Neutral bookshelf speakers @ $2000?

[napilopez]

Hence my earlier point about the flaw in these threads:

They're not really based on anything that is a true test.

Even a simple blind listening test shoot out would be nice.

Instead, people have their favorites, and provide testimonials, data, test, etc, in isolation to advocate.

I find the whole nature of threads like this, basically asking for purchase recommendations, to be a weird fit to ASR; they're really better off for fully subjective places like WBF.

I see what you're saying, but on the other hand, I'd counter that the benefit of asking for recommendations on ASR is to pick the brains of people who care about objective data, even if they can't provide objective comparisons themselves. I mean, where else might one ask for recommendations and get such a high quality pool of recommendations? Surely at any other online venue we'd see some more questionable suggestions.

 

[ernestcarl]

Some say the KH120 is on the bright side. As for amplification there many Hypex based amps which measure far better than anyone needs for half the price as the NAD. Try Nord, for example.

Another speaker possibility is the Ascend Acoustics Sierra II. I second the Revel M106.

Not sure, but I think their overall tonality is rather dark.

If it's bright to your ears, I'd say to just use the treble shelving built in if you're using them in such close proximity. At a distance, I would actually use the +1dB treble shelving myself. But that's me.

 

[matt3421]

nothing in any measurements of the KH120 would indicate that they are bright sounding. they are easily one of the most neutral, uncolored speakers ever made

 

[napilopez]

I mean, if you showed me a few plots of the Revel Ultima Salon2, I wouldn't be ready to immediately declare it one of the best performing speakers

Actually if you studied Toole's book, and learned a little about what they look for you'd have a good idea. Not as good as having the entire spin-o-rama data, but enough of the off axis info is presented by Stereophile and Soundstage.net to pick contenders vs pretenders.

If Harman's work is accurate, indeed you probably could pick which of your list of speakers would be best if you hear them blind. When you hear them sighted with other info given to you it pollutes the experience of hearing only their sound quality. Harman's spin-o-rama data is able to show which bookshelf speaker will perform better in blind comparisons at a 99% correlation rate. With full range speakers the rate is still into the 90+% range. What Stereophile and Soundstage show us isn't enough to be that accurate, but enough to be highly suggestive and to eliminate some choices.

Actually, you and I are mostly in agreement. I've read the book and refer to it frequently, so I'm well aware of what to look for, and the effects of sighted vs blind listening.

But the disagreement is precisely about whether the data we have here is "enough to be that accurate." Can we declare a champion between the top recommendations in this thread (and others like it) based just on measurements of varying methodologies from different sources?

Even with the same people doing the measurements, it can be tricky. I remember when reading about the shootout that happened between the Salon2 and Harman's own JBL M2. Many expected the latter to win because of its 'prettier' spins - flatter on axis. I believe the explanation for the Salon's victory was its wider directivity exciting more early reflections. A subtle distinction even when directly comparing spins.

For reference for anyone who hasn't seen them, here are the Salon2's spins:

And here are the M2's:

Interpreting these measurements certainly requires some care at least.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Actually, you and I are mostly in agreement. I've read the book and refer to it frequently, so I'm well aware of what to look for, and the effects of sighted vs blind listening.

But the disagreement is precisely about whether the data we have here is "enough to be that accurate." Can we declare a champion between the top recommendations in this thread (and others like it) based just on varying measurements from different sources?

Even with the same people doing the measurements, it can be tricky. I remember when reading about the shootout that happened between the Salon2 and Harman's own JBL M2. Many expected the latter to win because of its 'prettier' spins - flatter on axis. I believe the explanation for the Salon's victory was its wider directivity. A subtle distinction without directly comparing spins.

For reference for anyone who hasn't seen them, here are the Salon2's spins:
View attachment 36876

And here are the M2's:
View attachment 36877
Interpreting these measurements certainly requires some care at least.

I read much of that thread on AVS. I would have predicted the Salon based upon better DI curves (red and blue). But then would have seen the uneveness vs the smoother flatter M2. And would have been troubled by that prediction.

Too bad that thread couldn't continue using each of the original two speakers vs two other highly touted non-Harman contenders.

Also, from descriptions of those, no one having chosen one vs the other in isolation would have listened to them and thought, "oh wow! big mistake".

 

[napilopez]

I read much of that thread on AVS. I would have predicted the Salon based upon better DI curves (red and blue). But then would have seen the uneveness vs the smoother flatter M2. And would have been troubled by that prediction.

Too bad that thread couldn't continue using each of the original two speakers vs two other highly touted non-Harman contenders.

Also, from descriptions of those, no one having chosen one vs the other in isolation would have listened to them and thought, "oh wow! big mistake".

Yeah, that thread was a real eye-opener! It really drove home the point of the importance of directivity. It also drove home the point of not being too parricular about the on-axis and listening window curves being ruler-flat though. Turns out we can handle some dips and peaks so long as they are shallow and/or high q and balance each other out.

 

[restorer-john]

See these paws? Deadly weapons...

A burst of loud pink noise whenever he gets near the speakers. He'll learn quickly.

 

[Phorize]

+1 to P3ESRs, they do very well in my small room, extremely neutral. Lack of bass not really an issue in a small room which renders deep base impractical anyway. Recommend an amp of at least 60-70 watts into 6ohms for these though.

I am using Harbeth P3ESRs as my desktop speakers, and I think they are among the smoothest and most natural small speakers on the market. They do not have a lot of bass and cannot fill a large room, but within their limitations they are glorious. They may be a bit over your budget, depending on your territory.

 

[BillG]

I'm looking for a pair of bookshelf speakers (can also be full range floorstanding, but prefer bookshelf) in the $2000 range that has good measurements (in other word, neutral)

~$900USD per pair, and the winner of numerous awards...

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/revel-concerta2-m16-speaker-system-review-test-bench

 

[oivavoi]

Yeah, that thread was a real eye-opener! It really drove home the point of the importance of directivity. It also drove home the point of not being too parricular about the on-axis and listening window curves being ruler-flat though. Turns out we can handle some dips and peaks so long as they are shallow and/or high q and balance each other out.

I'm also not completely sure that the use of horns/waveguides is as non-problematic sound-wise as some people assume. Yes, it can improve directivity plots, but Earl Geddes' research on HOMs indicates that it may create artifacts that don't necessarily show up on simple measurement sheets. My subjective anecdotal listening increasingly indicates to me that I like speakers where there is nothing interfering with the sound waves after being emitted by the drivers. It just sounds more natural and relaxed to me. That may also be one of the explanations for why people preferred the Salons (albeit they also have a very shallow waveguide for the tweeter, but not like the deeper waveguide of the M2).

 

[restorer-john]

~$900USD per pair, and the winner of numerous awards...

Clearly not the award for applying straight "Revel" badges...

Maybe they got the award for the "absolute worst photoshopping of a brand logo on a product shot" ever?

They took it to a whole other level with the black version:

 

[MZKM]

Those are good mesurements.

But does that really earn them the title of "best accurate sound $1000"?

There are several other speakers that measure quite well at that price.

Example, LSR 308, which is powered and <$1000/pair:

You can easily see the beaming ~2kHz, due to the waveguide not being sufficient enough to crossover to an 8” woofer (need the Dutch & Dutch 8C level of waveguide).

 

[BillG]

Clearly not the award for applying straight "Revel" badges...

Bye, clown...

 

[Ron Texas]

Why are people pushing the KH120 so hard when the OP obviously is looking for passive speakers and has expressed an interest in Revel?

 

[veeceem]

Why are people pushing the KH120 so hard when the OP obviously is looking for passive speakers and has expressed an interest in Revel?

At last someone notices .... :'(

 

[digitalfrost]

Just got a pair for 410€, thanks to @VintageFlanker notification.

They're quoting me 478€. Was shipping already included in your price, or does this come on top? I could explain the price difference.

 

[daftcombo]

They're quoting me 478€. Was shipping already included in your price, or does this come on top? I could explain the price difference.

I don't know. For France, shipping would be included. It might depend where you live.

 

[Rja4000]

He pierced the surround in three locations

Time for a pair of 948?

Ok, if that's the flexible part, the repair is likely not that expensive...

 

[ernestcarl]

nothing in any measurements of the KH120 would indicate that they are bright sounding. they are easily one of the most neutral, uncolored speakers ever made

There are some subjective "reviews" out there that do say that though. Such is the nature of the internet.

As for my statement of them being dark -- to me, that is mostly only evident when I have these running without a sub. And that is in comparison to all the other monitors I've heard of a similar size. It is possible that my skewed, small sample size of said heard monitors just happen to be bass light. Yet, certainly by relieving them of the heavier lower frequency load they do seem to sound lighter -- even with a sub in place where frequencies go down as low as 14Hz.

 

[LDKTA]

Actually, you and I are mostly in agreement. I've read the book and refer to it frequently, so I'm well aware of what to look for, and the effects of sighted vs blind listening.

But the disagreement is precisely about whether the data we have here is "enough to be that accurate." Can we declare a champion between the top recommendations in this thread (and others like it) based just on measurements of varying methodologies from different sources?

Even with the same people doing the measurements, it can be tricky. I remember when reading about the shootout that happened between the Salon2 and Harman's own JBL M2. Many expected the latter to win because of its 'prettier' spins - flatter on axis. I believe the explanation for the Salon's victory was its wider directivity exciting more early reflections. A subtle distinction even when directly comparing spins.

For reference for anyone who hasn't seen them, here are the Salon2's spins:
View attachment 36876

And here are the M2's:
View attachment 36877
Interpreting these measurements certainly requires some care at least.

The listening test conducted between the M2 and Salon2 was sighted. Not to mention, when you have two loudspeakers measuring so well, I am of the assumption that it'd be up for grabs in a controlled and unsighted test... DI was also mentioned already and that should be noted.

To the OP:
Revel M106 ($2000 - Can be had for less used)
JBL 705P (Can be had for nearly $1300/pair B-Stock or Used)
Salk Sound SongSurroundII ($1495/pair in B/W or $1695/pair in Standard Veneer)
Salk Sound SongSurround Supercharged ($1995/pair in B/W or $2195/pair in Standard Veneer)

If you haven't heard Salk Sound loudspeakers... Rest assured, they sound beautiful. Comparable to Revel. **They also offer a 30-Day in Home Trial Period**