Expensive loudspeakers that sound bad

[daftcombo]

A word on B&W speakers, they seemed to have gone with very basic crossovers in a lot of their more recent iterations, usually only an inductor on its own for the low frequency driver which means the bass doesn't roll off as steep as it should and you get nasty cone breakup in the treble region. Why they do this I don't know, a few cheap changes to the crossover can make a dramatic difference as Rutcho outlines here.

Slow slopes are supposed to keep phase flatter, maybe that's why.
Or maybe just because cheaper to make.

 

[onslash]

Most expensive passive speakers sound bad to OK for me. I would only consider 3-4 uber expensive brands - Magico, TAD, Raidho, Rockport. Have not heard Revels in person.

Tad me 1 sounded quite impressive imo

 

[smodtactical]

All Wilson and Magico sound like crap to me. Any and all horns suck, too.

Martin

Which magicos have you heard? Have you heard M series like M2 ?

Also in terms of horns, avantegard duo mezzo or JBL 4367?

 

[maverickronin]

I'm going to join the dog pile on the current B&W 800's.

Just plain underwhelming.

 

[AnalogSteph]

RFT speakers from East Germany. There was model we sold and it was called a BR-26 Classic and we would stack them on top of each other and call it a B-52 ;P We slang called them Really F***** Terrible.

Ironically, this particular model was anything but crap in its day - developed by none other than the folks at ME Geithain and equipped with a waveguide as seen. XO is 2nd / 3rd order, with tweeter protection (lightbulb). They are basically mini monitors à la LS3/5A; their 4"-ish mid-woofer (a rather long-throw affair for the day) is not likely to be a good match for North American tastes and rooms but they do actually have their following over here. (I suppose you shouldn't require too much in terms of bass output, but that's par for the course on a 30+-year-old small speaker.) The foam surrounds on most have long perished but you can still get replacements from Audiofriends.

BTW, given the crap exchange rates in the late '80s you guys must have gotten these for a song. The typical GDR citizen would have had to invest something like a month's wages into a pair. (Well, a color TV was like 10 times that.)

 

[Doodski]

Ironically, this particular model was anything but crap in its day - developed by none other than the folks at ME Geithain and equipped with a waveguide as seen. XO is 2nd / 3rd order, with tweeter protection (lightbulb). They are basically mini monitors à la LS3/5A; their 4"-ish mid-woofer (a rather long-throw affair for the day) is not likely to be a good match for North American tastes and rooms but they do actually have their following over here. (I suppose you shouldn't require too much in terms of bass output, but that's par for the course on a 30+-year-old small speaker.) The foam surrounds on most have long perished but you can still get replacements from Audiofriends.

BTW, given the crap exchange rates in the late '80s you guys must have gotten these for a song. The typical GDR citizen would have had to invest something like a month's wages into a pair. (Well, a color TV was like 10 times that.)

We where paying about $119.00 per pair landed in Canada and delivered from the wholesaler. The mark-up on them was insane and they also had a $45.00 spiff for the salesperson that made them attractive for selling too. They retailed for $399.00 and had a minimum sell price of $350.00 but we always sold them for $300.00'ish and for friends we would give them a deal under $200.00. They where bright sounding and paired well with a sub woofer. They where the highest mark-up speaker we sold and one of the highest margin products in the store.

 

[thewas]

Ironically, this particular model was anything but crap in its day - developed by none other than the folks at ME Geithain and equipped with a waveguide as seen. XO is 2nd / 3rd order, with tweeter protection (lightbulb). They are basically mini monitors à la LS3/5A; their 4"-ish mid-woofer (a rather long-throw affair for the day) is not likely to be a good match for North American tastes and rooms but they do actually have their following over here. (I suppose you shouldn't require too much in terms of bass output, but that's par for the course on a 30+-year-old small speaker.) The foam surrounds on most have long perished but you can still get replacements from Audiofriends.

BTW, given the crap exchange rates in the late '80s you guys must have gotten these for a song. The typical GDR citizen would have had to invest something like a month's wages into a pair. (Well, a color TV was like 10 times that.)

Exactly, they also measure and sound imho better than the LS3/5a, since they have smoother directivity due to their waveguides and lower bass due to bass reflex design:
https://www.tools4music.de/index.ph...oken=7d668102c84eae715e12f39453dc3aede13e9342

Am glad to own both of these and their bigger 3-way brothers which are still today used in some smaller studios in my vintage loudspeaker collection.
http://ifatwww.et.uni-magdeburg.de/~madaus/boxentext/kbr50t.html

 

[Midwest Blade]

Attending Axpona I have heard such a variety of both good and bad sounding speakers. A lot of this can be attributed to setup and presentation, to loud, to soft, poor choice in music, to many people in the room or simply just not a very good speaker. You can extend this to your local dealers as well in many ways. I generally have found that sound is an area where our subjective preferences do come to the forefront, what may sound great to someone, may sound like poop to another. What we listen to is also a big contributor.

 

[mhardy6647]

...poor choice in music...

I do know what you mean (in the context of a demo) -- but music should drive the bus, not the hifi (loudspeakers, in this case).
Dunno about you, but I don't want to live in a world where I am forced to listen (only) to Holly Cole, Jacintha, Diana Krall, Gregorian chants, and Jazz at the Pawnshop

I'll also add that, IME, everything I've played on a pair of the venerable Quad ESL-57 loudspeakers (even 'bad sounding' recordings) sounds good -- and it's not because the speakers filter out rough edges (as some do) nor that they add a pleasant sheen or coloration. I actually don't know what it is about those classic loudspeakers -- but they just sound good.

 

[Midwest Blade]

I do know what you mean (in the context of a demo) -- but music should drive the bus, not the hifi (loudspeakers, in this case).
Dunno about you, but I don't want to live in a world where I am forced to listen (only) to Holly Cole, Jacintha, Diana Krall, Gregorian chants, and Jazz at the Pawnshop

I'll also add that, IME, everything I've played on a pair of the venerable Quad ESL-57 loudspeakers (even 'bad sounding' recordings) sounds good -- and it's not because the speakers filter out rough edges (as some do) nor that they add a pleasant sheen or coloration. I actually don't know what it is about those classic loudspeakers -- but they just sound good.

So true about the music...Nils Lofgren anyone...

I am a Quad ESL-57 owner as well and agree with you that I can play and enjoy a wide variety of "well produced" music of any genre but to me bad recordings are just simply bad recordings.

 

[mhardy6647]

one of my benchmark 'bad sounding recordings'

I've never played a copy on the Quads, though, come to think of it.

 

[Putter]

I'll confess that recordings like that don't really bother me although listening to scratchy 78 masters does. Especially for pop recording I consider it part of the whole presentation.

 

[andreasmaaan]

I'll confess that recordings like that don't really bother me although listening to scratchy 78 masters does. Especailly for pop recording I consider it part of the whole presentation.

Generally speaking, I can put up with a huge amount of distortion, so long as the tonal balance is nice. It's recordings with a poor tonal balance that I find unlistenable.

 

[sejarzo]

I'll confess that recordings like that don't really bother me although listening to scratchy 78 masters does. Especially for pop recording I consider it part of the whole presentation.

That trend baffles me. I find myself wondering "what's gone wrong with my playback chain?" when listening to new cuts on Tidal...until I play a classical piece that I know well and realize nothing has gone wrong with my stuff.

 

[bigbag34]

Focal, Golden Ear. Bright, harsh misery speakers to my ears; at least what I’ve heard from those brands.

 

[Frank Dernie]

The most disappointed I have been by expensive speakers was the original Wilson WAMM.
I had seen so many articles eulogising it when some came up available used at the French Wilson importer I went to listen to them expecting to be blown away and getting out my cheque book.
They were crudely impressive but mind numbingly hideous and I didn't find them particularly convincing on classical instrumental timbre.
The company was also the distributor of Goldmund in Europe and had Apologue and Analog on demo too.
They were in a different class on accurate instrumental timbre, massively better looking and not as expensive.
In the long run I ended up buying Goldmund Epilog 1&2 which I have been listening to with great enjoyment for 25 years now, and am listening to now.
I have yet to hear anything which makes me want to change them.

I did spend about 2 years listening to different speakers on that search.

 

[UCrazyKid]

B&W, Devialet

 

[tuga]

Raidho speakers measure quite poorly in most parameters except perhaps distortion but I've not listened to any.

 

[Koeitje]

3 stars is very good? What?

 

[q3cpma]

3 stars is very good? What?

5 stars must include a reserved place in paradise, I guess.