Good secondhand speakers for £6-700... suggestions?

Do you have a particular paper in mind? Harwood and Mathers published quite bit of stuff.

However it was mostly before psycho-acoustics really got to grips with what people could hear, and in hindsight could well be conjecture by speaker designers/electrical engineers about what they thought might be important.

Still, I wouldn't mind reading what they thought, so if you do have some references in mind either post them or PT me.

 

The BBC had no particular axe to grind, they were open to whatever worked and set about finding the best solutions for their needs in a pragmatic and methodical fashion.
Maybe the "science" of psycho-acoustics isn't the final word either - I guess it still relies on interpretation and the quality of the questions being asked (not saying it doesn't provide answers, but a little sceptiscism never hurts).
Derek has been selling a few bits and pieces on ebay recently. Look for rodneps.
My experience with EQ is that I cannot make the Mackies sound like my Harbeths or a pair of really large JBL studio monitors (I have tried ). EQ is vital, however, for counteracting room effects, "difficult" speaker placement and, of course, feedback / gain issues.
In any case, I'm not about to run psycho-acoutic or other tests before buying a pair of speakers for home use.
My simplistic take is that BBC monitors can sound very good in most rooms, and are the best for the music I listen to and my style of listening. There are other speakers that are very good as well, but which I can't afford, and wouldn't fit in my appartment anyway.

 

In the immortal words of Malcolm Steward

" Buy what you like it is as simple as that"

I had a chance to get some compact sevens a year ago for £500...I took jamo concert 8s instead.
Should have got both

 

dat,
the problem i have is that enjoyment is a subjective thing and empirical measurements are not (assuming they are done correctly and not massaged in some way - which i'll assume they're not, trusting soul that i am).
person 'a' likes a huge mid bass response for kick drums and rawk music whilst person 'b' listens to violin solos all day long and so needs a very sweet and transparent treble response. admittedly these are extremes but most people do have a preference towards one end or the other. what you are saying is that all else being equal they should both get the speaker that measures as flatly as possible. i would suggest that both should listen to different speakers in their rooms and choose the one they like the sound of best. i agree that in principal the speaker that measures 'the best' SHOULD sound the best, however what i'm saying is that measurement fails to take the listeners preferences and prejudices into account.
your suggestions re room tuning and equalisation are taken however i'd rather start half way up the mountain than in the valley between the mountains. i.e. i'd prefer to tweak a sound i like into one i love than one i hate into one i like.
cheers


julian

 

I am indeed running Compact 7s, and in the past have owned Isobariks. Both are great speakers, though are totally different. The Isobarik is capable of producing such a “real†presence of instruments in the room, they are a incredibly good loudspeaker, but take a lot of money elsewhere to get right. I would try them with the Classe amp first though as they are very amp picky – I used a friends Krell KSA100Mk2 at one stage when one of my 135s died when I had a pair and the Krell was absolutely hopeless into them, you could tell it hated the load. It sounded really slow and out of control compared to the allegedly less powerful Naim amps.

The Compact 7 is a far smaller design and does very different things – they don't have the tangibility and sheer weight of the Bariks, but are very neutral and have an ability to just get out of the way in a way that few speakers I have heard can manage. I love the things and can't imagine growing tired of them. Since they arrived I just don't criticise the system and just enjoy whatever music I put on. I can't recommend them any higher than that! They are not a volume freaks speaker, if damaging your ears / blowing the windows out is a priority the Bariks are a far better contender. I actually listen very quietly compared to most people so take no account of sheer volume ability when choosing equipment. The Harbeths are an easy load, my old 20 watt Nait 2 drove them remarkably well.

The Compact 7ES is +/- 3db from 46Hz to 20Hhz which in speaker terms is ruler flat – most speakers struggle to manage +/- 6db. They sound very neutral indeed. The reason I like them so much is that they are incredibly even handed with differing musical genres; they just play anything you throw at them – far too many speakers are to my ears either 'rock' or 'classical' in their voicing, the Harbeths will play anything. They are also astoundingly good on voice - I run the TV through them and my enjoyment of films etc has really increased.

The only Spendors I've had access to have been the old BC1 and its replacement the SP1/2, and both are too my ears are more laid back than the C7 – the C7 also has a much better low end and sounds far faster, tighter and groovy to these ears. I guess this is down to the Radial bass driver which seems to be something quite special. The BC1 is still a true second hand bargain IMHO, I'm amazed no one uses them round here or at pfm – they are bloody amazing for 200 quid second hand.

I'm sure the SP100 will be something else altogether as it has a 'real' 12†bass driver! Having enjoyed the C7s so much if I ever wanted a bigger speaker it would be on my audition list for sure. I'd love to hear the Harbeth Monitor 40 too.

Tony.

 

Just to be clear Tony, the C7ES is shelved down between 2khz and 6khz by I believe about 3db. Nothing wrong with that, but they are deliberately voiced in that way. My experiments show a very noticable difference in presentation by doing just that, lending what many would consider a more natural, less forward feel to the overall sound.

But if you listen to a monitor that is truly ruler flat across that area, the presentation will be considerably different and to my ears, less enjoyable.

 

Just got back from my second day at the Scottish Hifi & Home Cinema Show... Blimey, what a show! First day was fun, but missed out on a lot of the best stuff (which I happily discovered today). So many wonderful systems, and such variety in sound! 'Twas a bit overwhelming... Makes me very tempted to just plump for the ATC SCM-12s and get it over with...! (turns out I should be able to get a new pair of them in exchange for my three Active 10s and I'll be picking up a pair for a home demo on Tuesday.)

The best of the lot, IMO, were:

Leema Xen - absolutely lovely little speakers (absolutely teensy!) with holographic imaging (and *no* sense of boxiness *whatsoever*, nor any speaker localisation problems *whatsoever*). I'm going to try to have a few more in depth listens to this little gem at the local Loud & Clear, but they don't have any in stock yet, so may be a bit tricky.

Dali Euphonia - hooge mamas that sounded absolutely gorgeous - lovely neutrality, resolution, transparency, PRaT, and some of the best imaging I've heard in my life! (The dealer had a peculiar way of setting up the speakers that involved toeing them in at a very steep 45-degrees so that they crossed way in front of the listener - it made imaging absolutely breathtaking, and the overall sound was fantastic, so he may have a convert there, though he said it's a very painstaking process to set them up right, and took him 3 solid hours before the show...)

Neat Ultimatum - one of the big double-bass-driver floorstanders from the new range. Absolutely stunning buggers, with such an open, transparent sound, and complete lack of speaker localisation/boxiness and fantastic bass... luverly... but not cheap! Even the wee standmounters that I was hoping might be something for me to consider are a hefty £3 grand!

Audio Note - dunno the speakers, but were chunky corner-loaded ones, fed by an 8-watt per channel Meishu (I think?) amp and a lovely AN turntable. I'd never heard anything like this before, and with the limited software they played (namely violins, cellos, and some acoustic rock, all ancient, scratchy, but LUUUUVERLY recordings from the '50s I believe), it sounded absolutely gorgeous. Not quite "uncoloured", but for that sort of source material, it sounded fabulous.

Living Voice Auditorium (not sure if it was one of the more upmarket Auditoriums or just the basic one) - sadly only listened to this briefly, but it sounded really lovely.

Meadowlark Kestrel 2 - these weren't quite as good as the above lot, but were still very involving, and had great imaging. Surprisingly good/powerful bass, given the slenderness of the cabs, though they did sound a bit strained playing Leftfield at high levels!

Totem Sttaf - not as good either, but still an interesting listen. They don't sound very accurate or neutral at all, but I can see the appeal of their sound - very sparkly and involving, though I don't think I liked the bass too much (sounded a bit detached, and "not quite right" somehow).

JM Lab Chorus 714 - yes, a pair of £400 budget floorstanders is getting mentioned along with the illustrious gems above! Why? Because for the money, they sounded fabulous! They just got everything right - tonal balance, bass, mids, treble, dynamics, resolution, imaging; all spot on! Lovely.

Anyway, yeah, I'll let y'all know how it goes with the ATC passives on Tuesday. What I'd really love is to get m'self a pair of these, then buy a pair of Dynaudio Contour 1.3 Mk. IIs secondhand and do a proper head-to-head in my home, loser gets sold on. I think it'd be a pretty awe-inspiring fight! :devil: :slayer:

Dunc

 

I'm not surprised there's no boxiness - there's virtually no box! But will you get any discernible bass out of them, or are you going to try them with a sub?

Expensive, too, IMO, although I quite like them I couldn't see myself paying a grand for them.

-- Ian

 

Hi Duncan

My Active 10/CA2 pre are settling down gradually in my "new" small listening room, thanks to your advice. Anthony has got the same set up as well and he is delighted with them.

There is no doubt that I miss the bass and authority of the passive 20. In my old house with a larger living room, the passive 20s were brilliant, although I wished I had more power from my Naim amps. Now the Active 10s are a bit bass shy for my liking, but physically they are ideal for my current room. One day when I move to another house with a bigger room, I will re-consider a pair of Active 20.

I think the SCM12 would be better than the Active 10 in terms of bass and scale, due to the bass/midrange drivers are the same as used in the passive 20. Just make sure you'll have a powerful amp to drive them.

Regards
Hon

 

Neat, who produce winners almost every time, don't measure their speakers at all, they just listen to them until they sound right.

 

Ditto Totem. They have a picture in their brochure of the only measuring device they use when designing their speakers - an SPL meter.

Dunc

 

I think developing speakers without measurements is stupid. Speaker measurement hard- and software is extremely cheap these days, even though something sophisticated from Klippel can be quite expensive.

Measurements allow you to iron out errors much more quickly than you can do if you have to find them by ear.

 

I agree. Measurements also help you ensure manufacturing consistancy and quality.

 

I do hope you are not dissing the Stealth amplifier Marco. According to a certain person, the ATC active pack is better than two Stealth Monos, so not a complete disaster then....

Tell me something I don't already know.

 

This is true. Measurements are essential but my take is that you don't start with measurements or finish with them. The ear (ear/brain) is still the best instrument and there are dangers in producing a product specifically to provide the best measured response, for example, a flat frequency response curve.

However, to detect resonances or to measure responses over a crossover point, measurements are the quickest and most accurate method.

To give a very simple example, suppose you're designing a transmission line loudspeaker. You could stuff the line with long-haired wool or other filling until the second impedance peak has been completely flattened. This would measure fine. However, if you tuned the speaker by ear you would add less filling, leave a little impedance peak and end up with a better sounding speaker.

After all, both Totem and Neat produce some pretty good speakers and I wonder how sophisticated the measurement techniques were that Peter Walker used when producing the ESL57.

Measurements are a very useful tool in the designer's armoury but the ear is king.

 

When was the last time you had an Audiogram? If your hearing is off, you could simply be building a prosthesis for yourself, and only those who have similar hearing loss will like what you've built?

In repsonse to a few posts that say "buy what you like", well, do so, but then don't complain about how those sound engineers who are "fooking up your fave bands music", if you have no idea what they heard in the studio. (The EBU have a standard for "acceptable range" which is +/-3dB to 2K or so, and slopes through +3/-5 at 10K). Of course if you have decent monitors at home and think they screwed the mix, then complain like hell

 

I read an extraordinary claim in a 'well-thought-of' rag recently. The idea put forward was that speaker manufacturers had given up 'striving' for accuracy because 'no-one knows what it is' and anyway there's no market for it...



This was Hi-Fi+



I think they have lost the plot.

 

Accuracy v Musicality

Bub

I have decided to temporarily unban myself from here.

Accuracy and detail are not as desirable as you may think. In theory yes but I have heard systems so accurate and detailed that the music was killed.

This is why I like my Naim system witn Briks on the end, musicality at its best. The system is not clinically detailed but it gets you into the music and that is what it is all about.

Regards

Mick

 

Hi Bub, You forgot to add this bit:

<< If you want to hear accuracy then go to a recording studio control room and marvel at how absolutely awful the montiors sound with a direct feed from the studio itslef. . . Systems that are built around the premise of being accurate are inevitably expensive, tedious and of only academic interest. >>

I know your system is built around the premise of being accurate, is very expensive and of great academic interest. Surely its not tedious as well?

 

Alex, you're repeating yourself, you've posted that before (on PFM IIRC). So, I'll repeat myself:

"Inevitably expensive" - My ATC CA2 cost me £375. How much was your (presumably not-accurate) preamp? ATC Active 10s are £1600. How much was your (presumably not-accurate) power amp and speakers?

Why tedious? Don't you like your record collection?

-- Ian