2. speakers
  3. 164250-459

Low power- transparency, dimension, dynamics and bass, or...

I've built several mature and immature systems over the years. That’s part of the fun for me. I’m exploring the possibility of getting the three dimensional sound of a monitor, with the tectonic plate shifting bass of a high quality sub. Can anyone speak to an integration point of say 50-80hz where it made more sense to focus on a high quality smaller speaker (in a medium sized room) vs a "full range" (35hz) speaker? In my experience the full range speaker can have more slam but not necessarily the imaging or quality of drivers. The monitor can struggle with dynamics. This also has me considering smaller horns or dual concentric drivers, but would they be difficult to integrate with a traditional sub or two? I’ve always been a fan of class a and tubes presentation but open to ideas.
I recently had a pair of O/93’s with great dynamics and bass to 30hz but disliked the dimensionality and upper mids of that speaker. I value dimension, image, dynamic ease, transparency, warm side of neutral. Trying to keep this speaker adventure under $6-8k used. I’ve talked to a few people that have said forget low power, increase speaker budget and go for Treo’s or a set of bigger Tannoys. Speakers would be 9 feet apart could be 2’ out 2’ from corners/open floor plan to larger space.

Some ideas- would like to hear bigger Harbeths with subs
Try the Soul Supreme with subs?
Arden, or Autograph mini with dual subs never heard Tannoy
Treo- owned older Model 5, 12 years ago for a limited time- tech seems to have really improved.
Horns but feel like the integration of technologies will be a challenge.
Single driver same issue as horns right?

bjesien
bjesien OP
1,311 posts
 
Tvad, I agree with your statement. Every combination has its synergy just as every part of our beautiful world has its season- although many are harsh :)

douglas_schroeder,  I agree with your reasoning completely, which kind of brings me back to the starting point. Just shy of 5 digits you see an awful lot of 35hz 40hz, 44hz specs.
My experience tells me that a floor stander will cover the 100-40hz region with better body and dynamic impact than a monitor. I've typically only used a sub to fill in maybe 50hz and below based on roll off. I also realize SS would give me more control of the lower octaves and am open to exploring SS again, but I tend to listen less- perhaps I am after that beauty over accuracy- but so be it, I am the only one in my listening space to enjoy the illusion. Or is that delusion?   
djones51
4,947 posts
 
You say you want transparency then go on to discuss amps and speakers that are anything but transparent. 
bjesien OP
1,311 posts
 
djones51 perhaps I am not using the word for its intended purpose.  Transparent in my mind is lifelike, in the room presence, clear. Opposite might be veiled, rich. I welcome some of your descriptors on what I see as a sliding scale.   
djones51
4,947 posts
 
You claim you’re objective in a monitor is
I value dimension, image, dynamic ease, transparency, warm side of neutral. Trying to keep this speaker adventure under $6-8k
The Adam s3v covers all of these. The " warmer" side of neutral I’m not sure what it really means but the Adam does have various adjustments where could tune to your liking. No speaker is transparent but what is considered neutral would be a flat FR. For instance in your OP you mention the O/93 that you felt was lacking which isn’t surprising since the FR of it is well terrible. Now you might not be interested in active monitors and that’s fine but to completely ignore something that meets your requirements without so much as a thanks but your notion stinks leads me to think you’re not really sure what you want, on your sliding scale.
djones51
4,947 posts
 
Amps are different low watt tube amps are anything but transparent if you value transparency look at a Benchmark AHB2. 
More to discover