[max190]

Ethan

As mentioned here you need to bass trap your room.  Doing this will give you tighter and more coherent bass.

I cannot comment on your Totems since I have never listened to them... but, have you mass loaded them?
I am a firm believer in doing this since it did wonders in the bass dept to my old MA Silver 5is

[jimdgoulding]

"FWIW Jim fitted a set of these inside my Totem Arro grilles and I'm quite pleased with the result. As I have said elsewhere, I reckon my Arros are now a luxury version of the same speaker - the same but different in a more relaxed, leather sofa, brandy and cigar and an ace bird in front of a roaring fire sort of way.  I never used to use the grilles before. The mid bass especially is 'lucid' or 'transparent'. More details are audible from the music without being tiring or 'clinical'.  Imaging is better, too."

This from a customer using Arro's in the Canary Islands in a small room.  I should pop in on my way by private jet to Madrid.  Least I think I should. 
Would more power help you for low end impact?  I'm curious about class D amps myself.

[doug s.]

as i said before, (imo, of course), arro's won't go loud w/o falling apart - top to bottom, not yust in the bass.  even when actively crossed over to subs at 80hz.

doug s.

[Stu Pitt]

I'm a big fan of the Arros.  I agree with a lot of what has been said regarding their inability got go loud and limited dynamics.  But I've heard good amplifiers take care of some of this.  They don't have to be powerful, but they need a very stable power supply.  Integrateds along the lines of the Naim Nait 5i, Bryston B60, Simaudio i5 sound very good with the Arros and the Arros short comings are greatly diminished.

The Arro is very deceptive in that its price doesn't match the level of electronics it needs.  You need to spend a ton more than the cost of the Arro to get every last bit of performance out of it.  I've heard it with an Onkyo AVR and CDP (awful in every way) and with Simaudio separates.  The Arros weren't too outclassed by a system that the amp alone cost 4 times with the Arros did, never mind the pre-amp and CD player.   

That being said - no matter what you connect to it, the Arro's bass isn't going to punch you in the chest, so to speak.  There's only so much a 4 inch woofer can do.

I'm not so sure that the problems are entirely the Arro.  They should be fine in a 12x15 room, so long as they're driven properly.  I think a Naim Nait 5i or Arcam A70 is probably the minimum amplification they should have.  Again, its not about the number of watts, its about an amp that delivers them no matter how difficult the load gets.  The Onkyo AVR I heard connected to it was rated at 125 wpc, the Nait 5i is 50 wpc.  There was no contest as to which was a stronger power supply.

The Arro is one of my favorite speakers, regardless of price.  When I recently upgraded, it was one of the top speakers on my list.  I ended up with Audio Physic Yara Evolution Bookshelves.  To my ears, they sound very similar, but they don't have the downfall of the limited dynamics and light bass.

Everyone's idea of good bass is different.  Mine is fast, tight, and tunefull (not that that's such a useful description).  Others like big, almost car-subwoofer like bass.  To my ears, the Yara's bass is far deeper, tighter, and stronger than the Arro's, regardless of what a spec sheet says.  If you have a dealer near by, you should check them out.  They just re-vamped almost their entire line.  I haven't heard the new ones yet, nor heard anything about them.  The new ones have a smaller woofer than mine, so I'm not sure how well they'll perform in the bass area.  If their are some of the older series laying around, you may be able to get a very good deal.

If you really like the Arros and aren't 100% ready to give up on them, maybe try a used intergated from Audiogon? A Naim, Bryston, Simaudio, Arcam, etc may be exactly what you're looking for.

[doug s.]

the arro's limited dynamics & inability to go loud won't be helped by any amps, imo.  ethan has already remarked about his problems w/the arro's in his smaller room.  and, if a pair of electrocompaniet aw75dmb's or a mesa baron won't light them up, even when actively crossed over to subs at 80hz, nothing will!     note that this exact same system/room set-up had no trouble driving the diminutive proac tablette 8 reference signatures to ear-bleeding wolume levels, w/o straining.

doug s.

[James Romeyn]

Below a certain speaker sensitivity threshold it seems no amount of power will suffice.  Some VMPS 6.5" mid bass crossed at 261 Hz in a 3200cf room would clip horrendously even a solid ATI 1802, which IIRC weighs 50+ lbs & is rated 200/350WRMS @ 8/4-Ohms.  On speakers of another brand w/ similar sensitivity specification the amp would never clip. 

Manufacturer specs of speaker senstivity may be about as useful (or useless) as amplifier power ratings.   

[EthanH]

Thanks for all the input guys.  I agree with pretty much everything that's been said about the Arros.  I'm sure that upgrading the amplification could provide some improvements in performance, but I don't think that these changes would outweigh the limitations that, after living with the speaker for over a year, seem incompatible with my personal taste.  I like tight, tuneful bass, which the Arros have, but I also like the occasional fast and visceral slam in the chest that, imo, imparts a sense of scale and drama to the music that is lacking in a lot of smaller speakers.  I don't know if it's transient response or the ability to move a lot of air, but whatever it is I like it.

I guess right now I should try to decide whether a sat/sub(s) combo or floorstander is the way to go and then start exploring my options.  I've never heard a properly implemented sat/sub combo, so hopefully I'll get to listen to one before I make any moves.  I had a Paradigm ultracube in my system briefly picking up where the Arros rolled off and was not impressed.

[jimdgoulding]

These are expensive and I don't know if there is much of a following amongst members for discussion here but one you might consider in addition to the Odyssey Lorelei is the Acoustic Zen Adagio.  I think they have a more compact and less expensive standmount, too.  I listen in a 12X15' room with standmount speakers with twin over and under mid/bass drivers like the latter and the Salk's, too, that leave nothing to be desired in the areas that disappoint you.  The more dynamic the recording, the better.

[James Romeyn]

Haven't heard the Acoustic Zen Adagio but the importer's ears seemed very similar to mine & he seemed like a reliable source.  I'd put them on my short list for sure.

Audiophiles might save thousands of dollars in upgrading (read depreciation & ad/shipping fees) by first spending the travel money to hear Earl Geddes' or Duke LeJeune's systems w/ three smallish subs distributed throughout the room.  I've much personal experience using room damping (about $7k equivalent retail value for full circumference acoustic soffit in my last room) AND employing EQ to flatten room modes.  My personal experience is that Geddes' advice beats the above by an absolutely huge margin (I'm using three subs w/ one xo/amp; intend to employ Earl's recommended two amps/xo poles).  As per Earl's advice/experience, it now appears the use of my parametric EQ in the bass decreases quality rather than increases it as is the most common wisdom (especially among full bandwidth digital EQ fanatics).  Earl's advice that EQ is a one-dimensional cure for a three-dimensional phenomena (room modes) appears to be accurate.

Has anyone read feedback about the latest active room mode devices (mic/spectrum analyzer/amp/subwoofer)?  During music these devices (look like a regular sub) feed back into the room the inverse of the room mode(s).  One problem w/ any such device is time: there has to be at least sum delay between the original signal picked up by the mic & the inverted signal generated by the device.  Whether the ear may be sensitive to the delay or not is the question.  As per conversations w/ Carver & per other designers the ear has extremely high tolerance for THD (30% may be tolerable) & phase distortion in the bass range (inverse of the ear's hypersensitivity to distortion in the 750-3k Hz range).  IIRC in all reflex designs the port/passive radiator output is 180-degrees inverse of the woofer (generated from the woofer's back wave).  The port's inverse output damps the woofer cone motion & causes the woofer's impedance to peak at the port tuning frequency.       

[mfsoa]

EthanH,
If you want to hear some VonSchweikert VR4JRs in a 13x18 room, come the October Rave at my place in NJ, Hunterdon Cty.
1H 15min from CHOP (I know that drive all too well unfortunately) w/ no traffic.

Or if you want to take a drive before that, PM me.

I love the VR4s but speaker curiosity (boredom?) is getting the best of me and I may be curious to sell 'em and look into sat/sub combo.

-Mike

[EthanH]

ro7939:  I've read about the multiple subs approach and am definitely intrigued, but would like to know if there is a certain frequency or range that you must crossover at.  I understand Geddes' designs employ a relatively high crossover point of around 80-100hz or so, but am wondering if that's only because his summa kits roll off at that frequency.  For instance, I don't suppose one could combine Geddes' approach with that of, say, REL, that to my knowledge espouses introducing the sub at the natural roll off point of the main speakers without removing their low frequency information?

Also, would any sub and plate amp suffice, or would you need an amp that employs a certain type of crossover, like a fourth-order?  I've been considering running two or more of the GR Research subs eventually, but in any case will have to hold off for now since I live in an apartment and have nowhere to do any woodworking.

[doug s.]

ro7939:  I've read about the multiple subs approach and am definitely intrigued, but would like to know if there is a certain frequency or range that you must crossover at.  I understand Geddes' designs employ a relatively high crossover point of around 80-100hz or so, but am wondering if that's only because his summa kits roll off at that frequency.  For instance, I don't suppose one could combine Geddes' approach with that of, say, REL, that to my knowledge espouses introducing the sub at the natural roll off point of the main speakers without removing their low frequency information?

Also, would any sub and plate amp suffice, or would you need an amp that employs a certain type of crossover, like a fourth-order?  I've been considering running two or more of the GR Research subs eventually, but in any case will have to hold off for now since I live in an apartment and have nowhere to do any woodworking.

ethan, these are cheap, & amazingly good for their price, even retail.  powered, & ready to go.  even tho they have built-in x-over, inwest in an outboard x-over to cross to your monitors, at 60-80hz, & then set these subs' internal x-over to 150, (as high as they go, iirc). i have a pair of yst-305's, these sub's precursors, & they are really nice.  no, not as nice as my vmps largers, but they will work great in a small room.

yamaha yst-sw315:

http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?homesubw&1222216658



doug s.

[TRADERXFAN]

ro7939:  I've read about the multiple subs approach and am definitely intrigued, but would like to know if there is a certain frequency or range that you must crossover at.  I understand Geddes' designs employ a relatively high crossover point of around 80-100hz or so, but am wondering if that's only because his summa kits roll off at that frequency.  For instance, I don't suppose one could combine Geddes' approach with that of, say, REL, that to my knowledge espouses introducing the sub at the natural roll off point of the main speakers without removing their low frequency information?

Also, would any sub and plate amp suffice, or would you need an amp that employs a certain type of crossover, like a fourth-order?  I've been considering running two or more of the GR Research subs eventually, but in any case will have to hold off for now since I live in an apartment and have nowhere to do any woodworking.

The basis for the frequency to crossover is dependent on the room... there is an article on his website that explores what happens above and below the rooms schroeder frequency. The smaller the room the higher you go in frequency where there is low modal density (awkwardly worded, just look at the chart--> ). But that is not to say you really need to pinpoint what this is, anything but extremely large rooms will have this effect. http://www.gedlee.com/downloads/Chapter%204.pdf  -look on page 4 chart.

This approach is all about combating the negative room effects by averaging out the peaks and nulls (which are constructive and destructive wave interferences). The room problems are extend higher in frequency than we typically think to use for subwoofer crossover points. Also remember the additional sources playing into these upper rangers (~50-150) should be at very low volume levels relative to the mains.

For me this is all theory, I still haven't done it myself yet to see what its like...

But those yamaha's look very attractive in price and performance to try!

-Tony

[James Romeyn]

ro7939:  I've read about the multiple subs approach and am definitely intrigued, but would like to know if there is a certain frequency or range that you must crossover at.

IIRC Earl recommends one xo at approx 50 Hz & the other much higher, around 150 Hz.  I don't recall the bass cutoff of his main speakers.  I'm stuck w/ one active xo for now.  Today I'm going to rewire my three subs (four 10s total, two in one box, one each in two other boxes) to allow the insertion of a large coil on two of the subs, providing two staggered poles.  All subs will be actively crossed around 150, two of the four 10s will be crossed some point lower w/ the passive coil, providing some of Earl's intended effect. 

The best effect, besides making unlistenable modes almost inaudible (it sounded better w/o the subs when sited below the monitors as stands in Cardas' prime recommended location), is the natural/musical effect in the bass.  The bass is let loose & doesn't have the small room, confined effect, exactly as mentioned by 5 of 5 independent sources who visited Earl's room.  I just saw Dark Knight in a large theater; similar effect, which as Earl points out is a dramatic difference of bass in large vs. small spaces.  Discs I've heard countless times have a dramatic difference in spatial quality. 

I was blessed to have four 10s requiring only 1cf each, in three separate boxes, in order to try Earl's theory.   

I understand Geddes' designs employ a relatively high crossover point of around 80-100hz or so, but am wondering if that's only because his summa kits roll off at that frequency.  For instance, I don't suppose one could combine Geddes' approach with that of, say, REL, that to my knowledge espouses introducing the sub at the natural roll off point of the main speakers without removing their low frequency information?

Also, would any sub and plate amp suffice, or would you need an amp that employs a certain type of crossover, like a fourth-order? ...

Sorry I don't know about those specifics.

Duke's "SWARM" 3-box sub system is somewhere between $1500-$2k.  Check Earl's recent thread here.  I just saw blems of Hsu's 10" subs for $250 IIRC at Parts Express.  That's the best sub deal I know of now.   

[THE_ANSWERS]

had a baby boomer -pinnacle- sub, and it was only two 8" drivers, less than a foot on each side, built in 600w amp (that's why I bought it) and it cranked !! I sold it a few years ago .   look for used ones on ebay or audiogon.

[Duke]

Just a minor clarifiction - Duke's "Swarm" is a four-piece subwoofer system (four small subs).   

Given that EthanH is in an apartment, I'm not sure that subs are the answer - especially if he can't play them loud enough to enjoy them because that would annoy the neighbors.

Just wondering aloud here... anybody know whether taking advantage of corner reinforcement significantly increases the amount of bass energy that is transmitted to other apartments?  If not, then perhaps a speaker that works well in a corner might give him the slam he wants without being too intrusive on the neighbors.  Hmmmm... The Horn Shoppe comes to mind.     

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?board=25.0

Duke

[94cdnm3]

I hope this response is not too late. I too, am using the Arros in a room which meaures approximately 10x25. By themselves bi-amped with a Bryston B-60 integrated for the highs and a Bryston 2B-LP for the mids/lows the bass is just satisfactory. For 90% of the material I listen to such as jazz, new age and pop, it is fine. However, when I get into techno-dance, rock etc. I too, find the bass lacking. The answer for me was relatively simple and straightforward. I added the Totem Dreamcatcher powered sub for one more octave of bass and more headroom. The Dreamcatcher was designed to be quick and tuneful which matched up well to the Arros. I have them crossed at 50Hz and to my ears they seamlessly blend together extremely well. Hopefully this may be your answer as well. By the way, you can find the Dreamcatcher sub used for ~$400-$500. Good luck and good listening to you!

[EthanH]

I thought I would update this old thread. 

To recap, I had the Arros and really liked them, but was unsatisfied with their bass impact, even when I used a subwoofer.  I liked the bass, but wanted more slam when I turned up the volume.

I ended up selling the Arros and building a pair of DIY speakers using the Seas L18RNX/P woofer and 27TBFC/G tweeter designed by John Krutke (the cabinets were built by John at diyspeakercabinets.com; thanks John).  I've been listening to these monitors for about two months now. 

First off, there is obviously a big difference between the bass from a 4" woofer and a 7" woofer.  The seas monitors have very good bass response considering their .5 cubic foot cabinets, and can play as loud as I care to listen to them without any compression.  They technically shouldn't reach any lower than the Arros, but subjectively they seem to go much lower due to the added impact from the increased surface area.  They also seem a little more laid back and less fatiguing, which is nice.

So was it a 100% success?  Yes and no.  The speakers are smoother and have better bass, which is what I wanted.  However, the Arros were able to do a disappearing act much easier, and although they were slightly more fatiguing than the seas monitors I think I prefer the Arros' tone.  The seas just strike me as very clear/neutral, which is not a bad thing, but I sort of like a little bit of euphonic editing once in a while.  Overall though, I'm very satisfied with my first pseudo-DIY effort.

Now, I'm trying to figure out how I might be able to improve the system's tone.  Maybe interconnects(?), a new amp, CDP, or sub.  No rush.

Thanks again to everyone who responded to this thread.     My system page on audiogon can be viewed here:  http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vopin&1161351433