Recomendation for speakers BEST for Piano?


Listen mostly classical piano and Medieval music. No amp yet. Room is 16x25 (lively). Thanks!
slotdoc3483e9
Yes I am a "cones in box" guy, but I also own a pair of ML Prodigy speakers too.

Maybe you need to read my comments again?

Ill repeat what I stated up top again:Pretty much any speaker can sound good reproducing a solo Violin since its not a difficult sound to reproduce and the majority of its audible spectrum lies in the midrange and above. So why you are surprised beats me. The DM 550 as I also stated(even though its not cutting edge transducer technology)above is a good solid sounding speaker. WHy the surprise?

As for me disparaging Maggies(Or Apogees or ML or whatever), I did no such thing. Planar/ribbons have their place and their positive traits no doubt. If they didnt I wouldnt own a pair myself.
Elhartford you may have misread my skeptic remark. I hold skeptics in very high regard. It is healthy to be skeptical. The point I was making is that if you could come to such a conclusion I would imagine (and you have confirmed) you have some basis for it before you would post something so seemingly off the wall leaving yourself open to scrutiny.

Back to skeptics, I am VERY skeptical of Riteri's general remarks concerning reproduction of instruments by audio system regardless of the design. A reasonable reproduction is not the same as being able to discern between reproduced and real. And now the violin. No Riteri, I don't play violin but have played in an orchestra in my younger days and still attend concerts regularly and know for a fact that I haven't heard a system reproduce the tones of real instruments accurately, as real. I do have a piano in the house and on a direct AB comparison with all things being equal I'll bet a 10 year old could hear the difference, same with the violin. Next you're going to tell us that there are audio systems that can produce massed strings realistically? Have you actually done direct tests or is this just a hunch based on what you hear? LOL

Tubegroover: You need to take a magical walk into a controlled studio environment in Norfolk Ct. for some comparisons that may startle you(as they did me 8 years ago). That week I learned more about what the human ear/brain can and cannot detect in that week than most people learn in their entire lifespan.
Ritteri, I am glad that your experiences have been educational (education is a beautiful thing); and that you have had the opportunity to take part in these "controlled tests". However, the best education is attained by accepting the fact that there is always more to learn. Just because you don't hear the obvious differences between real and recorded, does not mean that the differences don't exist, and that they are not obvious to others. To make comments like "violins are not difficult to record/reproduce because their audible spectrum lies in the midrange and above", simply weakens your case. I guess this means that female vocals, trumpet, clarinet, flute are also easy to record. These have a range even narrower that the violins , but still in the "midrange and above". When digital recordings first came on the scene, and even today, guess what it was that most listeners objected to about their sound? The sound of strings. Anyway, the idea that one instrument is easier to record than another is, overall, simply absurd. It's a bit like saying: the trumpet is easier to play than the oboe. Not true, they are all difficult to play and to record well; overall, to the same degree. We all focus on different aspects of sound, and deem easier those that we are more confortable with.

Happy listening.
Actually frogman: There are sounds that are easy to reproduce and ones that arent. Complex full spectral sounds are more difficult to reproduce than sounds with a narrow bandwidth any sound engineer will tell you that.

Here is a good starting link: http://www.linkwitzlab.com