Speakers for 20-30K - Page 8

- 2

Lol what are you -2 ing? lol

= -1

And that's our math lesson for today.

Hi Mark, that's fine, except it's not consistent with what jmichaelf is responding to (and you quoted him), which is this:



The Music’s listening-window response (a five-point average of axial and +/–15-degree horizontal and vertical responses) measures +3.49/–6.02 decibels from 200 hertz to 10 kilohertz.

As such, that loudspeaker has a serious octaves wide hole in is upper mid/low treble power response and it should be clearly audible to a loudspeaker designer.
Feel free to disagree if you wish.

cheers,

AJ

Teach me calculus next so I can become a Physicist! =P

Yeah, then you will have the credentials to sell special electrical plug covers and rocks to attach to your cables.

****! You discovered my evil plan! Muhahahaha :P

Time out for you! :P

Interesting input. I'm not sure if you're suggesting that I stated that I want flat frequency response and only flat frequency response, but the statement I was replying to said something to the affect of, "manufacturers explicitly model peaks and nulls into their speakers to achieve a specific goal." This is antithetical to hifi.

Out of curiosity, in a sentence or two, could you describe your design philosophy?

Then have you considered the flagship of Klipsch? The Palladium P-39F. Just in your price range at 20K.

http://www.klipsch.com/p-39f-floorstanding-speaker

So with all the talk about CBT speakers, does Keele actually make any of those to sell, like the CBT36? Or are they just design exercises?

How about JBL's CBT speakers like the 70J-1 + 70E-1? Has anyone heard those? They're actually fairly inexpensive (comparatively speaking) at $1038 for the 70J-1 module and $5xx for the 70E-1.


Max

Personally, if I had 14K, that's what I'd go with.

Not trying to sway your decision. That's just my choice. Demo all the speakers you can! At this price point, you should be able to do in-home demos.

salon 2s instead of Salk SoundScape 10s with a matching Rythmik sub?

Personally, I'd rather have the Salon 2 over the Salk SoundScape 10.

Again, I encourage the OP to listen to everything he can!

That being said, I don't think the OP can go wrong with either. I just bought the Philharmonic 2. Aside from the lower extension and louder SPL without distortion, the Phil sounds just like the SoundScape. (Shocking since they were designed by the same man. :P)

The fact is that 30 or 40 years ago very few speakers measured flat across the frequency band. Does that mean those speakers sounded bad because they were not "accurate" as perceived by many audiophiles as "the last spoken word of hi end reproduction." Again I respectfully disagree with the notion that a speakers "measured frequency range" is the most important factor in sound reproduction.

Most of these measurements are meaningless to begin with because most people that do these measurements use different techniques not to mention that these measurements are often taken in anechoic chambers. We do not listen to music in anechoic chambers, or at least most of us don't. Secondly, even when a tech does take these measurements in a normal room setting, we are led to believe that every room will be constructed identically to that room that the measurements were taken in. That is we again have to believe that everyone will use that speaker in a room that has the same treatments, same room construction and boundaries.

Many of the speaker designers in the past did tune their speakers by ear, and many have gone back to doing that in the here and now. And I would argue to kingdom come that many of the finest speakers I have ever listened to were anything but flat across the entire FR. There is invariably differences in mid-range suck out and other diffraction's that play a major role in how we perceive a speaker in the room in which we listen to it. I would much rather listen to a speaker that has smooth continuos roll off at and beyond 15khz, than a speaker that stays flat all the way out to 20khz. To me a gentle roll off is the way I prefer a speaker, especially with more on an emphasis on natural decay and timbre cohesiveness as that decay swims over my head. To me the midrange is where a speakers tonality is born and where it lives.

Again not everyone will appreciate the same qualities, which was my point as to why some speaker manufactures strive for something less than a totally flat frequency response throughout the entire band.

This article is a good read for those that may appreciate such qualities.

http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/138

Again I am not advocating that engineers should not strive for a flat frequency response, but there are subtle changes in a frequency response that can make a speaker's attributes shine through, while still maintaing a level of accuracy in a more cohesive manner.

Yes, the CBT36 is available as a kit or assembled system. I also had a new CBT on demo this weekend at the AK Fest in Michigan.

Would that be the 'Next Step' array on the website? I wanted to check out AK Fest, but I had to head out of state.


Max

As far as flat frequency responses go, I think there is a difference of perception and semantics of what that exactly entails. Some folks mean flat as in a horizontal line, others mean flat as in a straight line, BUT it may not necessarily be horizontal in-room.

I DO want a speaker that can measure flat anechoically. I wouldn't want anything with inherent peaks and dips in the design because speakers with built-in uneven responses like that can be practically impossible to correct. They will skew the sound of whatever is playing. Some folks may like the skewed sound, but that would be up to individual tastes. I don't think speakers, amps (or cables) should act as tone controls. I want all those components to have as little variation and coloration as possible.

Now that article has a point. A measured flat in-room response is not perceptually flat. The Harman studies have shown that people tend to perceive a falling response as flat, and their tests indicate that the most preferable frequency response is one that is as smooth as possible with no major peaks or dips, and gently decreases as frequency increases. It's probably because we're accustomed to hearing that inside any structure with walls.

As it turns out however, because room gain tends to have a greater effect on the lower octaves, and the higher frequencies experience greater decay over distance, a speaker with an anechoically flat FR tends to naturally exhibit a falling power response when placed in average sized rooms and measured at average listening distances. With the exception of constructive and destructive interference causing peaks and nulls (which can be greatly reduced with placement and acoustic treatment), the natural in-room response tends to emulate the 'Harman curve', just as my speakers do in my listening room. A little EQ'ing and I get a nice, smooth FR.

A speaker incapable of measuring flat anechoically is probably not going to have a smooth FR in-room either, and unlike the flat speaker, treatments and EQ are probably never going to get the FR smooth. I would much rather start off with a speaker that I KNOW is capable of a smooth response and fine tune it in-room, than a speaker with a response that needs to be fixed even before I begin.

Of course, there are other factors like the off-axis response, bipole or dipole design etc. which will have differing effects and cater to different preferences, but to me, the ability to produce a measured smooth/flat FR is part of the basic requirement for consideration. I don't exactly want a speaker that produces a smooth but sloped decreasing response anechoically either, because its in-room response is very likely going to produce an even steeper slope.


Max

Did you ever listen to the KEF 207/2?

I think it even measures just slightly "better" than the Salon2. The KEF 201/2 measures better than Salon2 as well, I think.

Here is the Stereophile review of the P-39F:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/k...r-measurements

Probably sounds pretty good, but another speaker that falls a little short on measurements.

I can't say that I have. I'll have to find a dealer. Never pass up an opportunity to listen to speakers!

EDIT: I found a dealer with the Blade (**** yeah!) and the reference series a few hours from me. I'll take a trip up next week!

The Off-Axis of the P-39F doesn't look very good. Especially compared to the S-1EX, Salon 2, Compact Reference One etc.

Personally, I'd demo it, but if I were to buy based on measurments alone, I would look elsewhere.

I looked yesterday, the SP-BS-41 ($100) off-axis looks better than the B&W 800D (20,000+). !!

I told B&W that the Infinity P362 has better on-axis and better horizontal & vertical off-axis than the $25K 800D.

I think they gave me the middle finger

But I think the 800D/802D are among the best looking aesthetically.

So when you listen, make sure to keep your eyes peeled on the 20 layers of beech, 10 coats of lacquer, and 4 days of polishing piano gloss cabinets at all times!

Warning: Do not, I repeat, do not close your eyes!

I've heard the first set in the US locally. They were very nice. I was directly in front of them so I didn't care about off axis. They are some of the sexiest pair of towers I'd ever seen. I'd love to have some time with them to put them through their paces, see if I could live with those horn tweeters for an extended period of time.

Some people think their $1K/pr speakers sound better. Like you say, so subjective.

Speakers may all sound differently. But all the great accurate speakers will sound more alike (closer to original content) than they sound differently.

So it may be tough to choose among the great ones. But even $1,000,000 speakers won't sound any better to most people. Law of diminishing returns.

That's a really good reason to suggest the JBL LSR6332. I haven't managed to find a better value in the past few years.

Unless you were in an anechoic chamber or outside, you still heard the off axis.
Care or not.

cheers,

AJ

Hhahahaha so true, although the room was a dedicated theater room and well treated... almost too much IMO, and I joked with a buddy that I went with that it was like an Anechoic Chamber... too dead for me... I like a bit livelyness to my room, not too much but not dead....

Until you go out there and listen to them all you will never know!

No, it was a new design not on my site yet.