2. speakers
  3. 166005-136265

Speakers The single most critical component

I know we've been over this Q hundreds of X's over the past 20 years here on audion, You can find dozen of topics dealing with this Q <which is the ,,,,most important component...>>
well time for yet 1 more topic dealing with this,, perhaps unanswered, un-resolved issue.
I'm bringing up the old hachet due to my recent experience acutally hearinga FR in my system. 
Let me tell you, there is not even 1 traditional/conventioanl/xover design <The Boxed Type>> in the world that could convince me  , there is something that will beat out FR (caveat, FR requires  some sort of high sens =sensitivity, tweeter)  in  the Boxy world of speakers.
That is to say, FR + Compression Horn is the future of 21st Century high fidelity. 
One lab has already brought us these ~~~SHF~~~ aka SuperHighFidelity  single drivers. 
The code word here is ~~SHF~~~ which can not never be employed when describing xover/trad/conventioanl style  aka The Box designs. db level under 91 are _<<IN-EFFICIENT>> , = dysfunctional, out dated, old school , = Dinasaurs. 
For amps, I only consider tube amps (PP and SET) as ~~SHF~~~ I can not include ss amps in this topic. 
IMHO all well made tube amps sound very close,
 a  kt88 in brand X will sound  close to brand Y. 
So amplification takes a  distant 2nd place in critical component.  No need to break the bank buying amp A vs  a  lower priced kt88 amp B
CD players, nearly all  tube DAC's , tube cdp-ers sound  close. No need to braek the bank over X vs Y.
My Jadis DAC is  only miniscule gain over the Shanling,
 the Shanling
only a  miniscule gain over the Cayin CD17. 
Now as for  best source  , phonograph is the ideal playback medium vs cds. 
I have some LP's now , but my main collection are classical cds, most not on LP version. Cables , I did note some gains employing silver/copper wiring throughout my entire system including inside the Defy.
Tweak worthy.
New Mundorf caps in all componets, tweak worthy. 
Yet the main central component remaisn the speakers.
Here is where  the entire audio resolution either rises to Nirvana or falls to <<distortion/muddy waters,/pollution/anti-fidelity  voicing  issues.
Your system's fidelity is ultimately dependent on what speaker  you have chosen to employ.
Forget all you've learned over the years, 
The new mantra is <,The speaker is key component>
All else is just extra tweaks/nuances. 
To sum up, a  ~~SHF~~ driver will match even the top of line Wilson weighing in at hundreds of lbs priced $$$$$$$ overa single FR driver. 
FR beats out any/all xover box design speakers. Mostly due to that key specification ~~db level~~~ which is everything in speaker design and thus in resolution/fidelity. 

mozartfan
mozartfan OP
2,143 posts
 
In any case, we agree that low efficiency, multi driver speakers in boxes with complex crossovers unsuccessfully trying to get them integrated is not the way to go

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WEll yes and no, 
This speaker discussion is a  tricky argument. 
AT this point i owe Troels Gravensen a  apology, Treols does in fact offer a few of his designs with 92db box/xover designs. So my Thors are 87 which is rediculously low, His 92db are acceptable and may be of some interest to those not willing to go FR/Horn. 
My listening room is 10x12, I can not employa  huge horn 3 way system and HUGE sound stage is not my goal, 
Easy listening , no fatigue is my goal.
I'm guessing your 3 way horn system is highly accurate  with stunning sound stage, 
But the size and most important the weight.
A single 8 inch FR can be built usinga snaded plywood cabinet, UNDER!!!! 40 lbs each.  HUGE benifit from a  low weight, small framce speaker, 
Here is where Troels gets in trouble with his 2 offerings of 92db speakers, 
The size and WEIGHT, 
Some of us are getting up in age and we have no use for any speaker over say,,,50 lbs. 
The Thors come in at 60 lbs, just ridiculous.

Not sure what Troels weight comes in at but they sure look heavy..and the price? = $$$$$$$$$
Lets go see

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/CNO-4.htm

Ohh look Troels is using the SEAS Cresendo tweet, SEas flagship which is NOT 92db, more like 87 or 89, so not sure where he is getting hhis 92db out of this speaker, Weight?
Does not say,,looks like she's a 100+ pounder, 60 lbs over my threshold.
+ the price? 
does not say, To havea  local carpenter to build that exact cabinet $3k 
+ the xovers/drivers , add another $3k+
so lets say $6k fora  *92db* box/xover style speaker, 
VS
Voxativ's 96db AC1C single driver.
@ $1900,  build your own cabinet @ $100. weight, under 50 lbs. 
Troels does very nice speakers in his lab, thing is they are dated vs the new technology from Voxativ.
Voxativ allows the music to flow naturally, you connect to the sound as if it is alive, a  living presence.
Troel's designs sounds like music comming froma box. It attacks you. 
Mostly due to the low 92 db sensitivity. 
Yeah 92db is low in my book. 
The Golden Threshold is 94db. 

mozartfan OP
2,143 posts
 
complex crossovers

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Huge advantage concerning Full Range, no xovers needed. 
I wish to continue employing the term *Full range* concerning the single driver design, Although as many have pointed out, these single drivers lack the high fq resolution. 
Still when we consider 90% of our music is in the bass/midrange fq's. 
Its as close to completeing the fq range as possibe voicing from a  single driver.
I suspect the Voxativ's drivers might even meet the 95% fq range in their designs, Making a  horn wteet only necessary for the *ambience*(in classical music)  as Richard Gray wisely points out. 
He really hit the nail on the haed bringing up that essential key issue, which i could not figure out.
*Ambience*
My Diatone cone 6.5 lacks the sparkle, shimmers  in the high register. So I can confirm some Ful range are missing top end. 
I can say no more about Voxativ's performance until I actually get the driver in my system.

dletch2
455 posts
 
In any case, we agree that low efficiency, multi driver speakers in boxes with complex crossovers unsuccessfully trying to get them integrated is not the way to go.


Active DSP crossovers negate many of those issues.


mozartfan OP
2,143 posts
 
Here you can witness a  early test model Voxitva in action 2015. Grant it the room  edxpensive treatment, regardless I can hear the sonics of the driver , separated from room acoustical treatment. This early model Viox blows away any/every/all box/xover designs in its class. 
That is under $20K and weiging less than 100 lbs.
Box/xovers can not compete with this level of high fidelity which i have coined the term 
~~Super High Fidelity~~~ = SHF.
Which is a more appropriate term for Full range in general, well no actually Full range will now be tagged High Fidelity whereas the Term Super High Fidelity can and will only be allpied to Voxativ. , 
All Vox's speakers are ~~SHF~~~
You can not employ this term SHF with any speaker in existence. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfWL7-EF2vU
herman
2,253 posts
 
Active DSP crossovers negate many of those issues.

point taken

You can also implement DSP in a digital front end but impossible to implement in my  analog chain .... Turntable >> Phono stage >> volume control >> amplifier >> speaker without digitizing my signal which is a non-starter. It  also adds another layer of complexity and expense to a digital path that many wish to avoid. 

however, if already  in the digital domain I'm not opposed to additional processing as I do have convolution filters created using AudioLense implemented in HQplayer
More to discover