side channel bookshelf vs Towers, why towers at all?

[EMBP]

Hello everyone,

Here are two questions:

1. Side speakers, bookshelf vs Towers
2. if anyone is running subs why get towers at all?

I came across the following dilemma: Side speakers, bookshelf vs Towers? is there any advantage of having towers if you are running subs. I have 4 Klipsch r625af to run atmos front and back as I don't want to make holes in the ceiling and a pair of r51m for the sides. I like Klipsch and found a good deal on the towers, but if anyone is running subs why get towers at all? Also, if you are listening to two-channel music unless you are listening to Pure Direct or set not to run the sub/s, the speakers (towers or bookshelf) will not extend to the lows frequency as they for the most part crossover to the sub/s

 

[kini]

Because towers have more headroom, don't require stands and IMO just look better. If you have the room for them and already have them then no issue using them.

Just MO here but the rear surrounds do very little in comparison to the sides. Maybe see if you can switch the towers to the sides where they would be of more use.

 

[KNOTSCOTT]

In my case, I had the tower speakers already when we moved them into a 4300 cubic foot room that opens at one end into the dining room and kitchen.....a large space to fill with two 8" woofers. I added the sub just to augment the bottom octave...I set the low pass at 40hz and down, and keep the gain low so I hardly notice the sub, but you feel it once in a while on music that contains deep bass.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Yeah, it's not about the bass.

It's about more Dynamics (play louder without distortion), not requiring Stands, and better Aesthetics.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Pretty sure @lovinthehd uses a pair of JBL 580’s(towers) for side surrounds maybe he can add. As for using towers as mains, and possibly sides. They’re usually easier to drive than many BS speakers due to their efficiency, or higher sensitivity. They can also spread the thermal load between drivers. Ime they usually have more dynamic range, and when pushed will sound more lifelike. In other words they’ll present the scale of a room or instruments better, including the range above the XO. Still subwoofers are critical with towers or books.
This is debatable of course, but that’s mean my experience over the years with towers and bookshelf speakers.
Also imo towers look much better. Of course NOT all towers are included in this post. Some are just BS speakers with built in stands. Gross…

 

[Mikado463]

why towers and subs, easy........ the majority of inexpensive towers do poorly on the lower two octaves and subs (properly located) add foundational stability

 

[Kingnoob]

Because towers have more headroom, don't require stands and IMO just look better. If you have the room for them and already have them then no issue using them.

Just MO here but the rear surrounds do very little in comparison to the sides. Maybe see if you can switch the towers to the sides where they would be of more use.

Yeah towers work best as sides or fronts but if someone has the space and money wouldn’t hurt to go all towers / I use bookshelves as rears in one set up , towers in other one .
I don’t understand why people think towers are replaced by a sub and bookshelves…. Definitely not relying on towers to handle most the bass , adds some depth tho .

Subwoofer is a must , regardless of towers or not … even for tritons and def tech w/ Building Services don’t replace a standalone

I’ve seen $100-250 subs beat towers $400 ea
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TLS Guy]

Yeah, it's not about the bass.

It's about more Dynamics (play louder without distortion), not requiring Stands, and better Aesthetics.

Well, it is about the bass. As I frequently point out that anything below at least 400 Hz is bass. There is far more power required from 80 Hz to 400 Hz than from 20 to 80 Hz.

Again it is worth repeating that many speakers if not most, tower or otherwise, do not have adequate resources in that crucial power band.

In my designs I have always taken immense trouble to devote sufficient resources to that region, and it shows.

When people hear my systems they frequently note that. They often describe the sound as having 'lots of body', or use terms like lots oomph!.

I don't know why more attention is not paid to the powerband. I suppose part of it is cost, as it does require drivers with substantial motor systems, and enough of them.

 

[Pandaman617]

As someone who has run everything from 5 Mirage OM-10’s and a pair of M5’s to 7 OMD-28’s I can tell you when I had the space it was pretty awesome to see 7 identical towers but when I moved my theater area became significantly smaller. In turn I’ve switched to 5 Mirage HDT-F bookshelfs on stands and 4 subs managed via a MiniDSP HD and my cinema and gaming performance are still phenomenal. I do believe the all tower setup had a bit more headroom but for non analytical type use it’s the same experience to me just with a bit more space in my new, smaller room for activities.

 

[JengaHit]

Towers can make a difference depending on the type of music, your listening distance, and room size. I listen to a lot of classical orchestral and opera where you can have massive fff tuttis comprising massed instruments that have fundamentals in the 100-300 Hz range, right above the typical 80 Hz crossover. (See pic.) The opening crashing chords of Tosca or Otello are good examples, and many movie scores like LOTR or Gladiator also have similar passages. In a large listening space I would want my speakers to reproduce those sudden dynamics with no compression or distortion. In my old place, where the listening room was ~5300 cubic ft, I needed towers. In my current space of ~2300 cubic ft, with closer listening distances, I can get away with bookshelves that have decent midbass, plus a sub.

 

[lovinthehd]

Pretty sure @lovinthehd uses a pair of JBL 580’s(towers) for side surrounds maybe he can add. As for using towers as mains, and possibly sides. They’re usually easier to drive than many BS speakers due to their efficiency, or higher sensitivity. They can also spread the thermal load between drivers. Ime they usually have more dynamic range, and when pushed will sound more lifelike. In other words they’ll present the scale of a room or instruments better, including the range above the XO. Still subwoofers are critical with towers or books.
This is debatable of course, but that’s mean my experience over the years with towers and bookshelf speakers.
Also imo towers look much better. Of course NOT all towers are included in this post. Some are just BS speakers with built in stands. Gross…

Yep JBL 590s for mains, 580s for surrounds (530s rear surrounds but if the room were different I wouldn't mind the 580s there too, especially at the price I paid). I was using smaller bookshelf speakers in the same room before that and have now moved those to my relatively small bedroom, the JBLs are in a much larger room. Both are well supported by subs and I cross the JBLs high in any case as my subs are far more capable than the towers are. They just work better in the larger room, back to the old no replacement for displacement thing to an extent and being of higher sensitivity doesn't hurt either. Seems many of the smaller towers these days are like you say, bookshelf speakers with built in stands....

 

[Mark E. Long]

I use towers for my side surrounds I’ve a big room and will probably get a pair for rear surrounds too they just look and sound so much better at least to me but I really think they should all be the same front side and rears too if you can Iam like HD it works for me .

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Well, it is about the bass. As I frequently point out that anything below at least 400 Hz is bass. There is far more power required from 80 Hz to 400 Hz than from 20 to 80 Hz.

Again it is worth repeating that many speakers if not most, tower or otherwise, do not have adequate resources in that crucial power band.

In my designs I have always taken immense trouble to devote sufficient resources to that region, and it shows.

When people hear my systems they frequently note that. They often describe the sound as having 'lots of body', or use terms like lots oomph!.

I don't know why more attention is not paid to the powerband. I suppose part of it is cost, as it does require drivers with substantial motor systems, and enough of them.

Yeah, it’s very easy (for me and others) to forget that up to 400Hz is significant “bass”.

That’s why I also believe in using 62”-200LB towers all around for speakers.

 

[Kingnoob]

Yeah, it’s very easy (for me and others) to forget that up to 400Hz is significant “bass”.

That’s why I also believe in using 62”-200LB towers all around for speakers.

Wish I could carry speakers that heavy , but yes bigger the better why else would cinemas use big speakers. But overkill sometimes isn’t necessarily needed if you don’t listen that loud.
regular towers can work for any channel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk