or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Best quality speakers for it's size
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best quality speakers for it's size - Page 5

post #121 of 153
this one is a little larger total, but will destroy the at-1: http://qsc.com/products/Loudspeakers/KW%20Series/KW122/
post #122 of 153
the makie 824 are smaller and will beat them: http://www.mackie.com/products/hrmk2series/
post #123 of 153
these are roughly the same size, and will slaughter the at-1:

http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/general/Product.aspx?PId=26&MId=5
post #124 of 153
another one, about the same size, total beatdown of the at-1:

http://www.genelec.com/products/8260a/
post #125 of 153
for the op, if you want the best speaker for its size, buy a pair of these:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?partnumber=264-893

and have a cabinet maker build you cabinets to house them. grab some subwoofers and hide them around the room and try to ignore the fact that their sensitivity is about 10 times higher than the at-1's. :-)~

of course you could hunt around for something similar and kef may have something good to offer, but it will probably cost closer to $5k than $500. markup...is a terrible thing. :-)
post #126 of 153
LTD02 you have been member since 2003 ,I think you know how to post those multiple posts, in just one post.
post #127 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

this speaker will perform quite similarly: http://www.salksound.com/songtower%20specifications.htm

as it is quite similar in size and design. there are countless others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

this one is a little larger total, but will destroy the at-1: http://qsc.com/products/Loudspeakers/KW%20Series/KW122/

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

the makie 824 are smaller and will beat them: http://www.mackie.com/products/hrmk2series/

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

these are roughly the same size, and will slaughter the at-1:

http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/general/Product.aspx?PId=26&MId=5

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

another one, about the same size, total beatdown of the at-1:

http://www.genelec.com/products/8260a/

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

for the op, if you want the best speaker for its size, buy a pair of these:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?partnumber=264-893

and have a cabinet maker build you cabinets to house them. grab some subwoofers and hide them around the room and try to ignore the fact that their sensitivity is about 10 times higher than the at-1's. :-)~

of course you could hunt around for something similar and kef may have something good to offer, but it will probably cost closer to $5k than $500. markup...is a terrible thing. :-)

You're adorable.

3rd party measurements, please. I provided them when I was asked. You do the same.

- As far as your last suggestion of just "finding" a cabinet maker and buying subs: Not everyone lives in their parents basement.
post #128 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlexMulti View Post


- As far as your last suggestion of just "finding" a cabinet maker and buying subs: Not everyone lives in their parents basement.

LMAO. biggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

Some of these guys believe the speaker with the highest factory-rated Max SPL "destroys" them all. eek.gifbiggrin.gif
post #129 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I would love to watch you do some truly level matched, time synched double blind listening tests of anything, speakers, amps, you name it. You appear to be yet another poster boy for the kinds of audiophile myths that sighted evaluations engender.

1st: You're a sick bastard for wanting to watch me do anything.

2nd: Why does it have to be double blind if I am indifferent?

3rd: What kinds of audiophile myths do I "appear" to be afflicted by?
post #130 of 153
PlexMulti take it easy please remove that b word so you don't get in trouble. You can defend your self ,just not like that.
Edited by losservatore - 9/13/13 at 5:57pm
post #131 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlexMulti View Post


You're adorable.

3rd party measurements, please. I provided them when I was asked. You do the same.

- As far as your last suggestion of just "finding" a cabinet maker and buying subs: Not everyone lives in their parents basement.

making personal attacks to try to hide your ignorance won't get you anywhere with me. just talk about the issue and leave the personal jibes aside please.

here are measurements for one of them. feel free to look up the rest on your own.







genelec_8260a_sound_and_recording_0410.pdf 2691k .pdf file
post #132 of 153
"2nd: Why does it have to be double blind if I am indifferent?"

because sighted tests are biased even to people who are indifferent. that is proven and is one reason why most good scientific studies are actually double blinded, so not even the researcher knows what is being tested, much less the participant.
post #133 of 153
the jbl pro stuff has really good spec sheets btw, so lots of measurements in there.

you can take them or leave them as being biased because they are manufacturer based, but these are tools not toys, so the specs tend to actually be accurate and not just marketing puffery.

http://www.jblpro.com/BackOffice/ProductAttachments/JBL.LSR6332.pdf

...


Mackie has pretty good details on its speaker as well:

http://www.mackie.com/products/hrmk2series/downloads/HR824MK2_Specs.pdf

independent frequency response sweep in this post: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5672373-post39.html
Edited by LTD02 - 9/13/13 at 6:03pm
post #134 of 153
"LTD02 you have been member since 2003 ,I think you know how to post those multiple posts, in just one post."

yeah...but sometimes you get an idea and make a post. then you get another idea and make another post. if all you do is go back and edit previous posts, much of the information can get lost. I've seen it happen too many times...

so long as each post is content rich, there shouldn't be a problem. it's not like i'm posting just to post or anything...
post #135 of 153
^^^^^Do you know how to quote?biggrin.gif just kidding....
post #136 of 153
no worries and i still believe that the coaxial driver that i linked to in a small enclosure would be quite nice. no crossover would be required and it will perform better than most of the speakers being discussed.

it could work in something like this, but subs would be required.

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?partnumber=302-731
post #137 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

so long as each post is content rich, there shouldn't be a problem. it's not like i'm posting just to post or anything...

When I read this, all I could think was "Now I know how he has 11,900 posts" biggrin.gif
post #138 of 153
yeah...some posts take 10 seconds...some take 10 hours http://www.avsforum.com/t/1485120/submaximus-a-large-front-loaded-horn-for-stereo-integrity-ht-18

i suppose it all balances out somehow?

wait, you have 8855 posts...who's talking??? :-)~
post #139 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

yeah...some posts take 10 seconds...some take 10 hours http://www.avsforum.com/t/1485120/submaximus-a-large-front-loaded-horn-for-stereo-integrity-ht-18

i suppose it all balances out somehow?

wait, you have 8855 posts...who's talking??? :-)~

I know, but I don't post a whole bunch in a row of my own. If I did, I'd have 15,000 or 20,000 by now smile.gif
post #140 of 153
yeah...it is a little strange for me to do that too...maybe i was trying to make a point or something...you know like when somebody doesn't appear to be listening... :-)

post #141 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

yeah...it is a little strange for me to do that too...maybe i was trying to make a point or something...you know like when somebody doesn't appear to be listening... :-)

Huh? What did you say?



wink.gif
post #142 of 153
That was funny ^^^^^^
post #143 of 153
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I take it that you are unaware of the principles of the science of audiometry. Audiometry is the science of measuring the response of the human ear, and the response of the ear is always measured with test equipment. In the old days a tuning fork, for a long time it has been electronic instruments.

The response of the human ear can be reliably tested on people who are unconscious or too young to respond reliably. Please see otoacoustic emission measurement.

If you think about it you never measure something using the thing being measured as your only tool. You need some kind of outside standard. Carpenters use tape measures and other calibrated devices, right?

Well I'm measuring what sounds good in my ear, so I use my ear to see what sounds good. I'm not sure whats wrong with that logic.. As for using units to measure, what units are used to measure what sounds good?


Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

fyi, studies show that there are measurements that correlate to preferences in speakers and headphones. there is actually quite a bit of research on this one.

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/

and it is not just trained or untrained listeners

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2008/12/part-2-differences-in-performances-of.html

ymmv.

Thanks LTD02 thats interesting.
post #144 of 153
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

That was funny ^^^^^^

That is hilarious! What a big baby haha.
post #145 of 153
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlexMulti View Post






You're adorable.

3rd party measurements, please. I provided them when I was asked. You do the same.

- As far as your last suggestion of just "finding" a cabinet maker and buying subs: Not everyone lives in their parents basement.

Haha, it was a cool suggestion though. But yeah I really dont want to get too involved in building stuff. I wish I had more time.
post #146 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

In the nearly 60 years I have been following audio, and including backward looks into legacy technology going back to the late 1800s, mainstream audio gear has been steadily evolving towards greater accuracy.

This will make perfect sense as long as we have natural sounds to listen to. We simply want natural sounds to sound natural as recorded sounds.

I totally agree that audio technology has made significant gains in accuracy.

But I disagree that we are all always looking for an accurate reproduction of a recording, or that the recording itself is always natural.

You might appear to be arguing against something that I didn't say and may wish to disagree with myself.

Artistic expression in recordings often takes the form of inaccuracy and that is generally accepted. For example CSI Las Vegas is usually underexposed and CSI Miami has the brightness and color saturation turned up much of the time.
Quote:
The final version of a studio recording is an interpreted piece of music created by the audio engineer who produces it. You could give master tapes of a four piece rock band to five different music producers, and the resulting recordings would likely be slightly different. Why? Because they interpret differently the ways to mix the the different instruments sounds together. It's passed through the aesthetic experience of the producer.

That again is an example of either art or accident or both.
Quote:
As a listener I might--and often do--chose to do the same, changing the EQ to emphasize what I want to hear in the recording. DJ's do it all the time, reinterpreting through EQ and other effects.

Again, no problem although I hear a lot of small venue mixers who mix like they have damaged hearing, and I walk up to them and say "Hi" and they say "What?" ;-) Joke, but there are more than few real experiences behind it. I don't know if you know this but I have years of experience as a medium-sized venue mixer and recording engineer, both tracking and mixing.
Quote:
I suspect that this predilection that some have for accurate reproduction is a little bit of a cultural bias. For the longest time, users had little ability to control the sound of the music they listen to. Now people are even remixing it/reinterpreting music the way that they want. Why do they do this? Because they are trying to improve what is ultimately an aesthetic experience.

I see a practical cause. Applying changes based on personal preference works best and most easily in a context that starts out as accurate as possible.
Quote:
So audio equipment is a lens that allows us to experience the music in a recording as an aesthetic experience. Maybe I like my world viewed through sunglasses with a polarized lens, or through rose colored glasses. smile.gif

And I will tell you that if you hard wire those preferences into a system you may regret it, but if you make them user options then you have a greater possibility of people having a favorable perception of the system. The other thing is that my view is more global view, and I'm looking at cultural trends, not just one system. For every car that rolls down the road booming so hard you can feel it on the curb, there are many others who don't want exaggerated bass or even as much as natural bass.
Quote:
Now granted, starting with an accurate reproduction could make it easier for listeners to reinterpret the music to suit their aesthetic experience.

So we agree about that.
Quote:
However, this does explain why people given a choice between two different speakers--one fairly accurate, the other a little bit colored---might choose the latter.

I look at the dialog over Audyssey and believe that most people are using it as is, while a minority are adding manual adjustments.
Quote:
It also explains why some people like tube amps over solid state.

Tubes versus solid state has a strong accidental influence since tubed amps exaggerate the differences among speakers because of the strong influence on frequency response from speaker impedance curves. I think that in modern times we have at least two markets - one influenced by sentimentality, and one influenced by a simple desire for something different.
Quote:
Meanwhile, applying the idea of "natural sounds" to music is an antiquated notion if one listens to EDM. I guess one could describe dubstep warbles as industrial, having a man made quality and thus "natural." But most of those sounds don't exist in nature, in the real world.

EDM is a niche, and criticizing general rules because there are a few exceptions isn't that helpful. Of course there are exceptions!

[/quote]
So this is why I question such
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

discussions which assume that neutrality/perfect accuracy is what people will enjoy the most.

Actually, I don't see naturalness as an issue. Making a natural-sounding speaker really doesn't relate to size and efficiency. Size and efficiency only control bass extension. You can splice whatever midrange and treble onto any speaker that is large enough to control those portions of the sound field.
Quote:
I'm not saying that measurements are not valuable. Quite the contrary. But I do find it interesting that discussions of speakers and what's best completely lump the realm of aesthetic experience into "listener's tastes" with almost nothing more said.

It makes sense to separate accuracy from personal taste because they are two different things. Furthermore, it is not written on stone that measurements = accuracy. If you want max boom, measurements and scientific analysis are still valuable tools for getting you there. Or wherever else!
Quote:
That category is WAY more complex than that the label makes it out it to be. I suspect that the reason people don't talk about it is because most people don't know how to.

I agree that ignorance and wrong-headedness limit our abiltiy to make things that we enjoy.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

We really don't know where ears sit on the scale of listening instruments because they are the only show in town. This week. ;-)

I wouldn't be surprised if in my son's lifetime (maybe not mine) if music won't be pumped directly into the brain, bypassing the auditory system.

Electronic bypass of the whole hearing apparatus but the ear is already a done deal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant

The existing technology seems to be nothing that a person would choose over good natural hearing, but the technology is young.
Quote:
Of course then we still have the brain's interpretation of music as an aesthetic experience, which is likely way more complicated than whatever factors the auditory system has on that experience smile.gif

IME creating that aesthetic experience is best left up to artists, and generally works best in an accurate reproduction environment that lets the art shine through unhindered.
post #147 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

yeah...some posts take 10 seconds...some take 10 hours http://www.avsforum.com/t/1485120/submaximus-a-large-front-loaded-horn-for-stereo-integrity-ht-18

i suppose it all balances out somehow?

wait, you have 8855 posts...who's talking??? :-)~

I know, but I don't post a whole bunch in a row of my own. If I did, I'd have 15,000 or 20,000 by now smile.gif

I find it interesting that you and I have made about the same number of posts since 2009, have different posting styles but about the same number of thumbs up.

Oh, and we are both from Michigan. FYI my cultural background is more like I was from the Western side of Michigan even though I was born and raised in Detroit. Some of my best friends are from Grand Rapids...
post #148 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by det1024 View Post

Well I'm measuring what sounds good in my ear, so I use my ear to see what sounds good. I'm not sure whats wrong with that logic.. .
Nothing, so long as you admit that doing so is purely subjective, and therefore only applies to what you prefer, not to what others may prefer. You also might think that Brussels sprouts taste good, but that would hardly serve as a reason for anyone, much less everyone, else to find them even palatable.
post #149 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildaccept View Post

good,hat for a dual woofer speaker is 90dB/watt. Numbers much higher than that are usually inflated, sometimes ridiculously so.22.gif
Not necessarily, as one may trade off low frequency extension for higher sensitivity, as in the case of pro-sound drivers. Or one may trade off sensitivity for low frequency extension, as in the case of sub woofer drivers. But when one claims both high sensitivity and low frequency extension that may only be accomplished with a large cabinet. If one claims both very high sensitivity and low frequency extension that may only be accomplished via horn loading, which results in an even larger cabinet.
post #150 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Artistic expression in recordings often takes the form of inaccuracy and that is generally accepted. For example CSI Las Vegas is usually underexposed and CSI Miami has the brightness and color saturation turned up much of the time.
That again is an example of either art or accident or both.
Again, no problem although I hear a lot of small venue mixers who mix like they have damaged hearing, and I walk up to them and say "Hi" and they say "What?" ;-) Joke, but there are more than few real experiences behind it. I don't know if you know this but I have years of experience as a medium-sized venue mixer and recording engineer, both tracking and mixing.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. That's a lot to think about in your main post, so I'm not going to try to respond to all of it smile.gif

I can see how your aesthetic is tied to an evaluation of accuracy. And there's nothing wrong with that, but that is a personal aesthetic which may differ from others. And I can hear the engineer here in the idea that art is designed in the separation of "art or accident" which I think many artists--photographers, painters, novelists, musicians, etc.--might disagree with that distinction.

I understand the DJ example, although I would argue it's not always lack of technical knowledge, but sometimes the individual's attempt at personal expression. I used to work at a small concert venue, and George Clinton was playing one night. The distortion was horrible in a way that just sounded completely off--not musical, not in the way that other artists use distortion well. I asked our technician afterwards if there was something wrong with the equipment, and he said, "No, that's how George Clinton likes it." LOL
Quote:
EDM is a niche, and criticizing general rules because there are a few exceptions isn't that helpful. Of course there are exceptions!

I'd call it more of a major exception since millions of people listen to EDM each day, and I would also say that it's starting to influence modern alternative rock. smile.gif

Plus it's a possible for anyone to compose in EDM with a computer. I helped my 13 year old son this summer to learn to create music with FL Studio. He had fun. I'm not a musician, but I was very impressed with what one could do with FL Studio, and I would imagine that we'll see even more people doing their own EDM creation now that the tools are available at a very reasonable price, cheap enough that someone can get into it as an amateur for fun.
Quote:
Oh, and we are both from Michigan. FYI my cultural background is more like I was from the Western side of Michigan even though I was born and raised in Detroit. Some of my best friends are from Grand Rapids...

Awesome. More MI people!

Maybe we need to do a MI GTG at some point. And we could setup a laptop with Foobar with some ABX testing of mp3 and flac to dispel that one myth about the great superiority of lossless smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Best quality speakers for it's size