speaker match for 282/200

Halloween Man posted:

Answer is active scm19a or scm40a with Hugo TT. The passive scm40 will give you a better top and middle with more low end. I know you have tried previously but try again and see if u come to the same conclusion. For me the scm40 is a masterpiece only improved by the actives. If they have one weakness they are a bit flatter at lower volumes. There is a compromise in everything.

Thanks, for my listening room the 40s are just a little too much loud speaker right now.. and working at low volumes as well as medium is important... noticeable disparity here could in my experience point to issues with subtleties and nuance.

I am sure 19a is very good, howeverI do enjoy my NAP 250 sound and more importantly there is no easy way to locally demo the actives.... The SCM 19 mk2 I have currently work quite well at low volume, although the bass extension semis to contract a little. Have you heard the Russel K 150 and compared to the ATCs.. The RK floor standers are authoritative and go deep and are subtle and nuanced... but possibly more room sensitive...

Hi Simon no I've not heard russel k speakers but they do seem universally praised by all who try them.

The scm40a are probably a tad too big for my room but I just don't want to live without them. I'm hoping some upcoming acoustic room treatment might make it a match made in heaven.

nap250 and scm19 will be a tough act to follow.

Halloween Man posted:

Bob I would save up for the scm19, or second hand scm40. I had PMC 20.23 and the scm40 is better from top to bottom.

Similar advice from me too Bob. I'm sure you'd love PMC 20/23s as I have and they have plenty of the bass that you are looking for . However I've been trying some ATC 19s for a couple of weeks as I mentioned earlier and they are really quite something , crystal clear and wonderful dynamics . I understand the lean comments but to my ears they have lovely tuneful bass albeit not quite as low as the PMCs , this is something I was longing for due to my home environment . They are really starting to open up now after the usual ride of running in and positioning but can only agree with the favourable words  from Simon and Halloween Man on ATCs  , they will be staying right here ! 

Halloween Man posted:

ATC c1 sub? I know huge has some experience of 2.1 setup

Yep, What do you want to know?  If I can give a reasonable answer from my experience, I will.

Last time any one with Hi-Fi experience listened to my system they didn't even realise there was a sub in the system, and couldn't hear the 'join' even when it was pointed out!  I do have a fair amount of bass trap gubbins in my room to help though.  On the other hand without the bass traps the room is truly awful (+23dB at 42Hz!), so I must have got something right with the sub (I integrated it using a miniDSP 2x4 as an active crossover)

Folks, how does the SCM11 match up to the SCM19? Does the SCM11 retain all the attributes of the SCM19? I presume the SCM11 is a smaller version of the SCM19, and the main difference between the speakers is the SCM19 can play louder than the SCM11. Other than that, everything remains fairly similar.

Is my understanding correct, or flawed?

Hungryhalibut posted:
Huge posted:

this is due to the magnetic shorting turn used to linearise the motor force

Are you making this up? It's not the impact of non-linearity in the multi-phase flange sprocket then?

Actually I'm not making it up.  It's a well known principle, used by a number of driver manufacturers to effectively extend the zone of linear AC flux response further toward the end of the pole pieces.  This is one of the things that distinguishes ATC's SL drivers.

Huge posted:
Hungryhalibut posted:
Huge posted:

this is due to the magnetic shorting turn used to linearise the motor force

Are you making this up? It's not the impact of non-linearity in the multi-phase flange sprocket then?

Actually I'm not making it up.  It's a well known principle, used by a number of driver manufacturers to effectively extend the zone of linear AC flux response further toward the end of the pole pieces.  This is one of the things that distinguishes ATC's SL drivers.

Makes perfect sense to me ! No wonder they sound so bloody good

ryder. posted:

Folks, how does the SCM11 match up to the SCM19? Does the SCM11 retain all the attributes of the SCM19? I presume the SCM11 is a smaller version of the SCM19, and the main difference between the speakers is the SCM19 can play louder than the SCM11. Other than that, everything remains fairly similar.

Is my understanding correct, or flawed?

There are some great links on ATCs website ,  Jason Kennedy and HiFi Pig have compared the 11 and 19s both of which they love . Their consensus seems to be that the 19s are rather more grown up due to their larger volume and different Bass/Mid driver . Their is a great review on the 11s by HiFi Critic which feature Jon Honeyball's own pair . 

ryder. posted:

Folks, how does the SCM11 match up to the SCM19? Does the SCM11 retain all the attributes of the SCM19? I presume the SCM11 is a smaller version of the SCM19, and the main difference between the speakers is the SCM19 can play louder than the SCM11. Other than that, everything remains fairly similar.

Is my understanding correct, or flawed?

Well used to own the SCM12 - which was the same cabinet volume of the SCM11, but used the same pro mid/bass driver as now used in the SCM19. I would say there were several similarities - but the mids and vocals come across slightly fuller on the 19 and the tone slightly warmer on the 19

I used to connect my PMC TLE1 subwoofer to the NAC 202 / NAP 200. At that time I was using a non-Naim PSU from Israel. The subwoofer was connected to one of the sockets of the non-Naim PSU. The setup worked out fine.

Since my system has been completely revamped not too long ago, I have the intention to hook up the sub to the Hicap DR but it appears that I have misplaced the 4-pin DIN cable and couldn't find it anywhere in the house.

 

Simon,

The NAC-N 272 has a phono pair pre-out as well as the 2 4pin DINs.  I connect a phono pair via short cables (not too much load on the output stage that way) to the miniDSP 2x4, and connect one of the miniDSP's output phonos to one of the low level inputs on the sub.

Your route is just as valid, but I'd still recommend using a miniDSP as a buffer amp, as an accurate crossover (single sided), and potentially for reducing the effect of the room resonances that will be excited by the sub.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Huge, how do you connect your sub to your NAC?

I was thinking of get a 4 pin DIN to phono made up to take a feed from the SuperCapDR 'Additional Signal Output' socket 3.

S

Simon, unless you intend to follow Huge down the DSP route, wouldn't you be better off using a sub with a high level input taken from the speaker terminals? This seems to be the Naim preferred method of connection, and seems to work well for me. 

When I ran my N-Sub off a Superuniti, I had the option of using a low level connection from the sub-out or pre-out, both of which worked well. My 282 doesn't have these options, and as I'm powering it from a 200DR, the high level connection is my only option. Cheaper cables than a long low level lead, and it fits in well with my KISS approach.

For me, the choice to run a sub is driven largely by aesthetics, as I really don't want a big pair of speakers dominating the room, whereas a sub 'hidden' behind the sofa doesn't really get noticed. I might even think about replacing my X2s with small standmounts at some point.

  

Chris, according to the FAQ, the high level connection is not Naim's preferred route for connecting a sub, that's a common misinterpretation of the FAQ.  The first 2 paragraphs of the relevant FAQ are:

 

For connection of subwoofers to amplifiers without a suitable (volume dependent) output.

If your amplifier system does not have a line level output which varies with volume (i.e. NOT a tape loop) you can still incorporate a subwoofer - providing this has a high level input.

 

For me there are three reasons for using a sub

1)  The position of the main speakers can be fully optimised for upper bass and midrange response without having to compromise the position to get a more even low-bass to mid-bass response.

2)  The sub can be positioned to optimise the evenness of the bass response without having to compromise the position to get an even midrange response.

3)  It enables a DSP to be used selectively on the lower bass range (leaving the critical midrange undisturbed), to ameliorate room resonances. This can then be done without detracting from the quality of the midrange (where the most critical and finest of the musical detail can be heard - or lost!).

ChrisSU posted:

For me, the choice to run a sub is driven largely by aesthetics, as I really don't want a big pair of speakers dominating the room, whereas a sub 'hidden' behind the sofa doesn't really get noticed. I might even think about replacing my X2s with small standmounts at some point.

Russel K Red 50s seem a good potential candidate for this.  If I need to replace my Spendor's I'd certainly have them on my shortlist.

Huge posted:
ChrisSU posted:

For me, the choice to run a sub is driven largely by aesthetics, as I really don't want a big pair of speakers dominating the room, whereas a sub 'hidden' behind the sofa doesn't really get noticed. I might even think about replacing my X2s with small standmounts at some point.

Russel K Red 50s seem a good potential candidate for this.  If I need to replace my Spendor's I'd certainly have them on my shortlist.

The 50s are certainly on my radar, although having only heard the 100s, I might stretch to them (in terms of size.) This is a future project for me though, I've spent enough in the last year as it is.

Huge posted:

Chris, according to the FAQ, the high level connection is not Naim's preferred route for connecting a sub, that's a common misinterpretation of the FAQ.  The first 2 paragraphs of the relevant FAQ are:

 

For connection of subwoofers to amplifiers without a suitable (volume dependent) output.

If your amplifier system does not have a line level output which varies with volume (i.e. NOT a tape loop) you can still incorporate a subwoofer - providing this has a high level input.

 

I think Naim, as ever, prefer to keep their opinions off the radar to some extent, on the basis that such decisions, as well as being subjective, are best explored by the individual, and it is the job of the dealer to help with this rather than Naim themselves. However, in addition to the N-Sub manual:

 "It is impossible to predict which option will sound best in a particular system and installation, however, the speaker level option, by virtue of higher signal levels being more robust over long lead lengths, is potentially superior."
.....I think the anecdotal evidence from both users and the Naim establishment on this forum suggest that speaker level connections are preferable.
(Not sure if DSP with this connection method is quite so easy, though - there's a challenge for you, Huge!)

 

 
 

I agree that it's best to try both HL and LL connections.  A further point is that even the position of the sub can actually influence which is better!

The things that need balancing are:
Signal loss or interference in cables
Group delay (Preamp > Poweramp > Sub Amp > Sub adds an extra group delay at ELF)
Loading of the amplifier by the extra cables (if no buffer amp / line driver is used)

Simon, REW has a very useful room simulation mode that can help to establish candidate positions for the main speakers and the sub to get the most even response (and you can simulate the effect of group delays).  It certainly helped me.

Then the trick is to use REW to measure the room response, and use the DSP to trim the FR (FIR filters to offset the room resonances), crossover point and group delay settings.  It's not as hard as it sounds!

Finally try judging by ear (now that one's a lot harder than it sounds as the ear/brain combination isn't very discriminating at ELF).

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Thanks all, the subwoofer I am considering has some DSP built in and offers speaker and line input - I think reading the above my instinct tells me to try the speaker connection first and from the loudspeakers themselves - keeping cable lengths for L+R the same

I used Chord Sarsen for my speaker > sub connection, as it's only 3.5mm diameter and easily hidden, although I'm assured that any old bell wire is perfectly adequate for the purpose. Conveniently, my speaker terminals take both bananas and spades, so I use bananas on my main speaker cable and spades for the sub, meaning I can put them on and remove them easily. The idea of piggyback bananas seemed a bit of a messy alternative, and soldering both cables onto the same set of plugs is a bit inflexible. I wonder if it's possible to borrow a low level lead, then comparisons would be quite easy.

ChrisSU posted:
For me, the choice to run a sub is driven largely by aesthetics, as I really don't want a big pair of speakers dominating the room, whereas a sub 'hidden' behind the sofa doesn't really get noticed. I might even think about replacing my X2s with small standmounts at some point.

  

I am no expert on subs, but I would have thought that behind  the sofa (or anywhere else away from the main speakers) may adversely affect phase and timing unless electronically compensated?

That depends on the difference in group delay in the two electronic paths, compared to the acoustic delay in the two acoustic paths.

Depending on the difference in the delays that may even be the ideal position.  The best way to find out is to measure the system, then you can make adjustments with that knowledge.  In my case that same location gives the best phase / time integration.

Innocent Bystander posted:
ChrisSU posted:
For me, the choice to run a sub is driven largely by aesthetics, as I really don't want a big pair of speakers dominating the room, whereas a sub 'hidden' behind the sofa doesn't really get noticed. I might even think about replacing my X2s with small standmounts at some point.

  

I am no expert on subs, but I would have thought that behind  the sofa (or anywhere else away from the main speakers) may adversely affect phase and timing unless electronically compensated?

You could be right, but for me, the options available are on the hearth in front of a woodburner, directly in front of a door, or behind the sofa. So behind the sofa it is, and I do have the option of moving it to any point across the rear wall. I still like what the N-Sub does, so it works for me. 

ChrisSU posted:
Innocent Bystander posted:
ChrisSU posted:
For me, the choice to run a sub is driven largely by aesthetics, as I really don't want a big pair of speakers dominating the room, whereas a sub 'hidden' behind the sofa doesn't really get noticed. I might even think about replacing my X2s with small standmounts at some point.

  

I am no expert on subs, but I would have thought that behind  the sofa (or anywhere else away from the main speakers) may adversely affect phase and timing unless electronically compensated?

You could be right, but for me, the options available are on the hearth in front of a woodburner, directly in front of a door, or behind the sofa. So behind the sofa it is, and I do have the option of moving it to any point across the rear wall. I still like what the N-Sub does, so it works for me. 

Chris - just so that you know. A subwoofer should ideally be placed in a corner of a room, close to one one of the front speakers, firing along the longest digonal in a room. This way the long bass waves can travel freely.

That's the theory - but each room has constraints. So do experiment.

Adam, that theory doesn't hold water.  The sub is a pressure mode device, placing it in a corner will cause the most efficient coupling to the primary room resonance modes.  This in turn will result in a very uneven frequency distribution, maximising the frequencies at the room resonance whilst providing very little boost to all other frequencies.  It will give the greatest impression of bass output, but it will actually be a very uneven response.

Paradoxically the best position to get the most even response from the sub is smack in the middle of the room (including half way between floor and ceiling!).  However this isn't particularly practical, and it also may not give the best phase response through the crossover region to the main speakers (the sub may need to be closer to the listener, or more distant from the listener).

Likes (1)
Drewy
×
×
×
×