# Adding a second HSU VTF-15H MK2 overkill?



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

My room is 14x20 with a 12' cathedral ceiling (8' walls and 12' at peak running the length of the room). This brings my total cu-ft of my room to just a smidge under 3,000. about 2925 to my calc. Currently using one HSU VTF-15H MK2 and the performance is really good but was considering adding a second only for headroom, more lower end db and most say will result in better frequency response.

Do you guys think it will be overkill?


----------



## willis7469 (Jan 31, 2014)

Nope. For movies especially. The space isn't that big so I'd upgrade my speakers first.


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

Agreed, you'll get all of that.


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

willis7469 said:


> Nope. For movies especially. The space isn't that big so I'd upgrade my speakers first.


+1

For a single sub the OP made a good choice, but the speakers are definitely on the small side. Perhaps that might be a better upgrade candidate.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

Well I only got this sub based on the recommendations here.

I do plan on eventually moving to the golden ear speaker setup. The NHT's were hooked up to my computer and now I'm speakerless on my PC. 

I do know I'm really lacking in the 100-250hz department which is where alot of gun fire/explosions are at. The krell does push these NHT alot better then the Denon so they actually perform very well for what they are but yes.... speakers are planned for the near future. 

So... better speakers before second sub. Gotcha.


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

Depending on where the sub is located you might try playing with the crossover frequency in the AVR.
Looks like the sub is fully capable of approaching 200Hz.
http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=100&mset=112 
If the sub is up front between the front mains you may be able to get the kick you want.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

chashint said:


> Depending on where the sub is located you might try playing with the crossover frequency in the AVR.
> Looks like the sub is fully capable of approaching 200Hz.
> http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=100&mset=112
> If the sub is up front between the front mains you may be able to get the kick you want.


Right now my NHT mains are 120" apart and are 8" off the wall. My sub sits in between them but is located right next to the right main (on the inside of the two).

Even with this location localization for me becomes a problem. I have them crossed over at 80hz right now.

Ideally I want all 5 channels capable of low end and plan on using 4 towers and a center channel under the screen. The rear towers will get stands to have them 2' higher than the front mains. Mains I am looking at was the Golden Ear Triton three or the new five. They have a frequency response down to around 25hz. Based on that I would end up having dual HSU subs and have them handle all the low end below 60hz.

I was hoping that the dual subs and the capable mains would give me enough headroom to never have an issue and could have any output I needed.


----------



## willis7469 (Jan 31, 2014)

I like the idea of 5 towers. Especially that you've mentioned getting them up in the air. The reason I would caution against this is twofold. 1: you won't be able to angle the "rears" tweeters toward you, and 2: I don't know that you'd be able to utilize towers in the rear to their potential due to content.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

well I would prefer 5 towers. Only issue with that is my room size. my room is 14.25' x 20.75' but I have my screen on the long wall and my couch along the other long wall giving me a viewing distance of 13'. 

By using a tower for a center I would have to mount the screen off the wall by about 16" and that reduces the viewing distance. Don't get me wrong I would prefer a tower and an AT screen and have the front three lined up perfect as this is ideal but I have to compromise on the center channel.

My upgrade path will be to upgrade the front three with two towers as mains and a matching center and then later on move those mains to the rear and get better mains.

For example... keep the NHT as rears for now but upgrade the mains to a Triton seven, and a XL center. Then later after that move the sevens to the rear and upgrade the mains to Triton Threes. All while adding a second HSU. This is my ultimate long term goal....


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

Your plan seems like a good one to me.
Just crack open the piggy bank and place your orders.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

chashint said:


> Your plan seems like a good one to me.
> Just crack open the piggy bank and place your orders.


my wife still remembers the fact I spent $300 5 years ago on 5 NHT speakers all while I try to explain it to her that they were a bargain....

she thinks the sub only cost me $200 LOL..........


----------



## Insearchof (Oct 21, 2014)

Bmxer241 said:


> Ideally I want all 5 channels capable of low end and plan on using 4 towers and a center channel under the screen. The rear towers will get stands to have them 2' higher than the front mains. Mains I am looking at was the Golden Ear Triton three or the new five. They have a frequency response down to around 25hz. Based on that I would end up having dual HSU subs and have them handle all the low end below 60hz.
> 
> I was hoping that the dual subs and the capable mains would give me enough headroom to never have an issue and could have any output I needed.


If you plan on setting the crossover at 60hz why do you need 4 towers that are capable into the 20's?
Unless using in 2 channel mode for music without a sub/subs, there's not much reason to have speakers that can play that low? Or maybe I'm missing something.
If setting the crossover at 60hz, the front speakers probably only need to play maybe into the 40's? I'm not sure I'd go with a tower that has +/- 3db @ 49hz but low 40's should suffice. Maybe.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

Insearchof said:


> If you plan on setting the crossover at 60hz why do you need 4 towers that are capable into the 20's?
> Unless using in 2 channel mode for music without a sub/subs, there's not much reason to have speakers that can play that low? Or maybe I'm missing something.
> If setting the crossover at 60hz, the front speakers probably only need to play maybe into the 40's? I'm not sure I'd go with a tower that has +/- 3db @ 49hz but low 40's should suffice. Maybe.


basically headroom. I want a 1000hp vette so I can get maximum milage lol. Right now I just got my system up and running so it's baby steps. 

Not sure where to move next but I know the speakers need to come soon but was mainly seeing if a second sub would be overkill and just stick to one.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

A second sub is never overkill but I also agree that you should upgrade the speakers for your front left and right channels first. There are many speakers under $1000 that would preform very well. There is no need to get speakers that can run full range on your surrounds.


----------



## willis7469 (Jan 31, 2014)

Insearchof said mostly what I was going to but I'll add that towers in the back are also non conducive because of placeability. IMO(maybe no others) surrounds should be around 6' off the ground to the tweeter and angled down, similar to "toe in, but more like "toe down" and slightly forward. IME, surrounds at ear height don't support the surround "bubble". You did mention raising the rest towers, but I think they'd end up outside the window of dispersion, and wouldn't blend good. Fwiw, my surrounds are rated to 45hz, but I've crossed them at 60 and 80. Never noticed a difference during playback. I would buy the largest,most capable speakers you can fit on the wall.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

willis7469 said:


> Insearchof said mostly what I was going to but I'll add that towers in the back are also non conducive because of placeability. IMO(maybe no others) surrounds should be around 6' off the ground to the tweeter and angled down, similar to "toe in, but more like "toe down" and slightly forward. IME, surrounds at ear height don't support the surround "bubble". You did mention raising the rest towers, but I think they'd end up outside the window of dispersion, and wouldn't blend good. Fwiw, my surrounds are rated to 45hz, but I've crossed them at 60 and 80. Never noticed a difference during playback. I would buy the largest,most capable speakers you can fit on the wall.


I can fit a tower haha. yes, angled down and in.

Look at my phone panoramic of my room you can see the surrounds and they are angled down by 10 degrees and are exactly 30" higher than the mains. I believe it was 64" from floor to tweeter while my mains are 38" from floor to tweeter. The center is angled up at 10 degrees as it sits lower. This is my intial setup and I literally just got this going on Saturday. 

I would build stands for the towers instead of wall mounting. but I do see what you mean about towers being too large but I have all the room I need and don't mind tilting towers and building anything I need to pull it off.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

But why are you set on towers for the surrounds?
You could go with the Golden ear Aon 2 and Aon 3


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> But why are you set on towers for the surrounds?
> You could go with the Golden ear Aon 2 and Aon 3


Ideally wouldn't you want all 5 channels to match identically. Meaning if you use towers then have towers at all 5 spots. I understand the surrounds do not see the same degree of sound that the mains do but to me it's all about headroom and matching. Although my room is setup abnormal (viewing across the width not length) symmetric is to my understanding one of the most important items.

as it sits right now my 4 corners are distanced from my main LP are all identical and the tweeters all aim at the main LP also (actually a spread of 16" wide as to basically leave 4" on each side of my head for movement).

Tweeter matching is probably the most important really as I see it.

I wouldn't mind jumping into the Chane A5rx-c as my mains to try them out and doing an entire Chane surround system before I jump to Golden ear. Kinda a mid upgrade to my final. 

So.... if I have the capability then why not towers at all 5? Only thing I would have to do is an AT screen and stand the screen off the wall just far enough to envelop the center channel.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

Ya I may move toward Chane as my next upgrade...

For a complete GE setup as Three's as the mains, A3 as the surrounds and the XL as a center that's $4,000.

I can get two A5 and three A2s for $1600. 

This may be my most "logical & economical" approach before I jump into GE.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Matching speakers across the front yes, for the surrounds as ling as they are from the same line using the same tweeter design your good. Even in the theaters they do not use the same speakers behind the screen as they do on the surrounds, just the same line with same tweeter.
Let the sub handle all the lows and keep the surrounds high enough up that they dont fire directly at your head.


----------



## willis7469 (Jan 31, 2014)

As a curiosity, why spend 1600 to later spend 4000? I mean the upgrade plan is good, but I just wanna see your pov.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

willis7469 said:


> As a curiosity, why spend 1600 to later spend 4000? I mean the upgrade plan is good, but I just wanna see your pov.


I get that alot actually. Same with my camera hobby. First camera I bought was a rebel, then 8 months later a 60D then 6 months later a 7D then 8 months later a 6D and now I've had the 5D3 for the past year. Same with my lenses... I've bought/sold so much that now I have a very nice kit.

I think it boils down to the fact that I like upgrade paths, typically in camera stuff I buy used/sell off and rebuy better used and my impact financially has been very little. Even though now I own over 10k in camera gear I just couldn't go out and spend that kind of money in one lump sum.

This will be the same for all my theater stuff. Can't just go out and spend it all at one time. I sold off 3 camera lenses and it paid for the denon, krell and benq along with all the misc stuff like my morrow audio interconnects, speaker cabling etc.

Eventually I may own 20k worth of theater stuff.... but it will take me 6-10 years to get there. I can typically only invest around 2-3k a year into my hobbies and so I take the path of upgrade...

although unlike camera stuff where I can buy used and sell a year later for literally no loss I cannot see me doing that with audio/video gear. 

So I have to be wise as I cringe on losing money on selling stuff... that which is non avoidable in a/v stuff. Oh well.


----------



## willis7469 (Jan 31, 2014)

I understand. Kinda like trading up. I fund hobbies that way too. We have a canon 40D with a tamron lens.(among other things) Not beginner, but not super advanced. Works great.


----------



## Talley (Dec 8, 2010)

willis7469 said:


> I understand. Kinda like trading up. I fund hobbies that way too. We have a canon 40D with a tamron lens.(among other things) Not beginner, but not super advanced. Works great.


have owned numerous Tamrons and Sigmas. Loved the 70-200 VC tamron but only got rid of it for the Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS which is my currently only zoom. The rest are primes. Rokinon 14mm, sigma 35 art, sigma 84, canon 135... of course I do have my 8-15L fisheye and 70-200 F4 IS for sale currently if your interested


----------

