RPS wrote:
Newbie wrote:

: Friends have suggeted Spendor, Proac and Dynaudio.

Those are well known names by now but I remember when each was news to
me and I suspected the salesman was trying to pull some trick.

Anyway, does anybody know any unknown / less well known speaker brands
that are of equal or better quality and much better value (ie, less
expensive) than these?

RPS

Based on Triangle drivers :
http://www.waterfallaudio.com/indexhtm.html

An interesting drivers manufacturer :
http://www.atohm.com/index.php
I have the occasion to hear these ones, very nice, very clean, very nice
spatial reproduction :
http://www.atohm.com/enceintes.php?enceintes_ref=4
they should be available as kit.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...



Too bad Arnii isn't Catholic. He'd keep a whole raft of priests busy
with his confessions.


But the priests might not like extra competition for the altar boys.

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
Roger McDodger said:

Pink Triangle

Really. It's the gayest domestic hi-fi brand I've ever seen.

I once had a PIP II preamp with accumulator supply.
Flaky build quality, but one of the best sounding preamps I've ever
heard, especially on MC.


Wonder how it 'measured'...??? ;-)

PT were way ahead of the game with a lot of their thinking - MDF plinths,
acrylic platters, non-suspended tts with 'shock absorption'....

"MINe 109" wrote in message


Studio monitors would be a bad choice for the OP. He wants a
floorstander roughly equivalent to his KEF 104s and prefers classical
music.

Agreed.

Monitors are often meant for tabletop positioning

But a number of manufacturers on my list such as Dynaudio, JBL Pro, and
Tannoy also make floorstanders.

and have frequency responses bumps to exaggerate recording/production
flaws

Given that my list included about 20 different brands, some do have
intentially peaked up response, most don't.

One exception (of many) would be the BBC monitors available in the UK
by various makers: Rogers, etc.

Like you say, there are many exceptions to the idea that all studio monitors
aren't floorstanders, or that they have deliberately peaked up response.

For example, I've heard the Behringer B2031A speakers that I mentioned,
mounted on speaker stands. They sounded warm and well-balanced, like many
floorstanders. They are also reasonably smooth.

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


Studio monitors would be a bad choice for the OP. He wants a
floorstander roughly equivalent to his KEF 104s and prefers classical
music.

Agreed.

Monitors are often meant for tabletop positioning

But a number of manufacturers on my list such as Dynaudio, JBL Pro, and
Tannoy also make floorstanders.

Dunno if the floorstanding studio monitor is a big market segment.
Haven't noticed any in the pro shops.

The OP has already investigated Dynaudio. IIRC, Tannoys, depending on
the model, favor near-wall placement.

and have frequency responses bumps to exaggerate recording/production
flaws

Given that my list included about 20 different brands, some do have
intentially peaked up response, most don't.

But of course.

One exception (of many) would be the BBC monitors available in the UK
by various makers: Rogers, etc.

Like you say, there are many exceptions to the idea that all studio monitors
aren't floorstanders, or that they have deliberately peaked up response.

For example, I've heard the Behringer B2031A speakers that I mentioned,
mounted on speaker stands. They sounded warm and well-balanced, like many
floorstanders. They are also reasonably smooth.

I enjoy an inexpensive pro-style monitoring system for casual listening
in a room that requires bookshelf positioning, but I doubt that
Behringer would be an improvement over the KEF 104. It's too bad he
isn't interested in electrostatic or planar speakers.

Stephen

PS I forget Focal-JM Lab!: "The beryllium dome represents a quantum
advance in tweeter technology".

"MINe 109" wrote
PS I forget Focal-JM Lab!: "The beryllium dome represents a quantum
advance in tweeter technology".

Duhhh, didn't the seminal Yamaha NS-1000M use a beryllium tweeter?

(Still remember listening at nearly top volume to Metallica "One" on
NS-1000Ms with a Quad 606 in the late 80s in the dem room at Chatham
Sevenoaks Hi-Fi, where I had a part-time job back then, after we'd
shut the shop. Our ears nearly bled!)


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk

MINe 109 wrote:
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


"MINe 109" wrote in message



Studio monitors would be a bad choice for the OP. He wants a
floorstander roughly equivalent to his KEF 104s and prefers classical
music.

Agreed.


Monitors are often meant for tabletop positioning

But a number of manufacturers on my list such as Dynaudio, JBL Pro, and
Tannoy also make floorstanders.


Dunno if the floorstanding studio monitor is a big market segment.
Haven't noticed any in the pro shops.

The OP has already investigated Dynaudio. IIRC, Tannoys, depending on
the model, favor near-wall placement.


and have frequency responses bumps to exaggerate recording/production
flaws

Given that my list included about 20 different brands, some do have
intentially peaked up response, most don't.


But of course.


One exception (of many) would be the BBC monitors available in the UK
by various makers: Rogers, etc.

Like you say, there are many exceptions to the idea that all studio monitors
aren't floorstanders, or that they have deliberately peaked up response.

For example, I've heard the Behringer B2031A speakers that I mentioned,
mounted on speaker stands. They sounded warm and well-balanced, like many
floorstanders. They are also reasonably smooth.


I enjoy an inexpensive pro-style monitoring system for casual listening
in a room that requires bookshelf positioning, but I doubt that
Behringer would be an improvement over the KEF 104. It's too bad he
isn't interested in electrostatic or planar speakers.

François-Yves Le Gal has just made a comment on a french NG about :
http://www.behringer.com/B2031A/index.cfm?lang=FRE
An exiting experience.


Stephen

PS I forget Focal-JM Lab!: "The beryllium dome represents a quantum
advance in tweeter technology".

Joseph Oberlander wrote:


MINe 109 wrote:

Studio monitors would be a bad choice for the OP. He wants a
floorstander roughly equivalent to his KEF 104s and prefers classical
music. Monitors are often meant for tabletop positioning and have
frequency responses bumps to exaggerate recording/production flaws.


Honestly, he's going to have to look really really hard to find
a better speaker than his 104s. He might look into large planars
or move to full-range electrostatics.


The higher ProAc ranges are VERY nice with the ribbon tweeters, though I
am quite happy with my Studio 125's, I actually prefer them to the lower
response series, I found them a bit "shouty".

You may also want to consider the Living Voice range (not the horns).

--
Nick

Joseph Oberlander commented

: MINe 109 wrote:
:
: Studio monitors would be a bad choice for the OP. He wants a
: floorstander roughly equivalent to his KEF 104s and prefers classical
: music. Monitors are often meant for tabletop positioning and have
: frequency responses bumps to exaggerate recording/production flaws.
:
: Honestly, he's going to have to look really really hard to find
: a better speaker than his 104s. He might look into large planars
: or move to full-range electrostatics.

You guys are getting off on a tangent here. The OP (and my virtual ears
pricked up, because I own exactly the same model) specifically mentioned Kef
104*ab*, not Kef 104 the much later reference model. Mine are marked "1972"
on the back of the bass drivers ... but I can't afford to upgrade *yet*.

Indeed, no-one has mentioned the later (or latest) Kef models as contenders
until now, I think. Surely they would be a suitable & obvious upgrade?

I've certainly liked the few later (Reference & Q series IIRC) ones I've
heard, and they still seem to take R&D work as seriously as ever.

RdM

In article ,
MINe 109 wrote:
For example, I've heard the Behringer B2031A speakers that I
mentioned, mounted on speaker stands. They sounded warm and
well-balanced, like many floorstanders. They are also reasonably
smooth.

I enjoy an inexpensive pro-style monitoring system for casual listening
in a room that requires bookshelf positioning, but I doubt that
Behringer would be an improvement over the KEF 104. It's too bad he
isn't interested in electrostatic or planar speakers.

If Behringer have produced a pair of speakers to equal the 104s at their
usual budget price, I'd be amazed. My limited experience of their products
is that it's decent value for money, but little else.

--
*I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
"Fleetie" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote
PS I forget Focal-JM Lab!: "The beryllium dome represents a quantum
advance in tweeter technology".

Duhhh, didn't the seminal Yamaha NS-1000M use a beryllium tweeter?

This one's new. ;-)

I assume the Focal is a new driver. The quote's a little out of context.

(Still remember listening at nearly top volume to Metallica "One" on
NS-1000Ms with a Quad 606 in the late 80s in the dem room at Chatham
Sevenoaks Hi-Fi, where I had a part-time job back then, after we'd
shut the shop. Our ears nearly bled!)

I've seen them, but have never heard them.

Stephen

"MINe 109" wrote
(Still remember listening at nearly top volume to Metallica "One" on
NS-1000Ms with a Quad 606 in the late 80s in the dem room at Chatham
Sevenoaks Hi-Fi, where I had a part-time job back then, after we'd
shut the shop. Our ears nearly bled!)

I've seen them, but have never heard them.

They (NS-1000M) were noted for being efficient *and* being able to take
high power.


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:20:18 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
So far we've been told that the holy grail in turntable platters is
either glass or plexiglass. These are very different materials. The
fact that the parameters of a 100 year old technology can't be nailed
down any better then this is indicative of how much ******** rules the
world of vinyl playback engineering.

A disc with a pickup resting on it acts rather like the diaphragm of a
microphone. Anyone who ever had a Transcriptors's design will be well
aware of this.;-)

So it seems only common sense to me that the disc must be isolated from
vibration of any sort - either structure or air borne. Including those
from the speakers. This must involve some form of heavy cover to the
entire turntable assembly.

Not if the disc is clamped to large mass of mechanically compatible
material - such as vinyl or acrylic.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:26:52 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

Studio monitors would be a bad choice for the OP. He wants a
floorstander roughly equivalent to his KEF 104s and prefers classical
music. Monitors are often meant for tabletop positioning and have
frequency responses bumps to exaggerate recording/production flaws.

Honestly, he's going to have to look really really hard to find
a better speaker than his 104s. He might look into large planars
or move to full-range electrostatics.

I had 104s, and I can assure you that he will have no troble at all in
this regard. Given our new knowledge of his budget, I'd suggest a hard
look at the B&W N804, the Spendor S9 and the JMLab Elektra range. Also
of course the incomparable Quad 988/989 for a completely different
experience.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:12:42 GMT, "Fleetie"
wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote
PS I forget Focal-JM Lab!: "The beryllium dome represents a quantum
advance in tweeter technology".

Duhhh, didn't the seminal Yamaha NS-1000M use a beryllium tweeter?

And a beryllium midrange!

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Dodge McRodgered wrote:

"Joseph Oberlander" emitted :


Based on recent listening evaluations, the bang-for-buck leader in studio
monitors could easily be the Behringer B2031A. They would make very gutsy
but nice-sounding speaker/amplifiers for use with a computer system and/or
CD player.

Those do look interesting.


The thing is, who wants to support a company which lifts ideas from
others who do all the hard work??

But that's the American way of doing business!

Ross Matheson wrote:

Joseph Oberlander commented

: MINe 109 wrote:
:
: Studio monitors would be a bad choice for the OP. He wants a
: floorstander roughly equivalent to his KEF 104s and prefers classical
: music. Monitors are often meant for tabletop positioning and have
: frequency responses bumps to exaggerate recording/production flaws.
:
: Honestly, he's going to have to look really really hard to find
: a better speaker than his 104s. He might look into large planars
: or move to full-range electrostatics.

You guys are getting off on a tangent here. The OP (and my virtual ears
pricked up, because I own exactly the same model) specifically mentioned Kef
104*ab*, not Kef 104 the much later reference model. Mine are marked "1972"
on the back of the bass drivers ... but I can't afford to upgrade *yet*.

Indeed, no-one has mentioned the later (or latest) Kef models as contenders
until now, I think. Surely they would be a suitable & obvious upgrade?

Well... I thought he had the 104/6s. For $1200-$1500, he can find
mint pair with dual terminals and then get them re-foamed for
good measure. Few things will sound as good for the money.

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:52:10 GMT, "Fleetie"
wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote
(Still remember listening at nearly top volume to Metallica "One" on
NS-1000Ms with a Quad 606 in the late 80s in the dem room at Chatham
Sevenoaks Hi-Fi, where I had a part-time job back then, after we'd
shut the shop. Our ears nearly bled!)

I've seen them, but have never heard them.

They (NS-1000M) were noted for being efficient *and* being able to take
high power.

Yep, one of the truly great speakers. I wish I'd been able to afford
to keep mine. AFAIK, they still make them for the Japanese market.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"François Yves Le Gal" wrote in message

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:51:11 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

For example, I've heard the Behringer B2031A speakers that I
mentioned, mounted on speaker stands. They sounded warm and
well-balanced, like many floorstanders.

Provided you pick the right settings...

The good news is that the settings are there to pick from. Because of the
active crossover design they are far more flexible and useful than the usual
tweeter level controls found on passive speakers.

They are also reasonably smooth.

Very smooth when properly used. At less than EUR 400 Per pair, all
inclusve, they are a real bargain.

Agreed. Since the issue was raised, I'm wondering how they would sound
compared to KEF 104s. It's been a long time since I've heard KEF 104s. From
what I recall, their performance was not unassailable.

"Dodge McRodgered" wrote in message

"Joseph Oberlander" emitted :

Based on recent listening evaluations, the bang-for-buck leader in
studio monitors could easily be the Behringer B2031A. They would
make very gutsy but nice-sounding speaker/amplifiers for use with a
computer system and/or CD player.

Those do look interesting.

The thing is, who wants to support a company which lifts ideas from
others who do all the hard work??

You mean companies like Mackie whose HR824s are slavish copies of Genelecs?

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
So it seems only common sense to me that the disc must be isolated from
vibration of any sort - either structure or air borne. Including those
from the speakers. This must involve some form of heavy cover to the
entire turntable assembly.

Not if the disc is clamped to large mass of mechanically compatible
material - such as vinyl or acrylic.

It's a point, but then the disc itself isn't rigid. And most would prefer
it not to be in direct contact with a material harder than itself for
practical reasons.

--
*Oh, what a tangled website we weave when first we practice *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:46:24 GMT, Newbie wrote:

Nick Gorham wrote:

: Having been away from audio for a long time, I am now looking to
: upgrade from KEF 104ab, an speaker, probably similar to Spendor and
: Rogers models. I would prefer a floorstander, but not much larger
: footprint than my present speakers (ie, no Quads or Maggies). This is
: for 2-channel stereo, not home theater.
:
:
: Please suggest suitable brands and models. Friends have suggeted
: Spendor, Proac and Dynaudio. However, I am confused by various "series"
: within a brands (don't recall that happening when I shopped last time
: but could just be my faulty memory!), eg, should I be looking at
: Contour or something else in dynaudio?

: I may have missed it, but have you given any idea of a budget ?

No. I have plenty of money, but I am not determined to spend it. I
could say 5K, but I would like to spend less and can spend more. Part
of it is to determine where the best value is, that would be noticeable
improvement upon my KEF's for least amount of money.

No one seems to have suggested AVI. Their stand mounting models are
well regarded. I have a pair of Pro-Nines which give excellent
results. (A snip at £700 a pair)

Bill

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

: I had 104s, and I can assure you that he will have no troble at all in
: this regard. Given our new knowledge of his budget, I'd suggest a hard
: look at the B&W N804, the Spendor S9 and the JMLab Elektra range. Also
: of course the incomparable Quad 988/989 for a completely different
: experience.

Hello Stewart. I appreciate your suggestions. However, I live a small
(expensive but tiny!) big-city apartment. The Quads are out of the
question! I suppose the speakers could be tall, but must have a small
footprint.

One general question I can't even articulate well goes like this: If
you have very good speakers of this age (my KEF's, or BC-1s, Rogers,
etc.), with no obvious breakdown, just old age, is it better to get
them "reconditioned", or has the speaker technology improved so much
that one should replace them?

Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

In article , Newbie
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

: I had 104s, and I can assure you that he will have no troble at all in
: this regard. Given our new knowledge of his budget, I'd suggest a hard
: look at the B&W N804, the Spendor S9 and the JMLab Elektra range. Also
: of course the incomparable Quad 988/989 for a completely different
: experience.

Hello Stewart. I appreciate your suggestions. However, I live a small
(expensive but tiny!) big-city apartment. The Quads are out of the
question! I suppose the speakers could be tall, but must have a small
footprint.

One general question I can't even articulate well goes like this: If
you have very good speakers of this age (my KEF's, or BC-1s, Rogers,
etc.), with no obvious breakdown, just old age, is it better to get
them "reconditioned", or has the speaker technology improved so much
that one should replace them?

Are you dissatisfied with the sound? There could be a simple fix by
repositioning them or using room treatments. Maybe you could tell us
about the room: hard floors, high ceilings, square footage, that kind of
thing.

Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

Stephen

Stephen wrote:


In article , Newbie
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

: I had 104s, and I can assure you that he will have no troble at all in
: this regard. Given our new knowledge of his budget, I'd suggest a hard
: look at the B&W N804, the Spendor S9 and the JMLab Elektra range. Also
: of course the incomparable Quad 988/989 for a completely different
: experience.

Hello Stewart. I appreciate your suggestions. However, I live a small
(expensive but tiny!) big-city apartment. The Quads are out of the
question! I suppose the speakers could be tall, but must have a small
footprint.

One general question I can't even articulate well goes like this: If
you have very good speakers of this age (my KEF's, or BC-1s, Rogers,
etc.), with no obvious breakdown, just old age, is it better to get
them "reconditioned", or has the speaker technology improved so much
that one should replace them?

Are you dissatisfied with the sound? There could be a simple fix by
repositioning them or using room treatments. Maybe you could tell us
about the room: hard floors, high ceilings, square footage, that kind of
thing.

Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

Stephen



Another option might be the Martin Logan Aeon i electrostatic hybrid, which is
only 10" wide and occupies less than a square foot of floor space. The Martin
Logan panels are extremely transparent (both visually and aurally) and they've
done an excellent job at blending the panels to their woofers, especially in
their most recent models.



Bruce J. Richman

Dodge McRodgered said:

Well if some have the audacity to think that all cd players and amps
sound the same why not also speakers?

Short answer : physics.

For the long answer see either one of Howard's books, note.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

MINe 109 wrote:

: Are you dissatisfied with the sound? There could be a simple fix by
: repositioning them or using room treatments. Maybe you could tell us
: about the room: hard floors, high ceilings, square footage, that kind of
: thing.

No, not realy dissatisfied, the condition would be better described as
"20 year itch". Just wondering if there are much better deals out
there now.

You have to appreciate that I can't do what one can in most Americans
cities: throw my speakers in the car and take them to a high-end dealer
for side-by-side comparison. That's a little difficult when you depend
on NYC subways and buses for getting around. Hence all this research.

When I bought these speakers I really wanted the Quads but my room
couldn't take them. It is ironic to find myself in the same situation
many years later.

Sander deWaal wrote:


Dodge McRodgered said:

Well if some have the audacity to think that all cd players and amps
sound the same why not also speakers?

Short answer : physics.

For the long answer see either one of Howard's books, note.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "



WARNING: The following side effects need to be considered if tragically reading
anything written by Ferstler: (1) Drowziness may occur so don't operate heavy
equipment or drive while reading his stuff, (2) consider taking either an
antacid or Immodium.



Bruce J. Richman

MINe 109 wrote:

: Are you dissatisfied with the sound? There could be a simple fix by
: repositioning them or using room treatments. Maybe you could tell us
: about the room: hard floors, high ceilings, square footage, that kind
: of thing.

No, not realy dissatisfied, the condition would be better described as
"20 year itch". Just wondering if there are much better speaker
deals out there now.

You have to appreciate that I can't do what one can in most Americans
cities: throw my speakers in the car and take them to a high-end dealer
for side-by-side comparison. That's a little difficult when you depend
on NYC subways and buses for getting around. Hence all this research.
If I could identify 1-2 best candidates, I could take my speakers in a
cab or even better convince the dealer to loan me a pair for a few days
for in-home comparison.

The room is approx 15x20, there is a false ceiling at about 11', wood
floor with 9x12 rug in the middle , leather furniture furniture (big
couch, small couch, a chair, ottoman), coffee table, entertainment
rack, a few paintings on the wall.

That said I tend to keep my audio purchases for a long time, so nothing
can be over-selected for this particular room.

When I bought these speakers I really wanted the Quads but my room
couldn't take them. It is ironic to find myself in the same situation
many years later...

In article , Newbie
wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

: Are you dissatisfied with the sound? There could be a simple fix by
: repositioning them or using room treatments. Maybe you could tell us
: about the room: hard floors, high ceilings, square footage, that kind
: of thing.

No, not realy dissatisfied, the condition would be better described as
"20 year itch". Just wondering if there are much better speaker
deals out there now.

You have to appreciate that I can't do what one can in most Americans
cities: throw my speakers in the car and take them to a high-end dealer
for side-by-side comparison. That's a little difficult when you depend
on NYC subways and buses for getting around. Hence all this research.
If I could identify 1-2 best candidates, I could take my speakers in a
cab or even better convince the dealer to loan me a pair for a few days
for in-home comparison.

The room is approx 15x20, there is a false ceiling at about 11', wood
floor with 9x12 rug in the middle , leather furniture furniture (big
couch, small couch, a chair, ottoman), coffee table, entertainment
rack, a few paintings on the wall.

I don't see any obvious problems. I built a system in a bad room (way
too long in a student apartment) and had the pleasure of moving to a
good room. In the old space, I did lots of upgrading to get everything
just a little better, but not to great overall effect. In the new, I
made room for the Quads and the other system now enhances my television.

That said I tend to keep my audio purchases for a long time, so nothing
can be over-selected for this particular room.

When I bought these speakers I really wanted the Quads but my room
couldn't take them. It is ironic to find myself in the same situation
many years later...

NYC? Hmm. Sorry to throw names around without direct experience, but
some classical types swear by Shahinian.

Stephen

"AKT" wrote in message
...
Michael McKelvy wrote:

My choice would be for Dynaudio and Proac since they use the top 2
drivers made

Do you know which series within each model would be best to look at?
Maybe I have been out of this game for too long but the situation
confuses me. For example, Dynaudio site has Audience, Contour,
Confidence, and Evidence! Every write-up is superlative, leaving no
hint of what is the series aimed at. If you know Dynaudio (or proac)
range, please help!

My experience with Dynaudio is more with the DIY end of things, so If it
were me in your place I'd look and listen to what was in my price range.
The same applies to Proac. The Dynaudio Audience 122 resembles the Dynaudio
TWYNN which was sold as a kit and had a very spacious and detailed sound,
with good bass down into the 30's.

In article ,
Newbie wrote:
You have to appreciate that I can't do what one can in most Americans
cities: throw my speakers in the car and take them to a high-end dealer
for side-by-side comparison.

If that's what they do, they're wrong. You should borrow speakers from
your dealer and check them at home. The room has a vast influence on the
final sound.

--
* What do they call a coffee break at the Lipton Tea Company? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Newbie" wrote in message
...
Michael McKelvy wrote:

My choice would be for Dynaudio and Proac since they use the top 2
drivers made

Do you know which series within each model would be best to look at?
Maybe I have been out of this game for too long but the situation
confuses me. For example, Dynaudio site has Audience,

I would look at eh Audience 122 since you want floor standing speakers, and
I'm somewhat familiar with them. They are a ported version of a kit speaker
they had designed by Joe D'Appolito, which used their aperiodic vents. I
built a pair and they sounded superb, very open and airy with plenty of
detail and bass into the 30-40Hz range.

With speakers it always best to pick a price range and listen. Nothing else
you do to your system will affect it more.

Contour,
Confidence, and Evidence! Every write-up is superlative, leaving no
hint of what is the series aimed at. If you know Dynaudio (or proac)
range, please help!

With Dynaudio there's almost no such thing as a bad speaker, they make great
drivers and designs.

"Keiron" wrote in message
om...
Newbie wrote in message
...
Michael McKelvy wrote:

My choice would be for Dynaudio and Proac since they use the top 2
drivers made

Do you know which series within each model would be best to look at?
Maybe I have been out of this game for too long but the situation
confuses me. For example, Dynaudio site has Audience, Contour,
Confidence, and Evidence! Every write-up is superlative, leaving no
hint of what is the series aimed at. If you know Dynaudio (or proac)
range, please help!


"Ranges" often equate to "price brackets", I believe, price overlaps
are probably quite rare. I'm a Dynaudio user, I have just upgraded
from the Audience 42 to the Contour 1.3mk2 (now deleted,there's also a
1.3SE and 1.4, though not sure if the 1.3SE is still current either).
I have to say the Contours are by a mile the biggest improvement I've
ever made to my system over 20 years. At times they are simply
breathtaking. I got them second hand, mint for £675 and I believe you
can get them about £899 new (if you can find any). In somes respects,
it's hard to imagine how a speaker could be any better. I'd recommend
them without hesitation. They're stand mounters by the way, so factor
in about £100 for stands. (I've never quite understood why people
insist on floorstanders.)

I suspect they like floorstanders because that kind of money for stands
seems extreme IMO. Since stands have only one function, to raise the
speaker to ear level, spending for that function should be able to be had
for a lot less. If the speaker is a tower type like say the Audience 122,
the elevation is already done.

If you have the money and there is a particular aesthetic you are getting,
go for it, but just to raise the speaker to ear level shouldn't cost that
much IME.

"Fella" wrote in message
.. .
Newbie wrote:

Having been away from audio for a long time, I am now looking to
upgrade from KEF 104ab, an speaker, probably similar to Spendor and
Rogers models. I would prefer a floorstander, but not much larger
footprint than my present speakers (ie, no Quads or Maggies). This is
for 2-channel stereo, not home theater.

Please suggest suitable brands and models. Friends have suggeted
Spendor, Proac and Dynaudio. However, I am confused by various "series"
within a brands (don't recall that happening when I shopped last time
but could just be my faulty memory!), eg, should I be looking at
Contour or something else in dynaudio?

All comments and advice appreciated.

I would advise a Sonus Faber. They get their drivers from dynaudio,
scanspeak, etc. Their work is *very* high quality and *very* good looking.
Although loyal to the source (ie, "hifi") their philosophy of the human
ear being the "strictest judge" and that they see home audio reproduction
as an end in itself, and as a form of artistic expression by itself makes
them stand out from all the rest, IMHO. You will get very sweet and
musical sounds when matched with the appropriate gear.

Two more advises:

1) Ignore the "all cd players, amps, speakers, wires, etc, sound the same"
type of borgs lurking around here. Just believe in your own ears.

2) Steer away from sonus faber if you are mostly into heavy metal, hard
rock, etc angry type of music.

The only reason IMO to go with Sonus Faber is looks, since the sound the
impart can be gotten in other brands or in kits.

There is one other speaker I would include in a recommended list, and that
is the VSM from Merlin. The last time I saw one it was $5000.00 U.S. and
used a Top of the Line Dynaudio Tweeter and a Scan-Speak 7" midwoofer.
Absolutely beautiful look and sound.

"Fella" wrote in message
.. .
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Fella wrote:

1) Ignore the "all cd players, amps, speakers, wires, etc, sound the
same" type of borgs lurking around here. Just believe in your own ears.


I'd love to know who you think reckons all speakers sound the same?

Well if some have the audacity to think that all cd players and amps sound
the same why not also speakers?


First lets deal with falsehood of anybody saying all CD players and amps
sound the same. It is that all CD players working the way tehy are supposed
to sound the same. If you have 2 CD players and one sounds different, one
is either malfunctioning or designed to sound someway other than flat.

Same for amps.

As to speakers, they are the weakest link in the audio chain sinc e they are
subject to room interaction and the fact that designs and drivers ahve gross
differences from manufacturer to manufacturer.



What about it howie? With level matching and 8 hours a day pink noise
listening subjected to the strictest iron curtain double blind tests you
think you would get a sonus faber sound the same as a, say, dynaudio ?


I've never seen this in print anywhere - the writer would be laughed out
of court.

Yes but he would come back.


I'd caution against just relying on your ears without a reference. The
room used for listening in has a far greater influence on the final sound
than any competent amp or CD etc. So what may sound fine in a shop at a
quick audition may well disappoint at home.

You are correct. I should have advised the newbie that (s)he should have
home auditioned any equipment for at least a week before any purchase
decision. That's what I do actually.



Also, IMHO, ... If a speaker sounds
'impressive' on one type of music more than another, it's a poor design.


Well I am not saying that for instance that some death metal vehemence
would sound bad with *spesifically* a sonus faber (it would sound bad
eminating from any old speaker, it wants to sound bad, yes?). What I am
saying is that its just a waste of money and abilities of the sonus faber
speakers to employ them on that kind of material. Sonus faber is designed
to bring out all the subtle inner details, the beauty, the musicality, of
a given piece of music, that IMHO, does not exist in angry music. And
since such music is preferably heard LOUD and with lots of distortion, a
sonus faber would be an overkill, as it were. A pair of cremona costs at
least three times as much as a pair of some average cervin wega!s which
are designed to give what the listeners or angry music want.

Bruce J. Richman wrote:

Stephen wrote:



In article , Newbie
wrote:


Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

: I had 104s, and I can assure you that he will have no troble at all in
: this regard. Given our new knowledge of his budget, I'd suggest a hard
: look at the B&W N804, the Spendor S9 and the JMLab Elektra range. Also
: of course the incomparable Quad 988/989 for a completely different
: experience.

Hello Stewart. I appreciate your suggestions. However, I live a small
(expensive but tiny!) big-city apartment. The Quads are out of the
question! I suppose the speakers could be tall, but must have a small
footprint.

One general question I can't even articulate well goes like this: If
you have very good speakers of this age (my KEF's, or BC-1s, Rogers,
etc.), with no obvious breakdown, just old age, is it better to get
them "reconditioned", or has the speaker technology improved so much
that one should replace them?

The 104s are very very good, so I'd presonally recondition them and
maybe add a sub. My guess is that they lack enough bass.

My experience with Dynaudio is more with the DIY end of things, so If it were me in your place I'd look and listen to what was
in my price range. The same applies to Proac. The Dynaudio Audience 122 resembles the Dynaudio TWYNN which was sold as a kit
and had a very spacious and detailed sound, with good bass down into the 30's.

I am becoming a bore about mine, as people here will attest. (A 52SE.)

They are among the best speakers I've ever heard and are _perfect_ for
my absolute _love_ of high quality treble.

I've had them a few months now and I still look at them in kinda
awed reverence when I think what they're capable of.

It is astonishing (to me).

NP: All About Eve: "The Pearl Fishermen", "Road To Your Soul".


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.fleetie.demon.co.uk

"Dodge McRodgered" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

Based on recent listening evaluations, the bang-for-buck leader in
studio monitors could easily be the Behringer B2031A. They would
make very gutsy but nice-sounding speaker/amplifiers for use with
a computer system and/or CD player.

Those do look interesting.

The thing is, who wants to support a company which lifts ideas from
others who do all the hard work??

You mean companies like Mackie whose HR824s are slavish copies of
Genelecs?

Behringer are something else.. many, many, many of their products are
cheap crappy-quality "clones" of products that some other company
sweated over and paid dues in research and development. Both Mackie
and Aphex have successfully sued Behringer for copying PCB's IIRC.

Mackie did not sucessfuly sue Behrninger. There was a secret settlement.

In the case of Mackie, the clincher was Behringer copied an error,
identically, from the Mackie board to "their own" design. *******!

Wrong.

In message , MINe
109 writes
In article , Newbie
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

: I had 104s, and I can assure you that he will have no troble at all in
: this regard. Given our new knowledge of his budget, I'd suggest a hard
: look at the B&W N804, the Spendor S9 and the JMLab Elektra range. Also
: of course the incomparable Quad 988/989 for a completely different
: experience.

Hello Stewart. I appreciate your suggestions. However, I live a small
(expensive but tiny!) big-city apartment. The Quads are out of the
question! I suppose the speakers could be tall, but must have a small
footprint.

One general question I can't even articulate well goes like this: If
you have very good speakers of this age (my KEF's, or BC-1s, Rogers,
etc.), with no obvious breakdown, just old age, is it better to get
them "reconditioned", or has the speaker technology improved so much
that one should replace them?

Are you dissatisfied with the sound? There could be a simple fix by
repositioning them or using room treatments. Maybe you could tell us
about the room: hard floors, high ceilings, square footage, that kind of
thing.

Anyway, what are the best "sleek" speakers that don't need much floor
space?

The Magneplanar 1.6 are tall but only 19" wide and 2" deep.

Stephen

But they need about 1.5 metres of space behind them!
--
Chris Morriss