Best option out of these 3

[f1shb0n3]

Thank you! I have the new Denon AVR-x4700h, so EQ is on the table.
I really understand everything they've said above and I'm still researching a lot, but I just see so many people with klipsch, it's difficult to believe they aren't good speakers.

Check out Amir's measurements of some Klipsch speakers if you need some proof:
Klipsch R-41M
Klipsch RP-600M

It's not to say they can't sound good in your room after calibration, but what we see on the measurements are:

• Resonances - not fixable by EQ.
• Directivity errors - will ruin any EQ efforts as the reflections have different tonality than direct sound.
• Significant tonality deviation from target - even if EQ'd will be losing significant dynamic range.
• High distortion.

People have opinions, but the measurement gear (Klippel) doesn't

 

[Beershaun]

Thank you! I have the new Denon AVR-x4700h, so EQ is on the table.
I really understand everything they've said above and I'm still researching a lot, but I just see so many people with klipsch, it's difficult to believe they aren't good speakers.
I am highly considering the suggestions above (the Kef and Polk R-200, etc).
What area should be focused on the EQ for the klipsch? (reducing the highs?)

I'd check out Amir's reviews of the Klipsch as posted above. Because of the inconsistent frequency response between the direct and reflected sound it is hard to EQ them. People like them because they have bright highs that present an initial impression of detail and they are very affordable.

Also not sure what you mean by no evidence about coaxial having good horizontal and vertical sound fields. both Erin's and Amir's reviews demonstrate how good KEF coaxial designs are at having wide dispersion with good frequency response both horizontally and vertically. This gives you a lot more placement options to get consistent sound from a center channel. If you are worried about budget i'd just get one KEF for your center channel and then get your speaker of choice for the other channels.

LS50 meta: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-ls50-meta-review-speaker.25574/
Q100: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-q100-speaker-review.11987/
Erin's review of KEF R2c:

Amir's review of KEF R4C: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...kef-reference-4c-review-center-speaker.30048/
Erin's review of KEF R3:

Hope these reviews give you what you were looking for.

 

[mallow81]

I'd check out Amir's reviews of the Klipsch as posted above. Because of the inconsistent frequency response between the direct and reflected sound it is hard to EQ them. People like them because they have bright highs that present an initial impression of detail and they are very affordable.

Also not sure what you mean by no evidence about coaxial having good horizontal and vertical sound fields. both Erin's and Amir's reviews demonstrate how good KEF coaxial designs are at having wide dispersion with good frequency response both horizontally and vertically. This gives you a lot more placement options to get consistent sound from a center channel. If you are worried about budget i'd just get one KEF for your center channel and then get your speaker of choice for the other channels.

LS50 meta: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-ls50-meta-review-speaker.25574/
Q100: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-q100-speaker-review.11987/
Erin's review of KEF R2c:

Amir's review of KEF R4C: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...kef-reference-4c-review-center-speaker.30048/
Erin's review of KEF R3:

Hope these reviews give you what you were looking for.

Thank you for sharing those videos! I will watch them. I didn't mean there is no evidence, just that I couldn't find any yet. What you shared was perfect and helps me get more definitive answers.

 

[Steve Dallas]

Keep in mind that Audyssey in you r 4700 reserves most of its taps for bass frequencies. Correction above 500(?) Hz is limited. I can post FR charts later tonight to demonstrate this.

 

[f1shb0n3]

Keep in mind that Audyssey in you r 4700 reserves most of its taps for bass frequencies. Correction above 500(?) Hz is limited. I can post FR charts later tonight to demonstrate this.

I'd be curious to learn more about this limitation, haven't heard it mentioned before. My Audyssey MultiEQ app with Denon X3500 shows the "corrected response" matching the target perfectly.

 

[mallow81]

So I'm looking now at going with the Q350s and the Q650C. total is just within my budget and I'll upgrade my sub in a few months.
Thoughts?

 

[f1shb0n3]

So I'm looking now at going with the Q350s and the Q650C. total is just within my budget and I'll upgrade my sub in a few months.
Thoughts?

Sounds like a good choice, I think you'll be happy with them. A future upgrade path also might be moving the Q350 as surrounds and getting matching towers from the same series such as Q550 for fronts if it makes sense for your room.

 

[sweetchaos]

Is there a Horizontal Polar (Globe) Plot for the Kef Q150? I searched through erin's page and through ASR but couldn't find one. I can't find any evidence that the coaxial has good horizontal and vertical sound fields

Here's Kef Q350 (placed normally as a bookshelf):

Horizontal directivity:

Spoiler

This looks to be +-60 degrees to get to -6db window.

Vertical directivity:

Spoiler

This looks to be +60 (-50) degrees to get to -6db window.

Regardless of orientation, Kef coaxial speakers are excellent in terms of horizontal/vertical directivity.

I expect Q150 to be very similar.

 

[mallow81]

Sounds like a good choice, I think you'll be happy with them. A future upgrade path also might be moving the Q350 as surrounds and getting matching towers from the same series such as Q550 for fronts if it makes sense for your room.

I was thinking that as well. I'd prefer to get the Q550s now as I'll still have to get stands for the Q350s and that increases the total cost. I'm still comparing totals.
This is exciting but also very stressful. SOO wish I could go somewhere to hear a demo of the speakers....

 

[f1shb0n3]

SOO wish I could go somewhere to hear a demo of the speakers....

The room influences sound so much that it's not very useful to audition them somewhere else. Additionally room correction and target curve customization with Audyssey would change sound significantly in your final setup, so what you hear in demo room vs what you hear at your home will be more different than similar, therefore pretty much useless to audition speakers. Trust the science and see what happens

 

[hex168]

Don't worry. You've gotten excellent advice here and the result will sound good. I do not have anything specific to add to the recommendations already made, but I wanted to note the unfailing politeness and clarity of your posts, which I appreciate and hope will serve as a model for others who would like to ask similar questions. Welcome to ASR!

 

[mallow81]

So I just measured my room. Listening position for the 3 seats are all within 12 degress (horizontal) of the center speaker. I am not sure I need the wide horizontal radiation of say the Q350s. I think, now based on the science the es35 should fit my needs.

Polk Signature S60 Speaker System Review Test Bench

Test Bench L/R Sensitivity: 89.5 dB from 500 Hz to 2 kHz Center Sensitivity: 88.5 dB from 500 Hz to 2 kHz Surround Sensitivity: 87.5 dB from 500 Hz to 2 kHz This graph shows the quasi-anechoic (employing close-miking of all woofers) frequency response of the S60 L/R (purple trace), PSW125...

www.soundandvision.com

as it is within +-15 degrees horizontal.
is there any reason at this point I should should not go with the Polk Elite Signature (es35 + es50)?
It's just a major cost justification at this point....
It's obvious the KEF are likely better speakers and more on neutral, but I don't think I can justify the higher price at this point.

Also, is there any feedback on the R-12sw? According to the Subwoofer spreadsheet it performs pretty well.

 

[mallow81]

Don't worry. You've gotten excellent advice here and the result will sound good. I do not have anything specific to add to the recommendations already made, but I wanted to note the unfailing politeness and clarity of your posts, which I appreciate and hope will serve as a model for others who would like to ask similar questions. Welcome to ASR!

Thank you so much. I am very happy that so many people have been supportive in this and give me solid advice and science backed research. I asked a few other forums and there was little to no replies (2 at the most). This has been VERY helpful and I can't wait to see the final result!

 

[sweetchaos]

is there any reason at this point I should should not go with the Polk Elite Signature (es35 + es50)?

You understand the limitations of 2-way MTM center speakers and your room fits that requirement.
Nothing wrong with making this choice.
Most people don't even understand this.

It's obvious the KEF are likely better speakers and more on neutral, but I don't think I can justify the higher price at this point.

Totally up to you.

Also, is there any feedback on the R-12sw? According to the Subwoofer spreadsheet it performs pretty well.

With the exception of a few very well-known subwoofer companies like SVS, Monoprice, JTR Speakers, buying subwoofers can be risky especially if we don't have CEA-2010-A data on them. If we have CEA-2010-A data on subwoofers, you can rest easy knowing you're getting your money's worth. Without my spreadsheet, people are buying blind and crossing their fingers in the hope it performs....haha.

 

[mallow81]

You understand the limitations of 2-way MTM center speakers and your room fits that requirement.
Nothing wrong with making this choice.
Most people don't even understand this.


Totally up to you.


With the exception of a few very well-known companies like SVS, Monoprice, JTR Speakers, buying subwoofers can be risky especially if we don't have CEA-2010-A data on them. If we have CEA-2010-A data on subwoofers, you can rest easy knowing you're getting your money's worth. Without my spreadsheet, people are buying blind and crossing their fingers in the hope it performs....haha.

1: Thank you! I actually watched Erin's video of the MTM last week so I was on board with your comments from the go. However, after comparing all the info, it really comes down the cost justification vs dreams.
2: I am going back through your subwoofer sheet right now to see if there are any other subs (besides the Klipsch R-12sw) that are within the price range and available here. Based on your sheet it looks like a decent choice.

Thank you ALL sooo much for your support, time, and knowledge! I will keep you updated on my final decision and post some before/after photos when my choice arrives!

This forum has drastically helped me better understand my choices and make an informed purchase. I can't thank you all enough. Reduced my stress by alot.

 

[f1shb0n3]

It's obvious the KEF are likely better speakers and more on neutral, but I don't think I can justify the higher price at this point.

I'm a big proponent of incremental approach to audio - start at most reasonably lowest price level possible and upgrade from there as you gain appreciation for what you have and then figure out very specific reasons why you want to upgrade from there on.
So many benefits of this approach - you start with what you can afford, learn how to optimize it and also how to appreciate it. Eventually when you find very specific reasons you can upgrade incrementally, while having a baseline to compare to.
My system following this approach - got the cheapest reasonably measuring speakers - Infinity R263 towers, R162 bookshelves and R12 subs, all gotten at sale price, in 5.4.4 configuration:

Also, is there any feedback on the R-12sw? According to the Subwoofer spreadsheet it performs pretty well.

If you mean Infinity R12, I'm super happy with mine, but for objective information check out Erin's video on comparing cheap subs where R12 "won":

 

[f1shb0n3]

I noticed we ended up featuring many of Erin's videos, he's a great teacher in "Speakers 101". Here's a great video that focuses exactly on what matters in speaker measurements, how it correlates with what we hear and how to find the most appropriate speaker for the use case:

 

[Steve Dallas]

I'd be curious to learn more about this limitation, haven't heard it mentioned before. My Audyssey MultiEQ app with Denon X3500 shows the "corrected response" matching the target perfectly.

I watched an XT32 video produced by Sound United & Audyssey in which the limitation was mentioned. Essentially, they are working within the available DSP power in the receiver and prioritize bass over treble, which makes tons of sense when you factor in room reflections.

What is shown in MultiEQ is a projected response, not a measured result. Mine shows the same thing, but since you do not re-measure, it cannot show an actual result.

Here are left and right measurements showing the response in my media room of full XT32 correction vs. limiting it to 1100 Hz, which is a multiple of Schroeder in my room:

As you can see, XT32 produces a curve equally as flawed as the raw response above 1100Hz. A little bit less even, actually. If you are well-versed in PEQ, you can see a low Q boost, medium Q cut...

This is Audyssey's reference curve with midrange compensation turned off.

My point is, one cannot rely on Audyssey to hammer a very flawed speaker into a perflecly smooth FR response. It likely will not beat a Klipsch into perfect submission.

Having said that, look at the improvement under 1100Hz compared to what I measured in Pure Direct mode (bass management on, Audyssey off):

While it could be better in the SBIR range near 150Hz, it is difficult to otherwise argue with that result. It is very good considering the hardware limitations of the AVR. Nearly everything below 1100Hz is improved by Audyssey [Note the phase was inadvertently inverted on both subs and Audyssey fixed it.]

Paraphrasing Dr. Toole, if you need to correct above the range of the influence of the room, you need better speakers.

START WITH THE BEST SPEAKERS YOU CAN AFFORD!

 

[Steve Dallas]

I was thinking that as well. I'd prefer to get the Q550s now as I'll still have to get stands for the Q350s and that increases the total cost. I'm still comparing totals.
This is exciting but also very stressful. SOO wish I could go somewhere to hear a demo of the speakers....

If I were in your position, I would look at the best towers within the budget and ignore the center for now. If you position the L and R well, you can create a convincing phantom center at the MLP. Later, as budget allows, you can add a center if you decide you need one. Stands are ultimately a waste of money, unless the mounted speakers are your end-game, or you can re-purpose them for surrounds.

When I bought my F206s, the center was not in stock. That continued for 6 months. My family and I forgot about it, as we were all satisfied with the sound we were getting. When it finally arrived, I installed it, and we all shrugged and said, "OK?" I could turn it off and no one would notice. Is that worth ~$1000?

If you end up with Q550s or Q750s, you could use a single Q150 or 350 on its side as your center. No need to purchase a dedicated "center" if you are using a coaxial and have subs.

 

[mallow81]

If I were in your position, I would look at the best towers within the budget and ignore the center for now. If you position the L and R well, you can create a convincing phantom center at the MLP. Later, as budget allows, you can add a center if you decide you need one. Stands are ultimately a waste of money, unless the mounted speakers are your end-game, or you can re-purpose them for surrounds.

When I bought my F206s, the center was not in stock. That continued for 6 months. My family and I forgot about it, as we were all satisfied with the sound we were getting. When it finally arrived, I installed it, and we all shrugged and said, "OK?" I could turn it off and no one would notice. Is that worth ~$1000?

If you end up with Q550s or Q750s, you could use a single Q150 or 350 on its side as your center. No need to purchase a dedicated "center" if you are using a coaxial and have subs.

Thank you Steve!
I already went ahead and got the Signature Elite series ES50 + ES30 + Klipsch r-12sw.
it should arrive all in about 3 weeks.

incremental approach to audio -

Yes, based on these I may slowly upgrade portions. But I had to get the baseline down first. It's all about waiting out my wife... We make decent money, but she is always in saving mode (and I am thankful that she does that cause I would have gone with a much more expensive system had I the choice).