Reference 2 Channel Speaker Recommendations

[botrytis]

6 minutes ago, fbee said:

Aren´t missing harmonics rather a malfuction than a flavour?

 

Just talking about overtones in instruments and voices.

Of course, you don't want your system to add harmonics to the signal path (except, if  you prefere listenung to tube amps)

 

 

 

 

 

 

He sets them up properly. They were the best Maggies I have heard and I have heard quite a few pairs.

 

Not my cup of tea, but this hobby is a big umbrella anyway.

[GUTB]

Consider old, low-definition CRT television. That warm, soft, 480 interlaced programming. Ever wonder why it just looked so pleasant? I liken tube amplification (at least "real" directly-heated SET tube amplification) to that. Noise performance is junk compared to even mediocre transistors in class A. My 60 lbs space heater 845 needs giant transformers to deal with the 845's 1000 volts and 1700 plate resistance, most of which just gets radiated as heat and light (if it weren't for the huge screens, the 845's filaments would easily light up a room). Dampening power is a joke, lower than even bad solid state amps, forcing you to pair them with easily driven speakers. 

 

However, the few watts that voltage running glowing filements produces is something special. Why is the midrange so good? Why are bad recordings glossed over? What causes the auditory illusion of depth that tubes enhance? Why do humans enjoy this kind of distortion? I don't know, but the effect is real.

[Ralf11]

Maggies that retained their usual virtues with some application of the top Vandies sound would be ideal -- esp. if they were only 3" wide and cost $50....

 

I have a thread on Vandies and other panels, which I'll bump so people can post there instead of running this one OT

[TubeLover]

8 hours ago, Johnseye said:

 

Nice.  Just like licorice.

 

As it happens, I'm eating some "Australian style" watermelon licorice as we speak!

 

JC

[botrytis]

On ‎2‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 2:45 PM, GUTB said:

Coming from headphones (I still own several high-end headphones, including the Focal Utopia), I've really been struggling to get resolution and dynamic power of high end headphone listening. I'm starting to get a little demoralized in speakers, honestly. I knew that amps make a big difference from my headphone journey -- but amps make a HUGE DIFFERENCE in speakers!

 

Speakers: Chane A1.4

 

Teac AI-301AD (ICE module) -- Unlistenable trash.

Emotiva A-300 (class A/B) -- flat, poor mids, bad.

Music Angel XDSE Mk.III (845 SET) -- Holographic, strong mids, good.

 

I rolled in some strong matched RCA NOS 6N7S and 6L7S tubes, and I'm waiting on a pair of new production 845s from China but I don't think they will impact resolution. Simply put, resolution and dynamic power just isn't there. It's really, really, bad. I feel like I'm waisting my dedicated audio PC with Paul Pang V3 card, X20 DAC with battery powered I2S interface, my high end power cables, etc. On the plus side, once I figured out these speakers prefer mid-field listening, center image is very focused, and the stage is nicely dimensional. I put a lot of money and effort into cables, vibration dampening, source tweaking, power delivery, etc. And they are less resolving and dynamic than my $170 AKG K553 headphones.

 

I posted a complaint in the Chane thread in AVS Forum, and the designer himself responded claiming the lack of bass performance is due to the 845, but seemed to not know what I was talking about in regards to resolution. Two different dealers (a high end audio dealer and a Best Buy dealer) didn't know what I was talking about either (the high end audio dealer seemed to think resolution was related to high frequency information). I auditioned a B&W D2 ($9K) at Best Buy, and a pair of ProAc D30Rs ($7k connected to a $10k integrated) at the high end place.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

 

Or was it synergy with the pre-amp? To me the Pre makes a bigger impact and if the Pre does not match well with the amp, one can have issues.

[ctsooner]

10 minutes ago, botrytis said:

 

Or was it synergy with the pre-amp? To me the Pre makes a bigger impact and if the Pre does not match well with the amp, one can have issues.

I agree about the pre. That's why I got the Ayre AX5/20.  The pre in that for a 13k integrated is silly.  To GUTB, speakers for most are still the way to go.  Have you auditioned Vandersteen TReo's on up?  If not, you need to for many reasons.  Best Buys typically will have no clue. They aren't even taught how to set up a pair of speakers properly.  Everytime I"ve gone into one (all over the country), I've ended up teaching them about high end audio. They are taught to sell to the masses. Every now and then you run into an audiophile who only knows their products, but it dying to learn about much more.

 

If you have Utopia's, you really need to get out to audition the Ayre QX5/20.  As I've stated, it's the best HP amp I've ever heard.  It's just that darn good. I've heard many top HP amps in various stores I've visited over the years.  I just found my original headphone amp from Headroom.  I also have their first portable DAC/amp.  I have owned Stax Lambda's as well as some other cans.  I have an idea of how they sound and should sound.  All I'm saying is that I get it IRT detail.  I don't want the etched/distorted kind either.  Go give the Ayre a whirl while you are at it.  Where do you live?  Plenty of dealers around the country and the world. IRT Ayre. Vandersteen has a growing network.  

[botrytis]

3 minutes ago, ctsooner said:

I agree about the pre. That's why I got the Ayre AX5/20.  The pre in that for a 13k integrated is silly.  To GUTB, speakers for most are still the way to go.  Have you auditioned Vandersteen TReo's on up?  If not, you need to for many reasons.  Best Buys typically will have no clue. They aren't even taught how to set up a pair of speakers properly.  Everytime I"ve gone into one (all over the country), I've ended up teaching them about high end audio. They are taught to sell to the masses. Every now and then you run into an audiophile who only knows their products, but it dying to learn about much more.

 

If you have Utopia's, you really need to get out to audition the Ayre QX5/20.  As I've stated, it's the best HP amp I've ever heard.  It's just that darn good. I've heard many top HP amps in various stores I've visited over the years.  I just found my original headphone amp from Headroom.  I also have their first portable DAC/amp.  I have owned Stax Lambda's as well as some other cans.  I have an idea of how they sound and should sound.  All I'm saying is that I get it IRT detail.  I don't want the etched/distorted kind either.  Go give the Ayre a whirl while you are at it.  Where do you live?  Plenty of dealers around the country and the world. IRT Ayre. Vandersteen has a growing network.  

I always felt the impact on sound went (in order of importance):  ROOM ; speakers ; pre-amp ; source (includes the Medium and how good it is) ; amp. Just my way of looking at things and I could be completely wrong but this is how it has always worked out for me.

[Johnseye]

 

42 minutes ago, ctsooner said:

I agree about the pre. That's why I got the Ayre AX5/20.  The pre in that for a 13k integrated is silly.  To GUTB, speakers for most are still the way to go.  Have you auditioned Vandersteen TReo's on up?  If not, you need to for many reasons.  Best Buys typically will have no clue. They aren't even taught how to set up a pair of speakers properly.  Everytime I"ve gone into one (all over the country), I've ended up teaching them about high end audio. They are taught to sell to the masses. Every now and then you run into an audiophile who only knows their products, but it dying to learn about much more.

 

If you have Utopia's, you really need to get out to audition the Ayre QX5/20.  As I've stated, it's the best HP amp I've ever heard.  It's just that darn good. I've heard many top HP amps in various stores I've visited over the years.  I just found my original headphone amp from Headroom.  I also have their first portable DAC/amp.  I have owned Stax Lambda's as well as some other cans.  I have an idea of how they sound and should sound.  All I'm saying is that I get it IRT detail.  I don't want the etched/distorted kind either.  Go give the Ayre a whirl while you are at it.  Where do you live?  Plenty of dealers around the country and the world. IRT Ayre. Vandersteen has a growing network.  

 

A well tuned speaker listening system will crush headphones any day.  Them be fightin words I know, but I've listened to some very high end headphones and it's not even close.  Granted, you're going to pay a bit more for a speaker rig.  You could also say it's like comparing apples and oranges.  Headphones have their uses and their place but I'll choose speakers any day as long as they're setup right.

 

Don't count out the Audio Alchemy DDP-1 DAC/Preamp.  For the cost it's a great piece.  I've got to keep talking it up.

 

38 minutes ago, botrytis said:

I always felt the impact on sound went (in order of importance):  ROOM ; speakers ; pre-amp ; source (includes the Medium and how good it is) ; amp. Just my way of looking at things and I could be completely wrong but this is how it has always worked out for me.

 

I agree except think the source comes after the amp.  The caveat there may be when comparing vinyl with digital.  Those two differences in impact exceed the change heard with an amp.  Everything I've been doing with higher sample rates, microRendu/sMS-200, fiber ethernet, etc is at the micro level when compared to the others you listed.

[GUTB]

39 minutes ago, botrytis said:

I always felt the impact on sound went (in order of importance):  ROOM ; speakers ; pre-amp ; source (includes the Medium and how good it is) ; amp. Just my way of looking at things and I could be completely wrong but this is how it has always worked out for me.

 

I had to get a carpet, 2" foam panels on reflection points, and recently a set of two GIK 4A Alpha panels on the front wall. I also had to divide off an open-concept kitchken with some wood-backed absorption panels.Untreated, the sound was quite bad; muddy, shouty, glared, etc.

 

Nothing could help the Chanes, though. I wish someone would have told me beforehand that I shouldn't waste my time messing with super low-cost speakers. I'm planning to try out a high-end class D like the Red Dragons, D-Sonic, etc, to see what the difference is, but I really, really doubt I was will prefer it over the 845. Alternatively, I've been told I need to stop being a loser and just get a Pass amp already and be happy.

 

I tried a pair of Zu Omen Mk.II. Their 10" paper drivers put out some decent dynamics and resolution (still not anywhere close to my Uptopia or TH-900). I'll see what the class D can do with them, but right now they're sitting in wait while I figure out which way I'm going to go...

 

Last week I got in a pair of Felix Carbon VIIs ($2500). A little more resolving than the Omens, less dynamic, BUT the ability to cast a layered, holographic soundstage, something that had been missing up until then. I ** FINALLY ** get to hear what a speakers can do with a soundstage.

 

There's only one high-end audio dealer in the Dallas area, who does happen to carry Vandersteens, but I'll never go back there, didn't have a good experience the first time I went. There's one in Houston, maybe I'll check it out the next time I end up down there. Also, I'm planning to go to AXPONA so I'm sure I'll get a chance to give them a listen there...

[Johnseye]

6 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

I had to get a carpet, 2" foam panels on reflection points, and recently a set of two GIK 4A Alpha panels on the front wall. I also had to divide off an open-concept kitchken with some wood-backed absorption panels.Untreated, the sound was quite bad; muddy, shouty, glared, etc.

 

Nothing could help the Chanes, though. I wish someone would have told me beforehand that I shouldn't waste my time messing with super low-cost speakers. I'm planning to try out a high-end class D like the Red Dragons, D-Sonic, etc, to see what the difference is, but I really, really doubt I was will prefer it over the 845. Alternatively, I've been told I need to stop being a loser and just get a Pass amp already and be happy.

 

I tried a pair of Zu Omen Mk.II. Their 10" paper drivers put out some decent dynamics and resolution (still not anywhere close to my Uptopia or TH-900). I'll see what the class D can do with them, but right now they're sitting in wait while I figure out which way I'm going to go...

 

Last week I got in a pair of Felix Carbon VIIs ($2500). A little more resolving than the Omens, less dynamic, BUT the ability to cast a layered, holographic soundstage, something that had been missing up until then. I ** FINALLY ** get to hear what a speakers can do with a soundstage.

 

There's only one high-end audio dealer in the Dallas area, who does happen to carry Vandersteens, but I'll never go back there, didn't have a good experience the first time I went. There's one in Houston, maybe I'll check it out the next time I end up down there. Also, I'm planning to go to AXPONA so I'm sure I'll get a chance to give them a listen there...

 

Oh man you have to listen to the Benchmark AHB2 amp.  Whatever you do.  They offer a 30 day audition period.  It's a $3k piece and can be run in stereo, or if you get another as monos.

 

I'll be at Axpona on Friday the 21st if anyone's interested in putting a face to the text.

[fbee]

On 22.3.2017 at 6:57 PM, botrytis said:

I always felt the impact on sound went (in order of importance):  ROOM ; speakers ; pre-amp ; source (includes the Medium and how good it is) ; amp. Just my way of looking at things and I could be completely wrong but this is how it has always worked out for me.

+1, ...how the speakers interact with the room, this creates the phantom soundstage illusion in your brain.

Does the soundstage illusion collapse when leaving the sweetspot by a few inches?

Some Wilson listeners and B&W owners reported...http://oplug-support.org/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=4227

[KnockKnock]

On 24 March 2017 at 6:27 AM, fbee said:

+1, ...how the speakers interact with the room, this creates the phantom soundstage illusion in your brain.

Does the soundstage illusion collapse when leaving the sweetspot by a few inches?

Some Wilson listeners and B&W owners reported...http://oplug-support.org/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=4227

Have you tried the active Dynaudio FocusXD? Fantastic speakers with built in amplification. They sound very, very good

[fbee]

....if you ever have a chance to listen to Siegfried Linkwitz´creations: Don´t miss it !

 

Only if you heard them once, you might understand why people are so fascinated

by their naturalness and extraordinary 3-D imaging.

 

http://www.magiclx521.com/epages/17940394.sf/en_GB/?ViewObjectPath=%2FShops%2F17940394%2FCategories%2Fnews

[Rexp]

On 23/03/2017 at 2:50 AM, Johnseye said:

 

 

A well tuned speaker listening system will crush headphones any day.  Them be fightin words I know, but I've listened to some very high end headphones and it's not even close.  Granted, you're going to pay a bit more for a speaker rig.  You could also say it's like comparing apples and oranges.  Headphones have their uses and their place but I'll choose speakers any day as long as they're setup right.

 

Don't count out the Audio Alchemy DDP-1 DAC/Preamp.  For the cost it's a great piece.  I've got to keep talking it up.

 

 

I agree except think the source comes after the amp.  The caveat there may be when comparing vinyl with digital.  Those two differences in impact exceed the change heard with an amp.  Everything I've been doing with higher sample rates, microRendu/sMS-200, fiber ethernet, etc is at the micro level when compared to the others you listed.

Because the tweaks you've applied to your digital source have only made a negligible improvement doesn't mean the Source isn't the most important component in the chain, which it is IMO.

[Johnseye]

6 hours ago, Rexp said:

Because the tweaks you've applied to your digital source have only made a negligible improvement doesn't mean the Source isn't the most important component in the chain, which it is IMO.

 

I think "source" is a very generic term and should be further defined.  As I mentioned if source is analog (vinyl or even tape) vs digital then it can have a most significant impact.  If we're saying the source is Roon on a PC vs JRiver on a Mac then is that the source and if so it's not going to be a significant change.  If we're saying source is a 96kHz vs 192kHz then I don't think we can say it's very significant.

 

When we say source are we referring to the player or the media?  Is the player doing the decoding or are separates involved?  We could get pretty deep into the weeds without defining what is what.

 

In my experience, the significance of changes revealed by making modifications to my digital chain; not my DAC, but everything leading to the DAC/preamp, was less significant than the speakers, DAC/preamp and amp.

I think you can find a good variety of speakers, preamps and DACs or preamp/DAC combos that offer a significant difference in sound, but you may have to pay a large price.  I also think that is possible with amps as well.  While less so than those other components, if you truly look for game changing amps and not just compare two SS class A/B amps, then you'll get a bigger change in your sound than using a microRendu, different USB cable or fiber converters.

 

If you've made changes to your source to where the quality improvement in sound has exceeded the other downstream components from the DAC or preamp on then please share.  Perhaps I'm missing something.

[Ralf11]

For source, I would include the technology used to make the recording in the first place.

 

e.g. a 1940s jazz or blues recording will differ from say Jazz at the Pawnshop

 

an audience cassette vs. a Betty Board tape of the same concert (which also implicates the location of the mics...)

[Johnseye]

2 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

For source, I would include the technology used to make the recording in the first place.

 

e.g. a 1940s jazz or blues recording will differ from say Jazz at the Pawnshop

 

an audience cassette vs. a Betty Board tape of the same concert (which also implicates the location of the mics...)

 

Well that complicates things even further because those sources have many possibilities.  I could have an original first run piece of vinyl or I could have a third or fourth edition or I could have a Music Matters or MFSL edition.  With regards to live recordings, I could have an audience show recorded FOB or with AKG or another mic and recording rig.  Then I could have a soundboard.  With both, the source could be recorded to DAT or analog with tape generations playing a factor.  With regard to digital studio recordings we're back to the 44 vs 96 vs 192 or dsd comparison.

 

So if we're classifying source as those, then yes they could have a significant impact, but I was originally referring to source as the components upstream to the DAC/preamp.  Source of music player, not source material.  I think that's where the difference lies in the term source.  Source as a music player vs. source as the actual music material.

[Rexp]

6 hours ago, Johnseye said:

 

Well that complicates things even further because those sources have many possibilities.  I could have an original first run piece of vinyl or I could have a third or fourth edition or I could have a Music Matters or MFSL edition.  With regards to live recordings, I could have an audience show recorded FOB or with AKG or another mic and recording rig.  Then I could have a soundboard.  With both, the source could be recorded to DAT or analog with tape generations playing a factor.  With regard to digital studio recordings we're back to the 44 vs 96 vs 192 or dsd comparison.

 

So if we're classifying source as those, then yes they could have a significant impact, but I was originally referring to source as the components upstream to the DAC/preamp.  Source of music player, not source material.  I think that's where the difference lies in the term source.  Source as a music player vs. source as the actual music material.

I see we were talking different definitions, I refer to source in a simplified chain: Source +  Preamp + Power Amp + Speakers (source material being the record/file). In this context where would you place each component in order of importance?

[Johnseye]

7 minutes ago, Rexp said:

I see we were talking different definitions, I refer to source in a simplified chain: Source +  Preamp + Power Amp + Speakers (source material being the record/file). In this context where would you place each component in order of importance?

Sorry, still confused. Are you saying source is the record/file or the device playing that material? If it's the device do you include every component of that device up to the preamp? 

[Rexp]

6 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

Sorry, still confused. Are you saying source is the record/file or the device playing that material? If it's the device do you include every component of that device up to the preamp? 

I'm not including source material (record/file) in this simplified chain, so yes Source includes every component before the preamp.

[Johnseye]

28 minutes ago, Rexp said:

I'm not including source material (record/file) in this simplified chain, so yes Source includes every component before the preamp.

 

Then other than a turntable vs media server and not including the DAC, if a PC or Mac,  even with a microRendu or sMS 200 endpoint is going to have less impact. 

 

There are many micro components before the dac/preamp. We could get into some detailed discussion about all this so lets either keep it simple or create another thread. 

[GUTB]

Well, I got in a D-Sonic, the M3-800S, which is a 400W per channel stereo amp. It only took a few days to receive it as it was shipped within the same state. The M3 series I believe uses the latest Pascal class D module, which features a lot of technical wizardry that goes way over my head to reduce switching noise artifacts further than the Pascal modules already were capable of. In addition to the Pascal module with power supply, D-Sonic has their in-house designed input stage.

 

Taking my Chinese 845 SET off the vibration control platform and putting the D-Sonic in it's place, I sat to listen knowing it was going to suck, like 99% of everything in this hobby does until a lot of burn-in time is provided. And suck it did. Mid-range, sucked into oblivion. Resolution and control, as would be expected, went up, but euphonics vanished along with the mids. Soundstage with the Felix Carbon VIIs remained wide, but it was flattened -- not completely, but depth perception was reduced. With the extra control it was cool to listen to orchestra and compressed rock/pop play while my speakers actually able to render it all. That's fine. But without euphonics, it was bad, bad, bad, bad, BAD.

 

So I'm sitting here, posting this, with my ears now safely underneath my Utopias....ah, resolution, dynamics, rich mids, wonderful treble, non-room-distored-bass, musicality...ahhhhh....now I wonder what am I doing all this for...

 

Sigh. So, does anyone know how long a class D needs to break in?

[Johnseye]

15 minutes ago, GUTB said:

Well, I got in a D-Sonic, the M3-800S, which is a 400W per channel stereo amp. It only took a few days to receive it as it was shipped within the same state. The M3 series I believe uses the latest Pascal class D module, which features a lot of technical wizardry that goes way over my head to reduce switching noise artifacts further than the Pascal modules already were capable of. In addition to the Pascal module with power supply, D-Sonic has their in-house designed input stage.

 

Taking my Chinese 845 SET off the vibration control platform and putting the D-Sonic in it's place, I sat to listen knowing it was going to suck, like 99% of everything in this hobby does until a lot of burn-in time is provided. And suck it did. Mid-range, sucked into oblivion. Resolution and control, as would be expected, went up, but euphonics vanished along with the mids. Soundstage with the Felix Carbon VIIs remained wide, but it was flattened -- not completely, but depth perception was reduced. With the extra control it was cool to listen to orchestra and compressed rock/pop play while my speakers actually able to render it all. That's fine. But without euphonics, it was bad, bad, bad, bad, BAD.

 

So I'm sitting here, posting this, with my ears now safely underneath my Utopias....ah, resolution, dynamics, rich mids, wonderful treble, non-room-distored-bass, musicality...ahhhhh....now I wonder what am I doing all this for...

 

Sigh. So, does anyone know how long a class D needs to break in?

 

Didn't want to give the Benchmark a listen, or is that on your list? 

Not sure how long long it will take for a class D to break in but I'm guessing you're 90% there. 

[Ralf11]

his is half the price

 

if it turns out to be half the SQ, then I hope it is returnable

[Johnseye]

8 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

his is half the price

 

if it turns out to be half the SQ, then I hope it is returnable

 

For half the price maybe that demo Audio Alchemy amp at Music Direct is still around. 

9 times out of 10 if you really don't like it out of the gate it's not for you. 

 

By the way, I've been having some fun comparing the microRendu with sMS - 200 as well as the silver Clear Day cables lately. Speaker, XLR and RCA. JL Fathom sub comes tomorrow for some 2.1.  And I pulled the trigger on  the Persona C center. Even with the Sopra center, which was much better matched I could hear a difference.