$1,500 Bookshelf Round-up

I recently purchased a pair of these, so far really enjoying the sound,

 

During a change of residence, we ended up living in a travel trailer for a couple of years. Being an old school floor-stander fan (and owner of such monsters as Revel Salon2, JBL 4350, and Everest DD67000), I couldn’t bear giving up full range music reproduction. Tried over a dozen smaller speakers and finally settled on BMR Philharmonitors. Close second was ProAc Response 2s. A couple of other notables - Ascend Acoustics Sierra 2 (fabulous imaging and spacious, airy soundstage was undercut by lack of bass extension) and Revel M106 (right behind the ProAcs in fine, balanced, strong all around performance. Very disappointed with LS50, especially after all the glowing press.

Back to the BMR Philharmonitors: These things blow away speakers that cost >$5K, IMO. Seriously fine stuff. Clincher is listening to something like Adagio on a Theme by Thomas Tallis, Ralph Vaughn Williams, lower volume, middle of the night, loudness function engaged. The full spectrum is reproduced beautifully. FULL spectrum - but low volume (to sleep with). Ya know, with smaller speakers, you’d expect to have a lot of roll off in the low end, especially at lower volumes, but these perform like much larger floor standers. Can’t say enough good things about them. Should be able to snag a pair for maybe $1200-1300, but you might have to be patient for a while. Owners tend to hang on to ‘em, for some reason. I know I’m gonna be hanging on to mine.

 

I've always been curious about the BMRs. They look awesome! Is Dennis back to making speakers again? I thought he took some time off for some health issues. I have the Sierra-2s and agree with everything you wrote. I'm hoping to upgrade the woofers and crossovers to the EX version sometime this year which will add quite a bit of bass extension. I think that will really bring it all together.

 

Salk Sound took over production of the BMRs and they cost about twice as much these days.

I’d like to hear a pair someday but that’s only likely if I build them myself or buy the Salks. My biggest reservation is the small diameter midrange driver. Maybe it’s not an issue with the flat diaphragm of a BMR driver, but my consistent experience with non-horn-loaded diaphragms of small diameters is they result in recessed vocals that lack appropriate scale.

 

BMR drivers operate on a different principle (distributed modal principle) than traditional drivers. Where as the diameter of a traditional driver is important in determining the way it disperses sound, that is not the case with a BMR driver. Theoretically a BMR driver of that small diameter can produce all the mid-range and treble without beaming. The BMR drivers only lack the ability to produce bass frequencies and are thus usually supplemented by a traditional bass driver.

Another weird thing about BMR drivers (as compared to traditional drivers) is that the front and back waves emerge in phase, so technically there is no need for an enclosure (at treble and mid-range frequencies) with a BMR driver. The driver could be mounted on an open air board and might even sound better that way.

The problem that I have with BMR drivers does not concern their excellent dispersion characteristics and their excellent ability to cover multiple passbands with no need for a crossover (these are all great things) but rather the lack of natural voice and instrumental timber. The BMR drivers just don't sound "right" to my ear (in the crucial mid-range).

 

The LS50s can be had for considerably less than that $1,500 you mention. I paid $999 for mine new. I've seen them advertised for $899. My advice, however, would be to stretch for the KEF R3s if you're considering the LS50s at all (I got an open box new pair for $1,700). They do everything the LS50s do, but better. More bass, in particular. More nimble. Greater clarity. Better overall balance. I started with LS50s but quickly upgraded to the R3s and wish I had started with them (although I'm happily using the LS50s in a secondary system).

 

Put a piano piece on those Sierras, walk to the next room, and you’ll swear there’s a live performance back there. They’re excellent for that sort of music.

 

Check these out. They actually sound pretty good. Note the excellent treble extension (with no traditional tweeter):

 

These are very simple speakers. Just (BMR) drivers mounted in a cabinet with no crossover necessary.

 

In free air, demonstrating that no enclosure is needed:

 

Absolutely. I’ve owned the stock Sierra-2s for over 2 years now and still get excited to listen to them every day. The bass extension is actually excellent for a speaker its size with its sensitivity rating. The new EX woofer brings the -3dB point from 46Hz to 38Hz anechoic while only sacrificing 1 dB in sensitivity, so I’m pretty excited to get that upgrade kit. With that I think I’ll be keeping these speakers for a very long time.

 

I still have mine but I’m going to let them go rather than do the upgrade, although it’s difficult to part with them. I’ll tell you this, if I didn’t have great alternatives, I would never let them go. As they are in their original configuration, they are top notch except for bass extension. And I just cannot abide subs.

 

Did you feel the same way about the R300? I am guessing no, I've read different opinions but the common thread is the R3 was a step up from the R300 as the 300 had a reputation for being a little hot in the treble?

But of course, opinions differ --- there's a guy locally I met and he owns the R3, R300 and LS50 and it's interesting to hear his take. This same guy also has a set of MA Gold 100 5G's on the way.... since he has some of the speakers I am considering, I am holding off until he gets them and going over to hear them. (I have a thread currently where I too am in the same territory $$ trying to find the "right" bookshelf / standmount).

 

Should be an interesting comparison, be fun to hear your take on how that all rolls out. I might still try to get a set of those XAVIAN speakers to try out, they kind of intrigue me.

 

It's almost comical --- I have a short list that still has the LS50, R3, R300 and MA Gold 100 5G as possibilities, and then met a guy that has them all in his living room! It's a ready made audition --- without the dealer!

What are the chances and talk about timing. I just spoke with him on the phone for the first time, great guy, for all I know he's on this forum.... I'll have to ask him. Or maybe he'll see my post.

He also has a Denfrips Ares II, something I wanted to hear too.

Go for the XAVIAN --- I'd like to hear your thoughts! I am going to hold off buying for at least a while until I can hear the ones mentioned.... but I always like hearing what you find / like too!

 

Oh one more thing - @avanti1960 might like this too - he is running a Parasound A21+ amp.

When he mentioned he had a P6 preamp, I asked him if he was in the market for an A21 as I may be selling mine, and he said he had the A21+.

 

MA Gold 100 5G... This may or may not help. I've had a pair of these for nearly a year and, for me, they have never quite worked overall. They've been variously hooked up to a Rotel RA-1572 integrated amp, then a pre/power combo of a NAD C 658 + Emotiva Stealth PA1 mono-blocks. In the last couple of months, the Emotivas have been moved out and replaced by a PS Audio Stellar S300 power amp.

In all configurations, there has been a tendency for the MAs to sound a touch on the bright side. The MAs have bags of detail, a more than decent soundstage (left to right) and passable "height". They dig reasonably deep which will be more than enough for some, although others will still want a sub. They handle a whole range of music (moderate+ volumes) without even a hint of stepping out - including rock. When they sound good, they really do sound good. When they sound bright, it won't be long before you want to hit the stop button. The Gold 100 5Gs don't have the characteristic brightness of, say, the MA Bronze 2s but there is still some kind of boost in the lower treble area that, for example, can make some (not all) lead guitar solos sound jagged and brittle. One caveat... My system has the option of running DIRAC (basic) and I haven't yet tried that - rather remiss really as it *might* make a significant difference that would be better for me.

That said, there are plenty of reviews around that describe the Gold 100 5Gs as being smooth, natural and neutral. In short, no indication of the issue I've referenced. A typical example of such a review is linked below:

Monitor Audio Gold 100 Standmount Speaker Review

The last para of the review gives an indication of where that reviewer places the MA Gold 100s compared to other options, including a passing reference (and link) to the much more expensive Dynaudio Special 40s. The Dynos are on my shortlist as potential "end-gamers" to stop the merry-go-round of change, change, change. Covid-19 and logistics permitting, demos happening before the end of this year.

PS: I've mentioned this elsewhere but it is relevant to this thread... Q Acoustics indicated earlier this year that a new addition to their speaker range is in the pipeline (Concept range?). At the time, a tentative suggestion was for release by the end of the year (2020) but then Covid-19 turned the world on its head. I mention it because the price point is likely (but NOT confirmed) within the US $1,500 budget. For me personally, I really hope the release happens so that I can demo them alongside other speakers.

 

Thanks for that thorough answer, and sharing your experience!

One thing that came to mind is "compared to what" --- what other speakers in the same class did you try / compare to the 100 5G's in that same system, if any? Did you try the Dynaudio's or is that on the wish list?

So much of speakers is what's driving them, and the space they're playing in --- and why we get so many different opinions of course. I've been looking at a lot of speakers, and researching extensively lately, and of course there is not a universal opinion on any of them! (which we all know).

One thing that will be a luxury - the person I referenced above is playing them on gear I am familiar with and have owned (or close enough, he has later rev), so it will be a good indicator for me. He owns a Parasound P6 / A21+ and I owned the P5 / A21 for a couple of years. The fact I will be able to hear them will be a big help versus buying unheard.

 

Other speakers demoed at the time of purchasing the MA Gold 100 5Gs were the KEF R3s (on your list!) and the B & W 704 S2 floorstanders. The demos were in a dedicated demo room of a hi-fi store ("Sevenoaks Sound and Vision", UK). IMO, the KEF R3s were even brighter than the Gold 100s and the soundstage of the R3s is a touch narrower, but not bad. As you rightly indicate, opinions are plentiful and varied but I truly don't understand how the R3s are, apparently, so well regarded. In the same demo room, the B & W 704 S2s actually sounded quite nice and, with hindsight, were probably the choice I should have gone for. BUT, the MAs didn't sound bright in the demo room and had just a touch more "detail" than the B & Ws which, unfortunately, translated into brightness in my home environment - the demo room was acoustically damped and I didn't make enough allowance for that. I also demoed a B & W stand mount - I think the 706 S2s - which I was thoroughly unimpressed by (sounded boxy, "shiny" but strangely lifeless and uninvolving - many reviews found very differently). There is a review by Steve Huff comparing the 706 S2s with the KEF LS50s which may make for a mildly entertaining read:

The B&W 706 S2 Speaker Review vs KEF LS50 and Falcon LS3/5a | Steve Huff Photo

Some people aren't fans of Huff's reviews and aren't afraid to say so. Personally, I like the way he writes and he doesn't pretend to be an "expert".

For info and background, the MA Gold 100 5Gs replaced a pair of relatively lowly Q Acoustics Concept 20 stand mounts and I've since had the chance to A/B the MAs and the Concepts. Of course, the Concepts don't dig as deep as the MAs but, in pure musical terms, I prefer the Concepts - hence my wish for the new Q Acoustics speakers to be available this year.

The Dynos... they are very much a product of hope and "to-be-demoed". The "hope" is for the Dynos have close to the detail of the MAs but with just that bit more depth / fullness and being a bit more forgiving than the MAs. On the other hand, given the track record and general "house sound" of Q Acoustics, could it be worth waiting for their new speakers, which would potentially be close enough to the quality of the Dynos but at a significantly lower cost? Can't answer that for now . Oh, the joy of hi-fi...

@TheVinylAddict : Best of luck with your own search.

 

Hi:

I’m certainly not an expert, but I own two set of bookshelf speakers and another set in the past. What I can certain of is the need for a stand or other form of elevation and good placement.

Some bookshelfs do not do good on a shelf surrounded by other objects. In fact I have noticed that some need a lot of clearance on all sides. Others do fine. But a good stand seems to always improve their sound.

Also, I have noticed how important placement is for bookshelf’s. I know it’s important for all speakers, but more so for bookshelf’s. I have towed mine in and out and moved them forward and back noticing a difference in various songs.

At any rate bad placement will make good ones sound bad and good placement will improve any speaker. This seems doubly important for bookshelf’s. Finally, one can’t overrate the need for a stand.