Vintage Audio part 5 - Speakers

[choke]

Originally Posted by djg

I don't want to dissuade anybody from a decent sub, if they want one, but there are speakers with credible low end that don't cost 10k per pair.

Two words - Tekton speakers.

[Ken Robb]

I think the area of one 12" is greater than the area of two 6 or 6.5" speakers. OTOH the smaller speakers might have longer travel and so move more air than a speaker with more cone area. Some designers like to use smaller cones because they are more easily controlled and may have less distortion than they can get using bigger cones. I think you have to listen to various speakers to learn what YOU like.

[Peter P.]

Originally Posted by Ken Robb

I think the area of one 12" is greater than the area of two 6 or 6.5" speakers. ... I think you have to listen to various speakers to learn what YOU like.

2-6.25" woofers = 66.4 sq.in.

1-12" woofer = 113.1 sq.in.

I think the issue has something to do with moving the cone mass of the larger woofer; the smaller woofer responds faster. That's if I recall correctly what I've read.

To be sure, there's also the issue of maximum cone travel, which equates to the low frequency's amplitude. I have no idea whether there are limitations to the maximum excursion capability of smaller drivers and whether they have lower amplitude limitations vs. larger drivers.

I think froze is on the right track regarding full-range speakers vs. bookshelf speakers, and the introduction of subwoofers. I wouldn't be surprised the popularity of subwoofers was partially driven by practical concerns: Most people (my casual observation leads me to believe it was the wives or female S.O.'s) disapproved of large speakers in the living room, which is typically where the stereo, and increasingly the TV were situated, and put their foot down when it came to "large, ugly, speakers". To get full movie effects, a subwoofer became almost a necessity, albeit not quite for only music. For some perspective, the lowest frequency on a piano is 27.5Hz, and the lowest tone on an acoustic bass is 30Hz. Audiophiles craving "authentic reproduction" would seek out larger, no doubt more expensive speakers, which were the only ones capable of reproducing such frequencies. It's the action movie sound effects which tend to reside in the sub-30Hz realm.

Today's subwoofers can fill in what more aesthetically acceptable bookshelf sized speakers are lacking. They are a great, affordable, in many cases unobtrusive solution to the practical dilemma facing many a married man.

[froze]

Originally Posted by Ken Robb

I think the area of one 12" is greater than the area of two 6 or 6.5" speakers. OTOH the smaller speakers might have longer travel and so move more air than a speaker with more cone area. Some designers like to use smaller cones because they are more easily controlled and may have less distortion than they can get using bigger cones. I think you have to listen to various speakers to learn what YOU like.

But I can tell from looking at the Wharfs that those are not long throw speakers.

And you are VERY CORRECT about each person needs to listen to various speakers to find out what they like, because everyone's idea of what sounds good is different due to how our ears pick up sound and even how our brain interprets it, as is the types of music we each like to listen to. To add to that, if a person is going out to audition some speakers they need to take several CD's of the various kinds of music they like, and not listen to whatever the sales guy puts in; also reference a movie track to see how it sounds. What I did once I narrowed the selection down was to take them home because speakers are going to sound a lot different at home then in the store, so make sure the store, or the internet store has a good return policy.

[froze]

Originally Posted by choke

Two words - Tekton speakers.

I've never heard of that brand before but the internet seems to be glowing over them!

[djg]

Originally Posted by Peter P.

2-6.25" woofers = 66.4 sq.in.

1-12" woofer = 113.1 sq.in.

I think the issue has something to do with moving the cone mass of the larger woofer; the smaller woofer responds faster. That's if I recall correctly what I've read.

To be sure, there's also the issue of maximum cone travel, which equates to the low frequency's amplitude. I have no idea whether there are limitations to the maximum excursion capability of smaller drivers and whether they have lower amplitude limitations vs. larger drivers.

I think froze is on the right track regarding full-range speakers vs. bookshelf speakers, and the introduction of subwoofers. I wouldn't be surprised the popularity of subwoofers was partially driven by practical concerns: Most people (my casual observation leads me to believe it was the wives or female S.O.'s) disapproved of large speakers in the living room, which is typically where the stereo, and increasingly the TV were situated, and put their foot down when it came to "large, ugly, speakers". To get full movie effects, a subwoofer became almost a necessity, albeit not quite for only music. For some perspective, the lowest frequency on a piano is 27.5Hz, and the lowest tone on an acoustic bass is 30Hz. Audiophiles craving "authentic reproduction" would seek out larger, no doubt more expensive speakers, which were the only ones capable of reproducing such frequencies. It's the action movie sound effects which tend to reside in the sub-30Hz realm.

Today's subwoofers can fill in what more aesthetically acceptable bookshelf sized speakers are lacking. They are a great, affordable, in many cases unobtrusive solution to the practical dilemma facing many a married man.

Well, yes, the area of a circle is probably still pie x r squared, so two 6" drivers do not have the same area as one 12" driver.

I think that the rest of it is perfectly sensible too. As I said, there's nothing wrong with a good sub, and for many rooms, sensibilities, systems, and budgets, it makes good sense.

The Wharfedale is relatively unobtrusive for a tower speaker, and easy to drive, and not too finicky WRT setup, but that's not to say it's everybody's cup of tea appearance-wise, any more than it's everybody's dream speaker at a given price. I was just offering it up as an example of something musical with a credible low end at a relatively reasonable price.

Somebody queried the price -- the 699 I mentioned is available per pair -- it's what I paid last year from the only US vendor that still seems to have the 10.7 in stock (AFAIK, which may not be all that far). Whether that's of interest to anybody I cannot say.

[djg]

Originally Posted by froze

But I can tell from looking at the Wharfs that those are not long throw speakers.

And you are VERY CORRECT about each person needs to listen to various speakers to find out what they like, because everyone's idea of what sounds good is different due to how our ears pick up sound and even how our brain interprets it, as is the types of music we each like to listen to. To add to that, if a person is going out to audition some speakers they need to take several CD's of the various kinds of music they like, and not listen to whatever the sales guy puts in; also reference a movie track to see how it sounds. What I did once I narrowed the selection down was to take them home because speakers are going to sound a lot different at home then in the store, so make sure the store, or the internet store has a good return policy.

Indeed. The speakers don't sound like much of anything without music and a system, and that's before you count the room. And that's not necessarily to say that they'll sound better in the store.

I actually took a flier on the Wharfedales mail order as the store offered both free shipping (one way) and a 60-day trial period (and based on the reviews, and based on my memories of the diamonds of long ago). But I did that partly because I'd become frustrated looking elsewhere in ways you might predict. There are good audio stores in my metro area, but they have what they have -- and then there are stores where you cannot remotely approximate your home setup, running to big box stores, like BB, where you cannot even play your own CDs. I heard what were probably pretty good speakers from B&W, Monitor, and other mfgs sound truly uninspiring due (I think) to the source material and listening setup. Had I been looking for a dream system I would have looked harder, but I wasn't. I might have done pretty darn well at a local record store that carries some vintage gear, but that's another story altogether.

But I'm rambling -- I completely agree that it makes sense to bring one's own source material.

[daker13]

Originally Posted by froze

...

Now going back to my statement you questioned, in today's average consumer market speakers are designed with the thought that you will at some time buy a subwoofer, so they don't build speakers that can get down to 30 or so hz. The better average consumer speakers today will go only as low as 35 hz with most hovering around the 40 hz range. Note I am only discussing average consumer speakers, I'm not going to entertain a $10,000 audiophile speaker for example in this discussion. Even modern subwoofers still only get into the 35 hz range with some dipping down into the upper 20's, and a few into the lower 20's...again for the average consumer market. Todays powered subwoofers are a bit better than the ones that were around when I tested that one subwoofer I mentioned, that one was a DCM, it looks like on the internet to be the KX model and the specs on that one was 30 hz which matched my JBL which explains why I couldn't hear any difference with it on or off.

A lot of people (speaker designers and music lovers) don't like subwoofers because they feel they don't integrate well with the rest of the system. If you have a subwoofer and you like it, that's great. But it's ridiculous to say that "In today's world almost all new speakers are built with the thought that you are going to get a separate subwoofer, so the bass on these modern speakers are not as powerful as they use to be" because this isn't remotely true. And many of the people who buy subwoofers are using them for home theater, not because they want to experience every bit of low end in Mahler's first symphony.

I've known several writers (some friends) from the audio magazines, and I can tell you, they generally don't use subwoofers. Again, if you use one and like it, that's great, but it's silly to say "almost all new speakers" are voiced with the expectation that you're going to buy a subwoofer. Then you qualify your statement about "almost all new speakers" to say that you're really only only talking about "average consumer speakers." What is an "average consumer speaker," the kind you buy at Target and Best Buy? What's an "average consumer" bicycle?

That's the other thing I disagree with in your post. You have this opposition between "average consumer speakers" on the one hand and "$10,000 audiophile speakers" on the other. This opposition is complete bs. You do not need to spend a ton of money to have a good stereo, and plenty of stereos that DO cost a lot of $ sound terrible. Case in point, the "ultimate" stereo that was set up at CES a few years ago, costing over $200k, where the cartridge was audibly mistracking. I guarantee you, the writers at Stereophile, Absolute Sound, etc., would not endorse this idea that you have to spend a ton of money to put together a nice stereo. For one thing, you see some of these guys integrating vintage components (not expensive) into their systems and using them to evaluate other components. Anyone can put together a great sounding stereo with minimal cash, especially if they're willing to buy used, learn something, and put a little care into how you they it together. I have to question your knowledge of the subject if your idea of home audio is JBL and Infinity on one side and "$10,000 speakers" on the other.

If you like listening to music on the stereo you have, good for you, I applaud you, but you don't need to act like you're some sort of authority on the subject when there's a clear lack of understanding about the hobby in your comments.

[froze]

Originally Posted by daker13

If you like listening to music on the stereo you have, good for you, I applaud you, but you don't need to act like you're some sort of authority on the subject when there's a clear lack of understanding about the hobby in your comments.

Well, so now your going to get nasty? Look I never said I was the authority of the subject, in fact I said early on I'm not even an audiophile! I said the things I said based on my experiences, I have not tested every speaker ever made from the 50's until this present age, nor every possible amp combination ever devised by man on all of those speakers, nor listened to every piece of music ever recorded on all those combinations; so don't get snarky.

[William]

Originally Posted by Peter P.

... I wouldn't be surprised the popularity of subwoofers was partially driven by practical concerns: Most people (my casual observation leads me to believe it was the wives or female S.O.'s) disapproved of large speakers in the living room, which is typically where the stereo, and increasingly the TV were situated, and put their foot down when it came to "large, ugly, speakers". Audiophiles craving "authentic reproduction" would seek out larger, no doubt more expensive speakers, which were the only ones capable of reproducing such frequencies.

Today's subwoofers can fill in what more aesthetically acceptable bookshelf sized speakers are lacking. They are a great, affordable, in many cases unobtrusive solution to the practical dilemma facing many a married man.

There is truth to this and I was somewhat in this boat. Then I decided to go the "Just get them and ask for forgiveness later" route. They are BIG speakers, but it turned out that once she heard them she loved the sound and now listens to them all the time.


For the win!!!







William

[froze]

Back in the mid 90's when I was doing all my home entertainment buying and test listened to a whole bunch of speakers, I did try smaller speakers with subwoofers combos in the stores and the fullness, richness and wide frequency range was not as good with those as they were with full size floor speakers. As the years went buy for fun I did listen to some of the newer small and larger speakers and I still ran into that same issue. I know that full size speakers are not for everyone, but I had the floor space and my wife didn't care so I got the big ones.

By the way, there was a speaker I auditioned that I really liked called the Magnepan which is a ribbon speaker, those sounded much more natural and a bit warmer than any speaker I heard but they did require a subwoofer back then; but I couldn't afford the speakers and the subwoofer combo, at the time I think they were $2,500 a piece plus the subwoofer, but man I loved the sound they put out. They also had another issue, they recommended that I buy two separate amps each the exact same amp, and one amp power one speaker and the other speaker with the second amp, that drove the price even higher out of my range (of course they were trying to sell me a more expensive amp then what I ended up getting). So those were a no go, but had I had the extra cash I would have dropped it. So I guess one could say I had to settle on second best from all the speakers I heard.

This discussion got me looking on Google about my JBL L7's and apparently there is a lot of love for them in the reviews, and they sell used for about what I paid for them new! so I guess I didn't make to bad of a decision getting those.

[kingpin75s]

Originally Posted by froze

Back in the mid 90's when I was doing all my home entertainment buying and test listened to a whole bunch of speakers, I did try smaller speakers with subwoofers combos in the stores and the fullness, richness and wide frequency range was not as good with those as they were with full size floor speakers. As the years went buy for fun I did listen to some of the newer small and larger speakers and I still ran into that same issue. I know that full size speakers are not for everyone, but I had the floor space and my wife didn't care so I got the big ones.

By the way, there was a speaker I auditioned that I really liked called the Magnepan which is a ribbon speaker, those sounded much more natural and a bit warmer than any speaker I heard but they did require a subwoofer back then; but I couldn't afford the speakers and the subwoofer combo, at the time I think they were $2,500 a piece plus the subwoofer, but man I loved the sound they put out. They also had another issue, they recommended that I buy two separate amps each the exact same amp, and one amp power one speaker and the other speaker with the second amp, that drove the price even higher out of my range (of course they were trying to sell me a more expensive amp then what I ended up getting). So those were a no go, but had I had the extra cash I would have dropped it. So I guess one could say I had to settle on second best from all the speakers I heard.

This discussion got me looking on Google about my JBL L7's and apparently there is a lot of love for them in the reviews, and they sell used for about what I paid for them new! so I guess I didn't make to bad of a decision getting those.

You are correct that small speakers and subs may be ok, but lack in body as well as cohesiveness compared to full size. I good friend of mine just replaced his Revel Gems to the new small revel M126Be bookshelf speakers. Paired with stereo subs it lacked the body of the bigger previous generation bookshelf Gems (which are not really a bookshelf). He has now leveled up to the 228Be full size speakers and is much happier.

Magnepan is local to me so I am very familiar with their sound. Considered them vs. my Revels. I have stereo subs either way but a must with the Megnepoans for sure.

[kingpin75s]

For stereo listening a pair of subs make a Big difference in a good system.

If you can afford the biggest Wilson 3 ways or something built with monster bass and a super low frequency extension right in them then great, but most speakers (even very good ones) can benefit from stereo subs.

I have a large listening space so I have quad subs stacked in pairs to the outsides of my primary speakers.

The key to integrating subs is to have control over crossover and gain at a minimum. Subs should be crossed over low and be set to effortless gain.

Mine are set to 55Hz crossover and at gain/volume 3 of 10. This setting benefited me more when I was running lower end revel F35 2 1/2 way speakers that start to roll off bass at 51Hz. The same setting still work for my much nicer Revel 228Be speakers that have a Bass response down to 27Hz. The fact that I have always kept them in an effortless and supporting state means they always integrate well and never overpower or smear my primary speakers.

[kingpin75s]

Originally Posted by daker13

A lot of people (speaker designers and music lovers) don't like subwoofers because they feel they don't integrate well with the rest of the system. If you have a subwoofer and you like it, that's great. But it's ridiculous to say that "In today's world almost all new speakers are built with the thought that you are going to get a separate subwoofer, so the bass on these modern speakers are not as powerful as they use to be" because this isn't remotely true. And many of the people who buy subwoofers are using them for home theater, not because they want to experience every bit of low end in Mahler's first symphony.

I've known several writers (some friends) from the audio magazines, and I can tell you, they generally don't use subwoofers. Again, if you use one and like it, that's great, but it's silly to say "almost all new speakers" are voiced with the expectation that you're going to buy a subwoofer. Then you qualify your statement about "almost all new speakers" to say that you're really only only talking about "average consumer speakers." What is an "average consumer speaker," the kind you buy at Target and Best Buy? What's an "average consumer" bicycle?

That's the other thing I disagree with in your post. You have this opposition between "average consumer speakers" on the one hand and "$10,000 audiophile speakers" on the other. This opposition is complete bs. You do not need to spend a ton of money to have a good stereo, and plenty of stereos that DO cost a lot of $ sound terrible. Case in point, the "ultimate" stereo that was set up at CES a few years ago, costing over $200k, where the cartridge was audibly mistracking. I guarantee you, the writers at Stereophile, Absolute Sound, etc., would not endorse this idea that you have to spend a ton of money to put together a nice stereo. For one thing, you see some of these guys integrating vintage components (not expensive) into their systems and using them to evaluate other components. Anyone can put together a great sounding stereo with minimal cash, especially if they're willing to buy used, learn something, and put a little care into how you they it together. I have to question your knowledge of the subject if your idea of home audio is JBL and Infinity on one side and "$10,000 speakers" on the other.

If you like listening to music on the stereo you have, good for you, I applaud you, but you don't need to act like you're some sort of authority on the subject when there's a clear lack of understanding about the hobby in your comments.

You have some good points in here but Froze was not so off base as well.

First, consumer vs. Audiophile speakers. Yes, I am sure many are designed just as froze says. Revels are.

Per my previous post, Revel F36 speakers which I consider consumer grade, even if on the higher end at $2K, start to roll off below 51Hz. They are part of the Concerta2 series which has subs to complement. Revel 228Be Revel speakers are Audiophile speakers are are in the $10K range as described. There are no Revel Be line subs. The speakers go down to 27Hz and while many would not need them, I run the quad subs for the extra body and SPLs for my large space.

Again, the key to subs is effortless use by managing crossover and gain.

Audiophile magazine guys all have different opinions. Does not mean they are right. My friends at Stereophile would disagree with yours so no help there.

The final part is the big debate. What does it cost for great sound? At what point is it real HiFi?

[William]

While I have audio bumped up:

Any one ever try speakers from the French company Cabasse? Do they plane or ride like they are on rails? Ride reports please if you have.





W.