Help CA Find New Speakers

[esldude]

6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Would love to hear from @esldude for a recommendation. 

Not sure why I was singled out.  I don't have experience with lots of the recent top contenders. 

 

Maybe I'm brainwashed, but I'm convinced Harman's methodology is sound and onto something important.  Now I knew of it for several years, but having heard some of their designs is convincing.  The LSR305's of JBL (Harman division) are stunningly good for peanuts.  Revel's are that too though pricier peanuts.  So considering you want something conventional mainstream, I would suggest whichever of the Revel speakers in your price and size range deserve strong consideration and investigation.  Even then speakers are personal, and you should hear them in person enough to know if they tickle your music bone or not.  I would say the various Harman sourced speakers may not quite be best at any particular aspect, but seem to score 90% on almost all aspects.  And the result is often hear it, love it, and forget about speakers as they get out of the way.  You'll not revel (pun intended) in micro-detail, or explosive dynamics,  etc. etc. What you will find is it is easy to revel in the music itself.  Normally  you'll not be fighting deficiencies in the speaker to get that result.  With many speakers they have a couple or three fantastic aspects, and need some careful or unusual setup to get the best of them.  Revel's will respond to careful setup, but aren't unbalanced in their positive attributes. 

 

One I've not heard were I you that would get some attention is Magico.  I think at the ultimate end of fidelity even if everything else is done right, a cone speaker must have a great enclosure.  I think Magico does well in this regard.  Though note I have never heard them, just seen their designs.  I've read the measured results at Stereophile and Soundstage.  I would listen to something in the Q or S series. 

 

So why no panel suggestions?  Well you've indicated you wanted to stay somewhat mainstream.  I assume you'll review some gear with them.  All panels have their peccadilloes.  

 

I would also note your room isn't far from square.  For reviewing things maybe too much bother, but a distributed  multiple subwoofer system can really help in the low end.  Maybe even to the point you could go a step down on the main speakers and spend extra on distributed woofers.  Dallas Justice can probably offer good advice on that.  I did see you said you wanted full range.  But I don't know if any full range speaker could give as good a low end and as even a low end (which is very important) as having multiple subwoofers. 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Would love @mitchco‘s advice on the complete system like Bill mentioned above  and some passive options. 

 

@Jud what say you, Vandersteen?

That would have been my suggestion as well.  Go active.  From your other comments I took it that you didn't want to go in that direction. 

 

Sal's suggestion is a good one, the JBL M2's.  They have a dedicated amp, but can be used with other amps.  It is a complete system however that includes their amp, their DSP, and speakers.  

 

Should one suggest a 5 channel system has some advantages since there is streaming of multi-channel recordings available?

 

 

[esldude]

I don't know which brand mitchco is about to review.  If you are open to the idea, here is one I'd have a short list. 

 

https://www.kiiaudio.com/

 

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/kii-audio-three

 

You'll want the BXT modules for a full range setup I think.   This is the sort of innovative product that will eventually become the norm for high performing speakers using DSP, beamforming and such to do what no passive design possibly can.  

 

Kal's reviewed them for Stereophile.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/kii-audio-three-loudspeaker

 

The Dutch&Dutch 8c would also fall into this new category of modern speaker. 

https://dutchdutch.com/8c/

 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, rando said:

I'll come out against an active system.  You could replace it in Germany every year for the foreseeable future.  Maybe even have reason to before the manufacture timeline is met.  Eschew but review would be a forward thinking policy where this developing segment is concerned.  

 

 

Would you have applied this idea to the first 15 years of DACs when the improvements were rapid?  I would hope not. 

[esldude]

1 hour ago, rando said:

 

There is a local illustration I'd like to use here.  

 

Two bulls are standing on a hill looking down at a field of heiffers.  A young male entertaining the situation for the first time in life gathers what they are up to.  Runs over towards them making a show of bucking and thrusting.  Shouts at them how fully he is going to make off with that saucer eyed one on the leading edge of the field paying him attention.  Without missing a beat the first bull replied, "Why run down the hill and take one when you can walk down and have them all?"

That probably wasn't nearly the comeback remark you think it was.  It actually could sound like you agree with me. ?

 

No hard feelings about it either way.  I just don't think you can future proof such situations.  You'll have to decide when to jump in and start taking part somewhere.  Waiting till it all settles down might take a generation.  

[esldude]

54 minutes ago, firedog said:

 You don't need the BXT for "full range". Interestingly, the published specs have  been changed from 20hz at the low end to "only" 30hz. But the Kiis without the BXT have been measured as "full range".

You do need the BTX if you want to play very loudly or to fill a large room. It  also adds a significant amount to the maximum SPL output of the system. I'm sure dynamics for something like an orchestral piece are improved with the added bass module, and bass distortion at low frequencies/high output is surely reduced. Apparently the modules also further reduce various room interactions (ceiling and floor). 

Yes, the measurement from Kal's review pair without the BXT.  The low end hump is a measurement artifact. Pretty much full range. 

 

But you wouldn't want to handicap Chris' new setup now would you?

[esldude]

2 hours ago, rickca said:

Like maybe Magico?  What is it about your TAD CR1 that needs improvement?

Hey I put in Magico.  Suggested the Q or S series.  

[esldude]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Not sure yet. Speakers aren’t really in my wheelhouse like DACs and digital, so I want to make sure I can offer this community something of value for their time spent reading. 

I think you need a special event. 

 

Organize a one time CA audio conference with each suggested speaker being given a chance to exhibit their speakers.  All for you to make a choice, and of course some of us attending and "helping you choose".  Sort of a can-jam except with speakers. ?

 

 

[esldude]

10 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

I always wonder with the electrostats that use dynamic drivers on the low end how good the integration might be.

 

And with full range electrostats, I wonder about the volume capability.

 

@esldude has SoundLabs (or at least had them last I inquired), so he may be a source of information.

Electrostats aren't likely to be rock and shake the house.  But in a reasonably large room and adequate power amps can be good rock speakers.  

 

I've not heard commercial ESL's with woofers that worked in my opinion.  I've not heard the latest from Martin-Logan, but had that opinion of them in their past efforts. 

 

For a long time I didn't believe you could integrate subs with ESL's. This after hearing or helping people attempt to do it.  I don't think that is the situation anymore.   I've heard Rhythmik's servo controlled subs work in a way they add what you wish and don't draw attention to themselves with Soundlabs.  Some DSP helps subs mesh with ESLs.  Using distributed multiple subs (more than two for stereo) is also beneficial (beneficial for box speakers too).  You also can purchase good inexpensive measuring microphones and combine with REW to help getting it all working in a way that wasn't possible in the past.  Or you can work with Dirac by getting things close and letting it help with fine tuning.  The things mitchco writes about using room correction software and subs for box or horn speakers will work for using them on ESLs.  

 

So simple version: a pair of large ESL's with a plenty capable amp and nothing beyond good room setup can be good on all kinds of music.  Using subs with them helps in the areas they are weak and relieves them of some burden of reproducing the low end making them better elsewhere.  Using at least some Room EQ or correction software for at least 500 hz and lower improves things quite a substantial amount.   They do still have their own sound which is not quite like anything else. 

[esldude]

9 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

@esldude Which Sound Lab speakers do you think would be a good fit in my room?

 

 

Most of my years with them have been in a long narrow room with them close to the sidewalls.  I've heard them elsewhere in wider rooms etc.  My experience has all been with A1 and A3 (at one time M1 and M3) sizes.  Mine are A3 sized, but mounted on steel frames they now only use for more expensive models.  I have heard the newer mylar on them and it is a benefit. 

 

So just eyeballing your room, and this is iffy for good advice, I would place the inner edge about where the inner edge of the speakers are in the picture.  Probably about that far from the rear wall too.  Maybe a little further out from the rear.  So the question is how tall can they be without hitting the sloped ceiling.  A3's are 6ft 2.5 inches.  A1's are 6 ft 10.25 inches.  They make one called the Audiophile 545 only 56 inches tall.  Whether it is worth getting the Ultimate series which appear to be the same panels in better frames depends upon the cost.  

 

They basically make the A1, A3 and 545 sizes in all the various trim levels.  There might also be a few other differences in transformers and are differences in the frame.  

 

The Quads might fit your room with the sloping ceilings better.  I've not heard the 2912 series, while the 2812 looks to be mostly the old ESL63 with some updates.  You probably would want a sub added with those or at least the 2812.  I do think ultimately the Soundlabs are a better speaker than the Quads.  

 

I've heard lots of Maggies, and owned some the most recent however being the old 3.3R.  They may of course have improved, but they simply aren't the sound of some ESLs even though both are panels.