Do you prefer floorstanding speakers or bookshelf speakers? Which do you find sound generally better at the same pricepoint?

[BobbyTimmons]

I started about 10 years ago buying gear not so in the high end audio gear but more studio gear like Allen & Heath digital console. Ableton controllers, diffuser panels to get rid of first reflections bass traps and not to forget Monitors like KRK vst series an Adam A7 monitor (i ended up with). Years before in the 80ties i owned decent audio gear (so called high-end) a class A amplifier with about 90.000 microfarad of elco capacity floor standing speakers all from JK Accoustics a Dutch brand something in between Krell and a Mark Levinson sound.

So getting back to the studio gear. The sound was not bad and it is used for making remixes, listening to uncolored sound it sounded quite good. However my CD collection never sounded as i heard with my JK Acoustic gear. That is also not so surprising till i could get hold of some 40 year old IMF compact monitors. Took an older NAD integrated amp put the IMF's on for fun an compared it to the Adam A7 i was shocked regarding detail an clean sound from the IMF's IMO way better in all aspects. The Adams where sold cost around 1400,- new an the IMF Monitors are still used cost 70,- Euro for both. Basically with the Adams and or KRK with kevlar bass drivers you could play much louder but that was for me the only advantage. When using later room correction software the difference was much more apparent so i bought some floor standing speakers (again) for now i ended up with Vandersteen Model 1 speakers which have a breath taking staging sound. More important I play all my old Cd's again an hear things I never heard before for about 45 years. When I sit behind my desk I listen to my IMF's when I need staging I sit in my Poang chair listening to the Vandies.

Compared to other consumer tech audio progresses very slowly. Equipment from 40 years ago can sound perfectly fine if it's still in good condition. A lot of the progress in the last 40 years is only in affordability. And technical progress in things like DACs is barely audible.

 

[JiiPee]

My listening space is approx 23m2 (250 sq. ft.) living room in apartment building, so concert hall spl with gut punching bass is out of question, and to be honest, I don't really miss that anymore. I'm perfectly happy with a traditional 2.0 speaker set-up, and while my current speakers are old System Audio Ranger floorstanders, my next speakers will likely be stand-mount active monitors. I think they work best in my case: Usually more inert cabinets than floorstanders, and the good ones can reach the low frequency response and spl requirements that I have without subwoofers.

 

[Snarfie]

Compared to other consumer tech audio progresses very slowly. Equipment from 40 years ago can sound perfectly fine if it's still in good condition. A lot of the progress in the last 40 years is only in affordability. And technical progress in things like DACs is barely audible.

Thats a real old picture (topic reply) Just in case i bought ( years ago) a spare pair of IMF monitors at a thrift store some people are throwing gold away the original T27 KEF tweeter has still a priceless sound. Updated picture

 

[Kvx]

Compared to other consumer tech audio progresses very slowly. Equipment from 40 years ago can sound perfectly fine if it's still in good condition. A lot of the progress in the last 40 years is only in affordability. And technical progress in things like DACs is barely audible.

Affordability is the best kind of progress for us plebs

As for floorstanders vs. bookshelf I prefer the on-stand looks/ease of height adjustment of smaller speakers.

 

[BobbyTimmons]

Thats a real old picture (topic reply) Just in case i bought ( years ago) a spare pair of IMF monitors at a thrift store some people are throwing gold away the original T27 KEF tweeter has still a priceless sound. Updated picture

I like how you updated with the picture of Miles Davis on the bookshelf. You must be one of the most dedicated audiophiles here blocking the windows with acoustic panels.

 

[prerich]

I like how you updated with the picture of Miles Davis on the bookshelf. You must be one of the most dedicated audiophiles here blocking the windows with acoustic panels.

I've blocked my center window with acoustic panels as well. It was cheaper to install the new picture window, fill the gap with acoustic panels and then install wood slat panels over it as well - than to brick in the window and install a new wall over it.

 

[robh36062]

If I used bookshelf's I would go satellite/Sub. Once you add stands it's almost the same footprint plus you have a sub. Do the floor standers also need a sub? Or do you want to use a sub with them to help take the load off the woofers and extend down a bit more?

Seems like a mixed bag with no clear "best case".

Rob

 

[Snarfie]

I like how you updated with the picture of Miles Davis on the bookshelf. You must be one of the most dedicated audiophiles here blocking the windows with acoustic panels.

This is a attic with a saddle roof 60 degrees angle. So the view/windows is looking down on tree tops only but an acousticly difficult room.
The panels were already there before I got into DSP. Side panels are for first reflections, and the ones behind the speakers actually sounded better than expected accidental bass traps, apparently.

But the real game changer was MathAudio Room EQ. Bigger difference than any hardware swap I’ve ever heard.

An Miles Davis reminds me I’m mortal

 

[aarons915]

The M126be sound significantly more detailed than the Performa3 series. It's due to their beryllium tweeter. You notice with classical chamber music and acoustic instrument recordings.

I was referring to the build quality difference compared to the M106 for double the price. Either way, the sound quality is your opinion and the measurements don't really back up your statement, the measurements are slightly better but I'd bet they'd be extremely close in a controlled listening test. They are great for people who love marketing though, Beryllium does sound very exotic.

 

[BobbyTimmons]

I was referring to the build quality difference compared to the M106 for double the price. Either way, the sound quality is your opinion and the measurements don't really back up your statement, the measurements are slightly better but I'd bet they'd be extremely close in a controlled listening test. They are great for people who love marketing though, Beryllium does sound very exotic.

The Beryllium tweeter M126Be sounds quite different surprisingly. I have both speakers so it's not opinion.

 

[Matt S]

The Beryllium tweeter M126Be sounds quite different surprisingly. I have both speakers so it's not opinion.

Which would be clear if measured, right....

 

[robh36062]

Which would be clear if measured, right....

Not frequency response you would need to look at the time domain either waterfall or preferably wavelets. But yes Beryllium has better performance in the time domain.

Rob

 

[BobbyTimmons]

Which would be clear if measured, right....

I would have been sceptical there would be difference. But having them all, the M126Be is different from the M106 and M16 especially level of detail from the tweeter. It's a noticeable difference unlike the M16 and M106 which almost sound the same as each other above around 200hz.

 

[Matt S]

I would have been sceptical there would be difference. But having them all, the M126Be is different from the M106 and M16 especially level of detail from the tweeter. It's a noticeable difference unlike the M16 and M106 which almost sound the same as each other above around 200hz.

Per Rob's comment above, it should be measurable. I guess someone has done so. Would be curious to see those objective differences.

 

[Redacted]

I used have mega floor standers, in a dedicated music room, but we have downsized and my wife does not want "loads of big, blokey crap" in her lounge.

Here's a thing I found out:

Unless you go for floorstanders with seriously extended bass wallop, and spend a fair amount on them, you can do just as well (possibly even better for the money) with little standmounts and a pair of (stereo-connected) powered subs. Sure, you will spend days blending in the subs if you have no automated room correction, but it comes out fine (bass-sweep tracks help). I did turn my fairly basic standmounts into IB boxes to lose the rear ports though, which made things easier and better (on extended subjective listening tests).

 

[101geo]

Floor standers, big floor standers with big bass drivers.

 

[john61ct]

Bass is VERY important to overall SQ of a system.

Floorstanders that cover the full spectrum at high even SPL do exist, that ideal is easiest, but both very rare and VERY expensive.

Depending on the room, may still need subwoofer(s) which take a bit of knowledge and time to integrate

Small bookshelves + subwoofer(s) can give just as good a result

at a MUCH lower cost.

 

[Sal1950]

Small bookshelves + subwoofer(s) can give just as good a result
at a MUCH lower cost.

A bit too simplistic IMO
I would disagree that when the big picture of deep bass extension + SPL and X levels of distortion across the complete audible range, that
the cost saving you claim doesn't add up. Being able to move more air thru the upper bass and midrange can be of great value in music.

 

[john61ct]

Actually yes that is correct. In my case I plan to put MBM couplers in between, and they are technically not true Subs.

There are subs that extend well up to say 200Hz though, they are just unlikely to also go right down past 30Hz.

I would rather have more subs than just one anyway, but there is no "one correct solution" that covers everyone and their different contexts

 

[Flaesh]

Bookshelf speakers or monitors are designed to

True bookshelf speakers are designed to be putted on bookshelves.