2. speakers
  3. 1202514611

The Most Realistic Speaker Technology?

OK, maybe this is the question that I should have asked originally...

I need some help, because I am now more confused than ever. I am in the market for new speakers, and have about $10,000 to spend, more or less. I am looking for the most "realistic", "true-to-life", "you-are-there", quality speaker there is, at that price. But the sheer number of speaker companies, speaker technologies, and speakers out there is mystifying, stupefying, and bewildering, so my search has been extremely confusing. I am not a constant upgrade kind of guy, and I don't have a lot of money, and so the speakers that I buy are the ones that I have to keep for a long time, and so it is even more imperative that I make the right and wise decision.

I realize that everyone has their own different opinion of things, and that different people like different types of sound from their speakers, and that that may be their favorite whether or not the sound coming from their speakers sounds even remotely realistic at all. And, while I respect the right for everyone to like their own particular pair of speakers that puts out a particular type of sound that suits them that they like and that sounds good to them as their favorite, regardless of whether it sounds realistic or not, my tastes are slightly different. My particular idea of good speakers are speakers that produce sound that sounds "real", or speakers that sound like a live performer is playing right there in front of you. Please forgive my particular taste, I know that a pair of speakers can sound perfectly good to someone whether or not they sound very realistic at all, but that is just what I personally in my own opinion consider good speakers, speakers which produce music which sounds as lifelike and as close to reality as possible.

And so, the first step that I am trying to do in order to nail down my speaker search is to isolate the type of speaker technology that sounds the most realistic. Since I know that most of you have heard literally dozens and dozens more different types of speakers in your lifetime than I have, all from many different types of assorted speaker technologies, can any of you tell me what, in general, is the speaker technology or type of speaker that sounds the most realistic and true to real life, like having a live performer playing right in front of you, that sounds the most similar to that? I know that part of this depends upon the system setup and synergy, room treatments, etc., etc., and I know that people do not always prefer the most realistic sound, but oftentimes just prefer the sound that sounds good to them, but surely, there must be some speaker technologies that sound more realistic, and more true-to-life than others. Please keep in mind that I am only asking for the speaker technology that sounds the most realistic, and not for a speaker company or a speaker itself, as I think that that would be impossible for anyone to say.

Knowing that most of you have heard many other speakers than me, and from all different types of speaker technologies, I thought that maybe some of you guys could tell me, maybe some of you could then give me a good place to start, or at least some of the more stronger options that there are available out there in terms of true-to-life music and sounding the most realistic.

If you could please help me out with a little advice other than, "well it all depends on you, you just have to listen with your own ears, and try to find what sounds right, and decide for yourself", that would be great. Because, unfortunately, that does not help me out much because I do not have "golden ears" as they say, and I do not even know what to listen for. Can you guys please help me out, and at least give me some places to start in terms of which speaker technology I should be looking at more than others, to get the most realistic sound? I would really appreciate it.

Thanks to all of you for your responses, I really appreciate all of your help, and am grateful to you for any help, tips, and advice, that any of you guys can give me. All advice is appreciated.
leroyc33
johnnyb53
3,510 posts
 
ncarv:
I hope leroyc33 has decided by this time . . .
Well, there have been several more realistic-sounding loudspeakers that have come along in the nine years since his original post.

For me, it’s Magnepan’s *.7i series, which is both a boxless panel speaker *and* a line source (win-win), but there are many others, such as:

o Monitor Audio Silver and Gold series with their CCAM drivers
o Bob Carver Corp.'s Amazing Line Source
o MartinLogan’s Masterpiece Series with more refined electrostatic/dynamic hybrids
o KEF LS50 and other speakers based on their Uni-Q concentric driver-- Muon, Blades 1 and 2, Reference    Series, R Series.
o Newer, more refined and ambitious products from WIlson, Magico, YG, and others ...
o Better, faster, and more affordable powered subwoofers that are easier to integrate with a pair of monitors,    panels, or floorstanders, and can elevate a $2K pair of speakers to a full-range system that can compete with    some much more expensive standalone passive speakers.

All these and many more have brought us closer to having the musicians in our listening room, or conversely, transporting us to the recording or concert venue.

stewart0722
184 posts
 
There are a lot of speakers that will sound great in one area or another, but in my experience, it has been very difficult for a dynamic speaker
to duplicate the illusion of instruments in an acoustic space versus a true dipole.  I have owned limited baffles such as Vandersteen, I have had Revel Studio 2s, and various electrostatics over the years.  I have for the past four years owned a pair of Magnepan 3.7s and I wouldn't trade them for anything I've had in the past.
The challenge with Magnepan is the appearance typically......and of course they need an enormous amount of current to really sing.....but if you feed them with the biggest Bryston amps you can muster like Magnepan does, you will be rewarded with the most dramatic illusion of "you are there" that has ever been conjured......
You can try to match that with other technologies, but you will not be successful overall unless you move far up the food chain to the likes of Magico and YG and maybe not even then......
Get a great pair of 3.7s for 3K or so, or 5.5K new and never look back.....
transaudio
96 posts
 
I think Shadorne has it-low distortion and wide dispersion (ie.consistent off axis) are top priorities, which eliminates horns, dipoles, electrostatic and good number of other technologies.  

Listening in a small room you are hearing more room than speaker.  For most of us, the only way to really hear the speaker is to eliminate the room- take your speaker outside or to a very large space.  While even these environments can have an effect on the speaker, you are finally hearing more speaker than room.  After you've selected what sounds best outside/in a very large room, now you have to return to your small room to listen.  Everything you thought you knew about your speaker will now change as this small room takes over.  Depending on your speaker's flaws or shortcomings, some of these flaws don't play well in small rooms.  

Poor off axis is a top problem made worse by nearly all rooms.  Uneven bass response is another one.  We are drawn to speakers with more bass in a demo- every time- yet bass is the one thing that is always different between one room and another.  The bass at the store will not be your bass.  The bass with the speakers along this wall will not be the bass when the speakers are put along that wall.  Sometimes 3 inches different can make or break bass in a room.  The bass sitting here will not be the bass sitting there.   All rooms will emphasize some set of low frequencies and will take away others, depending where you sit and where the speakers are.  

So focusing on off axis response and low distortion as values in the speaker inherently makes at least that part a non issue once you get the speaker in a room.  Now the next task to work hard at speaker placement once you get them home.  This is generally to get the best bass and the best imaging.  It amazing to read threads of speaker owners ready to jump ship yet have never moved them around in the room.  You should be moving them all the time, learning your room, learning how this is different from that.  Its usually a bigger difference than speaker cables!  After you find the best placement sonically, then you can attack the last of your problems with acoustic treatment and maybe just maybe, some very subtle room EQ.  

The idea you must avoid is thinking that placing the speakers at home where they look nice and never moving them is a good idea and that any problems or weaknesses discovered from the "look nice" position can be solved elsewhere.  The industry has not done itself any favors pitching a magic little built in software program and $10 microphone that came in the box fixes it all- and if it doesn't, you need new "better" speakers.  

Brad

 
willemj
1,036 posts
 
I think many recording engineers will agree that the Quad electrostatics are about as clean and neutral as it gets. I have owned Quad stats for over fourty years now, and have still not heard anything that vanishes more effectively. Apart from size their dowsides are relatively limited bass extension for such an expensive speaker (but what there is is out of the ordinary, and a subwoofer can add the rest), and somewhat limited dynamics, although the modern models are far better at this.
The only dynamic speakers that come close are Harbeth, with their special RADIAL come material and very careful design. The smaller models, like the P3ESRs in my study are superb if size matters, and the biggest ones are great if you are after a big sound in a big room.
audiokinesis
2,710 posts
 

Transaudio wrote:  "low distortion and wide dispersion (ie.consistent off axis) are top priorities, which eliminates horns, dipoles, electrostatic and good number of other technologies."

I agree with you that low distortion and consistent off-axis response are top priorities, but some of the very best examples of speakers that do these things well come from the ranks of horns, dipoles, and electrostats!

The best, most consistent measured off-axis responses I have ever seen come from the JBL M2 and the GedLee Summa, both of which use a very high quality 15" woofer crossed over to a very high quality 1" throat constant-directivity waveguide-style horn.  Both of these speakers are extremely uniform across a 90 degree arc in the horizontal plane over most of the spectrum.

Probably even more uniform are SoundLab's faceted-curved panel fullrange electrostats:  Either 45 degrees front-and-back, or 90 degrees front-and-back (depending on the specifics) over the portion of the spectrum where the panel's directional characteristics dominate, transitioning to a dipole figure-8 pattern at low frequencies.  And negligible floor and ceiling bounces. 

Radiation pattern control is probably my top priority as a designer, and in my experience direct radiators are the inferior technology in this area.  If the dispersion is too wide, there is too much energy in early reflections.  Early reflections degrade clarity.  Wide dispersion speakers sound good because the benefit of the late-arrival reflections outweighs the detriment of the early-arrival ones, but ideally we want the beneficial late reflections without the detrimental early ones.  This calls for better radiation pattern control than we can normally get from conventional direct radiators. 

Duke

dealer/manufacturer



More to discover