2. speakers
  3. 158881-139155

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

I've been trying out speakers in a complicated shoot out, both bookshelves and towers — all in my home with my gear. I'm looking for speakers obtainable up to about $4k but could go up (or down) a bit if the right thing came along.

Basic facts: All speakers were run in at least 100 hours. Room is 27 x 14 x 6.5 ceilings. Powering with all QS tubes, 60w, NOS, tube R2R dac, and decent cables. No terrible reflection points; room not overly live or dampened. REL R 328 sub available but I did most listening without it.

Recent auditions, type:

Klipsch RP 600-M (budget singleton of the group)
Fritz Rev Carbon 7 mk II (bookshelf, 2 way, soft dome)
Focal 936 (tower, 3 way, inverted metal)
Martin Logan Motion 60s XTi (tower, 3 way, AMT)

Coming soon:

Salk SS 6M (bookshelf, 2 way, beryllium)
Dynaudio Evoke 30's (tower, 3 way, soft dome)

Let me speak just to the problems, rather than what was good about the speakers. So far, I've found the Klipsch, Focal, and especially the Martin Logans were all too bright — forward, aggressive, "turn it down" treble.

The ML's were the most impossible to tame and hardest to listen to on more tracks. (I did a lot of hanging of towels and other dampeners and other soft things to try to see if I could bring them to heel. I varied the recordings used. Changed cables/wires. No luck.)

The Focals were occasionally too bright; their bigger problem was a bit too much energy in my small listening space. They were better when I plugged their ports with socks.

I'm looking forward to how the next two speakers sound. The Dynaudio towers, I notice, are 10 inches shorter and half the weight of the other towers; not sure what that might mean, but it could just be right size for my space. I'm looking forward to seeing if the Salks bring more detail to the treble without also being too rolled off or harsh.

Hearing is very personal for physiological and taste reasons. However, if anyone has any thoughts about why I might be experiencing some of the phenomena I am (harsh treble, especially) based on my room or gear, etc., that might help me understand factors I'm not fully appreciating. Thanks.


128x128hilde45
b_limo's avatar
b_limo
2,277 posts
 
Interesting how many of us suggest lengthwise vs widthwise. I was also wondering if a lack of lows is contributing to the brightness.  You’d think though with how close he is to the back wall when setup widrhwise, he’s have exaggerated bass.  I wonder if he’s got a suckout like suggested.  Hilde did mention to me that he felt like the lows on the Carbons were rolled off so I’m wondering if that is the suckout or the overall size of his room and the little carbons not being able to pressurize / grip the room bass wise.

His AP speaker cables and front end should not be the culprits.  I don’t have any experience with those focals or ml’s he was experiencing the brightness from...


b_limo's avatar
b_limo
2,277 posts
 
I should add ghat I meant I don’t think his front end is the culprit in the brightness but it could be an impedance / current / power mismatch with the speakers and his front end.  I also have very little experience with tubes.
hilde45's avatar
hilde45 OP
5,015 posts
 
@b_limo
I was also wondering if a lack of lows is contributing to the brightness.
There is no lack of lows in my room. The lows are fine, deep, right, taut. No problem.

Why "rolled off"?

Specs say:

Carbons 38Hz-35Khz +/- 3 db
Focals 39Hz - 28kHz +/- 3dB
ML 60 xti 35–25,000 Hz ±3dB

In actual listening experiences, bass notes were present in the towers that were not even registering in the bookshelves, while slightly higher pitched bass notes were not taut in the bookshelves, even with solid state. Kind of didn’t expect them to be, and they weren’t. But they’re bookshelves, right? They sounded really good. But down at the bottom, how could they compete? Maybe if I had a 300w amp, the difference would disappear, especially since the bookshelves are harder to drive.

mapman's avatar
mapman
22,389 posts
 
" Easy to drive" and efficient are two different things.

Easy to drive (like Fritz) means most any amp can drive the speakers with good tonal balance.  But bass always still requires exponentially more power as frequency gets lower.

So if also inefficient (like Fritz and most small monitors with extended bass that must work harder to deliver bass than similar larger speakers) the amp will clip sooner at higher volumes. So more power (and current usually in the case of smaller speakers capable of extended bass) is definitely needed to go loud and clear including bass with most any near full-range monitor.

Tube amps (and many Class D amps) tend to soft clip which is easier on the ears than most SS amps that hard clip.
jackd
1,074 posts
 
I have driven the Carrera's with both the 30 wpc EL-84 based Music Reference RM-10 and the 40 wpc EL-34 based Mystere PA-11 with no problem with frequencies at either end of the spectrum.  Both amps were fronted by the Supratek Chardonnay so a similar compliment as hilde45's setup with a less power.  The speakers were set up in a 15' x19'x10' room 32" from the sidewalls and the front baffle 44" from the rear walls using a short wall setup.  So my point is the speakers are capable of balanced frequency reproduction Though the Carbon 7 Mk II will not quite match the Carrera note for note on either end it will be a well balanced speaker up to the capabilities of those specific drivers.  So 4 or 5 hz on the bottom end and less detail on the top end. 
More to discover