2. speakers
  3. 1231139823

What's next for the ultimate sound quality?

The question may be naive, but I'm not sure what's next to try in the quest for the ultimate sound. I owned the entry level magnepans mmg (didn't like them much for anything but jazz), monitor audio S6 (good all around, imho, but nothing spectacular except for the cheap price tag). Lately I built speakers myself that should supposedly rival the best in the world (ZRT 2.5 from Zaph Audio with Scanspeak drivers)

(design):
http://www.zaphaudio.com/ZRT.html

actual speakers:
http://picasaweb.google.com/grybkin/ZRTSpeakers

The question is what's next? These speakers use one of the best drivers in the world and the best I've heard to date with excellent bass and accurate sound, but soundstage and imaging could be improved (magnepans are better). Also, the sound is a little thin. Am I asking too much, though, from 2 wooden boxes with paper diaphragms in the middle? The speakers are built precisely up to spec and I'm pretty sure that's the way they should sound.

Have I reached the limit where the speakers should be left alone and improving other components can make better returns; e.g, room acoustics and/or amplifier not to mention using quality recordings?

P.S. The receiver I'm currently using is Panasonic SA57 connected to a computer via digital COAX cable and JULI@ sound card. Despite the cheap price, this receiver is great, imho, and sounds better than my NAD 754 (probably because Panasonic is on the bright side and the speakers are warm, so it pairs with them better).

Thanks!
Gleb.
asdf777
asdf777 OP
7 posts
 
S7horton,

Right, I'm quite a newbie and haven't had a lot of opportunity to experiment. In fact, very little. Before building these speakers, and having listened to Seas drivers for 3-4 years (in monitor audio speakers), I bought drivers from Aurum Cantus, Bohlender Graebener and Scanspeak (for reference planning to return them later). After auditioning, the scanspeak tweeter came so on top that I really decided to build a reference system and not waste time and money on everything in between. In terms of amplifiers/receivers, Panasonic and NAD are the only ones I've got and Panasonic sounds better with these speakers. NAD was wonderful with Magnepans.

In terms of "thin", English is not my native language, so this may be a confusion on my part. "Damped" may be a better description. If I put studio headphones to compare the sound (I have AKG 271), it's pretty much the same except that with the headphones, it feels like there are more instruments playing (thin, damped?) and the speakers have more realistic bass and highs.

P.S. How does one experiment with amplifiers/receivers anyway? Do you buy a receiver and return it if you don't like it? Or bring your speakers to the dealer?
s7horton
1,077 posts
 
That's what audiogon is for. Figure out what you want, buy it used, and sell it later for small or no loss if you don't like it.

In my opinion, those speakers deserve better than a reciever. Something like a really nice integrated, or a separate pre amp and power amp.

I do not think a tube amp is the answer. I think better quality solid state along with proper placement, and room treatments is the answer.
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,467 posts
 
Given my ideal sound description (a wall of clean and powerful sound), I've got clean and powerful, but the "wall" is missing.

Are your speakers uncluttered well away from any side walls or furniture? Any sharp edge obstructions can kill soundstage. 2 feet minimum and 4 feet is best. Also - is your listening position away from any walls - this can kill soundstage too.
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,467 posts
 
Also jitter and phase can affect soundstage. Again I'd recommend you try out a DAC rather than rely on a PC and a sound card and an interface to your DSP.

Also check your PC settings very very carefully - many people think they have a bit transparent sound only to find out there are a multitude of software bugs/reported problems and software volume control/EQ issues(software volume control can be especially bad in many cases).
drew_eckhardt
394 posts
 
>The question is what's next?

The physics of conventional speakers are inherently flawed, where conventional speakers have non-uniform polar response especially in the cross-over region.

The polar response is too non-uniform to sound natural, especially if you're stuck with walls within a few feet of the speakers where the early reflections with non-uniform spectra are integrated with the direct sound.

The reverberant field is too bass heavy.

You're also likely to have enclosure issues, from resonances and internal reflections coming back out the thin driver.

To get away from the problems you need to get away from conventional speakers. The differences are huge even with modest (a couple hundred a pair) drivers. The differences between speakers that have more uniform polar response are less.

Open baffle dipoles (4.8dB directivity index at low frequencies and first side wall reflections which can be attenuated 10+ dB in a conventional room) like the Linkwitz Orion are one approach.

I've heard the Seas coaxials in a dipole; they were surprisingly natural too.

Wave guides are another; although practical sized ones only provide control at high frequencies. Earl Geddes Nathan/Abbey would be starting points.
More to discover