Bookshelves & Sub (2.1) or Tower Speakers (2.0). Which?

[BoredSysAdmin]

Haven't heard these, but I believe Dennis had a hand in their design. TL so they should have solid bass and I think a few here have built them before. Wait until they go on sale, they're around $200.

http://www.parts-express.com/parts-express-tritrix-mtm-tl-speaker-components-and-cabinet-kit-pair--300-702

Dennis can correct me, but I think Curt Campbell designed these, but that doesn't make them any less as good

FYI: Unlike Zath 5.3 speaker kit, Tritrix kit will require more involved assembly.
aka - gluing and clamping box and also assembly of crossover.

 

[agarwalro]

Dennis can correct me, but I think Curt Campbell designed these, but that doesn't make them any less as good

FYI: Unlike Zath 5.3 speaker kit, Tritrix kit will require box assembly.
aka - gluing and clamping and also assembly of crossover.

Yup! On both counts.

http://speakerdesignworks.com/AviaTrix_1.html

http://www.parts-express.com/project-gallery-speaker-project-the-aviatrix

The PE product page has assembly instruction videos.

 

[j_garcia]

Sorry, was thinking of the similar one that was done by Dennis and Paul Kittinger.

 

[Motrek]

The CBM-170SEs are very good, but you DEFINITELY need a sub with them. The 340s are still somewhat lighter on bass than a typical bookshelf of that size, but you can get away with them without a sub in a smaller room IMO. With a decent tower, I tend to listen to music without a sub even giving up that extension (somewhat for simplicity), however my main rig has been bookshelf/sub for many years.

Stumbled on this thread while looking for reviews of the new Elacs.

Anyway, I have the CBM-170SEs and the characterization that they have "no bass" and "you definitely need a sub" is IMO exaggerated.

They are specified to have typical in-room response down to 53Hz (-3 dB). I just used a tone generator and, at my normal TV-watching volume (not especially loud), they can produce a nice meaty tone at 40Hz and still go somewhat lower than that.

It must be remembered that many people on this forum have extremely high standards, and if their sound system doesn't have the bass response of a THX movie theater or a dance club, they consider it unacceptable.

Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, most people still watch TV with the built-in speakers, which usually struggle to produce any sound at all below 70Hz. Compared to that, the bass from a CBM-170 is spectacular, rather than nonexistent. Most "sound pedestals" (like ZVOXs) only go down to ~50Hz and many of those are considered quite good. And there are über-expensive sound bars from vendors like SONOS and B&W and Definitive Audio that don't produce nearly as much bass as CBM-170s but reviewers rave about how great the bass is from these small bars and how you don't need to use a subwoofer with them. And I should also mention that the tiny subwoofers that are bundled with inexpensive sound bars and HTiaB systems often aren't specified below 50Hz either.

So yeah, you need a subwoofer if you want your living room to sound like a movie theater. The CBM-170s will not get you there. But that isn't the same has having "no bass" or absolutely requiring a subwoofer.

 

[lifestyle]

Stumbled on this thread while looking for reviews of the new Elacs.

Anyway, I have the CBM-170SEs and the characterization that they have "no bass" and "you definitely need a sub" is IMO exaggerated.

They are specified to have typical in-room response down to 53Hz (-3 dB). I just used a tone generator and, at my normal TV-watching volume (not especially loud), they can produce a nice meaty tone at 40Hz and still go somewhat lower than that.

It must be remembered that many people on this forum have extremely high standards, and if their sound system doesn't have the bass response of a THX movie theater or a dance club, they consider it unacceptable.

Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, most people still watch TV with the built-in speakers, which usually struggle to produce any sound at all below 70Hz. Compared to that, the bass from a CBM-170 is spectacular, rather than nonexistent. Most "sound pedestals" (like ZVOXs) only go down to ~50Hz and many of those are considered quite good. And there are über-expensive sound bars from vendors like SONOS and B&W and Definitive Audio that don't produce nearly as much bass as CBM-170s but reviewers rave about how great the bass is from these small bars and how you don't need to use a subwoofer with them. And I should also mention that the tiny subwoofers that are bundled with inexpensive sound bars and HTiaB systems often aren't specified below 50Hz either.

So yeah, you need a subwoofer if you want your living room to sound like a movie theater. The CBM-170s will not get you there. But that isn't the same has having "no bass" or absolutely requiring a subwoofer.

Thanks Motrek, I did end-up getting a sub and love the way the whole set-up sounds - very 'full'. But I agree - they (CBM's) did'nt 'need' a sub to sound great all alone! (I'm the original poster)

 

[Motrek]

Thanks Motrek, I did end-up getting a sub and love the way the whole set-up sounds - very 'full'. But I agree - they (CBM's) did'nt 'need' a sub to sound great all alone! (I'm the original poster)

Cool, glad you're enjoying your setup. What sub did you end up with? I've thought about getting one but haven't gotten around to it. I'm also not looking forward to positioning it in my room. The chance that a subwoofer sounds best in a location that also looks good seems slim.

 

[lifestyle]

Cool, glad you're enjoying your setup. What sub did you end up with? I've thought about getting one but haven't gotten around to it. I'm also not looking forward to positioning it in my room. The chance that a subwoofer sounds best in a location that also looks good seems slim.

I got the http://www.hsuresearch.com/products/stf-2.html, it's an economy sub, but by all reviews and opinions I had read - it's no 'small player'! I like it...

 

[j_garcia]

Stumbled on this thread while looking for reviews of the new Elacs.

Anyway, I have the CBM-170SEs and the characterization that they have "no bass" and "you definitely need a sub" is IMO exaggerated.

They are specified to have typical in-room response down to 53Hz (-3 dB). I just used a tone generator and, at my normal TV-watching volume (not especially loud), they can produce a nice meaty tone at 40Hz and still go somewhat lower than that.

They are -6dB at 53Hz per the specs and are realistically looking at Ascend's measurements -3dB around 70Hz.

It must be remembered that many people on this forum have extremely high standards, and if their sound system doesn't have the bass response of a THX movie theater or a dance club, they consider it unacceptable.

Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, most people still watch TV with the built-in speakers, which usually struggle to produce any sound at all below 70Hz. Compared to that, the bass from a CBM-170 is spectacular, rather than nonexistent. Most "sound pedestals" (like ZVOXs) only go down to ~50Hz and many of those are considered quite good. And there are über-expensive sound bars from vendors like SONOS and B&W and Definitive Audio that don't produce nearly as much bass as CBM-170s but reviewers rave about how great the bass is from these small bars and how you don't need to use a subwoofer with them. And I should also mention that the tiny subwoofers that are bundled with inexpensive sound bars and HTiaB systems often aren't specified below 50Hz either.

So yeah, you need a subwoofer if you want your living room to sound like a movie theater. The CBM-170s will not get you there. But that isn't the same has having "no bass" or absolutely requiring a subwoofer.

There's no reason for you to take someone's comments personally when it relates to a product you happen to own. While many of the regulars on this forum have "high standards" I would still not characterize the 170s as having stellar bass. For movies, I'd recommend a sub in nearly all cases, not just with these speakers. For music, I could listen to the 170s without a sub too if that's what I was looking for in a system. The A/V-1 and A/V-2s I compared these to are spec'ed at -3dB at 55Hz and I've used them both in a few setups without a sub. Ultimately it depends on the goals of the system, and for a stereo system with these particular speakers for my purposes, yes I'd still want a sub.

 

[Motrek]

They are -6dB at 53Hz per the specs and are realistically looking at Ascend's measurements -3dB around 70Hz.

No, the specs couldn't be more clear:

http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages/products/speakers/cbm170/cbm170specs.html

It's -3dB at 53Hz, not -6dB. Anechoic is -3dB at 58Hz. Nothing anywhere about 70Hz. Maybe you are thinking of the non-SE version? That was discontinued years ago though.

There's no reason for you to take someone's comments personally when it relates to a product you happen to own. While many of the regulars on this forum have "high standards" I would still not characterize the 170s as having stellar bass. For movies, I'd recommend a sub in nearly all cases, not just with these speakers. For music, I could listen to the 170s without a sub too if that's what I was looking for in a system. The A/V-1 and A/V-2s I compared these to are spec'ed at -3dB at 55Hz and I've used them both in a few setups without a sub. Ultimately it depends on the goals of the system, and for a stereo system with these particular speakers for my purposes, yes I'd still want a sub.

Yes, of course, and that's exactly what I said in my post.

If your goal is to have a home theater system that will sound like a nice movie theater, you will need a sub. If you want it to sound like a rock concert or a dance club, you will need a sub. There are no bookshelf speakers in the world (Ascends or otherwise) that will give you that kind of room pressurization.

But to say that a sub is "required" or that the Ascends have "no bass" is equally guilty of not taking goals into consideration. A pair of CBM-170s without a sub will still slaughter any TV, any standalone sound bar, any sound pedestal, and many small HTiaBs in terms of amount and quality of bass. So again, it all depends on goals.

 

[j_garcia]

No, the specs couldn't be more clear:

http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages/products/speakers/cbm170/cbm170specs.html

It's -3dB at 53Hz, not -6dB. Anechoic is -3dB at 58Hz. Nothing anywhere about 70Hz. Maybe you are thinking of the non-SE version? That was discontinued years ago though.

+/-3 dB is a difference of 6dB and is usually used to indicate the -6dB point. The chart shows them falling off quickly below the tuning point. The 1/3 octave chart is pretty clear. You are correct that I also overstated that a sub is "necessary" at the time; perhaps "recommended" is a better comment.

No matter those details, the speakers sound great and I highly recommend them. I've been a fan of the Ascends for many years.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

But to say that a sub is "required" or that the Ascends have "no bass" is equally guilty of not taking goals into consideration.

It was simply an opinion. Everyone has a different opinion.

It is my opinion that the Revel Salon2 speakers require a subwoofer when I owned the Revel Salon2.

Just an opinion.

 

[Motrek]

+/-3 dB is a difference of 6dB and is usually used to indicate the -6dB point. The chart shows them falling off quickly below the tuning point. The 1/3 octave chart is pretty clear. You are correct that I also overstated that a sub is "necessary" at the time; perhaps "recommended" is a better comment.

No matter those details, the speakers sound great and I highly recommend them. I've been a fan of the Ascends for many years.

Point taken re: 6dB. The port tune frequency seems to be ~45Hz from my understanding of the impedance graph. I assume the rolloff is the same as any other ported enclosure (-24 dB/octave) which I believe is dictated by physics rather than anything to do with the speaker's design.

The port tune frequency seems to be a few Hz lower than usual for a speaker of this size. I don't know much about speaker design but maybe this means the port exists mostly to increase the efficiency of the speaker and not as much to extend the bass output. That's fine with me since the output from a port is off by a wavelength anyway, so I figure the less I hear from a port, the better. Although maybe the CBM-170s have a bit less bass than other speakers their size. They are relatively large bookshelf speakers and I haven't heard any other bookshelf speakers their size though. But the other bookshelf speakers I *have* heard don't have any more bass than the CBM-170s.

I still believe what we both agreed on, i.e., the need for a sub depends on a person's goals.