Are you using silver cables? That will have a definite influence on bright highs.
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.
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.
Showing 7 responses by auxinput
Klipsch RP 600-M. Obviously these are lower end speakers. The plastic horn on this speaker can have a tendency to resonate, causing a shouty type of result. That combined with the metal woofer could result in a harsher upper midrange. Focal 936 (tower, 3 way, inverted metal). The previous generation titanium tweeters were always on the bright and harsh side. In addition, the focal midrange drivers were always very fast responding and can come across thin/bright and sterile. The Focal speakers need special attention to matching the proper amplifiers and equipment. Martin Logan Motion 60s XTi. I don't have direct experience with these, but these lower end ML speakers do have a tendency to sound very forward. Once again, I don't know. Fritz Rev Carbon 7 mk II (bookshelf, 2 way, soft dome). Probably the best engineered speaker you have in this collection. Using a scanspeak soft-dome tweeter, these are actually pretty revealing even though they are soft dome. The Salk SS 6M could also be a very excellent choice with the Satori beryllium tweeters. The Beryllium tweeters do not have the bright/harsh breakup that metal dome tweeters do. However, a couple of the Satori Be tweeters do have a slight upward tilt in the 22khz area. You'll just have to try them out to see. I never got into Dynaudio speakers. They never sounded good or engaging to me. I always thought they kind of smeared the midrange and didn't have good high frequency extension. This is my own opinion, of course. One other speaker I would recommend trying if you can are the Revel M125 PerformaBe bookshelves. They probably won't have the lower bass extension that the Salk do, but they have excellent tonal balance and resolution without being bright/harsh. |
You would be surprised how many people say that there's harshness or brightness in the highs when they are actually hearing midrange frequencies, especially the upper midrange. Most people hear frequencies in the 3000 kHz to 5000 kHz range and mistake them for the very high frequencies. The Klipsch RP 600-M is crossed over at a very low 1500 hz between the woofer and the horn tweeter. This means that titanium compression horn is playing a LOT of the upper midrange and can contribute to the harshness. Same goes with the Focal midrange. For the Salk, Satori has two tweeters that seem to match what is in the Salk: Satori TW29B: https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/beryllium-dome-tweeters/satori-tw29b-b-beryllium-dome-tweeter-... Satori TW29BN: https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/beryllium-dome-tweeters/satori-tw29bn-b-8-beryllium-dome-tweet... The cheaper "B" model is flat, but if you look at the frequency response of the more expensive "BN" model, you'll see a slight uptick in the response at about 25 kHz. Whether this can be heard by you is another matter, but in general, Be tweeters should not necessarily be harsh sounding like the older metal domes are. |
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Trying not to overemphasize burn in (I read your article); just trying to do some burn in and put it out of my mind. sorry, but I disagree here in burn in. I have burned in so many different cables, capacitors, power cords, equipment, speakers. They all require burn in. Some more than others. I know that tweeters could have a slight bright edge when they are new and will smooth out after a burn in process. I have had some connectors and cables that sound absolutely nasty in the middle of the burn in process, but you need to be patient and wait. Sometimes my equipment is absolutely unlistenable in certain points of burn-in and I just have to stop and wait another few days. |
This discussion of test tones and REW reminded me of a couple tools I have used. If you look at deep bass, amroc shows that your room has a couple of nodes at 40/42hz and another one at 62hz. https://amcoustics.com/tools/amroc?l=27&w=14&h=6.5&ft=true&r60=0.6 If you decided you need to treat these nodes, the best solution is to start buying GIK Acoustics Scopus tuned membrane bass traps. Buy 2-4 of the Scopus T40. Then ask them to make custom T60 models (they will do this for you). As far as testing for bass NULLs, REW can help, but probably the best way I have found is to do it by ear using test tone sweeps. You can use the following tool to generate 5 second test tone sweeps: https://www.wavtones.com/functiongenerator.php Select the "Sweep 1" option. Then create and download a separate file for each sweep. I like to sweeps that cover 10 Hz at a time. Start with a file where Start Frequency = 20 Hz and Stop Frequency = 30 Hz. Then generate additional files (such as 30-40, 40-50, etc.). You can save them all on your computer and then burn a CD. As you play each sweep, you can hear when the volume of the bass increases or decreases. The decreased areas are where you have a problem, which can usually be improved by tuned membrane bass traps. |
By the way, it appears there are tone generators on Spotify, etc. too. Is there a reason not to search out these tones via a streaming service rather than download each one, burn a CD, etc.?It depends. If you can get sweeps that provide a small sweep (i.e. 40hz to 50hz), then it's good. The list of test tones did not really give you small amount of sweeps. Sure, you can test at 40hz, then test at 50 hz, but these are sine waves that stay at that frequency (i.e. plays a 50hz sine wave for 20 seconds). What you need is a sweep. That is a test tone that starts at 40hz, then gradually increases until it hits 50hz. This will show the entire span between 40 hz and 50 hz (you could have a bass null around 45hz or so). |