Smaller speakers in 2.0, 2.0 modified, or 2.1?

Strange I posted here yesterday, but its gone????

I like all the comments. @tonyb hit some key points.

tonyb wrote: »

If your lacking lower level dynamics, there's some other issue going on. Using tone controls simply is an attempt to mask it. Your source, cabling, or impedance issues would be a good place to start.

To set a baseline (bass line lol) that most should be familiar with, lets say the speakers are Polk 5jr's or even 5jr+'s. There is no issue going on, the bass simply rolls off because it is a small speaker. Even at low volumes they don't have the bass of my 1c's or RTA11's.

tonyb wrote: »

The tone controls add noise to your signal which is why most don't use them. If your system isn't too revealing , it wouldn't matter much. The better your system gets, the more present the noise in a signal becomes and more easily heard.

I am thinking crossovers in the 40-80Hz range. This is where a lot of smaller speakers start their roll off. What if I took the the low pass signal, boosted it some, and added it back to the main. Essentially its going through the crossover with a small boost. How is that different from some tone controls? Doesn't a crossover in a 2.1 system add the same noise or maybe more? It has to go through a parametric crossover which often effects the high pass. There are also level controls and phase angle for the low pass. This seems like more electronics than I good quality tone control.

A side note, on the dual subs. I get that you can use a lower power amp on the small speakers, have nice package for the bass woofer, but essentially you built a full range speaker that may or may not be more compact.

PS I did get an audiophile answer, but I would call that solution "fanatic"

Atmosphere may be a better term than tone.

I am having a hard time understanding the difference between crossover circuitry and tone control, or bass boost circuitry in the analog sense. I would think each would introduce noise as they are similar. Depending on the tone control they look similar accept with the tone control the signal is added back to the original.

The "fanatic" audiophile" solution was the small speakers with no crossover. The preamp output was split to the main and subs.Then much work was done to find subs that would blend well with the mains. It started with one sub with only crossover frequency control. He may have even started with a separate crossover and amp. Moving the sub to find the right position and timing. Eventually it became two subs under the speakers, which IMO just became a full range speaker, or a biamped one to be more accurate. It was no longer a bookshelf speaker system.

I was researching tone control circuits and saw some of the phase issues they cause, but I guess there are some that don't cause phase issues and are more like a crossover circuit. I thought one was done by David Hafler that was supposed to keep the phase, be sonically neutral in the center, and unlike others did not cause a bump, but raised all the frequencies above or below a certain target and cutoff slope. I can't seam to find that info now, but that may be why I found the Hafler bass boost better than other tone controls. I've been using it with my 5jr's and M5A's and it really extends their range. It seams they have similar roll off points, but different rates. Once I get a good sub, I'll have to compare it with its own crossover, and the Parasound crossover.

I've also wondered how you mesh passives with subs and try and get the phase right through the blended or crossing frequency range.