I think that depends on the line. Many manufacturers save their best work for their top offering. Franco Serblin has passed on. For those who do not know who he was, he was Sonus Faber's chief designer. His Ketema is his assault on SOTA and he could only get the price up to $40K. Where exactly does that leave companies like Wilson and Magico? Their top of the line speakers are stupid expensive and IMHO definitely not worth it.
Big speakers, are they really the best way to get great sound?
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to listen to some very large speakers that are considered to be at, or close to, the pinnacle in speaker design and ability. Needless to say, the speakers retail in the mid to high $300k range. These speakers, and I will not be naming them, were sourced by about $800k of upstream gear. Room size was about thirty by twenty, maybe a little larger.
To say the the overall sound was BIG would be accurate, but also I noticed something else, that I typically hear with big speaker systems. Generally, the speakers were right on edge of overloading the room, depending on music, the dreaded bass boom could be heard. But, the whole presentation was greater in impact than most any smaller speaker system, yet it was almost unlistenable for the long term.
The question I asked myself, is do we really want this type of presentation in our home audio systems? The speakers threw a pretty large soundstage, but also made things sound somewhat larger than life. I also thought that this type of speaker is akin to the large box dynamic speakers of yesteryear. For example, a set of large horns from Altec Lansing or similar was reminiscent of this sound. Makes me believe that if one has a big room, a similar sound can be obtained from most any large speaker system and at a fraction of the price.
I listen in a very small room, and by necessity in the near field, yet I think the overall intimacy of this type of listening experience is better for me, your thoughts?
203 responses Add your response
@daveyf wrote:
As you've indicated already this may be down to a near field listening preference with smaller, 2-way speakers vs. a far field, or certainly further away presentation from larger, likely multi-way dittos - with all that involves in regards to added room interaction, more complex speaker topology, added LF energy, heavier amp load, etc. My own setup context with high efficiency, actively configured and large main speakers + subs aren't representative of a larger scale, home segment for sure; the mains sport 2x15" woofers and a large format horn + compression driver per channel, so a 2-way system with a fairly narrow, controlled and uniform dispersion pattern over a single crossover point placed between 600 and 650Hz, and a sound that sums smoothly and coherently at ~11ft. listening distance. Add a pair of horn-based subs and everything dialed in actively as a single speaker system per channel. There's no lack of presence or intimacy at the LP, I can tell you that, nor the lack of a vast sense of scale when called for.
Knowing which speakers you're referring may give me/us a better idea of what we're dealing with - certainly I'm simply trying to hone in more precisely on your specific listening context.
Maybe this is at least part of an explanation for your near field preference in music reproduction. My own frame of reference is hardly only one, but it can be seated among an audience, typically between row 7 to 10 and listening to what you people are playing for us in a live symphony orchestra. I'm also inspired by cinema sound, with a preference in particular for Meyer Sound EXP-fitted auditoriums, as well as aspects of IMAX sound. There's also another, "unto itself" element of what forms my preference that's more of a synthesized, unknown ingredient; something that more overtly just makes me feel the sound is "right" or intriguing. I'm not trying to be elusive here, but rather that I can't, in earnest, but sure of what that's really about. Do you know of that exhaustively with regard to yourself, and what forms your preference in sound reproduction? |
@phusis what you stated about your listening and sound preferences is very helpful. Thank you. It gives us an idea as to where you are coming from as to what your system expectations are. I think all of us could benefit from having this discussion, as it is pretty accurate to say that most of us listen for different things in our systems…and what we hope to achieve with these systems. Personally, I am trying to get as close to what I hear from an acoustic instrument or instruments in the settings that I have experienced.As such, I occasionally use my Taylor acoustic guitar to listen as a guide to what the system can portray of this type of instrument. I have an excellent memory of what this instrument sounds like in various settings. If a system can produce the sound of an acoustic guitar in my room, with a close to representative of this sound, I believe I am on the right track.What I truly like about Franco Serblin’s work, was that I believe he had a similar goal.The speakers he produced were attempting to sound as close as possible to a real instrument, not in the sense of being a playable instrument, but in the sense of what said instrument sounded like in a live and acoustic environment. |
Yes …. I have a 7.5x5x3.6m room tannoy Arden with tulip waveguide 15inch cones the treble fires through the middle of bass cone (like a horn sort of) in the 5 years I’ve had them I have never felt I am missing anything. The thing about big speakers is they move air so even at low volumes it sounds great. Smaller speakers always seemed to need to be louder. Also great with all music. I used to have some ls3/5a monitors in other room - great near field and nearly holographic with singer songwriter stuff. |
Interesting discussion. It makes sense that a music listener who enjoys non amplified acoustic recordings is looking for a different set of attributes in their speakers than those who enjoy hearing performances on amplified instruments. Having been on stage watching Derek Trucks and Susan Tedeshi’s road crew set up I found it fascinating that there is significant effort put into having the musicians hear each other’s performances as “point sources” rather than depending entirely on stage mixed monitor sound. Even though much of the music came from Fender Twin Reverbs and B-3 Leslie type speakers, their stadium volume performance had wide dynamic range…during their show, hanging on stage rail outdoors at DelFest I remember being impressed how they could play so loud softly at times :) |
A properly designed large loudspeaker will not cause perspective distortion i.e. a string quartet will sound smaller than a full orchestra. However, if the frame of reference is habitual nearfield listening in a small room then there will be quite an adjustment if listening to a large speaker in a large room. However, also, in the case of the OP's experience there may well be the bombast factor involved, where the demonstrator plays everything too loud - which is guaranteed to make one want to run out of the room! |
Darn, I like your philosophy. I also like your system. Please explain what you mean by, "actively configured"? The only thing I do not like is running the 15" woofer up to 600 Hz. I assume this is because of the horn's low frequency cut off. I would use a very high order cross. Minimizing room interaction by limiting dispersion is a very important concept. Omni Directionality is a problematic attribute as it maximizes room interaction. You "hear" the room which destroys the impression that you are in a large space. It is also much harder to achieve controlled directionality and not overdo it and limit reasonable listening positions. Horns are really good at limiting dispersion without overdoing it. You have a full frequency, limited dispersion point source system. I have a full frequency, limited dispersion line source system. I also configure everything "actively", by which I mean all crossovers and processing are done digitally and each driver or transformer has its own amplifier. I would love to be able to compare the two systems. |
Live music is loud, effortless and impactful. Small speakers never really are. I can never be fooled into thinking I'm in the room with the musicians as I listen to small speakers. To me, small systems are the equivalent of a very nice photography of an event; you will see everything on it but you're not "there". YMMV and we all have our preferences but I sure like a grand piano to sound like a GRAND piano! |
What you want to say i think is that with big speakers in big room we can had the experience of the musicians occupying our room, the room acoustic of the listener being replaced in ideal case by the theater acoustic where the musicians played ... Thats right ... But with small speakers well done in small room we can have the impression of being out of our room in the musicians own room acoustic , it is recording dependant also ... The best is big speakers in big room ... But small speakers in small room are not bad at all when well done ... I dont need to have the impression that the live event fill my room listening space as in rock concert on big speakers ...I just need to be transported there in my head forgetting my room ... It is what i had for a price too low to be mentionned in my acoustic small room ... Small speakers in near listening in an acoustic dedicated small space beat all the headphones i heard and give intimacy with enough punch to be rewarding for my listening body with a large soundfield , imaging pin point and natural timbre ... ... I can live with that ...
|
@mahgister Good post. I agree there are a number of ways to 'slice the cake' in our hobby. To get a good SQ does NOT always require a large room with large speakers, as I believe I can demonstrate with my system. OTOH, what large speakers in a large space can deliver, which i do not think smaller speakers in a large space ( or a small space) can is: scale. This, however, is many times the only advantage to large speakers, IME. There are also several advantages of small speakers over large speakers, one of which I touched on earlier, and I believe that is imaging precision. |
Historically yes, but recent technical advancements in amplification and DSP technology is changing that allowing smaller speakers to do more than used to be possible. Two examples are Vanatoo Transparent Ones and kef ls60s active speakers with integrated DSP. These are examples of real game changers in regards to getting big clean sound out of a smaller package. |
There seems to be many saying large speakers will overdrive a room which I disagree with. A room properly sorted with regards to acoustic treatment will allow any speaker to perform at its best. If a large bass driver will 'overdrive' a room then consider a string quartet pitching up at the venue but are told that the cellist must sit this one out because the room is not big enough for it. Really? Now, everyone likes bass, not met anyone who doesn't, so the big manufacturers will pander to this and produce speakers that they claim are full range: "Yes Sir these speakers are truly full range" but they are not told about the problems that can/will arise. As I'm sure, most here will know that the best placement for a realistic sound stage from these FRS will not be ideal for bass and so what is one to do? Well two things are possible and optimal results will be realised if both are employed. @daveyf, Before getting to that though is to find out from you what if any room treatment you have in place. Looking through your photos I see some grey coloured panels behind the speakers which will help with mids and tops but the bass issues will need something more. Without any bass specific treatment your room will produce peaks and nulls, all rooms do, they just do regardless of size. To keep this short, the bass frequencies are bouncing around uncontrolled and are combining sometimes in phase (peaks) and sometimes out of phase (nulls) and here lies the problem. Those peaks are the reason for one-note bass and the reason for boominess and the reason for 'slow' bass and need to be tamed. What is happening is that the extra bass energy is taking very much longer to decay than the rest of the frequency range and the result is the 3 nuisance phenomena mentioned in the above paragraph. If you move your speakers around you will find a position where the bass is smoother and will notice more detail and no boom in the room, but, one speaker may be in a corner and the other behind you. Not great for realistic listening. Bass traps will absorb some bass and smooth out the sound and make a significant change. Understand that in addition to having the peaks reduced is a corresponding filling in of the nulls, nulls that work like a black hole for music. It's cancellation remember so that is music info that heretofore was missing. Next: I did say there we two things 😎 Add at least 2 subs minimum, better 3. Now before you guys start shouting "He already has too much bass" The multi-sub approach has been well documented with much on the net on how and why it works and also me lecturing you on using it as a solution. The subs will further smooth out the bass and increase the benefits of bass traps. I strongly encourage both methods. I find it difficult to express what it brings but will finish with stating that nothing you do to your system regardless of $$$ spent will have this much effect. You are essentially removing the damage that acoustics in a small room causes and so what are you left with??? The ideal, transportation to the acoustics of the venue. Another suggestion is temporarily drag some mattresses into the room corners and borrow from dealer or mates 2 or more subs, even small easy to hide 8" units will do. If you go this route get sealed boxes not ported and make sure they have variable phase. |
@lemonhaze Uh..the photos of my room show grey colored panels, which are bass traps! Also, I utilize two small subwoofers, so I know what you are talking about there. |
This is complete and total nonsense. In fact, a great 2-way speaker, placed / setup exactly where they need to be and combined with high pass filter to remove the work they don’t need to do, blended with dual subwoofers that can each be placed to their benefit and each adjusted precisely for room response... that system can and will surpass many of the best floor standing speakers in existence. A floor standing speaker with a low end that cannot be tailored for room response is inherently at a disadvantage to a system in which the low end can be tailored for room response. But, big speakers have "The Bigness" and "Jewelry" factor, so there’s that. |
@jim2 Member inna likes to post with absolutes. Unfortunately, this also shows his inexperience and lack of knowledge in this hobby. |
@daveyf, without you describing your room treatment I searched through your many photos and only saw those 2 grey panels which I would like to point out represent broad-band absorbers and as such do not absorb down below the Schroeder frequency so have little to no effect where the bulk of room problems lie. Also bass build up happens in the corners of any room. So the vertical floor to ceiling corners or horizontally along the ceiling/wall corners or floor to wall corners, for example fabricating a bass trap to lie horizontally behind a couch This is where bass trapping will be most effective. It takes up much more space than broad-band absorbers unfortunately but that's what it takes to deal with those long bass wavelengths. A 40Hz wave is 28ft. long. If those 2 grey panels form the entirety of your room treatment then I regret to inform you that more is needed if you wish to tame the acoustic character of the room. If you have not taken a measurement of your room then you do not know what you have to deal with and this then IMO should be your first line of defense. How did you set up the 2 subs you have so that they help with the room modes rather than make them worse? |
@jim2, That is one of the best posts I've read on this, you summed it up beautifully. There are some manufacturers of speakers who have a model or two just below their flagship full range speakers that use the identical mid range and tweeter drivers mated to a lesser performing bottom end in a smaller enclosure and at a substantially lower price. It is these that represent the best value and mated to an intelligent application of room treatment and proper installation of subs will at lower cost outperform the flagship model for the reasons you mention. Of course the dealer with an opportunity to move his overpriced 'white elephant' might suffer from selective amnesia. |
@lemonhaze I have multiple room acoustic treatments in my room, many of which you can see in my system photos, but you have to be able to recognize them.... Including the Real Trap Mondo Traps that you do not recognize. The subs were dialed in by me, as I totally trust my ears (albeit at some considerable difficulty and time). No one who has visited my room has ever complained about the SQ. In fact the last visitor, a well known a'phile writer and reviewer, was highly complimentary on the SQ and could not locate the subs at all ( which to my ears is what you want). Oh, and you are right..I do have a bass trap behind my seating position. It seems you to like to jump to conclusions about other people's systems... which leads me to my question for you, why is your system not posted somewhere on this forum?? |
And it's also why I've spoken to a Wilson Audio dealer who was read the riot act by Wilson Audio for selling customers the Wilson Audio Duette and subs rather than one of their exponentially priced floorstanding speakers... But... people don't buy Wilson Audio floorstanding speakers for "value" anyway... so they don't mind being the sucker, as long as they look good / feel good. |
@daveyf -- Indeed, we listen for different things in our setups. That’s as it should be, or certainly that’s how it is. As I mentioned previously I’ve listened to the Guarneri’s at a couple occasions, and they’re very good speakers, I find - relaxed sounding, balanced, tonally "mature" and very resolved and easy on the ears. @mijostyn wrote:
Thank you. Actively configured, as in digital crossover/DSP prior to amplification on signal level, and 3 stereo amps looking directly into their respective driver sections with no intervening passive crossovers whatsoever.
The horns control directivity all the way down to 500Hz. For pro cinema installations they are/were crossed at 500Hz/12dB octave passively, or 24dB/octave actively, so they can to take the juice with fairly shallow slopes and the lowest recommendable XO. I cross them higher because I find they sound better here, and I use 36dB/octave L-R slopes. Using the 15" woofers this high is no issue. Meyer Sound’s EXP cinema series are crossed at 580Hz (with 15" woofers as well), and they sound excellent. JBL’s DD67000 Everest’s and M2’s are crossed at +700Hz, and they are very good sounding.
Never really cared for the sound of omni’s, and also for the reasons you outline. Yes, horns and their dispersive nature are very much helpful here and makes the room characteristics less of an issue.
Indeed, it would be interesting to compare with our similarities in approach, and yet vital differences here and there. Floor to ceiling ESL’s, not least high-passed and properly subs augmented, are beastly performers. @rolox wrote:
+1 |
@daveyf, if you had mentioned in your OP the room treatment in place I would not have been inspired to type a long email trying to be of help.
I did not jump to anything! The fact that I mentioned 2 grey panels should tell you that I obviously had a look at your system, not so? I did not see this as a challenge to 'spot the hidden treatment' As to why no photos of my system, well I do not feel the need, simple. I post the photos below, not because of your brash comment but for the benefit of anyone interested in the start of my DIY super-chunk bass traps. They measure 900mm across the width and except for frequency specific helmholtz resonators this is what it takes to deal with the long wavelengths.
|
I did not mention room treatments in my OP, as the place I heard the speakers in question was not in my room...or with my system. Not sure why you assumed that to be the case? The demo was at a local dealers and the room was large and fairly well treated. The room was certainly not the main problem here, although it did contribute...as they all do. Nonetheless, don't get me wrong, I am a BIG believer in room acoustic treatments and in making sure that the room is optimized for the system; so no TV's between speakers, an attention to where the speakers are placed ( I use a laser to assist here) and careful attention to how cables are run etc., I also posted a new photo on my system page, which shows the vault ceiling in my room. This is a very important aspect of the sound field and in contributing to the SQ that i manage to get in this small room. Mainly due to the fact that while the size is small, the actual volume is acceptable. |
@ronboco, Hey I think you can safely call that a dedicated room 😁 Congratulations. I agree with your philosophy of getting the room properly sorted early in the quest. So many ignore or avoid even considering acoustics and end up constantly swapping out components trying to banish brightness, congestion, boom etc. I have 2 such traps in place but measurement shows I need one more, just need to finish up some house repairs first. |
| Post removed |
All your post made sense thanks but for 2 points....
It is possible to enjoy an immersive inclusive soundstage engulfing the listener with swmall speakers .. I know it because i enjoy it ... The reason why you did not observe it is because you think that nearfield listening dont need acoustic control of the smaller room as with bigger speakers ion a bigger room ... Sorry but it is not the case ... Even in near listening in a small room the timing of the waves , the pressure zone distribution , the crosstalk control between speakers , any acoustic factor matter as much as with bigger speakers in bigger room ...
There is no fatigue with bigger speakers in a bigger room if all acoustic factors are in control ...
I totally agree with your wise conclusion :
|
I agree with him saying “Every speaker above 50 Hertz is a small speaker” in below video. It doesn’t have to be large speakers for a big room. My system consists 5.24” woofer 2way speakers with 8” powered sub. I am very happy. Alex/Wavetouch |
@mahgister wrote:
@mihorn wrote:
An individual enjoying/being happy about the sound from a small speaker system is all well and important to the one feeling this way about it, but "enjoyment" here is no measure in itself when it comes to assessing the true capabilities against a larger, more physically all-out speakers system and the traits that follow here. And no, no acoustics fiddling or trickery will change that. Different ways to skin your cat, as they say, and priorities I can deal with, but diminishing the importance of physics of speakers (i.e.: size and efficiency) and effectively saying "a small, inefficient speaker package compensated perhaps with more power will do the same (or "enough") as the larger, more efficient combo" is being delusional. Sorry, but that’s the way it is. In vital, related parameters small, low efficiency speakers won’t do the same, not by a mile or even in a relatively small listening space, and anybody who’s intricately familiar with a well implemented, large displacement and true full-range speaker system that’s wholly effortless in its entire frequency range at any desirable SPL - and it needn’t be placed in a large environment to properly come together as such (in fact I favor a moderately sized locale) - will know full well it’s an experience unique to this segment of speakers. If one can do without this kind of experience and feels no need to pursue it, perfectly fine, but what’s enough and enjoyable to some (with small speakers) only tells you about their priorities, perceptions and particular context. Refusing to acknowledge the importance, and to begin with the very existence of parameters like uninhibited dynamics, scaling, ease, true full-range abilities, physicality of presentation and this wash of immersion one simply cannot attain from a smaller speaker package, is not seeing things for what they are and can be. I’m not trying to impose anything onto others, and each to their own and all that jazz, but let’s not fool ourselves. |
I see your system and I understand why you believe that. Then I want to hear the truth. Do you have a live recording of your system online? Alex/Wavetouch |
You put something in my mouth i never said then you refute it with common place evidence facts for all .. 😁 An honest discussion dont go this way ...Sorry... I said that it is possible to enjoy some level of "immersiveness" which is a SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE acoustic concept with any well embedded speakers, small or big ... I presume you know that any acoustician can prepare a room big or small to be optimal for giving a relative experience of "immersiveness" because there is parameter we can work with to do that with any room and with any speakers , big or small .. ... ...I presumed that some reader of my post would know that for sure ... 😊.. I know i presumed too much... I never said that small speakers work as well for that "immersiveness" acoustic experience than bigger better designed speakers in better and bigger room ... Do you catch what i spoke about ? I spoke about an OBJECTIVE acoustic concept WHICH WE CAN AND MUST CONTROL IN ALL SPEAKERS CASE as timbre is one : immersiveness ... We can even enjoy some level of immersiveness with headphones...Do you know that ? Try to understand when reading a post what is the matter in discussion ... Only an idiot can say that low cost small speakers will perform as well as bigger speakers in a big adapted room ... And i am not an idiot as you suggested unvolontarily misreading me ... But read acoustics and you will learn how to create immersiveness or a better timbre experience or any other acoustic factors with any speakers and even with headphones so hard it could be .,..But no acoustician think doing so that all speakers are equals ... I am not an acoustician but i learned by experimenting basic concepts .. Being happy with small speakers and knowing how to do so dont implicate that i suggested that bigger speakers will not improve the experience ...But the reverse is true , owning bigger speakers dont means that no small speakers can be satisfying giving immersiveness ... Immersiveness is not a SUBJECTIVE impression only it is an OBJECTIVE concept and experience which we can learn to control in any room and with any speakers to some minimal satisfying acoustical level we can even measure now .... I think that i was clear ...Thanks for your attention and thanks for the occasion you gave me to be clearer ...
|
I think size alone has little to do with a speaker's capability. Implementation and design are the key here. I would much rather have a small speaker that is designed to work well in typical listening space than a large speaker that is thrown together haphazardly. This applies to the room as well. IME, the best sounding rooms are the one that have speakers in them that are appropriate for not only the size of the space, but also the acoustics of the space. In my OP, the speakers were large, the room was quite large and unfortunately the sound field was over ripe! Why, because these speakers were being played in a space that worked ok for them, but not great! A smaller model of the same line would have been more appropriate for this space, and would have probably sounded better; albeit not as impressive looking! IMO, large speakers many times equates to large problems, but I guess if all else is equal, the large can out do small....BUT it better be in a room that has been designed for what the larger speaker brings, warts and all. |
@mihorn wrote:
I don't, and if you want the "truth" it would hardly be the proper approach. @mahgister -- Much of this, it appears, comes down to semantics and which meaning to ascribe to terms. It seems to you "immersion" is linked to acoustics predominantly, while to me it isn't (predominantly). When you spoke, or rather wrote about "an immersive inclusive soundstage engulfing the listener with swmall speakers," I found it "stole" into the realm of mainly horn-loaded and to some degree panel speakers of considerable physical size, speakers that to my ears have been the only real way to experience a large radiation bubble of said "wash" of immersive, and indeed visceral quality. Having posted my previous reply and after re-reading it a bit later (while then being unable to make further edits) I saw what could be interpreted into what your reply then pointed to (and apologies for any perceived insinuations here, which weren't my intention), but thought "Oh, well - I'll deal with that when the opportunity presents itself," and here we are. I'm aware of immersiveness as it relates to headphones, but while a much more controllable means of listening to music I've never bought into their presentation, in some respects at least, as anything particularly natural and convincing to my ears. An asymmetrically placed and mono-coupled DBA sub setup kinda gives me the same-ish "bass in the head"-experience that, while it may be relatively flat in FR, just doesn't sound natural to me. Though I'd no doubt take such a bass presentation compared to any headphone ditto for sure. @daveyf wrote:
Speaking for myself and my context of large speakers with large format horns, overall prodigious air radiation area, separate subs and active configuration that translates into limited (i.e.: fairly narrow), controlled dispersion and elaborate means of tweaking on the filter/DSP side of things (incl. delay), acoustics and room size isn't as much of a factor here. Conversely I could easily imagine a pair of large, direct radiating, full-range, multi-way, lower efficiency and load-heavy passively configured speakers to be a potential nightmare setting up, not only acoustically but as well with regard to amp pairing. And that's just the problem with this segment of passively configured, large speakers, as you point to yourself; as a fixed, all-in-one package you're much more dependent on the listening room being designed around them than actually being able to integrate them into an existing, variable environment. As such size isn't the real factor here as it is dispersion characteristics and the means of integration at one's disposal. |
If you don’t have a live recording of your own, please let me know you think/believe/heard the best sounding large speaker in the world. Or may be the closest sounding system to your system. I’ll count it as your system. It is OK to include > $million speakers. Please list few if you can. Then we can talk about the proper approach. Alex/Wavetouch
|
Immersiveness is a precise acoustic property not only in headphone but in speakers soundfield... It is related to the ratio ASW/LV control in a room ... And the fact that you attributed it to the speakers design is not false, because each type of speakers MAY contribute in his own way to an immersive experience , but this quality is first and last an ACOUSTIC concept and the result of an acoustic set of controls of the relation speakers/room/listener location , immersiveness is then not a speakers design concept even it is for sure related to speakers design concept ... Then as such we can use any speakers and make his experience "immersive" ... it could be easier in some specific room with specific appropriated design but ANY speakers can be associated with a relatively good immersive experience if we understand how to use the many acoustic factors related to this concept in a room acoustically controlled for them ... i learned it with big as with small two way speakers by the way ......But i could do it with ANY speakers type , it is only necessary to put them in the right room and right acoustic conditions ... It ask for way more than few acoustic panels though in my experience ...
|
@mihorn wrote:
Let’s take a previous reply of yours once again:
If you truly believe the above then I can only assume you haven’t heard the difference a large, preferably high efficiency speaker setup can do. There’s no easy domestic equivalent to the system I have in my home, but some setups I’ve heard that resemble it in core areas is the actively driven Vitavox Thunderbolt system with 10-cell Vitavox mids horns (w/S3 drivers) and Mundorf AMT’s (augmented with 15" ATC subs), or JBL’s 5672 cinema system. Are they among the best I’ve heard? In some areas, yes. The Thunderbolt bass horns, non-truncated (but of course 1/4-wave), are hitting ~40Hz, so close to your 50Hz number mentioned, and yet they’re anything but small to say the least - that’s what 105dB’s sensitivity is about per Hofmann’s Iron Law. In that light a ~5" woofer/midrange + dome tweeter(?) and 8" subs augmented, indeed any such variant, sounds small and utterly malnourished by comparison. So, is sounding "big" a quality in itself? No, not necessarily; depending on the context you can overdo it for sure. The main takeaway here to my ears is what sounds more natural, uninhibited and live-/life like in core areas, and not least effortless, and the high eff. systems mentioned (well-implemented) - including my own - can do just that. I’d like to stress that what I’m after/advocating is not about effect or being easily impressed here - though some of the members around here would like to believe it is - but simply what presents itself less reproduced and, again, more natural. That being said you can only do so much trying to convince others who believe the higher price tag with low eff. stuff from known hifi brands is the sole quality marker, and who finds anything big (and off-segment) in speakers to be an inconvenience or offence even (and I’m not pointing my fingers at you here). Indeed: what’s "natural" sounding to some obviously isn’t to others - if only it came down to that. |
