Best Speaker You Have Owned.

[Shakeydeal]

You strike me as being someone who is not an active listener. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, some people listen passively. It's ok, no shame in that.

Intracacies and subtlety aren't for everyone. So painting that broad picture is easier than listening for the minute details.

But even with that being said, many times the tonal differences in speakers is perfectly
obvious. Speakes are certainly the most distorted link in the chain, so you would expect them to have the most difference.

Shakey

 

[Hyfi]

The best pair I have owned/own are a pair of Clearfield Continentals designed and built by Von Schwiekert when he worked for Counterpoint. They do not have deep bass but have great mids and highs. Coupled with my sub there is plenty of bass.

My other speakers that get swapped with the CFs are Dynaudio 82s. Family room speakers are JM Labs Tantal 509s.

As far as the best I have ever heard goes, really hard to say. When Soundex had their big 22 room building, I got to hear everything from Dynaudio Arbiter, to Wilson Grand Slams, Grand Utopias, Dunlavy, Proac, B&W Nautalis.......

 

[Shakeydeal]

I would love to hear those Clearfields. I was an early adopter of the first generation of VR4s back in 1996. I later owned VR2s and the VR4 Gen III HSE. Albert makes good stuff.

Shakey

 

[Hocky]

So Don Henley's voice (or any singer's voice) on the same exact CD sound differently on every speaker?

And the same guitar, bass, and drum sound differently on every speaker?

Speakers should NOT create a sound of their own.

All they should do is accurately reproduce the sounds.

If these speakers are accurate, they should reproduce all the voices and instruments accurately.

Thus, the same CD, the same singer, the same song, the same voice, and the same instruments should sound the very, very alike, if all these speakers are all accurate.

Like it or not, that is the way it is. And in the case of different technologies especially (ie mono vs dipole), the presentation is very different. So, even if the tonality / response is the same, the sound is different.

 

[enrique]

The 803D has more bass, but the SA1750 is more accurate (has a flatter frequency response).

Thanks.I think i would like a speaker that is more accurate than more bass.My sub blends in very nicely.

 

[Hyfi]

I would love to hear those Clearfields. I was an early adopter of the first generation of VR4s back in 1996. I later owned VR2s and the VR4 Gen III HSE. Albert makes good stuff.

Shakey

Yeah, I got them for a steal and at first tried to sell them but the more I listened to them the less I wanted to sell.

I got the CFs, a VAC CLA1 MKII, a Counterpoint NPS400, AudioSource EQ, and all Synergistic Cables for $300. Had to re-tube the VAC and put $200 into the Counterpoint.

If I ever have a few K to burn, I will surely be looking at VSs and luckily I will be able to listen to them at Quest For Sound in Philly.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Best speakers I own(ed) - well, not a much of brainer - my current tSc TST2s
But much better ones are the ones I'll buy next

 

[mattsk8]

Maybe I'll open the door to a lot of ridicule here, but I'll post anyhow !

I've had a lot of different speakers over the years- Fishers, Paradigms, Infinitys, Polk Audios, JBL's, Cerwin Vegas, Bose, Sonys, MTX, etc.

When I buy speakers it boils down to 2 things- where I'm at financialy and how good they sound to me. The numbers, charts, and everything else doesn't mean that much to me. I'd rather go into a room blind folded and listen to a bunch of speakers w/ 3 good test songs. I think the 3 best songs to test speakers would be Dire Straights, your latest trick; Pink Floyd, welcome to the machine; and Metallica, dyers eve (a good one for durability).

To me the best 3 were the Paradigms, the infinitys, and the polks. The infinitys sounded good until you pushed them, the woofers couldn't take much abuse. The pardigms sounded decent even when you pushed them, but they just seemed to me to be slightly lacking on the highs.

Out of all of them, I really liked my Polk R50's. They seemed to me to have great highs and played well at loud volumes as well. I also like the JBLs I have now; those have great highs too.

I know I have a lot to learn but just wanted to throw my 2 cents out there. I always judge my speakers w/ music and not movies. I did figure out that the receiver plays a larger part than I ever new as well. I figured this out when I got rid of my 5 year old Denon and picked up my new Yamaha- WOW! What a difference just a receiver makes! The Yamaha sounds AMAZINGLY better w/ movies but the Denon sounded a bit better w/ music.

Maybe TMI for the question 'what's the best speaker you've ever owned', but just wanted to help you audiophiles know how I come to my conclusions ! Long story short, the Polk R50's to me were the best sounding I've owned. Had to get rid of them when I bought my house 6 years ago though cuz towers don't work in this living room.

 

[ohskigod]

Guess it's a toss up between a pair of Carver Amazing Platinums and the current Acoustic Reasearch (Teledyne) AR9's I'm using.

Having a crossover upgrade done on a pair of Polk LSi9's with high hopes, as while I like the AR9's they take up a lot of real estate.

 

[GranteedEV]

Planars and electrostatics typically image "out of the box" better than dynamic speakers.

Dynamic speakers tend to have more SS depth than planars.

Dipoles don't usually have the pinpoint imaging of dynamic speakers.

The best of the best combine the virtues of all of the above, regardless of technology.

However, I don't understand how someone can say "all speakers sound the same". Aren't you taking that OB stance just a little too far. You "it all sounds the same guys" used to state that speakers were not included in your mantra.

So by your theory, a 500.00 monitor with a decent sub = a well designed full range (insert your favorite here) speaker? Just trying to clarify....


Shakey

He was saying that the absolute best properly engineered speakers with effective crossover design, uniform controlled directivity, ultra low distortion high end drivers, and critical damping sound virtually undiscernable because of how true to the recording they are. There are very few of these however.

When refering to dipoles he was talking about dynamic dipoles like the NaO, Orion. Not planars/Electrostats which are guilty of beaming and other issues. Electrostats are fundamentally limited but they are not the only form of dipole.

The fact is that what we hear is a combination of reflected and direct sound. The better the speaker, the more that reflected sound mirrors the direct sound resulting in correct timbre. Dipoles and omnipoles and controlled directivity monopoles are all different room placement sensitive but all three design approaches are valid if applied within their design limitations.

Linear frequency response alone does not indicate a speaker is on this tier. To find a good speaker we search for linear frequency response. To find a great speaker, there's a lot more.

 

[zumbo]

Owned, own, and heard.

I have three sets on two different systems, and would put them up against any speaker at three times the price.

I just got my third set, and completed my 2.0 rig. I am in love all over again. Perfection.

MB Quart QLS 830

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Owned, own, and heard.

I have three sets on two different systems, and would put them up against any speaker at three times the price.

I just got my third set, and completed my 2.0 rig. I am in love all over again. Perfection.

MB Quart QLS 830

Congrats and I also believe they sound as good as any great speakers out there regardless of price.

Just one question though; does the exact same CD sound exactly the same on all three sets of MQ Quart speakers?

 

[zumbo]

Just one question though; does the exact same CD sound exactly the same on all three sets of MQ Quart speakers?

No.

There is no sound from the rears while listening to a cd with the HT system.

With my new Quad 99 pre-amp in my 2.0 rig, I can alter the sound to achieve any "sound signature" I desire. Very cool piece.

Also, the 2.0 rig is in a much smaller room. With MUCH more power.

So the third set sounds the best.

 

[jrayton]

A pair of Ohm Walsh 2.100-S3's are the best I've ever owned.

 

[swspiers]

A pair of Ohm Walsh 2.100-S3's are the best I've ever owned.

Oh heck yes! Nice speakers.

One thing about Ohm that I think most people don't realize is that most of their speakers can be upgraded/rebuilt or replaced for a fraction of the cost of new.

Did you upgrade the Walsh 2's or did you buy them with the 100-S3 drivers?

I'm planning on buying an old set of 1's or 2's and upgrading to the 2000 drivers some time this year.

 

[Pyrrho]

Oh heck yes! Nice speakers.

One thing about Ohm that I think most people don't realize is that most of their speakers can be upgraded/rebuilt or replaced for a fraction of the cost of new.

Did you upgrade the Walsh 2's or did you buy them with the 100-S3 drivers?

I'm planning on buying an old set of 1's or 2's and upgrading to the 2000 drivers some time this year.

The Ohm Walsh 2, if functioning properly, is good in its original form. One of my brothers has a pair that he bought in the mid 1980's, and they still sound good. I prefer my Apogee Stage speakers, but the Walsh 2 has some significant virtues that my speakers lack (e.g., a very, very wide "sweet spot"). I personally would not bother upgrading them, if they are functioning properly.

 

[browninggold]

Started w/HT in a box

Zenith system, then JBL Bookshelfs along w/Bose center and surrounds. Then I purchased Aperion 6Ts and 5Bs for 7.1 sold them and currently have the Klipsch RF-7IIs and they sound great. No more upgrades for me.

 

[swspiers]

The Ohm Walsh 2, if functioning properly, is good in its original form. One of my brothers has a pair that he bought in the mid 1980's, and they still sound good. I prefer my Apogee Stage speakers, but the Walsh 2 has some significant virtues that my speakers lack (e.g., a very, very wide "sweet spot"). I personally would not bother upgrading them, if they are functioning properly.

I understand completely that the 2's are great, as is. But I've had the chance to listen to or own virtually every generation of Ohm over the past 2 years. The improvements, over tiime, simply in terms of sensitivity, impedence and extended frequency response have been worth the upgrades.

I am, of course, merely stating my opinion regarding my personal preferences and goals. I think there is tremendous merit in maintaining older speakers in their original states as long as the surrounds are in good shape.

And oh yeah- the Apogees are awesome as well!

 

[tcarcio]

I have heard some nice speakers over the years and find I like some better then others for different types of music but as I sit here now with Deep Purple Machine head screaming out of my 1980 B+W 801's, I am a happy man.....

 

[dem beats]

So far it's the Energy RC-50s I just got. I haven't owned that many speakers

I definately love those. I'm not sure if you have the old or the new. My old RC set up sounds better than what I heard at bect buy the other day thats for sure.

The center may be the best from that series of speakers. I'm actually sad somewhere inside that I can't buy more to get more than my 5 chan.