Best speakers in the world?

[TankTop]

Presentation is everything, and with sound, a big room has advantages attributed to size. Speakers placed far away from boundaries, strong late arrival reflection level. A small room requires acoustic treatment to perform similar, but it can be done, though it is difficult to achieve the same late reverb level.

The best large room acoustics I’ve heard is Red Rocks in Colorado

 

[krabapple]

I'm pretty darn objective, but what you're saying is really starting to sound xenophobic as if you wish this place to be an echo chamber for a particular dogma. I don't enjoy being in a place like that.

Do you like being in a place where science is prioritized?

That's what this place purports to be. Do you consider grounding discussions in science equivalent to being *dogmatic*?

 

[Helicopter]

Remember this is definitely a 'have a good time' thread with an admittedly absurd premise. We have a shared culture and some shared tastes, but some of us still like Focals because they are well engineered but also hand finished by French workers and Golden Lions because they are hardy but also glorious in a dark cold room.

 

[napilopez]

What would you say are the best speakers on the planet?

View attachment 89530

So you're saying a pair of $10K active monitors like Genelec 8361A or Kii Three will sound as good as these giant Focals?

I've not read all of this thread. Some of you know I'm a big Focal fan. I've chosen the Chora 806 to hold onto as a reference despite all the other more expensive speakers I've tested.

But to address the original post, the funny thing is that when I listened to the Grand Utopias at Focal's HQ in their main listening room, they weren't even my favorite speakers I heard there =]

It was only for a few minutes and I didn't get to play the music myself, so it may not mean much, but nonetheless my raw reaction was basically "Impressive! Sounds big! Dynamics! Clarity!" But it wasn't a revelatory experience. The session was too short to have any definitive opinions, but I remember being more enthusiastic about the Kanta surround setup they had in a home theater room.

(Pics or it didn't happen):

Don't get me wrong. They were very impressive, for sure, but I remember thinking they maybe sounded a bit too big. That could've just been a combination of room/song/speaker interaction. I didn't get to choose the songs, and the listening session was brief.

The real issue was that I could clearly hear the room nodes in one of the tracks they played (Beyonce's Partition, a song I use for testing every speaker I review. It starts with a massive bass sweep). That last one was a particular sore spot, perhaps because as much as I tried to tame my expectations, I nonetheless was hoping for something near absolute perfection from the price.

Unfortunately, such an obviously audible flaw will quickly make any speaker fall short of perfection compared to one that deals with the issue head-on. The fact that so few hi-fi companies attempt to 'fix' the low-end room interaction immediately disqualifies many from being "best" in my book. Perhaps this is less of an issue for audiophiles who largely listen to acoustic music, but I listen to too much bassy music for that to be acceptable on the high end.

You might think "sure, but what if you did use room correction? Would they be the best?" Who knows, maybe, wouldn't know until I got them in my room (Focal actually offered a while back.... but no way these would've made sense in my apartment lol). The measurements I've seen of the Utopia series don't seem particularly amazing, but there are pretty much no measurements I've seen that are done as extensively as I'd like.

Personally, I believe the user experience is part of what makes a speaker "best," -- does the manufacturer guide you towards optimizing sound? Any time I'm required to optimize the sound beyond the manufacturer's explicit intent, to optimize the sound, I consider that a flaw. If I need to add subs, that's a flaw. If I need to do room correction and the manufacturer doesn't provide a way for me to do that, that's a flaw. Once I need to "tweak" things, I am no longer really hearing the speaker as intended -- I'm hearing a setup partially of my own design.

To me the best speakers I've heard so far, completely on their own merit, are the D&D 8C. The cardioid directivity already helps minimize room interaction, and I believe the fact that room correction -- for that last bit of optimization -- is an integral part of the setup experience makes them superior to many traditional hi-fi speakers. Plug them in, do what D&D tells you to do in terms of setting distances to your wall and optionally using REW, and you have truly spectacular sound as part of the user experience.

Sure, I might prefer other speakers once I do room correction and throw in a couple of pairs of subs, but unless that's being sold as a package experience, it's not really "better."

That long spiel aside, you could make the argument the Revel salon2 are the best speakers in the world, since they are the only ones, to my knowledge, whose performance as the "best" has been evidenced to some degree by double-blind testing. If one could consider double-blind testing a sort of Speaker Olympics, then it would seem the Salon2 are the reigning champ. They're the only speaker I know of with such "verified" performance.

Of course, we have to take Harman's word for it, but I've always been hoping another manufacturer would publish their own DBT results against the Salon2. Seems like an easy enough thing to set up if you wanted to prove your chops.

EDIT: And obviously I'm talking mostly from the perspective of sound quality. Once you factor in design and cabinet work, prestige, etc, it's a whole nother ballgame.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

Do you like being in a place where science is prioritized?

That's what this place purports to be. Do you consider grounding discussions in science equivalent to being *dogmatic*?

Did you read what I said....'I'm pretty darn objective'? Obviously not. I'm a design engineer for a company which makes audio equipment - of course I believe in science and scientific method! I also listen to my designs (mostly for things like oscillations as the PSU collapses, turn-on/turn-off clicks and pops and other problems), as it would be foolish not to.

 

[TankTop]

Did you read what I said....'I'm pretty darn objective'? Obviously not. I'm a design engineer for a company which makes audio equipment - of course I believe in science and scientific method! I also listen to my designs (mostly for things like oscillations as the PSU collapses, turn-on/turn-off clicks and pops and other problems), as it would be foolish not to.

Honest question, do you ever enjoy a system or setup that scientifically doesn’t measure well but just sounds good? If so, why do you think that is?

 

[Helicopter]

I've not read all of this thread. Some of you know I'm a big Focal fan. I've chosen the Chora 806 to hold onto as a reference despite all the other more expensive speakers I've tested.

But to address the original post, the funny thing is that when I listened to the Grand Utopias at Focal's HQ in their main listening room, they weren't even my favorite speakers I heard there =]

It was only for a few minutes and I didn't get to play the music myself, so it may not mean much, but nonetheless my raw reaction was basically "Impressive! Sounds big! Dynamics! Clarity!" But it wasn't a revelatory experience. The session was too short to have any definitive opinions, but I remember being more enthusiastic about the Kanta surround setup they had in a home theater room.

(Pics or it didn't happen):

View attachment 89895Don't get me wrong. They were very impressive, for sure, but I remember thinking they maybe sounded a bit too big. That could've just been a combination of room/song/speaker interaction. I didn't get to choose the songs, and the listening session was brief.

The real issue was that I could clearly hear the room nodes in one of the tracks they played (Beyonce's Partition, a song I use for testing every speaker I review. It starts with a massive bass sweep). That last one was a particular sore spot, perhaps because as much as I tried to tame my expectations, I nonetheless was hoping for something near absolute perfection from the price.

Unfortunately, such an obviously audible flaw will quickly make any speaker fall short of perfection compared to one that deals with the issue head-on. The fact that so few hi-fi companies attempt to 'fix' the low-end room interaction immediately disqualifies many from being "best" in my book. Perhaps this is less of an issue for audiophiles who largely listen to acoustic music, but I listen to too much bassy music for that to be acceptable on the high end.

You might think "sure, but what if you did use room correction? Would they be the best?" Who knows, maybe, wouldn't know until I got them in my room (Focal actually offered a while back.... but no way these would've made sense in my apartment lol). The measurements I've seen of the Utopia series don't seem particularly amazing, but there are pretty much no measurements I've seen that are done as extensively as I'd like.

Personally, I believe the user experience is part of what makes a speaker "best," -- does the manufacturer guide you towards optimizing sound? Any time I'm required to optimize the sound beyond the manufacturer's explicit intent, to optimize the sound, I consider that a flaw. If I need to add subs, that's a flaw. If I need to do room correction and the manufacturer doesn't provide a way for me to do that, that's a flaw. Once I need to "tweak" things, I am no longer really hearing the speaker as intended -- I'm hearing a setup partially of my own design.

To me the best speakers I've heard so far, completely on their own merit, are the D&D 8C. The cardioid directivity already helps minimize room interaction, and I believe the fact that room correction -- for that last bit of optimization -- is an integral part of the setup experience makes them superior to many traditional hi-fi speakers. Plug them in, do what D&D tells you to do in terms of setting distances to your wall and optionally using REW, and you have truly spectacular sound as part of the user experience.

Sure, I might prefer other speakers once I do room correction and throw in a couple of pairs of subs, but unless that's being sold as a package experience, it's not really "better."

That long spiel aside, you could make the argument the Revel salon2 are the best speakers in the world, since they are the only ones, to my knowledge, whose performance as the "best" has been evidenced to some degree by double-blind testing. If one could consider double-blind testing a sort of Speaker Olympics, then it would seem the Salon2 are the reigning champ. They're the only speaker I know of with such "verified" performance.

Of course, we have to take Harman's word for it, but I've always been hoping another manufacturer would publish their own DBT results against the Salon2. Seems like an easy enough thing to set up if you wanted to prove your chops.

EDIT: And obviously I'm talking mostly from the perspective of sound quality. Once you factor in design and cabinet work, prestige, etc, it's a whole nother ballgame.

That is awesome. I am impressed with Choras performance compared to Aria, but I got Arias because they come in a bigger model (948) and I got a great deal (40% off MSRP), which would be hard to find in something as new as Chora. Aria 906 measured only slightly better than Chora 806 and the Choras look a little better to me. I think the Kantas have the most advanced design, and I also think a HT is hard to beat with stereo. While I am not surprised Kanta HT setup was better to you than the Grand Utopia, I am a little surprused the Grand Utopias were not incredible in that room. If I were old enough for a midlife crisis I would probably have gotten Kanta No 3s. They look like the best out of everything tjey have, at least for a 50m sq. High ceiling Room like mine.

Revels may have won a double blind test, but they are not even made in America or Europe. I would not pay that kind of money for something from a low cost location.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

Honest question, do you ever enjoy a system or setup that scientifically doesn’t measure well but just sounds good? If so, why do you think that is?

Honest answer, Yes. I'm listening to one right now. Vacuum tubes, horns, vinyl, analog tape (see: my screen name and my avitar - a magnetic tape head). I also have digital source components and enjoy them too.

 

[Helicopter]

Honest answer, Yes. I'm listening to one right now. Vacuum tubes, horns, vinyl, analog tape (see: my screen name and my avitar - a magnetic tape head). I also have digital source components and enjoy them too.

Me too. I like it all. I mostly listen to vinyl, tubes, and horns, and even like 8 tracks on 1960s consumer grade panasonic gear. I love early 1970s Marantz solid state and vintage Klipsch, but I also like transparent systems and I have an Amazon whole house system. The only thing I have not gotten to is home theater, but I will.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

[QUOTE="Helicopter, post: 552452, member: 18814"... and even like 8 tracks[/QUOTE]

You're a brave person for admitting that.......

 

[Helicopter]

You're a brave person for admitting that.......

Oh they are not detailed on 16 ohm full range original speakers. I must have listened to Jethro Tull's Aqualung 30 times (it is a fairly short loop) before listening to it with HD digital and excellent DAC and HPA and headphones... I think the band picked up two more instruments. I was blown away by what I had been missing. I was quite surprised, not so much by what was revealed as by what had been covered in a thick veil. But they are fun for my basement man cave.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

Oh they are not detailed on 16 ohm full range original speakers. I must have listened to Jethro Tull's Aqualung 30 times (it is a fairly short loop) before listening to it with HD digital and excellent DAC and HPA and headphones... I think the band picked up two more instruments. I was blown away by what I had been missing. I was quite surprised, not so much by what was revealed as by what had been covered in a tjick veil. But they are fun for my basement man cave.

Its a wonder the 8 track format worked at all given the extremely narrow tracks and crude machanism of the tape cartridge. I think I would rank garden variety cassettes as better in sound quality than 8 track, this mostly being due to improvements in tape formulations and more advanced head manufacturing techniques.

 

[Helicopter]

Its a wonder the 8 track format worked at all given the extremely narrow tracks and crude machanism of the tape cartridge. I think I would rank garden variety cassettes as better in sound quality than 8 track, this mostly being due to improvements in tape formulations and more advanced head manufacturing techniques.

Oh yeah. 8 tracks are vasty audibly inferior to cassettes. I agree it is not the format itself, but rather its implementation and development.

 

[MZKM]

Play some Doja Cat

Didn’t think I’d see Doja Cat on this forum.

To answer OP’s question, the answer is obviously some DIY design with active crossovers (DSP via a digital only MiniDSP fed into an Okto DAC8, with HYPEX/Purifi amps into 3-way speakers and then dual/multi subs).

As for the drivers:
Tweeter:
BlieSMa T34A-4:
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/bliesma/bliesma-t34a-4

2x (TMM, not MTM) midrange:
SB Acoustics SB12CACS25-4:
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/sbacoustics/sb-acoustics-sb12cacs25-4

2x side-firing (force canceling) woofers:
ScanSpeak 32W/8878T11:
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/scan-speak/scanspeak-32w/8878t11

~2kHz crossover for the midwoofers and ~300Hz crossover for the woofers.

 

[richard12511]

I think that digital beam shaping and room interaction fixes like that seen from D&D, B&O, and Kii are probably the new frontier of SOTA speaker design. All of these ultra high end designs are probably gonna have to go active and implement some form of those features for me to consider them in the running for "best speaker in the world". I'm hoping that these new active SOTA speakers will convince some of the big boys(like Focal) to step up to the plate and challenge them. Unfortunately, I think most audiophile's still (wrongly) believe that active designs can't possibly sound as good as passive designs; this board is the exception.

 

[Emlin]

Some people buy products, some people buy brands, and some people buy solutions.

And others powder their noses, if you know what I mean.

 

[Helicopter]

I think that digital beam shaping and room interaction fixes like that seen from D&D, B&O, and Kii are probably the new frontier of SOTA speaker design. All of these ultra high end designs are probably gonna have to go active and implement some form of those features for me to consider them in the running for "best speaker in the world". I'm hoping that these new active SOTA speakers will convince some of the big boys(like Focal) to step up to the plate and challenge them. Unfortunately, I think most audiophile's still (wrongly) believe that active designs can't possibly sound as good as passive designs; this board is the exception.

You can put really good DSP even without an ADC between your streamer and DAC for $170 - 400 with miniDSP, so what is wrong with separate amps and good passive speakers? Is it just the passive crossovers in the speakers to which you object? ... serious question. That would be a rational reason. I am guessing there are others.

 

[Helicopter]

And others powder their noses, if you know what I mean.

I do not. That expression always eluded me. Something to do with aristocracy but also sometimes with cocaine, maybe.

 

[MattHooper]

I think the Kantas have the most advanced design, and I also think a HT is hard to beat with stereo. While I am not surprised Kanta HT setup was better to you than the Grand Utopia, I am a little surprused the Grand Utopias were not incredible in that room. If I were old enough for a midlife crisis I would probably have gotten Kanta No 3s. They look like the best out of everything tjey have, at least for a 50m sq. High ceiling Room like mine.

I did a very extensive speaker audition/search within the last few years which included auditioning the Focal Kanta 2. I really like the looks and stylin' of the Kanta 2/3 models. The Kanta 2 didn't really do it for me - very clear, clean upper frequencies but overall a bit too clinical/electronic sounding, and the bass didn't seem well integrated. I don't know if much changed with the Kanta 3 or not as I haven't heard them. I also found the Focal stand mounted speakers too "cool" sounding, missing some satisfying body and richness. But their really big models sounded richer and fuller at shows. I always have felt that Focal had a bit of a "look at me" sound to the upper frequencies, like the company was super proud of it's tweeters so you are damned well gonna notice them! But though I went a different direction I certainly get the appeal of the Focal speakers.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I'm surprised Focal's passives are liked around here but their pro monitors get no love at all.
Even though they use higher end "W" sandwich drivers vs the Kanta's Flax drivers.