I work in high-end AV. Perceptually, in a good space, those fantastic speakers often do not make the sound people associate with "loud", no distortion, no top end becoming hissy, just the concert-level bass to clue you in to how loud it is.
People who have paid a lot for their system want that "wow" factor that immediately makes anyone think it's loud.
The other issue is that different listening material definitely needs different amplifier and processor settings - there is no setting that "just works". We find many customers do not wish to get engage with those settings these days.
As an audiophile (without the madness), I can understand you. On the other hand, with a pair of good speakers and a nice amplifier with bass, mid & treble knobs, you can almost dial the tone which's best for a genre.
A 2x10 band eq is better, but I prefer to listen pure-flat instead. In my setup, only vinyl needs loudness + tone circuits, the rest is happy with pure flat.
Of course music and sound is a subjective taste, but 90% of the road can be traveled with just basic, but good components IMHO.
High end stuff has no limits, there's always a better system in some feature/property. Also, when you start to upgrade something, there's chance of endless loops (these speakers needs better amps, which shows some defects of my DAC, etc.)
So setting a limit, reaching it and leaving it there is good IMHO.
I run an entry level HiFi CD player with iPod interface through a vintage amplifier to a pair of bookshelf style speakers (which are pretty big for their class though).
If my friend is confusing whether his phone is ringing because a similar sound is present in the playing track, then it's good enough. Similarly, if you're enjoying the sound you're getting from your system, you've accomplished your goal IMHO.
I'm neither looking for loudness, nor for that ethereal sound. If I can hear everything in relatively clear manner, and I'm enjoying it, that's it. I'd rather enjoy it instead of sweating over smallest details.
Lots and lots of variations. But basically get a $250-350 pair of speakers for a decent brand (Dali Spektor 1 or 2 are a good bet) and plug them into a $100-200 second hand amp and you've got a great set up. If you don't want to go second hand then Yamaha and Sony have some decent amps in this price range.
Spend whatever you have left over on a second hand CD player or DAC for your phone, depending on what you want to use as a source.
JBL 305 + 310S matching subwoofer will measure impeccably and play nearly full range with strong bass down to 27ish hz. Would have to catch some sale prices around black friday or some such.
Or this excellent DIY kit and basically, any solid 50-100W ish amp. Might push you up to more like $600. But you get the idea.
I have a generally very high opinion of Wirecutter's bookshelf speaker and receiver recommendations - any recommended receiver and any recommended bookshelf speaker, basically. Although, most retail bookshelf speakers in this range might be more like an 80% experience not 90% lol.
Another thing you can do for a very legitimate hi fi experience on a budget is to turn modest speakers into excellent performers with DSP EQ. Either automatically with a receiver that has e.g. Audyssey auto correction or with a MiniDSP etc.
Audio reproduction is, well, signal reproduction/amplification. Whether a driver produces objectively correct sound via excellence in physical driver construction and engineering, or via a DSP assist, makes little difference.
Mine is a bit more expensive, since I bought the speakers new (I had somewhat specific demands), but everything else was second-hand.
I've got a pair of Monitor Audio Bronze 2s, a Denon AVR-1911 receiver and two Dali SWA 12 subwoofers.
As I wrote above, I bought the speakers new, because I wanted relatively large bookshelf speakers with front ports and living room-friendly looks, and nothing presented itself second-hand. With a bit of patience, you should be able to find a solid pair of speakers in mint condition for $2-300, no problem.
The receiver has 90W per channel (for real, no tricks), Audyssey room correction and was just $80 second hand from a guy who had upgraded to a 4K-capable receiver. I have it hooked up to my TV and so on, but at that price I would be perfectly happy just using it as a stereo amp, since it has good power, digital inputs, room correction and bass management for subwoofers.
The subwoofers were ~$200 each second hand, years and years ago. I'm sure they're even less expensive now, or you can just do without subs.
I also use HifiBerry's AMP2 to drive a pair of old Kenwood speakers with a dedicated subwoofer (it's a 2.1 set out of the box), and boy, that thing's impressive for its size.
It has a Burr Brown DAC and a Class D 2x30W amplifier on board. It has delicious sound.
You'll probably want an interface that has TRS/XLR outputs instead of RCA unless you want to get a weird cable. Focusrite Scarlett Solo would do the trick nicely!
On the topic of speakers here, does anyone here feel like the Cinema does not offer the audio experience advertised? I've been to old cinemas and brand new cinemas with Dolby Atmos yet in each of them the audio is just absolute ass. Is this just my local cinemas or is this a common experience?
You'd think that a cinema would know how to tune their speaker set up correctly. Yet even at a brand new cinema the audio is just blown out in loud scenes. Like they've got the speakers turned up too high.
A well put-together powerful system with low distortion is quite an experience when you really crank the volume. It just gets bigger and bigger sounding but not really "loud" (ie. distorted), and loud clean sound is just a lot more satisfying and less fatiguing.
It's all about headroom, dynamics and being able to move air. Audiophiles may laugh, but a speaker like the Cerwin-Vega XLS215 one of the best choices you can make for reasonably affordable speakers, provided you have the room for them. They do look somewhat low-rent, but CV have taken some important lessons from PA speakers to heart, so they're surprisingly efficient and have large drivers that can effortlessly move significant amounts of air. Combine them with a powerful amplifier with plenty of headroom and you have a setup that can handle serious dynamics with very low distortion, better than 99% of concerts I've attended[¤].
For an actual PA speaker that can do much of the same thing, the JBL SRX835 is a similar powerhouse, but it has horn-loaded midrange and tweeter drivers, for those who prefer that sound. They are also effortlessly dynamic and I want a pair for my living room, despite the very utilitarian looks.
Unfortunately logistics and space constraints mean bookshelf speakers are the only practical setup in this apartment, so I picked ones that were as big as I could reasonably get away with, and supplement them with two reasonably well-hidden 12" subwoofers. I should have never sold my JBL 4410s, I'm sure I could have made space for them somehow.
[¤] The best sound quality I have ever heard at a concert and honestly better than most home setups, was when Opeth played in DR Koncerthuset here in Copenhagen in 2016. The sound is always insanely good there, but the combination of prog metal, an outrageously well-designed acoustic space, a seriously impressive sound system and world-class people behind the scenes, elevated everything to a completely new level.
It was the cleanest and most pristine amplified sound I have ever heard, and what really impressed me was how clean and deep the bass reproduction was, with absolutely no distortion or wooliness. It is my measuring stick that all other concerts are compared to.
As a very, very casual audiophile, I don't personally feel the need for new models all that much. I don't go crazy trying to fit speakers to rooms — that's going to change over time! So I'd put the speaker in whatever location sounds the best in that house, and I'm happy with that.
I like the sound of old 60's-70's acoustic suspension speakers with large (11-12") woofers. In particular, I find them to produce a much more satisfying deep bass when played at low volumes. I won't say they're "the best", since I haven't had the chance to listen to much modern high-end equipment, but certainly they're good enough for me to be happy with. Currently listening on a pair of 1970 Advents (OLA), for the curious.
I appreciate that passive speakers are nice. I prefer listening on the Polk T15's I own over the desktop speakers I have, a logitech Z323 paired with the subwoofer from a Z-2300, despite the superior bass of the latter.
Anyway, my point is that I don't personally need all that much (expensive) innovation; I'd be pretty satisfied if these companies wanted to produce product lines that already exist (or bring back older designs, which are increasingly more expensive/difficult to find, these days. I admit to ignorance here, and I get that solid wood is expensive, but I have difficulty understanding why this type of speaker can't be manufactured and sold at a couple hundred bucks a pop, vs several thousands for the models the grandparent comment mentioned.
That reminds me of an Experience I had once at a former colleague. He was a bit of an audiophile, dj/producer and had e.g. added more insulation to his living room to not annoy the neighbours as much, and built his own speakers and record player.
Anyway, something was playing, it was (sounded?) really quiet but it was crystal clear at the same time; normally I feel like I have to turn the volume up to hear the whole music.
Bass distortion is the only big factor. Everybody knows it doesn't matter, but it's actually where distortion is the easiest to hear. Chinese manufacturers don't know, and do care, so even cheap USB speakers blow out of water the majority of even much more expensive products.
They are a bit underpowered, rumble with Bluetooth, and you need to turn the bass and highs quite a bit down to make them sound flat, but I bet that something like 100x times more expensive studio speakers will be the cheapest setup that matches them in the clarity.
You have not heard those, they absolutely do sound more precise than cheap studio monitors. I think they may actually be flat with both bass and treble all the way down, but then they just don't sound like loudspeakers at all.
I have a very hard time believing that, especially considering the absolutely miniscule woofers, no tweeters and tiny cabinets. The marketing focuses mostly on "cool led lights" and "fashion design". Claiming that they sound better than studio monitors is an extraordinary claim, and there doesn't seem to be any sort of reviews available, and the only videos on Youtube are from people who bought them and basically go "yes, these make sound". Not a single actual review.
The JBLs are some of the most well-regarded studio monitors, routinely besting competitors at four times the price. They are JBL's crowning achievement in sheer performance per dollar, no joke.
I can only conclude that you have literally never heard a decent set of speakers in your life, or you're wasting everyone's time with an extremely low-effort troll.
I understand your disbelief. I was also in disbelief as I expected the speakers to be a joke and wouldn't believe it if I didn't hear it myself. But they are as much above cheap studio monitors as the monitors are above regular hifi speakers. I guess there is some DSP magic at play, but they realy sound that good. Really the only way we could resolve this issue is that you waste $30 and listen for yourself.
No, you can't change the laws of physics, especially not with miniscule cabinets, a single 3" woofer, two 1.5" midrange drivers and a paltry ~10W of total amplification. It simply isn't physically possible, no matter how much DSP "magic" you throw at it.
If you're genuinely serious and believe these tiny speakers are truly amazing, please do spend the $30 yourself and send a set to Amir at audiosciencereview.com, so he can put them through the same set of tests and measurements that he uses for HiFi speakers and studio monitors. He doesn't mince words, he will rip apart manufacturer claims if they don't deliver on them, even if they're a well-regarded brand.
It can reduce the distortion which is what really matters more than frequency balance.
The problem as I understand it is the equal loudness curves. The bass itself may be perceived possibly tens of dB quieter in relation to the distortion which occurs an octave or more above the original frequency, so that the perceived distortion is amplified. The measurement should be multiplied by the loudness curves, which shows the trully horrible distortion at bass, which pollutes the sound way up into the mids.
Even at that site you can read statements like "below 100Hz, 10% [harmonic distortion] is OK", which just isn't true.
All I can see is that he lives in Seattle, and I don't really care that much.
I'd love to see the sources you base your claims on, since you seem to disagree with respected professionals like Floyd Toole and Sean Olive, as well as every sound engineer employed by pro audio companies. Extensive research and listening tests have shown that a linear frequency response with a slight roll-off towards high frequencies and a slight low-frequency boost, combined with even dispersion and low distortion is preferred by the vast majority of listeners. You need all of the elements together, in order to achieve a pleasing presentation. This is the groundwork and design philosphy of a speaker like the JBL 305P MkII, and it works, based on solid repeatable science.
Please provide your research or the sources you base your conclusions on.
You cannot get low-distortion bass at any usable volume out of a 3" speaker in a small cabinet, no matter how much DSP trickery you add, it is physically impossible. The driver simply doesn't have enough membrane area nor excursion to move the required amount of air. On top of this, the type of DSP tricks you are proposing require significant additional amplifier power and heavy-duty speaker drivers that can withstand it. Even then, what you're going to get is massive amounts of distortion, especially as the driver tries to reproduce anything under 150Hz at any sort of volume.
From my experience in hifi and electronics, what they're probably doing is using an off-the-shelf BT+amplifier module, with standard low-power amplifier modules. On top of this there is probably some standard EQ and maybe a "bass enhancer" module of the sort that generates overtones based on low bass frequencies, which uses the "missing fundamental" principle to fool the ear into perceiving bass that is too deep for the speaker to actually reproduce. Some bluetooth speakers make good use of this trick, but it is very much adding a bunch distortion in order to fool your ears.
I'm glad you like your speakers, but you are utterly delusional if you think they offer sound quality that is even on the same planet as a decent set of studio monitors.
The problem is that you seem to be assuming I like them for the opposite reason why I do, so I guess you will just need to listen for yourself.
I think they might actually be doing the opposite of what you suggest - they generate overtones that cancel out the overtones produced by the speaker itself.
I have been listening on studio monitors for years, as I prefer the sound over the typical consumer audio sound.
Sure, they won't shatter your room, and they are really only powerful enough for listening from close distance, but the thing is how the bass sounds like real bass, rather than loudspeaker bass, it sort of adds weight to other sounds, rather than being directly heard and the whole sound often almost sounds like if it wasn't coming out of speakers.
You claimed that those speakers had more accurate sound, clarity and bass reproduction than a set of studio monitors costing 100x as much.
That sort of statement needs to be backed up by serious, verifiable facts.
So please go right ahead and back up your extraordinary claims with some verifiable proof. Distortion measurements would be a good start.
As I previously mentioned, Amir at audiosciencereview.com has the necessary tools for thorough speaker measurements, and he accepts shipment of speakers for testing.
I said it would cost 100 times as much to match the clarity.
I told you you need to investigate it yourself as I have no way to convey that information over the internet. They just sound very clear, detailed and precise. The 0.5% claim seems quite believable after you listen to them. They are small, but with low distortion.
Then tell that Amir guy to test them. I don't know him.
> " said it would cost 100 times as much to match the clarity."
Based on what, exactly? Do you have any sort of verifiable information to back up that claim?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and you are making some very extraordinary claims. You seem to be very firm in your beliefs, but completely unmotivated to actually put them to the test.
Do you really honestly and seriously believe that a $25 set of gimmick speakers can match a set of $2500 studio monitors for sound quality, on even a single performance parameter, let alone overall clarity and low distortion?
I can only conclude that you are utterly delusional and that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, which a cursory glance at your comment history confirms.
Based on comparing them with studio monitors. They sound more like good headphones or not like speakers at all. They can play string bass. The drums sound unamplified on good enough recordings. There is no doubt that their distortion is extraordinarily low, and it's not the distortion of the amplifier but the speakers. I don't know how you expect me to prove it to you.
> "I don't know how you expect me to prove it to you."
By providing objective measurements, as I have written in multiple previous comments already.
If you do not have measurements at hand, or the necessary gear to undertake them yourself, Amir at audiosciencereview.com has the gear, skills and experience to perform in-depth detailed speaker measurements. He accepts speakers shipped to him for review.
It's not very complicated: You made claims of extraordinary performance from outrageously cheap speakers. I ask you to provide evidence of this very hard to believe claim, and I even provide you a way of doing this.
Of course, Occam's Razor says you're just full of BS, which is a perfectly fine conclusion for me.
They can play the kick drum without any noticeable accompanying "dunnn" sound, which is enough to tell that their distortion must be extraordinarily low. In fact the people who said they "yes, they make sound" may dislike them for their dryness.
Occams razor has nothing to do with that, as your phone screen has better image quality than the best TV screens a few decades ago.
And that is my last reply, do it yourself if you care about measurements, you'd probably say I faked them anyway.