KenM10759

KenM10759

Audioholic Samurai
Do either of those wood stands have a hole through them or a channel up the backbone to hide the speaker wire?

I have always preferred metal ones that can be filled with heavy inert material to aid in damping resonance, and almost all have a place to hide the wire.
 
Ponzio

Ponzio

Audioholic Samurai
Do either of those wood stands have a hole through them or a channel up the backbone to hide the speaker wire?

I have always preferred metal ones that can be filled with heavy inert material to aid in damping resonance, and almost all have a place to hide the wire.
If this is in reference to the DR Pro's u can fill them with buckshot or whatever but there's no speaker wire channel. They come with some clips that attach to the rear of the body of the stands, which I haven't used.
 
KenM10759

KenM10759

Audioholic Samurai
Good to know you seem to be exploring on the speakers front for sound quality. Many of us learnt it the hard way, only after spending a fortune on preamp/amps, that we finally woke up and be honest with ourselves. That it is the recordings, speakers, and the room, stupid..
Damn. I thought it was the speaker wires, the interconnects, the black dots & blocks, and the fuses!
 
ematthews

ematthews

Audioholic General
Well. I did a long listen today. Did some back and forth swapping to the Polk LSIm 703's. First thought with no sub is they are extremely bright but detailed. So I added in my sub and turned on the sub controls on the Parasound P5. Cut off at 80 and then full on the KEF's with sub. Much better blend on full for the main and 80hz for the sub. When compared to the Polk... The Polk are more balanced and full. I actually like the Polk better after a full day. I was really impressed with the Polks from the start however.... These are both brand new. So no run time yet. Tomorrow I will see how they compete with my RAAL towers. Bottom line after one day. Not impressed at all. Need more time. Maybe my equipment isn't a good match either. Maybe tubes. Or even maybe set up my Marantz gear with them since they are much warmer sounding equipment.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Well. I did a long listen today. Did some back and forth swapping to the Polk LSIm 703's. First thought with no sub is they are extremely bright but detailed. So I added in my sub and turned on the sub controls on the Parasound P5. Cut off at 80 and then full on the KEF's with sub. Much better blend on full for the main and 80hz for the sub. When compared to the Polk... The Polk are more balanced and full. I actually like the Polk better after a full day. I was really impressed with the Polks from the start however.... These are both brand new. So no run time yet. Tomorrow I will see how they compete with my RAAL towers. Bottom line after one day. Not impressed at all. Need more time. Maybe my equipment isn't a good match either. Maybe tubes. Or even maybe set up my Marantz gear with them since they are much warmer sounding equipment.
I have powered mine with a Denon AVR, a pair of Marantz separates (SC-7/SM-7), a Cambridge Audio/Halo A21 separate, all combinations sounded great with no brightness whatsoever. There is also no evidence to support the newer Marantz gear being "much warmer" sound equipment. I really think Placebo likely has a lot to do with such perception.

Depending on your room and placement, you may want to try a higher crossover setting, say 100 or even 110. By the way, I know the older Polk LSI speakers have the ring radiator tweeter that was very popular and well liked, do the 703's have the same ring tweeter too?
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Well. I did a long listen today. Did some back and forth swapping to the Polk LSIm 703's. First thought with no sub is they are extremely bright but detailed. So I added in my sub and turned on the sub controls on the Parasound P5. Cut off at 80 and then full on the KEF's with sub. Much better blend on full for the main and 80hz for the sub. When compared to the Polk... The Polk are more balanced and full. I actually like the Polk better after a full day. I was really impressed with the Polks from the start however.... These are both brand new. So no run time yet. Tomorrow I will see how they compete with my RAAL towers. Bottom line after one day. Not impressed at all. Need more time. Maybe my equipment isn't a good match either. Maybe tubes. Or even maybe set up my Marantz gear with them since they are much warmer sounding equipment.
I, too, did not care for the ls50's. I recognized that they did lots of things very well, but felt like ambiance was lacking.

Much of the music I listen to is stuff like Melody Gardot or Norah Jones where the sense of a piano in a room is important. When I closed my eyes, I could envision I was outside of the room listening to the music through a large, open doorway. My best take on this is that much of the room reflections were missing, which I would venture to be the effect of an aggressive wave guide (the mid-woofer cone acts as the wave guide for the tweeter). Something like a trumpet, that primarily projects sound forward, sounded very good on the ls50's.

The imaging is truly incredible. I liked the look - anodized aluminum drivers and form factor with the spherical contour to the baffle.

In retrospect, I wish I had kept them another week before returning them. I would like to try them closer as near-field or desktop speakers and also with some less acoustic music (where room reflections are not so vital).

The Martin Logan Electrostats I recently bought have opened my mind to appreciating a presentation that is radically different, although not necessarily worse. Their artifice, as I perceive it, is that if you were to have a well recorded finger snap, it would be too crisp and too vivid; however, they do so much other stuff wonderfully. If I focus on T's and K's and smacks of lips, they just don't sound real, but after focusing on their other qualities, they are delightful to listen to and it is much more interesting than having roughly identical sound to my other good speakers!

After this experience, I would like to re-assess the ls50's!

Good luck!
 
Last edited:
S

shkumar4963

Audioholic
I, too did not care for the ls50's. I recognized that they did lots of things very well, but felt like ambiance was lacking.

Much of the music I listen to is stuff like Melody Gardot or Norah Jones where the sense of a piano in a room is important. When I closed my eyes, I could envision I was outside of the room listening to the music through a large, open doorway. My best take on this is that much of the room reflections were missing, which I would venture to be the effect of an aggressive wave guide (the mid-woofer cone acts as the wave guide for the tweeter). Something like a trumpet, that primarily projects sound forward, sounded more realistic on the ls50's.

The imaging is truly incredible. I liked the look - anodized aluminum drivers and form factor with the spherical contour to the baffle.

In retrospect, I wish I had kept them another week before returning them. I would like to try them closer as near-field or desktop speakers and also with some less acoustic music (where room reflections are not so vital).

The Martin Logan Electrostats I recently bought have opened my mind to appreciating a presentation that is radically different, although not necessarily worse. Their artifice, as I perceive it, is that if you were to have a well recorded finger snap, it would be too crisp and too vivid; however, they do so much other stuff wonderfully. If I focus on T's and K's and smacks of lips, they just don't sound real, but after focusing on their other qualities, they are delightful to listen to and it is much more interesting than having roughly identical sound to my other good speakers!

After this experience, I would like to re-assess the ls50's!

Good luck!
Excellent observation. Ls50 do have a clinical feel to them . I was wondering why? It could be limited radiation pattern, sound without cabinet vibrations, absence of driver and other resonances, absence of low end frequencies, a slight peak at 2.kHz or something else.

If you see the radiation pattern in sound stage network and stereophile measurements, you will see that the radiation pattern is better than most high end speakers. However the measurements are only till 45 degrees. So not sure if it still has good radiation pattern beyond that.

The speaker cabinet vibrations, since they are at low frequencies do add to the ambiance feel. Ls50 does not have much of cabinet vibrations. Specially compared to floor standing speakers.

FR does not show significant resonances in ls50. But I have not seen decay curves that may show presence of various low frequency resonances that add to what we call ambiance.

Ls50 does have a significant peak at 2.2 k that looks like it is some kind of resonance as it is present at 15 and 30 degree angle curves as well. But it is at high enough frequency to not be a reason for no ambiance in the speaker.

Yes. It sure does not have any output below 60 Hz. My suspicion is that it may be the reason that these speakers sound analytical. This and the presence of lot of low frequency cabinet resonances in other speakers. Low frequency cabinet resonances (some call them as cabinet singing) do add ambiance but also smear the music.

There may be other reasons. I would love to hear your opinion.

Do these still sound clinical when you integrate them with a high quality sealed sub?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
S

shkumar4963

Audioholic
JA seems to like them. You wonder why I don't pay much attention to subjective reviews.:)
Yep. Stereophile loves them. They probably still are listed as class A (with limited lf) in their annual reviews.

But many people like reviews by other users as stereophile is a commercial magazine and reviews may be influenced by advertisement money.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Yep. Stereophile loves them. They probably still are listed as class A (with limited lf) in their annual reviews.

But many people like reviews by other users as stereophile is a commercial magazine and reviews may be influenced by advertisement money.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Again, I don't pay much attention to subjective reviews, but I do value Stereophile's measurements, as I do with Audioholics. That's just me.. I mentioned JA in this case because he measured them, and I assume (could be wrong) he probably liked them because of, or influenced by the measurements.
 
S

shkumar4963

Audioholic
Again, I don't pay much attention to subjective reviews, but I do value Stereophile's measurements, as I do with Audioholics. That's just me.. I mentioned JA in this case because he measured them, and I assume (could be wrong) he probably liked them because of, or influenced by the measurements.
I love them too but only with a sub.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
9
 
Last edited:
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I love them too but only with a sub.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
9
That's what I have been telling people too so far, but I suspect they may work fine on their own in a small room for near field listening. Then again, we all have different taste and, even more importantly, different rooms.
 
KenM10759

KenM10759

Audioholic Samurai
If you ever get a chance to listen to the LS50 Wireless, they're quite a bit more amazing than the passive version.The passive version is now selling for as low as $1,000 a pair new. The $2,200 LS50 Wireless has the 200 + 30 watt amps for each and a DSP that really works to get far more out of them. Most would have to spend a lot more time and money than that $1,200 difference to get that level of performance.
 
killdozzer

killdozzer

Audioholic Samurai
Yes. It sure does not have any output below 60 Hz.
Statements like this one will make me spend money on a measuring device.

Do you have any reason to suspect your room sucks out the lows?
 
ematthews

ematthews

Audioholic General
I have powered mine with a Denon AVR, a pair of Marantz separates (SC-7/SM-7), a Cambridge Audio/Halo A21 separate, all combinations sounded great with no brightness whatsoever. There is also no evidence to support the newer Marantz gear being "much warmer" sound equipment. I really think Placebo likely has a lot to do with such perception.

Depending on your room and placement, you may want to try a higher crossover setting, say 100 or even 110. By the way, I know the older Polk LSI speakers have the ring radiator tweeter that was very popular and well liked, do the 703's have the same ring tweeter too?
Yes. The Polk's still use the Ring Radiator. I know the LSI 703 didn't get the best reviews but I am really liking them. I did not get a chance to compare the Ascends to the KEF's. I already now the RAAL ribbons are entirely different sounding than the KEF.
 
S

shkumar4963

Audioholic
Statements like this one will make me spend money on a measuring device.

Do you have any reason to suspect your room sucks out the lows?
Well. I was going by stereophile measurements. At frequencies below the port resonance, there is not much volume. The port resonance is close to 60 but may be a bit lower.

I was suggesting that maybe this absence of lower frequencies was responsible for lack of ambience that some report with this speaker.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
Ponzio

Ponzio

Audioholic Samurai
a common truth about the LS50's is that they crave power. the more the merrier and the better they sound. I noticed that when I went from a Yammy 2040 to the 3040. the neutral tonal quality doesn't change one bit but the details and dynamics improved.
 
ematthews

ematthews

Audioholic General
a common truth about the LS50's is that they crave power. the more the merrier and the better they sound. I noticed that when I went from a Yammy 2040 to the 3040. the neutral tonal quality doesn't change one bit but the details and dynamics improved.
I read that too. I would hope that my ATI 2002 amp would be considered a tank.
200 Watts RMS/ channel into 8 Ohms from 20Hz to 20kHz with no more than 0.03% THD and I.M. distortion with 300W RMS/channel available at 4 Ohms..
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I read that too. I would hope that my ATI 2002 amp would be considered a tank.
200 Watts RMS/ channel into 8 Ohms from 20Hz to 20kHz with no more than 0.03% THD and I.M. distortion with 300W RMS/channel available at 4 Ohms..
I don't think any LS50 owner would need anything more powerful than the ATI2002. Even my AVR-3805 has no trouble making them sound as good as when they were powered by the A21.
 
ematthews

ematthews

Audioholic General
To ALL here. Has anyone compared the Q-acoustic Concept series to the KEF's? I have read some stuff that these bookshelf versions or the 40 towers can be a laid back Kef. Has my curiosity up.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top