need advice...towers vs bookshelf..advantages

[pearsall001]

Unless your towers can hit 20hz at 100db without breaking a sweat, they're not even close to being "full range". Generally speaking a pair of monitors (from the same line as the towers) with a sub, better yet 2 of them will out perform a pair of towers. Towers by design are a box full of comprimises, the bass being the biggest design flaw. They just can't compete against the pure quality bass coming from a sub.

Your AVR or amp will thank you for not having to waste power to the towers trying to produce true bass that it just can't reproduce. Also the location in the room for towers is more likely than not, the worst position for bass production. The sub can be placed for optimal bass reproduction & seemless integration with the monitors. Now there is some work involved with getting the combo just right...but man oh man the end result is well worth it!!!

Monitors on the other hand have superior mid & highs because of the design & room placement. Crossovers are another hodge podge design of towers, there's just too much going on in that single box.

I used to be a tower man until I got a taste of a monitor sub combo & now there's no turning back, as far as my ears are concerned.

[Beta Man]

^^^---

You have some nice gear.....

[STARSCREAM]

YES, the price for the Energy RC-70's is for brand new speakers and authorized dealer as well with warranty.

[Twitch9]

Originally Posted by StimpsonJCat

If you listen to any 2 or 2.1 channel music towers are the only way to go. For HT you could get away with bookshelves. I'd recommend a good sub for HT no matter which way you decide to go.

Some will disagree about bookshelves not being good enough for music (especially some high end ones).

I disagree with bookshelves not good for music, i auditioned the new Paradigm studio 10's and 20's v5 and they will blow most floor standing speakers away in the same price range. I have never heard that statement before that bookshelf speakers are not good for music.

[Squozen]

Originally Posted by StimpsonJCat

Some will disagree about bookshelves not being good enough for music (especially some high end ones).

I would absolutely disagree. A friend of mine has some beautiful Monitor Audio bookshelf speakers that sound stunning with music. As long as you have a well-integrated subwoofer to provide the low-end, bookshelf speakers are theoretically better than most tower speakers as they have stiffer panels and less resonance due to the lack of large woofers.

[jomari]

listen to some dynaudio focal 110's and this would change your mind regarding musical bookshelves. i hold my own regarding bookshelves can dish out as much as towers can when it comes to musical interest. you just have to pick the right one.

ive imparted my take on towers, bookshelves, and using towers as surrounds in a previous posting...

this may lead to a very opinionated discussion. the whole tower vs bookshelf speakers is a very subjective topic at times, and hopefully others can keep an open mind towards this.

as beta man mentioned earlier, sure some towers can handle lower frequencies compared to their counterparts, but sometimes (based on klipsch' reference and synergy line) sometimes can hold its own (of course, we are comparing the same line, the same drivers (size of course), and done in ideal conditions.

you have to remember that in a home theater setting tho, most of the lower frequencies will be handled by the subwoofer, care of beta. in two channel (no sub) listening tho, it also would be advisable to have a set of fronts that can handle that as well.

the great thing about quality bookshelves is that not only can it perform the mids and highs of a tower, but can be placed much more conveniently within the living conditions. you can also consider adjusting the height of the speaker in order to afix the tweeters towards the line of 'sight' so to speak to get better imaging, thus the different heights of speaker stands.

at times tho, i noticed that others would prefer to have all matching speakers (including the surrounds) as a 5.1 system, but id disagree. a good example is having someone use towers all throughout the room, completing his 5.1 with tonal and sonic balance. in retrospect, id rather have all that money you've placed in purchasing those two surround towers, and use that to have better front channels (mains to be exact, and if allowing, a matching center), and then minimize the amount you dedicate for the surrounds (as long as the surrounds are tonally matching your front stage to prevent localization).

again, this is just the way i see things, and well, as an opinion its quite subjective.

kinda got that part earlier. just wasnt sure.

invest your money in a great soundstage, fronts and center speakers, and then move towards the surrounds later on. not only will you get your moneys worth in the long run, you will enjoy years of sonic bliss when you know your hard earned money, time, and diligence in research and auditioning, has paid off.

on a quick whim, i say again,

you dont rush when you buy a house, or a car, why the hell would you do so with your home audio equipment?

Again, this is a matter of preference.

If you do plan to get towers, consider that they should be able to handle quite a lot more than its counterpart bookshelves to justify this. my colleagues and i have had numerous discussions regarding the fact that most bookshelf speakers have almost identical if not accomodating components that a tower would have. Id also consider that unless your towers can go to a decent lower frequency, you'd still end up setting your speakers at small and use the crossover settings to assist you.

Another factor to consider is the size of the room. With towers, you'd end up pulling em a bit farther due to its relation to the backwall, either giving you too much boom, or too little.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

W.A.F. be damned

Dimensions: 24 x 10.5 x 13 (HxWxD in inches) how's that for W.A.F. not very large at all (large for a bookself) Very solid speaker.