So what, all the claims of higher end speakers having this and that sound is all mostly placebo? For what it's worth, changing from my old audio engine A5s to "serious" speakers like the kefs produced a significant improvement in sound, so I was looking for a similar step up.
Not placebo, it is called sight bias, it is leading to subjective comments produce by the listener brain interpretation of what he hears. 99% of the comments are not grounded on fact and reality.
Fidelia scores 6.45 and 8.46
Indeed it seems very good. Assembly is rather unnerving though.
This is also a good point. Even with wider directivity speakers you'll have a hard time with the 'big' sound one can get.
Mostly. You are dealing with two things. One, the AEs are poor, like not very neutral or flat which is the goal. But you can't get flatter than flat, right? (within reason.)
Don't they go hand in hand? I mean I've had these for 8 years now, feels like it might be time for an upgrade. Even my custom jh audio iems are multiple times more expensive than these speakers, which is a strange notion when I've seen audiophiles with speakers that go all the way to hundreds of thousands of dollars, making my old kef look basically ultra-entry level in terms of market positioning. Prior to comments here I had no clue that these entry level kefs were so impressive that apparently you need 2k speakers to dethrone it.
How much do you think the kef coaxial and uni-q design contributes to this? Because I find my current one already pretty decent despite being nearfield. I'm not asking for gigantic concert hall soundstage, just a reasonable upgrade from the kefs.
www.audiosciencereview.com
That would really surprize me. Of course you don't hear the room as such, but its size, form and the placement of your speakers in it can drastically change their in-room frequency response.
I have the same situation (scroll down to see the thumbnails - only members of that forum can pop up the full size pictures, but the thumbnails are good enough to get an idea) and when I first heard my nearfield monitors I was delighted. But when I measured the frequency response at my listening position it became clear that the 2 speakers performed rather different due to their differents placements in the room. Anyway because I liked the sound as it was I first did not bother to EQ them.
Shrugs I'm not using the roxanne, mine's the 16, but as I said, i've moved on from IEMs for quite some time now.Jerry Harvey (JH) Custom IEM Review
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Jerry Harvey / JH Audio custom made IEM. It was kindly donated to the forum by a member and cost starts at US $2,299. The multidriver IEM feels quite substantial. I was pleasantly surprised in how well it fit my measurement artificial ear...
So little time and so much to learn.
There is, but generally speaking, it is a complex matter. It's easier to EQ just to one position - in my case, where I sit in front of my computer setup. If it's the same for you, then it's pretty straight forward.
That's no wonder if you know that the same speaker can give quite differing results in different rooms, or even in the same room if placed differently, or if listened to from a different position.
The starting point is to get a mic and do some sweeps with REW to see what's going on.
The thing I worry about with Genelecs is that they are active. Not sure if that decreases their longevity. With the current passive setup I have if the amp/dsp is busted I can modular-ly swap it out. With the used genelecs I run the risk of a thousand dollar brick as I assume no one can really fix em at a decent cost.
