PDA

View Full Version : HTM-200 enough?



fooman
08-02-2005, 01:38 PM
Here's my situation..

Moving into a duplex I just bought, so I'm downsizing to a 1000sq/ft apartment. I have a 15'x15' room I want to double as a living room and home theator.

Current plan is:
- use an optoma H31 projector, ceiling mounted
- mount the screen against one wall
- mount 5 HTM-200 and a HSU sub for the 5.1 system. The HTM's would have to be mounted fairly high to avoid doorways, say about 7' 6" up, pointing slightly downwards and toward seating area.

My main motivation is that I watch no television but do love curling up with the ms in front of a good movie. I want a system that's mostly hidden, sounds great for music but still kicks butt for movies.

Q's:
- am I completely crazy to be trying this?
- is ANY system going to sound good in this environment?
- I'm leaning towards HTM-200's because they are not back ported (for wall mounting) plus their smaller size, will the sound disappoint me? (my current setup is 4 Paradigm Titans, CC 200 and PDR 10 sub)
- will that high of mounting still sound ok?

Thanks for any and all comments..

-Nic

curtis
08-02-2005, 02:27 PM
I actually think that would work pretty well if you can angle the speakers.

BGHD
08-02-2005, 04:23 PM
In my little in-home test, the 200s played loud and clean even at high volumes for movies and music. With a sub, not giving much up to the 170.

Kurt C.
08-02-2005, 04:38 PM
Do you have to mount the speakers up high and on the wall? Comparing the frequency response with the 170s, I think placing the HTM-200s at that height is going to force you to make some compromises. For one thing, you won't be able to get an ideal match with a subwoofer unless you set the crossover at about 100 Hz. Unfortunately, that will make it pretty easy to tell where the subwoofer is located. If you can mount them a couple of inches out from the wall, I think the 170s would work better...

fooman
08-03-2005, 10:27 AM
Unfortunately ya, I have some doorways in the way so they need to go above them. Also since the room is serving a dual purpose (and really home theater is the secondary purpose) then I'd like the install to be as stealth as possible. (as stealth as can be with speakers jutting out of the corners that is)

I probably need to mock up the size of the HTM-200's vs the 170's to get a feel for how big the difference is. That said, if the HTM's with a sub equal my current Titans I will be a happy camper, so maybe I should just be happy with that.

Anybody know how that would compare? I certainly am happy with my Titan setup, I just need to go smaller and decided that stepping up to Ascend's would get me the smaller size while still maintaining the sound quality.

-Nic

Kurt C.
08-03-2005, 12:19 PM
I wouldn't rush into making changes from you current system.

There is a good reason why 6.5-inch woofers, like those on your Titans and on the 170s are a favorite--they are big enough to allow the fronts and surrounds to comfortably handle frequencies down to about 80 Hz. If you look at the 200s, the frequency response starts to drop off above 100 Hz. That means you'll have to choose between:

1) Having the subwoofer handle frequencies all the way up to 100 Hz.

or

2) Having a big valley in the frequency response of your system between 80 and 100 Hz.

The first option is bad because sounds in that range will sound like they're starting to come from the center but will then seem to migrate in the direction of the subwoofer. (I'm oversimplifying here, refer to discussion of the Hsu ventriloquest speakers for a detailed account of this problem and Hsu's rather clever method of partially overcoming it.)

You obviously value speakers with flat frequency response or you wouldn't be looking at Ascends, so the second option is obviously bad.

Based on my limited knowledge, I'd say your best options are: a) Do your darnest to fit your Titan's into your space and spend your money on improving the acoustics of the room. b) If they Titans won't fit but the 170s will, buy the 170s. They'll sound noticibly better, especially if you also spend a bit more to improve the acoustics of the room. c) Buy the MTM-200s and locate the subwoofer close to the screen or d) Pick an even less obtrusive system like the Hsu ventriloquest.

davef
08-03-2005, 01:07 PM
Hi Fooman,

I have to agree with Curtis on this one, the HTM-200 should be perfect for your application...

The HTM-200 are -3dB at 87Hz anechoic, place them close to a wall or ceiling and you can expect a slight boost in the 80Hz region making them very close to -3dB at 80Hz.. These are a sealed enclosure and the bass response will roll-off at 12dB/octave versus 24dB/octave versus a ported enclosure.. The HTM-200 are specifically designed for a seamless blend with a subwoofer using an 80Hz crossover.

Just a few additional comments:


2) Having a big valley in the frequency response of your system between 80 and 100 Hz.

Not true.... using a sealed speaker like the HTM-200, which has a gradual low end roll-off, the difference in the "valley" you might experience between the speaker and sub when comparing an 80Hz crossover vs 100Hz will only be 3dB... Typical in-room peaks and valleys in frequency response just due to room reflections and boundaries are 10 - 12dB....

Hope this helps....

fooman
08-03-2005, 01:38 PM
Well I guess I have 30 days to find out huh?

The 200's will indeed be wall mounted and somewhat near the celing, so if that helps the bass, then even better! Sounds to me like it's at least worth giving a set of 5 a go.

The ventriloquist seems like a really intriguing setup, especially for the price, but I somehow have a hard time beleving that that setup with no tweeters vs the dual 4" and tweeter on the 200's would measure up.

Since it's a rather small space and I have neighbors below I think the STF-1 will do the job just fine for bass.

Now onto the receiver. Are the HK's somehow more appropriate for the Ascends than others? I was leaning towards the new Pioneer VSX-815, but if the low end HK with 7.1 is just as good or better with the Ascends then I'll go that route.

-Nic

Kurt C.
08-03-2005, 02:11 PM
The HTM-200 are -3dB at 87Hz anechoic, place them close to a wall or ceiling and you can expect a slight boost in the 80Hz region making them very close to -3dB at 80Hz.. These are a sealed enclosure and the bass response will roll-off at 12dB/octave versus 24dB/octave versus a ported enclosure.. The HTM-200 are specifically designed for a seamless blend with a subwoofer using an 80Hz crossover.

Not true.... using a sealed speaker like the HTM-200, which has a gradual low end roll-off, the difference in the "valley" you might experience between the speaker and sub when comparing an 80Hz crossover vs 100Hz will only be 3dB... Typical in-room peaks and valleys in frequency response just due to room reflections and boundaries are 10 - 12dB....


I know better than to argue with someone who is both an expert and a forum administrator, but...since we're comparing the HTM-200s to the 170s--two fantastic speakers both of which are made by Ascend--indulge me just a little...

I agree with Dave that the MOST important thing you can do is to make an effort to deal with the in-room peaks and valleys in frequency response due to room reflections and boundaries. This is true regardless of which speaker you choose. I also agree that you may get some boost in the 80Hz range, particularly if you have 8 ft. ceilings. This boost may be significant enough to take care of the "vally".

It's a bit generous to say that the HTM-200s are only -3dB anechoic at 87 Hz. Unlike the amazing 170s, which are almost completely flat to 90 Hz, the 200s start a gradual rolloff at about 150 Hz and, compared to that point, are down by at least 6 dB by 80 Hz.

My ramblings aside, you'll probably love the HTM-200s. I just think you may be even happier if you can figure out a way to use the 170s. (As I plan to as soon as my wallet allows). I look forward to hearing your impressions of the speakers.

davef
08-03-2005, 02:35 PM
Hi Kurt,

What you are seeing in the posted response of the HTM-200 loudspeaker is a limitation in measuring... Frequencies below 150Hz are not accurate due to the arrival of first reflections. It is nearly impossible to accurately measure the response of a loudspeaker below these frequencies unless using a true anechoic chamber.

Glance at the CBM-170 listening window measurements... Notice how the low end response (below 150Hz) is practically the exact same as the HTM-200? We all know the CBM-170 does not start rolling off at 150Hz like these measurements show. We used the results of true anechoic chamber measurements of the CBM-170 to derive the posted on-axis response of the CBM-170... We do not have documented HTM-200 anechoic chamber measurements so we can't post these.. However, based on t/s parameters and my specific design of the speaker, I can tell you that the low end response of the HTM-200 is indeed as specified...

I chose to not manipulate the posted response curve of the HTM-200 to match the true low end response (which most manufacturers due unless they have a true anechoic chamber)...

I probably should indicate something to this matter on the HTM-200 measurements :o

BGHD
08-03-2005, 04:05 PM
Now onto the receiver. Are the HK's somehow more appropriate for the Ascends than others? I was leaning towards the new Pioneer VSX-815, but if the low end HK with 7.1 is just as good or better with the Ascends then I'll go that route.

-Nic
I've recently tried the Pio 912 (cheap-ish Pio), HK 1005 and Denon 985, and prefer the HK with my Ascends. I tried my best calibrating the Pio and Denon to my tastes, but for me (and my wife) still ended up preferring the HK sound. Of course, I can't assume the 235 will sound the same as the 1005; not sure how the 815 compares to the 912; and plenty of folks here like the Denon brand with their Ascends. So, as per the usual bail-out, try them and see what you like.

fooman
08-04-2005, 08:33 AM
Ok, so now I'm thinking the HTM's would probably work, but I've now caught the HSU VT-12 bug.

I've heard the VT-12 in ventriloquist mode would outperform the HTM's, since the center has two 6"x4" woofers vs the 4"s in the HTM's.

Is there any truth to that? Most of my listening will be music, so although I could believe the VT-12's would do awesome for movies, I'm really wondering whether such a tiny system could deliver.

Oh and a full setup is almost half the price.. it's got to be too good to be true!

-Nic

Kurt C.
08-04-2005, 08:57 AM
Ok, so now I'm thinking the HTM's would probably work, but I've now caught the HSU VT-12 bug.

I've heard the VT-12 in ventriloquist mode would outperform the HTM's, since the center has two 6"x4" woofers vs the 4"s in the HTM's.

Is there any truth to that? Most of my listening will be music, so although I could believe the VT-12's would do awesome for movies, I'm really wondering whether such a tiny system could deliver.

Oh and a full setup is almost half the price.. it's got to be too good to be true!

-Nic

I should have ranked my options list in order of preference.

If good sound is your priority, I'd rank the speakers: 170s, HTM-200s, your current paradigm setup, the VT-12s.

Once the movie starts, good speakers will disappear, but if you and your S.O. care more about the system being hidden than how sounds, the order would change to: VT-12s, HTM-200s, 170s, your paradigms

You've been listening to titans, so I'm afraid anything less than the 200s would be a real disappointment to you. While the VT-12s are, in my opinion, a decent and inexpensive REALLY small speaker setup, they aren't going to sound anywhere near as good as the HTM-200s. Use the biggest speaker from my first list that you can possibly fit into your alotted space.

JeffD2
08-04-2005, 06:26 PM
...... place them close to a wall or ceiling and you can expect a slight boost in the 80Hz region making them very close to -3dB at 80Hz.....
...... Typical in-room peaks and valleys in frequency response just due to room reflections and boundaries are 10 - 12dB....


Thanks Dave. As you've addressed in a previous thread, my dip in that region was from cancellation due to my unorthodox placement of the fronts (which proved correct). I am not adverse to (nor the Waf) going up high with the HTMs. I'll give it shot and post results.

Jeff