Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5

    "best speaker" based of frequency

    Hi

    Which of the following speaker specifications is "best"? Will be used as fronts in conjunction with a sub. 50% music and 50% movies.

    (a) 80Hz - 22kHz

    or

    (b) 50Hz - 22kHz

    Thanks


    Paul

  2. #2
    Do What? jrhymeammo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,275
    This one looks suspcious, but I'll bite.

    What speakers are you talking about?

  3. #3
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852
    Specifically, to which two speakers do you refer?

    What are the associated electronics? (amps, pre's, and source)

    What are the room conditions?

  4. #4
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    Quote Originally Posted by PAUL250268
    Hi

    Which of the following speaker specifications is "best"? Will be used as fronts in conjunction with a sub. 50% music and 50% movies.

    (a) 80Hz - 22kHz

    or

    (b) 50Hz - 22kHz

    Thanks


    Paul
    All else being equal, the better spec is b. Which is the better speaker? Anybody's guess.

  5. #5
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5
    Basic HT set-up.

    HTD center (flat panel) http://www.htd.com/cabinet-speakers/...-panel-speaker

    HTD Level 2 sub

    Sony Blu ray player
    Onkyo SR TX 507 5.1 receiver


    I currently have above plus 2 pairs of in walls http://www.htd.com/in-wall-ceiling-s...-wall-speakers It works well but we have just bought a new home and I am little concerned that the right hand side wall does not have the same "density" as the left because it's a false wall.

    So, I was wondering whether I should just go with 2 flat panels L & R.

    I don't have room for floor standing speakers and I'm on a budget.

    And why did the post look suspicious?

    Thanks

    Paul
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  6. #6
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    Quote Originally Posted by PAUL250268
    Basic HT set-up.

    HTD center (flat panel) http://www.htd.com/cabinet-speakers/...-panel-speaker

    HTD Level 2 sub

    Sony Blu ray player
    Onkyo SR TX 507 5.1 receiver

    I currently have above plus 2 pairs of in walls http://www.htd.com/in-wall-ceiling-s...-wall-speakers It works well but we have just bought a new home and I am little concerned that the right hand side wall does not have the same "density" as the left because it's a false wall.

    So, I was wondering whether I should just go with 2 flat panels L & R.
    I don't have room for floor standing speakers and I'm on a budget.
    And why did the post look suspicious?

    Thanks

    Paul
    I don't understand how this information relates to or clarifies the original question, but it's likely still useful. I also don't understand what a false wall is or how that would affect your decision on the number of speakers. If you want to be able to maximize your movie experience, you'll need 5 speakers in addition to the sub...but I guess you knew that. Can you explain the intent of the original question?

  7. #7
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by 02audionoob
    I don't understand how this information relates to or clarifies the original question, but it's likely still useful. I also don't understand what a false wall is or how that would affect your decision on the number of speakers. If you want to be able to maximize your movie experience, you'll need 5 speakers in addition to the sub...but I guess you knew that. Can you explain the intent of the original question?

    Sorry. The "rough" photoshop area to the right of the fireplace is now a sheetrock wall.

    My questions is :

    In walls or flat panel mounted onto surface of wall.

    Thanks.

    Paul

  8. #8
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    No question in my mind out of those two options. I'd go for the 4 little in-wall speakers and a center. It just seems more like the way home theater audio ought to work.

  9. #9
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by 02audionoob
    All else being equal, the better spec is b. Which is the better speaker? Anybody's guess.

    Hi

    Thanks for the response.

    Could you explain why.


    Paul

  10. #10
    Forum Regular blackraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    5,421
    I vote for in wall also for home theater. Its a cleaner look. I feel that HT should be inconspicuous if possible. Who wants 5-7 speakers sitting visible in a room? (some people would I'm sure).

    And spec B is better because of the greater frequency range. B dips down lower so your cross over point can be a little lower with the sub.
    Pass Labs X250 amp, BAT Vk-51se Preamp,
    Thorens TD-145 TT, Bellari phono preamp, Nagaoka MP-200 Cartridge
    Magnepan QR1.6 speakers
    Luxman DA-06 DAC
    Van Alstine Ultra Plus Hybrid Tube DAC
    Dual Martin Logan Original Dynamo Subs
    Parasound A21 amp
    Vintage Luxman T-110 tuner
    Magnepan MMG's, Grant Fidelity DAC-11, Class D CDA254 amp
    Monitor Audio S1 speakers, PSB B6 speakers
    Vintage Technic's Integrated amp
    Music Hall 25.2 CDP
    Adcom GFR 700 AVR
    Cables- Cardas, Silnote, BJC
    Velodyne CHT 8 sub

  11. #11
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    Quote Originally Posted by PAUL250268
    Hi

    Thanks for the response.

    Could you explain why.


    Paul
    Your original question asked about nothing more than the range of frequency response. A wider range would mean that the speaker will respond to and reproduce a wider range. That's added capability not offered with the spec of a narrrower range.

    I said that with all else being equal...meaning a speaker could have a narrower range of frequency response and still be the better speaker of the two.

    The reasons I like the 4 in-wall speakers as compared to the 2 panel speakers are (a) I suspect the panel speakers could lose their focus with all those drivers and HT relies heavily on location of sound and (b) your panel option offered fewer speakers than is required for the full 5.1 program, again compromising location and direction of sound.

  12. #12
    Forum Regular blackraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    5,421
    Very true Noob. Its only if all things are equal except for the freq. response can you say B is better.
    Pass Labs X250 amp, BAT Vk-51se Preamp,
    Thorens TD-145 TT, Bellari phono preamp, Nagaoka MP-200 Cartridge
    Magnepan QR1.6 speakers
    Luxman DA-06 DAC
    Van Alstine Ultra Plus Hybrid Tube DAC
    Dual Martin Logan Original Dynamo Subs
    Parasound A21 amp
    Vintage Luxman T-110 tuner
    Magnepan MMG's, Grant Fidelity DAC-11, Class D CDA254 amp
    Monitor Audio S1 speakers, PSB B6 speakers
    Vintage Technic's Integrated amp
    Music Hall 25.2 CDP
    Adcom GFR 700 AVR
    Cables- Cardas, Silnote, BJC
    Velodyne CHT 8 sub

  13. #13
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by 02audionoob
    Your original question asked about nothing more than the range of frequency response. A wider range would mean that the speaker will respond to and reproduce a wider range. That's added capability not offered with the spec of a narrrower range.

    I said that with all else being equal...meaning a speaker could have a narrower range of frequency response and still be the better speaker of the two.

    The reasons I like the 4 in-wall speakers as compared to the 2 panel speakers are (a) I suspect the panel speakers could lose their focus with all those drivers and HT relies heavily on location of sound and (b) your panel option offered fewer speakers than is required for the full 5.1 program, again compromising location and direction of sound.

    I apologize noob. I will have 5.1 whatever I decide to do. I'll be running 2 in-ceiling for the surrounds (not ideal I know but it's all I can have).

    I'm just trying to decide what to do about the front L and R.

    Paul

  14. #14
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    I hope I'm getting closer to understanding it all, now. I like blackraven's comment about the system being inconspicuous and the one about being able to cross over the sub lower...so I guess I still vote for the in-wall speakers.

  15. #15
    I put the Gee in Gear.... thekid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    VB VA
    Posts
    2,307
    Quote Originally Posted by blackraven
    I vote for in wall also for home theater. Its a cleaner look. I feel that HT should be inconspicuous if possible. Who wants 5-7 speakers sitting visible in a room? (some people would I'm sure).
    You mean like this.......

    Sorry could not resist........
    Please resume normal serious answers to OP

  16. #16
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by thekid
    You mean like this.......

    Sorry could not resist........
    Please resume normal serious answers to OP
    hahahahahahaha....well done kid, "the wall". Feared by wives all over the world. Of course, also known for its superb HT application. Oh man, that was perfect timing...

  17. #17
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by PAUL250268
    Which of the following speaker specifications is "best"?
    Unfortunately, that is like asking whether using eight spark plugs is better than six. There are so many other relevant variables to speaker performance. First of all, every speaker exhibits variations around their nominal response. Those two sets of numbers could represent the same speaker using different tolerances.

    I'll be happy to comment if you care to provide two real world examples.

    rw

  18. #18
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    I thought we are talking about real world examples.

  19. #19
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by 02audionoob
    I thought we are talking about real world examples.
    My mistake - now I see the linked examples. Since neither provides the frequency tolerance, we can only guess. Ideally, a center speaker would use similar drivers as the mains if not a pair of slightly smaller woofers.

    rw

  20. #20
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    Choosing from the two options given by the OP, I just wouldn't want to add any more of that particular cabinet speaker. I'd rather have four of the little guy...

    http://www.htd.com/cabinet-speakers/...4Pa38Ta38PbN90

  21. #21
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by PAUL250268
    Hi

    Which of the following speaker specifications is "best"? Will be used as fronts in conjunction with a sub. 50% music and 50% movies.

    (a) 80Hz - 22kHz

    or

    (b) 50Hz - 22kHz

    Thanks


    Paul
    Those specs are virtually meaningless as they give no plus and minus tolerances. As well, with many manufacturers we have no idea what the speaker specs mean, anyway, like how were they derived (imagination? some sort of measurement?). Does speaker (b) actually go lower than speaker (b)? It's hard to say without measurements.

    As well, even with plus or minus limits, the spec gives no suggestion as to the dispersion pattern of the speakers. Some manufacturers do supply such information in minimal form, but few actually supply graphs such as found in Stereophile or Soundstage.
    "Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony."
    ------Heraclitus of Ephesis (fl. 504-500 BC), trans. Wheelwright.

  22. #22
    3db
    3db is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    527
    Quote Originally Posted by PAUL250268
    Hi

    Which of the following speaker specifications is "best"? Will be used as fronts in conjunction with a sub. 50% music and 50% movies.

    (a) 80Hz - 22kHz

    or

    (b) 50Hz - 22kHz

    Thanks


    Paul
    Like Pat D said, these are meaningless in itself. If speaker A had ruler flat frequncy response and speaker B's frequency response was filled with hills and valleys, I would definetaly choose speaker A over speaker B. Frequency response isn't enough. There HAS to be a tolerance +/- ??db..with te smaller the value in ?? the better the speaker. Also missing is sensitivity, input impedance; both nominal and minimum. All these factors into what kind of amplifciation is needed to drive the loudspeaker.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •