|
Post by pop on Oct 22, 2015 8:14:06 GMT -5
Power sound audio released the specs and preorder for their new towers last night, the MTM210T. They look like behemoths! I must say though, initially looking at the specs, I'm a bit disappointed. I understand they aren't in the business of full range towers as they are a sub manufacturer, but these speakers tout 2 10" drivers and 1 compression tweeter. They are 52"h 11"w and 16"d. However, specs only rate them to 60hz. Interesting choice I thought. After all, there isn't very much need for towers in a home theater environment. I would think the release of a tower would indicate a bit of a 2 channel market. Thoughts? Why do you say there isn't much need for towers in a home theater environment? I say they aren't needed because in home theater we will typically use a powered sub to handle mid and low bass. Ideally from 80hz down. Most towers are designed to deliver a wider range of frequencies which typically go unused as you introduce cancellation issues without having phase control. Therefor running a towers to 40hz and having subs pick up at 80hz can be very problematic and the vast majority of us will never use a tower this way. They aren't unnecessary, but there simply isn't much need. I received better mid bass response out of my Pendragon monitors than I did my pendragon towers.
|
|
|
Post by pop on Oct 22, 2015 8:35:30 GMT -5
i guess you arent understanding what IM saying the physics are EXACTLY the same ...however...speakers do NOT take advantage of room gain...room gain is only highly advantageous to the low frequency ...general speaker frequencies >50hz isnt effected as much as <30hz for room gain...so its not even talked about... so if you want a speaker to dig lower you have to do 1 of 3 things 1)make it ported 2)make the enclosure enormous 3)reduce the efficiency PSA chose a decent size box (enough to just not need stands) and high efficiency...since anyone who understands proper speaker placement and full range...knows you need a dedicated sub to take over for bass duties...cause proper spot for your speakers is almost never the correct spot for the subs... So this begs the question, why not do slightly different tuning and stick a port in the cabinet for the vast majority who like a more full range tower? Surely the response to 60hz could have remained linear and robust. This is all I am stating. Seemed to me like a bit of a missed opportunity. Not bashing Tom or PSA, as I feel you are taking this, but merely saying the opportunity was there for a more multi purpose speaker.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2015 9:09:52 GMT -5
no no no..Im not taking it as a bash. (just trying to explain the desicion as I talk to them on e regular basis and get the backstory)..I feel they designed them to be 100% integrated with a sub...it was intentional as they feel the sound quality is better than trying to have a speaker try to reach those lower frequencies that should be handled by a sub.. and again...the number 1 "complaint" of the mtm210...waqsnt it needs to dig deeper...it was it needs stands...so thats all they did...otherwise they wouldnt have even brought a floorstander into the mix
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Oct 22, 2015 9:13:46 GMT -5
i guess you arent understanding what IM saying the physics are EXACTLY the same ...however...speakers do NOT take advantage of room gain...room gain is only highly advantageous to the low frequency ...general speaker frequencies >50hz isnt effected as much as <30hz for room gain...so its not even talked about... so if you want a speaker to dig lower you have to do 1 of 3 things 1)make it ported 2)make the enclosure enormous 3)reduce the efficiency PSA chose a decent size box (enough to just not need stands) and high efficiency...since anyone who understands proper speaker placement and full range...knows you need a dedicated sub to take over for bass duties...cause proper spot for your speakers is almost never the correct spot for the subs... I realize you are talking about speakers and not subs. However, the discussion centered around your saying that ported speakers dig deeper than sealed speakers. Then you said that when it comes to subs, sealed ones go deeper because of room gain, whereas the physics are different with speakers. That doesn't make sense to me. If we are talking about the low frequencies (which we must, since it is a question of whether sealed or ported "digs deeper" with a speaker), then why would low frequencies emanating from a speaker be any different than low frequencies emanating from a sub? The sound waves are the same, so why would the physics be different? Maybe further up the range it is different, like you said (>50 hz), but we're not talking about higher frequencies, we're talking about the lower ones. So whether these low frequencies come from a speaker or a sub, shouldn't the same principles of physics apply to both?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2015 9:26:15 GMT -5
I NEVER said physics is different for speakers...EVER.Show me where I typed those words? and no WE are not talking about sub frequencies...we are talking AT BEST 40hz (mostly any other floorstander...will not have clean output at lower than that so its not even worth talking about...unless its a 6' tall speaker like the 215 from JTR).....which again even in a sub does not use room gain @40hz ....room gain is effective in the lowest of octaves <30hz. the PSA's go to 60hz...Pop is wondering why they dont go 2/3 an octave lower...I am trying to explain why...because PSA thoughts are the characteristics of a sealed design that is HE is more important than extension that 95% of the time isn't/should be used since it will be used with a sub here is a graph showing boundry (cabin) gain...with the tones originating in a CORNER (two walls, floor, celing) and its effect on frequencies..as you can see the lower the frequency the more boundry gain exhibited...hence why SUBS AND SPEAKERS show different effects regardless of sealed or ported (due to the frequencies they reproduce) a ported speakers can be TUNED to a lower HZ than the same size sealed cab. but after that tuned port will drop like a rock...if sealed the frequencies your asking the room to boost in a floorstander isnt enough to make a real world difference...and you would have to put that speaker in a corner (very very undesirable placement) to even see those room gain effects at all does this make more sense?
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Oct 22, 2015 10:14:45 GMT -5
I NEVER said physics is different for speakers...EVER.Show me where I typed those words? and no WE are not talking about sub frequencies...we are talking AT BEST 40hz (mostly any other floorstander...will not have clean output at lower than that so its not even worth talking about...unless its a 6' tall speaker like the 215 from JTR).....which again even in a sub does not use room gain @40hz ....room gain is effective in the lowest of octaves <30hz. the PSA's go to 60hz...Pop is wondering why they dont go 2/3 an octave lower...I am trying to explain why...because PSA thoughts are the characteristics of a sealed design that is HE is more important than extension that 95% of the time isn't/should be used since it will be used with a sub here is a graph showing boundry (cabin) gain...with the tones originating in a CORNER (two walls, floor, celing) and its effect on frequencies..as you can see the lower the frequency the more boundry gain exhibited...hence why SUBS AND SPEAKERS show different effects regardless of sealed or ported (due to the frequencies they reproduce) a ported speakers can be TUNED to a lower HZ than the same size sealed cab. but after that tuned port will drop like a rock...if sealed the frequencies your asking the room to boost in a floorstander isnt enough to make a real world difference...and you would have to put that speaker in a corner (very very undesirable placement) to even see those room gain effects at all does this make more sense? Yes, I see that. The physics is the same but subs and speakers are like apples and oranges. Assuming a speaker could go as low as a sub, then the room gain considerations would be applicable, I suppose. Anyway, I am one who thinks a sub is necessary, so I'll leave it at that.
|
|
|
Post by Cogito on Oct 22, 2015 11:45:55 GMT -5
I NEVER said physics is different for speakers...EVER.Show me where I typed those words? That is true, you never said those words. However, you did post the following "Room gain doesn't effect the frequencies of speakers the same". That would infer that there is a different set of rules for "speakers" vs. subwoofers. The fact is, the rules are IDENTICLE for both. Anyway, the "Room boundary effect" also effects upper bass output, not just low bass. Even your own chart shows a significant effect even up to 60hz. This is well within the range of the vast majority of tower speakers and even most bookshelf designs. After all, this is one reason most speaker designs sound muddy and boomy when placed against walls or worse, corners. On the other hand, the effect can be taken advantage of with subwoofers to extend the low end, but careful consideration must be taken to avoid the potential nasty effects this has on it's sound.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2015 12:16:12 GMT -5
I NEVER said physics is different for speakers...EVER.Show me where I typed those words? That is true, you never said those words. However, you did post the following "Room gain doesn't effect the frequencies of speakers the same". That would infer that there is a different set of rules for "speakers" vs. subwoofers. The fact is, the rules are IDENTICLE for both. Anyway, the "Room boundary effect" also effects upper bass output, not just low bass. Even your own chart shows a significant effect even up to 60hz. This is well within the range of the vast majority of tower speakers and even most bookshelf designs. After all, this is one reason most speaker designs sound muddy and boomy when placed against walls or worse, corners. On the other hand, the effect can be taken advantage of with subwoofers to extend the low end, but careful consideration must be taken to avoid the potential nasty effects this has on it's sound. the majority of a speakers frequencies (I would say 99.995% or more considering speakers go up to 20,000hz) are ABOVE the frequencies effected by room gain...so my general statement about speaker frequencies is true yeah the room gain from my chart shows significant effect up to 60hz IF you corner load the speaker....which is the worst spot for a speaker...so its a moot point. this is the reason why ALL speakers should be crossed to a sub where it can be placed optimally...and doesnt have to worry about the effects that location has on the upper frequencies can we put this to bed now?
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Oct 22, 2015 12:47:32 GMT -5
While you guys were goofing around arguing, I enjoyed some music...
|
|
jlafrenz
Global Moderator
I don't want to jump in, unless this music's thumping
Posts: 7,722
|
Post by jlafrenz on Oct 23, 2015 17:27:32 GMT -5
Why do you say there isn't much need for towers in a home theater environment? I say they aren't needed because in home theater we will typically use a powered sub to handle mid and low bass. Ideally from 80hz down. Most towers are designed to deliver a wider range of frequencies which typically go unused as you introduce cancellation issues without having phase control. Therefor running a towers to 40hz and having subs pick up at 80hz can be very problematic and the vast majority of us will never use a tower this way. They aren't unnecessary, but there simply isn't much need. I received better mid bass response out of my Pendragon monitors than I did my pendragon towers. I see the point you are trying to make, but would counter it with the system isn't properly setup. With current AVR's and processors you can set the mains to large to benefit from their low frequency extension and output and keep the remainder of the speakers at small. Crossovers can be set per speaker. You can't necessarily set speakers globally, but do understand that many do. Also, while 80Hz is often the recommended setting, it isn't necessarily the best. It needs to be set based upon the specific system and room.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2015 3:05:42 GMT -5
A sealed sub ONLY goes lower than ported due to the room gain boosting the lower frequencies (this is why sealed isn't recommended for large rooms) otherwise if you look at their native response, a ported sub actually extends deeper (in an open field) The native responses are the same for speakers. But room gain only works in the lowest of octaves. M Have you ever heard a sealed speaker isn't duties for a large room? No Also some recommend to plug a speaker port to make bass tighter at the expense of extension So for speakers yes ported extend deeper than sealed Both sealed and ported speakers are affected by room gain. Regardless, ported speakers DO have higher output than sealed speakers. That's not the argument. The fact is, at any given output level, the ported speaker has a typical roll off rate of 24dB per octave below it's tuned frequency. This is TWICE the rate of a sealed enclosure. Here's are couple CEA2010 output results from two SVS subs. Both have identical drivers and amps. The first one is ported (And it happens to be the one I use. The other is it's sealed sibling. The results are quite clear. The ported DOES have higher output, but please notice the greater bass extension of the sealed system.Stating that: please notice the greater bass extension of the sealed system. is IMO rather misleading without also stating that the greater extension of the sealed system is at the expense of much lower output and higher distortion. Note that both speakers output almost the same at 63Hz, the sealed is 107.6dB's with 3.8% distortion while the ported is 108dB's with slightly more distortion at 5.2%. However, at 20Hz the sealed is at 91.9dB's with 18.7% distortion while the ported is still quite strong at 103.2dB's and 9.2% distortion! At 16Hz the sealed is at 87.7dB's with 16.7% distortion while the ported is still stronger at 93.3dB's and 14.3% distortion. Yes, the sealed does continue down to 12.5Hz at 81.1dB and 18.3% (26.5dB's below the 63Hz level) while the ported could not produce passing result. So yes you can say the sealed sub has lower extension but you have not mentioned at what expense. I'll take the sub any day that from 63Hz to 20Hz is down only 4.8dB's versus one that is down 15.7dB's and distortion of only 9.2% versus 18.7%. The ported sub here is clearly far superior for the lower bass range especially for HT. From 125Hz to 40Hz the two subs are fairly close with the ported being a little louder and the sealed being a little cleaner, but from 31.5Hz to 16Hz the ported has much louder and cleaner performance. PS: I see that the specs on the new tower are listed as: Frequency Response = 60Hz - 18kHz. As I have mentioned in other posts more speaker brands seem to be using these drugstore type speaker specs of frequencies with no relative output traditionally stated as in 60Hz - 18kHz +/- 3dB's. In itself the spec of 60Hz - 18kHz is meaningless! Yes, many times the correctly listed speaker specs might be exaggerated but I find it interesting that such experienced folks as PSA especially in subs can't list FR in the traditionally excepted manner. We don't know if the new MTM-210T tower is -3dB's at 60Hz or -6dB's or whatever! I can only presume it is -3dB's or close and since they are big sub guys they follow the theory of cutting off their bookshelf and tower speakers in the 50-75Hz range for folks who plan to designate them as "small" and use their excellent sub for the lowest bass frequencies both in HT and music. The run my towers at full range folks will have to look elsewhere, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Cogito on Oct 24, 2015 17:09:31 GMT -5
Both sealed and ported speakers are affected by room gain. Regardless, ported speakers DO have higher output than sealed speakers. That's not the argument. The fact is, at any given output level, the ported speaker has a typical roll off rate of 24dB per octave below it's tuned frequency. This is TWICE the rate of a sealed enclosure. Here's are couple CEA2010 output results from two SVS subs. Both have identical drivers and amps. The first one is ported (And it happens to be the one I use. The other is it's sealed sibling. The results are quite clear. The ported DOES have higher output, but please notice the greater bass extension of the sealed system.Stating that: please notice the greater bass extension of the sealed system. is IMO rather misleading without also stating that the greater extension of the sealed system is at the expense of much lower output and higher distortion. Note that both speakers output almost the same at 63Hz, the sealed is 107.6dB's with 3.8% distortion while the ported is 108dB's with slightly more distortion at 5.2%. However, at 20Hz the sealed is at 91.9dB's with 18.7% distortion while the ported is still quite strong at 103.2dB's and 9.2% distortion! At 16Hz the sealed is at 87.7dB's with 16.7% distortion while the ported is still stronger at 93.3dB's and 14.3% distortion. Yes, the sealed does continue down to 12.5Hz at 81.1dB and 18.3% (26.5dB's below the 63Hz level) while the ported could not produce passing result. So yes you can say the sealed sub has lower extension but you have not mentioned at what expense. I'll take the sub any day that from 63Hz to 20Hz is down only 4.8dB's versus one that is down 15.7dB's and distortion of only 9.2% versus 18.7%. The ported sub here is clearly far superior for the lower bass range especially for HT. From 125Hz to 40Hz the two subs are fairly close with the ported being a little louder and the sealed being a little cleaner, but from 31.5Hz to 16Hz the ported has much louder and cleaner performance. PS: I see that the specs on the new tower are listed as: Frequency Response = 60Hz - 18kHz. As I have mentioned in other posts more speaker brands seem to be using these drugstore type speaker specs of frequencies with no relative output traditionally stated as in 60Hz - 18kHz +/- 3dB's. In itself the spec of 60Hz - 18kHz is meaningless! Yes, many times the correctly listed speaker specs might be exaggerated but I find it interesting that such experienced folks as PSA especially in subs can't list FR in the traditionally excepted manner. We don't know if the new MTM-210T tower is -3dB's at 60Hz or -6dB's or whatever! I can only presume it is -3dB's or close and since they are big sub guys they follow the theory of cutting off their bookshelf and tower speakers in the 50-75Hz range for folks who plan to designate them as "small" and use their excellent sub for the lowest bass frequencies both in HT and music. The run my towers at full range folks will have to look elsewhere, sorry. I understand that the output is lower and the distortion in higher (Mostly due to the higher cone excursion) for the sealed system at the lowest frequencies. However, my statement holds true, the sealed system still has usable output at 12.5 Hz, whereas the usable output stops at 16 Hz for the ported system. This may not seem like much, but with consideration of the physics involved, it's huge.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,357
|
Post by DYohn on Oct 24, 2015 17:35:15 GMT -5
The MTM210 are high-efficiency systems that use pro-sound drivers. Response to 60Hz is great for that sort of system. A "tower" design (or more accurately a floor-standing system) sounds like a good idea to me.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Oct 24, 2015 18:05:39 GMT -5
I NEVER said physics is different for speakers...EVER.Show me where I typed those words? Wrong @bmoney! Here it is. physics is different for speakers...I typed those words The evidence doesn't lie son. The evidence doesn't lie.
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,230
|
Post by novisnick on Oct 24, 2015 19:02:44 GMT -5
I NEVER said physics is different for speakers...EVER.Show me where I typed those words? Wrong @bmoney! Here it is. physics is different for speakers...I typed those words Just fell out of my chair laughing!! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, still rolling around!!! The evidence doesn't lie son. The evidence doesn't lie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2015 21:30:31 GMT -5
I NEVER said physics is different for speakers...EVER.Show me where I typed those words? Wrong @bmoney! Here it is. physics is different for speakers...I typed those words Lmao!!!! You got me good The evidence doesn't lie son. The evidence doesn't lie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2015 23:00:45 GMT -5
I understand that the output is lower and the distortion in higher (Mostly due to the higher cone excursion) for the sealed system at the lowest frequencies. However, my statement holds true, the sealed system still has usable output at 12.5 Hz, whereas the usable output stops at 16 Hz for the ported system. This may not seem like much, but with consideration of the physics involved, it's huge. I and a few others here understand that at 12.5Hz the sealed sub has usable output, but saying that output down 26.5dB's at 12.5Hz is huge is to me a huge exaggeration! The reason I find it misleading/deceptive is because most of the folks reading the statement: please notice the greater bass extension of the sealed system without further study or sub knowledge will presume that in general the sealed sub has superior lower bass performance. Nothing could be further from the truth. Note again that at 16Hz the ported sub is still superior in output and distortion. Also again from 63Hz down to 20Hz the ported sub is far superior to the sealed sub. I read posts over and over that the sealed sub goes lower but almost always with no further clarification. I'll take a sub any day with excellent performance from 63Hz down to 16Hz over a sub with much poorer performance in that area while still having some output at 12.5Hz. How many useful strong signals are in movies at 12.5Hz, not enough for me to make a buying choice. I guess we disagree on this.
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Oct 25, 2015 0:26:22 GMT -5
Well, 16hz or 12.5hz or 20hz my ears are already starting to hurt...Go Pats!
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,230
|
Post by novisnick on Oct 25, 2015 0:32:17 GMT -5
Well, 16hz or 12.5hz or 20hz my ears are already starting to hurt...Go Pats! Theres only this much difference,,,,,,,,,
|
|
|
Post by guzz46 on Oct 25, 2015 1:34:00 GMT -5
Hmm, my speakers have two 10" drivers, and are sealed, and are rated down to 22hz
|
|