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
Well I did some experiments playing the speakers the long way down the room and it was inferior for sure. Placing the speakers on the long wall and playing across the short width of the room was better for imaging and tonal balance. Of course I have not done an extensive analysis of the room with the various tools we are talking about but I could do that at some future point. But, back of the envelope, it is better to put the gear on the long wall.
Hoping once again that the Salks will work out this round!Also that you gain some knowledge from your sweeps:-)
I've had the Harbeth C7ES here for a couple of days.
First observations are 1.these largish monitors need to be out a couple of feet for smooth bass
2.silky smooth and natural 3.harsh upper mids are handled by rounding them off,sort of 'blunting' them so they aren't excruciating.Less good recording are much more listenable.
They are just as dynamic and detailed as the Tektons but put me back a few rows instead of front row center.And they somehow sound best to me with the damned lamp cord rather than the AP or Clear Day cables.I'm going to pull out my old mid monos and try them out of curiosity.Just thought you'd be interested as your journey continues:-)
@jtcf
Heard my buddies Harbeth 40.1s with my former EL34 tube amp, sounded pretty darn nice, weighty transformers drove them fine in 50w strapped triode mode. Curious to know if you are running the 2-way or 3-way Harbeth’s, and if you have other output tubes for the Mid Monos to try, KT77, KT88s, other.

If you report out on the test results for your combo or make posts in a separate QS thread elsewhere, will be on the lookout for it. Thx.