Defining (Objectively) A Dream System (is it the 8c?)

[Rob_Gordon]

Hey everyone,

I need help setting up « an audiophile horizon ».

I suppose there’s no need for me to describe my current system. I will simply say that I enjoy it very much. I acknowledge that I am not too experienced when it comes to hi-fi system. Thanks to ASR, I know a bit of the theory, but I haven’t « met » any high-end system in a proper environnement. First (and only) time I went to an audio show, the rooms sucked and people talked all over the place. Absolute disaster. I’m going to another one at the end of the month, hoping that, this time, I get to experience something spectacular.

My current system is my first « serious one », meaning that, on top of the time and money spent for it, it’s also the first time I have a real listening position, with an equilateral triangle, etc. I believe my room is doing a pretty god job, it’s neither dead nor resonant. It’s the first time I experience « disappearing speakers » and a feeling that the musicians are in the room. Every time I listen to it, I’m amazed. It’s a great feeling and the confirmation that my audiophile fantasy (that started as a teenager with no a dollar to spend) was worth the effort.

So, because I enjoy it and because I have neighbors just below my living room, because I don’t have the money, I’m not gonna change any time soon.

BUT, I’m still here, reading, still gathering information, and I want to start « planning » my future dream (maybe final) system. If, by chance, I end up living in a little house where I could transform an office in a dedicated (and treated) listening room.

I can’t help but think: « even though I love my system, maybe there are other (accessible) set-ups that would make my jaw drop »

So, I want to think, some day, I'll upgrade!

Intuitively, from everything I read, I feel like I shouldn’t bother starting an « investigation ». I just need to save for the 8c. Is that true?

I keep on asking myself: if measurements are the only valuable/reliable criteria, shouldn’t we have, like, an objective and definite ranking of all (measured) speakers? Can’t we come up with a sort of « total score » ?

And then, maybe you find out that you need to spend 50k to get to 9.9/10, but also that you can reach 9.2 for 6K.

Do you know what I mean? It feels like one of the benefits we should get from an objective-data-based approach is a clear ranking (which would reveal the quality/price ratio).

Am I wrong? Is it more complicated than that?

Could anyone buy, for instance the 8c, without even hearing them first, and be « disappointed » ? (For other reasons than stupidly biased ones of course). Can great measuring speakers be a bad choice? If so, why?

If someone says: « my budget it 15K », is there a better answer than the 8c? If yes, what/why?
If someone says: « my budget is 30K », is there a better answer than the 8c? If yes, what/why?

Is the question « what is the best system available? » easy? Shouldn’t it be?

tl;dr: how to reasonably define the « best system » available?

 

[kemmler3D]

Intuitively, from everything I read, I feel like I shouldn’t bother starting an « investigation ». I just need to save for the 8c. Is that true?

The answer is no. Even if you have perfect frequency response and directivity, stereo speakers have some limitations that mean you have some choices to make.

1. What is your ideal pattern width? Do you prefer wide or narrow dispersion, or maybe even Omni or dipole? None of these is considered fundamentally more correct than the others. Stereo reproduction just needs two speakers that allow the creation of a stereo image, but the "pinpoint" vs. "envelopment" question is up to the listener.

2. How much do you care about dynamics? This boils down to getting more or less sensitive speakers, maybe leading to horns. Are you willing to trade off anything for unclipped, high peaks?

3. How much do you care about distortion and clean bass? This may turn you away from smaller systems like the 8c, or not.

4. How much do you care about phase coherence? There are users here who swear no system without flat or nearly flat phase down to the bass region is really hi-fi. Do you agree?

5. How much spl is enough for you and how big of a room will you be in? This will tell you how big the speaker needs to be.

keep on asking myself: if measurements are the only valuable/reliable criteria, shouldn’t we have, like, an objective and definite ranking of all (measured) speakers? Can’t we come up with a sort of « total score » ?

Well, there is one, it's the preference score associated with the familiar Spinorama / CEA 2034 measurements. You can see this ranking at spinorama.org. however, you'll notice that this ranking has nothing to say about the above questions. No single number can objectively rank all speakers for all listeners because some important factors can't be defined as more or less hi-fi or aren't scientifically established as important to most listeners. In the latter case that doesn't mean they don't matter, and won't matter to you, just that we don't have the evidence to say it definitely matters for all speakers.

So unfortunately I can't tell you it's that simple. Reaching a final endgame system will require you to make some choices.

 

[Satanica]

Although one has to pay for it, Dutch & Dutch are the only speakers that have the uBAACH plugin built in, if that's important to you.

5 years ago when I bought my 8C Studios for a price considerably less than what they sell for now, it seemed like my best option. I might not buy them now based purely on performance, but I think they still look better and are overall a more finished product compared to their obvious direct competitors. I use mine with 4 subwoofers and Dirac ART.

For a speaker that's been selling for nearly 10 years now, one could say they have become slightly long in the tooth. Drivers have seemingly improved in that time.

On another forum there was a guy who replaced his Revel Salon 2's for 8C's and was very happy with the result. He mentioned the 8C's sound more dynamic and that might ruffle a few feathers.

If you are completely sold on Dutch, consider the 6C/6S upcoming combination that should be superior, albeit for a considerably higher cost.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

I have 8Cs and one thing that recommends them is they play nice in untreated or otherwise troublesome rooms. That said, wide vs narrow directivity is a matter of personal preference, and if you're going to have to save up, you owe it to yourself to figure out what you prefer.

 

[Satanica]

I have 8Cs and one thing that recommends them is they play nice in untreated or otherwise troublesome rooms. That said, wide vs narrow directivity is a matter of personal preference, and if you're going to have to save up, you owe it to yourself to figure out what you prefer.

I think it's more complicated that simply preferring a wide, medium or narrow radiation width, it depends on the room too. The 8C's have a radiation width of about 55-60 degrees so they could be considered neither wide or narrow. Perhaps for this reason they could be considered a good "all rounder" as far as dispersion goes.

 

[kharan]

I believe the C8C+BX8C combo is $13k.

The C8C is just as good if not better than the 8c. Also cardioid. Also full range. Slightly narrower 50° dispersion. Less ceiling and floor interactions due to MTM design, but also less of a vertical listening window (nothing crazy, just an issue if you're close and stand up). Unfortunately, we don't have IMD numbers for the 8c, but for the C8C, they are stellar. Horizontal directivity is also stellar.

The B8XC is the corresponding bass module, it adds a lot of headroom and extends the cardioid response to 50 Hz. There are also additional modes that extend the cardoid response further down to 35 Hz at the expense of headroom and a Max SPL that forgoes extending the cardioid response and trades max headroom in return.

I don't believe there's anything close to it at this price.

 

[Mr. Widget]

I have 8Cs and one thing that recommends them is they play nice in untreated or otherwise troublesome rooms.

I hear that a lot on this site, but I think what people mean to say is that the bass performance is excellent even in untreated rooms. Like all other speakers, they will not sound great in an overly live room which I am currently dealing with. Some treatment is needed in minimalist reflective rooms.

I have the 8Cs and agree with those who believe they are excellent. Really the recurring criticism is mostly regarding the price and the measured distortion in the lower end of the spectrum at higher volumes. Either this distortion is not a big deal or I am not sensitive to it. I have cranked the speakers up in my last listening room and the results were nothing less than stellar.

The C8C is just as good if not better than the 8c.

I think at this level of performance the audible differences if any are secondary to feature set, physical/aesthetic design, brand longevity/support and other aspects of a large purchase.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

Yes, they are definitely not a panacea for all room problems, that's a fact

Like all other speakers, they will not sound great in an overly live room which I am currently dealing with.

 

[Cote Dazur]

I can’t help but think: « even though I love my system, maybe there are other (accessible) set-ups that would make my jaw drop”

Nice post, very interesting questions. Until you have a clear idea of what to aim for, as in what can a great system sound like for you, then you need to spend time finding out.
For all I know, you might already have very close to as good as it gets.
From my perspective, great recordings and a very music friendly room is 80% of the recipe. The rest is the “system”, which is mostly the speakers. Different design can have some appeal, but overall neutrality is the main item and if you have a big room, the ability to fill the space.
I hope you find a way to visit people or dealers with good set up, to forge your opinion.
Shows are a waste of time, you will find out soon enough,
Good luck in your quest.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

The C8C is just as good if not better than the 8c.

I agree with this. There are some differences that may matter to some people, though. First, 8C is a roon endpoint, so if you have a roon server, you can have a system consisting solely of 8Cs + cables, no amp, no streamer, no nothing. Second, and most importantly for many consumers, is availability. Ascilab is an awesome company but as it is new it still struggles to keep up with demand. That may or may not matter depending on a buyer's tolerance for watching and waiting.

Anyway, if the C8C + BX8C existed when I bought my 8Cs I might have gone that route. I've met the Ascilab guys & seen their facility and I'm a big fan. I'll probably buy some speakers for them for another space at some point.

 

[Scobass]

I've owned a number of different speaker systems in different rooms, and I always found myself wanting something else after a while. It seemed like if the speakers were truly expensive for me, I'd end my search, but each time, after a while, I'd end up dissatisfied — audiophilia, you'll say, and you'd be right, but I kept getting tripped up by pretty obvious issues, like the fatiguing treble on the Focal Utopia Alto or the boomy bass on the Harbeth 40.2. Even DSP didn't help — I lived with a MiniDSP SHD for a long time. Right now I'm in my 4th year with Dutch & Dutch 8c, and I couldn't be happier. Taking everything into account, for me this is the ideal speaker system — it works as a Roon endpoint and as part of a home theater setup. The BACCH plugin lets you hear a lot of recordings, especially older ones with strong channel separation, in a completely new way. That said, I wouldn’t rely entirely on the speakers’ cardioid directivity — room treatment still makes sense.. Of course, I'm only speaking from my own experience and haven't heard every possible candidate.

 

[Purité Audio]

Audibility of distortion aside ,they are both truly excellent speakers, but the C8C even with the BX8C are considerably cheaper.
Keith

 

[see_no_evil]

tl;dr: how to reasonably define the « best system » available?

The best system is the system you can afford.

If I were to build my "dream" system I'd start with a room of proper dimensions. NC should ideally be (for me anyway) sufficiently low, around 25-30. I'd set a goal to achieve RT60 of 0.2-0.3s across audible range using passive broadband absorbers, some diffusers and active bass traps. As for the audio system itself, I'd go for a well know pro audio brand that makes cardioid woofer systems and aluminum coaxial speakers. Throw on top their calibration and room analysis for final corrections. And all that expense to beat my 50$ IEMs!

But before I can afford that I'd enjoy the hell out of my Topping/Purifi or Benchmark stack system in a very lightly treated and very flawed room.

Write down your goal and constraints, and you'll be half way there already.

 

[Rob_Gordon]

The answer is no. Even if you have perfect frequency response and directivity, stereo speakers have some limitations that mean you have some choices to make.

1. What is your ideal pattern width? Do you prefer wide or narrow dispersion, or maybe even Omni or dipole? None of these is considered fundamentally more correct than the others. Stereo reproduction just needs two speakers that allow the creation of a stereo image, but the "pinpoint" vs. "envelopment" question is up to the listener.

2. How much do you care about dynamics? This boils down to getting more or less sensitive speakers, maybe leading to horns. Are you willing to trade off anything for unclipped, high peaks?

3. How much do you care about distortion and clean bass? This may turn you away from smaller systems like the 8c, or not.

4. How much do you care about phase coherence? There are users here who swear no system without flat or nearly flat phase down to the bass region is really hi-fi. Do you agree?

5. How much spl is enough for you and how big of a room will you be in? This will tell you how big the speaker needs to be.


Well, there is one, it's the preference score associated with the familiar Spinorama / CEA 2034 measurements. You can see this ranking at spinorama.org. however, you'll notice that this ranking has nothing to say about the above questions. No single number can objectively rank all speakers for all listeners because some important factors can't be defined as more or less hi-fi or aren't scientifically established as important to most listeners. In the latter case that doesn't mean they don't matter, and won't matter to you, just that we don't have the evidence to say it definitely matters for all speakers.

So unfortunately I can't tell you it's that simple. Reaching a final endgame system will require you to make some choices.

Woaw, thank you so much for such a thorough answer.

Of course, it's not as simple as I wanted it to be.
The main problem is that I don't know how I could begin to answer your questions. It's not like I can go down the street and ask to compare systems with wide or narrow dispersions, with different dynamics, phase coherence, etc.

Your answer seems to say "even though everything (important) is measurable, some things are not objectively better than others because they do rely on taste/preferences". Is that right? There isn't an objectively good dispersion? Or, are you saying that speakers that really do everything objectively well are out of reach and that the game is to find speakers whose flaws are not too bad for one's taste?

It kinda feels "impossible", to be honest, because if I were to go to a store/showroom where I live, it'd very likely be a subjectivist with poorly set up systems and I won't learn anything about what matters to me.

 

[Rob_Gordon]

Nice post, very interesting questions. Until you have a clear idea of what to aim for, as in what can a great system sound like for you, then you need to spend time finding out.
For all I know, you might already have very close to as good as it gets.
From my perspective, great recordings and a very music friendly room is 80% of the recipe. The rest is the “system”, which is mostly the speakers. Different design can have some appeal, but overall neutrality is the main item and if you have a big room, the ability to fill the space.
I hope you find a way to visit people or dealers with good set up, to forge your opinion.
Shows are a waste of time, you will find out soon enough,
Good luck in your quest.

thank you!

I'm afraid I have no way to really find out. I can't test any systems (let alone objectively designed ones...)
Maybe that's the point of my first message? Maybe I should have phrased it like that: "if you can't try anything before, what should you choose?"

 

[Cote Dazur]

"if you can't try anything before, what should you choose?"

when I started my audio journey, in the 80's, there was only one source we would consider, the source options did not sound ( or measure) all the same, so you first tried to get the best of that. Back then you could go to many places in most city around the world, and try the source with your own records. After a while, you would make a decision, most of the time for totally wrong reasons, bring the source home and most people would just enjoy the music. So much for being able to try.
Back then having access to valuable information was a much bigger challenge, even if the information was available.
Today, we do not need to "try" as much, if at all. we have access to information.
It is much easier to learn and discover what is really important in audio, what really make a difference.
Based on the knowledge available, we need to make a list of those important factor, put a scale to them, start with those.

to me it is:
Have a dedicated room where what ever is in there ( that you probably already own ) can be optimized by fixing room issue, one way or the other or with all means available and by being bold with speaker and MLP placement.
When that is done, you probably be amazed by how gears widely criticized or ignored by so many people can sound great and will play music in a spectacular way.
You may, or may not, need any gear. If you still absolutely "need" to buy something, then speakers is the next important aspect, just keep in mind that they can only do so much if not given room to play (pun intended).

 

[Rob_Gordon]

when I started my audio journey, in the 80's, there was only one source we would consider, the source options did not sound ( or measure) all the same, so you first tried to get the best of that. Back then you could go to many places in most city around the world, and try the source with your own records. After a while, you would make a decision, most of the time for totally wrong reasons, bring the source home and most people would just enjoy the music. So much for being able to try.
Back then having access to valuable information was a much bigger challenge, even if the information was available.
Today, we do not need to "try" as much, if at all. we have access to information.
It is much easier to learn and discover what is really important in audio, what really make a difference.
Based on the knowledge available, we need to make a list of those important factor, put a scale to them, start with those.

to me it is:
Have a dedicated room where what ever is in there ( that you probably already own ) can be optimized by fixing room issue, one way or the other or with all means available and by being bold with speaker and MLP placement.
When that is done, you probably be amazed by how gears widely criticized or ignored by so many people can sound great and will play music in a spectacular way.
You may, or may not, need any gear. If you still absolutely "need" to buy something, then speakers is the next important aspect, just keep in mind that they can only do so much if not given room to play (pun intended).

Thank you very much.

I totally agree with your approach to the issue. That's also why I felt the need to start another thread : https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...scriptions-of-objectively-good-systems.73197/

With my current system, I discovered imaging. This is a very easily perceived difference when you're not used to it. It's a shock, really. Like "what? the music comes from in between the speakers? not the speakers themselves? and you can pretty much place the instruments?"

I suppose it's really tickling me to not know how far from what I can reasonably obtain my current system is.

 

[Flaesh]

8c, .. the 8c? .. 8c?

I haven't read the thread yet. In short, my opinion is "no." I listened to 8s for half a day. Made a special trip to the suburbs for it)).

I suppose there’s no need for me to describe my current system

That wouldn't hurt)) What exactly would you like to improve?

not the speakers themselves?

This is a normal and necessary property of any normal and functioning stereo system.

 

[Cote Dazur]

I suppose it's really tickling me to not know how far from what I can reasonably obtain my current system is.

Once you realize that most of the effect is from the recording itself and that any set of speaker once positioned adequatly can reproduce it, it makes the whole approach a lot more manageable.
Can some speaker be better at it? yes, Will those same speaker have their sound slap back to their baffle if not set up properly or if the recording is poor, absolutely, every time.
At the end of the day we have to deal with a compromise and accept and preferably enjoy the music.
If perfect existed, with the myriad of "expert" in here, would be known by now.

 

[Rob_Gordon]

Once you realize that most of the effect is from the recording itself and that any set of speaker once positioned adequatly can reproduce it, it makes the whole approach a lot more manageable.
Can some speaker be better at it? yes, Will those same speaker have their sound slap back to their baffle if not set up properly or if the recording is poor, absolutely, every time.
At the end of the day we have to deal with a compromise and accept and preferably enjoy the music.
If perfect existed, with the myriad of "expert" in here, would be known by now.

yes, of course.

I suppose I was naively hoping that the perfect had, indeed, been obtained by some "whole in 1" system with room correction.