Using a SPL Meter and Speaker Sizes

[tpirovol]

Hi Everyone,

I recently purchased a RSX-1550 with B&W 683front, HTM62Centre, 685rear. Just wondering what size speakers I should set the Rotel to? I have them set to large and Sub max so that the speakers get the bass as well. Is this correct?

The other thing I would like to ask is how I would use my SPL meter to calibrate my 1550? Do I just turn the SPL on and make sure all the speakers are at the same db level?

Thanks Terry

[Kal Rubinson]

Hi Everyone,

I recently purchased a RSX-1550 with B&W 683front, HTM62Centre, 685rear. Just wondering what size speakers I should set the Rotel to? I have them set to large and Sub max so that the speakers get the bass as well. Is this correct?

Only if you want to maximize the bass and not to balance the system. Generally, one recommends that all speakers (with few exceptions) be set as small so that the low bass is sent to the sub. I have no idea what you mean by setting the to "max' but, if it means the highest level, it is TOO HIGH! Aren't there instructions on this in the user's manual?

The other thing I would like to ask is how I would use my SPL meter to calibrate my 1550? Do I just turn the SPL on and make sure all the speakers are at the same db level?

Yes but (1) make sure the meter is set for "C"-weighting, mounted on a stand or tripod (not hand-held) at the listening position and aimed straight up to the ceiling.

Kal

[joetama]

SUBWOOFER (yes/no/max): The YES setting is the standard setting if
your system has a subwoofer. If your system does not have a subwoofer,
select NO. Select the MAX setting for maximum bass output with normal
bass being duplicated by both the subwoofer and any LARGE speakers
in the system.

I would set the system to Large for the 683 & Center Channel. I would set the subwoofer to MAX and then adjust the subwoofer output level to sound the way you like it. That way low frequency is going though both the subwoofer and the loudspeaker. The reason I do this is to me a subwoofer should be used to supplement the low frequency not replace it.

[Kal Rubinson]

I would set the system to Large for the 683 & Center Channel. I would set the subwoofer to MAX and then adjust the subwoofer output level to sound the way you like it. That way low frequency is going though both the subwoofer and the loudspeaker. The reason I do this is to me a subwoofer should be used to supplement the low frequency not replace it.

That may be your personal preference, so OK. I guess you like a lot of bass.

OTOH, the 683, and certainly the HTM62, are just not capable of handling extreme low bass without distortion, IMHO. They would perform better if they were relieved of that burden.

Kal

[tpirovol]

What would be considered if not the 683's?

Thanks Terry

[Kal Rubinson]

What would be considered if not the 683's?

Thanks Terry

?? Can you restate the question, please?

Kal

[tpirovol]

Sorry what would be considered large speakers if not the 683's?

Thanks Terry

[joetama]

That may be your personal preference, so OK. I guess you like a lot of bass.

OTOH, the 683, and certainly the HTM62, are just not capable of handling extreme low bass without distortion, IMHO. They would perform better if they were relieved of that burden.

Kal

Actually I don't like a lot of bass at all.

But, what is the point of buying a floorstanding loudspeaker with dual bass drivers if you don't like how they sound? The way you suggest using a subwoofer and setup he might as well take his 683 back and get some 685. Because if you aren't going to send the low frequency information to the loudspeaker then why bother with the extra money for the extra drivers taking up space in the cabinte. Set the output setting to MAX, crossover the subwoofer where the low frequency of the loudspeakers rolls off (30-40Hz), adjust the level to suppliment the output and call it a day. /story

[Kal Rubinson]

Sorry what would be considered large speakers if not the 683's? Thanks Terry

Dunno. I use bass management with my 802Ds for multichannel, although I use the L/R straight for stereo.

Kal

[Kal Rubinson]

Actually I don't like a lot of bass at all.

But, what is the point of buying a floorstanding loudspeaker with dual bass drivers if you don't like how they sound?

Who said anything about not liking how they sound? The issue, for me, comes down to the observations that (1) it is nearly impossible to find a unique spot for each speaker that will optimize MR and imaging and that will also optimize bass response. Moving the low bass to the sub (which is then EQ-ed to compensate for room modes) alleviates one of that burden. Also, (2) rolling off the very low bass, increases the output potential for the amp and speakers for that channel since the low bass consumes an inordinate amount. The result is a smoother, flatter overall response and greatly increased power handling for the entire system.

The way you suggest using a subwoofer and setup he might as well take his 683 back and get some 685.

Ah but a 685 would require a much higher crossover with the potential result that the sub would be audibly localizable. At lower crossovers, the 685 would have much less power handling than the 683.

Because if you aren't going to send the low frequency information to the loudspeaker then why bother with the extra money for the extra drivers taking up space in the cabinte.

See above.

Set the output setting to MAX, crossover the subwoofer where the low frequency of the loudspeakers rolls off (30-40Hz), adjust the level to suppliment the output and call it a day. /story

As I said, that gets you a lot of potential problems and, while I would not say it will not work in all instances, it is not a general solution if your goal is a reasonably flat frequency response and maximal power handling for the chosen equipment.

Kal

[wettou]

Dunno. I use bass management with my 802Ds for multichannel, although I use the L/R straight for stereo. Kal

Kal,

What crossover do you use for the 802D 80Hz or lower?

[tpirovol]

So you say set it all up as small and let the sub deal with the bass? I will give it a try when I am back home.

Kal: I notice you are from NY just wondering who has the best deal on Rotel gear in NY city since I am in NJ till friday then in NY till Wed before I head back to TO.

Thanks T

[Kal Rubinson]

Kal,

What crossover do you use for the 802D 80Hz or lower?

40Hz.

[Kal Rubinson]

So you say set it all up as small and let the sub deal with the bass? I will give it a try when I am back home.

Kal: I notice you are from NY just wondering who has the best deal on Rotel gear in NY city since I am in NJ till friday then in NY till Wed before I head back to TO.

Thanks T

I cannot help you with Rotel or retail or both. Sorry, I plead ignorance.

[wettou]

40Hz.

Kal

Does that work better than 80Hz or 60Hz please remind me what you drive the 802D with also I seems to remember that you also have 802 all around?

[Kal Rubinson]

Does that work better than 80Hz or 60Hz.

Makes the sub (jl F113) completely indistinguishable as a source and a contributor for only the very lowest tones. OTOH, my experimentation with this is unfinished.

please remind me what you drive the 802D with also I seems to remember that you also have 802 all around?

The amps change a lot. Currently, Mc(Intosh) MC-303 for the front 3 802Ds and a modified Mc(Cormack) DNA-1 for the surround 804Ss. I swap in/out stacks of BelCanto Ref1000s or a Classe CA-3200.

Kal

[wettou]

Makes the sub (jl F113) completely indistinguishable as a source and a contributor for only the very lowest tones. OTOH, my experimentation with this is unfinished. The amps change a lot. Currently, Mc(Intosh) MC-303 for the front 3 802Ds and a modified Mc(Cormack) DNA-1 for the surround 804Ss. I swap in/out stacks of BelCanto Ref1000s or a Classe CA-3200. Kal

Thanks Kal how much power is for the front then?

I have a similar system like you 3 802D and 2 802N for surround driven by CA-5200. I have been thinking of getting 3 Emotiva XPA-1 (http://emotiva.com/xpa1.shtm) I missed the December sale so I will wait. I would love three CA-M400 but I don't want to put 15K for amps

[Kal Rubinson]

Thanks Kal how much power is for the front then?

As you can infer from the list, it varies depending on the amp(s) in use.

Kal

[wettou]

As you can infer from the list, it varies depending on the amp(s) in use. Kal

So what are we talking about 200W/Channel 400W/Channel ?

[Kal Rubinson]

So what are we talking about 200W/Channel 400W/Channel ?

Depending on the choice of amp, anywhere from 200wpc to 1000wpc.


Kal

[wettou]

Depending on the choice of amp, anywhere from 200wpc to 1000wpc. Kal

Woa 1000 w/c it must make quite a difference what do you find works best? I am not sure if I should bite the bullet and get Classé CA-M400 or Emotiva XPA-1.

Or if my CA-5200 is good enough :B

[Kal Rubinson]

Woa 1000 w/c it must make quite a difference what do you find works best? I am not sure if I should bite the bullet and get Classé CA-M400 or Emotiva XPA-1.

Or if my CA-5200 is good enough :B

The differences that I hear among the amps has, I believe, nothing to do with the power ratings of the amps because, frankly, I do not play much music that places great dynamic demands on them. Sure, the occasional Mahler symphony but usually I am listening for clarity and balance. In my room and with my listening habits, 200wpc is adequate.

Kal

[wettou]

Ok so my next question is how big is your room?

[joetama]

Interesting to hear the way that you do it. I understand why you setup your system the way that you do. It actually is a good theory to take off the low frequency demand of an amplifier, especially if you want to save money and go with a smaller amplifier. I've tried to setup my system this way, but I prefer it the way that I listed. I guess it just comes down to room, personal preference, and equipment. For a sub I either use a custom built box with a TC Sounds TC12OEM or a Martin Logan Dynamo. Both of them handle low frequency fantastically, just have different output levels. But, maybe it is my listening style of habits but if I don't set them up in the max setting crossed over at 40Hz or lower I feel that I can hear the subwoofer and that I am taking away from the dynamics and overall sound of my 703. Maybe this is just paranoia or some other crazy idea but I like the wide unadulterated 20 to 20 idea. To be 100% honest I don't even use a subwoofer for stereo, I just don't like it with my system. If I had a pair of 705 or 805S then I would probably want a sub, but not with my full range system. I've just always been of the opinion that a subwoofer was to supplement a hole in the response, not replace it. But, there are definitely several strong arguments to go sub only with the ultra low frequency.

[Kal Rubinson]

Ok so my next question is how big is your room?

Basic room is 15x26 but there is no back wall as it opens up into two other spaces, an entry foyer and a dining room.

Kal

[wettou]

Basic room is 15x26 but there is no back wall as it opens up into two other spaces, an entry foyer and a dining room.

Kal

Hello Kal

Thank you, I have been thinking about putting an other JLAudio F113. I beleive that you also have two subs what do you see are the benefits and are their any downsides?

[Kal Rubinson]

I have two subs but they are in different houses. Only one per system.

Kal

[wettou]

I have two subs but they are in different houses. Only one per system. Kal

Kal,
What do you think about all the opinions to have two subs even with 802D? Is it overkill?

[Kal Rubinson]

The use of more than one sub, imho, is only for the purpose of obtaining better, less modally-influenced performance. I have no need for more bass or higher levels in my applications.

Kal

[scanido]

The use of more than one sub, imho, is only for the purpose of obtaining better, less modally-influenced performance. I have no need for more bass or higher levels in my applications.

Kal

What about localization on a single sub? I think this would be my main reason for getting dual subs. I am also contemplating a second F113. The added output is just icing on the cake!

[tpirovol]

I had just one question how would the RSX-1550 with a RMB-1075 sound? I am assuming amazing but just wondering if the internal amp is good enough or would I notice a large enough imporvment to spend the extra $900?

Also is $900 a good deal for the 1075?

Thanks Terry

[bnieman]

$900 is not a good deal for the 1075. It's price was (before the new 15 series came out) $1000. Most dealers will give you 10% off which is $900 right there. You can find them on Audiogon in great condition these days around $600 give or take a hundred (which is a great deal)

Or you could bump it up a notch to the RMB-1085 (which I have listed on Audiogon right now )

[tpirovol]

Sorry should have mentioned canada so around $700 new!

[bnieman]

Well in that case, it's a good deal with the 5 year warranty I would still see what you can get a 1085 for though, when I upgraded there was a definite difference between the 1085 and 1075. The 1085 to me sounds like a 1095 which is substantially more money.

[Kal Rubinson]

What about localization on a single sub? I think this would be my main reason for getting dual subs. I am also contemplating a second F113. The added output is just icing on the cake!

Localization is not a problem as the sub crosses over low enough and is situated between/among the front L/C/R, in my case. For others, I think that the crossover frequency and smoothness is the main issue, not localization. OTOH, anything's possible.

Kal

[wettou]

Localization is not a problem as the sub crosses over low enough and is situated between/among the front L/C/R, in my case. For others, I think that the crossover frequency and smoothness is the main issue, not localization. OTOH, anything's possible. Kal

So you have your sub in the middle next in between left and center?
L/Sub/C/R?

Crossover at 40HZ ?

[Kal Rubinson]

So you have your sub in the middle next in between left and center?
L/Sub/C/R?

Between right and center.

Crossover at 40HZ ?

At the moment.

Kal

[kiwi2000]

tiproval wrote
I have them set to large and Sub max so that the speakers get the bass as well. Is this correct?

I think what he means if this has not been covered is within the rotel setting there is an option to set the sub to max. This setting allows bass information to any speaker marked large duplicating the information already sent to the sub.

[wettou]

Between right and center.

At the moment.

Kal

Kal, Did you find out about the XA5400ES yet? :roll:

[John Holmes]

Kal, Did you find out about the XA5400ES yet? :roll:

This isn't the thread for this.

[renpar61]

As I said, that gets you a lot of potential problems and, while I would not say it will not work in all instances, it is not a general solution if your goal is a reasonably flat frequency response and maximal power handling for the chosen equipment.

Kal

Kal,

can you elaborate on this? what potential problems do you see?
I've had a Rotel RSX-1057 for 2 years and I was not aware of the MAX setting for the sub until I read this post. I kept my speakers to "small" and crossed the sub slightly above the speakers' rolling point. In my particular situation I have the sub in a corner behind the listening position and the fact I could "locate" the sub sound bothered me a little. Just for curiosity I tried to set the sub to MAX and the speaker to "large". I haven't had the time to experiment a lot, but the sound seems to be fuller and more uniform. Maybe I lost a little in sound presence. I have Logans Clarity as mains powered separately by Rotel RMB-1070, Logans Fresco as center and surround.
Any thoughts?

[Kal Rubinson]

I am not sure what you are asking. My response was to a specific statement. My main point is that it is difficult to have an ideal speaker location for both imaging and bass.

Kal

[renpar61]

I am not sure what you are asking. My response was to a specific statement. My main point is that it is difficult to have an ideal speaker location for both imaging and bass.

Kal

Maybe I misunderstood you. I thought you were seeing "a lot of potential problems" by setting the speakers to large and the sub to max, therefore duplicating some frequencies in the speakers and the sub. I thought this setting would simply override the cut off on the receiver and make a good use of the crossover in the sub.
I guess my question was if you consider this setting sort of "incorrect"...

[Kal Rubinson]

Maybe I misunderstood you. I thought you were seeing "a lot of potential problems" by setting the speakers to large and the sub to max, therefore duplicating some frequencies in the speakers and the sub. I thought this setting would simply override the cut off on the receiver and make a good use of the crossover in the sub.
I guess my question was if you consider this setting sort of "incorrect"...

Yup. I am concerned about the integration of the redirected bass from the mains and the un-redirected bass. If the main speakers are capable of extreme LF and are EQ-ed for room modes, I would use them that way and let the sub handle LFE.

Kal

[kiwi2000]

Kal wrote

Yup. I am concerned about the integration of the redirected bass from the mains and the un-redirected bass. If the main speakers are capable of extreme LF and are EQ-ed for room modes, I would use them that way and let the sub handle LFE.

What then is your suggestion for the processor configuration to achive this? Setting of max sends all bass information to the fronts and sub(s) to the best of my knowledge.