cbope

Sorry this is a duplicate post, I mistakenly posted this under home theater. I figured it would get more attention in the proper section [] I'm looking for a decent quality sub for my new 5.1 HT speaker setup mentioned in the subject. It needs to be equally good for music and movies. I have a decent Sony DA2400ES AVR to drive everything, and sources are sat TV, DVD, Blu-ray, CD and FLAC lossless music from my home jukebox. My local selection of brands is a bit more limited as I live in Finland. At the moment I have narrowed my choice down to an SVS SB12-NSD. I have heard SVS are pretty reputable for their subs and the price just squeezes into my budget range (~700 euros). I'm pretty confident this sub will be great for LFE in movies, but my main concern is music. Is it a good sub for music? I've also looked at the Epik Legend and the price is right (cheaper than SVS) but the size is a bit too big. The SVS is considerably smaller. Any other recommendations are welcome.

This is my 19th post already, sorry I didn't introduce myself earlier so I will do it now. I've been a long-time audio and music fan, starting back when I was in junior high school. I put together my first home audio system before I was 15, buying one component at a time as my small budget allowed. Although I couldn't afford them back then, I've also had some experience with fairly high-end audiophile gear like Nakamichi tape decks (anyone remember the Dragon?), McIntosh, etc. I was first exposed to Klipsch via one of my close friends while growing up, his mom owned a pair. I don't remember what model they were, but they were mid-sized floor-standing models, not Khorns or any of the "big" stuff. I immediately liked the sound they produced. Very early on, I discovered how much more I enjoyed music when listened to on a good quality setup, and I've fortunately been gifted with good ears which are holding up well into my early 40's now. I'm originally from Texas and have been living in Finland for the past 11 years. Ok, enough about me and on to my next question. I've ordered a set of RB-52 II's to be my L/R speakers in a 5.1 setup and I have a question about the rear firing ports.The speakers will be placed on top of my TV cabinet, so they are not enclosed. Good so far. But, the rear of the speakers will not be far from the wall behind the TV, since the cabinet is not very deep. While I don't have the new speakers yet, I would guess the ports will be approx. 6-8 inches at most from the rear wall. The wall covering is a vinyl textured material which is painted. Should I plan to put some treatments on the wall behind the speakers, or is this enough distance to dissipate the air and sound coming from the ports? I do plan to elevate the speakers on stands to raise them to ear height. Ideally, I could have bought the RB-61 II's which have front firing ports, but their size was too large for the space available and it would start to stretch the budget more than I would have liked.

Yes, it's very likely that a low-quality extension cable is causing some degradation. I never use extensions on headphones, the plug always goes straight to the headphone jack on the amp. A 4m cable extension in addition to the built-in cable (usually 2-3m) is quite long if you want to preserve full quality. A headphone amp plus a good quality cable may help. I would start wih a better quality extension cable, since it is the least expensive option and see if the improvement is enough. If not, a good quality headphone amp may improve it, but that is not an inexpensive option. A good headphone amp runs a couple hundred dollars for an entry-level unit and prices can easily exceed $1000.

(edit: formatting fixed) I can't realy comment if the common return will cause problems or not, as I have never tried this kind of connection with audio components. Hopefully someone else can help. Regarding balanced vs. unbalanced, practically all consumer level audio uses unbalanced signals. A balanced signal requires 3 wires, a ground or return, the signal and an inverted signal that is exactly opposite of the signal. In a balanced configuration the inverted signal is used to cancel out any noise picked up in the cable over longer runs. The equipment must be able to generate this inverted signal on the out jack and of course it has to subtract it at the in jack at the other end. Balanced connections are mainly used in professional music gear, where long cable runs can be used. If the equipment does not have balanced ins and outs, you will not get any benefit using an balanced cable because there will be no inverted signal. Common consumer audio is always unbalanced although there are some exceptions. While balanced connections can be made using TRS connectors, it is less than ideal because the signal is momentarily shorted when the plug is inserted and this typically causes pops in the audio which can damage speakers. Professional-level balanced connections use a different kind of connector called XLR, which always connects ground first and does not short the signal pins when connected. The XLR connector has 3 pins. In short, it's the components used that determine balanced or unbalanced, not the cable itself. You can use an unbalanced cable between two balanced components, but the inverted connections will be grounded at each end and you will lose the benefit of a balanced connection. Using a balanced cable between two unbalanced components will not magically give you a balanced connection, it will still be unbalanced although it will work fine.

If you used an RS-52 in back, you would have a 6.1 system as it only accepts a single channel input as far as I know. You need 2 speakers in back to have 7.1. Sorry I can't really comment if using the RS-52 is a good choice as a rear speaker in a 6.1 setup, but I believe it would be fine. Keep in mind the vast majority of movies are encoded in 5.1, so the benefits of going to 7.1 are pretty minimal in my opinion. A good 5.1 setup can sound equally as good as 7.1. Main benefit of 7.1 is if you have a very large room or are building a professional style home theater room dedicated for that purpose, where the additional channels may be a benefit to add additional depth behind the listening position.

Thanks to everyone for your replies. It makes a lot of sense to use direct-firing RB's in my case. I'll order a set of RB-41 II's after I pay off my other recent Klipsch purchase.

The same site that sells SVS also has Epik. The Epik Legend is even a bit cheaper than the SVS. Between the Legend and SB12, what would you recommend? The main downside I see with the Legend is size. It is considerably bigger than the SB12.

The sleeve is the ground or return. You can learn more than you ever wanted to know here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS_connector Note, the type of TRS we are referring to here is the unbalanced stereo type. Scroll down to the section titled "tip/ring/sleeve terminology" for the meat.

The shielding may still work somewhat if it's not connected at either end, but it won't work that well. It really depends on the amount of noise preset. If you want to run stereo signals you would need TRS and either TRS or 2x RCA's at the other end. If mono, then TS and RCA at the other end. Don't worry about the common return. Take a look at your headphone plug, it's either TRS or mini-TRS (3.5mm or 1/8") and it has a common return for both drivers.

Solid-state amps do not have a break-in period and their sound will not change over time, with the possible exception of capacitors drying out over time, as in many years. Some speakers may change their response slightly after a "break-in" period, but this is typically inaudible. The speaker surrounds which may be stiff after manufacturing, will loosen up a bit with extended use and allow the speaker cone to move more freely.The effect is VERY small but noticeable with some speakers.

The common ground of a TRS plug/socket is needed as the return path for both the L and R signals, the cable won't work without it. However, if you are making a cable with TRS on one end and RCA on the other, there is no point to use TRS on one end because an RCA on the other has only 2 conductors, the ring or outer part and the pin in the center while TRS is 3. You probably want to use TS, which has 2 conductors. But, I am making an assumption here because you did not mention the use of these cables. Regarding shield grounding, the best method I am aware of is to ground only one end and leave the other end unconnected. This is to prevent creating a ground loop between the 2 components which can introduce noise and/or hum. The shield will still do its job even with only one end connected, which is to shunt external noise to ground.

Class D amps are high-frequency switching-type power amplifiers. Class D designs are very efficient when compared to other common types such as class A or A/B. The switching speed is many times higher than the highest frequency that needs to be amplified, typically an order of magnatude higher (10x or more). They are quite common in subwoofer amps because they are much less expensive to manufacture than class A/B or other types, due mainly to the limited frequency range used. The efficiency of a good class D design can reach over 90%. Due to the efficiency, they can also be made with smaller heatsinks and transformers than other types, so they are good for use in modern multi-channel AVR's where space and heat dissapation is a concern. Fortunately, we don't need to worry much about electrical outlet power capacity here. A "normal" household outlet supplies a max theoretical 2300 watts (230V x 10A) and 16A circuits are quite common which can supply up to 3860 watts per outlet. And that's not counting the 3-phase (230V x3) we use to supply our sauna stoves! You guys on the other side of the pond are stuck with 1700-1800 watts per outlet on a typical 115-120V 15A circuit, or if you are lucky you have some 20A circuits that can supply up to 2400 watts.

I checked out the setup info on thx.com. Nothing new there I did not already know. Based on your suggestion of placing the 42's slightly behind the listening position, that's impossible in my room as my sofa is against the rear wall and I don't have an option to move it due to the room layout. The best I can do is to have them at 90* position directly to the side of the listening position. My main concern with the 42's in this position is the rear angled drivers will be firing very close into the rear wall, about 6" away. Won't this create unwanted reflections off the rear wall? That is why I asked about moving the RS-42's forward of the listening position a bit. My other option is direct-firing RB-41's (not RS-41's) pointed directly at the listening position. If the dipole RS-42's are a problem with my room setup, then it looks like direct-firing is the way to go. To sum up, these are my 2 current options: 1. RS-42's positioned at 90* and directly beside the listener or slightly forward of the listener. 2. RB-41's positioned at 90* and directly beside the listener. The first option I believe is the better setup, if there are no problems with either of the mentioned placements. The second option is the fallback if the first one is a bad idea and should work fine, but potentially less immersive than using the dipole speakers. Comments?

I'm considering the RS-41 II or RS-42 II as rear surrounds in a 5.1 system. I've never used dipole speakers before and I had a question about placement. My current surrounds are mounted directly to either side of my sofa, with a straight shot into the listeners ears but elevated about 2m from the floor. Should the RS surrounds be mounted in the same position or should they be slightly more forward so the rear elements have som breathing room? If I mounted them where my current surrounds are, there is only 15cm to the rear wall.

What about SVS subs? I found a Norwegian online shop that sells them. The SB12-NSD stretches my budget a bit at ~700 euros, but it's doable.

I will go listen to a few. I am hesitant on the CV's, the description of both says they are designed for "movies and gaming". No mention of music?!? The models are CVHD Sub-1 and VE-28S.

I ordered the RB-51 II's for L/R and an RC-52 II for my center today, a Klipsch representative confirmed the RB-52 II's would be fine. Now I need to find surrounds and a sub.

Hi all. I've just ordered this setup to upgrade my current home theater system and I'm now looking for a suitable sub. I have a budget of about 500 euros (~700 USD) to spend. Unfortunately, Klipsch subs are not available via the importer I bought the speakers from, so it will have to be another manufacturer. I live in Finland and the locally available brands are JBL, Cerwin-Vega, Audio Pro, Jamo, OR, Cambridge Audio, Dali, Elac, Genelec, Infinity, Monitor Audio, Scandyna, Simex and Tangent. There might be some non-locally available brands on Amazon's UK site, but sometimes there are shipping restrictions that prevent them shipping certain products outside the UK. We don't have Amazon here in Finland. Ordering overseas from the US is not an option, too expensive by the time you pay shipping for a heavy sub, customs, duty and import fees. Not to mention the delays in actually getting what you order and the risk of damage. The system will be used for TV (HD satellite), DVD, Blu-ray and music. I put an equal importance on music and movies. At the moment, I am considering the Audio Pro B1.40 with 10" driver and 250w amp. I'd like to get a sub that reaches 30Hz or below and is not boomy or bass-heavy but balanced with good extension, so I'm pretty much looking at 10" and 12" subs with at least 200w. The Audio Pro is fairly highly rated here and a good value, it sells for 450 euros. But I'd like to hear about other options, so that's why I'm posting here! Thanks in advance!

Thanks for your replies. The specs in the manual actually say 110w/channel for each of the 7 channels, but it states that power at 1KHz, not 20-20KHz. Stereo power is indeed rated at 110w/channel into 8ohms, 20-20KHz according to the manual. Any comments on my choice of the smaller RB-41 II's for the rear surrounds?

I'm upgrading the speakers in my home theater setup and I'm considering the Reference series. I have a good quality home theater receiver, a Sony DA2400ES rated 110 watts per channel and I'm planning a 5.1 config. My room is not very large, about 250 sq ft. Space is limited and floor-standing speakers are out of the question so I'm looking at the bookshelf models. Currently, the RB-51 II seems to be a good compromise on size and cost, and will fit well into my room. I would use the RB-51 II's as front L/R speakers and the RC-52 II for the center channel. For the rear surround channels I would use the RB-41 II's or another pair of RB-51 II's. The system will be used for TV, movies and music and sources are HD satellite, Blu-ray, DVD and CD audio. My receiver is capable of decoding the high resolution multi-channel formats used in Blu-ray such as DTS Master HD and Dolby TrueHD. My questions are regarding the power handling of these speakers. The RB-51 II's are rated for only 75 watts continuous power, which is obviously much less than my amplifier is rated for. I am not looking for extreme volume levels, but I do enjoy movies at near cinema levels. I am aware of issues such as clipping and I have a pretty thorough knowledge of audio systems, but this is the first time I am considering speakers rated somewhat less than my amplifier. 1. Will I damage the RB-51 II's if I use them as L/R channels with my current receiver? 2. Can I use the RB-41 II's as rear L/R surround speakers, since there is less content present in these channels or am I better off to use the RB-51 II's? I'm concerned because the reason for this "upgrade" is that I just blew out the woofer voice coils on my current L/R channel speakers, which were rated for 100 watts. I do admit they were being pushed too hard and the drivers are quite small compared to the Klipsch models I am considering at 3.5 inches.