Bookshelf speakers list for... (1 Viewer)

[John]

I'm compiling a list of bookshelf speakers that general consumers can get behind and enjoy, but also have decent quality.

I've compiled the categories people are really looking for, alongside a basic, brainstormed thought:

• overall top-tier — some sort of KEF
• under $500 — some Elac Debut?
• budget — monolith audition b5
• active — Klipsch R-51PM
• passive — JBL A130 (heard great things on it in the forums, relatively easy to use / setup, etc.)

What I'm understanding is that a ton of average people are looking for wireless bookshelf speakers, but word on the forum is just don't do it. My gut here is that non-audiophiles are going to eat up something that has a good Bluetooth codec and links well. Am I totally off-based on this? Granted, I'm also of the opinion that if you are putting your bookshelfs close to your TV, you won't need to worry about wireless anyhow, so grabbing wired is just worth it.

Looking for thoughts, criticisms, etc.! Thanks!

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Just don't do wireless in general. You don't have to be "audiophiles" to find them wanting/problematic. Wireless would make much more sense for something that needs to be portable or the like, especially including headphones.

RE: the <=$500 tier, you can often get the ELAC Uni-Fi bookshelves on (frequently recurring) sale in that tier. For instance, the current sale, which has lasted for at least a few weeks already, has the Uni-Fi 2.0s down to ~$420. And in this same sale, they've even knocked the Debut Reference bookshelves down to ~$525 (probably first time ever).

RE: the budget level, you can often get the ELAC Debut 2.0 bookshelves (again, on frequently recurring sale) for about the same price as those Monolith Audition B5s. Only thing is you probably can't buy an odd number of ELAC bookshelf speaker(s) unlike the Monoliths, but why would you though? Those JBL A130s are also similarly priced though on more regular basis than the ELACs I guess.

Maybe you mistook those Monoliths to be priced for the pair perhaps?

Cheers!

_Man_

 

[Baenwort]

I would include wireless as 3 out of the 4 people I've helped make selections in the last two years would only accept wireless as they rent and can't hide wires and want a easily movable system for when they move again.

 

[John]

I would include wireless as 3 out of the 4 people I've helped make selections in the last two years would only accept wireless as they rent and can't hide wires and want a easily movable system for when they move again.

All of my number and intuition tell me that people want wireless, yes. So, we'll see.

 

[Todd Erwin]

I would say pretty much anything in Monoprice's Monolith Series would be a good budget bookshelf, although they do lack mounting connections.

 

[John]

I would say pretty much anything in Monoprice's Monolith Series would be a good budget bookshelf, although they do lack mounting connections.

Yeah, that's the exact sentiment I keep seeing everywhere. This seems to be a pretty universal feeling.

 

[JohnRice]

People can "want" what they want, but wireless just isn't likely to be much of a reality any time soon. Distributing audio wirelessly is one thing. That's easy, but a full surround system that is wireless has always been a tough nut to crack. First off, it is basically guaranteed to be a closed system, most likely of quite low quality and high cost. Sony is venturing into wireless surround speakers, but you're limited to a couple of their own model speakers, which I guarantee are not going to be of especially good audio quality. A problem is, people tend to believe a wireless system is no big deal. That's simply not the case. If someone insists on wireless, then they need to go Sonos and make it a day. Plus, keep in mind, speakers require power, so there is no true wireless, unless they are battery powered, which is not a viable solution. They still need to be plugged in. A wireless surround system is so vastly more complicated that just a bluetooth codec.

Bookshelf speakers? Top tier - Legacy Calibre (you did say "top tier) Paradigm Persona or Founder, and yes, some KEF models.

More reasonable priced, definitely ELAC Uni-Fi v2 or Debut v2, especially on a frequent sale.

Budget, Monolith or Dayton are both excellent choices.

 

[John]

Thanks for all of the input! Especially on the wireless situation. I'll explain the situation and recommend something else that is wireless instead.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

FWIW, Stereophile seems to like a few wireless options well enough... well, we're talking for stereo playback only, not for HT surround setup though... including a couple models from KEF, LS60 Wireless and LSX Wireless, that latter of which seems/sounds a fair bit like a wireless version of their popular LS50 bookshelf, but probably not quite as good. They're definitely not cheap though (at ~$1.3-1.4K for the lower end LSX Wireless) and probably beyond the budget of most folks wanting wireless just for stereo playback (w/ not that much bass to boot)... but then, one also wouldn't need an (separate) AVR/amp to drive them (since it'd have its own onboard) -- the LS60 Wireless, which they seem to like most and even rated class A (albeit not full-range), would cost ~$7K, which is certainly what one might expect for a class A rated speaker of this type.

Recommended Components 2023 Edition Loudspeakers

Loudspeaker Systems: A (FULL RANGE): Audiovector R8 Arreté: $77,500/pair Optional grounding cable adds $3850. (Vol.44 No.9 WWW) Bang & Olufsen Beolab 90: $115,000/pair ★ (Vol.40 No.1 WWW) Dutch & Dutch 8c: $14,950/pair (stands necessary) (Vol.42 No.8, Vol.43 No.4 WWW) Dynaudio Confidence 30...

www.stereophile.com

The other few recommendable options are either super expensive (Piega Premium Wireless 701 at ~$9K w/ class B rating) or more modestly priced (Vanatoo Transparent One Encore at ~$600 also class B rated or SVS Prime Wireless Pro at ~$900 and class C rated).

_Man_

 

[John]

I'm actively working on this now, writing up about this very issue. The constant insights are pretty great.

Current angle is like this:

• People want wireless bookshelf speakers for reasons like blah blah
• home theater enthusiasts warn against this, even for average builds, because
  • requires some power anyhow
  • just doesn't work well for surround sound unless you box yourself into a particular system (i.e. Sony stuff) that becomes quite limited
• Your probably better off going Sonos Arc or some sort of soundbar instead.

I like this take, though, where there are some "decent" ones out there, but they are super expensive and the value/cost ratio is off. Will probably pivot slightly in this direction, as part of the warning, but won't give these choices as some sort of actual recommendation.

 

[JohnRice]

I haven't looked at those ones Man mentioned, but generally wireless speakers are just stereo powered speakers with bluetooth and maybe something like AirPlay. They are intended to play music wirelessly from your iPhone or iPad, but not to be part of a surround sound system.

 

[John]

Yeah, I need to look into them first, of course!

 

[Todd Erwin]

When I worked at Best Buy several years back, customers were always asking for "wireless" speakers for their home theater setup. The only ones I felt somewhat comfortable to recommend were from SONOS, but I still had to remind them that they would require power, so technically they would not be truly wireless, and at the time, SONOS only supported Dolby Digital Plus. Also, streaming was just starting to take off, so most movie content was primarily DTS-HD MA on Blu-ray. Therefore, SONOS would basically play those back in stereo with matrixed surround.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

My experience with friends/family asking for advice with wireless equipment matches John’s and Todd’s experiences - they’re so wrapped up in the idea of eliminating wires altogether that they forget the speakers need to get power from somewhere.

If you’ve got a 5.1 wireless system, that’s six speakers, each needing its own outlet.

If there’s even a system in existence for using powered wireless speakers with built-in rechargeable batteries, you’re either gonna need to run cables to them temporarily to recharge them, or pull them off the wall to put them into a charging base. I can guarantee that the speakers won’t run out of battery all at the same time, so it’s going to be a constant battle to stay on top of what is charged before watching anything.

In my experience, needing six electrical outlets in different parts of the room for powered speakers with wireless reception winds up being, practically speaking, a bigger burden than needing one electrical outlet and then having to hide a few wires afterwards.

If you’re a renter and can’t change the structure of your place, or even if you’re not but you’re just not inclined to open up walls, floors and/or ceilings to run cables, I think it makes more sense to look at other options for hiding them before looking to wireless. There’s a lot of inexpensive covering available that you can use to run the wires on the floor against the wall, put the covering over the wires, and paint it to match the wall. Only someone knowing what to look for would ever even notice it in the room; to everyone else, if it even registers, it’ll just appear to be regular wall trim or moulding.

My advice is usually to get the better quality, lower priced wired gear, and to spend a fraction of the savings on something to conceal to wires, rather than spending a fortune on wireless equipment that usually isn’t as good of quality or compatibility as the wired stuff.

I hate to be the kind of person who tells people “no” or that their idea isn’t a good one, but at the same time, if you’re someone who wants high quality 5.1/7.1/Atmos surround sound, who wants the setup to be near-invisible in the room, and who also doesn’t want any kind of wire involved at all, those goals are in opposition to each other. You can accept a lower quality wireless system, or you can accept a higher quality wired system and decide how to manage the wires, but high quality and wireless do not really go together yet. Maybe one day.

It’s not dissimilar from an old saying about speakers in general - you can get two out of these three choices: you can have small, you can have energy efficient, or you can have cheap. You can get any two of those options but not all three.

 

[Todd Erwin]

My experience with friends/family asking for advice with wireless equipment matches John’s and Todd’s experiences - they’re so wrapped up in the idea of eliminating wires altogether that they forget the speakers need to get power from somewhere.

If you’ve got a 5.1 wireless system, that’s six speakers, each needing its own outlet.

If there’s even a system in existence for using powered wireless speakers with built-in rechargeable batteries, you’re either gonna need to run cables to them temporarily to recharge them, or pull them off the wall to put them into a charging base. I can guarantee that the speakers won’t run out of battery all at the same time, so it’s going to be a constant battle to stay on top of what is charged before watching anything.

In my experience, needing six electrical outlets in different parts of the room for powered speakers with wireless reception winds up being, practically speaking, a bigger burden than needing one electrical outlet and then having to hide a few wires afterwards.

If you’re a renter and can’t change the structure of your place, or even if you’re not but you’re just not inclined to open up walls, floors and/or ceilings to run cables, I think it makes more sense to look at other options for hiding them before looking to wireless. There’s a lot of inexpensive covering available that you can use to run the wires on the floor against the wall, put the covering over the wires, and paint it to match the wall. Only someone knowing what to look for would ever even notice it in the room; to everyone else, if it even registers, it’ll just appear to be regular wall trim or moulding.

My advice is usually to get the better quality, lower priced wired gear, and to spend a fraction of the savings on something to conceal to wires, rather than spending a fortune on wireless equipment that usually isn’t as good of quality or compatibility as the wired stuff.

I hate to be the kind of person who tells people “no” or that their idea isn’t a good one, but at the same time, if you’re someone who wants high quality 5.1/7.1/Atmos surround sound, who wants the setup to be near-invisible in the room, and who also doesn’t want any kind of wire involved at all, those goals are in opposition to each other. You can accept a lower quality wireless system, or you can accept a higher quality wired system and decide how to manage the wires, but high quality and wireless do not really go together yet. Maybe one day.

It’s not dissimilar from an old saying about speakers in general - you can get two out of these three choices: you can have small, you can have energy efficient, or you can have cheap. You can get any two of those options but not all three.

Back when I was renting, the way my living room was laid out, it was not easy to run wires to the back corners unless I tried to run wires under the carpeting (and thus kissing my security deposit goodbye). My compromise was an earlier version of the Rocketfish Wireless Rear Speaker Kit.

It actually did a pretty decent job, allowing me to hang my surround speakers on the walls, run the wires down the wall and into the receiver box (bottom photo) and plug that into a power outlet on that side of the room. The transmitter (middle photo) was then connected to the surround speaker outputs on my home theater receiver.

 

[Nathan_H]

I find that people that want wireless ALSO want simple. That ends up meaning something like a SONOS system -- which I think is about as good as wireless gets for a surround setup in terms of balancing sound quality and simplicity.

There are, however, several good STEREO wireless options. KEF, SVS, etc have some. But the people that dislike wires, also seem to dislike SIZE, so a sound bar often makes far more sense once one delves into it. The sound bar really wins when dialog intelligibility and adjustment comes into play.

---

Now, there are some awesome setups possible in the 1k range for surround sound if one is willing to get creative and learn a few things.....but that's not what the guide is about, right? The guide is about clicking "Buy it now," a box showing up on the doorstep tomorrow, and within 45 minutes, setup is complete?

---

Back to the broader topic: There have been quite a few double blind listening studies to determine what speakers are most likely to be liked by the most people.

I'm working on summarizing it, and will share some of my working thoughts here and how I think it applies to the list of speakers in the first post.

Here's the thinking: If I can ask enough people who have listened to enough systems in enough rooms what they like, perhaps I can narrow my search to the speakers that are more liked than most others. And perhaps if most people tend to agree regarding which speakers sound better than others, knowing that will help me narrow my search!

The reality is that getting that information is difficult.

Any particular place I might pose that question is likely to be answered by at most a couple dozen people, who have each heard fewer than a dozen speakers in a dozen rooms during their life. They didn't hear them all at once, nor set up the same, and they heard them while knowing what they were, probably what they cost, and often with some expectation about how they would sound. So the results of posing such a question online are seldom very compelling.

What would really help is to have hundreds people hear the same few dozen speakers in the same room, all set up correctly, without any knowledge of which speaker was which, what it cost, what the brand name was, and so on. And then to do that process again and again, and track the results over time.

Then, if a consensus emerged from all those listening sessions and all those people, experts and novices alike, regarding which speakers sounded better than other speakers, that might be really useful to know.

The good news? Experts have been running those kinds of listening tests for decades, and the results have been very consistent. The same speakers (ie, the same kinds of performance) tend to be preferred by most people, including expert listeners and novices.

So, you can look up the results of those tests and buy the speaker that won.

Of course, not every speaker has been tested that way. So can we make use of those tests to help us get a sense of which untested speaker might also be winners?

Could we measure the response of the speakers in a large number of ways, and see if the speakers people like all happen to share some particular characteristics? That way, instead of ONLY having a list of some specific speakers we tested we would ALSO be able to PREDICT whether OTHER speakers, that we haven't had everyone listen to, might also be preferred by most listeners?

It turns out, we can measure the speakers people like, and then predict, based on measurements of other speakers, what they are likely to like even if the new speaker wasn't in one of the test!

And we can validate those predictions, by then conducting a test and seeing the predicted preference closely matches that actual preference of listeners.

What does that mean? That means we can accurately predict which speakers most people will prefer without even listening to them, most of the time, simply based on how those speakers measure and how they compare to other speakers most people like in double blind listening tests. This is not conjecture or a hypothesis. This is a tested, consistent, result.

It's not that measurements are the only way to find a good speaker. You can do double blind listening tests of dozens of speakers to feel confident in your choices. But the results are unlikely to be much different that using tools like the CEA 2034 measurement suite to narrow the field down to some top contenders. Measurements can help rule out choices that are less likely to be appealing, and narrow in on those that are likely to sound best.....saving you time, money and aggravation.

Based on thousands of listening tests with thousands of people with hundreds of speakers done over the past few decades, we can say with a whole lot of confidence they are most likely to like speakers that exhibit some specific kinds of measurable behaviors -- not because those features are measurable, and not because I buy into some theory about them, but because that is what other expert and non expert listeners tend to choose based on what they hear with their own ears. It's a description of how things have worked, that also describes the most likely course of how things will work. It's "right" most of the time for most people including experts and novices.

If consensus driven choices are what you are seeking (a consensus based on non sighted listening tests with hundreds of combinations of speakers and listeners) then there is a great tool for figuring out what speakers are the most popular based on how they sound: CEA 2034. This process takes all those listening preference tests and summarizes what people like most often, and lets you use the same criteria to evaluate which speakers (even those that weren't directly tested) you and I are most likely to like. Is it perfect? No. Does it work most of the time? Yes. Is it easy to figure out what matters more within this test? Not always at first.

Amir over at Audio Science Review has some good videos about how to use these data, as does Erin over at Erin's Audio Corner. And increasingly, speaker reviewers and manufacturers are measuring speakers in this manner, which greatly aids in narrowing down the selections.

What happens when we apply this process to the brands in the original post?

KEF does really well versus the competition at any most price points. (Their flat on wall speakers don't measure up, pun intended, so one cannot completely blindly go KEF, but almost everything else they are selling makes the grade.)

At their price point, the Monoprice THX speakers do really well. I couldn't find measurements of the audition B5 model.

JBL has a mixed history, but many are good. (This is funny because their parent brand, Harman, was one of the early adopters and pioneers in this area.). The A130 however, is not great: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/jbl_stage_a130/ which may just be a reminder that sighted listening tests and biases are inevitably related to one another..... which we have known for decades: paper from 1994 documenting this in speaker listening tests.