SURVEY: Do you notice a big difference in $10K+ speakers vs. more affordable ones? (1 Viewer)

[Tom Brennan]

Saurav---Good horn-driver combinations have very good frequency response and their rolloff is generally very smooth without "flareups", this due to the excellent damping that the column of air in the horn exerts on the diaphragm. Better I think than damping with notch filters as is common with direct-radiators. My Altec-JBL horn rig is +-3db from 25hz to 16khz on axis in my room, as shown on my RTA (not the most highly resolving of devices, it doesn't take that many "slices", but the trend is clear). One advantage is that the controlled dispersion of horns keeps sound from splattering all over the place, willy-nilly, doing God knows what to actual response at the listening point.

 

[Justin Doring]

Sorry I'm late to the party.

To address the original question first. Generally speaking, you get what you pay for, which is why a $20,000 speaker usually sounds better than a $10,000 speaker, and why a $10,000 usually sounds better than a $5,000, and why a $5,000 usually sounds better than a $2,500 speaker.

That said, $3000-$6000 buys you an excellent speaker these days (e.g. NHT 3.3, Dynaudio Contour 3.0, Magnepan 3.6, PSB Stratus Goldi, Martin Logan Odyssey, B&W N804, or whatever floats your boat etc.). These speakers aren't perfect, of course, but I've found that when you advance to this price range, great sound begins. I've also found that once you've reached this $3,000-$6,000 price range, you have to jump to $20,000 to get significantly better sound. Sure, a few of the best speakers around $10,000 (e.g. Revel Ultima Studio, Vienna Acoustics Mahler, Wilson Sophia, etc.) may sound a bit better in some areas, but not significantly so. Once you move up to the $20,000 range, however, you start hearing close to state of the art sound (e.g. Wilson WATT/Puppy (unfairly maligned by many), Sonus Faber Amatti Homage, Revel Ultima Salon, B&W Signature 800). It's interesting that after the $20,000 range there are very few speakers under $70,000. Although these goliath-sized and uber-expensive speakers sound great and can fill a huge room with sound, I could personally be just as happy with a pair of $20,000 speakers as I could with an $85,000 pr.

What I've also noticed, is that when you move into the higher price ranges, "better" is replaced with "different." For example, I can say with certainty that the B&W DM303 sounds far better than the Paradigm Mini Monitor, but I can't say that the Wilson WATT/Puppy 6 is "better" or "worse" than the Revel Ultima Salon. They're just different.

Addressing some of the later arguments, every speaker technology, be it cones, horns, or electrostatics, planers, etc. has its strengths and weaknesses. Some people swear by horns, others by planers, and others by cones. Much depends upon personal and musical preference. Personally speaking, for a string quartet, small jazz ensemble, or female vocals, nothing can compare with the Martin Logan Odyssey or the Magnepan 3.6 in their price range. Put on a Mahler symphony, however, and these speakers are destroyed by the NHT 3.3. Regarding horns, the cheap ones like Klipsch make my ears bleed, and even expensive ones like the Avant Gardes are terribly bright, even with SETs. Horn advocates talk about the sound of music, but I only hear the sound of horns. Everybody, however, hears differently and has different personal and musical preferences, so if you love horns, then by all means continue to love them.

 

[Arnel Enero]

'Accuracy' doesn't end with flat frequency response.

But it sure starts with it. Get the frequency response wrong, and it brings everything else down with it, IMHO.

Musicians that I know would certainly agree that timbre is the most important characteristic that discriminates one instrument to another. If you fail to reproduce the timbre properly (through accurate tonal balance), you're not reproducing the sound of that instrument at all.

But in the end, I do agree that flat FR is not everything.

 

[Chad Kuypers]

Hello all,
I enjoy reading this kind of thread. I love hearing people's opinions on what they consider worthwhile and expensive. I especially like reading responses where people say that something "is" or "isn't" even though everyone knows that audio preferences greatly differ from person to person.
Do I notice a large difference between 5 and 10 thousand dollar speakers? Yeah. The truth is, I hear a huge difference between every speaker. For every person who thinks that a ten thousand dollar speaker isn't worth the money, I guarantee that there is someone who has a pair at home and loves them. That is just the nature of the beast.
I find it interesting that my own personal preferences for speakers have changed and evolved so much from when first I started this hobby. They also continue to do so. I started out preferring speakers playing at low volume. I preferred them to have a smooth top end. I never played them at high volumes. Through endless changes in my ability to discern certain aspects of speaker representation, I currently prefer gigantic speakers with enormous dynamic capabilities and a high end like a laser beam. I want every stinking detail to be there!
I played classical orchestral bass professionally for about ten years. That has a lot to do with my evolving tastes. It is funny that my original opinion about speakers was that they NEVER sounded good or "right" trying to reproduce full orchestra. For this reason I never listened to full orchestra recordings played through a stereo. Either that, or I listened at lower volumes to avoid hearing all of that distortion and compression. Now I build gigantic speakers that can play at ridiculous SPL's and have extremely detailed high ends that the "old" me would have probably considered annoying and horrible sounding.
I look at a thread like this and I just think of what the old me would have said versus the preferences of me from 5 years ago versus now and so on. I could have argued with myself enough to fill up this whole thread. No matter how odd someone's opinion may sound in response to all of this, I now understand where everyone is coming from.
I should mention that I am now completely engulfed in DIY speakers and there is no turning back. I can achieve (in my opinion) the sound quality of ANY speaker I want to for a fraction of the cost. I am not a huge fan of planar speakers anymore, so I really have no urge to duplicate them. (which would be a lot more difficult) I have a full woodworking shop and I build a new pair of speakers for myself almost every two months or so. I either sell my old speakers or add them to my "collection".
My current speakers are made Focal Utopia components. I am in love with them. When other people listen to them, some think they are the greatest speakers they have ever heard, and others think they are bright and "too loud". Neither response surprises me. I will be building them into gigantic three-way speakers in the next month or two. I can hardly wait...
Chad

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Horns represent dynamics the way no other technology can

Don't get me wrong. There are some magical horn/SET combinations that sound good. I have just found that horn speakers do tend to have colorations versus what I have heard in the studio. I have created DATs in recording studio and than gone over to a friend's house with top quality horns and there was definitely something wrong with the midrange. I also personally have some issues with high frequencies. That is why I politely object to the above statement. For me, ribbon tweeters do high frequencies like not other and that is why I have Maggie speakers. When I play my SACD with Joe Henderson blowing on the sax, IMHO it simply sounds real and closer to what I heard in the studio.

We will have a difference of opinion on this at the end of the day I believe but that is what makes this hobby interesting.

For some, low wattage SET amps and horns are the pinnacle, for others panel speakers and tubes (me!) are the pinnacle. But there are always good and bad things. As much as I love Maggies they don't have the bass (although more than you think and what is there is accurate) of the new Krells or the Wilson System 7 (which cost a LOT more by the way). Horns have great dynamics, no doubt, if done right, but there are some of us that feel the coloration is heavy. Maggies have great dynamics as well, but many don't put enough current on the panel and hence don't hear a good setup and draw the wrong conclusion.

I just feel it can be dangerous to make generalizations about a particular technology as being the best in certain areas. They all have plus and minuses.

 

[Larry B]

Justin, Chad, Lee:

Thanks to all three of you for your insightful and level-headed comments. I truly enjoyed reading them.

Larry

 

[Lee Scoggins]

My current speakers are made Focal Utopia components.

Chad,
Excellent quality parts here. DIY is a real alternative if you have the skills for cabintrey, etc. Have fun!
Larry,
Thanks.
This has been a very enjoyable read on the HTF.

 

[Saurav]

Wow, Lee, you're running Maggies on tubes? I hesitate to think how much your tube amps cost
And I would like to echo the other sentiments, this has been a great thread.

Get the frequency response wrong, and it brings everything else down with it, IMHO.

Actually, my tastes are different. At this point in my life I would put dynamic accuracy just a shade above tonal accuracy. Of course, I've lived with mini monitors for the last few years, so maybe I'm just giving more importance to the things they cannot do.
Larry, that might also be a factor in my opinions about soundstage and imaging - I've spent the last 2 years listening to speakers which soundstage really well (for the money, of course), but cannot handle large-scale dynamics. I'm sure that plays into my current preferences in some way or the other.