2. speakers
  3. 138050-5397

Floor-Standards to Monitors?

I am always tempted to try a good pair of monitors/bookshelf speakers mated with my two subs and see if I can equal or surpass a good pair of floor standing speakers ($15k to $30k) in my 20 x 16 (vaulted ceiling) treated room. The thought of being able to move and set up things without help is very appealing as I get older.  Also, with much of the price of floor standing speakers going into the large cabinet, I am thinking that that an equivalent, or better sound, less the low end should be achievable at “reasonable” prices.  With the application of DSP/room correction, does this eliminate the gap between most of these products? Once you get to a magic price point, are we just paying for company name, exotic materials that may or may not have an impact, and aesthetics?

There are so many monitors out there and the price range is staggering – I have named a few below. The magazines say they are all wonderful and clearly there is no place to hear them all. Where there are measurements, it differentiates them somewhat. I like dynamic resolving speakers (Magico/Vivid) and concerned about mid/bass impact between 80 Hz and 250 Hz when you crank them up where the subs do not help. I would also like a US presence and a company that builds more than 25 copies a year. What do you think? Can I get there? Is paying more than $5k just crazy for monitors? Does room correction level the playing field? Any thoughts or recommendations?

ELAC DEBUT 2.0 B6.2 and AS-61 – both sounded very good at AXPONA

ATC – Never heard them / multiple options

Kii – Great reviews out there but all seem to point to a small room

Revel –M126 Be

TAD – ME1 – sounded great in small room at AXPONA. Likely too small for my room and very expensive as you move up the line

Dynaudio – New Confidence 20 monitor coming out and Contour 20

Focal - Diablo Utopia Colour Evo (expensive) and Sopra 1

Dutch and Dutch – Not highly available in the US but supposed to be exceptional

B & W – 805 D3 – Would need a very treated room

Paradigm – Persona – I have found the entire line bright and lean on bass

Fritz - Carrera 7 Be- A small company but sounded excellent at AXPONA

KEF – A laid back.

Raidho – Expensive

Magico – Very Expensive and old Q design

Harbeth –Cabinet resonance built in - odd


128x128cdj123
audiokinesis
2,753 posts
 

In my opinion, before you expect room correction to "level the playing field", you should be aware that there are two things DSP cannot fix:

1.  DSP cannot correct the dynamic limitations of a loudspeaker.  It cannot make the motors handle more wattage before overheating, and it cannot make the voice coils travel further before going into over-excursion.   

2. DSP cannot improve the radiation pattern.  For example if a speaker has a lower treble over-emphasis because the radiation pattern is very wide at the bottom end of the tweeter's range, thereby putting out too much energy into the reverberant field in that region, the best you can hope for is a compromise.  If the on-axis and off-axis responses differ significantly, you cannot fix them both at the same time via DSP.

My point being, if you're going to rely on DSP, then make intelligent initial choices in these two areas because DSP can't fix them. 

That being said, it is quite possible for a standmounts-plus-subs system to outperform many floorstanders.  It depends on the specifics - there is a lot of variation possible.  Sometimes standmounts-plus-subs is the configuration of choice, rather than the configuration of necessity. 

Duke

dealer/manufacturer

erik_squires
16,416 posts
 
Monitor Audio are superb. 
soix
9,810 posts
 
Too many variables to make a blanket statement here as @audiokinesis mentioned in his last paragraph, but I’ve also thought about this quite a bit myself and have a couple thoughts.  But to answer a couple of your questions, when audiophiles are frequently spending $30k+ for speakers, spending more than $5k+ on very good monitors seems very reasonable to me.  And no, I don't think DSP/room correction, although quite awesome when used properly, can make up for all the advantages larger floorstanders can provide...

First, if you’re talking about large, multi-driver speakers or line array speakers IME there is a soundstage size/scale, coherence, dynamics, and perceived effortlessness thing going on that I just don’t see a monitor and subs being able to match. Period. Size and physics still matter.

Short of that size/scale, etc. thing though, and more focusing on more reasonably-sized 3-way floorstanders, I think the lines get much blurrier.  And this is where all the variables really make the ultimate answer very situation and brand specific. I’ll use one specific case I’ve been considering that I think brings some of these things to light. One of my potential end-game speakers are Joseph Audio Pearls, but they’re currently way out of my budget and may remain so. So I’ve thought about pairing Pulsars with a couple very good value priced subs from the likes of SVS, Rhythmic, Hsu, etc. or a swarm-type setup to create a "Mini Pearl," which would cost around $20k less than new Pearls. (I use Pulsars not only for personal taste but also because they can reach down fairly low on their own, which I think is important in trying to achieve similar seamlessness and dynamics to full or near full-range floorstanders -- not sure smaller monitors that don’t go much below 80Hz could pull this off). Now, although the Pulsar very much shares the JA house sound (and tweeters) with the Pearls, the Pearls have a more substantial and dedicated midrange driver that I think will give it an advantage over the Pulsars with subs (PWS) in dynamics and coherence (among other things) that I can’t overcome. But, on the flip side, I’d expect the PWS to reach significantly lower and cleaner in the bass range -- very possibly better coupling with my room and assuming I’m using good DSP integration technology -- that could bring significant advantages in that area (let’s leave the amp not having to work as hard thing out for purposes of focusing on speakers here, but we all know that’s a big potential factor here as well). Now, even if I can’t match everything the Pearls do with the PWS setup, I’d bet I’m getting pretty darn close with an extra $20,000(!!!) in my pocket, thankyouverymuch. Let me repeat that number -- TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. Just think of what else you could do with that much disposable income. The Pearls would have to conjure up quite a bit of synergistic magic to fill that big of a monetary hole.

But there’s another option. What if I ponied up for the Perspective floorstanders and paired THEM with subs? Now I’ve got two (or, maybe more technically accurate, one and one half) of the Pulsar’s midwoofs working to replicate the larger midrange driver of the Pearl, and I can cross the subs over even lower since the Perspectives produce more and lower useable bass than their monitor siblings. I’d think I’ve now closed a good bit of the dynamics and coherence gap that existed in the above PWS configuration, thereby coming even closer to the Pearl’s level of performance. But, as per the OP’s wish list, I’ve still got small floorstanders that are very easy to move around, and I’ve also still got about an extra $10k in my pocket!!!

All that said, if I had the scratch for the Pearls would I choose either of these options instead? Nope. But to be honest I’m an idiot, and I don’t plan on moving my speakers around at all and can still add a couple good subs and create my own "Super Pearls." As Sam Tellig used to say, "I laugh my evil laugh." It never ends, right???

Anyway, I used this specific example not to be self serving but because I think the same variables here can be applied across several brands, and it surfaces a lot of the basic issues on which I think the OP was looking for thoughts/feedback. Peace out.
audiokinesis
2,753 posts
 

@soix said:  "First, if you’re talking about large, multi-driver speakers or line array speakers IME there is a soundstage size/scale, coherence, dynamics, and perceived effortlessness thing going on that I just don’t see a monitor and subs being able to match."

Sometimes it is the exceptions to the rules that make high-end audio interesting!

I'll be showing a monitor + subs system at RMAF 2018.  On paper at least, I think my system will theoretically compete with some six-figure floorstanders in several areas, including bandwidth and dynamics and effortlessness.  Harder to compare soundstage and coherence by making educated guesses, but I don't think these are necessarily compromised by the monitor + subs format. 

So IN GENERAL I agree with you, but I'm involved with something that aspires to be an exception to the rules. 

Duke

mitch2
4,114 posts
 
Much happier with my monitors and two subs but, in fairness, the monitors have two 9-inch woofers in each sealed box and go very loud wIthout compression, the sealed-box (acoustic suspension) bass is excellent down to 40hz
More to discover