Floorstanders Vs. Bookshelfs

[shadyJ]

The only reason to get a second VTF-2 mk5 would be to even out the bass and minimize localization. Just one would likely have enough headroom to get you evicted, let alone two, if you cranked it hard enough.

 

[MrBoat]

I don't really start looking at floor standers until we get 12" and beyond woofer size. I have stand mount and floor speakers with 12" woofers. I tend to treat, or implement them in the same ways.

Now that I think of it, I have always categorized speakers more by displacement than actual cab size, as long as the freq range is agreeable with music.

The other preference that has always paid off in the past is having speakers and amp that are rated at twice my average power usage, or, that much headroom. In my style of living and average listening room size, that would be about 40-50w so, 100-150w rms (figure speakers with avg sensitivities from about 85-90db) is about the headroom that is perfect for all my music needs.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I am a total sucker for gigantic towers...especially the hudge monolithic towers like the absurdly outstanding Status Acoustics 8T Reference towers. They will be mine one day. Oh, yes. They will be mine.

Dilly Dilly!

 

[Auditor55]

Not preferred by who? You?

The budget conscious, those that prefer sound over aesthetics and the astute shopper. Again, I say that if the user intends to have sub(s) in his audio system.

 

[Auditor55]

not true, it all depends on ones tower specs and room interaction. I have Revel Studio 2's and sill utilize a sub for bottom octave reinforcement.

That's fine if you want to do that, however it is not necessary if your tower speakers were able to reach those octaves without the use of a sub. Floorstanders that truly full range, people that own them typically won't use a sub.

 

[Auditor55]

One of the dumb things that you can see from time to time are bookshelf speakers on speaker stands that are so expensive that it wouldn't have cost much more to just get the tower version of the bookshelf speaker being used.

That's probably because the bookshelf speakers are very expensive, so thought would be to get expensive stands for expensive speakers.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Floorstanders that truly full range, people that own them typically won't use a sub.

I have to agree.

I would never use a subwoofer with my RBH SVT Towers.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I have Revel Studio 2's and sill utilize a sub for bottom octave reinforcement.

When I owned Revel Salon2 for about 2 years, I also used dual Funk 18.0 subs.

 

[snakeeyes]

I had removed the little 8 in sub before from my BP10b DT towers when I got sick of it bottoming out (the towers hit below 30hz without a sub) and I quickly found myself missing it. Currently running the Rythmik LVX12 with my towers and my audioholics’ism is restored! I am loving my theater room again. This is a bit of an addictive hobby. I’ve got another system in the master bedroom that sounds great with Q Acoustic 3020 bookshelves and c3090 and bass managed with a L12 Rythmik sealed sub but it is not the same as my home theater towers as you crank up to reference levels. Good luck.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

The budget conscious, those that prefer sound over aesthetics and the astute shopper. Again, I say that if the user intends to have sub(s) in his audio system.

I see. So those that use towers and subs have a penchant for wasting money, and prefer bad sound? Wow, A55, thanks for that bit of super narrow minded insight. I think you’re using a pretty wide brush.

 

[Mikado463]

That's fine if you want to do that, however it is not necessary if your tower speakers were able to reach those octaves without the use of a sub.

Understood , but I'm willing to bet the majority of those on this forum do not have floorstanders that do in fact go to the bottom octave and those that do may struggle with the given room in which they are playing, thus the augmentation of a proper sub (or two)

Floorstanders that truly full range, people that own them typically won't use a sub.

That thinking has changed in the last ten years or so, mostly for the reasons I stated above.

 

[Montucky]

Understood , but I'm willing to bet the majority of those on this forum do not have floorstanders that do in fact go to the bottom octave and those that do may struggle with the given room in which they are playing, thus the augmentation of a proper sub (or two)

I know you said "the majority," but may I refer you to AcuDefTechGuy's post above? Something tells me he doesn't have to worry too much about hitting those lower octaves.
FWIW, those RBH SVTs can be configured to be some absolute BEASTS!
For reference: https://rbhsound.com/svt.php

 

[Mikado463]

I know you said "the majority," but may I refer you to AcuDefTechGuy's post above? Something tells me he doesn't have to worry too much about hitting those lower octaves.
FWIW, those RBH SVTs can be configured to be some absolute BEASTS!
For reference: https://rbhsound.com/svt.php

a lot of 'boom boom' there !

 

[KEW]

There are too many variables to ever reach a proper conclusion.
Specifics that I have actually listened to:
I'd rather have two Energy RC-10 bookshelf speakers ($550/pr) plus $1450 for subs than two Energy RC-70 ($2000/pr) towers.
I'd rather have two Paradigm Studio 20 bookshelf speakers ($1400/pr) plus $1600 for subs than Two Studio 100 speakers ($3000/pr).

Another comparison is ...if you are buying subwoofer(s) regardless of towers or bookshelf... is the SVS Ultra Bookshelf which costs the same as the SVS Prime Tower. Given bass will not be outright anemic, I'll take the improved mid-range and treble performance of the Ultras over the bass improvements the Prime might offer anytime. Our ears are much more sensitive to inaccuracies in the mid-range!

So my experience is Bookshelfs represent better value if you are matching cost for both conditions!

However, if you are not trying to match cost, and once you are spending enough money to get very well built speakers (so resonance is not a liability to the towers), then hell yeah, spend the extra money and get the towers!

 

[KEW]

I'd invite William and Mikado to give the specific cases where they have realized that towers offered better value than bookshelf plus sub (for the same cost).
Including sub with the towers is certainly an option as long as the overall cost is the same.

PS - I'm not at all sure that is what they are really saying!

 

[Mikado463]

I'd invite William and Mikado to give the specific cases where they have realized that towers offered better value than bookshelf plus sub (for the same cost).
Including sub with the towers is certainly an option as long as the overall cost is the same.

PS - I'm not at all sure that is what they are really saying!

Kurt, you're right, that's not what I was implying ($$ wise). My situation (room) is such that floorstanders make more sense (14'6"x24'6"). Simply put I prefer 'fuller' range speakers that minimize what is to be expected out of ones sub(s)

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Actually Kurt, to your PS, I’m not sayin that. In fact I didn’t mention price at all, and I actually agree with you, and find your SVS example appt. Dollar for dollar, BS speakers paired with a subwoofer usually represent good value, but we all know it’s not that simple. In my post to the OP, I was simplifying my response, saying why I feel towers “can” deliver better dynamics etc. Even above the XO point. I didn’t qualify my statement with a price point, speaking arbitrarily.
The answer is always the same. “It depends”. My friend has a room for example. It’s on a suspended floor with short ceilings. You can get good bass response with a cell phone speaker. It’s too easy. My room however is concrete slab, and combined with my kitchen(not included foyer) is around 6700cuft. Mains are 14’ away. Not an easy space. My friend could use a pair of LS50 and an sb2k. I can’t. (Q950 are on my short list when that time comes.)
So my theoretical response was only pointing out why I feel towers can be better.
Iirc, OP is soon to be in a larger space, and I feel the uf5 would be worth the extra money, and since he has and likes the ub5 they’d make good surrounds.
As far as money is concerned. Everyone has a different budget, and perception of value. For me, it’s worth it to save longer to get what I feel is better. That means waiting till my squirrel fund is big enough for the towers I want vs buying the BS I want right away.

 

[Auditor55]

I see. So those that use towers and subs have a penchant for wasting money, and prefer bad sound? Wow, A55, thanks for that bit of super narrow minded insight. I think you’re using a pretty wide brush.

I don't think you understood what I was saying. Personally, I think towers look better in a room as opposed to speakers sitting on stands. I think speaker stands look a little flimsy to me and sometimes doesn't look like the speaker that they are holding. However, I'm willing to forego the superior aesthetics of towers in favor of the savings you get from choosing book shelf speakers over towers. I don't need the extra low end that towers usually provide over book shelf speakers if I plan using sub(s) with my mains crossed over anyway.

Now, I'm only saying that in a situation where I was trying to decide whether to purchase towers over book shelf speakers, if I already owned towers, I would then use them with sub(s). I have used towers in addition to subwoofers.

BTW, I did not mention anything about bad sound. My point is that, if book shelf speakers with subs can give me the same sonic performance as towers, at half the price, why would it be advisable to purchase towers, save for them being more aesthetically pleasing in a room?

 

[Auditor55]

Understood , but I'm willing to bet the majority of those on this forum do not have floorstanders that do in fact go to the bottom octave and those that do may struggle with the given room in which they are playing, thus the augmentation of a proper sub (or two)



That thinking has changed in the last ten years or so, mostly for the reasons I stated above.

Probably so do to home theater applications, however, the hardcore so-called "audiophile" still somewhat turn their noses up at the use of subwoofers at all.

 

[Auditor55]

I was simplifying my response, saying why I feel towers “can” deliver better dynamics etc..

Care to explain, what exactly do you mean by better dynamics?