Affordable speakers

[GMK]

But the 2020i's edge them in your opinion?

 

[matthewpiano]

I'd say the 2020s create more atmosphere, which is one of the things I really like.

 

[manicm]

That's great Matthew. Guess I would have considered the 2020i too but was too shy of the paper specs. Your experience of the BX2s were mine exactly, as good as they were.

Anyway, I'm really enjoying the RX1 and will keep them

 

[matthewpiano]

That's great Matthew. Guess I would have considered the 2020i too but was too shy of the paper specs. Your experience of the BX2s were mine exactly, as good as they were.

Anyway, I'm really enjoying the RX1 and will keep them

The RX1s are great speakers.

 

[plastic penguin]

Why didn't you wait a little longer and move up a price bracket or two?

I had been using B&W 685s for a while and, excellent though they are, I found them tiring over long listening sessions - that detached treble WHFS&V refer to in their latest review. I sold them. Current finances aren't going to allow a big step up for some time and it would take a lot of listening and auditioning to convince me to part with bigger money. I wanted something I could really enjoy listening to and which would work well with the Denon. To be honest, listening to music last night, I didn't feel like I was missing anything. The Qs sound much bigger than they are, lay tremendous amounts of detail out without shoving it down your ears, and really create an involving sense of atmosphere. I'm finding them far more enjoyable than the 685s or Q300s which have both had periods in my room in recent months. That isn't to say they are BETTER than those speakers, but there is something innately right about the sound that suits me and my room/system.

Congrats, Matthew.

Just out of interest - wondering whether you miss any of the scale the 685 or RX1s give? Although not a bass head, my overriding issue with tiny monitors is without a strong bass, it can sound a little empty. Or are the Qs so good that all the plus points outweigh the slight bottom-end shortfall?

 

[the record spot]

Hope you are well and still enjoying your Tannoys.

Not bad thanks mate, likewise. Yeah, the Tannoys are a bit good. Like their finish as well as the sound off them. Terrific for small rooms or when pointing across a room as mine do.

 

[matthewpiano]

Why didn't you wait a little longer and move up a price bracket or two?

I had been using B&W 685s for a while and, excellent though they are, I found them tiring over long listening sessions - that detached treble WHFS&V refer to in their latest review. I sold them. Current finances aren't going to allow a big step up for some time and it would take a lot of listening and auditioning to convince me to part with bigger money. I wanted something I could really enjoy listening to and which would work well with the Denon. To be honest, listening to music last night, I didn't feel like I was missing anything. The Qs sound much bigger than they are, lay tremendous amounts of detail out without shoving it down your ears, and really create an involving sense of atmosphere. I'm finding them far more enjoyable than the 685s or Q300s which have both had periods in my room in recent months. That isn't to say they are BETTER than those speakers, but there is something innately right about the sound that suits me and my room/system.

Congrats, Matthew.

Just out of interest - wondering whether you miss any of the scale the 685 or RX1s give? Although not a bass head, my overriding issue with tiny monitors is without a strong bass, it can sound a little empty. Or are the Qs so good that all the plus points outweigh the slight bottom-end shortfall?

I've not had RX1s only heard them but I have had 685s and Q300s. I'm not a bass head either, but I do like some depth to the sound. When I had AE Compact 1s I felt they were let down by that slightly empty sound you refer to, but I'm not experiencing that with the Qs. Of course they don't pump out as much bass as the 685s or Q300s, but neither does it sound like there is anything significant missing and the atmospheric sound and the excellent image stability and timbral detail they produce make it well worth not being able to shake the room (not something I tend to do anyway).

I'm off tomorrow and planning a good day of listening, so I'll report back with further observations then.

 

[ID.]

Why didn't you wait a little longer and move up a price bracket or two?

Because that's not what mathewpiano does. He seems to be satisfied swapping pieces of kit all around the same price level. Arguably he could be the proud owner of much better (or at least more expensive) kit by now considering the number of times he has made what many might call a sideways move rather than an upgrade, but I'm not sure that he'd be any more satisfied than he is doing what he does now. Personally I enjoy reading about all the kit he tries.

 

[GMK]

I certainly do too because it's around my price level for now. Although he does give me far too many ideas and I'm awful at making decisions :twisted:

(currently still tossing up V1's, 2020i's and DC4's, some JPW Sonata's, Mission 751 and even Usher S520)

 

[matthewpiano]

Well, I've done lots of listening today, including:

Bartok - Concerto for Orchestra (Solti)

Jon Lord - Concerto for Group & Orchestra

Nick Drake - 5 Leaves Left

Heidi Talbot - The Last Star

Moody Blues - Long Distance Voyager

Barclay James Harvest - Everyone Is Everybody Else.

I'm very happy. I've really enjoyed the music and I've not felt, at any point, that I'm missing anything. The sense of scale is excellent (you should have heard the Bartok and Jon Lord CDs! :O ), but what really works for me is the stability of the soundstaging and tonal reproduction and the way in which these speakers invite you into the music rather than throwing it at you at 100 miles per hour. There is loads of detail there, but it is part of the music rather than being detail for show.

 

[cse]

Because that's not what mathewpiano does. He seems to be satisfied swapping pieces of kit all around the same price level. Arguably he could be the proud owner of much better (or at least more expensive) kit by now considering the number of times he has made what many might call a sideways move rather than an upgrade, but I'm not sure that he'd be any more satisfied than he is doing what he does now. Personally I enjoy reading about all the kit he tries.

[/quote]

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh

 

[plastic penguin]

Well, I've done lots of listening today, including:

Bartok - Concerto for Orchestra (Solti)

Jon Lord - Concerto for Group & Orchestra

Nick Drake - 5 Leaves Left

Heidi Talbot - The Last Star

Moody Blues - Long Distance Voyager

Barclay James Harvest - Everyone Is Everybody Else.

I'm very happy. I've really enjoyed the music and I've not felt, at any point, that I'm missing anything. The sense of scale is excellent (you should have heard the Bartok and Jon Lord CDs! :O ), but what really works for me is the stability of the soundstaging and tonal reproduction and the way in which these speakers invite you into the music rather than throwing it at you at 100 miles per hour. There is loads of detail there, but it is part of the music rather than being detail for show.

So you're impressed then?

 

[dalwen]

Hi guys, i can confirm that the smaller 2010i deliver a great soundstage at low listening levels.

i also do enyoy reading Matthew piano's posts, WHF should offer him a job

the 720 denon dropped in price, i'm thinking i should give it a try

 

[matthewpiano]

Nice to know some people enjoy my posts. There are plenty of posts from others which I enjoy too!

I have to confess I do enjoy trying different things, but I have settled down a lot over the last 6-12 months. I've been using the Roksan CD player for nearly 12 months now, and the Denon amp for over 6 months. I've had the RP3 for 18 months. Those who know my box-swapping history will know these are quite lengthy innings!! I'm very happy with these items (apart from the fact that the bottom half of the display on the Roksan is much feinter than the top half - it will get sent back to Roksan for a repair in the near future).

I've struggled the most with speakers. I've had a lot that I've bought and sold on for various reasons. I liked the Q Acoustics 1030i that I had but they were let down by a ragged quality in the treble (which fortunately isn't the case with the 2000i series thanks to a revised tweeter). I have found, with some other speakers, that there is a tendency for the music to be thrown at the listening position with an overly jacked-up bass and strident treble. There are also several speakers out there that spread the soundstage out to an incredible extent but don't really manage to keep it stable and I find that intensely annoying. I've also had some with a recessed mid-range which doesn't give any sense of life to vocals.

My system as it is shouldn't really work but it does. Time will tell but I think things might have just clicked into place.

 

[Blackdawn]

Yeh, nice system you have there. Did you find the 2020i's needed much running in? How easy are they drive? Sound good at both high or low volumes?

The most limiting factor of my system is the fact the neighbours are on the other side of the wall!! My headphones are looking ever more inviting..

 

[matthewpiano]

Yeh, nice system you have there. Did you find the 2020i's needed much running in? How easy are they drive? Sound good at both high or low volumes?

The most limiting factor of my system is the fact the neighbours are on the other side of the wall!! My headphones are looking ever more inviting..

Well, they sounded great out of the box but for all I know they might still be running in. They seem easy enough to drive and they certainly sound good at all volumes.

Like you, I have neighbours to worry about (directly above), so good sound at low volumes is important. I love my headphones, particularly the Beyers, but I still like listening through speakers best.

 

[steve_1979]

Good reviews Matthew.

Q Acoustics speakers sound very nice for the price. I used to have the old Q Acoustics 1010i 5.1 system which I found very easy to listen to for long periods of time thanks to their warm sounding presentation. Ultimately though I ended up upgrading the whole system because I felt the overly warm tweeter was robbing the music of too much detail and the integration between the speakers and the Q1000Si subwoofer was never convincing.

I think that the new tweeter Q Acoustics uses on the 20** series speakers is better balanced than the one that they used on the old 10** series speakers. The new tweeters seem to have a bit more detail while still being on the warm side. IMO Q Acoustics are better than most budget speakers in the same price range because they never sound harsh or tiring when listening for long periods of time (I'm looking at you Monitor Audio BX2 and B+W 685).

I've found that Acoustic Energy's compact budget speakers always sound very nice too and are worth considering with the other budget speakers mentioned in this thread. They seem to get a perfect balance of being detailed without being harsh. Yamaha and Behringer active speakers also offer outstanding sound quality for the price and are well worth auditioning too.

Though for me I found that moving up the price range a little bit to some £400 AVI Neutron 5 speakers was the perfect upgrade. They are are leagues ahead of the Q Acoustics speakers. They have bags more detail and clarity than the Q Acoustics (or anything else this side of a pair of PMC DB1 speakers!). When partnered with the matching AVI amplifier and subwoofer the sound quality is outstanding and is easily the best that I've heard for the price.

 

[matthewpiano]

Hi Steve

I agree with you about the old tweeter on the 1000i series. I had a pair of the 1030i floorstanders briefly and, though I liked the overall sound and presentation, the tweeter spoiled them for me. Fortunately, the new tweeter on the 2000i series is much much better. The Denon amp sits slightly on the brighter side so the relative warmth of the Q's top-end works well.

It is also interesting what you say about the difficult top end of some other speakers, and particularly that you name-check the 685s and BX2s. I found the 685s very tiring after the first couple of CDs in a longer listening session and I frequently reached the point where I couldn't listen any longer, even though there were many things I did like about the sound. I notice the review in the latest WHFS&V also references the 'detached treble' as one of the downsides. There are also plenty of other speakers around which, whilst good, can get tiring as I found when I had the KEF Q300s here.

I'm quite sure there are plenty of speakers out there that are better than the Qs at more money but, as I have found, there are also plenty of those which bring even more detail but in a tiring way which discourages longer listening sessions. I'm pleased to hear you are still enjoying the Neutron Vs - it sounds like they may be a stand-out speaker in a £400-£500 market which otherwise seems to have many speakers designed to impress in short bursts. If I'd had the money I may well have considered the Neutrons but for now they'll have to stay on a 'future possibilities' list as, apart from anything else, I plan to enjoy the Qs for some time.

 

[chebby]

Are AVI still making Neutron Vs?

 

[steve_1979]

Hi Steve

I agree with you about the old tweeter on the 1000i series. I had a pair of the 1030i floorstanders briefly and, though I liked the overall sound and presentation, the tweeter spoiled them for me. Fortunately, the new tweeter on the 2000i series is much much better. The Denon amp sits slightly on the brighter side so the relative warmth of the Q's top-end works well.

It is also interesting what you say about the difficult top end of some other speakers, and particularly that you name-check the 685s and BX2s. I found the 685s very tiring after the first couple of CDs in a longer listening session and I frequently reached the point where I couldn't listen any longer, even though there were many things I did like about the sound. I notice the review in the latest WHFS&V also references the 'detached treble' as one of the downsides. There are also plenty of other speakers around which, whilst good, can get tiring as I found when I had the KEF Q300s here.

I'm quite sure there are plenty of speakers out there that are better than the Qs at more money but, as I have found, there are also plenty of those which bring even more detail but in a tiring way which discourages longer listening sessions. I'm pleased to hear you are still enjoying the Neutron Vs - it sounds like they may be a stand-out speaker in a £400-£500 market which otherwise seems to have many speakers designed to impress in short bursts. If I'd had the money I may well have considered the Neutrons but for now they'll have to stay on a 'future possibilities' list as, apart from anything else, I plan to enjoy the Qs for some time.

So long as you're enjoying them that's what counts. The Q Acoustics are very 'listenable' (for want of a better word).

I knew someone who had the B+W 685 speakers with a Marantz amp which sounded great in the shop but after owning them for a few months he wanted to change them because of listening fatigue whenever he listened to music for more than an hour or so. He now has a pair of Yamaha HS50M speakers and is happy as a pig in poo.

 

[gasolin]

Hi Steve

I agree with you about the old tweeter on the 1000i series. I had a pair of the 1030i floorstanders briefly and, though I liked the overall sound and presentation, the tweeter spoiled them for me. Fortunately, the new tweeter on the 2000i series is much much better. The Denon amp sits slightly on the brighter side so the relative warmth of the Q's top-end works well.

It is also interesting what you say about the difficult top end of some other speakers, and particularly that you name-check the 685s and BX2s. I found the 685s very tiring after the first couple of CDs in a longer listening session and I frequently reached the point where I couldn't listen any longer, even though there were many things I did like about the sound. I notice the review in the latest WHFS&V also references the 'detached treble' as one of the downsides. There are also plenty of other speakers around which, whilst good, can get tiring as I found when I had the KEF Q300s here.

I'm quite sure there are plenty of speakers out there that are better than the Qs at more money but, as I have found, there are also plenty of those which bring even more detail but in a tiring way which discourages longer listening sessions. I'm pleased to hear you are still enjoying the Neutron Vs - it sounds like they may be a stand-out speaker in a £400-£500 market which otherwise seems to have many speakers designed to impress in short bursts. If I'd had the money I may well have considered the Neutrons but for now they'll have to stay on a 'future possibilities' list as, apart from anything else, I plan to enjoy the Qs for some time.

So long as you're enjoying them that's what counts. The Q Acoustics are very 'listenable' (for want of a better word).

I knew someone who had the B+W 685 speakers with a Marantz amp which sounded great in the shop but after owning them for a few months he wanted to change them because of listening fatigue whenever he listened to music for more than an hour or so. He now has a pair of Yamaha HS50M speakers and is happy as a pig in poo.

Yes listening fattigue is the worst thing and i think it's most the tweeter that courses listening fattigue

 

[steve_1979]

Are AVI still making Neutron Vs?

No they stopped making them about two years ago but they occasionally pop up on the secondhand market from time to time.

Bartletts hifi shop might still have a pair left though. They have a pair of Neutron Five speakers on their website but they're only advertised as part of a complete 2.1 system with the matching AVI amplifier and subwoofer included.

 

[GMK]

Nick Drake - 5 Leaves Left

I'm glad you didn't top yourself so that you could post this review. I love this album but I try not to listen to it in anything other than a good mood.

MP, what's the size of your listening room and which finish did you opt for on the Q's? (I'm sure I've read one dubious review where the reviewer claimed the gloss version sounded better) :wall:

 

[matthewpiano]

Nick Drake - 5 Leaves Left

I'm glad you didn't top yourself so that you could post this review. I love this album but I try not to listen to it in anything other than a good mood.

MP, what's the size of your listening room and which finish did you opt for on the Q's? (I'm sure I've read one dubious review where the reviewer claimed the gloss version sounded better) :wall:

Hi GMK

Yes, Nick Drake is rather bleak stuff. I love his music but, like you, I have to be in a positive frame of mind.

Its a long open-plan room, with lounge area at the front, dining room, then kitchen at the back. The listening space is approx 10ft long (plus the bay window space) and 11ft wide, with the speakers firing across the width. The room as a whole is approx 30ft long.

I went for the walnut finish as it is a reasonable match with my Blok 200 hi-fi stand and I'm not a fan of gloss black or white finishes on speakers (apart from anything else the gloss black finishes always look cheap compared to the pianos I'm dealing with at work).

I don't go in for the finish making much difference to the sound of speakers, although I have noted with pianos that satin wood finishes do have a slightly different tonal character to the same make/model in Black Polyester....

 

[GMK]

Thank you. I'm quite tempted