Speakers The single most critical component

If I were to go the FR route, which I doubt I ever will, I would use OTL amps. 

ZSeems the SET amplification has been officially coveted as the only amplification for the task.
But there are draw backs with the SETs. They do not produce music likea PP can in certain complex, hard driven signals.
They can get overwhelmed witha single 845 trying to master all the complexities thrown its way.
PP has the muscle to channel all that high voltage music.

All this agonising over amplifiers, which in the end, basically all sound the same? ’SET amplification has officially been coveted as the only amplification for the task‘. Dig the pompous nomenclature - Kinda makes amplifier choice crucial to the system performance in my book.

Indeed as mentioned loudspeakers are the most important components of a good audio system.
This  however hinges on locating speakers in a proper room perhaps with dimensions measuring 16X21.5X8 feet to minimise echoes and room reflections of sound waves.
Having owned a Anthony Gallo 3.5 pair of speakers, which I found to be excellent, although reasonably priced I would be happy to know from members their views of this speakers.
Thank you.

 Anthony Gallo

~~~~ If I  recall wayyy back in early 1970's, a  audiophile friend  took me to a   speaker  build shop here in New Orleans , near Franklin Ave, called Gallo Speaker studio.
I think it was all horns. Is this same Gallo you are refering to?

to minimise echoes and room reflections of sound waves.

The goal of active psychoacoustic control is using direct waves and early and late reflections in a positive way and timing them to create at will the adequate imaging, soundstage, and a ratio for the listener envelopment (LEV) and source relative width (ASW) factors that will be optimal...

Then thinking about minimising reflections or neutralizing them is not enough and not very powerful in a small room....

The positive use of reverberation is key.... But it takes more than just a balance between absorbtion,reflection and diffusion... This is elementary passive material treatment....


Complementing it and more powerful is the systematic use of Helmholtz resonators in a grid beginning near the speakers and around the room.... I use 32 pipes and tubes fine tuned... Results: spectacular control at will of the many acoustical factors... I called that "a mechanical equalizer"...No upgrade rival this save a very costly one... My system value is 500 bucks but does not sound at all like 500 bucks system ...

Regards...

Winder if we took a blind test with Voxativ FR and used 3 amps, 
SS, PP and  845 SET, with full blown orchestra like Schnittke /BIS label and Pettersson/BIS Segerstam,  which are superior recording  sonics vs the later recordings on BIS with Lindberg..and see who can guess which amps are in performance.  Along with some full orchestra jazz/female vocals/LP source. 
And which 1 amp comes out in the winner circle. 

Kinda makes amplifier choice crucial to the system performance in my book.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not in my limited experience, as i stated earlier, 
Richard's 2 loan tube amps, performed quite well vs the much more pricey and beefier Defy7. 
It was not like night/day difference.
The 3 digital souces , had close performance.
It was the Diatone FR vs the xover/box design  which revealed a  wide margin in performance.
From this test,  seems to me  : all tube amplification requires a  high sensitivity speaker.
Futher my testing does not take in the idea, SET amplification is  The Ideal power source for wide band drivers. 
SET amps as we all know have  limitations,.. these   flaws tend to surface   when it comes to certain styles of music.
I'm not buying  in the idea SET's are superior in wide band speakers.
When my  2nd FR arrives in a few weeks, I'll see if Richard will loan out his *treasured* SET amps.
I doubt it,
But this way I could get a  real experience of these 2 beautiful  tube amplifiers in a high sens speaker. 

Give it a rest,just sit back and enjoy your speakers.....

I rest my case.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well yeah  i did make a few bold daring opinions. ,
 seems I just now ran into a very interesting amplifier to match perfectly (priced right and weigth perfect)
while doing other research
I had heard of Decware, but not investigated.
This really looks like it would make a dif in sonics vs the Defy.
Some things you can just look at and feel its different.
hummm I just might list my Defy,,,,,as i really do not need 100 watts a channel, as i listen at low gain


https://www.decware.com/newsite/TORIIJR.html

Pity can not find many YT uploads on this amp, 
Also does not have my fav imput tubes in the pre section, the 12AU and 12AX. 
For me, tahtsa  big issue. 
Back with my Defy, I'm thinking once i get a  wide band 8 in, I will better make the judgement about PP paired with wide band/high sensitivity single source driver.
3 weeks.
I would advise all newbies to NOT make any decision to purchase  any piece of equipemnt, until you have spent time in research, Not always the case though, 
 The caveat here is, when/if you see a  Jadis intergrated on the market, do not hesitate, or it will go in  a  flash. 
Best bang.

Give it a rest,just sit back and enjoy your speakers.....

Good one Einstein

I had heard of Decware, but not investigated.
This really looks like it would make a dif in sonics vs the Defy. 
Some things you can just look at and feel its different.
hummm I just might list my Defy,,,,,as i really do not need 100 watts a channel, as i listen at low gain


https://www.decware.com/newsite/TORIIJR.html

Just buy a Leben CS600 and be done with it......

if you really want to burn dollar bills Shindo would get my vote.

Seriously. all this pontification is just self indulgent BS.

Trade offs and compromises, All components have weaknesses and strengths.
This is a given.
I've looked over SET's, I have no interest.
I've looked over box/xover/traditional  design speakers,
I have no interest.
Both components have flaws,,, which will not meet my personal listening experience goals.
Likewise, 
PP and wide range/high sensitivity drivers,  might have flaws which others will not accept compromises.
w/o having access to dealers shops which provide listening/testing pre purchase, we  are required to do our homework, research.
Lets imagine Seas  came out with drivers that matched Exel  performance but with a  sensitivity at 93db. WEll then sure now  this <<magical future driver>  conventional/traditional/xover box design would be the ideal match for the PP amp.
There might be a  92+ sensitivity xover design out there somewhere, I just have not found it and have no interest in looking.
Going wide band driver/Horn with my PP amp, any compromises/weaknesses will just have to be accepted.
there is no such thing as the perfect speaker.
We this, we try that. Hopefully we do not try too many , as it can and will cause issues in ones finances and thus relationships. 
Others may hate a wide band high sens driver paired witha PP amp, 
We are all free to pick and chose as we wish.
Some may even go so far as loving the sound of their 2 watt SET amp paired with  the Magnepan 30.7 4 panel Electrostat. 
To each his own. 

More pure rambling pontification.......

Just one more tiny rant, then i'm done
how about this setup vs the  suggestion above, 2 watt/Magnepan 30.2 4 panel
How about this possiblity
Jadis JA800 4 mono block, each weigs 200 lbs paired with say a  8 inch wide range 110 sensitivity single driver.
Everyone is free to make their own calls as to how they wish to enjoy music in their listening room. 
My room  is tiny at 10x12, so contraints on both amp and speakers  does limit my choices.
Anyway, I plan to challenge the SET as The Ideal amplification for a  wide band high sensitive single source driver.
There area  few YT  vids,  with this setup, however the choice in music , as always , is light instrumental, no female vocals. 
making it impossible to make any determination as to how the performance came off.
Which is why i use 2 reference cds,  Gatemouth Brown/Gateswings and Sophia Milman Beautiful Love. 
If Richard would be so kind to allow loan of his SET vs the PP, will post 2 vids

Obviously neither set up would work, so we need to finda  happy middle ground
If we all agree the new wide band single source (Horn tweet is part of this single source , 2 drivers meet perfectly = Single Source) the new that is, out with the old tech FR,
offer the most musical experience of any speaker designs.
And there are a  few  labs  engineering   the most neutral, natural, dynamic amplification vs the 2 competitors SET/SS. 
All that is needed is to pick any of the new tech FR , add in your fav PP amplification, and you could have that magical system you've been always seeking and searching. 
This  just might be the best compromise set up offering gorgoeous voicing for female vocals in your jazz LPs, and for  rich ,deep , detalied full blown orchestra. 
And a  set up anyone can afford. None of this break the bank paypal debt for 10 years. 
Its a  win~win~win~win    system.  
I ve considered this set up from every/all angles, I just can not  see any  alternatives that would compete with my The Ideal Stereo System. 

Audiogon discussion board
Amp/Preamps 40k comments posted
Speakers ONLY 30k comments posted, 
Logically should be
Amps 40k, 
speakers 100k comments posted.
If you fail to make the best choice in speakers fidelity voicing, it really does not  matter which amplifer you have. Neither source, LP vs cd vs DAC vs streaming super high digital.  cabels ,, inter connects, Boutique capacitors. Tube A vs Tube B. 
None of this is of any importance if one has a  lousey speaker  Lousey =  sensitivity lower than 92db. 92db just barely makes the grade as acceptable,  At 92db,  dinasaur-ish .
Very difficult to come by traditional /xovver designs with a  92db spec. 
There might be 1 out there, but price? Weight? Again 2  obstacles  going traditional/xover. 
And thats a  big IF, at 92db. 
Wide band all begin at 94db/up.. 
Nice, super sweet.

As if anybody was really interested.....

YES YES!!!!!

mozartfan OP669 posts

04-24-2021 11:17amAudiogon discussion board
Amp/Preamps 40k comments posted
Speakers ONLY 30k comments posted,
Logically should be
Amps 40k,
speakers 100k comments posted.

Have you done the same analysis for acoustical treatments, and I don't me SR toys.

Amp/Preamps 40k comments posted
Speakers ONLY 30k comments posted, 
Logically should be
Amps 40k, 
speakers 100k comments posted.

Or maybe they got it right.

Acoustical treatmenst? 
Not my interest. 
I'm into near field, small room listening.
I should have stated this at the beginning. 
Some of you have cathedral size listening rooms, So testung results may vary from my room acoustics. 
Also note, many of you listen at high db  volume. This is yet another factor, I listen at a  comfortable low  db.
However I did crank up the vol on the last video and there was no break up, no distortion at all with the tiny 6.5 Diatone.
You crank upa  xover low efficiency speaker, the sound will attack if not assult the listener, small  room or large, does not  matter. 
Over the years I've never been impressed with any  traditional xover designs, most were just obnoxiously muddy, polluted  the musical image.

These wide band Diatone, $110/pair, really have out performed in most areas of speaker characterists if we add all up together. 
The Seas Thors, which represent the finest old school drivers, in the world, just can not hold up against a  wide band/no xover driver.

I have no idea , can not comprehend why FR/wide band is not the main topic interest here on Audiogon these past 10 years or so. 


I imagined if only i can upgrade the Thor xovers with high quality Mundorf caps, now i will have a   reborn Thor. 
Wrong, the  nuance was  ~~miniscule~~
Thats when I on my own, decided to ck out FR/wide band.
Once you  auditione a  wide band driver, you'll never consider going back to old school.

I guess  it all comes down to different ~cups of tea~

+1 limomangus

Now we learn the biggest, or shall I say the dominant, reason for the thread, "My room is tiny at 10x12, so contraints [sic] on both amp and speakers does limit my choices."

Explains the infatuation with small, FR speakers. 

Without disparaging the OP, the budding audiophile can learn from this thread. Declarations (such as seen in the opening post) are often made out of context, as if applicable to all. Hold tentative such declarations until you know the context.   :) 

The context was never made clear. Just sweeping uninformed statements. Hear a pair of active ATC monitors with a good front end. Goodbye Voxativ.

It’s like saying your lungs are more important than your heart or your brain.  They all need to work in harmony.  

Explains the infatuation with small, FR speakers.

Without disparaging the OP, the budding audiophile can learn from this thread.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You would be very surprised at  one of Ricahrd Gray's ~~~ Guess what speaker or amp (he perforams both tricky blind auditions)  is  now playing behind the curtain. ~~~ He chuckles as to how often seasoned audiphiles can get their guesses WRONG, some folks get hoy headed to the point ofa  fist in the face.
So small room yes, but even ina  larger setting a  high fidelty 8 FR will knock your socks off. 
Yet can also accustom itself to a  small room setting with pleasant richness, never ever do you feel under attack, as with the other <brands>


As to 2nd point, Correct. That is the  main goal of this thread. 
Had someone wayyy  back in 2000ish when I opened one of Agons longest running threads, ~~Speaker Shootout at the OK  Corral~~~ seems in all the k'sm of posts, somehow i missed out on the FR alternative, Electro stats were HUGE favor back then, so they along with xover brand took up most of my attention. 
I knew i did not like SET sound, so FR somehow got deleted from my serious considertion.
Now some 20 years later, I am FR/wide band /high sensitivity worlds biggest fan-atic.
Guess you can;t tell 
;--))
anyway. sure glad Douglas saw through my rants as to the main goal of this topic. 
Newbies can now look at the speaker mountain from different angles and make their own wise, well researched decision 
In these troubled times, makinga  speaker purchase can be a  1 time event for some newbies here. 
They wish to make it count.
Besides note the speaker board, 99% is all about xover traditional designs. 
I feel thats a  bit biased if not  tunnel  vision. 
FR technology has come alonggg way, lets not shove FR off the table.
Fr will give xover low sens speakers a run for their money in comming decades. 
Its just a matter of EDU and time. 
I can see a  new revolution in speaker  choices.
Remember when we would go ina  audio store and ck out the rooms full  of all sorts of xover designs,, hahaha, I picked the Philips 2 way, paper 8 woofer, nice tweeter.
I thought they were the most cleanest,, Then I placed the next to the Thors and dumped the Philips 425's for $50 on craigslist.
Now i am dumping the Thors. 
Never could go back-wards to xover low sensitivity speakers.
But hey whatever floats your boat. 

My hope is newbies comming into this fantastic , most wonderful and can be very rewarding hobby, will say, <<Gee this guy has been around all audio for longer than i was born,,and he has completely totally rejected ~~The Standard xover design speaker~~, whats up with that?? 
This is my hope, to plant seeds of change, That they maight be enlightened and with minds opened, awareness sparked by this new technological advances in speaker design. This way they can make more careful, studied, purposeful decisions when purchasing what may be theirs for The KEEPS.
This is my dream and hope.
Xovers, ha!,  = means the driver has crippling  flaws and serious issues. in all things voicing true high fidelity.
Think, say this word over and over
~~Efficiency~~ = Effectiveness, performance, helping the amplifier to works its inner magical qualities.
High = good 
Low = bad.  

Just out of curiosity, just wondering
if there were other threads  showing interest in Voxativ
Sure enough there area  few.
However, some have been DELETED, CANCEL CULTURE, Moderattors shut  a  few down.
Why?
Is audiogon for free speech Or against out constitutional rights to free respecful, civil speech??
Moderators?
Well this thread is close to get shut down, I am sure. 
sad, if so, 
Even if it does, there were more than 5000 views in less than 1 week. I think this is a Audiogon count record since this  forum began. 
So if we have 5000 views, this shows more folks are gaining interest in all things audio and increases Audiogon  popularity as a  audio chat forum where new ideas can be discussed and explored.
This is what makes Audio a  new adventure, and hopefully will allow newbies to make better more critical judgements in their purchases. 
Thats all I am attempting to do with this topic. 
Think outside the box.
If I have acheived this, I am not at all disgruntled about my recent $1800 loss in box xover upgrades. .
Kind Regards.

I've heard quite a few excellent quality speakers that employ three drivers with the mid driver covering a wide frequency range and the woofer&tweeter extend with low and high crossover frequencies.   They act like a FR with some help.   I have not heard a FR dynamic box speaker using one driver that I want as my main listening room speaker.

One could argue that the most important range to cover with a single driver is from about 200Hz to 1500Hz. This is the frequency range where we use timing information for location. Outside that frequency range, flat frequency response and consistent L/R frequency response would be more important.

No stopping a man with infatuation, be it with women or speakers. No reasoning with him, as well. We have several members with their own particular Transducer Tunnel Vision, my phrase to describe the phenomenon.   :) 

Voxativ speakers are quite nice and do some things very well. But, obviously presenting a FR speaker as ideal  (The nebulous term "superhighfiedelity" or SHF is being promoted by the OP to promote speakers without crossovers) because it avoids a crossover is problematic when the company offers supplemental subs with crossover.   :) 

The basis for the OP's opinions has slowly become more clear--some of the comparative research involves viewing on-line videos.  I don't see how that can be of ANY value in evaluating sonic performance.  There is only one way evaluate the sound and develop one's own personal taste and that is by listening to the gear.  Even the most gross characteristics that one hears from a video is primarily that of the speakers the viewer is using and NOT that of the speaker being recorded.  It is also highly flavored by the microphones being used (probably not high end Telefunkens, or Schoeps or the like), the room where the recording is being made, the recording technique employed (a skill taking many years to perfect), the upstream electronics, the recording gear. . . .

The one critical feature about speaker is their choice drives two important things, one is the components needed to maximize their sound and the other is how much their sound appeals to your ears.

Planars are different from Horns and they are different from box speakers.  Speakers are not the most important feature in sound replication, but they do influence amp and preamp choices to a large degree in my experience. YMMV

Many years ago in la la Linn land I remember hearing a pair of active Kans on the end of a fully tricked up Linn/Naim system doing things they couldn‘t possibly achieve. When driven with the right gear my Naim IBLs do a reasonable facsimile. Size or mode doesn‘t count - it‘s all about communication.

mozartfan - Anthony Gallo
I am not sure if it was the same Gallo sir, 

But I append a link to Anthony Gallo Acoustics, herein : 

https://galloacoustics.com/usa/

At the same time I would be happy for your comments on the Boyuurange integrated single-ended amplifier being promoted by Amazon :

https://www.amazon.com/BoyuuRange-MKIII-Intergrated-Amplifier-Single-end/dp/B0896YXRSM

@mozartfan a course in concise writing would benefit you greatly.

Wish had a pair of the Gallo reference pair!

Got a pair of the Reference III‘s and won‘t be letting go of them. They really are quite special.

Wonderful sir.

@mozartfan a course in concise writing would benefit you greatly

Agree
At least my content speaks for itself, no rhetoric, no fluff, no lies, frauds to lead astray, no hype , no propaganda, unlike alot of what you see, hear and read all over  the Inet,, news, speaker manufactures, audio retailers, etc, 
Often I see others who  possess  polished  skills in expressing their ideas, but when you boil it down, it all evaporates.
Substance over fluff is my expression methodology. 

research involves viewing on-line videos. I don't see how that can be of ANY value in evaluating sonic performance.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yes and no,. 
Agree its very dif to make a  rock solid determination of how a speaker voices, its qualities all based ona YT vid.
Yet is larryi makes a  YT video and then we meet in person. 
How or why would your voice be any different from what i hear on the YT vid?
2ndly
Im my 40 yrs spealer experience, not a  single one matches what the Diatone 6.5 does for musical presentation. 
I can see absoluetly no reason whatsoever to continue with any/every/all xover standard/traditional speaker design, not when there is  a  high fidelity wide band in the room.
There is not even 1 xover/traditional speaker that would change my ideas about the  FR supreme victory over the old standard design. 
Not sure why there is so much resistence on this board for FR/wide band single source???
When  the Voxativ is up N running in my system, I will upload many YT videos, showing off what this driver can do, BUt my video will be superior to any current YT Voxativ vids, all the current YT vids on Voxativ  have poor choice in music selection, which does nothing to reveal the full potential of this driver.
Voxativ drivers are only limited by the associated equipment it is paired with. 

The problem with the vast majority of speakers including everything Mr Mozartfan is talking about is, they sound like speakers. The very best speakers disappear. Unfortunately, the very best speaker I know of does poorly with tube amplifiers with the exception of Atma-Sphere amps. Solid state amps as a rule tolerate difficult and reactive loads better. The best loudspeakers will appreciate better gear up stream but excepting the amplifier you can get away nicely with less expensive equipment. Unfortunately, the cheapest speaker I have heard that disappeared was $30K. On the other hand I have listened to $250K loudspeakers that sounded like  loudspeakers. 

The very best speakers disappear.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Excellent addition to this discussion.
Your post is timely and helpful towards understanding of ~~The Speaker Choice Dilemma~~

Can we take your ~~disappear~ to say, ~voices the music as close as possible to the very actual studio recording~~ provided the studio engineers are capable of producing high fidelity~~.
WE all know there are a few lousey quality recording in the catalogue.

I would add, what speaker can present music, witha certain natural-ness, neutral-ness, channeling the dynamics which are in the actual studio performance, ,
Further
w/o the listener feeling his sensibilities are being attacked in any aggressive manner.
lastly, zero fatigue , or as close to zero as possible.
In my rather limited experience of xover/traditional designs, most have not meet these criteria.
Sure xover/traditional low efficiency designs might sound fantastic to the listener (I thought the world of my Philips 375 2 ways, , then the Thors were The Ultimate) but when enters the room a high fidelity wide band/FR driver, now the listener is made fully aware of all the faults and distortions added to the music by his most perfect xover/traditional design.

FR are the new kids on the block and they mean business.
This is how I see the future of audio comos,
1) That speakers will be understood as The Most Critical Component
( King Amps will now have to , regretfully to many of you here on audiogon, take a distant 2nd place in terms of critical importance ina audio system)
2) That wide band/FR /kigh efficiency drivers will be understood as the most perfect ideally voicing driver ever engineered.
These 2 objectives/goals will take another 10+ years brought to cognition.
1st awareness, next the pondering, reflecting, last the fruits of my hopes that FR/wide band will become The 21st Century Speaker by choice.
10 years, we will see some changes take place.
The FR/wide band is comming into its own by low price drivers from Dayton, Emminence and others these past 10 years, Mostly used for car audio applications.
We owe alot to the early models , Fostex, Lowther, JBL, Seas, for important engineering which the new FR labs have built upon.

Its up to us to acknowledge these new 21st C developments and take the FR new designs into consideration for our next speaker purchase.
FR/High sens speakers are ~~Win~win~Win~Win,  the only weakness, but simply, economical fixable~~ is the roll off on the high register. 
But as i say, the newest high fidelity FR may actually voice the high fq's  w/o the need to add a  Horn tweet.
I havea   budgest 8 FR arriving in 3 weeks, At that point I can make a  determination, The Diatone 6.5 has severe high roll off.  Miniscule fault considering everything  the driver does well with  mids/bass. 

Ii‘s all about the implementation. Not the mode.

@mijostyn --

The problem with the vast majority of speakers including everything Mr Mozartfan is talking about is, they sound like speakers. The very best speakers disappear. Unfortunately, the very best speaker I know of does poorly with tube amplifiers with the exception of Atma-Sphere amps. Solid state amps as a rule tolerate difficult and reactive loads better. The best loudspeakers will appreciate better gear up stream but excepting the amplifier you can get away nicely with less expensive equipment. Unfortunately, the cheapest speaker I have heard that disappeared was $30K. On the other hand I have listened to $250K loudspeakers that sounded like loudspeakers.

Let me guess: those 8’ iteration of the Sound Lab 645’s retail for $30k? I feel rather confident that setting the bar at the top with those speakers will actually have a substantial basis as something that delivers on that "promise," though I don’t understand why you’d skimp out on the subs? ;) Partially kidding; I’d have proposed vertically aligned, flanking bass columns with higher driver count (i.e.: more displacement) to seal the deal, so to speak, but it would seem your current solution is a rather capable one.

Many can’t afford the luxury of a binary approach offered by a main speaker system like yours, and will instead have to make settlement with a solution that more pragmatically dictates the speakers, in conjunction with their interaction with the acoustics, as the (by far) most coloring part of the chain. Indeed, though: sheer displacement and headroom are your friends and among the vital parameters to attain, and yet that demand sees limited following.

~~~ Relentless,  Avenging, Controversial, The Adversary~~
WEll it was a  lobgggg time a  comming,
All dinasaurs are fated to perish.

With that we will try to place this speaker shootout in a  clearer perspective.
We need to list the negatives and positives of each design.
Xover Traditional/conventional/= The Popular vote
all their goods and evils.
Then we list the pluses and minuses of FR/Wide band  single point source drivers.
OK   so lets begin
Lets have 3  weaknesses concerning xover speakers we've all been listening to since the AR's came out in 1975, or Seas A25's, 1960's. .
Then we list the  3 best things we love about the xover things we find difficult to give up. 

Then someone  who knows more about FR than I do, can list the 3 positive and 3 negatives of this  design. 
In this super competitive world, I think this is a fair challenge. 
Consider this contest like the Speaker Olympics. 
Gold is the winner, and  silver ,,,well thats the loser.