The Official Energy Speakers Thread

[callas01]

Originally Posted by BigAl87

All I can say is wow after listening to Dark Side of the Moon SACD in 5.0 track on my Energy speakers.

Who ever can experience SACD listening should try it. Most of the newest Bluray players now support that media in high Res format as any cd player or standard DVD/Bluray will still pay the cd layer of the SACD but not in the HD sound format.

Anyhow I'm glad I took the plunge on SACD and i'm looking forward to more HD audio in the near future.

I heard Dark Side of the Moon on SACD at Big Daddys house on his all bi-polar 10.6 setup. I must say my wife and I had a great time there and it was reuly a treat...... Does your Sony S-550 have SACD??? or did you play it on somehting else.

[BigAl87]

Originally Posted by callas01

I heard Dark Side of the Moon on SACD at Big Daddys house on his all bi-polar 10.6 setup. I must say my wife and I had a great time there and it was reuly a treat...... Does your Sony S-550 have SACD??? or did you play it on somehting else.

Nope only the new line of bdp-370 and up have it but I have a HK DVD-48 that reads them and it's quite impressive for audio honestly in fact I think it's the strongest pro of that player.

HEHE!!

Sells for 250$ on Amazon.

[MaCruz]

Good Morning Guys,

I'm looking for (1) One C-100 Bookshelf Speaker in Black to go 7.1. If anyone is willing to sell.. send me a PM.

I have a thread up in the trading forum and there's a guy that's selling his pair, but I only need just one. I might buy his set, but I rather wait to see if I can buy just 1. Thanks again for all the help on this thread.

[BigAl87]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

Good Morning Guys,

I'm looking for (1) One C-100 Bookshelf Speaker in Black to go 7.1. If anyone is willing to sell.. send me a PM.

I have a thread up in the trading forum and there's a guy that's selling his pair, but I only need just one. I might buy his set, but I rather wait to see if I can buy just 1. Thanks again for all the help on this thread.

You might as well try to find another C-C50 to match the 2 back channels or get the pair of c-100.

I think those 2 options are better and not to mention that I would doubt that anyone would get rid of only 1 C-100.

[MaCruz]

Originally Posted by BigAl87

You might as well try to find another C-C50 to match the 2 back channels or get the pair of c-100.

I think those 2 options are better and not to mention that I would doubt that anyone would get rid of only 1 C-100.

If I decided to get the pair, where would I hook up the 8th speaker on the receiver?

[BigAl87]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

If I decided to get the pair, where would I hook up the 8th speaker on the receiver?

LOL hehe I Totally agree with you but I think your best option is to get another C-C50.

Or you get rid of C-C50 but that wont be easy and get the C-100 pair.

[MaCruz]

Originally Posted by BigAl87

LOL hehe I Totally agree with you but I think your best option is to get another C-C50.

Or you get rid of C-C50 but that wont be easy and get the C-100 pair.

I'll probably just swap out the C-C50 and try to sell it.

Using the C-C50 on the rear sounds almost the same as the C-100

[Rebel6666]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

I'll probably just swap out the C-C50 and try to sell it.

Using the C-C50 on the rear sounds almost the same as the C-100

I would try to sell you CC-50 and buy the CC-100 make a hudge difference

[MaCruz]

Originally Posted by Rebel6666

I would try to sell you CC-50 and buy the CC-100 make a hudge difference

I have the C-C100 already. I use my C-C50 as my 6th speaker. See my HT pics.

[Rebel6666]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

I have the C-C100 already. I use my C-C50 as my 6th speaker. See my HT pics.

Oups sorry, Here is my set, It's been a year now I have it but no room to use it lol. I'm actually on the verge to finish my HT room in my basement.

Fronts 2 x C-500
Center C-C-100
Sub: S10.3
back and Surround 4x C-100

[MaCruz]

Originally Posted by Rebel6666

Oups sorry, Here is my set, It's been a year now I have it but no room to use it lol. I'm actually on the verge to finish my HT room in my basement.

Fronts 2 x C-500
Center C-C-100
Sub: S10.3
back and Surround 4x C-100

Man that's an awesome setup when you can set it up. Hmm.. I wonder how it will sound if I had the C-500

[Rebel6666]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

Man that's an awesome setup when you can set it up. Hmm.. I wonder how it will sound if I had the C-500

Well I never heard the C-300 but I heard the C-500 before I bought them and I must say that the sound was great, I always love Energy, My first HT was a In the Box Energy Take 1, which I still have and plays very good for a system that is 10 yeard old.

Bought the C-Serie too much early because I got a deal this full set for 1500 Taxe included Canadian money

[callas01]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

Man that's an awesome setup when you can set it up. Hmm.. I wonder how it will sound if I had the C-500

Originally Posted by Rebel6666

Well I never heard the C-300 but I heard the C-500 before I bought them and I must say that the sound was great, I always love Energy, My first HT was a In the Box Energy Take 1, which I still have and plays very good for a system that is 10 yeard old.

Bought the C-Serie too much early because I got a deal this full set for 1500 Taxe included Canadian money

The C-500s are a 2.5 way design or a sloped 3-way, however they feel it best to be called. Essentially the C-500s would have a little more pop on the low-end, however typical of a 2.5 ways speaker, the slam isn't heart pounding like a true 3 way speaker. A true 3-way has a crossover from the mid-range to the low-end typically in the 500-850 hz range, this is what gives it more concentration on the low-end slam and that heart thumping bass as its responsible for the frequencies between say 36hz up to 750hz, as all mid-range duties are handled by the Mid-Woofer from about 750-2.2k hz, then the Tweeter above 2.2k-20k hz, as an example. On a 2.5 way speaker the crossover is typically slightly lower then the tweeter crossover, so say the tweeter and mid-woofer crossover at 2.4k hz, then the mid-woofer and woofer will crossover at about 1.2k -1.7k hz. Making the bass driver more responsible for handling some upper mid-bass, mid-bass and low-end bass combined, which ultimately detracts(NOT ALWAYS) from the deep bass you get from a 3-way speaker.

Expect that the C-500s would have some extra low-end bass, but ultimately I don't think it would have a sub like sound to it. Perhaps in 2-channel you may find that you still want a sub, unlike say the RC-50s where a sub may not be needed because it has deep bass and less responsible for upper and mid bass duties.

Hope that helps you out some.

[MaCruz]

callas01,

The C-300 is about the same as the C-500? It's just smaller. I'm looking at those right now.

[callas01]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

callas01,

The C-300 is about the same as the C-500? It's just smaller. I'm looking at those right now.

what do you mean, Smaller?

the C-300 is a 2-way design single driver and single tweeter array, the C-500 is a dual driver and single tweeter array in a 2.5-way design.

[MaCruz]

Originally Posted by callas01

what do you mean, Smaller?

The overall size? I didn't really get into the specs of it but it said smaller to fit in smaller rooms
http://www.energy-speakers.com/na-en...-300-overview/

[callas01]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

The overall size? I didn't really get into the specs of it but it said smaller to fit in smaller rooms
http://www.energy-speakers.com/na-en...-300-overview/

Ummm... yea I guess, its only 2 inches shorter and about 2.5 inches less depth, not really a smaller speaker by any real sense. Unless the footprint was say 14.5" deep on the C-500s and 9.75" on the C-300, say like Totem speakers, they are very shallow, 7.1" - 9.6" on the Arros to the Hawks. However the depth on the C-300s is about 12 inches.

Remember that some people want to THINK that their speakers are small and compact, but the C-300s is not small and compact. Small-ER, sure Ill grant that, but some people need the marketing to say that so they can pass it past a wife or not feel like their room is gonna be swallowed up by a large 1980's type full-range speaker.

[MaCruz]

Originally Posted by callas01

Ummm... yea I guess, its only 2 inches shorter and about 2.5 inches less depth, not really a smaller speaker by any real sense. Unless the footprint was say 14.5" deep on the C-500s and 9.75" on the C-300, say like Totem speakers, they are very shallow, 7.1" - 9.6" on the Arros to the Hawks. However the depth on the C-300s is about 12 inches.

Remember that some people want to THINK that their speakers are small and compact, but the C-300s is not small and compact. Small-ER, sure Ill grant that, but some people need the marketing to say that so they can pass it past a wife or not feel like their room is gonna be swallowed up by a large 1980's type full-range speaker.

I gottcha. Yeah I had to feel that if I had the C-300 coming off of the C-200, it won't benefit me as I'll probably be better off with the C-500. I think I should just stick to what I have and possibly just buy that pair of C-100 for a 7.1 since the C series is discontinued.

[Rebel6666]

Originally Posted by callas01

The C-500s are a 2.5 way design or a sloped 3-way, however they feel it best to be called. Essentially the C-500s would have a little more pop on the low-end, however typical of a 2.5 ways speaker, the slam isn't heart pounding like a true 3 way speaker. A true 3-way has a crossover from the mid-range to the low-end typically in the 500-850 hz range, this is what gives it more concentration on the low-end slam and that heart thumping bass as its responsible for the frequencies between say 36hz up to 750hz, as all mid-range duties are handled by the Mid-Woofer from about 750-2.2k hz, then the Tweeter above 2.2k-20k hz, as an example. On a 2.5 way speaker the crossover is typically slightly lower then the tweeter crossover, so say the tweeter and mid-woofer crossover at 2.4k hz, then the mid-woofer and woofer will crossover at about 1.2k -1.7k hz. Making the bass driver more responsible for handling some upper mid-bass, mid-bass and low-end bass combined, which ultimately detracts(NOT ALWAYS) from the deep bass you get from a 3-way speaker.

Expect that the C-500s would have some extra low-end bass, but ultimately I don't think it would have a sub like sound to it. Perhaps in 2-channel you may find that you still want a sub, unlike say the RC-50s where a sub may not be needed because it has deep bass and less responsible for upper and mid bass duties.

Hope that helps you out some.

Thanks for the in fo my friend but IMO there must be more of a difference than just the bass, if you take and compare the C-C-50 to the C-100 the difference is remarquable between the two of them, when I bought my set the salemans made me hear both and the difference is more than I thought taht is why I bought the C-C-100. Now I could not comapre with the C-300 as they didn't had tem on the floor for try-out but the salesman told me that I was better off with the C-500 for yes bass but also the sound in general. This also goes with my C-100 bookshelf speakers, compared the them with the C-50's and the difference is quite remarqualble.

IMO I think it's a matter of opinion but If i could have tryed both of those like I did with the centers then I could debate more of it.

[callas01]

Originally Posted by MaCruz

I gottcha. Yeah I had to feel that if I had the C-300 coming off of the C-200, it won't benefit me as I'll probably be better off with the C-500. I think I should just stick to what I have and possibly just buy that pair of C-100 for a 7.1 since the C series is discontinued.

The C-300s would give you a little better bass... don't know how much you would hear it tho... maybe a little, if I were you I would stay with what i have, unless a great deal on any of the towers comes up... then it may be worth it. esp, if they are the C-500s