Neal Young famously had his roadies set up an entire pro PA system outdoors so he could listen to a mix of an album. One pile of speakers was close to a barn so at some point he could row out on his lake and yell, "more barn!"
Big speakers, are they really the best way to get great sound?
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to listen to some very large speakers that are considered to be at, or close to, the pinnacle in speaker design and ability. Needless to say, the speakers retail in the mid to high $300k range. These speakers, and I will not be naming them, were sourced by about $800k of upstream gear. Room size was about thirty by twenty, maybe a little larger.
To say the the overall sound was BIG would be accurate, but also I noticed something else, that I typically hear with big speaker systems. Generally, the speakers were right on edge of overloading the room, depending on music, the dreaded bass boom could be heard. But, the whole presentation was greater in impact than most any smaller speaker system, yet it was almost unlistenable for the long term.
The question I asked myself, is do we really want this type of presentation in our home audio systems? The speakers threw a pretty large soundstage, but also made things sound somewhat larger than life. I also thought that this type of speaker is akin to the large box dynamic speakers of yesteryear. For example, a set of large horns from Altec Lansing or similar was reminiscent of this sound. Makes me believe that if one has a big room, a similar sound can be obtained from most any large speaker system and at a fraction of the price.
I listen in a very small room, and by necessity in the near field, yet I think the overall intimacy of this type of listening experience is better for me, your thoughts?
- ...
- 203 posts total
None of the megabuck systems I have heard were anywhere near worth the money. The size of speakers can be misleading. From LS3 5As to monster Wilson's or Magicos it all comes down to one tweeter. It is mostly the visual overload of these large speakers that impresses. My opinion is jaded by the fact that I will only listen to Dipole, Line Source ESLs and the very best of them cost $45,000.00. My subwoofers technically cost more. The system in total costs about $100,000 and that is chump change compared to other systems and IMHO are far more convincing. On the downside, they (the ESLs) are rather plain looking. The new subs will spruce things up a bit. The best dynamic loudspeakers I have heard in a long time are the Franco Serblin Ketemas and they are a relatively inexpensive at $40,000. Only the lowest octave is missing. They are also handsome, beautifully made devices.
|
@daveyf Great post. I thought it was just me. I have enjoyed some big rooms at AXPONA but doubt that it translates to my space. My tendency when I buy is to want the top of the particular line. I need to change that attitude. |
I think that depends on the line. Many manufacturers save their best work for their top offering. Franco Serblin has passed on. For those who do not know who he was, he was Sonus Faber's chief designer. His Ketema is his assault on SOTA and he could only get the price up to $40K. Where exactly does that leave companies like Wilson and Magico? Their top of the line speakers are stupid expensive and IMHO definitely not worth it. |
@daveyf wrote:
As you've indicated already this may be down to a near field listening preference with smaller, 2-way speakers vs. a far field, or certainly further away presentation from larger, likely multi-way dittos - with all that involves in regards to added room interaction, more complex speaker topology, added LF energy, heavier amp load, etc. My own setup context with high efficiency, actively configured and large main speakers + subs aren't representative of a larger scale, home segment for sure; the mains sport 2x15" woofers and a large format horn + compression driver per channel, so a 2-way system with a fairly narrow, controlled and uniform dispersion pattern over a single crossover point placed between 600 and 650Hz, and a sound that sums smoothly and coherently at ~11ft. listening distance. Add a pair of horn-based subs and everything dialed in actively as a single speaker system per channel. There's no lack of presence or intimacy at the LP, I can tell you that, nor the lack of a vast sense of scale when called for.
Knowing which speakers you're referring may give me/us a better idea of what we're dealing with - certainly I'm simply trying to hone in more precisely on your specific listening context.
Maybe this is at least part of an explanation for your near field preference in music reproduction. My own frame of reference is hardly only one, but it can be seated among an audience, typically between row 7 to 10 and listening to what you people are playing for us in a live symphony orchestra. I'm also inspired by cinema sound, with a preference in particular for Meyer Sound EXP-fitted auditoriums, as well as aspects of IMAX sound. There's also another, "unto itself" element of what forms my preference that's more of a synthesized, unknown ingredient; something that more overtly just makes me feel the sound is "right" or intriguing. I'm not trying to be elusive here, but rather that I can't, in earnest, but sure of what that's really about. Do you know of that exhaustively with regard to yourself, and what forms your preference in sound reproduction? |
- 203 posts total