which speakers

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Not sure why contrary, since this is exactly what dr Floyd is saying pretty clearly.

My statement was in response to the post referring to those subwoofer placement graphs/charts in the white paper. Those graphs show no significant improvement between 1 sub vs 2 sub vs 3 sub vs 4 sub vs 5 sub when all the subs are in the same front wall. The graphs show that only 4 subwoofer placement locations have significant improvement in the subwoofer measurement, while the other 16+ other locations do not.

Did Floyd say in words that having one sub on each side of the SAME FRONT wall made significant improvement? I hope he did day that because that has always been my experience.

Actually this whole debate started because someone else said that having one sub on each side of the front wall (1/4W) is among the WORST subwoofer placements, which I DISAGREED with. I think having one sub on each side of the front wall is a lot better than having only one sub.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

My statement was in response to the post referring to those subwoofer placement graphs/charts in the white paper. Those graphs show no significant improvement between 1 sub vs 2 sub vs 3 sub vs 4 sub vs 5 sub when all the subs are in the same front wall. The graphs show that only 4 subwoofer placement locations have significant improvement in the subwoofer measurement, while the other 16+ other locations do not.

Did Floyd say in words that having one sub on each side of the SAME FRONT wall made significant improvement? I hope he did day that because that has always been my experience.

Actually this whole debate started because someone else said that having one sub on each side of the front wall (1/4W) is among the WORST subwoofer placements, which I DISAGREED with. I think having one sub on each side of the front wall is a lot better than having only one sub.

Going to quote from Dr Floyd "Sound Reproduction" book, which btw is a must read for any serious Audioholic :


Moving the subwoofers to the null locations for the
second-order mode reduces the efficiency of energy
transfer to that mode, attenuating it. The other modes
remain attenuated because the subwoofers continue
to be located in lobes having opposite polarity. These
locations are the 25% points across the width of the
room. Stereo setups in this form incorporate a mode
attenuating scheme that minimizes the problem of the
listener being in a position of left-right symmetry at
low frequencies."

Aka (as i understand it) multiple subwoofers are helpful, but how much helpful is heavily depends on how many and where subs are located.
In small rectangular rooms (all rooms under 4k sqft) only few ideal sub placements exist :
2 subs at mid-wall on opposite walls 4 subs in same fashion and last one is 4 corner subs

These special setups will create a special spartital equalization - aka help to deliver good bass for more seats

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

In small rectangular rooms (all rooms under 4k sqft) only few ideal sub placements exist : 2 subs at mid-wall on opposite walls...

Right. So for dual subs, the best location is in the center of the front wall (where the Center speaker, TV stand, & big screen TV are) and center of the rear wall (probably behind the sofa), which is not the same as 1 sub on each side of the front wall, which is how MOST people place their subs.

In my experience, dual subs where 1 sub is on each side of the front wall (1/4W location) is a lot better than a single sub on 1 side of the front wall. The question is, would Floyd Toole agree?

 

[onlyme]

... The question is, would Floyd Toole agree?

WWFD??

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Right. So for dual subs, the best location is in the center of the front wall (where the Center speaker, TV stand, & big screen TV are) and center of the rear wall (probably behind the sofa), which is not the same as 1 sub on each side of the front wall, which is how MOST people place their subs.

In my experience, dual subs where 1 sub is on each side of the front wall (1/4W location) is a lot better than a single sub on 1 side of the front wall. The question is, would Floyd Toole agree?

What he would say i suppose is every room is different and to really know, one must measure, measure and measure again.

 

[Cos]

What about a sub like this that has 4 12" drivers? Would positioning be the same?

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/goldenear-sub-fires-four-directions

 

[bsf]

Might go with the revel f206

 

[manwithnocape]

Ill cheer for an active system too.
This was my old system until I upgraded to something different. But this one is a monster, it suffered no abuse or neglect, simply because it was too much for my taste, I simply didn't use it in a way that took advantage of its potential. And I ran it under the exact same parameters that you are talking about. Music, all digital, no extra fluff. All you need is a dac. It is hardcore.
http://www.funkaudio.ca/store/p5/_Funk_Audio_Speaker_and_Subwoofer_Set_-_2.1_active_powered_system_Price_Reduced!.html

 

[bsf]

i listened the b&w cm10 and the paradigm studio 100... i think i like these better than the f206 now..... the cm10 are very nice

 

[Cos]

I owned the Studio 100v5s before switching to the GE. I specifically compared them against the F206 when I picked those up because I was at a place that had them side by side in Hoffman Estates IL. I went with the Studio 100s because I thought the bass was that much better. The F206 may not go as low, but I would describe it as more detailed in the mids ad high and accurate in the bass.

I haven't Heard the CM10s, so no input on that, but at 4k a pair (about what I paid for my T1s), I would wager there are better options. If I was buying purely for music I would have probably leaned towards the F206. For a mix of Home Theater and Music I would have still gone with the Studio 100s.

You are aware that Paradigm has recently updated their line with the prestige series. 85F are a little more expensive. They have a little more range and are a more efficient speaker then the Studio 100v5, but I have not had a chance to hear them.

The Studio 100sv5 haven't changed design since 2010, when the started making the enclosures in Canada. Paradigm will not be updating the Studio line as it will be phased out. On the positive side you might be able to get a good deal. I got a little more than 25% off from my dealer when I bought them 2 years ago.

Paradigm does not get a lot of love on these forums either.... lol

I did check the review on the CM10 and www.hometheaterreview.com has one. They rate it a solid speaker, but caution the following: (taken from their review)

The DownsideThe CM10 needs powerful and stable amplification in order for it to come anywhere close to reaching its potential. When breaking the speaker in, I tried a few smaller amplifiers and integrated amplifiers, and the speakers needed a good deal of power and control to come alive. I would suspect that the impedance of the speakers drops below two ohms at places.

A possibly related trait surfaces in the CM10's bass reproduction. The low-frequency extension is good, with usable bass below 40 Hz, but the definition and speed of the lower bass falls behind the performance of the upper frequencies. The bass power is quite good for this size speaker, and the detail is above average - still, the detail and sense of natural ease present in the midrange and highs does not make it down to the last couple of octaves.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

i listened the b&w cm10 and the paradigm studio 100... i think i like these better than the f206 now..... the cm10 are very nice

Do you feel the CM10 have fuller, richer sound?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Paradigm does not get a lot of love on these forums either.... lol

I agree after my own personal audition of the Paradigm. But I was surprise others felt similar because Paradigm speakers tend to measure very accurately on-axis and off-axis.

On the other hand, B&W speakers tend to measure poorly on-axis and especially off-axis.

So again, we can often throw measurements out the window when it comes to personal preference.

I always thought towers with built-in subs sounded better because they sound richer and fuller overall. I think the treble and midrange may be as good as any, and the bass is much fuller and richer.

 

[Cos]

I agree after my own personal audition of the Paradigm. But I was surprise others felt similar because Paradigm speakers tend to measure very accurately on-axis and off-axis.

On the other hand, B&W speakers tend to measure poorly on-axis and especially off-axis.

So again, we can often throw measurements out the window when it comes to personal preference.

I always thought towers with built-in subs sounded better because they sound richer and fuller overall. I think the treble and midrange may be as good as any, and the bass is much fuller and richer.

I guess I am going to get on a soapbox for a second here..

That's what it really boils down too for the majority, it's personal preference.

I won't argue the 20 page document on subwoofer placement isn't important to some and offers a lot of value. I use that research as a guideline to build a system, I enjoy as close as I can to "Ideal Placement"

If I were building my Listening area in an anechoic chamber I would probably follow the research to a T, but it is not the case for me. In my current room build I done a lot of research on the best types of sound treatments, drywall, room size and shape and it won't be perfect. I am resigned to the fact that my speakers placements will not be 100% perfect, but I would be more interested to learn how that impacts my hearing as opposed to how it may look on a graph and would I even be able to tell that much of a difference?

In my case, I demo'd a ton of speakers, drove a few hours out over a period of about two months, to hear different brands and in the end I chose the one that best sounded to me, and even better when I got them home. While it's nice that pretty much every major Home Audio publication I have seen that has reviewed my choice has given them 5 Starts or 2014 Best in catagory, if they didn't sound good to me I wouldn't have bought them, no matter how they measure or how they review. PERSONAL PREFERENCE

At the end pick the speaker that sounds best to you, and realize that someone else may not agree or that it's spec on a piece of paper may not be prefect. Unless it's Bose...don't buy Bose...

Ok enough off tangent, back do your regularly scheduled forum replies

 

[JohnnieB]

I don't think any of the recommendations would be a bad choice. I was able to find the Revel F208's for $4k. I absolutely loved em'. Since they were out of my budget, I bought Ascend Towers Raal, and haven't even thought about the Revels'. I haven't heard the Sierra 2's, yet, but I can't imagine not having the stellar mids in the towers. You can run them without a sub, but I would recommend one. I cross over at 60hz. It really opened them up. That leaves about 1K for a capable AVR. They really do play everything very well.
I too drove 80 miles one way to audition speakers. The Revels in fact. I auditioned Paradigm Studio 100's closer to home. I found the tweeters to be much too sibilant on the Paradigms, and the mid bass fell apart when pushed. That was my experience anyway.

 

[bsf]

The cheapest I found he GE one was 4600 .... I'm going to hear the revel f208 ... I still want to check out sonus fabers.... Hoping to buy speakers in the next few weeks

 

[bsf]

I'm not good at describing speakers good sound or no good sound but they all sound good

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The cheapest I found he GE one was 4600 .... I'm going to hear the revel f208 ... I still want to check out sonus fabers.... Hoping to buy speakers in the next few weeks

Way too high. I would aim for under $4K street price for speakers that are in the $5K MSRP range (RBH SX-8300, Golden Ear One, DT BP7000SC, Revel F208, KEF R900, B&W CM10).

Samsung Note 3

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I'm not good at describing speakers good sound or no good sound but they all sound good

In this $5K range they all sound good. The biggest difference is the bass and how the bass is powered - active vs passive.

 

[bsf]

well I'm a huge bass fan.. not sure if i mentioned that but for example in the the live version of eagles hotel california when hell freezes over i had my sub cranked and loved it

 

[bsf]

Way too high. I would aim for under $4K street price for speakers that are in the $5K MSRP range (RBH SX-8300, Golden Ear One, DT BP7000SC, Revel F208, KEF R900, B&W CM10).

unless i order them online I'm limited to about 2-3 stores within a 60-80 mile drive

if i can get the revel f208 under 4k id probably buy them tomorrow