Quality speakers for classical music with high output/volume

[excelsius]

I own a miniDSP SHD and it's a great tool for integrating subs into a stereo system. This takes quite a bit of work though even with Dirac. I love the versatility of the I/O and only wish it had more output channels. The built in Volumio streamer is crap though and I don't use it. I just turn off that input in settings and ignore it.

I also own a Wiim Pro streamer which is very reliable and enjoyable to use. I can verify that you can control the digital output volume using the remote. The remote is an optional accessory so make sure to order one.

@excelsius you seem to have some confusion about DACs. The KH-150 has a digital crossover that is implemented using a digital signal processor (DSP). No matter what input you use with the KH-150 it will be using its internal DAC after the DSP. If you feed it an analog signal from a DAC it will just convert that signal back to digital with an ADC so that it can do its digital signal processing.

It is true that the Bluesound Node DAC is not great but the same can be said for the Wiim streamers. If you connect these streamers to the KH-150 using a SPDIF digital connection then their DAC is not being used so no need to worry about its quality.

Thanks for that explanation and confirming WiiM volume control. So no need to get a DAC. But I'm assuming not all active speakers have an internal DAC.

Do you know if I could bypass the need for external DSP or balanced DAC I get a balanced sub to connect to the KH-150 (different brand)?

 

[excelsius]

Mostly yes. The cone area is squared in the top of the efficiency equation so it is a powerful factor. That's why PA speakers all have big woofers, and why you can't find 5" woofers with truly high sensitivity. One crude way I think about it is the atmosphere is huge, so a bigger cone can "grab it better" than a tiny one. And a cone coupled to the atmosphere through a horn can grab it better. A speaker in a corner "grabs a smaller piece" of atmosphere so at low frequencies gets some boost. Yes, while in theory a 5" moving 4X as far would move as much air as a 10" in practice it is really hard to physically make such a thing...and even if it could physically move far enough, the motion with in that range will be more distorted.

Very interesting about distortion, especially it's relationship to the physical distance moved. Makes sense. It would seem then, at least theoretically, that there should not be any difference between the sound produced by a large cone vs a small cone, as long as they're both measured to produce the same distortion level at a given SPL. It's understandable that smaller cones will have a harder time producing bass (longer wavelengths), but essentially this could be overcome with a separate sub specifically designed for that purpose. Let me know if I'm getting anything wrong here. My main excursion in this direction was to understand what is the difference between the sound produce by a large speaker, like the Linton vs small one, like the KH-150. It seems that at least in terms of physics, there should not be a difference given equal specs, unless I'm missing something.

It's complex. The port adds a resonance, which puts out a bunch of bass with little cone motion at the tuning frequency. Usually you get a lot more output for the same power at those lowest frequencies. But if the tuning frequency is too high, the sound becomes boomy, plus below the tuning frequency the port is like a hole. With no enclosure the woofer then unloads and flaps around like crazy. So it's all about the tuning. In theory a sealed box has a purer sound-again depending on the tuning-but in practice the reduced excursion around the port tuning can reduce distortion a lot. The smaller and smaller the box, the harder it is to tune a port of effective size low enough. At the other extreme, big boxes with huge ports can have a peaky resonance(s) in the ports themselves which can color the sound. My personal preference is for "under-tuned" boxes where the port is tuned lower than usual; you get some advantage without much problem.

Another interesting point, because it seems you're saying that a ported sub, when properly tuned, could essentially have a lower distortion because the cone does not have to move as far. But if so, how do we define or know a "properly tuned" sub? Have you tested specific brands or models that you know are tuned well or under-tuned?

 

[Avp1]

Whoah, having just bought a minidsp flex, yes, please elaborate and is there a thread here on ASR discussing? Would like to learn more asap.

Edit: As an aside, I'm also in the camp that current (post-2000) B&W's have an objectionably weird response. Although it's been a long time I remember really liking the old 800 Matrix speakers in the 1990's, but having recently heard the low end of the 800 series I was disappointed. Just like everyone's said, bright, detailed, etc. but that mid-range suck made rock sound hollow and was just such a flaw I could never be happy with them knowing all my music was being misrepresented even if I couldn't pin it down in the middle of some chamber music.

In 800 series you need choose 802 and up models for front speakers. Smaller ones are mostly fo surround duty in high end HT. D and D2 generation were still good - better than N generation. They do require serious room treatment. But surprisingly work in rooms from like 12x13 ft size.

 

[excelsius]

If you do go the professional route, try to get a recommendation or use someone who can demonstrate their work to you.

I say this because I know of two people who had systems set up “professionally” but got terrible results. I only know the end result for one of them, who went to Fair Trading and got compensation, then employed someone competent.

It's not really easy to find good professionals. I stopped by likely the last local audio place and although I had a long conversion with the person there, I sensed frustration because my questions were going more towards science and measurement and the guy ended up confusing himself a bit and then in frustration basically said that all you can do is listen to the speaker and that's it. I wouldn't mind working with a professional, but it has to be the right fit and I find that unlikely locally.

In either case, I did learn some interesting theory, although not sure if all of it was true. I was told that speakers get destroyed only because 1. the amp isn't powerful enough, which results in clipping the sine wave and destroying the speaker or 2. the amp doesn't produce enough clean power (under 0.1% distortion), which creates distortion and can destroy the speaker. That's when I followed up with feeding a theoretically "clean," unlimited power into a speaker, and he said that should be fine but inefficient. Also that speaker power ratings have no meaning. His contention was also that speaker loudness is determined only by sensitivity. That higher efficiency (said is the same as SPL) means lower SQ. I followed up on this claim too and he got a bit flustered, so left it at that. Mostly selling Paradigm speakers, Monitor Audio, and those large, paper thing speakers.

Not sure if all of the theory was true, but at least I did learn how SPL and Watts work (upon some additional reading at home) and also the dB loss by distance in open space. I put together the calculations in Excel:

Since SPL/sensitivity is measured at 1m, I had a hard time figuring out which one is the sensitivity spec in the KH-150:

It has half space and full space terms that I don't get. Also has terms like "short-term," which again is not clear. Would mean it can sustain high volumes only for a certain duration? And if so, for how long? 100 dB at 2.3m would be about 107 dB at 1m, to be consistent with the specs of other speakers.

 

[cavedriver]

It has half space and full space terms that I don't get. Also has terms like "short-term," which again is not clear. Would mean it can sustain high volumes only for a certain duration? And if so, for how long? 100 dB at 2.3m would be about 107 dB at 1m, to be consistent with the specs of other speakers.

Since the KH-150 is powered (has its own amplifier), there's no need to report a sensitivity. The table in grey is them reporting the volume output capability according to various conditions

 

[Head_Unit]

Very interesting about distortion, especially it's relationship to the physical distance moved. Makes sense. It would seem then, at least theoretically, that there should not be any difference between the sound produced by a large cone vs a small cone, as long as they're both measured to produce the same distortion level at a given SPL. It's understandable that smaller cones will have a harder time producing bass (longer wavelengths), but essentially this could be overcome with a separate sub specifically designed for that purpose. Let me know if I'm getting anything wrong here. My main excursion in this direction was to understand what is the difference between the sound produce by a large speaker, like the Linton vs small one, like the KH-150. It seems that at least in terms of physics, there should not be a difference given equal specs, unless I'm missing something.

Another interesting point, because it seems you're saying that a ported sub, when properly tuned, could essentially have a lower distortion because the cone does not have to move as far. But if so, how do we define or know a "properly tuned" sub? Have you tested specific brands or models that you know are tuned well or under-tuned?

For the first part, there are just physical barriers to making very long stroke small cones. You can make the surround very big but then it cuts down on cone area to some extent. A bigger problem is the spider, whose diameter simply cannot be as big as one a larger woofer, and so can't move/stretch as much especially in a linear fashion. The biggest problem is usually nonlinearities in the magnet/voice coil system. It is also difficult to make the small cone heavy enough to make the resonance low enough to get really low bass. The SVS twin 8" you can look at the specs and compare to the 12"-the bigger woofer designs go significantly lower.

For the second part the designs that were tuned well were ones that I tuned myself
Subs from Hsu, SVS, et al tend to have ports tuned low. Big tower speakers tend to be tuned reasonably low; small bookshelf speakers tend to be tuned higher. This is for home; autosound can have some purposely boomy designs. But there's a LOT of variation. And a lot of opinions about "boomy" bass or "fast" bass, when in fact this is more related to overall response (room modes, and integration between sub(s) and satellites).

 

[Galliardist]

It's not really easy to find good professionals. I stopped by likely the last local audio place and although I had a long conversion with the person there, I sensed frustration because my questions were going more towards science and measurement and the guy ended up confusing himself a bit and then in frustration basically said that all you can do is listen to the speaker and that's it. I wouldn't mind working with a professional, but it has to be the right fit and I find that unlikely locally.

In either case, I did learn some interesting theory, although not sure if all of it was true. I was told that speakers get destroyed only because 1. the amp isn't powerful enough, which results in clipping the sine wave and destroying the speaker or 2. the amp doesn't produce enough clean power (under 0.1% distortion), which creates distortion and can destroy the speaker. That's when I followed up with feeding a theoretically "clean," unlimited power into a speaker, and he said that should be fine but inefficient. Also that speaker power ratings have no meaning. His contention was also that speaker loudness is determined only by sensitivity. That higher efficiency (said is the same as SPL) means lower SQ. I followed up on this claim too and he got a bit flustered, so left it at that. Mostly selling Paradigm speakers, Monitor Audio, and those large, paper thing speakers.

Not sure if all of the theory was true, but at least I did learn how SPL and Watts work (upon some additional reading at home) and also the dB loss by distance in open space. I put together the calculations in Excel:

View attachment 274487

Since SPL/sensitivity is measured at 1m, I had a hard time figuring out which one is the sensitivity spec in the KH-150:
View attachment 274483

It has half space and full space terms that I don't get. Also has terms like "short-term," which again is not clear. Would mean it can sustain high volumes only for a certain duration? And if so, for how long? 100 dB at 2.3m would be about 107 dB at 1m, to be consistent with the specs of other speakers.

Your table is optimistic for smaller passive speakers as they can have sensitivity in the low 80s. Also, remember it may not tell you much about response at frequency extremes.

Half space is best thought of as placed on flat ground outdoors. It’s against one boundary with no influence from others. Short-term may be peak, or for a couple of seconds, depending on manufacturer. Quarter space is two boundaries, free space none (anechoic).

I’d take tbe figures to mean that two of them, well placed on the floor against a wall, will comfortably do what you need when set up correctly. I’m no expert though.

 

[Keith_W]

It's not really easy to find good professionals. I stopped by likely the last local audio place and although I had a long conversion with the person there, I sensed frustration because my questions were going more towards science and measurement and the guy ended up confusing himself a bit and then in frustration basically said that all you can do is listen to the speaker and that's it. I wouldn't mind working with a professional, but it has to be the right fit and I find that unlikely locally.

You probably went to the wrong shop. If you want to ask those types of questions, I suggest a Pro Audio shop, or a shop that sells DJ supplies. I don't know your location so I can't search for you, but in my home city (Melbourne) there is a shop called "Store DJ" that sells pro audio active speakers (including Genelec and D&D), mixers, microphones, etc.

 

[ooheadsoo]

I get your idea, hopefully. You want to have speakers with special characteristics as to bring out one certain, undoubted aspect of the original (sic!) performance.

My point was that such an attempt would most probably divert from the sound-engineer's intentions. With it it would not be 'more' of the good, but less.

Because the sound engineer did all the best to convey the 'meaning' of the original performance. The issue that you address is for sure considered in the recording process. To take away from or to add to is, to put it pathetic, a form of disrespect towards the sound engineer's art.

As to stress again the metaphore already used, it would be like viewing the Mona Lisa (sorry) through correcting sunglasses, only that it was nighttime and your eyesight doesn't need correction to begin with.

Conclusively, the speakers should be just exact, but not special. Exact in the same way, by the same criteria by which the studio's speakers are exact.

There is no "just exact" dispersion pattern. It works be nice if there was. Sounds engineers have to make an educated guess about their audience average speakers. Floyd Toole's research indicates that most people prefer wide dispersion. We have to decide for ourself how wide is wide enough.

 

[ooheadsoo]

Not always true. You won't get pin point imaging in a large concert hall, that is true. In fact, even expensive seats don't always get you great imaging. I once sat in the second row, to the right. My entire evening was dominated by cellos and basses. OTOH I have had some "wins", like when I was invited to a couple of small private concerts - one featuring a lieder singer with piano accompaniment, and the other a string quartet. Both were performed in a small room in an art gallery (I would estimate about twice the size of my living room). Pinpoint imaging was quite evident.

I would be curious to hear your thoughts again if you have the chance to do it again but without visual cues as best as your can manage. I am curious by your description of the sound of a piano, especially in close quarters, sounding like a pinpoint.

 

[levimax]

1. the amp isn't powerful enough, which results in clipping the sine wave and destroying the speaker or 2. the amp doesn't produce enough clean power (under 0.1% distortion), which creates distortion and can destroy the speaker.

Myths that are widely accepted. Here is a link with the correct answer https://sound-au.com/tweeters.htm

 

[Ellebob]

Wide dispersion vs narrow dispersion. There are applications for both but in general a wide dispersion speaker is easier to tailor the focus (aka imaging) and envelopment (aka soundstage) with acoustic treatments. When I do acoustics design wide dispersion allows more flexibility.

 

[ZolaIII]

It's not really easy to find good professionals. I stopped by likely the last local audio place and although I had a long conversion with the person there, I sensed frustration because my questions were going more towards science and measurement and the guy ended up confusing himself a bit and then in frustration basically said that all you can do is listen to the speaker and that's it. I wouldn't mind working with a professional, but it has to be the right fit and I find that unlikely locally.

In either case, I did learn some interesting theory, although not sure if all of it was true. I was told that speakers get destroyed only because 1. the amp isn't powerful enough, which results in clipping the sine wave and destroying the speaker or 2. the amp doesn't produce enough clean power (under 0.1% distortion), which creates distortion and can destroy the speaker. That's when I followed up with feeding a theoretically "clean," unlimited power into a speaker, and he said that should be fine but inefficient. Also that speaker power ratings have no meaning. His contention was also that speaker loudness is determined only by sensitivity. That higher efficiency (said is the same as SPL) means lower SQ. I followed up on this claim too and he got a bit flustered, so left it at that. Mostly selling Paradigm speakers, Monitor Audio, and those large, paper thing speakers.

Not sure if all of the theory was true, but at least I did learn how SPL and Watts work (upon some additional reading at home) and also the dB loss by distance in open space. I put together the calculations in Excel:

View attachment 274487

Since SPL/sensitivity is measured at 1m, I had a hard time figuring out which one is the sensitivity spec in the KH-150:
View attachment 274483

It has half space and full space terms that I don't get. Also has terms like "short-term," which again is not clear. Would mean it can sustain high volumes only for a certain duration? And if so, for how long? 100 dB at 2.3m would be about 107 dB at 1m, to be consistent with the specs of other speakers.

Use actual measurements as they lied big time.

Those are done at 1 m so it's also easier to do calculations with them.
I left this conversation as no one whose realistic, especially you.
If you cut down distance by placing speakers 3m from listening spot optimising both speaker placement and listening position we might be able to get somewhere. Regarding dogs problem I did some thinking and came to flexible arm wall stands such were used for old CRT TV sets (stil used for projectors and such) with arm length of at least 50 cm. If you use those on a side walls and place speakers on them that solves the problem.
Now I (we) need to see the actual room (pictures and favorably diagram).
Future more no one of us can really give you guarantees that even when you lower the load on speakers/monitors woffer by high pass they tweeters will survive on the long run with very high SPL.
As usual everyone chose deliberately to ignore sync clock issues when using different cristal clock oscillators on different DAC's and additional ADC - DSP - DAC delay which you will have using higher end monitors/sub's that use such embedded path.
If you lower the distance and chose to lower the SPL expectations you might get to where you want including amplifiers that have equal loudness normalisation (Yamahas mostly this day's) with pasive speakers and dumb powered subwoofer's (without their own DSP and not doing analog - digital conversation). You did get to a conclusion that you will need central DSP procesor with a single DAC (and ADC). And if so than I can guarantee you it will work for a long time.

 

[Galliardist]

Use actual measurements as they lied big time.
View attachment 274558
Those are done at 1 m so it's also easier to do calculations with them.
I left this conversation as no one whose realistic, especially you.
If you cut down distance by placing speakers 3m from listening spot optimising both speaker placement and listening position we might be able to get somewhere. Regarding dogs problem I did some thinking and came to flexible arm wall stands such were used for old CRT TV sets (stil used for projectors and such) with arm length of at least 50 cm. If you use those on a side walls and place speakers on them that solves the problem.
Now I (we) need to see the actual room (pictures and favorably diagram).
Future more no one of us can really give you guarantees that even when you lower the load on speakers/monitors woffer by high pass they tweeters will survive on the long run with very high SPL.
As usual everyone chose deliberately to ignore sync clock issues when using different cristal clock oscillators on different DAC's and additional ADC - DSP - DAC delay which you will have using higher end monitors/sub's that use such embedded path.
If you lower the distance and chose to lower the SPL expectations you might get to where you want including amplifiers that have equal loudness normalisation (Yamahas mostly this day's) with pasive speakers and dumb powered subwoofer's (without their own DSP and not doing analog - digital conversation). You did get to a conclusion that you will never central DSP procesor with a single DAC (and ADC). And if so then I can guarantee you it will work for a long time.

Clearly everyone missed my moment of madness when I said based on the specs that they would be loud enough - on the floor!

However, your quoted measurements don’t look any worse in practice and suggest tbe speakers may peak higher in real world use than the “lie” you accuse the company of. If we take the levels noted when @excelsius listened in store rather than the initial request, the quoted spec appears good enough, but with subs.

The suggestion in Amir’s review here that they are subjectively warm raises another concern though given that the B&W speakers were preferred in store. However, tbe tweeter appears to be distortion free at high volume which has me wondering about your comment re tweeter life.

What usage levels do you think will actually shorten tweeter life? @excelsius has explained that most usage will be at much lower level for background listening. We’re talking occasional peaks at the speakers’ limits. Would an hour every day played loud do damage? An hour every couple of days? Do you have evidence of Neumann or Genelec tweeters failing prematurely? Why would a tweeter in an active speaker be more likely to fail than in an equivalent passive speaker, or are you making a general point with that comment?

I’m not sure that the KH 150 is tbe right answer here and would suggest purchasing from a company that he can return them to if they don’t work. If tweeter life is an issue though that won’t show up in a few days’ use.

 

[notsodeadlizard]

It's Hartsfield, of course

Classic Audio Loudspeakers

 

[ZolaIII]

@Galliardist a coil overheating and bursting. Reference whose for all small tweeters used in home speakers. Take a good look at the measurements vs spec's particularly the low bass levels and THD.

 

[Steve Dallas]

Thanks for that explanation and confirming WiiM volume control. So no need to get a DAC. But I'm assuming not all active speakers have an internal DAC.

Do you know if I could bypass the need for external DSP or balanced DAC I get a balanced sub to connect to the KH-150 (different brand)?

You cannot really just plug things together and call them integrated. (And, how do you endeavor to connect that sub to the KH-150? It has no analog thru nor out, according to the manual.)

In addition to crossover matching, you have to account for differences in the time domain. Active DSP speakers have some number of ms latency due to time needed for conversion and processing. Subs do too. Do they match? IIRC, in a domestic environment, 1ms = ~1' distance. If your sub has 3ms latency and your speakers have 11ms, it will sound like your sub is 7' closer to you than the speakers. <-- totally made up numbers thataway

To do this right, you need DSP and a DAC with at least 4 output channels. In the DSP, you need to set crossover points and slopes for the speakers and sub, then time align them. It is not a trivial process, which is why most people just use an AVR for bass management and let the software do it for them. This is partly why I included Dirac in all of my recommendations to you.

You also REALLY want DRC in the bass frequencies for classical music. Without it, entire instruments disappear into room cancellations.

 

[fineMen]

There is no "just exact" dispersion pattern. ... Sounds engineers have to ... Floyd Toole's research ...

You don't take my replies into account when discussing your topic after asking me back. Actually, you still seem to ignore the mere fact, that their isn't any original's specific acoustic property that a speaker can replicate.

To put it frankly, this topic doesn't reveal the best of this forum. I pretty soon and before got under the impression, that many folks here only (mis)use the science as to support any of their guesses. Very much like the cable guys do. Is it even worse? I dunno ...

 

[Galliardist]

It's Hartsfield, of course

Classic Audio Loudspeakers

View attachment 274622

Maybe a touch over budget?

 

[excelsius]

Since the KH-150 is powered (has its own amplifier), there's no need to report a sensitivity. The table in grey is them reporting the volume output capability according to various conditions

Still would be nice to have that measurement as a standard comparison to other speakers, especially since I think the speaker could still be driven by an external amp, theoretically.

Your table is optimistic for smaller passive speakers as they can have sensitivity in the low 80s. Also, remember it may not tell you much about response at frequency extremes.

Half space is best thought of as placed on flat ground outdoors. It’s against one boundary with no influence from others. Short-term may be peak, or for a couple of seconds, depending on manufacturer. Quarter space is two boundaries, free space none (anechoic).

I’d take tbe figures to mean that two of them, well placed on the floor against a wall, will comfortably do what you need when set up correctly. I’m no expert though.

Strange measurement given that floor reflections are considered not good and that's why rugs are used.