• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

What's the best passive (and preferably floorstanding) speaker one can find for $2,500 or less?

OP
D

Dialectic

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
1,738
Likes
3,090
Location
a fortified compound
There is a Devialet SAM profile for the LS50 you have probably tried.
The LS50s are absolutely stunning IME though mine are not in use just now I had them in my study and the ProAc EBS are connected in there now.
They do need lots of power and my guess is that those who find fault have an inadequate amp.
Yes, my London system was Devialet 120 plus LS50s with SAM. Sounded wonderful in most respects but quickly ran out of dynamic range in the low bass.
 

Ron Texas

Master Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
6,074
Likes
8,908
I've found the same thing. They need more power than some people realize. They sound much better with a beefy amp behind them.

No kidding. Not quite as much power is needed if a sub is in use.

Of course we can throw everything out and replace it with vastly superior powered speakers with all kinds of DSP tricks, LOL.
 

andreasmaaan

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
6,652
Likes
9,399
More flat and with only first order filters!

Can you please stop spreading this misinformation here. They are not first order filters, as is obvious looking at the graph you posted of the speaker's phase response.

I'm sure they sound much better than they would if they actually did use first order filters, of course.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,779
Location
Oxfordshire
Yes, my London system was Devialet 120 plus LS50s with SAM. Sounded wonderful in most respects but quickly ran out of dynamic range in the low bass.
Indeed, it is mainly the lack of dynamic range that keeps them from being used in a bigger room here, and of course SAM doesn’t allow damage to the speaker so it can only compensate the bass accurately at low SPLs on something so small
The nerd in me enjoyed looking at the SAM corrections on the Devialet site, both max displacement and bass roll off. I noted both the Estelon and YG acoustics speakers were already pretty well spot on and needed no correction for anything but extension, maybe there are others too many to look at all of them...
 
OP
D

Dialectic

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
1,738
Likes
3,090
Location
a fortified compound
Indeed, it is mainly the lack of dynamic range that keeps them from being used in a bigger room here, and of course SAM doesn’t allow damage to the speaker so it can only compensate the bass accurately at low SPLs on something so small
The nerd in me enjoyed looking at the SAM corrections on the Devialet site, both max displacement and bass roll off. I noted both the Estelon and YG acoustics speakers were already pretty well spot on and needed no correction for anything but extension, maybe there are others too many to look at all of them...
I also nerded out on the SAM site and was fascinated by how the smaller Wilson speakers seem to have more low-end extension than the bigger ones. Separately, I thought about picking up some passive Mangers in Singapore on the basis of their ridiculous extension with SAM (12 Hz if I recall correctly) but thought better of it.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,779
Location
Oxfordshire
I also nerded out on the SAM site and was fascinated by how the smaller Wilson speakers seem to have more low-end extension than the bigger ones. Separately, I thought about picking up some passive Mangers in Singapore on the basis of their ridiculous extension with SAM (12 Hz if I recall correctly) but thought better of it.
The measurements show why I found the bass of the Harbeth Monitor 40s a bit much!
 

Erik

Active Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
137
Likes
271
What is perplexing for me is a surprising lack of evidence used to substantiate the defense of the LS50 - especially on ASR of all places - and that people whose listening experience have been enhanced by relying on some very sophisticated audio engineering ironically cast aspersions upon using the same parameters their equipment excel in to evaluate cheaper equipment.
Yes, this is disgusting.

Since the the discussion started from my post, I would like to share my thoughts about it. First of all, I have not said that LS50 are bad. Actually I said that they are nice loudspeakers but there are products with better characteristics for about the same price. And I provided objective data that shows it. I don't even understand what are you trying to argue with here, I just see a bunch of triggered LS50 owners rationalizing their choices. Especially Ron Texas has a really severe case of buyers Stockholm syndrome, getting so angry beacuse someone dared to call his speakers just "nice" but not "the best". Reading his and others low quality arguments feels like I'm on a very different forum, not on ASR.
 
Last edited:

Roen

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 14, 2018
Messages
681
Likes
247
I can chime in as well. I auditioned the LS50 as a contender for speakers in its price bracket, but went the RAAL / SEAS route instead. LS50 is good, but wasn't amazing to me, subjectively.
 

Ilkless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Messages
1,757
Likes
3,437
Location
Singapore
It is curious behaviour, sure. I don't think it looks terrible compared to many speakers in that price range (or any price range), but it's not ideal.

Nevertheless, as per my original point, it's actually the opposite kind of directivity mismatch to that which would be described as "classic".

I think we agree that this is a compromised design. The disagreement lies in how we take different definitions of directivity mismatch. My focus in characterising directivity mismatch lies in the outcome: off-axis flaring/peaking resulting in response anomalies that substantially deviate from the listening window, regardless of whether it is caused by the crossover or lack of pattern control at an individual driver level. In this case the data suggests it to be both. Perhaps I could have been clearer with my use of the word "classic" - I was referring to the peak-dip response trend (ie. outcome rather than root cause) that increases in severity off-axis.
 

Ron Texas

Master Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
6,074
Likes
8,908
Yes, this is disgusting.

Since the the discussion started from my post, I would like to share my thoughts about it. First of all, I have not said that LS50 are bad. Actually I said that they are nice loudspeakers but there are products with better characteristics for about the same price. And I provided objective data that shows it. I don't even understand what are you trying to argue with here, I just see a bunch of triggered LS50 owners rationalizing their choices. Especially Ron Texas has a really severe case of buyers Stockholm syndrome, getting so angry beacuse someone dared to call his speakers just "nice" but not "the best". Reading his and others low quality arguments feels like I'm on a very different forum, not on ASR.

Sounds like a personal attack to me. You are trying to make a molehill into a mountain. If anyone here is triggered (another insult), you are. Low quality arguments, another insult. On some other forum, that's a big assumption from someone with 19 posts. Actually, I don't care if my speakers are nice or the best or whatever. If anything, I see the owner of something else, or some idea, feeling insufficient because the LS50 received so many accolades. You said that people who like the LS50 are out of reality and implied it's success was marketing and not substance. Nobody said they were perfect. Please return to your planet and stop being a total annoyance.
 
Last edited:

Ron Texas

Master Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
6,074
Likes
8,908
I think we agree that this is a compromised design. The disagreement lies in how we take different definitions of directivity mismatch. My focus in characterising directivity mismatch lies in the outcome: off-axis flaring/peaking resulting in response anomalies that substantially deviate from the listening window, regardless of whether it is caused by the crossover or lack of pattern control at an individual driver level. In this case the data suggests it to be both. Perhaps I could have been clearer with my use of the word "classic" - I was referring to the peak-dip response trend (ie. outcome rather than root cause) that increases in severity off-axis.

You are clear as mud. Haters will hate. You have your favorites and are aggravated that the LS50 has received so much attention. Tough. I don't have buyer's remorse. You are making a big deal out of nothing which I don't like. If you look around you might find my negative reaction to claims that the D&D 8c and Kii 3 have made everything obsolete. Speakers are not like electronics.

As Jeremy Clarkson says, there are two opinions, mine and the wrong one.

You are reminding me of why I have cut back on internet forum participation. People get rude because they don't have to face those whose toes they are stepping on. The Technics speaker which What Hi-Fi dissed was not a success, the LS50 is. Perhaps you should be asking yourself why instead of dismissing the result to marketing. Your analysis is wrong.
 
Last edited:

andreasmaaan

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
6,652
Likes
9,399
I think we agree that this is a compromised design. The disagreement lies in how we take different definitions of directivity mismatch. My focus in characterising directivity mismatch lies in the outcome: off-axis flaring/peaking resulting in response anomalies that substantially deviate from the listening window, regardless of whether it is caused by the crossover or lack of pattern control at an individual driver level. In this case the data suggests it to be both. Perhaps I could have been clearer with my use of the word "classic" - I was referring to the peak-dip response trend (ie. outcome rather than root cause) that increases in severity off-axis.

Yes, we basically agree in that case.

FWIW, I'd say the Technics speakers being discussed here have a more classic directivity mismatch; you can see the directivity widen just where the tweeter crosses over at around 2.5KHz:

1549095667229.png
 

Ilkless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Messages
1,757
Likes
3,437
Location
Singapore
Yes, we basically agree in that case.

FWIW, I'd say the Technics speakers being discussed here have a more classic directivity mismatch; you can see the directivity widen just where the tweeter crosses over at around 2.5KHz:

View attachment 21219

This'll be my last comment on this can of worms I've inadvertently opened (not directed at you, just a general comment about what ensued, thanks for the conversation). Yes, there is a very slight off-axis flare, but it is to a much smaller degree than the LS50 under similar conditions, which is especially peculiar considering how much smaller the radiating surface of the 5.25-inch Uni-Q is. It is as you pointed out, perhaps more "classic" in the sense of having a crossover-induced root cause rather than a mix of crossover and an unusual lack of polar pattern control in the Uni-Q midwoofer.
 

andreasmaaan

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 19, 2018
Messages
6,652
Likes
9,399
This'll be my last comment on this can of worms I've inadvertently opened (not directed at you, just a general comment about what ensued, thanks for the conversation). Yes, there is a very slight off-axis flare, but it is to a much smaller degree than the LS50 under similar conditions, which is especially peculiar considering how much smaller the radiating surface of the 5.25-inch Uni-Q is. It is as you pointed out, perhaps more "classic" in the sense of having a crossover-induced root cause rather than a mix of crossover and an unusual lack of polar pattern control in the Uni-Q midwoofer.

Have you also heard the Technics btw? I've heard neither, and personally from the measurements I would consider both speakers to be quite well-performing although not perfect when it comes to polar response. Sure the, discontinuity in polar response is more pronounced in the KEF, but it's also much narrower in bandwidth. Hard to make a definitive call from my POV.

In any case, my much greater concern with both speakers would be that they are small passive ported speakers with port tuning frequencies up near 50Hz, and what this would mean in terms of diaphragm displacement and port compression (and resulting distortion) when fed signals with significant content below 50Hz.
 
Last edited:

maty

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Messages
4,596
Likes
3,160
Location
Tarragona (Spain)
Can you please stop spreading this misinformation here. They are not first order filters, as is obvious looking at the graph you posted of the speaker's phase response.

I'm sure they sound much better than they would if they actually did use first order filters, of course.

Just by using a search engine you would see that Q100 and Q300 have the same type of first order filter.

KEF-Q100-crossover.jpg


And yes, with my cheap tweaks and with more mass (after the Summer), they sound much better than new. And the graphs are the graphs, made by Kimmo Saunisto, aka kimmosto (VituixCAD creator).

https://kimmosaunisto.net/Software/Software.html
 
Last edited:

maty

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Messages
4,596
Likes
3,160
Location
Tarragona (Spain)
About KEF LS50 speakers, they need a lot of watts and, very important, at least 90 cm / 35" to the three walls. And they need feets. Over a bookshelf is a bad idea. I suspect that many of their owners did not bother to inform themselves well before making the purchase.

LS50 wireless, thanks to the internal DSP have not these great limitations. They are much better purchase than the LS50. Woofer with class D 200 watts, tweeter with class AB 30 watts.

The more interesting review, by Phil Ward:

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/kef-ls50-wireless
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom