Looking for a small Speaker (active or passive), woofer not bigger than 4 Inches preferably

[MachOne]

actually this is interesting as I always check with the white Apple ear-pods as most use it with their iPhone as is pretty balance I would say...

Now seems that these Homepodd are mono right? so may need a pair

thanks

I use just one as it is more useful in mono for me as this is the most common way people use them. The bass is exaggerated on them and it's a good way to check your bass isn't going to be out of control when it goes out onto this sort of device.

 

[HeadDoc12]

Vanatoo Transparent Zero Plus. I think they sound pretty great for their size, they are actives, and they can even be positioned differently for near field and mid field listening. Definitely check them out. I imagine the One Encore Plus sounds even better.

 

[Steven Holt]

Oh, I'm going to get grief for this, but -- if you use them in nearfield...I repeat NEARFIELD -- then the Micca RB42 just might do the job for you. They have a 3 db dropdown and the bass will whump ya......did I mention that you have to use them NEARFIELD??

 

[JLGF1]

Ascend 200SE Four inch woofer... you didn't specify how many.

 

[AmielMix]

for real consumer reference I would go with some highly popular single wireless speaker, preferably with wired line input for ease of use and low latency, like Sonos Era 100, Bose Soundlink Revolve II. You also gain completely different way of rendering stereo. Getting something neutral like KH80 wouldn't be much different than just putting high pass filter on D&D

exactly, even tho are diffences between highed Sudio Monitors, there are similarities in the voicing .. and you are right i want some contrast in the voicing and not only frequency response of the speaker

 

[AmielMix]

Ascend 200SE Four inch woofer... you didn't specify how many.

View attachment 309975

this looks interesting in so many way, do you have them? if yes, any good amp for these?

 

[AmielMix]

Vanatoo Transparent Zero Plus. I think they sound pretty great for their size, they are actives, and they can even be positioned differently for near field and mid field listening. Definitely check them out. I imagine the One Encore Plus sounds even better.

that looks like a badboy!! and super compact...the price I guess is for one speaker right ($449 each)?

 

[AmielMix]

Oh, I'm going to get grief for this, but -- if you use them in nearfield...I repeat NEARFIELD -- then the Micca RB42 just might do the job for you. They have a 3 db dropdown and the bass will whump ya......did I mention that you have to use them NEARFIELD??

this looks great too, thanks for the info

 

[YSC]

i have my speakers that I am very happy with, but want a small speaker, more limited and not a "studio" speaker...want a different reference

Can consider KEF LSX, fostex PM0.4

 

[JLGF1]

this looks interesting in so many way, do you have them?

I have the V1's with the Peerless tweeter. The current V2 (SE) have an SEAS tweeter. They are sealed, not ported.

200 SE specs

 

[fineMen]

Can consider KEF LSX, fostex PM0.4

+1 for the KEFs**. They are very limited in bass whilst quite o/k-ish if used at low background volumes, a bit shouty simply due to a decidedly forward frequency response.

One may also assume that customers will regularly exploit the output capabilities of their set-up fully, accepting a certain amount of distortion, which is determined by the set-up. The signature, as to find a word, of the usually very limited stereo (5.1) set-up is something to be determined.

I always wondered for which reasons the standard 'bad' speakers, Yamaha, Aurasound, are chosen as that standard. It cannot be bass extension alone, because that could be set using an equalizer for the main monitors. Distortion, maybe, but a software simulation should be available. Intermodulation is a hot candidate but the amount of IM varies wildly with use case, size, quality, extension etc pp.

Briefly, how come to have a 'standard bad' and what is it actually? Motivation: if the double check against 'bad' is part of studio technologies and methods, it should be well described, technically. I think it is consensus that there is only one 'perfect' but there are infinitely many 'bads'.

** equalize the LSX in bass for full detrimental effect , see also: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-lsx-review-wireless-speaker.24802/

 

[AmielMix]

anybody checked the Edifiers?

+1 for the KEFs**. They are very limited in bass whilst quite o/k-ish if used at low background volumes, a bit shouty simply due to a decidedly forward frequency response.

One may also assume that customers will regularly exploit the output capabilities of their set-up fully, accepting a certain amount of distortion, which is determined by the set-up. The signature, as to find a word, of the usually very limited stereo (5.1) set-up is something to be determined.

I always wondered for which reasons the standard 'bad' speakers, Yamaha, Aurasound, are chosen as that standard. It cannot be bass extension alone, because that could be set using an equalizer for the main monitors. Distortion, maybe, but a software simulation should be available. Intermodulation is a hot candidate but the amount of IM varies wildly with use case, size, quality, extension etc pp.

Briefly, how come to have a 'standard bad' and what is it actually? Motivation: if the double check against 'bad' is part of studio technologies and methods, it should be well described, technically. I think it is consensus that there is only one 'perfect' but there are infinitely many 'bads'.

** equalize the LSX in bass for full detrimental effect , see also: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-lsx-review-wireless-speaker.24802/

thank you so much for sharing this, this is really a great forum

 

[escape2]

that looks like a badboy!! and super compact...the price I guess is for one speaker right ($449 each)?

$449 for a pair (set of 2).

 

[AmielMix]

Anybody compared the Micca RB42 vs the Ascend Audio HTM-200SE?

I see the Micca has more low end and that ascend audio has a great tweeter and both with an optimal juice (amp) can fill the room (that is good, but not my first interest), but my question goes about the voice characteristics, which one is more HiFI, or which one resemble more a descent consumer system/speaker or which one are more different from a "studio" speaker?

Thanks in advance

 

[AmielMix]

$449 for a pair (set of 2).

Thank you was unclear in the website or I missed something

 

[HeadDoc12]

that looks like a badboy!! and super compact...the price I guess is for one speaker right ($449 each)?

Nope. Per pair. Actually a good deal.

 

[Ron Texas]

LS50 Meta, 5" but it's a small box. Alan Jones designed a speaker for Pioneer with a 4" mid/woofer. They are dirt cheap and sound good.

 

[AmielMix]

LS50 Meta, 5" but it's a small box. Alan Jones designed a speaker for Pioneer with a 4" mid/woofer. They are dirt cheap and sound good.

Yes, I heard about that small pioneer speaker...do you remember the original model? maybe it was the SP-BS21-LR ?

 

[NTK]

Yes, I heard about that small pioneer speaker...do you remember the original model? maybe it was the SP-BS21-LR ?

Reviewed by Amir with the @Dennis Murphy mod.

Affordable Accuracy Monitor Review

This is a detailed measurements of a modified Pioneer SP-BS22-LR speaker by @Dennis Murphy called Affordable Accuracy Monitor (AAM). He was kind enough to send me a sample. I let him explain the mods but basically the tweeter was replace with a higher quality one and a new modified crossover was...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[mtmpenn]

How about the Philharmonic Audio “True Mini?”

I have not heard it but Dennis supplies measurements which look good. I have a pair of Dennis’ affordable accuracy monitors and they were a fantastic value.

These are $380 per pair.