This is not exactly a question about the "BEST" HT set up. It is a question about design objectives or duties for each of the speaker positions in a 5.1 HT set up.
Does anyone know where I might find the specific frequency ranges and "impact" that one expects to see at each of the 5.1 positions? I understand frequency can be limited and/or trimmed by the receiver. I just wanted to know if there was a published spec. Right now I assume they are all full range unless you make it something else. And, I assume that most systems are what you can get by with and not what would be optimal. But I don't know.
So, while I read redundantly that the center channel sees most dialog, it is not clear to me if, in addition, it is seeing the same low frequencies as the front mains.
Likewise, do the surrounds need to have the same frequency, low extension, as the front mains?
There is also the issue of "impact." Do the center and surrounds carry the same responsibilities for sound "impact" as the front mains?
I can’t find much about home theater that isn’t marketing BS and euphemisms. Thanking all in advance.
Does anyone know where I might find the specific frequency ranges and "impact" that one expects to see at each of the 5.1 positions? I understand frequency can be limited and/or trimmed by the receiver. I just wanted to know if there was a published spec. Right now I assume they are all full range unless you make it something else. And, I assume that most systems are what you can get by with and not what would be optimal. But I don't know.
So, while I read redundantly that the center channel sees most dialog, it is not clear to me if, in addition, it is seeing the same low frequencies as the front mains.
Likewise, do the surrounds need to have the same frequency, low extension, as the front mains?
There is also the issue of "impact." Do the center and surrounds carry the same responsibilities for sound "impact" as the front mains?
I can’t find much about home theater that isn’t marketing BS and euphemisms. Thanking all in advance.
Last edited:
Go to the Dolby. Com website and you should find some information about the settings. I know Dolby crossover sets the full range speakers at 80hz and above
And there you can print some layouts of all the speakers for all the types of formats like 5.1. 7.1 and all the atmos setups
And there you can print some layouts of all the speakers for all the types of formats like 5.1. 7.1 and all the atmos setups
I can be pretty dense. And I don’t exactly know yet what sort or how thy are dividing frequencies (slope/order). But, if open C on a cello is around 65hz, isn’t 80hz a bit high to start crossing over? In stereo mixed music, with common floor standing speakers that normally extend mid/high 30’s, I would be using a 1st order active subwoofer cutting in much lower than 80hz. Maybe that is the way movies are mixed? It seems odd that I would want to hear a healthy chunk of a cello (for example) through a subwoofer. My knowledge base is pretty inconsistent. I must be missing something.
Some stress about crossing too high for these things. Some see a sub as too unrefined for the job and some worry the stereo image will suffer if used with a mono sub too high.
The main reason that this specification includes a sub is so the main speakers don't have to be as large. Is this kind of thing a priority for you?
Some prefer not to cross subs, but overlap them. This can help in a room.
The main reason that this specification includes a sub is so the main speakers don't have to be as large. Is this kind of thing a priority for you?
Some prefer not to cross subs, but overlap them. This can help in a room.
You have articulated my concerns succinctly and better than I could. it was my suspicion that they spec’d such a high crossover to find the best generic compromise/common denominator in what is a night sky of possible speaker constellations. It’s pretty easy to override just about any parameter with these HT preamps. I’m going to build speakers that will optimize the space I can get away with and the amps I have to drive them. Even if I leave some frequency extension on the table because some Dolby standard hijacks the settings temporarily I’ll have the capacity back when I’m playing conventionally mixed music. You can’t be too wealthy, healthy, or have too much bottom available in a system. Thank you.
Let the AV Receiver do all the work. I set my HT speakers to small even though they show up as large in the auto setup and the xo to the sub is 60Hz but you can choose others. You don't need a xo in the sub as the LFE channel sorts out the crossover.
In theory all the speakers should be fullrange but not practical in my situation. I use a different system in the same location for music so the HT only does movies.
In theory all the speakers should be fullrange but not practical in my situation. I use a different system in the same location for music so the HT only does movies.
I picked up an old Marantz AV7005 pre-amp and am, in fact, trying to figure out how to let it do the work. It is a 7.1 but has SW1 and SW2. My assumption is that it puts out the same SW signal to each output but can independently adjust the volume between them.
Likewise, you can "bi-amp" the Front Left and Front Right channels by employing the rear surround channels. Again, I think it is sending the same channel signal and must be relying on the passive XO in the speaker to divide the signal to the drivers.
This seems like a dumb question, and it feels like I must be missing something. But, if the pre-amp is sending the same signal, say of the Front-Left to two amplifiers and relying on the passive crossover that is ahead of each driver to divide the signal, why can't I do this myself for all the drivers using a simple RCA splitter?
It just seems too simple to be correct with all the PLLXO and Active XO abounding. If the signal of the same channel is sent to 2 amplifiers and the passive crossover to the woofer scrubbed the high frequencies and the passive crossover to the tweeter scrubbed the low frequencies, is this a successful way to bi-amp a channel?
I must be missing something.
Likewise, you can "bi-amp" the Front Left and Front Right channels by employing the rear surround channels. Again, I think it is sending the same channel signal and must be relying on the passive XO in the speaker to divide the signal to the drivers.
This seems like a dumb question, and it feels like I must be missing something. But, if the pre-amp is sending the same signal, say of the Front-Left to two amplifiers and relying on the passive crossover that is ahead of each driver to divide the signal, why can't I do this myself for all the drivers using a simple RCA splitter?
It just seems too simple to be correct with all the PLLXO and Active XO abounding. If the signal of the same channel is sent to 2 amplifiers and the passive crossover to the woofer scrubbed the high frequencies and the passive crossover to the tweeter scrubbed the low frequencies, is this a successful way to bi-amp a channel?
I must be missing something.
That's a different beast to what I'm using as mine has 7 power amps built in but the setup procedure is the same.
All you are dealing with here is line level outputs so you can do what ever you want with this signal. Using say RF (right front) there are plenty of options.
RF > power amp > passive xo speaker
RF > active crossover > HP & LP power amp (bi-amp) > speaker
RF > HP & LP power amp (bi-amp) > passive HP & LP xo speaker
To bi-amp per channel, you can use the 2 RCA outputs as you have mentioned by reallocating the rear surround channels, or Y-RCA cable, or daisy chain at the 2 power amp inputs. All have the same result with a passive xo speaker. Active only needs the one output per channel.
SW1 & SW2 would have the same LFE channel with the crossover determined after the setup.
Once you have it all wired up you have to go through the auto speaker measurement procedure to set the distances, size, sub crossover, level, equalisation etc which is no different to single, bi-amp, tri-amp etc. Any fine tuning is then done in the manual setup with my Receiver but the Marantz may be different.
Marantz AV7005 Configuration & Set-Up | Audioholics
All you are dealing with here is line level outputs so you can do what ever you want with this signal. Using say RF (right front) there are plenty of options.
RF > power amp > passive xo speaker
RF > active crossover > HP & LP power amp (bi-amp) > speaker
RF > HP & LP power amp (bi-amp) > passive HP & LP xo speaker
To bi-amp per channel, you can use the 2 RCA outputs as you have mentioned by reallocating the rear surround channels, or Y-RCA cable, or daisy chain at the 2 power amp inputs. All have the same result with a passive xo speaker. Active only needs the one output per channel.
SW1 & SW2 would have the same LFE channel with the crossover determined after the setup.
Once you have it all wired up you have to go through the auto speaker measurement procedure to set the distances, size, sub crossover, level, equalisation etc which is no different to single, bi-amp, tri-amp etc. Any fine tuning is then done in the manual setup with my Receiver but the Marantz may be different.
Marantz AV7005 Configuration & Set-Up | Audioholics
This link to Audioholics is very helpful. The flexibility of this pre-amp is wild so the learning curve is a bit steep. It's sorta like getting a rental car and knowing you want to turn on the windshield wipers but cursing and needing to pull over because you can't figure out where they put the damn controls.
Back in the day KEF kits came with the high and low crossovers on separate boards. It never occurred to me that I could have sent the same pre-amp out to 2 separate amplifiers that fed the two separate crossovers. I was thinking it just couldn't be this simple. Ha. Still feels that I am missing something.
Back in the day KEF kits came with the high and low crossovers on separate boards. It never occurred to me that I could have sent the same pre-amp out to 2 separate amplifiers that fed the two separate crossovers. I was thinking it just couldn't be this simple. Ha. Still feels that I am missing something.