Another happy ending. 👍
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 23 responses by mapman
Well the good news is sounds like you have about as good of a floor as you can acoustically especially in regards to bass. Should result in clean articulate bass not boomy that does not obscure midrange detail. With upper frequencies under control via right gear for you and whatever treatments you might apply that should get you to a good place. You certainly have had lots of good suggestions and options to consider. You might even miss the fun of tweaking once you get things nailed! 🙏 |
I’ve heard KEF R3s and those are very solid contenders in the small but extended monitor camp for me. I do currently run KEF ls50s in one room (with sub). Lots of leading edge attack and dynamics especially for the size....not the easiest on the ear at first, but really grabs and holds your attention.....very impressive within their limits once things get dialed in. I run them off Bel Canto ref1000m Class D amps (500w/ch to 8 ohms), same as my big Ohms and others. |
Thanks to progress with digital technology, DSP is not a bad word these days (except to some old-fashioned purist audiophiles). Lots to gain and little to lose if done right. Especially in acoustically challenged rooms. Should make getting to the desired results much easier.....and perhaps even less expensive in the end. |
" Easy to drive" and efficient are two different things. Easy to drive (like Fritz) means most any amp can drive the speakers with good tonal balance. But bass always still requires exponentially more power as frequency gets lower. So if also inefficient (like Fritz and most small monitors with extended bass that must work harder to deliver bass than similar larger speakers) the amp will clip sooner at higher volumes. So more power (and current usually in the case of smaller speakers capable of extended bass) is definitely needed to go loud and clear including bass with most any near full-range monitor. Tube amps (and many Class D amps) tend to soft clip which is easier on the ears than most SS amps that hard clip. |
...also would add that dips in bass response will tend to add emphasis to the rest which could also be a factor in the overall tonality issues. I bet the Fritz do really well if set up facing lengthwise with some distance to rear wall somewhere around where the bed is currently. Other smaller speakers should do better as well with the extra bass reinforcement from the walls/corners. Maybe some taller ones even cut it, who knows, unless you try. |
That would fit the bill. Also still worth checking impedance/phase curves for an easy load. Fritz should be a leader there and so far seems to be. It’s seldom just one thing. Could be at least three contributing factors to various degrees 1) inherent speaker brightness 2) more difficult load to drive 3) room acoustics/low ceiling. Wires used could also. I think I recall some kind of power conditioning being used so I would assume that is covered for now. hilde, is there a picture or some other more detailed description of the room here somewhere that I missed? Others responses lead me to suspect that. Nobody ever said good sound was easy.....especially with acoustically challenged rooms to start with and sensitive ears. Well, MC kinda insinuated that but he is special. :) |
Another very good value speaker model that just came to mind that I found to be most polite in the top end are Goldenear Aon3. Thing is the MLs, which I have not heard, appear to use a similar folded ribbon tweet like the Goldenear so it surprises me that they would be offensive but have never auditioned carefully so don’t know. Could be impedance/drive issues contributing to the problem? Stereophile reviews when available usually provide the measurements needed to assess properly. Given the Fritz speakers did not exhibit the problematic brightness I still suspect that is a contributing factor to some degree. It’s often not just one factor alone that sinks the ship. |
hilde, The speakers are directional so the most higher frequency energy fires straight ahead. I’d expect way more distance to the facing wall to be beneficial in reducing reflections overall. That and/or lowering the speaks as discussed (combined perhaps with a tad of tilt back to increase distance to opposite wall even slightly)) to reduce ceiling reflection. Worth a try just to find out if possible. Then maybe just some treatment on side walls at prime reflection points to you main listening position to further damp the side walls if needed. Also listening nearfield sounds like a good idea even if just as a test to minimize effects of room acoustics, which is what you are striving for. |
..except MC is not being forthcoming because on his thread about his new speakers he indicates he will be making various thus far undisclosed modifications so it does not appear to be etched and done at all. Which is it? Knowing MC it will be both at the same time as best serves him. Sorry to digress...... |
Shorter good quality towers is probably a decent option like monitors, as long as tweets are lower. I would often suggest someone having brightness issues and willing to try something completely different consider Ohm Walsh speakers, which tend to be more laid back and seldom ever exhibit brightness. The maker voices them to sound like what he hears in his favorite seats at Carnegie Hall and having heard both, I’d say he does a good job of that. A pair of microwalsh speakers would be a relatively low cost experiment and the liberal in house audition period and return policy would help. I think the smaller models would meet the height requirements for your case. Just having a discussion with John Strohbeen at Ohm about your specific room might be insightful. He tends to have a great focus of getting the right speakers into each person's unique room. Here are the stands I use with my small monitors in my wife’s acoustically challenged sun-room: https://www.guitarcenter.com/IsoAcoustics/ISO-130-Isolation-Stands-for-Studio-Monitors-Pair-1500000214884.gc?cntry=us&source=4WWRWXML&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=%5BADL%5D%20%5BGC%5D%20%5BLIA%5D%20%5BCurbside%20Pickup%5D%20-%20(Accessories%20-%20Studio%20Furniture)%20-%20%7BMQ%7D&utm_term=4578297733882292&utm_content=%5BLIA%5D%20Accessories%20-%20Studio%20Furniture%20(GC)&adlclid=ADL-9b30c280-0ba8-4008-9e9c-778a263ac543 Low, inexpensive and very effective. Can be tilted upwards slightly if needed. Just make sure you get the right size for any particular monitor. Also an amp may be up to the task of driving harder load speakers, but they will still distort less and perform their best with an easy load, which puts you in the best place you can be to help take that factor out of things. That’s typically where the Fritz excel. |
When it comes to difficult rooms, less/smaller speaker is often the ticket to better results (with fewer room treatments). Once you have a handle on the frequencies where most of the music occurs, ie the midrange, then you might consider adding powered sub or two if needed/desired and have the flexibility of setup that approach offers. I am a big Dynaudio fan but will be surprised if those resolve the issue. I have heard my older Dynaudio Contours lean towards a tad bright with some amps which is exactly what the reviews indicated. I have heard Fritz Carrerra not Carbon and still assert you would be hard pressed to do any better than that (with low stands) in that room. The easy load of the Fritz at least helps assure that amp matching is not likely a problem. Not the case with Dynaudio in my experience. Dynaudio are wonderful but only with the right amp up to the task and that is not most tube amps. I have heard Salk and they have yet to catch my ear but not enough experience to know what to expect with those. I think the fast path to a solution will be getting things tuned in/optimized around the Fritz along the lines discussed. I would focus on that were it me before adding expense of other speakers, but I know rolling speakers is a lot of fun if you have the time, money and patience and you don’t know what you will get until you hear it. Once things were tuned in with the Fritz, it would then serve as a good reference I think to then perhaps try others, if still of interest. |
Maybe others here have knowledge of the amp that might help to clarify what can be expected. In general it’s worthwhile to pay attention to impedance matching amp, pre-amp and speakers. Distortion results otherwise which can produce the symptoms observed. It’s generally more of an issue when higher impedance tube gear is involved. Personally I would go no further until I confirmed all my components were well matched to each other in regards to impedance. Could be a wild goose chase with speakers otherwise. Also what is a “tube R2R DAC”? Also what is a “QS tube”? What amp and dac specifically? That will help to assess. Thanks Of course with tube gear, it also helps to test tubes to know the condition. NOS tubes sound like a good thing to many but they are still old and may not be a good place to start. My concern Here is the focus on the speakers Unless it is safe to assume first that all is well upstream. MIT terminator ICs are good for taming brightness but may just be a bandage and not address the root problem. I find DNM Reson ICs to be very coherent and easy on the ears. Those are my personal preference. |
Regarding more detail on the upper end, have you ever had that with your setup in the past? What was that setup if so? Not familiar with your amplification but perhaps something could be done there? If you like tubes, take a look at the Linear Tube Audio MicroZOTL gear. It seems to excel in that area with it’s low output impedance which helps reduce distortion. Would love to hear that with the Fritz. Maybe the monitors on lower stands will help. https://www.lineartubeaudio.com/the-technology |
With the monitors try putting them on low stands given the low ceiling, maybe with slight tilt back. Also play with toe-in. Brightness can be tamed often by not having direct tweet exposure to ears. Also often helps with soundstage and imaging. The Fritz will be hard to beat if you can get them set up optimally. I’d stop and work on that first if it were me. |