I just bought the Morel Applause 5.1 speaker system. It's got 5 small sphere's like the Gallo Micro's (only better). The sphere's have a 4" woofer and outboard tweeter. They can handle 120W at 8 Ohms and 85 dB sensitivity.

My room is very reflective. It's all glass/wood/stone/drywall. My only option was a sub/sat system due to various constraints.

Since I'm dealing with small sats and a highly reflective room, the laws of physics are working against me. Would the 950/7100 combo be too bright and harsh for this situation? Or should I be looking at warmer electronics? Something like; the Rotel RSX-1055; the NAD T762; the Marantz SR-7300; or the Harmon Kardon AVR-8000?

Any input or advice would be appreciated.

Infosponge,

The only real way to tell is to audition the 950/7100 in your space. I am returnng a 950/755 combo for that very reason. I have Revel F30 mains and a Revel C30 center channel and the Outlaw gear was too revealing for my tastes. I am now auditioning a Marantz 9300 in it's place. The Marantz does not have that juice to really open up the Revels like the 755 did but the sound is much warmer and musical to my ear.

The guys at outlaw are great about the in home audition and 30 day return policy. I've not dealt with a better bunch. I really wish I'd liked the sound better but what can ya do?

Good Luck,

Lawrence

Thanks deputy. Maybe thats the route I should take. Just try them out and send them back if it doesn't work out.

Since your room is very reflective you may want to equalize the room brightness, in order for the sound to be satisfying. You might consider room treatment or electronics. Since your speakers are so small (a 4" woofer), you probably wouldn't need the power of the 7100 and could better put the money saved into room equalization, which you may need more than power. Just a thought...

Although Outlaw has a 30 day return policy on the 950/7100 combo, I think they charge for shipping if you decide to send them back.

Best,

Will

Thanks Will.

Due to the architectural/design features of the room, acoustical treatments are out. That's why I had to choose such an inconspicous system to start with.

The room is very large (6,300 cubic feet, 15 x 20 with a 21 foot high ceiling). That's why I was worried about power. The little sats can handle 120W each.

Like you indicated, my fear is I might need an expensive equalizer. But with a limited budget, the EQ money would probably have to come out of the 950/7100 budget. If I had to go with an EQ, to pay for it I would have to give up the 950/7100 and go with a $600 to $900 receiver.

You'll probably want plenty of equalization.

At what frequency are you planning to cross over the little 4" (in the woofer) speakers, to your subwoofer? If the frequency is high enough, you probably won't need the power of a separate amplifier, if you are concerned about having enough power to power your speakers. I'd spend the money on equalization for your room, instead.

Best,

Will


[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 17, 2003).]

Not ever having heard a "bright" system (and yet having had Yamaha and Outlaw components in my system that *other* people say are "bright" ...)

I would *think* that the largeness of the room would offset the "brightness" somewhat. I.e., sound level drops off as a function of the square of the distance so that a bigger room would have less of a problem with brightness than a smaller room...


[This message has been edited by Kevin C Brown (edited October 18, 2003).]

InfoSponge says his room is very reflective. Of course this means some frequencies are reflected back, and other frequencies aren't as much. If he were to play music softly enough that the sound didn't bounce off the walls, maybe he wouldn't have to worry about equalizing the sound. But I imagine in his 15 x 20 with a 21 foot highly reflective listening room, they'll be plenty of sound bouncing about, in some of the higher frequencies. While equalization alone can't solve all the problems caused by bouncing high frequencies sound waves, it should tame those frequencies somewhat in his listening room. A better approach would be to treat the room itself, but for aesthetic reasons, Infosponge said earlier that "acoustical treatments are out."

Best,

Will

OK, what you really want to do (not) is to put a black box between the 950 and the 7100. What this black box will do is sample signals from each channel, and with the appropriate adjustable delay on each channel to account for sound travel from one wall to the other, insert an inverted, low level signal in the opposing speakers' channels such that the reflected sound will be accompanied by a matching negative image of itself as it travels toward the listener, effectively canceling out all horizontally reflected sound.

Is there a 'smiley' that indicates "tongue-in-cheek?"

Don't laugh too hard. There is some high-dollar equipment out there that uses a similar sound canceling practice for other reasons.

This must be an interesting situation, to have absolutely "no way" to do any acoustical treatment whatsoever. I wish you the best.



[This message has been edited by bestbang4thebuck (edited October 18, 2003).]

That is exactly my point. Because the room is so big, and sound waves do not propegate for infinite distances, a larger room is "better" for "brightness" than a smaller room. And in fact, higher freqs die off sooner than low anyway. (Why the new high power sonar the Navy uses is at low freq. Effective for longer distances in the ocean. Not so good for whales though. )