Jump to content
IGNORED

The best speaker.... really


Recommended Posts

Everyone is on their own personal quest to find the "holy grail"

 

I’m trying to think scientifically on what precisely would make the best speaker in that space logically.

 

My thoughts (feel free to correct me, I am far from an expert) It is a bit of an ask of a driver to think it could accurately produce multiple frequencies at any given time without one freq of movement having adverse effects on the accurate production of another. Which is obvious that’s why speakers have multiple drivers of different size. I understand that you can’t expect a woofer to produce treble and so on.

 

Going deeper though. My thoughts are why can we have a speaker with the worlds most complex crossover and have a box with say. 4 Woofers, 2 mid-bass,1 mid,1 mid treble, 1-2 tweeters all having their own assigned frequencies to produce individually.

 

My question being would this offer a more accurate production of sound.

 

I’m thinking of the best thing you could have is every instrument in a piece of music playing through a totally separate speaker. Obviously this would be prohibitively expensive but its all in theory.

 

The reason for this whole thread is I see 2 way speakers which are supposedly brilliant and think to myself how could so much Information come from a single place and not get muddled because the driver is so busy.

Its like asking a guitar to sound like it does with only one string or a drum kit with only one drum, if you know what I mean

 

Thoughts please.

Link to comment

No, I doubt one could get them all to integrate properly.

 

Arguably the most accurate speaker ever produced is/was the Quad ESL63s and the modern variants. By themselves they are limited in SPL and bass, but crossed at 100-150 Hz with the best subs you can afford, and those babies will blow the house down. They suffer from a bit of dynamic compression as most ESLs and are picky about amplifiers and placement, which is my guess as to why they are not even more popular. Still, they are one of the most popular(loved) speakers of all time for good reasons: nearly mass less point source single drivers. Sort of the opposite of what you are suggesting. FWIW, this is not purely subjective either, I remember seeing measurements long ago, and they can damn near pass a square wave.

 

Just my opinion...

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment

ESL-63 is indeed very good speaker. Gradient from Finland makes some time ago a special dipole subwoofer for ESL-63, a SW-63 2x12" bass in dipole configuration (design of Jorma Salmi), subwoofer itself acts like a stand for ESL-63, places them in right listeng height. Visually exact matched look.

The Gradient SW-63 SUB WOOFER for the Quad ESL-63

Sorry, english is not my native language.

Fools and fanatics are always certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.

Link to comment

In optics you can construct a perfect three-dimentional image with a single laser beam, split in half. One half diffract off of the object, and the other acts as the reference, so that phases can be accurately reconstructed.

 

By analogy, there is no reason why two point sources with speakers can't give you all the 3D information.

Link to comment
In optics you can construct a perfect three-dimentional image with a single laser beam, split in half. One half diffract off of the object, and the other acts as the reference, so that phases can be accurately reconstructed.

 

By analogy, there is no reason why two point sources with speakers can't give you all the 3D information.

 

In theory that is true Bill, but reality is often more murky. Loudspeaker crossovers are very complex, as the driver characteristics are not constant over frequencies. Even then, the math only gives you a starting point. Electronic crossovers for bi/tri/quad amping are no panacea either. There are some very bright minds that work on this stuff, and it often eludes them. That is one of the reasons why single drivers (with all of their intrinsic flaws) have such a strong following.

 

Maldur: I own the SW 63, and one can do better. It does fit rather well on top however. I have been considering putting my 63/sw63s back into service once I service them. I have owned them since the 80's...

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
That being said, speakers with one driver should be fine then?

 

Generally, no.

 

These are not your typical single driver loudspeaker, and really most single driver cone speakers are lacking. Great for small acoustic ensembles and vocals, but fall down hard and fast on complex or larger works IMO. I did say get a sub too btw. I find something like the Tannoy/Kef/TAD dual concentrics a good compromise- you'll probably need a sub with these too, and I am not a bass freak either. Everything is really a compromise, vying dollars, size, space(placement) and so on. I always suggest people find a speaker that does it for them, and then match the balance of the gear to minimize that speaker's weaknesses in that room.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment

As digital processing continues to drop in price relative almost anything else, it's going to be interesting to see the rise of digital crossovers. It's easy to manage the function of a crossover in the digital domain and to do so with no phase or timing issues. For a two-way speaker, imagine each channel being split into separate digital streams, one for high frequencies, one for low, each going to a separate DAC for output. Bi-amp each speaker and now you have a very powerful and flexible way of optimizing how that speaker operates.

Link to comment

Maggie 20.7s, Magico Q7s, TAD Reference, Wilson, etc. They are all about as close to state of the art as you are going to get this half of the second decade of the 21st century. And, every one of them takes a radically different, utterly scientific, approach to sound reproduction.

 

Check them out and get some ideas, or at least some reasons to dream...

 

Me? If I had the space, it would without question be the Maggie 20.7s.

 

In the space I have, on a limited budget - Maggie MMGs. To be replaced at some point by Joseph Audio Pulsars. :)

 

-Paul

 

 

 

Everyone is on their own personal quest to find the "holy grail"

 

I’m trying to think scientifically on what precisely would make the best speaker in that space logically.

 

My thoughts (feel free to correct me, I am far from an expert) It is a bit of an ask of a driver to think it could accurately produce multiple frequencies at any given time without one freq of movement having adverse effects on the accurate production of another. Which is obvious that’s why speakers have multiple drivers of different size. I understand that you can’t expect a woofer to produce treble and so on.

 

Going deeper though. My thoughts are why can we have a speaker with the worlds most complex crossover and have a box with say. 4 Woofers, 2 mid-bass,1 mid,1 mid treble, 1-2 tweeters all having their own assigned frequencies to produce individually.

 

My question being would this offer a more accurate production of sound.

 

I’m thinking of the best thing you could have is every instrument in a piece of music playing through a totally separate speaker. Obviously this would be prohibitively expensive but its all in theory.

 

The reason for this whole thread is I see 2 way speakers which are supposedly brilliant and think to myself how could so much Information come from a single place and not get muddled because the driver is so busy.

Its like asking a guitar to sound like it does with only one string or a drum kit with only one drum, if you know what I mean

 

Thoughts please.

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment

Ideally, you'd need the proper drivers for the application of instrumentation. For example, you don't need a precision tweeter capable of 50KHz to reproduce the double bass of a drum set. What you'd need is the drivers that can accurately reproduce the right frequency range. Now with this comes the complexity of creating such a complex crossover multiple times. If you're going to create such a system then you have to have a lot of space or do a wall of the 2" or 3" drivers both horizontally and vertically then maybe bigger drivers for the low end.

 

The thing one must realize too is the point of this setup to reproduce music or HT. There is a difference between each... often times a more simplistic 2-way crossover will produce music with a lot more pleasureable characteristics than the more complex 3-way crossover. 3-way crossovers are difficult to be designed properly which is why a lot of the more "musical" speakers tend to be 2 way systems. I'm not saying a 3-way can't sound as good as a 2 way. If properly done a 3 way system is amazing. But you can often get a good 2 way speaker and add a subwoofer and get amazing results that can equal a more expensive 3-way speaker that's a lot more money.

 

If you're looking for no holds barred speakers, you have to go with the Focal Grande Utopia EM (elegant), Wilson Alexandria XLF (ugly), and probably the best... Avantgarde Trio Series with the Basshorn (gorgeous). Those those are my opinions on the beauty of them. ;)

Link to comment
Maggie 20.7s, Magico Q7s, TAD Reference, Wilson, etc. They are all about as close to state of the art as you are going to get this half of the second decade of the 21st century. And, every one of them takes a radically different, utterly scientific, approach to sound reproduction.
Add the Meridian DSP8000 to that list.

Kal Rubinson

Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile

 

Link to comment

I have a pair of B&W 802d's. I dont have the bread to get Grand Utopias. Im just after opinions and critique on my thoughts from those who have been in the game for longer than I have.

 

As bright mentioned, i think digital X-overs will probably become more frequent in the future. and with them those that love and hate them for whatever reason.

Link to comment
That being said, speakers with one driver should be fine then?

 

I wasn't being very clear. I am just approximating "point source" to mean "single full-range speaker".

 

The main flaw in my analogy is that a laser is phase-coherent. Sound isn't, but given the wavelengths, it doesn't really matter. You should be able to construct a complete 3D image from two speakers.

Link to comment
By analogy, there is no reason why two point sources with speakers can't give you all the 3D information.

 

In theory a pair of headphones could provide a very high quality pair of point sources, yet no matter how resolving my headphones may be, I find that (particularly on pieces with a combined orchestra and multiple highlighted soloists) I am better able to pick out and enjoy those individual instruments on my main multi-speaker system. It isn't a case of frequency response and doesn't seem to be a function of clarity, so it must either be something about the room response or the multiple speakers that better allows me to pinpoint an instrument in a particular location on the soundstage and focus in on that instrument.

 

Except for their likely limitations in frequency response, I would assume that a pair of single coherent source drivers like those KEF makes, could also recreate that sound stage and allow the listener to "pick out a single instrument." In either case, the reality of the soundstage contributes hugely to the listening enjoyment.

Synology NAS>i7-6700/32GB/NVIDIA QUADRO P4000 Win10>Qobuz+Tidal>Roon>HQPlayer>DSD512> Fiber Switch>Ultrarendu (NAA)>Holo Audio May KTE DAC> Bryston SP3 pre>Levinson No. 432 amps>Magnepan (MG20.1x2, CCR and MMC2x6)

Link to comment
Maggie 20.7s, Magico Q7s, TAD Reference, Wilson, etc. They are all about as close to state of the art as you are going to get this half of the second decade of the 21st century. And, every one of them takes a radically different, utterly scientific, approach to sound reproduction.

 

Check them out and get some ideas, or at least some reasons to dream...

 

Me? If I had the space, it would without question be the Maggie 20.7s.

 

In the space I have, on a limited budget - Maggie MMGs. To be replaced at some point by Joseph Audio Pulsars. :)

 

-Paul

 

Paul,

 

IMHO, the 3.7s are better than the 20.7s. Just my opinion. The 3.7s are the best Maggies ever made.

Link to comment

My two cents.

 

People are always claiming this speaker and that speaker most accurately recreates live music. I am not sure what that means. On stage with the performer, 10th row, mezzanine, etc? In a cozy club, acoustic with no electronic amplification? A crappy auditorium where an overwhelming majority of orchestras play. A Bar Mitzvah or wedding? "Live music" has plenty of issues and I am still waiting for someone to tell me the "point" on the wide spectrum of live music that a speaker should hit.

 

I guess if one wanted to have a standard by which to judge, those like Barry who records in studios, probably would be the best to judge what the performer sounds like in the studio versus through its reproduction.

 

As to a driver having to reproduce multiple frequencies I understand the issues, but if you think these frequencies in a "live" setting are not interacting with each other as they originate from each instrument you are kidding yourself. There is no discrete frequency, unless its a single instrument, reaching your tympanic membrane but a multitude of frequencies, all interacting, with some cancellations and some additive consequences, which are all effected the further one sits from the source, how far to the left or right one sits, the acoustics of the room, etc.

 

While my main speakers are "full range" pseudo-line sources (Nola Baby Grands Series II) which I love, my favorite speakers are those with limited drivers such as monitors (take your pick), understanding their benefits and negatives. I broke my cherry on ProAc Tablettes and Celestion SL600s and have been in love with the intimacy of the sound these point sources (as wsgott properly points out) generate. Are monitors perfect or sound like live? No they are not perfect and I guess it depends upon what variable of "live" you are trying to reproduce as your reference.

Link to comment
I would say the B&W N801's where close to being a perfect speaker. They get used in recording studios , that speaks volumes IMO.

Sadly the new Diamond range has dropped the 801

 

Eloise

Eloise

---

...in my opinion / experience...

While I agree "Everything may matter" working out what actually affects the sound is a trickier thing.

And I agree "Trust your ears" but equally don't allow them to fool you - trust them with a bit of skepticism.

keep your mind open... But mind your brain doesn't fall out.

Link to comment

I'm a B&W fan myself. Have a pair of Matrix 801 Series 2. Since B&W seem to be used quite often in recording work, including some of the BIS recordings (Minnesota Orchestra), I still think this is not a bad choice and could probably be improved with active crossovers.

 

I look with great interest at the work of Seigfried Linkwitz and am wondering about his new dipole speaker LX521. I've never heard his designs, but some think this is the way to go.

 

Linkwitz Lab - Loudspeaker Design

 

Has anyone around here heard the Linkwitz Orions? The LX521 is probably too new for many to have heard it, although I think he was at RMAF with it.

JohnMH

Link to comment
I'm a B&W fan myself. Have a pair of Matrix 801 Series 2. Since B&W seem to be used quite often in recording work, including some of the BIS recordings (Minnesota Orchestra), I still think this is not a bad choice and could probably be improved with active crossovers.

 

I look with great interest at the work of Seigfried Linkwitz and am wondering about his new dipole speaker LX521. I've never heard his designs, but some think this is the way to go.

 

Linkwitz Lab - Loudspeaker Design

 

Has anyone around here heard the Linkwitz Orions? The LX521 is probably too new for many to have heard it, although I think he was at RMAF with it.

 

Interesting design. I do enjoy open baffle speakers and one of the big benefits of Nola. I will keep following this guy. Thanks for the tip.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...