advertisement


How to run SBLs?

DoctorRad

DoctorRad

pfm Member
As a long-term project, I'm looking to get a pair of SBLs to have a play with, as it appears that if you like them, then you really like them...

For the time being, I will be running them from Meridian 208 (CD and preamp), Townshend Rock (Mk2 I think) / RB300 / Goldring 1042, Ben Duncan ADEQ photo stage (soon), and a pair of Rotel RB850s.

The RB850s are probably going to be a bit of a stopgap, but they'll do for now as they offer me multiple options as to how to actually run the speakers:
  • Passive, original crossover
    • Single stereo power amp
    • Use both amps, one channel driven (Probably not worth it as the RB850s are dual-mono)
    • Bridged mono power amps
    • Biamped with a split crossover
  • Passive, new DIY crossover
    • All above options
  • Active, DIY crossover (Neil McBride circuits)
  • Active, DIY crossover (Ben Duncan circuits)
  • Active, digital crossover, e.g. Behringer DCX2496 or Mini-DSP
Any opinions on what I'll get from which approaches? What have others tried?
 
Linn Akurate Exakt DSM streamer/pre-amp (they call it a System Hub now), Linn Akurate Exaktbox and add your amps of choice (the Rotels will be a good start). Or you could go 2x box with the streamer and Akurate Exaktbox-i which has power amps built in.
Search on here for Gidders and SBL for a thread or 2.
FYI, I can provide the Exakt filters for SBL, so I'm not exactly(!) impartial :)
 
I would start with bridged monos into the original crossover, it's easy to do and will give you an idea as to the overall sound characteristics. If you like it then you can consider new crossovers or active.... I think they work well driven actively, but only heard them on the end of Naim electronics.
 
Hi DR,

I have tried my SBLs with: EAR534; CB250; CB250 avondale; and, 300DR.

This is using Naim XOvers and Avondale XOvers.

The 534 was always the winner with other speakers, but with the SBLs: 300DR >> CB250 Avondale > EAR534 = CB250.

I wanted to go the passive route as I have enough boxes already. Less's XOs are a nice step up on the Naim.
 
sunbeamgls said:
Linn Akurate Exakt DSM streamer/pre-amp (they call it a System Hub now), Linn Akurate Exaktbox and add your amps of choice (the Rotels will be a good start). Or you could go 2x box with the streamer and Akurate Exaktbox-i which has power amps built in.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I tend to look out for high VFM gear which is now available for relative peanuts. Other than the ADEQ which is yet to be collected, the rest of what I have for my main system came in at under a grand over the last 20 years, broken styli apart :D
 
If you’re considering DIY passive SBL crossovers, there’s an old thread here somewhere with quite a lot of discussion, including, if memory serves, actually building a pair, along with chat about various individual parts.

IIRC it was started by deepdivedog. Might be worth a search.
 
Dave***t said:
If you’re considering DIY passive SBL crossovers, there’s an old thread here somewhere with quite a lot of discussion, including, if memory serves, actually building a pair, along with chat about various individual parts.
Click to expand...
This one, I presume? I think I've found most of the relevant PFM threads, I'm more after knowing what's actually been tried that I can reasonably afford, and what I might expect and what are the tradeoffs.
 
Those DIY x-overs were great, a real step up from the originals. I thought at the time as good as active*. Timing and integration was better, cost was @ £100 plus beer token for a friend to build them.
The Audio42 took them to another level, sold onto another member here who had active SBL's and again preferred passive route.

*I didn't have matched amps, 2 sets of Avondale NCC, but 1 was regulated, the other not. How much difference it made is anyones guess.

Edit, technology has moved on, a DSP unit much more configurable than SNAXO may be an option?
 
Yes, I think the obvious route in terms of flexibility would be to go with DSP crossovers if I'm going active. The real question would appear to be how that would compare with a decent passive crossover, either bi-amped or with the RB850s bridged.
 
DoctorRad said:
Yes, I think the obvious route in terms of flexibility would be to go with DSP crossovers if I'm going active. The real question would appear to be how that would compare with a decent passive crossover, either bi-amped or with the RB850s bridged.
Click to expand...

The hierarchy seemed to be a best amp was better than 2 lesser ones, 135's better than active 250's, 250 better than pair of 180's, haven't done it myself so its hearsay from me.

What you can do is compare your amps bridged vs a stereo pair and hear the difference. Unless you're playing very loud I suspect not much, SBL's an easy load.

Just re-read your OP and you seem to have the correct method of going through amp options no love for bi-amping in forum land generally, but it's your ears.

The other point I'd make is about SBL's in the context of non Naim . They seem to have a following on the end of a Naim from a certain era, be careful trying to put lipstick on the pig :D
 
CHE said:
Run them active, much better than passive.
Click to expand...

The only time I heard them sounding seriously great was when active.
I ran a pair myself for several years (CB & olive Naim) & could never get them to sound like anything other than a bag of nails if the source material wasn't very well recorded.
Given a well-recorded album, they could then sound fabulous, if rather bass shy.
 
Yes, I think most of the options with the stock passive crossover are pretty easy to try out, and if I'm going active, I'll probably go with a DSP crossover rather than (messing around with?) an analogue one.

SteveH said:
Given a well-recorded album, they could then sound fabulous, if rather bass shy.
Click to expand...
I remember reading a review of the DBL which said something similar, as in "you'll hear the source material, warts and all". Maybe the reticent bass is just 'non-hifi bass', which is a virtue many seem to apply to these speakers?
 
Probably best to listen to them in the least costly way & see whether you like them. They are very revealing, this is usually seen as a good thing outside of the context of naim.
 
DoctorRad said:
I remember reading a review of the DBL which said something similar, as in "you'll hear the source material, warts and all". Maybe the reticent bass is just 'non-hifi bass', which is a virtue many seem to apply to these speakers?
Click to expand...

And therein lies the problem. If you think the bass is 'shy' is that because the bass on the recording is shy or you're used to a non-accurate representation from other speakers. ? I went from active Credos to active SBLs and the bass is different but MUCH more controlled than on the Credos which 'smear' things a bit; going active removes yet more 'smearing' in my opinion giving much better transients - alluded to elsewhere. Certainly when I ripped all my vinyl and listened to all the albums I had, I could hear excellent recorded material from the most unlikely sources and poor from sources you'd expect to be good. So yes, they sound better with better recording - who would have thought it.

In conclusion, you may not like SBLs passive or active depending on your perception of what is 'correct' bass (and treble, that's another topic) but that's not to say the sound they make isn't rather good.

Oh and I use Teddy's amps now - better than the Naim options I tried.

CHE
 
CHE said:
If you think the bass is 'shy' is that because the bass on the recording is shy or you're used to a non-accurate representation from other speakers. ?
Click to expand...

Put it this way... I'm expecting great things from the full 12-minute version of Yello's 'The Race' :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top