Topic: Bookshelf or Floorstander

[aHobbit]

... But admiittedly there's a lot more work to be done with bookself-sub combinations that may not be there with FS.  Making sure that you achieve a seamless integration between the two is one very important aspect to work on in such a set-up.   

...

Not only this, but also with sub/bookshelf combo, you remove compromises in getting the best audio - because you can now place the bookshelf to a position of better imaging, and position the sub separately to a position of better LF propagation - this is the area where endless work will not even solve FS proposition in coming up with the best in LF/mid positioning as they require different placement, unless of course, you are prepared to face your compromises (I mean, more compromises on top of what is inherent in any speaker).

... But admiittedly there's a lot more work to be done with bookself-sub combinations that may not be there with FS.  Making sure that you achieve a seamless integration between the two is one very important aspect to work on in such a set-up.   

...

Of course, there will always be initial work, but with sub/shelf, it will pay with maximum audiophile performance (100 for LF/ 100 for mid) of your setup and probably no need of further rework - while with FS, you will never get the best of both worlds (LF/mid), always negotiate with your compromise (50/50 for both LF/mid, or more LF, or more mid imaging - choose 1), and probably constantly re working because something is not that right in your ear!     

[accastil]

If we're talking about music (not HT), floorstanders are best.
Floorstanders generally convey a better sense of space and depth in recordings
which bookshelves that rely solely on the subwoofers can struggle to present.
 

this would of course factor in the cost object...FS and BS of the same pricepoint in comparison, i would go for the BS. given a cost-no-object comparison, FS would outperform a bookshelf..but then again, this is on the category of watt puppies, egglestonworks, and other insanely expensive bookshelves...
for a practical set up, i would still go for a sub/BS combo over a lone FS. the clarity and definition you get out of a BS can never be beaten by a so-so FS.

[aHobbit]

...
 the clarity and definition you get out of a BS can never be beaten by a so-so FS.
...

Let me highlight this point again ... indeed!!!   

... and to extend the point, the flexibility, the accuracy, and the audio spectrum completeness you can get by using BS/SUB can never be beaten by any expensive FS in a typical listening room!     

A good BS does not necessarily need to be expensive ... in the same way that expensive bookshelf are not necessarily good!

[qguy]

its all about compromises, in a smaller room a bookshelf would have an advantage when it comes to imaging, however FS has the edge when it comes to dynamics. Even when paired with a subwoofer, a BS/Sub can only do so much. I have had several bookshelves in the past from AE, Heybrook, Celestions, JPW  and currently a large Usher X-719, even with the ushers X-719 (BS)  7 inch woofer, coupled with a pair of 12 inch subs, dynamics music specially drum test tracks, the sound is...it shall I say "shrunk". On the other hand my KEF 105.2  (FS) can "realistically" duplicate the dynamics and slam of the drum test track.  These were some of the compromises that I had to accept, when I decided to retire my KEF 105.2. The only thing that the Ushers do that is better that the KEF 105.2 is imaging/dissapearing act, and this is one aspect that I am currently enjoying  in my setup

I would not compare a good BS with a "so so" FS with a small 6.5 inch woofer. The same way that I would not compare a "so so" BS with a good FS.

[oweidah]

apples vs. oranges?

for me its bookshelves. nothing against FS as long as you got the space and amp power (if needed) to let out its full potential.

[MAtZTER]

I have been home auditioning several bookshelf speakers lately. And my, to my astonishment, some BS can even "out-bass" my previous FS in my 12sqm listening room. When I was a newbie, all I wanted was a FS cuz its porma & no need for stands, also thought that BS's were wussies. How wrong I was...

FS in a small room can be boomy IMExperience, Specially if your room is bare walled. We used to live in a bare walled condo before I moved in to our current place. This exp taught me to place bass traps on my corners.

I have also changed from a FS setup to a BS setup for my HT. It was really hard on my part to let go of the FS cuz of the hidden "basta FS dapat kasi porma" mentality, but with my room size & the results of my experiments, no regrets...

[Platinum]

It depends on what Bookshelf or Floorstander you refer to.
The ProAc bookshelf I heard from REM's place "CRUSHES" my REL-B&W combo to bits and pieces! .
Not only in sound but in its cost too!

[RU9]

The ProAc bookshelf I heard from REM's place "CRUSHES" my REL-B&W combo to bits and pieces! .
Not only in sound but in its cost too!

How???
The ProAc will not go down to 20 Hz??? What type of music? Rock, dance, hip-hop?

[MAtZTER]

It depends on what Bookshelf or Floorstander you refer to.
The ProAc bookshelf I heard from REM's place "CRUSHES" my REL-B&W combo to bits and pieces! .
Not only in sound but in its cost too!

HuWOW! Baka mapa home audition ako ng ProAc ng di oras sa nabasa kong to ah. 

Studio 110 ba? or Tablette?

[synchro_01]

if you are in this hobby long enough you will sooner or later realize that the porma factor or the size factor has nothing to do on how a speaker will sound.

For me its not about how a book shelf speaker can beat a floorstander or vice versa. There will be no clear cut winner on this one. There are examples of each variety that can out perform the other. For me Its not true that floorstanders are hard to drive as compared to BS. This is totally dependent on the specs of the speaker itself and not on the size of the cabinet. Its also not right to generalize that FS speakers cant touch BS in terms of imaging and SQ.  One can beat the other in any given time. It will all depend on the speaker model, set up, positioning, associated electronics. Floorstanders boomy in small rooms? there are bass shy floorstanders that can sound just right in a small room. Positioning problem perhaps thats why it sounds boomy. So many variables and combinations to consider.


 

[av_phile1]

Not only this, but also with sub/bookshelf combo, you remove compromises in getting the best audio - because you can now place the bookshelf to a position of better imaging, and position the sub separately to a position of better LF propagation - this is the area where endless work will not even solve FS proposition in coming up with the best in LF/mid positioning as they require different placement, unless of course, you are prepared to face your compromises (I mean, more compromises on top of what is inherent in any speaker).

Exactly.  BS allows you to position the speakers to achieve the best stereo stage imaging possible, independently of positioning the sub/s to achive the best bass response for your room.   And it's a common observation that the speaker position for best imaging is not the same and is often in opposition with the best postion for good bass response.  For instance, best bass is often near corners or boundaries which is the worst position for getting the best stereo imaging.

Hence, in general,  FS are really compromising best stereo imaging and best bass response.  But ofcourse there are exceptions with excellent FS models out there designed precisely to minimize these compromises inherent in FS.  That's why there are FS models meant to be positioned further away from boundaries to deliver both great imaging and great bass.  Just a matter of finding which FS model can really deliver both in spades. 

[synchro_01]

one thing inherent that I noticed in the SQ of bookshelves that I have previously owned...they may have the uncanny ability to sound good in coherence, imaging depth, width but almost always they have a hard time getting the height of the soundstage.  Example of this is that you may get that feeling that Jacintha is singing right in the middle and right smack front of you if you close your eyes on a BS system but if you pin point the height of the stage, she will always sound like she is 3 to 4 feet tall only a midget singer perhaps hehe.  it kinda ruins the sense of realism if you lack that aspect in imaging.  getting a system to image in the center is the easy part. getting the stage height, width and depth is the hard part and often the most difficult to achieve not to mention pace, rythm and timing.  

[av_phile1]

And that is perhaps why some receivers have this "height" channels, using the 8th and 9th channels to drive speakers a meter or so above the fronts to convey a perception of height.  I think the Yamaha Z9 has this.   

And those 6ft and 7ft tower speakers with an array of dome or ribbon tweeters and mid rangers from head to foot can do a convincing job to impart that total immersion to stereo image.  Like those towering Genesis speakers. 

But I think speakers with respectable on axis vertical dispersion trait should be able to address this perception of height adequately. 

[synchro_01]

well for me adding extra channels and synthesizing the sound for these channels by a home theater receiver in order to come up with a realistic sense of the height aspect in imaging isnt my piece of cake and I believe it will never will be.

6ft and 7 ft towers are just the ultimate in the speaker world but the entry price for these giants are just to much to swing by mere ordinary mortals. I have heard speakers replicate the height aspect but are much much less expensive as compared to the Dunlavys, Evidence series, Genesis etc.  Examples of these speakers are the ff: Model 3A Vandersteen (48 inches high) and a custom made Voigt speaker. for me those towers and behemoths give new meaning to the word REALISTIC 

[av_phile1]

The vandersteens are great, specially their subs with three 8" woofers.

[qguy]

I once stacked a Celestion Sl6si on top of two LARGE floorstanders, the tweeter was in the 6.5  height, tilted about 20 or so degrees, It reminded me of the Wilson X-1, very imposing and scary in my smallish room,   what did I get ?...a singer that was singing and standing in front of me !!! it was more realistic compared to the "midget 4 foot singer" when the BS was in the regular stands. I reckon this is the same presentation that some of the owners of super floorstanders get

one thing inherent that I noticed in the SQ of bookshelves that I have previously owned...they may have the uncanny ability to sound good in coherence, imaging depth, width but almost always they have a hard time getting the height of the soundstage.  Example of this is that you may get that feeling that Jacintha is singing right in the middle and right smack front of you if you close your eyes on a BS system but if you pin point the height of the stage, she will always sound like she is 3 to 4 feet tall only a midget singer perhaps hehe.  it kinda ruins the sense of realism if you lack that aspect in imaging.  getting a system to image in the center is the easy part. getting the stage height, width and depth is the hard part and often the most difficult to achieve not to mention pace, rythm and timing.  

[synchro_01]

qguy

precisely what i mean. People might rave on how good a bookshelf speaker sounds but it you are really after the accurate reproduction of the 3D image (height, width and depth) then the height factor would be almost always be compromised in a bookshelf set up that is about 36 inches high only so in short you only get 2D imaging unless you consider listening to midget singers as realistic . We are only talking about soundstage here and we still have to factor in Pace, Rythm and Timing not to mention Coherence, Accuracy. 

[accastil]

one thing inherent that I noticed in the SQ of bookshelves that I have previously owned...they may have the uncanny ability to sound good in coherence, imaging depth, width but almost always they have a hard time getting the height of the soundstage.  Example of this is that you may get that feeling that Jacintha is singing right in the middle and right smack front of you if you close your eyes on a BS system but if you pin point the height of the stage, she will always sound like she is 3 to 4 feet tall only a midget singer perhaps hehe.  it kinda ruins the sense of realism if you lack that aspect in imaging.  getting a system to image in the center is the easy part. getting the stage height, width and depth is the hard part and often the most difficult to achieve not to mention pace, rythm and timing.  

what BS was this? try anything from the 30T pricepoint and above...see the difference between a good BS and a good FS....a good example would be proac, studio20..just make sure the electronics are as good.

[synchro_01]

Accastil,

Through the years I have tried and owned the ff bookshelves:
Dahlquist DQ20
Canton S plus
B&W DM302
JBL minimonitors

I have the ff bookshelves on hand right now:
Polk Audio M series minimonitors
Dynaudio Audience 40
Dynaudio Audience 50 (The multi awarded model...not the 52)
B&W Nautilus 805N

As you can see, im a big fan of Bookshelf type of speakers. A lot of them are imaging monsters in spite of their dimunitive size plus there are models that sound stupendously loud for its size (A50). Each model has its own strengths and weaknesses. Presentation and sonic signatures are so different to each other but one thing that you will notice after you listen to properly set up tower type loudspeakers is that the small bookshelves have a hard time replicating the height factor of the soundstage criteria (and of course the scale and bass weight). it just hovers around 4ft tall and thats it. I can get the depth and the width right but the height stills fall short of expectations for me. I listen to a variety of musical genres and at a level that I believe to be loud for others already.  Now for the towers, its different because of the physical size of the cabinets plus the location of the drivers really project the image around 5 feet or more making it a lot realistic to my ears. Kung bakit pa kasi ako naka pag audition ng malalaking speakers eh.... :'(

[av_phile1]

Then just place the bookshelf speakers on a 4ft tall stand.  That would be about the same as a 5ft tall FS.  The important thing is that the tweets are approximately of the same height as your ears when you're seated in your sweet spot, if the speakers are  D'Appolito arrayed.  Or midway between the tweets and mid driver for most 2-way speakers.  BS can actually give better flexibility with this as you can always vary or customize the stand's height.  Most afforadable FS are just 3 - 3.5 ft tall.   So may want to put them on short stands.

[markmlists]

Then just place the bookshelf speakers on a 4ft tall stand.  That would be about the same as a 5ft tall FS.  The important thing is that the tweets are approximately of the same height as your ears when you're seated in your sweet spot, if the speakers are  D'Appolito arrayed.  .....

or use a lower listening chair. but true, most floorstanders are really "punggok" compared to a bs on stands. This is the reason why 6-12"  "floorstander platforms"  have a market 

[synchro_01]

Maybe the real point of contention for me would be how a two way bookshelf speaker measure up to a two way floorstander (same manufacturer, same drivers). would the added bass eight edge out the small bookshelves or would bass control win it for the small bookshelves?  we cant compare BS + sub to floorstanders because that would be unfair. if you augment a floorstander w/ a sub then the comparison would be fair.  speaker to speaker lang dapat.

[oweidah]

Maybe the real point of contention for me would be how a two way bookshelf speaker measure up to a two way floorstander (same manufacturer, same drivers). would the added bass eight edge out the small bookshelves or would bass control win it for the small bookshelves?  we cant compare BS + sub to floorstanders because that would be unfair. if you augment a floorstander w/ a sub then the comparison would be fair.  speaker to speaker lang dapat.

you could start comparing the ff bookshelves and floorstanders of the same brand:

wharfedale diamond 8.2BS vs. 8.3FS
B&W 602BS vs. 602.5FS or 603FS
mordauntshort 902BS vs. 904FS
wharfedale diamond 9.2BS vs. 9.4FS (?)

or use a lower listening chair. but true, most floorstanders are really "punggok" compared to a bs on stands. This is the reason why 6-12"  "floorstander platforms"  have a market 

mismo! usually some speaker companies make a bookshelf version and a floorstander version using the same driver (woofer) size; ex. above is the wharfedale diamonds 8.2 / 8.3 and 9.2 / 9.4- same 6.5"woofer 1"tweeter same crossover point= 2k. perhaps its a marketing ploy - kung ayaw mo gumastos para sa speaker stands, eto kunin mo next model - floorstander.

for "height" factor - try wharfedale diamond 9.6 

[synchro_01]

Oweidah

yes a lot of companies manufacture BS and FS that have the same driver compliment but almost always the FS has been tuned to put out a much lower freq response which results into higher bass slam or bigger output at the low end freq spectrum. They dont manufacture those FS for "porma's" sake and they even have identical specs than that of the BS version meaning all you need is the same amount of power to drive both types which totally negates the notion that FS are harder to drive.

they manufacture those to suit different needs (room requirement, positioning options) and different tastes (low end extension,bass control, coherence)....plus of course they are assured that no matter what your preference are they have a chance to get your hard earned cash hehe 

maybe if we could do a shootout between those models that you mentioned then once and for all we will have an objective/subjective answer to this FS VS. BS thing. One cant do a reliable conclusion by utilizing speakers from different brands/models. so many different parameters and factors that can influence the outcome. BTW the 9.6 is one big speaker for a typical medium sized room. heard it once at a shop in Makati and it looked mighty impressive although it sounded kinda confused when the music began to be demanding (orchestral accompaniment usually). Oh well...thats a different story altogether 

[oweidah]

Oweidah

yes a lot of companies manufacture BS and FS that have the same driver compliment but almost always the FS has been tuned to put out a much lower freq response which results into higher bass slam or bigger output at the low end freq spectrum. They dont manufacture those FS for "porma's" sake and they even have identical specs than that of the BS version meaning all you need is the same amount of power to drive both types which totally negates the notion that FS are harder to drive.

they manufacture those to suit different needs (room requirement, positioning options) and different tastes (low end extension,bass control, coherence)....plus of course they are assured that no matter what your preference are they have a chance to get your hard earned cash hehe 

maybe if we could do a shootout between those models that you mentioned then once and for all we will have an objective/subjective answer to this FS VS. BS thing. One cant do a reliable conclusion by utilizing speakers from different brands/models. so many different parameters and factors that can influence the outcome. BTW the 9.6 is one big speaker for a typical medium sized room. heard it once at a shop in Makati and it looked mighty impressive although it sounded kinda confused when the music began to be demanding (orchestral accompaniment usually). Oh well...thats a different story altogether 

sir synchro_01,

i dont believe people buy FS just for "porma" factor. as i posted, if the customer doesnt want to spend for speaker stands to pair with the BS then they could go for the FS version. they may have the same driver size, impedance, sensitivity, even the same crossover point. the similarities ends there. sound quality is another matter.

re:9.6 i gave that example in response to markmlists post - certainly 9.6 aint a "punggok" FS

tho i have never heard the 9.6 singing orchestra/ classical.
yung narinig mo na 9.6 pwede rin hindi matched sa gears na kapartner nya- baka mas bagay sa ibang amp or a change of cables might do the trick etc.

last week i enjoyed listening to a fellow member's 9.6 driven by an amx integrated tube amp el34pp- ultralinear and triode mode using an ordinary sony cdp and biwired- chordcarnival silverplus LF and qed silver anniversary xt HF played some vocals, some rock never impressed me that it was dazed & confused.

[synchro_01]

oweidah

I also heard the 9.6 belt out rock tunes...solid tumunog  sa classical and fast orchestral works lang medyo parang hirap syang integrate yung 4 drivers to sound as one and make the speaker disappear. Maybe its just my preference  cheers bro

[oweidah]

oweidah

I also heard the 9.6 belt out rock tunes...solid tumunog  sa classical and fast orchestral works lang medyo parang hirap syang integrate yung 4 drivers to sound as one and make the speaker disappear. Maybe its just my preference  cheers bro

Synchro_01

yeah kanya-kanya lang talaga sa audio. cheers!

sana may makapag-post actual user reviews/comparisons of BS vs. FS from same brands ex. wharfedale 8.2 vs. 8.3 / 9.2 vs. 9.4,  B&W602 vs. 602.5 or 603, Mordauntshort 902 vs. 904.
tnx 

[MAtZTER]

if you are in this hobby long enough you will sooner or later realize that the porma factor or the size factor has nothing to do on how a speaker will sound.

Yes brotha! I had already seeen the light! Jolly luya! 

But I still cant help it if the "porma factor" comes into play even now when I am looking for new speakers, whether BS or FS. Its just part of my personal preferences. I just dont like the plain vanilla looking speakers. Been looking for real wood veneer or piano finish BS's lately in my auditions, SQ is still of primary importance though. At least you have something cool looking to stare at while you listen to music.  Also it adds points to the WAF, wife acceptance factor  .

Just me.

Floorstanders boomy in small rooms? there are bass shy floorstanders that can sound just right in a small room. Positioning problem perhaps thats why it sounds boomy. 

Hmm, I cant understand why you would choose a "bass shy" FS. I thought that one of the reasons you go for FS is the added bass. Maybe you mean "tight bass" , like I heard with Dynaudio FS.

Positioning, perhaps. I was just too lazy to type the whole scenario, " In my experience, a 2 woofer, rear ported, 1m tall, 25 cm wide floorstander positioned at 30 cm from the sides & 60 cm from the rear wall, using xx receiver in a bare walled place (plus measurements), was sometimes boomy." just not me

But at least the words "in my experience" are there. Other experiences can be different & they are welcome to share theirs. Nobody is claiming anything as fact here, just subjective observations. 

[aHobbit]

sir synchro_01,

... pwede rin hindi matched sa gears na kapartner nya- baka mas bagay sa ibang amp or a change of cables might do the trick etc...

Unless all variables are controlled, the shootout will accomplish nothing - and will not even be a conclusive thing to determine if FS is better than BS.

the 3-dimensional thing in stereo audio is non-existent - (I think I remember this in one interview with Harman founders, and I agree) - in multi-channel 5.1, the 3 dimensional exists.

In my quest to determine my favorite amplifier, I had an event I did with my brothers. Having 5 amps to audition on a set of FS. I tried a branded surplus, and the imaging is good right on our listening seat. Followed by the next 1, and so on until 5 amplifiers go the rigors of tests. Findings?

We are quite perplexed by the variation - what contributed to what? 1 amplifier put the image right in the level of my listening position, another 1 sound like crap. Tried to find the answer, and I found out, the image is at 2 feet above my level of listening position (meaning, if I want the image, I have to adjust my seat 2 feet above). In the 3rd amplifier, the image is near the floor, another, at the exit door      .

So people dont want midget singer, I seconded the one who suggest put your speaker higher!    - if the image is down low. If the image is high there, put your speaker near the floor - or probably just adjust your listening level position.

I remember putting my floorstander on a stand, because I want to adjust the image to my listening level!    - or could have opted to be satisfied listening seated on the floor!     

Matching your speakers with the right amp, aiming it in the right listening spot, playing them in the right acoustical environment, and complementing them with the right compensator (as in SUBW for the BS) - will be rewarded with the best imaging plus the slam and LF propagation.

FS still has 2 challenges inherent into it as it is, (1) the compromises on each driver, and (2) the combo of mid/hi & LF in 1 box. BS/SUBW removed the challenge#2.

[MAtZTER]

For me Its not true that floorstanders are hard to drive as compared to BS.

Now this I did not mention in this thread. Maybe you are referring to some of my posts in other threads.

Sir, maybe for you its not true cuz I have the impression you do not use entry level gears at all . Almost any speaker you can throw at your high end gears/electronics will sound good  .

But for me & the regular Joe (or Juan), the majority in this forum who use entry level gears, maybe its a different case. My observations are mostly for HT & concerns entry level gears. I would like to clarify that I actually meant that FS "sound better" w/ upper class gears, but wont they all?  There is no spec for "sound better" , not even the spec of sensitivity. IME, FS w/ some underpowered entry level AVR's do not sound good at all, but thats me. If there will be a speaker shootout, make sure there are those 14k receivers for test as well.

This is totally dependent on the specs of the speaker itself and not on the size of the cabinet.

If you are referring to sensitivity, I have auditioned enough FS & BS the past month to disagree with "specs" based on my experience.

I wouldnt always rely on specs for everything. Speakers are like cars or people. You can read the specs, Bio datas for people, brochures for cars. But you wouldnt buy a car based on specs alone, or hire someone based on biodata. Will marrying a 34-24-34 woman guarantee a long happy blissfull mariage? (mail order bride/ arranged marriage anyone?) LOL. You have to know them more by being with them. I wont use "audition them" cuz it sounds green: like audition your secretary or audition Inday comes into mind...

Anyway, one example is that I have auditioned 86 sensitivity BS & a 89db FS w/ 2 woofers w/ the same low powered amp. The 86db BS was LOUD & sounded much better, the 89db FS could barely be audible.

In my auditions in audio shops, this amp rocked an 89db BS so I wanted to use it w/ the same brand FS with two additional woofers (3 woofers) @ 91 sensitivity. The shop owner claimed it wont be able to power it well. I said "But its 91 db!, sabi sa pdvd kaya daw yan!". Let me give you this store owner's response: "Audio is not only about specs or numbers, some in this hobby are 'by the book', specs driven people, but in my experience w/ all these speakers, you have to really test them yourself to know if an amp can really power them well."

2 days later I met another experienced hobbyist who also auditioned many FS & BS speakers in his search for his, He also rallied the store owner's viewpoint on specs. But there are some FS brands that can truly be easy to drive based on specs. But not all...

It will all depend on the speaker model, set up, positioning, associated electronics.  So many variables and combinations to consider.

Just like you said, so many factors to consider... I agree with you on that one. 

all for the sake of friendly discussion