Am I throwing good money away?

[mazersteven]

I'd pair your Klipsch speakers with a Klipsch subwoofer. That's me. Good luck!

 

[Pogre]

I'd pair your Klipsch speakers with a Klipsch subwoofer. That's me. Good luck!

I would pair any speaker with a subwoofer from a manufacturer who specialize in subwoofers like HSU, SVS, Rythmik, PSA, etc. Klipsch is more in the speaker game than the sub game. Most of their subwoofers are pretty sub par.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Klipsch is more in the speaker game than the sub game. Most of their subwoofers are pretty sub par.

I see what you did there...

 

[mazersteven]

At the end of the day, it comes down to personal preference, and people will just have to agree to disagree.

Maybe he just needs more Army training Sir

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Maybe he just needs more Army training Sir

You mean the "Sir, Yes Sir," mentality?

 

[mazersteven]

Or maybe he needs Jedi Training

 

[TLS Guy]

I have been watching this thread unfold. We seem to have a lot of slow learners here.

This knee jerk reaction, that all bass loss can be solved by more and or bigger subs needs to stop. This is simply not true, and I'm pretty sue in this case it is not true.

As I have said so often that sub range is only a small percentage of the FR perceived as bass. What is perceived as bass is 20 Hz to 400 Hz and actually you can make an argument that it is 500 Hz. However I usually cut it off at the bottom end of the speech discrimination band.

In fact that band between 80 Hz and 400 Hz is absolutely crucial to perception of bass quality. Even small changes in this range have an outside influence on whether a speakers sound thin or bloated in the bass.

Now in this region there is a lot of power in all types of music. Not only that but this is just the range where baffle step compensation is operative. It is also a range where speaker interaction with the room has an out sized influence on how any speaker performs in a given room.

So the other compounding issue, is that it is also the range where impedance needs to drop the most to get optimal baffle step compensation. So basically power output needs to double in this range. Which has to mean halving the overall impedance in this range.

This is a major reason why ALL receivers need to be 4 ohm stable and have honest specs for performance at 4 ohms.

So lets see what we have here.

Ground pane FR of his main speakers.

You can see that baffle step compensation is not quite adequate.

Impedance.

The impedance has been dropped, but not quite enough.

Now as I have stated this is a crucial area and room gain and position have a strong influence. This is why I have designed my speakers to have infinitely variable baffle step compensation. The set of the BSC is very different in my new room from the last. This room requires significantly greater BSC.

The answer to this problem is active speakers. James Larson (shady) has been taking a close look at active speakers, and they are showing better measurements and giving improved sound.

Active speakers will solve the receiver impedance nightmare, they will allow for optimal speaker performance in a wide variety of rooms. That will go a long way to solving the speech intelligibility problem, by solving serious crossover timing issues with the use of DSP. It is now known that timing problems do downgrade speech intelligibility. Personally, I have known that for a long time.

So we could make a quantum leap and I think be cost effective, by putting power amps in speakers and NOT receivers. It is now time for the industry to transition.

What we really need though is an optical standard for transmission from pre/pro to speakers. This will prevent ground loops, so speakers could be plugged in to any circuit. Also optical cables are small and easily concealed. All this absolutely needs to happen.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

@TLS Guy - Ok, So assuming you're correct about the BSC issue of these speakers, then won't sub as ULS-15 crossed at 90-110Hz mostly resolve thus this? (and yes, I know localization of sub starts at about 120hz)

 

[TLS Guy]

@TLS Guy - Ok, So assuming you're correct about the BSC issue of these speakers, then won't sub as ULS-15 crossed at 90-110Hz mostly resolve thus this? (and yes, I know localization of sub starts at about 120hz)

Yes, and know. You are getting into the area where you really need a custom crossover and not an off the shelf one, and where timing issues really do start to get more and more important.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Mark, I don’t know if you missed, but some of us were talking about proper integration first. My point AFTER that was, the little sunfire doesn’t stand a chance in that large space on concrete.

 

[TLS Guy]

Mark, I don’t know if you missed, but some of us were talking about proper integration first. My point AFTER that was, the little sunfire doesn’t stand a chance in that large space on concrete.

Those little Sunfire subs are more potent than you might imagine. Bob Carver actually demonstrated one of those, to me in my basement. That was my Grand Forks studio. That was a bigger room than his and also had a concrete floor. Those little things did not lack for output, but the bass quality was not the best, but they good produce a lot spls to a degree that was astonishing.

We tested them here.

You could get the driver to bottom, but at that point the volume was far higher than what you would require.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Those little Sunfire subs are more potent than you might imagine. Bob Carver actually demonstrated one of those, to me in my basement. That was my Grand Forks studio. That was a bigger room than his and also had a concrete floor. Those little things did not lack for output, but the bass quality was not the best, but they good produce a lot spls to a degree that was astonishing.

We tested them here.

You could get the driver to bottom, but at that point the volume was far higher than what you would require.

Going in circles eh? System Integration and bass accuracy is what we are talking about here.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Those little Sunfire subs are more potent than you might imagine. Bob Carver actually demonstrated one of those, to me in my basement. That was my Grand Forks studio. That was a bigger room than his and also had a concrete floor. Those little things did not lack for output, but the bass quality was not the best, but they good produce a lot spls to a degree that was astonishing.

We tested them here.

You could get the driver to bottom, but at that point the volume was far higher than what you would require.

Have to say. Having Bob carver demo just about anything in my home would be pretty cool. I do in fact have experience with those little sunfires, and my experience hasn’t been the same as yours. What brought them to popularity was what they could do for their size. Now I must say for that, they do impress(mostly), but Pressuring a room, or shaking the couch with T-rex footfalls they won’t. Not in my room anyway.

 

[TLS Guy]

Going in circles eh? System Integration and bass accuracy is what we are talking about here.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Yes, we are talking integration. However I highly doubt you can achieve proper BSC without diver alignment. As I have said before, speakers need so much more than a flat frequency response. You can easily design and build a speaker with a perfectly flat frequency response, that is totally useless as a reproduces. FR tells you absolutely nothing about time by itself. Major designers and many authorities, have been totally cavalier about time. Time is an extremely important dimension is any sound reproducing system. It is the overlooked parameter far to often and it leads to bad results. I have never been cavalier about time, and no one else should be either.

Look at the bottom trace of my integrated system.

Now look at the system in the adjacent room, that has two subs on a different wall to the main system with the subs also spaced. This trace is form the MLP, but with the subs, equally ahead and behind the MLP.

Probably not a big deal in the last two octaves, but it certainly would be above that point.

 

[Pogre]

I have been watching this thread unfold. We seem to have a lot of slow learners here.

This knee jerk reaction, that all bass loss can be solved by more and or bigger subs needs to stop. This is simply not true, and I'm pretty sue in this case it is not true.

As I have said so often that sub range is only a small percentage of the FR perceived as bass. What is perceived as bass is 20 Hz to 400 Hz and actually you can make an argument that it is 500 Hz. However I usually cut it off at the bottom end of the speech discrimination band.

In fact that band between 80 Hz and 400 Hz is absolutely crucial to perception of bass quality. Even small changes in this range have an outside influence on whether a speakers sound thin or bloated in the bass.

Now in this region there is a lot of power in all types of music. Not only that but this is just the range where baffle step compensation is operative. It is also a range where speaker interaction with the room has an out sized influence on how any speaker performs in a given room.

So the other compounding issue, is that it is also the range where impedance needs to drop the most to get optimal baffle step compensation. So basically power output needs to double in this range. Which has to mean halving the overall impedance in this range.

This is a major reason why ALL receivers need to be 4 ohm stable and have honest specs for performance at 4 ohms.

So lets see what we have here.

Ground pane FR of his main speakers.

You can see that baffle step compensation is not quite adequate.

Impedance.

The impedance has been dropped, but not quite enough.

Now as I have stated this is a crucial area and room gain and position have a strong influence. This is why I have designed my speakers to have infinitely variable baffle step compensation. The set of the BSC is very different in my new room from the last. This room requires significantly greater BSC.

The answer to this problem is active speakers. James Larson (shady) has been taking a close look at active speakers, and they are showing better measurements and giving improved sound.

Active speakers will solve the receiver impedance nightmare, they will allow for optimal speaker performance in a wide variety of rooms. That will go a long way to solving the speech intelligibility problem, by solving serious crossover timing issues with the use of DSP. It is now known that timing problems do downgrade speech intelligibility. Personally, I have known that for a long time.

So we could make a quantum leap and I think be cost effective, by putting power amps in speakers and NOT receivers. It is now time for the industry to transition.

What we really need though is an optical standard for transmission from pre/pro to speakers. This will prevent ground loops, so speakers could be plugged in to any circuit. Also optical cables are small and easily concealed. All this absolutely needs to happen.

I um, stressed proper integration before considering a new sub also... I think you're reading more into the advice than what's there. Almost every one of us is recommending better integration first and foremost...

 

[TLS Guy]

I um, stressed proper integration before considering a new sub also... I think you're reading more into the advice than what's there. Almost every one of us is recommending better integration first and foremost...

Sub integration alone will not solve this problem. Having a sub at a distance, will solve some problems and create others. We need to be far more cognizant of the problems we create. Separating fundamentals from their harmonics in time is not good, and a significant aberration.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

The sad thing is I think the baby is out with the bath water...

 

[Pogre]

Sub integration alone will not solve this problem. Having a sub at a distance, will solve some problems and create others. We need to be far more cognizant of the problems we create. Separating fundamentals from their harmonics in time is not good, and a significant aberration.

Not alone I agree, but it's certainly a good start and a legitimate path to improvements. I've made more improvements just moving things around, using proper toe in, distance from boundaries, etc. than any new piece of equipment has offered me. We work with what we have.

That said, moving from a pair of 10" subs to a pair of 15" subs, along with proper integration did make a very significant and audible improvement in my almost 6000^3 room. The 10s (and the sealed 12s I had) were just woefully underpowered for the space. When it comes to large spaces I believe size does matter. However, I also believe in optimizing what you already have before making purchase decisions.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...The answer to this problem is active speakers...

...by putting power amps in speakers and NOT receivers.

Active speakers are fine.

But we do NOT need to put amp inside the speaker or sub to make it Active.

We should keep the amp exactly where it belongs - in its own chassis.

Gene's new $45K RBH system is Active and all the amps are EXTERNAL, not inside the speakers!

 

[Teetertotter?]

My 10" subwoofer for my 12 X 10 basement room area is at 1/4 gain, for my listening pleasure. My set-up is perfect for my listening pleasure w my specific Klipsch Speakers. The AVR has all audio adjustments turned off.

With the AVR auto speaker microphone calibration, I have balance that is most acceptable for my small area of the basement. The whole 30 X 40 basement area is carpeted with concrete walls and bare rafters. The front speakers are 8 feet from the listening area along with the 55". The surrounds are a little behind my head with the tweeters 20" above my head angled down. The front L/R tweeters are at my head level.

For someone like @mazersteven, to disapprove of ALL Klipsch subwoofers, as a blanket statement, is very misinformed. IMHO. AMEN!