Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Am I losing Midrange by setting my front speakers to "Small" ?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
9 replies to this topic

#1 of 10 OFFLINE   Kevin*Harley

Kevin*Harley

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 137 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 15 2003

Posted April 03 2003 - 09:07 AM

I have Monitor Audio Silver S8’s ( 32Hz-30kHz ) and a Velodyne HGS-15. Running them with a Denon 3803. I was instructed to set the speakers to “Large” and had the cross over at 80.

Last night while listening to LOTR I experimented back and forth from “Small” to “Large”. Bass was noticeably better with fronts on “Small” .

If I keep the fronts on this setting am I going to lose midrange while listening to music in 2 channels?

#2 of 10 OFFLINE   Dustin B

Dustin B

    Producer



  • 3,128 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2001

Posted April 03 2003 - 10:57 AM

You shouldn't be if things are setup properly.

http://www.hometheat....rs-9-2002.html
Constant Area Screen - The Only Way To Go

My Home Theatre Page

#3 of 10 OFFLINE   BruceD

BruceD

    Screenwriter



  • 1,223 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 12 1999

Posted April 03 2003 - 11:32 AM

Actually, I found that the mid-range can actually improve by letting the sub do the bass to mid-bass. This also gives the bass a stronger foundation.

This is because IM distotion is generated by drivers trying to do both bass and mid-range at the same time.

Relieve the drivers of the lower bass and they can do a better job with the mid-range.

Obviously, this depends on the driver compliment (2-way, 3-way, or 4-way) and type of speakers you have.

#4 of 10 OFFLINE   Kevin*Harley

Kevin*Harley

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 137 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 15 2003

Posted April 03 2003 - 12:40 PM

Great article. Thanks!

I recently put my system together and articles like that would be incredibly beneficial.

Is there a favorite/popular place where I can find more articles?

#5 of 10 OFFLINE   Richard Burzynski

Richard Burzynski

    Second Unit



  • 471 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted April 03 2003 - 01:24 PM

What Bruce said - midrange should be BETTER if you set them to small.

Rich B.

#6 of 10 OFFLINE   Dustin B

Dustin B

    Producer



  • 3,128 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2001

Posted April 03 2003 - 02:06 PM

This post has a quote of the post that article sort of grew out of.

http://www.hometheat....537#post739537

There are a bunch more on Secrets of HiFi as well:

http://www.hometheat...dex_essays.html

This is good reading too:

http://www.harman.co...ticleId=default

Mise well plug my contributions to the Primer as well :P)

http://www.hometheat....124#post517124

http://www.hometheat....602#post523602

Some of the primer isn't very good, but some of it is also very good.
Constant Area Screen - The Only Way To Go

My Home Theatre Page

#7 of 10 OFFLINE   RobWil

RobWil

    Supporting Actor



  • 733 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 17 2003

Posted April 04 2003 - 10:34 AM

I have fairly good size mains...Klipsch KG5.2's w/ a frequency response of around 34Hz-20kHz. I recently got an Infinity IL120S sub and a new receiver which allowed the 'Large' and 'Small' settings. Before getting the sub properly positioned and calibrated I liked the sound of music using the 'Large' setting much better. However, after crawling around on all fours (per a speaker positioning article found here) to find the optimal spot for the sub, in addition to calibrating it with the RABOS kit I received last night, I must say that I now prefer the 'Small' setting for music. I'm assuming that a mis-placed and/or uncalibrated sub can make all the difference in the world.
that's my story and I'm stickin' to it!

#8 of 10 OFFLINE   Arron H

Arron H

    Second Unit



  • 333 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 17 2002

Posted April 05 2003 - 03:55 AM

Quote:
In the majority of surround sound processors and receivers, FULL RANGE copies of all channels set to "Small" are combined together with the LFE channel, and the sum is low-passed. Think about that. Strictly speaking, any* such processor with a sub/sat crossover frequency set lower than 120 Hz is "discarding" the upper end of the LFE channel. THX units are NOT exempt from this. With the standard THX 80 Hz 4th order crossover, the top of the LFE channel gets chucked.



Quote:
Don't panic. This has been going on since day one, and virtually nobody has noticed . . . with good reason. I've said many times before, and I will say it again: THX did not pull their crossover out of thin air. It is the product of much development, and, when used in concert with THX speakers (or others which exhibit the correct roll-off), represents the best overall compromise of minimizing localization, extending dynamic range, and as it turns out, minimizing LFE truncation. When Dolby Digital was coming to the consumer marketplace, THX looked at an inordinate number of modern 5.1 soundtracks and guess what they found in the LFE channel: not much at all in the region of 80 Hz - 120 Hz, making their original choice of 80Hz rather fortuitous. Dolby Digital's LFE channel has a digital brick wall at 120 Hz, not a roll-off, so content creators almost always roll-off their stuff, usually somewhere around 80 Hz. Therefore, chucking the top band of the LFE is no big deal but the argument here is that a standard SSP crossover set much lower than 80Hz or so may actually be costing you bass content.


Does it make any sense to set the crossover on sub at 80hz and the crossover on the receiver at 80hz? What potential advantages or disadvantages might there be? It doesn't look like you lose any LFE, at least according to this quote.

#9 of 10 OFFLINE   Dustin B

Dustin B

    Producer



  • 3,128 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2001

Posted April 05 2003 - 04:20 AM

The problem with that isn't that you are losing LFE, the problem with that is you have two different lowpass filters interacting with each. Can be a good thing if designed for, but I don't think the manufacturer of your sub plate amp and your processor did the design work together. The safe bet is to defeat your plate amp crossover if possible, if not turn it as high as it will go to get it out of the way.
Constant Area Screen - The Only Way To Go

My Home Theatre Page

#10 of 10 OFFLINE   Arron H

Arron H

    Second Unit



  • 333 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 17 2002

Posted April 05 2003 - 05:18 AM

I have a Rava and have always had the crossover on it as high as it will go in order to get it out of the way. I was kind of curious about messing with the plate amp crossover because I went back and looked at the Rava literature which indicates:

Quote:
Frequency response measured with the crossover set to 80 Hz, and gain set to yield an average 85 dB SPL from 30 Hz to 90 Hz.


The response curve looks preety flat from 30-90 using an 80hz crossover on the plate amp (sorry, I'm not sure how to display the curve from Adire's website). Also, I'm not sure how Adire would have set the crossover on their pre/pro or receiver. I guess I'll just stick with what has been working Posted Image





Forum Nav Content I Follow