|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
97.93.20.162
Hi all,
My new listening room is 10'x16'. I'm considering new speakers, from Vandersteen 1Cs. Looking for more transparancy and detail, with great instrumental and vocal timbre presentation.
I'm considering some planars (Magnepan 1.7s, Martin Logan Electromotion ESLs). But new in the mix for me are small monitors on stands. I've never considered them before, but I heard some things at two recent audio shows that turned my head (mostly the new KEF LS50s, the little Harbeths, and a recommendation from a friend of the Opera Mezza.) I'm intrigued by little speakers now.
Based on the size of my room, any opinions out there about my choices? I really like planars, but I'm afraid of them not working well in this size room. Any opinions are welcome, thanks!
Jenn
Follow Ups:
Sorry for chiming in late; I just noticed this post for the first time.
You have not mentioned what the rest of your system consists of (amp, pre, sources, etc?) Also, how is your room furnished and treated?
If it were me, and one of my listening rooms is quite small (10.5 x 12.5), I would suggest the Audio Note E or J (placed in the corners of thew room), or maybe something from the Tannoy Prestige line (used if possible). I know that lots of guys claim it works, but I have never been happy with planars in a small room. If you can treat the room properly you might get some non-planar dipoles to work. Something like the DECware ERR might work.
Or simply go to a good pair of stand-mount monitors and add a sub, if necessary.
Just my $0.02 worth.
I'm down to three candidates: the new little KEFs, and I hear the Opera Mezza and the Maggie 1.7s for the first time this Saturday in San Francisco. Your help and opinions have been super valuable. I thank you!
Good luck with your listening sessions. If you going to a dealer, most won't demo the 1.7s with a sub but adding one really completed the picture for me. The sub contributes some foundation and notes/subtones below 40Hz that the 1.7s can't quite reach. Sadly, dealers also demo Maggies poorly because they move stuff around alot and don't take the time to find the perfect placements.
BTW, my listening room (spare bedroom) is about 11x13'. It could even be smaller and the 1.7s would still work. They dominate visually, but the room isn't seen by visitors unless they want a demo.
Scott
Planars actually work well in small rooms even though they are physically large. The dipolar behavior means that side reflections are minimized and if they are tall planars (think Acoustat 1+1, 2+2 or large Spectra models) then there is little to no interaction with the floor and ceiling as they behave like a true line source at relatively close distances.
This means that dispersion in the room is tightly controlled compared to most other speakers and you will have less room interaction and better imaging and soundstage than you would get with any direct radiating speaker...unless you treat the room quite dramatically.
I'll second that morricab. I have the mini maggies in my bedroom rig and they sound just fine.
I happily use largish PBN Montana SPX in a dedicated room 16.5' x 10.5', with some treatments. Arrangement is almost near-field, with speakers and seat forming 6.5" equilateral triangle.
Driver integration is important, so I would exclude speakers that require large distance from listener to integrate properly (older Thiel floorstanders, for instance).
nt
Interesting point. I suspect it depends on the big speakers. You made me recall Chicago CES many years ago and the Fulton J speakers(really biggies for the newer folks) in a smallish room playing lovely music even though they were in the corners(15" woofers that went deep). It can work.
You must be about 6" tall then! ;)
"Arrangement is almost near-field, with speakers and seat forming 6.5" equilateral triangle."
hahaha.
6.5 feet is still quite close!! :P
Cheers,
Presto
Shelby+Kroll Nano monitor Woofer monitor combination. Absoulutely superb sounding and easy to drive
Half the longest diagonal, see Tomservo's posts here at AA.
If it has a floating floor and dry-wall (gyprock in cardboard over timber frames) go with sealed speakers whose bass alignment and roll-off F3 can use that gain & slope best.
If the room has highish bass gain, due to stiffer and thicker walls/floor try reflex (ported) spkrs.
The difficulty with small rooms is more bass modes and dips, careful positioning can deal with some of the problems.
Good 2-ways (stand-mounts or floor mounts) with a 7 to 8 inch frame main driver are IMO a better choice than two minis, or two minis with one sub because of the extra integration and positioning issues, especially if the sub doesn't match your room-gain slope.
Note that a post in response is preferred.
Warmest
Timothy Bailey
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio Scrounger
And gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
Good general advice here from the Oz man!
Particularly,
If the room has highish bass gain, due to stiffer and thicker walls/floor try reflex (ported) spkrs.
To this I would add you could try sealed speakers with a higher roll off. Around -3dB @70 hz proved about right in many of the small brick wall apartments I lived in back in East Coast cities. You will get info at much lower frequencies than the -3dB number and it will play in the room much more comfortably.
The notion of a speaker with extended bass response looks good on paper but there are many rooms they won't play happily in.
Here's another thought:
The P3's match well with subs. I've run mine with the little $799 Def-Tech and it's a great combination.
You need a bigger room for 1.7's.
I hear the new Kef LS50's are very good, I wish I could hear a pair.
Whatever you get put them on skylan stands.
"Lock up when you're done and don't touch the piano."
-Dr. Greg House
I have a new listening room of about the same size as yours. I bought and am using (stand mounted) Dynaudio Focus 140 speakers after auditioning them vs. Dynaudio Excite x12s. The 140s are along the 10ft. wall, out about 2 ft. from the front wall, and only 20in. or so from the side walls. They are about 50in. from each other. I listen about only 64in. from the tweeters. It is such that the speakers disappear, the soundstage is full and deep, in both solo guitar and orchestral works. This model also has great bass; I am not in need of a sub.
Having had Maggies (MG 1.6) in the past, on a whim I tried MMGs in this room. They did not like the room and I did not like the presentation I was given. Grainy, somewhat flat and most notedly, a lack of bass.
...I would still insist on a subwoofer. In fact, I use a subwoofer with my floor standing speakers that reach down to a very respectable 40Hz. Being able to clear 20Hz made a noticeable, satisfying difference (wouldn't mind the capability of going even lower, but I just don't have the space or cash for that at the moment).
I'm of the opinion that however low the music we listen to can reach (I listen to all sorts of stuff - including large orchestral and organ music), our stereo systems should ideally be able to reach some comfortable range below even that -- so that it reaches all the direct/ambient fundamentals we should be hearing and feeling with ease .
Before I added the subwoofer to my floor standers, while their 40Hz sounded pretty impressive in the most casual terms, I still found myself scrunching up my face in an effort to will the bass into "absolute fullness", yet never feeling quite satisfied -- even with all my facial contortions and willpower. Once the 12" subwoofer was added, even though it didn't have to cover a very wide frequency range, the feeling I had could only be described as "relief". There's more to sub-bass than meets the spec sheet. There's music down there.
Agreed: there is music lower than 40Hz. And I am hearing lower than the specs. for the Dyn. Focus 140 due to the positioning of the speakers (rear vented as they are)to the front wall. The OP mentioned the small room. No knowing what other functions their room may be for, so a sub or 2 may be a squeeze. The bass for me and my needs is ok (well fleshed out down to upper 30Hz - see the testing results from the Stereophile review, as they comment on this). Hope this helps.
My friend used Magnepan SMG's in his small room until he discovered the Tekton Lore-S. The Lores easily won the day over the Maggies in his opinion.
I get very good results with two stand mount monitors and a sub.
Agreed. Much easier to tune a 2.1 set-up in a small room. At least in my experience.
?amp?
?budget?
Music preferences?
fstein:
Amp = Rotel 1070 (130w/channel)
Room = 16x10, with one of the 16' walls being a half wall, opening to a stairwell (it's like a loft)
Music = I'm a conductor of wind bands and orchestras, as well as a gigging solo steel string guitarist...I listen to a lot of those things and a variety of classical from chamber music to big Romantic period works.
THANKS TO EVERYONE for your replies so far. I'm learning A LOT!
Based on forty years of experience with planar speakers, and Maggies in particular, I think your room is too small for 1.6s or 1.7s. MMGs would probably work, MG-12s maybe. The original Quads and Stax ESL F-81s would probably also work.
Vandersteen 1Cs could work although I can't say that I love that loudspeaker.Out of the advice offered below I guess I'm more in sync with genugo than anyone else although I would emphasize close-to-wall friendly over corner friendly. I think smallish monitors that don't need a ton of free air space around them (like the Gurus) are probably your best bet.
Edits: 08/13/12
1. The sound you like to hear, which differs between speakers, and
2. To what extent your speakers will over-drive ("light up") your room.
I suppose imaging properties of the speakers vs. placement is a third.
Most small standmount monitors are easy to place, can easily be "disconnected" from the room acoustics and will image fabulously. The rest is up to your subjective likings and dislikings + your wallet.
My personal choice would be the Harbeth Monitor 30, but it is very expensive for such a small speaker.
Observe, before you think
[disconnected" from the room acoustics] not true the radiation pattern doesn't permit it. Your confusing small baffle small loudspeaker on stands as disconnection. The perceived imaging benefit of small loudspeakers is purely visible and since small to the eyes and image is between and appears to emanate more from space between they are considered better at imaging but its not true. If you listen with eyes closed most larger designs image better. And I wouldn't consider costly stand purchase as easier one who buys bookshelf's must consider the stand.
And I prefer the P3's and they are less than half the price of the Monitor 30.
I do not know what is up with Harbeth Pricing.
"Lock up when you're done and don't touch the piano."
-Dr. Greg House
I have compared the older versions of both and I thought the M-30 was superior in the near-field. The new P3 is a step up. No doubt about that. Maybe that's why Harbeth revised the M-30. I look forward to hearing the new model at RMAF, if it's there.
As for the new LS 3/6, I still haven't made it to the UK, but it's on my list.
Observe, before you think
If you are a planar guy...get planars!
For what it is worth I have Maggie 3.6r's in a 15'x12' room with a sub and I love them. I have owned in my life Altec A7's, Acoustat Monitor 3 electrostatics, Watt Puppy 3's, Lowther Medallions and now my Maggies. They were all wonderful speakers but the Maggies are the best. Go for it
Alan
I've had excellent success in my 10'x11' listening room with both the Ohm Walsh Micro Tall and the Ohm Walsh 1000. The 1000's ended up being the keepers, but both of these speakers worked better than anything I've ever tried in this small space. On a similar note, I have a friend who has a room a bit closer in square footage to yours and he's found excellent results with the Tekton Lore-S.
I know people think I'm crazy but large horns can work great in small rooms.Also if your a planar guy those to can be set up to function just fine in your space.
since they are designed for near-field listening anyway. A pair of big ass planars like the soundlabs will produce magic even in small spaces. They are better with room around them, but you would be surprised....
dee
;-D
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.
quote by Kurt Vonnegut
I just bought some B&W PM1 monitors and these are the best sounding speakers I've owned in 20-years. I have a subwoofer behind my listening position set for 55-Hz low-pass to fill in the deep bass. If your budget permits, you might want to check out these little B&W PM1 speakers. They retail for $2800 a pair and the stands are $575, but you can probably get a 15 to 20% discount on the package. Anyway, I really like mine. They image beautifully and present an awesome soundstage.
Edits: 08/12/12
they make some of those. Without going into a lot of detail (ie your system, budget, etc.) I would do some reading up on Reynaud.
EASY placement and marvelous music movers.
HEY! there's a used pair of Bliss on the Asylum Trader (link below)!
No connection to the seller, just a JMR fan.
(not familiar with the KEF or Harbeth)
"One this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" - Michael McClure
My listening room is both narrow and oddly shaped, ranging from 9' wide at one end to nearly 13' wide at the other end. I need to use "corner friendly" speakers to help ensure that proper tonal balance and soundstage width can be maintained. You should be looking at certain room friendly speakers from Klipsch, Linn, Audio Note, and Guru (among others).
Edits: 08/12/12
In a room about that size I was running 6.5" midbass / 1" tweet stand-mounts with a sub in the corner for years and it was excellent.
Most audiophiles poo poo a "2.1" system (sub/satellites) probably because they've never heard one properly set up before and also believe that "woofers integrate better when in the same cabinet as the midbass/mid speakers". This is a fallacy because the crossover point between woofer and mid is two to three octaves higher than the crossover point between subwoofer and satellite.
Most audiophiles add a sub to "get more bass" likely to compensate for monitors which do not have proper baffle step compensation. First clue of a speaker with no baffle step compensation is a design with a 90db sensitivity tweeter where the final speaker sensitivity is 90db. (Low sensitivity speakers that are 84 or 85 db sensitive are often the ones with proper baffle step compensation.
So, I think that users poo-pooing subs were trying to do baffle step compensation (or some abberation of it) cranking the crossover frequency of their sub from 45-60 (where it belongs) to 120-200Hz (where it doesn't belong) and OF COURSE this will have a very detrimental effect on imaging with very obvious placement cues of the sub.
A sub crossed over between 40 and 65hz actually has BETTER integration possibilities than any sub frequencies being created by a floor stander for the sole reason a floor stander needs to be in a specific location that benefits every part of the audible bandwidth EXCEPT for sub frequencies.
2.1 is the way to go if you want deep full bass without compromising the location of your main (satellite) speakers.
Cheers,
Presto
I would suggest a subwoofer as well because of the tuning options. Of course to set it up correctly requires some understanding of room acoustics in order to choose a proper location. Measurement gear also is best to have, but with just a fine tuned ear and taking the appropriate time to listen, you can dial in a subwoofer in just about any room.
That's what I've always thought too! Then again, I think many audiophiles try to cross them over way too high and add "bass" to a system with a sub. Subs are not supposed to DO bass, and if they are called upon to, they muck everything up.
Typical crossover frequences in my systems are 45-65 hertz with 4th order lowpass on the sub and 2nd to 4th order highpass on the satellites (aka mains).
Cheers,
Presto
I honestly don't know why many are so averse to integrating subwoofers. From some people I hear things like "I've never heard a setup where the subwoofer was seamless". And others just think it's not as "pure" as letting the mains handle the full range.
Fact is, done right subwoofers do nothing but enhance the experience.
It's the 'done right' part that gets some people. If you're the kind of person that just likes to plop stuff down in the room and listen, then you probably won't have good luck integrating subwoofers. But if taking the time to make small changes and listen for the results is no problem, you'll likely have success. 1 db changes in sub volume, 5hz changes to crossover point, 6 inch changes to sub location, etc can make the difference between seamless or not.
Small rooms can make these tweaks even more important, because the bass nodes are typically in a more noticable range of frequency than in larger rooms ... and can be higher in magnitude. Since the thread is titled Best Choices for a Smallish Room, subwoofer and monitor speakers are it. It just takes more work/time than monitors alone.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: