sub/Sat v floorstanders

[Thompsonuxb]

Been thinking about this last couple of days.

In my limited experience a sub paired with standmounts does not work.

Most setting the sub to high. Setting the sub so it only kicks in at the lowest frequency to reinforce bass in music makes the sub redundant, most of the music don't employ. 'sub bass'.

A well fed floorstander delivers better and more natural bass.

Ever since I heard the Anthem demo on Sunday, subs work for HT. Never sound quite right with music.....in my limited experience anyway.

Opinions....

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Can we no longer edit opening posts?

Awell.....

 

[FennerMachine]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Over the past 13 years I've had:[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Stand mount (B&W 601)[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Floor stander (B&W 602.5)[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Floor stander (Mission 782)[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Stand mount (Von Schweikert VR1)[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Stand mount (Spendor SA1)[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Floor stander (Quad 21L2)[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]I've not used a sub for 14 years, back when I had a Kenwood 5.1 Sub/Sat system.[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]My current personal preference is floor standers.[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Floor standers take up the same amount of space as stand mounts as they need to be put on stands.[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Small speaker Sub/Sat systems (Bose, Kef Eggs, small book shelf style), from my experience, lack the integration of larger full range speakers.[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]They have the benefit of being small enough to put out of the way though, so may be more suitable for some, hence why they are produced![/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]Sub/Sat can work very well for movies, but I still prefer full range front speakers.[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]A sub would be good with movies but I would rather put the cost of a good sub into even better front speakers.[/font]

[font="Times New Roman, serif"]I'm actually considering changing to a 2.0 system instead of 5.0 when I move house and get my Icon Audio ST40 amp.[/font]

 

[abacus]

If you are using a HT Amp and your front speakers are set to large, when you select stereo the sub is automatically turned off so as to give best results.

Floorstanding speakers are not ideal for all rooms (They can become overpowering) which is why you must always take this into account when auditioning speakers.

Bill

 

[JoelSim]

Over the past 13 years I've had:

Stand mount (B&W 601)

Floor stander (B&W 602.5)

Floor stander (Mission 782)

Stand mount (Von Schweikert VR1)

Stand mount (Spendor SA1)

Floor stander (Quad 21L2)

I've not used a sub for 14 years, back when I had a Kenwood 5.1 Sub/Sat system.

My current personal preference is floor standers.

Floor standers take up the same amount of space as stand mounts as they need to be put on stands.

Small speaker Sub/Sat systems (Bose, Kef Eggs, small book shelf style), from my experience, lack the integration of larger full range speakers.

They have the benefit of being small enough to put out of the way though, so may be more suitable for some, hence why they are produced!

Sub/Sat can work very well for movies, but I still prefer full range front speakers.

A sub would be good with movies but I would rather put the cost of a good sub into even better front speakers.

I'm actually considering changing to a 2.0 system instead of 5.0 when I move house and get my Icon Audio ST40 amp.

I agree. Get a speaker that works well throughout the range...the sub is just another element to match which isn't hifi. I appreciate a movie soundtrack may benefit in an over-the-top kind of way but is ain't going to improve the vocals on a Tracy Chapman album.

 

[ellisdj]

I think to say a sub is not hifi is a false comment.

A sub is a purpose designed bass maker no different to a speaker in any other box.

By thinking you get best bass from speakers because the manufacturer has put it together is only looking at half the picture,

You plonk the speaker down in the room and it destroys all the work done by the manufacturer as the room kills the bass timing and freq response.

By seperating the speakers and sub you are actually are in a position to best place both for best sound reproduction of their respective ranges. Otherwise its a trade off - best place for bass which might be in the front corners is no good for the rest of the range or imaging for example

I agree that sub integration is difficult - especiaily with hifi products as they are mostly not designed to integrate a sub.

However some are and some companies believe whole heartidly in this approach as being a very viable "hifi" option.

Some people can integrate a sub with book shelf speakers they doo fully support the lower mid bass regions and do add to the vocals surprisingly by creating a full range sound

 

[hg]

I agree that sub integration is difficult - especiaily with hifi products as they are mostly not designed to integrate a sub.

Although I fully agree with the rest of your post how can one design a speaker not to integrate with a sub?

To expand your post further. As far as I am aware it has long been recognised (among the technically literate rather than audiophiles) that the practical way to get high fidelity bass in the home is to treat the room for the lowest few modes (electronic correction is insufficient) and then to use distributed subwoofers with 4 being a typical number. Putting large subwoofer cones in the main speakers is not wise because, as you say, they will not be in good locations to control the room modes and the large forces and pressure changes will degrade the motion of the cabinet and the other drivers.

 

[SteveR750]

Agree with you Joel, I've not heard a subwoofer in a system that dodn't result in overblown and out of time bass. Fine for watching dinosaurs romping around an imaginary island, but not for critical listening. There is a reason why loudpseaker manufactuers spend so much time trying to get the phase alignment of multiple drivers (ATC, PMC, KEF and Tannoy are the obvious names).

 

[ellisdj]

You have not heard a good setup of a sub then - because its not the case at all - good bass setup doesnt romp at all with dinosaours.

Its accurate pressure which has tone and clear definition depending on what the source material is - pacifim rim is quite rompy but other material you might think is rompy actually isnt - such as the bat coming out the alley scene in Dark Knight rises - thats acutally a mad varied pulse sensation - awesome affect

To support my comments above you only have to take the briistol show for an example - I didnt hear any real good bass there, but I didnt hear every room so its not fair to make the overall statement.

The rooms I did hear B&W room for example - fully acoustic treated out.

They put Lorde Royals on to show just how good the bass from the big CM floor standers was.

I was sitting 3 rows back and one to the left of centre so pretty central and should have been a good spot and I appreciate they are trying to do good bass for 30 people not 1 - However the bass was horrendous and that was supposed to be a bass demo

In contrast the PMC demo room using a sub centrally located had Much better tone and amount of bass which added scale to tiny bookshelf speakers to fill a big room of 30-40 people.

When I said Hifi doesnt really aim to integrate with subs I mean with the source components pre-amps etc. That is where it needs to happen simialr to an AV processor to allow for varied placement of the sub/subs and then correct integration.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Ellisdj, I heard the PMC demo at the show the sound was woeful!

Distorted noise - I was stunned by the badness of the sound in that room.

Anthem did a demo with their new sub and a pair of standmounts. Using a mixed up Shirley Bassey tune (best music choice of the show)

One with sub one without. The non sub demo was 'acceptable' the sub version was disco-ish.
Poor integration and the timing was off.... real thump though.

(just a note: they used HDMI for connections)

The volume was probably set too high (like the PMC demo to accommodate the room)

Even though the room was 'treated' with heavy curtains. It sounded off.

Can't remember which speakers they used.

 

[relocated]

It is, indeed, all about your inexperience. A properly integrated sub-sat can be blindingly good, provided the manufacturer really knows what they are doing.

 

[relocated]

I agree. Get a speaker that works well throughout the range...the sub is just another element to match which isn't hifi. I appreciate a movie soundtrack may benefit in an over-the-top kind of way but is ain't going to improve the vocals on a Tracy Chapman album.

Isn't hifi? By god what chance do punters have when this is the standard of knowledge and experience from someone selling in the hi-fi industry????????????????????

 

[richardw42]

I think good implementation of a sub means you feel you need to put your hand on it occasionally to make sure it's working. If you can spot it's presence with music you've got it too high.

i sold a sub to a friend and recommend he kept to the settings I had it on. He complained that he couldn't hear it. I went over and incrementally adjusted it to where he was happy, it sounded god awful (slow, lumpy etc etc). A week later he phoned to say he'd put it back to the settings I had it on.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

It is, indeed, all about your inexperience.  A properly integrated sub-sat can be blindingly good, provided the manufacturer really knows what they are doing.  

I think that's the point.

To integrate a sub in a 2 channel set up is not an easy task.

Just to get the timing right is difficult. Not saying it's not possible just that floorstanders do a much better job achieving 'musical' bass.

 

[SteveR750]

It is, indeed, all about your inexperience. A properly integrated sub-sat can be blindingly good, provided the manufacturer really knows what they are doing.

I think that's the point.

To integrate a sub in a 2 channel set up is not an easy task.

Just to get the timing right is difficult. Not saying it's not possible just that floorstanders do a much better job achieving 'musical' bass.

For once I agree with you

 

[ellisdj]

Ellisdj, I heard the PMC demo at the show the sound was woeful!

Distorted noise - I was stunned by the badness of the sound in that room.

Anthem did a demo with their new sub and a pair of standmounts. Using a mixed up Shirley Bassey tune (best music choice of the show)

One with sub one without. The non sub demo was 'acceptable' the sub version was disco-ish. Poor integration and the timing was off.... real thump though.

(just a note: they used HDMI for connections)

The volume was probably set too high (like the PMC demo to accommodate the room)

Even though the room was 'treated' with heavy curtains. It sounded off.

Can't remember which speakers they used.

I Read your comments I think before I went - I am guessing you went Friday, I went on Saturday - maybe it was better setup on Sat. I could have sat and listened to that system more.

They have 21's very wide apart with the new sub in the middle - clever advertising of the new product - I sat in the middle at the front and it was good what i was hearing - tuneful and rich. The soundstage was very wide as you would expect from speaker 20 foot apart but also flat no depth - that is also to be expected of that setup. I was not a lover of the treble though (second time I demo'd pmc and thought that) However believe or not in cables but I am sure they were using Van Damme speaker cabling and my experience of that cable is it does not have a good treble.

For me the Anthem room sounded poor after hearing the other demos - but it was a rubbish song being played when I went in there so and I was expecting magic after reading a / your report and it was far from magic for me

 

[Thompsonuxb]

It is, indeed, all about your inexperience.  A properly integrated sub-sat can be blindingly good, provided the manufacturer really knows what they are doing. ?

I think that's the point.

To integrate a sub in a 2 channel set up is not an easy task.

Just to get the timing right is difficult. Not saying it's not possible just that floorstanders do a much better job achieving 'musical' bass.

For once I agree with you

Don't panic, it gets easier to do with time..... ;D

 

[SteveR750]

It is, indeed, all about your inexperience. A properly integrated sub-sat can be blindingly good, provided the manufacturer really knows what they are doing.

I think that's the point.

To integrate a sub in a 2 channel set up is not an easy task.

Just to get the timing right is difficult. Not saying it's not possible just that floorstanders do a much better job achieving 'musical' bass.

For once I agree with you

Don't panic, it gets easier to do with time..... ;D

And it was going so well....

 

[Craig M.]

As some of the others have said, it is possible to get a sub/sat combination that sounds just as good as a pair of floorstanders, you just need a sub that can 'keep up' with the speakers. I have heard subs that completely fail at providing anything other than a slow, boomy bass.

Pro's of a sub would be the ability to 'tune' the bass to the room to an extent, through positioning and crossover/level adjustments.

Con's would be having to accomodate a large, heavy box, and the extra cabling. Also there is the possibility that you might set it up badly, and end up with poor sound.

If you have the room to accomodate one, and can be flexible about positioning, excellent results can be had - you just need a good enough sub. I have floorstanders now and had a sub/standmount set up before that, the transition from the sub to the speakers was seamless, you could only tell sound was coming from the sub when you knew the bass was too low for the speakers to play, and so it had to be coming from the sub.