Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

First post!

I never considered myself an audiophile. All the music I listen to is mp3 (192kbps usually) through my cheap sound card, through my cheap 20 year old Pioneer 200W receiver, through my 30 year old Pioneer 100W tower speakers (speakers and receiver were hand-me-downs, I am less than 30 years old myself!).

I always liked the sound, even though there is a little bit of hiss in quiet parts which I think is a function of the cheap receiver.

I am moving those speakers to another room and wanted a replacement speaker setup for my computer room. I considered trying a 2.1 powered setup from Logitech, the Z-2300 I think. I bought them from a major retailer with the intention of returning them if I didn't like them (which I don't). Sure, it's nice not to have to use the receiver anymore (since speakers are powered), and there is no hiss like on my "old" setup, but the sound is just NOT THE SAME. The quality of the sound is alright, but it sounds so much "smaller", it doesn't fill the whole room up like my giant towers (and I don't listen to music loud in general, either).

Now, I have never bought speakers in my life (my Pioneer hand-me-downs have lasted since I got them), so I don't know what's popular or being used or being sold, or good/bad or old/new technology. Heck, I just figured out what the ".1" in 2.1 means. But I noticed that it seems like there are not a lot of floor/tower speakers being made, and more 2.1 and 5.1 setups in general. Can a sub/satellite speaker ever sound as good as a nice wooden tower? Or was my Logitech setup just cheap? I listened to a Bose 5.1 setup at the store, and sure it sounded nicer than the Logitech, but still not like what I want. My theory is that you cannot make a small speaker produce a sound like a large wooden case can... it's like trying to make a desktop keyboard sound like a grand piano - impossible.

Are floor speakers going the way of the buffalo? Do the real speaker geeks still prefer them?

What's the scoop?

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

They are preferred by me, particularly since I listen to a lot of two channel music.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

They are *not* preferred by me, especially because I listen to a lot of 2-channel music.

IMO you can get better performance value at any given budget point with monitor type speakers where the cost is targeted more towards the mids and highs performance rather than the significnatly added cost of a much large cabinet and more bass drivers for bass performance which is less important especially if you have a quality subwoofer in the system.

You can run searches on this too, there are a zillion threads you can dig up.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Though the bose and the logitech both feature tiny satellites and subwoofers not really worth of the name. A lot of bass is actually quite localizable.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Not to mention both the logitech and Bose setups are not of high quality at all. Avoid Bose like the plague. Hideous.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Chris Wiggles, thanks for your input. What can you recommend as a good 2.1 option in the $150 price range? I was looking at the Sony SS-F5000 tower speakers, I can get a pair shipped for around $170. I will admit the space savings of a 2.1 system is appealing, but the ones that look decent cost significantly more, it seems to me.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

When I listen to two channel music, I listen via a direct option that keeps the receiver from further processing the input, thereby, coloring the music. Listening via this direct option will eliminate the sub woofer from the signal. You find many people who listen to two channel music opt for this method as well.

In the end, it a matter of preference.

If you go the satellite-sub woofer route, you have to ensure the cross-over setting are proper to ensure the full range of music is heard.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

A lot of CD players have really good analogue outputs that are stereo only-- they aren't set up for a subwoofer. Full range speakers take advantage of this.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

With your budget I would avoid a subwoofer at this point. A set of bookshelf speakers that are rated down to around 60Hz will probably satisfy you until you can afford a decent sub to go with it. FYI - one of the cheapest decent subs out there (Dayton SUB-100) is about $100 when it's on sale.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Hello,
I know that these prices may be a bit above your Budget however: I would strongly recommend the JBL Studio Line. If you want bookshelves, I would recommend the either the L820 or the L830 because of the 6" driver. I used the 820s for mains for a while. Here is a link to a dealer that I use. http://search.stores.ebay.com/The-E-Warehouse-Store_jbl-studio_W0QQfciZQ2d1QQfclZ4QQfsnZTheQ20EQ20Warehous eQ20StoreQQfsooZ2QQfsopZ2QQsaselZ307266210QQsofpZ0


Hope this helps and happy hunting

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Matt, the most important thing you didn't even mention. The $150 budget. For that budget, you should most definitely go bookshelf.

Regarding the whole other issue, it has been beaten to death already. But my condensed version is this. It depends a lot on budget. Ideally, large speakers have the capability to do the best job, regardless of how good a sub is used. The problem is, good large speakers are expensive. You are typically talking minimum 2.5K to get started on a genuinely good floor standing speaker. I have become convinced that those who completely disregard them have never actually heard a good set of floorstanding speakers (cue incensed disagreement) properly set up.

Still, the bottom line, for $150, don't even consider floor standers.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Yikes... So what speakers did you have in mind when you quote such a price?

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

I agree, this type of response is a bit too "audiophilic" for me I think. Though I do still, of course, appreciate the input.

However, every major electronics store I've been to sells floor speakers from, for example, $100 min to $1000 max. And you're telling me that $2500 is the bare minimum for "good quality"? So EVERY single set the major stores are selling, even their most expensive, are crap?

Hard to believe...

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

You better believe it.

That's why I avoid the chain big-box stores like the plague generally speaking.

Certainly there are good quality towers under a grand, but you'd be far better off getting monitors, and in any case you're not going to find quality towers like that in the chain stores.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Myer-Emco is all too willing to cater to large budgets. So is Tweeter. Magnolia has some higher end stuff as well.

But the truly exotic stuff is carried by small, independent dealers. Don't discard them out of hand, though. I may not have been prepared to buy a Wilson Maxx, but "Progressive Audio" was quite happy to sell me a fine pair of headphones.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Chris
^ I second that

I have a nice set of towers that listed at $800.00 about 7yrs ago
I picked them up for $400.00 last year - mint condition

If I had been looking at NEW fronts - I would have budgeted about $900 and this definitely would have kept me in the bookshelf range

See - in this range $150 for the stands doesn't matter - since the speakers are $900

Example The reason some people jump to towers, is they would rather spend $300 on towers - instead of $150 for speakers and $150 for stands - cause it's seen as a waste

Problem is that you end up with $300 towers - which are not good.....

That is why this low of a budget is difficult to work with

Maybe make some stands and try to 'up' your budget for the fronts

Hope this helps

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

That is correct. Anything short of "truly good" is "crap". There is no middle ground. There is no such thing as a "pretty decent" floor standing speaker. The fact is, most people have never heard "truly good" speakers.

Sarcasm aside, It is probably possible to get a truly decent pair of floor standing speakers for around 1.5K per pair, but I think that is about the starting point. What model was I thinking of? Vandersteen 2C for example, I believe, is about $1,800 and are quite good. I doubt there are many bookshelfs which can truly compete with them at the price. You say you've never heard of Vandersteen? You thought B&W was the best speaker ever made? You need to get out of those big box stores. OK, I guess the sarcasm wasn't quite over.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Also remember that the big box stores generally price their speakers on a per speaker basis rather than per pair. So that price you quoted is more likely $200-$2000/pair ---- I just checked the BB website. The cheapest pair of floorstanders on there are $206 and they are crap. The cheapest pair they have that I would even consider purchasing (some JBLs) are $318/pair.

But what has been said above is pretty much true that the big box stores sell crappy speakers. While JBL and Klipsch both make great speakers they only sell their lowest-end products at these stores. The speakers sold in these stores still have their place in the market, but I don't think anyone would consider any of them to be audiophile quality.

Also, when you consider that the market for floorstanding speakers goes well over $50k/pair it's not all that crazy to talk about a $2500 pair of speakers.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

My speakers are $1500/pr and they are decidedly small 2-way stand-mounted monitors. I probably wouldn't consider floorstanders at all until probably $5K/pr or more, but again that's my bias towards critical music listening.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Well, Magnepan and Vandersteen (and probably few others) certainly make suitable large speakers starting under 5K, even for "critical" music listening. Still, the 5K level is constantly getting lower. I know my mains were 4K when they were introduced back in 1992. They were only just discontinued this year (in production for 15 years!) at 4.5K, but the replacement model is selling for a whopping 10K

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Ok, here is a better question.

The speakers I originally compared to the Logitech 2.1 setup I purchased (and hated) are the Pioneer hand-me-downs I've been using for 10 years: I just checked the model # and they are "CS-B9000D". They sound fine to me and sound way better than the Logitech setup did.

Do you guys consider these good speakers? If not, then obviously my standards are lower than yours, since they sound great to me... and obviously I'm afraid to hear what a "great" speaker sounds like for fear I'd like it and have to spend $4k. So any idea what "price range" these Pioneers would be in today? (tough to tell since they've been discontinued for decades as far as I can find)

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Matt. It's not surprising the Pioneers sound better than the Logitechs. Unfortunately, it is unlikely you will find anyone who has experience with that particular Pioneer speaker. If you like them, that's all the really matters.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

I LOVE discussions like these.

Allow me to offer my audio knuckledragger opinion ...........

I have a love/hate relationship with subs so keep that in mind as the following is read; and I DO own a sub myself

First: the sat/sub system concept has been around since at least the late 60s (here's one), but it didn't take off until Blose marketed the crap out of it starting in the late 80s with their plastic cube/boomy bass module system. The beginning of the end for affordable, truly full/rich sounding speaker systems.

Second: The111, many people still think large speakers, including your Pioneers, can still sound great. <--- excellent, no b.s. audio site

Anyway............

It's really difficult to find nice medium-quality i.e. "Chevy/Toyota" quality floorstanders anymore, since sat/sub systems are all the rage. These systems can sound excellent..............if you're willing to fuss with them enough to take advantage of the....er....advantages of subwoofers and satellites: picking the correct crossover, hoping the differing slopes of the crossovers in the sub and the receiver don't conflict with each other; placing the sub in juuuuuuuust the right location - if there isn't already furniture there - for good output but also so it doesn't sound boomy.

FYI: many people report on audio-only forums no matter what they do, they can still localize their system's subwoofer, which can be distracting when listening to music. That could just be a placebo effect, but is something to consider in a discussion such as this (for its lowest crossover choice, my older receiver offers only 100Hz and I can *definitely* locate the sub with this setting).

And make sure the satellites are large enough to produce enough bass at the standard 80Hz crossover, so there isn't a dip in the overall system's frequency response. When this doesn't happen, from what I've seen this is what causes so many sat/sub systems at any price level to sound thin and "small". And to me, generally speaking a satellite that produces enough bass output at 80Hz is going to use at minimum a 6.5" woofer and really more like an 8". So one of the advantages of a sat/sub system, nearly invisible speakers, is pretty much eliminated.

But for movie use, the above doesn't really apply for me: IMO sound quality isn't as important in the movie watching scenario because of the use of so many artificially-generated sounds AND there's a movie going on, so I'm just not as "tuned into" the sound as I am with music.

Floorstanders' main disadvantage vs. sat/sub system? Attaining good stereo imaging AND good bass response. In other words, you can't always place them for best bass response and have them pointed in the correct direction. But in my experience, imaging is more important for realistic sounding music & when optimized for this aspect, most of the time a pair of floorstanders' bass output sounds quite good, and lots of times it can sound excellent.

But then again, let's not get obsessed and forget that bass is only part of the music and part of the movie.

SO: if we're talking Ultimate Sonic Performance here, I agree that for the same price, a sat/sub system that is 100% properly configured with lots of time spent doing so, can outperform two floorstanders.

But otherwise, I think if you don't walk around with a sound level meter and a test disc in your pocket, a pair of old-skool floorstanders can still sound e-x-c-e-l-l-e-n-t. And visiting any audio-only/music forum will reveal many others who think the same thing.

To me, the disadvantages of both types of systems end up balancing each other out, so just adopt whatever system suits your ears.


***************************************
Some of you guys knew I was going to link to these.

Cerwin-Vega is the last manufacturer I know of that still sells medium quality floorstanders. One series is geared more toward ultimate thump and a visceral experience; the other newer series is tamer and more accurate but still retains a strong streak of political-incorrectness.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Cool. So the speakers I mentioned I was interested in originally, the Sony SS-F5000's... I can find a PAIR of them from reputable online retailer, for under $200 shipped. Any idea at all if those would be decent, or would compare to my old-school Pioneers? I realize that's a tough question...

Thanks for the input.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

Decent for two channel audio? No. Decent for home theater? No. Decent for listening to MP3 on your computer, sure, knock yourself out.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

These Sonys, right?

I've actually heard the bookshelf version of these, exact same drivers but in a smaller enclosure, using my own CD and for what they cost they sounded quite good & especially, had no overt irritating qualities: less expensive systems like these usually involve certain performance tradeoffs and if not engineered properly, can sound boomy, have "tizzy"/harsh high frequencies etc. But if they are engineered properly, while they may lack lots of resolution and pounding bass, at least they don't drive you nuts after just 30 minutes.

Plus, Sony is a huge corporation so the economies-of-scale thing helps with the price/performance ratio vs. a smaller manufacturer's basic speaker.
On that AudioKarma.org site, I found a post that said those Pioneers used a 12" woofer. So these Sonys won't really be able to keep up bass-wise, but should be able to match most of the Pioneer's other "big speaker" qualities.

BTW: Sony is capable of making speakers that can compete with many speaker-only brands. Check out this review of their little-known SS-K series Circuit City used to sell until a couple years ago. I heard the 2-way model w/6.5" woofer and didn't buy them ONLY because I was in between paychecks....then they were all gone.

Hmm. Anyone that hasn't heard a pair of floorstanders properly set up doesn't know what they're missing.

And a 2.0 system's associated electronics, like the ones pictured in the above review, really add to the pleasure of using them. That's because with a traditional system like that i.e. just two speakers, a stereo receiver or a preamp + power amp and a 2.0 source component(s), there is no complicated onscreen parameter menu to deal with and other fussy things associated with a bass-managed system.* This is the "elegance" many 2.0 fans mention when discussing a stereo-only system: they're simple but can still sound excellent.

Anyway, once you've determined the best location for optimum bass output - with the stereo imaging issue taken care of first - for the speakers in that particular room, unless the bass REALLY sucks, mentally-speaking there is no nagging doubt that something more can be done with phase controls, crossovers, blah blah blah. That's all you can do, end of story.....now you get to enjoy your music! Or your video game or movie or whatever. I'm sure that sounds almost evil to people obsessed with 100% accuracy, frequency graphs and spec charts but it works for me. Before DSP chips and subwoofers, for decades people enjoyed listening to their music this way, and lived to tell about it. Amazing.


* remember, I myself own just such a system, which also includes a hi-res audio player which has its own set of hair-pulling configuration issues I have to deal with. But surround music makes that pulling worth it to me.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

I'm sure glad you all gave the caveat that this is for audiophiles. Otherwise I'd have to go home and burn my Infinity Beta Floorstanding speakers and spit on their smouldering remains.

So it seems that if your budget is $150 you most definitely have to go for monitors but it also seems from these posts that if you're in the $500/pr to $1500/pr you don't stand a chance of getting non-crap speakers as John Rice defines them.

Sure glad I'm not an audiophile yet so I can still enjoy my speakers!

Actually there's some generally nifty advice here and really good advice for when I finish my international crime spree and can afford Rice's speakers.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

No, but it was obvious from the replies.

However, I DID give the caveat in my original post that I am not an audiophile, and my music library (which is HUGE since I am a music-phile) is all in 192kbps mp3, driven through a cheap soundcard through a cheap stereo receiver. So that should make it obvious that I don't need any $2500 speakers.

My original point was that the $150 Logitech 2.1 setup I bought sounded like crap compared to my old Pioneer towers (even to my unintelligent ears, with my crappy source), and I want to find something that sounds as good as the Pioneers, FOR MY SOURCE. I think the Sony SS-F5000's may do that. My only concern, as somebody pointed out, is that they have 8" sub while my Pioneer has 12". What about the 4-way version of the Sony, the SS-F6000, with two stacked 8" subs? Would that make up for not having a 12", or is it still not quite the same? Honestly the <10" width of these towers is one of the most appealing things about them to me. And FWIW, I am not a bass fiend, and most music I listen to isn't bass heavy.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

why not try ebay, or www.audiogon.com and instead of buying brand new get a higher quality carefully used pair. but make sure to audition your speakers first, since they are a long term purchase there is no sense in getting stuck with something that doesnt sound good to you.

Re: Are tower (floor) speakers still popular among audiophiles?

How depressing. Not only have I apparently never heard a "truly good" pair of speakers, I also find out the ones I have are $1800 below the "crap" line and aren't even half the way to "truly decent" starting point. Now I'm bummed! Maybe I'll put on a three piece suit, rent a Mercedes and go speaker shopping again. O.K, now the sarcasm is over . I've never been a big fan of Sony speakers, but at that price for towers there's not much else to recommend. Maybe Polk R50's when Frys had them for around $69 a piece but that's been over for quite awhile.