Why do we buy tower speakers? (1 Viewer)

[Marty M]

I can't speak for we, but I can speak for me. I purchased floorstanding speakers because of the stand issue. When you factor in the price of good stands for comporable bookshelf speakers, you or we can spend as much as a floorstanding speaker.

 

[Chris PC]

Charles JP,
Thats another really good reason to buy towers. No matter what you do, if you set your fronts to small, they should really be able to go an octave below that crossover. If I used PSB Image 2B's, I would be stuck with a 100 hz crossover, cause the 2B's only went to 49 hz. Unless!! Unless I set the 2 B's to LARGE and set the subwoofer crosover to 50 hz. In room, it wouldn't work so well cause my subwoofers crossover only goes down to 50 hz. Now, had I bought 3LR's that are flat to 55hz, then running those LARGE and setting the subwoofer to 50-55hz might actually work ok. Interesting thing to try.......but back to the issue at hand....
The coolness of tower speakers. All I gotta say is, I love all those drivers. My 6T's go to 32 hz but thats fine cause I would be happy with a 60-70 hz crossover using SMALL setting. Of course, thats if I actually had REAL bass management! I would be interested to see what my system would sound like if I set the 6T's to LARGE and crossed over my subwoofer below my towers natural rolloff, say 25-30 hz. The subwoofer would really just be filling in the BOTTOM end

 

[Charles J P]

No matter what you do, if you set your fronts to small, they should really be able to go an octave below that crossover.

-- Yep, and you and I arent the first to say so.

 

[BruceD]

I agree with both Charles and Chris on the tower speaker's ability to cleanly produce output a full octave below the selected xover frequency, even when selecting to run mains as small in an HT setup.

The key item to remember is that xovers are like ski slopes and not cliffs (gradual vs. immediate drop-off).

I selected my mains because I liked their sound the best, period.

I took my time to carefully measure, listen, and blend an M&K sub with my Dynaudio Contour 2.8 tower mains (-3dB @32Hz), and I found a 60Hz xover offered the smoothest integration between mains and sub, even with 2-channel music. I use a separate active electronic xover where I can change the xover frequency.

 

[Chris PC]

Bruce D,
Thats what I'd like to do ultimately. I want to find a good 5 channel amp (Marantz MM9000) and maybe use the Outlaw ICBM or a similar xover inbetween my SR6200 and the MM9000. Perhaps later get an Outlaw950? Who knows. Another option would be to sell or trade my SR6200 for a receiver with better bass management, OR at least one which has a MAIN-OUT/MAIN-IN loop which I could use to insert a crossover.
Like I said though, I'm curious what my setup would sound like if I left my fronts LARGE and inserted a crossover in between my receiver and my subwoofer which would crossover below my towers lower limit of 24-26 hz. It would certainly limit the subwoofer, but I think the blend would give me a good idea of what I would hear if I crossed over my towers and subwoofer at 60-70 hz rather than the 100 hz.
Anyways.....these are the things you can do with towers..but like I said, you could just as easily use bookshelfs and run them LARGE and just blend your subwoofer crossover to fill in the bottom end. Any bookshelf that goes to 60hz, 70 hz or as low as 45hz would do the trick. If I were to go that route, I'd choose a bookshelf that went to 50-60hz.
Difference? With towers, you can remove the subwoofer and have good bass vs much less bass with bookshelfs. Its a matter of flexibility and mood

 

[KeithR]

If just for ht there is no good reason (see thread at AVS on this for heated debate). I agree with John Kotches and the writers of HTHifi...the reason people do have towers in HT is because there sub(s) aren't up to snuff. There just is no reason to run towers large with dual subs. If you say it sounds "fuller" then your sub just isn't up to par. Dynamics can be just as good on monitors, and monitors kill towers on soundstage/imaging. Also, they are simpler, easier to design crossovers for, etc.

A great monitor/sub combo will have seamless transition, and you will save some money.

Also, some monitors are great for music---only pipe organ music has much below 40hz. My Dyns go below 40hz with ease...it will beat some floorstanders bass-wise.

Besides, I can't find a good floorstander under 5k that has seamless transition between its own drivers, so why bother?

 

[BruceD]

Also, some monitors are great for music---only pipe organ music has much below 40hz. My Dyns go below 40hz with ease...it will beat some floorstanders bass-wise.

Besides, I can't find a good floorstander under 5k that has seamless transition between its own drivers, so why bother?

Well I guess my thinking was influenced by my auditioning the 2-way Dynaudio Contour 1.3MkII monitors at the same time I bought my 2-way Dynaudiuo 2.8 towers (the 2.8 tower has the Confidence Esotar tweater and a passive radiator instead of a bass reflex port).

I simply liked the 2.8 towers better than the 1.3 monitors because of the smoother bass, yet my imaging is still phenomenal.

Crossing the 2.8 towers with a single very low distortion sub @60Hz, gave a real solid foundation to the bass that just isn't possible with most main speakers by themselves.

I actually have this system running through a 2-channel preamp, with the HT processor L&R outputs feeding an AUX input.

I define the processor's main L&R as large and sub=no so all bass goes to main L&R.

 

[rodneyH]

why do monitors have better soundstage???reportadly

 

[Jim A. Banville]

why do monitors have better soundstage???

Their small size. It allows more "breathing room" on all sides of the speaker for the soundwaves to propogate in.

While I use towers, I think it is best to use bookshelf or mini-monitor designs (when using a sub) that rapidly fall off just below the xover frequency with the sub. Why? The less the main speaker and the sub interact over the same frequencies outside of the xover frequency, the better. Even with my towers set to small, they still affect the bass that the sub puts out well below the xover frequency. This is easy to see by measuring the frequency response of the mains and sub separately, and then measuring the combo. Unless the mains and sub are in perfect phase over the entire area that they interact, they will negatively alter the combined frequency response. Unfortunately the 0/180 phase switches common on most subs isn't enough, and often room placement of the mains and sub can't be "perfect".

Now, why do I use towers? Because (1)I LOVE the sound of bipolar Mirage speakers, (2)the Mirage OM-10's are a Stereophile Guide to HT recommended component, and (3) they were discontinued and HALF price at $600/pair!

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Anyone that says using a Sub/Sat/MiniMonitor/Bookshelf for

mains is only stating an opinion. You will never see an official

answer one way or the other simply because it is all personal

taste.

If you were to ask my honest opinion I would reply that I

feel Mini Mons,Sats and Bookshelf's were created for W.A.F.

 

[Mike Strassburg]

Why does everyone think that setting their towers to "small" kills all the bass?? It's not like you're totally disconnecting the woofers.

I have a set of Klipsch KLF-30's with dual 12's. As a test I set them to small and unplugged my sub. Cranked various CD's and demo'd some DVD's....Guess what....they still had awesome bass!!

I'm guessing that "most" music doesn't have bass that goes below the 80hz crossover point. Same with lots of the bass in movies. Obviously the LFE stuff was lost, but this was only a test.

I've also tried them as Large and Large + LFE. Didn't really notice any difference, so I left them at Small.

JMHO......Mike

 

[David Judah]

Having owned 2 way bookshelves and 2.5 way & 3 way towers, I prefer the towers, especially the three ways because it frees up the midrange driver from having to reproduce the low frequencies right above the receiver/pre's crossover.
Anyone concerned about tower drivers not blending well has not heard good towers, IMO, and that is one reason why the myth of bookshelves having better imaging/soundstage is perpetuated.
DJ

 

[JerryW]

Anyone concerned about tower drivers not blending well has not heard good towers, IMO, and that is one reason why the myth of bookshelves having better imaging/soundstage is perpetuated.

Amen! I totally agree. A great set of towers, properly calibrated, are nigh impossible to beat. I use the RABOS system that came with my Infinity Prelude MTS mains and my response values are flat as a board (+/-3dB) from 20-100Hz. True, they aren't the greatest below 20Hz but that's what a good sub is for. My big ole Shiva handles all the LFE action and really rumbles the joint down to about 12Hz. The way I look at it, it's the best of both worlds.

 

[Charles J P]

Their small size. It allows more "breathing room" on all sides of the speaker for the soundwaves to propogate in.

This was more of an issue years ago. Why do you think towers usually have such narrow baffles now. My dads floor standing speakers from the 1970s where about 2 feet wide, 3 feet tall, and maybe 15-17 inches deep. I'm sure there was a ton of difraction from the baffle. Now, I think my Paradigm monitor 7s have the same width baffle as the mini monitors, if not, its very close. And, I challange all people here to conduct Mike Strassburg's test. I think some people dont even know what frequencies they would consider bassy really are number wise. Also, as much as you think you understand a crossover on paper, listen to one functioning.

 

[Brett DiMichele]

I understand how a crossover functions on paper and implemented.

I simply can not listen to my mains on small "without" a

dedicated sub (which I do not have). I am sure any sane

speaker enthusiast would say "well duh" because most music

does dip down below 80Hz.

Running my Mains as large and running tone sweeps *(bass cd's)*

it's amazing how low they do go..

I always hear people saying towers bass response is boomy

and they don't go that low.. Yadda Yadda. I must either be

an expert at positioning or I actualy do have a good set of

mains. Because my AR9's go all the way down even below the

Manufacturers stated spec of 32Hz and indipendanty tested

spec of 32Hz @ 100DB. They extend clean down into the 20's

with very audible and house shaking output I might add.

Like I said before I must have the positioned dead balls on.

Beleive it or not I run a 3.0 Cu Ft Sealed enclosure in my

car with 2 12" RF Series 1's drawing nearly 400 watts Mono

RMS wired Parallel/Bridged at 2Ohm and my AR9's with 10"

Free Air suckling on a way underpowered Onk 787 Receiver (100WPC)

absolutely hits harder than my car! And is less "boomy" at

the same time.

Go fig..

 

[Michael R Price]

True. Well designed towers nowadays have thinner (well, as thin as possible while still accomodating the woofers) baffles to reduce diffraction effects. And rounded corners too. So towers can probably have imaging very close to a good minimonitor.
Besides, what good is setting a speaker to small if it can't deliver clean midbass in the 60-80Hz range anyway? Especially at reference level this might be a problem for minimonitors.
If I were spending money on speakers again... I'd do DIY so towers didn't cost any more than bookshelfs. But seriously, I do think that sat/sub is a better economical option for most people since speaker companies inflate the price of their larger towers which often don't sound any better than the bookshelf counterpart. Especially if your sub is good.
However, stands are expensive and then there's also the 'tip over' factor. So this isn't a black and white issue.

 

[Max Knight]

I have to question the idea that a bookshelf has more "breathing room" than a floor stander. From my experience, most bookshelves are not significantly (not by more than a few inches anyway) different in dimensions from a floorstander in any direction other than height. There are of course exceptions, especially when you get into the really huge 5' floorstanders, but on the whole I don't think this is a legitimate argument. A properly set up speaker will have all the breathing room it needs. If you deny your speakers breathing room, they are not set up correctly, and thus you can't really compare them to a different set of properly positioned speakers.

I used to think that there was no point in floor standing speakers provided that you used a sub. But over time I've come to realize that sound isn't simply a matter of cut offs and reported frequency ranges. In my experience (and price range) I've found floor standing speakers to give smoother more cohesive sound than bookshelves, even when paired with a good sub (my reference sub is an SVS 25-31 w/ 240 watts of monoblock amplification).

This is not to say that there are not fantastic bookshelf speakers out there. The Red Rose Music R3's beat the pants off many floor standing speakers in and above their price range (about $3500). But what really matters is what you hear in your own home. In my home, it's going to be floorstanders + sub until a listening experience convinces me otherwise.

 

[Jim A. Banville]

Anyone concerned about tower drivers not blending well has not heard good towers, IMO, and that is one reason why the myth of bookshelves having better imaging/soundstage is perpetuated.

"Blending" is about matching xover frequency and the phase of the frequencies in the area around that frequency, not imaging or soundstage. The 0/180 phase switch on most subs is woefully inadequate in many cases where speakers can't be placed "anywhere" in a room, such as a living room that people must LIVE in. Many people are advised to simply choose the "0" or "180" position on the phase switch depending on which gives more bass, which is "fine", but definitely not the end all, be all of "blending" a sub with mains. If you do a detailed frequency response of your mains and sub separately, followed up by one of the combination of the two interacting with one another, you may very well see, as I have, that when using a tower speaker that goes deep in the bass region (about 30Hz for my towers), even when set to small, are still quite audible in the area well below the sub xover frequency, and further study would probably show that even when using the "best" phase position of the sub, the sub and mains main be "phase coupled" at one frequency, but not another, which can cause cancellation. My towers actually start to drop off below the 80Hz high pass xover frequency from my receiver when set to "small" as they should, but then they climb right back up to a peak that is possibly due to a "room mode" that I can't seem to shake given the limited positions I can place the speakers in whilst in a living room used by the rest of the family. Now, this overlapping of frequncies created by both the mains and sub outputing sound at the same frequncies is "bad" because the sub and mains aren't phase coupled at all those frequencies. Point is, if they were bookshelf designs that "naturally" rolled off at about 80 Hz, I'd most likely get a much better blend. In my case, the "180" position is "worse" for the 80Hz xover frequency because the mains and sub are out-of-phase at 80Hz, but are actually in-phase at the frequncies below 80Hz where the mains are still audible - this is easy to see on detailed frequncy response measurments. The "0" position is best for the 80Hz over frequency, as this gives the "most bass" at 80Hz, but as you may have predicted from the previous sentence, the sub and mains are slightly out-of-phase at frequncies below the 80Hz xover frequency. All this simply means that due to my tower style mains low frequncy ouput, even when set to small, I get nasty interactions that most likely wouldn't occur if (a)the receiver's high pass xover on the mains was "steeper" (pretty rare, I believe), or (b)if my main speakers and subwoofer could be placed "perfectly" and were "perfectly" in-phase with each other (pretty hard to accomplish) , or (c)if I was using a bookshelf design that dropped off "naturally" right at the xover frequency (the simplest and most straight forward approach, in my opinion).

 

[David Judah]

Jim, I was talking about blending drivers within the speaker itself, not blending with a subwoofer.

There is certainly some merit to what you are saying, and it is the reason many of us spend quite a bit of time on placement.

In my experience there is more to be lost(within a wider range of frequencies)above the crossover point than gained below the crossover with bookshelves.

 

[BruceD]

In my experience there is more to be lost(within a wider range of frequencies)above the crossover point than gained below the crossover with bookshelves.

I tend to agree with this, and actually find that relieving my main towers of trying to reproduce the lowest 2-octaves actually improves the mid-bass to mid-range clarity because of less IM distortion. This is caused by a single woofer driver not having to try to reproduce too many frequencies at the same time, at least for my 2-way tower mains.

I do use a symmetrical active 4th order L-R electronic crossover from mains to L+R summed mono sub.