Minimum specs for a decent subwoofer ?
 

Hi. Please help this newbie with some reference point.
For the main purpose of watching movies (home-theater), in a very
small room, what specifications should I look for in a Subwoofer ?
I can't go over more details o the rest of equipment since I'm trying
to help my brother in building an affordable system.

I understand a decent Sub should be "active" (self-powered). So:

1- How many Watts RMS should it be rated, at minimum ? 100w, 150w,
200w,250w, ... ?

2- What frequency range should it cover for not too
unnatural/unpleasant sensation? 20hz, 30hz, 40hz, ...?

I guess some Subs that are too cheap enphasize the response in the
frequencies they handle, to generate some kind of impression effect
since they can't reach lower, is this so ?

3- Is there any JBL model that does a decent job ? Where I live, the
higher regarded names like Velodyne, Paradigm, etc, can't be found or
else cost too much for my budget. Waht about Infinity, Yamaha,
occasionally seen around ?
Again, this is not the US, where you can find other brands easily, and
the intention here is watching movies quite more than listening to
music.

Many thanks for reading.

wrote in message
...
Hi. Please help this newbie with some reference point.
For the main purpose of watching movies (home-theater), in a very
small room, what specifications should I look for in a Subwoofer ?
I can't go over more details o the rest of equipment since I'm trying
to help my brother in building an affordable system.

I understand a decent Sub should be "active" (self-powered). So:

1- How many Watts RMS should it be rated, at minimum ? 100w, 150w,
200w,250w, ... ?

Output power has little relevance, as driver efficiency, whether the cabinet
is sealed or ported, mutiple IB will also come into effect. Also required
SPL, material is being played (ie really low sub sonic bass), plus the size
of room another consideration



2- What frequency range should it cover for not too
unnatural/unpleasant sensation? 20hz, 30hz, 40hz, ...?

Better is lower, however also want a rough estimation just how loud at
required low frequency, and at what distortion. Most 8" subs will be able to
reproduce 20hz, but not at a very high SPL, or with low distortion. However
a high quality 12", 15" or 18" driver with 500W-2000W will most likely be
able to reproduce 100dB at 20hz at under 10%THD.

The overall frequency response is important too. Check it has +/-3dB. Avoid
anything with +/-6 or 10dB. Usually these subs are hyped up and overrated.

Look here for tested subs..

http://members.cox.net/frankcarter/T...Sub%20Data.htm

I guess some Subs that are too cheap enphasize the response in the
frequencies they handle, to generate some kind of impression effect
since they can't reach lower, is this so ?

Yes, usually have a mid-bass boost to give the effect of superior sound.
Also those with high THD seem to sound "nice" to unexperienced users.


3- Is there any JBL model that does a decent job ?

Quite a few use 18" JBL drivers in a multiple IB array, they do a very good
job. The seperate subs don't seem that highly regarded.

Where I live, the
higher regarded names like Velodyne, Paradigm, etc, can't be found or
else cost too much for my budget. Waht about Infinity, Yamaha,
occasionally seen around ?
Again, this is not the US, where you can find other brands easily, and
the intention here is watching movies quite more than listening to
music.

The Velodyne HGS/DD range are very good, but pricey. Paradigm Servo is a
great sub too. Don't bother with the PDR line. Consider PW-2200. Haven't
used Infinity. Avoid Yamaha.

I've got a SVS sub, and recommend them..

http://www.svsubwoofers.com/

wrote in message
...
Hi. Please help this newbie with some reference point.
For the main purpose of watching movies (home-theater), in a very
small room, what specifications should I look for in a Subwoofer ?
I can't go over more details o the rest of equipment since I'm trying
to help my brother in building an affordable system.

I understand a decent Sub should be "active" (self-powered). So:

1- How many Watts RMS should it be rated, at minimum ? 100w, 150w,
200w,250w, ... ?

Output power has little relevance, as driver efficiency, whether the cabinet
is sealed or ported, mutiple IB will also come into effect. Also required
SPL, material is being played (ie really low sub sonic bass), plus the size
of room another consideration



2- What frequency range should it cover for not too
unnatural/unpleasant sensation? 20hz, 30hz, 40hz, ...?

Better is lower, however also want a rough estimation just how loud at
required low frequency, and at what distortion. Most 8" subs will be able to
reproduce 20hz, but not at a very high SPL, or with low distortion. However
a high quality 12", 15" or 18" driver with 500W-2000W will most likely be
able to reproduce 100dB at 20hz at under 10%THD.

The overall frequency response is important too. Check it has +/-3dB. Avoid
anything with +/-6 or 10dB. Usually these subs are hyped up and overrated.

Look here for tested subs..

http://members.cox.net/frankcarter/T...Sub%20Data.htm

I guess some Subs that are too cheap enphasize the response in the
frequencies they handle, to generate some kind of impression effect
since they can't reach lower, is this so ?

Yes, usually have a mid-bass boost to give the effect of superior sound.
Also those with high THD seem to sound "nice" to unexperienced users.


3- Is there any JBL model that does a decent job ?

Quite a few use 18" JBL drivers in a multiple IB array, they do a very good
job. The seperate subs don't seem that highly regarded.

Where I live, the
higher regarded names like Velodyne, Paradigm, etc, can't be found or
else cost too much for my budget. Waht about Infinity, Yamaha,
occasionally seen around ?
Again, this is not the US, where you can find other brands easily, and
the intention here is watching movies quite more than listening to
music.

The Velodyne HGS/DD range are very good, but pricey. Paradigm Servo is a
great sub too. Don't bother with the PDR line. Consider PW-2200. Haven't
used Infinity. Avoid Yamaha.

I've got a SVS sub, and recommend them..

http://www.svsubwoofers.com/

wrote in message
...
Hi. Please help this newbie with some reference point.
For the main purpose of watching movies (home-theater), in a very
small room,

What's a small room? Dimensions. How loud do you listen to the system? Is
your current subwoofer calibrated hot, or would you set your new subwoofer
hot? (by that I mean the subwoofer is set louder than the others via the
test tones generated by the amp, and measured with a SPL meter. Usually
you'll set it slightly lower due to RS meter being off. Some bass heads set
it +6dB or even higher) If so you'll need a better subwoofer

what specifications should I look for in a Subwoofer ?
I can't go over more details o the rest of equipment since I'm trying
to help my brother in building an affordable system.

I understand a decent Sub should be "active" (self-powered).

By the way, you can buy very high quality passive subs too. Most people
associate passive subs to really cheap units like those in a HTIB.
Servodrive Contrabass is passive, so is the SVS B4+. Certainly high end
subs. What it means is you can decide what amplifier to use, you're not
limited and fixed to the sub panel (connections too). So you could buy a
cheap Samson S700 (2ch) for a budget passive dual sub system (ie DIY with
Peerless XLRS10 driver) or perhaps top end system with Crown K1 or K2 with
aforementioned Contrabass/B4+

What's his budget?

wrote in message
...
Hi. Please help this newbie with some reference point.
For the main purpose of watching movies (home-theater), in a very
small room,

What's a small room? Dimensions. How loud do you listen to the system? Is
your current subwoofer calibrated hot, or would you set your new subwoofer
hot? (by that I mean the subwoofer is set louder than the others via the
test tones generated by the amp, and measured with a SPL meter. Usually
you'll set it slightly lower due to RS meter being off. Some bass heads set
it +6dB or even higher) If so you'll need a better subwoofer

what specifications should I look for in a Subwoofer ?
I can't go over more details o the rest of equipment since I'm trying
to help my brother in building an affordable system.

I understand a decent Sub should be "active" (self-powered).

By the way, you can buy very high quality passive subs too. Most people
associate passive subs to really cheap units like those in a HTIB.
Servodrive Contrabass is passive, so is the SVS B4+. Certainly high end
subs. What it means is you can decide what amplifier to use, you're not
limited and fixed to the sub panel (connections too). So you could buy a
cheap Samson S700 (2ch) for a budget passive dual sub system (ie DIY with
Peerless XLRS10 driver) or perhaps top end system with Crown K1 or K2 with
aforementioned Contrabass/B4+

What's his budget?

wrote in message
...

3- Is there any JBL model that does a decent job ?

I have just bought the JBL 150P (Northridge series) subwoofer and it's a
stunning sub and great value for money. Plenty of slam and punch without
even a hint of distortion (105W RMS inbuilt amplifier, 225W peak), great for
music and movies and no 'humming' (digital inbuilt amplifier), I highly
recommend it.

--
Italo

wrote in message
...

3- Is there any JBL model that does a decent job ?

I have just bought the JBL 150P (Northridge series) subwoofer and it's a
stunning sub and great value for money. Plenty of slam and punch without
even a hint of distortion (105W RMS inbuilt amplifier, 225W peak), great for
music and movies and no 'humming' (digital inbuilt amplifier), I highly
recommend it.

--
Italo

"Nath" wrote :
Output power has little relevance, as driver efficiency, whether the cabinet
is sealed or ported, mutiple IB will also come into effect. Also required
SPL, material is being played (ie really low sub sonic bass), plus the size
of room another consideration

Many thanks for these tips.
Material being played should be rented DVDs and maybe mpeg-4 videos
with either AC-3 or mp3 audio.
The room I'd say is about 4 meters long by 6 meters wide and 2.5
meters high. I understand this is a very small room size for a HT
system and thus there shouldn't be a requirement for lots of power.
Could a 12-inch sub do a decent job regardless of how many Watts RMS
it is rated at ? How many Watts minimum in a real world?

The overall frequency response is important too. Check it has +/-3dB. Avoid
anything with +/-6 or 10dB.

OK. I'll keep a not of that too.

http://members.cox.net/frankcarter/T...Sub%20Data.htm
Yes, usually have a mid-bass boost to give the effect of superior sound.
Also those with high THD seem to sound "nice" to unexperienced users.

The site you provided suggests that the response of the lower end can
be compromised if it isn't as loud as the upper bass range (around
63hz). What would be an acceptable difference between the two ends ?
How can one minimize the effects of the above discrepancy, is there
any variable control that allows for some trimming-off of undesired
level emphasis ?

(JBL). The seperate subs don't seem that highly regarded.
The Velodyne HGS/DD range are very good, but pricey. Paradigm Servo is a
great sub too. Don't bother with the PDR line. Consider PW-2200. Haven't
used Infinity. Avoid Yamaha. I've got a SVS sub, and recommend them..

As I said, options aren't many. As far as models being sold nearby I
have seen these:
Acoustic Research AR PR1212
JBL E250P
Velodyne CHT-12

Are you familiar with any of these ? Could any do the job ?
Thanks, again,

"Nath" wrote :
Output power has little relevance, as driver efficiency, whether the cabinet
is sealed or ported, mutiple IB will also come into effect. Also required
SPL, material is being played (ie really low sub sonic bass), plus the size
of room another consideration

Many thanks for these tips.
Material being played should be rented DVDs and maybe mpeg-4 videos
with either AC-3 or mp3 audio.
The room I'd say is about 4 meters long by 6 meters wide and 2.5
meters high. I understand this is a very small room size for a HT
system and thus there shouldn't be a requirement for lots of power.
Could a 12-inch sub do a decent job regardless of how many Watts RMS
it is rated at ? How many Watts minimum in a real world?

The overall frequency response is important too. Check it has +/-3dB. Avoid
anything with +/-6 or 10dB.

OK. I'll keep a not of that too.

http://members.cox.net/frankcarter/T...Sub%20Data.htm
Yes, usually have a mid-bass boost to give the effect of superior sound.
Also those with high THD seem to sound "nice" to unexperienced users.

The site you provided suggests that the response of the lower end can
be compromised if it isn't as loud as the upper bass range (around
63hz). What would be an acceptable difference between the two ends ?
How can one minimize the effects of the above discrepancy, is there
any variable control that allows for some trimming-off of undesired
level emphasis ?

(JBL). The seperate subs don't seem that highly regarded.
The Velodyne HGS/DD range are very good, but pricey. Paradigm Servo is a
great sub too. Don't bother with the PDR line. Consider PW-2200. Haven't
used Infinity. Avoid Yamaha. I've got a SVS sub, and recommend them..

As I said, options aren't many. As far as models being sold nearby I
have seen these:
Acoustic Research AR PR1212
JBL E250P
Velodyne CHT-12

Are you familiar with any of these ? Could any do the job ?
Thanks, again,

wrote in message
m...

Many thanks for these tips.
Material being played should be rented DVDs and maybe mpeg-4 videos
with either AC-3 or mp3 audio.
The room I'd say is about 4 meters long by 6 meters wide and 2.5
meters high.

A 20-39 PCi would be plenty in that sized room. I use a 20-39 PC Plus in a
4m x 4m room :-) overkill I know, but I wasn't sure just how much headroom
the Plus has over my Rel Storm. I'd say quite a bit now ;-)

http://www.svsubwoofers.com/subs_pci_20-39.htm

Looking at £480 all-in price, and with the good exchance rate (1.7) it's a
good time to buy.

SVS have great customer service. Contact Tom V at SVS. He will not oversell
you, or tell you BS, in fact if you mention some other subs he sometimes
will recommend them over his own products (ie a Canadian can get a Servo 15
at a much better price compared to it's SVS competitor, the PCi)

I understand this is a very small room size for a HT
system and thus there shouldn't be a requirement for lots of power.
Could a 12-inch sub do a decent job regardless of how many Watts RMS
it is rated at ?

A good quality subwoofer should do fine, a decent 10 or 12". Again watts RMS
is another issue. A ported efficient large box subwoofer would require much
less power with no EQ, comapared to a small sealed box with a high amount of
EQ to correct the driver/cab issues. If you've got the money though, and
want lots of headroom (or like it loud) then buy the best subwoofer you can
afford, it's definetly worth spending £100-£200 more from a budget model to
one-up.

For example there's a huge multiple IB subwoofer with something like 32 x
18" drivers, a 18W tube amp is being used to drive it.

Compare a SVS PCi (300W) versus a Sunfire Junior (1.5KW) The Sunfire has a
much bigger amp. But in reality the SVS goes much louder, plays cleaner,
plays lower, with much lower distortion. The SVS is also cheaper too.

How many Watts minimum in a real world?

Can't answer that.

The site you provided suggests that the response of the lower end can
be compromised if it isn't as loud as the upper bass range (around
63hz). What would be an acceptable difference between the two ends ?
How can one minimize the effects of the above discrepancy, is there
any variable control that allows for some trimming-off of undesired
level emphasis ?

If you want a subwoofer to be flat(er), then consider a Behringer Feedback
Destroyer Pro. It's also a 12 band stereo parametric EQ. Read up here..you
might not need a BFD but it's worth considering later on. About £100.

http://www.snapbug.ws/bfd.htm

As I said, options aren't many. As far as models being sold nearby I
have seen these:
Acoustic Research AR PR1212
JBL E250P
Velodyne CHT-12

I would consider that SVS above that list. From other users the PCi is
superior to that of the CHT-12. Haven't really heard much about the JBL or
AR.

I take it you're looking around £350 for a subwoofer? What's the rest of the
system?


Are you familiar with any of these ? Could any do the job ?
Thanks, again,

Do the job, yes. So could a mid-range Yamaha subwoofer or Rel Quake. But do
you want something to "do the job" or do you want a great sounding
subwoofer?

wrote in message
m...

Many thanks for these tips.
Material being played should be rented DVDs and maybe mpeg-4 videos
with either AC-3 or mp3 audio.
The room I'd say is about 4 meters long by 6 meters wide and 2.5
meters high.

A 20-39 PCi would be plenty in that sized room. I use a 20-39 PC Plus in a
4m x 4m room :-) overkill I know, but I wasn't sure just how much headroom
the Plus has over my Rel Storm. I'd say quite a bit now ;-)

http://www.svsubwoofers.com/subs_pci_20-39.htm

Looking at £480 all-in price, and with the good exchance rate (1.7) it's a
good time to buy.

SVS have great customer service. Contact Tom V at SVS. He will not oversell
you, or tell you BS, in fact if you mention some other subs he sometimes
will recommend them over his own products (ie a Canadian can get a Servo 15
at a much better price compared to it's SVS competitor, the PCi)

I understand this is a very small room size for a HT
system and thus there shouldn't be a requirement for lots of power.
Could a 12-inch sub do a decent job regardless of how many Watts RMS
it is rated at ?

A good quality subwoofer should do fine, a decent 10 or 12". Again watts RMS
is another issue. A ported efficient large box subwoofer would require much
less power with no EQ, comapared to a small sealed box with a high amount of
EQ to correct the driver/cab issues. If you've got the money though, and
want lots of headroom (or like it loud) then buy the best subwoofer you can
afford, it's definetly worth spending £100-£200 more from a budget model to
one-up.

For example there's a huge multiple IB subwoofer with something like 32 x
18" drivers, a 18W tube amp is being used to drive it.

Compare a SVS PCi (300W) versus a Sunfire Junior (1.5KW) The Sunfire has a
much bigger amp. But in reality the SVS goes much louder, plays cleaner,
plays lower, with much lower distortion. The SVS is also cheaper too.

How many Watts minimum in a real world?

Can't answer that.

The site you provided suggests that the response of the lower end can
be compromised if it isn't as loud as the upper bass range (around
63hz). What would be an acceptable difference between the two ends ?
How can one minimize the effects of the above discrepancy, is there
any variable control that allows for some trimming-off of undesired
level emphasis ?

If you want a subwoofer to be flat(er), then consider a Behringer Feedback
Destroyer Pro. It's also a 12 band stereo parametric EQ. Read up here..you
might not need a BFD but it's worth considering later on. About £100.

http://www.snapbug.ws/bfd.htm

As I said, options aren't many. As far as models being sold nearby I
have seen these:
Acoustic Research AR PR1212
JBL E250P
Velodyne CHT-12

I would consider that SVS above that list. From other users the PCi is
superior to that of the CHT-12. Haven't really heard much about the JBL or
AR.

I take it you're looking around £350 for a subwoofer? What's the rest of the
system?


Are you familiar with any of these ? Could any do the job ?
Thanks, again,

Do the job, yes. So could a mid-range Yamaha subwoofer or Rel Quake. But do
you want something to "do the job" or do you want a great sounding
subwoofer?

"Nath" wrote:

What's a small room? Dimensions. How loud do you listen to the system? Is
your current subwoofer calibrated hot, or would you set your new subwoofer
hot? (by that I mean the subwoofer is set louder than the others via the
test tones generated by the amp, and measured with a SPL meter. Usually
you'll set it slightly lower due to RS meter being off. Some bass heads set
it +6dB or even higher) If so you'll need a better subwoofer

Thanks again. As much as I appreciate these excellent pieces of
advice, I realize that where I live I'm trapped with very few options.
I would seriously look at SVS, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to be
a choice. It seems the best I could get is a Velodyne CHT-12, for a
very high price (imports tax plus trasportation of these heavy units
make them way more expensive than your country, you'd be shocked). For
about 60% of the CHT-12's price I could get a JBL e250p, and for 50%,
I could buy an Acoustic research AR-PR1212 or a JBL e150p. So it
would be a matter of just how better one is compared to the others
even though maybe none of them would be the very best choice. For
example, both JBL models use a 12-inch driver, the difference
apparently being that one has a 250-watt amplifier while the other has
a 150-watt amp, maybe there's some extra control in the e250p. Coming
from a musical background I know for sure that even a cheaper and
smaller model can do the job because of the frequency range used in
music not being the same as in movies. So how do these few options
compare in movies, that's the question, which seems very difficult to
answer. I guess I'll be in the dark shooting and tell my brother to
get used to whichever I can pick for him, maybe he won't be able to
tell a difference that maybe I could tell.
all the best

"Nath" wrote:

What's a small room? Dimensions. How loud do you listen to the system? Is
your current subwoofer calibrated hot, or would you set your new subwoofer
hot? (by that I mean the subwoofer is set louder than the others via the
test tones generated by the amp, and measured with a SPL meter. Usually
you'll set it slightly lower due to RS meter being off. Some bass heads set
it +6dB or even higher) If so you'll need a better subwoofer

Thanks again. As much as I appreciate these excellent pieces of
advice, I realize that where I live I'm trapped with very few options.
I would seriously look at SVS, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to be
a choice. It seems the best I could get is a Velodyne CHT-12, for a
very high price (imports tax plus trasportation of these heavy units
make them way more expensive than your country, you'd be shocked). For
about 60% of the CHT-12's price I could get a JBL e250p, and for 50%,
I could buy an Acoustic research AR-PR1212 or a JBL e150p. So it
would be a matter of just how better one is compared to the others
even though maybe none of them would be the very best choice. For
example, both JBL models use a 12-inch driver, the difference
apparently being that one has a 250-watt amplifier while the other has
a 150-watt amp, maybe there's some extra control in the e250p. Coming
from a musical background I know for sure that even a cheaper and
smaller model can do the job because of the frequency range used in
music not being the same as in movies. So how do these few options
compare in movies, that's the question, which seems very difficult to
answer. I guess I'll be in the dark shooting and tell my brother to
get used to whichever I can pick for him, maybe he won't be able to
tell a difference that maybe I could tell.
all the best

"Italo" wrote :
I have just bought the JBL 150P (Northridge series) subwoofer and it's a
stunning sub and great value for money. Plenty of slam and punch without
even a hint of distortion (105W RMS inbuilt amplifier, 225W peak), great for
music and movies and no 'humming' (digital inbuilt amplifier), I highly
recommend it.

Hi. Could you please share why you chose the 150p and not the 250p ?
How often have you been watching movies, do you feel you have already
gotten used to your system to be able to understand what the
limitations are ? Which other speakers do you use to match the 150p,
did you have to do much tuning adjustments ? Thanks for helping.

"Italo" wrote :
I have just bought the JBL 150P (Northridge series) subwoofer and it's a
stunning sub and great value for money. Plenty of slam and punch without
even a hint of distortion (105W RMS inbuilt amplifier, 225W peak), great for
music and movies and no 'humming' (digital inbuilt amplifier), I highly
recommend it.

Hi. Could you please share why you chose the 150p and not the 250p ?
How often have you been watching movies, do you feel you have already
gotten used to your system to be able to understand what the
limitations are ? Which other speakers do you use to match the 150p,
did you have to do much tuning adjustments ? Thanks for helping.

wrote in message
m...

Hi. Could you please share why you chose the 150p and not the 250p ?

The 150p fits neatly into the corner of my loungeroom (right next to the
wall unit) whereas the 250p would have been just too big. Unless you have a
hangar for a loungeroom (mine is 5m long, 3.6m wide and 2.7m high) the 150p
will do just fine. The price also fitted my budget perfectly.

Having said that (having now tested the 150P) I'd buy the 250P in an instant
if I had the right space for it. JBL finally has got it right with this
series of subs.

How often have you been watching movies, do you feel you have already
gotten used to your system to be able to understand what the
limitations are ?

No limitations so far. I replaced a Klipsch Sub which was very good for both
music and movies and was looking for a worthy replacement (at a reasonable
price). I did try the newer Klipsch subs but preferred the sound, specs (and
looks) of the JBL. Music/Movie listening, in both DVD-A, stereo or
multichannel is outstanding, clean clear bass with no distortion at any
listening level.

Which other speakers do you use to match the 150p,
did you have to do much tuning adjustments ? Thanks for helping.

I use a set of Klipsch Quintets surrounds and the JBL complements them
wonderfully since it has a higher cutoff than the previous sub and far more
power. It's extremely punchy without a hint of distortion, chuffing or noise
from the internal amp, it's just a great buy.

--
Italo

wrote in message
m...

Hi. Could you please share why you chose the 150p and not the 250p ?

The 150p fits neatly into the corner of my loungeroom (right next to the
wall unit) whereas the 250p would have been just too big. Unless you have a
hangar for a loungeroom (mine is 5m long, 3.6m wide and 2.7m high) the 150p
will do just fine. The price also fitted my budget perfectly.

Having said that (having now tested the 150P) I'd buy the 250P in an instant
if I had the right space for it. JBL finally has got it right with this
series of subs.

How often have you been watching movies, do you feel you have already
gotten used to your system to be able to understand what the
limitations are ?

No limitations so far. I replaced a Klipsch Sub which was very good for both
music and movies and was looking for a worthy replacement (at a reasonable
price). I did try the newer Klipsch subs but preferred the sound, specs (and
looks) of the JBL. Music/Movie listening, in both DVD-A, stereo or
multichannel is outstanding, clean clear bass with no distortion at any
listening level.

Which other speakers do you use to match the 150p,
did you have to do much tuning adjustments ? Thanks for helping.

I use a set of Klipsch Quintets surrounds and the JBL complements them
wonderfully since it has a higher cutoff than the previous sub and far more
power. It's extremely punchy without a hint of distortion, chuffing or noise
from the internal amp, it's just a great buy.

--
Italo

"Italo" wrote:

The 150p fits neatly into the corner of my loungeroom (right next to the
wall unit) whereas the 250p would have been just too big.

That's certainly a crucial aspect (wanting Vs having the space for),
and your remarks about the 150p encourage me to suggest it as an
alternative solution should my brother
have spacing concerns.

Having said that (having now tested the 150P) I'd buy the 250P in an instant
if I had the right space for it. JBL finally has got it right with this
series of subs.

I see. In which way do you feel the 250p would make a difference,
since the power rating isn't considered a major spec and they have the
same driver size? Is there any tuning control on the 250p that is
lacking on the 150p, or is it basicaly a subjective impression that
the overall low end would sound more natural in the 50p?
Thanks for shariung your very useful experience.
all the best

"Italo" wrote:

The 150p fits neatly into the corner of my loungeroom (right next to the
wall unit) whereas the 250p would have been just too big.

That's certainly a crucial aspect (wanting Vs having the space for),
and your remarks about the 150p encourage me to suggest it as an
alternative solution should my brother
have spacing concerns.

Having said that (having now tested the 150P) I'd buy the 250P in an instant
if I had the right space for it. JBL finally has got it right with this
series of subs.

I see. In which way do you feel the 250p would make a difference,
since the power rating isn't considered a major spec and they have the
same driver size? Is there any tuning control on the 250p that is
lacking on the 150p, or is it basicaly a subjective impression that
the overall low end would sound more natural in the 50p?
Thanks for shariung your very useful experience.
all the best

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote:

I see. In which way do you feel the 250p would make a difference,
since the power rating isn't considered a major spec and they have the
same driver size?

That's incorrect, the 250P has a 12" driver and the 150P has a 10" driver,
also the amplifier of the 250P is rated at 250W RMS Vs the 150P rated at
150W RMS, the frequency range is also (barely) lower.

Is there any tuning control on the 250p that is
lacking on the 150p, or is it basicaly a subjective impression that
the overall low end would sound more natural in the 50p?
Thanks for shariung your very useful experience.
all the best

For a standard loungeroom the 150P is more than sufficient, though if I had
a dedicated HT room the 250P would also have been a good buy. Either way
it's a great sub.

--
Italo

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote:

I see. In which way do you feel the 250p would make a difference,
since the power rating isn't considered a major spec and they have the
same driver size?

That's incorrect, the 250P has a 12" driver and the 150P has a 10" driver,
also the amplifier of the 250P is rated at 250W RMS Vs the 150P rated at
150W RMS, the frequency range is also (barely) lower.

Is there any tuning control on the 250p that is
lacking on the 150p, or is it basicaly a subjective impression that
the overall low end would sound more natural in the 50p?
Thanks for shariung your very useful experience.
all the best

For a standard loungeroom the 150P is more than sufficient, though if I had
a dedicated HT room the 250P would also have been a good buy. Either way
it's a great sub.

--
Italo

"Italo" wrote:
That's incorrect, the 250P has a 12" driver and the 150P has a 10" driver,
also the amplifier of the 250P is rated at 250W RMS Vs the 150P rated at
150W RMS, the frequency range is also (barely) lower.
For a standard loungeroom the 150P is more than sufficient, though if I had
a dedicated HT room the 250P would also have been a good buy. Either way
it's a great sub.

That pretty much wraps it up for me then. I'll tell my brother to get
the 250p if he has the money and the space, or else get the 150p and
still enjoy.
I'll tell him to build his system around whichever sub he gets. Would
you suggest any decent receiver among mainstream brands such as
Yamaha, Pioneer, Sony ? Speakers should be easier since the purpose
isn't music listening. BTW, I've noticed that recent models are "6.1",
what is the purpose of the extra channel ?
Thanks again.

"Italo" wrote:
That's incorrect, the 250P has a 12" driver and the 150P has a 10" driver,
also the amplifier of the 250P is rated at 250W RMS Vs the 150P rated at
150W RMS, the frequency range is also (barely) lower.
For a standard loungeroom the 150P is more than sufficient, though if I had
a dedicated HT room the 250P would also have been a good buy. Either way
it's a great sub.

That pretty much wraps it up for me then. I'll tell my brother to get
the 250p if he has the money and the space, or else get the 150p and
still enjoy.
I'll tell him to build his system around whichever sub he gets. Would
you suggest any decent receiver among mainstream brands such as
Yamaha, Pioneer, Sony ? Speakers should be easier since the purpose
isn't music listening. BTW, I've noticed that recent models are "6.1",
what is the purpose of the extra channel ?
Thanks again.

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote:

That pretty much wraps it up for me then. I'll tell my brother to get
the 250p if he has the money and the space, or else get the 150p and
still enjoy.

He won't be disappointed with either. I'm pretty picky in terms of sound for
both music and movies and the JBL is a superb sub and excellent value for
money.

I'll tell him to build his system around whichever sub he gets. Would
you suggest any decent receiver among mainstream brands such as
Yamaha, Pioneer, Sony ? Speakers should be easier since the purpose
isn't music listening. BTW, I've noticed that recent models are "6.1",
what is the purpose of the extra channel ?
Thanks again.

All the brands you mentioned are excellent and I would also add Marantz to
the list but it really comes down to your brother's budget and specific
needs. 6.1/7.1 refers to the numbers of speakers being driven by the amp.
Most mid-to-high range amps are either and allow you to use an extra 1/2
speakers as back surrounds to bolster the panning sound effects.

The Yamaha range amplifiers give great value for money, especially at the
midlevel point, and even their bottom of the range amplifiers have separate
subwoofer levels for DD and DTS soundtracks. Surprisingly this important
feature is only found in the upper level models of other manufacturers if at
all.

Tell your brother to read some reviews of the amplifiers he's interested in
and make sure the amplifier he finally chooses has all the inputs/outputs he
needs.

--
Italo

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote:

That pretty much wraps it up for me then. I'll tell my brother to get
the 250p if he has the money and the space, or else get the 150p and
still enjoy.

He won't be disappointed with either. I'm pretty picky in terms of sound for
both music and movies and the JBL is a superb sub and excellent value for
money.

I'll tell him to build his system around whichever sub he gets. Would
you suggest any decent receiver among mainstream brands such as
Yamaha, Pioneer, Sony ? Speakers should be easier since the purpose
isn't music listening. BTW, I've noticed that recent models are "6.1",
what is the purpose of the extra channel ?
Thanks again.

All the brands you mentioned are excellent and I would also add Marantz to
the list but it really comes down to your brother's budget and specific
needs. 6.1/7.1 refers to the numbers of speakers being driven by the amp.
Most mid-to-high range amps are either and allow you to use an extra 1/2
speakers as back surrounds to bolster the panning sound effects.

The Yamaha range amplifiers give great value for money, especially at the
midlevel point, and even their bottom of the range amplifiers have separate
subwoofer levels for DD and DTS soundtracks. Surprisingly this important
feature is only found in the upper level models of other manufacturers if at
all.

Tell your brother to read some reviews of the amplifiers he's interested in
and make sure the amplifier he finally chooses has all the inputs/outputs he
needs.

--
Italo

"Italo" wrote:

The Yamaha range amplifiers give great value for money, especially at the
midlevel point, and even their bottom of the range amplifiers have separate
subwoofer levels for DD and DTS soundtracks. Surprisingly this important
feature is only found in the upper level models of other manufacturers if at
all.

This is one more interesting tip, although I'm not capable to evaluate
how it affects the system's performance. But I'll add that to an
Yamaha choice. I also remember that Yamaha used to be "conservative"
in their power ratings, something like 80 Watts RMS corresponding to
about 100 Watts in other brands. Anyway, for a room the size we're
talking about, what would be the minimum power rating for a good
receiver, would 60 Watt per channel be enough, or should he definitely
get 80 or more to be sure?

And yes, Marantz would be great but it's not really a mainstrem brand
where I live so I can foresee potential hassles in case of eventual
servicing.

About 6.1 and 7.1, would one really miss something by finding a good
older 5.1 model, would 6/1 or 7.1 really make a difference in the real
world aside from demonstration movies?

Tell your brother to read some reviews of the amplifiers he's interested in
and make sure the amplifier he finally chooses has all the inputs/outputs he
needs.

Yes. I remember once reading (about 4 years ago when I had more time
to dedicate to the subject, before becoming a father) that a receiver
should have all different types of IO connections, analog and digital
and even some provision for future formats. Is it still so, or has it
evolved to some kind of standard these days about DVD-audio, SACD, etc
? I also wonder if things have evolved to some closer relation between
receivers and computers, other than SPIDF ? My guess is it SHOULD,
since computers nowadays have all the capacity to handle video and
24-bit audio easily.

I'm sure this thread will be very useful to others as well.

"Italo" wrote:

The Yamaha range amplifiers give great value for money, especially at the
midlevel point, and even their bottom of the range amplifiers have separate
subwoofer levels for DD and DTS soundtracks. Surprisingly this important
feature is only found in the upper level models of other manufacturers if at
all.

This is one more interesting tip, although I'm not capable to evaluate
how it affects the system's performance. But I'll add that to an
Yamaha choice. I also remember that Yamaha used to be "conservative"
in their power ratings, something like 80 Watts RMS corresponding to
about 100 Watts in other brands. Anyway, for a room the size we're
talking about, what would be the minimum power rating for a good
receiver, would 60 Watt per channel be enough, or should he definitely
get 80 or more to be sure?

And yes, Marantz would be great but it's not really a mainstrem brand
where I live so I can foresee potential hassles in case of eventual
servicing.

About 6.1 and 7.1, would one really miss something by finding a good
older 5.1 model, would 6/1 or 7.1 really make a difference in the real
world aside from demonstration movies?

Tell your brother to read some reviews of the amplifiers he's interested in
and make sure the amplifier he finally chooses has all the inputs/outputs he
needs.

Yes. I remember once reading (about 4 years ago when I had more time
to dedicate to the subject, before becoming a father) that a receiver
should have all different types of IO connections, analog and digital
and even some provision for future formats. Is it still so, or has it
evolved to some kind of standard these days about DVD-audio, SACD, etc
? I also wonder if things have evolved to some closer relation between
receivers and computers, other than SPIDF ? My guess is it SHOULD,
since computers nowadays have all the capacity to handle video and
24-bit audio easily.

I'm sure this thread will be very useful to others as well.

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote:

The Yamaha range amplifiers give great value for money, especially at the
midlevel point, and even their bottom of the range amplifiers have
separate
subwoofer levels for DD and DTS soundtracks. Surprisingly this important
feature is only found in the upper level models of other manufacturers if
at
all.

This is one more interesting tip, although I'm not capable to evaluate
how it affects the system's performance. But I'll add that to an
Yamaha choice. I also remember that Yamaha used to be "conservative"
in their power ratings, something like 80 Watts RMS corresponding to
about 100 Watts in other brands. Anyway, for a room the size we're
talking about, what would be the minimum power rating for a good
receiver, would 60 Watt per channel be enough, or should he definitely
get 80 or more to be sure?

It seems Yamaha are one of the poorer amps to actually reproduce rated or
better than rated output..and use bottom link to work out approx amp
requirements.

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Holl...1/ratevsac.htm

http://www.myhometheater.homestead.c...alculator.html

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote:

The Yamaha range amplifiers give great value for money, especially at the
midlevel point, and even their bottom of the range amplifiers have
separate
subwoofer levels for DD and DTS soundtracks. Surprisingly this important
feature is only found in the upper level models of other manufacturers if
at
all.

This is one more interesting tip, although I'm not capable to evaluate
how it affects the system's performance. But I'll add that to an
Yamaha choice. I also remember that Yamaha used to be "conservative"
in their power ratings, something like 80 Watts RMS corresponding to
about 100 Watts in other brands. Anyway, for a room the size we're
talking about, what would be the minimum power rating for a good
receiver, would 60 Watt per channel be enough, or should he definitely
get 80 or more to be sure?

It seems Yamaha are one of the poorer amps to actually reproduce rated or
better than rated output..and use bottom link to work out approx amp
requirements.

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Holl...1/ratevsac.htm

http://www.myhometheater.homestead.c...alculator.html

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote:

This is one more interesting tip, although I'm not capable to evaluate
how it affects the system's performance.

Frankly to me it's a crucial feature since otherwise the sub level is always
severall Db higher when playing a DTS track, what people always refer to
when they think a DTS soundtrack sound 'better'.

I was disappointed recently when I replaced my 3 year old Yamaha surround
amplifier and bought a Marantz 7300 amp which did not have this feature and
I had to buy myself a graphic equaliser to achieve a consistent sub level
when playing DVDs. This feature is standard on all Yamaha amps, even the
bottom of the line models.


But I'll add that to an
Yamaha choice. I also remember that Yamaha used to be "conservative"
in their power ratings, something like 80 Watts RMS corresponding to
about 100 Watts in other brands. Anyway, for a room the size we're
talking about, what would be the minimum power rating for a good
receiver, would 60 Watt per channel be enough, or should he definitely
get 80 or more to be sure?


The power rating required really depends on the speakers he's planning to
use. If they're highly efficient satellites combined with a powered sub I'd
say any amp delivering 60+Watts per channel is sufficient. If he's driving
full range speakers, rated less than 8 Ohms, in a large room he definitely
needs to up his budget and look for a stronger amp driving all channels at
the rated power setting.


About 6.1 and 7.1, would one really miss something by finding a good
older 5.1 model, would 6/1 or 7.1 really make a difference in the real
world aside from demonstration movies?


No, in general it would not make any difference at all. The current standard
for DVD soundtracks is 5.1 DD and/or DTS (5.1 is also the standard for DVD
Audio and SACD surround tracks) and likely to stay that way for the foreseab
le future. 6.1 soundtracks have appeared in a few discs (Gladiator, Star
Wars etc...) but they are not the norm and they are fully compatible with a
5.1 system. There are no discs with a 7.1 soundtrack.

Unless he's planning to use the HT system in a very large room then a 5.1
system is fine, he might even find some very good deals on a top of the line
amplifier from a couple of years back.


Yes. I remember once reading (about 4 years ago when I had more time
to dedicate to the subject, before becoming a father) that a receiver
should have all different types of IO connections, analog and digital
and even some provision for future formats. Is it still so, or has it
evolved to some kind of standard these days about DVD-audio, SACD, etc
? I also wonder if things have evolved to some closer relation between
receivers and computers, other than SPIDF ? My guess is it SHOULD,
since computers nowadays have all the capacity to handle video and
24-bit audio easily.

No generally amps have pretty much stayed the same. Biggest improvements are
generally invisible like better power supplies; better chipsets; video
upsampling; and RS32 connections for upgrading firmware on certain models.

Buying a new mid-level amplifier from a reputable brand is usually a good
bet but I repeat, even then many lack turntable inputs and other important
features, so your brother really needs to take a good look around. All part
of the fun!

--
Italo

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote:

This is one more interesting tip, although I'm not capable to evaluate
how it affects the system's performance.

Frankly to me it's a crucial feature since otherwise the sub level is always
severall Db higher when playing a DTS track, what people always refer to
when they think a DTS soundtrack sound 'better'.

I was disappointed recently when I replaced my 3 year old Yamaha surround
amplifier and bought a Marantz 7300 amp which did not have this feature and
I had to buy myself a graphic equaliser to achieve a consistent sub level
when playing DVDs. This feature is standard on all Yamaha amps, even the
bottom of the line models.


But I'll add that to an
Yamaha choice. I also remember that Yamaha used to be "conservative"
in their power ratings, something like 80 Watts RMS corresponding to
about 100 Watts in other brands. Anyway, for a room the size we're
talking about, what would be the minimum power rating for a good
receiver, would 60 Watt per channel be enough, or should he definitely
get 80 or more to be sure?


The power rating required really depends on the speakers he's planning to
use. If they're highly efficient satellites combined with a powered sub I'd
say any amp delivering 60+Watts per channel is sufficient. If he's driving
full range speakers, rated less than 8 Ohms, in a large room he definitely
needs to up his budget and look for a stronger amp driving all channels at
the rated power setting.


About 6.1 and 7.1, would one really miss something by finding a good
older 5.1 model, would 6/1 or 7.1 really make a difference in the real
world aside from demonstration movies?


No, in general it would not make any difference at all. The current standard
for DVD soundtracks is 5.1 DD and/or DTS (5.1 is also the standard for DVD
Audio and SACD surround tracks) and likely to stay that way for the foreseab
le future. 6.1 soundtracks have appeared in a few discs (Gladiator, Star
Wars etc...) but they are not the norm and they are fully compatible with a
5.1 system. There are no discs with a 7.1 soundtrack.

Unless he's planning to use the HT system in a very large room then a 5.1
system is fine, he might even find some very good deals on a top of the line
amplifier from a couple of years back.


Yes. I remember once reading (about 4 years ago when I had more time
to dedicate to the subject, before becoming a father) that a receiver
should have all different types of IO connections, analog and digital
and even some provision for future formats. Is it still so, or has it
evolved to some kind of standard these days about DVD-audio, SACD, etc
? I also wonder if things have evolved to some closer relation between
receivers and computers, other than SPIDF ? My guess is it SHOULD,
since computers nowadays have all the capacity to handle video and
24-bit audio easily.

No generally amps have pretty much stayed the same. Biggest improvements are
generally invisible like better power supplies; better chipsets; video
upsampling; and RS32 connections for upgrading firmware on certain models.

Buying a new mid-level amplifier from a reputable brand is usually a good
bet but I repeat, even then many lack turntable inputs and other important
features, so your brother really needs to take a good look around. All part
of the fun!

--
Italo

"Nath" wrote:
It seems Yamaha are one of the poorer amps to actually reproduce rated or
better than rated output..and use bottom link to work out approx amp
requirements.
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Holl...1/ratevsac.htm
http://www.myhometheater.homestead.c...alculator.html

Thanks for the links, Nath, I'll have a careful look at them. So I
guess a should be better off not saving on power but adding some
spare margin. My previous comment was because I once heard a Marantz
model against a Yamaha and the latter sounded more powerful despite
being lower in nominal rating. This was some 4 years ago.

"Nath" wrote:
It seems Yamaha are one of the poorer amps to actually reproduce rated or
better than rated output..and use bottom link to work out approx amp
requirements.
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Holl...1/ratevsac.htm
http://www.myhometheater.homestead.c...alculator.html

Thanks for the links, Nath, I'll have a careful look at them. So I
guess a should be better off not saving on power but adding some
spare margin. My previous comment was because I once heard a Marantz
model against a Yamaha and the latter sounded more powerful despite
being lower in nominal rating. This was some 4 years ago.

"Italo" wrote
The power rating required really depends on the speakers he's planning to
use. If they're highly efficient satellites combined with a powered sub I'd
say any amp delivering 60+Watts per channel is sufficient. If he's driving
full range speakers, rated less than 8 Ohms, in a large room he definitely
needs to up his budget and look for a stronger amp driving all channels at
the rated power setting.

Got it. In general, sattelites would be more appropriate in small
rooms, right ?
Less volume been required and space being at premium. The usefulness I
see in sattelites is the easiness in tuning for movies, since their
response is totally parted from that of a sub. Trouble is they're not
great for music and even so they used to be very expensive, don't know
if this is something that's changed (I remember when Bose came up
drawing lots of attention as well as lots of hatred from demanding
music-listeners). In truth, coming from a musical background, I'd say
it all depends on how one listens to music.
In my brother's case, I've ruled off any music requirement right from
the beginning. But I had the feeling that even for movies a bookshelf
speaker would allow better response, if trickier to tune against a
sub.

"Italo" wrote
The power rating required really depends on the speakers he's planning to
use. If they're highly efficient satellites combined with a powered sub I'd
say any amp delivering 60+Watts per channel is sufficient. If he's driving
full range speakers, rated less than 8 Ohms, in a large room he definitely
needs to up his budget and look for a stronger amp driving all channels at
the rated power setting.

Got it. In general, sattelites would be more appropriate in small
rooms, right ?
Less volume been required and space being at premium. The usefulness I
see in sattelites is the easiness in tuning for movies, since their
response is totally parted from that of a sub. Trouble is they're not
great for music and even so they used to be very expensive, don't know
if this is something that's changed (I remember when Bose came up
drawing lots of attention as well as lots of hatred from demanding
music-listeners). In truth, coming from a musical background, I'd say
it all depends on how one listens to music.
In my brother's case, I've ruled off any music requirement right from
the beginning. But I had the feeling that even for movies a bookshelf
speaker would allow better response, if trickier to tune against a
sub.

wrote in message
m...
Got it. In general, sattelites would be more appropriate in small
rooms, right ?

Generally yes, if only for the space issue.

Trouble is they're not
great for music and even so they used to be very expensive, don't know
if this is something that's changed (I remember when Bose came up
drawing lots of attention as well as lots of hatred from demanding
music-listeners). In truth, coming from a musical background, I'd say
it all depends on how one listens to music.


Well my Klipsch satellites are (were?) the smallest surrounds around and
sound superb (especially coupled with the new Marantz Amp and JBL sub), so
it's not always the case. But I'd suggest you stay right away from Bose.


In my brother's case, I've ruled off any music requirement right from
the beginning. But I had the feeling that even for movies a bookshelf
speaker would allow better response, if trickier to tune against a
sub.

Makes his decisions, and your suggestions, easier then. Have fun shopping
around :-)

cheers
--
Italo

wrote in message
m...
Got it. In general, sattelites would be more appropriate in small
rooms, right ?

Generally yes, if only for the space issue.

Trouble is they're not
great for music and even so they used to be very expensive, don't know
if this is something that's changed (I remember when Bose came up
drawing lots of attention as well as lots of hatred from demanding
music-listeners). In truth, coming from a musical background, I'd say
it all depends on how one listens to music.


Well my Klipsch satellites are (were?) the smallest surrounds around and
sound superb (especially coupled with the new Marantz Amp and JBL sub), so
it's not always the case. But I'd suggest you stay right away from Bose.


In my brother's case, I've ruled off any music requirement right from
the beginning. But I had the feeling that even for movies a bookshelf
speaker would allow better response, if trickier to tune against a
sub.

Makes his decisions, and your suggestions, easier then. Have fun shopping
around :-)

cheers
--
Italo

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote
The power rating required really depends on the speakers he's planning to
use. If they're highly efficient satellites combined with a powered sub
I'd
say any amp delivering 60+Watts per channel is sufficient. If he's
driving
full range speakers, rated less than 8 Ohms, in a large room he
definitely
needs to up his budget and look for a stronger amp driving all channels
at
the rated power setting.

Got it. In general, sattelites would be more appropriate in small
rooms, right ?

Not necessarily. You could still buy bookshelf and standmounts, and set the
crossover to higher than that of the speaker frequency response. In fact
that's better than setting it exactly equal to that of the response of the
speaker, it'll most likely have better basss response than a 80hz-sat
speaker also set to 80hz, since at higher levels the 80hz speaker could have
alot more excessive cone movement, compared to the other larger speakers
(standmount, tower) for example, I have a centre speaker which has a F3
point of 55hz, another at 75hz, and another one of 85hz. There's a
noticeable difference that the 55hz centre goes deeper, despite the same
80hz crossover. Since the crossover is not a brick-wall cut-off, it's a
slope.

A 80hz speaker set at 80hz will not sound the same (bass depth) as a tower
speaker also set to 80hz

Less volume been required and space being at premium. The usefulness I
see in sattelites is the easiness in tuning for movies, since their
response is totally parted from that of a sub. Trouble is they're not
great for music and even so they used to be very expensive, don't know
if this is something that's changed (I remember when Bose came up
drawing lots of attention as well as lots of hatred from demanding
music-listeners). In truth, coming from a musical background, I'd say
it all depends on how one listens to music.
In my brother's case, I've ruled off any music requirement right from
the beginning. But I had the feeling that even for movies a bookshelf
speaker would allow better response, if trickier to tune against a
sub.

Avoid the smaller sats if possible, consider speakers with speakers that can
handle just under 80hz and below. If a HT system you'll most likely set the
crossover to 80hz all-round + subwoofer. So in fact a speaker that can go
lower than 80hz is a bonus, as the crossover it a slope anyway, the speaker
will be trying to reproduce ~60hz & 70hz, if a sat speaker is marginally
handling higher SPL at these

wrote in message
m...
"Italo" wrote
The power rating required really depends on the speakers he's planning to
use. If they're highly efficient satellites combined with a powered sub
I'd
say any amp delivering 60+Watts per channel is sufficient. If he's
driving
full range speakers, rated less than 8 Ohms, in a large room he
definitely
needs to up his budget and look for a stronger amp driving all channels
at
the rated power setting.

Got it. In general, sattelites would be more appropriate in small
rooms, right ?

Not necessarily. You could still buy bookshelf and standmounts, and set the
crossover to higher than that of the speaker frequency response. In fact
that's better than setting it exactly equal to that of the response of the
speaker, it'll most likely have better basss response than a 80hz-sat
speaker also set to 80hz, since at higher levels the 80hz speaker could have
alot more excessive cone movement, compared to the other larger speakers
(standmount, tower) for example, I have a centre speaker which has a F3
point of 55hz, another at 75hz, and another one of 85hz. There's a
noticeable difference that the 55hz centre goes deeper, despite the same
80hz crossover. Since the crossover is not a brick-wall cut-off, it's a
slope.

A 80hz speaker set at 80hz will not sound the same (bass depth) as a tower
speaker also set to 80hz

Less volume been required and space being at premium. The usefulness I
see in sattelites is the easiness in tuning for movies, since their
response is totally parted from that of a sub. Trouble is they're not
great for music and even so they used to be very expensive, don't know
if this is something that's changed (I remember when Bose came up
drawing lots of attention as well as lots of hatred from demanding
music-listeners). In truth, coming from a musical background, I'd say
it all depends on how one listens to music.
In my brother's case, I've ruled off any music requirement right from
the beginning. But I had the feeling that even for movies a bookshelf
speaker would allow better response, if trickier to tune against a
sub.

Avoid the smaller sats if possible, consider speakers with speakers that can
handle just under 80hz and below. If a HT system you'll most likely set the
crossover to 80hz all-round + subwoofer. So in fact a speaker that can go
lower than 80hz is a bonus, as the crossover it a slope anyway, the speaker
will be trying to reproduce ~60hz & 70hz, if a sat speaker is marginally
handling higher SPL at these

Italo and Nath, you're both great !
I feel much more confident now to making system decisions and defining
a sweet-spot for best cost-benefit. Once my brother has his stuff,
then I will be the one hunting for own solutions, and they will
certainly be more pickier as I will want decent results for both
movies and music, not something easy to accomplish I believe.
All the best to both you guys, what a pleasure to share thoughts on
this subject.