Happy but I want a bit more

[lindsayt]

If anyone thinks having a cheap pair of speakers at the end of quality hifi? They live in cloud cuckoo land! I have never heard such nonsense...the speakers should be the best you can afford..if not new? Then secondhand.

Anyone who has been around hi-fi for a few years will have heard small, inexpensive speakers sound phenominal on the end of a really good system...

I've been around hi-fi for a few years and I haven't heard any small inexpensive speakers sound phenominal.

None that I've heard have been able to bridge the gap between sounding like a hi-fi and not sounding like a hi-fi - as in; like a set of musicians playing instruments and singing, with a wide variety of recordings.

And that is my definition of phenominal when it comes to hi-fi.

In this day and age, it's quite easy to get affordable, good sounding sources, amplification and speakers. I don't see why anyone has to skimp on any part of the hi-fi chain.

 

[Al ears]

I use a powerful amp..but my speakers good with my t amp! All six watts..bass light? The walls shake! They are reference speakers..better the kit..better they sound..to my old ears anyway!

How much do you wind up that thing? *shok*

im the Popeye of the south coast! A nice zonophone and a can of spinach...and bottle of beer!

that's what I thought

lol.the beer is 'old speckled hen' its ok i suppose....much better before greene king took over..hey ho

Old Speckled Hen... The legal equivalent of LSD...

No that would be Old Peculiar.

 

[Al ears]

If anyone thinks having a cheap pair of speakers at the end of quality hifi? They live in cloud cuckoo land! I have never heard such nonsense...the speakers should be the best you can afford..if not new? Then secondhand.

Anyone who has been around hi-fi for a few years will have heard small, inexpensive speakers sound phenominal on the end of a really good system.

There are a number of reasons for this, the bandwidth and sheer volume capabilities of good big speakers are often lost in domestic situations, room size and speaker positioning often conspire to make such speakers underperform such that smaller, often cheaper speakers, sound better.

It depends a lot on the speaker of course, a lot of small budget models are really not very good, they are deliberately 'overhyped' to sound impressve with a big warm sound, this is what sells.

Really good speakers in this area are often at a disadvantage, their more neutral response fails to impress the average buyer, until of course, you get them onto the end of a serious system. Q Acoustics are a brand that fall into this category, they can (2000i series) sound a littly bit flat and unengageing in run of the mill budget systems but as Gazzip and others will attest, on the end of a good system, they are completely different.

+1

My old original Heybrook HB1's spring to mind, as do the new Elac B6

Top order twaddle! The speakers may well be the most important component of a hi fi system..i have 902i and tannoy f1..very good..esp 902i then i went to dynaudio 40..then 42s...ibput my 42s on top of my ae reference speakers..and listened to both...no comparison....are you really telling me Q acoustic speakers can match my AE1mk3s? Lol....i know what hifi love Q acoustics speakers..and for new hifi people..go with what hifi recommendations..good advice! My dynaudios are superior to Q acoustics..and they sounded very boxy indeed compared to AEs...i thought all amps sound the same as absurd..but this? Is nonsense...

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. The subject was cheap speakers, and I never mentioned Q Acoustics.

 

[gregory]

Thanks guys, lots of interesting comments and some funny reference's, I thought Fullers ESB was an LSD alternative, 3 pints and I'm out for the count, I have taken on board your comments and am coming down on the better amp first and speakers at a later date, I am going to listen to the PM 8005 and the Rega Elex R, I will report back with my findings, thanks all.

 

[keeper of the quays]

If anyone thinks having a cheap pair of speakers at the end of quality hifi? They live in cloud cuckoo land! I have never heard such nonsense...the speakers should be the best you can afford..if not new? Then secondhand.

Anyone who has been around hi-fi for a few years will have heard small, inexpensive speakers sound phenominal on the end of a really good system.

There are a number of reasons for this, the bandwidth and sheer volume capabilities of good big speakers are often lost in domestic situations, room size and speaker positioning often conspire to make such speakers underperform such that smaller, often cheaper speakers, sound better.

It depends a lot on the speaker of course, a lot of small budget models are really not very good, they are deliberately 'overhyped' to sound impressve with a big warm sound, this is what sells.

Really good speakers in this area are often at a disadvantage, their more neutral response fails to impress the average buyer, until of course, you get them onto the end of a serious system. Q Acoustics are a brand that fall into this category, they can (2000i series) sound a littly bit flat and unengageing in run of the mill budget systems but as Gazzip and others will attest, on the end of a good system, they are completely different.

+1

My old original Heybrook HB1's spring to mind, as do the new Elac B6

Top order twaddle! The speakers may well be the most important component of a hi fi system..i have 902i and tannoy f1..very good..esp 902i then i went to dynaudio 40..then 42s...ibput my 42s on top of my ae reference speakers..and listened to both...no comparison....are you really telling me Q acoustic speakers can match my AE1mk3s? Lol....i know what hifi love Q acoustics speakers..and for new hifi people..go with what hifi recommendations..good advice! My dynaudios are superior to Q acoustics..and they sounded very boxy indeed compared to AEs...i thought all amps sound the same as absurd..but this? Is nonsense...

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. The subject was cheap speakers, and I never mentioned Q Acoustics.

if there were a pair of speakers that sounded very good in my system that are cheap..i would of bought them.my 902i and tannoy are brilliant! As are my dynaudios and as what hifi rightly say over and over again! To a level..they punch above their weight (of course, award winners) and one could argue how far do they go before they fail? In my kit..they failed...they are still fine speakers in their class! Maybe in a class above..if i came across as disrespectful? I apologise...but i think im right on this..i would much rather spend a few hundred quid on speakers in my kit..if i could, sadly its a pipe dream.

 

[Gazzip]

If anyone thinks having a cheap pair of speakers at the end of quality hifi? They live in cloud cuckoo land! I have never heard such nonsense...the speakers should be the best you can afford..if not new? Then secondhand.

Anyone who has been around hi-fi for a few years will have heard small, inexpensive speakers sound phenominal on the end of a really good system.

There are a number of reasons for this, the bandwidth and sheer volume capabilities of good big speakers are often lost in domestic situations, room size and speaker positioning often conspire to make such speakers underperform such that smaller, often cheaper speakers, sound better.

It depends a lot on the speaker of course, a lot of small budget models are really not very good, they are deliberately 'overhyped' to sound impressve with a big warm sound, this is what sells.

Really good speakers in this area are often at a disadvantage, their more neutral response fails to impress the average buyer, until of course, you get them onto the end of a serious system. Q Acoustics are a brand that fall into this category, they can (2000i series) sound a littly bit flat and unengageing in run of the mill budget systems but as Gazzip and others will attest, on the end of a good system, they are completely different.

+1

My old original Heybrook HB1's spring to mind, as do the new Elac B6

Top order twaddle! The speakers may well be the most important component of a hi fi system..i have 902i and tannoy f1..very good..esp 902i then i went to dynaudio 40..then 42s...ibput my 42s on top of my ae reference speakers..and listened to both...no comparison....are you really telling me Q acoustic speakers can match my AE1mk3s? Lol....i know what hifi love Q acoustics speakers..and for new hifi people..go with what hifi recommendations..good advice! My dynaudios are superior to Q acoustics..and they sounded very boxy indeed compared to AEs...i thought all amps sound the same as absurd..but this? Is nonsense...

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. The subject was cheap speakers, and I never mentioned Q Acoustics.

if there were a pair of speakers that sounded very good in my system that are cheap..i would of bought them.my 902i and tannoy are brilliant! As are my dynaudios and as what hifi rightly say over and over again! To a level..they punch above their weight (of course, award winners) and one could argue how far do they go before they fail? In my kit..they failed...they are still fine speakers in their class! Maybe in a class above..if i came across as disrespectful? I apologise...but i think im right on this..i would much rather spend a few hundred quid on speakers in my kit..if i could, sadly its a pipe dream.

I would be surprised if Q Acoustics came close to the SQ of your speakers. However I can personally attest to the fact that a pair of 2020i's sounded fantastic through my ARC and Bryston combo. Much better than they did through my Cyrus One which is no slouch of an amplifier. I think that the point being made by others here is that the quality of an amplifier can have a significant impact on the SQ that loudspeakers produce. Always defaulting to loudspeakers as the logical upgrade may not actually therefore be the correct approach as a less expensive pair of speakers properly fed and positioned may also have the desired effect.

 

[davedotco]

This thread has moved on somewhat since yesterday, perhaps just as well I was at a Muse concert yesterday, as I might have become involved.

Discussions of absolute and relative quality are always difficult unless the arguments, for and against, can be effectively demonstrated. Trying to argue one's case with words leads to a somewhat fractious arguement about what is and what is not good hi-fi and this can get more than a bit snippy.

I have spoken in the past about just how mediocre I consider a lot of mainstream (budget) equipment to be and this is compounded by the way it is chosen, set up and positioned in most peoples homes. The overall standard of reproduction in the average home is now so poor as to make any discussion of quality pretty meaningless.

 

[BigH]

I use a powerful amp..but my speakers good with my t amp! All six watts..bass light? The walls shake! They are reference speakers..better the kit..better they sound..to my old ears anyway!

How much do you wind up that thing? *shok*

im the Popeye of the south coast! A nice zonophone and a can of spinach...and bottle of beer!

that's what I thought

lol.the beer is 'old speckled hen' its ok i suppose....much better before greene king took over..hey ho

Old Speckled Hen... The legal equivalent of LSD...

No that would be Old Peculiar.

Or Owd Rodger.

 

[drummerman]

If anyone thinks having a cheap pair of speakers at the end of quality hifi? They live in cloud cuckoo land! I have never heard such nonsense...the speakers should be the best you can afford..if not new? Then secondhand.

Anyone who has been around hi-fi for a few years will have heard small, inexpensive speakers sound phenominal on the end of a really good system.

There are a number of reasons for this, the bandwidth and sheer volume capabilities of good big speakers are often lost in domestic situations, room size and speaker positioning often conspire to make such speakers underperform such that smaller, often cheaper speakers, sound better.

It depends a lot on the speaker of course, a lot of small budget models are really not very good, they are deliberately 'overhyped' to sound impressve with a big warm sound, this is what sells.

Really good speakers in this area are often at a disadvantage, their more neutral response fails to impress the average buyer, until of course, you get them onto the end of a serious system. Q Acoustics are a brand that fall into this category, they can (2000i series) sound a littly bit flat and unengageing in run of the mill budget systems but as Gazzip and others will attest, on the end of a good system, they are completely different.

+1

My old original Heybrook HB1's spring to mind, as do the new Elac B6

Top order twaddle! The speakers may well be the most important component of a hi fi system..i have 902i and tannoy f1..very good..esp 902i then i went to dynaudio 40..then 42s...ibput my 42s on top of my ae reference speakers..and listened to both...no comparison....are you really telling me Q acoustic speakers can match my AE1mk3s? Lol....i know what hifi love Q acoustics speakers..and for new hifi people..go with what hifi recommendations..good advice! My dynaudios are superior to Q acoustics..and they sounded very boxy indeed compared to AEs...i thought all amps sound the same as absurd..but this? Is nonsense...

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. The subject was cheap speakers, and I never mentioned Q Acoustics.

if there were a pair of speakers that sounded very good in my system that are cheap..i would of bought them.my 902i and tannoy are brilliant! As are my dynaudios and as what hifi rightly say over and over again! To a level..they punch above their weight (of course, award winners) and one could argue how far do they go before they fail? In my kit..they failed...they are still fine speakers in their class! Maybe in a class above..if i came across as disrespectful? I apologise...but i think im right on this..i would much rather spend a few hundred quid on speakers in my kit..if i could, sadly its a pipe dream.

The point was that a more expensive speaker will more likely expose any shortcomings of a cheap amplifier more so than the other way round.

More expensive speakers, especially compacts, usually have low sensititivity thus stressing a cheap amplifier with compromised power supply more, generally speaking. There are exceptions like Micromega's Myamp which apparently drove a pair of Focul Utopias to great effect in Munich.

So, in conclusion and without wanting to atagonise you further ... I personally would rather have a capable amplifier and a cheaper speaker these days (they are quite capable these days) than the other way round.

You could of course split the budget more even ... .

 

[davedotco]

I use a powerful amp..but my speakers good with my t amp! All six watts..bass light? The walls shake! They are reference speakers..better the kit..better they sound..to my old ears anyway!

How much do you wind up that thing? *shok*

im the Popeye of the south coast! A nice zonophone and a can of spinach...and bottle of beer!

that's what I thought

lol.the beer is 'old speckled hen' its ok i suppose....much better before greene king took over..hey ho

Old Speckled Hen... The legal equivalent of LSD...

No that would be Old Peculiar.

Or Owd Rodger.

Was always a favourite.

 

[davedotco]

If anyone thinks having a cheap pair of speakers at the end of quality hifi? They live in cloud cuckoo land! I have never heard such nonsense...the speakers should be the best you can afford..if not new? Then secondhand.

Anyone who has been around hi-fi for a few years will have heard small, inexpensive speakers sound phenominal on the end of a really good system.

There are a number of reasons for this, the bandwidth and sheer volume capabilities of good big speakers are often lost in domestic situations, room size and speaker positioning often conspire to make such speakers underperform such that smaller, often cheaper speakers, sound better.

It depends a lot on the speaker of course, a lot of small budget models are really not very good, they are deliberately 'overhyped' to sound impressve with a big warm sound, this is what sells.

Really good speakers in this area are often at a disadvantage, their more neutral response fails to impress the average buyer, until of course, you get them onto the end of a serious system. Q Acoustics are a brand that fall into this category, they can (2000i series) sound a littly bit flat and unengageing in run of the mill budget systems but as Gazzip and others will attest, on the end of a good system, they are completely different.

+1

My old original Heybrook HB1's spring to mind, as do the new Elac B6

Top order twaddle! The speakers may well be the most important component of a hi fi system..i have 902i and tannoy f1..very good..esp 902i then i went to dynaudio 40..then 42s...ibput my 42s on top of my ae reference speakers..and listened to both...no comparison....are you really telling me Q acoustic speakers can match my AE1mk3s? Lol....i know what hifi love Q acoustics speakers..and for new hifi people..go with what hifi recommendations..good advice! My dynaudios are superior to Q acoustics..and they sounded very boxy indeed compared to AEs...i thought all amps sound the same as absurd..but this? Is nonsense...

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. The subject was cheap speakers, and I never mentioned Q Acoustics.

if there were a pair of speakers that sounded very good in my system that are cheap..i would of bought them.my 902i and tannoy are brilliant! As are my dynaudios and as what hifi rightly say over and over again! To a level..they punch above their weight (of course, award winners) and one could argue how far do they go before they fail? In my kit..they failed...they are still fine speakers in their class! Maybe in a class above..if i came across as disrespectful? I apologise...but i think im right on this..i would much rather spend a few hundred quid on speakers in my kit..if i could, sadly its a pipe dream.

The point was that a more expensive speaker will more likely expose any shortcomings of a cheap amplifier more so than the other way round.

More expensive speakers, especially compacts, usually have low sensititivity thus stressing a cheap amplifier with compromised power supply more, generally speaking. There are exceptions like Micromega's Myamp which apparently drove a pair of Focul Utopias to great effect in Munich.

So, in conclusion and without wanting to atagonise you further ... I personally would rather have a capable amplifier and a cheaper speaker these days (they are quite capable these days) than the other way round.

You could of course split the budget more even ... .

There have always been some that are remarkably capable at practically beer budget pricing. Thinking back to the old HB1s, original Diamonds (not the later abominations), MS10s and the rest.

One of the things I feel is dissappointing is the number of quite mediocre products (from some very serious brands) that are 'hyped', both sonically and otherwise to sell in what is now a pretty unsophisticated market.

The 'boom tish' brigade have taken over large swathes of the market, so the standard is really nor very high and though there are some very decent products available I have found few dealers (or buyers for that matter) with the necessary expertese to sort the wheat from the chaff.

 

[BigH]

I use a powerful amp..but my speakers good with my t amp! All six watts..bass light? The walls shake! They are reference speakers..better the kit..better they sound..to my old ears anyway!

How much do you wind up that thing? *shok*

im the Popeye of the south coast! A nice zonophone and a can of spinach...and bottle of beer!

that's what I thought

lol.the beer is 'old speckled hen' its ok i suppose....much better before greene king took over..hey ho

Old Speckled Hen... The legal equivalent of LSD...

No that would be Old Peculiar.

Or Owd Rodger.

Was always a favourite.

On draught straight out the cask was surperb, bottled no good. Don't think they do it on draught anymore. Old peculiar also is good draught, I remember a lakeland pub, roaring fire and pints of OP, bliss.