The best 'speakers are the width of a human head - discuss

[Mr Pig]

The speakers I heard and really disappear when music is playing are the LS3/5A and the likes....I never had that feeling from a large 3 way speaker of any kind !

Yes, but there are always pros and cons. While these frontal area of these little speakers might be similar to a human head, it's not similar to anything else they're trying to reproduce!

Play sweet music at low volume on them and it's all smiles but a rock band at full tilt? You'll be mentally digging their graves 'till the torture stops.

 

[Tony L]

Do you have a step response plot for either?

No. I do plan to do a couple of DIY in-room measurements with REW to try and better visualise what I’m hearing.

I think there are some more overt differences between LS3/5A and JR149 - the former has quite a bit less internal volume than the latter, and has more baffle-step compensation.

The area that interests me the most in the comparison is the mid-band/crossover region. The 149 has a very different bass response, it is leaner, but digs deeper and is punchier. The midband is fascinating and the LS3/5A fully deserves its reputation, it really is just stunningly natural, open and clear. I thought the 149s were exceptional, and they genuinely are, but the 3/5A edges them out in this area, e.g. sax, voice, violin etc really are astonishing. Just ‘there’ without any artifice. I’d like to understand what is going on here technically.

 

[Robert]

I’m not buying that at all despite being a huge, huge fan of mini-monitors. Exhibit A: the Quad ESL. Once you’ve beaten that on voice we can discuss the idea!

PS I am still forming my crackpot theory as to why I like tiny speakers and point source speakers so much and I suspect it is phase/time coherence rather than anything else, or at least for the potential for it to be a hell of a lot better than big multi-driver speakers with drivers spaced apart on the vertical plane. I’m currently comparing LS3/5As and JR149s, two speakers that should be all but identical, but really aren’t, and my best guess is that comes down to phase too (I know the BBC spent an absolute fortune addressing it!).

I don't think that's a crackpot theory at all!
I'm using Kef R3s at the moment, a small-ish 3-way using a 5" Uni-Q with central 1" dome and wave guide, and those do a lot of what my 63s can do. They can't quite match the Quads for transparency and scale but they nail the coherence and realism aspects.

On Quads, they don't really have a baffle as the whole radiating area is effectively the 'speaker, and is mostly transparent to sound.

 

[Robert]

Would you mind naming the designer or speaker brand?

8.20 in this video:

 

[Colin L]

The best, most likelife speakers don’t have baffles.

 

[marshanp]

Interesting observation here........
The speakers I heard and really disappear when music is playing are the LS3/5A and the likes as well as some very narrow Raidho speakers with multiple small white woofers...

OK... the speakers disappear... that's good.

The speakers I like (good omnis) make the room disappear. Then you're really getting somewhere.

 

[Subito]

I don't think that's a crackpot theory at all!
I'm using Kef R3s at the moment, a small-ish 3-way using a 5" Uni-Q with central 1" dome and wave guide, and those do a lot of what my 63s can do. They can't quite match the Quads for transparency and scale but they nail the coherence and realism aspects.

On Quads, they don't really have a baffle as the whole radiating area is effectively the 'speaker, and is mostly transparent to sound.

The ELAC Uni-Fi 2.0 UB52 employs a similar 3-way, concentric driver design and delivers stunning clarity and definition for the price ($600/pr).

 

[guydarryl]

Sounds quite reasonable, if limiting - the chap in the video is referring to the reproduction of human voice, not orchestra or rock band

 

[Yank]

No. I do plan to do a couple of DIY in-room measurements with REW to try and better visualise what I’m hearing.

Will REW do a step response?

If you're interested in loudspeaker phase, it would be good to be able to look at arrival times.

 

[Tony L]

Will REW do a step response?

If you're interested in loudspeaker phase, it would be good to be able to look at arrival times.

I have absolutely no idea! I’m a total beginner with REW. When I get round to it I’ll ask on the JR149 thread for advice as to how best to configure it. I’d like to get something meaningful between the three minis I have (also a pair of Spendor S3/5R in the TV rig, I like them a lot).

PS whilst I don’t agree at all with the notion that human voice should be reproduced with a ‘head sized box’ it has to be said one of the most comedically ridiculous systems I’ve ever heard was a pair of JM Labs Grande Utopia at Heathrow decades ago driven by a huge pair of US monoblocks that likely needed a fork-lift to get into the place. It was a big room and they stuck some typical audiophile girl and acoustic guitar on and it just sounded daft, total gigantism, like some hippy chick playing through the Grateful Dead’s PA. Nothing even remotely like reality. It actually made me laugh! As such you can certainly overdo it, but as stated I just don’t seem to like big multi-driver speakers very much (plus Focals are a bit odd tonally to my BBC/Quad/Tannoy ears). Thankfully big Tannoys don’t suffer from the comedy gigantism thing as they are a point source, so can do tightly-focused ‘small’ as well as the full heft of a drum kit, bass guitar or whatever.

 

[tuga]

I have absolutely no idea! I’m a total beginner with REW. When I get round to it I’ll ask on the JR149 thread for advice as to how best to configure it. I’d like to get something meaningful between the three minis I have (also a pair of Spendor S3/5R in the TV rig, I like them a lot).

PS whilst I don’t agree at all with the notion that human voice should be reproduced with a ‘head sized box’ it has to be said one of the most comedically ridiculous systems I’ve ever heard was a pair of JM Labs Grande Utopia at Heathrow decades ago driven by a huge pair of US monoblocks that likely needed a fork-lift to get into the place. It was a big room and they stuck some typical audiophile girl and acoustic guitar on and it just sounded daft, total gigantism, like some hippy chick playing through the Grateful Dead’s PA. Nothing even remotely like reality. It actually made me laugh! As such you can certainly overdo it, but as stated I just don’t seem to like big multi-driver speakers very much (plus Focals are a bit odd tonally to my BBC/Quad/Tannoy ears). Thankfully big Tannoys don’t suffer from the comedy gigantism thing as they are a point source, so can do tightly-focused ‘small’ as well as the full heft of a drum kit, bass guitar or whatever.

There's a chance that the problem is down to the recording and not the system.
Studio mixes of pop/rock are hardly ever produced to sound like what one would listen to live from a seat in the audience.

 

[tuga]

Conventional box speakers with wide baffles (f.e. Sonus Faber Stradivari) have narrower directivity than with speakers with narrow baffles.

That is why LS3/5As produce a perceived wider soundstage and more envelopment that large boxes.

Quads and dual concentric speakers like the Tannoys or the Kefs have narrow directivity. This could perhaps explain why many LS3/5A lovers might not enjoy the presentation of an LS50.

 

[davidsrsb]

If you are optimizing for voice you use a small mid woofer to get the crossover out of the way, but it cannot handle bass instruments

 

[AndyU]

http://tripp.com.au/sbir.htm

 

[Mick P]

The best speakers are the ones that sound the best to you. I have a Naim system powering a pair of Shahinian Arcs and to me they are perfect. No amount of waffle will convince me otherwise. We are all different, have different ears and brains and what suits me does not suit you etc. So worry about yourself and stop worrying what everyone else thinks.

The secret of Hifi success is to workout what is good for you, then buy it and learn to relax and stick with it.

I was trapped out in Spain for nearly 8 months and returned to the UK on the 27th October, I had to self isolate for 2 weeks and it seems to have rained every bloody day since for at least an hour, so other than a dental check up I have been indoors and I spend a lot of time listening to the music. Not once have I worried about the Hifi, I just listen to it and enjoy it and to me, at least, that is what it is all about.

 

[Nero]

I'll keep an open mind, but I suspect someone listened to some head-size speakers, and liked them, so decided that was because they were head-sized.

Over the years, I am increasingly of the opinion that wide baffles are best, but generally, the baffle width is one of the least problems of most speakers.

 

[Tony L]

Quads and dual concentric speakers like the Tannoys or the Kefs have narrow directivity. This could perhaps explain why many LS3/5A lovers might not enjoy the presentation of an LS50.

I’m very far from convinced wide dispersion is a good thing, and I suspect it is a total disaster with large multi-driver speakers and could well be the reason I don’t get on with so many of them. FWIW almost all the large speakers I like are either horns or panels.

The more a speaker beams treble and mid at the listener the longer time delay there is between that direct sound reaching the ear and the splash, flutter or other room effects as the rear wall largely becomes the first reflection point. The ear is vastly better at interpreting and filtering out post-delay than pre-delay, our brains are just wired to do this. Now contrast this with a wide directivity speaker, you are now basically bouncing treble off the side walls, floor, ceiling etc and the delay between direct and reflected sound becomes far shorter, more blurred, and harder to pick apart. This is even more so with tall speakers with multiple drivers spaced out on a baffle which results in comb/time/phase differences between reflections, e.g. the distance of a mid and tweeter floor or ceiling reflection is now different, which becomes an issue (comb filtering etc). The systems that almost always sound the worst to me tend to have fairly tall multi-driver speakers in rooms with inadequate damping (e.g. no carpet, minimal furnishings) and listened to at quite a distance so the room really takes a hold. I struggle with this sort of sound as it sounds so unnatural to me and tends to give me a headache fairly fast!

I also believe mini-monitors play by very different rules, closer to that of narrow-directivity as one tends to listen up-close in the near-field, so the direct sound arrives well ahead of any destructive room reflection. The thing good horns, panels and mini-monitors all have in common is an almost headphone like clarity, which I’m sure is down to the strength of direct sound/lack of destructive reflection. Panels obviously add the ability to null at the side/top/bottom, which is hugely advantageous, but you obviously have out of phase rear output to deal with. Quad get it to work superbly well with damping etc.

PS Credit to Paul Klipsch for helping the penny to drop on some of the directivity/time-delay stuff. I’m convinced he hit the nail on the head half a century or more ago, though he was obviously arguing from a corner-horn perspective.

 

[tuga]

The best speakers are the ones that sound the best to you.

The best speakers are those which reproduce/transduce the signal with the highest possible accuracy at the listening spot.

The speakers that sound the best to you are just that, speakers sound the best to you.

 

[tuga]

I’m vert far from convinced wide dispersion is a good thing, and I suspect it is a total disaster with large multi-driver speakers and could well be the reason I don’t get on with so many of them. FWIW almost all the large speakers I like are either horns or panels.

The more a speaker beams treble and mid at the listener the more time delay there is between that direct sound reaching the ear and the splash, flutter or other room effects as the rear wall largely becomes the first reflection point. The ear is vastly better at interpreting and filtering out post-delay than pre-delay, our brains are just wired to do this. Now contrast this with a wide directivity speaker, you are now basically bouncing treble off the side walls, floor, ceiling etc and the delay between direct and reflected sound becomes far shorter, more blurred, and harder to pick apart. This is even more so with tall speakers with multiple drivers spaced out on a baffle which results in comb/time/phase differences between reflections, e.g. the distance of a mid and tweeter floor or ceiling reflection is now different, which becomes an issue (comb filtering etc). The systems that almost always sound the worst to me tend to have fairly tall multi-driver speakers in rooms with inadequate damping (e.g. no carpet, minimal furnishings) and listened to at quite a distance so the room really takes a hold. I struggle with this sort of sound as it sounds so unnatural to me and it tends to give me a headache fairly fast!

I also believe mini-monitors play by very different rules, closer to that of narrow-directivity as one tends to listen up-close in the near-field, so the direct sound arrives well ahead of any destructive room reflection. The thing good horns, panels and mini-monitors all have in common is an almost headphone like clarity, which I’m sure is down to the strength of direct sound/lack of destructive reflection.

PS Credit to Paul Klipsch for helping the penny to drop on some of the directivity/time-delay stuff. I’m convinced he hit the nail on the head half a century or more ago, though he was obviously arguing from a corner-horn perspective.

I agree with a lot of what you've written in regard to dispersion. My preference also tilts towards narrow directivity / less room sound.
I wouldn't put mini-monitors (which are wide-directivity) in the same bag as horns and panels/dipoles though. When listeneded from mid-field distance in a large room large speakers will sound as good as a mini-monitors in terms of clarity.

I think that what gives mini monitors a headphone like clarity is their limited response in the low-bass and inexistent sub-bass which helps such speakers integrate in the room without triggering the modes too audibly.
I find those low-end limitations an unsurmountable barrier which to me makes mini-monitors unfit for serious music listening (and truth be told they were designed to monitor vocals in small booths and vans).

 

[Fretbuzz]

If this theory holds true I must be Frank Sidebottom.