What SIZE of PSB bookshelf loudspeakers should I get with my svs subwoofer

[maxx_k]

Hi,

First, hello to every posters and readers on this forum.. I read a lot on this forum about anything and everything and I learned a lot too.. as a spectator. Lots of knowledge and passion is going on there and this is nice to read even if sometimes some threads goes wrong . This is my first post on this forum and I will try to make it as simple as possible.

I am the happy* owner of an SVS subwoofer, the 20-39PC-Plus Cylinder Subwoofer. It has an integrated 525 watt BASH amp, a 12.3 inch woofer, its 39 inch tall and it can go down to 20Hz steady before leaving off the axis on "his" frequency response graph.

Well, I'm not that happy*, because I want to build a simple 2.1 system around that monster, it seems to be difficult to get powerful enough loudspeakers to match it, so I narrowed my choice to the PSB new image line. You can see the .pdf specs directly on the psbspeakers dot com website.

I wanted to know your opinions about if I should go for the B4, B5 or B6.
B4 being 0.11 cubic feet, 0.32 cuft for the B5 and 0.48 cuft for the B6. Same tweeter in each speaker, and respectively 4", 5 1/4" and 6 1/2" Woofer. Their Low Frequency cutoff is respectively at 55Hz, 50Hz and 40Hz. Their crossover is 1800Hz for B4 and 2200Hz for B5 and B6.

I really don't know what loudspeaker would match best the SVS subwoofer...this 2.1 system is intended for music and movies. Mostly music. I wonder......since the subwoofer can reproduce frequencies up to 200Hz on axis... why should I bother getting the B6 and don't just get the B4?

Any ideas/comments on this matter will be welcome.

Thanks.

**PSB Image B6 is the replacement for the respected B25 and B5 replaces the B15 PSB bookshelf loudspeaker.

 

[highfigh]

If they're not going in a bookshelf, don't buy the little tiny ones- they'll never sound realistic. If you plan to put them on stands, you'll need to listen to them in that situation in order to find what will work best. Tiny speakers with a powerful subwoofer don't have a seamless transition in the crossover region.

 

[jliedeka]

With a 2.1 system, I'd look for a speaker that lets you comfortably cross over at 80 Hz or lower. I think the B5 will work for that. If possible, situate the sub between your speakers. That should help it to integrate the best. If you can't do that, get it as close as possible.

Also, I think PSB is a good choice. I would buy their speakers if I wasn't going the DIY route.

Jim

 

[XEagleDriver]

Going at it the wrong way

. . . I am the happy* owner of an SVS subwoofer, the 20-39PC-Plus Cylinder Subwoofer. . . .

Well, I'm not that happy*, because I want to build a simple 2.1 system around that monster, it seems to be difficult to get powerful enough loudspeakers to match it, so I narrowed my choice to the PSB new image line. You can see the .pdf specs directly on the psbspeakers dot com website.

I really don't know what loudspeaker would match best the SVS subwoofer...this 2.1 system is intended for music and movies. Mostly music. I wonder......since the subwoofer can reproduce frequencies up to 200Hz on axis... why should I bother getting the B6 and don't just get the B4?

Maxx,

I think you may be looking at this the wrong way, let me explain.

You are building a system primarily for 2.1 music. Very little music has significant material in the frequencies below about 40 Hz.
(See Freq of Music chart on PSB's website http://www.psbspeakers.com/audio-topics/The-Frequencies-of-Music )

Therefore, the quality and capability of the 2 main speakers, and not the subwoofer, will be the determining factor in the system's sound.

You already own an excellent sub, it will be able to complement any good set of speakers once properly placed and adjusted. So the question really is what are the best 2 main speakers your budget/decor will allow.

Staying with the Image line (a very good choice for sound/value), if you can afford the $$ and room real estate, get the T6 or T5 towers since they will have the best capability in reproducing the music.

If cost, WAF, or personnal preference necessitates a bookshelf, then get in order the B6 or B5 (I would not even consider the B4 for your application).

Cheers,
XEagleDriver

 

[markw]

Subs are made to do the low, low feequencies only. If you expect to use it up to anywere near 200 hz, the sound will simply suck.

Like the others said, the main speakers should play as much as the range as possible and the sub should only fill in where they fade out. Your mains should go as low as possible and, in my book, that would mean as large as possible.

 

[highfigh]

Subs are made to do the low, low feequencies only. If you expect to use it up to anywere near 200 hz, the sound will simply suck.

Like the others said, the main speakers should play as much as the range as possible and the sub should only fill in where they fade out. Your mains should go as low as possible and, in my book, that would mean as large as possible.

The "Tiny speakers with a subwoofer" phenomenon is just more fallout from companies who have great marketing departments with well-respected spokespeople. Old people loved Paul Harvey and couldn't see that he was just collecting a paycheck for his testimony, although it's possible that he actually liked them. For those who can't hear the difference, fine. For those who know and can hear the difference, not so much.

'Sub' means below, 'subwoofer' means it should play below what the woofer can reproduce well. 4" speakers can only reproduce bass well in the near field in a small space, at best. At the worst, they stop being effective well above 200Hz in a normal sized room when realism is the goal. Wives and girlfriends love speakers that can't be seen but if someone actually has a choice, unobtrusive speakers shouldn't get the nod. Sound is produced by moving air and if any realism is to be obtained, larger woofers are absolutely necessary. That's not saying everyone needs 12" three-ways with 18" subwoofers but small speakers usually sound like small speakers. However, if the room is extremely small, smaller speakers will work better than really large ones.

 

[Boerd]

My system has a crossover at 135Hz (see the links below).
I'd say cross to the sub at the -3Db frequency for the bookshelf speakers.
I doubt a 13 inch driver (sub) will sound good above the 150Hz - (you'd need a lot of amplification/EQ) - ideally you should cross over between 80 to 150. Quite a few bookshelf speakers can fit the bill.

 

[JerryLove]

2.1 isn't a good setup for music:
http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm#twosubwoofers

 

[KEW]

I wanted to know your opinions about if I should go for the B4, B5 or B6.
B4 being 0.11 cubic feet, 0.32 cuft for the B5 and 0.48 cuft for the B6. Same tweeter in each speaker, and respectively 4", 5 1/4" and 6 1/2" Woofer. Their Low Frequency cutoff is respectively at 55Hz, 50Hz and 40Hz. Their crossover is 1800Hz for B4 and 2200Hz for B5 and B6.

I copied specs (at the bottom of this post) for convenience.

1) First, consider the low frequency question:
Forget the Lf cutoff (-10dB is not something you actually want in what you are listening to). The low end of the Frequency Range spec at ±1.5dB is a much better indicator. Also, for the PSB speakers, the Frequency Range spec at ±3dB indicates that none of these speakers fall off the cliff too abruptly below the ±1.5dB specification.
I believe the THX standard is to crossover at 80Hz and from what I have seen it seems most people end up setting their crossover between 80Hz and 100Hz. Admittedly, if you had some ($$$) B&W 802D's for your mains, it would probably make sense to take the crossover lower. But you have a good subwoofer and spending money on full range speakers with better sound than your SVS in the sub 100Hz range is not cost effective.
Go to a speaker dealer in your area and have him set the crossover to 80-90Hz (no sub) and compare between the speakers you are interested in (be sure to match the speaker sound levels). Try some larger full range speakers, as well (again with the same 80-90Hz crossover).
From this, you can evaluate with your own ears how important the extra size or number of mid-bass drivers would be to your 2.1 system.
Personally, I have a pair of EMP 41-SE/Be speakers with a 4" mid-bass driver and am extremely happy with the low end and how they blend with my (bottom-of-the-line) Martin Logan Dynamo sub with a 100Hz crossover. I believe your sub should do as well or better.

2) Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, you said:

Well, I'm not that happy*, because I want to build a simple 2.1 system around that monster, it seems to be difficult to get powerful enough loudspeakers to match it, so I narrowed my choice to the PSB new image line.

By powerful, I'd assume you mean loud? Why did you chose the PSB Image?
The sensitivity specifications show a big difference in the output between the B4 and the B6, and this is probably the main reason you should be considering the B6 over the B4. Also, consider the recommended power spec. The B6 not only plays louder per watt of input, but it can also handle twice the power (as can the B5).
So while I would consider the B4 from a blending standpoint, I would rule it out from a "powerful speaker" standpoint. If you plan to work it hard in a largish room, It probably cannot keep up! The B5 may do as well as the B6, but it depends on how loud and how large a room.
Again, if you have a dealer where you can listen, you should. You can often save money by establishing a less expensive unit will fit your needs, but more importantly, if you don't listen, you'll always wonder "what-if".
It would be useful if PSB had maximum output (or max SPL) data. I bet if you contacted them, they would provide.


*****************************************************
Image B4, B5, & B6 Bookshelf respectively:
Frequency Range
On Axis @ 0° ±1.5dB 70-20,000Hz 70-20,000Hz 59-20,000Hz
On Axis @ 0° ±3dB 60-23,000Hz 50-23,000Hz 45-23,000Hz
Off Axis @ 30° ±3dB 70-10,000Hz 70-10,000Hz 59-10,000Hz
Lf Cutoff -10dB 55Hz 50Hz 40Hz
Sensitivity
1w (2.83V) @ 1m, IEC-filtered Pink Noise, C-weighted
Anechoic Chamber 85dB 87dB 89dB
Typical Listening Room 87dB 89dB 90dB
Impedence
Nominal 6 Ohms 6 Ohms 6 Ohms
Minimum 4 Ohms 4 Ohms 4 Ohms
Input Power
RMS, Clipping < 10% of the Time
Recommended 10 - 80 Watts 20 - 150 Watts 20 - 150 Watts
Program 60 Watts 150 Watts 150 Watts

 

[sholling]

2.1 isn't a good setup for music:
http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm#twosubwoofers

This is exactly why I have suggested tower speakers to people in the past. I cross my family room towers over over to the sub at 40hz. That gives a good almost uncompromising compromise between seamless music reproduction and deep room shaking movie bass. Thankfully my receiver allows me to set the crossover point for the center and each pair individually.

Unless you have a dedicated stereo listing space I would probably make it 3.1 home theater/music system using the very best near full range mains (and matched center) that I could possibly afford and cross them over as low as possible. Preferably around 40hz. On the other hand if it's going to be a pure stereo music system then I would invest in a pair of very good quality full range speakers and run it as a 2.0 system and keep the sub for a separate dedicated home theater system.

 

[JerryLove]

option 3 would be an external crossover and integrating stereo subs into good-range bookshelves. You avoid the resonance problems that can be associated with towers while avoiding the monoroal-bass problems of a combined LFE in music.

 

[sholling]

option 3 would be an external crossover and integrating stereo subs into good-range bookshelves. You avoid the resonance problems that can be associated with towers while avoiding the monoroal-bass problems of a combined LFE in music.

My response to that high buck suggestion is

 

[njedpx3]

Budget ?

2.1 isn't a good setup for music:
http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm#twosubwoofers

Actually, pure stereo 2 with a .1 for bass is one of the absolute best setups for music listening. I looked at the Roger Russel link and found nothing about 2.1 not being good for music; Maybe I missed the point.

As mentioned by several others the subwoofer is for your low frequncy sounds, especially movie sound effects anf minimally comes into play in music.

The SVS subwoofer the OP has is an excellent subwoofer, but the subwoofer in no way has to match the front speakers.

OP, I am not sure why you are selecting only PSB. I would look at your budget and then go to a HT store and audition several speakers brands.

If you are inteested in TV and movies then 2.1 is probably not the way to go . You probably really want 3.1 and probably more likely 5.1 or 7.1

With TV and/or DVD /BD the center channel becomes important for dialog. It very important that the center channel match the fronts to maintain timbre(seamless front sound), the rears are for presecenc and enhancement and do not need to match the fronts. The subwoofer is for lower frequencies and is particularly nice for movie gunshots, explosions and earthquakes. A subwoofer only comes into play minimally in music if you like the vibration -- then turn up the gain .

So what is your budget for fronts ? You might also want to consider B & W, Def Tech, Swan, Paradigm, Mordaunt Shorts, Behringer, JBL, Niles, Polk , Velodyne, etc.

Peace and Good Sound!

Forest Man

 

[JerryLove]

Actually, pure stereo 2 with a .1 for bass is one of the absolute best setups for music listening. I looked at the Roger Russel link and found nothing about 2.1 not being good for music; Maybe I missed the point.

From the site:
In a good two or three microphone stereo recording, bass information can arrive at different times at each microphone. The arrival time at each microphone can be such that at some very low frequencies the sound is 180 degrees out of phase. If you combine these frequencies into mono, the result is zero output at those frequencies. This means if you have a 32 Hz organ pedal note that has a phase difference of 180 degrees between channels, you will get nothing and feel nothing, except perhaps hear a few harmonics. I think even a deaf person can feel the difference between a 32 Hz note being present or not!

As mentioned by several others the subwoofer is for your low frequncy sounds, especially movie sound effects anf minimally comes into play in music.

As long as you don't listen to any musical insturmets below, what, 80hz?

http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm

It's far less of an issue in HT, where the soundtracks have been mixed assuming mono subs.. but it's something I at least try my best to avoid in critical music listening.

I mean: whatever works, but I would think that music fedility would be better served 2.0 than 2.1, and use the sub money to try to improve the response on the mains.

 

[highfigh]

2.1 isn't a good setup for music:
http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm#twosubwoofers

I'm using a 2.1 system for everything and I would hardly call it a bad setup but I'll be changing to 2.2 very soon. Only a true point source will sound close to the original sound and I don't know of a 5.1, 6.1, 7.1 or any other system that captures that realism but simpler tends to be free of timing issues, which makes it better than a larger quantity of speakers, IMO. However, I also think most people would balk at the prospect of needing two subwoofers when it's often a hard sell just to have one. Just ask Matt. I'm pretty sure that he's be living inside of his sub if he went home and said he needed another horn loaded sub like the one in his thread.

For this reason, I think more people should consider towers with real bass response and this includes manufacturers. They don't have to be huge, but a single speaker at each front side that does a great job of full range response would be far better than a sub begrudgingly placed in the only convenient spot. Besides- the speaker's footprint has already been taken, so putting something below it that handles the low end isn't such a big deal. At least it's not taking up real estate in another part of the room.

 

[highfigh]

My response to that high buck suggestion is

I'm not sure it would be that expensive. People seem to like the Behringer equipment quite a bit and while I haven't used it much in a real high-fidelity system, I did put a 2x15 band EQ in a bar and that one has HP and LP variable crossover. So far, it has worked flawlessly, other then the bartenders messing with it because they "know how it should be set". This EQ was less than $150.

 

[highfigh]

Very little music has significant material in the frequencies below about 40 Hz.

Most instruments don't do much below 40Hz but pipe organ, 5 string electric bass and synthesizers do just fine below that and the latter two are extremely common. A synth can do whatever frequency the person wants and a 5 string bass has a B string below E, which is in the 34Hz area. It's only about 7 Hz below E but musically, it's six notes if the sharps are included, so it's important. Kick drum is in this range, too, and if that's weak, it doesn't sound right to someone who knows how drums are supposed to sound.

 

[JerryLove]

I'm not sure it would be that expensive. People seem to like the Behringer equipment quite a bit and while I haven't used it much in a real high-fidelity system, I did put a 2x15 band EQ in a bar and that one has HP and LP variable crossover. So far, it has worked flawlessly, other then the bartenders messing with it because they "know how it should be set". This EQ was less than $150.

A CX crossover can be had off Amazon for $70. If the AVR has pre-ins (my old Pioneer does) then all that's left are some XLR converters and a second sub (the biggest cost).

If there are not pre-ins on the AVR, then a 2-channel amp sufficient for the bookshelves will be needed. I'd think an old Adcom or NAD or Kenwood could be had cheaply in the used market. Alternately a Yamaha pr (would save you $10 in XLR converters) or such.

 

[jliedeka]

There's nothing wrong with TM type bookshelf speakers crossed to a sub. If you want loud, look for something with more power handling like an MTM or TMM speaker.

I think crossing over lower can be good. You don't want the sub to play too high. I think shooting for a 60-80hz crossover point is pretty good. Otherwise your receiver or amp has to work harder to play the bass frequencies on the main speakers.

Jim

 

[highfigh]

There's nothing wrong with TM type bookshelf speakers crossed to a sub. If you want loud, look for something with more power handling like an MTM or TMM speaker.

I think crossing over lower can be good. You don't want the sub to play too high. I think shooting for a 60-80hz crossover point is pretty good. Otherwise your receiver or amp has to work harder to play the bass frequencies on the main speakers.

Jim

But a good amp will handle full range audio with no problem, so regardless of where the x-over point is, the HP amp should be fine. If the octave above the Fs can be avoided, the load will be easier for the amp to drive but again, a good amp won't struggle. Whether the speaker works well in this range is another story but even a lot of smaller speaker systems do well down to 60Hz, although not necessarily with any real authority.