Anyone with a high-end home theater sans sub?

For me, home theater is all about eating Twinkies! I love yellow Twinkies...they take my mind off of all the short-comings out of my system, and transport me to a place where puffy white clouds, and noodle salad reign supreme...

Clipper ships...I love Clipper ships...sailing...shifting...adrift in a sea of torment and termoil...
Gee my subwoofer sounds all nice and "squishy!". Fat big subwoofers, pounding....throbbing...shifting too and fro...on the go...ya know?....
...gee me thinks me subwoofer's sounding slow....

I only have been into theater for 10 years and to me home theater is to recreate the effects of being in the movie. I have heard big, expensive, full range speakers and they sound awesome. I think they sound good for theater but are still missing the impact. I sit at my office everyday and when a big rig goes by I can feel the vibration and my seat seems to become heavier from me getting pushed down from the impact. Now this is the best bass you can get because it is real and natural. Mind you not music but sound effect from real life. When my sub started doing the exact same thing I thought "wow". Subs can be very accurate and add the impact (realism) that real life dishes out. That is what home theater is about. You need a great sub for that. If you are just playing concerts than maybe not.

try a james sub or a sunfire signature for home theatre... they pack a punch and work really well and have a small foot print...

i have a sunfire signature in my ht systtem and though it doesnt intergrate with music as well as my rel sub did...it is pretty good for home theatre (ie incredible imo) considering its size...i couldnt find anything else close (the james is very good)

Bass reproduction is, first and foremost, a function of proper seating and speaker placement. This is at least the equal, likely more important than the actual speaker design, in regards to bass woofer. That's what I find!
I've heard the best speakers and woofers in the world placed where there's absolutely NO bass response to be heard! Basically, the speakers were placed in a huge null!
On the other hand, you can easily place woofers and listening possitions where the sound is so boomy and unatural, that any fidelity potential is a wash!
give me a properly setup speaker system, over all the "potential" in the world, every time! That's just me.
I do think you have much greater flexibility however from a sub/sat system vs. full range speakers in the typical smaller or medium sized domestic home spaces usually involved.
I've personally heard the Def Tech's setup, simply superbly in the past. But I can easily see setting em up "wrong" for ill-results though.

Wow. What a thread. My only comment is that when you watch the sound engineers mix the sound tracks- its done channel by channel for the most part. ( Lots of playback and reworking and balancing to be sure). But the information, from an audio standpoint, is crafted for, in most cases but not all, a 5.1 channel balance.

I do think you can have a decent movie audio expereince with high end 2 channel, but the digital 5.1 sound tracks are made to be heard through 5.1 channels. Anyone who is missing out on a quality center channel has missed the boat. trying to do 5.1 through 2 channel means you can never hear how the soundtrack was designed to be heard.

Just like trying to take a good 2 channel recording and play it through a 5 channel stereo option leaves a less than desired result, trying to hear a 5.1 designed soundtrack through a 2 channel set up, while gratifying through high end speakers, falls short of hearing the movie audio experience as it was designed to be heard.

My only other comment is that I really don't personally enjoy the bass reproduction on the Def Tech line of speakers. That's just my opnion.

I agree with Flrnlamb,

Johnmcelfresh, you need to do some more research.

"The people who tend to achieve the best sound are those who have significant experience in high-end two-channel audio."

I wish this were the case, but often the experience rarely transfers. I think a good ear is a good ear though no matter how many channels. But two channel setup dudes never can seem to wrap their mind around 7.1 channels.

"I actually love both, and believe that many who are home theater enthusiasts could benefit from some audiophile experience."

Well an experience with well selected "audiophile" equipment would be more to the point. I once made a horror movie called the "Audiophile Experience". Kind of like Psycho without the shower scene, but there was an incident with record cleaning fluid. ;)

"Audiophiles" are too diverse a creature to define as two channels inability to be satisfying when the signal is represented most accurately leaves the masses to seek religion more than truth because the truth is a bit thin and shallow and downright uninvolving. So now it is audio patch work time with fuzzy tubes, 12" full range speakers and other weird solutions, Dipole, omnipole....anything one can do make it music sound more realistic except real surround sound.

Fear of the Rear channel: Circumauraphobia

Later

Javachip - sorry - my post should have been addressed to Dmurfet

Javachip,

No flame here - I promise - just a slight correction in terms. It might actually be more accurate to say that the Meridian DSP speakers maintain a digital signal THROUGH the crossovers, as the crossover is also digital. The D to A convertors are at the end of the signal path immediately preceeding the amplifiers, after all DSP processing (such as volumne, treble, bass, balance, tilt, etc.) and crossovers.

Javachip

Certainly sounds like a vote toward the dsp8000 then! Just that it is digital until the crossover.

As a newcomer to the 'Gon, I would feel honored to get flamed by Flrnlamb, sort of as a rite of initiation. So here goes.

I would like to comment on the distinction between "passive" and "active" as I understand those terms in this thread. The crucial point is not whether or not the amplifier is inside the same cabinet as the big cones. Rather, the crucial point is whether the crossover occurs before or after the high-level amplification. I have a VMPS New Larger subwoofer, which is passive in the sense that it does not contain a built-in amplifier, but since I am feeding it an input signal that was crossed over prior to amplification, it yields the same advantages that Flrnlamb enumerates for powered subwoofers.

There seems to be a growing school of thought that the best overall sound quality, for both music and home theater, results from placing the crossover BEFORE the amplifier. The real question in predicting a subwoofer's addition to (or subtraction from) overall sound quality is whether the subwoofer starts with a line-level, already-divided input signal (best solution) or whether the subwoofer takes a full-range high-level input and then extracts the bass from it, sending the remainder to the other speakers (inferior solution).

This idea is nothing new. Audiophiles have been bi-amping and tri-amping their speakers for decades. (Although, if full-range signal is delivered to each set of binding posts, then the benefit of this appoach seems uncertain.)

I found an interesting discussion of this topic in Sigfried Linkwitz's website www.linkwitzlabs.com. Linkwitz, no slouch in crossover and loudspeaker design, designed his Orion speaker with a separate pair of binding posts for each driver, thereby requiring 3 or 4 channels of amplification per speaker. The crossover, which is custom made for the specific drivers employed, occurs at line level, between the preamp and the power amp. The result, he claims, is accuracy and dynamic range that is unobtainable with high-level crossovers (the kind that most of us have).

There are many large full-range speaker systems with flat response down to 20 Hz or lower. According to the viewpoint I am describing, these full-range speakers may have an inherent disadvantage if they divide the signal after it has been amplified. The combination of a high-quality subwoofer, high-quality line-level crossover or surround processor, and high-quality amplifier, would seem to have an inherent advantage over the other system design.

Three Flrnlamb posts in a row and they get more rambling and incoherent each time. What in God's name is he even talking about?

Let's have some fun and try something new. Can anyone guess how many exclamation points Flrlamb used in his last post?

A. 16
B. 28
C. 46
D. So many that the author would have to be insane!
E. Both C and D

If you answered E, you are correct. Those who answered D get partial credit for make an astute observation apart from the tedious exercise of actually counting such a ridiculous number of exclamation points. Next time I'm going to count the number of times he uses "lol" or types in all caps.

Also, for a guy who has bragged about his credentials to the point of making everyone nauseous, he really doesn't want to verify what those credentials are. Flrnlamb said:

If you need your home theater (come on over, anytime folks, really!) done to a world class level, then you call me!...seems fair enough, sure...lol

I’m certainly not interested, but maybe some other Audiogoner’s are. "Come on over, really..." Where?

Ok, let's look at what's the focus and interests of the general "A-gon" crowd here are, so maybe we can help clear all this mess up here...
I'm looking at the "discussion forum" category break downs, and the posting trends that I can remember off hand, and I've put it all together. (aren't you all so glad?!...lol)
I see here we've got 11,000+ posts for "preamps/amps". Next most is "speakers"...yeah!!!!(with 8,000+ posts). Then we got "digital", with 5,000+. Then "cables" with 4000+ postings, followed by good ol' "analag" with 3000+, ending with "HT" at 2000+ posts for discussion...
Ok, so what I gather, is that, even though speakers are DEFINITELY the most important factor in any audio system, gear-wise, THEY ARE OBVIOUSLY SECOND IN IMPORTANCE to the "gear-heads" on this forum!!! Go figure. Most people here, it seems, from what I read, worship their 10 baggillion dollar CAT L1/Macintosh/Golden Tube/whatever preamp's, as THE ANSWER TO ALL TINGS GOD LIKE IN RELATION TO AUDIO!!!!! I mean I think there was, what, like over 1000 posts (litterally) regarding a past posting entitled "Preamp deal of the century", er something er other, right? So we see the priorit order here.
Then, Digital over analog! K, true audiophiles here, all of em!!! Yeah, don't be FRONTIN'!!!!!!!!!...all you digitalia peps!...lol (ok, I'm one too...oh well...lol!).
And then, we got "Home theater" with a lowly 2000+ postings, WAY BEHIND EVERYTHING ELSE mostly!!!!
So, let me get this straight...most of the people here swimming around in the Audio Gon pond, are really into their preamps, then maybe their 2 channel speaker system. They then like their digital DVD players and CD players more than their turn tables and tuners I suppose. Then, lastly, they MIGHT consider HT, or at least ponder whether HT is even worth it er not!! After all, their great sounding world class, super dupper 2 channel, exotic, one of a kind preamp's (yawn) must be making their mediocre, "just get by" speakers they picked up at the flee market sound SOOOOOOOOOOO good!!!...driven by their 5 year old dvd player or 300 disc cd changer, no less!!!
Of course, there's obviosly still some "tube-guy's" and turntable dedicated's around here...let's not forget them.
Still, they think NOTHING OF HT!! So it's no wonder people here are on the 2 speaker HT bandwagon! It all makes sense now!!!
Oh, it also apears many here believe cables "make a difference!" That's at least a good sign...lol
Like I said, "show me someone who doesn't think cables make a difference, and I'll show you someone with a crappy sounding system...every time!"

Cinematic? I think Waldner123 likes you!!!! That's hot!... (Paris Hilton)...lol

This cracks me up actually. Waldner?...if we all come over and play some heavy metal, bass-destroying heavy percussion, bass-laden world-beat music, some rap, serious Techno music from the clubs, and some "dino-romp" heavy DD/DTS tracks through your KILLER 2 channel setup, we're all gunna be mighty impressed, right!?!!!!
I just wanna be sure, so we know what to bring...muuuuuuahahaaaaahhahahaahahaha!!!!
Yeah, that's right, It's all very funny, and I've seen/heard it a million times. So so so so so many of the 2 channel "full range" HT-setup guy's think that they got the end-all-be-all HT system, running dirrectly from their dvd player, into their $10,000,000 preamp and $2000 amp combo, and they think it's the chiznit!!!
Well, ok, but it's just not, really!!
yeah, the audiophile speakers are nice and clear, and pretty, and delicately detailed, on a low-level-dynamics scheme of things kinda way. Personally, we need those attributes from a speaker system, to be true, yes. But in terms of large scale macro dynamics, and an acutal mico-dynamic's perspective for REAL PRESSENCE AND INPACT, they are mostly SERIOUSLY LACKING!!!! Yes, it can be "ok", but that's about it. Don't expect to blow the pants off anyone with your StarWars Demo like this, any time soon. They get better at the local cinema, believe it!
The sad truth, dynamically, and I've said it a million times, is that, ESPECIALLY going the 2 channel full range passive (sans subwoofer)(especially sans the pre/pro) route, is not very powerful, like intended. Dynamically, we're talking a serious lack of dynamic transparancy, realism, impact, and emotion! Wimpy, wimpy, wimpy!!!
If you don't think so, just go down to the local Sam Ash store, and pick up some moderate, even passive designed, "pro audio" speakers, that have little problem dishing out real dynamics! MOstly we're talking a complete dynamic thrashing of what's on the home market! You get into larger versions, and active speakers, and the price of an "E-ticket" dynamic ride just got very interesting!!!!
All I'm sayin, is people just don't mostly know! They think they got it goin' on with their 2 speakers usually, but they don't! There's a lot more to this HT stuff here than meets the eye folks!
There are a scant few out there that REALLY know how to do it right. Everyone else just thinks they are.

Oh, here we go again!!!...
First off Waldner, I NEVER MENTIONED A DEFINITIVE SUBWOOFER!!! What I did mention, was the POWERED 500-1000WATT SUBS BUILT INTO (huge difference)a pair of properly integrated Def Tech BP2000/2000tl's (and do a fine job I might add, compared to 99% of the separate powered sub setup jobs most people end up with in their "ill-setup" and ill-conceived sub/sat systems, cause they can't setup/place the darn sub right anyway!!!). (even though that's the way to do it, and offeres the best flexibility)
I've had these Def Tech speakers in a couple of stores, and many many setup's, and they're still most of the way there, bass-wise, to some passive Wilson woofers in the WATT PUPPIES!, yes! There's simply better control pottential in the active woofers from the Def's, properly setup, yes! Still, granted, maybe a smidge more tightness and speed, better damping, whatever, from the better higher end driver Wilson's, sure. Still, get the movies and heavy dynamic stuff rolling full range, and the Def's (bass dynamics-wise)walk away from the Wilson's, which you can bottom out, distort, etc...I know, I've done em on NUMBEROUS OCCASIONS! Not so with practical applications of the PB2000's.
Now I'm basically correcting Walden (who'm I love to chastice, criticize, and basically despise for no apparant reason...lol!), who likes to take what I say, and put words in my mouth, twist things all around, show how much he DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT world class home theater, or even addequate home theater, cause he's in love with his two speakers, that are not capable, full range of doing HT properly, this I know!!!!
Case in point, even though I don't own or promote Def Tech, I still know the old active woofer designs they made are powerful enough for super strong bass dynamics, unlike most full range passive speakers for the home.
Still, as Waldner123 MIS-STATED, I never said anything about an individual Def Tech sub!, not once!!!
Yeah, and for the record, I've used and promoted 2 channel plus a sub (2.1) for many many setups, including my own! Yes, it can be done well.
I just like to chose up sides, get obnoxious, and pick on wiennies like Waldner123, for no apparant reason...mostly cause I can't do it on the job...lol
Oh, and Walden? I'm not in the slightest bit interested in sharing my resume with someone who'd never buy from anyone but the used-gear market on the net anyway! You're in your own little 2 channel closet world anyway...no one on the plannet could sell to these guy's anyway.
I could sit here, expound the most profound and meaningful b.s, about this stuff out there, convince everyone here about how to setup the absolute stone cold best, world class setup's, and it would make no difference to my bottom line!!! This is NOT a place/market for selling! It's a chat room for DIY'ers! I sell to "Joe-blow" off the street, who's not a "tinkerer". Wisely, my customer get's my experience, and world class.
Why sell Honda's to working stiff's all day, when you can sell Lexus's to the white colar crowd?! That's my moto...location is everything I've once heard...and this is "ear-candy central!"
Enjoy all the free advice you moochers!...lol

I actually agree with much of what you have said Cinematic. At the performance level of most systems, a good powered subwoofer makes a huge difference in the enjoyment of the movie experience. I was only responding to some of the over-the-top and condescending comments made by Flrnlamb in a couple of his posts prior to my joining the thread. He was so rude and full of himself without having a leg to stand on that I felt compelled to give him a few jabs.

But just so I am not misunderstood, at the very highest-end of audio and home theater (the state-of-the-art), having a mediocre powered subwoofer (like the one mentioned in Flrnlamb's example) will actually make the system sound worse than it would without it. A Definitive powered subwoofer will not even come close to sounding as good in the bass as pair of big Wilson speakers driven by a Boulder 1000 watt amplifier. My comments were in reference to that ludicrous example specifically. But yes, in the real world of much more affordable components, the same powered sub can be a wonderful thing. The same applies to my comments about a center channel sometimes making worse sound than the much better quality mains could.

Also, you shouldn't assume that a good understanding and of what some consider "wacky expensive" audiophile systems precludes an equally good understanding of multichannel home theater systems. I actually love both, and believe that many who are home theater enthusiasts could benefit from some audiophile experience.

Simply assuming that almost any powered sub, speaker and crossover combination can work and blend well is setting the bar too low. THX requirements are also setting the bar way to low. There really is a reason that not a single respected high-end loudspeaker manufacturer chooses to pay the fees to have a THX logo on their speaker systems. Having to meet the THX requirements wouldn’t just dumb down a loudspeaker, it would render it incapable of making natural and realistic sound.

While theater systems are different from two channel audio systems in a few ways, most obviously in the number of speakers, they require the same techniques and understanding of what makes each channel sound good and natural, and to get each channel to blend and image with the other channels in the system. Your equipment and loudspeakers have no idea what the difference is between a movie soundtrack and a music recording. Their job is to accurately reproduce the input signal as best they can. Because of this, the best foundation for a great theater system is a great two-channel audio system and the people who tend to achieve the best sound are those who have significant experience in high-end two-channel audio.

Actually I have found that an HT setup with no center and a sub sounds superior to a center and no sub. I will caveat this with the fact that the fronts I am using are the Aerial 10 T's with a very nice processor, (Cal 2500).

I'll go a step further and say that the system without the center did not give up any ground to the system with the center when I am sitting in between the two fronts. If you are looking at buying a front end, spend what you would have put into the sub into your fronts, you'll be rewarded with superior imaging & soundstaging and two channel playback will benefit as well. The sub was the last piece of the equation I added, (Rel Strate III) and the family did enjoy watching movies with only the Aerials up front...the sub took the movie experience up a notch and as a bonus improved the two channel set up to even a greater degree.

hmmm. only one showcase home per decade huh?

(hey I'm just poking fun lol)

Yes you can have a 7.0 system that rocks on movies, and music especially if you own Hybrid type or completely active speakers. All Passive guys will need some serious power to overcome the disadvantages of a passive design, no matter who makes the speakers.

A subwoofer would be an improvement to nearly anyone's system though, mainly due to the fact that where a speaker sounds good for midrange performance is most likely not the same spot for the best bass, even with five to seven bass sources. And the obvious, .1 is a subwoofer channel designed to run to a sub with its own volume controls etc.. so distributing the .1 channel does cut down on some flexibility in setup.

Perfect-Ideal-competent-adequate-good enough all subjective terms, subwoofers in a properly designed system dissappear and become one with the Satellite speakers, especially in surround systems. Even if the Satellites are capable of incredible bass output, a Sub can help merely by increasing dynamic range and better room response/ integration. BUT! your system can still kick butt without a sub.

Reality Check------

This thread is a clear example of how misunderstood multichannel sound is to the average home user, and the dealers who try to put together the systems for them.

Walnder and Aroc with just crazy presumptions about movie sound and center channels and subwoofer quality. Most of my "theaters" sound better (playing music from CD in PLII) than the pathetic I mean carefully crafted "audiophile" systems I hear in people's homes. Multi-channel is something you can't slap together like a 2 channel system and call it art like we seem to do here on audiogon. It requires and understanding of how the components work, and interact and this cannot be done by "feel". Either you know it or you don't. Clearly by your "opinions" and funny statements you have not take the time to get aquainted with these design parameters. Thus you're trapped with what you know. And unwittingly have joined the "Chadnliz Theater Philosophy Club" the motto, "Loud, Proud and Wrong"

Sorry for you both, I am

I have a highend H.T setup which I have run both ways.I use B+W 801s for mains.I can tell you a good sub still makes a huge difference.I am using a paradigm servo 15 and an Anthem D1 pre/pro.You can spend alot more for a sub but I doubt you will get any better.I am not saying it is the best but it is certainly one of the best.IMHO

Since you brought it up (too many times to count) Flrnlamb, where can one go to buy gear from you and receive some of your wisdom? Also, I'm curious, which two "high profile showcase homes" did you do? And which six stores were you at?

Mmm, Look at this pile of wrongness, see what happens when I'm not around. A view askew for sure...gentlemen must focus power and be realistic, lots of rights spoken here with just enough wrong to make a mess.

It's neat to have the .1 channel handled by a sub or two for really one reason in my mind, the best location for bass and the best location for midrange clarity from a single speaker are usually not the same spot. BUT!! from a shear output perspective 7.0 can work, with passive speakers bring the 3-400---1000 watt amplifiers cause the powered subs do.

DSP8000's will do 115dB at 30hz, good enough in my book

Do I actually see a positive post on the BP2000's? whoa where am i? Flrnlamb you been drinking?

Hey Aroc, I'm hiring a new jock holder, want to send your resume, you may just know enough to get the job. ;)

"if you watch tasteful flicks that don't need LFE"
tasteful= weenie A closing door uses LFE my friend

I guess if you need your posts proof-read, and your grammar corrected, you talk to Walden. If you need your home theater (come on over, anytime folks, really!) done to a world class level, then you call me!...seems fair enough, sure...lol
20 years, 6 audio stores, and 2 high profile "Showcase homes" can't be wrong you know...

it would be my hell!

The center channel is the most important speaker in a theater system, which is precisely why it is crucial that it be at least as high-quality, neutral and revealing as whatever your main speakers in the system are. Many people simply buy a center channel from the same manufacturer as their main speakers assuming it is as good (which it usually isn't), or worse, buy an inexpensive inferior center speaker that doesn't sound anywhere near as good as the more expensive and capable main speakers they already own.

But now for an English lesson: A few typos are one thing, but Flrnlamb clearly has a problem utilizing the english language.

Yeah, having all your info routed to two PASSIVE INNEFICIENT stereo speakers is the answer to it all, um, k, hummmm....no! Sharing the load amungst more drivers/speakers yeilds improved dynamics, clarity, stearing, efficiency in the system, impact, solidy of sound, detail(assuming quality gear, acoustics, setup, yes), system sensitivity, and thus dyamic prowess, dialog inteligibility, etc, with a good center speaker!!!

1. "INNEFICIENT" has one N and two Fs
2. "amungst" is spelled amongst
3. "stearing" is spelled steering
4. "solidy" is not a word, try solidity
5. "dyamic" = dynamic
6. "inteligibility" has two Ls right next to each other

Can you imagine correcting the whole post? Frnlamb, rather than repeating your mesmerizing credentials over and over again, why not learn how to spell at a 2nd grade level. I'm sure that alone would buy you some small measure of credibility.

You know, we can flip flop terminoligy back and forth, we're talking about the same thing in regards to "tighly controled/damped woofers" vs. more loosly controled woofers. And there are certainly many high performance subs that do very well in the "control" and "accuracy" category, especially when you consider the job they're designed to take on! This is music AND movies here!!
So what Waldner is stating, is that his 2 channel, full range, stereo speaker setup, is the way it's REALLY BEST! Sounds like his personal issue to me. I'm sure 99.999% of all the audio/video reviewers, recording engineers, and industry professionals alike would agree here....NOT!!!
Why do you think they all promote, and have promoted for years, since all this AV stuff came down the pike, that you should IDEALLY, have 2 SEPARATE SYSTMES!?!...one for music 2 channel and one for movies!?! Well there, because IT DOESN'T WORK BETTER FOR MOVIES DOING 2 CHANNEL, that's why!

"With the exception of a very select few high quality, Low Q subwoofers, the lack of an LFE and the presence of very capable front main loudspeakers and audiophile electronics is what defines the home theater as "high-end" (Waldo)

UH, no. the BALANCE of effective, and properly selected gear for your room/system, properly SETUP gear, speaker location/setup, seating, room acoustics(easily HALF THE EQUATION!!!), noise control, airconditioning, light controled, well damped, tweaked, and effectively engineered and executed room is what DEFINES A HOME THEATER AS HIGH END! You stand corrected.
Every high end guru worth his salt will tell you that having 2 audiophie (pleeeease!....) speakers and some gear IS ABOUT AS FAR FROM HAVING HIGH END HOME THATER AS IT GETS! Anyone buys this theory lives in his own world, and thinks the earth is "flat", and that "we've never been to the moon!" Yeah, no!... Waldorf Estoria guy!

"Truth be told, most "home theater" systems are LESS GOOD SOUNDING (doh!)than a high-end two-channel system used for movies. Sure, the stereo system may lack many of the rear localized special effects, but from a clarity and sound quality standpoint, they are still far better"(Walden Books)

yeah, this sounds like someone's "own personal little issue here", ya think?

"Most center channel speakers sound noticeably worse than having that same information routed to your main speakers, assuming your main speakers are capable high-end designs. Center speakers, like powered subwoofers, tend to be poorly designed in comparison. A really good center channel is the exception, not the rule." (Waldo Kitty)...lol

Yes, again, all the mixing engineers, dubbing studio's, movie theaters, recording people, and industry pro's alike(Who've hammered home forever,that the center channel is THE MOST IMPORTANT SPEAKER IN THE SYSTEM, for a reason), have it WRONG! Thank you Walden for clarifying. What were we all tinking!?!!!!...
Yeah, having all your info routed to two PASSIVE INNEFICIENT stereo speakers is the answer to it all, um, k, hummmm....no! Sharing the load amungst more drivers/speakers yeilds improved dynamics, clarity, stearing, efficiency in the system, impact, solidy of sound, detail(assuming quality gear, acoustics, setup, yes), system sensitivity, and thus dyamic prowess, dialog inteligibility, etc, with a good center speaker!!!
Yeah, let's compress everything from demanding complicated thouroughly mixed, dubbed, overlaid, overprocessed and confused soundtracks into 2 channels of BARELY ADDEQUATE, often under-adequate stereophile speakers!...yeah, that's it. They surely can handle what's at the movie theaters around town, cause they're always so efficient and effective that way...2 channel stero that is, from HOME AUDIO SPEAKERS, SURE!!!
Rule of thumb: DON'T LISTEN TO GREENPEACE PHSYCO'S, ALQUEDA,OR WALDEN123! The man knows nothing of setting up a home theater, probably from lazyiness, and lack of motivation...thus his 2 channel (easy route) supremecy stance.
Walden? You never gave us a resume of your credentials on building home theaters! Since you're dodging this one, I assume it's safe to say you have put together exactly 2 stereo systems total in your existence, and that's the extent of your high end AV career, yes? Or do you secretly build high peformance theaters for the rich?

Sloppy HIGH "Q" bass is just that-- sloppy bass. It makes no difference whether you are watching a film or listening to music. An audio system will tend to sound best when it is more accurately reproducing the input signal. For movies, there is plenty of intense bass built right into the soundtracks themselves.

With the exception of a very select few high quality, Low Q subwoofers, the lack of an LFE and the presence of very capable front main loudspeakers and audiophile electronics is what defines the home theater as "high-end".

Truth be told, most "home theater" systems are less good sounding than a high-end two-channel system used for movies. Sure, the stereo system may lack many of the rear localized special effects, but from a clarity and sound quality standpoint, they are still far better.

And here is one more that will send Furrylamb into a tailspin. Most center channel speakers sound noticeably worse than having that same information routed to your main speakers, assuming your main speakers are capable high-end designs. Center speakers, like powered subwoofers, tend to be poorly designed in comparison. A really good center channel is the exception, not the rule.

Here, let me help you remove your foot from your mouth.

Actually, in clarifying, I'm refering to something else here in regards to "speaker driver Q"! yes, lower "Q" woofer is a tighter driver setup. Higher 2.0, etc, "Q" is typical in boomy subs, yes. "Q" is an often misinterpreted discription, dpending on wether your talking speaker desing, or acoustics. Non-the less, "tighter Q" speaker desings, are better associated with higher quality speaker designs mostly, and weaker Q designs are with lower qualiy, mos often. STill, most "lower Q" speaker designs, like typical audiophile offerings, won't handle deep dynamic bass, in a passive design mostly, from DD/DTS material! This is even more true of "very low Q" sealed enclosure "high end designs", like from Dunlavy, and other sealed speaker designs. There is therefore always compromises in speaker configurations, sadly.
Still, the best solution is a slightly "less than Ideal" "Q" subwoofer situation, to improve output and dynamic range for demanding DD/DTS tracks, and maximize movie impace on earthquakes, dino-romps, explosions, gun blasts, tornados, mass destruction, etc. Your typical audiphile designs just blow all to hell if you don't do bass managment to a more apt sub system.
This compromise is still better than the typical full range speaker setup audiophile chose

Waldner123's feelings are hurt. Sorry. Desparate attempt to discredit an accomplished HT designer, and more experience audiophile to boot!...ehem.
Good try, no-one's biting Waldner!
Also, you didn't answer my claim to your HT experience. So that answers that. You've never built an HT for anyone but yourself, face it.

"He also doesn't know that "high Q" refers to poor quality underdamped bass. High end audiophile speakers are Low Q"(Waldner123)

WRONG!!!! YOU JUST STUCK YOUR FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH Waldner!...lol Let's ask THX, any speaker manufacture, recording engineer, acoustician, etc, what "Low Q", "high Q" means!
High Q is Higher control, tighter damping. "Low Q" is what most "home theater subs" are!...not the other way around!! Sorry, your wrong here, as in others.
Anyone else here care to clear this up, regarding the "Low Q, High Q" situation?!
Let's email a few high end speaker makers, acoustical engineers (Rivesaudio.com, PMI, etc), THX, and others to ask...what do you say Waldner???
Sure you want to make that statement about my ignorance here? It's making you look worse, I'm tellin' ya...lol.

I'm not even going to "go there" about THX speakers in theaters or home! Because you obviously don't know what you're talking about regarding eithers applications, and are biased toward audiophile speakers, to no end...good for you. enjoy your lackluster delicate speakers and poor acoustics. Don't sell me what I already have done a thousands times, and it doesn't work. No thanks...

Like I said a ton..."if anyone wants to put up the budget, I'll be more than happy to do what "Extreme choppers" TV show does, and that's have a "Biker buildoff", er, "HT build-off"!!!! I garantee victory at any budget!
I take on any comers....lol

Flrnlamb wouldn't know good sound if it landed in his lap. He also doesn't know that "high Q" refers to poor quality underdamped bass. High end audiophile speakers are Low Q. THX and Lucas Film are responsible for some terrible theater standards which limit the dispersion of loudspeakers to a degree that is unacceptable. That is why no respected high-end speaker manufacturer has a "THX" logo on their speakers. This is unlike amplifier manufacturers who can build a very good amplifier that happens to meet the minimal and meaningless THX spec without having to screw up the design of the amp.

Also, a Definitive sub is not even close to a 9/10 in bass quality relative to more capable high end offerings. The Wilson speakers (plus countless others) are shockingly better in terms of bass quality than anything made by Definitive. Good examples of Low Q, high quality subwoofers can be found from REL or a Vandersteen.

If you are looking for high-end sound QUALITY, Flrnlamb is definitely not the guy to get advice from.

Actually Aaron, I don't use active systems in all but the more expensive all out systems. Mostly, I use "meat-n-potatoes" typical monitor speakers, with good gear combos, sometimes even receivers, yes!...there I said it...ehem.
Bottom line, most people budget for this, not the "balls to the wall" full-on system. That'll always be the case.
Never the less, I try to always lead them that way, to the very best. Inevitably, they end up with the Honda Accord over the Ferrari. I understand.
Basically, I preach "balance!" It can be done superbly at even the lowest levels, if you know what your doing.
It's the "knowing what you're doing" where all the audio enthusiests fall flat. Just the way it is...

In a lot of cases the LFE channel is just glorified car audio, brought indoors. Why does it have to be loud "teevee" if you watch tasteful flicks that don't need LFE? I've seen far too many HT setups that actually used teevees instead of front projection, as it was meant to be.

I'd say unless you are a disciple of Cinematic_systems or exertfluffer and have to have active speakers, then just build the "best" 2CH or MCH music system you can, and graft on video in the from of front projection and call it a day.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

Aaron

Personally,I think it's cool that the teacher "did" the kid!...lol

Whew. sombody pushed a button. I can live without a sub, although I recently listened to a supercube and I did like it......

Well, another "arm-chair quarterback" audiopile has spoken here! I respect your input Waldner123, but Lucas film, THX and anyone who's built high end custom theaters will dissagree with you!
BTW, (and I already know the answer), since this topic is about "high end theaters", how many high end custom HT's have you do professionally, or otherwise?
Oh wait!...No need to answer...I already know the answer. And so does everyone here listning!...lol

"Nothing could be further from the truth. The active subwoofer section of a Definitive BP-anything is not capable of high-end bass reproduction..." (Waldner123)

"Most powered subwoofers like the Definitive (and actually 99% of powered subwoofers) are incapable of the kind of accuracy, control, lack of boom or overhang, and integration that defines high-end sound. I would argue that systems which contain state-of-the-art amplification driving very accurate full range speakers are far superior in every qualitative way to all but the very rarest few powered woofers. By telling your surround unit to route the LFE information to the much more accurate main front channels, which are in turn being driven by a far superior amplifier, the result his high-end bass."(Walnder123)

"Folks FOR A HIGH END HOME THEATE, what Waldner said, is WAY OFF BASE!!
I've sold Wilson's right off the floor for a living, and have driven Wilson WATT PUPPIES with the likes of Pass Labs X1000's, Krell FPB 600's, Theta Dreadnaughts (400w/ch), $30K NERO Mono's, and more!!!! What Waldner123 is stating is WRONG WRONG WRONG! We're talking about movie playback capability here, not typical music bass output!...HUGE DIFFERENCE! There's WORLD OF DIFFERENCE between the dynamic output of DD/DTS and 16/44 digital music or analog!!! DD/DTS is about 5x's more potent and demanding in the bass than most any music content!
Yes, your audiophile speakes like Wilson Grand Slams, JM Utopias, etc, have tighly tuned "high Q" bass response,which "holds together for modest music dubties", granted But that all goes right out the window when dynamic movie material hits em!!! passive crossovers just suck the control right out of the drivers, they bottom out, distort, get blown, flatten, and just plain fall apart!! Been there, done that...It doesn't work.
If you listen at a "flee's volume", and don't mind dynamicially constrained and "untransparent" sound from your bass on movies, PLEASE run your Wilson's and others full range for movies!.
And while a Powered bass speaker like the Deftech 2000's I menitioned might rate a 9/10 for bass speed and acuracy through out, and the Wilson's get a 10/10, the fact is the Wilson's will fall apart and get a 4/10 for THX playback full range bass info, and the DEFTECH'S get a 10/10 here!!!
Audiophiles who've done 2 channel for a million years will argue this point to no end!...but then they don't do HT for a living. They tinker with tubes and turntables. Who you gunna believe?
Yes, a good powered commercial subwoofer (Paradigm Servo 15, M&K MX5000, Rel B15, etc) needs to be properly integrated, placed, phased, level matched, calibrated, EQ'd, whatever to work right. But that's still far more ultimately effective for handling movie bass than the passively controlled,relatively inefficient woofer config in a full range audiophile speaker!!!
yeah, they sound fast for dynamically limited music material, but that's about it. And even at that, try rap, techo, hard rock, heavy metal, dynamic "world beat" music, etc through some Wilson WATTPUPPIES or JM Utopias, and see what you get! You'll be wantin' your $20-30k refunded back, like, IMMEDIATELY!!!
I've been around high end for 20 years plus, and have done hundreds of custom jobs. Sold, it all! Believe me, if it was what Waldner said, I'd be doing it that way, for sure....but it ain't, sorry.
Lucas Film spend hundreds of thousands of man-hours, and millions of dollars getting this stuff right for the home. Waldner, I'm sure you could show em a thing or two about HT..why don't you petition them to change their standards around. Oh, and BTW, send em your resume while you're at it...lol

Flrnlamb said: "YES, EVEN A PAIR OF OLD DEFINITIVE BP2000'S WITH 15" 1000WATT ACTIVE AMPS DRIVING THE BASS, WILL STOMP ANY WILSON GRAND SLAM, JM LABS UTOPIA FULL RANGE, or anything else you can think of that's passive, even being driven by, YES, Bolder 1000watt monos!!!!!...graantee it, every time!!"

Nothing could be further from the truth. The active subwoofer section of a Definitive BP-anything is not capable of high-end bass reproduction any more than Flrnlamb is capable of writing a respectful, modest, or believable description of his own knowledge on the subject.

Most powered subwoofers like the Definitive (and actually 99% of powered subwoofers) are incapable of the kind of accuracy, control, lack of boom or overhang, and integration that defines high-end sound. I would argue that systems which contain state-of-the-art amplification driving very accurate full range speakers are far superior in every qualitative way to all but the very rarest few powered woofers. By telling your surround unit to route the LFE information to the much more accurate main front channels, which are in turn being driven by a far superior amplifier, the result his high-end bass.

The vast majority of active subwoofers can, when dialed up to exagerated levels, provide much more bass quantity, but very poor bass quality.

Huh?...who dat?...who der?...dat you mama???
Sorry, wrong person.

Flrnlamb -
No, not talking about gay porn here, please don't take offense at my question. Just wondering because there were a couple of very lively and informative threads on the 'Gon several months ago regarding proper bass management for home theater and "Exertfluffer" had lots to say on the subject.

The info/opinions and style of the writing by that author is very similar to your posts here. For example, check out a thread started on 12/31/04 titled "Too many speakers for theater?". The response from Exertfluffer on 1/02/05 sounds almost exactly like your posts above. Just wondering if you had changed your Audiogon handle.. no big deal.. and if that wasn't you, the coincidence is very interesting. JZ

Without a doubt, you can have a high-end home theater without a sub. The point of home theater (for me) is to enjoy the MUSIC in movies. I used to have a pair of bottlehead straight-8s hooked up to 5WPC SETs and watched many movies with friends on this setup. Movie soundtracks were OUTSTANDING and "high-end" in every way. Like any other system, there are trade-offs and comprimises that you will have to choose. An HT system without subs certainly can still be high-end. Too much bass is way more annoying than bass that's not quite as dynamic as it could be with active subs.

Exert-who? Fluffer? No, I've never done gay-porn, nor do I care to, thank you.

Flrnlamb,

Chill out, dude! I wasn't trying to discredit you. I was simply trying to point out that the original post asked if ANYONE was enjoying HIGH-END home theater without a SEPERATE sub.

Though an active, separate subwoofer are the most common and most efficient means of accomplishing the task, they are not the only way. So the answer to his question is still "yes".

Flrnlamb,

Did you used to post under the "Exertfluffer" handle in the past? Your post sounds a lot like him..? just curious. JZ.

Johnmcelfresh, If I was sounding condescending, it was because you started putting words in my mouth, and were missenterpreting what I was saying!!!
HOwever, your 25 years of owning a turn table and a pair of speaker, plus some Stereophile mag's on the coffee table, don't tell me anthing!...nor do I care!
Show me your accomplished track record of custom theaters and I'll be impressed..I've worked on hundreds, plus $1million dollar installations, for large clients! I've been trained by the best in the biz, consult on setting these things up for a living, yada, yada...so you can discredite me all you like. I can put together world class systems. When you even setup "one speaker" properly in your room, come talk to me. If so,TEll me your proceedure? Let's see what you know. Then you can tell me how it should be done.
Till that time THIS GUY IS REFERING TO "ACTIVE SUBWOOFERS"! I hate to inform you. He might not has specified, but he's infering "powered subs", not some passive boxed woofer-weirdness...lol.
And, BTW, most separates sub modules, sans the amp and crossover, are really active subs anyway!...the gear is just outside the box, that's all..same thing.
Still, to reiterate, YES, EVEN A PAIR OF OLD DEFINITIVE BP2000'S WITH 15" 1000WATT ACTIVE AMPS DRIVING THE BASS, WILL STOMP ANY WILSON GRAND SLAM, JM LABS UTOPIA FULL RANGE, or anything else you can think of that's passive, even being driven by, YES, Bolder 1000watt monos!!!!!...graantee it, every time!! How do I know?
Because, I've been there, heard that, tried that, installed/set up that, and it's not as good! It's called LEVERAGE AND EFFICIENCY! AGain, passive crossovers suck engergy, limit control over bass woofers, and don't offer even remotely the kind of control that "dirrect coupling" does!
So you can skirt around with semantics all you want! Active subs are what people need to do this right!
They can rinky-dink around with their full range setup. But it's not as good, setup properly.
Go sell THX and Lucas Film your BS! They'll tell you the same.
So, yep, I'm sure some bum under the overpass has some tv stereo speakers sitting in a shopping cart, who swears he's got a THX sound from a console television....that doesn't mean it's truth for the masses.

Home theater is all about subs! More than one if possible.
Todays DVD's audio sound tracks are really focused on LFE
freqs.

Flrnlamb,

Do you always communicate so condescendingly? You might have considered that someone who has invested the kind of time and money in audio as I have (over the past 25 years) MAY have done a bit of research. In fact, my DSP8000s are not the first active speakers I have owned. I am quite familiar with the advantages of active speakers - that's why I own them.

As I mentioned, the original poster in this thread seemed to be referring to seperate subwoofers (hence the comment about 7.0 configuration).

Your definition of subwoofers as active bass speakers (integrated or seperate from main speakers) is arbitrary and incorrect. There are a number of passive subwoofers available today, though I'll grant that active subs are more common. The passive ones are no less subwoofers, however.

I'd wager that the folks who own 1000W Boulder amps and Wilson Alexandria speakers would challenge your assertion that passive full-range speakers are incapable of handling home theater without additional subwoofers, powered or not.

I realize that this is an extreme example, but the subject of this thread is "Anyone with a high-end home theater sans sub?" and the post begins "Is anyone else out there enjoying a high-end home theater without the contributions of a subwoofer, e.g. 7.0?". Since the writer specifically asked about high end, it is reasonable to answer "yes".

Audiophiles and enthuiests alike will tinker, plot and plan HT systems around their full range two channel systems to no end! They'll even go "sans" the processor, do processing for DD/DTS in their dvd player, out of the analog out's of the dvd, into their high end CAT preamps and such, and expect it will get no better! Yeah, sorry, that ain't even remotely the case!

JOHNMCELFRESH, there is a VAST DIFFERENCE between full range speakers with large woofers, that play down to or bellow 20hz(+/-3db or better), and ACTIVE POWERED WOOFERS!!!...make no mistake! The control and power deliver, and thus efficiency of a woofer that's ACTIVE(meaning the amplifier is coupled dirrectly to the woofer, AFTER THE CROSSOVER,as opposed to the amp being INFRONT of the crossover, as in any passive full range typical speakers setup) is FAR SUPPERIOR and MORE POTENT than a typical passive arrangement, yes! (all things equal).
So, no I'm not implying anything remotely similar to what you are pressuming I stated! You're listening to me, but you're not hearing me.
So hear this...Bass is the single most demanding and difficult thing for speakers and amplifiers to reproduce and thus control! Ative, especially highly efficient woofer designs need control and high damping factors to properly due justice to demanding bass frequencies. IT's not like moving a tiny tweeter a few thousands of an inch!
And the only way to properly control a large bass driver, or even smaller one's, with impact, extension, speed, authority, and weight, even percision, is to get as much control of the woofer as possible. And that's best done by putting the amplifier dirrectly to the driver(s). There are other factors to be sure. But this is critically more efficient than running the passive route, like most full range speaker configurations...you just lose too much going through the passive crossover. That's exactly why crossing over higher in a passive setup, to active powered subs for movies is much more efficient and dynamic of a pressentation overall. (THX's implementation). Passive speakers need help.
So, no, I mean nothing of the sort Johnmcelfresh.
Infact, take a pair of Def Tech BPtowers, with active subs, and run em agains't a pair of, similarly sized(woofered as well) Paradims or B&W's, and play some movies or heavy bass demanding music full range through em. You'll immediately notice the power,extension, dynamic effortlesness and lack of distortion with the acitive woofer designed Def Tech's!!!
We're easily talking a 200% improvement in power and potency in the bass dynamics and weight,easily! Infact, it's not even close. You can fill a LARGE ROOM with powerful awe inspiring bass response with the better Def Tech's. While the others, and similar I mentioned, need you to definitely add some powered subs.
Same goes with Designs like the Infinity Prelude MT's, NHT VT powered sub towers, Old Polk RT2000's, and even, yes, Meridian 8000's!
Speaker desings that start to approach this in passive designs, are very highly efficient larger Klipsch speakers. Still, getting an active sub setup surpasses these easily in bass authority.
Also, very efficient "transmission line" desings, like PMC and Def Tech(at lest they used to), grealy helps the bass response. Still, you take better more efficient designs, and add "active control" to the setup, and it's still a huge advantage!
Any quesions?

No self-respecting HT afficianado would have a theater without a sub. :)

Flrnlamb,
As you point out, the DSP8000s (like most full-range speakers) include separate drivers for various frequency ranges. If your implication is that any speaker that includes drivers that play the lowest octave automatically include a "subwoofer", then this discussion is moot. However, Quicke's initial post questioned the need for a separate subwoofer (not just full-range speakers) - note his reference to a "7.0" configuration.

For the record, I don't know how loud the DSP8000's will play an 18Hz tone, but they are measurably flat down to 18Hz for as loud as I can stand in my room, so they work for me. My previous post may have incorrectly implied 118dB at a single frequency. They are specified as within 3dB from 20Hz to over 20kHz. Maximum output >118dB spl @ 1m on music material (presumably a combination of freqencies). Honestly, I'll never be able to test them at that level.