AVS Forum banner

My Journey to find the "perfect" speaker...

825K views 7K replies 336 participants last post by  gurkey 
#1 · (Edited)
This is the best A/V forum on the internet, so I hope this thread assists myself and many others.

For those of you who don’t know me, my name is Brandon and I am a audio/videoholic.
Since before I can remember and up until present day, I have listened to many speakers, however no speaker I have run across has ever been perfect to my ears. Hmm, perfect is a poor choice of words...how about this: I have not run across a speaker of whose flaws I could live with for a long, long time. Ever since I delved into A/V a number of years ago I have been on a seemingly hopeless quest to find that one "perfect" speaker. I have come close in some instances, but in the end I always yearn for more. So if you don't mind, I would like to share a little of my experience with you and explain to you what I am looking for. Hopefully with your help and recommendations, I can come to a journeys end…well, at least for a while.

Here goes:

All right, concerning myself...I have listened to a lot of crap over the years, but on the other end of the spectrum I have listened to a few very nice speakers, most of which are out of my current price range. So, being a man who strives for (near) perfection in every purchase he makes, I don't know which products will fill that void. I have owned many speakers, the most recent being Canton Ergo 900's, B&W 604's, Rocket 750's and 550's and the Vandersteen 2CE Sigs. Not one pair of speakers on the list was perfect to my ears, but as mentioned, none are or ever will be. However, I want to finally find an affordable solution of whose flaws I can live with for a long, long time.

Here are the requirements that I would love to be met (most of them anyway), unrealistic as they may be…

To die for imaging/wide soundstage/great dispersion - This system needs to be used for Home Theater and perform like a champ in 2-channel and multi-channel music listening. I don’t want to just hear what is coming from before me; I want to be captivated by it! I want the speakers to disappear into the room. I want to hear music, not speakers trying to reproduce music, if that makes sense.

My wife does not understand this hobby as many of us men do, and with that said she wants me to limit my purchase to one system (7.1 at the most). This means finding a set of fronts that will excel at music above all else (home theater is much easier to reproduce than the intricate and delicate dynamics and nuances of musical instruments, in my opinion of course. If I can find a speaker to do the latter, home theater requirements will easily be met). It also means meeting the WAF (aesthetically).

Dynamics, in both meanings of the word - One: able to be run at near reference levels without distortion or tonality changes. Two: able to pick out each and every instrument and every sound and nuance that said instrument makes on a boundary-less soundstage presented before me. The latter definition is more important to me than the first.

Accuracy – I know what you are thinking, it’s a relative and subjective term with no true definition, but I am indeed a stickler for flat frequency responses. Perhaps it’s a mental/anal retentive thing; a way to just appease that part of my brain, but it’s necessary for me nonetheless. I want a speaker that measures flat all the way through. I don’t want to have to worry about treating my room in order to improve the speaker, but rather just treat my room to only treat the reflections. In my opinion, too much EQ is a bad thing, thus I am against all EQ except parametric. Still, wouldn’t it be amazing to only have to EQ (treat) the room due to its imperfections rather than any of your equipment’s imperfections? Perhaps I am grasping at straws here, but one can hope.

Efficiency – I don’t mind shelling out for good equipment in order to get the most out of my speakers, but there is so much voodoo and snake oil out there…it’s disheartening, not to mention I will have to save over time in order to be able to afford this equipment. Still - the more true power (the actual power when measured with all channels driven), the better. And, of course, low total harmonic distortion measured when under duress. Obviously that is a completely different topic for another time (amplification). However, in lieu of the above mentioned, an efficient speaker that can be run on modest power (until I purchase the power that the speakers deserve) would be wonderful. This is the one place the Vandersteens lack…well, that and the looks department to appease the WAF.

Cost - I am just an average Joe that makes an average salary at an average job with a not so average passion for his hobbies, especially A/V. I also have a not so average wife (yes, she’s that good), and I have to think about her through all of this as well. I don’t have the luxury of being able to purchase what I want when I want and then compare it in my own home without worrying about cost. And this is no knock on those that can do such, God bless them. Due to cost restraints and my personal experience with what I have listened to over the years I have spent in this hobby, Internet Direct offers the best value to performance ratio in my opinion. And for the record, my arrival at this conclusion has nothing to do with the ID “fanboys” or the ID “haters,” or the fact that I get along with many of the ID supporters. It’s a simply judgment call that I have made based on my listening experiences. It is also not a knock on B&M speakers as they make some amazing products. And I am certainly not saying that all ID product are better than their rival B&M products in that same price range (I have heard garbage from both ID and B&M). But if one can eliminate most of the markup created by a local shop, the decision becomes a no brainer for me – look to ID first. This line of thinking is not static, however. If I can find a good deal on a used product or receive a nice discount on B&M equipment – awesome, I’m all over it.

With all of that being said, I do not have a set price range. I would like to keep things as low in cost as possible, but if I find a true contender that can win me over, I will try to save for it. However, let's not get too crazy here.


To conclude, I am looking for a speaker with the open and airiness of a Vandersteen, the dynamics of a Klipsch horn, the sound stage of beffleless speakers and a price that won’t break the bank or give my wife a reason to hate me. Add in a shake of accuracy and a dash of a well balanced treble extension, and that is my "perfect" speaker. Does such thing exist? Is something along these lines in the works?

So there you have it; my requirements, however unreachable they are.

In lieu of all this, I have no issues at all with purchasing the front speakers and adding the rest of the multi-channel system later.

So that brings me to the present and the decisions I have to make. Where do I go from here? Many of you have been doing this much longer than me, so can you offer any advice? And, of course, everyone’s ears and opinions are different, so I am specifically looking for opinions and some recommendations on what to listen to. I know better than to purchase based on someone else’s opinions, but I assure you they will be taken to heart and appreciated, though taken with a grain of salt.

Thank you all! Sorry for the very lengthy read. Feel free to PM me if you feel you may be flamed or challenged on your recommendation.

Thanks,
Brandon

Update - 3-23-08

Having listened to many speakers, I'm going to chose a "perfect speaker" for my ears based on price categories. So, here is what my favorites are at each price point thus far:

My "perfect speaker" under $1000/pair:
Vandersteen 1C

My "perfect speaker" under $3000/pair:
Salk SongTower

My cost no object "ultimate speaker:"
Salk SoundScape

As you can see there are a lot more price categories out there, which is why I will continue my journey until I've picked something for each category. No, I can't listen to everything, but that won't stop me from trying.


Jump to Audition # 1
Monitor Audio RS6 and Vandersteen 1C

Jump to Audition # 2
Paradigm Studio 100 v.3 and Monitor Audio GS60

Jump to Audition # 3
Vandersteen 2CE Sig II, Vienna Acoustics Schonberg, Sonus Faber Concerto Domus, Vandersteen Quatro and Vandersteen Model 5A

Jump to Audition # 4
Swan Diva 6.2, Acculine A3, Onix Rocket 850 Signature, Salk SongTower QWT, Definitive Technology BP10B and NHT Classic 2

Jump to Audition # 5
Ascend Acoustics Sierra-1

Jump to Audition # 6
Dynaudio Contour S1.4

Jump to Audition # 7
SVS MTS Series, Onix Rocket 850 and Paradigm Studio 100 v.4

Jump to Audition # 8
Monitor Audio PL300

Jump to my final decision...for now.

Salk SongTower's

Bonus Speaker Review
Chase Home Theater WAF-1's

My journey's end - the final choice (including review)
Salk SongTower RT (ribbon tweeter) - the first pair ever built

Unfortunately I have not added all of the speakers I have auditioned to this thread. It is very time consumming, and it would mean trying to remember all of the qualities of every speaker I've listened to before creating this thread (about another two dozen speakers or so). However, if you are interested, please PM me and I will answer your questions to the best of my ability (memory).

Finally, I want this thread to be more than my "journey." I want this thread to be used as a timeline of events for everyone and their search for their "perfect" speaker. Please don't let this die, even if and when I find my speaker and am content with it. In that event, the journey must continue, but now it's your journey folks.
 
See less See more
5
#28 ·
Gentlemen, thank you - some very good suggestions here.


Dollarman, I agree with all that you said. I am a big supporter of taking time and auditioning as much as possible. In fact, I have said the same thing probably hundreds of times on this very forum. I will certainly do so. Oh, and I will be consistently checking audiogon for good deals.


Paul, thanks man. You are dead right about room treatments and I am an avid suppoter. This cannot be stressed enough.


IcemanDallas, I do not have a dead set budget. Obviously, the cheaper the better, but I guess I would say no more than $4000 for the fronts, but I would rather go with $2000, or even $1000 (naturally). If I find something I truly fall in love with, I will save until I can purchase those speakers, but I hope to not have to spend that much on the mains.


CTviggen, see above for the price range. Thank you for the recommendations. Salk makes some gorgeous looking speakers!


Lewdog, thanks for the info. It seems there are a lot of Energy fans here. I will certainly check them out.


A flat frequency response do not an accurate speaker make. However, it’s one step in the right direction which is why it is important to me. A speaker that can maintain a relatively flar FR off axis would just be incredible!


How do you guys feel about open baffle designs? Less baffle to interfere with the sound, thus less resonance sounds nice. Anyone have any experience with this design?


Que, I own Vandersteen 2CE sigs, but they aren’t dynamic enough for HT. And we’ll have to agree to disagree about the 5A’s. I have heard the Wilson Sophia’s and the 5A’s and loved the Vandersteen’s and hated the Wilson’s. I also briefly demoed the Watt Puppy 8’s and was shocked at the performance to price ratio, and not in a good way. I guess this just goes to show you that everyone’s ears are different and/or each person likes a different sound.


I guess a good piece of information for you guys to know would be that I love the Vandersteen sound, but not their efficiency. They are rated at around an 87 efficiency, but I wouldn't be surprised if its more like 84. If I can find the Vandersteen sound paired with Klipsch dynamics, we'll have a winner.


Keep ‘em coming folks; this is good stuff! There is nothing better than the suggestions from a bunch of folks who have done this as long or longer than I have. I am basically making a research log and will be updating it with what I read about each speaker suggested. I will then be taking an entire month (or more) to audition whatever I feel is worthy of doing so. So please, bring on some more suggestions, especially now that you know what sound I prefer.


Thanks!
 
#30 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance /forum/post/11839490


Que, I own Vandersteen 2CE sigs, but they aren’t dynamic enough for HT. And we’ll have to agree to disagree about the 12A’s. I have heard the Wilson Sophia’s and the 12A’s and loved the Vandersteen’s and hated the Wilson’s. I also briefly demoed the Watt Puppy 8’s and was shocked at the performance to price ratio, and not in a good way. I guess this just goes to show you that everyone’s ears are different and/or each person likes a different sound. For me, I am now anti-Wilson Audio because the performance does not warrant the sound quality IMO. Oh, and I will never spend that much on two speakers. There is no speaker good enough for that price. Remember, average joe at an average job with an average salary.

I've never heard the 12A, but I have heard the 5A. To me they lacked the ability to present a decent 3D soundstage and they were grainy. Also to my ears they lacked an ability to present decent mid-range detail (i.e. they were not very transparent sounding). The 5a speakers I heard were set up by Vandersteen himself, so they were definitely set up correctly.


People do experience different things with stereophonics, so it isn't surprising to me that people experience different things with the same speakers... To my ears the W/P 8 speakers sound worlds better than the 5a speakers. I had the opportunity to buy either one and went with the speaker that made the music sound more like a "real" event to me instead of a compromised recording.


Sorry if I hit a nerve with you, as my intent was not to get you to start spouting the kind of anti-Wilson rhetoric you hear from Vandersteen fans like Richard Hardesty. It is apparent that is what happened, because you went from being friendly to attacking Wilson speakers when all I had said was that I don't like the 5a speakers...


Besides which, I think your reaction was just brand loyalty. You must not be happy with something about Vandersteens or else you wouldn't have started this thread and would just buy another pair of Vandersteens.
 
#32 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by QueueCumber /forum/post/11840383


I've never heard the 12A, but I have heard the 5A. To me they lacked the ability to present a decent 3D soundstage and they were grainy. Also to my ears they lacked an ability to present decent mid-range detail (i.e. they were not very transparent sounding). The 5a speakers I heard were set up by Vandersteen himself, so they were definitely set up correctly.


People do experience different things with stereophonics, so it isn't surprising to me that people experience different things with the same speakers... To my ears the W/P 8 speakers sound worlds better than the 5a speakers. I had the opportunity to buy either one and went with the speaker that made the music sound more like a "real" event to me instead of a compromised recording.


Sorry if I hit a nerve with you, as my intent was not to get you to start spouting the kind of anti-Wilson rhetoric you hear from Vandersteen fans like Richard Hardesty. It is apparent that is what happened, because you went from being friendly to attacking Wilson speakers when all I had said was that I don't like the 5a speakers...


Besides which, I think your reaction was just brand loyalty. You must not be happy with something about Vandersteens or else you wouldn't have started this thread and would just buy another pair of Vandersteens.

Oops, I did mean the 5A's...typo, sorry. Although, the quatros aren't quite as "dark" sounding as the 5A's.


You didn't hit a nerve at all. I was just giving an example of different strokes for different folks. And to be honest, I do have a small vendetta against Wilson because of an instance that happened to one of my good friends concerning his customer service/quality control. I don't want to delve into it though...no need to throw fuel on the fire.


I may have some brand loyalty, yes, but not so much as one would think, else I wouldn't be looking for another brand of speakers.



So no hard feelings I hope. I didn't mean to insult your intelligence or be unfriendly. I just wanted to get the point across that we all may like different sounds, and apparently the Vandersteen and Wilson sound isn't for everyone.



I have been wanted to get a demo of Dyns, but no dealer carries them around here. I'll have to take a roadtrip to get a listen, though. Thanks for the tip!
 
#33 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pibbo /forum/post/11839366


Do you have the older C line? Because I've got a pair of the C-9s right now, and I can definitely say that the Reference line sounds like a CONSIDERABLE improvement to me. Same basic "personality", just much more refined, transparent, smooth, etc. I'd say the biggest improvement I noticed was in the highs, where my C-9s can get a little harsh and ringy at times, but the Reference's highs are always delicate and sweet with NO harshness.

I believe mine are from the C series. I've heard before about the new Reference line and have been curious about them. Your words certainly make me even more curious to hear them. They have gone up in price but I'd certainly be willing to pay more than I did since there is so much more of what I like, which is sort of how I'm interpreting what you're saying. The genetically superior next generation, so to speak...
 
#34 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance /forum/post/11840856


I have been wanted to get a demo of Dyns, but no dealer carries them around here. I'll have to take a roadtrip to get a listen, though. Thanks for the tip!

IMO the Dynaudio C1s sounded better than the Magico Minis, but to be fair, the C1s were in a room well treated for high frequency reflections, while the Minis were in a room without any treatments at all. My biggest complaint on the Minis were how bright they sounded and how cacophonous the music ended up being, both of which are highly likely signs of an untreated room and possibly not the speaker itself.
 
#35 ·
Hmm, that does sound like a room acoustics issue, though I have never heard the Magico's. I certainly don't want a speaker with over the top treble energy. My ears fatigue pretty quickly, so finding that "right balance" will be an interesting journey.


I have a decent list of speakers to start with, but please keep making recommendations. Do any of the Internet Direct guys want to add anything to my list based on my preferences?


P.S. Those Aerials Acoustic 7B's look real nice!
 
#37 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance /forum/post/11843881


Hmm, that does sound like a room acoustics issue, though I have never heard the Magico's. I certainly don't want a speaker with over the top treble energy. My ears fatigue pretty quickly, so finding that "right balance" will be an interesting journey.


I have a decent list of speakers to start with, but please keep making recommendations. Do any of the Internet Direct guys want to add anything to my list based on my preferences?


P.S. Those Aerials Acoustic 7B's look real nice!

I would love to see the look on your face when you find out the 7B's are $5000/pair and another $500 for the bases.

 
#38 ·
Nuance, it sounds like you're going to take some time to make your decision, which is a good idea. I would suggest you locate an Anthony Gallo dealer and listen to the Reference 3.1. Unique design, no baffle, open and airy highs that compare favorably with Magnepans, with the benefit that they have excellent bass, large sweetspot and are not finecky as far as room placement. They also do not dominate the room as they are about 40" tall and 8" wide. I have a 2 channel system and the soundstage is wide and precise. If there is one complaint I've heard, it is image height when you're standing. Doesn't bother me because I'm sitting if doing serious listening. I have the optional subamp which extends the response from 34hz down to 22hz, but it is not necessary for the types of music I prefer. I usually only turn it on when watching movies, for added slam. Personally, I don't think an outboard sub is necessary but some do. I think the efficency is around 89db and I'm driving them with a Pioneer receiver putting out 140 WPC but I'm looking for something that will deliver a higher current level. Around 3K new and the subamp is $900 but both can be found for less used. I've had mine for 10 months and have no regrets at all. Good luck in your search!

http://www.roundsound.com/reference-3-speakers.htm
 
#39 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub /forum/post/11844302


I would love to see the look on your face when you find out the 7B's are $5000/pair and another $500 for the bases.


Then you should have been at my house last night; my heart sank a little...DOH! I guess they would be something to save up for one day, if I like them of course.


$5000 is a little too much says me, but as I mentioned earlier, if they knock my socks off I'll start saving.



Iceman, thanks for the info. There is actually a contracting company that performs large HT installations in my area that supplies Anthony Gallo speakers. I will check 'em out.
 
#40 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub /forum/post/11844302


I would love to see the look on your face when you find out the 7B's are $5000/pair and another $500 for the bases.


Welllllll....Craig. That Five grand could buy a 1995 Crown Vic, I suppose.



I already scared the pants off him when I told Nuance that they were $5k each
...my wife was nagging me to get off the computer and I erred. But I corrected it a moment later. So now Nuance is thrilled that they're not TEN grand. LOL!!
 
#43 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa /forum/post/11846522


I think that $5k is a great price point for speakers. Lots of amazing choices! Start saving those pennies, Nuance!

Oh yes, will do.


Say, you've listened to a lot over the years haven't you? What are your recommendations?
 
#44 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance /forum/post/11846600


Oh yes, will do.


Say, you've listened to a lot over the years haven't you? What are your recommendations?

I listened to just about everything I could back 18 months ago, yep. I had Maggie MMGs and fell in love with them. I felt as though the planar sound had ruined me for all "boxes", and they just about did. I was pretty sure I was going to jump into some Magnepan 3.6s. What I basically realized was that it wasn't so much the radiation pattern that I loved as much as it was the realism, transparency, and overall lack of coloration that came along with the Maggies.


I listened to the Gallos, Von Schweikert, B&W, JM Labs, the Paradigm Signatures, Martin Logan, etc....it wasn't until a local audio dealer with whom I'd become friends had me down for a listen to some DeVore Fidelity Super 8s that I finally found what I was looking for. They were very transparent, had a wonderful soundstage, precise imaging, and plenty of dynamics. They aren't bottom feeders, but they go low enough to where I can run them full range w/out a sub for music and be plenty happy.


I had a few conversations with John DeVore, read some reviews, listened to them a few more times, and then fate sealed my decision: Someone who had ordered a pair in a special veneer - Italian Ebony - had canceled his order after hearing the Silverbacks (the DeVore flagship speaker). So, they were offered to me and I jumped at them.


Pics dont' do them justice at all, but you can see them in the link in my signature below. They look much nicer in person.


The two main changes I've made to my system since picking up the Super 8s have been the addition of a Butler hybrid tube amp and some room treatments. Both made a nice improvement in the sound, but I've heard what the Super 8s can do in an ideal situation (my audio dealer friend's listening room is sick!), and I know I can improve things even more. But they're great for both music and HT (I use an SVS with them for HT), and I have had no desire to look elsewhere since picking them up.


I think what you originally posted in this thread is the key....you took an inventory on what qualities you want out of a speaker, and now you can find the best fit for you. For a while I wasn't exactly sure I had a real grasp on the specific qualities that most appealed to me. I was allowing the speakers to lead me down that path until I figured it out. Once I DID figure it out, it became much easier to rule out some of the products I was auditioning. When you know what you want out of your system, it's quite a bit easier to put the pieces together, I think.


BTW, I dont' know if you have them on your short list, but some other speakers you might want to listen to are the Salk HT-3s, the Odyssey Loreleis, and the Omega Acoustics stuff. Those are three lines I never had the chance to audition, but I hear lots of good things about them.
 
#45 ·
Summa, there is a lot of good information in what you just posted. Thanks a lot buddy, that is exactly what I was looking for! It sounds like you made the exact same journey I have, the difference being you have arrived at (or near) the end. Congrats on your purchase! I hope to one day be as satisfied as you.


Thanks!
 
#46 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance /forum/post/11848695


Summa, there is a lot of good information in what you just posted. Thanks a lot buddy, that is exactly what I was looking for! It sounds like you made the exact same journey I have, the difference being you have arrived at (or near) the end. Congrats on your purchase! I hope to one day be as satisfied as you.


Thanks!


Thanks, man
I think I'm lucky in the sense that I really don't like the whole process of auditioning an endless number of speakers or all sorts of gear. I like the part where I'm just satisfied with what I have and can enjoy it, you know? I think a lot of people love the idea of getting new ****, and that's what drives them more than anything. I'm not saying I don't enjoy getting new things, cause I do....but what drives me is the same thing that's driving you - the pursuit of a speaker that can reproduce music and/or movie soundtracks in the manner you feel is most satisfying.


When I make a purchase, I have to research the HELL out of it. I put a lot of time and energy into it...just can't help it. So for me, when it comes time to buy something, that means work, lol. The work always pays off, and I feel I've made a nice progression from when I first started in this hobby, but yeah, it feels good to be able to see a thread about some great new speaker and not be like, "wow, I wish I had THAT!" I'm still interested in what's going on in the hobby, of course, but I don't sit here and drool over a pair of speakers like I used to do.


For my purposes, I know I have the best match given my tastes and preferences. And I have no doubt that you'll end up in the same place since, in my opinion, you're doing it the right way.
I'm looking forward to hearing about which products you audition, and which direction you go next...part of why I love these forums is because I enjoy hearing about what others are doing, seeing pics of their gear and set-ups, etc....I think that's pretty cool
 
#48 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by QueueCumber /forum/post/11840383


I've never heard the 12A, but I have heard the 5A. To me they lacked the ability to present a decent 3D soundstage and they were grainy. Also to my ears they lacked an ability to present decent mid-range detail (i.e. they were not very transparent sounding). The 5a speakers I heard were set up by Vandersteen himself, so they were definitely set up correctly.

Did you hear them at the show in NY in May?
 
#49 ·

Quote:
Nuance, it sounds like you're going to take some time to make your decision, which is a good idea. I would suggest you locate an Anthony Gallo dealer and listen to the Reference 3.1. Unique design, no baffle, open and airy highs that compare favorably with Magnepans, with the benefit that they have excellent bass, large sweetspot and are not finecky as far as room placement

. I finally heard the Gallo 3.1 and came away with a completely different opinion from what I'd read in a review. The reviewer said that there was no sense of the sound character changing from the various drivers, that the soonic character was very coherent. I thought the bass was very good, the highs were a little too forward but nice sounding, and the midrange was recessed, making voices sound too far back. Not sure if room acoustics would make the midrange sound recessed.
 
#50 ·
Nuance -


I know exactly what you are going through, but my gut reaction to your quest for the perfect speaker is that you may be chasing a rainbow. I know, because I have been through quite a few high-quality speaker brands in the last four years trying to do the same thing you are. I've come to the conclusion that eventually, you will find something not to like about just about any speaker. None of them are perfect, and even the ones that measure flat on-axis, are far from it off-axis, so the power response (both direct and reflected energy) of the speaker in your room will dictate the sound you hear. In fact, if you are going to consider measurements and graphs as part of the qualifying criteria, forget looking at just the on-axis FR. It means very little in regards to the in-room response. And then there is the inevitable fact that some recordings are going to sound good on one speaker and crap on another. You may have to be happy with the speaker that is the least offensive while giving you the most of what you want, or just plan on switching speakers every few years at least.


I started this hobby in the early 90's, and at that time I was more interested in movies than music. Over time that changed and I wanted a system that would do both well. I have always loved music as much if not more than movies, but in the early 90's surround sound was new and exciting. Here's a brief account of what I went through in my search for the perfect speakers.

1st good quality speakers meant mainly for movies: 5.1 M&K THX certified system. Nice and compact, dynamic and exciting on movies, but also lean, dry, and analytical sounding on music. They were also a bit bright and emphasized sibilance, which I found quite annoying the longer I had them. Had these for about four years, but it was time to start the search for a better set of speakers . . .

2nd system: Aerial Acoustics 7B's, CC3, and SR3's (kept the MK sub). These measure ruler flat on-axis and received the most hyped-up, glowing review Ultimate AV Mag has ever given a surround sound speaker package. I don't think Ultimate AV made a single criticism of the speakers. (Yes, I know virtually all speaker reviews are positive, but there are at least a couple of minor negatives stated.) No one but an HT installer carried them in my area, so I bought them sight unseen (unheard?). A major no-no, I know, but what can I say, I was new at this. I had to drive two hours to get them, and I couldn't imagine being more excited. Got them home, hooked them up, and while they weren't offensively bad in any way, they did very little to impress me. The center speaker sounded boxy and chesty, and the 7B's had no life or sparkle to them. OK, so maybe I like a sound that is a little lifted up top, at least on axis. Definitely not the last word in transparency or dynamics. Yes, they could play loudly without strain, but they had very little jump or snap to their sound. Now I know that the 7B's have been recommended by another poster in this thread, and it is not my intent to discredit him. I am just stating my experience with them and it just goes to show you that we all value different things when it comes to sound reproduction. We all say that we want the same thingaccuracy, but obviously, our perspective on what is accurate differs from one person to the next.

3rd system: Vienna Acoustics Mozart, Maestro Center, Waltz surrounds (kept the MK sub again). These are still amongst my favorite speakers for music, but they simply didn't cut it for movies. Do they have flat on-axis FR? No way. They have a significant and intentional dip in the 2-4kHz region and a little lift at the top of the treble. They very easy to listen to, with never a chance of fatigue. However they never cam across as dull or overly polite. They sparkled up top, had a nice warm and reasonably tight bass and somewhat laidback, but never dull midrange. Very nice for music, and not noticeably colored in any way, despite the lack of accuracy in their FR. Unfortunately they didn't make the cut because that dip in the 2-4kHz region made it very difficult to understand spoken dialog in movies. So much so that my wife and I were constantly asking each other what was being said while watching TV and movies. The bass drivers would also bottom out during dynamic passages in movies or when rocking out. Lastly, not that is has anything to do with the sound quality, but their build quality was a little disappointing as well. I was able to catch these things soon enough that I was able to return the entire package to the store within their 30 day return period. Whew!

4th system: Martin Logan Aeon i, Cinema i center, Script I surrounds, MK subwoofer. After having been through a few speakers at this point, I asked to take the Aeon's home for a day to listen before I made a commitment to buy them. I also listened to them at the store prior to that. But I think at the time, I was so enamored by the slick looking electrostatic panels, that I pushed down some concerns I had with them. They were also just so damn transparent sounding, like there was no speaker their at all. Their transparency was very seductive. As you can see above, I ended up buying a 5 speaker set based on this limited in-home audition. After livening with them for a few months, and the honeymoon was over, I started to notice several things I really didn't like about them. First, they were too directional for HT. Sitting even slightly off center made the speaker closest to you dominate the sound. Second, because the Aeons are relatively small for an ESL speaker, they had very limited dynamics at moderately loud volumes. They became compressed and congested when pushed. And they really sucked for rock music, which is meant to be played loud and is often already highly compressed. Last but not least, I found them very fatiguing to listen to, even at medium to low volume. There was something strange about how their sound coupled to my ear. I know that this may sound strange but it felt like there was pressure on my eardrums when I listened to them.

5th system: KEF Reference 203's, 202 center, and matching dipolar surrounds, MK subwoofer. You would think that I would have learned my lesson in buying speakers without listening to them first, but I was desperate to find a speaker I could be happy with and I was confident that I could make a well informed decision off of measurements, reviews and past experience with the KEF brand. Again there were no dealers that stocked these speakers, so I ordered them through an HT installer. They measured almost ruler flat from the bass to the treble, so I was confident that what ever I fed them should be true to the recording. Boy was I wrong. They were very forward and even aggressive sounding through the lower to mid-treble. Other than this, they did sound quite balanced, but man were they fatiguing. I'm an idiot for buying these, but like I said, I thought it was a calculated risk based on the measurements. It didn't take long for me to know that these were not the speaker for me, but I remember hoping that they would mellow out and even-out with break-in. Never happened. Sold them after about three months. There was absolutely nothing in the FR graphs that showed a peak in the mid-treble, so the reason for their sound quality is still a mystery to me.


At this point, I swore that I would never again buy a set of speakers without first listening to them, so I asked to borrow some speakers from the local hi-fi shop.

1st audition: Borrowed a pair of Dynaudio Contour S3.4's to bring home. Pretty good overall, and again they have very flat response on-axis, but I noticed in my room a bit of lower-treble glare that I knew would be a problem in the long run. In looking at the off-axis measurements for these speakers (after I listened to them), sure enough they have broader response in the low-treble than in the upper-mids and upper-treble, thus reflecting more energy in this region and skewing the power response.

2nd audition: Paradigm Signatures. These just so happen to be the speakers I have happily owned for the past two years and i thought they were speakers that I could be happy with for a long time. They are generally well balanced, though a bit bright and a bit forward (just a little). Excellent soundstage, great detail, can be played at high volumes without strain, efficient, and dynamic. They seemed to offer most of what I wanted, with no faults that I couldn't live with. I typically don't mind a little extra energy up top on a speaker (to accentuate detail), but don't much care for a mid-forward sound. These were a little more forward than I wanted, but not so much that it bothered me. In fact that direct sort of sound kinda grew on me. But you know what? Even though they had a good run, they are being replaced. Over the last few months, I started to dial in on a shouty and somewhat resonant quality to vocals in music. I first heard it during moderately loud listening, but then it started hearing it all the time even at lower volumes.


About two months ago, I started the search again. I really only had to potential choices this time though, as I had either already listened to everything available in my area, or the brands that I would like to hear are no longer available locally (like Revel).


I listened to the Paradigm Signature V2 (with new aluminum midrange drivers and Beryllium tweeters), and the Monitor Audio Gold Signature series. I ultimately chose the Monitor Audio's. Tonally they sound neutral trough the bass, mids and lower-treble and slightly lifted in the upper treble. But what really drew me to them is that they have close to the transparency of an electrostatic, but the dynamics of well a dynamic driver. Are they the right speaker for you? I dunno. Are they worth a listen? Sure. But the point to all of this is that you really shouldn't rule out any speakers in your price range, even if the measurements don't look so hot or if one person likes them or another doesn't. You might just find that the technically less accurate speaker is more pleasing to listen to with your music in your room. Sure a thread like this may help you get a general idea as to which speakers to consider, but then again just look at the recommendation for the Aerials. One poster loves them, I don't. Who's right? Should you listen to them or shouldn't you? If I were the only one to post my feelings on them would you have ruled them out?


I'm not saying that you shouldn't keep looking, as that is part of the fun in this hobby, but again I think you are either going to have to learn to be happy with the shortcomings of the speakers you have, or plan on a long journey of speaker replacements until you finally whittle it down, if that is even possible. I think I would be fooling myself if I said that the Monitor Audio's are going to be the last speaker I ever own, but hopefully they will last me a few years . . . .


Best of luck on the hunt, and just be sure to enjoy the ride!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top