Towers vs Bookshelf/subs

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Today I have been listening to my TAD 2201 + Funk 18.0.

AVP-A1HD setting: Pure Direct 2.2, 250Hz XO (instead of 80Hz).
Music: Breaking Bad original score (Dave Porter).

There may have been other threads discussing towers vs bookshelf/subs. But I don't think anyone has talked about Pure Direct 2.2 using bookshelf+subs, especially crossing over high @ 250Hz.

We all know that the bass from towers will never compete w/ the likes of Funk Audio, JTR, Seaton, Rythmik, PSA, HSU, Velodyne, JL, etc.

So some people may ask, would bookshelf + dual subs be actually BETTER than using full-range towers?

Could bookshelf+subs be the ultimate "modular" (like RBH's modular) full-range tower?

What about output and dynamics, some may ask? Wouldn't towers have more dynamics/output? Not necessarily especially from 100Hz-20kHz.

So anyway, I am utterly enjoying my bookshelf + subs "modular full-range tower" setup.

I think if someone had a budget of $2.5-3K, it may be best if they spent $2K on dual subs (HSU or PSA) and $500-$1000 on bookshelf, instead of $3K on a pair of towers.

Why placing bookshelf on top of tall subs even make them look like giant towers. For example, the tall PSA XV30f.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I'd be wondering about dispersion and coloration in a big sub, like the 18.0, crossing over at 250Hz. Even with an 18db/oct low-pass filter you'd need clean output at 300Hz from the sub. Maybe the Funks can do it, but I suspect most 15"+ dedicated sub drivers won't. Since Middle C is at 261Hz, that's a rather sensitive place to put a crossover between two so dissimilar drivers and get it right.

Have you tried listening to solo piano on that set-up yet?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I'd be wondering about dispersion and coloration in a big sub, like the 18.0, crossing over at 250Hz. Even with an 18db/oct low-pass filter you'd need clean output at 300Hz from the sub. Maybe the Funks can do it, but I suspect most 15"+ dedicated sub drivers won't. Since Middle C is at 261Hz, that's a rather sensitive place to put a crossover between two so dissimilar drivers and get it right.

Have you tried listening to solo piano on that set-up yet?

I am listening to some Beethoven Piano now with KEF 201/2 + Funk. Sounds great to me.

But I suppose 100, 150, 200 Hz would work great too.

 

[fuzz092888]

I'd be wondering about dispersion and coloration in a big sub, like the 18.0, crossing over at 250Hz. Even with an 18db/oct low-pass filter you'd need clean output at 300Hz from the sub. Maybe the Funks can do it, but I suspect most 15"+ dedicated sub drivers won't. Since Middle C is at 261Hz, that's a rather sensitive place to put a crossover between two so dissimilar drivers and get it right.

Have you tried listening to solo piano on that set-up yet?

I remember reading somewhere that the funk sub drivers aren't the last measure in ultra low bass, but plays loud and clean all the way up to 500+hz. If you look at the basic response graph on data-bass of their budget 18" driver it looks pretty clean all the way up to the roll off around 630hz. I would expect their top of the line driver to be clean at least as high.

That being said, without extremely competent bookshelves that are capable of a fairly low cross at pretty robust SPL's or subwoofers capable of playing that large bandwidth like the funk's it would be tough to get the same coherency and seamlessness as a true full range tower. Not that you couldn't come close.

 

[ratso]

I am listening to some Beethoven Piano now with KEF 201/2 + Funk. Sounds great to me.

But I suppose 100, 150, 200 Hz would work great too.

i realize you want the subs to handle as much of the bass response as possible, but the TAD's are rated down to 50Hz. what is the advantage of crossing over so high? it seems you are creating the opposite problem (instead of forcing the TAD's to handle bass you are forcing your subs to handle mid's)?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

i realize you want the subs to handle as much of the bass response as possible, but the TAD's are rated down to 50Hz. what is the advantage of crossing over so high? it seems you are creating the opposite problem (instead of forcing the TAD's to handle bass you are forcing your subs to handle mid's)?

Perhaps Nathan Funk can elaborate better, but if you look at the THD + output of the subs at higher Hz (80+), you see a lot LOWER THD. So the subs can output cleaner lower THD sound at higher Hz.

I suppose if the high-end speaker already has lower THD, then setting XO high may not make sense. But I just think perhaps many $2-3K towers don't have as clean/ low THD at 200Hz as some of these subs.

 

[psbfan9]

i realize you want the subs to handle as much of the bass response as possible, but the TAD's are rated down to 50Hz. what is the advantage of crossing over so high? it seems you are creating the opposite problem

I was wondering the same thing.

I've talked to Phil Bamberg a few times and his designs are kind of unique. I guess they could be called modular. I think that adding a sub to a system puts you in a position of becoming the xover builder. With Bamberg's design, all the xover work is done.

Is this what you are trying to achieve ADTG?

Bamberg Audio :: Speakers for Life

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I remember reading somewhere that the funk sub drivers aren't the last measure in ultra low bass, but plays loud and clean all the way up to 500+hz. If you look at the basic response graph on data-bass of their budget 18" driver it looks pretty clean all the way up to the roll off around 630hz. I would expect their top of the line driver to be clean at least as high.

That being said, without extremely competent bookshelves that are capable of a fairly low cross at pretty robust SPL's or subwoofers capable of playing that large bandwidth like the funk's it would be tough to get the same coherency and seamlessness as a true full range tower. Not that you couldn't come close.

My first "audiophile" set up was the NHT SuperZero + SW2P 10" sub ($700 for 2.1). I hooked up AVR L/R output to the NHT amp's XO and ran Pure Direct. I thought the SQ was better than any $3K towers I ever heard.

Towers just seem "bad a$$" aesthetically - big and bad.

I think some placebo effect is at play. I don't know.

 

[fuzz092888]

i realize you want the subs to handle as much of the bass response as possible, but the TAD's are rated down to 50Hz. what is the advantage of crossing over so high? it seems you are creating the opposite problem (instead of forcing the TAD's to handle bass you are forcing your subs to handle mid's)?

To use your example the TAD 2201 aren't really rated down to 50hz. If you look at the specs you'll see that 50hz is their F10, which means they start rolling off somewhere a touch under 100ish hz, which means you'd want to cross them over maybe 150-200hz.

 

[fuzz092888]

I was wondering the same thing.

I've talked to Phil Bamberg a few times and his designs are kind of unique. I guess they could be called modular. I think that adding a sub to a system puts you in a position of becoming the xover builder. With Bamberg's design, all the xover work is done.

Is this what you are trying to achieve ADTG?

Bamberg Audio :: Speakers for Life

Bamberg crosses his flagship model over at 145hz to the subwoofer. Which still makes the case for a wide bandwidth sub for use with monitors. Especially when many monitors won't be as capable as his the ones sitting atop that sub.

 

[fuzz092888]

My first "audiophile" set up was the NHT SuperZero + SW2P 10" sub ($700 for 2.1). I hooked up AVR L/R output to the NHT amp's XO and ran Pure Direct. I thought the SQ was better than any $3K towers I ever heard.

Towers just seem "bad a$$" aesthetically - big and bad.

I think some placebo effect is at play. I don't know.

So you think that setup sounds better than the Phil 3's (which are $3K speakers when you don't get them fire engine red super gloss)?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I was wondering the same thing.

I've talked to Phil Bamberg a few times and his designs are kind of unique. I guess they could be called modular. I think that adding a sub to a system puts you in a position of becoming the xover builder. With Bamberg's design, all the xover work is done.

Is this what you are trying to achieve ADTG?

Bamberg Audio :: Speakers for Life

I would not consider myself a builder of anything technical.

But I think this "modular concept", which is really nothing new, is a superlative design. Even the $60K RBH T8 is a modular design.

We all have awesome subs anyway. Whether we use towers or bookshelves, we use them with our subs.

If space is a concern, placing bookshelves atop subs would be just like full-range towers, except the bass is killer sub bass.

Like how I place my KEF atop the Funk subs or TAD atop the RBH subs.



The Phil3 is also a modular design, except the bass is nothing compared to the bass of dual Rythmik/PSA/HSU/Funk etc.

Why not place a Philmonitor atop a bad-a$$ sub?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

So you think that setup sounds better than the Phil 3's (which are $3K speakers when you don't get them fire engine red super gloss)?

Only if the music has copious amount of high quality bass.

I bet a pair of $1K Philharmonitors atop dual $2K subs (PSA, HSU, Rythmik) would sound better - if you like ribbons and such.

A pair of high efficiency monitors atop subs would be great too.

 

[fuzz092888]

It has to do with speaker design and getting everything to come together as a coherent whole. If you dial in the subs to best match the output and frequency response (I would also cite phase, but I'm not to that chapter yet ) of the monitors they sit on top of you might find that they match more closely to the Phil 3's. I'd also like to point out that louder = better to the mind and you happen to be an admitted bass junkie who runs his subs hot.

 

[fuzz092888]

Only if the music has copious amount of high quality bass.

I bet a pair of $1K Philharmonitors atop dual $2K subs (PSA, HSU, Rythmik) would sound better.

See above.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Now I am switching to TAD+Funk, but this time Stereo 2.2 mode.

Before I was comparing PD 2.2 vs Stereo 2.2 using the Salon2 @ 80Hz XO. Now I am comparing using bookshelves @ high XO.

Now PD sounds the same as Stereo mode.

Bottom line, there are many configurations we can try out to see what suits us best.

But for overall SQ (all types of music), I think for the same price, a monitors + subs modular system is better than towers w/o subs.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

It has to do with speaker design and getting everything to come together as a coherent whole. If you dial in the subs to best match the output and frequency response (I would also cite phase, but I'm not to that chapter yet ) of the monitors they sit on top of you might find that they match more closely to the Phil 3's. I'd also like to point out that louder = better to the mind and you happen to be an admitted bass junkie who runs his subs hot.

I am probably just a junkie period.

I just think instead of towers-next-to-subs, monitors-atop-subs would not only save space, but also money. That's all I am really about here. Saving money and spending sagatiously.

 

[Irvrobinson]

So if you have front-firing subs that are clean to 500Hz, and you have two subs, so that you can place the subs with the satellites, averting directionality issues at 200Hz+, and the placement of the subs with the satellites does not cause room mode problems, this strategy can work. For me at least, it wouldn't work. The sub needed different placement from the mains, obviously, because otherwise with the Salon2 I wouldn't need a sub for music.

 

[fuzz092888]

I am probably just a junkie period.

I just think instead of towers-next-to-subs, monitors-atop-subs would not only save space, but also money. That's all I am really about here. Saving money and spending sagatiously.

Who am I to argue with that logic

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

So if you have front-firing subs that are clean to 500Hz, and you have two subs, so that you can place the subs with the satellites, averting directionality issues at 200Hz+, and the placement of the subs with the satellites does not cause room mode problems, this strategy can work. For me at least, it wouldn't work. The sub needed different placement from the mains, obviously, because otherwise with the Salon2 I wouldn't need a sub for music.

Of course, Salon2 + Sub will beat almost any monitor + Sub systems.