What are the best loudspeakers under $4000 to re-create lifelike piano
Over the past 4 months I've spent time with five loudspeakers. On a scale of 1-10 I'd rate them as follows in their ability (with my equipment in my room) to recreate a lifelike piano. Tekton Lore - 6.5 (great scale but tonal accuracy and clarity somewhat lacking), Kef LS50 - 7.0 (moderate scale but slightly better clarity and tonal accuracy) Kef R500 - 8.0 (great scale and very good clarity and tonal accuracy), Spatial Audio M3TurboS -8.1 (great scale and very good clarity and tonal accuracy and very smooth) Magnepan 1.7i - 9.0 (very good scale with excellent clarity and tonal accuracy - very lifelike).
In your room with your equipment, what loudspeakers are you listening too and how would you rate them for their ability to recreate a lifelife piano and if possible a few comments as to why?
It has been almost 5 years since I started this thread. Over that time period, I've owned a bunch of different speakers and electronics. With 5 years of trial and error and stating the obvious, rooms and electronics matter as much if not more than the speakers. And....recordings with piano are all over the map in terms of how they attempt to spread the sound over two speakers.
I've also come to believe that a system/room/speakers that are capable of portraying a realistic piano may not be as convincing in other areas. A recent example:
A buddy of mine has Maggie 3.7i's fronted by a Lyngdord 2170 used for its dac and room correction as a preamp into a Halo A21. The Maggies are crossed at 80hz and an Audio Kinesis 4 sub array handles the bottom end. The realism of a piano is really, really good...but...only if the volume is 80db-90db at the listening position. Less than 80db and the piano sounds lifeless and more than 90db and it is too bright.
The Maggies are equally convincing with stringed instruments...but only one or two at a time...more complex music that contains 4+ instruments and voices seem a little less clear and focused....and again have the volume limitation issue.
By comparison, I would say that my own system with an Oppo 205 into a Belles 22a pre into a Wells Immorata llST amplifier into Spatial Audio M3 Sapphires also does an excellent job with pianos....not quite as realistic as the Maggies but quite a bit better on all other music....and really good at 70db as well.
I draw no firm conclusions at this point and have no pronouncements to make...I just remain interest in everyone else's experiences.
I am a full-time trained classical pianist who still regularly perform on various grand pianos so let me chip in on this discussion.
I think the bare minimum speaker I've heard that is decent to listen to piano was ATC SCM19 though it's slightly over 4K for a pair, but if you pressed me I guess below 4K I might settle with an Amphion Argon 1.
Currently using a Cabasse Riga setup and it's very lovely for piano and classical.
so I compared speakers with 3 cords of a piano intro from the Gypsy Queen by VM. I was sold when I heard it as if it were in the room. It was a low end Dynaudio monitor
Agree on Philharmonic my musician friend has an older pair of the Phil 3 which is truly amazing. I see they also have a tower on their web now about 4K that goes down to 25 hz.
Any Maggie 1.7 or higher with a sub will also sound fantastic.
Philharmonic BMR monitor powered with a Hegel H95 or H 360, depending which room I move them to. They were a DIY kit from Meniscus Audio. In Baltic Birch cabs. I used top tier Clarity caps for the tweeter, air core inductors and mid tier Clarity caps for the midrange circuit and all Mundorf resistors. Much better x-over components than most speaker companies use. These speakers are transparent and accurate. Solo piano sounds wonderful. Violins sound realistic. Being a stand mount, they don't scale as large as a full orchestra, but tone and timbre wise, they're excellent. The speaker designer is a professional classical violinist. The best I've ever owned, they make my other speakers sound sad. DIY rocks!
I was wondering if anyone has owned or heard the older (circa late '80s early '90s) 5 1/4 neoflex focal drivers in a proper bass slot loaded and inert speaker? It had been the most believably lifelike tonal reproduction of piano I've ever had, with an old (Sherwood?) tube integrated and modified old Magnavox CD player in my living room playing a Naxos solo piano disc. Sounded exactly like the upright piano in the same room was playing, hearing it while approaching from outside the house, it fooled me to thinking someone was actually playing the real thing.
There has to be a few of those focal driven speakers that still exist?
I owned Nola Contenders first version. They were great. I received a call from Nola regarding my speakers. They needed a first version for a dealer abroad. Carl, the owner offered me a brand new pair of his 3rd version as a swap. Fast forward, I received my new pair. I was told they had about 50 hours on them. These are the first pair in production. Right away they sounded great, but I decided put more hours on them. To be fair I must say I have 3 systems. They are an amazing speaker. Much better then the ones I had before. Carl explained to me he has upgraded the drivers, the crossover and the cabinets are made in the US. The benefit of the US cabinets is in the denisity and production. I've been really enjoying them. What blew me away was a piano piece. I was completely taken back by what they were doing. The Contenders rendered the piano with amazing scale. I could here the full weight of the instrument. I felt as if the piano was in the room! As I mentioned before I do own 3 systems. The Nola Contenders cost a fraction of other speakers I own. They are the only pair that can do Classical music well. I believe the price will be $4,900. If you get a chance audition them. I could go on and on about them but your own ears will tell you best. Side note, I'm driving them with a Cary Sli80 intergraded amp. Sources, Bluesound Node2 and an Oppo BDP-105 D. Cables are mostly low end Nordost with the exception of the Nola Blue Thunder speaker cables. Happy listening, Brian
I owned Nola Contenders first version. They were great. I received a call from Nola regarding my speakers. They needed a first version for a dealer abroad. Carl, the owner offered me a brand new pair of his 3rd version as a swap. Fast forward, I received my new pair. I was told they had about 50 hours on them. These are the first pair in production. Right away they sounded great, but I decided put more hours on them. To be fair I must say I have 3 systems. They are an amazing speaker. Much better then the ones I had before. Carl explained to me he has upgraded the drivers, the crossover and the cabinets are made in the US. The benefit of the US cabinets is in the denisity and production. I've been really enjoying them. What blew me away was a piano piece. I was completely taken back by what they were doing. The Contenders rendered the piano with amazing scale. I could here the full weight of the instrument. I felt as if the piano was in the room! As I mentioned before I do own 3 systems. The Nola Contenders cost a fraction of other speakers I own. They are the only pair that can do Classical music well. I believe the price will be $4,900. If you get a chance audition them. I could go on and on about them but your own ears will tell you best. Side note, I'm driving them with a Cary Sli80 intergraded amp. Sources, Bluesound Node2 and an Oppo BDP-105 D. Cables are mostly low end Nordost with the exception of the Nola Blue Thunder speaker cables. Happy listening, Brian
re: John-- I agree , My Bache-audoi-002 get active crossover built in with 2 amplifier , Cross points 80Hz and 700Hz. so one class D amp working like sub , but another one loaded on 8 " driver working with frequency 80-800Hz active crossover 24db/oct and adjuster to make flat responce , and piano tone very natural So external amp ( can be low power) driving another 2 driver with regular passive crossover cover all after 700Hz
Thanks for the confirmation Schubert. The triple whammy of OB, active crossovers and good conditioning is the only thing I've yet witnessed to **completely obliterate** the problem of descending piano chords, for example...somehow or other they otherwise invariably run into that "brick wall" - that zone of murkiness, muddiness or chunkiness that starts anywhere in the lower mids to the mid bass, which in my view will pretty much spoil the show for piano.
Just so Ivan , just so. Of the 4 speakers I currently own 3 have only a cap for tweeters and 1 has no crossover at all . May not be the ultimate solution but it helps . If I were young and starting over I would go open baffle .
I don't really know if anyone has already suggested this since I have not gone through the entire thread, but I'd say that for the best piano reproduction, especially through the lower registers, you'd be much better off looking at something Open Baffle rather than a boxed design. Also, I think maybe you are looking for active crossovers rather than passive.
Passive crossover design and parts quality can and do start to play havoc with a lot of, if not all, instruments - but particularly with piano.This is because a passive crossover, even an extremely well designed one and that uses the very best parts, will act to clip off, or blunt, basically the top half of the dynamic peak. The natural clanginess of the instrument we all look for comes up missing or subdued. Oh the tone may seem very nice and all, but the realism still eludes. But, unexpectedly, when you go with active crossovers (I prefer digital) you smooth out the entire crossover region not only in terms of dynamics (no blunting at all), but also in tone, timbre, imaging and sound staging, as well. For anyone not having heard active crossovers, this total effect on the coherence of the sound would be revelatory...and for any instrument's sake, but certainly for piano as well - both throughout the low/mid crossover zone and the mid/high.
Generally, EQ can help, but balance alone will not net you realistic piano. IME, the underlying problem with tone does not seem to be the room or box resonances per se, but may be more related to woofer resonance in box design speakers.
In a boxed design, the woofer is under rather a lot of stress. The air pressure inside the box falls when the piston moves outward and rises when the cone moves inward. IOW, the air behind the woofer is exerting a (not always entirely equal) force in the *opposite* direction the signal is demanding the woofer to travel in. The woofer is stressed because it can't be in two places at once, so the woofer may tend to deform toward the edges under load. That sets up both distortion and resonances in the cone, especially as frequency falls and as excursion increases...again, not good for the deeper tones of a clangy (or vigorously played) piano.
OB, OTHOH, has no such disruptive force acting on the cone. The movement is equally unhindered in either direction and there are no real cabinet resonances to contend with, all of which lets the inherent performance of a driver that's well suited for OB purposes come to light more discernibly. Things like sustain and harmonics are noticeably longer and clearer. The only issue left with OB is the amount of bass cancellation at the lowest frequencies. Go with the largest woofer size here you can afford/accommodate, the biggest factor I've found with most OB speakers' low end response. I've been using 15-inchers for a while now and absolutely love them, with enough bass for piano or anything else.
To me, the ideal speaker system for piano would actually have at least three major ingredients. 1) OB bass with as large a woofer size as feasible. 2) digital active crossovers, and 3) some sort of good quality (that doesn't introduce other audible problems) power conditioning solution that will help tame any digital "nasties" your system may have and help things to sound nice and analog-like and it will help with things like the sound of the "air" in a piano's soundboard to come through and give it life. Not to mention the musical detail; the "clicking" of keys, feet working pedals or the incidental creak of a piano seat. It will also help flatten and extend the bass and give new clarity and air to the most emphatic "plinking" in the highs.
My only problem is that off the top of my head, I can't think of the best likely candidates in your price range, or otherwise really, since arriving at my own solution by way of DIY. But, maybe others here can point you to them.
To produce the good piano , the speakers must be very flat in midbass and low mid the region about 300-600 Hz is very important to make low octave of piano sound with full body sound . this is possible , if 3 way Loudspeakers get cross point in this area, and absolutely impossible in one speaker ,no crossover design . We make unique design LS with active midbass driver, that allow to perfect adjust the mid bass
I am using ADSL1290/2s. The owner of the company played piano and he was a physicist. Used a lot of math and of course his ears to get the sound very natural. Todays speakers I couldn't be of any help.
It's pretty hard to understand how ohm can offer 120 days and silver line offer none... return option. It's pretty much understood that a great loudspeaker may sound less spectacular when you get it home.
This is is the same problem you face with many loudspeakers sold by dealers if you don't live nearby... no way to try without tons of driving.
@twoleftears - Yup, good luck with that. This is the reason, when I did some speaker shopping eight years ago, I crossed both Silverline and Shanhinian off my list. How do sell direct only with NO return option?
I guess your best bet is to seek out local current owners of the Silverlines and see if you can get them to invite you in for an audition.
I'd like to add a few comments to my previous post about my Ohm speakers.
With all the other speakers that I've owned (AR, Infinity ect.),piano sounded pretty much the same. The Ohms were different. They imparted a sense of presence, realism, and tones and textures that I had never heard before, even with very familiar recordings. For the first time I was able to hear clear differences in whatever piano was being used, and I continue to be delighted and amazed by the presentation my Ohms provide for piano, and everything else, for that matter!
Don't want to repeat what others have said, but, for lifelike piano you have to take your equipment into context.
To over simplify the whole thing, tubes are better for voices, ss for piano. With speakers, very stiff drivers will probably be better, aluminum, ceramic, carbon fiber/rohacell (the best). I do not think a Be tweeter is needed, it's mainly in the midrange where you need "stiffness".
As some mentioned above and my personal beliefs is that it all starts with a great recording , Yarlung Records have done a absolutely superb job of capturing a realistic sound of a piano and so far I think the most realistic sounding available on vynal , real to real , cd and Hi-Res download
My Ohm 1000's do an incredible job of reproducing piano and acoustic guitar. I originally had a pair of the Ohm micro talls and was so impressed that I upgraded to the 1000's. The main difference I noticed was the way the 1000's fleshed out the harmonics and string oscillations of both instruments. All in all great speakers and worth an audition.
I'll offer that ANY great speaker will "do" piano well. And it bears repeating how absolutely different piano tone on recordings appears, thus making "absolutes" like your face in the path of an open lid Steinway (if yer lucky) as compared to Monk in 1960. Or Gould…or "no sustain" Schiff.
YMMV, of course, but what mapman says about the Ohms I completely agree with. They do a good job of telling you what is going on upstream, but they are not so ruthless that poor quality recordings become unlistenable. I think Jonathan Valin of TAS would say the Ohms are "As You Like It" speakers. Yet, I don't feel like I am missing any details. And while the imaging may not be laser-cut, on good recordings, each performer occupies their own space within the sound stage.
I also agree that the Ohms respond well to upstream improvements. I have a pair of subwoofers that cost more than my 2000s. My amplifier, which is in the middle of being upgraded, will have cost about what the speakers did, and my preamp cost significantly more than the 2000s. Yet, I would not consider the Ohms the weak link in my system. Not even close.
Dynaudio monitors, set up well, are a very good choice for piano.
I run Dynaudio Contour 1.3mkII monitors in an adjacent smaller room to the room with the big OHM F5s. They are very competitive with the smaller OHM 100s I switch in and out with the Dynaudios in that room and especially good with dynamics and bass extension for their size. Esotar tweeter is a natural for crisp dynamic piano that you can feel as well as hear.
Also, I had meant to weigh in on the suggestions for monitor speakers. Of course smaller speakers will struggle to reproduce the scale that larger speakers can, but with many of these you can get within 90%, with potentially better spatial resolution and less cabinet coloration. And integrating a very good sub can get you 102% of what you can get with most larger speakers alone. Right now I would look at these on Agon, many already recommended above:
Focal Electra 1007 Be Monitor Audio Platinum PL 100 Harbeth 7es3 Harbeth 30.1 Harbeth Super HL5 Plus (stretch for these) Audio Note AN-E SPE Wilson Benesch Trinity Dynaudio C1 Revel Ultima Gem
All of these can reproduce piano music convincingly. The Dyanaidios look like they were in a car wreck but if operating to spec are a steal.
@snapsc “What do you mean when you say the sound is too difffused.”
Let me take a whack at this. I have a family member who had a 5.2 Ohm system with reasonable AB amps and run of the mill DAC. Big Ohms in the front and smaller Ohms in the back. That system in either 2.2 or 5.2 formats excelled at presenting music with accurate tone and dynamic impact. And it could be enjoyed in anyplace in his large listening/living room. While there was a sweet spot, especially in 5.2, every place sounded pretty sweet.
But the kind of spatial definition and seemless placement of instruments you get from excellent dynamic drivers in two channels in a traditional listening “sweet spot” just was not there. In contrast, you felt like you were inside the performance - perhaps more like a live venue. Piano music sounded fine, but not remarkable. Perhaps better electronics and cables could have helped there.
He moved and sold all that gear and replaced it with a Focal/SVS 5.2 system powered by Emotiva electronics. Same basic cables used. This system is more resolving, with the spatial definition that I have come to expect from Focals. Piano music is convincing. Good recordings of classical, jazz, country or alternative are breathtaking. The deficiencies of most pop and some old rock recordings are exposed in the glare of accuracy.
So, my experience was that the Ohm based system presented naturally throughout a larger listening area, and was more forgiving of poor recordings, while a Focal system was more incisive but less forgiving. I find both enjoyable in different ways.
Recently I’ve been using a Chord Mojo DAC in my system from time to time as an alternative to the mhdt Constantine DAC I use normally.
With the Mojo, I notice a huge difference in the presentation. Location of elements in the recording, which are already very well defined with the older mhdt DAC, become more focused, essentially more palpable. The overall soundstage width may actually be somewhat smaller with the Chord but still extensive with added depth.. Its a night and day difference anyone could hear. Another step towards the absolute best sound stage and imaging I've ever heard which was with a six figure mbl setup at a local dealer in a room setup to enable the mbls to work their soundstage and imaging to the nth degree, a room unlike anything most would ever have at home.
The Chord DAC sound does express itself as well but perhaps to a somewhat lesser degree with all my good quality gear including headphones, their prime application. I’ve used the Chord in at least half a dozen or so different listening scenarios with my stash of various gear.
My point is how transparent the OHMs are in regards to to the source device used. They will sound radically different depending on what they are fed. So as is always the case but particularly applicable in teh case of OHMs, one must take caution in attributing the sound heard in a single audition uniquely to the speakers. You will hear radically different things in different setups. The OHMs are merely the messenger. I love that!
Read John Strohbeen’s blog under "news" on the OHM website. You’ll get a good feel for what makes OHM tick. He will talk all day about what technically goes into making good sound in a manner many can understand but very little if ever talk about anything "audiophile" or "high end audio". He is very nuts and bolts and about finding ways to make good sound available to more people. Also it becomes clear that he is as much a lover of music as he is of hifi.
Ohm seems to have a regular presence at the NY Audio show but they tend to use their smaller models and pair them with average quality electronics. I think their theme was you can get real good sound at moderate prices. As a soundstage junkie, their sound is too diffused for my taste. Might be room set up or electronics. Nice tone and texture,
^ Bingo, snapsc. As I said previously, I think Ohm gets little respect because of their lower price points and direct-sales approach. Compare, for example, how few reviews there have been of the Von Schweikert VR series, which are likewise priced lower and sold direct, as opposed to their more expensive lines, sold by dealers. Another common point between the VR series and the Ohms is their appearance. They look okay, but clearly, neither Ohm nor Von Schweikert have spent a lot on the cabinetry. That would raise the prices and defeat their purpose of offering great sound and great value.
But the Ohm forums on this site are quite extensive. Also, until recently, Ohm eschewed exhibiting at audio shows, and does not advertise in print media. This might explain the scarcity of reviews in audio publications. They do a bit of web advertising, but, otherwise, it is mainly word-of-mouth.
Ohm is not alone in having a sort of under-the-radar, cultish following. Tekton and Silverline Audio are two more I would put in those categories.
It is interesting/unusual?? that there are so few comments about the modern day ohm Walsh on any forum you look at compared to most other loudspeakers. Not sure what it means but given how long the company has been around its surprising. Given that pianos have air and scale the Walsh would seem to be a good candidate since it has no crossover in the critical frequencies.
I’ll venture a guess at why not more "Walsh" drivers.
The biggest reason is probably that "true" Walsh drivers are 100% omnidirectional. Omnidirectional speakers are an acquired taste and getting them set up right away from walls, etc (to avoid early reflections that compromise imaging) is not practical for most.
Also the original Walsh drivers were full range but also inherently prone to self destruction and reliability issues over time. Not practical for most.
Hence the OHM "Walsh" CLS driver which addresses those issues and makes the design practical for many and I believe is also patented.
German Physiks DDD "Walsh" driver also addresses the reliability issue by punting on the bass. Those are also very pricey and have the usual omni placement issues so not for everyone.
OHM CLS takes a different approach and punts on the highest frequencies with the Walsh-style driver. A wide dispersion separate tweeter is used. CLS driver also facilitates placement closer to walls by physically attenuating Walsh driver output in rear and side directions inside the "cans".
Nobody seems to include the "lowly" Snell Type B speaker to this list. I have a pair. I picked them up used for the ridiculous price of $675.00!!! I needed to replace four of the midwoofers which added $300.00 to the cost. They sound like new. The Type B's are unique because they are five sided. The side that fires into the sound stage has a tweeter that adds significantly to the soundstage. Look for a pair or at least a chance to hear them. They compete with speakers that cost tens of thousands of dollars. I'm happy with mine! Joe
snapsc - If I can chime in while we wait for ASVJerry, Ohm does not use Walsh drivers these days, but they do use the Walsh principle of bending wave propagation, in which the back of a cone driver radiates sound in a quasi-omni pattern. Getting this type of speaker voiced right requires, IMO, a different skill set than voicing other speaker types. A few are really good at it, including John Strohbeen at Ohm and German Physiks (which does use a Dicks Dipole Driver).
Part of the reason so few do this is, perhaps, marketing. Many consumers expect a bunch of forward facing drivers in a box. Many assume omni's can't image well (which is false, IME). And in the early days, true Walsh designs were, um, finicky about associated gear and had some reliability issues. And then there is the price. Ohm Walsh speakers are not expensive, and since Ohm doesn't sell a $75,000 Reference model, they don't get a lot of love from the audio press or high-end folks. Selling factory direct is a two-edged sword, too, which keeps prices low, but means there is no dealer network to talk up the brand. Just my 2 cents.
ASVJerry. Ok, this is a little off subject but it looks like you built your own style of walshes. What kind of transducers (paper, titanium, etc) did you use and why.
It it seems strange that so few loudspeaker companies have adopted then marketed a Walsh based product???
snapsc - My room is on the larger side of the size range for the 2000s, although I sit only 9' back. Without the subs, the 2000s seem to go well into the 30's, probably around 35Hz, with a good amount of output. (Sadly, with my amp in the repair shop, I am listening now without the Vandy subs, but only my HT sub, an old Def Tech PF15. Even through my cheap AVR, these speakers sound lovely!) But with your sub properly dialed in, you should have no bass issues.
Your guess on the need for larger Ohm Walsh models in bigger rooms is correct. The thing about this line of speakers is that the sound is very consistent model-to-model. You gain low-end extension, higher dB output and perhaps some better macro-dynaimcs as you move up in size. But timbre, resolution, soundstage characteristics, etc., are all about the same, whether you have the Micro-Walsh Tall or the 5000s.
@bondmanp thanks for the comments...I see on other forums that the relatively few people that comment on Ohm Walshs also seem to find them very good on piano.
The ohm room size guide is confusing...I'm guessing that you could fill a very large room with a seating position 12' back using the OhmWalsh 2000...but only from 60 hz or so on up as the big room would suck out the lower bass....if that is correct, then their website is actually suggesting you need larger more expensive models in order to get the bass performance without a sub???
In my case, I'm using a Power Sound Audio S1500 which is pretty fast and has great tonality.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
