ATTN: AUDIOPHILES!

[bombadillo]

I specifically pointed him toward consumer grade things because he is obviously going for "better than bose" which is a low bar to set.

Telling to go with a 2500 dollar pair of B&W bookshelf speakers is like telling someone looking for a camry to buy a Lexus LFA because its better in every way.

The Telarc comment I'm just going to ignore because thats like getting into my AR is better than your AR type of argument.

Look at his original post and throw him some middle of the road consumer grade products, not mega high end stuff.


Also, OP check out www.emotiva.com for some great quality amplifiers at a reasonable price. They have DAC's Amps, Pres and Pros, CD players, but mainly I would get a good 5.1 Preamp, and their 7 channel amplifier for a great sounding clean system. Don't worry too much about snobbery that happens in this field. Its just like firearms and I've heard some phenomenal sounding systems on a budget and some CRAZY expensive systems that I didn't think sounded much better at 10x the price. Go with what sounds good to YOU, and do it at the best budget you can afford.

[sholling]

Sholling, have you been able to audition a Lava sub yet? You would be blown away at what dual 12" Lava subs are capable of. You can get 2, 12" subs for the price of 1 HSU or SVS 10" sub. They are near identical on paper in most ways, and are really good working man's subwoofers.

I have heard Lava 12s and while they are really nice bang for the buck entry level subs they aren't in the same league as 12" or larger Hsu or SVS subwoofer. Hsu and especially SVS just dig deeper and with more authority. Audioholics has a good review. BTW your plan to use multiple subs has lots of merit because it provides for a more even distribution of the bass.

Ported subs sound horrible at high volume levels due to air rushing through the ports. They also artificially bump the frequencies up the the port is tuned to. Again, great for the boom and tinkle crowd but not for audiophiles.

Perhaps you've never heard good quality ported subwoofers. Things have changed over the last 20 years and many genuine audiophiles prefer the flat frequency response (down to below the limits of human hearing) of ported subwoofers over the rolled off lows of a vanilla sealed subwoofer or the limited low frequency output of electronically enhanced (electronically boosted and flattened) sound of modern sealed subs. I own high quality examples of each and each has its place but sealed subs are not necessarily "better" than ported subs. Remember that both low frequency compression and roll-off are forms of distortion.

The majority of music and movie "bass" is in the 50-100hz range.

The majority of music and movies - yes, the totality - no. Action movies and organ music often hit lower - much lower to include material too low to hear (below 20hz) but that you can still feel. I have a couple of subwoofers capable of reproducing bass to well below 20hz.

Below that you need lots of power and lots of driver. A single 12" won't cut it.

Very true with sealed subwoofers, but not necessarily true with modern ported subwoofers.

This is why a ported sub is not a good idea for quality audio as once you get into the frequency range of tubas and pipe organs you go below the tuned frequency of the port and cause the cabinet to go into extreme distortion.

Only true with a p-poor designed and constructed ported subwoofer. On a well constructed and braced sub once you go below the port's tuned frequency the bass output simply drops off faster than a sealed sub (which generally run out of steam earlier). If you consider bass roll off below the limits of human hearing to be distortion then you must not like sealed subs which tend to roll off around 40-45hz unless the lows are electronically boosted - in which case they sound compressed as they run out of power.

He will need a quality sub due to the room dimensions and materials in it.

Here we agree, and he should work with SVS or Hsu to size a sub for the room.

Any kind of mass market amplifier, pioneer, yamaha, sony, dennon etc. are not and were never intended to sound good. They are designed, built and marketed to be high KPD "knobs per dollar" items. This is by definition the antithesis of high quality sound.

While this may have been true 20 years ago it no longer applies. Modern mid-range receivers from Denon, Yamaha, and Onkyo are capable of providing sound reproduction on par with high-buck separates. Nothing is lost or distorted which is why many audiophiles have replaced their separates or at least their preamps with good quality receivers.

1 - a very high quality source. Everything after that in the signal path will do one of two things; it will maintain the integrity of that source, or, it will deteriorate it. It cannot by definition improve it.

I absolutely 100% agree with you about the critical roll the source plays - in the form of a good quality recording and storage medium. Many albums are poorly recorded and there is nothing that you can do about that other than buy something else. But the end user can choose to use lossless storage (CD, WAV, FLAC, or Apple lossless) over compressed formats like MP3s.

2 - to get the best quality sound out of the rest the signal path you don't run it through millions of piss poor quality parts, dissect it into fifteen segments, add lots of bouncing lights or surround sound. If you want high quality sound, the rest of the signal path after the aforementioned high quality source must use as few, hi quality, parts as possible to accomplish the task at hand.

True 20 years ago, not so much today. Modern receivers are as clean to the limits of human hearing as high-end separates and modern room correction algorithms do a darn good job of reducing or eliminating what is often the largest source of distortion - the room itself. Of course that takes us into discussion of room treatments for rooms who's acoustics are that are so bad that electronics alone cannot eliminate room distortions.

As for subs, stereo is better, but REL, or perhaps Velodyne. Cabinet resonance is the biggest issue, Which is why good quality subs weigh a freakin' ton. They need non-reverberent, non resonant enclosures.

Again 20 year old news. SVSounds and Hsu Research have been eating Velodyne's lunch with in the know audiophiles with very high quality reasonably priced subwoofers for over decade.

The fellow who gave a speaker brand list above I would not put Klirsch on that list and Polks are just consumer junk, but other than that, his list is not exhaustive but pretty good.

While I don't care for the two brands that you mentioned everyone has different tastes. I find both to be too bright and harsh to listen to for very long.

OP don't just take my word or anyone else's on here, spend a few tens of hours on Audioholics' forum and the reviews section and then get out and listen to speakers. AH's forum tends to be more 'been there done that' than the AVS echo chamber. Anyway the choice of speakers is highly subjective and subject to personal taste. I'll close with saying that the Andrew Jones designed Pioneer speakers are good speakers for someone on a very tight budget and should be auditioned, but the money saved on speakers should be plowed into a good quality subwoofer.

[bombadillo]

True story, SVS, some of the Paradigm 15" and HSU stuff is out of this world clean. I would love to own some, and after hearing them, are on my drool list. I'll have to get by with dual Lava's for now.

[bigdawg86]

I recently bought all this from Crutchfield and am VERY happy with my purchase... like stated before "how good it sounds" is largely use preference, but these components have exceeded my expectations. My system is in a VERY large "great room" that is close to 30x30 feet and it has no trouble in such a large area. The only thing I noticed with my current setup is that I need to play with sub positioning, which isn't easy cause the wife doesn't want me to mess up the feng shui of the room. The sub is very commanding, but I am unsure if I am hearing air movement from the ports or resonance from the walls.

It was a challenge to get my surrounds and center to fit. The TV had to be wall mounted so I can make room for the center channel.

Sony STR-DN840 AV Home Theater Receiver x1
Klipsch CDT-3650-C II In-Ceiling Speakers x 2
Klipsch RB-51II Bookshelf Speakers x 2
Klipsch RC-52II Center Channel Speaker
Klipsch SW-112 Powered Subwoofer

[bombadillo]

Big dawg, you have a very similar setup as I do. I have as follows

Klipsch wf-34 mains
Wc-34 center
Insignia nab-2111 carbon coax 2 way surrounds
Dual lava lsp10 subs.
Sony receiver that I can't remember the name
Emotiva amp 5 channel 100wpc

[REDPATCHUSMC]

OMG! You all are great! I am going to explode!

from the current TV and the entertainment center, it has built in wiring, I am going to go with bookshelf speakers and a sub.

Q: Are "Wireless" sub any good?

I am digging this Onkyo system

http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/ONKLS3100/ONKYO-LS3100-EnvisionCinema-2.1-Channel-Bluetooth-Speaker-System/1.html?gclid=CMv70OaE5LsCFU5gfgodLgYAPA

And I will get a 5.1 reciever and build on as time goes by.

Hell.. The sony 60" TV in the oak center sounds awesome by itself... but it's no War of the Worlds!

[bombadillo]

Wireless ANYTHING in audio tends to be junk. Very few things are even remotely good quality, but things are improving.

[sholling]

Digital wireless often works well with subwoofers. The reasons that digital wireless works ok for subs are the very modest bandwidth required to cover the sub's limited frequency range (roughly 10-150hz for a very good sub), a digital signal's inherent resistance to outside inference, and the fact that subs are self powered. I'm far-far-far less fond of wireless speakers.

[ibanezfoo]

One thing to keep in mind about all this really expensive "audophile" over priced crap, is that most people that claim to hear all these differences and whatnot are full of crap. Most of them can't tell the difference between an obnoxiously priced audiophile quality cable and an ordinary coat hanger. Kind of like wine drinkers who claim to be able to tell the difference between wines when the only real difference was food coloring added to the same one.

Point: Go listen to some things for yourself and buy what sounds best to your ears.

[bombadillo]

I don't know, I can tell the difference between something like Pioneer or Sony Vs. Paradigm, Klipsch, and PSB. The latter 3 are obviously much better sounding with much better mids, and lows. Usually the cheap stuff have BIG woofers made up of paper materials with boomy lows, awful port noise, and brash, shrilly highs that just grind on you in comparison.

I suggest you listen to a pair of Martin Logans, B&W's, or Magnepans, and compare it to some cheaper speakers like Bose 301's or Sony bookshelf speakers, or otherwise and you will REALLY hear the contrast.

I'd imagine it would be the difference between a REALLY high quality Ibanez Vs. a Johnson from a flea market. I figure this would be a good comparison due to your username.

[Creampuff]

Paradigm's to me are a great value for the amount spent.

[bombadillo]

Here is my low key setup. I usually have the grills on for the kids, so they don't try and poke through the speakers. They are the Klipsch WF-34 Icons. Super bright, punchy mid-bass speakers that hit down to about 45hz or so. My subs are crossed over at about 75-80hz. It is a basic setup, but has worked very well for me.

[ibanezfoo]

I don't know, I can tell the difference between something like Pioneer or Sony Vs. Paradigm, Klipsch, and PSB. The latter 3 are obviously much better sounding with much better mids, and lows. Usually the cheap stuff have BIG woofers made up of paper materials with boomy lows, awful port noise, and brash, shrilly highs that just grind on you in comparison.

I suggest you listen to a pair of Martin Logans, B&W's, or Magnepans, and compare it to some cheaper speakers like Bose 301's or Sony bookshelf speakers, or otherwise and you will REALLY hear the contrast.

I'd imagine it would be the difference between a REALLY high quality Ibanez Vs. a Johnson from a flea market. I figure this would be a good comparison due to your username.

There should be an obvious difference between something like the crummy little Bose speakers and any other decent speaker. The thing is, everyone's ears are different and nobody can sit there and say one sounds better than the other, its completely subjective. Even busting out instruments to measure frequency response and reproduction is meaningless if it just doesn't sound good to someones ears. For example, I use very flat response studio monitors to mix my music. Its to get all the levels and frequencies where I want them without the speakers tainting it. However, these things suck to my ears to just listen to music for enjoyment.

The guitar thing is a good point. If both guitars were properly intonated and had the same type of pickups (humbucker vs single coil) plugged into the same amp and played by the same person, I doubt anyone would be able to tell which is which without hearing them before hand. Theres no quantifiable "better" tone. Some people like scooped mids, some boosted mids, some boosted hights, whatever.

Don't mean to be negative or whatever its just weird to me with these types of threads become big dick contests about ridiculous gear that 98% of people couldn't tell the difference between and nobody can really afford anyway. Thats where they nose dive in my opinion. Its like someone asking about a new car and considering a Honda Civic or a Toyota Corolla and then some people have to whip out their virtual dongs and tell them the only real car that is the best is a Saleen S7 or a Porsche GT3. Just seems odd to me...

I did comment on the Bose stuff because it is too expensive for poor sounding stuff.... to my ears anyway. Too many people get suckered by them. But in reality, some people genuinely think it sounds great. Who are we to argue I guess...

[bombadillo]

I gotcha. I hear that a LOT when it comes to recording and mixing gear. I feel like I have a good ear, and I have heard a lot of really high quality gear ranging from pro audio live gear to home audio, to headphones, to recording gear.

When I listen to a guitar, I have a hard time hearing the difference between a Mexican strat, compared to a 5k dollar vintage Les Paul that supposedly has a better "tone" to it. I sat in a music store for HOURS and hours and listened to my wife play her guitar until I finally told her to buy the one that felt, sounded, and played the best to her. She picked a Martin OMC-16gte, and it has been a fantastic guitar for her. I can hardly tell the difference plugged in from that guitar, compared to her cheap Briarwood guitar. I know some guys claim to hear big differences, but I just can't hear much of a difference or change.

As to speakers vs guitars, or otherwise, you are very correct. You could NEVER tell someone else what sounds good to THEM. I like bright, clear, punchy speakers, and other folks love warm, round, thick sounding speakers. They are very different in every way, but some people like one style, and other people like a different type of sound. Each person has their own desire of what sounds good to them.

My advice to the op, is to audition EVERYTHING you can when it comes to actually dropping some money on any speakers.