$30K Budget - On the quest for my "end game" speaker

[benanders]

Figured maybe. But never know - some folks can become home bodies in their own good threads.

Thanks @benanders … very well aware of that thread, and it is helpful to be sure. It is in fact primarily what inspired me to seek out nuclear power station amps if I go with the Salon 2, along with first hand observing the ATI 6000 struggle (in a relatively small room no less) during my audition.

Certainly I will reach out to that specific thread audience for counsel if my final choice is the Salons (and especially if my Simaudio W5 doesn’t cut the mustard)

 

[benanders]

I used to think the garbage in / garbage out idea was 100% true with revealing speakers, but the Ascend ELX Ribbon towers were the first revealing towers where I didn't experience that to the same extent as other revealing speakers. With these speakers I found they were ruthlessly revealing (I realized some of my typical test tracks weren't as well mixed as I thought they were) and at the same time I was still addicted and couldn't stop listening to songs with subpar mixes.

For example in a rock song where the bass is mixed too soft, without extra bass boost with tone controls, I would have a hard time listening to it on a typical neutral speaker because it would just sound too bright and hard to listen to. But on the ELX Ribbon towers, I found myself thinking, "this needs more bass... but the guitars and everything else sound incredible." I haven't heard the Salon2 so I don't know if I don't know if they would be similar in that aspect to the ELX Ribbon towers or not.

“Revealing” speaker is subjective (same as “soft bass” ) and can allay with personal preferences and also performance within specific frequencies among speakers. Too many factors are tangled in this sort of thing to tease apart the way some (many?) try, IMO.

I haven’t heard the most recent iteration of Ascend towers. I’m glad you like them. And I’m glad they make you enjoy mediocre recordings/masterings. Sir, that right there is a sign of a speaker that’s a KEEPER for YOU. Never mind what anyone else says. Excellent!

In terms of superlatives in engineering, however, Ascend’s are shy on coupled woofers, compared to Salon 2’s. The effect of multiple 10” woofers per channel is not subtle, in a good way, if well-implemented. I should admit I’ve a strong personal preference for cylindrical wavefronts, even if they’re purely theoretical (grin).

 

[MKR]

View attachment 262817
Figured maybe. But never know - some folks can become home bodies in their own good threads.

The man the myth the legend, the great Sam Elliot … one of my heroes … and right back at ya sir

And full disclosure, I probably spend 90% of my time on ASR in my own thread, you aren’t far from the truth

 

[database]

“Revealing” speaker is subjective (same as “soft bass” ) and can allay with personal preferences and also performance within specific frequencies among speakers. Too many factors are tangled in this sort of thing to tease apart the way some (many?) try, IMO.

Sure. My post is a direct reply to the post I quoted, the idea that "revealing speakers make bad recordings sound bad." My whole point is that that statement doesn't line up with my experience and I'm not sure it can be generalized as simply as that. So I think we're in agreement here.

In terms of superlatives in engineering, however, Ascend’s are shy on coupled woofers, compared to Salon 2’s. The effect of multiple 10” woofers per channel is not subtle, in a good way, if well-implemented. I should admit I’ve a strong personal preference for cylindrical wavefronts, even if they’re purely theoretical (grin).

I'm running them with 2 12 inch Rythmiks and 2 18 inch Rythmiks, integrated with Dirac Live Bass Control so no worries there. I don't find the subs necessary for most music, only HT, but I like to keep things simple and run the same setup for both. The Salon2s have more bass in full range for sure but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss those 6 inch woofers either. The output on a single LX woofer in the Sierra LX puts many other towers to shame as you can see from the spins at https://www.spinorama.org/, and the ELX has two of those woofers.

 

[GXAlan]

And the tweeter array concept, I am less than convinced given the reasoning posted on Tekton website, seems like it is just asking for major issues, not to mention a waste of a bunch of nice tweeters. Why not just use a standard midrange like the normal folk?

Tekton Design Impact Monitor loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/tekton-owner%E2%80%99s-thread.3091432/post-59153854

 

[srrxr71]

Just to keep things honest. Genelec and I have made some peace. They told me I have a path to complete return at no financial loss.

I’ve decided to rather investigate and work with them rather than return them. Because I really do like them.

I think they were really big on checking all the electronics first and then allowing me this testing.

 

[MKR]

Just to keep things honest. Genelec and I have made some peace. They told me I have a path to complete return at no financial loss.

I’ve decided to rather investigate and work with them rather than return them. Because I really do like them.

I think they were really big on checking all the electronics first and then allowing me this testing.

That is truly great news! I really hoped (and deep down believed) Genelec would do the right thing here. Though it should NOT have taken the act of congress that it did.

 

[MKR]

Tekton Design Impact Monitor loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/tekton-owner%E2%80%99s-thread.3091432/post-59153854

Thanks! Will give this a read

 

[Holmz]

…but what would say of the Salon2 step reponse? (from Stereophile’s review)

View attachment 262620

I would certainly wonder if they would benefit from a DIRAC DSP before it.
I woud think that someone might have tried it.

If we glance at the electrical signal, then it is hard to imagine that this pressure signal is a high fidelity representation.

Step response is very controversial, and personally, one of the few measurements I don’t put much stock into, as I have never been able to correlate poor step response to poor loudspeaker performance (subjective listening sessions), and vice versa. Maybe just my lack of “golden ears”, but doesn’t mean much to me.

From the great Dr Toole on step response in a 1986 paper:
"The advocates of accurate waveform reproduction, implying both accurate amplitude and phase responses, are in a particularly awkward situation. In spite of the considerable engineering appeal of this concept, practical tests have yielded little evidence of listener sensitivity to this factor...the limited results lend support for the popular view that the effects of phase are clearly subordinate to amplitude response."

I generally like to put step response below compression.
It is also somewhat correlated that may of my acquaintances have had Theil and Dunlavy at some point… and usually for a long time.

Many people using systems with DSPs still rate frequency response at the top, but it is the one things that is correctable with a DSP.
Compression, cabinet resonances, and radiation pattern are not correctable.

If one had a passive XO Salon, then I would expect a hacked Salon version using an active XO would be somewhat different sounding.

He is certainly correct about engineering appeal.

 

[RobL]

I would certainly wonder if they would benefit from a DIRAC DSP before it.
I woud think that someone might have tried it.

If we glance at the electrical signal, then it is hard to imagine that this pressure signal is a high fidelity representation.




I generally like to put step response below compression.
It is also somewhat correlated that may of my acquaintances have had Theil and Dunlavy at some point… and usually for a long time.

Many people using systems with DSPs still rate frequency response at the top, but it is the one things that is correctable with a DSP.
Compression, cabinet resonances, and radiation pattern are not correctable.

If one had a passive XO Salon, then I would expect a hacked Salon version using an active XO would be somewhat different sounding.

He is certainly correct about engineering appeal.

(Stereophile step response measurement from Salon2 review)

Is it likely that the delayed response of the bass drivers was a design choice? I have read that some multi-way loudspeaker designers might bake in this sort of delay to force the main lobe of irregular responce upwards into a less offensive area. Messing with it might cause a more audible issue on or off axis?

 

[stevenswall]

Maybe we should define End Game?

End Game: Something where there is no move that is an upgrade/beats it. No other speaker would be an upgrade. There is no competitor based on X Y and Z characteristics. If you're still playing the game, they aren't endgame speakers. If you already know what you're going to swap them out for once budget allows, you're still playing the game and they didn't end it.

Based on that definition, to get an End Game speaker system the only option I see is Genelec considering the whole package:

-I want both stereo and surround sound audio to sound amazingly accurate.
-Most brands won't have a center channel as capable/flexible as The Ones without using a projector screen.
-Vertical dispersion is worse in all non-coaxial speakers. (Eliminates Dutch & Dutch, Kii, and Grimm... KEF and Kali and Devialet can be argued for)
-Any remaining speakers would need to have multiple sizes to mount and place in a surround sound system. (JBL could work with this single point.)
-Those that are capable of this will be wasting cabinet volume if they aren't made of a material thinner and stronger than wood. (Eliminates JBL)
-Extra dampening and bracing will be needed if they don't have a chassis like the Ones. (Eliminates basically everything besides Genelec and Devialet.)
-Cardioid bass is an option with the Ones (eliminates everything besides Kii, Dutch & Dutch, and Grimm I think.)
-Simple room correction and easy setup and availability for surround sound systems is possible. (Eliminated Devialet)

Unless a company like Genelec pops up and does even better, this is the end game for stereo and surround sound. Things I'm not considering:

-Extreme volume levels. It is a lie that a speaker that can play at 200dB sounds more dynamic than a speaker that only goes to 120dB if you're listening at safe levels from a reasonable distance.

-Soundstage stability at all costs, which would better be accomplished by something like a toed in line array so that moving left to right and forward and backward wouldn't greatly affect the sonic image.

-An in wall, architectural system built into a house designed primarily for acoustics where it's no longer about a flexible speaker system but an end game house.

***Thanks to the guy who said things are only endgame until something else comes out. I'd love to see another Genelec pop up and compete. For what they are, I see no competitors to the Genelec The Ones currently, from any company considering the above. (Unless you are looking for price to performance in which case I'd say a Kali surround sound system would probably impress me with how close it would get to my Genelec system.)

***Please respond to the criteria I've laid out in a list if you disagree. Low effort posts that don't address the points above simply show laziness rather than meaningful disagreement and useful context.

 

[Bugal1998]

Maybe we should define End Game?

End Game: Something where there is no move that is an upgrade/beats it. No other speaker would be an upgrade. There is no competitor based on X Y and Z characteristics.

"End game" for me simply meant finding a speaker within whatever budget I set for myself that's good enough (i.e. I enjoy enough) to stop worrying and just start listening to great music.

I have no need to pretend my speaker is the best at anything, or can't be beaten on certain criteria. Just an all around excellent speaker with no major shortcomings that can't be completely/mostly mitigated with proper setup and tuning...

End game also doesn't mean it's the last speaker I'll ever buy (far too young for that); it means for the foreseeable future I'm done searching/upgrading and no longer have FOMO.

But what matters here is MKR's definition of end-game.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

Let's not get ourselves tied in knots over a definition .. Yes, "endgame" means , end of the game ... We all know however, that we are not yet at the stage of a speaker that is <placeholder for your choice of modifying adverb here> perfect. The term simply means that it it is a component that allows one to pause the search, rest and, enjoy more of one's music or available library... for however long one decides, hopefully "long enough".. a vague , subjective and undefined notion...

For electronics however such strict defintion could apply ... If one gets one of those latest 500 wpc Purify, Hypex, etc amplifier or in the case of DACs, anything with a SINAD over 115 dB and able to push over 4Volts, with 0 dB channel separation and the usual flat to Nyquist Fr .. The game is over, you have actually a perfect component and prices are between $150.oo and whatever you care to pay but should know : You can measure better but can't/won't hear any improvement in performance... and the ceiling in price is perhaps $1500.oo for DACs, that is truly remarkable... We are there for DACs, perhaps for amplifiers ..Not yet for speakers... As for room ...

I am inspired by this thread... We'll see what the future holds...

Peace.

 

[benanders]

Maybe we should define End Game?

End Game: Something where there is no move that is an upgrade/beats it. No other speaker would be an upgrade. There is no competitor based on X Y and Z characteristics.

Based on that definition, to get an End Game speakers system the only option I see is Genelec considering the whole package:

-I want both stereo and surround sound audio to sound amazingly accurate.
-Most brands won't have a center channel as capable/flexible as The Ones without using a projector screen.
-Vertical dispersion is worse in all non-coaxial speakers. (Eliminates Dutch & Dutch, Kii, and Grimm... KEF and Kali and Devialet can be argued for)
-Any remaining speakers would need to have multiple sizes to mount and place in a surround sound system. (JBL could work with this single point.)
-Those that are capable of this will be wasting cabinet volume if they aren't made of a material thinner and stronger than wood. (Eliminates JBL)
-Extra dampening and bracing will be needed if they don't have a chassis like the Ones. (Eliminates basically everything besides Genelec and Devialet.)
-Cardioid bass is an option with the Ones (eliminates everything besides Kii, Dutch & Dutch, and Grimm I think.)
-Simple room correction and easy setup and availability for surround sound systems is possible. (Eliminated Devialet)

Unless a company like Genelec pops up and does even better, this is the end game for stereo and surround sound. Things I'm not considering:

-Extreme volume levels. It is a lie that a speaker that can play at 200dB sounds more dynamic than a speaker that only goes to 120dB if you're listening at safe levels from a reasonable distance.

-Soundstage stability at all costs, which would better be accomplished by something like a toed in line array so that moving left to right and forward and backward wouldn't greatly affect the sonic image.

-An in wall, architectural system built into a house designed primarily for acoustics where it's no longer about a flexible speaker system but an end game house.

***Thanks to the guy who said things are only endgame until something else comes out. I'd love to see another Genelec pop up and compete. For what they are, I see no competitors to the Genelec The Ones currently, from any company considering the above. (Unless you are looking for price to performance in which case I'd say a Kali surround sound system would probably impress me with how close it would get to my Genelec system.)

@stevenswall the “soundstage stability” issue you mention for Genelec is in contrivance to one of the main interests of the OP’s end game concept, so by your definition: Genelec end game fail.

Genelec are a hack, plain and simple (wish I could’ve seen your expression upon reading that, wink).
What the WHAT do I mean? How dare I!?
Okay, don’t take my smarmy teasing wrong: Genelec speakers are impressive tools… for what they’re designed to do, and that’s a somewhat different set of tasks from typical in-home hifi playback.
Folks using Genelec for home hifi are appropriating their speakers. Nothing wrong with that, but when those who’ve done it and liked the results begin promoting the approach as everyone’s ideal solution, it veers towards misappropriating their speakers.
Dang, now here I am inadvertently perpetuating a name brand as an ASR “drinking word” in this post…

 

[RobL]

…Genelec are a hack, plain and simple (wish I could’ve seen your expression upon reading that, wink).
What the WHAT do I mean? How dare I!?
Okay, don’t take my smarmy teasing wrong: Genelec speakers are impressive tools… for what they’re designed to do, and that’s a somewhat different set of tasks from typical in-home hifi playback.
Folks using Genelec for home hifi are appropriating their speakers…

Genelec doesn’t share your idea oh pigeonholing their products

 

[MattHooper]

The game doesn't truly end with me. I enjoy different speakers.

I do keep more than one pair around which keeps things fresh. But this is a hobby - I like high end audio gear, and there's more I'd enjoy trying out.

(Though when I do actually feel burnt out on audio at all, I tend to switch over to Home Theater mode and concentrate on that hobby/movie watching).

 

[FlyingFreak]

Damned discussion here took a turn.

Back to fun with MKR adventures towards end game speakers if y’all don’t mind

This thread got me curious real curious about end game sound. I looked around in the area, turns out my local Best Buy just happen to have the Blade One Meta on display! I’ll spend some time listening to them this week.

I would never have thought about listening to those without this thread. I’m super curious.

One thing I’m wondering about is me not having train myself to listen to speakers, if I’ll be able to express, or indeed perceive, the differences between them and my M106 (besides the bass).

Unfortunately I couldn’t find any Salon2 around.

 

[Doodski]

One thing I’m wondering about is me not having train myself to listen to speakers, if I’ll be able to express, or indeed perceive, the differences between them and my M106 (besides the bass).

If you are a daily listener you'll be able to differentiate the different models of speakers very well. Bring some of your favorite music for the demo.

 

[stevenswall]

I agree. To say Genelec is the only end game speaker solution is preposterous. I’m sure they are excellent but I for one won’t be going in that direction in this lifetime. It doesn’t mean I haven’t reached my end game if I stop here.

To post such a lazy, contextless response is preposterous. Please outline how you define endgame and put at least as much effort into it as I did rather than ignoring the clear bounds and context in my argument.

Plus it’s just ignorant to those who may never be able to afford them. As Charles Barkley would say, it’s turrible, just turrible!”

You're just ignorant to people who can't hear... To them whatever you say isn't endgame because they are working with different constraints! (Yeah, pretty terrible logic. You're talking about price to performance/value, not an endgame speaker system.)

@stevenswall the “soundstage stability” issue you mention for Genelec.

Genelec are a hack, plain and simple... What the WHAT do I mean? How dare I!?
Okay, don’t take my smarmy teasing wrong: Genelec speakers are impressive tools… for what they’re designed to do, and that’s a somewhat different set of tasks from typical in-home hifi playback.
Folks using Genelec for home hifi are appropriating their speakers. Nothing wrong with that, but when those who’ve done it and liked the results begin promoting the approach as everyone’s ideal solution, it veers towards misappropriating their speakers.

I don't think you understand what I'm talking about when I say soundstage stability, suggest line arrays if you want with some effort to describe the goals and how they are acheived.

Lots of people criticize things they don't understand. Go ahead. You might define high fidelity/high accuracy while you're at it.

Please explain your criteria for an endgame speaker system and what you are trying to accomplish. You've done nothing to actually refute what I've said.

 

[benanders]

…
I don't think you understand what I'm talking about…

@stevenswall you said:
“Based on that definition, to get an End Game speakers system the only option I see is Genelec…”
Did I misunderstand what you wrote?
If by that statement you meant the only option suited for you personally (and not the only option you see for anyone) is Genelec, then I did misread your post, and apologize.
If you did, however, mean Genelec for anyone wanting point source imaging (which is the way I read your post), please see below.

Lots of people criticize things they don't understand.

I tend to question that which I don’t understand, especially before I criticize. Hallmark of the scientific method that works well in most walks of life. In case I mistook your statement, then make note I at least returned with a question.

Please explain your criteria for an endgame speaker system and what you are trying to accomplish. You've done nothing to actually refute what I've said.

The OP explained that. It’s what was relevant and why I took the dismissive tone towards Genelec’s suitability in this case (and likely many other cases).
Make no mistake I was not implying every case. They’re nice speakers. Unless you like details that cater to in-home hifirniture like wood grain, brushed steel etc. - trims don’t much affect studio monitor sales, I’m guessing.