|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
61.17.218.157
Ever since reading the review of Thiel CS1.6 by Tom Miller,I have been wondering how good one of these speakers will work alone.Great for female voice,does things easily.separates instruments like no other,very low noise floor,flat treble,great for piano,sublime low level,dynamic range,simply great.He may even use it as a center speaker.Well, now if I use just one in Mono,will it sound at least 75 percent as good? I am rather disappointed with the budget speakers auditioned so far except for one acoustic suspension design which was more musical than the other 15.So,instead of spending a grand for something I dont really like, why not buy one Thiel.Is that dumb?I am yet to see an honest opinion by audiophiles on Mono.They like stereo more than Home Theatre,I guess.Thanks and Regards
Follow Ups:
when you say "does it sound as good" meaning one vs. two spkrs, it should sound the same. only you will be missing the spacial aspect of stereo. just because the guitars ect arent panned in left/right ect doesnt mean the tonality will change. it will still sound flat ect if its one or two speakers. im a mono guy too, altec 604c, and yes, combining l & R channels for mono changes things, for me, i hear stuff that wasnt apparent in stereo that is easily heard in mono. mono still gives all the depth. listen with your eyes closed to classical, some instruments actually sound farther away from you..
If you are listening only to mono sources, one speaker will actually reproduce that better than two speakers pretending to be a mono source. Don't know if that answers your question.
if you're listening to 2 or more channel source material in mono, you lose something and it's not only the spatiality that 2 or more channels provide. When you electrically mix 2 signals that were discrete, they interact in ways that they don't when fed to different speakers. That interaction is detrimental and reduces clarity.How much do you lose? Well, part of that depends on how the channels are combined, part on the speaker, and part on the listener and their experience, expectations, and tastes and preferences. Whether it's casual or serious listening plays a part. It doesn't bother me for casual listening and I can enjoy some serious listening that way but I'd prefer my serious listening to occur with the same number of channels as the source material. It may or may not be a big deal for you and you're fine if it isn't. If it turns out to be a big deal, then you will be unhappy.
Thanks for the comments.My memory of mono is the sound of my old KLH radio in the dorm.But then we guys were sprawled around smothered with books and magazines and the Byrds singing.Such musically satisfying sound! Like Dylan was standing in the room and all.Allison Steele, the nightbird of WNEW 102.5 FM keeping us company all night!Perhaps it is not the Mono or great speaker or tubes but it is where you listen and with who you listen etc are more important.
Where you listen, who you listen with, why you're listening are all important and definitely affect your experience.A lot of what we do when we listen, things like what we listen for and how we listen to them, are at least to some degree learned; maybe even totally learned in some cases. We 'develop a taste' for certain things and some of those things are more important to us than others. Once something becomes important to us, it's hard to give it up. On the other hand, it's much easier to give up things that aren't really important to us.
Unfortunately we sometimes only find out what's really important to us when we have to give it up for some reason.
But as far as giving important things up goes, I think the old line from a song sums it up nicely: "How you going to keep them down on the farm after they've seen Paris?" Once we get used to something new, we don't want to go back to what we had before that.
Save your money and buy a pair of whatever speakers you like. On the other hand, I can't imagine that for a grand, you can't find a pair of speakers you like better than Thiels. A thousand bucks will buy you a lot of speaker on the used market. And if you shop wisely, it will even buy you TWO of them. Thiels aren't that hard to beat, you must be shopping in the wrong neighborhood......
Ozzy, sorry if I gave the impression I liked Thiel a lot.I havent heard Thiels.Only read the good review by Tom Miller in TAS #135.I was referring to Thiel only as an example.I appreciate your advice.Used equipment is the way to go when budget is limited.Of the new ones I liked NHT 3 better than similarly priced ones.
I always love when I am browinsing through and see someone with some common sense. If you truly listen to that much mono, I do not feel that is a dumb question...Or even an unreasonable one.Stereo-mono has it's advantages too, but I am unsure just how much you would get by one REALLY GOOD speaker. I am assuming as well that the recordings are not perfect, and you may want to focus on a speakers tonality and presentation over cost for what you listen too.
Keep us posted, it sounds like an interesting advanture.
Mike "use your ears" Z
I am now getting emails suggesting pairs of speakers which would do more justice to the perspective and ambience of music than playing ONE speaker,even if it is a Thiel.It is getting very confusing.I wish some manufacturer or retailer with access to many types of speakers would experiment and come up with an opinion.Well,they cant ask everybody to go mono!! that will be half the volume of sales!!!
Arent you the Mike who was missing for some time?Welcome back.
I am confused. I don't like multi-channel sound. I don't own a TV. I do own a faded blue, state-of-the-art (vintage) portable, mono transistor radio to listen to the news and weather. It sounds awful.
One very good Mono speaker versus a lower quality pair of speakers in stereo.
I won't have a choice.
Is this something Danish? My best friend, from Copenhagen too for that matter, to whom I must trace back all that jazz I'm enjoying today, has been half-deaf since his fifth or sixth birthday (one ear is gone). I know no one who enjoys music as much as he, and he's happy to pocket the savings from the gear and with that seat in the concert hall.Seriously, I am very sorry about that. But it doesn't seem to be as big a damper on life's pleasures as we'd think. Maybe it's just the perspective that changes. A crisis nonetheless, even if there are bigger reasons for crises in life than lost audio investments. But then again what do I know. I'm on the path towards a total decline myself, insofar as my genes are to be trusted. Maybe time for a one last splash when I can still respond to the results.
NT
That one ear can still decern a sound source. Not nearly the same as two good ears, but there is something. I think I remember it is because your one good ear will pick up where sound is bouncing off your outer ear, shoulder, inner ear cannal, walls, furnature, etc. and it somehow associate a sourse. I remember it facinated me because it didn't seam feasable to my dopey wooden head. You may want to try to find a forum or group for deaf or hearing disabled and ask. But to answer your question I think you would still get musical satisfaction with only one good ear. Soundstage and imaging aren't to only good things about our hobby.
I would rather listen to one of my speakers than ANY $2k pair of speakers from any other company I have heard in my lifetime. So if you like the Thiels "sound" then I don't see that as a problem. It's preference in the end.I chose to dump surround sound because IMO 2 good speakers is more enjoyable to listen to for home theater than 5 shoddy ones and something that supposedly passes as a subwoofer.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: