Upgrade to LS50s from Q150s for near-field? Something else?

[mtaz]

UPDATE: I hooked up the Wiim Ultra and did a room correction. Big improvement. However, I'm not 100% sure I like that setting best; playing with the Graphic EQ on the Wiim produced results that I liked about as well.

I still think I'm probably going to upgrade the speakers. I only have a couple of weeks left on the trial period, and I think that for a few hundred more I could probably get a significant improvement. The front-runner right now is the Revel M16, at $700/pair.

However, it's now clear that I'm still going to need EQ... which means I would probably end up buying another Wiim UItra. My budget for an office sound system has now tripled.

 

[Ktacos]

Should I get something like this to elevate the speakers and hopefully reduce desk reflections?

Speaker isolation pads

Only way to get rid of desk reflections is to remove the desk, which isn't really practical. EQ can tame the reflections though to an acceptable degree. Isolation pads won't really do anything to stop reflections, they are generally meant for reducing vibrations that may transfer to the desk or whatever they're on.

Can you describe how the speakers are placed?

 

[mtaz]

Only way to get rid of desk reflections is to remove the desk, which isn't really practical. EQ can tame the reflections though to an acceptable degree. Isolation pads won't really do anything to stop reflections, they are generally meant for reducing vibrations that may transfer to the desk or whatever they're on.

Can you describe how the speakers are placed?

About 38" apart (center to center), currently about 9" from the front wall. About 4 feet on one side and 18" on the other side from the side walls. The center of the drivers is around 10" below my ear height. I was thinking about also elevating them some.

I already ordered the pads; they're only $20, and I guess they probably won't hurt.

 

[Ultrasonic]

About 38" apart (center to center), currently about 9" from the front wall. About 4 feet on one side and 18" on the other side from the side walls. The center of the drivers is around 10" below my ear height. I was thinking about also elevating them some.

I already ordered the pads; they're only $20, and I guess they probably won't hurt.

One thing your new pads will allow you to do is to tilt the speakers back a bit to be pointing up at you slightly. How far away are your ears from the speakers? With coaxials like the Kefs there's usually a better response slightly off-axis rather than on-axis. Below is measured data for your Q150s from Erin's Audio Corner for reference.

 

[Ultrasonic]

EQ can tame the reflections though to an acceptable degree.

Well, it can mitigate the effect somewhat.

(EQ can't specifically attenuate reflections vs the direct signal in the slightest, which is a reason why DSP can't replace all aspects of what acoustic room treatments can achieve.)

 

[Ultrasonic]

I still think I'm probably going to upgrade the speakers. I only have a couple of weeks left on the trial period, and I think that for a few hundred more I could probably get a significant improvement. The front-runner right now is the Revel M16, at $700/pair.

Why specifically those out of interest?

Assume you're looked at the review data here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/revel-m16-speaker-review.11884/

For the same money you could buy a pair of Kali IN-5. These are designed for nearfield use (unlike the M16s) and have significantly better bass extension. You also started this thread by saying what you were looking for was better clarity rather than things sounding like a 'jumbled muddy mess'. Clarity is something studio monitors are built with in mind as they need to allow people mixing to hear all the details to make judgements on, and the 3-way design (vs M16 2-way design) would at least in theory be expected to improve performance on complex passages of music by reducing intermodulation distortion (neither review gives actual data to compare sadly). The M16s are also rear-ported which could be an issue with your near-wall placement, whilst the Kalis are front ported and also have built-in DSP to compensate for near-wall placement, as well as on-desk placement. You may well still feel you'd benefit from additional EQ from something like your Wiim, but there is the possibility that you wouldn't (saving you money).

Review data here for the Kali IN-5:

Kali IN-5 Studio Monitor Review

Copied from my website so some of the formatting may not transfer very well. You're welcome to read the review there, in that case: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kali_in-5/ Kali Audio IN-5 3-Way Studio Monitor Review Wednesday, Apr 14, 2021 Foreword / YouTube Video Review...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I think you've probably decided you do want to stick with passive speakers which is totally reasonable but just sharing my thoughts as from what you've said I genuinely feel there may be a better route for you to explore here. If you have the slightest temptation to try something like this I'd suggest you have a look at the details of return policies for companies you could buy these from. (I live in the UK so can't offer advice based on experience relevant to you here.)

 

[uwotm8]

Different speakers, same spot, nearly identical responses thanks to the room issues which dominate the speakers response. $140 vs. $1500 and physics still hits them the same.

But do they sound the same to you? Something tells me that transient response/speed/whatever you call that makes 8030 a sports car vs C-Notes being rather family van. FR is not the whole picture.

Another aspect is hype and "expert opinions" - may happen that you simply don't like the sound of particularl speakers but make yourself cope because a lot of people and reviewers told you they are good and the wrong part is... you if you don't like them lol.

So I think if OP need to understand if he does or does not like Q150 overall - if no, there's no point of making himself love them or their better version aka LS50; if yes - then it's definitely worth upgrading.

I swapped budget model of another brand to next level exactly because I liked how they sound; if not then I'd go elsewhere starting from some speakers I mentioned above.

 

[Ktacos]

But do they sound the same to you?

Yes they sounded very, very similar.

Well, it can mitigate the effect somewhat.

Yup, that's pretty much exactly what I said....

 

[Ultrasonic]

Yes they sounded very, very similar.

That really is very surprising even given your measurements, since these only show a small snapshot of the whole picture. And actually that even very small changes is relative levels of different parts of the frequency spectrum can make a surprisingly big difference to the overall sound.

Sounds like you saved some money though!

 

[mtaz]

Why specifically those out of interest?

Assume you're looked at the review data here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/revel-m16-speaker-review.11884/

For the same money you could buy a pair of Kali IN-5. These are designed for nearfield use (unlike the M16s) and have significantly better bass extension. You also started this thread by saying what you were looking for was better clarity rather than things sounding like a 'jumbled muddy mess'. Clarity is something studio monitors are built with in mind as they need to allow people mixing to hear all the details to make judgements on, and the 3-way design (vs M16 2-way design) would at least in theory be expected to improve performance on complex passages of music by reducing intermodulation distortion (neither review gives actual data to compare sadly). The M16s are also rear-ported which could be an issue with your near-wall placement, whilst the Kalis are front ported and also have built-in DSP to compensate for near-wall placement, as well as on-desk placement. You may well still feel you'd benefit from additional EQ from something like your Wiim, but there is the possibility that you wouldn't (saving you money).

Review data here for the Kali IN-5:

Kali IN-5 Studio Monitor Review

Copied from my website so some of the formatting may not transfer very well. You're welcome to read the review there, in that case: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kali_in-5/ Kali Audio IN-5 3-Way Studio Monitor Review Wednesday, Apr 14, 2021 Foreword / YouTube Video Review...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I think you've probably decided you do want to stick with passive speakers which is totally reasonable but just sharing my thoughts as from what you've said I genuinely feel there may be a better route for you to explore here. If you have the slightest temptation to try something like this I'd suggest you have a look at the details of return policies for companies you could buy these from. (I live in the UK so can't offer advice based on experience relevant to you here.)

I decided that I needed to make a more concerted effort to overcome my biases. I watched Erin's video, and... I'm still undecided.

The IN-5s and the M16s are the same price. The Kalis might be more suitable for near-field, but the Revels are more flexible. And in the M16 thread, someone said that he has been using them for near-field and is happy with them (here). (Coincidentally, the speakers that he upgraded to are what I'm currently using on my main system downstairs. Hard to be sure, but it looks like he's saying he upgraded to the Sierras for near-field :-o )

 

[Ktacos]

I'd rather have the m16. Kali are nice but the cheap construction does kinda come through in the sound IME.

 

[Ellebob]

We did a comparison of the IN-5 and the Kef R3 Meta and people preferred the IN-5. I would say the finish is better on the Meta but some of the women actually liked the look of the IN-5 better, to my surprise. They were both in white, so probably different in black.

 

[DamianW]

Have you tried the Q150s in sealed configuration?

 

[Ultrasonic]

We did a comparison of the IN-5 and the Kef R3 Meta and people preferred the IN-5. I would say the finish is better on the Meta but some of the women actually liked the look of the IN-5 better, to my surprise. They were both in white, so probably different in black.

What sort of setup was this out of interest? Nearfield or further away, and what sort of sized room?

 

[uwotm8]

We did a comparison of the IN-5 and the Kef R3 Meta and people preferred the IN-5

Makes me wonder how pleasing KEF are then

Here's a funny video, yep, youtube listening, I know - but I also know how these Dynaudio sound and it's actually translated good enough through record:

BM5A are solid begginer to mid level, I mean their overall sound quality (not tonality/FR signature). Less clarity in hi-mids and HF than even beginner Adam but overall more substantial and "analogue-like". Overall one of no-brainers. The second set of speakers on that video sounds like something between clock radio and a typical street musician PA speaker. It's plain bad to me (while overall tonality itself is kinda OK).

 

[Ultrasonic]

@uwotm8 have you heard any Kali speakers? Trying to judge anything at all from videos like that really is a waste of time. Human hearing doesn't work like microphones, and in this case it doesn't even look like the microphones are set up where a listener's ears would optimally be anyway.

 

[Ellebob]

What sort of setup was this out of interest? Nearfield or further away, and what sort of sized room?

Room is about 22x25 feet open on one side to kitchen and rest of the home. Listening was about 13 feet from the speakers. This is a family/dining room and on the left wall looking at the speakers is a bay window. On the right side is open to the dining side. Not an ideal room by any means but a real world room and not a dedicated space. This isn't how they were set up for the comparison just to show the differences in size. They were on stands and the Kef was on its matching white stands. The sub was not used for the comparison.

 

[uwotm8]

have you heard any Kali speakers?

No. Was never really interested in buying due to rather subpar measurements (again, not just FR/tonality in a nutshell) and cost effective construction with plastic front baffle (in normal budget case there's MDF baffle underneath).
All mentioned above is actually fine, but... HYPE. Not just excessive hype (okayish speakers, on par with other budget models, nothing to hate, nothing to rave about) but those who dare to dislike/criticize these (and KEF on youtube BTW lol) receive feedback which sometimes is nothing short of agression. Are these really sort of holy cows?

Human hearing doesn't work like microphones

I totally agree with you, however, there's a night and day difference - while BM5As are captured well enough and sound "right". How could that happen? Except it's all made up by Kali haters lol.

 

[uwotm8]

Room is about 22x25 feet open on one side to kitchen and rest of the home. Listening was about 13 feet from the speakers

~50 m2, 4m listening distance kinda too much for all 3 (?)

 

[Ellebob]

Not with a sub and not at our listening volume. A lot of misinformation on nearfield vs farfield. More about design (dispersion) and volume then size of speaker.
Currently in that space is a pair of Paradigm MilleniaOne in a 2.1 configuration. Kali's are in the living room which I bought and had the opportunity to buy the Kef for about the same price.