Bookshelf v. Floorstanding

F1nut

Originally posted by audiobliss


You have to compares similar equipment, here........

I'll start off with an example that compare my (price-wise) above-average floorstanders to a (price-wise) average sub. My Klipsch RF-35 towers, with a price tag of $1k/pair, have a lower -3db limit of 37Hz. HSU's STF-2 that costs $400 has a lower -3db limit of (somebody help me out here, I'm not sure if this is right....) 25Hz. Hmm...seems the sub is creating a lot more bass than the floorstanders.....

My 2.3TL's cost me 1k, the Plat's were $800.00, so we're in the same range, price wise. I think we're getting a little nit picky here because if someone says they can tell the difference between 25Hz and 27Hz I'll tell them they are a liar. In fact, most music doesn't drop below 40Hz, maybe 30Hz at the most. Anything below 20Hz can't be heard, only felt. I also get the feeling that some of you are thinking along the lines of HT applications and not music. I know Doro doesn't use a sub with his 2 channel set up and gets plenty of musical bass from his Polk's. That brings up another point, musicality. It doesn't matter how low the bass gets if it's not musical and from my experience it's a rare sub that gets that right.

F1nut

MacLeod,

I see that you've indicated a preference for bookshelf speakers, so I'd like to suggest you take a look at the NHT SB-3.

http://www.nhthifi.com/2004/products/product_detail.asp?ProductLineID=2&ProductID=13

They aren't very efficient (86dB), but are 8 ohm loads, so any receiver can drive them, just not to loud levels. They are a sealed design, no ports, so the bass is tight.

dorokusai

I agree, I don't use a sub and am very happy in the 2CH arena, just like you...but to equate the subwoofer output to the frequency response of an SDA is a little odd.

The design and actual output are two totally different animals.

The day any SDA drops a pressure wave at 20hz, like a subwoofer can, will be the day. Never going to happen. Hardcore subwoofers have an extremely hard time dropping <15hz....at reference volume...a 1.2TL would be about as powerful as a chick farting.

A frequency response is just that, what it is capable of.....not the actual response curve.

SDA's can have tight and immediate impact in the lower regions, it's fantastic, but the total lower response is far from the subwoofer class.

I mean a real subwoofer, not a Polk subwoofer.

Loud &amp; Clear

Originally posted by dorokusai
Hardcore subwoofers have an extremely hard time dropping <15hz....at reference volume...a 1.2TL would be about as powerful as a chick farting.

You know, I used to date a very attractive young lady. Very cute and demure. I'll tell you though, it wasn't too terribly long into our romance that she became comfortable enough to put me into the Pants Waffling Club, if you know what I'm saying.

Chicks can absolutely blast a killer ****, I know this to be true. And unlike guys who will do it for effect and laugh, carry on and such, she would do it and just continue on like nothing had happened ... just keep making soup or switch channels on the television.

I got a nice chuckle from the metaphor in your post, and perhaps I should have left it at that, but I thought it necessary to set the record straight lest anyone have any doubts.

VR3

Jesse,
You paid that USED - they didn't cost that new...

And not to mention if the 2.3tl was available NOW it would be like what? 7 grand a pair new? lol

I dont have any clue about the Carvers though....

L&C,
that was dang funny...lol

reeltrouble1

The 20 hz wave is what? 56 ft long or so, when you get below 80 hz which is the bottom two octaves. You need diaphrams in the 12" or bigger range to make these sound waves effectively, never seen a bookshelf with a cabinet that big, maybe they do exsist. You need lots of power to try and control the mass of the diaphram compared to the movement in makes. Kind of like the power needed to open a heavy steel door compared to a window shutter, very hard to be precise with opening that heavy door a certain distance. Using a small cone to produce bass is akin to digging a grave by hand, you can do it but not very efficiently, use a big powered shovel and you are done in a snap but difficult to effectively move the shovel in precise increments.

I want my musical bass woofer in the same cabinet with the other drivers, crossover's matched and tuned by the maufacturer for a smooth response. A response down to 35 hz makes me pretty happy, to 27 hz even better since this covers the full keyboard. Ok so I need 1.2's or better. Given only one choice I take the compromises of the floorstander, I get excellent placement of instruments within the three-dimensional soundfield along with deep powerful bass.

jdhdiggs

Sorry reel, while I agree with the speaker choice, how you got there was a bit wrong with the analogy:

SPL = displacement and most speakers are the most linear close to their resting position. Therefore, a large, properly motored large speaker will be more accurate since it would not have to move as far or as fast to produce the same SPL at a particular Hz.

Using your example: If the shutter weighs 5lbs and you can only lift 5, your not going to be very accurate or fast. A steel door weighing 200lbs and you can move 1000lbs, you will be very accurate and fast. It's not just size and weight but also motor strength as well as the linearity of the motor.

Now what about tweets and mid woofs? That's a rigidness and wave propigation issue not present in the last three octaves. Also, cost/size is a major factor.

As for the SDA and other speaker ratings below 30Hz, they dont say how loud the speaker is going at that volume. Granted I have the tiny SDA's but I ran a test with the bass limiter on the reciever. The SDA 1B against the SVS... no contest. The SDA's got to -30db on the scale before they started to look like they might clip. At 0, the SVS wasn't even breaking a sweat. This wasn't a super low test signal either, ~45 Hz or so. Oh, and the SDA's had 350W/channel so the had plenty of power. They are different beasts (floorstanders vs subs)


One day I will integrate the SDA's and the SVS and see how it works, just gotta get a dang house.

reeltrouble1

Hi Jd,

Hehehe thanks for your insight cuz we are getting to the crux, no I am correct in my analogy's generalities, you are discounting the mass to air movement ratio of the radiating surface in your response, however, you have nailed the power issue requirement precisely and the bass speaker will be more accurate than a mid in reproducing these low freq. waves that is why you need it, however, the mid and tweet are more accurate in producing their assigned wavelenghts than the bass since they have less surface area to move. I never said how much power was available to open the shutter you did. We may very well be saying the same thing in the end from different perspectives. Its just that given a power source it is easier to wave a piece of paper back and forth than it is a steel door.

RT1

dorokusai

The point is, and I agree with JD, is that the SDA while great, cannot reproduce the low end like a subwoofer is able....that's all I'm saying. The SDA is probably 10-12db down at the very low end, and that's useless.

The bass reproduced by an SDA can be hard-on inspiring, but it isn't a subwoofer and vice versa.

It's a moot argument. Do we really have to get specific? Steel door....paper....dilithium crystals....harmonically balanced poppycock....athlete's foot....sheesh

jdhdiggs

42!

reeltrouble1

both of you need to go back to work, and yes the SVS can defintely go lower than the SDA.

Doro i am sorry you have a rash on your foot.

dorokusai

I never said it was on my foot......

MacLeod

$300 for stands? :eek:

If I were poopin' hundred dollar bills I wouldnt pay $300 for stands.

The stands Im using for my surround speakers right now were $30 at Radio Shack for the pair.

Jesus P. God! Why would a stand need to cost $300???

VR3

Because people will pay for it, atleast - thats how I see it..

something about no vibrations or something or another

MacLeod

Oh please! Im quite guilty of buying **** I dont need jsut cause it might make a difference but I will never conced that a $300 set of stands will sound any better than my $30 set from Radio Shack.

2+2

Expensive stands are often much heavier and fillable with buckshot to weigh it down more. Sonic improvements aside, they reduce the likelihood of tipping.....especially if you have children in the house.

MacLeod

Oh I agree that not all stands are created equally but $300?! Screw buckshot, you could buy a couple shotguns with that!

scottnbnj

experiment with height with your gear in your room before buying expensive stands.

)

MacLeod

Well wont most good stands be height adjustable?

okiepolkie

Just build your own stands. Oak pillars filled with sand and mahogany bases. Originally built for my RT5's, but now hold my LSi7's. They are very sturdy, but I'll still come up with somewhere else to put them when the little one leans to walk.

VR3

4 3" PVC pipes will hold a large amount of weight dumped in it...

dorokusai

I fill my underwear with lead shot, it really improves the bass response of my farts.

scottnbnj

yeah,.. well that's not bad for folks that can afford to buy new underwear for each listening session.

)

scottnbnj

Originally posted by MacLeod
Well wont most good stands be height adjustable?

hmmmm,.. *good* mains' stands that are height adjustable. now there's an idea that might work.

i'm gonna give this some thought.

)

dorokusai

On a serious note, I shot load everything.

I have always found improvements in isolation and/or mass loading of components and accesories.

LuSh

Before you all go haywire over stands, try it. If you've never tried it, then don't fault somebody for spending their dough on it. The differences between Radio shack $30 jobbies and the Sanus Foundation stands would be huge.

Its more about the ability of the stand to isolate the speaker so the speaker doesn't waste energy sending sound down the spine of the stand. Bass response and imaging are two critical areas which will improve with proper stands.

Price doesn't always dictate the stands value. If you can DIY and know how to make a proper design then you can save some bread. The Sanus foundation stands are "budget" minded...I could show you stands costing upwards of $1k. But that's not the point, the point is to make sure you maximize the speakers performance. $30 Radio Shack speakers aren't helping much. At least in a 2 channel setup.

MacLeod

Originally posted by LuSh
Before you all go haywire over stands, try it. If you've never tried it, then don't fault somebody for spending their dough on it.

Relax.

Nobody is going haywire.

Nobody is faulting anybody. If you want to spend $1000 on speaker stands, then good on ya mate. Im just not ever gonna do it.

Mjr7531

They do
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/product/detail/0,,2076_4163_38069_tab=B,00.html?compName=PNA_ProductDetailComponent
I couldn't find their 12" model, theres the next best thing, they used to sell the 12" woofer "bookshelves" at CC, but discontinued it.

Originally posted by reeltrouble1
The 20 hz wave is what? 56 ft long or so, when you get below 80 hz which is the bottom two octaves. You need diaphrams in the 12" or bigger range to make these sound waves effectively, never seen a bookshelf with a cabinet that big, maybe they do exsist.

F1nut

.....and the best it can muster is 50Hz??? Oh wait, that's right it's a Pioneer.

tryrrthg

If you don't want to spend high dollar on stands but still want something solid, try building some DIY stands. I built some based on this design but I altered it a bit to suit my needs. My stands are VERY stable and weigh about 50-60 pounds when they're filled with sand. I really like the way the turned out, and they only cost me about $75 or so. I might upgrade to a "better" stand at some point but not until all my components are squared away.

Construction Pics

Pictures: