Why no Hsu?

[davef]

Yes definitely some confusion - on two points here.

1. My understanding is that "Large" IS the only correct setting when you don't have a sub. I don't care how bad your frequency range is on your mains, if you don't have a sub, the small setting is just.... wrong. A speaker will play what it can and wont what it cant in the absence of a sub. No sense in making that a certainty with the small setting.

This statement is 100% correct.

My point is I assumed you were saying something specific about Ascends instead of stating the obvious. Again, I don't want to get into linking old threads because its inherently antagonistic, but I was almost certain you started suggesting large for 340s because they could actually play low enough to warrant it without the sub's help and because of the inherent balance compromise that comes when two speakers (main + sub) are playing the same music within one frequency range.

When we switched over from 340 classics to 340 SE, I mentioned that now people *could* use the 340 SE as large because bass response and bass power handling was improved. It is assumed (by me and by most in this hobby) that when large is used, no sub is being used. We have customers that want to use the 340SE without subwoofers, thus resulting in the statement that the 340 SE could be used full range.

but I was almost certain you started suggesting large for 340s because they could actually play low enough to warrant it without the sub's help and because of the inherent balance compromise that comes when two speakers (main + sub) are playing the same music within one frequency range.

Again, I never suggested (nor would I) to use the 340 (or any loudspeaker) as large when used together WITH a subwoofer. The balance compromise you mentioned occurs when both the speakers and the subwoofer are playing the same frequency range. This occurs when using a subwoofer and setting the speakers to large. Your above statement suggests that I am in favor of this balance compromise, and as I mentioned -- my design philosophy for the past 26 years has always been for accurate frequency response and accurate phase.

On my receiver (and most receivers that I'm aware of), if you set a specific main to large (aka full range), then the sub automatically will not play the low frequency range for whatever speaker(s) you have set to large.

Entirely dependent on the receiver. In my experience, setting speakers to large simply sends the full range signal to the speaker, this is entirely independent of what low frequency information is sent to the subwoofer (sub still receives low frequency information)

if you set a specific main to large (aka full range), then the sub automatically will not play the low frequency range for whatever speaker(s) you have set to large.

In other words, on your receiver -- if you set a specific speaker to large, no signal from that particular channel is sent to the subwoofer? I don't believe this to be the case, but if it is, then no signal to the subwoofer equals no subwoofer in use which is equivalent of not having a subwoofer.

I think you might be assuming that if you set your speakers to large, then the receiver sends a full range signal to the speakers and because the speakers can only play down to a certain frequency, that the subwoofer will play only those frequencies that your speakers are not capable of reproducing. This is not how it works -- your receiver does not know what the capabilities of your speakers or subwoofer is.

The more critical matter is that by setting your speakers to small, the high-pass and low-pass "slope" (the rate at which the bass response of the speakers roll-off and the rate at which the upper range of the subwoofer rolls-off) precisely matches each other to allow for proper integration. When set to large, the receiver does not control the integration between speakers and sub.

But you did, from my original interpretation, encourage Ascend listeners to use the large setting for the 340SE and Sierra-1, even if they owned a sub.

Please take the time to point this out to me. My memory is not as good as it once was, but I am always very careful about what I post.

So you don't have your Sierra-1's on large when you listen to music? I could have swore you said you prefer the Sierra-1's full range (large).

Yes, I prefer the Sierra-1's on large but that is with no subwoofer, of which I have referenced in dozens of posts.

I apologize if you have drawn the wrong conclusions from both mine and others posts.

NO subwoofer = set speakers to large
With subwoofer = set speakers to small, use an 80 or 60Hz crossover point.

[azanon]

Again, I never suggested (nor would I) to use the 340 (or any loudspeaker) as large when used together WITH a subwoofer. The balance compromise you mentioned occurs when both the speakers and the subwoofer are playing the same frequency range. This occurs when using a subwoofer and setting the speakers to large. Your above statement suggests that I am in favor of this balance compromise, and as I mentioned -- my design philosophy for the past 26 years has always been for accurate frequency response and accurate phase.

We're still getting lost in semantics.

I'm not saying you ever said or suggested for a main and sub to be set to play the same frequency range of music at the same time. Call that whatever you want.

When I hear someone suggest use "large" setting for a speaker, I assume someone is saying to set the receiver to have the sub cut off for all frequency ranges for speakers set to "large" unless they say otherwise. To me, running a speaker with "large" setting means setting it, and it alone, to play the full spectrum of sound and for the sub to play nothing for that channel, regardless whether you have a sub or not.

Entirely dependent on the receiver. In my experience, setting speakers to large simply sends the full range signal to the speaker, this is entirely independent of what low frequency information is sent to the subwoofer (sub still receives low frequency information)

I’ve owned 3 receivers so far, one of them being a H/K in the same line you sell. All three behave as I describe. “large” sends the full range to the main, and the sub default setting is to play none of the material for every speaker that’s set to large.

In other words, on your receiver -- if you set a specific speaker to large, no signal from that particular channel is sent to the subwoofer? I don't believe this to be the case, but if it is, then no signal to the subwoofer equals no subwoofer in use which is equivalent of not having a subwoofer.

This is exactly correct. Lets give an easy example here. If you have your Sierra-1's set to "large" on your receiver right now, and you play a CD in stereo, and output it in stereo, and you do have a sub, then your sub will not play at all. Even if you put a hip-hop CD in there. Yes, in this example, it would be like you don't have a sub even though you do.

The sub plays, in short: 1. All content below the crossover for every speaker set to small and 2. The LFE channel for content with an LFE channel. 3. Nothing else

Again, yes, most all receivers HAVE a setting where you can tell the sub to play everything regardless of the large vs. small setting on individual speakers, but as you've already said and I agree with, that's always a poor choice and anyone using that choice is going to have messed up/duplicated sound in the lower frequencies.

I think you might be assuming that if you set your speakers to large, then the receiver sends a full range signal to the speakers and because the speakers can only play down to a certain frequency, that the subwoofer will play only those frequencies that your speakers are not capable of reproducing. This is not how it works -- your receiver does not know what the capabilities of your speakers or subwoofer is.p

I never said that and definitely disagree with that. If you're not saying that either, then lets drop that one.

When set to large, the receiver does not control the integration between speakers and sub.

Exactly, because with large, the receiver simply sends the entirety of the music content to the mains.... for that channel. The sub gets nothing from that channel (again, unless you have the "speaker + sub" setting enabled for the sub)

Yes, I prefer the Sierra-1's on large but that is with no subwoofer, of which I have referenced in dozens of posts.

I apologize if you have drawn the wrong conclusions from both mine and others posts.

NO subwoofer = set speakers to large
With subwoofer = set speakers to small, use an 80 or 60Hz crossover point.

Large means no subwoofer. Lets be clear here, I haven't drawn any wrong conclusions. When you say run a speaker large, - to audio hobbyists they are going to presume you're essentially saying to run them full range. That's interchangeable because, again, almost no one uses the "sub+speaker" setting on their receiver because most audiophiles aren't going to want to have their bass duplicated.

[Mike^S]

We're still getting lost in semantics.

Large means no subwoofer. Lets be clear here, I haven't drawn any wrong conclusions. When you say run a speaker large, - to audio hobbyists they are going to presume you're essentially saying to run them full range. That's interchangeable because, again, almost no one uses the "sub+speaker" setting on their receiver because most audiophiles aren't going to want to have their bass duplicated.

NO IT DOESN'T. How do you know how many people are using sub+speaker? Not everyone is an audiophile. In fact a lot of people think that they should set the speakers to large especially if they have floor standing speakers. Then when their sub doesn't play, they go and turn on sub+speaker. I work in the audio industry. A LOT of people do this.

[azanon]

NO IT DOESN'T. How do you know how many people are using sub+speaker? Not everyone is an audiophile. In fact a lot of people think that they should set the speakers to large especially if they have floor standing speakers. Then when their sub doesn't play, they go and turn on sub+speaker. I work in the audio industry. A LOT of people do this.

Obviously I can't deny it doesn't mean that to Dave, since he's already admitted it doesn't to him.

NOW I KNOW when I say I'm running my Ascends large, there's going to be a certain percentage of you that will think I'm dumb enough to set my sub to play the same lows, and that I'm not necessarily saying I'm not duplicating the lows with my sub.

MIKE, we're talking about Ascends here, not some other speakers where it might be appropriate to run "speaker+sub". Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but there isn't an Ascend speaker yet given any sub where a "speaker+sub" setting would be appropriate or recommended. Since we were specifically talking about Ascend speakers, "large" should always mean "full-range, no sub"

[Mike^S]

Obviously I can't deny it doesn't mean that to Dave, since he's already admitted it doesn't to him.

NOW I KNOW when I say I'm running my Ascends large, there's going to be a certain percentage of you that will think I'm dumb enough to set my sub to play the same lows, and that I'm not necessarily saying I'm not duplicating the lows with my sub.

MIKE, we're talking about Ascends here, not some other speakers where it might be appropriate to run "speaker+sub". Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but there isn't an Ascend speaker yet given any sub where a "speaker+sub" setting would be appropriate or recommended. Since we were specifically talking about Ascend speakers, "large" should always mean "full-range, no sub"

uh huh, so what if somebody is buying Ascend speakers for the first time and doesn't know that you shouldn't run Ascend speakers as large + sub. What's wrong with Dave clarifying that in his statement?

And who says you have to be dumb to run speakers as large + sub? Not everybody is an audiophile. I'm sure that are many smart lawyers and doctors who have no idea how to operate a home theater system.

I would personally never recommend that anyone run large + sub, but I know that there are plenty of people out there who are running their system exactly like that.

[muzz]

I've done it before, not normally, but I have when looking for extra output down low, and fidelity wasn't the #1 priority.

Normal setup is small+sub

[azanon]

Normal setup is small+sub

By default on yours too? Cool, I guess.

Sorry if I gave a mistaken impression that I claimed somewhere that this is never the default on any receiver. I never said that, and never would.

[azanon]

uh huh, so what if somebody is buying Ascend speakers for the first time and doesn't know that you shouldn't run Ascend speakers as large + sub. What's wrong with Dave clarifying that in his statement?

My point was he didn't clarify it originally by flippantly saying he runs his Sierra-1's large in another unrelated thread. Sure, he's more than clarified that here and that's more than welcome. I'm enjoying our (Dave's) discussion.

And who says you have to be dumb to run speakers as large + sub? Not everybody is an audiophile. I'm sure that are many smart lawyers and doctors who have no idea how to operate a home theater system.

You're taking me on a tangent that I don't think I went. My Ascends came with a brief 4-5 page insert that, going on memory, had specific information about how to set these up. I believe it even included the very information pertaining to this discussion to help avoid "doctors and lawyers" from making this error.

I would personally never recommend that anyone run large + sub, but I know that there are plenty of people out there who are running their system exactly like that.

Neither would I.