SPEAKERS sorted by how they Sound

[insider9]

I'd put Meridian in my second system and B&O in my neighbour's system *biggrin*

You wish.

Are you offering? *mosking*

 

[CnoEvil]

Canton had the traditional German Taunus saund, a loudness saddled FR curve, with pitched extreemes. Very exciting, meaty yet airy and dynamic sound, but can be too much for smaller rooms prone to nasty reflections.

Things have changed with Frank Göbl as their chief designer (and premier weird eyewear promoter). They still have the fat tight bassy coloration, but go very neutral onwards. It seems to be 'in tune' with the JBL/Harman philosophy of speaker-room interaction.

Designers change the house sound. When Andrew Jones entered Elac the signature went towards detailed and forward, a more contemporary choice aka 'modern hi-fi sound'. Some brands stick to their guns regardless who the engineer at the helm is. Example Dynaudio, which always had a darker aesthetic to them since I can remember. They can feel like unable to open up to their true potential with some kit and music preferences.

Excellent background info.

If you had to pick one of my groups, would you choose Neutral for Canton?

 

[CnoEvil]

I'd put Meridian in my second system and B&O in my neighbour's system *biggrin*

You wish.

Are you offering? *mosking*

NO! *stop*

 

[Vladimir]

Excellent background info.

If you had to pick one of my groups, would you choose Neutral for Canton?

Technically by the numbers it's not neutral but saunds neutral to my ears. The bass hump adds energy, but doesn't feel boomy and loose. If you had a really thick and dense furniture, it would really even out. There's definetly more 'excitement' tuned to old Cantons compared to new ones, yet the Seas tweeter still has its airy shimmering character in all of them. Neutral but not boring.

(btw, you need to read "saund" as zaund, with an accent) *biggrin*

 

[CnoEvil]

Excellent background info.

If you had to pick one of my groups, would you choose Neutral for Canton?

Technically by the numbers it's not neutral but saunds neutral to my ears. The bass hump adds energy, but doesn't feel boomy and loose. If you had a really thick and dense furniture, it would really even out. There's definetly more 'excitement' tuned to old Cantons compared to new ones, yet the Seas tweeter still has its airy shimmering character in all of them. Neutral but not boring.

(btw, you need to read "saund" as zaund, with an accent) *biggrin*

I'm putting it in Neutral.....as long as you wouldn't consider it forward of Neutral (No.1)

 

[davidf]

Now added.....the only one of those I've heard is Eclipse and I agree with 2.

There is no in between, so I've gone with 3. *dash1* If this isn't right, let me know. *unknw*

As someone who is familiar with a lot of this list, would you, by and large, agree with it.

There’s a few manufacturers there I’m not familiar enough with to say whether they're in the right section, but one thing that stands out to me - Monitor Audio are in the ‘forward of neutral’ category, whereas B&W are in the ‘slightly warmer than neutral’ category.

It’s a tricky one. I can understand B&W where it is as I find their midrange a little recessed, so they come across warmer than some. The MAs have more midrange to them, giving them a little more of a forward sound, but I don’t think that’s enough to nudge them into the first category in comparison. I know that some feel that MAs are bright, but I don’t find them any brighter than B&Ws. Based on that, I’d say the MAs should be in category 2, just behind the B&Ws, but that’s just my opinion

Not sure if anyone else agrees with what I’ve said...

 

[Vladimir]

Where would people put B&O and Meridian....possibly 3?

Old B&O with Philips, Seas and Audax drivers was buttery smooth and pleasantly warm. One of the most listenable speakers you could find. You could play them all day every day with quality reception tuner (B&O or Braun). Zero fatigue. Haven't heard any of their new stuff.

Old Meridian actives - neutral boring, for people who don't fuss with hi-fi, just want the quality reproduction and to focus on the music.

B&W are all over the place. Wouldn't dare to fit them in one basket. On my CM-1 the midrange was 'blanketed', gave them warm signature, too warm on occassions.

 

[CnoEvil]

There’s a few manufacturers there I’m not familiar enough with to say whether they're in the right section, but one thing that stands out to me - Monitor Audio are in the ‘forward of neutral’ category, whereas B&W are in the ‘slightly warmer than neutral’ category.

It’s a tricky one. I can understand B&W where it is as I find their midrange a little recessed, so they come across warmer than some. The MAs have more midrange to them, giving them a little more of a forward sound, but I don’t think that’s enough to nudge them into the first category in comparison. I know that some feel that MAs are bright, but I don’t find them any brighter than B&Ws. Based on that, I’d say the MAs should be in category 2, just behind the B&Ws, but that’s just my opinion

Not sure if anyone else agrees with what I’ve said...

When it comes to taste, we agree on quite a lot, but you prefer a cleaner more neutral sound than me, which may account for my positioning of those brands.

You will be much more familiar with those 2 particular brands than me, having sold and demoed them on countless occasions...on the other hand, I have to try and be consistant with what I hear as well.

I will certainly take your view very seriously and see what other feedback I get.

 

[Vladimir]

I'm putting it in Neutral.....as long as you wouldn't consider it forward of Neutral (No.1)

Just neutral on the new Cantons.

Stereoman should also chime in on the Cantons.

 

[CnoEvil]

Where would people put B&O and Meridian....possibly 3?

Old B&O with Philips, Seas and Audax drivers was buttery smooth and pleasantly warm. One of the most listenable speakers you could find. You could play them all day every day with quality reception tuner (B&O or Braun). Zero fatigue. Haven't heard any of their new stuff.

Old Meridian actives - neutral boring, for people who don't fuss with hi-fi, just want the quality reproduction and to focus on the music.

B&W are all over the place. Wouldn't dare to fit them in one basket. On my CM-1 the midrange was 'blanketed', gave them warm signature, too warm on occassions.

I agree totally with your assessment of both Older B&O (my Uncle had a B&O system in the 70s) and Meridian. For the moment, I'm putting both in 3. Pedro2 might help, as he demoed Meridian very recently and was very impressed.

Your point about B&W could explain the variety of opinion on them.

 

[CnoEvil]

Categorisation may not be as easy as we think it is. *smile*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuvrWJ9WYK0

I don't think there is anything easy about Categorization, as has been highlighted on this thread...not least by me. I still think it's worth the effort though, for the reasons I have given.

 

[Native_bon]

Cno.. Think this video will explain a lot about speakers and choosing speakings will largely depend on specific traits we look for in a speaker. I actually paid attention to his mention of the LS50's needing care and attention to get them sounding right. Categorisation may not be as easy as we think it is. *smile*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuvrWJ9WYK0

 

[CnoEvil]

I'm putting it in Neutral.....as long as you wouldn't consider it forward of Neutral (No.1)

Just neutral on the new Cantons.

*good*

Edit. Where would you put JBL....Neutral?

 

[CnoEvil]

You need a new category "Chaos". Chuck B&W and JBL in it.

I'll do the next best thing.

 

[Vladimir]

I'm putting it in Neutral.....as long as you wouldn't consider it forward of Neutral (No.1)

Just neutral on the new Cantons.

*good*

Edit. Where would you put JBL....Neutral?

You need a new category "Chaos". Chuck B&W and JBL in it. These companies are too big to have a house sound IMO.

JBL has a mythical West Coast sound that is dynamic, exciting, punchy, forward. But then again, they've made boring, dull, warm, neutral... anything possible you can imagine a speaker can sound.

What's the B&W house sound?. Best I can describe it is: "wow that sounds good... nice.. I'm liking it... but something is missing.... something is off.... its kinda irritating... wth, I hate this speaker now!"

 

[Vladimir]

I'm putting it in Neutral.....as long as you wouldn't consider it forward of Neutral (No.1)

Just neutral on the new Cantons.

*good*

Edit. Where would you put JBL....Neutral?

You need a new category "Chaos". Chuck B&W and JBL in it. These companies are too big to have a house sound IMO.

JBL has a mythical West Coast sound that is dynamic, exciting, punchy, forward. But then again, they've made boring, dull, warm, neutral... anything possible you can imagine a speaker can sound.

What's the B&W house sound?. Best I can describe it is: "wow that sounds good... nice.. I'm liking it... but something is missing.... something is off.... its kinda irritating... wth, I hate this speaker now!"

JBL should go in the #1 category with ** attached - under conditions that you shop domestic, not pro, and you do your homework to skirt arround the marketing board 'experiments'. Just stick to the true exciting JBL DNA. The new Pro stuff is neutral as it gets.

 

[Vladimir]

Cno.. Think this video will explain a lot about speakers and choosing speakings will largely depend on specific traits we look for in a speaker. I actually paid attention to his mention of the LS50's needing care and attention to get them sounding right. Categorisation may not be as easy as we think it is. *smile*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuvrWJ9WYK0

Excellent video.

 

[CnoEvil]

It’s a pointless list as everyone hears things differently, plus the biggest difference is usually the room not the speakers. (Plus I have never come across anybody that classes B& W as warm (It’s normally the complete opposite) so that makes the list suspect anyway)

Bill

Slightly Warmer than Neutral, is not warm....it just means there is a tiny hint of warmth/extra refinement....hence speakers like current Kef Ref in there, whereas the Old Refs are in the group above.

 

[Vladimir]

You've missed out Yamaha ....*smile*

Traditionally cat. 1 in both Pro and Domestic (think NS1000, NSX10000, NS10, NS8, Beryllium beheamoth GF-1). Not sure what to comment about their surround offering. Never heard any of them individually as standmount or floorstander pairs.

Anyone heard the Toshiyuki Kita designed NS-F901? They look serious.

 

[davidf]

TAD would belong in category 1 as well.

 

[nopiano]

BBC LS3/5a can go in the historic category. Unless you have a ‘squished dynamics and no bass’ section!!

Just out of interest I’d have said KEF LS50 were pretty neutral, but I guess they aren’t at all brash so you’ve probably called that well - and obviously you own them too!

I’d second the view that some brands like B&W are hard to categorise across the piece. Quad’s non electrostatics are slightly warmer than neutral I’d suggest. And Tannoy I’d have have as Exciting, not neutral, but again the range is huge.

 

[CnoEvil]

BBC LS3/5a can go in the historic category. Unless you have a ‘squished dynamics and no bass’ section!!

Just out of interest I’d have said KEF LS50 were pretty neutral, but I guess they aren’t at all brash so you’ve probably called that well - and obviously you own them too!

I’d second the view that some brands like B&W are hard to categorise across the piece. Quad’s non electrostatics are slightly warmer than neutral I’d suggest. And Tannoy I’d have have as Exciting, not neutral, but again the range is huge.

Having owned the LS50s for a while now....and owned IQ9 and 205/2s....they are definitely more refined at the top end and a bit warmer sounding (all compared on my system). This means they should be in a different group to the old series. They are also more neutral than the R Series, which is in the group below.

At least the grouping is consistant in comparative terms.

Regarding Tannoy....the modern looking ones imo sound a bit more forward and cleaner than Kef, more like the previous Series of Kef....to the point where they can get a bit shouty if paired with a forward amp. I have never heard the old school, legacy looking ones ..do they have a different sound?

 

[CnoEvil]

TAD would belong in category 1 as well.

Done

 

[nopiano]

BBC LS3/5a can go in the historic category. Unless you have a ‘squished dynamics and no bass’ section!!

Just out of interest I’d have said KEF LS50 were pretty neutral, but I guess they aren’t at all brash so you’ve probably called that well - and obviously you own them too!

I’d second the view that some brands like B&W are hard to categorise across the piece. Quad’s non electrostatics are slightly warmer than neutral I’d suggest. And Tannoy I’d have have as Exciting, not neutral, but again the range is huge.

Having owned the LS50s for a while now....and owned IQ9 and 205/2s....they are definitely more refined at the top end and a bit warmer sounding (all compared on my system). This means they should be in a different group to the old series. They are also more neutral than the R Series, which is in the group below.

At least the grouping is consistant in comparative terms.

Regarding Tannoy....the modern looking ones imo sound a bit more forward and cleaner than Kef, more like the previous Series of Kef....to the point where they can get a bit shouty if paired with a forward amp. I have never heard the old school, legacy looking ones ..do they have a different sound?

I’ve not heard any current generation Tannoy, so maybe it’s silly of me to suggest. But the big dual concentric ones, both the huge luxury models, and the recently re-invented Ardens etc were always warm and rich. In a sense they deployed the “cabinet as speakers” much like the thin-walled Spendor and Harbeths do. Conversely the Tannoys around £800 to £1500 always struck me as having added excitement, a bit like Naim amps. And JBL speakers.

To someone who finds many speakers compressed, the high efficiency types like JBL and Altec sound realistic and dynamic. Whereas to me they often sound ***** and shouty! And that’s what makes it all such fun.

Would you put Wilson Audio in Neutral? I think I would.

 

[CnoEvil]

I’ve not heard any current generation Tannoy, so maybe it’s silly of me to suggest. But the big dual concentric ones, both the huge luxury models, and the recently re-invented Ardens etc were always warm and rich. In a sense they deployed the “cabinet as speakers” much like the thin-walled Spendor and Harbeths do. Conversely the Tannoys around £800 to £1500 always struck me as having added excitement, a bit like Naim amps. And JBL speakers.

Would you put Wilson Audio in Neutral? I think I would.

IMO. There isn't "Silly", only opinion on what you've heard.

I think I'm putting Tannoy Legacy into 4 and Wison Audio into 2.