CLS depth. Xover, pre-amp and processor. oh my.

i am looking for some thoughts on how to hook up the second depth into my system. there are a few other changes to the system, so i'll start the description from scratch.

I want to use the depths as the bottom end for my CLS. i have an outboard electronic crossover to help with this.

Up to now i have used a single depth for X.1 surround and hooked the depth into the LFE output of the processor. i want to continue aiming the LFE channel directly to the depth(s).

I am incorporating a 2 channel preamp with HT bypass into things for better 2 channel listening (vinyl, CD and r2r).

If i had only one depth i would hook things up in the following way:


processor main out goes to the preamp
preamp L/R line outs go to the crossover
crossover feeds the depth from the lowpass
crossover feeds both CLS form the highpass

processor LFE out goes to depth LFE in


this seems to agree with the depth manual. but adding in the second depth is harder, and here is why.

the manual says that all additional depths must run as either an addition LFE or 2 channel, but not both. that makes sense as the way to add an additional depth is to run an interconnect from the SUBOUT of the 1st into either the LFE -or- the L (or R) line input of the second depth.

this makes sense as there is only one SUBOUT connection on the 1st sub that one connection can only go to one place on the second sub.

so if I wanted to add a second sub for LFE, i'd be set

processor LFE out goes to depth 1 LFE in
depth 1 SUBOUT goes to depth 2 LFE in



If wanted to run two subs on the two channel side I'd also be set as the electronic crossover has two distinct L and a R channels for the lowpass output.

preamp goes to crossover
crossover feeds both depths from the L/R lowpass
crossover feeds both CLS from the L/R highpass

but how do i get the second sub to work for both LFE and 2 channel?

here is what i envision:

processor mains go to preamp
preamp goes to crossover
crossover feeds both depths from the L/R lowpass
crossover feeds both CLS from the L/R highpass

processor LFE goes to the LFE input on depth 1
SUBOUT on depth 1 goes to LFE in on depth 2

The second way i see this happening is by using a Y adaptor on the LFE output of the processor and sending the same signal to both of the depths.

processor mains go to preamp
preamp goes to crossover
crossover feeds both depths from the L/R lowpass
crossover feeds both CLS from the L/R highpass

processor LFE goes into Yadaptor
Yadapter feeds both depth 1 and depth 2

Has anyone done a similar set up?

If your prosessor supports directing LFE to main channels wouldn't it be simplests to apply that and connect:

processor main out goes to the preamp
preamp L/R line outs go to the crossover
crossover feeds the depth from the lowpass
crossover feeds both CLS form the highpass

MPS said:

If your prosessor supports directing LFE to main channels wouldn't it be simplests to apply that and connect:

processor main out goes to the preamp
preamp L/R line outs go to the crossover
crossover feeds the depth from the lowpass
crossover feeds both CLS form the highpass

Click to expand...

Correct in that its simpler, but it requires checking out that the processor handles summed LFE correctly.

Many processors screw this up and have -10dB error in LFE levels realtive to L/R with no way to 'fix

So before you try this, run some tests to validate that your processor can do this right.

zaphod said:

i am looking for some thoughts on how to hook up the second depth into my system.
...
The second way i see this happening is by using a Y adaptor on the LFE output of the processor and sending the same signal to both of the depths.

processor mains go to preamp
preamp goes to crossover
crossover feeds both depths from the L/R lowpass
crossover feeds both CLS from the L/R highpass

processor LFE goes into Yadaptor
Yadapter feeds both depth 1 and depth 2

Has anyone done a similar set up?

Click to expand...

This is the arrangement I think might work best for you.

A quick question Does the Depth non-LFE input have the ability to deactivate/bypass the internal crossover?

Otherwise you'll have doubled-up crossovers, and resulting too steep a slope, plus additional delay and phase shift you probably don't want.

IIRC, the only non-crossover input on a Depth was the LFE in.

PS- this is why I usually go with a Speaker Processor, as this scenario is easily handled by something like the DBX 4800.

Set up for 3 inputs and six outputs, it would work like this:

Feed full-range left and right into it, as well as the LFE signal.
Internally, set up crossovers to send high-frequencies to the CLS, and the low-passed output to the corresponding sub out.

Take the single LFE in, and split the signal (using internal routing) into each of the Sub outs, managing levels as required.

Use phase and delay management to time-align all outputs so you have in-phase and time-coherent reproduction in the room.

Use the nine-band parametric EQ on the low-frequencies as required to correct for room placement and room-induced issues.

Feed each Depth via the LFE in (no internal x-over).

See, simple

JonFo said:

A quick question Does the Depth non-LFE input have the ability to deactivate/bypass the internal crossover?

Otherwise you'll have doubled-up crossovers, and resulting too steep a slope, plus additional delay and phase shift you probably don't want.

IIRC, the only non-crossover input on a Depth was the LFE in.

Click to expand...

hmm, that is a real interesting question that i hadn't even thought of asking myself. hmmm.

because i only want the very bottom removed from the CLS in stereo mode, perhaps if i play with the depth filter higher (say 80) than the crossover filter (say 50). hmmm. obviously some experimentation, including how the processor handles LFE through mains would work. hmmmm.

hmm, i just thought of another trick available up my sleeve....

Jon - and this is a leading question - you have a open baffle sub experience, right?

do you find that the open baffle design works better with music or with the LFE channel? i suspect music, but i might be wrong on that...

zaphod said:

hmm, i just thought of another trick available up my sleeve....

Jon - and this is a leading question - you have a open baffle sub experience, right?

do you find that the open baffle design works better with music or with the LFE channel? i suspect music, but i might be wrong on that...

Click to expand...

Hi Zaph, I use an Infinite Baffle subwoofer, which I do find integrates well with the electrostats for music. It has the lowest distortion products of any sub alignment out there with extremely high output.

As for how they perform on LFE duties, I find them perfectly satisfactory, as they go down to 18hz flat, and still produce decent output at 10hz.

What it does not have is 'boom' (or one-note resonances) due to room or sub, as the sub is very neutral and the room pretty well treated. With room correction on top, this thing is as musical in the bass as any system I've ever heard. And it has output that has to be experienced :music:

In contrast, open baffle subs suffer from low output levels and lack of true deep-bass performance IMHO. But they do have very low distortion products due to lack of box-induced 'spring' effects, which is why some people like them.

yeah, i meant Infinite baffle, not open baffle. sigh. that's what happens when you dash off a question when you should be getting into the car and your wife's foot is tapping...

just off to the right of the CLS i have a biggish space under the stairs to the basement, about 160 cubic feet. and i have a dual voice coil 12" sub that is sitting idle. i could mount that sub into the wall under the stairs and create an IB sub for either music or HT and leave the depth pair for the other.

hmmm.

Hola Zaphod...I use my CLS full range without any cut. This is because my room is very small, the problem is the speed of the CLSs even with low frequency. So what I did first, was to get the best of them using my room to find the low frequency fundamentals and standing waves for the best natural double bass and counter bass as reference. The natural notes coming from them, makes me feel to have the bass player at the stage, with the other musicians, and not next to me. I love image, and I do love what they give me. I had tried a lot of different Martin Logan models, and the CLSs are the ones that are truly in my heart. On the other hand, the lowest musical note from a Bosendorfer big piano is an A giving a low frequency of 28.5 Hz. And this musical note, is not used on a regular piano songs, just a few works, because even for this big piano, it is very difficult to play it and resolve that low frequency. My point is, you do not need too much bass energy in your room...just enough for the lower fundamentals or subsonic harmonics of the musical notes. Listen to live un-amplified instruments as a reference, because you might get not natural resonance through electronic and speaker live sound. Good jazz recordings from RR or Chesky, Denon, DMP, Telarc, Propius, etc. could give you a direct recording and you can use them as a reference too. Put the crossover to the subs, and not through the CLSs...and adjust the level to match the missing low frequency sub harmonics, the deepest fundamentals... and listen your CLSs and the wonders that they do...perhaps this might like to you...cut the electronic crossover around 50Hz...so the upper bass will be handle only by the CLSs...try it, you might like it...happy listening,
Roberto.

I could not agree more with Roberto on this. My sub is set at 45 and it has plenty of bass. There is no boom! Stand up or double bass sounds like they are in the room.

Jeff

Jeff, Roberto - i hear what you're saying and i agree. i've run the depth on LFE only and left the CLS full range for music. but i've been hearing so much about getting the very bottom end off the CLS that i thought i'd try it.

but i don't want to lose the LFE connexion to the pair of depth.

so i want stereo depth for two channel, and a pair of depth for LFE. i want it all

if i can't do that however, then i do have the option of a an IB for one task or the other. that 200 cubic foot space under the stairs is so very convenient...

zaphod said:

so i want stereo depth for two channel, and a pair of depth for LFE.

Click to expand...

Refering to my previous post on subject, does you system have a problem with directing LFE to main channels or is there some other reason you can't use the method I recommend as it does exactly what you say you would prefer? Channel levels shouldn't be a problem as normally it is possible to match LFE level to other channels by increasing LFE level or decreasing level in other channels.

hey MPS,

no real problem with doing that, if the processor does the routing right. if it does then i am golden, but if not i will need to come up with another approach.

but you are right, if the processor does the summed LFE properly, then directing the LFE at the mains would work.

i can't test that right now because my we just moved into the new house and i'm at the planning stages right now. currently my HT looks like this:

Oracle in a box, hmmmm....:drool:

Jeff Zaret said:

I could not agree more with Roberto on this. My sub is set at 45 and it has plenty of bass. There is no boom! Stand up or double bass sounds like they are in the room.

Click to expand...

Same here....

MPS said:

Oracle in a box, hmmmm....:drool:

Click to expand...

sme IV and koetsu in another.... man, things have been boxed up since mid june, and the new room won't be finished for at least 5 more months... a year without logans or CRT.

DTB300 said:

Same here....

Click to expand...

so what you, and Jeff and Roberto are saying is that for music, the CLS should be fine by themselves with no sub. hmmm, that would make hooking up the depths a lot easier, but get rid of the need for the electronic Xover that i recently picked up.

in my old room (12x18x7) the bass was pretty darn solid. this new room is going to be similar in size (13x21x8) so maybe i should leave well enough alone...

The way I have my system setup now which gives me the best and more realistic bass reproduction is to run it from the secondary preamp outputs from my preamp to my sub. I believe I have the Depth set at 45db so it only engages when necessary.

I also had the LFE setup for HT and it what it did was create too much bass and at times bloated bass sound. This would show up when playing SACD or DVD-A's too. I have plenty of bass for HT applications. I actually went back in to the settings of my processor and told it I had no subwoofer at all! (Thanks for the suggestion Dan) This gave me the results I was looking for. Yes the explosions and whatever are still there with plenty of bottom end.

Just some food for thought

Jeff

zaphod said:

so what you, and Jeff and Roberto are saying is that for music, the CLS should be fine by themselves with no sub.

Click to expand...

I agreed with Jeff on his quote: "I could not agree more with Roberto on this. My sub is set at 45 and it has plenty of bass". While the CLS can play bass, it does not have the chest pumping levels most are looking for with HT. For Music, my sub is crossed over at 40 or 50Hz most of the time.

With the processor set to NO SUB, I run my mains full range, and then let my bass EQ system (not the processor) take care of the HP/LP Filters, Phase, cuts, volume levels, etc for the sub. For movies I change the xover point much higher, add some more low level details with a boost around 35Hz, and up the volume.

With this setup, I get the best of both worlds, but 2Ch is my main concern.

The CLS by themselves and sufficient enough for producing bass? It is very room dependent and also personal preference dependent.