One of my ambitions for the NY is to get the band hifi back together.
(Actually, I'd like to get the band back together again as well, but that's a different subject. Back to hifi ...)
For years, I've gone for the convenience and quiet-wife option - AV amp and Bose surround sound speakers. Used more for watching DVDs than listening to music, and the set-up is probably better at the former than the latter. CDs were (infrequently) played on the DVD player, most music listened to via headphones elsewhere.
So, I've dusted off my reasonable-spec CD player and am looking at amp & speaker options.
Encouraged by lots of similar threads on here, I've looked at eBay for older kit - though most of it now seems to be described as "vintage" and attracts "vintage" pricing in the same way that any old guitar now does. I'll probably go for the reliability/guarantee of a new amp, but I'm intrigued by the speakers.
Are older speakers inherently better made and properly "run in" or do the advances in speaker technology over the years offset the inevitable cheaper materials now being used? Should I be as wary of the potential reliability problems of older speakers as I am of the problems of older amps? (Seen a few speaker re-conditioning sites, and discussions of replacing worn-out tweeters et al).
And ... do I get better bass out of floor-standing speakers, or can stand-mounted units do the job just as well?
And - finally - how do I persuade MrsTT that we really do need another set of speakers in the room ...
Comments
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
I suspect it's a bit of both. I used to think my KEF Kit3 speakers were excellent, but I learned that the B110 and T27 mid & treble drivers were a bit long in the tooth, design wise. I got a pair of KEF Q Compacts a few years ago, and find them better for detail and clarity. I till use the B139 bass drivers, though. (The system goes through an active crossover, so the Q Compacts are only seeing 150Hz and up - I tried the little KEFs on their own, and the bass was decent but not a patch on what the B139s can do.) The B139 bass divers are about 40 years old and have a lump of polystyrene rather than the usual cone - possibly the most piston-like of all bass drivers at any power within their handling limits.
Probably depends on the floor. Wooden floorboards will need isolation. If it's a hard surface, might want to be careful about proximity effects. I have big boxes on bricks, on a concrete floor, in a pretty well damped room, so not a big deal for me. The little KEFs were tried on Atacama stands (hollow metal columns full of sand for ballast and damping).
I should mention that I virtually never sit down and listen to music. The hi-fi is mainly used for playing backing tracks for jamming along with and as one of several sound references for my compositional indulgences.
Nomad
Nobody loves me but my mother... and she could be jivin' too...
Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
My music:- https://soundcloud.com/hubobulous
I went on a speaker hunt some 6 months ago as my Mission 732's on stands were a bit boomy and lacked clarity. Now I still had the Kef catalogues from back in the day,1996 I think. I was after some Q55.2's (The 2 version has the veneer front as well and the 55's two drivers) but open to loads of others and had loads shortlisted. Generally what I found was that even speakers this old, getting on twenty years were still commanding decent money and were going for £250+. So in the end I settled on some Q35.2's for fifty quid. Now on getting them home I was massively impressed by their transparency and openness, I think that is a older British Kef feature, but 6 months down the line I remember why I chose the 732's in the first place, as they were more fun to listen to in some respects. The Kef's are great, but they are a bit like monitors in the detail respect and they leave a four piece band lacking a bit.
I think the only disadvantage you will have when buying used is that tweeters and rubber and some cones (Mission) can wear and age and break down, depending on abuse and sunlight you have no stage to try them out against each other. When you go on YouTube, you get a zillion renditions of crap MP3 dance tracks played by internet warrior morons through them and since it's through your computer anyway, it is no real help or reference. I forget the favourite particular theme of the month, it's dragon warrior computer synth thing or something. About as useful as a warm turd.
I also have plenty of older Wharfdales, they are infinitely shit compared to modern speakers.
It's nuts to play Van Halen through a 50k system. It's like spending 40k on an engine polish for a Suzuki Alto.
Also I wanted floorstanders that also looked half decent.
It's incredible how personal it is to what sounds good or not is.
It's very hard to find domestic speakers with drivers larger than 4 or 5 inches, and realistically, you can't get bass from small drivers unless they have a huge throw, so you are losing the bass or sending it from behind some furniture, or at best from a single off-axis location near a wall
The Bose speakers sound good compared to the space they occupy, but they did not invent the technologies involved, and so you can save lots going for the competitors, Richer Sounds' Cambridge brand does a rival product. Bose and its rivals are not hifi though, since you are always going to have bits of the spectrum missing or with phase errors where different frequencies from a single instrument or voice are coming from different places, and you will always be losing some of the midrange from the little drivers
The most stunning example of what Bose cannot do was the pair of Tannoy Ardens I had. Dual concentric point source 15 inch drivers
I bought the pair (main studio monitors from Mike Harding's studio ) in their original cabs, for £400 or so
I think they were £7k new in the 70s
Anyway, as well as being ridiculously efficient, and based on Alnico magnets, they were also unusual in that the tweeter horn was in the centre of the woofer, aligned to be completely in phase with the woofer, so any sound would emerge from a single point, with all frequencies in phase. They were amazing, but huge. I had to sell them when we lived in our 2nd house, and the replacement Dynaudio pair of passive monitors were a a little more accurate, but nothing like as enjoyable
Don't let anyone tell you that having a separate sub is not a compromise. Ideally you need all the sound for each channel coming from the same place, so Bose-type systems are always a compromise, although of course they are easier to fit into kitchens and decor-driven living rooms
As mentioned, wall and corner effects will mess up sound, but most hifi buffs ignore this, and there's little chance of correcting this in a main living room
At present my approach would be:
For a compromise room: use the small speaker + sub approach, e.g. http://www.richersounds.com/product/standmount-speakers/cambridge-audio/minx-min11/camb-minx-min11-blk
For "hifi", try to get large volume speakers with bigger drivers. Years ago I helped a friend select B&W 603s, which as expected did not need separate sub, since they kick out enough bass for AV and hifi anyway. I bought a used pair myself eventually, definitely far better than bose and may even pass the decor test
for hifi/mixing, look at the studio monitors available. These are far more tweakable for the way sub and main drivers integrate, with rolloffs, etc. Often bigger bass drivers are available, and having separate dedicated amps for each driver is an advantage. Focal are good.
Also you can go to the "Wilmslow audio" route, and build large studio monitors with ATC drivers, etc
Ideally we'd be talking drivers at least 12 inch diameter, and avoiding the need to rely on bass ports
8 inch drivers are OK
http://www.wilmslow-audio.co.uk/recording-studio-monitors-117-c.asp
As mentioned, speakers over 10 years old could have faults - better to get newer
Don't make the mistake of getting a 20w amp, since properly mastered stuff on CD has a far larger need for headroom than vinyl, so ideally 150w a channel if you like to play music loud
I tried amps up to 200w a channel, and there is definitely a clearer rendition of drums and other transients using more powerful amps compared to 50w per channel ones. I used to use a NAD 180w a channel amp before I got powered monitors