Do my ears deceive me??


     The money is in the bank, thinking of upgrading speakers, but everything I demo is no better or worse than what I have.   Willing to spend up to $6,000.      Upgraditis??   My main system is Mcintosh MX 134 that I bought in 2003, with a pair of Focal 836v's and a Parasound 5250  (250w/channel) amp I bought around 2012.   I either blew the tweeters or crossover on my 836's, so they are in for repair.   Since I've owned them for 10 years, I was considering new speakers.    The blades are way more than I would spend, but I also demoed the Kef R11s, Martin Logan xtf 200's, Mcintosh XR 100s, and B&W 703 S3.   

       None of them sounded better than what I'm hearing right now from my BP 2006s.    Would I really need to demo them in my room to make a fair comparison??  Or are speakers just not much better than they were 20 years ago?   I know I love detail, and tend to lean towards aluminum tweeters.  I pretty much only listen to classic rock and roll.   Of all I demoed, I really like the B&W 706s.   They sounded much brighter/cleaner than the others.   But they had the reciever set up so I couldn't adjust the treble/bass.  I love a V equalizer curve, and bump up the bass and treble a bit on my home/car systems.   Maybe I just have the good luck of prefering cheaper speakers.   

 

  

fenderu2

@soix 

If Magico, Wilson, Joseph Audio, Rockport, Vandersteen, Audio Research, etc. don’t ever use EQ at shows that they pay a boatload of $$$ to attend, what do you think you know that they don’t? Are you smarter than them? If the answer is no, you really gotta think about your whole system because something is clearly off. Or just keep polishing the turd with EQ.  Whatever makes you happy is all good.

Soix, you make a good and rational point. Yet at the end of the day a listener has to choose what sounds preferable to them and makes their listening experience enjoyable. So as always, YMMV applies.

Charles

I am thinking about this thread. And the only clear path is not to sell the speakers. Otherwise, listen to some B&W, Sonus Faber or Focal speakers. Audition before you buy. I think that the last thing you want is a neutral speaker. 

@soix Here comes the EQ police! @fenderu2 better lock his doors and pull down the curtains. 

But seriously, there's no right or wrong. I notice that treble is emphasized on some entry-level amplifiers so pulling down the treble with tone controls may help. I'm so beyond objectivity here, do as you please. Dialing knobs is partially fun.  

But a passionate speaker designer prefers to tune the sound in the acoustic domain. Changing the baffle size can increase the 2kHz frequency for example. This is relevant if the driver has a 2kHz dip (some Fostex drivers do). Correcting that 2kHz dip with EQ or crossover components may result in a more 'digital' sound. 

at the end of the day a listener has to choose what sounds preferable to them and makes their listening experience enjoyable. So as always, YMMV applies.

@charles1dad I agree, but I also thought it important to point out that most high-end systems need no EQ.  If the OP wants to keep using EQ that’s perfectly fine.  I was just trying to be helpful that maybe he should explore the rest of his system to maybe see WHY he’s feeling the need to use EQ.  That’s all.

In a magazine interview, Mr. Lyngdorf, one of the pioneers of DSP room compensation/equalization stated that a serious audiophile carefully selecting gear for a particular room, setting up speakers in the ideal location, using appropriate room treatments, will probably achieve better sound than can be achieved with even the best DSP compensation (he makes ultra expensive  versions of such).  But, for the vast majority of situations, DSP compensation is the way to go if one does not have the experience, patience and ability to make no compromises in setup.