Reference Speakers to Audition

[microstrip]

How do you listen? By yourself seated in the sweet spot? Or do you spend a lot of time listening with your spouse, children, friends, in what looks like a multi-purpose family room.

You are focusing one the most important aspects of the discussions in this forum. Most of the long, interesting, but never finishing arguing in this forum is due to the perspectives of members of this two groups, that are irreconcilable. It would be nice if bellow the nick of the member we had a reference such ad NFL or FFL (near field or far field listener).

 

[garylkoh]

You are focusing one the most important aspects of the discussions in this forum. Most of the long, interesting, but never finishing arguing in this forum is due to the perspectives of members of this two groups, that are irreconcilable. It would be nice if bellow the nick of the member we had a reference such ad NFL or FFL (near field or far field listener).

Thanks, microstrip. I find that most people audiophiles think that they want to buy someone else's reference not knowing if their preferences are aligned. A lot of equipment changing and upgrading or side-grading could have been avoided if the fundamental questions are first asked by the dealer or manufacturer.

Unfortunately, most dealers (and I would include manufacturers here) don't want to take the effort or risk losing the sale.

 

[KeithR]

Thanks, microstrip. I find that most people audiophiles think that they want to buy someone else's reference not knowing if their preferences are aligned. A lot of equipment changing and upgrading or side-grading could have been avoided if the fundamental questions are first asked by the dealer or manufacturer.

Unfortunately, most dealers (and I would include manufacturers here) don't want to take the effort or risk losing the sale.

By "reference" speaker--- i mean the last speaker i need to purchase for many years. one that does it all. 50k MSRP is the kind of budget i could potentially foresee.

it is indeed a multi-use room, although i'm really the only person concerned with sound. while i critically listen at times reading a book or something, most of the time we are doing something else with music on.

KeithR

 

[KeithR]

You posted:

"My amplification will be McIntosh 601s when released after CES."

If the amps haven't been released yet, how do you know they're a superb match for your Zus?

Are you a beta tester?

BTW- here's JV's take on the $20K+ speakers at RMAF:

http://www.avguide.com/blog/tas-rmaf-jonathan-valin-loudspeakers-priced-20000-and-above

Because I know the 501s are. the 601s are an evolutionary, not revolutionary step (they will use the same quad balanced circuit).

fwiw, i don't care for the spectral/boulder sound that is becoming so prevalent. its lifeless and sterile to me. very whitish sounding. Mac may not be the last word in detail, but it more than makes up for it in tone. the Mac amplifiers today do not sound vintage at all either.

 

[garylkoh]

By "reference" speaker--- i mean the last speaker i need to purchase for many years. one that does it all. 50k MSRP is the kind of budget i could potentially foresee.

it is indeed a multi-use room, although i'm really the only person concerned with sound. while i critically listen at times reading a book or something, most of the time we are doing something else with music on.

KeithR

In that case, you couldn't be further from the "reference audiophile loudspeaker". Like rblnr, you might find the Scaena's to be just what you need.

Full disclosure: I have no association with Scaena, I have not even spoken to them. They are my direct competitor, and I have lost business to them, but I think that they are good loudspeakers and are suitable for your application.

 

[mauidan]

Because I know the 501s are. the 601s are an evolutionary, not revolutionary step (they will use the same quad balanced circuit).

fwiw, i don't care for the spectral/boulder sound that is becoming so prevalent. its lifeless and sterile to me. very whitish sounding. Mac may not be the last word in detail, but it more than makes up for it in tone. the Mac amplifiers today do not sound vintage at all either.

Hope your faith in McIntosh is rewarded.

Good luck with your speaker search.

 

[Robh3606]

Have you looked at any of the JBL K series like the 9800 or current 9900?? You have Everest as well but are expensive. I have DIY Array 1400 with Be drivers and they are quite nice. If you would consider horns you might want to check them out. They are not your fathers horns and simply don't have the same coloration as is typically associated with horns.

Rob

 

[JackD201]

I agree with the K Series they are very good. Like Rob says however they are not old school horns. Unfortunately that also means they are not as sensitive. The local dealers of JBL/Synthesis are very close friends of mine and I'm passing on the report. You might have a hard time rocking out even with an 845 or 211 SET amp.

 

[KeithR]

thanks for the ideas guys.

Line arrays won't work in my room---and just seems too complicated for a multi-use room. Evolution Acoustics just doesn't do it for me in the looks department at all. As far as big horns, don't think that is a good match either (Classic Audio Reproductions are supposed to be amazing as well).

Probably comes down to:

Magico Q5
Tad Reference 1
Wilson Maxx3
Rockport Aquila

Although some of these choices are less amplifier friendly than others.

KeithR

 

[elescher]

I could never understand not buying any audio component based on appearance.

 

[DWR]

Keith, have you read the review on the Magico Q-5 in the November Stereophile?? If that review is on the money, and I had 60k that I was spending on a pair of speakers (which I probably never will) I certainly wouldn't consider the Q-5 with its bass limitations.

 

[Nyal Mellor]

If you are moving around and doing stuff whilst 'critically listening to music' then you really need wide dispersion, even power response speakers such as omnis and you also need to solve the bass variability throughout the room by using some form of distributed low frequency system. That's a very different set of priorities than the typical audiophile who need only worry about good sound in one position. It's more like the challenge you have in a home theater environment.

 

[KeithR]

I could never understand not buying any audio component based on appearance.

good for you. but when i'm thinking about this kind of money for a multi-use room, they have to look good.

 

[KeithR]

Keith, have you read the review on the Magico Q-5 in the November Stereophile?? If that review is on the money, and I had 60k that I was spending on a pair of speakers (which I probably never will) I certainly wouldn't consider the Q-5 with its bass limitations.

they aren't bass limited. MF clearly likes boosted upper bass of his Wilsons. that is his prerogative.

 

[Gregadd]

...Q-5 with its bass limitations... The Q5 has no bass limitations IMO. Indeed a sub is optional. I think Michael Fremer and I must have listened to two different speakers.

 

[KeithR]

btw, why do all of these speakers not named Maxx3 have such low sensitivity?

 

[FrantzM]

This is something of a mystery to me, I would have expected in these days and age to see higher sensitivity speakers.. Alas.. <90dB seems to be the most common figures.

 

[Bruce B]

This is something of a mystery to me, I would have expected in these days and age to see higher sensitivity speakers.. Alas.. <90dB seems to be the most common figures.

That is one of the reasons I chose the MM3 with it's 93dB rating.

 

[brianherlihy]

Agree - the Q5 are not bass limited. they do need a good amp to drive them....

Keith - my room is also multi-use and i echo your thoughts on appearance

 

[Mike Lavigne]

they aren't bass limited. MF clearly likes boosted upper bass of his Wilsons. that is his prerogative.

of course, this question of correct bass comes down to a matter of taste. taste is based on a personal viewpoints but also on what one considers possible.

at RMAF i spent time listening to the Q-5's and heard what Fremer was referring to in terms of his view on the bass performance. there are aspects of the Q-5 bass performance which are all there from my perspective......but there are also aspects which fall short of my expectations.

however; my reference for bass performance is not any ported speaker. or separate subwoofer supported full range speaker. the integrated powered bass on the Evolutions get the bass tunefullness and agility of the Q-5 and also the weight and foundation of the MAXX 3 or other such speakers (but minus any bloat). in my fairly large room the bass is physical and agile.

if given the choice between precision and weight i'll take precision......but why have to choose?

and also get an easy load for an amplifier.

all that said; the Q-5's are a remarkable speaker and have amazingly low levels of distortion. i can easily see that they would be the perfect speaker for many listeners.