big speakers

It may be worth giving JBLs a try. Merlins JBL subs certainly have that absolute effortlessness and naturalness that I havent experienced anywhere else.

K2s anyone?

 

Why not? I think the whole point of hi-fi runs counter to your views.

I can't believe that you are actively searching for flawed speakers. You are looking to colour the sound of all your records? Why? (And in what way?)

Genuinely amazed.

 

Bub,

There is no such thing as an uncoloured loudspeaker, this beast only exists in manufacturers advertising hype. ATC, Dynaudio, B&W and others all make monitors that are supposed to be the last word in accuracy. Isn't it strange then that they all sound so different from each other? If we had got anywhere near an accurate speaker then an ATC and a Dynaudio would sound nigh on indistinguishable from each other. This is self evidently not the case, if we ever do get near to an accurate sound it certainly won't be with drivers stuffed into a resonating box.

Anyone who looks at Sound on Sound will soon get to the truth, which is that studio engineers seem to pick the monitor which annoys them least, rather like us Hi Fi people when you come to think about it.

Back on topic, Data, have you thought about a secondhand pair of Klipsch La Scalas, they do sometimes come up and every time I've heard them with valve gear I have been really impressed. With about 5 watts you can also have more loudness than Bub can acheive with a lot less distortion. This would then allow you, if you can be bothered, to play the "mines more accurate than yours" games.

 

Yes, but you can pursue a theoretical goal. There's no perfect anything - so do we just give up on 'the closest approach to the original sound' and instead go for 'the most coloured approach to the original sound'?

How is this self-evident? To demonstrate this, you'd have to compare them in the same system & room, and I haven't done this. I would guess that if you did this, they would be pretty darn similar.

Remember Alan Ball's recording session at my place? Are you telling me that the ATCs aren't very accurate?

 

.

"How is this self-evident? To demonstrate this, you'd have to compare them in the same system & room, and I haven't done this. I would guess that if you did this, they would be pretty darn similar."

I have tried ATC 50as, Dynaudio M1 monitors, and Quad ELS 57s in my room with the present system. Sorry they all sound completely different, with the Quads way ahead on detail retrieval and tonality.

 

I think it might be more complicated, Paul. 50s are way too big for your room and are going to excite some major room modes in there. I guess the only fair comparison would be anechoic, with similarly-sized models from the different manufacturers, and using the same power amplifiers for all.

I'd like to hear the Quads, but I don't see how they could be 'way ahead' on either tonal accuracy or detail. You will have to educate me.

[I bet the Quads were 'way behind' both the ATCs and the Dyns on dynamic range, and SPL though.]

 

If we bring the room into this James we are going to be at it all day. A very complex subject.

One point though, if we can find the perfectly accurate speaker in an aneochic chamber does this mean that we have to buy that speaker .and then turn our listening rooms into aneochic chambers. I mean we can't listen in innacurate rooms can we?

The Quads can be way ahead because they have no box and use drivers lighter than a feather, honestly. This means that they can react to vibration many times faster than a big heavy Moving Coil driver.

 

I think 'inaccurate rooms' are what most of us have. There's nothing you can do about it (rather like a bad recording) except try to choose one that suits you.

I also think that the room plays a far more important role in the sound than most people realise.

The main selling point of my current abode, for me, was the living room with its very high ceiling. I immediately recognised it as being probably a good one for a very silly hi-fi.

 

the answers quite simple and logical, I am seeking a sound that i like and enjoy how it reproduces the music, and for me valves and big speakers ( ie horns, trans lines, electrostatics) are the way, its only a singular goal in many possible ones that music must be true to the recording, other equally valid parts can come in...soundstage, big bass, all the 'parts' we know and love.
basically at this moment in time at the end of the day you have to do what's right for you
....argggh.. tv glib

 

My room, for it's dimensions also has a high ceiling, and is OK for none silly Hi Fi systems. It does close down large speakers rapidly though.

 

Sounds reasonable Data,

Do try to hear the Klipsch if you can. John Watson and I still talk about the time we heard those speakers and the potential they had.

 

It's more than OK! The sound you get in there is really first-class in all respects, and with very surprising bass.

Shall we start a separate thread about high ceilings? I think this is possibly quite important, as obviously it will minimise ceiling reflections because of the inverse-square law, and the angles involved.

 

Once you spend time with a speaker without a box you become very aware of the effect even a well designed box has. Then there is speed; the moving part of a Quad is incredibly light, effectively a large piece of coated clingfilm, compare this to the heavy cone, spider and voice-coils in a moving coil loudspeaker. Quads also have a very large flat driver area, so shift a lot of air. Sound also comes out from both the front and back – again very different to the way moving coil boxes do things, and logically far nearer to how a musical instrument works. They are very different in the way they do things, yet also very accurate IMHO.

Tony.

 

Hi Tony,

Yes I've heard this said many times, and I can see where you are coming from. The only electrostatics I've heard were Martin-Logan hybrids, about 7 feet tall, and sounded dreadful - but that might have been the Sim audio Moon (?) CD player used, don't know.

The fast-reacting film might well bring out more detail, but tonal accuracy?

I will seriously have to listen to those Quads Paul knows about.

 

Well put Tony,

Don't worry the Quads are a speaker Bub will like very much. Castle Chesters multiplied by about 5 will suit him I'm sure. They would work brilliantly in Bub's room too.

I think a thread on high ceilings may be found a little on the dry side for most.

 

Bub,

regardless of the quality of the ATC drive units, you are in fact listening more to the cabinet than anything else. You can easily demostrate that by swapping cabinets, the tonal characteristics of your dirvers will change far more than if you alter the drivers themselves in the same cabinet.

Then you've got the room. A dipole drives the room differently and IMHO more efficiently.

To give you an example, I'd be interested to know whether you like the Proac Response 4, it uses similar ATC drive units to yours.

 

I couldn't disagree more!
There are several things you can do to 'optimize' the acoustics of a room: any professional specialist in acoustics could give you enough suggestions to make you spend a fortune.
The fact is that there are not many people who try to do something against that but this doesn't mean that there is nothing you can do about it.
I understand if the room is rented, then spending money in buying diffusors or / and absorbers and putting them on the critical parts of the walls and ceilling is somewhat like throwing away money especially if one day you move out.

Another point is that the acoustic in the room is dependent also from the loudspeakers. If you know you will buy some other speakers later on, spending money in getting someone to measure the room and suggesting you how to improve the acoustics is also somewhat nonesense. That is why I decided to get the gear first and then to optimize my room.

 

Don't have much time right now and can't elaborate, but briefly: as the impedance of the coupling between the film and the surrounding air is so low, you have to take into account not only the mass of the mylar film itself but also that of the air it is in contact with. The effective mass of an electrostatic panel can - counter-intuitively - be higher than that of a good dynamic driver.

Also, mass alone does not tell the whole story. What really counts is the relation between mass and driving force.

Electrostatics are no panacea. But I do agree a well sorted Quad 57 is difficult to beat. I ran one for a while. If it was a little easier to place, I might still have it.

The 63 is no slouch either, but it lacks a directness which I find very attractive in the 57.

 

You can't make a silk purse out of a crap room. I viewed about a dozen flats before I found the room I wanted.

Not on phase seven Mana which (largely) takes out the cabinet resonances. Never heard the Proac response 4.

 

Sorry Bub, Mana won't do anything about the port resonance will it?