1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Oppressively large speakers

Discussion in 'audio' started by Brian S, Jul 30, 2020.

  1. misterdog

    misterdog Not the canine kind

    Even bigger jacked up with monoblocks underneath and wider in rigid steel frames.

    How they should be :):)

    Went to hear some Apogee Scintilla's today, similar size.[​IMG]

    These very ones, - I need.

    Size matters.
    Darren, norton and martin clark like this.
  2. Lowgroove

    Lowgroove Member

    I think this - the only way to get small speakers to come close to the effortless feel of larger is to remove the requirement for them to cover low frequencies.

    If the sound of small mains with subs does not work for you then stick to large speakers if you want that sound.
  3. RJohan

    RJohan pfm Member

    The good big ones simply sounds better than the good small ones. In the old days big ones where more expensive but today it seems small stand mounts can cost a fortune.
  4. mondie

    mondie pfm Member

    The big gains in SQ from a full range system are in the midbass where you want a 12" or ideally, 15" driver. Subs don't solve this failing of standmounts as they are operating at lower fq's. I am unsure what the OP is looking for in this thread as the standmount/Sub route is one well-travelled but there are better ways to achieve full-range sound without having 6ft boxes in your room.
  5. Nero

    Nero Wiped Clean

    How do you get in and out of the room? Maybe you could use the Quads as doors?
  6. Brian S

    Brian S pfm Member

    Thanks for this. Sorry I didn't make myself clear. I really just wanted to know: could I get the sound quality of my AN Js into something smaller by spending more.
    mondie likes this.
  7. Tony L

    Tony L Administrator

    There is definitely a context thing here. Some of the very best and most believable systems I have ever heard have had mini-monitors in the extreme nearfield, i.e. a listening triangle of 1.5-2m tops. Get this close to a seriously good little speaker and you remove most of the adverse room effect, plus with drivers being so close together they tend to behave quite similarly to a point-source. I seem very sensitive to this in most of my favourite speakers are point-source or have the driver centres within a few inches, and most of my least favourite have them spaced widely apart, or worse an array of smaller bass-drivers. I’m sure it is a timing/phase/coherence thing. There is something remarkably good about a no-compromise mini-monitor system. As I’ve said many times before I love tiny speakers and I love huge speakers, its all the stuff in the middle I’m not so keen on!
    Brian S and PhilofCas like this.
  8. Olsen

    Olsen pfm Member

    Thats a fair bit of over-generalisation me thinks.

    FWIW i have heard quite a lot of good small ones that I preferred to some good larger ones.

    Room and amplication should certainly be considered into the mix.
    Brian S likes this.
  9. S-Man

    S-Man Kinkless Tetrode Admirer

    Depends what you mean by "sound qualities of larger cabinets".
    I visited the Munich HE Show last year and there were huge numbers of huge speakers sounding totally overblown. Small speakers won't do this... thankfully!.

    I would take the Soundmith speakers over nearly all of the OTT ones, based on what I heard at the show.
  10. h.g.

    h.g. pfm Member

    Possibly but you might have to clarify the sound quality part. Audio Note speakers tend to be both expensive for what is an old fashioned speaker configuration which driver evolution has largely made obsolete and they have a non-neutral characteristic sound which partly stems from the configuration. They are not high technical performance speakers in the studio monitor sense which are relatively straightforward to theorise about by preserving the physics responsible for the technical performance. I suspect you would first need to get a handle on what you value about your Audio Notes before looking for smaller speakers which preserve it.

    One possibly good thing though, the more you spend with most modern hardware the more you are likely to be moving away from what Audio Note provide in terms of sound quality and towards more neutral higher technical performance. You might find what you after with vintage kit like Dynaco A-25 type speakers with large resonating midwoofers crossed at high frequencies by modern standards. Perhaps Harbeth, Spendor and similar which still tend to do this to some extent with their more "classic" ranges. Don't really know just a thought.
    Brian S likes this.
  11. Mike Reed

    Mike Reed pfm Member

    Depends entirely on what one's view is of 'big'. I have 2905s, the successors to the 989 (but same size, more or less) and don't consider them big at all. I wish they made bigger ESLs. However, I've been a big speaker man for over 50 years, with the Heathkit 12" being my first foray. 15" Goodmans with horn mid and tweeter (in 1.15" thick cab's) came next, with 12" Goodmans as well. Through Leak 2075s, Isobariks and two other ProAc Responses, I ended up with R4s, which majored more on weight (133 kg each) than size, before going ESL.

    Had some decent small speakers (LS3/5A,) and medium ones, but I'm a BIG fan of BIG speakers; they're effortless. Woof (er) !
    PhilofCas likes this.
  12. martin clark

    martin clark pinko bodger

    It's a matter of perspective really; system pic in this years thread. (the H2 live neatly paired side by side to my left as pic taken -from another doorway:

    They are portals of a sort...

    (doors behind ESLs are to the storage dimensions; books, mostly...)
  13. eastone

    eastone pfm Member

    Try some Ks?

    I’ve had both and would take the Ks every time.

    Full-range they ain’t but the bass that is there is much better IMO. And they do get surprisingly low with boundary reinforcement and the right amp.
  14. Brian S

    Brian S pfm Member

    Yes, Bourney suggested the same, and had I the cash and the time I would certainly look at this. Not easily found. It took weeks to get my Js. Thanks for adding substance to the view.
  15. Squires

    Squires Well-Known Member

    I've heard that room, very nice.
    The coffee was excellent as well :)

  16. eastone

    eastone pfm Member

    Worth having a search for Snell Ks, same design and can usually be had for less than £300.
  17. misterdog

    misterdog Not the canine kind

    They did, exhibited some ESL's at Munich 2 years ago with 8 panels (extra 2) though nothing seems to have come of them, maybe the transformers were an issue.
  18. Darren

    Darren All Business

    My grail speaker! I'm in love all over again..... ❤️
  19. misterdog

    misterdog Not the canine kind

    Listening to my 989's now there is little difference between ESL's with properly integrated Sub and supertweeter. I think my mid range may be more nuanced and textured though, the apogees were more dynamic.
    The biggest difference I noted was that the Apogees had a pronounced vertical sweetspot where the Quads have a pronounced horizontal one.

    I could happily live with either.

    Both - LLLarge.:)
    Darren likes this.
  20. martin clark

    martin clark pinko bodger

    BTW Apogees are a lesson in acceptability of grotesque levels of 2nd & higher even-order HD%, inevitable result of the asymmetric (single-ended, if you like) mag field ... also, criminal inefficiency...

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice