|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
219.79.109.207
In Reply to: RE: Why not studio monitors? posted by audiogremlin on June 28, 2014 at 09:32:45
A few things - the goal isn't about the flattest response - it should be about what sounds the best or the most believable. That may be a reasonably flat speaker but it may not.
Second - I wouldn't say studio speakers are cheaper - it depends on the studio - but some studios use $20,000+ loudspeakers from brands that also sell to the public. Studios are a business and some businesses are incompetent or cheap or both and use cheap junk.
No real reason a good home speaker can't be used in a recording studio (see my photo a few posts below). A better sounding loudspeaker is a better sounding loudspeaker. Granted there is the whole far field versus nearfield thing to consider but if your space requires nearfield you buy a nearfield speaker if not far field etc.
Follow Ups:
Hi and sorry but this i do not understand
If i send in a flat sweep i should get a flat response, listening room allowing of course
But in a anecoic room is what i would expect
If i see a response all ups and downs this is not true to the original signal. Am i wrong ?
And the same of course for distortion and so on.
Maybe i am missing something ?
Kind regards,
bg
You won't get a flat response in room - what a speaker does in an anechoic chamber is interesting but not at all related to how it will perform in a room. Your ear isn't remotely flat either. It's one parameter of a larger picture. A three dimensional problem that people continually try to solve with 2 dimensional problem solving techniques.
I own wonderful measuring speakers and I own not so great measuring speakers - the latter is vastly superior when listening to music - the former I can use to win technical arguments on audio forums where I get to say "see I own good measuring speakers."
Buying good measurements is easy and very cheap. Buy yourself a second hand Bryston or Rotel anything and it will be about "as good as it gets" in terms of measurements - then buy a SS CD player that has exceptional measured response as cheap as you can - and then buy a Speaker with same. If you can stomach the results great.
But this is the year 2014 - prices have come down - we can all have it all. You can pick up excellent measuring stuff at Pawn shops for dirt cheap. And you can buy good tube/SET amps that will cost more but tend to retain their value.
I have had my Audio Note equipment for 10 years - I can sell it for what I paid or more than what I paid - net cost is Zero. So the tube system is basically free and the SS can be had dirt cheap on the second hand market (because their value drops 60-90% ten years later). You can have the whacko tube measuring stuff AND the elite measuring stuff. Got your bases covered.
Hi and of course what you say it is a fact, especially for tube equipment
There are some that on the bench perform in a weird way and then they sound very very good ... so in the end they are good.
My point was a little academic, in the sense that i would like to see at the output, as a general rule, a signal similar to the input signal maybe amplified
I said anecoic chamber to take out the listening room interference
If i have a speaker spectacular in the anecoic chamber that fails to be linear in the listening room the problem is not the speaker but the room that needs treatment
Then there is the maybe the important point ... what measurements are more telling about the actual perceived sound quality of the speaker
I read here a 3D about a speaker very little linear but with a very low distortion that was judged very good at listening
So i guess high linearity is not the most important of requirements while low distortion could very well be
And you know what ? almost no magazine performs distortion measurements
Why ? i do not know but i would like to know of course
I have found one that indeed carries out these kind of measurements
And the results are impressive ... in some case in the bad way
For instance is very challenging to get high SPLs and low distortion at
freqs below 100 Hz with common also very expensive speakers
When people speak of prodigious bass from a 5" woofer ... well this means that they do not know was a real bass is ... completely
It is not their fault ... they have just not been exposed to a real shaking bass ... they do not know what they are talking about.About instead sound from tube equipment i have an opinion but i should try some tests
I have found extremely interesting the 3D about damping factor
Usually tube equipment exhibit a much lower damping factor of solid state equipment
It could be that this low damping factor contributes to expand the sound more in the ambient
Maybe there is an optimum value for damping factor ?
But damping factor can also be decreased very easily in a soli state preamp/amp with just a resistor
A solid state amp that has received huge praise as a output impedance of about 0.34 ohm corresponding to a damping factor of 24 for a 8 ohm load.
My present amp has 150 for comparison.
Maybe this could be that optimal value ... i have to try anyway.
This could be also a reason why single ended equipment higher usually in out impedance sound nicer than the other equipment where the feedback reduces the out impedance to very low values giving a very high damping factor.
Low damping factor could be like wine ... it gives less control, but it is more fun
But i will try also with a preampJust out curiosity may i ask which speakers are you referring at that were wonderful measuring and failed to convince you on listening ?
I am very curious to knowThanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 07/02/14 07/02/14 07/02/14
"I said anecoic chamber to take out the listening room interference."But why would you take out the room since the speaker will be played in a room? Putting a car on rollers may tell you some things too but what it won't tell you is how the car does on a road or in corners.
I have Audio Note speakers which are designed to be place near the wall or in the corners - it is designed to take the room into account. Corners and floor bounce at a "generally" far field listening distance. What any such speaker does in an enechoic chamber would be completely irrelevant. Give the speaker the near wall and/or corner and you get pretty mcuh the same result REGARDLESS of the room you stick them in. That is such a huge advantage in my view because that is exactly what a speaker should do - give the same or very very similar results regardless of the room you stick them in whether heavily damped or completely empty. That is a practical speaker for most environments with 3 sizes for three room volumes. Other corner speakers (numerous horns) would likely fall into the same camp.
Free standing speakers typically require the home user to spend a bucket of money ruining their living room with ugly room treatments, bass traps, diffuzers, buying EQ devices (which usually sound like dredge) and you've spent so much darn money on all that and the corner horn or AN E (corner horn) likely still sounds vastly better without wrecking your entire living space. Of course if you can't place the speaker in the corner near wall well all this gets chucked out the window. Still I agree with my fellow reviewer Jack Roberts that in general very HE speakers like his Teresonic or Devore Orangutan or possibly Bob Neil's new favorite Tocarros offer an alive out out of the box presentation and dynamic ease that can get away from both their cabinet and room reflections (so can panels but their other problems and price don't do it for me personally).
About BASS. Well reviewers have a knack for hyperbole which makes for entertaining reading. I don't think most people expect 10hz at 140db from a 5 inch woofer with 0.1% distortion. But there are speakers that do put out quite good bass with a 5 inch woofer versus other speakers that put out a lot less with a 6 inch woofer.
I own two such speakers - the KEF LS50 with a 5 inch woofer puts out deeper bass than my Audio Note AX Two with a 6 inch woofer. The latter uses the bigger woofer to gain sensitivity and easy of drive and tries to gain a little oomph from the near wall or corner location. The AX Two has more tuneful midbass than the KEF but the KEF goes lower and hits harder. Depends on what you like but neither is necessarily "better".
If you really want serious bass response you need subs. But will they integrate truly properly. Maybe - maybe not. Depends on the listener - how long you listen and what your home is made out of. If you live in a wood house with wood floors it is possible that the wood beneath the sub vibrates and you get a "weight" coming from wherever you place the sub. I lived in such a place and wound up having to put the sub dead in the middle between the two speakers. I had to cut the low bass goping from the mains - the problem then was that the bass was handled by the sub and the main floorstanders sounded beamy because the speakers seems to be hacked off. The floorstanders while they only went down to 40hz sounded far more tuneful than my top rated raved about power subwoofer. Home theater was fine - it could crush car explosions but otherwise sound like poo on music. Subs when used for ambiance and truly "subsonic" territory below 25hz is I suspect what I would rather.
But since I am not an organ listener or someone who buys drum music to show off (because musically it and the likes of Mahler is usually void of any musical value)most music is above 30hz so put the money there. Note - that's me - if you love Mahlet buy Two top of the line Genesis Subwoofers and knock yourself out - literally they might be able to knock you out!!! Which is kinda cool.
Speakers that don't convince me that measure well - most stuff from PSB, Paradigm, B&W (if it uses a metal tweeter and isn't BE).
Even my KEF LS-50 - this measures very well - I expected it to beat the ever loving snot out of my Audio Note AX Two at 2/3 the price. With all the hype and the excellent measured performance and all. It's a fine speaker no question - I am keeping it - I have had it for 6 months and I really like the KEF - but I can't honestly tell you that it sounds better than the AX Two. I sure like it's looks better and the weight and quality. But on sound the AX Two should be blown out of the water. I go back and forth. One wins on one thing the other wins on something else. A 14 year old speaker design with a Vifa woofer and Vifa tweeter in a chipboard box. C'mon.
That's why I am not totally in the frequency response or low box resonance camp. Depends on where and when and how fast the box resonance leaves the box (see lossy cabinet). Harbeth seems to do alright in that regard as well. I think Audio Note sounds quite a bit better than Harbeth because AN is more sesnitive and sounds more transparent as a result and is a lot less money in terms of starting points. Both don't exactly wow you in the Stereophile plots.
But like I say - it's easy to buy a good measuring system - The KEF LS50 with a big SS amp and SS CD player - and poof - rock solid perfromance on the plots - I doubt that will sound better than a SET with NOS CD player an AN/Harbeth/Devore/Teresonic loudspeaker however.
Edits: 07/02/14
Hi and thanks for the reply
Very interesting and informative
By the way i do not agree with some statements ... better we have to decide what BASS means for you
You say ... " the KEF LS50 with a 5 inch woofer puts out deeper bass than my Audio Note AX Two with a 6 inch woofer "
I am attaching the graph of the max SPL obtainable from the LS50 with 5% of distortion
We have to establish was bass is but if you ask a speaker to be realistic with all the instruments it is clear that the LS50 will be not able to give a realistic organ, piano or cello
Maybe they will be perfectly splendid with chamber music ... much less so with orchestras and similar
They need a sub in my opinion, and this is a personal opinion of course
Honestly i do not know if it is more sane the approach of Audio Note to design taking into account the room or like many other do using test in anecoic chambers ... maybe they are perfectly acceptable both
I also like the sound of Audio Note speakers a lot
Regarding " age and price " ... it is all relative
I am bidding just now for a quite old pair of ProAc EBS because a little bird told me they can sound quite good also for modern standards.
I have never listened to them but i trust the bird ... he has been exposed to a lot of speakers. He was a dealer of high end brands.
To say that i have absolutely nothing against aged speakers
I think we live in a plastic age, not the best for speakers.
" Speakers that don't convince me that measure well - most stuff from PSB, Paradigm, B&W (if it uses a metal tweeter and isn't BE) "
i think that we are down to personal preference here
Some speakers from these manufacturers have been quite well judged
And their designers are famous in the business like Paul Barton
I also think that not all the models from a brand can be equally succesful of course
For instance I could live with speakers coming from all the brands you mention.
Actually i have lived with both Paradigm and B&W, no PSB
While they were cheap they were not bad at all ... not bad
Obviously now i would like to taste something better.
Thanks a lot again.
Kind regards,
bg
Graph taken from Stereophile http://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-ls50-anniversary-model-loudspeaker-measurementsI am not sure exactly where the graph comes from but the KEF is really only capable up to about 105dB to 108dB I should think and Stereophile's measurements indicate the speaker is capable to 47hz -6db which is very good for a speaker this size and with a driver that size. Soundstage's anechoic measurements appear to be around 55hz -6db. Bass disappears with volume when pushed beyond limit which is what your graph appears to indicate.
If you want 110dB+ continuous listening levels then KEF and AN are absolutely not the right speakers to be looking at. Even the AN E is rated to 108dB - Of course they will play louder but distortion starts up and then it seems pointless if quality is the goal over quantity - I'd be buying a big ole horn.
I have nothing against older speakers either - but the audio magazines (press) and the industry in general needs to tout the next new improved (which usually isn't) thing that is the bee's knees. I was in HMV in downtown Hong Kong and I was amazed to see 8 shelves with hundreds of LPs lined up for sale - HMV for heaven sake and in Central another shop with brand new artists stacked in of LPs. These are some of the biggest rent districts in HK which is saying something since HK is the Manhattan of Asia. There are placed selling 30 year old Tannoys which sell fo rpretty large dollars - $3k US+ and they sell them because you listen to those old beasties versus new $3,000US loudspeakers and you wonder what the fuss is about with the new.
Speakers have gotten smaller and prettier - better is something else. The cheap speakers today seem to me to be better than cheap speakers of yesteryear. Although I owned a set of B&W DM302s and I sometimes wonder - the 303 wasn't better (stupid Kevlar and metal tweeter made it sound more powerful - but better I question).
PS - I agree with you on the KEF and subs but the issue is I think that far too many people will rush out and buy the LS50 because of the dopey product of the year BS and not bother to consider that it is really only for bedroom sized rooms 10 X 10 sort of thing. In a bigger living room it is absolutely going to need a subwoofer (ditto AX Two).
In a small room there is only so much bass depth that is realistic and you don;t want a big boomy echo chamber. The LS-50 also drops to 3 ohms so you have to spend some coin on amplifiers with real power supplies (not just high watts) and at $1500 I suspect most people will slap on a receiver or budget integrated from NAD or Arcam that really IMO are not at all up to the job. But definitely in a living room the KEF absolutely needs a sub (or you have to buy the Blade).
Big room = Big speakers.
Edits: 07/02/14
I didn't believe all the hype about the speaker of the year award I let my ears do the listening and I have a lot of speakers. I have the Ellis 50s on a pastry integrated amp in my bedroom and I have to say they're fabulous. I think you're right you can expect put them in a huge room and even with the sub that may not work I prefer them without the sub. There is no doubt this is a very high-quality speaker and sounds like speakers of the 20 and 30-year-old vintage but was a little more detail but not overly.
Hi regarding the curve by Stereophile it looks very good indeed
Impressive bass extension for such a small woofer
The driver by the way is very well built
I guess the curve i mentioned is not completely dependable ... i do not have any guarantee
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
I have the KEF LS50s set up in a 12 x 15 treated room, with them 8' apart and from the listener. Driving them with an old Aragon 8008, which was known for low ohm capabilities and excellent bass performance.
The room is probably close to the maximum that these speakers should be set up in, but the sound is very room filling, excellent soundstage and imaging, even at high playback levels. Nothing wimpy about these speakers! :)
In my room, the KEFS do put out decent bass for their size, they go fairly low and it is not "one notey". But...IMHO, the bass is not as dimensional as the rest of the range, in reviewer speak it would be called "dry". And it lacks the punch that is needed for the best dynamic range.
I currently run them with the ports plugged (to reduce their bass output), and have dual diy subs, optimized for mid-bass, colocated next to each speaker.
Used a satellites, in this configuration, the KEFs are excellent, and I feel I have a very nice full range system. Much more punch and real sounding. So I agree with your comment as to what the definition of bass is.
Hi and thank you very much for the very valuable reply
First i have a great admiration for Kef brand and for this little big speaker ... just looking at the driver the excellent build quality shows.
When you say " in reviewer speak it would be called "dry". And it lacks the punch that is needed for the best dynamic range " you explain much better than i could do the situation
A 5" woofer can arrive up to a point, no matter how good it is.
Not only ... i have read mainly that if you ask a little woofer also to do the very low bass at relatively high level this leads to distortion in the midrange (i think that at least 3 ways is a minimum in general with "conventional" drivers to cover the full range, like Wilson does for instance ... )
I am sure that a two ways active system with electronic xover and cut at around 150 Hz with one good 12" woofer for side below and the Kefs above would give a spectacular and full range sound.
And the Kefs made free to reproduce the low and energetic bass would sound even better (i.e. less distortion)
But in a small room and with music with not much bass content they could be just perfect also standalone, as everyone here is saying. Rightly.
I have recently moved to a HE solution just to keep distortion low as much as possible ... this should always be the aim, IMHO of course.
Thanks a lot.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 07/05/14 07/05/14 07/05/14 07/05/14 07/05/14 07/05/14
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: