Have you moved away from full range to standmount speakers + subs?


I want to know if you have been on a journey moving from a large full range speaker to a smaller one paired wit subs, maybe even four subs.


Maybe you moved away from the big speakers because you had too much bass or you got a better soundstage from the smaller speakers. Let me know what motivated you and if you think it’s better now.


My motivation for wanting to try smaller speakers.


I have the Tekton DI and until a month ago I was using a LM845P SET amp to drive them.

It only sounded good on simple jazz and vocals but on complex music everything was falling apart.

I am not playing loud but I think it was the low 2 ohm load in the midrange that made the LM break down.


I bought a used PS Audio BHK250 and pre and it was like getting new speakers. Never ever had it occurred to me that speaker and amp matching could have such a profound effect.


So I am enjoying my speakers now and listen to music I have avoided like the plague and enjoying it (:


But all of this got me thinking, what if I paired my LM845P with an easy to drive speaker and paired it with some subs?


Then the LM845 could do what it's best at, playing glorious midrange and the subs could play the bass.

So that's my motivation for trying smaller speakers.


I am also hoping that maybe I could get better and more even bass with 2 or 4 subs. Maybe a better soundstage because the small speakers have a very small baffle.

martin-andersen
phusis,

Very well said. Certainly efficiency and also impedance are very important, but these are issues worthy of separate threads. I am trying to limit myself to addressing the notion of why larger cabinets sound larger and if this is a good thing. Even more importantly if this larger sense of scale, assuming it is the influence of the cabinet exclusively, can possibly be a good thing. Put ports, wide front baffles, lossy cabinets and parallel surfaces inside cabinets in the same boat. Have I heard good sounding speakers with some of these design particulars yes just as I have heard lousy speakers whose designers share my opinions. 
I always had, and I still have full range speakers around.A smaller pair (mini tower) is the main speakers in my second system. It's about 91dB efficient, and does a fine job down to the 30s - wonderful for all genres, and bass quality and extension is much better than multi-way bookshelves. No need for sub for the material and volume I listen to with them. I have a Nakamichi tape deck and a turntable with that system, (no digital there), amplified by a flea power Darling Loftin-White amplifier (sporting 600+VDC power supply) and use it for quiet listening. It is just absolutely wonderful for quiet volumes: the emotional connection, atmosphere is very very deep.
(Regular bookshelves fizzle out at low volumes.)

For main system (main audio and movies) I moved to 10 cuft size ultra efficient cabinets.... they seemed humongous when I built them, but now they seem to have positively shrunk as I got used to seeing the size. In hindsight I think I could have made them 15cuft each... LOL. Curiously though these giant speakers have exceedingly high WAF. Who would have thought. Also, no need for subs, as they are practically monster size subs. Bass is transformatively different when you have the lung size to produce it.

I've had two floor standing speakers since 1978. 
 

I have not found a substitute for the idea that you need a commensurate amount of mass to move air. 

Glad to hear Millercarbon shares my choice as I have the Tekton DI monitors driven by a Peachtree Nova 300 and I recently added in an RSL Speedwoofer. It is audio nirvana for me and anything I play sounds detailed, deep and strong. The closest thing to live I've ever experienced. I'll likely add another RSL but that's it. I don't think I can improve on this system without doubling my budget and that would be a questionable ROI. 

If room size was not an issue and large enough, I'd have full size speakers (and probably still augmented with multiple subs). Generally speaking, a big speaker simply sounds bigger to me most of the time; there are well-designed exceptions.

But big speakers in a too small room sounds like a bad combo. My (gone) Dynaudio Sapphires could fill and play our 3500 cu. ft. living space set far apart however I now have Raidho D2s set in a nearfield 8' triangle and they are great. I don't think they'd fill the room, especially at volume, but I know they will work in smaller rooms if needed at some point. The joy in this little D2 floorstander is it cleanly digs to 30Hz and flat, in my room. So the subs are left turned off a lot.

I can easily see rooms where a standmount and subs may well be best but a well designed small tower will image every bit as well as a monitor in my experience. It would only be a small room dictating my move back to bookshelf speakers, and even though the Raidho D1s I had at home on audition were really amazing, the D2s are simply better; it's cabinet volume (and one more tiny mid-woofer).

 

 

I just replaced my 20 year old JMLab (Focal) Chorus 716s with the matching center channel with 3 Kef LS50 Metas sitting on Solidsteel stands and to me it's a massive upgrade. I replaced a cheap subwoofer with the Kef KC62 and it's like a veil over details and soundstage has been lifted. Aesthetically my ladyfriend is also happier with this setup so it's a win for everyone.

I just recently sold my VR 4 originals. They had just become too heavy to move

around with even the slightest toe-in etc. I have been enjoying a nice large standpoint: Marten Duke 2 with an REL T9i sub. They do produce a large sound and soundstage. The only large speakers I truly miss was a price of vintage RCA 15" full range drivers in a small furnace size cabinet...but the Martens do a wonderful midrange as well.

and of course, there is the wife factor.