Seeking recommendations for sanely-priced full-range speakers

I attended the 2017 and 2019 shows. An was in the same room at both shows. PQ was there this year but I doubt he will be there next year. He just happened to be on vacation in the US when Constantine pushed to get him to come over and give a presentation with Constantine and me. The quality of the hotel is a lot better than some other shows I have been too. But it's not a big show in the least. The disadvantage is that there are far less products but on the other hand you can spend a lot more time in each room so a kind of quality over quantity kind of thing.

I believe you can type in California Audio Show 2020 already and see that some exhibitors have already signed on for next year as it is the 10th anniversary. I can't access the site to provide a link because the site has a countdown clock and my computer here in Hong Kong gives me a warning about that. But you can google it.

PS - I am fare more likeable in person than I am on forums so you are not going to want to punch me out.

 

The picture above is different, for that is a picture of the living room. This whole situation arose from the fact that the Zu speakers with Coincident SET amp, originally situated in the bedroom:



only sound good with acoustic music, and sound like crap with electric. The Wharfedale/Parasound combo in the living room is great with electric/dynamic music. I wanted the best of both, so decided to combine the two systems in the living room, upon which the Zu started exhibiting bass boom positioned deep in the corners (see the prev. picture). That's how the thread started, me looking to replace the Zu with something full range front ported so they could stay in the corners and produce no boom. Eventually, I'd played with positioning and added rubber mats underneath, to negate the Zu booming nearly completely, so now the issue is solved.

As to electronics, you are correct - there are two systems in that picture:

Denon DD TT / Cambridge CXC/DACMagic+ / Magnum Dynalab FM/ Brown Audio tube preamp / Parasound NewClassic 2250 / Wharfedale Diamond 10.7

and

Pro-Ject belt TT / Sparkler Audio non-oversampling CDP / Little Dot Mk II headph. amp as preamp / Coincident Dynamo SET 300B amp / Zu Omen DW II

And the bedroom system, seen in the picture here, now looks almost identical, but with Onkyo C-7030 CDP instead of the Sparkler that was moved to the living room, and with PSB speakers in place of Zu, driven by the same PrimaLuna 4 amp in the picture herein. This is the system sounding a bit thin to my ears now, that may or may not get new speakers (possibly Tannoy XT 6F). Before I do that - I will try the Cambridge Audio Minx 30 sub-woofer.

 

Don't worry, I wouldn't resort to violence. I'm not so stupid as to let this hobby land me in jail. I am candid however, and not afraid to say what I think when I'm not hiding behind my chicken-$#!+ avatar. I'm sure we could have a civil debate, or maybe I'll actually consider the AN room Best-in-Show. It's certainly possible.

 

If we go I'll be happy to sit with you and listen - then we are both hearing the same thing at the same volume at the same time. That is something that generally never happens.

There is far too much - I heard X and it sucked - yeah but I heard X and it was great. So where was it heard? What volume and what music?

On forums you often read people say something like "we all hear things differently" and I always say that no we don't.

If Sarah McLachlan comes on the radio or Madonna comes on the radio - everyone instantly knows which singer is which. We do not need visual cues to know who the singers out there are - we all hear enough the same to be able to identify a violin from a cello and singers from other singers. So we all hear it the same otherwise society wouldn't work. So if someone says - I heard X speaker and the bass was boomy and I heard X in another location and the bass was tight fast clean and tuneful - then I say - everyone in audio can tell the difference between a "boomy" bass and "tight" bass and most of know that you can make most speakers sound "boomy" via positioning or putting them in a horrible space.

Lastly, and most importantly, while I believe everyone hears things the "same" - they do not "value" things the same way. Take Sarah McLachlan - I like her voice. My friend likes her but laughs that she is a yodeler like Stevie Nicks. I mean you can't argue the vibrato and some people can't stand when singers do that. I like it - they stand out and it can used to good effect. But the fact is two people can hear the exact same singer and have a totally different like dislike to that singer. Or indeed an entire genre of music. I can listen to Hip-Hop and rap music but it's not going to be the delightful toe tapping experience for me that it will be for others. I sort of tolerate it and like the odd song. Same for Nightwish mentioned above. I think it's cool that Metal has been infused with an operatic vocalist like Tarja Turunan. Metal Opera and I can listen to 3-4 songs but beyond that I will get a headache. Other people could play it all day and yet others would shut it off in 12 seconds if even that long.

 

I'd go as far as to say we all hear similarly. I have a couple audiophile buddies who have vastly different tastes from my own. We can agree on much, but bass quality and high freqs are where our opinions differ most. One of them can't seem to ever get enough bass or highs - loves the smiley-face EQ despite having heard what I consider far more balanced systems. He doesn't seem to care if bass overloads the room, yet he's been to shows like RMAF and knows what great bass can sound like.

I'm in my early 30s and find many speakers have an intolerable top-end. I don't know if has to do with my ability to still hear beyond 16kHz or some weird anomaly. It seems many older audiophiles are not bothered by some of the brands I find intolerable, like Golden Ear Tritons. OTOH, I have a friend in his 50s and his likes mirror mine almost exactly.

There are even a couple pairs of Harbeths that I consider bright. And in contrast to the claims of many, I find most Spendors more resolving, even among multiple models/rooms/systems. It seems to me that many audiophiles mistake brightness for detail/resolution.

The following link is to a shootout between two speakers I've owned:
Stirling Broadcast SB-88 vs Harbeth Compact C7ES-3 Speakers – Comparo, Reviews | TONEAudio MAGAZINE

My experience is nearly the exact opposite, with the Stirlings coming out far ahead in almost every measure. So I can only guess that review is really an advertisement in disguise or folks really do hear things at least somewhat differently if it's to be considered the least bit credible.

I also wonder at times how much our different ear shapes might affect our perceptions of sound. We all share the same basic shape of course, but there is enough variation that I would think it has some affect on sound pressure, maybe not in the midband where we hear loudest, but in the frequency extremes.

 

As happy as I am to see people get along, I'm not gonna lie. I'm a little sad that there won't be any Stone Cold stunners at the CAS AN room.

 

I am not sure about ear shape but I think different people gravitate to different things. Why does one person care a lot about timbre or micro-dynamics whereas someone else cares more about imaging and macro-dynamics. I think people here macro or micro dynamics and imaging the same way but how do they value it internally

Many years ago I wanted to have a system where the review would rate a speaker in several categories like enjoythemusic.com does but rather than just give a rating to each - I thought it would be good for each reviewer to then add a multiplier so that if I gave Tonality an 9.5/10 and Soundstage a 7/10 - I may say that Tonality is 4 times (4X) more important so that 9.5/10 would carry more weight for the overall score. So the review could give the reader the flat score and the "reviewer bias" score. In this way the reader would have my objective overall rating and the one with personal preference:

Here is an example of a review with say the B&W 805

Tonality ................................................. 5/10 (x4)

Sub-bass (10 Hz - 60 Hz)...................... 1/10

Mid-bass (80 Hz - 200 Hz)-------------- 6/10

Midrange (200 Hz - 3,000 Hz).............. 7/10

High-frequencies (3,000 Hz on up)....... 8/10

Attack....................................................... 8.5/10
Decay........................................................ 5.5/10
Micro Dynamics...................................... 5/10 (x3)
Midi-dynamics......................................... 5/10 (x3)
Macro-Dynamics ..................................... 6/10
Soundstage .............................................. 9/10
Imaging.................................................... 9/10
Cohesion .................................................. 2/10 (x5)

Fit and Finish........................................... 9/10

Total flat score........................................................... 88 /140 (63%)

Total with reviewer bias .......................................................... 131/250 (53%)

The above system would then be placed into a value for the money data set based on price. So I would have a general price bracket of
<$1000
$1,000 to $2,000
$2000 to $3000
etc

So for under $1,000 I would want a speaker to score say between a 40-50% - if it did then it would be a "recommended" speaker. If the speaker scored above 50% for this price bracket it would score a Best Buy speaker. If it fell below the 40% it would be "no-recommended"

So while the percentage mught look bad - the 805 in my example is up against the best speakers in the world.

So at $3,000 which was when I was doing these ratings - a 60% rating would make it a "recommended" loudspeaker but with my personal bias it would be "not -recommended"

This way readers who agree with me might steer clear but readers who look and say - well I think soundstage is more important they could do the quick math and for them it might fall into the Best Buy category.

The system all made sense but it is highly convoluted. Still I liked the idea of having people reading my review and knowing exactly where my bias is and what part of the spectrum I value over the others. It also allows me to be obective that yes I may not love the speaker but it sure does soundstage and image well. In the late 1990s I had a lot of the above done for dozens of speakers.

So for the above - the AN E I might give a 7.5/10 for soundstage and imaging. So a speaker with a 10/10 that someone else values 5 times more important than me - will be able to come up with a higher number. So I could both be objective and show my bias.

Convoluted - LOL

 

I think you make a good point that I had not thought about much regarding the room acoustics at audio shows. It seems that more often than not, the hotel room is cited as a deterrent to to good sound. I think a good argument can be made that the average upper-end hotel room possesses acoustic properties that are not worse (perhaps better) then the average middle-class American home listening room. The speaker designer would obviously prefer a room that was specifically designed with acoustics in mind to showcase their product, a manufacturer of any product would prefer ideal conditions.

My personal carpentry experience is limited to common building practices on the west coast, this probably varies in other regions... Rigidity is usually mentioned as one of the keys of a room built with acoustics in mind, a concrete floor and walls & ceiling constructed of multiple layers of sheet-rock.
Homes in this region primarily have wood floors above an open crawlspace. Interior walls are wood 2x4 studs and only rarely have insulation, perhaps around a master bedroom or bathroom (older homes do not even have it in exterior walls). The average exterior wall is wood 2x4 on an older house, 2x6 on newer ones.
A multi-story hotel will have concrete floors and ceilings, walls between rooms will certainly have sound deadening material making them denser than a typical home interior wall and the exterior walls and windows will definitely have more strength and thickness in a hotel room.

The drawbacks of a hotel would include increased noise from outside the room and unfamiliarity with a setting up a system in a new room for optimal sound. However, I don't think they should get a "free pass" on the unfamiliar room claim. Setting up their own equipment to showcase it to potential customers is part of their chosen profession. They are responsible for setting up the room and if that requires more resources like showing up a day early, and installing room acoustic treatments, then that is what is required.
It almost seems like another questionable assertion by the audio industry... The take it home, let it break-in, listen to it in a proper room for a few hundred hours and you are going to love it approach.
Perhaps another reason so many people prefer buying vintage systems.

 

Agreed. If a multi-thousand-dollar system sounds like crap in a hotel room - what should make me think it will sound any better in the room of my apartment?

 

This is so incorrect. We do not all hear the same. Some people hear Yanny. Some hear Laurel. Some people have perfect pitch. Some are tone deaf. The fact that a tone deaf person can tell the difference between Madonna and Sarah McLachlan means nothing. You're conflating audio memory with hearing. The proper audiophile analogy would be that I hear Madonna's singing as pitchy and you don't.

 

Well it depends on whether your house is built better than your hotel. You can't really know.

A corner loaded speaker like the AN or Klipschorn relies heavily on the quality of the walls being "Solid" (brick or concrete would be best). My AN speakers sound considerably better in Hong Kong than they do in my apartment in Canada which was made of wood and dry wall with obvious gaps. The idea is that the direct wave and the indirect wave (first bounce off the side wall) arrives at your ear at the same time with such speed that you can't distinguish one from the other. If that first bounce is hitting a crappy vibrating wall (not a solid wall) then you will get the direct wave, the indirect wave and sound from a vibrating wall - a sympathetic vibration. How bad that is depends what frequency is played. Mid bass or bass the likeliest. It's a form or smearing or boom.

I mean this is why many makers make free standing anechoic speakers because most homes, in the west, are built to be blown over by the big bad wolf. Hotels are often even more shabbily built. I mean take their electrical systems - some rooms have shut off because other rooms were using too much power draw.

Now I am not excusing the speakers or systems - I just want to make sure I audition a speaker 3 times in 3 different locations with different electronics before I make all sorts of absolute claims that the speaker sucks. A lot of unfortunate crap goes on behind the scenes that showgoers don't see that may have major impacts on a room. I had MBL and YG Acoustics ranked near the bottom of my list at one show and a few years later they were my top two rooms. And typically I am kind of biased against speakers like YG Acoustics and MBL. And I am biased to Audio Note being an owner of the speakers - and at the show - they didn't crack the top 15. It had all sorts of problems.

Then at shows you always have people yapping in the background - noise in the hallways - maybe they are playing music you don't like (Patricia Barber) or when I am there AC/DC or Guns and Roses LOL. Or the room is too Quiet or too loud or the sales person is annoying.

I understand S&G's case though - it is the dealer/manufacturer's job to display the stuff an impress you. Sometimes the first impression is the only chance you are going to get. But hey even this last show I covered - some people would tell me they though XYZ was the best sounding room at the show and my internal eyes rolled because I was think "really I thought that was pretty awful" so it goes. On the specific music played to that guy it may have been great - when I went in the music played may have been a pitiful recording.

 

The AN-E's design are esoteric to a fault, just looking at your room (even if they were in your budget) they would not work optimally. Nor would they work in a majority of most people's rooms if they didn't have block/brick walls with corners that don't resonate "it's the room's fault" is the go to excuse whenever anybody reports back that they didn't like them.

Agree with you that if they don't sound good in hotel rooms how could they sound good in most people's homes ... especially if the walls in your home are made in a similar fashion.

 

Well yes - audio memory is something that DBTers will tell you only lasts a few seconds. Some people actually hear both Laurel and Yanny. Me for one. I have what is called Perfect relative pitch.

Well the have been well regarded by the press worldwide for nearly 30 years and have been highly thought of in the US press as well based on USA hotel rooms. In corners or not.

But i just suggested trying a K. The K would work in the space. But the OP has two sets covering what needs to be covering. Personally, I'd just buy music. The system is a means to an end not an end in itself.

If people relax and think ... really all of thos is first world problem BS. Creating a problem that doesn't exist. Wharfedale and Zu Audio make fine speakers.

In fact I would not mind bringing in a set from both companies. Now that I finally have my 2a3 Empress Silvers I would like to revisit Zu because the ZU Audio dealer here always had them connected to 845s which might be slightly bullying to ZU.

 

Sounds like a plan.

However, being in the states, most of use don't have the access to this luxury. Most would be lucky if they could hear a speaker at a single dealer or a single audio show.

I have never even seen, let alone hear a Spendor, AN, Harbeth, MBL, Avant Garde, Tannoy or many other speakers.

 

Fyne

 

The only reason I've heard as many as I have is because I'm crazy enough to drive 6 hours one-way for some auditions. I recently made a trip to Dallas - 12 hours of driving in one day for about 3 hours at the audio salon and an hour at a friend's.

 

Same here, one speaker I'd like to hear is the Tannoy D700. I've been in futile hope for a used pair to show up.

 

Even then, that is not bad. But being in South Florida, there is no where to go but north and even Orlando is a 4-hour one-way trip, with Tampa being at least 5-hours away.

There was an audio show in the Tamps area earlier this year that had many of these brands, but unfortunately, I could not get away to make the trip. They were showing many of the speakers that I would have truly liked to have had the opportunity to listen to.

 

My dream speaker would be a Westminster SE.

But then, I like BIG toys!

 

@Benzion since this thread is completely off the rails already, can I ask your thoughts on your Sparkler CD player? I’m super curious about that brand’s products.

 

LOL.

I like it - it has a non-oversampling Philips 1543 DAC chip, and sounds as close to analog as a digital source can, I guess. The sound is very subtle - in line with the SET amp and Zu speakers, and they make a great system together. I play only acoustic jazz on it, because of the system it's in. Have never hooked it up to my other system, with more powerful gear, but I'm fairly sure it would hold its own.

One detail worth mentioning - the analog output is pretty low - it's nowhere near the customary 1.5 - 2.0 V we are used to getting from "players". I sometimes find myself upping the volume when playing Sparkelr CDP more than with vinyl/phono.

 

Same here, I wouldn't mind attending an AN demo with @Richard Austen so I could point out the exact deficiencies I hear with good music. I think much of this is easier when you communicate in real life opposed to writing about it. You can mention exact recordings, times, what you're listening for in a certain piece much more eloquently than in writing. Anyone interested in acoustic music should read Aaron Copland's What To Listen For In Music, it changed my appreciation of music greatly. Best audio related (and one of the better music related) books I've read.

Since many of the speakers I truly love aren't ones that get discussed on forums let me give an example of a mainstream speaker I would be quite pleased to own- Vivid Giya G2 or G3. I think these speakers have wonderful tonal balance (not quite ESL57/the horns I like in "presence" or "holographic-ness") and very good dynamic range (not reference level dynamics). And I think they are the best looking speakers ever made, I still might get a pair one of our houses, they look like modern works of art; sort of remind me of some of Giacometti's sculptures!

Edit: I liked one of the posts someone posted about Supravox speakers earlier in the thread. It is a shame these are not better distributed (the North American distributor in Canada is very poor with even responding to emails ), their full range drivers don't have your typical full range shouty sound. They're really nice.

 

Totally.

 

Shows you how different tastes are. Based on looks alone, I wouldn't touch these with a six-foot pole.

 

Not an unpopular opinion, loads of people say the same on forums and I have seen them posted a few times in ugliest equipment threads. I am a big fan of early 20th century modern art so they draw my eye.