Speaker shootout update; aggressive treble eliminating some (fairly?)

@helomec,
did you audition the older "XT" or latest "XTi" version? Updates for the XTI version mention  no tweeter or crossover changes, but I’m suspect. The woofer surrounds in the new XTi version are noted as upgraded and  "stiffer". I’ve heard the older 60XT many times, and own the smaller ML40XT for another setup, and they are not overly bright, fairly neutral in fact. As noted before, found a spike on the response graph between 10k-15khz.

Still kinda wondering if there was a change in material used in the AMT diaphragm or crossover with the new XTI version...no proof, just curious.

I auditioned the older XTs. I noticed the spike in the measurements of one online review, but a spike in that octave is most likely to result in a sense of "air" and atmosphere, not brightness. I do wonder if these AMT drivers might require a break-in period where the binding/matrix material has to undergo micro-cracking, thereby allowing the pleat to relax, not unlike a conventional spider material. Not all AMTs are created equal that's for sure. The ML AMTs are far superior to those used by Golden Ear.

@helomech
The original Dr. Von Heil AMTs did mellow out some over time, and it was the crossovers/caps settling too, not just the diaphragms. I worked on the assembly line at ESS early 1980s, where it was all invented. Seen some variations since the patent expired on the AMT. My own ML XT40s did settle some over time for my HT setup. Smoother now for sure. I agree all AMTs are not created equal. My own current custom speakers with great heil amt units sound smoother with larger presentation than all mentioned here so far. Over time, messing around, learned it really comes down to a very high quality crossover and corresponding drivers to get the right tone and staging one might be looking for. One thing for sure, when you get the right AMT speaker setup paired with really good tube amps, with really good tubes, its very enjoyable to listen to. :) 
 

One possible source of aggressive treble is poor amp/speaker matching, but this is not something which is obvious to most people. One would think good amp + good speaker = good results, but not necessarily.

If I understand correctly, the amplifier is a transformer-coupled tube amp. This kind of amp tends to deliver approximately the same amount of power into a fairly wide range of impedances.

On the other hand a solid state amp delivers increased wattage into an impedance dip, and decreased wattage into an impedance dip.

Let’s walk through an example:

So suppose we have an 8 ohm speaker with a 16-ohm impedance peak at 4 kHz. With a solid state amp, when the amp is delivering 1 watt into the 8 ohm nominal impedance, it is delivering 1/2 watt into that 16 ohm impedance peak. The designer probably assumed that a solid state amp would be used, so this speaker’s output is "flat" (or whatever the designer intended) with the amp delivering 1/2 watt into that 16 ohm peak.

Now let’s use a tube amp. The tube amp delivers approximately the same amount of power into that 16 ohm peak as into the nominal 8 ohm impedance. So at 4 kHz, the speaker is getting 1 watt rather than the 1/2 watt the designer intended. So we have a 3 dB peak at 4 kHz. That’s enough to transform "smooth treble" into "aggressive treble".

Rather than ditching your imo very nice Quicksilver amp(s), you might want to consider speaker compatibility with tubes.   I can go into a bit more detail about it if you'd like. 

Here is a paper written by a tube amp designer which goes into this from his perspective, mine being the perspective of a speaker designer:

http://www.atma-sphere.com/en/resources-paradigms-in-amplifier-design.html

Best of luck in your quest, wherever it takes you.

Duke

@decooney  today TungSols 7581A (EL34) were in the Quickies running the Harbeths,still using lamp cord.Very lively and dynamic!The transients had some bite to them.There was little bit of a 'gritty' overlay to the presentation which actually enhances string instruments.Tomorrow the KT150s are up.

Regarding the ASR review of the Salk WOW1 speakers:

That speaker was designed to be used UP AGAINST THE WALL, and its overall frequency response curve is imo CORRECT for a small speaker which will be getting a lot of boundary reinforcement from that wall. If the WOW1 had plenty of low end, in the measurements, it would sound bloated when placed against the wall.

Regarding the dip at 600 Hz, dips are less audible than peaks and 600 Hz is NOT a bad place to have a dip. There are three frequency regions I pay particular attention to, where erring on the side of dippage is preferable to erring the other way, and arguably preferable to "flat". 600 Hz falls within one of these regions.

Finally, Amir did not audition these speakers up against the wall, so it is not surprising that he didn’t like them. He tries to be as consistent as possible in his measurement and audition conditions, which is not a bad thing, but it does result in some measurements being imo incompletely interpreted, and in some speakers being auditioned under conditions they were not designed for.

So imo ASR’s review of the Salk WOW1 should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Duke

@audiokinesis Thanks for the additional knowledge. It helps me understand why some of these effects are happening, and even though it doesn't replace listening tests, it narrows down what is more or less likely to work.

Does anyone else treat the room before buying speakers? What about change the treatments if you install new speakers?
The OP has said he’s not going to treat the room first. Is this a deal breaker? 
OP - what about Monitor Audio say Bronze or Gold? Start with the Bronze first...

If your budget is up to 4k why would you be auditioning a $600 pair of Klipsch ? I had Focal 1038, Focal Sopra 2 in my 13x22 room that was treated running on a Pass 250.8 and have a REL s5/sho avail to use to. The 1038 though lower priced (bought used on this site for 4k as I recall) they were more musical than the $7500 Sopra 2 which were too etched/detailed and often bright. I then sold them and bought Harbeth 30.2 Anniversary - used for 4k- which are fantastic. Musical, never fatiguing and the best I can recall owning in 40 years of owning tons of gear. Simple boxes, simple crossovers, simple stands but wow- they're great. Check out some reviews. Often it comes down to room acoustics, treatment, then the electronics. I listen to jazz, funk, soul jazz, Americana, and a wide variety of other things, the Harbeth do it all (IMO).

BTW, one of the best features Roon offers IMO is a parametric EQ- gives you infinite control of eq'ing your room- super easy and effective, all digitally. Once you treat your room for slap echo/brightness then try using their EQ function for the rest. You can try Roon for free for a week or two as I recall. 

@cowan217 thanks for the roon tip. Harbeth keeps coming up as a name to try. I bought the Klipsch to have something to play with while my Salks were taking 7 months to build. (The virus shut things down in Michigan.) These Klipsch are great for the money but not in the league of anything else listed.

Try Vienna Acoustics, but these speakers are typically better off with SS amps (instead of tubes).

Golden earring  makes some very interesting speakers, they have ones with build in Subwoofers.My old house had the lower suspended ceilings 6.5.Great to run cables around .I had put more insulation in the ceiling .it was a basement only 12 ft wide by 21 ft.I had used alot of different  speaker ohms 2 ,Ar5 with built in subs ,polk towers and klipsch all sound pretty good.it was a great room for movie setup 7.1 .

Long list of great selections. I too have similar size room also having to appease the wife as my system is in living room. Would LOVE to do sound treatments but alas...no go. So running a Cary audio sl80 f1 signature NOS tubes with Audio Mirror troubadour II DAC, Manley Chinook preamp, VPI Classic 3 TT, and Fritz Carbon MK II speakers and found moving them out 30", 7' apart provides ideal sound stage WITH silver coated cables (culigan) provides just the right amount of clarity in the treble without sounding to bright IMO...Good luck on your search and remember...there is always going to be a better sound with the right sound treatments to any system, its just that some of have to sacrifice the nirvana for something better than 90% of the people who would rather listen to music as a background. 

Philll your system sounds wonderful! And I agree with what you said.

FYI, I hope to post report about the speakers soon. In the meantime I received the testing Mic that was recommended and I am looking into the Rew software.

Several thoughts:

Many years ago bought a pair of Def Tech BP-10's following an all to quick audition. They were bright. I had 6 CD's that sounded great. The rest not so much. Learned to hate them. They did not "break in" nor did my ears adjust. When you have a speaker like this, it is sheer lunacy to try and spend huge amounts of money to tame a speaker you don't even like in the first place. WHY WOULD SOMEONE EVER DO THAT?

By doing some careful research I am amazed how you can often find what you love without carting numerous speakers home (pity those dealers). We should all agree that a Klipsch is going to brighter than a Sonus Faber. Now what you love is up to you. So with careful discussion with other audio friends who owned both Magnepan 1.7's and then Tekton DI's, I confidently ordered up. And not only did I LOVE the DI's, but they did exactly what others had said they did.

So do some homework and don't waste time on stuff doomed to fail. Tonal balance and some other qualities will remain a constant no matter what room and what gear you pair them up with. I'll bet with careful research and discussion you can find a speaker you love in one or two tries. Then address placement and room treatments. Then look at associated gear and cables.   If your electronics are staying put, then obviously that has implications in what speakers will be good candidates as well.

I had good luck with ProAc, Merlin and Sonus Faber Cremona monitors.
WLM (now sort of vintage) La Scala and Diva are great as well.

I suspect the DeVore Gibbon 3XL could work too.

Lot son great opr=tions suggested already.

@corelli 
I've done a lot of homework, and have made a yeoman's effort trying to avoid things *doomed* to fail. Of course there is quite an expanse between "doomed" and "delightful." So, learning what my ears would like meant some experiment, some shipping, and some schlepping. This has got to be typical of most here. What I didn't appreciate sufficiently was the effects of a low ceiling on an otherwise very balanced space (in terms of reflection, absorption, etc.). Now that I've learned that, I'm in the zone. It's taken some time, but this is a hobby, so if it had been more efficient, it would have been less fun. 

According to the simulations done by the School of Acoustics at Salford, your room is almost exactly a foot too long. I suggest putting in shelving on one end, books or records, just make sure that the irregular surface (records) presented to the room is 12-18" from the wall. Specifically, room dimension dimensions of 1 : 2.15 : 3.95 would work better (6.5, 14. 25.75). What are the EXACT measurements of your room, I mean to the nearest 1/4 inch?

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but ESL's are not inherently bright. It is the electronic processing which can make them so, especially the protection, crossover, and EQ circuits. I spent a gob of money on ML hybrids about 20 years ago, and IIRC, found that they used cheap capacitors in the signal path. Lost those and found the sound.

Even so, they weren't Quads. Not sure if that's useful information or not, as you probably want to get something that works well out of the box.

If you can afford to spend $6,000, I would buy a pair of SALK Song3 Encore towers.  I heard these at the RMAF in Denver and they sounded better than a pair of $60,000 speakers down the hall.  Call Jim Salk and tell him Larry Edwards from Denver sent you.  There is nothing in this for me, but I think you will be blown away by the sound.  He sells only direct and because he does not have to discount his speakers to dealers, he can afford to use the best speaker components.  His cabinet build is also incredible.  Wish I had waited to buy these myself.  Hopefully, one of these days I will buy a pair.

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

@jhills

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

jhills,
Comparing the three, did you find the Harbeth to be a bit more midrange forward (generally) compared to Salks and Spacials you heard?

A friend who purchased my former tube amp has tried several different amps with his Harbeth 40.1 speakers. While I enjoyed them, they were more midrange present in a smaller room (with 3 different type amps), like having headphones on at times. It was nice for 30 minutes, and after an hour the midrange fullness became a little fatiguing for my ears. And, now easier to listen to after moving them to much larger room with higher and more open vaulted ceilings. Lets say if the Salks are generally voiced more neutral with Be tweeters, where do you place the Spatials in the spectrum of neutral to bright sounding on your rig(s)?

My last Harbeth post as they go back to their home tomorrow.The KT150s sounded wonderful in the QuickSilvers with the Harbeths - my favorite!Big soundstage,sharp transeints,gobs of micro detail,natural sounding instruments and vocals.The highs were the best ever.Toed in they exhibited some upper mid glare.Firing straight forward and my listening position moved forward a foot,no glare whatsoever.
The Harbeths were very responsive to tube changes.

My ceiling is not quite 8ft.Old farmhouse with a wooden ceiling covered with faux tin tiles(fiber board).I have one GIK panel on the ceiling,the front wall and corners have GIK bass traps and panels.So I'm hoping this helps a little.Looking forward to reading about the Salks and the best of luck to you!

@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 

@larry5729

If you can afford to spend $6,000, I would buy a pair of SALK Song3 Encore towers. I heard these at the RMAF in Denver and they sounded better than a pair of $60,000 speakers down the hall. Call Jim Salk and tell him Larry Edwards from Denver sent you.

Hi Larry, Thanks for the suggestion. I’m currently in possession of Salks which took 7 months to build, and am of the mind that towers are too large for my space. Plus, there's no way I'd wait another 7 months.

I’ve often seen you recommend Salk with the suggestion that whoever you’re posting to say that "Larry Edwards from Denver sent you." I’m wonder if you have a special reason to have people mention you? Is there a chance you might become a local Salk dealer here in Denver? Because that would be big and very cool news!

@jhills

...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.

Good to know. The Maggie 1.7.., the other one I recall a few members here on Agon with QS mono tube amps were running like @hilde45 has. Never heard them in a smaller room. Once tried 3.6 Maggies on demo in a wide/short space. They were way too big for that room, did not work well that way.. 1.7 would be fun to try with the QS Mono 60s or 120s. Do you run your 1.7s with SS or tube amp(s)?

@terry9 I'll get back to you about the room dimensions, but it has weird pockets and spaces. (I posted the diagram a few back.)

@jhills Yes, I'm giving them a good chance (the Salks) and the Harbeths sound great but hard to get a pair to audition.

I hope you find the SS 6Ms acceptable.
I’ve had my Salk SS 6M’s now for about 6 weeks now and I love them as they are everything and more than I’d hoped for, to say nothing about the exceptional Salk fit and finish.

 

Salk  StreamPlayer (Roon), Yggdrasil DAC, Macintosh MC-240 (re-caped) with modern tubes including 7581’s.

 

My listening room is 21’ x 23’ with a vaulted ceiling ranging from 9’ to 13’.

 

The SS 6M are setting on 22” Sound Anchors.

 

After much listening and experimenting I ended up with the SS 6Ms centered on the 21’ wall 28” from the wall, and 9’apart.

 

My listening position is 9’ from each speaker.

@pelletfan Thanks for your post. So far so good, but I’m going to put them through their paces. 
Your suggestion of a stand is SUPER helpful. 

ONCE UPON A TIME I had a pair oof B&W-801 Matrix speakers (upgraded). I had always thought the tweeters sounded a little "hot" especially on CD's as they were 1st coming out in droves. I had an excellent Levinson amp (23.5's) and I was pretty happy anyway with the sound. But then after I sold the speakers to a friend I heard them driven by Pass Aleph 1.2 mono blocks. Of course they were $14K and all that, but all of the sudden the B&W's sounded astonishingly good, smooth and as delicious as a chocolate malt. Just an example of how good the speakers really were all along. But I wonder if and when you were able to hear an audition at a dealer where you "knew" right then and there this is what you were after (with the cd's you brought in yourself)? Then you make a careful note of everything they were using along with the room, etc. Since your hearing is obviously very good, you should be able to find what is right and not so right about your own set-up. It may take some time (and unfortunately money) to find equipment that gets you closer faster to your personal goal. BTW, I replaced my B&W's with Eggleston Andra's and never looked back, but they weren't cheap and it took a lot of time for me to be able to to make the changes I wanted, including different amplifiers (Levinson 33H's- wonderful amps).

There have been some good suggestions here. I recommend you become familiar and comfortable with REW. It is a positive step in the right direction. Also free and really useful is HolmImpulse  I am using Omnimic from Parts Express but is not free, about $300, because it also allows me to measure Thiele/Small parameters. This provides tone bursts and measures room response in a second.

I have found the ability to read CSD plots (waterfall) very useful when adding acoustic treatments. Not only in how the frequency is altered but more importantly how the decay time is shortened. An untreated room has sound bouncing around with early and later reflections, confusing the information leading to smear and congestion, ruining soundstage and imaging.

All rooms suffer from this and taming these long decays makes a such a difference that unless you have heard it, is difficult to conceptualise. You have a room with reasonable dimensions that can be sorted out. No need to be overly concerned with a low ceiling unless you use a trampoline to keep fit!

A statement you made earlier about matching speaker to room or room to speaker is, I feel, not the way to approach this. There is a scientific target to strive for with room treatments and measurement is the only way to achieve this. Some of the advice offered here is well intentioned but misleading. EQ can not sort out overly long decay nor dips in the response. If you increase the power into a dip/null it will just cancel with the same power, leaving the problematic dip there but sapping the amplifier's power and driving it towards clipping. Taming the peaks by reducing power will flatten the response, but the sound is still taking to long to decay.

People often suggest drapes and wall to wall carpeting. They often do more harm than good. These are narrow-band absorbers, where what is required is broad-band absorbers. Take wall to wall carpet. It is thin with no air gap so it becomes a high-Q narrow-band absorber, and because there is a lot of it those freqs. are mostly lost. A nice thick rug in the listening area is fine. To sort out the floor to ceiling reflections consider the idea below. Absorption is needed on either the front or back wall or on both. The third axis to consider is the two side walls but in your case they are far away and not so troublesome. Dispersion/ diffusion would work well here. Drapes can help and also blend in nicely with the decor but a single thin drape will not do much. Use a 2 or 3 rail set up with thick material. The multirail provides a lot more material and, importantly, spaces the layers at different distances from the wall, broadening its freq. of absorption.

You mentioned a blanket positioned on the ceiling. If you replaced this with a proper broad-band absorber about 4ft X 8ft X4" thick and filled with OC73 or equivalent, you would hear an immediate improvement and see it on the response plots. There are many DIY articles for building these and bass traps on the net. Check out super-chunk bass traps. Simple and cheap if you are at all handy.  Bass traps are the true stars when treating a room. Can't really have too many.

Sound propagates in different ways depending on frequency. below the Schroeder freq. it is modal, transitioning to a reverberant field above that. When low freq's are present in a room, there is combining, some constructive and some destructive resulting in peaks and nulls. If its a full null then that is information missing and as previously mentioned EQ can't get it back. But bass traps can. They will smooth out the response, which again can be seen and heard.

It may have occurred to you that how do you know when to stop with treatment. It is not guesswork and there are tables that will give you a target to aim for. The aim is to achieve a reduction in decay time across the full freq. spectrum. In your size room it will be about 400ms. where the sound is required to decay by 60dB. Known as T60. This is great fun to do. As you introduce some bass traps you will notice on the waterfall plots that some previously missing information (nulls and partial nulls) is now starting to return and that some problematic peaks are being tamed. The audible result defies credulity.

One last thing, Take no notice of Kenjit, I think his lobotomy went wrong.

@lemonhaze71
I'm glad you say the low ceiling is not a disaster. A lot of things have sounded quite amazing, so perhaps I've just figured out where the low ceiling factor becomes a major issue, untreated.

I will try to learn REW, and HolmImpulse also. It's helpful to hear what you're using the software for, as I don't really know how to go about with analysis. This is probably why folks keep telling me to contact GIK — because there's a lot to this, and my fumbling around isn't going to get me that far. Still, knowing what I can use a *few* things the tools for to help my room (and speaker choice) a little bit is something I can seek out for the moment. I can at least seek to learn something about the major problems getting in the way of the test speakers' having a fair hearing. I have already taken some steps to soften the rooms reflection points, though I have not used measurement to know exactly how it helps. In this way, I am effectuating your comment about not trying to match "speaker to room or room to speaker is," though I am not yet on the way toward a scientific target.

Regarding this basement's floor, the room has a concrete floor with thin wall to wall carpeting, but also several thicker area rugs, other furniture (couch, leather chair, bed, wooden chest covered with a blanket), so there's quite a range of absorbtion and diffusion going on.

Regarding ceiling reflections, I may look into replacing the blanket and getting an OC73 absorber but I'd hope I can just mount it temporarily without getting into a DIY project at the start. Given that I'm not sure how far apart the speakers should be, ultimately, I'm not sure whether or not 4ft X 8ft will cover the correct area, though maybe there's a lot of wiggle room in something 8 feet across?

Bass traps — noted. I'm not finding any problems with the bass that make me want to set up traps *before* making a speaker choice. Still, if as you say there could be issues with frequencies *above* the bass which are affected by peaks or nulls, then some home-made experimentation may be in order. I appreciate you mentioning some targets to shoot for, such as 400 ms and T60. I bought a miniDSP mic that I can put at my listening position or at other places in the room (I obviously need to read about how to go about this), and see if I can figure out the software.

FYI, the rear wall is actually a built in bookshelves above cabinets that run the entire length of the room, with books of various heights all along. The two side walls are far away though I will confess that the speakers are not the same distance from either side wall. A bit hard to explain. My electrical setup has limits which necessitate this arrangement.

Anyway, super helpful post. Thank you.

@jtcf  Good luck with your search, too!

@pelletfan Thanks for your post. So far so good, but I’m going to put them through their paces.
Your suggestion of a stand is SUPER helpful.

Select the stand height so that the tweeters are at or just above your ear level where listening.

@pelletfan I will, and Oldhvymec's suggestion to lower my listening chair has been factored in, too. Luckily, I have two stands to try out and between them I can get speakers firing appropriately.

Today will be about trying speakers at different distances and trying to learn the REW software. After learning how to do basic measurements, I'll begin to correlate what those measurements say with what I experience; hopefully, I can find a way to use the tool to optimize the trials.

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! 🙏

@mapman Yes, I may be approaching a good state. In order to stop fussing about audio, I may have to start investigating espresso machines and grinders. In other words, get a side-quest rolling to divert whatever OCD tendencies have been stirred up so that I can put a period on the end of this long audio sentence and just "enjoy the music," as the hackneyed phrase goes.

Great advice Lemonhaze!

Giks 244 panels are 4x8x4” made with ownes corning I believe.  Anyhow, they work great Hilde45.  You ought to grab 4 of them to start.  Hang 2 on the ceiling above your speakers using the mirror trick.  When you order the Gik 244 panels buy 2 “cloud mounting brackets” for mounting 2 panels to the ceiling. I’d recommend using 1 panel directly in between the speakers and one panel directy behind you.

The 244 panels are considered bass traps.  They’ll tighten up your bass and make it better defined along with helping with decay times!  You can order them with scatter plates for some diffusion and a better look, and you can also have art printed on them too so they look nice.  Maroon Bells centered between the speakers would look nice.

Glad you like the Salks!  They are keepers it sounds like.

@hilde45 

A couple of photo's of the SS6's would be a nice thing.  Also check with Timbernation about custom speakers stand with the height and top plate dimensions to fit the Salk's.  Also multiple finish choices.

Hi hilde45, you mentioned, I think that you only hear to 14KHz. I only hear to 12K but it does not matter. The very high freq's are harmonics and for realistic sound it's essential that the tweeter is able to reproduce them.

Transients are rich in harmonics, they provide the leading edge and spatial clues. This stems from man's survival in the wild. The sharp crack of a breaking twig  gives the direction and even height of possible danger. We need those high freq's man.

Consider some musical instruments, a sax, a violin and a piano, robbed of all harmonics playing middle C. What will be heard is only the fundamental freq. a sine wave (261Hz), the instruments sounding exactly the same. It is the associated harmonics with the fundamental that allows one to recognise the piano say. The better and more complete the harmonics the more the piano will sound like a piano and listening fatigue is delayed.

Last year attending the XFI Premium Show in Holland I managed to have a lengthy. informative chat with Max Townshend from the UK. He was lecturing and demonstrating his super-tweeter. When hooked up the sound opened up with improved imaging and rhythm. Rim shots, snare,  the whole drum kit and mid range improved. Understandable because of a more complete harmonic structure.Still thinking about that tweeter, expensive though. The sound was not brighter, just cleaner and a lot more fun.

Some links that may interest you. The first one is excellent with much on REW. Plus a bunch of other very useful links. The second link has a short video on powder on a plate being excited by a sweep tone.  Enlightening. This is essential reading for anyone wanting to inexpensively take their system to the next level. A level that I don't believe can be attained by endless upgrading of components.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/610173-acoustics-treatment-reference-guide...

https://ledgernote.com/columns/studio-recording/acoustic-treatment-guide-for-panels-and-foam/

@b_limo I’ve not really done my critical listening yet. Thanks for the info about the GIK stuff. I’m not ready to start spending money in this area yet.
@jackd Here’s a nice comparison photo of Salks SS 6M and Fritz Carbon Rev Carbon 7 mk II

Replace "dot" with "."

photos dot app dot goo dot gl/Mn3xMdCuUn3dw41MA

@lemonhaze Thank you so much for the links. Saving, reading, enjoying to come! I hope to design a listening room from the ground up, with a dedicated line.

@brownsfan @lemonhaze
@mapman
@djones51I’ve tried some measurements using REW software. First I tested with my Adcom amp and then switched to the tube gear. At first I measured with the mic pointed straight up (D’oh!) and then did more with the mic pointed forward.So…three photos — if you can get to them — are with the Salk speakers, with the microphone pointed forward. SPL graph. Right, left, and combined. I’m new at this, so this is probably of limited value, but gotta start somewhere.

photos dot app dot goo dot gl/Pus38hvRmMqrp8gz8

@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

hilde does not look like that link pasted correctly.  

the OP is still here complaining that he cant find perfect sound. He needs a custom tuned by hand speaker otherwise he will never be happy. 

@hilde45 

The Salks look great. Jim did his usual impeccable cabinet job.  With their size you are probably going to have to look at stands of 19" or 20" maximum like are recommended for the Harbeth C7 and 30.2.  I just completed a deal earlier today for a pair of Cherry C7-ES3's with matching custom cherry stands from Timbernation.  They've got multiple styles and pretty much can match any standard speaker finish.

https://timbernation.com/speakerstand.html  

@jhills — You've just hit upon a great marketing slogan for audio: "Have a beer, not an Advil." Brilliant!

@mapman replace the [ dot ] with [.] and it works.

@jackd Nice selection. Let me ask you the killer question -- are they stable enough despite not being fill-able with sand etc.?

@kenjit Isn't there a village somewhere missing your contributions?

good recommendation on the timbernation 👍  There racks and speaker stands look really nice

@hilde45 

I just finalized the deal this morning so I won't have them until later in the week but if the stands are built anything like my Timbernation rack being solid should be the least of your worries.  My five shelf rack weighs over 120 lbs and is built out of solid 2" maple.  The stands that are coming with the Harbie's look to be built of the same stock so they probably weigh around 40 lbs a piece. Call Chris on the phone and discuss it with him but remember he is two hours ahead of you. First thing is to decide on a lower or adjustable chair and have the wife make the ear measurements along with the measurement from the bottom of the cabinet to the middle of the tweeter.  One minus the other should give you the height of your top plate. Chris can then adjust the post length to get you the height you need.  I have always been curious about Harbeth but for some reason never tried them as I gravitated toward Reynaud instead.  Will be interesting to hear the contrast between the and the Carrera Be.

Hilde they're finally there!Congrats!
@jakd congrats to you too!I'm pretty sure I'm buying the C7ES 3s that I had on loan.He's buying new speakers and was kind enough to let me have them for a few days when my eyes lit up and told him I was interested.Nice that you got the stands too:-)

What did you play to get those graphs? You didn't smooth it. How do they sound?

@hilde45,  I looked at your REW frequency response curves.  At a quick glance, they don't look that bad to me.  Most rooms that are not custom built for audio that are well treated will still show plus or minus 5 dB below 300 Hz.  I usually change the scale so I can get a good feel for the plus minus range.  I would suggest you also click on the spectrograph and waterfall tabs and generate the plots.  You should be able to see where your long decays are.  If you have long decays in higher frequencies, that can make a room sound bright even if your frequency response is pretty flat.  Also take a look at the impulse graphs.  I like to see the impulse graph achieving room noise level by about 300 ms.   You might like a bit more.  It looks like your deep nulls are in the statistical zone where moving your mic an inch or two can really change the graph.  In other words, don't pay attention to the details above 400 Hz or so.   You could look at the psychoacoustic smoothing frequency response and get a feel for what kind of balance you have between low and high frequency.  
I don't know what to make of the asymmetry in that sharp null close to 200 Hz.  It must be associated with the room asymmetry on the right and left sides.  It looks like a pretty deep null, but it is narrow, so it may not give you much trouble.  But you might figure out what the exact frequency is and play that tone while you are walking around the room.  

@jackd  Thanks for the instructions on measuring. I like your comments on stability; I don't want anything too resonant, but the black metal stands one fills with sand are not that attractive to my eye.

@jtcf Those seem like really nice speakers. If we were neighbors, it would be fun to speaker swap! (As long as you're not violating any vows.)

@djones51 I just played the sweep tone that folks here were mentioning. The speakers sound good — a more detailed description is coming, but they are not harsh or aggressive at all. That bullet's been dodged. (Talk about burying the lede; that's the answer to this entire thread!)

@brownsfan  Appreciate your feedback. I'll do another measurement soon (I'm moving the speakers around a bit) and will try to generate additional graphs. I need to look up what an "impulse graph" is, to be honest. But I'll do one of those, too. Let's see if that weird null at 200 hz is reproduced, and where, and then I'll walk around a bit to see what's going on.