Got a pair of Adam f5

[tone]

I know I know all the talk about the Martin Logan's

I will definitely get them but not now.

Priority is I get a car now.

I will get them in a few months.

Yes the Adams don't give goosebumps but they are really good speakers

Tight nice bass, they don't sound box-like at all plus they fill the room

The only thing negative I could say is that on more happening rock that was really busy the speakers kinda weren't fast enough . Sounded like they got mixed up at fast rock like Creed.

But they totally fill a big room well.

They are not magical like the Martin Logan's but they are great speakers .

I am slowly getting it about hifi .

Kinda quickly actually. Playing music for over 25 years gives pretty good ears

It's really cool though listening to these great systems and hearing what I have been missing all these years .

Hifi is awesome. Listening through a great system is where it's at

 

[DocG]

I know I know all the talk about the Martin Logan's

I will definitely get them but not now.

Priority is I get a car now.

I will get them in a few months.

Yes the Adams don't give goosebumps but they are really good speakers

Tight nice bass, they don't sound box-like at all plus they fill the room

The only thing negative I could say is that on more happening rock that was really busy the speakers kinda weren't fast enough . Sounded like they got mixed up at fast rock like Creed.

But they totally fill a big room well.

They are not magical like the Martin Logan's but they are great speakers .

I am slowly getting it about hifi .

Kinda quickly actually. Playing music for over 25 years gives pretty good ears

It's really cool though listening to these great systems and hearing what I have been missing all these years .

Hifi is awesome. Listening through a great system is where it's at

Hi tone,

I see these Adams sport a ribbon tweeter too.

How much are they in the US? Here in continental Europe, they are €380/pair, which looks like an utter bargain.

Enjoy!

 

[craig84]

ooooooooh....Im looking at the f7's as ive fallen in love with actives after going round a mates and hearing some KRK rokit 8's. So you like the Adams!?

Craig

 

[EvPa]

How much are they in the US? Here in continental Europe, they are €380/pair, which looks like an utter bargain.

Even as low as 350€/pair (£295) if you don't mind B-Stock; I haven't heard the "F" series yet but at that price you probably can't go wrong with them.

On a related note, my ARTist 6s should be leaving their warehouse soon.

 

[davedotco]

Perhaps you need to bear in mind that the F Series is very much Adam's budget line and the F 5 the entry model.

At uk pricing you are talking about the equivilent of a pair of £200 speakers and, just barely, a budget Denon or Pioneer amplifier so real entry level stuff.

The Adam Ax series are considerably more refined, in my view the A5x and A7x offer astonishing value and can be driven off any of the modern dac/preamps. With a computer or other streamer at the front a terrificly simple and effective way of getting great sound at modest cost.

For me such systems have the great advantage of not sounding like a typical 'budget system', the sound of which I have come to dislike more and more in recent years.

 

[SunnyCyprus]

+1 on the A5/7x but l would say that wouldn't l .

Mine fed from a Synology NAS (controlled by an android tablet) via a Musical Fidelity M1 DAC/M1 HPA combo provides me with all the musical involvement/enjoyment l could possibly want. Sub helps a bit as well

 

[tone]

Perhaps you need to bear in mind that the F Series is very much Adam's budget line and the F 5 the entry model.

At uk pricing you are talking about the equivilent of a pair of £200 speakers and, just barely, a budget Denon or Pioneer amplifier so real entry level stuff.

The Adam Ax series are considerably more refined, in my view the A5x and A7x offer astonishing value and can be driven off any of the modern dac/preamps. With a computer or other streamer at the front a terrificly simple and effective way of getting great sound at modest cost.

For me such systems have the great advantage of not sounding like a typical 'budget system', the sound of which I have come to dislike more and more in recent years.

Hey Dave!

Yes they are not as refined as the AX series true. But they will do nicely for my desktop speakers. Real nice. If the 3Ax was cheaper I would have bought those as they are perfectly fine for my aptarment right now.

They do have a ribbon tweeter and while it sounds good, really is nothing compared to the Martin Logans. sorry but true. these are great speakers but the combo Arcam A19 amp and Martin Logan 40s is on a completely different league.

Not to say that these dont give awesome sound.

Not box sounding at all, with nice tight bass that goes pretty deep. instruments sound pretty darn nice and not like speakers and vocals are great as well. Mine still need breaking in so they will get a bit softer and nicer.

Here in the US they are $500.00

I had a Guitar Center %15 discount so I used that.

really nice sounding speakers.

But I WILL get the Martin Logans and a great amp.

It is SO worth it.

 

[davedotco]

Just trying to put things in perspective.

In the UK a pair of F5s are just £330, a pair of the small Logans and a good amplifier probably £1500 plus. No comparison really.

Personally I find the F series lacking in refinement, still great value in the right sort of system but nowhere near as good as the A series.

I have tried the A3x at home and I agree with you, a truly outstanding speaker in a desktop situation, I would have A5x or A7x in a heartbeat for my main system, really good value, to my ears anyway.

I have a small pair of ribbon hybrid speakers which sadly are in storage. I think they are phemominal, but at a price.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

There's another subtle difference, me old mate . Martin Logans aren't near field monitors, which the Adams are.

Nearfields work well on desks, but they're not so sh*t hot in normal living rooms.

 

[steve_1979]

There's another subtle difference, me old mate . Martin Logans aren't near field monitors, which the Adams are.

Nearfields work well on desks, but they're not so sh*t hot in normal living rooms.

Have you ever heard any monitors at normal listening distances? Many of them (including Adams) sound sound better than regular hifi speakers IME.

 

[Craig M.]

^^^ Wrong, lemon. The term nearfield refers to a speaker that has the drive units close enough together to sound coherent up close (ie. the sound not obviously coming from two seperate drivers). This makes no difference at all to their ability to sound good (or otherwise) at longer distances.

 

[alienmango]

anyone willing to chime in on what hifi speakers/amps would better these?

http://www.adam-audio.com/en/pro-audio/products/s3x-v/technical-data

I'm just genuinely interested simply because the adam a7x were the only monitors I liked the sound of.

 

[steve_1979]

anyone willing to chime in on what hifi speakers/amps would better these?

http://www.adam-audio.com/en/pro-audio/products/s3x-v/technical-data

I'm just genuinely interested simply because the adam a7x were the only monitors I liked the sound of.

Adams top of the range S Series monitors are some of the best speakers around IMO. I think you'd struggle to find any passive speaker/amp combinatin for the same price which could match them.

But as always have a listen for yourself and see what you like best.

 

[davedotco]

The term 'nearfield monitor' is bandied about as if it actually means something and describes a particular type of speaker. In this context it does nothing of the sort.

It is used because the primary application for these speakers in in home or 'project' studios for mixing or assessing the quality of an audio (music) signal. Given that in these circumstances the rooms are usually untreated or lightly treated at best, it is normal to sit quite close to the speakers so that the direct sound is dominant, so the sound of the room is 'taken out of the equation'.

You can set up an amplifier and a pair of passive hi fi speakers in the same way and get the same results, in this respect at least.

The idea that some speakers are designed with their drive units deliberately set further apart than they need to be is a nonsense too, they are always placed as close together as the design allows. Think of Tannoy Dual Concentrics and Kef UniQ drivers for a moment.

The big difference with speakers of this type is the fully active setup, which allows them to do certain things very differently from classic hi-fi designs. If you like what they do then going back to an inexpensive hi-fi amp and speaker combination is pretty difficult.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

^^^ Wrong, lemon. The term nearfield refers to a speaker that has the drive units close enough together to sound coherent up close (ie. the sound not obviously coming from two seperate drivers). This makes no difference at all to their ability to sound good (or otherwise) at longer distances.

That is incorrect. See the Sound on Sound definitive article about them. Near field work best when sitting close to them, room reflections negatively affect the sound, far more so than with proper hifi speakers.

Ddc has corrected your comments about drive units.

 

[ID.]

Every standmount I've owned has worked better nearfield (or at least mid-field).

What about a speaker like the PMC DB1 where there are versions that are for studio use (both passive and powered) and home use, without significant differences to the design? My DB1i work fine in my lounge room, but I still prefer the more immersive experience of listening to them near or mid-field.

 

[davedotco]

There are 'technical' definitions of 'near field' and 'far field' and in theory there are differences in the way speakers are balanced for these applications but in the case of the sort of speakers we are discussing this really is not the case.

They are, in the main, simply small active speakers, they are called 'near field' monitors because that is mostly how they are used. They are not big enough or powerful enough to work at a distance, simple as that.

They will work fine as hi-fi playback speakers, where the demands placed on them, particularly with regards to level are much more modest.

The fact that they can sound 'different' to hi-fi speakers is because they are active and in some cases have responses that are 'shaped' differently. More importantly they have lower distortion in the midband due to the lack of a passive crossover and generally play louder without a sense of strain.

 

[plastic penguin]

There are 'technical' definitions of 'near field' and 'far field' and in theory there are differences in the way speakers are balanced for these applications but in the case of the sort of speakers we are discussing this really is not the case.

They are, in the main, simply small active speakers, they are called 'near field' monitors because that is mostly how they are used. They are not big enough or powerful enough to work at a distance, simple as that.

They will work fine as hi-fi playback speakers, where the demands placed on them, particularly with regards to level are much more modest.

The fact that they can sound 'different' to hi-fi speakers is because they are active and in some cases have responses that are 'shaped' differently. More importantly they have lower distortion in the midband due to the lack of a passive crossover and generally play louder without a sense of strain.

This is true. These terms are a load of EDITED, in the main. If people concerned themselves more about room size and matching a speaker to fit that requirement, a lot of the issues could be resolved.

Years ago the term 'short' and 'long throw' speakers were used. If you have a small box room don't buy hunking big floorstanders or if you live in a barn don't use a tiny bookshelf speaker. Simples.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Interesting article here: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Jun02/articles/monitors.asp

 

[plastic penguin]

Interesting article here: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Jun02/articles/monitors.asp

Apologies to the OP...

Al - what's happened to those speakers you made? I know they were completed but it's gone quiet... were they any good?

 

[Craig M.]

^^^ Wrong, lemon. The term nearfield refers to a speaker that has the drive units close enough together to sound coherent up close (ie. the sound not obviously coming from two seperate drivers). This makes no difference at all to their ability to sound good (or otherwise) at longer distances.

That is incorrect. See the Sound on Sound definitive article about them. Near field work best when sitting close to them, room reflections negatively affect the sound, far more so than with proper hifi speakers.

Ddc has corrected your comments about drive units.

Absolute nonsense. As stated by Thomas Barefoot on this very forum "In fact, having good nearfield performance just means that a speaker is even more cohesive at longer listening distances." Post no.7 http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/are-separates-on-borrowed-time?page=25

And in case ddc thinks otherwise, I never stated that speakers might have their drive units further apart as a design decision, more a case of pointing out that a 3 way floorstander wouldn't be ideal as a nearfield because the bass and treble would be coming from obvious different places.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Some, not all I agree, of the evidence says otherwise - did you read the link? - but lets get back on track anyway.

The main thing is the OP has some speakers he'll get a lot of enjoyment out of.

 

[davedotco]

@PP

The terms 'short throw' or 'long through' are primarily used in PA and cound reinforcement and are part of the technique of 'controlled dispersion' that is used to provide even coverage over large areas, it does not really apply to hi-fi or studio speakers.

The only thing that matters is to understand that in normal domestic rooms, if you want to listen in the 'near field', you need to be very close indeed, depending on the room any listening position more than 3 or 4 ft away is likely to be far field.

@CraigM

Regarding the placement of speaker drive units, I was really making a general point. If I appeared to be taking you to task over something you had clearly not said, I apologise. It's just Al stirring it up!

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Interesting article here: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Jun02/articles/monitors.asp

Apologies to the OP...

Al - what's happened to those speakers you made? I know they were completed but it's gone quiet... were they any good?

In pieces waiting a new improved cabinet is the answer. Have built some floorstanders for a friend since which are awaiting covering - lime green or red are the options, apparently.

 

[steve_1979]

http://www.adam-audio.com/en/pro-audio/products/s3x-v/technical-data

I'm just genuinely interested simply because the adam a7x were the only monitors I liked the sound of.

Have you ever heard Quested monitors? You might like them because they sound smoother than most monitors.