers for fronts and surrounds (and added a fourth sub), and I like that better. Better sound stage and more detailed.

 

[phannon]

I am running all speakers full range, except for a small center rear speaker (when I have a 6.1 source). My mains have built in 2 x 8 in subs (Mirage OM-6), the rears have 2 x 12 in subs (old 80's AR-9), the centre channel has a 2 x 8 in sub in the line in to the centre amp (Mirage BPS-150) and the LFE is produced by a 2 x 12 in sub (Mirage BPS-400). No bass management needed.....


Cheers,

P.E.H.

 

[Kal Rubinson]



Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek /forum/post/18176695


I can't stand "base management". I do the best I can with the room and crossovers.

I run full range out of the AVR into an external electronic crossover ( modified Behringer), then to my mains and subs.

So, you are doing bass management anyway.

Quote:
There is no bass to speak of in the center and rears.

That really depends on the source material. I have many recordings with lots of bass in those channels.

Quote:
No need for subs there anyway. ( check the spec, but last I saw, rears were limited to 80 Hz anyway, and a decent center can get to 60.

So, what do you do when/if there is bass in those channels.

Quote:
I am more interested in best stereo music, so LFE is not that important to me.

Whatever.

 

[Magnefied]

Not me baby! Bass mgmt is an incredibly useful tool provided it is implemented well. I can tailor the crossover, level, and delay for each speaker in my 7.1 system individually and I can store settings for each input. It provides a lot of flexibility and allows a wide range of speakers to work with a wide range of rooms. I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't want to have that capability.

 

[tvrgeek]

Kal, of course, I am managing the entire spectrum, but not using AVR digital bass management. I don't know all the reasons, but AVR digital management and level adjustments all sound lifeless and dull to me. I am not too far away from trashing the entire 5.1 and go back to stereo. Maybe I have not had high enough equipment for an AVR. 3 Denon's, a Yamaha, and currently a Rotel.


I may be out of date, but DTS and DD I believe do not go below 80 in the rear. Someone who knows the spec better or more currently may have a better say. One hint is than none of my AVR's ever had a large vs small setting for the rears or the center. It would be pretty silly from a bandwidth management perspective. I can't speak for other formats as I have never read the other specs. I would like to know what source material you have that does have sub 80 hs in the rears. Of course, 90% of what most people think is deep bass is above 60 Hz. I have looked at the cumulative spectrum of a lot of pop music. Not much bass. Jazz,yea.

 

[GregLee]



Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek /forum/post/18179589


I may be out of date, but DTS and DD I believe do not go below 80 in the rear.

You are. Long ago, Dolby Pro-Logic surrounds were frequency limited, but the surrounds of DD 5.1 are full range.

 

[Kal Rubinson]



Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek /forum/post/18179589


I may be out of date, but DTS and DD I believe do not go below 80 in the rear. Someone who knows the spec better or more currently may have a better say.

Dunno because I am only interested in the HD codecs, MPCM and DSD. Full range on all channels except LFE.

Quote:
One hint is than none of my AVR's ever had a large vs small setting for the rears or the center. It would be pretty silly from a bandwidth management perspective. I can't speak for other formats as I have never read the other specs. I would like to know what source material you have that does have sub 80 hs in the rears. Of course, 90% of what most people think is deep bass is above 60 Hz. I have looked at the cumulative spectrum of a lot of pop music. Not much bass. Jazz,yea.

Of the top of my head, the Linn SACD of the Poulenc organ concerto, the JAV SACD of the Widor Organ Mass, the Telarc SACD of 1812 and others.

 

[oOOBillO0o]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson /forum/post/18179768


Dunno because I am only interested in the HD codecs, MPCM and DSD. Full range on all channels except LFE.


Of the top of my head, the Linn SACD of the Poulenc organ concerto, the JAV SACD of the Widor Organ Mass, the Telarc SACD of 1812 and others.

Kal, I read an article or post from you-- you mention that you have had great success with using bass management with your city playback system. Even more to the point, you bass manage all your speakers, do you still claim better results versus letting the mains, center and surrounds naturally roll off?


All, If the studio mandates that the artists and engineers keep all channels in multi channel playback full range, why isn't the option to run full range NOT a popular option? ref ITU 775. or at least a group of hard core users out here that support that it's "the way"


I understand that physically large speakers are not "in" and also more expensive, but if you read the "manual" for recording and playback I feel that running full-range with full range capable loudspeakers would make sense. by manual all the AES, ITU and SMPTE papers I have come across..

 

[sdurani]



Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek /forum/post/18179589


I may be out of date, but DTS and DD I believe do not go below 80 in the rear.

You may have read the spec for the theatrical version of DTS, which stores their LFE channel in the surrounds and separates it out during playback. So surround information is only 80Hz up and the LFE channel only goes to 80Hz.


The theatrical version of DD doesn't have that limitation and uses 5 full-range channels plus a separate .1/LFE channel that goes to 120Hz. Home/consumer versions of both codecs are 5 full range channels plus .1/LFE.

 

[penngray]

Is the OP only talking about music?


That seems to be the asumption by some here.

 

[penngray]



Quote:
Originally Posted by oOOBillO0o /forum/post/18176454


Since 5.1 or Multi-channel audio has full-range channels and a LFE channel, Who chooses to run full range speakers for each channel and a subwoofer(s) for LFE?


OR subwoofers for each channel, i.e. 5.1 would have 6 or more subs, one sub for each channel ( line level or pre out ) plus however many for the LFE channel-- treating each channel as a 3 or 4 way speaker.


Cost-effectively 5 small speakers with bass management to a subwoofer that has to play bass and the LFE channel works.. but wouldn't electing NOT to use bass management capture a greater effect of sound reproduction?

It depends on what speakers you own, what subs you own, what equipment is available.

 

[sdurani]



Quote:
Originally Posted by oOOBillO0o /forum/post/18180831


All, If the studio mandates that the artists and engineers keep all channels in multi channel playback full range, why isn't the option to run full range NOT a popular option?

There are likely several reasons why running full range is not a popular option. Relatively few people have speakers that can reproduce all the contents of each channel. More importantly, the speaker locations where you get best soundstage and imaging are typically not the best locations for bass reproduction in the room. Bass management allows you to filter the low frequencies from each channel and reproduce them from where they sound best without affecting soundstage and imaging.

 

[penngray]



Quote:
Originally Posted by oOOBillO0o /forum/post/18180831


Kal, I read an article or post from you-- you mention that you have had great success with using bass management with your city playback system. Even more to the point, you bass manage all your speakers, do you still claim better results versus letting the mains, center and surrounds naturally roll off?


All, If the studio mandates that the artists and engineers keep all channels in multi channel playback full range, why isn't the option to run full range NOT a popular option? ref ITU 775. or at least a group of hard core users out here that support that it's "the way"


I understand that physically large speakers are not "in" and also more expensive, but if you read the "manual" for recording and playback I feel that running full-range with full range capable loudspeakers would make sense. by manual all the AES, ITU and SMPTE papers I have come across..

Full Range is not a good idea actually. It is not better then a proper system with subs.


Here are the key points to remember...


1. Very few speakers handle full range well enough, very few go actually low enough for some music. Forget it with movies and this discussion is about LFE so I assume we are talking about movies.


2. Subs can be placed better in room and separated from mains to great a better overall in room response. With just full mains, you will have nulls, you will have peaks/dip issues because the bass is attached to the mains and placement is restricted.


3. Subs are built to handle low frequencies, reinforced and have the Watts to handle those PEAKS in the LFE. Mains with subs are a joke to those who build true subs. We know what it takes to have proper bass.


4. Low frequencies (

 

[hd_newbie]



Quote:
Originally Posted by oOOBillO0o /forum/post/18176454


but wouldn't electing NOT to use bass management capture a greater effect of sound reproduction?

and why would that be?

 

[oOOBillO0o]



Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray /forum/post/18182667


Full Range is not a good idea actually. It is not better then a proper system with subs.


Here are the key points to remember...


1. Very few speakers handle full range well enough, very few go actually low enough for some music. Forget it with movies and this discussion is about LFE so I assume we are talking about movies.


2. Subs can be placed better in room and separated from mains to great a better overall in room response. With just full mains, you will have nulls, you will have peaks/dip issues because the bass is attached to the mains and placement is restricted.


3. Subs are built to handle low frequencies, reinforced and have the Watts to handle those PEAKS in the LFE. Mains with subs are a joke to those who build true subs. We know what it takes to have proper bass.


4. Low frequencies (


I get why bass management is used. It's great! I use it!


I guess what I am having trouble communicating is- if the professional playback for multichannel mastering or dub-stage monitoring white papers directs that one use full audio range identical speakers for all channels and low frequency capable elements, such a subwoofer(s), for LFE channel...


...Though most of the papers, google them Grammy, dolby, ITU 775, or AES, are dated, some of these came up in the 90's, perhaps there doctrine and directives have changed since there release. -Which Explains this forum's strong collective opinion of "Use Bass Managment, it's better"...



...Then, is there a crowd of end users that think that this is "the best" method for playback and design their system around eliminating the key elements quoted?



a side note:

I was trying to avoid the bringing up brand names but it might help. Professional Home Cinema (PHC) speakers and JBL Pro Cinema speakers are becoming more common in home theater set-ups

These speaker can play deep bass, indicating no real need for Bass Management. From what I understand the cinema does not use Bass Management, 6 channels LCR-RS,LS, and a Subwoofer/LFE Channel.

 

[penngray]

Yep, DIYers are building similar stuff more and more.


here are my new QSC HPR 152i clones I just finished building. Im just measuring them as I type and they do not go below 60Hz...too get high sensitivity, you do not get low frequencies.

I have similar waveguides/CD combos you posted above in my Garage. ready for another project


example QSC HPR 153i

btw, your above example is not what I consider deep bass and that system will not compete with DIYer HT rooms. Dynamics would be insane but we want 10Hz too

Now add the Danley DTS-10 and then you will have something!!

 

[penngray]



Quote:
Still, is there a crowd of end users that think that this is "the best" method for playback and design their system around eliminating the key elements quoted?

Those end users do not have a clue about modern designs. They probably never measured anything either. They are just guys who THINK they know audio since they love music. You can just ignore posts from those types of people, they add little value in terms of audio science.

 

[oOOBillO0o]



Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray /forum/post/18183688


those end users do not have a clue about modern designs. They probably never measured anything either. They are just guys who think they know audio since they love music. You can just ignore posts from those types of people, they add little value in terms of audio science.

lol!