Floorstander needed if using subs?

[Sendu]

Imagine in a particular line of speakers from a manufacturer there is a floorstander that does 19Hz to 28kHz with a 5" midrange driver and 1" tweeter (with additional bass drivers), while the standmount speaker does 42Hz to 28kHz with a 6.5" midrange driver and the same 1" tweeter (and no bass drivers).

If you'll be using active subs crossed over at 80Hz, is there any point in getting the floorstander? Could the standmount actually have a better sounding midrange with that larger driver (that is not being asked to produce lower frequency sounds)?

Or, generally speaking, is there some other reason to always get the floorstander and pay for bass units that might not get used, or configure your AVR to use the floorstander for bass along with your multiple active subs?

 

[HTfreak2004]

Amplification Amplification Amplification. Good subs will offer a cheaper solution. But keep in mind where is the -3db point of the floor standers? A great amp(s) will be needed for full range floor standers!

 

[Russdawg1]

Even though the floor stander may reach a desirable frequency, the optimal placement for imaging/soundstage/etc for the towers is almost never the same spot where it’s optimal to place the subs/produce those frequencies.

 

[Sendu]

Even though the floor stander may reach a desirable frequency, the optimal placement for imaging/soundstage/etc for the towers is almost never the same spot where it’s optimal to place the subs/produce those frequencies.

Indeed. So is that a vote for getting standmounts? Why do you never see standmount speakers in people's home theatre photos where they show off massive floorstanders next to massive active subs?

 

[HTfreak2004]

Even though the floor stander may reach a desirable frequency, the optimal placement for imaging/soundstage/etc for the towers is almost never the same spot where it’s optimal to place the subs/produce those frequencies.

I wonder if that is Low Frequency Extension from a ported box for the Floor Standers.

 

[Russdawg1]

Indeed. So is that a vote for getting standmounts? Why do you never see standmount speakers in people's home theatre photos where they show off massive floorstanders next to massive active subs?

Cause stands are ugly. Floor standing towers look great.

There is also the added benefit of better crossover between the subs and towers since the towers reach lower but it’s negligible.

It really depends, blanket rules are almost nonexistent in audio.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Indeed. So is that a vote for getting standmounts? Why do you never see standmount speakers in people's home theatre photos where they show off massive floorstanders next to massive active subs?

Well easy! Lol
IMO even if towers(I mean real ones, not a bookshelf speaker with a built in base lol) are crossed at 80, they will have more dynamic capabilities above the XO. Larger/multiple drivers found in real towers share thermal load, power handling, are usually more sensitive and easier to drive, so even if not using their extension capabilities(which is a whole other topic) imo they’re a better choice. In most decent sized rooms anyway.

 

[HTfreak2004]

I have both and started with mains on stands now used as surrounds.

Takes more power to drive floor standers and at lower frequencies power begins to stress amps trying to drive lower ohms hard.

But with a floor standers crossed over you will definitely get better imaging and more output! The cost is better as well meaning a mid grade floor standers will outperform the next level up stand mounted!

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I have both and started with mains on stands now used as surrounds.

Takes more power to drive floor standers

I’m going to say this is mostly not true. I believe most good towers are much more efficient than bookshelf speakers.

 

[HTfreak2004]

T

I’m going to say this is mostly not true. I believe most good towers are much more efficient than bookshelf speakers.

I Agree with you to a point! Efficiency of the true floor standers over the bookshelves depends a lot upon the space they have to breathe.

Just because the measurements agree with the floor standers over the bookshelf does not mean they are suited in the same room for the same dedicated role! (Efficiency should include the room area into that equation)

As Audiophiles we can agree we want the most bang for our hard earned dollar which can side on the favour of bookshelves that can breath correctly in the quarters they reside in!

You can have comparable dynamics above the crossover if the room mates well!

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

T

I Agree with you to a point! Efficiency of the true floor standers over the bookshelves depends a lot upon the space they have to breathe.

Just because the measurements agree with the floor standers over the bookshelf does not mean they are suited in the same room for the same dedicated role! (Efficiency should include the room area into that equation)

As Audiophiles we can agree we want the most bang for our hard earned dollar which can side on the favour of bookshelves that can breath correctly in the quarters they reside in!

You can have comparable dynamics above the crossover if the room mates well!

I’m assuming when you say “breathe” you mean image properly, and be far enough away from the LP that the drivers will integrate properly. For that I will agree, and also agree that a small room doesn’t always lend itself to a tower speaker.
But specs are specs, and like I said, the larger/multiple drivers coupled with a larger enclosure just win imo. The only “room efficiency” that should be accounted for might be dB loss over distance.

 

[Kingnoob]

I wonder if that is Low Frequency Extension from a ported box for the Floor Standers.

FLoorstanders are good for 2.1 or fronts , side surrounds . In 7ch surround , if price of floorstander Is too high to with bookshelf's. Bookshelf’s can take up the same or more space depending on speaker stand size .
Lower hertz mains will blend more seamless .
Floorstander are usually more bang / buck as they have ave multiple drivers and woofers.
Its more to do with budget or space constraints .
There are some incredible bookshelves but doubt I’ll be able to afford them even after I find a Job, some are thousands.

 

[lovinthehd]

Size of room and distance from speaker play roles. In a fairly large room I changed to floorstanders for L/R and surrounds from standmount units, and I prefer the larger speakers in the larger room; moved the standmounts to my bedroom and they are better in the smaller room. Depends on the particular speaker, too.

I wouldn't call the 6.5" a midrange driver but rather a mid-woofer, pretty typical in a 2-way standmount. Hoffman's Iron Law tends to dictate the larger speaker will tend to be more sensitive, even tho that may seem counterintuitive to some. My floorstanders are 3-4 dB more sensitive than the standmounts they replaced. Many floorstanders are not true full range speakers (20hz-20khz +/- 3dB is how I view full range), I still use subs with mine. Some floorstanders don't have substantial cabinets, some have small drivers, so details count.

 

[Kingnoob]

Size of room and distance from speaker play roles. In a fairly large room I changed to floorstanders for L/R and surrounds from standmount units, and I prefer the larger speakers in the larger room; moved the standmounts to my bedroom and they are better in the smaller room. Depends on the particular speaker, too.

I wouldn't call the 6.5" a midrange driver but rather a mid-woofer, pretty typical in a 2-way standmount. Hoffman's Iron Law tends to dictate the larger speaker will tend to be more sensitive, even tho that may seem counterintuitive to some. My floorstanders are 3-4 dB more sensitive than the standmounts they replaced. Many floorstanders are not true full range speakers (20hz-20khz +/- 3dB is how I view full range),I still use subs with mine. Some floorstanders don't have substantial cabinets, some have small drivers, so details count.

Yeah pioneer Andrew Jones sp 52 are very small and lightweight.https://www.amazon.com/Pioneer-SP-FS52-Designed-standing-Loudspeaker/dp/B008NCD2S4
There woofers really are smaller then most midrange. Wouldn’t be suprized if there’ not a top seller .

 

[lovinthehd]

Yeah pioneer Andrew Jones sp 52 are very small and lightweight.https://www.amazon.com/Pioneer-SP-FS52-Designed-standing-Loudspeaker/dp/B008NCD2S4

Yes as an example, the SP-FS52s are rated 87dB sensitive but their standmount counterparts, the SP-BS22s, are only rated 85dB sensitive (neither being particularly sensitive). Hoffman's Iron Law

 

[KEW]

Indeed. So is that a vote for getting standmounts? Why do you never see standmount speakers in people's home theatre photos where they show off massive floorstanders next to massive active subs?

Because you haven't been to my house!?

The pros of towers are
1) Looks (most people like the look of towers over bookshelf speakers on stands).
2) Higher SPL (which doesn't matter if the bookshelf gets louder than you will play it).
3) Lower frequency response (which often doesn't matter because subs seem to like to be crossed at 80Hz or higher which a 6" bookshelf can handle reasonably well).

The cons of a tower are
1) Cost
2) If you sit close, the multi-drivers on towers spaced out with a greater distance apart may not have enough distance from the LP to integrate well.
3) Resonance - The larger panels of a tower are inherently more prone to resonances. More expensive towers incorporate computer analysis and are braced accordingly.

Wild card factor - not all towers and bookshelf speakers share the same design. For example the tower is likely a 3-way while the BS a 2-way. In this case, there can be real differences in how well the crossover is designed and the capability of the different drivers used. Which has better SQ all depends on the specific speakers!

My rule of thumb on this is if the savings allows you to step up to a higher level of performance by using a BS, do it! For example, the SVS Prime tower costs $500 each and the SVS Ultra BS costs $500 each. For equal cost, assuming you will use subwoofer(s),the Ultra BS is a much better option. The caveat is that if you had a truly humongous room, the BS may not fill it. However, if ultimate SQ is the objective the drivers in the Ultra are simply capable of more accuracy and detail!

I recently stumbled over Marshall Guthrie's comment on the Ultra Tower vs Ultra bookshelf which reinforces my thoughts:

I made the SVS Ultras my primary speakers for several weeks, and after running through every usage scenario that exists in my listening room, my take is that these are beautiful, capable speakers that are also a terrific value. I find the aesthetics of the towers to be simply gorgeous. With their tall, sleek faces meeting a broad, angular back, the cabinet design is artful in a way that few $1000 speakers can touch. However, from a performance standpoint, I think the real star of the show are the Bookshelves.
They retained the best of the towers, including composed and natural response even at high volumes, while sacrificing only the lower register in frequency response. Mated with one of SVS's subwoofers, this becomes a non-issue and at $499 each, you have a beautiful looking and performing system. In a multichannel system, if your setup allows for the form factor, I think this is the only speaker you need.

https://www.audioholics.com/tower-speaker-reviews/svs-ultra-series-speakers-video
If cost is not a concern, and you are buying in a top-tier level of quality, there is not much penalty of getting towers (since cost is not a concern and you can't use the money saved to buy into a superior series).

 

[HTfreak2004]

I’m assuming when you say “breathe” you mean image properly, and be far enough away from the LP that the drivers will integrate properly. For that I will agree, and also agree that a small room doesn’t always lend itself to a tower speaker.
But specs are specs, and like I said, the larger/multiple drivers coupled with a larger enclosure just win imo. The only “room efficiency” that should be accounted for might be dB loss over distance.

We agree about the specs!
Just use them as a guideline to maximize your in room performance unless the intention is to treat the speaker like a 1000 HP car that never gets the space to really let her rip

 

[HTfreak2004]

Yes as an example, the SP-FS52s are rated 87dB sensitive but their standmount counterparts, the SP-BS22s, are only rated 85dB sensitive (neither being particularly sensitive). Hoffman's Iron Law

-2db is going to be almost non-discernible. What will be discernible is how much more amp power is needed just to make up the -2db at loud playback volume.

I’m not trying to be an antagonist here but like you already said with a larger room, speaker sensitivity becomes much more important due to the inverse square law.

If the bookshelf speaker suits the room and listening distance switching to a floor stander will add more cost for little to no advantage and could possibly sound less appealing.

You already made that clear by purchasing the floor standers and relocating your bookshelves.

(Size of room and distance from speaker play roles. In a fairly large room I changed to floorstanders for L/R and surrounds from standmount units, and I prefer the larger speakers in the larger room; moved the standmounts to my bedroom and they are better in the smaller room. Depends on the particular speaker, too)

 

[Kingnoob]

Because you haven't been to my house!?

The pros of towers are
1) Looks (most people like the look of towers over bookshelf speakers on stands).
2) Higher SPL (which doesn't matter if the bookshelf gets louder than you will play it).
3) Lower frequency response (which often doesn't matter because subs seem to like to be crossed at 80Hz or higher which a 6" bookshelf can handle reasonably well).

The cons of a tower are
1) Cost
2) If you sit close, the multi-drivers on towers spaced out with a greater distance apart may not have enough distance from the LP to integrate well.
3) Resonance - The larger panels of a tower are inherently more prone to resonances. More expensive towers incorporate computer analysis and are braced accordingly.

Wild card factor - not all towers and bookshelf speakers share the same design. For example the tower is likely a 3-way while the BS a 2-way. In this case, there can be real differences in how well the crossover is designed and the capability of the different drivers used. Which has better SQ all depends on the specific speakers!

My rule of thumb on this is if the savings allows you to step up to a higher level of performance by using a BS, do it! For example, the SVS Prime tower costs $500 each and the SVS Ultra BS costs $500 each. For equal cost, assuming you will use subwoofer(s),the Ultra BS is a much better option. The caveat is that if you had a truly humongous room, the BS may not fill it. However, if ultimate SQ is the objective the drivers in the Ultra are simply capable of more accuracy and detail!

I recently stumbled over Marshall Guthrie's comment on the Ultra Tower vs Ultra bookshelf which reinforces my thoughts:

https://www.audioholics.com/tower-speaker-reviews/svs-ultra-series-speakers-video
If cost is not a concern, and you are buying in a top-tier level of quality, there is not much penalty of getting towers (since cost is not a concern and you can't use the money saved to buy into a superior series).

Wow well said!!!
I think some lower end towers can outperform more expensive bookshelves though . Bigger soundstage , but I think bookshelves are better for surround When its going to cost too much to use towers for rears , heights or whatever’s you do for 5-9 ch.
For lfe effects no tower can compete with a larger cone sub . Except maybe towers with larger built in subs . Not that I will ever be able to afford a pair.

How good are svs speakers , don’t emotiva and monoprice make speakers now ?
Is there a ton of brands to look at but no stores anywere to listen to them .
I’m often suprized how much some speakers cost even when home audio seems to be on life’s support , why do goldenear cost 6-7k and klipsch horn 13k for there flagship models ?
My bedroom sucks I cannot event turn my sub up past half power. Its usually half or 1/3!!

 

[TLS Guy]

Imagine in a particular line of speakers from a manufacturer there is a floorstander that does 19Hz to 28kHz with a 5" midrange driver and 1" tweeter (with additional bass drivers), while the standmount speaker does 42Hz to 28kHz with a 6.5" midrange driver and the same 1" tweeter (and no bass drivers).

If you'll be using active subs crossed over at 80Hz, is there any point in getting the floorstander? Could the standmount actually have a better sounding midrange with that larger driver (that is not being asked to produce lower frequency sounds)?

Or, generally speaking, is there some other reason to always get the floorstander and pay for bass units that might not get used, or configure your AVR to use the floorstander for bass along with your multiple active subs?

You have proposed probably the biggest error in the race to the bottom for poor reproduction.

We have been over this again and again. Frequency response is only one aspect of a sounds systems reproductive accuracy. What you have neglected is the even more important power band response. FR by itself tells you very little and is a totally incomplete description of a sound systems capabilities.

So where is he power in music? It is NOT 80 Hz and below, unless you want to put a system together where the below 80 Hz power band response is considered above all else. I have come to the conclusion that this is the biggest fallacy in downgrading the accuracy of systems in the current era.

The fact is the power is really required between 80 Hz and 1500 Hz and actually out to 2,500 Hz. That is where you need good FR, but at power. The largest power band is 80 Hz to 500 Hz, which is where most of your resources need to be devoted, and NOT below 80 Hz. A bookshelf with a 5" drover is not going to cut it. And by the way below 500 Hz is bass and not mid range.

I'm getting tired of having to point this out. But if you want to have a good and realistic system that is where to devote most resources and NOT below 80 Hz.

This sub craze has produced the biggest downgrade to good reproduction in my lifetime. A sub as I have said so often should be the most disposable part of any system. In a good system the benefits of a sub should be subtle and NOT in your face.