Subwoofers make all big speakers obsolete?

[voodooless]

Or would you do a sub under each speaker in addition to one or more well positioned subs?

the more the merrier, right

But yes, raising the X-over will make the locatable. It’s just a different compromise. If you need more output, you should not choose 8010 anyway.

 

[tuga]

I don't think it is in absolute numbers but rather an impression when you are in our audiophile "bubble" like related forums, the few remaining hifi shops and fairs. If you look in the charts of price comparison sites and big shops like Amazon the HT seems to sell much more, also almost all "average consumers" I know rather buy AVRs then stereo amps.

Yes, I was talking about audiophiles. Of the dozens of people I know, only one has a multi-channel system. Most have nothing but their TV and a bluetooth speaker, or a soundbar at best.
My speakers are 60x30x30cm mid-sized standmounts but most visitors comment on their "huge" size and the small-size of the TV, by their standards... It shows where the priorities lie.

 

[gnarly]

This x1000. It is really hard to fully integrate subs with speakers that lack bass. A basic design rule is that you want your driver to be linear for an octave past the crossover. So for a common 80hz crossover, you want your mains to extend comfortably down to 40hz before rolling off. This means a decent sized bass driver in the mains. I know that with my revels high passed at 80hz, when cranked up (i.e. 100+db peaks) you will still see the 8” woofers moving a lot.

I take a different approach integrating subs with speakers. (I'll call a speaker a main from here.)
I use steep complementary linear phase crossovers, 96dB/oct Linkwitz-Riley's, between sub and main.
Typically at 100Hz. So all summation/interaction occurs between only 80Hz and 125Hz. And this is counting contributions thru the summation region all the way down to -30dB.

This accomplishes two things for me.
First, if the sub and main are within 1/4 wavelength, 100Hz allows almost 3ft of separation between acoustic centers without lobing or phase cancellations. Even 2 1/4ft at the end of summation, 125Hz.
Second, with the sub's contribution to summed output ending at 125Hz. There is no localization at all (to my ears).
A typical shallower xover at 100Hz, say 24dB/oct or less, can easily be localized.

It's good practice occasionally to run sub alone without a main ime, to hear what's coming out of 'em.

 

[tuga]

Subwoofers do not make large main speakers obsolete, it is advances in technology and design that makes it possible to make smaller high performance main speakers.

All serious system has some sort of separate bass-system solution, call it subwoofer if you will.

I agree that in order to achive high-performance full-range 4 "ways" are needed. But I am not convinced, from my limited experience, that it can be done with small mains because of the requirements of each of "way".
In a design with tweeter for treble, a single driver for the whole of the midrange, a woofer for bass and a subwoofer for sub-bass the crossover frequency between the last two should be somewhere in the 60-80Hz range. And high-performance (low distortion) low-bass seems only possible with large cabinets and large woofers (or an array of mid-sized ones).

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

Hardly. Dirac Live does only do proper sub integration if you buy a separate module, and that is only supported on a limited number of devices.

You do realize that there are AVRs with Dirac Live? That should be accessible to the "non tech people" who unlike us have qualms about messing with modules and DAW setups.

 

[voodooless]

You do realize that there are AVRs with Dirac Live? That should be accessible to the "non tech people" who unlike us have qualms about messing with modules and DAW setups.

Those AVR’s do not really rely on Dirac for bass management. Yes the sub channel is “Dirac’ed”, but it it’s still very basic. If you want really good intergation, you’ll need DLBC. It costs quite a bit extra and is only available on select models.

 

[fineMen]

As a kid I always dreamed about the huge towers with a big woofer ...
What am I missing here?

Nothing--big subs are o/k as long as the mains don't get smaller. When it comes to clarity as opposed to extension down low, the frequency range around 150Hz is still prone to be muddled by too small speakers. A typical 5" or so doesn't have the muscle to present this range without taking the mids down the drain.

 

[Kvalsvoll]

I agree that in order to achive high-performance full-range 4 "ways" are needed. But I am not convinced, from my limited experience, that it can be done with small mains because of the requirements of each of "way".
In a design with tweeter for treble, a single driver for the whole of the midrange, a woofer for bass and a subwoofer for sub-bass the crossover frequency between the last two should be somewhere in the 60-80Hz range. And high-performance (low distortion) low-bass seems only possible with large cabinets and large woofers (or an array of mid-sized ones).

Depends on how loud you want to play, and the size of the room. For a smaller room, with listening distance around 2.5m, it is possible to achieve sufficient capacity with modest sized speakers, don't really need more than around 120dB capacity at the lp. Today there are small drivers available that can do this. The problem is radiation pattern, a small direct radiator has too wide pattern at low-mid frequencies, once you solve this, the speaker can be smaller. Of course, part of the equation here is that the main speakers do not play the low bass.

 

[rdenney]

Back to the original question. In another thread, I compared Revel floor speakers to stand speakers that used the same drivers and design choices. The difference was that the floor speakers had twice as many bass drivers. In measured performance, the difference was in linearity--really reciprocity--does 3 dB more power draw result in 3 dB more SPL? Answer: yes, to a higher SPL with the floor speakers versus the stand speakers, particularly in the 80-200 band (the stand speakers had no pretensions much lower than that).

One person argued with me because he has his subs crossed over at 120 Hz. But I doubt most would do that, and crossing it very high will allow it to call attention to itself.

So, it seems to me that we can determine from measurements that speakers with more low-driver surface area will produce higher SPL in the region just above the subs than speakers with less low-driver surface area. Yes, this might be overcome by design--using drivers with greater excursion in the smaller speaker. But given similar design, I think it's a good rule of thumb.

My Revel F12's were particularly good at sustaining that reciprocity in the tests that Soundstage conducted in the NRC labs. They have two 8" drivers--the rough equivalent of a single 12" driver--plus a mid-range driver for a true 3-way design. I would not want to give up what those can do even if I added subs. And, as Don suggests, adding subs would probably help them do it better.

I would not cross the subs any higher than 60 Hz, and they would still be good for filling in nulls probably up into the 90's, but only if I have complete freedom to move them around (which in my room is a bit of a fantasy for non-audio reasons). My mains would still be doing their thing down to 40 Hz at least. I can use my PEQ to high-pass filter the mains, and whatever subs I buy will have low-pass filters in their plate amps.

I do not watch movies on that system.

Rick "one can always turn it down" Denney

 

[tuga]

Depends on how loud you want to play, and the size of the room. For a smaller room, with listening distance around 2.5m, it is possible to achieve sufficient capacity with modest sized speakers, don't really need more than around 120dB capacity at the lp. Today there are small drivers available that can do this. The problem is radiation pattern, a small direct radiator has too wide pattern at low-mid frequencies, once you solve this, the speaker can be smaller. Of course, part of the equation here is that the main speakers do not play the low bass.

I'd be interested in seeing the HD and IMD measurements of a sub when crossed at 60Hz vs 100Hz.

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

Those AVR’s do not really rely on Dirac for bass management. Yes the sub channel is “Dirac’ed”, but it it’s still very basic. If you want really good intergation, you’ll need DLBC. It costs quite a bit extra and is only available on select models.

Why would you need DLBC? AVRs have the appropriate crossover filters anyway. Oo

 

[Bill Brown]

.....subs crossed over at 120 Hz. But I doubt most would do that, and crossing it very high will allow it to call attention to itself.

I now realize this is an incredibly pervasive myth on this site. It is unfortunate, especially as the many that espouse it are completely dogmatic as they proclaim it (over and over).

Bill

 

[voodooless]

Why would you need DLBC? AVRs have the appropriate crossover filters anyway. Oo

That is not the point. The point is proper subwoofer integration so that output is as smooth as possible and crossover area is as good as possible. Normal Dirac will just make the eq the sinds and mains, and then just us whatever crossover you set in the AVR. It will not do any optimization on those slopes.

 

[Juhazi]

I'd be interested in seeing the HD and IMD measurements of a sub when crossed at 60Hz vs 100Hz.

Don't forget to measure main speakers' crossed 60/100Hz as well!

For music listening two wide range speakers beats 2.1 6-0. The problem is that you must diy main speakers then. The difference is huge with classical music - spaciousness, envelopment etc. is from another planet if the room is wide enough.

 

[sigbergaudio]

This accomplishes two things for me.
First, if the sub and main are within 1/4 wavelength, 100Hz allows almost 3ft of separation between acoustic centers without lobing or phase cancellations. Even 2 1/4ft at the end of summation, 125Hz.
Second, with the sub's contribution to summed output ending at 125Hz. There is no localization at all (to my ears).
A typical shallower xover at 100Hz, say 24dB/oct or less, can easily be localized.

It depends how you place your subs of course, but I'd say that the statement "100hz with 24dB/oct can easily be localized" isn't necessarily and generally true. Subs without any distortion or noise are generally less localizable than one would think.

 

[sigbergaudio]

I'd be interested in seeing the HD and IMD measurements of a sub when crossed at 60Hz vs 100Hz.

What would you expect to find?

 

[gnarly]

It depends how you place your subs of course, but I'd say that the statement "100hz with 24dB/oct can easily be localized" isn't necessarily and generally true. Subs without any distortion or noise are generally less localizable than one would think.

I meant when playing music through a sub alone...sorry if that wasn't clear.
In that situation I think anybody will easily localize a sub (with a 4th order low pass at 100Hz).

Admittedly, with speaker playing too, sub localization will be much more difficult.
Personally, I go for as clean as i can make it, when building speakers...which for me means avoiding lobing and phase cancellation issues, as much as possible.

 

[rdenney]

I now realize this is an incredibly pervasive myth on this site. It is unfortunate, especially as the many that espouse it are completely dogmatic as they proclaim it (over and over).

Bill

Well, I thought I read it in Toole. At what point are the frequencies high enough to allow localization?

And I'm not seeing consensus on the topic even in this thread.

Rick "submitting to correction, if it is offered and defended" Denney

 

[tuga]

Don't forget to measure main speakers' crossed 60/100Hz as well!

Agreed, but we were discussing small vs large mains.

 

[tuga]

What would you expect to find?

I would expect higher levels of IMD and HD when covering a wider range. It would be interesting to see how much driver size and cone excursion of a sub impact the result when covering a wider range.