|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jul 10, 2016 21:37:32 GMT -5
The Wilson Alexandria XLF (aka Rockem' Sockem' Robot speakers) cost as much as some houses. They weight 665 lbs each.  I would not want to be home alone with those things. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2016 21:49:10 GMT -5
I wonder on what planet they were manufactured?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Elliot on Jul 10, 2016 21:59:42 GMT -5
I wonder on what planet they were manufactured? Transformers Homeworld. A fine product of the Decepticons |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jul 10, 2016 22:00:58 GMT -5
The Wilson Alexandria XLF (aka Rockem' Sockem' Robot speakers) cost as much as some houses. They weight 665 lbs each. Something like this: |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 10, 2016 22:08:07 GMT -5
What do I want in a speaker? I could write a book... My preferences (in order of priority):
1. DYNAMICS - If a speaker can't come close to the dynamics of live music, then it just sounds like a speaker. The vast majority of dynamic (cone) and planar speakers seriously lack dynamics. Want proof? Go listen to a pair of Klipschorns. Despite their (many) flaws, the K-Horns do dynamics like nothing else I've heard. A speaker with dynamics will sound that way regardless of volume. Speakers without (most dynamics & planars) typically have to exceed a certain volume level before they "come alive." I hate that. I want a speaker that will sound dynamic even at low volumes.
2. LOW DISTORTION - Some types of distortion are unavoidable as volume rises (total harmonic, for example). Other types are tied to the speaker's sensitivity (transient-intermodulation, for example). I want a speaker that has reasonably low distortion through it's entire volume envelope (from low to moderately loud levels). I understand that the speaker will distort more at higher volumes, but since I don't listen at those volumes, I don't care about that end of the volume envelope.
3. FLAT FREQUENCY RESPONSE - Some are sensitive to specific parts of the frequency spectrum. I'm one of those. I've found that I'm particularly sensitive to the vocal ranges. I can forgive a speaker that rolls off or plumps up the bass a bit or that softens (or even emphasizes slightly) the treble, but the vocal range had better be laser-beam flat or I'm not happy.
4. WIDE FREQUENCY RANGE - I like a speaker that digs low into the bass and sounds open in the treble. Some say that subwoofers are the way to get the bass one wants, and they may be right. But I prefer the coherency of a wide range speaker so I don't have to fuss with crossover blending to a sub.
5. REASONABLE PRICE - Yes, I understand that true quality costs more than particle board and Chinese car-stereo drivers. And I don't begrudge the maker their cost, their engineering overhead, or their profit margin. But I balk at speakers that appear to be priced so that the owner can have "bragging rights" among his peers who also have too much disposable income for their own good.
Now everyone's ears are different, and you probably have additional priorities that don't matter to me. Among the few priorities I've listed, you may even have a different sequence of choices. Power to you! Your ears - your wallet.
Cheers - Boomzilla
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2016 22:14:40 GMT -5
You don't give a damn what it looks like?
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 10, 2016 22:25:04 GMT -5
Cute is better than not, but I'm not paying too much extra for it. SPEAKERS, ChuckieNut - I'm talking SPEAKERS!  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 10, 2016 22:53:55 GMT -5
I look for correct tone, room presurrization, enveloping soundstage and lots of detail. Out of all these I think enveloping soundstage and correct tone is the hardest to get just perfect. With regards to room pressurization, this can be accomplished with just the speaker or with subs in the mix too. Well, that's a whole lot of... words! How do you know when you have the "correct tone"? What is the measure of "enveloping soundstage"? How do you measure "room pressuization"? Ultimately it usually comes down to personal preferences which are always subjective and immeasurable. The measure is subjective for practical purposes. I'm sure you could measure it, but the intepretation of what does what may be beyond us at least for a regular person like me. subjectivity being imeasurable/ unintepretable does not mean insignficant. Imo it's most of what matters despite its inherent biases and errors. It can be measured. Just not by microphones. It's measured by people and ears in the way that they want to do it. If a speaker designer doesn't listen to the speaker after measuring it, he is a bit of an idiot. And I think that says a lot of what needs to be said for subjectivity. You can do it that way without listening in designing but it's foolish. Enveloping soundstage and room pressurization go hand in hand. Enveloping soundstage means that the soundstage is seamless from left to right. There's no center, left, right gaps. Also mportantly it is not two dimensional. It comes out to you and goes just around your ears sort of like a bubble. Best I can explain is the sound reaches out to you like in real life. It's not flat. It doesn't start and stop at the thing that produces it. It travels and interacts with your environment. Really good reproduction makes this interaction not necessarily the environment you are in but the environment of hte recording. Room pressurization is important in this. If the speaker can't fill the room and pressurize it - usually with bass - it can't make you feel like the environment changes around you. Now of course it's not surround sound. It's stereo sound but it gives you that illusion. If you play a piano in a room that is dead that is an example of no room pressurization. The piano sounds completely flat. But play it in a room with great acoustics and you can hear it fill and interact in complex ways that sounds realistic and pleasurable. Similar to that. Tone: This is surprisingly hard. You can hear an instrument played. And it osunds clear etc. But it doesn't sound anywhere close to real. You know it's a recording and that the reporduction is off. That's how tone messes up. The importance of tone shows up when it's messed up. Not so much when it's not. You get the tone right you can forgive a lot. For instance my axiom tweeters aren't terribly fast units when compared to say the tweeters in the LSA-1 signature which has tremendous resolution. It doesn't sound as fast as the Tekton Pendragons tweeter or the Klipsch tweeter units. From what I gather the Axioms don't cost more than $50 per tweeter either. More like $25 or so probably. They are not high end specialty units. But they managed to integrate its tone very well along with the rest of the speaker to the point where I've heard several speakers do better in one way or the other but it can't manage the same natural tone that they can despite the tweeter being not world class. Its tone is well done compared to real life subjective experiences. Imo its tweeter is its biggest stregnth and surprisingly its weakness (not as ridiculously resolving as higher end units) both at the same time! |
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on Jul 10, 2016 22:59:00 GMT -5
As most of you may know by now, my favorite speakers are the MBL Radialstrahler 101 E MKIIs. These unfortunately are just a little bit out of my budget! (OK, a lot out of budget). A few of us auditioned these at Axpona a few years ago (me, LCSeminole, jlafrenz) They are absolutely amazing. The soundstage is incredible as are dynamics and rapid transitioning. That they look stunning just adds to the WAF. Not only my WAF, but most people's! If I win the lottery, I know who I'll be calling! I've never heard of these Hemster so I looked them up. They look like they belong on top of a lighthouse. How do they work? |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 10, 2016 23:03:25 GMT -5
The ideal point-source radiator has been described as a "pulsating sphere." The Radialstrahlers attempt to do just that. Consider them a cone speaker with the cones pointed downward. Instead of a cone, the "leaves' of the speaker, driven by a conventional magnetic structure are driven to flex inward & outward. This provides a 360 degree wave around the speaker.
|
|
|
|
Post by mauriceminor on Jul 10, 2016 23:25:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by yves on Jul 10, 2016 23:50:27 GMT -5
a song
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,951
|
Post by hemster on Jul 11, 2016 0:34:53 GMT -5
As most of you may know by now, my favorite speakers are the MBL Radialstrahler 101 E MKIIs. These unfortunately are just a little bit out of my budget! (OK, a lot out of budget). A few of us auditioned these at Axpona a few years ago (me, LCSeminole, jlafrenz) They are absolutely amazing. The soundstage is incredible as are dynamics and rapid transitioning. That they look stunning just adds to the WAF. Not only my WAF, but most people's! If I win the lottery, I know who I'll be calling! I've never heard of these Hemster so I looked them up. They look like they belong on top of a lighthouse. How do they work? What Boomzilla said. However in practice they project am immense soundstage that really is 360 degrees and envelopes the listener. The WAF is outstanding as they look like esoteric lamps. |
|
|
|
Post by vneal on Jul 11, 2016 8:14:28 GMT -5
I like grills held on by integrated magnets.
I like nice looking cabinets. I like piano gloss black, But believe in veneer choices for top speakers
I like high resale on the used market
Like thinner speaker designs.
Like speakers that image well
Want one to go down to at least 35 Hz
Low distortion, well made,blah blah blah
Mostly blah
|
|
|
|
Post by simpleman68 on Jul 11, 2016 8:40:49 GMT -5
simpleman68 I don't like bright tweets either or shrill like you get with some ribbons. I knew you had those Legacys. It's been a whole new learning curve with placement and what to expect. They need a bit more toe in than other speakers I've had but the pay off is tremendous. I'm amazed at how much these speakers take the room out of the equation. Very helpful as the house is very open with lots of hardwood flooring, tiling etc. An otherwise huge echo chamber but these speakers don't sound that way at all. The other speaker within this price range I'm dying to audition is the Revel Salon 2. Scott |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Jul 11, 2016 8:55:59 GMT -5
What I like is if a speaker makes me feel like eating chocolate. I think that pretty much summarizes it and is pretty much self-explanatory.
|
|
|
|
Post by adaboy on Jul 11, 2016 9:28:29 GMT -5
The Wilson Alexandria XLF (aka Rockem' Sockem' Robot speakers) cost as much as some houses. They weight 665 lbs each. [/quote] I've heard these, I was impressed with the sheer size! Not impressed by the sound though for some reason Wilson's seem to be a little thin on mid-range. When Wilson auditioned them here in Scottsdale AZ they had all Mcintosh gear and had them flanked by dual 18" Wilson subs. Still was unimpressed as much as I wanted to like them. Thiel 2.4se's sound fantastic, but would like it to be more "Curvy" (Dan) maybe Sonus Faber like. Not a big fan of SF's sound signature to tipped up. |
|
|
|
Post by adaboy on Jul 11, 2016 9:39:13 GMT -5
How about this...  Big Dan posted this 3 years ago??? This is where he ended up?  Awful!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by brutiarti on Jul 11, 2016 9:45:37 GMT -5
How about this... Big Dan posted this 3 years ago??? This is where he ended up? Awful!!! The teaser reminded me to the Canton Vento (really nice speakers) |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Jul 11, 2016 9:59:55 GMT -5
Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion....... Personally, I'm getting tired of seeing speakers with curved sides.... and I never was fond of piano black. I have a pair of Stealth 8's, and I like the way they look.... and I like the way these look. But, as I said, to each his own... and I guess we'll see how many people agree with me. How about this... Big Dan posted this 3 years ago??? This is where he ended up? Awful!!! |
|
Awful!!!
