There is no point in having larger fronts when Sub takes over

[mista ting]

Ok so after browsing the AVS forums seems like everyone in there is filthy rich. Every one is recommending 300$+ fronts and saying it is the most important piece in a 5.1....but from the way i see it, it is a really inefficient buy and a waste of money. I have my receiver in which i can adjust the crossover frequencies. Anything above 80Hz the 5.0 channels take over.....frequencies under 80Hz the sub-woofer will take over. This leads to my conclusion what is the point in spending so much money on a larger front channel? which usually is just a bigger woofer than the rear........the bigger woofer and cabinet won't even matter because below 80 will get cut off and sent to the subwoofer..........wtf?

even the most expensive $1,500+ floor standing fronts can only go down to ~50hz.......but why pay more on fronts when you can just get a better sub to handle those frequencies?

 

[Riddlinkidstoner]

Typically theres more to the speaker than whats written on paper. Hell I don't even use a subwoofer.

 

[obobski]

Ok so after browsing the AVS forums seems like everyone in there is filthy rich. Every one is recommending 300$+ fronts and saying it is the most important piece in a 5.1....but from the way i see it, it is a really inefficient buy and a waste of money. I have my receiver in which i can adjust the crossover frequencies. Anything above 80Hz the 5.0 channels take over.....frequencies under 80Hz the sub-woofer will take over. This leads to my conclusion what is the point in spending so much money on a larger front channel? which usually is just a bigger woofer than the rear........the bigger woofer and cabinet won't even matter because below 80 will get cut off and sent to the subwoofer..........wtf?

even the most expensive $1,500+ floor standing fronts can only go down to ~50hz.......but why pay more on fronts when you can just get a better sub to handle those frequencies?

you want those big fronts, trust me, and here's why:

when a 5.1 or 6.1 soundtrack is cut, all of the channels except LFE are 20-20k, which means theres full range data, in a proper system, the sub isn't there to do everything UNDER 80hz (which is a pretty high xover point at that), its there to RE-ENFORCE everything under your xover point, and handle the VERY lowest (like 15-25hz) stuff that your floorstanders likely won't put out at a matching SPL (so if they're pushing 90 dB at 1khz, but only 80 dB at 20hz, thats a problem, the sub helps to combat that)

you also want larger speakers in a larger room, because the extra woofers will help filling that room out (like a legitimate HT, not your average dorm room, where you're talking 25x20 (thats feet) or bigger)

furthermore, if you're running a STEREO source, having fullrange (or nearly fullrange) mains is entirely desirable, as you don't have to deal with LF redirection, and can do it "the way its meant to be played"

as far as $300/ea (or is this per pair?) for main L/R's, that isn't bad at all, thats fairly cheap tbh (a good pair of main L/R speakers will usually run about a grand list, or more)

as far as "most expensive $1500+ floor standing", you aren't even approaching "most expensive" at $1500/ea, try $15,000/ea, or even $150,000/ea, and you'll be better in that ballpark, and trust me, there are speakers at even $1500/ea that will do lower than 50hz (hell, my ~$400/ea floorstanding speakers are rated down to 35hz, and get along just fine without a sub in a small to medium sized room)

I'm gonna say this in the nicest possible way:
lurk more and lurk at better places

basically theres a LOT still out there to read, you'll never learn it all (none of us will), you do raise some good points in your arguement, but some of them are a bit misguided (mostly your view of what a front/main speaker does, and whats available at what money), you're entirely entitled to your own view of course, but you asked for commentary....

 

[Daishiknyte]

Ok so after browsing the AVS forums

They do tend towards high end equipment. Their definitions of 'minimum acceptable' are also bumped up a bit more than the average person expects. What do you expect? It is a forum dedicated to that. You could make similar observations about most of the sub forums here on [H].

Every one is recommending 300$+ fronts

$300 for a pair is fairly cheap for a solid pair of good entry speakers. Speakers in this range will actually give you good balance of range, power, clarity, and price.

saying it is the most important piece in a 5.1

The front channel is, without a doubt, the single most important piece of the equation. A large percentage of the sound will come through them. If you are listening to music or TV, they will be handling all of the burden, unless you are using signal processing and effects which is a whole other can of worms in and of itself.

it is a really inefficient buy and a waste of money

There are several types of 'efficiency'. If all you want is something that is 'efficient', there are plenty of HTiB systems that you can go pick up. What is inefficient on getting a pair of speakers that will last you for the next 10+ years? that you can use alone, in a system, with dolby, or even better, by themselves? You shouldn't be going onto a place like AVS expecting to be told to 'just go buy something off the shelves at Walmart'. These people are serious about their audio. Skimping out on equipment is a waste of money because they will end up upgrading to what they should have gotten in the first place.

I have my receiver in which i can adjust the crossover frequencies.

Most receivers, especially ones in the 'efficient' (read: dirt cheap) price range that I suspect you use really skimp on the audio parts. These days, the receivers are far more about putting as many inputs, video options, and signal processing (Dolby, etc) onboard.

Anything above 80Hz the 5.0 channels take over.....frequencies under 80Hz the sub-woofer will take over.

A couple of points on this part. First, 80Hz is a bit high. A decent pair of fronts should be able to handle lower than that, much less a whole system. Also, it forces the subwoofer to cover a larger range which will hurt its performance. The subwoofer is meant to get the low notes that a non-dedicated box just can't do. The subwoofer is meant to give car engines that deep rumble, explosions their chest filling boom, and give music that concert feel. It isn't meant to compensate for cheap speakers, but to support the rest of the sound.

This leads to my conclusion what is the point in spending so much money on a larger front channel?

Take more than a 30 second glance at the reasons why. These people don't spend thousands on something they can't justify or see the benefit in. You need to actually do some reading. Better yet, track down someone with one of these 'inefficient' setups and spend some time listening to music and watching a movie. Who knows, maybe the 'efficient' setup's quality is enough for you, it certainly isn't worth wasting the time and money on for the people you are trying to look down upon. Heck, for just an idea of the difference I'm talking about, grab an ipod, some high quality rips, a pair of apple earbuds, and a $40 pair of earbuds. Even those $40 buds will blow the stock ones out of the water.

even the most expensive $1,500+

obobski wasn't kidding when he said $1500 didn't even begin to pay off some speakers. You should know this since you've been through the AVS forum.

floor standing fronts can only go down to ~50hz

It all depends on the set. Mine, which fit in your $300 price range, certainly go lower than 50. Most of the time, I only notice the 'weakness' of the lower end because my chest isn't thumping from the amount of air a dedicated sub can move.

why pay more on fronts when you can just get a better sub to handle those frequencies?.

Balance. What is the point of putting a turbocharger in a Prius? There isn't one because the systems don't match up. If any part of the system is sub-par, the system as a whole suffers. Also, to get that good of a sub, you will be putting more money into your sub than you did your fronts. (Again using the $300 as a reference.)


Obobski had several good points too, especially with pointing out the problems with the encoding and response. Take a look around and do some more research before effectively calling a very large and active community stupid.

 

[obobski]

Obobski had several good points too, especially with pointing out the problems with the encoding and response. Take a look around and do some more research before effectively calling a very large and active community stupid.

Obobski is not pleased after reading your post on his tiny laptop screen

nah but for srs, excellent points

 

[Neb]

Everyone above has already stated most of the points I had issue with. Another reason to get larger fronts is to properly mix the subwoofer to your fronts. 80hz is the standard HT crossover freq, but if your fronts can't match your subwoofer's output at 80, you're going to have a fun time eq'ing to make it work (assuming your receiver or equipment can do that...most consumer gear can't).

Just because you can set a crossover frequency on your receiver doesn't mean it will work well with the system.

 

[Sycraft]

There's plenty of reasons to get larger front speakers. One would be to have a lower crossover frequency. There isn't a hard and fast place where sound becomes non-directional. At 80Hz it is generally rather non-directional, but some people at least can still hear a bit of directionality. As such it is nice to have speakers handle things a bit lower, if possible. Also, you don't want to cross your speakers over where they are having trouble, you want to cross them over well before that. You want your crossover such that they play entirely in a range they can do easily. So if your speakers start rolling at 80Hz, you probably want to cross them at 100 or 120. So to cross speakers down at 60Hz or so, you'd probably want them to go down to 30 or 40Hz.

You have to remember crossovers are not immediate devices. It isn't as though at a given frequency the sound switches over to another speakers. Rather, they are a slope of a given amount. 12dB/octave is normal, as is 24dB/octave. The point you set is simply the center of this curve. This means your speakers aren't completely off the hook below the crossover point.

Also, there's the fact that larger speakers can have more drivers, and get lower distortion for it. When you have a single driver that is responsible for doing bass all the way up to whatever the tweeter does, it has a large range to cover. This translates to more distortion, at least at higher levels. Well with floorstanding speakers, you can go 2.5 or 3 way. What this means is you either have dedicated bass and midrange drivers (in the case of 3 way) or a mid bass and an exclusive bass driver (in the case of 2.5 way). That nets you not only a lower response, but a smoother midrange. It can also let you cross over to your tweeter a bit higher, which takes strain off the tweeter.

Larger speakers can also handle more power. When you have more drivers, and a larger cabinet and baffle for those drivers you can push the speakers to higher levels. In the case of front speakers, this is a good idea since they tend to get the loudest sounds, other than the sub. For example the line of speakers I use rates their 2.5 way floor standers to 250 watts, but their 2 way bookshelf speakers to only 150 watts. They both use the same components, the floorstanders just have a larger cabinet, and a 3rd driver. The tower speakers are also rated about 3dB louder per watt, because their design makes them more efficient, and they have higher tweeter extension because there is less baffle diffraction.

Now none of this is to say that you have to have larger front speakers. It isn't required, movie theaters don't, for example. However it is often a good idea, especially if you listen to music. If does give a better experience and your hearing is more sensitive in front than it is behind you. If all you do is watch movies, then maybe don't worry about better fronts as much, worry more about a good center speaker since that's where the dialogue comes from. However if you listen to music, good fronts are a good idea.

You are also perfectly capable of getting fronts that go below 50Hz. Mine do, they go down to 38Hz in an anechoic room, which means they go lower in a normal room since you get low frequency reinforcement. You can get speakers that go lower than that too, if you want to pay for it. Ones I have seen myself that'll go down to 20Hz and below are Dunlavy SC-Vs, though they aren't made anymore.

More or less, do what you like with your setup, there isn't a "right" answer, but realize that there are valid reasons to want better front speakers. You should still have a sub and have it handle the low stuff, but good fronts are worth it in my opinion. I personally go for tower fronts instead of bookshelf, and I also have dedicated amplification for the fronts whereas the rest runs off of my receiver. I feel it is worthwhile. The net result is my system can kick your skull in with sound, but not get distorted doing it.

 

[illgiveumorality]

It depends on if you're near or mid-field monitoring. Larger speakers will fill the air space much more appropriately than smaller ones. Woofers aren't the only drivers with different sizes.

 

[defaultluser]

Yeah man, pay no attention to the crazies with money to burn over at AVS. We have the same situation here, where people spend way more than they should on SLI video cards, large-screen multi-display gaming, and an ungodly amount of money on water cooling (for that last %10 overclock you can't get with air!)

Most of us "enthusiasts" here get-by with a sound system well under the $300 mark, run with a single GPU and single display, and just couldn't bother with anything but air. But the eccentrics are VERY vocal, and like to feel important

Get whatever satisfies YOUR desires. That said, you probably shouldn't rain on other people's parade just because you think a certain size speaker is enough - some people can actually benefit from larger speakers, especially when you take room size and layout into consideration. There are a lot of overpriced, overdone speaker setups out there, but outside of that trainwreck there are a HUGE array of systems with more reasonable prices that fill every little audio niche you can imagine.

 

[wtourist]

Try build it yourself speaker manuals for information.
As said above, you need a complex blend of sound. That said the smaller is better drives prices way up.
You can get great sound from a Klipsch corner horn (or pair). All you need is carpentry skills and two room corners.