New to the field, seeking recomendations.

[avaserfi]

Don't bother with the A5...

Well, A2 seems like a good choice. But from personal experience (no, I haven't heard the A2 in particular, but I have auditioned many small bookshelves) I don't think those 2.5inch woofers are going to be sufficient for bass. There is also a sub on that site, it seems it would complement nicely with the A2. A5 has larger 5 inch woofers. The larger woofers may give you sufficient amount of bass without the addition of a separate sub. Anyways, just something to think about.

Damned, now I am itching to get a pair of A5 and that sub. The nice thing about the A5 is that they are active monitors, which means I don't need outboard amplification. $350+$399 = $750. Seem like a nice deal for a 2.1 system. Now I am really tempted. I am thinking about using the A5 plus that sub as my new 2.1 stereo system. What do you guys think?

What kind of listening is the A5/A2 designed for? Nearfield or farfield listening? Nearfield monitors usually sound good nearfield listening (like right in front of you on your desk), but the soundstage isn't very good for farfield listening (like when you are sitting on a couch). Opinions?

I cannot speak for the A5's design as I haven't seen any credible third party measurements, but the A2 is designed firstly for near field listening. The A2 ($200) coupled with a sub like the Dayton Sub-120 ($150), proper treatments ($50) and a proper bass management either from a sound card or a stand alone unit will provide a near field listening experience that most would not expect to be had for about $400. Simply put the A2 measures superbly. A while ago someone asked about the performance of the A2 and I did a quick rundown found right here. Please note, I did not address all issues, but covered some of the basics.

As far as getting the A5 over the A2 I would not recommend it. If the A2 is integrated with a subwoofer properly there will be no lack of bass. Along side there have been no credible third party measurements of the A5 and it would be a little presumptuous to assume it measures the same or better than the A2 especially as WmAx mentioned in the realm of resonance where the A2 is surprisingly inert for its price point, but due to a larger cabinet it is very possible the A5 is not. To sum it up get the A2 over the A5, get a good sub and you won't be missing anything.

 

[WmAx]

Well, A2 seems like a good choice. But from personal experience (no, I haven't heard the A2 in particular, but I have auditioned many small bookshelves) I don't think those 2.5inch woofers are going to be sufficient for bass. There is also a sub on that site, it seems it would complement nicely with the A2. A5 has larger 5 inch woofers. The larger woofers may give you sufficient amount of bass without the addition of a separate sub. Anyways, just something to think about.

Sufficient bass from a 5"? That depends on the requirement of the user, of course. Under the best conditions, a 5" driver in an ideal ported enclosure would not be able to have useful SPL output under about 50Hz, give or take a small error margin. And this assumes nearfield use with an IDEAL set-up and IDEAL ported enclosure design. More likely, output to 65-70 Hz, or there abouts, is the practical/common circumstance, due to the very limited cabinet size available for a book shelf type speaker. Again, this is presumed near field. SPL will still be limited, and distortion products a real concern at low frequencies. But if you put a crossover on the speaker and remove low frequency requirements entirely from the unit, and hand them off to a far more capable subwoofer, then the system will have fuller sound, far less distortion and simply be better overall.

-Chris

 

[furrycute]

Thanks avaserfi and WmAx for your explanations.

Larger cabinets produce more resonance. Thanks avaserfi, didn't think of that one before.

WmAx, I have a question for you. You seem to be really knowledgeable about speakers and subs. If I go with a sub/satellite configuration, at what crossover point do you think I should set the sub to? I know bass is supposed to be unidirectional, but above 45Hz, that's well into audible range. If the satellites are small, and cannot produce adequate SPL below 90Hz, would it be better than to use stereo subs (2 subs, each one connected to one satellite, and fed only one channel), and have the subs crossed over at 90Hz?

And what's your take on stereo subs in general? And what about placement? Would it be a good idea to place one satellite on top of each sub?

 

[furrycute]

I also have another question regarding subwoofer connections.

My stereo rig consists of a preamp and an amp. The preamp has no built in crossover. Now I have to rely on the sub's built in crossover if I want to add a sub.

Suppose the sub has 1) low level in and low level out (RCA connections), and 2) speaker level in and speaker level out.

When I hook up the preamp's audio out to the low level in on the sub, and connect the low level out on the sub to the amp. Regarding the signal being fed out of the low level out on the sub, does that signal still have the low frequency portion? Or have the low frequency portions been subtracted from the original signal?

The same question regarding the speaker level ins and outs on the sub. This time I have to hookup the speaker level out from the amp to the speaker level in on the sub, and then from the speaker level out on the sub to my main speakers. Regarding the signal from the speaker level out on the sub, all the low frequencies substracted from the original signal?

Thanks for the help guys.

 

[WmAx]

If I go with a sub/satellite configuration, at what crossover point do you think I should set the sub to?

This depends on the satellite used. The A2 should be crossed over around 90-100Hz for near field applications. The A2 should not be used for a primary speaker set into a room though, unless only low SPLs are needed.

I know bass is supposed to be unidirectional, but above 45Hz, that's well into audible range. If the satellites are small, and cannot produce adequate SPL below 90Hz, would it be better than to use stereo subs (2 subs, each one connected to one satellite, and fed only one channel), and have the subs crossed over at 90Hz?

This depends on the distance you place the subwoofer from the satellites. In a near field application(such as for computer speakers), the subwoofer can easily be placed within a distance that can integrate at 90-100Hz, since both satellites and subwoofer will be within 1/2 the wavelength in air that is the center frequency. For reference, a 100Hz sine wave in air is roughly 11' in length. So, the sub would need to be within 5.5' or closer, to both satellites, for optimal integration. In the case of a full room system, due to the wide spacing, this is not practical. In that case, stereo subs(one placed on each side of room, somewhere in the vicinity of each satellite) will allow for superior integration at these higher crossover frequencies. In any case, I always recommend a minimum of a 4th order crossover rate on sub to satellite integrations.

Would it be a good idea to place one satellite on top of each sub?

That will work. But you may find that a better LF response at a different position as compared to the ideal position for the mid/treble sound quality, in relation to the listener seating position.

-Chris

 

[WmAx]

I also have another question regarding subwoofer connections.

My stereo rig consists of a preamp and an amp. The preamp has no built in crossover. Now I have to rely on the sub's built in crossover if I want to add a sub.

Suppose the sub has 1) low level in and low level out (RCA connections), and 2) speaker level in and speaker level out.

When I hook up the preamp's audio out to the low level in on the sub, and connect the low level out on the sub to the amp. Regarding the signal being fed out of the low level out on the sub, does that signal still have the low frequency portion? Or have the low frequency portions been subtracted from the original signal?

The same question regarding the speaker level ins and outs on the sub. This time I have to hookup the speaker level out from the amp to the speaker level in on the sub, and then from the speaker level out on the sub to my main speakers. Regarding the signal from the speaker level out on the sub, all the low frequencies substracted from the original signal?

Thanks for the help guys.

I never have, and never will recommend using a subwoofer's built in passive crossover functions. This almost never results in proper integration. In fact, many lower priced receivers that have active crossovers do not seem to integrate speakers very well due to lack of versatile adjustments, or even a crossover rate that is too shallow. A shalllow crossover rate is very problematic. It will allow substantial energy past the crossover point to be played over the speaker(s) in question. In any case, I must make it clear that at minimum a SPL meter and a basic test tone CD are required to set up a subwoofer with satellites. Even if your receiver has auto-set up with a mic, one had better be able to see the before/after measurements themselves to get an idea of what it did.

-Chris

 

[furrycute]

Thanks WmAx! Your knowledge about these things always amaze me.

I don't have a receiver. I only have a preamp and an external amp. So what active external crossover do you suggest I should get for a satellite, subwoofer setup?


Another question I have is, suppose I want to go with the stereo sub route, can I get away with two single 8 inch subs? I was thinking about getting 2 Velodyne SPL 800R for the stereo subs. If I go with a single sub setup, I was thinking about getting a single Velodyne SPL 1000R or 1200R.

In your opinion, for full room application, is it better to go with a single sub or stereo sub?

 

[avaserfi]

I don't have a receiver. I only have a preamp and an external amp. So what active external crossover do you suggest I should get for a satellite, subwoofer setup?

The DCX2496 is a wonderful unit. I purchased one on WmAx's recommendation for use with my subwoofer, headphones and eventually for my DIY main speakers and have discovered this is the swiss army knife of audio as he put it.

Since this is a piece of pro gear some custom cables will need to be made (adapters can be purchased, but they aren't always made of the best quality). These cables aren't hard to make if you know how to solder.

Also, to get the ideal crossover network and equalization done you will want to have access to a measurement program. For the application being discussed Room EQ Wizard from the Hometheatershack would be more than sufficient. Using a RS SPL meter along side the offered calibration file.

Another question I have is, suppose I want to go with the stereo sub route, can I get away with two single 8 inch subs? I was thinking about getting 2 Velodyne SPL 800R for the stereo subs. If I go with a single sub setup, I was thinking about getting a single Velodyne SPL 1000R or 1200R.

The driver size of the subwoofer doesn't really matter that much as long as it can produce low enough frequencies at the dynamics you require of it at low THD. The subwoofer choice is up to you, but for a low cost high quality solution you could look into the Dayton Sub 100 or Sub 120. Both of these subs would work well in such an application.

In your opinion, for full room application, is it better to go with a single sub or stereo sub?

As previously mentioned by Chris having the subs withing 1/2 the wavelength they are crossed over at is ideal due to localization issues. Since the A2s would be ideally crossed over around 90-100Hz you would likely need stereo subwoofers to achieve this end.

Other pluses of dual subs include a more linear pre-eq response along with more headroom at lower distortion than possible from one lone woofer.

 

[furrycute]

Thank you avaserfi for your detailed explanations.

I am assuming that active crossover is a Behringer right? Where can you get it? And does it have the connections to accommodate 2 subs? I am going to use one sub for each channel. So can this active crossover do the crossover for 2 channels independently? Or do I need to get 2 of them?

Oh this is getting expensive...

 

[cbraver]

Since this is a piece of pro gear some custom cables will need to be made (adapters can be purchased, but they aren't always made of the best quality). These cables aren't hard to make if you know how to solder.

There are well-made cables available for such applications, I'd sift through here before starting any cable projects:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/category/1667/General_Accessories_Cables_In_Line_Accessories.html

If you can't find what you need, avaserfi is absolutely correct that cable making is very easy.

Thank you avaserfi for your detailed explanations.

I am assuming that active crossover is a Behringer right? Where can you get it? And does it have the connections to accommodate 2 subs? I am going to use one sub for each channel. So can this active crossover do the crossover for 2 channels independently? Or do I need to get 2 of them?

Oh this is getting expensive...

Yes, Behringer. You can order Behringer products from a number of internet retailers. I often order from B&H Photo Video because I've had great experiences with them (shipping and customer service): www.bhphotovideo.com .... PSSL is another good retailer, and they price match: www.pssl.com

You will be able to accommodate 2 subs with that unit, and will be able to control them independantly. You only need one.

Oh this is getting expensive...

You could probably save some money and get a CX2310 crossover instead, which is only 90 bucks or so. This unit will also be able to control two subwoofers, individually configurable.

 

[WmAx]

Thank you avaserfi for your detailed explanations.

I am assuming that active crossover is a Behringer right? Where can you get it? And does it have the connections to accommodate 2 subs? I am going to use one sub for each channel. So can this active crossover do the crossover for 2 channels independently? Or do I need to get 2 of them?

Oh this is getting expensive...

Yes, the DCX2495 is a crossover... and so much more. The DCX2496 is of the quality and power needed to accommodate any quality of stereo, regardless of price. It has powerful and seemingly infinite versatility for integration and other special purposes.

I recommend the lower priced CX2310 only in cases where the budget just can't be stretched. The CX2310 is a quality unit, and it will not produce noise or audible coloration, but it can not integrate speakers as well as the DCX2496. The DCX2496 also allows custom response modification to your system to better fit your preferences.

The DCX2496, btw, has 3 inputs and 6 outputs. You can configure/connect any input to any output and perform any function discretely on any channel.

BTW, what are the main speakers you will using?

As for subwoofers, inform me of the budget for them and I will provide my recommendation for the highest quality(in terms of objective performance) units available for that price.

-Chris

 

[furrycute]

Well, thank you guys so much for all your help! You guys are the best!

Well, I was originally hoping to keep my whole expenditure under $3000, and that does not include the subs.

My plan for a new stereo system:

1) A pair of Polk LSi9 bookshelves
2) Denon PMA-2000IVR integrated amp
3) Benchmark DAC-1 (external DAC, one of the best out there)

As to subs, ideally I would like to keep the sub budget under $1000. I was really hoping to be able to get a pair of Velodyne SPL-800R for that stereo sub configuration. But I can always wait a while, and save some more money.

I guess all this will add up to about $5000 if not more when I am all done.

This really makes me wonder if I will be better off buying the NHT xd system. I think the retail price is about $6000, excluding the processor.

http://nhthifi.com/current/s-s-ultimate.html

 

[gus6464]

This really makes me wonder if I will be better off buying the NHT xd system. I think the retail price is about $6000, excluding the processor.

http://nhthifi.com/current/s-s-ultimate.html

That is one crazy setup right there. Overly expensive though. I am also putting together a 2ch system piece by piece consisting of Epos ELS-3 speakers, Rega TT, and right now I have an older Sony AVR.

Right now I am in the process of upgrading the TT with a new cartridge and counterweight. Then in about 6 months I will be upgrading the amplification and I will be going tube preamp (Ming Da MC 7R) and high current SS amp (Rotel RB-1070). Then in another couple of months I will be going for a small sub (most likely the SVS SB-12Plus). And the final thing I will be doing but not for another year and a half or so will be to upgrade speakers (either Epos M12 or Mark and Daniel Ruby).

 

[furrycute]

That's a nice setup gus!

The only thing that worries me about your new setup would be the Rotel amp and the SVS sub.

In fact I had that Rotel 1070 amp in my possession a couple of years ago. For whatever reason, I find that amp is severely rolled off in the high end. Everything just sounds syrupy coming from that amp. And at the time, I had Benchmark DAC-1 as the source, a pair of NHT SB3 speakers which are considered bright. I don't know, I just did not like that Rotel amp, sold it in about 2 weeks.

As to the sub, ever considered the Velodyne SPL-1000R or the 800R? Very nice small subs for the price.

 

[gus6464]

That's a nice setup gus!

The only thing that worries me about your new setup would be the Rotel amp and the SVS sub.

In fact I had that Rotel 1070 amp in my possession a couple of years ago. For whatever reason, I find that amp is severely rolled off in the high end. Everything just sounds syrupy coming from that amp. And at the time, I had Benchmark DAC-1 as the source, a pair of NHT SB3 speakers which are considered bright. I don't know, I just did not like that Rotel amp, sold it in about 2 weeks.

As to the sub, ever considered the Velodyne SPL-1000R or the 800R? Very nice small subs for the price.

Well the reason I was thinking of the SVS is because the tube preamp has no sub preouts. And it's the only musical sub I can think of in it's price range. I want to perfectly integrate the speakers with the sub so I don't just want the automatic 80Hz cutoff. SVS told me that if I wanted to run the speakers full range I have to get a Y cable and hook it up to the tube preout with one going to the amp and the other to the sub. That way I can control the crossover with my own settings.

I haven't decided on the amp yet but it's the only high current I have found at it's price range. I though about the Parasound A 23 which is also high current and maybe I can score a good deal on a used one.

 

[furrycute]

I was actually thinking about getting a Parasound halo amp as well. But I was leaning more towards the Halo A21. Maybe an overkill, but hey, it sure does look like one beefy amp.

 

[furrycute]

Ever thought about buying one of those new Parasound Classic amps? I heard they are quite nice.

 

[gus6464]

The A21 is freaking huge and would be overkill as the listening position is barely 5ft away and sometimes closer. I have found out that Epos speakers really benefit from more current than more power.

I found a lot of A23 selling on audiogon though for $400-500 so if you want to save some money it would definitely be the way to go.

 

[gus6464]

Ever thought about buying one of those new Parasound Classic amps? I heard they are quite nice.

I checked out the 2250 which is high current like the A23 but it's more expensive. Around $1200 and you rarely seem them on audiogon.

 

[furrycute]

Yeah, I think you are right, that A21 is kind of overkill for bookshelves. But hey, it does look awesome doesn't it?

I read that the early Halo products have some quality control issues. The quality control issues were later corrected. So I am not too keen on buying a used Halo.

But that A23 only weighs about 28lbs. For some reason, I like my amps to weigh at least 50lbs or more. I know this is unscientific. But I have always had good luck with beefy amps in the past. Maybe it's just me.