AVS Forum banner

3121 - 3140 of 5694 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,036 Posts
Thanks, I'm hoping to spend $2K or less on a pair of speakers. I wish I had unlimited funds to dedicate to this hobby, but unfortunately I don't :) And I'll try to pair it with the most powerful receiver I can (will probably go used so I can get say a Denon X4K series receiver, or even X6K if I can find a good deal). Receiver, because at some point I'll add a center speaker for movies, but probably won't add a sub.
Please compare Magnepan LRS with a natural sounding high end speaker (MSRP 2 to 4k per pair).

I am intrigued by them but have not been able audition them yet.
Since I'm a subjectivist audiophile, therefor with an opinion that's not very welcome among the listen by numbers crowd, let me refer you to someone with slightly more credibility than me. I know Steve, and we disagree fairly frequently, but I think he's got it mostly right with this one. Where I disagree with him on this one is that I still have soundstage and center when way off axis. Caveats are that these are 86db at 1 meter at 1v and they like power plus they need to be placed out from the front wall, which some folks cannot do …. WAF. These are very tolerant of positioning provided that they are several feet out into the room from that front wall and aren't so brutally resolving as my ESLs. The goal being to play music and not drive you nuts.

I know a few audiophile types with $500k to $700k systems who bought these just for the hell of it, for a master bedroom or office, who agree with my and Steve's assessment. Within it's limits (no 120db), for $650 for the pair, they're the deal of the year. Just be prepared to wait 3 - 5 months in line unless you can find a dealer who stocks them. Many dealers refuse to stock them because they're too cheap and no money in them (direct quote, btw, from the Maggie dealer in C-Bus) For an audiophile oriented budget system with these and maybe the little Schiit Vidar amp at 200w per at 4ohms at $699 and stream, you're there.

I'm currently using them in my budget system and they're being driven by the cheapest Yamaha integrated the AS301 They're fine provided that you're not looking for a 100+db.

at min 2:45


And another would be the new $2,000 Dynaudio Evoke 20 standmount.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,954 Posts
I wish reviewers would at least look up the difference among planar-dynamic, ribbon, and ESL drivers. QR is more marketing than engineering IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
Thanks, I'm hoping to spend $2K or less on a pair of speakers. I wish I had unlimited funds to dedicate to this hobby, but unfortunately I don't :) And I'll try to pair it with the most powerful receiver I can (will probably go used so I can get say a Denon X4K series receiver, or even X6K if I can find a good deal). Receiver, because at some point I'll add a center speaker for movies, but probably won't add a sub.
Definitely get a receiver as an amp, they have so much more functionality than a "stereo receiver" that it's stupid.

For some reason, "audiophiles" frown on receivers, but as far as I can tell, it's only because of marketing. AV receivers often have the same amplification hardware as regular amps from the same manufacturer and they measure just as well.

Don't worry too much about receiver power. You need exponentially more power for more volume, so a receiver that can put 150W into some speakers is only going to be somewhat more powerful than a receiver that can "only" put 75W into the same speakers.

Also, don't worry about a receiver's video capabilities. You don't have to plug your video sources into a receiver, you can plug them into your TV. So if you have a 4K video source, you can plug it into a 4K TV no problem, and then you can use a 1080p receiver to decode and output the audio just as well as if you had a 4K receiver. (Although that situation might eventually change with Atmos/point-source-encoded audio.)

Where I am, it seems like a bunch of people are upgrading their receivers from 1080p to 4K, and you can get a really great 1080p receiver for around $100 on Craigslist. Plug your 4K video source into your 4K TV, plug your TV into your 1080p receiver, and you've just saved $400 on a top-quality receiver/amplifier...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,738 Posts
Does Revel make all of their drivers in house? Or do they outsource some of them?

I was noticing some similarities between the Performa3 and PerformaBe woofers and some SB Acoustics woofers available online....

Revel M106:



SB Acoustics SB17NBAC35-8:



Both have black aluminum cones, both have five ribs, both have same screw pattern, same cast aluminum frame, similar dust cap. 87dB sensitivity for both (assuming the woofer is dictating the overall sensitivity for the M106). Response looks very controlled, Revel quality.

Diameter is off by 5mm(?), but I’m sure Harman would want their own custom version, not the same exact as the consumer version.

I also couldn’t find anything about this online, so maybe I’m completely wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
Definitely get a receiver as an amp, they have so much more functionality than a "stereo receiver" that it's stupid.



For some reason, "audiophiles" frown on receivers, but as far as I can tell, it's only because of marketing. AV receivers often have the same amplification hardware as regular amps from the same manufacturer and they measure just as well.



Don't worry too much about receiver power. You need exponentially more power for more volume, so a receiver that can put 150W into some speakers is only going to be somewhat more powerful than a receiver that can "only" put 75W into the same speakers.



Also, don't worry about a receiver's video capabilities. You don't have to plug your video sources into a receiver, you can plug them into your TV. So if you have a 4K video source, you can plug it into a 4K TV no problem, and then you can use a 1080p receiver to decode and output the audio just as well as if you had a 4K receiver. (Although that situation might eventually change with Atmos/point-source-encoded audio.)



Where I am, it seems like a bunch of people are upgrading their receivers from 1080p to 4K, and you can get a really great 1080p receiver for around $100 on Craigslist. Plug your 4K video source into your 4K TV, plug your TV into your 1080p receiver, and you've just saved $400 on a top-quality receiver/amplifier...
Agree completely. Just one caveat. If you have multiple 4k video sources, you would need a TV with multiple video inputs or a 4k video selector with digital audio out. Still cheaper than buying a 4k video AVR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
Definitely get a receiver as an amp, they have so much more functionality than a "stereo receiver" that it's stupid.

For some reason, "audiophiles" frown on receivers, but as far as I can tell, it's only because of marketing. AV receivers often have the same amplification hardware as regular amps from the same manufacturer and they measure just as well.

Don't worry too much about receiver power. You need exponentially more power for more volume, so a receiver that can put 150W into some speakers is only going to be somewhat more powerful than a receiver that can "only" put 75W into the same speakers.

Also, don't worry about a receiver's video capabilities. You don't have to plug your video sources into a receiver, you can plug them into your TV. So if you have a 4K video source, you can plug it into a 4K TV no problem, and then you can use a 1080p receiver to decode and output the audio just as well as if you had a 4K receiver. (Although that situation might eventually change with Atmos/point-source-encoded audio.)

Where I am, it seems like a bunch of people are upgrading their receivers from 1080p to 4K, and you can get a really great 1080p receiver for around $100 on Craigslist. Plug your 4K video source into your 4K TV, plug your TV into your 1080p receiver, and you've just saved $400 on a top-quality receiver/amplifier...
It depends on the users requirements, How loud do they listen, how efficient/inefficient are the speakers and what does the impedance curve look like. Most multi-channel receivers' power ratings are only specified for two channels. Their power supplies and output transistor count are compromised vice a separate power amp, so they have a problem driving low impedance loads. Also a good rule of thumb for amplifier power for your speakers is twice the RMS power rating to avoid clipping. That doesn't mean you have to spend a lot of money. A bought this several years ago and I am completely happy with it. https://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/yamaha-p7000s-dual-channel-power-amp. It has been discontinued now but is a great fit for my system. I do use a Multi-channel receiver, but only as a preamp and to drive my side surrounds.


Cheers,

OldMovieNut
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scotth3886

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,036 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,954 Posts
I'm not sure I understand the distinction, But the last thing I would accuse Magnepan of is 'marketing'

https://www.magnepan.com/magneplanar_technology
Look carefully at the pictures in the article you linked (yes, I am very aware of that one). Magnepan knows the distinction, and I sort-of understand why they would use "quasi-ribbon" to describe their newest panels, but it can confuse folk.

Conventional planar dynamic = conductive wires bonded (glued) to a plastic (mylar or whatever) sheet (membrane). Magnets are behind and/or in front of the sheet.
Quasi-ribbon (Magnepan style) = pattern conductive aluminum traces on plastic, again with magnets behind or in front of the membrane.
True ribbon = conductive film (often aluminum) with magnets on either side of the ribbon.

Signal (current) through the wires (traces, film) interacts with the magnetic field to move the membrane.

Conventional vs. QR is sort of like point-to-point wiring versus printed-circuit boards. Their QR uses Al on the membrane like a ribbon, but the magnet structure is conventional planar-dynamic. Not saying anything's wrong with that. A true ribbon is more work to make, generally has less mass, and is not amenable to making large sheets (you have to make a lot of thin strips/stripes instead).

An ESL uses a conductive membrane but instead of magnets an electric field is generated to move it back and forth in response to the signal.

Unless they've changed, all their speakers through the 3.x series put magnets on one side of the membrane; the 20.x and 30.x put them on both sides. This can increase sensitivity and decrease distortion for a given drive level (e.g. like push-pull magnets instead of single-ended).

HTH - Don
 
  • Like
Reactions: JimWilson

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Definitely get a receiver as an amp, they have so much more functionality than a "stereo receiver" that it's stupid.

For some reason, "audiophiles" frown on receivers, but as far as I can tell, it's only because of marketing. AV receivers often have the same amplification hardware as regular amps from the same manufacturer and they measure just as well.

Don't worry too much about receiver power. You need exponentially more power for more volume, so a receiver that can put 150W into some speakers is only going to be somewhat more powerful than a receiver that can "only" put 75W into the same speakers.

Also, don't worry about a receiver's video capabilities. You don't have to plug your video sources into a receiver, you can plug them into your TV. So if you have a 4K video source, you can plug it into a 4K TV no problem, and then you can use a 1080p receiver to decode and output the audio just as well as if you had a 4K receiver. (Although that situation might eventually change with Atmos/point-source-encoded audio.)

Where I am, it seems like a bunch of people are upgrading their receivers from 1080p to 4K, and you can get a really great 1080p receiver for around $100 on Craigslist. Plug your 4K video source into your 4K TV, plug your TV into your 1080p receiver, and you've just saved $400 on a top-quality receiver/amplifier...
Thanks, and that's what I thought. I also hear people always talking about this brand is brighter than that brand, that one is warmer than the other, and yada yada yada. That just never makes sense to me. Unless your amp is broken (or you have a tube amp) it shouldn't really be noticeably altering the sound signature. I think I've hears people say for example that Yamaha receivers sound a lot brighter than Denon receivers, so you need to pair correctly with the right speakers? Is this again just part of all the pseudo-science that's all too common in audiophile land? Or is there something to it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
Thanks, and that's what I thought. I also hear people always talking about this brand is brighter than that brand, that one is warmer than the other, and yada yada yada. That just never makes sense to me. Unless your amp is broken (or you have a tube amp) it shouldn't really be noticeably altering the sound signature. I think I've hears people say for example that Yamaha receivers sound a lot brighter than Denon receivers, so you need to pair correctly with the right speakers? Is this again just part of all the pseudo-science that's all too common in audiophile land? Or is there something to it?
Most differences in AVR sound signatures are because of their pre amp units. And of course if you use any digital signal processing that is supplied with that pre amp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Most differences in AVR sound signatures are because of their pre amp units. And of course if you use any digital signal processing that is supplied with that pre amp.
Thanks. Other than the DSP, do you happen to know of any objective testing that compares these sound signatures?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
It depends on the users requirements, How loud do they listen, how efficient/inefficient are the speakers and what does the impedance curve look like. Most multi-channel receivers' power ratings are only specified for two channels. Their power supplies and output transistor count are compromised vice a separate power amp, so they have a problem driving low impedance loads. Also a good rule of thumb for amplifier power for your speakers is twice the RMS power rating to avoid clipping. That doesn't mean you have to spend a lot of money. A bought this several years ago and I am completely happy with it. https://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/yamaha-p7000s-dual-channel-power-amp. It has been discontinued now but is a great fit for my system. I do use a Multi-channel receiver, but only as a preamp and to drive my side surrounds.





Cheers,



OldMovieNut
Yes. I agree it depends but let's see what it depends on.

1. Desired listening levels and speaker sensitivity. While not exact here is a rule of thumb I use for a speaker in a small room. (3 dB per doubling of distance or doubling of power) so for two 86 dB sensitivity (1 meter 1 watt) speakers listening at 12 ft, you would need 2 watts of power per channel for 86 dB sound (stereo). In addition, most amps can provide more than twice the transient power as their RMS power. Now if you use a sub, the power required from the AVR may be half or a third .

Please correct if I am mistaken in my calculations.

2. Speaker impedence;. Agree with you that amp must be capable of driving a 4 ohm load if speakers are 4 ohms.

So while more power is better to avoid clipping, an AVR that can provide 75 to 100 watts of power when run in stereo mode may be more than sufficient.

Comments and corrections welcome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
Thanks. Other than the DSP, do you happen to know of any objective testing that compares these sound signatures?
I remember Bob Carver doing some work where he would be able to reproduce the sound signature of any expensive amp by tweeking his amps. Not sure if that qualifies as objective test though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,036 Posts
Look carefully at the pictures in the article you linked (yes, I am very aware of that one). Magnepan knows the distinction, and I sort-of understand why they would use "quasi-ribbon" to describe their newest panels, but it can confuse folk.

Conventional planar dynamic = conductive wires bonded (glued) to a plastic (mylar or whatever) sheet (membrane). Magnets are behind and/or in front of the sheet.
Quasi-ribbon (Magnepan style) = pattern conductive aluminum traces on plastic, again with magnets behind or in front of the membrane.
True ribbon = conductive film (often aluminum) with magnets on either side of the ribbon.

Signal (current) through the wires (traces, film) interacts with the magnetic field to move the membrane.

Conventional vs. QR is sort of like point-to-point wiring versus printed-circuit boards. Their QR uses Al on the membrane like a ribbon, but the magnet structure is conventional planar-dynamic. Not saying anything's wrong with that. A true ribbon is more work to make, generally has less mass, and is not amenable to making large sheets (you have to make a lot of thin strips/stripes instead).

An ESL uses a conductive membrane but instead of magnets an electric field is generated to move it back and forth in response to the signal.

Unless they've changed, all their speakers through the 3.x series put magnets on one side of the membrane; the 20.x and 30.x put them on both sides. This can increase sensitivity and decrease distortion for a given drive level (e.g. like push-pull magnets instead of single-ended).

HTH - Don
The only distinction I saw between planar magnetic and QR is that instead of thin wire bonded to the surface of the Mylar, it's a conductive ribbon attached. Other than that, it's pretty much the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,954 Posts
@SouthernCA : The Carver test is written up in Stereophile. There are three parts that I recall; he didn't quite make it in time (the challenge was not only to match sound but do it within a certain time frame), so there is the first part, then a short follow-up when he finally obtained the deep null he wanted, then a third follow-on later after some additional work. The challenge resulted in him matching his SS amp to a CJ tube amp and led to the M-NNNt amplifier line ("t" for transfer function IIRC).

https://www.stereophile.com/content/carver-challenge
http://www.carversound.com/carver-amplifiers/
@ScottH3883 : Exactly. That is why I was making the distinction between planar dynamic/QR and true ribbon drivers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
Thanks, and that's what I thought. I also hear people always talking about this brand is brighter than that brand, that one is warmer than the other, and yada yada yada. That just never makes sense to me. Unless your amp is broken (or you have a tube amp) it shouldn't really be noticeably altering the sound signature. I think I've hears people say for example that Yamaha receivers sound a lot brighter than Denon receivers, so you need to pair correctly with the right speakers? Is this again just part of all the pseudo-science that's all too common in audiophile land? Or is there something to it?
Based on my reading/research, it's all pseudo-science. As long as you have a modern amp that's correctly engineered (basically anything from a reputable name brand) and you're running it at less than half of its advertised power output then it's basically going to be perfect and sound identical to any other amp.

Audioholics and Sound and Vision will sometimes do reviews of amps and receivers with instrumented tests, e.g.:

https://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/denon-avr-x3300w-1/measurements

I don't think I've ever seen a receiver that, if it's being run at half of its advertised power output, deviates from ideal frequency response by more than a small fraction of a dB or has more than a tiny fraction of a percent of distortion. Basically, whatever imperfections you might have with your speakers are going to be at least 10x more audible than whatever imperfections you might have with your amp. I'm pretty sure the people who claim to be able to hear differences between amps are the same people who claim to be able to hear differences between speaker wires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,954 Posts
The biggest difference among power amplifiers that I have heard/measured, other than SNR (more an issue with high-sensitivity speakers -- they hiss), is the output impedance. That causes slightly different frequency response when driving a speaker. So, the difference you hear depends on the load. Not rocket science, but science.

Note IME the vast majority of differences heard in live testing are from lack of precision level matching and inclusion of eyes in the test parameters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vergiliusm

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,036 Posts
Based on my reading/research, it's all pseudo-science. As long as you have a modern amp that's correctly engineered (basically anything from a reputable name brand) and you're running it at less than half of its advertised power output then it's basically going to be perfect and sound identical to any other amp.

Audioholics and Sound and Vision will sometimes do reviews of amps and receivers with instrumented tests, e.g.:

https://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/denon-avr-x3300w-1/measurements

I don't think I've ever seen a receiver that, if it's being run at half of its advertised power output, deviates from ideal frequency response by more than a small fraction of a dB or has more than a tiny fraction of a percent of distortion. Basically, whatever imperfections you might have with your speakers are going to be at least 10x more audible than whatever imperfections you might have with your amp. I'm pretty sure the people who claim to be able to hear differences between amps are the same people who claim to be able to hear differences between speaker wires.
Yes we are
 
3121 - 3140 of 5694 Posts
Top