John Marks in a recent Stereophile "5th Element" wrote about the inherent difficulty in designing a floorstanding speaker because of the resonant frequency of floorstanders at typical height. True or not, its an interesting analysis and may explain the peaks and valleys of some floorstanding speakers. All the same issues of positioning hold true for both. His contention was that under $5000, monitors are better by design. I like both, but with a stand mounted monitor I need a sub to provide the bottom octaves. Small room? Monitors + small sub would be my choice. You can buy very nice monitors and a sub for very reasonable prices leaving money for a great source and amplification. Have fun!
Monitors + sub or Floor standers?
Due to a potential domestic situation I may have to move my system into a small den (10x10). I love my Usher BE10 speakers and my initial inclination is to try and make them work in a small room by using a lot of room treatments. But being an incurable audiophile I quickly realized that this could an opportunity to try something new. I figure my options are to keep my speakers, get smaller floor standers, or get monitors + sub. I am partial to the last option. Because the room is small, I want to keep the visual and physical impact of my speakers down to a minimum. I also "think" that monitors will work better in a small room. So my question is if people had their choice, would they get a floor stander or monitors + sub? It dont listen at high volume and prefer detail and imaging over explosive dynamics. I listen to mostly acoustic female vocals.