Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community

sivadselim

Regulars
  • Content Count

    852
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About sivadselim

  • Rank
    Forum Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You set that atop that gorgeous speaker?!?!?!? []
  2. Unfortunately in Buenos Aires, Argentina. UInfortunately?!?!?!? I hear it's an awesome city. [H]
  3. IIRC, your Integra has more advanced and more flexible bass management capabilities than most AVRs.
  4. As hinted in the thread, there is really no need to use a Y-adapter unless the sub's Auto-ON (if it's so equipped) is not workig properly, in which case a Y-adapter might help. With your front speakers, it is understandable why you would want to run them as LARGE. It is also understandable why you would want to use the "Extra Bass" (is that really what it's called?) setting so that the sub can participate in the reproduction of not just the LFE channel but some of the front channel bass, as well This sort of setup can be made to work but it can also result in, as also hinted in the thread, a lot of redundant bass. How much redundant bass there would be would depend upon (in addition to your room's effect, of course) the low-pass frequency which might be being applied to the front channel bass frequencies that are duplicated at the sub. With many AVRs it can be difficult to ascertain what that frequency might be. If you can still set a front channel "crossover" setting while the front speakers are set to LARGE, this may well be the low-pass that is applied with the "Extra Bass" setting. So, setting it to 40Hz (or even lower if you AVR allows it), near the low-end capablilty of your RF7s, might be useful. If, however, there is no way to ascertain or adjust this setting, your AVR may well duplicate all those front channel frequencies below, for example, 80Hz (or even higher). In which case your setup would be reproducing a significant amount of bass redundantly from both your front speakers and the sub between the RF7s low-end roll-off and the 80Hz (or whatever ) low-pass that is being applied to those front channel frequencies that are also being sent to the subwoofer. Assuming that you can set different crossover frequencies for all your speaker channels, I think that a better option would be to try setting the RF7s to SMALL with a 40Hz crossover setting. This will allow you to still get a lot out of your front speakers' prodigious low-end capabilty without worrying about reproducing redundant front channel bass at the subwoofer, as well as also relieve your AVR's front chanel amps of having to amplify those frequecies below 40Hz. And, honestly, you may want to even try using the more oft-cited 80Hz (for all the speakers, btw). I know that this might seem high to you for your speakers, but the octave difference between a 40Hz and 80Hz crossover setting is significant in terms of the amount of work the AVR's amplifiers have to do in order to amplify the lowest frequencies. If clean headroom is not a concern or issue for you, though, this may not be a significant concern for you. But realize that even with an 80Hz crossover setting, your front speakers' woofers will still be used pretty significantly to reproduce the front channel content.
  5. Assuming you mean the receiver's crossover setting, you set that based upon the capabilities of your speakers, particularly your front 3 speakers. Except in a couple of very unique circumstances, your subwoofer's capability doesn't dictate what that settng should be.
  6. Sweet. I miss my RSW-15. [:'(]
  7. If you are going to gain match your subs like that, and use MCACC to set the sub channel's level, honestly, there really is no reason for you to get an SPL meter. Unless, of course, you want to do some measuring. It can be useful for adjusting the relative phasing of the two subs. Misleading, too.
  8. There are some AVRs available now with truly independent subwoofer outputs and a version of Audyssey that can do just that.That said, Audyssey (at least the more capable versions), because of the specific way it works, actually does a very good job of dealing with phasing anomolies with two (or more) subs connected to a single subwoofer output.. I donl't know about MCACC but I do know it works very differently from Audyssey.
  9. This is level-matching. And it can work just fine. However, it is also very possible that after applying EQ, in unison, to two (or more) level-matched subwoofers that they would no longer be level-matched. Not really a big deal but for identical (not dissimilar) subwoofers connected to a single subwoofer output, I would recommend simply gain-matching them. It is probably easier to do and has some advantages over level-matching.
  10. An AVR's auto-EQ/auto-cal can't do anything, directly, to adjust the phasing between 2 (or more) subs connected via Y-splitter to a single sub output or 2 (or more) subs connected to separate sub outs that are not capable of being independently adjusted by the AVR. Phasing between two (or more) subs in this instance would, of course, have be adjusted as best as possible at the subs, themselves. An AVR's auto-EQ/auto-cal in this instance would (could or should), however, be able to (try to) compensate, to some degree, for any acoustic anomolies that might result from 2 (or more) subs not being in phase with one another. In other words, if there were a severe dip in the combined FR at a particular frequency that was attributable to subwoofer phasing, you would (or might) expect an AVR's auto-EQ/auto-cal software to try to address that. But, I do not know what the exact capabilities at the lower frequencies are of the version of MCACC in question.
  11. I assume you mean in unity. In other words, it will adjust both subs' combined output, but not individually. Unless the AVR is equipped with a version of Audyssey that will do two subs individually, Audyssey wil do the same; that being, EQ and adjust the combined output of two (or more) subs, in unison.Or am I misunderstanding? [:S]
  12. As CECAA850 said, there is no problem at all in using a Y-splitter. However, you really should assess what your AVR's capabilities truly are. If it has 2 sub outs (and you only have 2 subs), whether those sub-outs are EQ'd/bass and time managed/level-matched/etc. individually or not, you should just simply use the 2 separate sub outs to connect your subs (unless wiring with a Y-adapter somewhere away from the AVR provides you with tidier wiring). But if your AVR is capable of EQing/bass and time managing/level-matching/etc. 2 sub outs independently, and you ARE going to use the MCACC to EQ/bass and time managed/level-match/etc. your setup, then, by all means, I would take advantage of that capability. What is your AVR's model # (forgive me if you have already stated this)? I will have a look at the manual and see if I can decipher what its capabilities are in this regard. It's an output, not an "input". What do you mean it calibrates settings based on the two locations? It either can adjust the two sub outputs individually or not.
  13. Not sure how this has resolved (or if it has) but just because an AVR has 2 separate sub outs and/or is called by its manufacturer an "x.2" AVR doesn't mean that the two sub outs are treated individually and independently. On some AVRs they are, and the AVR can EQ and bass and time manage each output independently, but on many AVRs the 2 sub outs are simply duplicate outputs that provide nothing that is any different than using a Y-splitter on an AVR's single sub out could provide.
×
×
  • Create New...