Aadams

I have found a solution if one is willing to use a separate preamp and power amp. QSC does not appear do this but a Crown XLS will do it. The signal passes unfiltered to the XLS where it is passed on as an unfiltered low level output through link/out jacks to the powered subwoofer low level inputs. This allows you to use the sub-woofer variable crossover but also lets you set up a high cut filter in the Crown amp between 30 and 3khz in 1/12 octave increments to control the satellites through the amp's high level speaker outputs. The amp is spec’d at 2 ohms 550watts so no trouble driving multiple satellites. This is tidy, repeatable and cost effective if you already have a preamp. The 2 sub woofers are by far the single most expensive piece of the setup. Adams

I have done a variation of both approaches using the AR58. It works well and I still use it but it is a kluge and not easily repeatable. I also don’t want to build anything from scratch or buy any new tools. If we keep drifting in this direction this thread will be transported into mods and tweaks and not get as many eyeballs which will harm chances of an actual solution in the line we are looking. IMO

We have arrived at the same point where I stopped a year ago in my search for a powered sub solution using small satellites. There still is no way to do this without an external crossover, that is, if you want to control the low and high cut frequency settings, which IMO you must do for the cleanest stereo sound. Using the natural roll-off of full range speakers that can effortlessly reach 50hz or below to merge a sub-woofer for deep bass is different than trusting the natural roll-off of small speaker units, which if they were used as elements in a full range unit, would be steeply cut by a crossover. I still use, daily, a kluge system of small satellites that is not easily duplicated but it exceeded my expectations. I know small satellites can be used to create very musical, high dynamic systems but using powered subs is still not simple and involves too much experimentation and speculative expense. I would like something at a reasonable cost that is out of the box repeatable that my daughter could set up any time I choose to spend the money. Jerry, SVS offers a 45 day money back trial and I think Crutchfield offers a 60 day trial. You could purchase the NHTs and find that your hunch is correct or if not, scuttle the project without much expense. Adams

Which, for the SVS, is never going to be lower than 160Hz. I am assuming you meant "higher". Same here so I chatted with SVS today and the crossover is disabled when the knob is turned to the LFE position. Set in this way the unit will respond up to its limit. But, as you point out, there are problems with using the AVR low cut filters even if LFE is turned off. They can only be used through the sub pre-outs. I was hoping a modern AV receiver could be an all in one solution but even the new premium AVRs have two mono sub outs. You can turn the LFE off but the sub pre outs are still mono. I first began to smell this yesterday when reading the SVS SB 1000 manual which states that for stereo application the left and right sub units should be connected to the left and right front speaker line pre-outs or high level speaker terminals. When connected in this way, you lose the ability to independently high cut your front speakers so, SVS supplies a fixed 80hz high cut filter if you use the line inputs but you must wire back into the amplifier line in jacks, which AVRs never have. My conclusion is unless you are using full range speakers and using a sub strictly to extend the low bass an AVR is not a single box solution. To avoid thread creep, we should keep in mind a configuration goal is to emulate or mimic the sound of a 12” AR, including the power response, using small satellites. Something else. 2 Crown XLS 1002 amps now cost $500 and can crossover as well as high and low cut. My point is, an amp is an amp whether it is in the speaker or outside. Is there a compact passive sub-woofer that is suitable? I can’t find one except inside an AR speaker system. Adams

Yes you are correct and make a good point. I should have been more careful. The OP is wanting to use 4.5" not 6". I think there are several full range speakers that have used 6" low mids including DCM Timewindows which used dual 6.5" angled 20 degrees apart. Adams

We are still on topic. Does anyone here have experience with this box? Is it good for the application under discussion?

With the NHT unit I choose, I suspect crossing at 100 to 120Hz would be ideal. That is, assuming the NHT bookshelf does a decent job in the 100 to 200Hz range. Now bear in mind, it is "rated" down to 85Hz. I have no experience with current sealed 4.5” speakers and it may be that NHT can do what others cannot but, on the chance they are normal, here is what I have discovered in trying to do the same thing around a year ago with powered subs and satellites. If our target is the sound of an AR12” full range speaker, then keep in mind we are asking a 4.5” speaker to produce music below 200hz with same expectation of performance as a 12” AR woofer. The AR 12” was never crossed lower than 200hz by AR. Even in their premium 4 way systems the woofers were crossed at 200hz when they could have let the 8” speaker cover the entire human voice range to around 100hz. If a pair of NHT 4.5” can sound like a pair of AR 12” between 200hz and 85 hz then I am on board. My experience however has been a 5.25” cannot sound like AR 12” in the mid bass range except for things like solo viola, violin, human voice and acoustic guitar. I recall you having AR3s and TSW910s so I feel certain the music to which you listen is not that limited. Whatever satellite you choose, can be compared to your AR woofers in the 85-200hz range by choosing a recording appropriate for the purpose, before you go deeper into the project. YMMV but this is what I have discovered in a similar effort. If you want to mimic the AR sound for “eyes closed listening”, using a powered sub: -The easiest and simplest place to crossover is just above the 3db down point of a proven full range satellite that has roughly the equivalent of a 10” bass unit. -The next good place is 200hz or above; -The middle ground between 70hz and 200hz is a difficult area and offers a lot of frustration and ittle chance for happiness that could be as easily and more satisfactorily achieved at 200hz or above; -If you cross very low, you get max freedom in sub placement but; -Because this is a music system, if you cross above 100hz and especially above 160hz, you must keep the satellites very close and perhaps vertically aligned with the subs or you will get some unwanted special effects from the music. If this were an AV surround system a lot this wouldn’t matter for my purposes but for “eyes closed listening” it does. Edit: I forgot to add, to finish the job you will almost certainly need an equalizer. Aadams

The SVS is a nice unit. Even though it extends to 260hz It appears the only way you can cross it over above 160hz is to use the LFE circuitry in an AV amp/receiver. My old 5.1 will cut LFE as high as 200hz and front satellites starting at 200hz down. I have never seen a stereo amp with this kind of built in capability. Adams

The news still hasn't spread much beyond engineering circles IMO. I have seen this opinion asserted in this forum in way-back threads but can't recall it being tied to AES research. Still, good to hear. Anyway, the OP wants to use new product rather than old, what approach do you suggest? Note: I changed to 200-12000 above because 6" ported mini speakers begin to differentiate below 200hz in my experience. Adams

Evidence from an expert supporting my own experience that from around 200 to 12000hz any reasonably linear full range speaker can be equalized to have the character of another speaker. They are never identical but can sometimes be very close. I congratulate myself. Aadams

Simple and direct with a stamp of authority lent by the sophistication of a portmanteau word. Adams

Exactly! Was watching Hans Zimmer in Prague concert recently where even the orchestral instruments were wired and digitized and wondering if my little system was really conveying the power of those immense line arrays as heard by the live audience.

First what does the * stand for? Second you are correct. He gets paid either way and his opinion does not matter to his paymaster so long as he gets clicks. Adams

Onplane This is your thread and we have not heard from you. Now that a few of us have tossed out ideas, what are your thoughts at this point? Adams

I guess I read correctly the first time. I could not handle that much complexity but my confusion led me to discover that some 9.2 amps will support 3 LR stereo pairs simultaneously. It turns out a few 5.1 receivers will do everything required and drive two pair down to 4 ohms but to drive 3 or 4 stereo pairs in an array you will need another power amp, which for me is OK. Aadams

I agree again. At first I thought you meant tuning a surround set up but, instead using all channels as either stereo L or R or Sub would drive an array, crossover the subs, high cut the satellites, permit some equalization and appear to be an all in one box solution. If you want more headroom then connect a 2 ohm capable amp from the LR pre-outs. The subs mentioned by the OP plus a good quality 7.1 or 9.1 would be about the price of an AR3a pair in 1972 dollars. The satellites can be purchased new or used and aren't that costly. Thank you genek, this looks like it hits all the criteria I laid out for a solution i.e. tidy, cost effective, musical, wide-dymanic range, repeatable implementation of a subwoofer with a satellite stack. Adams

Agree. To help focus this discussion I am including a photo. I know for sure this works and should work using any linear mini two way. The difficult part is integration of the bass units. If someone can arrive at a tidy, cost effective, musical, wide-dymanic range, repeatable implementation of a subwoofer with a satellite stack it will be a great step forward IMO.

I have been hoping someone would do all of the heavy lifting to find a solution of reasonable cost and complexity using subs and satellites, so I could ride their coat tails. The simplest way I know to do this is to use a sub with a high pass filter but, few subs have this feature and they are of the more expensive variety. Two of these subs will cost in the 4 to 5k range which to me is over the mark considering ……….well, several things. The next simplest solution is to begin with a good AV receiver using its crossover features to create cutoff filters-------a low pass filter for the subs and high pass filter for the satellites. At this point you either decide to use speakers A and B on the AV unit to power two satellite pairs or use the pre-outs to an equalizer to an external amp that will drive two satellite arrays. You still must work out the octave to octave balance at the transition between subs and satellites, but this is practically doable at not too great a cost. Aadams

Replicating the musicality of an AR12 inch system with subs and sats is a pretty high bar. Integrating the Sats to the Subs is not as easy as it seems. If you raise the crossover point of the sub to a frequency that is well above the 3db down point of the sat you will double the output of some mid and high bass frequencies and create an octave to octave imbalance. In your example of a 200hz crossover it would mean the sats and the sub would be covering frequencies between 85hz to 200hz. Using the subs in question, the only way to trim out the imbalance is to use an equalizer, which seems simple enough except whenever you change the sub volume controls or crossover point it forces an equalizer change and still doesn't shutdown the sats below 200hz. To avoid this complexity you could simply lower the crossover point to just above the 3db down point of the satellite but the problem with this simple approach is these small speakers sound like crap in the mid bass area and below which is why 200hz is a great idea. To replicate the AR power response you will need a left/right satellite array. The wiring will get complicated unless you connect through a speaker selector switch, or a second amplifier to which you will also connect the equalizer. Adding an equalizer and an amp will give you at least 2 more volume controls per side giving you even more ways to create an imbalance but it will also allow you to silence the sats below the crossover point and have cleaner sound. If you are going to use only one satellite per side an alternative would be to use a larger satellite that actually sounds good in the mid bass area so you can lower the crossover point to 60 or so and maybe keep the whole system simple. I could be wrong and may have left something out, it is 2am, but I think I summarized the problem pretty well. Adams

Acquiring a vintage receiver or integrated you can trust to reliably to drive 4 AR3as will probably cost as much as 3 Crown XLS 1002s that each crank out 550w per channel at 2 ohms. Maybe a Macintosh Integrated or receiver will do this. Their layout gives this impression, they have protection circuitry but they will not come close to the wattage of a digital power amp and even used will cost more than the smallest QSC or Crown and almost certainly have zero warranty.

Which modern loudspeakers? It seems like it requires a highly experienced and trained ear or an ear with perfect pitch for a listener to hear timber differences between professional grade instruments that have identical shape but of different materials. I know the performer can hear the difference but could a listener consistently choose between them in a double blind test---- In your opinion?

The system is still operating. My, months ago, statement that tuning was at an end was premature. I have tamed the overemphasis of deep bass and more importantly have discovered center balance is not obviously simple to achieve when systems are merged in this way with equalizers and power amps. The BA CR65s have 4 gain controls that can affect left right balance while the AR58s have three. What I have learned is identical index points for left and right knobs on the same unit of equipment are not necessarily the same. Just because settings look equal doesn’t mean they are equal. I think folks who bi-amp or tri-amp speakers even with identical power amps may sometimes face the same problem without knowing it. When the LR center balance of the upper speakers differs greatly from the lower speakers it is obvious, but when they are very close to centered yet not aligned it is not easy to detect nor easy to correct by listening without a mono signal. Correcting that last little bit of difference to align the center points makes a huge difference in the sound. My mistake was to assume all the gain controls were working identically and balance the left and right speakers as a group when I should have been centering each system separately before they were all engaged to play music. My acceptance of the close but not correct setting for so long was, I think, because I was still thinking that the problem was with speaker placement or angles or perhaps this was just a bad idea. Happily, the system is improved and for now the beast is tamer and easy to live with. In my 11 steps above I covered vertical balancing of the separate systems but I ignored horizontal, left/right, because it seemed so obvious, but it is not. I have attached an illustration that may help.

I am not a physicist but 75 watts sustained over any time period is equal to the energy of around a constant 10 horsepower in the same period. A small tweeter voice coil that could handle that much energy would glow like a small electric stove or perhaps a light bulb. Your speaker could double as a food warmer or space heater. Adams

Transmaster you seem to have an ear for timbre and are one of only three I have seen mention it on the forum. Is there a loudspeaker from which you personally have heard the difference between precious metal flutes or a Strad vs Guanari vs "good modern" or even violin and viola in their shared range? My prejudices say no for loudspeakers but possibly yes for headphones and even then only if the instruments are solo and meticulously recorded. What is your experience?. There is no passion here just a question. Aadams