What Are the Best Sounding Speakers UNDER $2,500 that You've Ever Heard.?

[ctsooner]

For a new speaker, personally I tell everyone to audition the Vandersteen 2's as well as the Maggies. They are totally different speakers and most Vandy dealers I know sell both. It will depend on what you listen to and how loudly you listen. I personally am not a big Maggie guy. I've heard them a few times recently and have enjoyed them (the larger screens as well as the 1.7's I believe they are). I wasn't asking price or names, just listening at a store.

 

The Vandersteen won't give you that WOW factor in the store that a Maggie may. Maggie's usually aren't set up properly or are run off the wrong gear and if so, they will fry your ears. When they are set up with a great, powerful amp and a very good pre, they will give you a wonderful presentation, especially in the mids. They will not have any true bass. It's not what they do.

 

I personally need that foundation to enjoy my music and that's what Vandy's will give you. Coherency, haunting mids and smooth highs that will give you plenty of sparkle, just not fry your ears, lol. There is a reason they are still being produced and why they've been on nearly everyone's must listen to or recommended components since the 80's when they came out. The nice thing about the Vandy's is that you can run them off an NAD or upgrade to the under 2k integrated by Belles and they will sing and rock.

[ctsooner]

The new Vander Steen signatures are well worth the price differential if you can afford it. I too have the trios I'm going to be selling them in order to buy the Quatro's. i'm running an Ayre a AX5 20 integrated along with the new Ayre digital analog converter QX 5/20. With every upgrade I've done in my system big or small, I hear the difference. It's the most detailed speaker in regards to micro and macro detail I have heard on the market recently. It's one of the few speaker lines that will give you all the detail along with the emotion and musicality that most of us are looking for.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

Lot's of facts and lot's misinformation. I too stay away from smaller companies. I've been burned enough over the years by getting a wonderful component only to have it need work and the company goes under within ten year or less. It happens in the speaker industry even more than electronics. Yes, there are many companies who just source drivers from a company or do very small and easy mods. Many top manufacturer's do that and they charge over 100k for some of these speakers. That doesn't mean the speakers aren't really good, just a bit over priced as the drivers and components don't even cost that much considering.

 

Companies like Vandersteen actually build many of their drivers and send them for finishing to their own specs to a large manufacture. That way they have drivers that no one else has and they build their cabinets to match. It's expensive, but it's the way they get pistonic movement of their drivers and that lowers distortion and smearing. It's not until they came out with more expensive speakers (yr 2000) that they even worried about cabinets and that's why their speakers with socks on them compete with speakers that are more than twice the price as cabinets finished are very expensive when done correctly.

 

Someone mentioned well engineered, good spec'd and measured etc... I don't know of any good speaker that isn't designed and built that way. Even some speakers I don't love the sound of as much as Vandersteen, Tidal and some others are top speakers and built this way. I get really upset with companies like Wilson who basically buy off the shelf drivers and throw them into nice heavy cabinets and market the hell out of them. They are dynamic and Wilson lovers love them because they are dynamic and tipped up a few db's on top and sound exciting compared to speakers that are much more accurate.

 

In the under 2.5k speakers there are so many choices, but personally I won't touch a speaker that isn't fuller range as I miss so much of the music with bookshelf speakers. The footprint of most floor standers is the same or similar than a speaker using a stand so why not use that extra space and get some bass! Yes, of course room and acoustics are the most important thing, but it's not that hard to get a room tamed and it's also not expensive.

 

As for Samsung and Harmon, no one really know what's going to happen there. I personally don't like any of the Harmon products to date, but they are a huge name. I can't see them tinkering much with the brand. Many were concerned when they purchased Levinson and I personally think they ran that brand into the ground. It's only recently that they are trying to bring it back. I hope that they invest and leave it alone. Maybe just share engineering as they do now.

[ctsooner]

Are you being serious or just kidding? Maybe models numbers have been around for years but great speakers evolve especially with the newer materials they can use to get substantially better sound and it's not even debatable. I may have misread your post though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

completely agree. I have just never understood those posting to others how great such older speakers are. I fully believe these folks have just not been out in the last few years to audition the newest gear. It's not even close IMHO and to my ears. Many of us have owned or have had friends who owned many of these older speakers so we do know what we are talking about. The other speakers with serious problems are the British monitors from various brands. Even using upgraded enclosures and drivers etc...they are lacking severely.

 

I'm a bit surprised at your continued admiration for LSTs & contemporary competitors, given their primitive designs and features. The LSTs are just AR3as with more of the same drivers set into angled panels. As such, they had all the phase, image and other SQ issues of the era that were later addressed in newer designs.

I'm old enough to remember being astounded at the SQ in the AR & KLH listening rooms when I went to college in Boston in the early '60s, and stacked Advents were a similar eye opener not that long afterward. But all of those acoustic suspension designs displayed common flaws that (at least for me) audibly limit SQ across the frequency spectrum, e.g. the bass was tighter and more linear by far than older vented and other open cab designs, but it was far from realistic. My JBL 305s are much closer to live music than any AR product I've ever heard, as are many many modern standards in the under-$2500/pair category.

 

Of course, the speakers that impressed me the most back in the day were KLH 9s. I'd love to hear a pristine pair today to see how well they do, especially with great source material and top quality contemporary electronics.

[ctsooner]

Serviceable is totally different from what folks are looking for when asking about the best speakers for them to audition under 2500 isn't it? As you said they sound like 1969 speakers that have been re-coned. Just not up to today's standards. Even the old panel speakers can't keep pace with today's panels.

 

 

And many of those old pieces are still capable of serviceable sound. My 35 year old son has used my KLH 17s in his second system to provide backing tracks for him to practice his drumming for many years. As I recall, I re-coned the woofers about 20 years ago, and they still sound OK - but I bought them new at Sam Goody in 1969.....and they sound like it.

[ctsooner]

Are you serious? This is the problem with many of you who only use measurements to 'listen' to audio. They are anything but that in the real world. Go listen for once and then you could come to the boards with real thoughts on how they SOUND and not measure. The audio community has had plenty of components over time that may not measure perfectly, but are musical and sound great. These speakers don't smear or distort the way so many others do in their price range. There is a reason these have been considered a best buy in their price ranges since the 80's in all their forms and updates. Since Vandersteen isn't a strong marketer, there is probably a reason so many reviewers and manufacturer's in the industry who own and love Vandersteen's for their own personal use.

 

Not saying that measurements aren't important, but they don't always tell the full story. Just saying.

 

Several people have recommended the Vandersteen 2Ce IIs but judging from Sphile's measurements these speakers are probably quite bright and forward sounding.

 

 

I wouldn't bother with a listen and perhaps try the 3s instead.

 

R

[ctsooner]

Beetle, thanks for being so much nicer than I am in your response, lol...

 

That figure is JA's in-room response and I suspect it is an artifact of interactions in his room and how he measures over a "listening window" rather than where his ears are. This puts 1st order speakers at a disadvantage in this test. Also, this graph is quite different than his quasi-anechoic measurement!

 

May I kindly suggest it is well worth bothering with a listen rather than rely on JA's dubious in-room measurement? Many folks have suggested Maggies on this thread. Can you imagine how *those* would look using JA's measurements!

[ctsooner]

John A. measures all speakers in the same way. I think this is fair, but it requires a person reading them to know what really matters. The in room response is the least informative, especially on a speaker with more than 2 drivers and first order crossovers. If the speaker has provisions for vertical alignment (horizontal doesn't matter) 2 thirds of the samples are not where the listeners ears are and that causes a very inaccurate measurement of what the speaker is actually doing. A speaker with steep crossover slopes and a minimum number of drivers is not defected nearly as much. Obviously if the speaker designer doesn't provide vertical alignment instructions as is typically the case with high order speaker designs the above point is certainly obvious. High order crossover designs do not preserve the waveform anyway, so all frequencies are in different phases relative to one another which randomizes the result enough to not change the measurements much by the above mentioned procedure. A listening session would be more important than the measurements anyway.

[ctsooner]

Yep, you can weigh them.

 

What still amazes me after all these years are folks who say you know what a component sounds like by measuring them and not listening to them. That's basically what is said when someone sees a measurement that isn't done properly and totally discounts anything. I realize how proud many of you are by taking your own measurements, but go reread my post earlier in this thread. Those words are from a couple of speaker designers/manufacturers I happen to be close with and they both said the same thing about measuring speakers. The irony is that they are on the opposite side of the design spectrum and their speakers don't have much in common. I then asked a designer of top league electronics and he read the thread and agreed with what I posted.

 

You guys don't need to agree with it, but it's hard to refute what was said, so I decided to share. Yes we all hear differently, but to make a statement that basically says only listeners of classical music care if their music playback is distorted is just incorrect and does nothing to support anything you post. You also seem to make the assumption that many of us don't listen to classical music. Again, poor assumption, even though it shouldn't matter.

 

Most top speaker manufacturers can use just measurements and design a great sounding speaker. They are at the point in their careers where they don't even need to listen to design speakers, but they do listen. They listen to different drivers, wiring, connectors, cabinets etc... but they do design with measurements and that's why I would never say measuring isn't important, but the final sound is the most important. That said, the way folks have talked about measuring is completely wrong according to folks like JA and designers who do this for their income. Not trying to inflame things and you can believe what you want as we can believe what we want. Bottom line is that we are all trying to enjoy our music regardless of what genre we listen to.

[ctsooner]

ctsooner

 

I can’t speak to others but I’ve probably heard one new to me system every month for the last ten years so about 100 systems with current speakers in generally good residential rooms. In the last year I’ve attended the monthly listening sessions held by a downtown high end dealer until they play audiophile music then I leave. I had business in Irvine California this year and attended Newport 2016. I went from room to room and was allowed to play classic rock that sounded good in that room. This got people out of the hallways and into the rooms making the vendors happy. I also provided some technical support when asked. As I was leaving Sunday a vendor came up and thanked me for helping him. And I went to RMAF 2016 this year. Based on the documented issues with the power and the rooms at RMAF it was hard to get a good feel for equipment but I tried. This is why I said your statement about me not auditioning the latest equipment is wrong.

 

My comment about hearing memory applies to you as well.

 

If modern speakers are so much better than the old AR and Advent speakers then why can’t people get speaker manufacturers to play Blonde on Blonde, Pet Sounds and Abbey Road on their superior speakers at shows? Is it because the only song played without my requesting it from my reference albums at Newport was “Willin” off the Mobile Fidelity version of Little Feat’s Waiting for Columbus and it didn’t sound right to me?

 

Steve, fair enough. We all have our opinions and to us they are correct and that's all good. I don't do shows as to me you can't get a decent listening at most of them for many reasons. Sometimes I'm sure you can, but most manufacturers will tell you that they don't love the shows but need to do them. I too love classic rock. Always have and always will. I didn't like Vandersteen's at all until about 5 years ago when I was forced to sit and listen to them. That's how I ended up getting the Treo's.

 

My point is that any time I've heard vintage speakers in a new system I felt strongly that they weren't up to what the newer speakers with better components and materials can do. Again, that's my thought. They don't do what I listen for and that's wanting a 3D illusion and sound stage. I spoke with someone who has been reviewing for the major magazines for years and years about this thread and your post as I wanted his take. He agreed, but also said that many of the older speakers get the mids better than a ton of the newer speakers as he and I both feel that so many manufacturer's screw with the mids to make you think their speakers are bigger sounding etc... than they really are and it messes up the sound, but most folks buy on name and always have. Interesting convo to say the least and all the matters is that you love your KLH's and Advents double stack. I honestly mean that. Pete

[ctsooner]

Snell C/V, they were $2500 new, when I bought about 25 years ago or so. Love them & won't part with them. An original Kevin Voecks design if memory serves. Great for medium to large rooms with good amplification.

 

If you can find these on the used market in good shape, jump. I haven't heard anything under $7K or $8K in today's dollars that compares.

 

Kevin did a great job years ago. I used to get to visit his shop in downtown Haverhill, MA. My ex actually grew up in Groveland and I went to visit him right before they closed it down. Had some prototypes sometimes too. Fun days.

[ctsooner]

a blast from the past - where is he now? still at Revel, or Harmon?

 

He's out in LA with Harmon as a project manager I believe. Haven't seen him since the 90's. Doubt he'd even remember me, lol. I really wished I had met Peter Snell before his heart attack/death. He used to eat grinders at my ex's uncle's grinder shop up the street from the factory.

[ctsooner]

Maggie's need a ton of expensive components in order to do their singing if you would. I like them in some systems but those systems have never been inexpensive. I know many dealers who sell them and they agree. That's the reality of that design. Nothing wrong with that but something to consider if you are trying to do a budget systems. They have the much smaller designs that are basically for video or a very small den/bedroom but even those are compressed and need clean power. A nice Belles integrated can run them but you are still talking a 2k amp. Again they can. E excellent speakers but folks should be realistic about them , that's all

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

Blues, where u at man? I'm in Berlin. Would love to hear u play. Love Sally's. Would love to meet up. Pete

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

How very cool. Too bad, I thought you may live up in the Hartford area. If you're ever up here again, I'd love to listen to you. Just let me know via the board. Pete

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

I just sold my last three sets of Proacs about a year ago lol.

 

RALF, there are very few amps, that also deliver good sound quality that can drop to 4 ohms (in actual life they go lower) and double their power. What they really need to sound good to my ears (just my opinion) is an amp that can double its load at least to 4 and hopefully 2 as it chokes when the music is calling for power. That's any speaker but for panels it seems to be a bigger problem. I've even spoken to someone who used to work at Magnapan about this as well as with someone from an amp company (engineer) who makes monsters amps that double all the way to nearly 1 ohm which is asking a lot. That's why Bryston and powerful amps like that are so often shown with these speakers but unlike some easier to drive speakers you can't throw a 500 Amp at them and expect them to sound very good. Again I'm sure you disagree, but in my listening to them a lot and speaking with folks who sell and work with them, they agree that they need a very powerful high current amp to drive them. RALF, I like your posts and respect where you are coming from. I've just never heard any of the Maggie's sound good without a powerful, expensive amp to drive them. Pete

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

Thx ctsooner - I just got home from listening to 3.7i (vs. 1.7) - both driven by a $4,000 Rogue amp. They sounded good (or good!!)

 

This was in a fairly narrow (but quite long) room and not at super loud SPL - loud enough to make the dealer turn them down a bit to converse tho. I forgot to take an SPL with me...

 

By " inexpensive amplification" above I was specifically referring to my 1.5QR's bi-amped by a Sunfire Cinema Grand - It was not a really costly amp, esp. for the non-Signature versions. I have not done any blinded tests to see if large buck amps will sound better (or if sub-kilobuck amps will still sound good).

 

After listening at the dealer's, I do think you should upgrade your Maggies every 20 years or so. It is pretty easy to drive them temporarily with whatever amp you have that shoot high current at 4 ohms, and then search for something else to compare with. A lot easier to A/B/X amps than speakers...

 

 

I'd be very interested to know what low buck amps Magnepan has tried on their larger speakers (not the desktop ones). I do know that wendell has used Bryston at shows and that they've used ARC gear a lot. There is a lot of legacy interchange between those two MN companies...

Yes, they actually voice them with the ARC ref amps. As you said they are very close up there. Both companies are great guys. I don't own any of their gear, but I do like them and enjoy visiting when they we are at events. The Bryston as I said, are big amps that have pretty high current and can drive them.

 

I think when I think of speakers in the 2500 range, I think of a Vandersteen 2 (new) or a Proac monitor if someone has to have a monitor, or a PSB/Paradigm (do they want a brighter or less colored speaker). When driving anyone of these speakers I can hook them up to the least expensive NAD amp for under 700 or possibly the Belles integrated at 2k for the higher end and they will run the crap out of any of these speakers without worrying about choking and running out of gas (this is where distortion happens and 90% of blown speakers).

 

If someone has a larger budget, then I'd got with a larger integrated (so they can save cash) that has higher current and then throw the Maggie 1.7's into the mix. That's why I personally feel that it's not necessarily a good option for a 2500 speaker, unless the poster has the money to purchase the higher current amp. I believe the 1800 Belles can drive them, but not to ear splitting levels that some still like to listen to. lol.... I agree about A/b'ing amps vs speakers. I've had many bring their amps over the house to play, but not quiet as many will bring speakers, lol.

[ctsooner]

Of course you can use them but they are on sale for 1400 each. Personally I've heard many of the higher end class D amps with the 3.7 and not likes them at all. Just very dry with no texture to thee music. Again not the W4s amps.

 

Again they are stable but they don't fully double into even 4 ohms. Again they are 2800 a pair and not a budget amp plus you still need a pre amp to control the system.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

Oh, I just got my w4s LPS today so please done think I don't like the company. ?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

I neglected to mention that I got a used pair of W4S SX1000's for $1000. So I was thinking of used prices. W4S on the used market offers unbeatable cost/performance imho.

 

Yes, there are plenty of good cost/performance values of used gear. It's still hard to find amps that have enough drive to PROPERLY drive a pair of fuller size Maggies. I even heard someone from Maggie make that statement some years ago for the same reasons I post above. Again, not trying to argue and if you aren't playing your music loudly and you aren't listening to things that are dynamic, then there isn't a problem. I do know a few folks who have blown theirs because their amps chocked and passed distortion because they ran out of steam on orchestral music.

 

There are too many folks who buy used and don't always understand the correct stats to look at when putting systems together. With most dynamic speakers you don't have to worry the amps doubling into a halved load. Remember that even though a speaker is rated at 4 ohms, let's say, it's running around possibly 2 ohms at times. Ohms is just an average load as if you put a resistor into the circuit instead of a pair of speakers that fluid and every changing. There are plenty of amps that can handle these loads, but some do it better than others and certain types of speakers demand a much better and stable amp that can properly drive said speaker. That's one reason you find these speakers sold at stores and those stores all seem to carry the same or similar amps. Audio Research comes to mind as does Ayre, D'agastino, Bryston for lower cost options (to me these are not cheap amps) and Krell or Mac. Can you get sound out of lower priced amps (even going the used route)? Of course you can and good sound. My point I guess is that in order to really hit that magic spot that Maggies can give you, takes money and much more so than what say a Vandersteen needs to sound excellent. These posts take NOTHING away from how good a Maggie CAN sound. I have so many friends who have and love them. I have a buddy who's a jazz drummer out of NYC, Billy Drummond. He owns Vandersteens And Maggies and loves them both. That said, he is able to run the Vandersteens off a less expensive amp than the Maggies. He's using a class D amp that's pretty expensive (forget the name off hand, but it's rated highly for a class D amp) and personally I don't like it that much, but when he puts on the high current amps they sing in the mids as if you are there in the club. Just personally choices I guess, but to me any 'budget' gear needs to sound close to it's best with similarly priced gear. JMHO

[ctsooner]

Some of you guys make me laugh. I've never seen so many obsessed with graphs and charts. It only tells part of the story. Many of you will die trying to get many to read graphs instead of listening and that your thing so it's fine. As much as I I've the sound of Vandersteen speakers and I don't like many of the other premium names speakers that doesn't make them inferior. I have plenty of friends who love other speakers and that means they are great speakers to them. So much goes into speakers and listening and there are no absolutes. Heck I've heard my favorite speakers sound like crap in systems. Not set up properly and with the wrong electronics. Happens all the time. I've heard speakers that I'd never ever own, even for free, sound pretty good in certain systems. We all sit and argue how speakers measure or B&W are better than Vandys but it's totally subjective and statements like that are wrong. I may have even posted something similar about Vandys killing another ( don't think so but I could have) and it's wrong. I just hope any newbies disregard so much of what many of us have posted and go listen and love their music and their gear. Off to go listen.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

I agree that accuracy is important. After speaking with a few world known designers and sharing much of this thread all said that most of the measuring isn't as accurate as it's needs to be to show the information they would need to help in the design of a speaker. No I don't pretend to be able to make any measurements. I have read Harley's reviews for many years and see his testing and do feel that there is a ton of validity to it. Many of you are trained engineers im sure and you and you may even have the gear that the professionals are using but do you have the same controls etc. My point is that some of the graphs that have been shared are not accurate compared to what has been published my RH and or some of the manufacturers whom I trust more. That's all. The bottom line though is that even totally accurate tests still can't full tell you how a speaker will sound. You or someone else said not to listen to the VANDERSTEEN on this thread or may be another one I'm reading this week because they don't measure good. The measurements that were posted were not accurate according to Vanderteeens graphs and what's been reported on. That's where you lost me but it's fine. You believe in your stats and making decisions to audition or not based on them and some of us audition anything to see what we do and don't like. Either way we are all doing it our way and having fun. That's what makes the hobbby part fun

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

Lol. I'm glad you love the B&W. passion is what makes this such a fun hobby. As far as nothing else is close means for you though. This thread proves that we all hear differently and love different speakers.

 

That's what drives these forums

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[ctsooner]

Folks also don't really realize how important the rest of the chain really is until they hear true top end gear. As many of us have stated earlier in this thread (some folks just haven't read all the posts as we had a long exchange on detail being so important), it all depends on the trade offs that any designer must make at any price level.

 

We all listen differently and that's why it's all good. The only posts that I always disregard are the ones that say theirs speakers are the best or things along that line. We all have favorites obviously. It's all good

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile