Sheesh. You guys thought i was long-winded ???
Personally, i disagree with a LOT of what Exertfluffer has stated concerning full range mains, surrounds and powered subs. "Most" commercially built powered subs perform less than optimally for multiple reasons and should be avoided. They are nothing more than a compromise and a convenience for those that aren't willing to do things "right" and / or want to keep things simple / are on a budget. There are exceptions to this rule, but for what these "exceptional" powered subwoofers cost, you could easily buy a passive sub, active crossover and a better quality amp. Most manufacturers charge a LOT for that "convenience factor", especially when maintaining high levels of quality through-out the entire design.
As to some of the other conversations here, my theory is that one should buy speakers that are suited for the task at hand. That is, IF one wants to do things "most correct" or "optimally". While i realize that most folks don't have the space for this and have to compromise / blend their 2 channel & HT systems together, I didn't do that and don't recommend it if at all possible.
I think that Vedric and i are on the same page. That is, my mains are down about 3 dB's in the low 20 Hz range. My surrounds make it down to the high 20 Hz range due to slightly smaller woofers and a slightly smaller cabinet. I mention this because El brings up a very valid point, but one that doesn't apply to my system. That is, since much of what we are hearing is voice reproduction in movies, the most important part of sound reproduction for an HT system would be the midrange. If the woofer is doing double duty as the lower and / or upper midrange, having it try to reproduce deep bass will surely "muddle things up". That is why i bought and run four-way speakers i.e. woofers, lower midrange, upper midrange, tweeter for the mains and surrounds.
In a design such as what i'm using, all the bass that requires any type of excursion is handled by dual woofers. Using this approach, the other drivers can do their thing over a narrower bandwidth. Not only does this reduce the required excursion from each of the other drivers, it lowers distortion, increases power handling, improves transient response and raises the max spl of the system. It is a "win-win" situation and there is no loss of resolution due to having the mains cover the full bandwidth.
Then again, every situation is different and you have to build / design for that installation and / or work with what you already have. Given that most people think of HT as being BIG "booms" and high spl tire screeching, the market has been flooded with highly efficient, low cost products that measure and perform poorly but sound "exciting". If that is what one is looking for, a cheap but effective system can be easily built for not that much money. Personally, i wouldn't take that approach, but there are tons of people out there that are doing just that. Sean
>
Personally, i disagree with a LOT of what Exertfluffer has stated concerning full range mains, surrounds and powered subs. "Most" commercially built powered subs perform less than optimally for multiple reasons and should be avoided. They are nothing more than a compromise and a convenience for those that aren't willing to do things "right" and / or want to keep things simple / are on a budget. There are exceptions to this rule, but for what these "exceptional" powered subwoofers cost, you could easily buy a passive sub, active crossover and a better quality amp. Most manufacturers charge a LOT for that "convenience factor", especially when maintaining high levels of quality through-out the entire design.
As to some of the other conversations here, my theory is that one should buy speakers that are suited for the task at hand. That is, IF one wants to do things "most correct" or "optimally". While i realize that most folks don't have the space for this and have to compromise / blend their 2 channel & HT systems together, I didn't do that and don't recommend it if at all possible.
I think that Vedric and i are on the same page. That is, my mains are down about 3 dB's in the low 20 Hz range. My surrounds make it down to the high 20 Hz range due to slightly smaller woofers and a slightly smaller cabinet. I mention this because El brings up a very valid point, but one that doesn't apply to my system. That is, since much of what we are hearing is voice reproduction in movies, the most important part of sound reproduction for an HT system would be the midrange. If the woofer is doing double duty as the lower and / or upper midrange, having it try to reproduce deep bass will surely "muddle things up". That is why i bought and run four-way speakers i.e. woofers, lower midrange, upper midrange, tweeter for the mains and surrounds.
In a design such as what i'm using, all the bass that requires any type of excursion is handled by dual woofers. Using this approach, the other drivers can do their thing over a narrower bandwidth. Not only does this reduce the required excursion from each of the other drivers, it lowers distortion, increases power handling, improves transient response and raises the max spl of the system. It is a "win-win" situation and there is no loss of resolution due to having the mains cover the full bandwidth.
Then again, every situation is different and you have to build / design for that installation and / or work with what you already have. Given that most people think of HT as being BIG "booms" and high spl tire screeching, the market has been flooded with highly efficient, low cost products that measure and perform poorly but sound "exciting". If that is what one is looking for, a cheap but effective system can be easily built for not that much money. Personally, i wouldn't take that approach, but there are tons of people out there that are doing just that. Sean
>