New Philharmonic BMR HT Towers

[amper42]

I have the BMR towers powered by Hypex NC400 monoblocks crossed over at 80 hz in a small home theater listening at about 2 meters distance. My listening is in the mid to high 80s dB, according to the master volume. There is a Minidsp Flex handling the crossover to matching Monolith M12 v2 subwoofers, and no boosts that might undermine my assumed headroom. I know that the HT Tower is the preferred solution for Home Theater, but I bought my Towers before the HT existed. I'm very satisfied with the SPL as is. How worried about my RAAL tweeters should I be? What is my recourse if the worst happens?

The BMR Towers are monsters on the low end. I love listening to them with Classical music. I wouldn't worry about the RAAL tweeter at all. It's a strong design that will last you many years. I have the RAAL Tweeter in both the BMR Monitor and the BMR Tower. Its one of the distinctive feature of these speakers.

 

[WillBrink]

I have the BMR towers powered by Hypex NC400 monoblocks crossed over at 80 hz in a small home theater listening at about 2 meters distance. My listening is in the mid to high 80s dB, according to the master volume. There is a Minidsp Flex handling the crossover to matching Monolith M12 v2 subwoofers, and no boosts that might undermine my assumed headroom. I know that the HT Tower is the preferred solution for Home Theater, but I bought my Towers before the HT existed. I'm very satisfied with the SPL as is. How worried about my RAAL tweeters should I be? What is my recourse if the worst happens?

I would expect your set up to outperform the HT towers no?

 

[arichman]

I would expect your set up to outperform the HT towers no?

That depends on how outperform is defined. The HT can play louder, and I can’t help but notice the change in tweeter design. Presumably that is part of the design intention to be able to play louder.

 

[Mort]

I would expect your set up to outperform the HT towers no?

HT towers are really designed to be paired with a subwoofer. Used alone they will satisfy only those that don't need deep bass.

 

[WillBrink]

HT towers are really designed to be paired with a subwoofer. Used alone they will satisfy only those that don't need deep bass.

That's how I would/will, set them up when I get a pair some day.

 

[Mort]

That's I would/will, set them up when I get a pair some day.

I've got mine paired with a rythmik e15. It's endgame for wide directivity passive home theater.

 

[WillBrink]

That depends on how outperform is defined. The HT can player louder, and I can’t help but notice the change in tweeter design. Presumably that is part of the design intention to be able to play louder.

By the 80hz X over, they increased dynamics and can play louder too no? I'm also thinking more a focus on 2ch music able to do HT well also, vs the other way around. If HT is the primary use, that's another thing, maybe a more robust tweeter makes sense there. I'd be 2ch mostly, and want good HT experience also.

I've got mine paired with a rythmik e15. It's endgame for wide directivity passive home theater.

What X over point used? Im more about best 2ch experience with good HT vs the other way around. I would expect that's also an excellent 2ch system.

 

[Mort]

What X over point used? Im more about best 2ch experience with good HT vs the other way around. I would expect that's also an excellent 2ch system.

It's room dependent but I usually crossed between 70-90.

Yeah it's a glorious 2ch system, especially in a medium sized room.

 

[amper42]

With classical music I find the BMR Towers sound best without a subwoofer. The bass integration with the BMR Towers is absolutely fantastic if you want to experience the nuance of being in a concert hall. A subwoofer at 80Hz just doesn't sound as smooth to me.

While I understand the argument that every thing needs a subwoofer for action movies, if Classical is your thing consider trying the BMR Towers full range without sub. It's an amazing sound for replicating a concert hall environment.

 

[Everett T]

By the 80hz X over, they increased dynamics and can play louder too no? I'm also thinking more a focus on 2ch music able to do HT well also, vs the other way around. If HT is the primary use, that's another thing, maybe a more robust tweeter makes sense there. I'd be 2ch mostly, and want good HT experience also.



What X over point used? Im more about best 2ch experience with good HT vs the other way around. I would expect that's also an excellent 2ch system.

HTs don't really need a subwoofer for most music, the F3 falls in line with most of Dennis and Paul's designs with TLs. If using subs, take advantage if them if they're low distortion through their mid and upper range.

 

[ry_]

I’ll echo @Mort. HTs in a two channel would be great if you’re not expecting earth shattering low bass. Even then they do reach pretty deep. I’ve run my HTs in 2ch mode and had to double check that the sub wasn’t on (more than once too).

 

[cavedriver]

HTs don't really need a subwoofer for most music, the F3 falls in line with most of Dennis and Paul's designs with TLs. If using subs, take advantage if them if they're low distortion through their mid and upper range.

I don't really agree with this. Dennis has been clear that he aligned the bass on the HT's for low distortion and tightness, but not extension. The roll off is significant and many program materials suffer. I would not listen to them without a sub unless you are prepared to lose all that content. I had them so I'm speaking from experience here.

 

[Mark609]

I don't really agree with this. Dennis has been clear that he aligned the bass on the HT's for low distortion and tightness, but not extension. The roll off is significant and many program materials suffer. I would not listen to them without a sub unless you are prepared to lose all that content. I had them so I'm speaking from experience here.

You had them? Curious, what did you move on to?

 

[Everett T]

I don't really agree with this. Dennis has been clear that he aligned the bass on the HT's for low distortion and tightness, but not extension. The roll off is significant and many program materials suffer. I would not listen to them without a sub unless you are prepared to lose all that content. I had them so I'm speaking from experience here.

You won't be missing anything with an f2 of 32hz except with certain electronic music and 16' stop and larger organs. Yes they are meant to be used sub for HT. The roll off is that of an MLTL.

 

[Chokurei]

I run my HTs basically full range crossing over to SVS SB16 at 40Hz to take advantage of the purifi drivers as much as possible. I use the set up for 90% music 10% TV. When listening to music at volumes around 90dB, the Purifis barely move. It sounds ridiculously good and I have no worries about pushing the HTs beyond their capabilities. One of the great secrets in high end audio!

 

[WillBrink]

I don't really agree with this. Dennis has been clear that he aligned the bass on the HT's for low distortion and tightness, but not extension. The roll off is significant and many program materials suffer. I would not listen to them without a sub unless you are prepared to lose all that content. I had them so I'm speaking from experience here.

I can think of vertually no speaker I would not run with subs for a full sound.

 

[Mort]

Well definitely not ones that are designed to be paired with a subwoofer. You'll could, but why?

 

[Ricardojoa]

You won't be missing anything with an f2 of 32hz except with certain electronic music and 16' stop and larger organs. Yes they are meant to be used sub for HT. The roll off is that of an MLTL.
View attachment 542719

The on axis doesn’t look like anything with a f2 of 32hz

 

[Everett T]

The on axis doesn’t look like anything with a f2 of 32hz

I'm using Dennis's measurements from the his website and them stating an f2 32hz anechoic. What do you think it's shows?

 

[mj30250]

It's likely an error. According to the spin above, 32Hz is roughly the F10.