bernardhepworth
pfm Member
Good for the manufacturers perhaps.
I think that was his point, but maybe not so good if you are looking for some new speakers
Speakers - lots of treble
- Thread starter Middlemex
- Start date
I think that was his point, but maybe not so good if you are looking for some new speakers
Tony L
Administrator
This is the long-term curse of short-term subjective AB dems. I’ve sat in so, so many over the years as an observer with no interest in buying (I had friends who worked in shops) as it so often seems like a recursive loop of brighter, more forward, leaner along with the dealer frantically tapping his foot to the very leanest and brightest option trying to sell the idea of a hyped snare and no bass as ‘rhythm’. It is a key reason I jumped ship entirely into the second hand market as I just detest this sort of sound and sales approach. It bares zero resemblance to any musical instrument I’ve played or studio control room I’ve visited. I suspect it is a key reason so many become so restless and disillusioned with their choices resulting in ever increasing box-swapping. I honestly think a lot of modern hi-fi is just attention-seeking crap. Really, really wrong!
There is a lot of great stuff out there though, but it tends to be aimed more at classical listeners who tend to have a far clearer personal reference point IME.
I would have said this a few years ago when i had a NAD / MA GR60 system.
I now look after my ears very carefully and use a Bryston / PMC system with more than 10x the power and i'm fine.
The old setup is fine in a small room totally understressed on the TV.
I suspect the cause was distortion from the NAD amps into 6 Ohms near their limits.
Darren L
Egalitarian
That's how Naim and their dealers built their businesses IMHO
narabdela
who?
Call me old-fashioned (go on, I won't be offended), but I prefer music myself.
Tony L
Administrator
The subjective thing, yes, for sure, but in the era I enjoyed (chrome bumper Naim amps, Linn turntable and speakers) they were only bright and forward (with vinyl at least) if the person installing the system was utterly clueless. I always managed to get a nice warm friendly sound out of my rig and that was with Kan IIs most of the time! Things started going rapidly wrong to my ears when the two companies went their own way and digital arrived. I’m sure I’d still find much to enjoy in say a period-correct LP12/Ittok/Asak, 32.5/HiCap/250 and Kan IIs. Not the last word for classical by any stretch, but that shouldn’t be a bright or forward system if well set up in an appropriate (i.e. small) room and kept well within the B110s volume envelope.
To my mind the problem is a cumulative one that has happened in decades since where we have gone through countless iterations of kit vying for attention in acoustically bad dealer showrooms and competing against itself, not the sort of measurement-centric kit that early generation of Linn/Naim stuff was put up against. It swiftly becomes a recursive loop where the actual reference point is so many generations ago no one even remembers it. I have no objection to anyone choosing whatever they like, no matter how bizarre the response, but really they should do so against a credible reference e.g. a BBC monitor, Quad ESL or whatever. Just picking the “most impressive” of say three options designed to fight in a dem room is a recipe for disaster IMO.
Darren L
Egalitarian
Aye @Tony L I loved the little chrome bumper Nait with a Rega Planar 3 and the HB2's, pretty much like the sound you've described but when I had a demonstration of the Nait3 and matching CD player in 97? it sounded awful, nothing like the earlier amp, the emphasis seemed to be on the top end and had lost the musicality and warmth of the earlier amp.
very good points - in my 50s...
the treble is probably metal string guitar kind of frequency, so you are right it is not at 20KHz. Although, some of the high end of the strings could go in the high KHz..
Inner secrets
I agree that many 'speakers these days are too brightly lit. Either that or I get more sensitive to it as I get older.
Take the KEF R3 which gains awards galore but to my ears sounds very wrong at the top.
Anyway, you can go on swapping kit for years hoping to hit the spot, or you could invest in some EQ and fix it day 1, assuming the speakers are fundamentally of good design without nasty resonant peaks.
Do not be tempted to fix something of this magnitude with amplifier swaps. Sure you'll get some very mild changes to tonality (sometimes) but you are really playing on the fringes if you want to effect a wholesale change in trop end presentation.
It's unfortunate today that many attribute powerful properties to amplifiers which they simply cannot posses, unless designed by a clown!
I say that as someone who certainly hasn't always followed his own rules over years, has gone off on wild chasses for perfection, spent far too much money and often come unstuck.
Don't make the same mistakes
Tell me about the Kef R3 - in what way is it wrong at the top? Too bright or not at all? I heard the previous series, the R700 and R900, and they were awfully muffled at the top.
On the other hand, the reference 1 (expensive bugger) sounded amazing, so is the R3 and new R 5,7, 11 clsoer to the reference or the R700, 900 series?
Its all Yamaha, I have had various amps, incl the as2100 and now as2200. CD is a Yamaha , and cable sare generic thick cables
the distinction i am making is actually very subtle - my current speakers are NS700, whcih is also very bright, but just lacks a slight metallic property. Also the recent NSF901 was much less bright int he treble, although it had a similar tweeter and alu plate to the previous models.
nostromo
pfm Member
'Well alright'Inner secrets
In my limited experience digital amps don't have the headroom.
Took me a good hour to set up the basic Crown / JBL system in our kitchen, very easy to get a distorted top end.
Tony L
Administrator
By ‘digital’ I was really referring to CD. The classic Linn systems were built around a then very warm and weighty sounding LP12, they did not transition easily to the ruler-flat response of CD, especially given so many (now coveted) early CDs were very lazy flat-master transfers and lacked compression or boosted bass. I remember being shocked by just how bad an early fairly budget Philips player sounded through my 62/HiCap/140 and Kan IIs. It stripped paint, yet the record deck (then a Xerxes) sounded great.
nostromo
pfm Member
For me digital has only recently, say in past 5 to 8 years, got even close to a good LP12 Linn setup. This may also be due to better methods of production for digital media nowadays. The Karik and Numeric were never close to a decent LP12 setup ( I never head the CD12) the dealer insisted I say 'different' rather than inferior. The newly released CD in those days was the live version of The Eagles Hotel California which was one of the better sounding CDs but to me it sounded just OK and the vinyl was far superior, the difference to me was large then, less so these days.
Tony L
Administrator
Yes, I’d say so. More specifically I’d say the Kan was the reverse EQ to the warmth of the LP12. The classic chrome bumper Naim stuff sounds great in a lot of contexts so I’d argue was far more neutral, e.g. it will sound nice through BC1s, Gales, Missions, Epos or whatever too. It was the next generation of Naim (‘olive’ amps, SBLs, DBLs etc) where they headed down a very distinct sonic aesthetic all of their own, and that is the point I personally lost interest. My mental image of the classic ‘chrome bumper’ Naim is warm, bouncy and funky. Not the last word in resolution or information retrieval, rather 2d/flat imaging, but great fun musically and not hard or harsh at all. I enjoyed it a lot and rather wish I’d kept a Nait 1 or 2 as a memento (I’d not pay the current price!). Of the stuff I personally owned my favourites were the 32.5/HiCap/250 (better than 135s IMO) and either the Nait 1 or 2. They were the most coherent/complete.