Back to the Future- the death of the gearhead!
- Thread starter Elliot G.
- Start date
Mike said a little more eloquently what I was trying to say!
One should revel in the differences between recordings and appreciate what each recording engineer/producer was trying to capture and achieve. After all, there are so many variables when it comes to recordings such as the hall/studio, mikes, patterns, arrangement, electronics, etc.
Mike said a little more eloquently what I was trying to say!
as I said earlier a great speaker should be able to do it all. if the speaker system is adding or more likely subtracting in scope, size, speed, detail, space then it is making its own music.
I want to hear whats on the recording even when its far from perfect. The time machine cant do any more than transport you to the place the music was made it can't and shouldn't act like an equalizer or a tone control.
when one listens to a mini monitor ( like we did at Howies) and then a full range speaker the differences are immediately there, sorry !
It wasn't that the Q-1 was not a good or even very good speaker it was however flawed in conveying the musical space and scope of many of the recordings even the small ones.
The CG's do it all and I believe that is what makes them special, They should be they cost a lot of cheese!
That of course holds not just for smaller speakers portraying large forces, but also for most large speakers portraying small forces. I take it the Nola Concert Grand is one of the laudable exceptions.
Nobody here has claimed that minimonitors can accurately portray the size of large forces like an orchestra of 80 musicians, so you don't have to say sorry for a disappointment that does not exist for anybody here.
I don't know how the Magico Q1s were set up, but it depends. My speakers are far apart, stretching across almost the entire width of my room, and I sit close to them. Something like a string quartet is portrayed quite believable in size, even when in a live situation you would sit rather close-up. Also smaller ensembles of up to 15-20 players are, and that from a seat not too far from the stage in a mid-sized, not large, hall.
The comparison of speakers with one another is not the correct one. The correct comparison is with live music. In fact, the sizes of live music vary wildly. If you sit in one of the first rows in front of a large orchestra, the sound picture is so huge and wide that no two speakers can accurately reproduce that, not even in a, lets say, 30 feet wide room. If you sit a bit further back, things change quickly, and large speakers can become very believable in size portrayal of such a situation. Now the funny thing is that much further back the sound image even from a large orchestra becomes very small. I experienced this for example two years ago when I sat much further back from the stage than I usually do, somewhat behind mid-hall. The sound character was still that of being enormously big and powerful (in a hall acoustic of above-average warmth), but the sound image was remarkably, even stunningly, narrow and small.
One caveat: you can make correct assessments of the width of sound images of live music only with your eyes closed. Your eyes will always fool you into thinking that the sound picture is much larger and wider because you see the musicians playing. Yet assessing the width of the sound picture with eyes closed will give you a direct comparison to what you should hear in your system from that position in the hall; when listening at home of course you don't see the musicians playing either.
If they really do it all, and I don''t doubt your or Howie's words, then that is special indeed.
I'm a full range guy but stage scale is relative. With small speakers you can get more relative scale by simply moving closer to them or moving them closer to you. You may augment the low end with subwoofers too. The inherent advantage of large speakers in my experience is in the mid bass. Allow me to qualify that statement, the really good dynamic driver full range speakers will make little or no sacrifices on the coherence front and actually offer more extension in a more linear way. That is opposed to what you would find in a big box store, that being speakers with lots of woofers because some people automatically think more is better when in fact FR is actually more limited compared to some 2-ways.
There is a lot of information residing in the mid bass region. A whole lot of the sustains of the event envelopes are in this range. The flip side is, aside from the higher potential amplitude, that the frequencies are also high enough to be, and in fact are, directional. In other words, more meticulous set up is required to get the desired balance.
The bottom line is that whatever size speaker one has it can be easily screwed up by the end user regardless of the pedigree or provenance of that loudspeaker. One can optimize a loudspeaker but the limit will always be the range it was designed to be operated at not even mentioning where they are intended to be used yet.
There is a lot of information residing in the mid bass region. A whole lot of the sustains of the event envelopes are in this range. The flip side is, aside from the higher potential amplitude, that the frequencies are also high enough to be, and in fact are, directional. In other words, more meticulous set up is required to get the desired balance.
The bottom line is that whatever size speaker one has it can be easily screwed up by the end user regardless of the pedigree or provenance of that loudspeaker. One can optimize a loudspeaker but the limit will always be the range it was designed to be operated at not even mentioning where they are intended to be used yet.
I know the post wasnt about you Al but it sure looks like it is to me now.
You are Captain obvious today.
I am sure you really dont get what I am talking about. I am not trying to provoke anyone but again I am now sure you dont follow what I am talking about.
The Q-1's were set up by the same expert with over 40 years experience as the Concert Grands.
It is really amazing how you dismiss something that you obviously know nothing about.
Please close your eyes LOL
Hi
I am with the Big speaker crowd here. One has to remember how critical set-up is with big speakers. maybe more so than with smaller speakers. Jack pointed about mid-bass an area where most mini-monitors fail completely and an area where subwoofers do not bring much. These helping in the bass not the mid-bass where a lot of music resides and a lot of what makes the bass to our mind .. under 100 Hz is a lot of rumbles the "tunefulness"of the bass is in the midbass . Its integration with the rest of the bass is essential to realism and the reproduction size in the music.
I have heard too many big speakers reproduce small scale to not be entirely convinced of the validity of my position. I have heard the Genesis 1.2 reproducing the scale of a solo violin correctly as well as exploding a second later with the m Mount Helen Symphony in all its (scary) glory. That mini-monitors even when helped by subwoofer can't do that trick
I am in agreement with Eliott with the process of optimization. it is not simple, it is arduous and require a degree of patience most audiophile do not possess The results when they finally come (often month , even years later) however are rewarding.
I am with the Big speaker crowd here. One has to remember how critical set-up is with big speakers. maybe more so than with smaller speakers. Jack pointed about mid-bass an area where most mini-monitors fail completely and an area where subwoofers do not bring much. These helping in the bass not the mid-bass where a lot of music resides and a lot of what makes the bass to our mind .. under 100 Hz is a lot of rumbles the "tunefulness"of the bass is in the midbass . Its integration with the rest of the bass is essential to realism and the reproduction size in the music.
I have heard too many big speakers reproduce small scale to not be entirely convinced of the validity of my position. I have heard the Genesis 1.2 reproducing the scale of a solo violin correctly as well as exploding a second later with the m Mount Helen Symphony in all its (scary) glory. That mini-monitors even when helped by subwoofer can't do that trick
I am in agreement with Eliott with the process of optimization. it is not simple, it is arduous and require a degree of patience most audiophile do not possess The results when they finally come (often month , even years later) however are rewarding.
thank you Sir!
I am trying to explain the very difficult and unfortunately so many only can see what they have right in front of their face and take that as the gospel.
I dont own this system or the few others that have been so influential in my life however I can appreciate what they are and the people that have put in the effort to get there.
I cant deal with being disrespected by those who think they know.
There is much in life I dont know and I do try to find expertise and advise in those subjects.
In this subject I have a lot and a lot of years and experience. I no longer can afford these things myself however that doesn't make me a novice.
Sometimes in life we need to listen to understand rather than just to prepare a reply!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
KeithR,
You are assuming the merry-go-round is a bad thing. A lot of people get a huge dopamine rush from thinking about the next cool thing and acquiring it. As long as you have the cash flow to keep up with it, it's a source of happiness. Shallow happiness, but happiness. And it's not just guys into audio. Check out womens' shoe closets, make up bags, and purse collections...
Elliot,
This is very interesting for a couple of reasons... Can you please describe exactly what changes you made over those 4-5 months? And what was the outcome with each change?
Also, are Focal guys just a bunch of engineers with a tin ear, that they can't set up their flagship speakers right, or do they just have a different taste?
My speakers are more or less flat to way below 100 Hz:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/pawelensemble-pa-1-amp-reference-loudspeakers-measurements
I assume the same holds for Peter's Magico Mini II, which have better bass output than my speakers.
From Dick Olsher's comments in the above measurement page:
the plus side of this tuning is that power handling in the midbass is greatly improved and the balance in the midbass and upper bass regions in relation to the lower mids is much flatter than is typical of the average mini monitor.
Again, as I said before, a friend of mine who also plays jazz himself is regularly impressed by how convincing the upright bass sounds. While the subwoofer obviously is essential for that as well, this would be impossible without proper mid-bass.
Last edited:
Al
mid-bass is an area where a lot of music energy resides. Some speakers could measure flat in this region (100~300 Hz ) at 80 dB of SPL in a room. Once the SPL is raised compression sets in and the response curve is no longer flat. There are many ways to mitigate compression, that can also be understood as the driver no longer being liner as the SPL increases. This is a spec rarely mentioned by manufacturer and even less understood by many audiophiles. Power compression is real and the bane of small speakers they are not linear at higer SPL. And inthat case the SPL doesn't have to be sustained, the speaker output linearity hit some kind of wall, it manifests itself often (not always) in the midbass. Interestingly a company known for its subwoofer HSU has a mid-bass module that purports to cover this critical area SEE HERE. I am close to certain its integration with a speaker is close to impossible, the sound becoming more and more directional above 100 Hz... But it tries to address the issue. Larger speakers can afford the driver area to remain linear in the region. They however tend to be fussy about the positioning and treatments required or them to image as precisely as mini-monitors. Moreover several large speakers suffered in their execution and the phenomenon of the 10-foot wide mouth is real . For some poorly designed big speakers, difficult to correct but not all big speakers share this flaw. The better can play chameleon in ways mini-monitors can't .. IOW they can play small and they can play absurdly big when the music warrants it. I have mentioned the example of a huge speaker that can do that trick the Gen 1.2 , smaller but still big speakers such as the Wilson X-2 will fool you in their ability to disappear in a well designed room. The Magico Q7, Rockport Altair and Wilson Maxx are all capable of this and there are more speaker on the market which when correctly set-up do this routinely YG, Vandersteen 4 nd 7, even properly set-up Magnepan (a range of speakers that are very difficult to prepuce without exaggeration small scale stuff but doable with knowledge and patience and of course room treatments).
I will stop there.
I am not sure what "merry go round" Keith R is referring to unless he is projecting. Me, I am on no "merry go round".
When I read inane comments like his I can only assume class envy is at play.
Compression? We'll talk again when you've heard my speakers. You'll come to the same conclusion as my jazz playing friend who is impressed at how convincing upright bass sounds through my system, at realistic volume. With full orchestra at higher volume than that there is no compression either.
Yet since they don't need to drive a large room and I sit close to them, my speakers need not put out so much energy to reach high SPL at my listening position. I am not as dumb as to try to fill a large room with me sitting at a sizeable distance from the speakers, as you can afford to do with large speakers driven by substantial amplification. Under those conditions compression would indeed be guaranteed.
I agree, Howie. Comparing the achievement of the goal of realistic music reproduction at home with womens' shoe closets, make up bags, and purse collections seems silly. If you can afford your system and it's really worth it, as it truly seems to be in your case, then I can only congratulate you to the enjoyment that it will bring.
On the other hand, to refer back to the title of the thread, I find gearheads with a compulsory drive to always upgrade, without ever being able to actually enjoy music for a while (some are found on WBF as well), well comparable with pursuers of above collections. I also feel pity for them.
Al
This is really not about you or your system. Once again the thread started by a person, a professional in the industry, who was bowled over by a system he heard while expressing the reasons he came to that conclusion.
I am not sure why audiophiles often make it about themselves and their equipment in order to validate something.
I am really happy you love your system. I am sure it is wonderful. I just don't get your need with every post validate it.
I did but I forgot....
You can call up there I am sure they will gladly tell you who . Transparent are great folks
These are really large speakers capable of a lot of output and low frequency energy and there room in France was ok however I really dont think they had the time to get them where they blew me away.
I dont want to assume anything about anyone.
When I got them in my room which was 16 by 23.3 and 10 foot ceilings it took me a while to find the proper alignment of the speaker and to learn all the settings and the nuances to setting up the beast.
I had not worked with a product like this before and so I did.
I showed them a lot of coool things I learned about setting the speakers up and what one could do to get perfect image height with the cranking system they had which I discovered.
I used a lot of different gear on them as well.
These things really dont work well with tubes and they need a big ass solid state amp and like many box type speakers room treatment becomes important than with other types of speakers like line sources or open baffles.
I cant really tell you everything I did because I didnt keep a journal. I just go through my process that I have learned and perfected over many years.
Similar threads
