My Input On Speakers

[soundhd]

My background (and have been "retired" from it for about 15 years now) is Pro Audio doing mostly concert mixing but a little of studio work both as a "mixer" and a player.

Speakers make the biggest impact on how well a playback system sounds. You can take an "average" amp/receiver (something you would find at a "big box" store) play a CD through it with a "big Box" level speaker system then replace the speakers with a very good high end set of studio monitors and there will be a world of difference.

One does not need to upgrade the electronics to get a good high quality playback....just use good high quality speakers.....and my opinion is use a set of studio monitors.....

Studio monitors are made to give a flat EQ playback......will not "color" the sound.......will accurately reproduce the music as it is heard at final mixdown as long as the system has been EQ'd using a realtime analyzer, preferably a 1/3 octive unit to make sure your system is putting out a "flat" response using "pink" noise. In most cases one would not need to add much in the way of EQ if one is using a good set of studio monitors to get a correct flat frequency response curve.

Do yourself a favor and borrow a set from a friend or most music equipment stores and high end stereo shops will let one "try out" a set for a night or two if one is serious about purchasing. Also with the rise in computer based audio one can take thier laptop into a store/shop and try it out right there........

Again Just my opinion (one of many)

 

Been a JBL studio monitor user since the 60's......currently have 5 different models of JBL studio monitors on systems in the home, all from the 60's/70's.......4350's, 4311B's, 4311EA's, 4301's, 4406's. Three of the systems are connected to "average" electronic's except for the 4350's and the 4311's (the two serious 2 channel music playback systems I have)

[Paul R]

(grin) Put a studio monitor in a real-life living room and compare it to several Audiophile speakers, like Maggies or Harbeths.

 

Then try that with piss poor big box electronics against even entry level audiophile gear, like NAD or CA or Creek, much less against something like Spectral gear. The difference will be astonishing.

 

Yes, I do agree that speakers make a huge difference, but GIGO applies here. The better speakers will just make the garbage more apparent.

 

-Paul

[DavidL]

Just to note Harbeth speakers are equally praised (and used) by Pro-Audio and domestic HiFi customers.

[soundhd]

I agree, Harbeth's are probably some of the best speakers that I have heard.....but very pricey.......$5,000 to $10,000+ for a pair.........still one can pick up a very nice used pair of JBL's for much, much less and still have great sound........

 

 

 

PS: and high end electronics do make a big difference in the quality of a play back system....but if on a tight budget....good speakers are your best bet for quality upgrade to start with............

 

 

Just to note Harbeth speakers are equally praised (and used) by Pro-Audio and domestic HiFi customers.

[Paul R]

I dunno- every top quality speaker is being used in some recording studio - from Maggies to Rockports to Theils to PSBs. All of 'em.

 

For my money, a $279 pair of PSB Alpha B1s is a very good speaker on a budget, as are $599 Maggie MMGs if you have the space and budget. But none of them are really satisfying unless you match them with decent, if entry level, electronics. A $359 NAD BEE316 integrated amp does a great entry level job.

 

On a super limited budget, an iPod or iPhone and set of Grado 80s would be my choice.

 

-Paul

 

 

I agree, Harbeth's are probably some of the best speakers that I have heard.....but very pricey.......$5,000 to $10,000+ for a pair.........still one can pick up a very nice used pair of JBL's for much, much less and still have great sound........

 

 

 

PS: and high end electronics do make a big difference in the quality of a play back system....but if on a tight budget....good speakers are your best bet for quality upgrade to start with............

[Audio_ELF]

I dunno- every top quality speaker is being used in some recording studio - from Maggies to Rockports to Theils to PSBs. All of 'em.

Paul,

Assuming this comment is in reference to Harbeth, the difference is Harbeth started making speakers for studios specifically for BBC studios and then later started selling into the domestic market.

 

Eloise

[mav52]

Paul,

Assuming this comment is in reference to Harbeth, the difference is Harbeth started making speakers for studios specifically for BBC studios and then later started selling into the domestic market.

 

Eloise

 

For some interesting reading, this old article Rogers Speakers - Other Models notes speakers used in the older days of the BBC. the original speakers built for the BBC were by Spendor and Rodgers, KEF's. Of course in today's world, know doubt there are a lot of manufacturers equipment is used at the BBC to include Genelec.

[Jsmith]

I agree, Harbeth's are probably some of the best speakers that I have heard.....but very pricey.......$5,000 to $10,000+ for a pair.........still one can pick up a very nice used pair of JBL's for much, much less and still have great sound........

 

 

 

PS: and high end electronics do make a big difference in the quality of a play back system....but if on a tight budget....good speakers are your best bet for quality upgrade to start with............

 

The Harbeth Compact 7ES are only $3700 new. These have won lots of awards and highly regarded with the media. So you can get great Harbeth's for under $5K. You can also regularly find them used on Audiogon for around $2800 to $3K.

[jackfish]

A good music system should provide a flat frequency response by design. The room and listener become part of that system. It is then a matter of making the room accommodate that system so flat response is delivered to the listener's position.

 

EQ is a crutch to compensate for a poorly designed or performing system, a room with acoustic problems, or a listener who prefers accentuated sound characteristics.

[PewterTA]

Both equipment and speakers play parts in the quality of sound you get. The key is finding synergy with both. You can have the best equipment and the best speakers and if they don't match well.... then they won't sound as good as either could with the right partner.

 

For example if you have a speaker that tends to be on the bright side... you don't want to pair that with a bright sounding amp/pre/receiver. You'd be better to use a warmer sounding equipment with that same speaker.

 

When you find a synergy you're on the money and can listen to them for hours and hours and hours. That's the real key.

 

I've heard a not so great speaker with a really great pre & amp... and it sounded really good. I've also heard a really good speaker with mediocre equipment and thought things sounded bad.

[Audio_ELF]

For some interesting reading, this old article Rogers Speakers - Other Models notes speakers used in the older days of the BBC. the original speakers built for the BBC were by Spendor and Rodgers, KEF's. Of course in today's world, know doubt there are a lot of manufacturers equipment is used at the BBC to include Genelec.

If I recall correctly Spendor and Rogers built the speakers to BBC specification and using KEF drivers. The actual designer of the speakers was the BBC's research department (who also created NICAM stereo of TV as an aside), who at the time of the speaker project was staffed by H.D. Harwood who on leaving the BBC started Harbeth speakers. Later models were ture active speakers running Quad (and later Chord) amplification.

 

There used to be a joke in the old days "an elephant is just a mouse as specified by the BBC"

 

A lot of BBC studios are equipped with PMC speakers, as well as Genelec; while many still have the older Rogers and Spendor designs. Unlike the golden days BBC just buy commercial products now.

 

Eloise

[mayhem13]

(grin) Put a studio monitor in a real-life living room and compare it to several Audiophile speakers, like Maggies or Harbeths.

 

Then try that with piss poor big box electronics against even entry level audiophile gear, like NAD or CA or Creek, much less against something like Spectral gear. The difference will be astonishing.

 

Yes, I do agree that speakers make a huge difference, but GIGO applies here. The better speakers will just make the garbage more apparent.

 

-Paul

 

*sigh*......couldn't disagree with you more....especially since you included Maggie's which sacrifice half an octave of content in some cases. I guess they would work for mastering MP3s though.

 

What exactly is an 'audiophile' speaker anyways?

[Paul R]

(Grin) Disagree all you please. But one of the best engineer/producers I know of uses Maggies.

I hshally find his opinions are spot on accurate and his work is awesomely good.

 

 

Paul

 

 

*sigh*......couldn't disagree with you more....especially since you included Maggie's which sacrifice half an octave of content in some cases. I guess they would work for mastering MP3s though.

 

What exactly is an 'audiophile' speaker anyways?

[mayhem13]

You just had to use the word 'accurate' didn't you! lol

 

Man, I'm having an identity crisis...is the Computer Audiophile forum or the Barry Diament fan club? If I download a Soundkeeper track, do I get a membership card too?

[Paul R]

Don't have *any* idea what you are talking about of course. (innocent grin)

 

Actually, I went away to think about what makes a speaker an "Audiophile" speaker versus a studio monitor, and besides "I know one when I see one!" the only things I could come up with are listed below.

 

(1) An audiophile speaker is designed to sound good in a much more difficult environment, and in mulitple environments. Studio monitors are expected to me used in environments designed for working in more than living in. Vague I know, but...

 

(2) Audiophile speakers often have design factors that studio monitors only give brief concern to - like looks and fit and finish stuff. Few studio monitors would have classic hardwood, or automotive quality paint finishes. Audiophile speakers can be gorgeous. Or they can be room dividers, but in general, I think they get more attention to fit and finish.

 

There are probably dozens of other factors involved, but those are the only two that really come to mind.

 

-Paul

 

You just had to use the word 'accurate' didn't you! lol

 

Man, I'm having an identity crisis...is the Computer Audiophile forum or the Barry Diament fan club? If I download a Soundkeeper track, do I get a membership card too?

[mayhem13]

You're no fun anymore Paul.....no fun at all!.....like me i suppose. Some day we need to share an afternoon with a few albums and a few pairs of speakers.....maybe remind me why I post here in the first place! Lol.

[Paul R]

I'll bring the beer. (Or Wine, or Scotch, whatever... )

-Paul

 

 

You're no fun anymore Paul.....no fun at all!.....like me i suppose. Some day we need to share an afternoon with a few albums and a few pairs of speakers.....maybe remind me why I post here in the first place! Lol.

[Kiwi2]

Then try that with piss poor big box electronics against even entry level audiophile gear, like NAD or CA or Creek, much less against something like Spectral gear. The difference will be astonishing.

 

I disagree with this as well. What you are talking about is the brand name game and fashion statements.

[Paul R]

Nope. I talking about gear that is well designed and engineered for audio. It is a bit disingenious to try to dismiss that with some nonsense about brand name gear. Are you saying that you do not research any company that makes or sells audio gear you are interested in?

 

 

 

I disagree with this as well. What you are talking about is the brand name game and fashion statements.