Speaker w/F.R. 100hz & Receiver Bass crossover

I'm trying to build up a econd system.
My receiver is NAD 742.

I'm trying to get a 5 speakers package and interested in Kef KHT 2005 or 5005

As I know, for most receivers, you can set your speaker setting as "large" or "small". If set to "small", signal over 80 goes to the sattlelite speakers and signal below 80hz goes to the subwoofer. I heard that the crossover point of 80hz is recommendation by THX.

Anyway, 2005 speakers goes down to 80hz which works out good, but the more expensive 5005 goes down only to 100hz...

so... isn't that a problem? Am I going to miss the signals from 80hz-100hz on 5005???

Divide the length of the longest wall in your listening room into 565. It gives you the lowest frequency your room will accomodate.

For instance, a 10x12 room is good for 565/12=47hz

You want the full frequency range provided: to extend to the 47hz. Some recorded material will have moments below, but it will only cause distrotion in the room and adversly affect all other frequencies.

The point of XO'ing lower frequencies to a larger driver, as from tweeter to midrange, is it is better designed for specific frequencies. At the same time, it relieves the companion drivers from the burdeon of frequencies beyond its range, so each perfroms better in the range it designed for.

In high end audio, one of the goals is to achieve a seamless integration throughout the frequency range. Those that do, tend to be systems with an active, instead of passive, XO (cross-over): a powered unit that resembles a preamp.

If you are interested in really getting into audio as a private party listener, check out http://www.linkwitzlab.com there is a wealth of knowledge on all things audio worthy to be considered a valuable research source.
Both the subwoofer, and the main speakers will produce significant sound beyond their respective crossover points. (The cutoff is gradual). The different LF response specs may just reflect different people writing the spec, and anyway, the difference between 80 and 100 Hz is not a big deal.
Didactically, view your system thread to see my final post. I think that it sums everything up. If others would care to see it, please go there.
20hz makes the difference between say, a 60hz max extension, and a 40hz. There are those who go to great lengths, like integrating subwoofers in the system, to achive that difference, so consider it a big deal indeed.

That is my opinion, and I am sticking to it :-)
Well, currently I have KEF 104/2 which is pretty good speaeker goes down to 55hz.

Recently I added REL Strata III, and yes, it's big difference...
Didactically...I think we are supposed to be talking about the main speakers of a setup using a subwoofer (or two). In this context a spec of 80 Hz vs 100 Hz is not a big deal, especially because the pricing structure of these two speakers from the same maker suggests that the difference is probably only in the published numbers.

You certainly may stick with your opinion, in fact you are stuck with it!
>You certainly may stick with your opinion, in fact you are stuck with it! >

You could have gone all day without saying that :-)
Didactically...Sorry about that. But you did make yourself such a tempting target. It made my day :-)

Feel free to post any damn fool idea that you might have. You will fit right in!
By the way Didactically, for the record, your info regarding figuring the lowest bass frequency a given room may support is incorrect. That is determined by figuring from the "LONGEST DIAGONAL" distance in the room, not the longest wall length!

yep, now that makes more sense...
Diagonal? I'm not so sure. Doesn't the sound wave bounce back and forth between parallel surfaces? Hence recording studios where nothing is parallel to anything else.