PaulE

Frzninvt: When I went from just receiver (Sony STR-V333ES) to receiver driving amp (Audiosource Amp3) via preouts, I found that, even though the amp is 150 wpc and the receiver 110 wpc, the decibel level which had normally been 80 at a given volume was now about 75...That is to say, the preouts must be reducing the signal a bit...The receiver has 2V preouts....Did you find the same thing on your Denon? What voltage spec is on your front R&L preouts?

Is the preamp stage in most $800 av receivers good enough to drive an external stereo amp to improved music sound quality?

Keith, to put it nicely as I can, look at the specs on both the SB3 and the RB5...Freq response is virtually the same, same size drivers...one is copper...Whooooo. In comparing these 2 lines, I have heard reviews from people comparing the floor standing models, and some have liked the bass response better on the Synergies. Sure, the Reference is marketed as the better sexier line...But sound wise, I believe they are very close....Not just from what I've heard, but from others's reviews as well....Sure, youre welcome to your opinion, but I just dont think the difference is that big. Maybe you'll hear it; maybe you wont...that kind of thing....

Spider, the speakers are SB-3. Theyre nice speakers, but because of their 52hz freq cutoff, I use them with a Sony SAWM40 sub.

I have a Sony STR-V333ES receiver, to which I want to attach a 2 channel amp to run my front R&L speakers for better classical music listening....I'm looking in the $500 - $700 area, for a 2 channel amp in the 100 to 130 w/c power range. The research I've done as shown me 3 possibilites: Acurus A100, Rotel 981, Nad 2200 or C-270, and Anthem MCA-2. Does anybody have experience with these, and any recommendations?

Thanks for the responses....I'm still unclear about one thing though...The freq response of my Sb3s goes down to 52 hz. The SC1 center goes down to 60 hz, as do my surrounds. Given these minimum frequencies, then why would I want to set my receiver crossover at 80 hz? Is it because we are allowing for a 20 hz error in rating, or, because of the slope of the rolloff, we want to allow the approx 20 hz between the 80 hz setting, and the 60 hz freq response rating? Thanks.

Thanks for posting this.....I wanted to send you this link, from a guy who claims, quite in contradicition to yourself, that you should Never use the small settings! http://www.hometheatersound.com/features/videonoise/vn_20010101.htm After reading it, do you find Any validity in any of it? I have my doubts!

My speakers are SB-3 up front, with matching center and surrounds, with active subwoofer. I'm sure this has been answered ad infinitum, only I couldnt find any references, so I'll ask again: In a typical home theater receiver, like my Sony STR-V333ES, how should I set my speaker sizes? I currently have my center set at small, with center channel crossover set at 80 hz, and my rear surrounds are also set small, with crossover set at 120 hz. And, I currently have my front SB-3s set as Large. Should I change these fronts to small also? Its more important to me these days to get music sounding the best,so that's how I want to tune it...I believe that for music, it sounds better setting the fronts to Large, for full range listening...Also, if I were to set the fronts to small, with the crossover set anywhere around 80 hz, I believe the bass sent to the sub would be audibly directional at that frequency. Thanks.

Dear Afraid, I dont know, but wouldnt you be better off with the 'real' matching center and surrounds, which are the sc1 and ss1? They have efficiency ratings of over 94db, and can easily handle over 100wrms. I have the SB3 monitors up front, and like the other synergy models, including yours, they match to my sc1s and ss1s. good luck.

I have the SB3s upfront, and teh matching synergy center and surrounds...For the sub, I have the highly rated, and cheap, Sony SAWM40. Now, my receiver, like yours, is a Sony STR model like yours..Only mine is the cheapest STR which gives DD and DTS, ie, the 445. It came from an awards catalogue at work, so I didnt exactly pay for it...Nevertheless, the sound is fine, and works well with the speakers....Your 945 is a Fine receiver...The reason you dont hear good stuff about Sony is two words : Snob Appeal. The same reason you dont see Klipsch speakers mentioned, instead of the 'snobbier' speakers like NHT, Paradigm, B&W, etc. I think youd be nuts frankly to replace your Sony....Theres absolutely nothing wrong with that receiver...Ive read that these receivers run hot, and humm...Well, so what...Mine runs warm, not hot, and its never caused problems...And as far as the hum goes, well, What Hum? I dont have any...I think those guys are turning it up to max volume, putting it on a silent passage, and surprise, surprise, theres hum! So What! Those in the know, who arent swayed by snob appeal will readily admit the Sonys are fine.

I do alot of research on different components, and am surprised at the almost total lack of respect Klipsch speakers seem to be getting.....Following is the typical list of recommendations I come across, when folks are trying to stock their HT with 5-6 speakers for under 1K$ and is copied from a post: Psb Alpha AV setup (combine smaller rears for cost savings) Paradigm Atom or Mini Monitor setup (as above) B&W DM302 setup NHT Super One and smaller rears like the Super Zero Other bookshelf setups like Mirage FRx setup, Energy e:XL or Encore setup So, why no Klipsch? Are these other brands really worthy of more attention than Klipsch? I have a Synergy set around SB3s and am extremely happy, and cant imagine those others are really better....Can someone explain?

I felt the same not long ago...A few months back I needed a pair of fronts. So I went to The Wiz, and auditioned JBL, Polk, Bose, and Klipsch. Well, I thought JBL and Polk sounded similar on the cd I brought...Then,I asked him to switch on the Klipsch...They were a pair of SB3s, and because of their increased efficiency, the had a ton more 'presence', so he had to turn them down to the same volume the others played at...STill, they sounded better. Alot better. funny, cause I was planning on buying floor standing speakers, but these SB3s just blew me away..Besides, all the towers come with 6.5" woofers, and my SB3s have 8". Between the SF1 and the SB3, I'd take the SB3. Jumping up in price, I might have opted for the SF2, but it would be close, thats how good the SB3s are. Anyway, it always surprises me how when you read people's reviews, theyre always talking about the Paradigms, or NHT or PSB, etc, and leaving out the Klipsch...It makes no sense, cause they can hold their own against any of these.

What is it, and how does it differ from playing, say, VH1 over my 5.1 speakers in pro logic mode? Is it more than the fact that my rear 2 channels only play in Mono, or is this the crux of the difference?

Well CO1nf, here's the problem...True, the sub produces better bass below a certain level. BUT, I dont think that level is 80 hz as you say....I believe that good speakers produce the better bass down to near the limit of their freq response. With my SB3s, the freq response starts at 52, so I feel that down do about 60 hz, they will produce the better bass. First, down to a certain level, getting the bass in stereo, mainly with music, is advantageous. Second, I dont know at what hz level the bass becomes non directional, but its questionable that at 80 hz, you cant detect difference. I feel that in general, with HT, it may be ok to do as you say, but with music, I'd set the fronts to large.

What sub do YOU have that rattles the neighbors apts at such low volume? at least in my apt, I havent had to turn off the sub; just down to 1/4 volume or so. To compensate for turning off the sub, you said you set your fronts to Large, so the bass is redirected ... But, I have my fronts set to Large All the time...They are Klipsch SB-3s, and with 8" woofers, I saw no point in setting them to small, and losing the front stage bass. But, are you saying I'd be better off setting them to Small when using the sub? For Movies/TV? Music? Thanks.

I hate to admit it, but, I just purchased a new sub...I would never have considered this mfg for subs, except I've read of nothing but RAVE reviews for it everywhere, including home theater mag. Anyway, its the Sony SA-WM40 12" 120 watt sub, and for $199, its got punch and accuracy equal to that of many > $500 subs...Its not me saying that, but many others...On Audioreview.com, it rates , I think, a 4.8something from a large respondent sample. At a similar price, and similarly equipped is the AR sub, so I was considering both, but, I went with the sony. I was surprised I went that route, but hey, that's what the research showed!

My listening room is 12 X 25 ft. I'm in a hi rise condo, with neighbors above, below, and to each side. I have a Sony STR-DE445 DTS/DD receiver rated at 80 watts / channel. My speakers are a Synergy matched set with SB3 monitors as my fronts. The sub I'm using came with a crappy set of sony speakers I was given, and I want to replace it, without driving the neighbors to throw me out...So far, I've only managed to get one complaint. I hope I'm not pushing my luck by gowing with a better sub, but I cant decide whether the KSW-10 or KSW-12 is the one I should get. I'd get the 10, only I'm afraid the power is too little at 55 wrms. It seems the 12 is the only one I wont wind up outgrowing in a while, especially if I move. Anyway, what are your thougthts about which will work better with my system. Thanks.

On your specs page, the power reads 'dynamic power: 225 watts'. I also read elsewhere where the amp in these subs puts out only 55 watts rms. Whats the difference between these two measures, and, are they both correct?

I currently have SB3s up front, and am waiting for a pair of SS1s for the rear, and an SC1. The SB3s have an 8" woofer and have a freq response starting at just 52 hz. The SF2 uses 1 6.5" woofer, but starts its freq. response at 40 hz. Why, with the smaller, same material woofer and build, does the SF1 give more bottom end? Is it the resonance that the tower provides which more than makes up for the smaller woofer? Would this mean that the SF1 would provide a perceptibly greater range than my SB3s? If so, I may move the SB3s to the rear, if I can cancel my SS1 order, and replace them with either SF1s or ever better, SF2s up front? Comments? Or, is it unlikely that anyone would hear the difference among the 3 models in your average, 280 sq ft room with all kinds of music? Thanks.

Yes, I considered this..HOwever, the speakers are situated about 6.3 feet up in the air on top of my wall unit. The seating areas are about 10 feet in front of them. I believe that, on their sides, the horns should be projecting just about right for those sitting in the chairs and couch listening.

I just picked up a pair today after auditioning them against Polks and JBLs. Because of their incredible sensitivity rating, each time the salesman switched the console from another speaker back to the SB-3s, the presence just soared. It wasnt just the presence, though...They seemed clearer and more distinct....I feel that against the Polk R series, these just buried them..The comparison with the JBL Northridge and Studio series was closer, and if they had the same sensitivty, it might have been closer. But, as it is, the SB-3s just blew away any of the others...Hence, I brought 'em home...I overpayed, paying list at a store which had all the others discounted, but since they sound so good, I dont even mind that much.....These are simply great speakers, and outplay many towers costing considerably more.

I just picked up a pair of SB-3s and I love them, although I overpayed, as I paid a list $450 from a store which discounts everything else, but apparently not these...still, I'm not unhappy, because theyre some of the best sounding speakers I've ever heard...I have them situated in my wall unit, and I have them on their side...Is there any reason bookshelf monitors like these cannot be placed either horizontally, or vertically, without negative impact?