2. speakers
  3. 158881-139155

Speaker shootout update; aggressive treble eliminating some (fairly?)

I've been trying out speakers in a complicated shoot out, both bookshelves and towers — all in my home with my gear. I'm looking for speakers obtainable up to about $4k but could go up (or down) a bit if the right thing came along.

Basic facts: All speakers were run in at least 100 hours. Room is 27 x 14 x 6.5 ceilings. Powering with all QS tubes, 60w, NOS, tube R2R dac, and decent cables. No terrible reflection points; room not overly live or dampened. REL R 328 sub available but I did most listening without it.

Recent auditions, type:

Klipsch RP 600-M (budget singleton of the group)
Fritz Rev Carbon 7 mk II (bookshelf, 2 way, soft dome)
Focal 936 (tower, 3 way, inverted metal)
Martin Logan Motion 60s XTi (tower, 3 way, AMT)

Coming soon:

Salk SS 6M (bookshelf, 2 way, beryllium)
Dynaudio Evoke 30's (tower, 3 way, soft dome)

Let me speak just to the problems, rather than what was good about the speakers. So far, I've found the Klipsch, Focal, and especially the Martin Logans were all too bright — forward, aggressive, "turn it down" treble.

The ML's were the most impossible to tame and hardest to listen to on more tracks. (I did a lot of hanging of towels and other dampeners and other soft things to try to see if I could bring them to heel. I varied the recordings used. Changed cables/wires. No luck.)

The Focals were occasionally too bright; their bigger problem was a bit too much energy in my small listening space. They were better when I plugged their ports with socks.

I'm looking forward to how the next two speakers sound. The Dynaudio towers, I notice, are 10 inches shorter and half the weight of the other towers; not sure what that might mean, but it could just be right size for my space. I'm looking forward to seeing if the Salks bring more detail to the treble without also being too rolled off or harsh.

Hearing is very personal for physiological and taste reasons. However, if anyone has any thoughts about why I might be experiencing some of the phenomena I am (harsh treble, especially) based on my room or gear, etc., that might help me understand factors I'm not fully appreciating. Thanks.


128x128hilde45
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,835 posts
 
Copy and paste of links to shared google photo albums should work.  I did it earlier on the thread most recently. 
decooney
1,897 posts
 
@hilde45
"...a more detailed description is coming, but they are not harsh or aggressive at all."

Excellent.  Reading posts, it seems the new monitor speakers are headed in a better direction for you and your listening space.  And, with no expensive room treatments, no DSP or equalization tools, running all of the exact same electronics. Nice. 
brownsfan
1,508 posts
 
Hilde45, the impulse graph provides a single (multi frequency, I think) short sound (the impulse)  and records every reputation of that impulse until it completely decays.  You don't need to run the scans again, just select the impulse tab in the row of options above the frequency graph.  Set the graph limits at -0.002 on the left and .050 on the right, 0db on the top and -65 dB on the bottom.  Each vertical line is a reflection of the initial impulse.  You would like to have everything from 3m to 20 m on the X axis at -20 dB.  Anything above -20 dB will erode imaging because the brain will merge those early reflections with the 0m impulse signal, thus obscuring the spacial information in the recording.  Anything longer than 20m will be perceived as room spaciousness. 
Next, set the limits to -.002m on the left and 0.5m on the left.  I set the bottom limit to about -85 db.  This will show you how long it takes for the impulse to decay to the level of room noise, which is really a picture of how spacious your room will sound.  This is a matter of personal taste.  Some want as close to an anechoic chamber as they can get.  In other words, those folks advocate that everything after the original impulse should be  at the level of room noise.  Most of us like added spaciousness of the room.   My room currently shows a gradual decline to the level of room noise (the more or less flat zero slope area at the right part of the graph) at 0.3m.  m is time in milliseconds. 
hilde45's avatar
hilde45 OP
4,783 posts
 
@brownsfan I've figured out how to adjust limits, but am still wandering in the dark. Let's take this off-forum.
hilde45's avatar
hilde45 OP
4,783 posts
 
I've been listening to the Salks for several days and have not been systematic about recording impressions. This is preliminary.
But a few things are certain.
  • The bass is incredible. Deep extension and also definition. I can feel it. It's not boomy. It's taut. There's no roll off that I can hear, as with some other speakers. I put on my REL sub and it barely added anything; it's a very subtle addition. (That said, I need to do a new sub crawl because I've moved listening position and speaker orientations.)
  • The highs are *not* shrill, sharp, metallic or harsh in the least. Very articulate and detailed without any graininess or aggressive sharpness.
  • The soundstage is well defined and has a tight central image. I'm still playing with placement; they sound like bookshelves (compared, e.g., to the massive sound stage of the tower 936 Focals) but they're big bookshelves. I'm still playing to see if I can get elements within the sound stage to locate a bit more definitely. The speakers have not "disappeared" yet.
  • Vocals sound intimate, human, present — "there."
More details and observations, comparisons to come I hope. I get the Dynaudio Evoke 30 towers on Wednesday.
More to discover