JOEnAZ

I think that what is missing from just about every discussion like this is whether the performance characteristics of the speaker fit your room. This is primarily driven by whether you have a single seat listening environment, or need to cover a listening area and how big that listening area is. Secondly, you have to make sure that the speaker is large enough to produce comfortably at the spl you will require right down to at least 80 Hz. I lived with and loved KL-650-THX LCRs for a number of years, so I use that as a reference for comparison. I do have an area to cover. I require smooth coverage across four seats at a 15' throw from the Center. The KL-650s did a pretty good job with this, but the left and right definitely required some toe-in to cover the row. My room is a large open floor plan media room of large volume (impossible to calculate). On a lark I took a chance to experiment with DIYSG. So impressed with them, I now utilize the HTM-12 for L/R mains, and an 88 Special center (due to architectural limitations). So impressed with the LCRs, I replaced the KS-525-THX surround speakers around the room with DIYSG Volt-10LX coaxial speakers. The minimum throw of the surround speakers is 12'. I also run four subwoofers, but not DIYSG designs. I utilize MultEQxt32 for room correction, including the separate Audyssey Sub Equalizer. I cross the LCRs at 60Hz. For this large room an the DIYSG LCRs, this is a perfect match. Before diving into the DIYSG LCRs, I tried a single new Heresy. These are very similar to the HTM-12 in footprint and concept, but...the directivity of the Heresy was too great for my requirements. Although it could cover two middle seats, it could not cover smoothly all four in the row. The DIYS SEOS-15 waveguide is noticeably wider and smoother at the limits of its dispersion pattern. That waveguide with the large compression drivers in those models also retains powerful directivity, but focused in a wide horizontal pattern, and with reasonable vertical dispersion, too. So, you don't give up the authority that higher directivity provides; you just spread it over a larger area. Although the KL-650s could be fired up plenty loud, there was a bit of strain when you got up there in loud transients. I didn't really notice it that much...until replacing them with the DIYSG LCRs. I think the secret sauce of these speakers is the unique design using professional drivers but crossovers customized for the residential environment. The designer mentioned in another post (Matt) is particularly good at this. They take professional drivers capable of brutal power, and tame them to a residential environment while still retaining all the potential for commercial level brute force. That sound is effortless; never strained...refined but with serious authority. At least that's how I describe them. The Volt-10LX surrounds would not be a great choice in a smaller room, IMO, because they would tend to sound too directional. In this large room (I use two side surrounds on each wall and two back surrounds), their professional beef can really be heard and interweaves with the LCRs exceptionally. They do not create a surround field or discrete surround sounds that sound like compact surround speakers create! It is far more realistic in spectral performance and authority when called for. Overall, I would be more likely to compare several of the DIYSG models (HTM-12, HTM-10, 88 Special, and Titan-615LX for LCRs and Volt-10 LX surrounds) to the larger JBL Synthesis models in character of sound and capability to perform in large rooms. Not sure if I was adequate in my explanation, but I think the most important factor is matching up the right speaker to your environment. The Heresy could have been great if I didn't need the wide coverage.

I finally have a little time (and a little more money in my pocket), so I've got a pair of Heresy IIIs on the way.

That's a logical choice...and I've looked at it and every model there, given the good experience with the 88 Special. The Cinema-8 is a bit too tall to fit in the niches I have. I have expansion room downward in the niche, but not without major cutting. If I were to start cutting for more room, I'd go with the Cinema-10 Max...which is narrow in width enough to be able to toe-in, and would be very powerful down to my 80Hz crossover. One downside to the Cinema-10 is no flat pack. Rather than cut downward and build two more speakers, I began to consider the Heresy III. Thanks for the reply and idea. Very welcomed. On any Sunday...a great idea can appear from anywhere.

Thank you all for the replies. Forgive me for being away so long after the initial post; just got buried with work for a while. It's complicated. Room volume is impossible to calculate due to large open floor plan. Also complicating is the installation which is in niches/cubbies that are just big enough for the Heresies with some toe in room in the width dimension. This puts them in a 2pi acoustic situation with the accompanying 200Hz boost, but Audyssey Pro handles that easily, so that is not an issue. At least those niches are at or just above ear height. The center niche will not permit an Heresy (read below about DIY SEOS). Yes, that's right. I recently built an 88 Special to test and utilize as a center since the niche I have for it is close to that dimension. In free space in the room (well clear of boundaries), the 88 Special is very impressive. I hamstring it a bit in the niche installation, but as long as I keep it out at least flush with the wall plane, it still does great (after Audyssey Pro calibration). DIYSG's Fusion-12 Tempest model is fairly similar in dimensions to the Heresy, but a bit deeper. That depth robs me of the room I need to be able to toe-in that speaker...which is a necessity to cover the primary listening area. Hence, the Heresy with its slightly smaller dimensions which permits the toe-in, the 3-way design, and the sensitivity seem like it would be an excellent choice and work well with the 88 Special. I also notice that the Heresy mid and woofer cross pretty low...which is pretty close to where the 88 Special crosses...considerably lower than most residential "hi-fi" speakers. I only require/expect any speaker to be good/linear down to 80Hz. That provides freedom to place nominally for LCR location, and permits nominal LF acoustic response with Sub placement to continue the linear response in the lower octave and a half or so. With regards to Audyssey, I have a lot of experience with it and Audyssey Pro. The "problem" with Audyssey is that there is not a verification pass after the calibration run. It presumes it did what it intended. As you guys have noted, it often has not. A decent and affordable RTA like OmniMic or similar can easily be used to verify the with-and-without effectiveness of Audyssey. I use the same mic positions as used in the Audyssey passes to spatial average to verify. You can turn off your subs and see how each speaker has done, then engage the subs and see how the splice and general smoothness turned out (with and without Dynamic EQ turned on). EDIT: You can also check the crossover selection effectiveness while the subs are off. Average at two different crossover points (40Hz vs 80Hz) and see if the lower really make that big a difference. Then do the same with the subs on Typically, the smoother response with the subs will occur with the higher LCR crossover (presuming around 80Hz). That higher crossover also allows the LCR woofer(s) to have much more headroom for dynamics on sound in the 80Hz to 200Hz range where there are a lot (gunfire, percussion instruments, etc.). I love DEQ, but find that it often chooses a trim level for the subs that is too loud at lower-than-Reference listening. The "tell" on the heavy LF is usually in coloring male voices/dialog. Using the RTA, you can easily quantify the LF difference between no-DEQ and DEQ and customize it for your common volume setting (probably less that Reference). I find that DEQ LF perception then tracks quite consistently across all the levels at which I listen. Yes, that's a bit of subjectivity, but not so much. You're only "compensating" for a bit for the Audyssey choice whether part of its algorithm or an acoustic anomaly that is causing the heavy LF. You aren't defeating it, just shifting its overall amplitude. It will still be tracking dynamically. FWIW I was hoping for some good subjective impression comments on the Heresy IIIs as LCRs...in case you have them to share.

I've searched, but not found a lot of folks using the Heresy III for LCRs. Seems you see a lot of hubbub here and there about DIY kits that have similar, albeit 2-way, designs and physical forms. Now, I would be the first to say that I don't have nor would I ever have a configuration where Heresy IIIs were placed on the floor. I have a large room and would either be on ear-level stands or in niches (with appropriate EQ to "defeat" the 2pi boundary gain effect), but it seems that this speaker would be a great choice for a room with longer throws and no necessity for -3dB response below 80Hz. Anybody out there using these as LCRs? Impressions?

How do you convert it into a separate amp? You just use the discrete 7.1 inputs, select Direct as the input on the 4806, and I also select Pure Direct. You set its volume at 0dB (reference), and then calibrate your AVC normally. Audyssey calibration will set the channel trims in the AVC accordingly. The 4806 is a THX Ultra2 amp, so setting it at 0dB and using a THX Ultra2 (or Ultra2 Plus) AVC will preserve the THX gain structure so that you get what your supposed to get at Reference (0dB on the AVC). Of course, almost none of us listen at that level, but it is essential that calibration is done at that level. New Audyssey and THX features such as Dynamic EQ and THX Loudness Plus do a terrific job of delivering the intended psychoacoustic affects of the surrounds and low frequency response at listening levels below Reference.

Hey, TK, thanks for the info. I wasn't dissatisfied with the 4806. The processing of what replaced it, including newer version of MultEQxt, is just superior to that in the 4806. The calibration was not the issue. I am an Audyssey installer, THX Professional (Level 2), HAA-certified, ISF-certified, blah blah. [*-)] So, everything in sight is calibrated ad nauseum, and kept that way. [] Technology just marched on. That said, the 4806 makes a superb "separate" amp with the new AVC!

Well, we'll have an excellent review to read!

Do you have any idea at what luminance (reference white) the calibrator set for your plasma? Much effort gets spent on whether to calibrate day and/or night modes. I've pretty much abandoned the day night issues as I do ISF calibrations. I use the SMPTE luminance spec for direct view displays of that size. Displays are getting much better at not clipping whites, so the SMPTE spec seems to hit a happy place; bright enough for the not so controlled day, but not overwhelming at night. This spec is what is used in telecine and broadcast (which are light controlled environments). You might ask your calibrator where he set that (in foot-lamberts). If he set it down in cinema/front projection territory (12 to 16 fL) you're going to be unhappy, and it will appear low on contrast, maybe even muddy unless you're sitting mighty close. The reason luminance specs differ between sizes of displays and envirionments is for many reasons, but the biggest reason has to do with how we perceive "brightness" and how much of the image occupies our vision. Big cinema-sized images are perceived a being quite bright at their spec because they are so large in our vision. A monitor display has a considerably higher luminance/white level spec. With regards to audio...what AVR or AVC are you using (therefore what Audyssey product)? Audyssey will certainly advise almost all speakers be set no lower than 80Hz for several reasons, even when the calibration run indicates "large." It partly has to do with amp headroom preservation, but also for acoustic reasons, which ultimately are Audyssey processing capacity issues as well. The lower the frequency, the greater chance that the positions in which your LCRs have to be to create the proper front stage may not be acoustically nominal for low frequency response (below 80Hz). Audyssey MultEQ would like to have as much of its horsepower available to deal with the low frequency response of the sub(s) (which have the freedom to be located in an acoustically friendly location). If Audyssey has to deal with sub-80Hz acoustic issues with the LCRs, it has less left to deal with the low frequency processing for the subs. Since much of what Audyssey has to process is in the time domain, it is better for the sub to carry that content. The Audyssey guide and thread on AVS are excellent. Cheers

My pleasure. Your have the right priorities regarding protecting your 650s...even though they are darn tough. I would say there is a strong case for more power in your room, even with the wonderful efficiency of the 650s. Is there any chance that you are running the 650s full range? If so, that could possibly push your amp into clipping quite easily. Even though they can perform in some rooms well below 80Hz, I'd recommend dumping that off to the sub(s) to give your amp more headroom. If it's an encouragement, my room is about double the volume of yours, but a sitting distance of 15' with no stress on the amp.

Here's my experience regarding this subject...and I was a bit surprised at my findings and conclusions. I would guess that the biggest improvement in Wow factor you will make is in a new processor. I was using the THX U2 system in a fairly large room with a Denon AVR-4806, no slouch on processing or amplification. I just upgraded to a new AVC but used the amp section of the 4806 for my "seperate" amp. The sonic improvement was quite monumental. The list of SQ improvements is long, but I can summarize and conclude that the processing in the 4806 was the weak link. The Denon amp running in pure direct does a spectacular job. I have zero need to upgrade to the Emotiva or anything else for an amp. Depending on the size of your room, your listening distance, and your volume preferences will affect your requirements for power; whether what you have is enough or not. On the subject of a new processor (AVR or AVC), I have the highest praise for new technologies offered by Audyssey. After proper calibration, Dynamic EQ is an amazing accomplishment, and based on very well known and good science. You will find that you can listen at lower volume levels, if you wish, and enjoy a very rich experience due to Dynamic EQ. The wifey definately notices this and appreciates. She also likes the Audyssey feature, Dynamic Volume, to tame the volume of TV commercials. There are a number of products that now include these features at reasonable prices. I chose Onkyo, and am extremely pleased. The only thing I have not done with the new AVC is an Audyssey Pro calibration. The latest generation of user Audyssey MultEQxt is noticably more capable than older versions. I'm not sure if Audyssey Pro calibration could make a significant improvement in my room...because it already sounds terrific. Edit: There would certainly be no downside to utilizing an Emotiva amp as part of an upgrade. I just didn't need it. Considering the original price of the 4806, I am thrilled to see it find a new life as a superb amplifier. Good luck.

Anyone here THX U2 (KL-650) users who have tried them with any of the XPA amps?