Beolab 50 - addressing the speaker/room interface.

[Tony L]

The other thing that needs pointing out is not everyone lives in horrible sounding rooms or has to compromise installation to silly 'lifestyle' concerns! To my mind it is a lot of unnecessary digital processing, servicing headaches and built-in obsolescence that I honestly don't think I need. I respect the MEG approach of reducing rear bass output with clever acoustic design rather than signal processing far more. I have no idea how that works!

 

[Purité Audio]

Keith, I'm just saying that DRC also "ameliorates the room's contribution" and I personally, don't miss the ability to achieve that digitally if honest.

I obviously appreciate that part of the attraction of loudspeakers like mine is the controlled dispersion from the midrange up. I don't feel any compunction to experience the same at the bottom end anymore though - it never sounded natural in room to my uncritical ears.

The Kiis don't use digital room correction, they use an ingenious crossover design and multiple drivers to cancel off-axis response , the result is just clearer sound you simply hear more.
B&O's 90's also have some built in EQ to primarily tackle bass response below the area of controlled directivity.
Keith

 

[iansr]

Keith, I'm just saying that DRC also "ameliorates the room's contribution" and I personally, don't miss the ability to achieve that digitally if honest.

I obviously appreciate that part of the attraction of loudspeakers like mine is the controlled dispersion from the midrange up. I don't feel any compunction to experience the same at the bottom end anymore though - it never sounded natural in room to my uncritical ears.

Which JBLs have you got?

 

[merlin]

K2 9800's. Just horn load mid and treble and a properly sized bass unit Ian.

 

[Space is the Place]

I know were veering slight of topic but the Kii's arent as natural sounding as the Arrays i had although my exposure to the Kii's is limited admittedly. I should imagine for the money the B&O 90/50's could be better but you never know, i was also thinking of the Active Zero 1's too but was told by a french dealer (who had nothing to gain) the the Arrays were much better than the Zero's when properly amplified.

I've also been down the Tact Lyngdorf 2+2 room correction root, and they aren't as good as the big JBL's either, i had the LS50 here at the same time as the JBL's, the vocal range of the LS50 is supposed very good, the Arrays just made them sound compressed. I have some recordings of Bjork singing at rehearsals that i was fortunate enough to be at, singing unamplified her voice is something else, a force of nature! The only speaker i've heard that has been able to render her voice without compression was the Array.

The other thing i feel is that electric bass and amplified guitar, just sounds more authentic via a 12 or 15 inch woofer that works up into the high bass/ lower mid, i'm willing to be proved wrong of course but i've never heard a speaker with smaller drivers get it quite right.

 

[Purité Audio]

Everyone imagines that what they have is 'correct' even though few take the trouble to acoustically measure their rooms, as to 'natural' sounding what does that mean?
The Kii's/Beolab/Dutch&Dutch are the most transparent loudspeakers I have heard.
Keith

 

[Tony L]

Though again, you are basing that on your idea of "correct", and in what looks on paper to be a very poor sounding room! A more interesting question in many ways would be what your references are?

 

[Purité Audio]

I am basing my ideas of 'correct' on the independent measurements of the loudspeakers and my in-room measurements of all the speakers I stock.
Which include ATC, PSI, Manger Audio Cessaro Grimm as well as Dutch&Dutch and Kii Audio .
Keith

 

[Space is the Place]

Everyone imagines that what they have is 'correct' even though few take the trouble to acoustically measure their rooms, as to 'natural' sounding what does that mean?
The Kii's/Beolab/Dutch&Dutch are the most transparent loudspeakers I have heard.
Keith

I thought the Arrays were "correct" in the way they represent natural sound, this is also their downfall to some extent as they sound so even and have so little compression you end up playing them at fairly realistic volumes.

I'm sure both studio monitors will have more resolution than the the 1400s, they JBL's arent without their compromises either, but on a lot of recordings they were fairly convincing, on some live recordings from acoustics - like St Martin in the Fields it was nearly as good as being there!

I was fortunate as just where the JBL's have their bass peak (see graph for LG's room in Stereophile) i have a null in the bass at 100Hz, because of the void floor, it's a bit narrower that the peak in the graph but it's was close. I also felt because of there directional nature i could have got rid of the acoustic paneling with the JBL's and not suffered that much, they are the only thing i've bought that i really regret selling.
I've though a great deal about the M2's but i just can't convince myself because of how ugly they are.

In room Array 1400.

Kii's outside...

B&0 90's in KR's listening room.

I know its a slightly different smoothed graph but this is in JA's room for the NHTs Evo i still have.

 

[Tony L]

Hefty pair of MEGs, RL-901s I suspect, spotted on Proms Extra tonight.

 

[merlin]

I thought the Arrays were "correct" in the way they represent natural sound, this is also their downfall to some extent as they sound so even and have so little compression you end up playing them at fairly realistic volumes.

It's the perceived authenticity that does it for me too.

The K2's however really excel even at very low levels. I frequently listen at 55db or so at the listening position and everything is there and correct and the music is enthralling - which at the end of the day, is what's important to me.

 

[iansr]

I thought the Arrays were "correct" in the way they represent natural sound, this is also their downfall to some extent as they sound so even and have so little compression you end up playing them at fairly realistic volumes.

I'm sure both studio monitors will have more resolution than the the 1400s, they JBL's arent without their compromises either, but on a lot of recordings they were fairly convincing, on some live recordings from acoustics - like St Martin in the Fields it was nearly as good as being there!

I was fortunate as just where the JBL's have their bass peak (see graph for LG's room in Stereophile) i have a null in the bass at 100Hz, because of the void floor, it's a bit narrower that the peak in the graph but it's was close. I also felt because of there directional nature i could have got rid of the acoustic paneling with the JBL's and not suffered that much, they are the only thing i've bought that i really regret selling.
I've though a great deal about the M2's but i just can't convince myself because of how ugly they are.

In room Array 1400.

Kii's outside...

B&0 90's in KR's listening room.

I know its a slightly different smoothed graph but this is in JA's room for the NHTs Evo i still have.

Interesting to see the love on here for JBLs. I have the M2s. They ain't pretty but boy are they good. It's going to be very interesting to see what I make of the speakers I've mentioned in comparison.

 

[Purité Audio]

You have the M2's , which amps/dsp do you have?
Keith

 

[iansr]

Hefty pair of MEGs, RL-901s I suspect, spotted on Proms Extra tonight.

Yes I understand the BBC uses them. I'm sure their amps are pretty good but they'd be of even greater interest to me if you could use amplifiers of your choice with them ( still in an "active" set up of course).

 

[iansr]

You have the M2's , which amps/dsp do you have?
Keith

I didn't want to use the recommended Crown amps. I use miniDSP OpenDRC DI units. NCore 400s on the woofers and Neurochrome Parallel 86s in bridged mode on the CDs. ( The latter are incredibly good amps.)

 

[Purité Audio]

I would very much like to hear M2's in a domestic environment having only heard them at the UK 'pro' distributor, whereabouts are you Ian?
PM me perhaps, thanks.
Keith

 

[Space is the Place]

I didn't want to use the recommended Crown amps. I use miniDSP OpenDRC DI units. NCore 400s on the woofers and Neurochrome Parallel 86s in bridged mode on the CDs. ( The latter are incredibly good amps.)

Thats pretty much what i was going to do although i noticed the they had a crossover at work that i could implement an EQ'd crossover on (can't remember the name of it now but had a blue anodized front?). My plan was to buy all the parts from the states minus the cabinets, they were about £3.2k in total before shipping. I did contact the distributer about them and he gave me some "interesting prices" i think £28,000 was the cheapest domestic package!

What speakers did you have before Ian?

 

[Space is the Place]

It's the perceived authenticity that does it for me too.

The K2's however really excel even at very low levels. I frequently listen at 55db or so at the listening position and everything is there and correct and the music is enthralling - which at the end of the day, is what's important to me.

Oh they were good at low levels too, but my current speakers are a little more explicit and dynamic at lower volumes, they have more depth to the sound too than the JBL's, but the JBL's where more coherent.
Like we discussed i think at the time i think your speakers probably have more midrange detail than the 1400 because of the better drivers in yours and that they are more balanced for smaller spaces.

 

[misterdog]

What speakers did you have before Ian?

Might require a separate thread for that answer

 

[vln]

Oh they were good at low levels too, but my current speakers are a little more explicit and dynamic at lower volumes, they have more depth to the sound too than the JBL's, but the JBL's where more coherent.
Like we discussed i think at the time i think your speakers probably have more midrange detail than the 1400 because of the better drivers in yours and that they are more balanced for smaller spaces.

What are your current speakers?