PDA

View Full Version : FAQ for the forum



smokey
08-13-2003, 08:57 AM
Another feature for the FAQ will be a list of other important online sites for stereo and home theater discussions or information. Here is a start:

avs speakers (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=60e46b89c2b8a684e6428037909ccbd d&daysprune=30&forumid=89)
hometheater forum (http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htforum/forumdisplay.php?s=be13afe8550a1bf57d78040b76e3f7e 1&forumid=46)
speaker asylum (http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/speakers/bbs.html)
home theater spot (http://www.hometheaterspot.com/htsthreads/ubbthreads.php?Cat=)
audioreview (http://www.audioreview.com/)
audiogon (http://www.audiogon.com/index.html)
ascend (http://www.ascendacoustics.com/)
axiom (http://www.axiomaudio.com/)
rocket (http://www.av123.com/)
hsu (http://www.hsuresearch.com)
svs (http://www.svsubwoofers.com/)

Smokey

Thanks, the Management.

smokey
08-18-2003, 03:20 AM
Guys! (and gals of course!)

We're falling down on the job. We need more FAQ input! Are there any other home theater/audio websites that we need links for? Have any of you made great posts elsewhere that you think we should link to? Any general comments that apply to the whole project of speakers?

I'm curious to hear what you guys think.

-Smokey

Thanks, the Management.

Ben_Wood
08-23-2003, 11:30 AM
Smokey, it might be nice to paste a link to Bradjudy's Ascend review.

curtis
08-24-2003, 04:10 AM
I asked Brad if I could post a copy of his review in the review section.

-curtis

frank
12-07-2003, 12:56 AM
try audioreview.com

nhan070
02-05-2004, 04:56 AM
How about recommendations for using the Radio Shack SPL meter for fine tuning one's system. Eventhough the analog RS SPL meter is recommended by AVIA (hometheater calibration DVD), the RS SPL meter does not provide accurate measurements for upper and lower feq.

Adjustment / offsets to get true audio db readings:
http://www.danmarx.org/audioinnovation/rsmeter.html

Modifications suggested for the analog RS SPL meter:
http://www.gti.net/wallin/audio/rsmeter/33-2050/33-2050.html

ilikeascend
09-14-2004, 07:47 AM
Allow a newcomer to ask a stupid question.

I have 340c and 170 l/r mains. Is htm200 or 170 better to be a surround speaker? The reason I ask this question is that, 170 won some awards as main speakers, and htm200 is designed as a surround speaker. Maybe htm200 has better performance, for a surround speaker. I listen music and watch movies using the system.


Thanks,

BradJudy
09-14-2004, 10:58 AM
ilikeascend,

I wouldn't consider the HTM-200 as 'designed as a surround'. It is sold for all of the positions and works well in each. It isn't like a di/bipole that is specifically designed as a surround.

The general rule of thumb has been that the HTM-200 is a great surround and that the main motivation for moving up to the CBM-170 is if multichannel audio (DVD-A/SACD) is important to you.

I have had both as surrounds and they both do a very good job.

Another item to consider is crossover control. If your receiver has a single crossover setting for all 5 speakers, it won't be ideal for both the 170s and 200s. If it lets you control the rear crossover separate from the fronts, then you're fine with either set of rears.

macebanyon
09-23-2004, 12:54 AM
Hello Smokey, how about a link to the Part's Express Tech-Talk message board.
http://www.pesupport.com/cgi-bin/config.pl

GaryB
09-26-2004, 11:32 AM
Brad, seeing as you're familiar with all three models, I wonder if I could pick your brains. [;)]

I'm considering getting 2 CBM-170s, a CMT-340c and 2 HTM-200s, the latter wall-mounted as surrounds. I have pre-ordered an SVS PB10-ISD sub and am planning to use one of the new h/k receivers, likely the AVR 635, when it becomes available. The h/k does allow separate crossover points, and studying the response curves for the different models, I have decided on 60 Hz for the CMT-340c, 80 Hz for the 170s and 100 Hz for the 200s, subject to experimentation and measurement, of course.

Would you concur, based on your experience, or have other suggestions? Anyone else is welcome to chime in, of course. Forums like these are one of the many things that make the internet-based audio experience great! [:D]

BradJudy
09-26-2004, 12:07 PM
Gary,

I would go ahead and do 80Hz on the 340 also. None of the dialog will be that low and there's no point in making your dialog speaker handle explosion level sounds. Otherwise, I think 80 and 100 are good choices for the 170 and 200 respectively.

GaryB
09-26-2004, 12:29 PM
Thanks, Brad. Actually, I was considering the 60 Hz crossover for the 340c more for music than for movies - does the center channel in DD or DTS soundtracks even carry information much below 80 Hz?

Intellectually, I guess I would like to fully utilize the capabilities of the satellite speakers, keeping in mind that their required output will be reduced by 6 dB at the chosen crossover point.

Glad to hear you concur with my choices for the other sats. [:)]

GaryB
10-07-2004, 10:28 AM
Further to the above, this is from the man himself, and I'm posting it here since I think it would be of general interest:

"Hi Gary,

You can pick my brains all you like :)

>So, in summary, would you agree that the optimal crossover points (for both movies and music) from the available options offered by the h/k receivers, are 100 Hz for the HTM-200 surrounds, 80 Hz for the CBM-170 "mains", and 60 Hz for the CMT-340c center?

Yes... exactly. Should sound great!

Take care!

Good Sound To You!
ASCEND ACOUSTICS, INC.

David Fabrikant"

Allen42
10-08-2004, 05:14 AM
So what to do if crossovers can't be set per channel?

If I'm using 340c, 170's and 200's, but can only specify a single corssover, should I go with highest denominator so nothing is missed?

Saying that, I'd cross at 100 for the 200's. But then aren't my 170's and the 340 being robbed of precious 60-100 hz ranges?

Is a good compromise 80hz for this combination of speakers?

bikeman
10-08-2004, 06:48 AM
Is a good compromise 80hz for this combination of speakers?

It's probably not a compromise. One reason I choose the 340's is people have posted they perfer the 80hz setting. My receiver is set at 80hz so that worked well in their favor. Building a speaker that didn't preform great with an 80hz setting would not win so many favorable reviews. It would be great to have base management but lots of us don't so the speakers have to strut their stuff with the defacto setting.
My speaker stands are in LA harbor. Curtis, you know any long shoremen? :->

David

curtis
10-08-2004, 07:16 AM
Actually David...I used have friends that worked on the docks.

FWIW....I have the crossover set for 80hz all the way around. I used to set the 340's at 60hz....but in my room, 80hz seems to work better.

-curtis

GaryB
10-08-2004, 11:48 AM
Allen42 - I would agree, and I bet David F. would too, that if you have only one crossover frequency to choose from for all three models, 80 Hz would be best, especially if the HTM-200s are wall-mounted and benefitting from some bass reinforcement.

Theoretically, an 80 Hz crossover for the CMT-340s is slightly suboptimal for the following reasons. The bass management in most processors/receivers high-passes the satellites at 12 dB/octave and low-passes the sub at 24 dB/octave. In the case of the CMT-340, which is nearly flat between 60 and 80 Hz, a crossover setting of 80 Hz will result in the 340's output rolling off by 12 dB/octave in the 80-60 Hz range, while the sub's output will be rolling off at 24 dB/octave above 80 Hz. This will result in a slightly excessive summed output in the 60-80 Hz range, which may be sonically pleasing, but is not necessarily accurate. In the more lengthy correspondence I had with David F., he considered 65 Hz to be the optimal setting (sonically) for the 340s, but since few of us have such fine control over crossover frequencies, he figured that 60 Hz would be close enough not to matter.

Curtis, in what way does the 80 Hz setting work better in your room? I've been reading your posts in various forums for quite some time and I certainly value your opinion. [:)]

curtis
10-08-2004, 01:28 PM
Gary...I just have some kind of room anomaly that makes the bass below 80hz sound better from where the sub is located when compared to where the mains are located. Some kind of resonance. I don't hear it at my Parents' place with their 340's running fullrange with the same material.

-curtis