Energy Take2's - Use Large or Small setting?
 

Hi guys & gals,

I've got a couple of questions that I was hoping you would help me with.

The first concerns the "large" & "small" speaker settings. My setup is:

- Denon 1602 receiver
- Energy Take2 speakers for the front & rear L/R
- Energy Take1 for the center
- Energy S8.2 subwoofer (the newer one that usually goes with the newer Take 5.2 speaker set, even though the rest of the speakers are from the older Take 5 set)

According to the Denon receiver manual, I should set any speakers that cannot handle below 80 Hz frequencies to "small". Since the specs for the Take 2 speakers indicate the frequency response bottoms out at 90 Hz, I set them to "small".

However, the problem is that in the woefully brief subwoofer manual it shows 3 possible ways to setup the subwoofer and ALL of them say to set the front speakers to "large". Even in the situation where the front speakers are *not* full range/floor standing (ie, like my Take2's), it says to use a particular setup called Crossover but still set the fronts to "large". In this Crossover setup, the subwoofer dials that alter the levels are not available either and it must be set from the receiver.

So, does this sound right to you? Should I follow the subwoofer instructions and set the front to "large"? Or should I leave them at "small" as instructed by the receiver's manual?

I noticed when I set them to "large", a lot of the bass is eliminated (I guess because it's now sent to the Take2's which cannot reproduce it?). I have to use the "main+" function on the receiver so that any bass is sent to both the take 2 and subwoofer.

Second question: My bass is very rumbly (In a bad way. It sounds indistinct and "muddy") and I can physically feel it shaking my ear drums to the point of irritation. However, the volume from the rest of the speakers seems too quiet. I can turn down the sub a few decibels, but the manual indicates I should leave it at 0 dB for optimal performance. Do you think the muddiness and excessive sound is due to the setup issues mentioned in my first question (eg, Crossover, large & small, etc)? Or should I just crank up the levels on the rest of the speakers?

Last question: The red speaker terminal on one of my Take2's is loose. The plastic red cap is screwed in tight and it holds the speaker wire tight. But the whole nob that cap is screwed onto is loose and can be moved around. Is this a serious issue or is it a common thing for speakers?

Thanks for your time!

Kevin

Okay, let me phrase it in a simpler way:

My Denon 1602 receiver's crossover is at 80 Hz.
My front speakers bottom out at 90 Hz.
I have a powered Energy s8.2 subwoofer.

So if I set the receiver to have front speakers as "small", then anything 80 Hz and under will be sent to the subwoofer, right? But won't that leave a section btwn 80 Hz & 90 Hz that is neither handled by the front speakers nor the subwoofer?

The subwoofer has two RCA inputs: One regular input and one crossover input. There are knobs on the subwoofer which allow you to adjust the level of the sub as well as its frequency senstivity (50 Hz - 100 Hz). However, when using the crossover input, these controls are disabled.

So, my question is: What should I do to ensure that area between 80 & 90 Hz is not lost?

There really is no good answer here to your coverage hole b/t 80-90hz, unless you can get your rcvr to xover at 100hz.

What do you mean by "regular" and "crossover" inputs on the sub? Either way, if your rcvr only outputs freq below 80hz to the sub then you will have a small hole in coverage so you definitely want to set your spkrs to "small" setting on rcvr.

You also want to remain using the RCA sub line out from rcvr to sub, instead of the inferior "all speaker wires to sub and sub acts as passive xover" method, which sends highs to satellites.

Set 'em to small and be done with it, no big deal. Also, read rcvr manual to see if you can select a different xover freq such as 100hz.

I assume sub asks for speakers to be set to large for the "all speaker wires to sub method" so that the wires will be delivering full-range signal including subb bass to the sub, and then the sub will strip the highs out to send to the sats?

Bass Management
 

The answer is to use a product from Outlaw Audio called the ICBM-1, visit www.outlawaudio.com for ordering information.

I had a similar situation but going the opposite way... I had too much bass interference and I had a mid-bass drone playing from my sub. As I too had my setup in the LARGE setting and the Subwoofer crossover at 80, anyways the speakers and the sub would play at 80 Hz and the bass sounded HORRIBLE! Personally I think the 80 Hz setting is too high, and I can usually find where the sub is playing nearly every time (my wife can pick it out EVERY time). We have our crossover set at 60 for our center and rears and 40 for our mains...DRONE IS GONE!

Anyways, with the ICBM-1 you can set the crossover for R/L, Center, RS/LS and CS seperately...and it will logically play the correct bass information into your subwoofer. It also gets you ready for DVD-A and SACD...

Check it out.

Thanks for the info, guys. I spoke with the store I bought them from as well and they also helped me out. Seems the front speakers can actually go below 90 Hz despite what the manual says.

Thanks, stevevt, but those are the Take 5.2 specs. My front speakers from the from Take 5 set. I'm thinking the guys at the store were full of crap about being able to handle below 90 Hz though.

They can probably go a lot lower than 90hz, but you need to understand freuency response charts, especially the "+/- 3dB" part. Below 90hz, you will still have response but it will fall away from -3dB and get worse. For example, 80hz might be -4dB, 70hz at -6dB and so on. The speakers may only be rated down to 90hz, but they certianly can go lower - it's justthat they won't sound as good down in the thumpin' range.

Again, set 'em on small and be done with it.

Also, crossovers fall like 3, 6 12 or 24dB per octave. So, your biggest hole will be halfway between where your sub starts off and where the sats leave off, and with a 10hz gap we're talking a miniscule response dip here.

Here is a very informative thread on the small and large settinngs.

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/003524.html

Check for Brian Florians post further down

This is only a viable option if your DVD player has a built in decoder and 6 analog outputs. This option adds more wires to your hook up and would take up the 5.1 channel analog input in his receiver adding more wires/splitters to add if he decided to go with DVD-A or SACD (which he may have zero interest in).

I would just set the speakers to small, and feed all of the other frequencies to the sub for easiet hook up. Don't be afriad to turn down your LFE either if it is overwhelming your system.

J

Forgot...
 

That is true...my next suggestion would have been to connect it to your pre-amp outputs to your amplifiers, but I just noticed that you have a receiver. Sorry I haven't dealt with receivers since my college days nearly a decade ago!!! The ideas of receivers are foreign to me...and I have converted nearly all of my family and friends to go the seperates route.

Re: Forgot...
 

You should be very proud of yourself.

Me, I use boomboxes for surround sound and a Lite-Brite to display images. Of course, I have the Lite-Brite connected to a hospital grade A/C outlet because I heard that it makes the colors more vivid, and I replaced the speaker wires of my boomboxes with gold-plated unicorn pubic hair for improved nuance and staging.

Oh wait, those hospital grade outlets are designed to suppress sparks so that O2 doesn't catch fire in a hospital, and we all know no mere mortal can hear the difference between Home Depot 16ga speaker wire runs of under 50' and that esoteric junk dipped in snake oil.

back to reality: Most mid-range receivers have discrete output transistors these days, so aside from the fact that separates are generally constructed better because they're higher-end and more expensive stuff ... they perform as separates do and there ain't nothin' wrong with using a decent high-current receiver such as a Denon, Yamaha or harman/kardon.

For most setups...
 

Yes I am sure that for most setups receivers and integrated amps and the all in 1 Home Theatre boxed setups are all dandy...

I'm not going to sit here and argue the pros and cons of each setup, as that is a highly debated subject... For me cost is less of a factor, and flexibility and a high quality tuner and multiple amps are higher on my agenda.

I do not use exotic cables, and would have little to no problem using Home Depot 16 guage cables... I prefer Kimbre Cable, just because those are what I am used to and their fit and finish and overall QC is a little nicer than Home Depot.

For most, the use of Receivers are probably better suited... Takes up little space, simplier connections, and if you want to upgrade just sell the old unit and buy the new... My system consists of some 20 year old McIntosh equipment that I would never part with, and I still listen to LP's!

(I do not wish to debate LP's Vs. Digital Recordings either)... Obvious advantages and disadvantages of both... Most of my recordings are on CD, and they are very conveniet, but I will take a LP over a CD recording any day. Just my preferences...

Ahh, you're a good sport. I'd love to have a nice set of tube amps and a 300lb preamp to go with some hand-crafted loudspeakers but it ain't gonna happen at this period of my life.

If you want the very best you'll be getting separates because there are no receivers in that strata of equipment. However, receivers have come a long way and I still argue that a $500 harman/kardon receiver and $50,000 pair of speakers will sound better than $25,500 worth of electronic boxes and a $25,000 pair of speakers.

You want good sound, put 75% or more of your budget into loudspeakers and you won't go wrong.

Vinyl? Nothing sounds smoother but it's a pain to do right. Remember that high-end esoteric turntable that had the stationary platter and the little car-like thing that drove around the record dragging the stylus and cartridge? Now that's taking audio a little too far...

Convenience Vs. Sound
 

Yes I agree receivers have come a long way... and you're point is taken.

Although I doubt you'll notice a difference between $25k speakers and $50k speakers. I think after about $20k you will definitely notice a price point of diminishing return. My choice would be to take the latter of the 2 senarios that you have laid out (at least I would have money for playback devices).

Personally I have the opposite setup that you suggest, and have opted for 60% of my budget on the electronics, 15% on cables and 25% on speakers...which works out approximately to $12k/$3k/$5k respectively. Speaker selection is very personal and is sensitive to the room itself... ie I would not want a pair of Wilson Grand Slamms in a 10x10 ft room, nor would I want a pair of bookshelf speakers in a 20x30 ft room.

To each their own, and I can respectifully appreciate each setup based on the homeowners wants/needs.

Thanks a lot for that link! I think I've got a handle on it now. I'm going to set mains to small and have the sub's cutoff up near its max.