Tower vs bookshelf speakers

[Count Arthur]

I wonder if this might be caused by my suspended timber floor, in an old house.

Are your subs stood straight on the floor, with solid spikes or feet?

I have a sub and if I stand it directly on the suspended timber floor the floor sort of joins in. My current sub, with opposed drivers is better than the old down firing sub, however, they both benefited from being on a platform that decouples them from the floor.

I have my sub stood on a granite slab with a block of foam under it, it's out of site so the DIY looks aren't really an issue for me, but you can get ready made solutions, for example:

https://auralex.com/subdude-ht/

https://isoacoustics.com/isoacoustics-products/pro-audio-musical-instrument-products/

 

[o2so]

Are your subs stood straight on the floor, with solid spikes or feet?

I have a sub and if I stand it directly on the suspended timber floor the floor sort of joins in. My current sub, with opposed drivers is better than the old down firing sub, however, they both benefited from being on a platform that decouples them from the floor.

I have my sub stood on a granite slab with a block of foam under it, it's out of site so the DIY looks aren't really an issue for me, but you can get ready made solutions, for example:

https://auralex.com/subdude-ht/

https://isoacoustics.com/isoacoustics-products/pro-audio-musical-instrument-products/

They now have Isoacoustic Gaia feet on. There is much less rattling but the waterfall is the one you see above

 

[Count Arthur]

Is there any way you can try an alternative sub? A friendly local dealer that will allow you to home demo one, perhaps.

 

[Kvalsvoll]

Is this reflected in any measurement?

Of course it is. A combination of several measurements and ways to look at them often follows general trends for big speaker vs. small speaker:

- Frequency response (in-room); often more energy and smoother in lower mid for big speaker.
- SPL capacity; a small speaker simply can not play loud enough to avoid compression of transient peaks, especially in the most important low mid range.
- Phase response and early reflection level is improved with better directivity for the larger speaker, and this affects freq response and tactile feel.
- Intensity of the sound field is more powerful and velocity potential is more consistent for a larger speaker, this can be seen by observing velocity pv in different directions in-room.

BUT - note that all those properties are ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES of the sound, and really is not directly correlated to loudspeaker physical size. Which means that it is possible to make a small loudspeaker with sound similar to a large loudspeaker. And some large speakers do not have the potential advantages.

 

[o2so]

Of course it is. A combination of several measurements and ways to look at them often follows general trends for big speaker vs. small speaker:

- Frequency response (in-room); often more energy and smoother in lower mid for big speaker.
- SPL capacity; a small speaker simply can not play loud enough to avoid compression of transient peaks, especially in the most important low mid range.
- Phase response and early reflection level is improved with better directivity for the larger speaker, and this affects freq response and tactile feel.
- Intensity of the sound field is more powerful and velocity potential is more consistent for a larger speaker, this can be seen by observing velocity pv in different directions in-room.

BUT - note that all those properties are ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES of the sound, and really is not directly correlated to loudspeaker physical size. Which means that it is possible to make a small loudspeaker with sound similar to a large loudspeaker. And some large speakers do not have the potential advantages.

Thank you. Are you saying that because of their larger size, floorstanders generally do better at the above measurements however well designed small speakers could perform just as good?

 

[richard12511]

This is in total disagreement with my experience.
Whilst the location does indeed make a huge difference and badly positioned speakers sound poor I have found it is the speaker design itself which strongly influences the bass quality. I have found this time and time again over the last 50 years so this frequently quoted diagnosis does not match my experience at all.
For me the order of importance is, speaker, speaker room interface then room compensation.
IME any amount of dicking about with room position is pointless if the speakers are boomy, and if room position can't ameliorate that problem EQ is a bodge maybe worth doing but you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

I do agree that I've heard speakers, and even cheap subwoofers that sound boomy as a consequence of their design. Not sure what causes this. Group delay? Distortion? My Monoprice 12s suffer from this, as do my Infinity R12s(to a lesser degree). I'd say almost all tower speakers I've heard as well as most sub $500 subwoofers I've heard suffer from this to at least some degree. IME, once you get to a certain level of subwoofer quality, with distortion, group delay, etc. all reduced to below audible thresholds, they all sound almost exactly the same once you equalize the position and response. I did a blind test between a Rythmik, JTR, and PSA subwoofer a few years ago. At first they did all sound slightly different, but once we put them in the same spot and EQed the response, none of us could tell them apart, and all of them were as "tight" and "controlled" as it possibly gets. Not saying there weren't still differences, but we couldn't hear them.

It definitely could be related to the sub itself, but imo, it's more likely due to the room. At those frequencies you're hearing the room way more than you're hearing the speaker. The speaker actually matters very little in comparison. It's the room and the position that really matter.

@o2so , from your pictures, it looks like the Dyns and the SVS are in different rooms? If they're in different rooms, then that's your explanation . That far below the rooms transition(Schroeder) frequency, you're hearing the room, speaker position, and speaker extension. Speaker quality has very little to do with it, imo. Directivity doesn't matter any more, and our ears are very insensitive to distortion and time issues.

Can you post frequency response graphs with a 50dB vertical scale? I think those would be useful, too, especially to see what's happening down super deep.

Also, a step response to see how well time aligned the subs could be helpful.

Assuming that the SVS and Dyns are in the same room, then I do see some differences in those CSD plots you posted, and based on those, I could forsee the Dyns sounding "faster", since they seem to decay faster. Fortunately(or unfortunately ), deep bass decay is more a function of the position and room, and has very little to do with the speaker/sub(once you get above that threshold). I think the most likely cause is probably one of two things:

1. Position
2. Speaker/Sub interaction

To test 1, move the SVS woofers into the exact location that the Dynaudio woofers are(you may have to raise them). Now remeasure and see what it looks like.

To test 2, something kinda hacky you could try is, disconnect the LS50s, then equalize the response of the Dyns and SVSs to the exact same target(with a lowpass and highpass in place) so that the Dyns are only playing up to as high as the SVS, and the SVS is only extending down as low as the Dyns. Does that make sense?(I struggled trying to put that thought in to words ).

If it's the second one, then that is probably gonna be harder to solve. Second one is (imo) the primary reason why many people still opt for 2.0 with big tower speakers, despite the inherent limitations.

If it turns out to be neither of those, then perhaps @Frank Dernie is right. I haven't seen group delay/distortion measurements for that sub, but usually those tend to be below audible thresholds(for decent subs). I know @Sancus posted a graph the other day showing an SVS with subpar group delay measurements, but I don't remember which sub it was.

I still think it's one of those first two things, though. A good sub array should be better and more well "controlled" than basically any tower speaker, but it can often be difficult to realize that potential.

 

[richard12511]

You are right it could be either.
IME a speaker with overblown/boomy bass will not be "corrected" by room position, that is all, it is inherent.
Interestingly I had found the crude clip of the before correction of Devialet's SAM graphs on their old site to correlate with the poor speakers I have experienced. Unfortunately the clips are now so tiny nothing can be deduced from them at all

What measurements do you think reflect a speaker/subs "control"? I think it's important to bring it back to objective metrics and define exactly what we mean by "control". Otherwise, we're drifting into typical audiophile subjective woo-wooery( I made that up ).

 

[Kvalsvoll]

Thank you. Are you saying that because of their larger size, floorstanders generally do better at the above measurements however well designed small speakers could perform just as good?

Depends on how we define well-designed. Most speakers are based on the same concept and technology, and if well-designed is simply a better crossover for better smoother frequency response and better drivers for lower distortion and increased capacity, then it can be better, but it will not solve the problem with directivity and still will be lacking in capacity. You need to rethink the speaker starting with the requirements specification, and then use technology suitable to achieve what is necessary to meet those requirements.

 

[Benedium]

Pity ASR has much fewer budget floorstander reviews.

 

[Sancus]

I know @Sancus posted a graph the other day showing an SVS with subpar group delay measurements, but I don't remember which sub it was.

SB/PB-3000. What some might term "excessive" group delay is very common to sealed as well as ported SVS subs. For example SB12-NSD, PB-2000 Pro, etc. The reason for it is probably due to DSP they've chosen to use. Sealed/sealed-mode subs from every other reputable manufacturer(eg: JL, JTR, Rythmik, PSA, Hsu, etc) tend to have group delay well below 1 cycle at all frequencies. Of course, port tuning delay is unavoidable and well understood.

Would it be audible? I'll note that data-bass claims that the SB12-NSD's group delay wasn't audible, despite being high at >30hz. Although I might personally buy from a manufacturer with better measurements in this area, I do suspect all I would be doing is avoiding a psychological difference caused by looking at graphs I wouldn't buy ported subs with a tuning frequency in the audible range, either.

I haven't seen much good evidence regarding low frequency group delay audibility. Audioholics' summary page states group delay is only an issue above 50hz, where it should stay below 1 cycle. I found one poster mentioning a 1985 study but not sure which exact one it is, and even then, frequencies below 40hz weren't tested.

 

[o2so]

I do agree that I've heard speakers, and even cheap subwoofers that sound boomy as a consequence of their design. Not sure what causes this. Group delay? Distortion? My Monoprice 12s suffer from this, as do my Infinity R12s(to a lesser degree). I'd say almost all tower speakers I've heard as well as most sub $500 subwoofers I've heard suffer from this to at least some degree. IME, once you get to a certain level of subwoofer quality, with distortion, group delay, etc. all reduced to below audible thresholds, they all sound almost exactly the same once you equalize the position and response. I did a blind test between a Rythmik, JTR, and PSA subwoofer a few years ago. At first they did all sound slightly different, but once we put them in the same spot and EQed the response, none of us could tell them apart, and all of them were as "tight" and "controlled" as it possibly gets. Not saying there weren't still differences, but we couldn't hear them.

It definitely could be related to the sub itself, but imo, it's more likely due to the room. At those frequencies you're hearing the room way more than you're hearing the speaker. The speaker actually matters very little in comparison. It's the room and the position that really matter.

@o2so , from your pictures, it looks like the Dyns and the SVS are in different rooms? If they're in different rooms, then that's your explanation . That far below the rooms transition(Schroeder) frequency, you're hearing the room, speaker position, and speaker extension. Speaker quality has very little to do with it, imo. Directivity doesn't matter any more, and our ears are very insensitive to distortion and time issues.

Can you post frequency response graphs with a 50dB vertical scale? I think those would be useful, too, especially to see what's happening down super deep.

Also, a step response to see how well time aligned the subs could be helpful.

Assuming that the SVS and Dyns are in the same room, then I do see some differences in those CSD plots you posted, and based on those, I could forsee the Dyns sounding "faster", since they seem to decay faster. Fortunately(or unfortunately ), deep bass decay is more a function of the position and room, and has very little to do with the speaker/sub(once you get above that threshold). I think the most likely cause is probably one of two things:

1. Position
2. Speaker/Sub interaction

To test 1, move the SVS woofers into the exact location that the Dynaudio woofers are(you may have to raise them). Now remeasure and see what it looks like.

To test 2, something kinda hacky you could try is, disconnect the LS50s, then equalize the response of the Dyns and SVSs to the exact same target(with a lowpass and highpass in place) so that the Dyns are only playing up to as high as the SVS, and the SVS is only extending down as low as the Dyns. Does that make sense?(I struggled trying to put that thought in to words ).

If it's the second one, then that is probably gonna be harder to solve. Second one is (imo) the primary reason why many people still opt for 2.0 with big tower speakers, despite the inherent limitations.

If it turns out to be neither of those, then perhaps @Frank Dernie is right. I haven't seen group delay/distortion measurements for that sub, but usually those tend to be below audible thresholds(for decent subs). I know @Sancus posted a graph the other day showing an SVS with subpar group delay measurements, but I don't remember which sub it was.

I still think it's one of those first two things, though. A good sub array should be better and more well "controlled" than basically any tower speaker, but it can often be difficult to realize that potential.

It's the same room, the SVSs are out of the photo of the kefs that I posted, but same room.
I doubt it's option 2, I hi passed the ls50s with a steep BW48db at 100hz. Same applies to the subs, but low passed.

With regard to option 1, the only way I can keep the subs where the Dyns are would be to get rid of the stands and put the ls50s on top of the subs, which would probably look even worse than having the Dyns in place.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Pity ASR has much fewer budget floorstander reviews.

If not Revel, take a risk on Infinity or JBL floor standers.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

I do agree that I've heard speakers, and even cheap subwoofers that sound boomy as a consequence of their design. Not sure what causes this. Group delay? Distortion? My Monoprice 12s suffer from this, as do my Infinity R12s(to a lesser degree). I'd say almost all tower speakers I've heard as well as most sub $500 subwoofers I've heard suffer from this to at least some degree. IME, once you get to a certain level of subwoofer quality, with distortion, group delay, etc. all reduced to below audible thresholds, they all sound almost exactly the same once you equalize the position and response. I did a blind test between a Rythmik, JTR, and PSA subwoofer a few years ago. At first they did all sound slightly different, but once we put them in the same spot and EQed the response, none of us could tell them apart, and all of them were as "tight" and "controlled" as it possibly gets. Not saying there weren't still differences, but we couldn't hear them.

It definitely could be related to the sub itself, but imo, it's more likely due to the room. At those frequencies you're hearing the room way more than you're hearing the speaker. The speaker actually matters very little in comparison. It's the room and the position that really matter.

@o2so , from your pictures, it looks like the Dyns and the SVS are in different rooms? If they're in different rooms, then that's your explanation . That far below the rooms transition(Schroeder) frequency, you're hearing the room, speaker position, and speaker extension. Speaker quality has very little to do with it, imo. Directivity doesn't matter any more, and our ears are very insensitive to distortion and time issues.

Can you post frequency response graphs with a 50dB vertical scale? I think those would be useful, too, especially to see what's happening down super deep.

Also, a step response to see how well time aligned the subs could be helpful.

Assuming that the SVS and Dyns are in the same room, then I do see some differences in those CSD plots you posted, and based on those, I could forsee the Dyns sounding "faster", since they seem to decay faster. Fortunately(or unfortunately ), deep bass decay is more a function of the position and room, and has very little to do with the speaker/sub(once you get above that threshold). I think the most likely cause is probably one of two things:

1. Position
2. Speaker/Sub interaction

To test 1, move the SVS woofers into the exact location that the Dynaudio woofers are(you may have to raise them). Now remeasure and see what it looks like.

To test 2, something kinda hacky you could try is, disconnect the LS50s, then equalize the response of the Dyns and SVSs to the exact same target(with a lowpass and highpass in place) so that the Dyns are only playing up to as high as the SVS, and the SVS is only extending down as low as the Dyns. Does that make sense?(I struggled trying to put that thought in to words ).

If it's the second one, then that is probably gonna be harder to solve. Second one is (imo) the primary reason why many people still opt for 2.0 with big tower speakers, despite the inherent limitations.

If it turns out to be neither of those, then perhaps @Frank Dernie is right. I haven't seen group delay/distortion measurements for that sub, but usually those tend to be below audible thresholds(for decent subs). I know @Sancus posted a graph the other day showing an SVS with subpar group delay measurements, but I don't remember which sub it was.

I still think it's one of those first two things, though. A good sub array should be better and more well "controlled" than basically any tower speaker, but it can often be difficult to realize that potential.

A tower with sub always sounds better. Regardless, if using for dialogue, 3 way center is necessity.

 

[Frank Dernie]

What measurements do you think reflect a speaker/subs "control"? I think it's important to bring it back to objective metrics and define exactly what we mean by "control". Otherwise, we're drifting into typical audiophile subjective woo-wooery( I made that up ).

Basically the SAM measurement showed a before and after waveform, with the after hopefully lying on top of the input waveform.
On small speakers the before was smaller than corrected, and on several small ones SAM was unable to completely compensate due to thermal or displacement limits of the bass unit.
In a very few cases the speaker was close in amplitude and phase even without SAM correction, ie did not need much. In the cases where I was familiar with the speaker and considered it poor in the bass (boomy slow - unlistenable for me) the uncorrected output was greater than the input and the SAM correction reduced it rather than increased it.
The origin of the whole SAM concept was to use DSP to get even and accurate bass from a restricted volume cabinet when they were developing the Phantom.
The engineers then decided to look into using the same concept to correct the bass of normal speakers by adding extra DSP to their amplifiers and updating the firmware.
They have measured hundreds of commercial speakers now and very, very few had accurate bass. There has been considerable pressure from owners to add room compensation as well, which was done in the latest firmware release, but the engineers at Devialet felt correcting the bass of the commercial speakers they were measuring was first priority based on what they had found, for better or worse.
I was surprised by how few commercial speakers had accurate bass, there are far too many now tested to look at every graph, and the new web site layout has left the plots tiny (and therefore pointless IMO) but I used to keep an eye on each new measurement a few years ago.

 

[Frank Dernie]

If not Revel, take a risk on Infinity or JBL floor standers.

Maybe Singapore is like the UK, larger JBLs are not available (the little ones are on Amazon UK) and Revel hard to find and expensive?
Big, heavy stuff like speakers are best bought from local manufacturers from a value for money pov IME.
I really wanted some JBLs at one time (K2 S9800) but gave up trying to get any.

 

[richard12511]

A tower with sub always sounds better. Regardless, if using for dialogue, 3 way center is necessity.

I'd say "a tower and a subs always has the potential to sound better" .

A few months ago, I ordered a couple Monoprice 12 subs($99) to complement the Infinity R263 in my garage gym. No matter what I tried, I just couldn't get the subwoofers + towers to sound better than the towers by themselves. Measurements revealed that the subs were exciting room modes below 50Hz much more than the towers on their own were. I eventually fixed the problem by ordering two more of those subs and introducing better DSP(not YPAO), but before I did that, the R263 towers on their own definitely sounded better. Perhaps someone more experienced could have made it work, but I was unable to.

 

[Grandzoltar]

The sub crawl putting the sub at the mlp and putting an ear down towards the area where the sub will go have music playing with different ranges of bass. This will show you areas of the room where bass notes may be bloated or lean. Don't just settle for one spot find a second or third incase you ever increase subwooferage you know your options. Find placements that complement each other not accentuate. This teaches how the bass frequencies bounce around your room like balls on a billiard table.

 

[Deleted member 65]

What do you mean with "controlled"?
The waterfall shows some obvious lingering bass but I'm not sure if this is due to the subs themselves or my room. Things got marginally better after finding the best spot where I can practically put them, but to an extent. I wonder if this might be caused by my suspended timber floor, in an old house.
The dynaudios floorstanders might suffer less of floor vibrations because the woofers are much higher up.
So I'm trying to figure out if better subs could fix this, or not. If not, I'll buy the Dyns and sell all the rest. Aesthetically this would be a step back because the Dyns look rather imposing in my smallish room(see pics) , which is why I'm trying to make the setting with bookshelves and subs work.

View attachment 109601View attachment 109602

Installed my standmount Evolution Acoustics MicroOnes on the 1909 built suspended wood floor. Speakers weigh 50 kg each incl stand. Used provided spikes, bass was really boomy. Replaced spikes with Soundcare ditto, great improvement in my room.
Worth a try maybe.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ment-tutorial-for-dummies-part-2.5/post-64231

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

I'd say "a tower and a subs always has the potential to sound better" .

A few months ago, I ordered a couple Monoprice 12 subs($99) to complement the Infinity R263 in my garage gym. No matter what I tried, I just couldn't get the subwoofers + towers to sound better than the towers by themselves. Measurements revealed that the subs were exciting room modes below 50Hz much more than the towers on their own were. I eventually fixed the problem by ordering two more of those subs and introducing better DSP(not YPAO), but before I did that, the R263 towers on their own definitely sounded better. Perhaps someone more experienced could have made it work, but I was unable to.

I agree. I solved problem with Anthem Room Correction.

 

[Desmo]

I am interested in this from a budget point of view.

Let's say you pick up a pair of good SVS subwoofers for $2000.
Could you get away with a pair of good budget standmounters like the Elac debut reference for $800 with stands?

For $2800 you can buy a pair of very well made and capable floorstanders I would say.