[jd3]

Anyone care to comment on their experience with the SongCenter?  I think there are some out there...I've already contacted Jim about possibly ordering one soon and am curious to hear some impressions.  Thanks.

John

[jam2001]

Anyone???

[jsalk]

The SongCenters just started shipping.  As far as I know, Micky is the only person who has one yet.

You might try posting your question on the thread with his speakers...

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=47584.0

-Jim

[jv8]

I have a L/C/R set on order.  However, I'm probably not the best person to write a review... this will be my first set of audiophile-grade speakers.

Jim, one question on the songcenter - would it be better to mount it vertically?  Horizontal gets the drivers closer to the screen but vertical would maintain a vertical dispersion pattern.  I guess the ultimate would be an acoustically transparent screen with the center mounted vertically behind the screen.  Or does it not matter that much?

Thanks,
Jon

[jsalk]

Jon -

Jim, one question on the songcenter - would it be better to mount it vertically?  Horizontal gets the drivers closer to the screen but vertical would maintain a vertical dispersion pattern.  I guess the ultimate would be an acoustically transparent screen with the center mounted vertically behind the screen.  Or does it not matter that much?

Interesting question. 

Obviously, the best option would be to mount the speaker vertically.  If you could do that, perhaps a third SongTower behind a transparent screen would be an even better option.  But let's take a look at what is going on here and see if there is much of an issue to be concerned about.

If you measure any MTM speaker (midwoofer-tweeter-midwoofer), like the SongTower, on axis at the tweeter level, you will have a reference frequency response graph.  Now, if you take a series of measurements at various distances above and below the tweeter, you will see that the FR graphs are not quite the same.  This is generally not a significant issue.  When you walk around the room, you will not notice a change in FR since your ears will always be a constant distance above the tweeter level.  So the response you hear does not change significantly until you are far off-axis. (With the SongTowers, even 60-degrees off axis the response is very good.)

If you mounted these speakers horizontally and walked around the room, to the extent that these variations in FR were audible, you would hear the changes since you would be varying your position above and below (in this case to the left and right) of the tweeter axis.

So the best option would be to mount the center channel vertically as it would eliminate these variations.  But is it a problem if you mounted the center channel horizontally?  Not really.

When using the speakers in a home theater application, you will normally be seated and in a constant relationship with the center channel.   So you will not hear any changes in FR response from that speaker.  What little variation there would be in response from the left and right mains would most likely not be noticeable either (unless you have an incredible sense of hearing).

So, in theory, vertical positioning of the center channel would be ideal.  But as a practical matter in a home theater application, unless you are a purest and are obsessed with theoretical perfection, it really doesn't matter.

What is more important is that the center channel is as close to the center of the screen as your set-up permits.  The dialog is almost always delivered by the center channel.  And since the characters are on screen, it is important that the sound of their voices appear to eminate from there as well.   

I hope that helps.

- Jim 

[jv8]

Jim,  thanks for the explanation.

Could you address one other songcenter topic: sealed vs. ported?  What are the tradeoffs?  I assume this is a construction option... do you have two separate cabinet designs?

I can pull the L/R songtowers away from the wall but most likely the center will be mounted very close to the wall (basement drywall/block).  I assume I should opt for a sealed songcenter?

Thanks.

[DMurphy]

One of the main advantages of the ST is its transmission line loading.  That affects the midrange as well as the bass.  I would certainly not alter that.  In another thread, a few of us reported on what happened when the ST's were mounted near a rear wall.  The feared boom never materialized.  Even if you're going to run them with a sub, I would try to cross the ST unaltered first, and only plug the "port" if you just couldn't get good integration any other way (which I doubt).

[jsalk]

Jon -

Jim,  thanks for the explanation.

Could you address one other songcenter topic: sealed vs. ported?  What are the trade-offs? 

Note that the following comments relate to the SongCenter and not the SongTowers.

The most significant difference is the amount of bass extension.  Ported cabinets allow the driver to play deeper than a sealed cabinet.  But a sealed speaker is a bit easier to successfully cross with a subwoofer since its falloff rate is more gradual.

I assume this is a construction option... do you have two separate cabinet designs?

Actually, the same cabinet can be used in either situation.  If you do not intend to use a sub, the ported version may be your best option.  If you are using a subwoofer, the sealed version would work just fine.  Another option is to get a ported version and simply stuff the port, turning it into a sealed version.  That is the most flexible approach.

I can pull the L/R songtowers away from the wall but most likely the center will be mounted very close to the wall (basement drywall/block).  I assume I should opt for a sealed songcenter?

Yes, or stuff the ports.

- Jim

[jsalk]

One of the main advantages of the ST is its transmission line loading.  That affects the midrange as well as the bass.  I would certainly not alter that.  In another thread, a few of us reported on what happened when the ST's were mounted near a rear wall.  The feared boom never materialized.  Even if you're going to run them with a sub, I would try to cross the ST unaltered first, and only plug the "port" if you just couldn't get good integration any other way (which I doubt).

Just so there is no confusion, the original question related to the SongCenter and not the SongTower QWT's.

- Jim

[jv8]

If you do not intend to use a sub, the ported version may be your best option.  If you are using a subwoofer, the sealed version would work just fine.  Another option is to get a ported version and simply stuff the port, turning it into a sealed version.  That is the most flexible approach.

Hmmm... I am using a sub.  However, one of the things I like about the songtowers is their bass extension... so I was planning on crossing over the sub as low as possible (40hz?) so all normal music is rendered completely by the songtowers and the sub is only for LFE explosions, etc.

So I guess I care about optimizing the center channel's bass extension and will try to use the ported version.  Perhaps I can move the screen away from the wall.

It would be nice to have an acoustically transparent screen and use a third songtower, but a new screen setup would blow the budget...

[zybar]

If you do not intend to use a sub, the ported version may be your best option.  If you are using a subwoofer, the sealed version would work just fine.  Another option is to get a ported version and simply stuff the port, turning it into a sealed version.  That is the most flexible approach.

Hmmm... I am using a sub.  However, one of the things I like about the songtowers is their bass extension... so I was planning on crossing over the sub as low as possible (40hz?) so all normal music is rendered completely by the songtowers and the sub is only for LFE explosions, etc.

So I guess I care about optimizing the center channel's bass extension and will try to use the ported version.  Perhaps I can move the screen away from the wall.

It would be nice to have an acoustically transparent screen and use a third songtower, but a new screen setup would blow the budget...

I cross my three SongTowers over at 40Hz in my HT setup and they work great like this!!

Here is a picture before the screen material was put into the frame:




I might ultimately decide to raise them up a little higher, but for now I am a very happy camper when I watch a movie.

George

[Bill Baker]

Nice looking rig there George. 
Who built the framing for the screen? What type of wood was used.
 This is very similar to what I had planned for the showroom bringing it out about two feet from the wall which would allow for acoustic treatment behind the screen (one the wall itself).

[zybar]

Nice looking rig there George. 
Who built the framing for the screen? What type of wood was used.
 This is very similar to what I had planned for the showroom bringing it out about two feet from the wall which would allow for acoustic treatment behind the screen (one the wall itself).

Bill,

You can see my thread here:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=44032.0

George

[NealH]

That is a very nice looking arrangement.  I assume the screen frame was a "do it yourself" job.  It looks good.  Is there any compromises by locating the speakers behind the screen (ie., no additional high frequency attenuation from the screen material)?

[zybar]

There is no high frequency attenuation.

You can read about the screen at the SMX website:

http://www.smxscreen.com/

George

[DMurphy]

"Just so there is no confusion, the original question related to the SongCenter and not the SongTower QWT's."

Ooops  I guess I thought your suggestion about using a Song Tower for the center was SUCH a good idea, I didn't see he was talking about the Song Center.  In any event, as you say, it's easy enough to plug the port, so there's no reason to rule out options by getting a sealed version. 

[jv8]

Thanks a lot guys... just when I had resolved the port/sealed songcenter choice... now I am off researching acoustically transparent screens to see if I can swing a songtower center!

[jv8]

FYI - I found one issue with crossing over at 40 Hz:  my processor will combine _all_ channels (L/C/R/Surr/LFE) first, and then low pass the result before driving to the sub!  This means the LFE channel is missing from 40Hz to 120Hz since LFE does not come out anywhere but the sub.  I assumed it would combine L/C/R/Surr, low pass it, then combine the result with a full LFE channel before driving the sub.  This is not the case.

I guess low passing the LFE is pretty common bass management for processors.

Anyway, to hear most of the LFE channel I will need to raise the crossover to 80Hz.  This means the SongTower's full bass extension will not really be used for HT.  That's ok, I will enjoy running the ST without sub for 2-channel audio.

This crossover issue plus my desire to keep a high-gain video screen has made me decide to stick with the smaller SongCenter.

Other ways to work around this issue:

• Find a processor with more flexible bass management?
• Don't use HT crossover at all: use sub for LFE, SongTowers for every other channel

[fRsimms]

That's ok, I will enjoy running the ST without sub for 2-channel audio.

I tried the SongTowers with a sub and didn't mention it in my review.  I used a Tact 2.2X to cross over to my SVS sub at 80 Hz.  The difference was amazing.  If you have a good processor and a good sub then I wouldn't hesitate to cross them over to the sub for 2 channel music.  Removing the bass load from the SongTowers helps significantly.

PS. The biggest problem with it is that you lose the great way that the SongTowers load the room in the base frequencies.  If you don't have a room correcting preamp or sub then you wouldn't get the results that I got.

[JP78]

why the screen sale then?