Heritage_Head

No. My guess is as StephenM pointed out, some do some don't, and when it comes to older material definitely "not." Remember the industry assumes that there will be Bass Managment at the users end just as there is in theaters...Again, if I am right and you enjoy your setup who cares what I think. I really don't think you are missing/gaining much either way...Fwiw, when I had my older Denon AVR-4802R I ran my RF-7s as large but with the addition of Audyssey on the AVR-4806 model I have been able to fine tune my Home Theater even further by running my mains as Small. It’s all good I like hearing people’s opinions on this stuff its very interesting and I seem to learn something new every day on these forums. It sounds really good both ways and really at this point its tuff to do it wrong just different.

Like I said I do it because I like how my subs sound better with the speakers set to large. The rest of the speaker’s imo sound the same large or small because there really isn’t any content anyways. Some speakers need bass management so there is differently a purpose for it. But if your speakers can handle 50 Hz with ease it doesn’t matter too much like svs and corn just said.

Yes that’s very close to what svs said and what I found.

Where is a reference for this assumption? EDIT: I also cross my RF-7s at 60 Hz because anything lower than that my RSW subs can handle better. I hadn’t really thought about it tell a conversation with SVS sparked my interest and I did some research on audio mixing for movies and confirmed what he said. The normal cut off for a speaker/channel is 80 Hz because that’s how movie theaters are set up. They send all the really low stuff to the lfe. (Why wouldn’t they?) All thx speakers are designed to go down to 80 Hz and up. Look at the stats for the klipsch thx speakers they are rated at 80 Hz and up. I’m not trying to convince anyone that one way is right. Just replying to your post when you asked how I came up with setting speakers to large. And SVS wasn’t telling me to set my speakers to large he just explained why it’s not as big of a deal as it seems to be made into in audio circles. You can crossover your speakers but you’re just not sending much of anything that low to the sub because there isn’t anything much to send below around 50 Hz. The reason I say 50 Hz and not 80 is because there is always a slope (12db or 24db) so at the 50 Hz point there really isn’t too much to send to the lfe. crossover your 7s at 60hz so you’re at the most sending about 50 hz-60hz to your sub. Same goes for your other speakers. So my way isn’t better it’s basically the same with just a little less mid bass to my subs. If you like it great I personally like how my subs sound without the extra bump in that range. For me it’s all about how it makes the subs sound and nothing to do with my speakers being full range or not. http://www.klipsch.com/kl-525-thx-bookshelf-speaker#second As far as “reference for this assumption” I will look for some proof if you need it. But ask yourself this. For the very same reasons you and 98% (me included) of people would argue to send all the real low bass content to the sub. Those same reasons would be a good “reference for this assumption” every point you make for your argument is another reason they would mix it that way. Right?

On your 2nd part yes if the sub was turned off the fronts would get a full load. That’s one example why it’s important for the channels to be full range 20-20k. But when the sub is set to yes the fronts don’t get lfe info its separate. I have read in some forums people saying large means they do but that is absolutely wrong.

FYI, Dolby does spec that each discrete channel is full range: http://www.ti.com/lit/an/spra724/spra724.pdf Some do, some don't. For the front channels though, I would practically count on the channels being utilized full range, reason being that if the analog outputs are utilized on a DVD player, the only bass that will be left is that on the front channels (LFE is thrown away). Full range capability doesn’t mean anything other than it has the ability to process 20-20k. The content material in movies just doesn’t have super low content to those channels. So just because it can doesn’t mean it automatically will. I will say it again sound engineers have no reason to put that type of content into those channels so they don’t. When you listen to music its full range right? But that doesn’t mean you’re hearing 20 Hz because most music doesn’t go any lower than 30hz.It’s the same thing with movies full range just means that it will get the full content of that channel which just happens to be in the 50-20,000 range. So again it comes down to what is really being crossed over. In theory yes if movies had low content (like lower than 30 Hz) going to those channels then it would be very useful. But that’s just not the case.

Plus it comes down to what sounds best. If it sounded better to run them as small I would. If you’re set up sounds better setting it to small then you should keep them small. We should never do something just because other people like it that way. I have tried it a lot of ways and this is how it sounds best so far. I think we get hung up on doing things because that’s what might technically be the best way. I wasn’t recommending it just saying it’s how I set up mine.

Wow my HT is a happy meal []

lol

1) In a perfect world no, but what speakers do you suggest reproduce the full range of sound effectively and what will you be driving them with? In the real world the more prudent question to ask is at what frequency is your sub better to hit those notes and blend with your other speakers and have a seamless sound environment while wasting the least amount of energy. 2) Yes, Who in their right mind would have a great sound system and then skimp on the sub? If they did, they may have well not purchased the sub in your above scenario and direct the LFE material to their mains. EDIT NOTE: No matter what I drive my RF-7s with my dual RSW subs are going to hit anything below 60 Hz with more thump because they each have a 650 watt continuous/2400 watts peak Bash amp and that takes alot of strain off of my AVR and allows my Home Theater blends seamlessly. I set everything too large to reduce the amount of mid bass content to my subs. Movie content doesn’t have super low frequency content to any of the speakers anyways so by setting your speakers to small (at say80hz) your only really redirecting frequencies in the 50hz-80hz range . To me adding all that extra mid bass to your sub makes it sound boomy. I see it on my screen with the sms-1 eq it runs its tone out of all the speakers not just the subs so I can see what is really happing. I totally understand all the logic of it and there are arguments to support both sides. But if you crossover your fronts at say 40hz you’re not changing anything because there is no content below that on the movie to the fronts anyways so what are you crossing over? If you crossover your surrounds at 50 Hz you’re not changing anything because movies don’t have content to the rears below 50 Hz. I run only lfe content to the subs and imo that’s when they sound there best. All my speakers can handle 50 Hz and up pretty easily. I have spent many many hours reading both sides and have kept an open mind to both ways. I ran my stuff set too small for a long time. But after having a long conversation with a SVS tech guy he explained that sound engineers who make movies don’t put low content into these speakers so the change is small and in fact if you crossover to high at say 80hz you can end up with too much mid bass going to your sub. Make sense?

heavy sigh.....If you are running 4 RF-7s and RC-64 off of a Denon AVR-2808 (even bi-amped your RF-7s dip down to 2.8 Ohms in certain frequencies) you are not providing any of them with the current they need to preform efficiently especially at higher volumes. The AVR-28XX series is not rated to drive speakers with lower impedance whereas the AVR-4810 is...The Denon AVR-38XX series was a workhorse in the Denon line because it could also drive speakers with 4 Ohm impedance loads, but not at higher SPL.. Btw, you are driveing $7,000 worth of speakers with a $500 AVR's power supply and No Sub. If that could be done how great of Klipsch advertisment would that be? Regardless, if you enjoy your very nice home theater, who cares what I think. For today's price you might be in ball park regarding 2808ci (obviously I paid much more than $500 at the time of purchae as a new, but much less than 3808ci for sure...). Few months ago, we did audition Marantz pre-pro hooked up to RF-7 II at Klipsch dealer who has quite nice - treated room that housed both P-37F and RF-7 II at the time and overall performance seemed comparable but wasn't great. And hence, an incremental benefit to the high cost seemed pretty low to us. But, hey, I don't claim to be an audiophile and nor do I have ears to hear louder than -30dB volume settings on 2808ci for longer duration on our setup. On the subject of subwoofer, RF-7 II delivers adequate bass for our needs. We watched movie with one of our friends and they were quite impressed as well and concurred that for the size of the room we don't need a sub-woofer to add more bass. Obviously, if we add a subwoofer then it will free up RF-7 II from that duty as well less load to 2808ci driving those low end frequencies. And thus for us the upgrade path would be a sub-woofer and then the amplfier or might be both together - . Sub would be my first upgrade

"Happy Meal Syndrome" Lol can someone please tell me what this means?

I disagree. The speaker placement and seating position are all wrong. I usually would not comment but to suggest this is optimal would be a disservice to the rest of the forum members. I call this the "Happy Meal Syndrome". Quantity over quality. Thanks everyone for the kind words! I’m not sure if the above post is sarcastic lol but I’m all ears on any advice. Perhaps placing the surrounds and HT screen eight foot off the ground along with two chairs in front of your mains would be a more ideal lay-out? Here's a link to wescott's room I pulled out of his profile: http://community.webshots.com/user/jbwestcott By the way jbw, that room is absolutely stunning! Other than his chairs in front of his speakers and the side surrounds a few feet higher than mine it’s very close to the same lay out isn’t? [^o)]

I disagree. The speaker placement and seating position are all wrong. I usually would not comment but to suggest this is optimal would be a disservice to the rest of the forum members. I call this the "Happy Meal Syndrome". Quantity over quality. Thanks everyone for the kind words! I’m not sure if the above post is sarcastic lol but I’m all ears on any advice. [] []

8ft and I did look at that as an option. Was probably the biggest reason I never did the rears because I couldn’t make up my mind how I wanted it. I hate wires and the whole basement is finished so coming up and down would have been tuff without running wire across at least some part of the celling. I’m glad I did it this way because having them at a different height level than the rs-62ii fills that whole area behind me really good. I really like how 5.1 sounds with all four back and side speakers running the surround. Compared to just the side surrounds. And of course 7.1 is really cool to. I turn my avr to the auto source function A.F.D (guess it looks for the highest possible source) not sure if it’s running pro2x or what but they all run all the time when watching TV or blu rays. Unless it’s just a 2 channel source. Yes the cherry looks very nice. I was actually surprised how nice. I love black speakers but these were the ones on sale so I took a chance that they would look good. []

[]

New speakers new pic (rb-61ii are new)

Large Large Large Large Is how mine are set []

Just as 125 watts could be an overstatement, could 30 watts per channel with all channels driven also be an understatement? Do you have a Benchmark results for the Denon AVR-3312? EDIT: Fwiw, my response to you was to clear up the confusion between Watts per Channel and Impedance, with the latter being why most people have problems driving RF-7s in multichannel configurations with lower-end AVRs..The reason I brought up my 140 wpc AVR is because it CAN cover the dips in my less than 2,000 cu ft HT. The rf-7 aside driving any 7 descent size speakers is almost always going to be a tuff task for probably 90% of avrs out there to reference levels. With that said I don’t see a problem saying that most avrs are only driving a small amount of watts when trying to explain why they run out of gas. YES there’s more to it than just watts but it’s probably the easiest way to explain it so anyone would understand it. I think corn did link a bench test for that avr showing with 7channels its only 30 watts at 0.1% dist. (36watts at1%)

My point was that the WPC isn't why his AVR can't drive RF-7s efficiently and that my 140 wpc Denon can. Fwiw, it's not about WPS but current available to cover the RF-7 impedance dips. EDIT: BTW, Here is a link to the Denon AVR 4806 Benchmark Results: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_12_4/denon-avr-4806-receiver-12-2005-part-5.html My guess that bench test is done at 1 kHz and not the full 20-20,000 there are a lot of different ways to bench test. Not saying it isn’t but he’s not very clear on how he does it on the pages I read.

Wow I can’t believe I didn’t do this sooner huge upgrade imo (5.1 to 7.1). The surround is so much bigger and detailed I love it so far. Just been messing around still need to watch a hole movie. I have over 200 blu rays and over 30 are 7.1 or 6.1 (ES).

How is it better can you give a small review of the change.

Now time to see how they sound

I need to learn how to post multi pics

These speakers look really nice.