• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

What do you look for the most in stereo loud speakers?

What is the top quality/characteristics that you look for in stereo loudspeakers?


  • Total voters
    102
85dB sensitivity from 30Hz upwards, a good 30dB low distortion (all the way down) range for max and peaks with not so wide dispersion.
Serviceable by a decent network of dealers and over time, both for drivers and electronics (for actives) .

Looks a certain way is personal, but premium feeling is mandatory.
 
SPL, power handling, and distortion are all linked. Without fail, the speakers that get the loudest also have the most power handling capability and the lowest distortion at sane levels.
 
SPL, power handling, and distortion are all linked. Without fail, the speakers that get the loudest also have the most power handling capability and the lowest distortion at sane levels.

Totally agree, the ability to make high SPL that is uncompressed and unclipped across the full spectrum, solves distortion issues, and adds a great deal towards realism.
It also rather ironically solves the problem of speakers sounding loud. When a speaker sounds loud, it's playing over its head. I'm always amazed how high the SPL meter can read, and it still not sound loud when real balls exist. It's my No 1 selection criteria.

No 2 is excellent time and phase response.

Both of those assume the givens, .... excellent frequency response, smooth spins, and bass extension.

All that said, I think one fundamental choice comes before any/all the above though ....
I think we have to start with the radiation pattern we want....wide, narrow, omni, dipole, etc, etc
 
I voted low distortion. Spatial qualities are great but should be taken care of by smooth directivity and the room, it's not something you can shop for directly.

Maybe the poll should have included wide/narrow/dipole/Omni options, as this is a major driver of spatial perceptions and there is no single correct answer on whether wide or narrow or beyond is best.
 
Minimally, I would look for speakers with THD/IMD/whatever-D < -40dB from 100Hz to 10kHz @ 95dBSPL
Ideally: < -50dB from 100Hz to 10kHz @ 95dBSPL
Wishful thinking: < -60dB from 100Hz to 10kHz @ 95dBSPL (I suspect such speakers do not yet exist ... happy to be corrected ...)
Taken at 91 dB, so a little short of your 95dB ref...
It's close, but can't quite pull off your wish list :) (but it's thru the noise floor so it might be a bit better, dunno.....taken outdoors)
1751051953337.png


edit: this post was intended to help show how high SPL capability usually equates with very low distortion even at moderately high home audio listening levels.
The speaker uses proadio drivers and is capable of 130+dB across the spectrum...I should have mentioned that
 
Last edited:
Yes, you've definitely missed some things.

You've missed defining what a "house sound" means relative to bass. I have never see any indication that matching brands between subwoofers and mains offers any audible advantages whatsoever, with the exception of active systems with their own internal DSP/bass alignment (Genelec GLM, for example).

Also, the most capable full-range speakers on the planet won't help you to address a difficult room (which encompasses the majority of domestic spaces) where the best positions for bass are rarely shared by the best positions for stereo speakers. Discrete bass sources can absolutely address this. To rely on full-range mains is much more often a "compromise" than the opposite.

But yes, you will need placement flexibility, a means to properly integrate them, and an understanding significant other (if applicable) for subwoofers to work well. Not everyone possesses the above, but happily I do.
Interesting points, but I find the alternative approach to subs works better in my room and to my ears. Let me elaborate.

I possibly shouldn't have mentioned "house sound" without explanation. We generally choose our speakers based on how they sound playing the style of music we enjoy and how much satisfaction they deliver to our ears and brains. This varies very considerably from brand to brand, as much as it does from one listening room to another. However, most of us will select a brand that delivers the sort of sound that pleases us most, and likewise we often find other brands offering apparently similar speakers not to our liking. One brand of speaker (or sub) may please us while another doesn't, and logically it seems illogical to attempt to match speakers of different brands, even if some deliver bass only.

In a good full-range speaker, the brand will have spent huge design and testing effort on matching all parts, so they work, as far as possible, in perfect harmony – treble, middle and bass. Chucking an untested (by the main speaker brand) and obscure sub into the mix isn’t necessarily a useful addition to the recipe!

"Room Correction" (possibly the biggest misnomer in audio) cannot be done by messing with the nice accurate signal that you pay good money for your amplifier to deliver. It seems absurd to spend several thousands on an accurate amplifier and then to deliberately destroy its accuracy by adjusting its frequency response away from the flat line that we have paid all that money to achieve.

We are led to believe that the room anomalies that most rooms suffer from to a degree can be “corrected” by signal manipulation away from accurate. Why don’t we look at the room rather than the signal we send to the speakers? There are numerous reasons (often of our own making) for the sound at our listening seat to have lost the accuracy that the amp sends to the speakers. We should look towards correcting these anomalies in a more thoughtful and intelligent way than by messing with the amp’s output. Do we expect the musicians at a live performance to “adjust” the output from their instruments to cater for the particular hall they are performing in that night? No, of course they don’t apart from tuning them after their journey to the hall and the change of temperature, etc. In practice, the hall will have been carefully treated so that the instruments will sound precisely as they should without artificial adjustment.

Shouldn’t we look at our homes in the same light and correct (as far as possible) their anomalies and keep the amp’s signal as accurate as it should be?

1 - First things first – have we bought the right TYPE of speaker to suit our own room? Probably 90% of us have never seriously considered this and we buy, or move from our previous home, whatever type of speaker we are used to – mostly conventional box speakers. [Note – I’m guilty of this when I bought £18K speakers that were very well reviewed and sounded great at the showroom, only to have to sell them at great loss after 6 months because their type didn’t suit my room – even with Anthem DSP doing its best to help!]

2 - Have we chosen the speaker model well to suit our room? As above, often not considered carefully enough – we probably didn’t even arrange home demos of 6 candidate speakers within our budget to compare their sound in our own room. Shouldn’t we do that before coughing up thousand on speakers incompatible with our own room?

3 - Have we spent enough time with speaker placement, toe-in, tilt, etc to get them sounding as good as they possibly can? Often not done thoroughly enough

4 - Have we seriously considered how the carpets and curtains (or lack of) affect the sound, and is our soft furnishings compatible with the playing of music in the room. Again, often not thoroughly enough.

5 - If, after getting the ideal speaker type and model, getting them ideally placed and set up, ensuring that the furnishings are suitable, we still think the sound can be improved, artificial room treatment such as ceiling or wall panels to absorb unwanted reflections, etc needs to be considered.

After all that, if the sound isn’t right, we have failed somewhere along the line and need to get help. Or perhaps, move home and start again! Chucking DSP at the problem destroys the whole principle of accuracy, and we may as well get cheap, poorly designed amps and speakers and believe that all their inaccuracies can be corrected by the magic of signal processing. Sorry, that’s balderdash!

Full-range speakers, properly set up in a room that has been given reasonable thought in terms of furnishings, etc will always sound better than a pair of limited range speakers, plus subs, fed by a DSP-buggered signal from the amplifier!

Others may disagree :)
 
There's a lot there that I agree with and a fair amount that I don't. Due to limited time I'll just grab a couple points for now...

In a good full-range speaker, the brand will have spent huge design and testing effort on matching all parts, so they work, as far as possible, in perfect harmony – treble, middle and bass. Chucking an untested (by the main speaker brand) and obscure sub into the mix isn’t necessarily a useful addition to the recipe!

"Good" full-range speakers are certainly impressive if sufficiently powered (i.e., Revel Salon 2s), but even the best of them are at the mercy of room modes. Everything below Schroeder is dominated by your room. The lowest-extended, flattest speaker in the world will readily have its world-class anechoic bass response chewed to shreds in a typical domestic space. This is simply physics. Unless you are extremely fortunate in your room dimensions and speaker positioning, your speakers will almost certainly require some level of DSP to sound their best, and in most cases, would improve with well-integrated subs. Of course, if you rarely if ever listen to bass-heavy material, this will matter much less.

After all that, if the sound isn’t right, we have failed somewhere along the line and need to get help. Or perhaps, move home and start again! Chucking DSP at the problem destroys the whole principle of accuracy, and we may as well get cheap, poorly designed amps and speakers and believe that all their inaccuracies can be corrected by the magic of signal processing. Sorry, that’s balderdash!

No one is suggesting that you should simply grab any number of poorly designed speakers and "fix" them with DSP. However, one can certainly (and should!) use the "magic" of DSP to correct inaccuracies caused by your room below the transition frequency at minimum, regardless of how excellent your speakers are otherwise. I do agree that above the transition one should prioritize accurate speakers and appropriate room furnishings / treatments, and if done successfully, you won't require signal processing.
 
Other: no down ports, down ports are a DQ for any speaker no matter how they measure. That's a simple answer. For the complicated answer...

Let's see if you can guess my hierarchy of speaker values from the choices I made in the past 15 months.

Ascend Sierra Lx. When ports are 4.5' from the wall, F3=28, but wiggle in the bass OR 700-3kHz depending on the 10 PEQ choices. I literally bought these to cross over with my floor fundamental, btw.

When ports are 9 feet out, F3=45, but super clean match to target. And a DEEP and WIDE, and nailed down sound stage. That's 1/3 the way into my room, btw.

Wanted some towers for AV, so Klipsch RP-5000f ii, literally first measured today, ports 1 foot from the wall: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ii-reviewed-by-erin.35861/page-4#post-2339363 ...for no-sub measure.

Those two speakers are not even close on many of the factors in the poll, but both fit well with my starting question for speaker selection: what will do the job I want in my room for the least amount of money?

For the Sierras, I wanted flat to 40, and that turned out to be almost too much to control. For the tower purchase, I wanted ... something that looked just like the 5000 tbh. Bass deficient. And that turned out to be easy to control, room wise and floor wise. Stereo and 5.1 as well.

Because my room dominates all. And my floor dominates my room. How a speaker flts with my floor is number 1, how it will play where I want to set it up considering room and floor effects is 2. That might mean more or less bass extension, more or less dispersion, etc.

Simple answer, complicated answer. FWIW.
 
Unless you are extremely fortunate in your room dimensions and speaker positioning, your speakers will almost certainly require some level of DSP to sound their best,
An odd observation as the speakers are not adjusted by DSP. It's the amplifier's frequency response that DSP adjusts. Pity really as good amps are designed to deliver a nice flat response.

You've missed the point of my post. The room should be "adjusted" by physical means (if necessary) and not by messing with a perfectly accurate amp's output. Concert halls and other live venues, however small, don't do this.

Good as they may be Revel Salon 2 speakers feature 8" bass drivers. These will struggle to deliver the full range of musical instruments.

My comment about DSP being able to make a purse out of a sow's ear is to a certain extent right, at least in theory, if the DSP can measure a speaker's dire response curve and flatten it to match the curve of a genuinely good speaker. Likewise, it could be argued that DSP can adjust a poor amp's response such that the sound from the speaker at the listening position matches a good amp's measurements.

So, DSP is ideal for the DIY speaker and amp builder who hasn't the resources to build and test 100 amps before producing a great one. Big brands do just that, but it’s not possible by DIY'ers.

For best quality sound, get an accurate amp to feed an accurate speaker, set up properly in a room that thoughtlfully treated. Chucking DSP at each of these potentially poor elements is a bodge and should be avoided if at all possible. There is a place for DSP and that's with DIY kit as I've suggested, or if a system is made complex by multiple speakers (AV/HT systems typically) and the owner hasn't the skills to set it up properly - understandavbly. In simple a 2-channel system with 2 well-chosen speakers in a well adjusted room, not need for DSP.
 
Likewise, it could be argued that DSP can adjust a poor amp's response such that the sound from the speaker at the listening position matches a good amp's measurements.

So, DSP is ideal for the DIY speaker and amp builder who hasn't the resources to build and test 100 amps before producing a great one. Big brands do just that, but it’s not possible by DIY'ers.

Wow...that is an incredible amount of utter horse poop. Any half-way decent amp, doesn't need any DSP.
 
It already has excellent linear tonal balance and controlled directivity. I am making the assumption that on ASR, most members would put linear tonal balance and controlled directivity as their number one priority, that's why I took it out of the equation.

You assumed wrong :)

My number one criteria that every speaker has to first pass is:

The tone/timber of the sound has to appeal to me.

That might come sometimes from a speaker that measures more neutral, but it would include plenty of speakers that measure less neutral.

If certain instruments such as acoustic guitar don’t sound “ right” to me - they don’t invoke similar timbral colours in my perception as I get from the real thing - then I don’t care how big or dynamic the sound, how large the sound stage or how precise the imaging, that speaker is ultimately going to leave me cold and I could not live with it.

And since no reproduction I’ve heard gets things “ perfect” (as much due to the imperfections of recordings as anything else), I can find certain aspects of one loudspeaker very pleasing and certain aspects of another loudspeaker to be pleasing as well, in terms of what they seem to be doing tonally/timbrally.

For instance, my Joseph speakers sound incredibly pure and clear so that the distinct timbral qualities of instruments come through beautifully. On the other hand, my old little Spendor s3/5s, while not as refined, seem to capture the “ gestalt” of the human voice more convincingly - the body, palpability and softness of the human voice.

But once the speaker passes the initial tone/timber test (and that’s something I can hear almost immediately), then I value things like convincing sounds staging and imaging, a sense of density and palpability to the sound, a sense of texture, a nice “ disappearing act” from the speakers. Lively dynamics that transmit the nuances of the playing, and being convincing on a wide range of music that include things like funk, dance, electronica, symphonic,
 
I’ll list the five most important to me.

Spatial performance
Balanced and accurate frequency response
Sensitivity
Impedance easy to drive
Acceptable distortion at sane listening levels

Not needing to play at levels to piss off the neighbors and quickly degrade my hearing, some of those things people value are low on my list.

Also, after owning several decent speakers, you can’t just plop them in a spot and expect to be blown away or even just satisfied. Positioning of speakers and room treatments were essential to try and get the best out of whatever speaker I owned.

I realize some speakers are less sensitive to room and positioning and perform good without much fuss, but that’s not a reason for me to buy them over what I think is more important.
 
What is ‘spatial performance’?
Keith
 
What is ‘spatial performance’?
Keith
To me it’s Separation of instruments, vocal. How focused the Depth and width of the soundstage is and all the instruments and vocals within it. Imaging, ability to clearly hear or not the different individual instruments and vocals.

Probably not a good definition, but you can add what you think it means.
 
Last edited:
I voted for spatial performance, but that's only because truth of timbre was not given as an option. Spatial performance would have been a close second if it had been.
Tone/timbre is a function of frequency response, primarily, and the condition of the poll is that smooth FR is taken as a given.

The secondary determinator of tone/timbre is distortion - So I voted low distortion as the most important of the options.
 
What is ‘spatial performance’?
Keith

I'm not the OP, but I (perhaps rightly or wrongly) interpreted this as how a given speaker responds to room boundaries. For example, in my main listening space, I prefer wide horizontal dispersion and limited vertical. In my desktop system, wide dispersion would likely be more destructive than helpful. In addition, speakers which are carefully designed and engineered for accuracy tend to provide tighter tolerances, resulting in superior pair matching. Taken together, these attributes tend to inform spatial performance and are thus important to consider when speaker shopping.
 
My first choice was buying speakers who are build (from a hardware point of view) phase coherent time alignt. Despite that DSP can suppose to correct these kind of anomalies i have some doudt how effective they can do that like using FIR or IIR filters for best result.? You can explain from a technical point of view how to do that at the end you have from a personal ( probably subjective ) perspective to judge the result. For instance i use a IIR based DSP taking care of pre-echo (pre-ringing) The absence of pre-echo ensures the neutrality of the sound which i guess is important for phase an time correction an because my speakers are from build phase coherent time alignt the DSP does not have to focus so much in these areas in other words they probably both (IIR DSP, my speakers) match better. Personal i find my DSP, speaker combination with good recordings sound almost liquid they dissepear completely.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom