What speakers that received rave reviews have just left you COLD upon listening ?

Omega Super 3XRS
Magnepan MMG
Pioneer SP-BS21-LR
Insignia NS-B2111

Vintage:
Snell Type K
Fulton 80
Sequerra Met 7

 

Exactly. B&Ws always garner great reviews and recommendations, but I have yet to hear a pair that I would pay money for. Scratch that: I did pay money for the old P6 model, but traded them in after about 3 months. Goes to show that a home audition is key.

John K.

 

audio note an - e. big disappointment.
sonus fabre
dali
kef r series

the ls50s are great speakers. they need the right amp and proper positioning to sound their best. solid state- dry and blah. tube amp- sweet and golden.

 

Sequerra Met 7, forget which iteration I had. I've heard plastic computer speakers that sound better.

Maybe it's time for

 

I auditioned the B&W 805D (forgot which iteration, maybe the second) based on the rapturous praise that it received from all of the audio magazines and on my ownership of the CDM1SE that I loved. I heard it with two different amplifiers, one tube and one solid state, and thought that both amps were broken. Overwhelmingly screeching highs that drilled directly into my brain was my main takeaway. That was the end of the B&W auditioning experiment for me. It was the most expensive (and the worst) of the dozen or so speakers that I auditioned before settling on a pair of Canalis Cambria, which goes to show that price never equals quality.

 

How about also adding the obverse side: Speakers that you ran into but weren’t looking for that just blew you away

One instance in my case was the Celestion 700 SE. Vocal to die for. Fell in love with them but never pulled the trigger!

 

I bought a pair of Axiom M22s. These speakers sounded very good on my 50 watt/channel Marantz HT set up. I connected my new tube amp a year later and the Axiom M22 were just awful sounding. Pioneer SP-BS22s blew the Axiom away and they are not much for a speaker. They needed the ports slightly stuffed to keep flabby bass away.

You cannot use Axiom M22s on tube amps per my tests. Sounds good on 50 watt & higher power SS amps.

 

I hated the Audio Note E loudspeaker the first couple of times hearing them - and interestingly I hated the KEF LS50 the first three times I heard them - talk about bad first few impressions. I ended up buying both of them!

Several things impact our listening sessions and to a degree the same thing happens when you go to the movies. If you go to a movie and the critics are ripping it to shreds you go in "expecting the worst" and when it's not THAT bad - there is a better than average chance you will leave with a positive impression of the film.

Conversely if the critics are all raving that the film is the best thing in 15 years and you go in expecting to be absolutely blown away - when you are NOT blown away there is a better than average chance you will be far harder on the film (or speaker) than you would have been if you watched or listened first before you read up on the hype.

This is called "expectation bias." And no one is immune. I have heard speakers and systems that I felt were dead last at one audio show and wound up being in first place at another (MBL and YG Acoustics are examples). And the longer you are an audiophile the more bias can affect you because you begin to isolate certain truths - like tubes are better than Solid State or metal tweeters suck. But I am reminded of my experiences with the AN E and the KEF and MBL and YG Acoustics that early impressions don't necessarily ring true over time. And often what we view as "strengths" of one speaker on short auditions become weaknesses over time and the speaker that was viewed as "boring" in direct comparison was in fact the more honest music reproducer.

On top of expectation bias - we have sight bias. If the speaker looks dumpy it already has a strike against it subconsciously. And if you don't think the big speaker companies don't have psychological research on the male brain and what attracts them to speakers you would be making a mistake. They know that the physical appearance of the speakers and what wives will accept in the house are major deals. Slim lines attract men to women to cars and yes to speakers and amplifiers and CD players etc.

Then there is price bias - if it costs more it must be better so put the price up. If it's too cheap it's not taken seriously enough.

The KEF LS50 is a terrific little standmount but it's little. And it requires quality (not necessarily expensive) front end electronics. It is not a giant killer - and when one expects it to slay giants one will be disappointed.

 

I remember my aunt accompanying me to a D.C. store to audition speakers. I listened to a bunch of stuff, but she opined -- innocent of any reputation of any brand -- that the best sounding speaker in the store was the . . . Boston A40. I should have listened to her; I suspect she was right!

 

I listened to and played with the B&W 800 D3s at a BMW model launch in a lounge set up with plenty of Classe power. Probably $30k worth of speakers and maybe $20k worth of amps. They were using an iPod Nano as a source! Sounded awful and no one was paying any attention. I found the Nano hidden under the amps and substituted my iPod Classic with ALAC files and it sounded a bit better but nothing about it screamed $50,000 to me, much less $5,000.

I played with some Thiel CS3.7s at the local Crutchfield store before they went to their "demo" room concept where all speakers are emulated by a synthesized program. Sounded like tin cans, and those were around $13,000/pair.

Went to a local shop to hear what all the fuss was about the GoldenEar line so I demoed the Triton One, listing for around $5,000 if I remember correctly. I don't recall what the amps were but this was a McIntosh dealer. The salesman just smiled in anticipation of having me swoon and hand over my credit card but I was so unimpressed and figured I had at least four pairs of speakers at home that sounded better, several of which had cost $200/pair on the used market. I told him what he wanted to hear and said something about having to check with my wife and left.

Now I'd love to be blown away by a fantastic system at some point—I'm in it for the sound of the music, after all—and there is nowhere near here where I can listen to Magico or even JBL DD67000s. For reference, my main system includes JBL 4345 monitors with upgraded charge-coupled crossovers, bi-amped with Crown PS-400 and 200 amps. Sure, I'm a bit spoiled but still, for what I have in my system I'd expect to find something I've heard costing at least ten-times as much that would impress me a little bit.

 

Pretty sure most people who saw the thread title knew someone would be taking a shot at the LS50's .

I still am very happy with mine.

 

Magico.

 

Snell, Fulton, Sequerra? You are old.

 

I find the staging and imaging of the LS50 incredible - which only proves that each of us perceive and experience sound differently.

My own disappointment was the Morel Fat Lady. I heard it twice on two separate occasions and in different rooms and it sounded boring and narrow.

 

KEF LS50. They're OK but sounded very very similar to my current speakers costing a fraction of the price... I was expecting much more from a speaker costing 3-4x what mine go for. Sure, a little better in the imaging department but I was expecting (or hoping) to be floored.

Denton 80th Anniversary. Initial impressions were very laidback which wasn't a bad thing. When I put in my current speakers, the Dentons lost big-time. Made no sense but I couldn't justify keeping the Dentons so I sold them.

Some B&W and a lot of Mirage just didn't sound good at all to me... though the M1 sounded awesome and the M3 pretty darn good. Same with Boston. Anything with the name Klipsch in it.

Conversely, I didn't expect much from ProAC but was floored. The Wilson Acoustic Grand Slam and Watt Puppies looked ridiculous but proved to be the very best I've ever heard, bar none.

 

Harbeth 40.2

 

The Bose acoustimass system.
I read about how great they sound, and how refined they were supposed to be, and how they would revolutionize the home audio experience...all the regular hype.
I heard others saying many great things...but I was not a BOSE fan so I ignored it...for a while.
Finally I had to break down and go listen.

I visited a cheap home theater place and listened. No big deal and certainly not up to the hype...but maybe they were set up poorly.
Another listen seems fair. A high end audio store with a dedicated listening room supposedly set up correctly...again, only so-so and not up to the hype.
Yet another high end studio with a BOSE only dedicated room. They must have it right, correct? Well, the sound was okay but not worth the money and certainly easy to better.

All the hype, all the accolades, all the everything and what I heard was not worth all the effort I put into trying to give them a fair shake.
They are small, they do almost disappear into the room, they do fill the room with sound...Just much less quality sound than I had hoped to hear.

 

Every speaker.... except mine!

 

I forgot about those, but I doubt if you went there to listen to them with high expectations so perhaps it wasn't a disappointment at all?

 

lol, some of my most enjoyable listening ever was done with a pair of Boston Acoustics A40s hooked up to a Scott LK-72 integrated amp, in a small room about 12' x 16'. The plummy midbass of the old tube amp fit the little bookshelf speakers perfectly, and the slight treble rolloff was kind to the Audax plastic dome tweeter in the first models. A beautiful panorama of sound- depth, rich timbre, stable and coherent placement of instruments and vocalists.

For that matter, I once tried the A40s out on a friend's high-end system, in place of his Vandersteen 2Cs, and they held up remarkably well! Smooth midrange, 3-D imaging...sweet sounding. Missing the lowest two octaves, compared to the Vandys. And HF response not as smooth as the 2C. But overall, quite listenable. Not bad, for $150/pair new.

As for the speakers named, I share the same impression. I think the problem those speakers all share is the lack of dynamics. The designs mentioned that I'm familiar with (Met 7, B&W, KEF) have cones that are so tightly damped and driver input signals controlled with steep slope crossovers to provide a smooth frequency response that both low-level harmonic detail and dynamic efficiency are lost. Although this stuff is always to some extent relative- a polite and undynamic but well-balanced sound works better for some ears and listening environments. And if you go too far in the other direction, you're dealing with harsh high frequencies from ringing or aggressive tweeter designs, untameable peakiness in the midrange from horns or shouty cone drivers, and boomy midbass with overhang that sounds more like sound reinforcement in a dance club than high fidelity audio for home listening to a wide range of musical styles.

 

TAD R1's left me wondering what the heck everyone else was hearing. Had them demod on a treated room with high end electronics and was meh ( so was my dad who was with me at the time). Went home with my dad, put some music on my PMC's and we both looked at each other and laughed at the difference in SQ.

 

COLD ??

anything that looks like a Velociraptor about to eat me

 

Might it have been something else in the playback chain?

 

How subjective is OK to be when not liking others subjective view.
Speakers are mostly just speakers to me, with some maybe with less flaws than others.

 

I had a very similar experience. The same speakers, driven by McIntosh amps. I didn't have to make a wife excuse though, my girlfriend plugged her ears and left the room after 5 minutes.

She loves the LS50s.