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.


hilde45

Showing 3 responses by jhills

@hilde45 Con-grads on getting the SALKs. There has been some very good advice here and It looks like you’re on your way to an incredibly good set up.
I agree about the hobby idea. After a point, we can find ourselves obsessed with the fiddling and not taking time to enjoy the music or the sweet spot once we’ve finally found it, or even recognize it when we do. My suggestion is: When you get close and it seems right, gather up some of your favorite tunes, a cold beer, and set back, relax and listen, to the music, not the system. At least, for me, when a system is right, it is about being drawn into the performance, with an underlying awareness of little subtle things - the timber of the horns, the tinkle of a triangle or the breath of a vocalist - that make it seem real. After 20 or 30 minuets - the feeling "I want the show to go on", not the feeling "I think I need an Advil".

@decooney I am driving my Maggie 1.7s with a Rogue Cronus Mag. II, 100W pr side tubed integrated, with KT120s. Also for a while with a Ayre V- 5xe 150W pr ch. SS amp with an Audible Illusions tubed pre. I like both very well, but favor the tubes. I think the 1.7s would sound very good with your QS tubed monos, in a medium sized room as long as you could put them at least 2’ from the side walls and at least 3’ from the front wall.
My 1.7s are set up in a medium sized room, 14’W x 27’D with a 10’ ceiling and open to the dinning rm. on the left another 12’x14’x10’. They are on the 14’ wall with a heavy carpeted floor and acoustic drapes on the wall behind and on the wall to the right and a fiber board acustic panel ceiling. In my room, they are very sensitive to set up but now that dialed in, sound incredible, regardless of where I sit and I wouldn’t trade them for anything else near their price.
Thanks to my little furry buddy’s 3:00 AM wake up calls, I get to set back and enjoy some great music every morning from about 3 - 6 AM, before getting the wife up to start the day and then again, most afternoons for a couple hours, with a cold beer.
Someday I might invest in the larger 3.7is and a bit more power, but for now, am very much enjoying what I have....Jim
Maybe I missed - just curious - judging from the low ceiling, your audio room must be in the basement? If so, it probably has a concrete floor and if so, is carpeted or covered with a large area rug? If the ceiling is sheeted with sheetrock, adding a layer of fiberboard ceiling tiles or acoustic panels, would greatly reduce the ill affects of the low ceiling.

Of the speakers mentioned, I think you will be be very happy with the Salks. Also, as mentioned, the Harbeths, or my pick of all would probably be the Spacials. Being open baffle, the Spacials are very room forgiving and present a large detailed (yet full and musical) stage, without being harsh or fatiguing and are incredibly easy to drive.

Best of luck with your adventure....Jim
@decooney 
In a small room, I'd say the Spacials have a more recessed and slightly broader stage and a more neutral sound, as apposed to the Harbeths being a bit more forward and on the warm side. The sound of the Spacials (at least the older, M 3 Turbo S, model) remind me a bit of the smaller 1.7 Maggies (that I am using now) with a bit more base energy but with the same deep, broad stage. Like the Maggies, they have a full rich sound without being overly warm or bright. 
All I know about the SALKs is the many good reviews and user claims of them being very room and Wife friendly, with the ability to produce a deep, wide stage and a clean, full but uncolored sound, with a minimal of room treatments and set up head aches.
 
I love my Maggies (ribbons and ESLs in general) but have a larger well dampened room and the patients it takes to set them up....Jim