FX1000 Large?

wallstreet

Anyone who has the 1000 setup in a DD/DD EX, did you set your 1000 to large?

Dr. Spec

No, I'm running mine on small. The F3 is 50 Hz for these speakers. Hardly low enough to do a full range signal justice.

They do have room filling volume and power in the mid bass and above, certainly, and high passing them at 80 Hz works well for me.

Feel free to try it both ways and report back. Use the U-571 (DTS) depth charge scenes, which I know from personal experience have a full range signal sent to all channels.

I'd do it with the covers off of all your speakers and observe the driver movement on both settings. If the drivers are going bananas on large, I'd worry about it and use small. That was my criteria, anyway.

On small at 80 Hz, driver movement is much less and the speaker sound seems clearer.

The purpose of the surrounds is to provide (obviously) mid range and treble sound effects, not to rock the room with full range bass.

How do you like the 400i as compared to the 350? I see you already have it in your sig, so I figured it was hooked up already!

RuSsMaN

Whats wrong with the driver going bananas? Man, that just struck me funny. I think these speakers would be a waste set to small personally.

But, hey, I'm in the 'large' camp, and you know that.

Cheers,
Russ

wallstreet

Originally posted by Dr. Spec
No, I'm running mine on small. The F3 is 50 Hz for these speakers. Hardly low enough to do a full range signal justice.

They do have room filling volume and power in the mid bass and above, certainly, and high passing them at 80 Hz works well for me.

Feel free to try it both ways and report back. Use the U-571 (DTS) depth charge scenes, which I know from personal experience have a full range signal sent to all channels.

I'd do it with the covers off of all your speakers and observe the driver movement on both settings. If the drivers are going bananas on large, I'd worry about it and use small. That was my criteria, anyway.

On small at 80 Hz, driver movement is much less and the speaker sound seems clearer.

The purpose of the surrounds is to provide (obviously) mid range and treble sound effects, not to rock the room with full range bass.

How do you like the 400i as compared to the 350? I see you already have it in your sig, so I figured it was hooked up already!

I thought the big deal with DD was full range signal to the surrounds. 50 hz is pretty low if you think about it. I had plans last night, so I didn't get a chance to compare yet. I'm going to watch signs tonight, so I'll swap out centers and give it a run through a whole movie.

faster100

you have a 350 for center and a 400 for a rear center?? seems like the 400 would better fit up front.. maybe i'm wrong and not real familiar with the 350, is it bigger then the 400??

wallstreet

Originally posted by faster100
you have a 350 for center and a 400 for a rear center?? seems like the 400 would better fit up front.. maybe i'm wrong and not real familiar with the 350, is it bigger then the 400??

I just bought the 400 yesterday. I'm going to run both through the paces. Winner gets front and center. Loser gets back and center. If the 400 is marginally better, then it loses cuz the 350 looks better than the 400. I'll post results Sunday or Monday.

danger boy

while i don't have the FX/1000s I too would think they are big bad boys and can handle a large setting. I sometimes use FX/300's for surrounds.. which are pretty small and meek.. then other times I use RT800i's for rear surrounds. which of course can handle large setting.

Dr. Spec

IMHO, the big deal with DD and DTS is a discrete signal to 5/6 channels, not a full range signal.

I think a full range signal to anything but the largest and most capable mains or a dedicated subwoofer is a compromise.

Why ask the 1000's to try and reproduce 25 Hz depth charges in the surround channels at loud volumes? They can't - not for extension and not for volume - so why bother.

It just beats on them and runs your amp harder, and you'll be missing out on bass you would otherwise hear and feel with digital bass management and a great subwoofer.

An 80 Hz high pass with a 12 dB/octave or 24 dB/octave filter rate is plenty low enough for me on any surround channel, I don't care how big the speaker is. With Polk, it doesn't get much bigger than the 400i and the f/x1000 and both of them sound better on small to my ears.

danger boy

i enjoy the hell out of fiddeling with the large/small settings.. it's fun, costs nothing.. and maybe just maybe you'll find a tweak setting that will help you out. while i understand Dr. Spec makes good points. very little in HT/audio is a set in stone.

whatever blows your hair back.. may not make sense to other people.. may just work for you. well all have different set ups.. different room acoustics, different hearing, etc.

wallstreet

You've got to remember that Dr. Spec has a subwoofer the size of a tree!:)

Dr. Spec

Originally posted by wallstreet
You've got to remember that Dr. Spec has a subwoofer the size of a tree!:)

I guess the real question to ask yourself (IMO) is this: "Would I buy a subwoofer with a 6-1/2" bass driver and an F3 of 50 Hz?"

If your answer goes something along the lines of: "Well gee, probably not - it doesn't go deep enough and the driver is too small to move a lot of air", then you have your answer.

Because some DVDs DO HAVE a full range, full power signal to all 5/6 channels. If the speaker assigned to that channel isn't a true full range speaker, then you have no valid reason to set it to large. It simply won't play everything present - you will miss out on part of the experience intended by the producer.

Maybe people feel that running the biggest version of Polk's center/surround on large somehow justifies the premium they paid over a smaller version. That IMO is a flawed argument.

I think the logic to apply is that the largest center/surrounds are capable of effortless, room-filling presence at any frequency above 60 Hz or so. They EASILY handle a high pass filter point of 80 Hz (where bass becomes non-directional).

In comparison, a tiny satellite speaker can't play with nearly the same volume and power, and furthermore would struggle badly with a high pass of 80 Hz, and requires more like 120 Hz, where bass is still directional and able to be localized.

RuSsMaN

Bass at 80Hz isn't truely non-directional. It may appear to sound non-directional, but only because of a 'masking' that occurs, with the other speakers playing at 80Hz, or even a half-octave (60Hz) lower.

If you send an 80Hz tone to your sub, with all other speakers off, you should be able to localize it, easily.

Go down an octave lower, to 40Hz, then we can talk TRUELY non-directional bass.

Small, large, it's personal preference. The Polk HT handbook actually has some interesting 'general' rules to follow, as to what setting particular speakers should use.

Cheers,
Russ

RuSsMaN

Actually I just had another thought on small vs large.

The majority of in-home theaters I have visited, the owner typically listens much louder than I do. In short, any given speaker in question running at 90-95db vs 105-110db, small vs large could make huge difference.

I need to pop in an action flick, and get my meter out.

Cheers,
Russ

mantis

having an adjustable crossover in the receiver is key.Being able to change to cut off point is golden.Like Polk spekaers,most of them can play down to 50zh range.Now if you use a 60hz cut off point,the speaker would perform down very close to here it starts to roll off.
My B&K has the ability to adjust my crossover point where I choose in 5db steps.Killer bass management.......gotta love it.

mantis

Hey Russ,
is the LARGE thing a guy thing?Or are you truely thinking aloud?

DAlba

I ran my RT5000p system on large.