[pugs]

I just noticed the HT1 + HTS combo on the Salk website.  Does anybody know how this combo would compare to the HT3?  What are the details/specs of the HTS?

[pugs]

To clarify, I am referring to the Veracity HTS subwoofer that mates with the HT1.

[Marbles]

I haven't heard the HTS, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.
My SVS Ultra subs use a TC Sounds 12" woofer.

As with almost all 2 way speakers, the driver that's asked to play the lowest bass is also asked to play a lot of the midrange. The HT1 is no exception.

If you can ACTIVELY cross the HT1 to subs at say 70 HZ, releiving them of playing the lowest frequencies, then they will sound very similar to the HT3's. The HT3's woofer crosses to the midrange at 250HZ.

If you play the HT1's full range and bring the subs in beneath them, the midrange of the HT1's will not be as clean and clear as it is on the HT3's, because as mentioned, the HT3's midrange is only asked to play from 250 HZ up to 2500HZ.

The woofer integration on the HT3's is remarkable and would be hard to duplicate with seperate subs IMO, but you could come close.

I know this doesn't answer your question regarding the HTS, but it might help in any evaluation of the HT1/sub combo vs the HT3.

[brj]

I asked Jim the same question a while back via PM, and here was his response (which closely matches Marble's comments above):

I would use the same driver [for the HTS] as with the HT3, but it would be side-mounted.

While it would seem that the results would be the same, the HT3 is a better solution for two major reasons.

First, no matter how well a sub is integrated with the mains, it can never be as good as having a crossover designed to integrate the drivers (as in the HT3). With the HT3's, the integration is perfect and you can't screw it up.

The second reason is that subwoofers with plate amps normally top out at about 150Hz. In the HT3's, the woofer takes over at 300Hz (which is why it is front-firing).

In this case, the TC Sounds driver works very well that high up. Many sub drivers do not.

The impact of this is that the W18 does not have to do any bass duties and can concentrate on midrange reproduction. While the W18 does a fantastic job in the HT1's, relieveing it of bass duties in the HT3 really makes it shine. Distortion is even lower and the results are clearly audible.

This would not be possible with a passively crossed HT1 and an integrated sub with a plate amp.

Besides, by the time you purchase the HT1 and then the subs, you have spent more than the HT3's in the first place.

Note Jim's specific reference to the limits of using a passive crossover to the sub, and Marble's comments above about using an active crossover.

Regarding the bottom end extension of the HTS vs. the HT3...

They should be exactly the same. The plate amp in the sub may have an EQ function which would allow a little more extension via EQ, but the driver would perform the same.

Note that this conversation was a direct comparison of the HT3 to the HT1/HTS combo, but it reflects my primary interest in 2 channel listening.  Jim mentioned in another conversation that if your primary goal is multi-channel audio or home theater, he would recommend the HT1 and subwoofer approach.  Even though the HT1 and HT3 are almost identical through the mid-range and top end, subject to his mid-range driver loading comments above, there are still apparently minor gains to be had in HT/MC audio by perfectly matching the speakers all the way around.  Of course, I guess you could go with HT3s all the way around!

Also note that Jim offers the HT1 in a sealed box version that provides less low-end extension, but a more gradual roll-off that is easier to integrate with a sub-woofer when using a passive crossover.  You could get a similar effect by plugging the port of the standard HT1.

I hope that helps!

Jim, let me know if I missed anything!

[jsalk]

brj -

That about says it all.

- Jim

[brj]

Wow, did you time that Jim?

I mention your sealed HT1 option and you release the first pictures of that configuration within hours!