2.1 Channel Receivers [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : 2.1 Channel Receivers



stj
09-27-2005, 08:47 AM
Pretty sure they exist but can't find in search. I'm almost sure that I have gotten information on these in these forums but can't locate any threads, now. I would like to find a receiver for stereo listening but which also has the ability to attach a woofer if I go to smaller speakers. Or does it matter, if I use only 2 channels of a 5.1 etc. receiver?

I don't like dealing with all the other speakers for one thing and just want to keep things simple-- this is for listening to music primarily, though obviously not multichannel sacd or dvd audio.


Can anyone help?

Thanks

stj

noddin0ff
09-27-2005, 09:20 AM
The thing you need to add a sub to a pair of small mains is a cross over. Something that separates out the low frequencies for the sub.

Many subs have a built in crossover. This allows you to run the L/R mains outs directly to the sub and then back out of the sub to the mains. The sub's cross over sends the low frequencies to the sub's amp (and 'active' sub) and the rest back out to the mains. This way you don't need a 2.1 receiver, just a 2.0.

You can set up a 5.1 receiver to function the way you want it to also. For stereo listening the receiver's x-over will send the appropriate signal to the sub via the LFE out. You generally tell the receiver you have a sub and then set the mains to "small" , this activates the x-over. The other 3 channels are not engaged.

markw
09-27-2005, 09:29 AM
...you can attach virtually any subwoofer to virtually any receiver. Assuming, ofcourse, you use a little common sense, some of which I will try to impart.

1) Make sure the sub you choose has two inputs, one for the right channel and one for the left channel. If you get one with only one input, you're screwed unless you want to spend several hundred extra dollars.

Most subs come with two types of inputs, line level inputs that work from a preamp level signal and speaker level inputs that work from a speaker output on the revceiver. Many subs also have an output and offer a "feed through" arrangement where the full signal is fed to the input of the sub but only the highs are "fed through" to the rest of thesystem.


If your receiver has a preamp output, you can use that to feed a sub'e line level inputs. There's no gnawing need to feed the output of the sub back to the receiver so you can get by if your receiver has no main (power amp) inputs.

Likewise, ifyou don't haver access to a line level signal you're going to have to use the speaker level inputs. Here you may want to use the speaker outputs on the sub to keep lows from your main speakers. that way you can use only one speaker terminal. butm if you choose, you can use the "B" terminal of most receivers but since not all receivers are created equal, I wouldn't do this.

poneal
09-27-2005, 10:20 AM
if that's what you mean. The only problem is that you cannot change the factory setting of 150hz. Why they put it so high I have no idea. To get around this problem you just run your receiver speaker wire the sub plate amp and then from the plate amp to your speakers. Set the volume, crossover, and phase on the sub and your ready to go.

stj
09-29-2005, 05:17 AM
I was aware of the option of feeding the rt adn lt speakers from some subs. I guessed that this would require one with some good crossovers, since it seems that this is processing the signal one more time.

So far no one has mentioned a 2.1 receiver. It seems this would be the best method if they exist.

stj

JSE
09-29-2005, 06:17 AM
So far no one has mentioned a 2.1 receiver. It seems this would be the best method if they exist.

stj


Not sure I have ever seen a 2.1 receiver. Can't think of a reason to have one. If you want 2.1 just go with a 5.1/6.1/7.1 and just use 2 speakers and the sub. As long as you have a crossover in the sub, the .1 is not needed.

JSE

markw
09-29-2005, 07:09 AM
do you know what those numbers mean? I think not.

a 5.1 receiver means there are six (5 soundtrack,1 LFE channel) different, distinct DIGITAL channels on the source mateial to be decoded and amplified. The only way this is done is via DIGITAL SOURCE such as DD, DTS, SACD or DVD-Audio. ...and a stereo receiver only works in the (two channel) analog domain.

So, what you are asking for is a receiver that plays back recording with two "soundtrack" channels and a low frequency channel. I can't think of too many "stereo" recordings like that, can you?

The best you're going to do is either an analog stereo receiver with a sub out or a full blown HT receiver capable of decoding those digital sources. Even then, whatever it sends to the subwoofer from a stereo source wasn't a separate ".1" channel initially, just like you would get from a stereo with a sub out.

IMHO, I'd suggest a stereo receiver and a standalone subwoofer but YMMV.

but, who knows? If you do find a TRUE 2.1 receiver let me know.

noddin0ff
09-29-2005, 07:58 AM
do you know what those numbers mean? I think not.
markw- that's mighty rude. I think it's clear he knows what those numbers mean.

So, what you are asking for is a receiver that plays back recording with two "soundtrack" channels and a low frequency channel. I can't think of too many "stereo" recordings like that, can you?
Obviously people used subs long before '.1' existed as evidenced by L/R inputs on subs, duh. And, guess what...they listened to STEREO recordings. A 2.1 receiver is not a bad idea. Technology/media just leap-frogged to 5.1 etc first.

Your thinking on 5.1 is overly rigid, in that 5.1 output doesn't require 5.1 discreet channels of input. The A/V processor can take a 2-channel analog source and make 5.1 channels from it. It does 2.1 as well. So why don't you make nice.

markw
09-29-2005, 08:57 AM
Hey, I went into great detail telling him how to accomplish what he needs to do and he simply ignored my, and everyone elses, input on the subject.

From his use of those numbers it's pretty obvious he has no idea what they mean and from your input in this thread I doubt you do, either.

The fact that so many manufacturer's (particularly 'puter speakers) use the term "2.1" to mean a two channel system with a common bass box doesn't mean that there are really 2.1 systems out there in the same sense that there are 5.1 systems out there. There are major functioinal differences.

Mainly, systems advertised as "2.1" are electricaly and functionally exactly the same as a two channel receiver with a subwoofer.

Now, if he chooses to use a HT receiver for these purposes (and I think it's a waste here) then he STILL won't have the advantage of three separate channels. IOW, there ain't no way to get a 2.1 channel signal from a stereo source. He'll simply have his original two channels with something being fed to the subwoofer, but that subwoofer feed ain't by no stretch of the imagination the magical third ".1" channel.

IMNSHO, he would be better served with a hunky vintage stereo receiver and, if he still chooses to, he can add a sub later.

Now, if you want to prepetuate your "2.1" fairy tales as opposed to accept the truth on this matter then that's your business. I prefer to deal in facts. Consider yoursevs disabused on this matter.

Resident Loser
09-29-2005, 09:52 AM
...reciever with a "sub out" ..lose the dot one cr@pola newspeak...

Marantz has one, I think Onkyo, HK was mentioned...and actually you don't even need the "sub out"...you can buy a powered sub-woofer that has multiple connectivity options and that sums the bass freqs and allows for setting cutoff freqs/phasing, and all that good stuff...

Or you can go multi-channel and just not use the facilities you don't need...the audio-gods won't strike you dead!

It ain't rocket science, no reason to make more of it than it is...

jimHJJ(...hi markw...are we havin' fun yet...)






Pretty sure they exist but can't find in search. I'm almost sure that I have gotten information on these in these forums but can't locate any threads, now. I would like to find a receiver for stereo listening but which also has the ability to attach a woofer if I go to smaller speakers. Or does it matter, if I use only 2 channels of a 5.1 etc. receiver?

I don't like dealing with all the other speakers for one thing and just want to keep things simple-- this is for listening to music primarily, though obviously not multichannel sacd or dvd audio.


Can anyone help?

Thanks

stj

stj
10-02-2005, 07:08 PM
Hey, I went into great detail telling him how to accomplish what he needs to do and he simply ignored my, and everyone elses, input on the subject.

From his use of those numbers it's pretty obvious he has no idea what they mean and from your input in this thread I doubt you do, either.

The fact that so many manufacturer's (particularly 'puter speakers) use the term "2.1" to mean a two channel system with a common bass box doesn't mean that there are really 2.1 systems out there in the same sense that there are 5.1 systems out there. There are major functioinal differences.

Mainly, systems advertised as "2.1" are electricaly and functionally exactly the same as a two channel receiver with a subwoofer.

Now, if he chooses to use a HT receiver for these purposes (and I think it's a waste here) then he STILL won't have the advantage of three separate channels. IOW, there ain't no way to get a 2.1 channel signal from a stereo source. He'll simply have his original two channels with something being fed to the subwoofer, but that subwoofer feed ain't by no stretch of the imagination the magical third ".1" channel.

IMNSHO, he would be better served with a hunky vintage stereo receiver and, if he still chooses to, he can add a sub later.

Now, if you want to prepetuate your "2.1" fairy tales as opposed to accept the truth on this matter then that's your business. I prefer to deal in facts. Consider yoursevs disabused on this matter.


I said thanks. What more do you want?

You are rude.

stj

John Ashman
10-02-2005, 08:26 PM
NAD's new unit is 2.1. Well, sorta. Generally, on these types of units, the mains will run full range and the sub out is simply a summed out. Better than nothing. The only stereo piece I've seen so far with real crossovers is the BIG NAD unit at $2800.

markw
10-03-2005, 01:31 AM
I said thanks. What more do you want?

You are rude.

stj...and you are dense.

nightflier
10-03-2005, 01:48 PM
I don't want to get in the middle of the debate, here, but many stores that sell stereo receivers with a seperate sub-out RCA jack advertise these as 2.1 receivers. So following that logic, HK's 3380/3480 are 2.1 receivers. Unfortunately, the sub-outs on these units are not filtered and are full spectrum signals, although most subs today will still do the filtering for you. None of the lower priced stereo receivers that I am aware of from Marantz, Onkyo, or NAD will do the filtering, although almost all their 5/6/7.1 receivers will.

If you absolutely don't want a multichannel receiver (which understandably complicates processing), then you still have options:

- The mid-priced multichannel receivers from these manufacturers often have a pure 2-chanel processing option which should reduce interference. The 2001-2004 Onkyos of which I've owned several models, however, do not have a pure mode that also outputs to the sub, and so would not help you out. It's either stereo with sub, or pure 2-channel (Large Front L/R) mode.

- The second option is to let the sub do the filtering, as several people above pointed out.

- Moving up the price-point, you can use a preamp that has filtered output. One preamp I'm familiar with is the B&K PT3-II which has 3 pairs of RCA preamp outputs: a full-range for the main amp, a filtered high-frequency output (above 80Hz.) typically for powered remote speakers or amps, and a filtered low-frequency (below 80Hz.) output typically for a sub or sub amplifier. There are several other preamps out there that have multiple outputs.

- Another solution, which also isn't inexpensive is to use the Outlaw Audio bass manager (aka the ICBM), between your pre and your amp. It will filter low frequencies from the preamp outputs and redirect them to a pair of mono sub outputs (for one or two subs / sub amps). It has a crossover adjustment dial on the front and worked very well for us when we were playing around with a pair of Martin Logan speakers with two additional subs, although you can of course use it with less expensive equipment. The ICBM is only $250 and really does wonders considering the cost.

There are other specialized solutions out there as well, but they do get expensive. So to answer your question, yes, there are 2.1 receivers out there, but none that I am aware of that do the filtering. There are however, seperates that will give you a similar effect.

Hope this helps.

stj
10-03-2005, 06:41 PM
Thanks John and Nigtflier and to the others who have posted here. Appears there are a lot of options for two speakers and a sub.

I've heard people comment they prefer 2 bookshelfs and a sub and had wondered about the best way to do this. Also,I have two Energy C5's that I think look nice, which differs from my wifes opinion. Two smaller speakers and a sub will be taking thier place. Then I'll have to find a place to set up the C5's, which I enjoy listening to.

stj







I don't want to get in the middle of the debate, here, but many stores that sell stereo receivers with a seperate sub-out RCA jack advertise these as 2.1 receivers. So following that logic, HK's 3380/3480 are 2.1 receivers. Unfortunately, the sub-outs on these units are not filtered and are full spectrum signals, although most subs today will still do the filtering for you. None of the lower priced stereo receivers that I am aware of from Marantz, Onkyo, or NAD will do the filtering, although almost all their 5/6/7.1 receivers will.

If you absolutely don't want a multichannel receiver (which understandably complicates processing), then you still have options:

- The mid-priced multichannel receivers from these manufacturers often have a pure 2-chanel processing option which should reduce interference. The 2001-2004 Onkyos of which I've owned several models, however, do not have a pure mode that also outputs to the sub, and so would not help you out. It's either stereo with sub, or pure 2-channel (Large Front L/R) mode.

- The second option is to let the sub do the filtering, as several people above pointed out.

- Moving up the price-point, you can use a preamp that has filtered output. One preamp I'm familiar with is the B&K PT3-II which has 3 pairs of RCA preamp outputs: a full-range for the main amp, a filtered high-frequency output (above 80Hz.) typically for powered remote speakers or amps, and a filtered low-frequency (below 80Hz.) output typically for a sub or sub amplifier. There are several other preamps out there that have multiple outputs.

- Another solution, which also isn't inexpensive is to use the Outlaw Audio bass manager (aka the ICBM), between your pre and your amp. It will filter low frequencies from the preamp outputs and redirect them to a pair of mono sub outputs (for one or two subs / sub amps). It has a crossover adjustment dial on the front and worked very well for us when we were playing around with a pair of Martin Logan speakers with two additional subs, although you can of course use it with less expensive equipment. The ICBM is only $250 and really does wonders considering the cost.

There are other specialized solutions out there as well, but they do get expensive. So to answer your question, yes, there are 2.1 receivers out there, but none that I am aware of that do the filtering. There are however, seperates that will give you a similar effect.

Hope this helps.