2. speakers
  3. 166257-976

You pay for it and you get it...

When it comes to large speakers, IME what you get far more than any other attribute, is the sense of scale...which is what seems to delineate the best large speakers from the best small speakers. As an example, yesterday I had the pleasure of listening to the new Wilson Sabrina X’s and the new Wilson Alexx V’s. While both speakers are from the same manufacturer, and both employ what looks like some of the same drivers, this is basically where the similarity ends. The big Wilson is about seven times the price of the small model! So, besides a much larger cabinet and a few extra drivers what do you get for your money...the answer is SCALE!! This is something that unless heard, is a little hard to fathom. The small Sabrina X’s do most things well..and I was very impressed by them, far superior across the board to the original model Sabrina. The Alexx V’s in a very large room ( which is also a MAJOR requirement for them to work their magic, and if one does not have this I believe then this is the wrong speaker for you) are able to throw a sense of scale that has to be heard to be believed. This is what you pay for with these large speakers, and in the Alexx V’s case, what you get. The frequency response of the larger model is not that different in the highs..and in some extent I think the midrange resolution was similar, but the bass is where it’s at...and this is where I think the sense of scale and enormity comes from. On paper, the smaller model can drop down to within probably ten Hz’s of the larger model, yet in a room of commensurate size, the little Sabrina X’s will never be able to portray the scale of the Alexx V’s. This aspect seems to apply to all large speakers in large room vs small/middle size speakers in large rooms.
Question is is it even possible to get scale with a smaller speaker in any size room, so far I have not heard this...anyone else?
128x128daveyf
dletch2
455 posts
 
I caution you; if you think that putting any given bookshelf with any given sub is going to get anywhere close to any given larger floor standing speaker, you are sadly mistaken. People who operate from specifications in such decisions are ignorant of real world HiFi system building.


If you don't know what you are doing. If you know what you are doing and use bass management software to do the integration of the mains and subs, then you can place the mains for ideal imaging, and place the subs in the ideal place for smooth bass response. Done right, you are right, it won't be the same. In most cases, you can make it better, especially in the typical untreated room. However, you must do it right, and in all your posts, I have not detected that you have the knowledge, nor equipment to do that.
ejr1953
918 posts
 
I experienced the difference in my former home.  I used to have my system with a pair of excellent two way stand mounts and a good but modest sub woofer with a 10" driver from our 13x24' living room to my 24x26' family room, the setup just would not "fill the room".  I upgraded to a pair of three way floor standing speakers and a pair of subs each with a 13.5" driver and 3000 watt amp, and that setup DID fill the room.  In both cases, the same source, preamp and power amp were in the chain.
daveyf's avatar
daveyf OP
2,919 posts
 
Once again, I think we should stress that we are NOT talking about dynamics here. The sense of scale is the only aspect. I have never heard large scale with any smaller stand mount or smaller floor standing speaker with or without subs, regardless of the room size. The closest I came was with a pair of the Wilson DAW's, but even these were nowhere near what the Alexx V brought to the overall SQ. 
phusis's avatar
phusis
1,221 posts
 
@daveyf --

Question is is it even possible to get scale with a smaller speaker in any size room, so far I have not heard this...anyone else?

Me neither, in fact I don't find it worth investigating any further; large scale (not to be mixed up with large soundstage, as rightly pointed out by poster @douglas_schroeder ) requires large speakers, as in LARGE radiation area distributed over proper physical height - period, end of story. Please don't misunderstand my intention with that conclusion: it's not that I find your query irrelevant, on the contrary. The important thing here is that it needs to be told out loud, repeatedly, so thank you, in effect, for contributing to that.  

@inna --

What about big speakers plus two big subs ? Might make sense ?

Oh, now we're talking! There are.. sound reasons to approach this route. Unless going with ESL's or planar, big mostly means adding complexity in the form of multi-way designs, with all that entails and the challenges it presents. I find mixing dual, large diameter (15") direct radiating woofers with a big horn for a 2-way main speaker hybrid design to be an interesting and very capable compromise; there's only one cross-over point (currently placed a bit over 600Hz), and the radiation pattern of the vertically placed woofers matches that of the big horn above them very uniformly at the cross-over region. The importance of proper power response is usually greatly underestimated, one might add. To have the dual woofers reproduce up to just above the lower midrange as cleanly as possible, high-passing them below 80-100Hz adds further headroom and relieves them of central to lower bass signals, which naturally calls for augmentation with subs - two big horn ones at that. Being over 6' tall and the way the main speakers are configured actually is sonically akin to panel speakers, yet with dynamics and ease galore - which, as it turns out, is no ill friend of large, proper scaling. 
keithr
1,306 posts
 
While I agree that larger speakers do scale better, in Wilson’s case I prefer their smaller speakers (DAW) as the big ones suffer from incoherency. 
More to discover