Quality speakers for classical music with high output/volume

[sejarzo]

MA 1 allows you to store multiple alignments, so he could take and save measurements while at the desk MLP and take and save another set with the mic placed further out into the (neighboring?) room. In doing so he could theoretically load one alignment while he's working away at the desk and switch to the other for when he's lounging further away. One of the two is still going to be much more compromised than the other, however, as without moving the speakers each time he moves, there's no way to avoid being way outside of an equilateral triangle.

Theoretically, but...

The implication is that if one uses the MA1 software, changing anything requires an active Ethernet connection to the speakers..

I just saw a picture of the MA1 that shows it has an XLR connection, not a USB connection. Here's what Neumann has to say about how the process goes:

"Simply connect"...except that the OP doesn't own an audio interface that connects to his computer with balanced inputs/mic preamps that supplies phantom power to the microphone (which is noted on the Sweetwater site as necessary to use the MA1 and associated software.)

Once the MA1 software does its thing, and the user loads the configuration, then the Ethernet cables can be disconnected--but then there's no way for a new configuration to be loaded. Only one configuration can be stored in the speakers.

Oh well, it's only money, and time required for the next learning curve, eh????

 

[mj30250]

Theoretically, but... View attachment 275257 The implication is that if one uses the MA1 software, changing anything requires an active Ethernet connection to the speakers.. I just saw a picture of the MA1 that shows it has an XLR connection, not a USB connection. Here's what Neumann has to say about how the process goes: View attachment 275259 "Simply connect"...except that the OP doesn't own an audio interface that connects to his computer with balanced inputs/mic preamps that supplies phantom power to the microphone (which is noted on the Sweetwater site as necessary to use the MA1 and associated software.)

Yup, I used a Focusrite Scarlett Solo as the audio input. It worked fine and wasn't expensive - but it's indeed another item (along with the necessary cables) to add to the grocery list.

Once the MA1 software does its thing, and the user loads the configuration, then the Ethernet cables can be disconnected--but then there's no way for a new configuration to be loaded. Only one configuration can be stored in the speakers.

As my speakers are used on a desktop and I don't need the switch ports for other things, I have no compelling reason to disconnect the network cables, so it's easy to swap alignments if desired. If the OP is looking for good fidelity at multiple positions and at significantly variable distances in his room, any pair of stereo speakers is going to be seriously compromised at one position or another. You're well into the realm of seeking out "the lesser of all evils" in that case, and being able to swap alignments relatively quickly could potentially be useful.

 

[sejarzo]

You're well into the realm of seeking out "the lesser of all evils" in that case, and being able to swap alignments relatively quickly could potentially be useful.

Absolutely, as anyone who attempted to dive into the circle of hell that fully manual room correction was in the early days well knows. LOLOLOL

The OP has modified his original concept of placement/wiring/connections but as far as I know, always-active wired Ethernet connections weren't in the plan.

(I recently dropped off my E-MU 0404 USB at the recycling bin. Served me well through the WinXP and Win7 days as a USB DAC...never used the mic inputs at all.)

 

[excelsius]

Congratulations on moving forward with a decision, and I hope you enjoy the speakers as much as I have!

This discussion went in a crazy amount of directions, so I don't know whether you confirmed what your source will be (Bluesound Node?), but if you plan to stream from a Windows PC or similar, have a look here:

Ending the Windows Audio Quality Debate

A debate has been long raging in the audio community that Windows isn't fit for use in a high resolution audio system. Sceptics counterargued that bits are bits and Windows audio degradations are a figment of an over-active audiophile imagination. I decided to investigate this as I kept...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I personally use Amazon Music HD and toggle on "exclusive mode" within the app.

Thanks. I went with WiiM Pro instead. On the computer, I used to use ASIO drivers before. I'm not sure how applicable that is for WiFi sound, but I'll get around to it eventually. My music is almost exclusively in computer files, rather than streaming services.

 

[Sokel]

(I recently dropped off my E-MU 0404 USB at the recycling bin. Served me well through the WinXP and Win7 days as a USB DAC...never used the mic inputs at all.)

You're a criminal to do that! (I'm only joking)I would pay for it,gladly,I have the smaller one for measurements and if modified is great (check diyaudio to see)

Have a look:

 

[excelsius]

I thought that the Fletcher-Munson curves were already noted somewhere early in the thread, and are discussed quite a bit in various other threads on the forum--they are something that hobbyists and pros are well aware of before they get into higher end components and the reason receivers back in the 1960s had a "loudness" button or control. The article I linked previously was regarding perception in general, and that graph was for the lower end of the SPL range.

Look at the curve for a nominal 80 dB SPL in the midrange. It peaks at 91 dB at 20 Hz; the curve for a nominal 90 dB SPL peaks at 94 dB.

The standard for monitoring/producing music in a studio in nearfield, for which the KH150 is designed, is at an average of 80-85 dB, which is what most listeners at home consider adequately loud. Ergo, for music, a sub that can handle +10 dB is just fine for music, plus is can handle the higher SPL demands of movie effects.

Look at any major studio with multiple monitors, and you will see that smaller monitors like the KH150 are typically on a shelf above the desk and secondary to significantly larger systems such as the in-wall monitors shown on this Genelec blog page that also makes some excellent points about listening SPLs.

High SPL Monitoring: The Facts - Genelec.com

Professional monitoring is all about neutral and reliable reproduction, including the need to present transients as they really are.

www.genelec.com

You have yet to work with setting subwoofer levels using an SPL meter, right? I think virtually all folks who have would agree that when they calibrate their systems to 80 or 85 dB using an AVR, which normally plays pink noise through the left/center/right/surrounds before finishing up with the subwoofer, the output from the sub is perceived as being rather quiet.

Read up a bit on it. Seems like a more accurate version is ISO226:

This is good information and seems to further reinforce the idea that if the goal is to make the system louder, adding a sub is not the solution for it.

I saw several comments about how large the diameter of the sub needs to be, such as 12". But as was discussed earlier, there isn't anything magical about the speaker size since even a smaller speaker can create the same sound waves, assuming its mechanics allow it. I understand this to also mean that a larger speaker/subwoofer can potentially be inferior to a smaller one. That's why instead of speaker size, it would be helpful to define the specific specs for what makes a good enough sub and why.

Also based on the discussions, it's not very clear why would someone cut off the lower frequencies for a high quality speaker and divert them to a subwoofer. This doesn't seem logical to me. As mentioned, based on the frequency response of the KH-150, a subwoofer would not need to cover higher than 50Hz (maybe 100Hz at most). And with many subs not publishing an SPL frequency response, it's again not clear how adding a sub without such information can be done scientifically. This goes back to the question above about what specs audiophiles use here to choose a sub that matches with their system.

 

[Chaconne]

I’ll never understand why some people think that a declaration of one’s modest personal standards for audio reproduction is contributing anything to an audiophile discussion.

Sorry, Newman. I should have tried harder to make a meaningful contribution to the discussion. You know—like you just did.

BTW, despite your assumptions, my lack of striving for concert-hall max SPLs has nothing to do with budget or settling for a lower standard. It has to do with neighbors, human consideration, leases, evictions and things like that. I must confess I live in the real world, and I guess that means I don't meet your qualifications for being an audiophile. I'll just have to find a way to live with that. (I think I'll be fine.)

Thanks to Jim Taylor and sejarzo for your fairness! Didn't think my post would cause such a dust-up. (Although I guess it wasn't really mine that did.)

 

[excelsius]

Yup, I used a Focusrite Scarlett Solo as the audio input. It worked fine and wasn't expensive - but it's indeed another item (along with the necessary cables) to add to the grocery list.



As my speakers are used on a desktop and I don't need the switch ports for other things, I have no compelling reason to disconnect the network cables, so it's easy to swap alignments if desired. If the OP is looking for good fidelity at multiple positions and at significantly variable distances in his room, any pair of stereo speakers is going to be seriously compromised at one position or another. You're well into the realm of seeking out "the lesser of all evils" in that case, and being able to swap alignments relatively quickly could potentially be useful.

I guess I need to add a balanced USB interface to the list as well then. Did you find even cheaper options than the Scarlett, by the way?

I don't plan to keep re-measuring for each position. I will connect the ethernet cables, measure for the position where I spend the most time, and leave it at that for now. Any additional measure or playing around I would have to remeasure, at seems, by taking my laptop to the speakers since the PC is in another room. I also read somewhere that Neumann is working on improving the software, so maybe the ability to swap multiple profiles without the ethernet connection will be implemented at some point.

 

[sejarzo]

Read up a bit on it. Seems like a more accurate version is ISO226:
View attachment 275295

This is good information and seems to further reinforce the idea that if the goal is to make the system louder, adding a sub is not the solution for it.

I saw several comments about how large the diameter of the sub needs to be, such as 12". But as was discussed earlier, there isn't anything magical about the speaker size since even a smaller speaker can create the same sound waves, assuming its mechanics allow it. I understand this to also mean that a larger speaker/subwoofer can potentially be inferior to a smaller one. That's why instead of speaker size, it would be helpful to define the specific specs for what makes a good enough sub and why.

Also based on the discussions, it's not very clear why would someone cut off the lower frequencies for a high quality speaker and divert them to a subwoofer. This doesn't seem logical to me. As mentioned, based on the frequency response of the KH-150, a subwoofer would not need to cover higher than 50Hz (maybe 100Hz at most). And with many subs not publishing an SPL frequency response, it's again not clear how adding a sub without such information can be done scientifically. This goes back to the question above about what specs audiophiles use here to choose a sub that matches with their system.

You have got to be kidding. It should be common sense that the mechanics don't allow it. Otherwise, why would larger drivers exist in the first place and still remain in use?

Next (and this should be as painfully obvious as the fact that mechanics don't allow it)...why would Neumann sell KH750s if people didn't need them for music monitoring?

What's the nominal area of a 6" driver? (3.1416*6*6)/4, or 28.3 square inches.

What's the nominal area of a 12" sub driver? (3.1416*12*12)/4, or 113 square inches.

How far does the cone of a 6" driver have to move to push the same amount of air as the 12" driver? Four times as far.

Explain how you would create a surround for a 6" driver cone that would allow it to travel 4x as far as the 12" driver and do so linearly, as well as design a complete motor assembly (the spider, voice coil, magnet, etc. etc.) that allows the same extended travel while remaining linear. I'll wait.

Take a look at the in-wall monitors in major studios. You don't see 6" woofers, do you?

You keep noting "science" but when it comes to speakers using real components with materials of construction limitations, it ain't science. It's engineering and tradeoffs.

 

[excelsius]

Sorry, Newman. I should have tried harder to make a meaningful contribution to the discussion. You know—like you just did.

BTW, despite your assumptions, my lack of striving for concert-hall max SPLs has nothing to do with budget or settling for a lower standard. It has to do with neighbors, human consideration, leases, evictions and things like that. I must confess I live in the real world, and I guess that means I don't meet your qualifications for being an audiophile. I'll just have to find a way to live with that. (I think I'll be fine.)

Thanks to Jim Taylor and sejarzo for your fairness! Didn't think my post would cause such a dust-up. (Although I guess it wasn't really mine that did.)

I have deliberately chosen not to comment on this topic and quite a few posts here, but maybe it's apropos to add: some of the flying tempers seem peculiar to me as well, especially since I usually associate expensive hobbies like this one with an older, hence (usually) wiser crowd. But even lack of technical experience seems to be considered a faux pas by some. And yet, if everyone knew everything, there wouldn't be much need for a technical forum to share experiences in the first place.

Often the best response is no response, lest it derails an interesting discussion.

 

[garyrc]

Only 1% THD at SPL=105 dB is possible only with very high quality drivers! Majority of the "high-end" hi-fi towers break down at <100 dB SPL.

Here are some 105 dB results taken from magazine reviews for both the possibly more meaningful IM distortion (which I think might be the same as "modulation distortion?") and THD

Everything else being equal, three way speakers often have less modulation (Doppler) distortion than two way.

Doppler distortion; an excerpt from Stereophile …

“The results were intriguing. Distortion of the flute was gross at 10mm peak diaphragm displacement and not in the least bit euphonic. On the contrary, Doppler made the sound as harsh as you might expect of a distortion mechanism that introduces intermodulation products.

music signals are less revealing of Doppler distortion than this special brew. But these findings undermine the view, widely accepted in the last two decades, that Doppler distortion in loudspeakers is not something we should trouble about. Having done the listening, I side with Moir and Klipsch more than with Fryer, Allison, and Villchur on this issue—something that may come as no surprise to anyone who has heard the effects of low-level jitter and sees where the Fryer criterion appears in fig.2. .

It has often been claimed that, with a two-way speaker, there are audible benefits to using a crossover frequency below the typical 3kHz, the usual explanation being that this removes the crossover from the ear's area of greatest sensitivity. But I wonder. Perhaps this not-uncommon experience Everyone who uses a two-way speaker (me included) can take heart from the fact that most actually has much more to do with the D word. A three-way solution is potentially even better. Three-way speakers bring new design challenges, of course, in particular the need to achieve another perceptually seamless handover between drivers. But from the Doppler perspective, having a crossover for the bass driver at 400Hz or 500Hz is, unquestionably, better (

https://www.stereophile.com/content/red-shift-doppler-distortion-loudspeakers-page-3)

”

 

[Galliardist]

Thanks. I went with WiiM Pro instead. On the computer, I used to use ASIO drivers before. I'm not sure how applicable that is for WiFi sound, but I'll get around to it eventually. My music is almost exclusively in computer files, rather than streaming services.

I assumed you would have a streaming service as a key part of this setup, from what you said about your listening habits initially.

There’s a good chance that you will prefer different interpretations with a better system to hand. Even if you don’t you can get a new light on a piece of music through different recordings.

 

[excelsius]

You have got to be kidding. It should be common sense that the mechanics don't allow it. Otherwise, why would larger drivers exist in the first place and still remain in use?

Next (and this should be as painfully obvious as the fact that mechanics don't allow it)...why would Neumann sell KH750s if people didn't need them for music monitoring?

What's the nominal area of a 6" driver? (3.1416*6*6)/4, or 28.3 square inches.

What's the nominal area of a 12" sub driver? (3.1416*12*12)/4, or 113 square inches.

How far does the cone of a 6" driver have to move to push the same amount of air as the 12" driver? Four times as far.

Explain how you would create a surround for a 6" driver cone that would allow it to travel 4x as far as the 12" driver and do so linearly, as well as design a complete motor assembly (the spider, voice coil, magnet, etc. etc.) that allows the same extended travel while remaining linear. I'll wait.

Take a look at the in-wall monitors in major studios. You don't see 6" woofers, do you?

You keep noting "science" but when it comes to speakers using real components with materials of construction limitations, it ain't science. It's engineering and tradeoffs.

I don't disagree with the main premise that it's much easier to drive a larger cone vs a smaller one and that at some point, the small cone will not be possible to drive at the same level as a larger cone due to design/material limitations, as @Head_Unit already explained earlier.

But this doesn't answer what specs are used to select a sub, which was the question. And engineering is science.

 

[sejarzo]

I don't disagree with the main premise that it's much easier to drive a larger cone vs a smaller one and that at some point, the small cone will not be possible to drive at the same level as a larger cone due to design/material limitations, as @Head_Unit already explained earlier.

But this doesn't answer what specs are used to select a sub, which was the question. And engineering is science.

Engineering is based on science, but it is not pure science.

 

[ZolaIII]

Read up a bit on it. Seems like a more accurate version is ISO226:
View attachment 275295

This is good information and seems to further reinforce the idea that if the goal is to make the system louder, adding a sub is not the solution for it.

I saw several comments about how large the diameter of the sub needs to be, such as 12". But as was discussed earlier, there isn't anything magical about the speaker size since even a smaller speaker can create the same sound waves, assuming its mechanics allow it. I understand this to also mean that a larger speaker/subwoofer can potentially be inferior to a smaller one. That's why instead of speaker size, it would be helpful to define the specific specs for what makes a good enough sub and why.

Also based on the discussions, it's not very clear why would someone cut off the lower frequencies for a high quality speaker and divert them to a subwoofer. This doesn't seem logical to me. As mentioned, based on the frequency response of the KH-150, a subwoofer would not need to cover higher than 50Hz (maybe 100Hz at most). And with many subs not publishing an SPL frequency response, it's again not clear how adding a sub without such information can be done scientifically. This goes back to the question above about what specs audiophiles use here to choose a sub that matches with their system.

Which discussion? If the card clearly state's:

You think that any biased individual subjective statement will change that?
I also showed you how same tweeter on bigger Neumann's with stronger amp clips on 106 dB white noise test signal.
Two 7" drivers will have approximately the same excursion rate of one 10" one for example. Subwoofer drivers are made to be able to have higher excursion rates than regular woffer's future on. Lower the excursion and cabinet resonance lower the THD. Plenty of measured subwoofer's and I already promoted you to database. When you cut the workload to the driver which he can not take you lower it's excursion and THD so it can play louder until it reaches same physical limits.
Equal loudness normalisation integration isn't easy to get. It's present in some Yamaha stereo amplifiers and AVR's along with Denon AVR's. From software it's supposed in JRiver on wired connection (trough internal volume controls) and that's probably best way to go as DSP processor as every closed box design will be limited one way or another.
Sealed subwoofer's can go less down than ported one's but will have better time domain and cause less additional room problems and besides port only produce one tone and mimic rest. By cutting in the same manner port frequencies and what driver can't do on the speakers and replacing it with much larger driver in subwoofer which can and it's in compression enclosure you get both real scale, cleaner over all reproduction and possibility of complete system to play louder with same distortion. I don't really see anything really hard tu understand there.
I am going to bed so good night from me.

 

[sejarzo]

Now, going back to the misconception that subs are not needed, this is a larger version of the ISO equal loudness contours.

Assume that I am monitoring music so the midrange is roughly 80 dB. What SPL do I need to sense equal loudness at 50 Hz? Is it not about 102 dB?

If I am monitoring music through a KH150 that measures flat via a calibrated measurement mic from ~40 Hz to 20 kHz, what SPL will it provide in that lower register versus the midrange?

 

[Newman]

Sorry, Newman. I should have tried harder to make a meaningful contribution to the discussion. You know—like you just did.

BTW, despite your assumptions, my lack of striving for concert-hall max SPLs has nothing to do with budget or settling for a lower standard. It has to do with neighbors, human consideration, leases, evictions and things like that. I must confess I live in the real world, and I guess that means I don't meet your qualifications for being an audiophile. I'll just have to find a way to live with that. (I think I'll be fine.)

Thanks to Jim Taylor and sejarzo for your fairness! Didn't think my post would cause such a dust-up. (Although I guess it wasn't really mine that did.)

Come off it. Your exact words were “never once has it occurred to me to try to replicate, dB for dB, the dynamic peaks of an orchestra. It never even occurred to me that some audiophiles have this as a goal.”

That’s not an assumption by be, it’s words by you. What you think some audiophiles have as a goal has nothing to do with your practical realities of neighbours etc. You are moving the goalposts from what you said, as if you never said it.

I tend to cut that sort of fancy debating footwork off at the knees, sorry if you don’t like it.

PS it was sejarzo who assumed you are talking about budget, not me. But you thank him! Strange indeed.

 

[excelsius]

I assumed you would have a streaming service as a key part of this setup, from what you said about your listening habits initially.

There’s a good chance that you will prefer different interpretations with a better system to hand. Even if you don’t you can get a new light on a piece of music through different recordings.

Yeah, most definitely. When I tested several works at the audio store, even though they sounded amazing, there was a very large amount of background hiss at high volumes. Nothing can really replace these old recordings, but I will definitely need to complement them with newer recordings with modern mastering to truly esperience the full SQ of the music through these high end speakers.

 

[Keith_W]

Yeah, most definitely. When I tested several works at the audio store, even though they sounded amazing, there was a very large amount of background hiss at high volumes. Nothing can really replace these old recordings, but I will definitely need to complement them with newer recordings with modern mastering to truly esperience the full SQ of the music through these high end speakers.

I am excited for you. There is a certain thrill in taking delivery of new speakers! It's like getting a new car after driving around an old clunker for years.

 

[excelsius]

Which discussion? If the card clearly state's:
View attachment 275302
You think that any biased individual subjective statement will change that?
I also showed you how same tweeter on bigger Neumann's with stronger amp clips on 106 dB white noise test signal.
Two 7" drivers will have approximately the same excursion rate of one 10" one for example. Subwoofer drivers are made to be able to have higher excursion rates than regular woffer's future on. Lower the excursion and cabinet resonance lower the THD. Plenty of measured subwoofer's and I already promoted you to database. When you cut the workload to the driver which he can not take you lower it's excursion and THD so it can play louder until it reaches same physical limits.
Equal loudness normalisation integration isn't easy to get. It's present in some Yamaha stereo amplifiers and AVR's along with Denon AVR's. From software it's supposed in JRiver on wired connection (trough internal volume controls) and that's probably best way to go as DSP processor as every closed box design will be limited one way or another.
Sealed subwoofer's can go less down than ported one's but will have better time domain and cause less additional room problems and besides port only produce one tone and mimic rest. By cutting in the same manner port frequencies and what driver can't do on the speakers and replacing it with much larger driver in subwoofer which can and it's in compression enclosure you get both real scale, cleaner over all reproduction and possibility of complete system to play louder with same distortion. I don't really see anything really hard tu understand there.
I am going to bed so good night from me.

Not entirely sure which spec you're referring to in that list. What I was referring to was the Freq vs SPL chart at 3% THD directly from the manufacturer showing that it can produce 40 Hz just a little under 100 dB SPL (link). And my question was if a high quality speaker can produce bass at 40Hz at ~100dB, why would we want to divert <100Hz to a presumably lower quality sub? And yes, now that I understand the perception curves, sure, if the main music (i.e. high freqs) is listened to at 100dB, then you'd need a sub to reach that extra 110dB in the low freqs to maintain a more or less even bass. But if you're not listening loudly, seems like the bass SPL from the speaker itself would have enough "headroom" to cover bass (don't know what would be the correct term here).

Sorry if I missed a link you had posted to measured subs. If that's the case, can you share that again? Also, what specs are you using to choose a sub?

In the bolded part, are you saying that if a speaker is rated at 100 dB, it is going to become louder (over 100dB) if we cut out the bass frequencies from it (such as <100Hz)?

Now, going back to the misconception that subs are not needed, this is a larger version of the ISO equal loudness contours.

View attachment 275312

Assume that I am monitoring music so the midrange is roughly 80 dB. What SPL do I need to sense equal loudness at 50 Hz? Is it not about 102 dB?

If I am monitoring music through a KH150 that measures flat via a calibrated measurement mic from ~40 Hz to 20 kHz, what SPL will it provide in that lower register versus the midrange?

But no one suggested subs are not needed. Quite the opposite, I'd love to experience the organ with the right sub, but as the discussions show, that's going to be very difficult (or expensive). The premise was that subs don't make systems louder.

To reiterate, it's a simple question: what specs does one use to make an informed decision about which sub to integrate into a given system? Hopefully you agree that choosing a sub by cone diameter does not make sense.