What's the best passive (and preferably floorstanding) speaker one can find for $2,500 or less?

[Roen]

JEEZ WHAT ARE ALL THOSE JAGGED LINES

 

[HammerSandwich]

Which speaker with the RAAL did you show?

Let's note that the Tekton's vertical response mostly reflects the interaction between wide woofer spacing & XO implementation, not the tweeter array's inherent dispersion. IOW, any MTM with that spacing & XO would show similar verticals. The tweeter array's dispersion can be seen more clearly in the horizontal polars.

Note also that I have assumed it's wired as a pseudo-coaxial. This link shows how arrays can allow different performance in different directions, if the designer is patient & stubborn!

 

[MZKM]

Which speaker with the RAAL did you show?

Let's note that the Tekton's vertical response mostly reflects the interaction between wide woofer spacing & XO implementation, not the tweeter array's inherent dispersion. IOW, any MTM with that spacing & XO would show similar verticals. The tweeter array's dispersion can be seen more clearly in the horizontal polars.

Note also that I have assumed it's wired as a pseudo-coaxial. This link shows how arrays can allow different performance in different directions, if the designer is patient & stubborn!

Alta Audio Hestia Titanium, it was the only one I could find. Take note it is a modified RAAL.

As for woofer spacing and XO, that does play a factor, but not at >5kHz where the response is still terrible.

 

[HammerSandwich]

Wow, those are remarkable measurements for a $32k speaker! The horizontal polars look nice above 1kHz, but everything else...

Well stated about the Tekton's verticals higher up. I focused on the performance around 1kHz, which I suspect will have greater subjective implications. The 3-10kHz is choppy, true, but appears more balanced. (Guessing these are predominantly diffraction effects.) Those treble flaws are more likely to be damped by the room than the 1kHz issues. Regardless, it could be better, as you say.

So, way OT. How are those Revels working out?

 

[Darwin]

The Revels are very nice. The 3-way Monitor Audio towers Kal Rubinson reviewed in Stereophile both measured very well on and off axis. I would prefer them to a Raal tweeter speaker, because I don't like the disappearing-when-you-stand-up treble effect from the Raal ribbon.
I reviewed and measured the last generation Monitor Audio Silver-series stand mount. It had excellent on axis measurements but cried out for a waveguide on the tweeter to be truly transparent sounding.
//QUOTE]

Yes I read that review. I was originally looking at the Monitor Audio Silver 100 and got the Revel Concerta 2 M16 stand mounts. They look and sound amazing connected to the new Sonos Amp. But now I'm going back and forth on do I want towers or not. I'm listening to the Revels now with a Sonos sub connected to the Sonos Amp and they sound so good.

 

[amirm]

I hope Amir can test some Pyle products.

What have I done to deserve that????

 

[Roen]

https://www.audioholics.com/bookshelf-speaker-reviews/bmr-philharmonitor-1/conclusion

 

[stunta]

What have I done to deserve that????

You tested a pyle of Schiit.

 

[boded]

I like the Magnepan speakers at almost every price point. The 1.7i would be my choice. If they want big movie bass, I would go with 0.7's and a powered subwoofer with DSP, like the SVS series.

 

[Sancus]

I like the Magnepan speakers at almost every price point. The 1.7i would be my choice. If they want big movie bass, I would go with 0.7's and a powered subwoofer with DSP, like the SVS series.

I own Magnepan 1.7is myself and I enjoy the big sound, but I'm not sure they're very accurate. I haven't seen any measurements of anything newer than the 1.6qr/3.6r on Stereophile but they didn't look particularly good. Actually, even though I'm not a trained listener, those measurements track with my subjective experience before even seeing them, which is that the midrange is great, but the highs and low-mid bass seem off.

The other thing is that I think a sub is basically mandatory if you like to play music loudly or anywhere near reference level for movies/tv. Without the sub(I have an SVS SB12) it doesn't take much for me to drive them to panel slap or weird distortion/resonance below 60hz or so. That low rumble effect that is popular and explosions can definitely cause issues.

I'm actually curious about how the 'big sound' of Magnepans is quantifiable and how you can get the same effect with multi-channel upsampling as Dr. Toole has mentioned in a couple of places, or whether some non-planar floorstanders in general are capable of it.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I own Magnepan 1.7is myself and I enjoy the big sound, but I'm not sure they're very accurate. I haven't seen any measurements of anything newer than the 1.6qr/3.6r on Stereophile but they didn't look particularly good. Actually, even though I'm not a trained listener, those measurements track with my subjective experience before even seeing them, which is that the midrange is great, but the highs and low-mid bass seem off.

The other thing is that I think a sub is basically mandatory if you like to play music loudly or anywhere near reference level for movies/tv. Without the sub(I have an SVS SB12) it doesn't take much for me to drive them to panel slap or weird distortion/resonance below 60hz or so. That low rumble effect that is popular and explosions can definitely cause issues.

I'm actually curious about how the 'big sound' of Magnepans is quantifiable and how you can get the same effect with multi-channel upsampling as Dr. Toole has mentioned in a couple of places, or whether some non-planar floorstanders in general are capable of it.

I've owned a few Maggies. The largest being a 3.3R. They always seem to wear thin with me as I've never quite liked them enough to keep them long term. The big sound I think is partly related to their dipolar nature and partly related to them being somewhat uncontrolled when they are pushed to play somewhat loudly. I don't mean rock concert loud, just on the loud side of polite listening. So the big sound also is part of what wore on my enjoyment of them. I mostly have owned large electrostats which have their issues, but I've been able to use them long term much more happily than Maggies.

As for augmenting box speakers to sound big with multi-channel I've never been happy with it on stereo source material. I prefer the native quality box speaker sound with only two channels to the upmixing result. I like some MCH source material over a MCH system. I know Toole has the opposite opinion.

 

[boded]

I own Magnepan 1.7is myself and I enjoy the big sound, but I'm not sure they're very accurate. I haven't seen any measurements of anything newer than the 1.6qr/3.6r on Stereophile but they didn't look particularly good. Actually, even though I'm not a trained listener, those measurements track with my subjective experience before even seeing them, which is that the midrange is great, but the highs and low-mid bass seem off.

The other thing is that I think a sub is basically mandatory if you like to play music loudly or anywhere near reference level for movies/tv. Without the sub(I have an SVS SB12) it doesn't take much for me to drive them to panel slap or weird distortion/resonance below 60hz or so. That low rumble effect that is popular and explosions can definitely cause issues.

I'm actually curious about how the 'big sound' of Magnepans is quantifiable and how you can get the same effect with multi-channel upsampling as Dr. Toole has mentioned in a couple of places, or whether some non-planar floorstanders in general are capable of it.

For me, it's not the "big" sound, but the lack of box resonance - tall floor standers tend to have this more than "monitors"[bigger side panels resonate more at unwanted frequencies - and especially, the linear fall off of the SPL with distance from the speaker that you get from a dipole. Makes speakers easier to live with. You can sit closer or further without the dramatic volume change. Especially nice if you invite a few people over to watch a movie.

 

[Sal1950]

I own Magnepan 1.7is myself and I enjoy the big sound, but I'm not sure they're very accurate. I haven't seen any measurements of anything newer than the 1.6qr/3.6r on Stereophile but they didn't look particularly good.

If you're looking for in-room accuracy, our member @RayDunzl has done some amazing things using AcoruateDRC and MartinLogan panels plus subwoofers. Maybe he'll stop by a post a link or so to his REW files.

 

[Dialectic]

If you're looking for in-room accuracy, our member @RayDunzl has done some amazing things using AcoruateDRC and MartinLogan panels plus subwoofers. Maybe he'll stop by a post a link or so to his REW files.

I very much doubt that the Magnepans will be capable of similar performance.

My relative is ecstatic with the Revel F206s btw...

 

[Sancus]

If you're looking for in-room accuracy, our member @RayDunzl has done some amazing things using AcoruateDRC and MartinLogan panels plus subwoofers. Maybe he'll stop by a post a link or so to his REW files.

This sounds interesting but I was under the impression from various other posts that you need anechoic measurements to properly EQ speaker response, and also that measuring near-field on planars and trying to use it as a replacement for anechoic response is problematic in general.

 

[Blumlein 88]

This sounds interesting but I was under the impression from various other posts that you need anechoic measurements to properly EQ speaker response, and also that measuring near-field on planars and trying to use it as a replacement for anechoic response is problematic in general.

Anechoic is best of course. I don't think Ray did near-field measurements. I believe he used his listening position.

I've considered a thread on panel speakers. But not sure there is anything useful to contribute yet.

 

[Ron Texas]

Sounds like a post-purchase rationalization.

View attachment 20393

As you can see, there are significantly better options for the price. LS50 is a nice loudspeaker and KEF made a great job marketing it, but let's stick to reality here.

I don't think the 8030a is still around, the 8030c is. Frankly I think you are making a post purchase rationalization yourself. There are tons of LS50's in use and I don't hear anyone complaining. Besides, I am not sure what those graphs prove, who did them or under what conditions. Or, is this another version of the active/passive debate. Genelec has a great reputation, but to say the LS50 is a product of marketing is political.

 

[Ilkless]

I don't think the 8030a is still around, the 8030c is. Frankly I think you are making a post purchase rationalization yourself. There are tons of LS50's in use and I don't hear anyone complaining. Besides, I am not sure what those graphs prove, who did them or under what conditions. Or, is this another version of the active/passive debate. Genelec has a great reputation, but to say the LS50 is a product of marketing is political.

The LS50 suffers from a mismatch in dispersion at 2kHz that manifests as an off-axis peak and elevated listening window response 2-5kHz. This is unacceptably-flawed engineering.

 

[Ron Texas]

The LS50 suffers from a mismatch in dispersion at 2kHz that manifests as an off-axis peak and elevated listening window response 2-5kHz. This is unacceptably-flawed engineering.

Unacceptable, LOL. Why do so many people love them? You can measure things, but reaching a conclusion about SQ is a different story.

 

[maty]

KEF LS50

KEF Q100

I LOVE my tweaked and modded KEF Q100 5.25" coaxial speakers. 49 Hz at -3 dB, with front bass-reflex.

More flat and with only first order filters!

With my mods they sound better, much better!