The only issue with the 100f is it doesn't have much deep bass compared to the others, if the OP is settled on that criteria. I would expect an in room f10 in the upper 30s and the bass should be very good from there on up.
I wonder why this is still going on. You are willing to spend for just loudspeakers some money that others would give a leg and and an arm for. And You dismiss totally the idea of having an equalizer to adjust the bass to a) Your likeing and b) the room and c) the listening position and d) the speaker's position?! Dunno what is worse, the deviation of a speaker from ideal proportions, or the disproportionate reasoning about it. My personal standpoint: generalized esthetics.
1) I never dismissed the idea of EQ.
I know you’re not asking me, but the f208s are on sale everywhere at 30% off until the end of the year. I read that on AVS in the Revel Owner’s thread by Rex something. He’s a Revel dealer. Further discounts could be had but not from places like Crutchfield who sell at retail prices.
That was going to be my comment when the OP responded-Crutchfield is the wrong place to buy speakers IMO, as they can't/won't discount them like a dealer. I paid for a pair of F208's last year at a local dealer for about what one speaker retails for on Crutchfield. I was going to strongly encourage him to seek out a dealer, if he has to drive a bit, as the savings could be substantial.
Some investor is credited the witty saying: "Your money isn't gone, it is just with somebody else."
You are being too gracious!
Crutchfield is selling at 30% off and free shipping. Just FYI.
In order to equalize room modes a pair (!) of smaller (!) subwoofers are in order. Only to fill in suck-outs, not to extend the range. Smooth bass is as important as extension, max spl. It makes a difference if the bass is booming at certain frequencies or not; the boom would highly affect the feel of extension, the clarity of lower midrange, what have You? Another electronic equalizer would best help with the integration of main speakers, subwoofers, room position of them all and listener's position also.
I am NOT certain this is a fact but it could be even argued w/o the justifications you state.
Is this a question about practices/theories or is this a question about your specific room and equipment?
Are any specs/details available for the upcoming BMR HT model? @Dennis Murphy ? Curious what tradeoff in low freq extension might be with the higher sensitivity and smaller cabinet.
The new HT uses a more sensitive version of the Purifi 8 Ohm 6.5" woofer. There is a trade-off in bass extension, but anyone who is serious enough to buy the HT for movies will no doubt have a sub(s). The box tuning is mass loaded transmission line, and there's useful room response down to 32 Hz. Even when run in parallel, the woofers aren't sensitive enough to get sensitivity above 90 dB. I will probably spec it at 89 dB to be conservative. Modeling shows 106 dB output at one meter before the woofers run out of travel. The new design is voiced the same as my other speakers, and horizontal dispersion is almost as wide, thanks to the very narrow Mundorf AMT. I haven't measured distortion much above 90 dB yet, but all of the drivers, including the new BMR midrange units, are clocking in at a maximum of .2% above 200 Hz.
Define 'match'?! Devices get matched in regard to frequency response etc., or do You mean the 'brand'?
You can use stands to hold the absorption panels and peq to help with room modesYou are being too gracious!
This one is a virgin's question, never asked before:
How in the heck does anyone correct (software? hardware?) for a listening room (20' x 25') where every wall has at least two ~3"x4" glass (plexiglass) covered artwork... and two sliding double-doors and two windows?
meh!
I gave up a loooong time ago!
*Sound absorption, reflection mitigation are impossible
*Multi-channel is not an option
*Software room correction has zero ROI...
*When compared to what you can let your mind compensate for
