Do floor standing speakers even make sense when used with a sub?

[Steve81]

I agree. Once you start having -3dB points above 80hz, you start getting into territory where you’re asking a sub to play frequencies above what it was designed to do.

That depends on the subwoofer. Subs are also expected to play up to at least 120Hz to cover the LFE channel as well.

IMHO, crossing above 80Hz does have significant benefits for the dynamic capability of a system. Think of it this way: ignoring potential port contributions (negligible in many cases since most bookshelves are tuned to reach as low as possible), for any given SPL, a 120Hz tone requires less than half the cone travel of an 80Hz tone, or put another way, you would have to raise the volume of the 120Hz a little more than 6dB to match the excursion of the 80Hz tone. In a system like mine, where the relatively modest L/C/Rs have dual 5.25" woofers, that essentially eliminates woofer excursion as a major limitation to dynamic range, and has the side benefit of reducing distortion at any given level as well. YMMV of course.

 

[Dale Doback]

That depends on the subwoofer. Subs are also expected to play up to at least 120Hz to cover the LFE channel as well.

IMHO, crossing above 80Hz does have significant benefits for the dynamic capability of a system. Think of it this way: ignoring potential port contributions (negligible in many cases since most bookshelves are tuned to reach as low as possible), for any given SPL, a 120Hz tone requires less than half the cone travel of an 80Hz tone, or put another way, you would have to raise the volume of the 120Hz a little more than 6dB to match the excursion of the 80Hz tone. In a system like mine, where the relatively modest L/C/Rs have dual 5.25" woofers, that essentially eliminates woofer excursion as a major limitation to dynamic range, and has the side benefit of reducing distortion at any given level as well. YMMV of course.

Also, since I set speakers to 'Small' and X'd-over @ 80hz, I've noticed my AVR (SC-99) doesn't get as warm.

 

[2channel lover]

I believe the message here is that much bigger speakers may have better midrange and upper bass than much smaller speakers - no replacement for displacement. Thus, you probably did not waste your money.

The day I did my B&W demo...I listened to the 805d3 and 804d3 in 2.0 and again in 2.1...the larger 804 easily separated from the 805 the mid bass, and mids were more defined...treble was the same imo. imo the 805 is a great speaker probably the best bookshelf I've personally heard, but $5k+?

 

[shadyJ]

I agree. Once you start having -3dB points above 80hz, you start getting into territory where you’re asking a sub to play frequencies above what it was designed to do. The other issue, is that speakers that small generally have a good bit of distortion at anything other than low levels in small rooms, that said, woofer size isn’t always an indicator of ability to perform at high spl, an 8” pro woofer can have a sensitivity of 93dB or greater, and be able to reach 120dB @1m, while an 8” hifi woofer could be as low as 83dB, and go up in smoke at 120dB, not even considering distortion.

Materials have an effect too. A polypropylene woofer has inherently lossy damping, which causes movement that might otherwise be transformed into sound to be wasted as heat, while an aluminum cone of similar weight would be much more rigid, and therefore significantly less loss into the surrounding cone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Many subs are designed to operate well above 80 Hz.

Polypropylene can have lossy damping but that can mean the breakups modes are relatively benign. Aluminium generally will not have benign breakup modes. The diaphragm material isn't going to be a big factor below breakup modes. It doesn't matter that aluminium is more rigid at higher frequencies because it would need a much steeper filter in order to reduce output at breakup frequencies. Besides that, aluminium is heavier and is generally less sensitive than polypropylene, so this could not be a simple comparison.

 

[yepimonfire]

@KEW I wonder if proper crossover integration has an effect as well, especially concerning Klipsch, since they use low crossover points. The 150m for example, is crossed over at 1500hz, which has a 9” wavelength, and the center to center distance is exactly 4.5 inches, the dispersion of the woofer matches the dispersion of the tweeter at the xover point, and they sum perfectly in the far field. Two drivers placed within a half wavelength should behave as a single radiating source, the small R-14m is crossed over at 2800hz, which has a wavelength of around 5 inches, and the c2c spacing is...you guessed it, 2 1/4 inches. I suspect this also explains why the horizontal MTM 250c lacks a dip in the xover point as far out as 45 degrees as well.

Some of the worst speakers for imaging I’ve heard have higher xover points (ie 3khz and above) or large distances between the woofer and tweeter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yepimonfire]

Concerning the first paragraph - as soon as I scratch the surface it immediately goes over my head. I simply can not believe that Tannoy would choose to build 10" or 12" mid/woofer cone in to their costlier speakers and have all sorts of IMD and cone break up and beaming...

I was listening to some jazz session thru them and some Nils Lofgren - Live Acoustic.

Which speaker? What’s the xover frequency?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yepimonfire]

@Steve81 if the sub can extend to 120hz linearly, and is either placed along the front of the room or multiple subs used, you might have good results with a 120hz xover. This is entirely room and speaker dependent though. Crossing my LCR over at 60hz gives me the flattest response and best sound. My speakers actually do a better job at 60hz-120hz than my sub, and I have no issues listening at the ridiculous volume levels i often use.

This is the distortion of my L/R speakers playing a 50hz tone at 100dB 11 feet away, which use 5.25” ceramic/aluminum woofer

This is 80hz @100dB

From 50hz-200hz, I’m able to get about 102dB before distortion starts climbing rapidly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[killdozzer]

Which speaker? What’s the xover frequency?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, check this one:

This is Tannoy Cheviot. It has been produced for decades which makes it all the more difficult for me to believe that it would continuously go out with such obvious inherent flaws. It goes for 6800$. It has some sort of tuning option:


and these are the specs:
- Frequency response: 38Hz-30 KHz ±6dB
- Recommended Amplifier Power: 20 - 250 Watts
- Power handling: 125 W continuous,500W peak
- Sensitivity: 91dB
- Impedance: 8 O
- Crossover: 1.2 kHz
- Connectors: 5 x 4 mm 24ct WBT binding posts
- Dimensions HWD: 860 x 448 x 260 mm
- Net weight: 29 kg

That driver is 12" for mids and lows!! (it's bigger than some people's subs).

LATER EDIT: Arde, the speaker from the same series has a 15" coaxial driver. I know it makes a world of a difference, but at least some measurements are available for similar speaker build. This is Churchill with a 15" coaxial.

 

[Steve81]

if the sub can extend to 120hz linearly, and is either placed along the front of the room or multiple subs used, you might have good results with a 120hz xover. This is entirely room and speaker dependent though.

Everything related to subwoofer performance is speaker and room (and setup) dependent That said, a 120Hz XO isn't something that's terribly difficult to accomplish with good results IME. In my case, even when it was a single subwoofer, it was mostly a matter of good placement, and that was a benefit for the entire passband, not just around the XO. One other factor is keeping the driver as close to the rear wall as possible, as that pushes up the cancellation notches associated with the Allison effect.

Crossing my LCR over at 60hz gives me the flattest response and best sound. My speakers actually do a better job at 60hz-120hz than my sub, and I have no issues listening at the ridiculous volume levels i often use.

So IOW you need a better sub(s) And if you're talking about the level mentioned in your OP, -10dB from reference as ridiculous... tell that to the folks that run multiple horn loaded subs or multiple 24s in their home theaters Of course, I have some idea of where you're coming from. I once thought my old SVS PB10NSD was a beast, and that it had no issues delivering those kinds of "ridiculous levels" as well. In my case at least, with more capable equipment, those perceptions changed.

This is the distortion of my L/R speakers playing a 50hz tone at 100dB 11 feet away, which use 5.25” ceramic/aluminum woofer...From 50hz-200hz, I’m able to get about 102dB before distortion starts climbing rapidly.

So with two speakers driven, you can get up to 102dB 50Hz-200Hz without distortion becoming a major issue. What about just 1 speaker, 120Hz-200Hz vs 50Hz-120Hz? That's really the comparison I'm getting at with a 120Hz XO.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I'm in the 120Hz XO camp.

I get the best sound quality from my subs (SV-1212, SX-1010) when I set the XO to 120Hz.

When I had the dual Funk 18.0 with Revel Salon2 and B&W 802D2, I also set the XO to 120Hz.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

View attachment 22841

That reminds me of my old $300/each Pioneer speakers that had 1" tweeter and 15" mid/woofers.

 

[Dale Doback]

I still can't decide. lol I keep going back and forth between 80 to 120hz. So, the difference must not be that huge to me. But, I have 4 10" subs, so, I am guessing it's easier to go with a higher x-over with my setup.

 

[Dale Doback]

That reminds me of my old $300/each Pioneer speakers that had 1" tweeter and 15" mid/woofers.

I had some Pioneer speakers with 15" woofers I bought in '78. My first real speakers. I was a kid (17) and 15" woofers was some serious bragging rights. lol Bought them at a stereo place called 'Dixie HiFi'. They went out of business a very long time ago. It was setup like a warehouse. That's also where I bought my Pioneer reel to reel. God, I'm gettin old.

I really shouldn't say they were mine. I talked my father into it.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I had some Pioneer speakers with 15" woofers I bought in '78. My first real speakers. I was a kid (17) and 15" woofers was some serious bragging rights. lol Bought them at a stereo place called 'Dixie HiFi'. They went out of business a very long time ago. It was setup like a warehouse. That's also where I bought my Pioneer reel to reel. God, I'm gettin old.

Maybe those Pioneers were the same ones.

Consumer Reports rated them #1. Oh yeah.

I can't even recall where I bought those 15"-woofer Pioneers. But I know I bought them brand new from some big name store.

But I do remember enjoying those speakers for a long time.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I still can't decide. lol I keep going back and forth between 80 to 120hz. So, the difference must not be that huge to me. But, I have 4 10" subs, so, I am guessing it's easier to go with a higher x-over with my setup.

Yeah, I went back and forth between 80 and 120Hz also with my SX-T2R towers.

So often that I couldn't even remember which XO I used!

Then finally I decided to go with 120Hz and kept it there.

When I got the new SVT towers (SV831R/1212) a few months ago, I also experimented with the 80 vs 120Hz. It went back and forth, but for some reason, this time it was a lot easier to decide to go with 120Hz.

 

[Dale Doback]

Maybe those Pioneers were the same ones.

Consumer Reports rated them #1. Oh yeah.

I can't even recall where I bought those 15"-woofer Pioneers. But I know I bought them brand new from some big name store.

But I do remember enjoying those speakers for a long time.

Well, I don't remember the model number. My father still has them. I just remember they were heavy as hell. Made out of solid oak I think with a wood/cloth grill. They are no match for todays speakers, but, just like you, I remember enjoying the hell out of that stereo. Other items were a BIC turntable, Yamaha receiver, and AKAI cassette deck.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Well, I don't remember the model number. My father still has them. I just remember they were heavy as hell. Made out of solid oak I think with a wood/cloth grill. They are no match for todays speakers, but, just like you, I remember enjoying the hell out of that stereo. Other items were a BIC turntable, Yamaha receiver, and AKAI cassette deck.

Oh yeah, the good old days.

Heavy as heck oak cabinet Pioneer speakers with 15" woofers, turntables, and cassette decks.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Oh yeah! I want to be in the 15” club too! I used to abuse a pair of CV D-9’s back in the day. I actually still own them but one needs a new horn, and both need surrounds. Ahhh, the 90’s...

 

[Dale Doback]

Oh yeah! I want to be in the 15” club too! I used to abuse a pair of CV D-9’s back in the day. I actually still own them but one needs a new horn, and both need surrounds. Ahhh, the 90’s...

I knew someone who owned those. Or some similar to those. Can't comment on the sound really, my buddy only listened to Heavy Metal and very LOUDLY. lol Yes, they played VERY LOUD!

 

[lovinthehd]

I still can't decide. lol I keep going back and forth between 80 to 120hz. So, the difference must not be that huge to me. But, I have 4 10" subs, so, I am guessing it's easier to go with a higher x-over with my setup.

If you're not getting localization for the subs....