Bloated speakers/weight wise


Hopefully most of us are keeping to our new years diet resolutions. But what about speakers, can they be overweight too? How many of us enjoy shoving around a speraker that weighs in at MORE than we do? I mean really is it really necessary to have speakers that weigh in at more than 150 lbs? I might go as high as 175, but even that is in need of a diet. What do you get more from a 150 lb speaker that i don't get from my 70 lb speaker.
So who are the haaviest speakers on the planet? list some brands and corresponding weiths.
I know Legacy and Wilson's are up there, any others?
bartokfan
Zaikesman, true for those interested in high SPL listening, then cabinet resonance may be an issue. i rarely listen with my amp vol at more than 1/4 - 1/3. Plenty of muisc going on. These audio club meetings in New Orleans with high/super high SPL listening sessions make no sense to me. But the group seemed (past, not sure where the New Orleans club is now scattered to) to get a kick out of it.
Bartokfan: I was saying that for those who like to listen at higher volumes, the smaller size that usually goes along with lower weight may put a limit on performance. But I don't agree that cabinet resonance, as its own issue, is a problem only for listening at higher volumes. IMO cabinet talk makes its unwanted contribution at all volume levels, and minmizing it, whether through brute-force construction or something more weight-efficient, pays sonic dividends no matter how soft or loud you like to listen. (I also should mention though, that I'm one of those who feel listening at unnaturally low levels, while sometimes unavoidable, does constitute its own form of distortion that renders reproduction less lifelike. Of course the same thing goes for listening too loud as well.)
(I also should mention though, that I'm one of those who feel listening at unnaturally low levels, while sometimes unavoidable, does constitute its own form of distortion that renders reproduction less lifelike. Of course the same thing goes for listening too loud as well.)

I would think most speakers are designed for accuracy at the realistic listening volume. I remember talking to John at Ohm Acoustics many years ago about the different models he had back then and he said that he has this particular model that sounded really good a low listening volume. He also said that he did not understand why this was so, he not intentionally designed it to do that, but it also sounded good at realistic levels. I do not remember the model, but it was not a Walsh and I doubt if it's being made at this time.
Finding a speaker that sounds 'good' at low levels is notoriously tough, but it is also rarer to find a speaker that can play at truly lifelike levels on large-scale material without seriously faltering than most audiophiles seem to assume. (My own speaker accomplish neither.) Either that, or probably most of us almost never listen at truly lifelike levels, but speakers that aren't large, driven by amps that aren't high-powered -- both of which are common in this hobby -- can't really get that done for the most part. Which is okay, because most listening rooms can't support that kind of volume anyway. Of course, if you mainly listen to a guy singing and playing an acoustic guitar, or string trios, the lifelike volume factor doesn't present as much of a problem. I coined a term I use to describe this theoretical factor (to myself, 'til now), "absolute amplitude distortion". But this concept really only applies to acoustic material, since there is no truly 'correct' volume setting for multitracked studio rock/pop, music which always depends upon electronic sound reinforcement in live performance. Still, no matter what kind of material you're playing, if you listen too low you'll miss musical detail and impact, and if you listen too loud you'll hear non-musical detail that's not an intended part of the performance, and most systems will throw the tonal balance off-kilter in either case.
speakers that aren't large, driven by amps that aren't high-powered -- both of which are common in this hobby -- can't really get that done for the most part.

I once owned full range electrostatics's (acoustat 2+2's), I did not keep them long. Did not like that small sweet spot and missed the dynamics. So I got my first pr. of Ohms, they are very easy to live with cause to me they sound like a hybrid, near electrostatic sounding with dynamics plus a very large listening area. I am a Ohm fan now.

Now to the quote above. I came across this particular Blue Circles amp. review, and after reading it I called John at Ohm's again and flat out asked him what amp. he would recommend for the Walsh's I have to get the most out of them. Now mind you; I have been using a ss 200 wpc at 8 ohms, 375 at 4 ohms and when I played music at higher volumes, the sound became fatiguing and earitating so I thought the amp. may be clipping. Well anyway John recommended the Sunfire Signature, and he said, make sure it's the Signature. What a difference this kind of power makes on these speakers. There just a clear and keep there composure at higher very high volumes, so high I can't here myself take (like I take to someone in a quiet room).
It was reading this review that prompted me to call John.

http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/bluecircle_bc8.htm

You may be interested in what is said when lots of power is fed to Walsh speakers.