fx500 question

chefsdm

I am driving rt800's (main), a cs400 (center) and fx500's (surround) with a sony strv555es reciever. The sony manual calls for surrounds to be "large" if possible, yet the fx manual states that they should be set to "small". My ears like the large setting, but I don't want to damage the speakers. I don't have a sub yet, the room is fairly small and the fx's are mounted behind the listening position, about 8 feet from the floor and are set to dipole. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks!

TroyD

You won't damage the speakers by setting them to large. I say whatever sounds best to you, run with it.

Troy

Strong Bad

Go for it! Set them to large and have fun. You won't hurt them unless you drive your amp to distorted levels, then it won't matter what they're set to.

Hmmm...I never tried mine set to large. Always had them at small since I set them up a few years back. Guess I just forgot about that setting. Time to tweak the system!

John

scottvamp

I have a killer dedicated hometheater. I have always gone large on my settings. I have plenty of subwoofer and decided to try them to small. Sometimes my CS400 seemed over powered. What a huge difference! Much fuller sound- nothing sounded over powered. If you have lots of sub- like I do -go small. Use the large setting to compensate if you have a small sud. 2$ LATER

rskarvan

Often times, setting speakers to small (when you have a subwoofer), provides much better sound because low frequencies take lots of power from a typically weakly powered receiver. If receivers could put out REAL power, they'd sound better set to large (its really not the speaker's fault).

A powered subwoofer takes the load off a receiver when you set the speakers to small.

Also, to be fair, speakers operating in a more narrow frequency band sound better than full range. One driver can do it all. But, its better if its not required/asked to.

TroyD

Having tried it both ways, I prefer setting all the speakers set to small as well.

Troy

polkster13

I have the exact same setup except my receiver is the Sony STR-DA50ES which is very similar to yours. I also have a PSW450 sub and have set my surrounds to small. Before I bought the sub, I had them set to large. Of course the only time they have any sound coming from them is when I am either watching a DVD which has surround content or Starz channel 520 when they play movies in 5.1 DD. But even then, I find that many DVD's and movies have very little sound going to the surrounds.

Anyway, IMHO I would use large if you do not have a sub and swith them to small when and if you ever do get a sub.

chefsdm

Thanks to all who answered this question. Now that I know the speakers can handle it, I will leave them set to large at least until I can afford a sub. I am debating between the psw450 and the psw650, any thoughts?:cool:

rskarvan

I have the PSW650 and I often think its not big enough.

I-SIG

My parents have a PSW650 teamed up with some RT55's and aCS350ls (great center speaker). Anyway, I would say for 95% (maybe more) the 650 will do quite nicely. Although I would persoanlly like a bit more "umph" that the 650 provides, I wouldn't have much reason to complain if I were stuck with a 650

On that note, between eBay and whatever sale you might find locally, you could probably encounter a 650 for not too much more than a 450, defintely around $500 or less anyway.

Wes

rskarvan

The PSW650 gets boomy a little too quick.
I've got the SRS 3.1's and the CS400.
Personally, sometimes, I really like lots of bass.
The 3.1's can pound out the low notes on their own quite well (better than the 650). I think the 3.1's are rated to 15 Hz or so. So, for movies, the 650 provides LFE and helps to take the load off my Denon receiver for powering the center and surrounds. Someday, I would consider upgrading to a quality sub (Paradigm Servo 1500) and take the 650 out of the system to perhaps supplement the bass on the monitor 10's (other stereo) - not that they need it.