Best Speakers for Vinyl

[Mash]

Let's Hear a round of applause for usatubeaudio for correcting madarahr's problem. Well done!

I agree with you, JoeE SP9, that servosubs cost more than non-servosubs, but I have also learned that a good servosub will usually blend with Magnepan speakers, while non-servosubs will not- they simply sound "slow" or "sluggish" in direct comparison with a Maggie in the region of the crossover frequency. The latter combination ultimately becomes annoying and you wind up doing what you should have done the first time.

A fun test with a servosub: with power "off" at the servosub and NO input signal, tap the cone lightly with your finger as you turn power to the servosub "on". Notice the apparent rise of pitch as the cone's apparent frequency approaches the servo circuit's operating (correction update) frequency. Every time your finger slightly moves the cone from its centered "rest position", the servo circuit slams it back to "where it is supposed to be".

This is why the servo feedback Mackie HR824 speaker series sound so clear.

[JoeE SP9]

It's been my experience that a lot of the integration problems with sub woofers and Magneplanars is because of too high a crossover frequency. Any setting higher than ~50hz for the low pass to the sub interferes with the sound.

Using the line level connections on most sub woofers means a full range signal goes to the main amp and speakers because there is no high pass filtering with most powered subs. This causes a frequency overlap when the main speakers have any kind of bass response. This is especially obvious with Magneplanars because their sound is so clean and resonant free.

I have heard some very good sounding Maggy/sub woofer systems that didn't have servo control. They were using the low pass set to 50Hz or lower.

I should add; I use non servo subs with ESL's which are even faster than Magneplanars. Choosing the proper crossover frequency and levels make the difference. I am using an electronic crossover with high and low pass filtering. I use 80Hz and the sound is seamless.

[Mash]

I use 50 Hz for my Velodyne with my Tympani because the Tympani go below 40 Hz so all is well. The Velodyne servo-15 has an internal crossover and I had Velodyne supply me with the crossover set at 50 Hz. A DeCoursey splits the music at 100 Hz and the below-100 hz signal is sent to the bass Magnepan panels & Velodyne.

BUT! The lower limit of the MMG is 50 Hz and when a panel speaker hits its lower frequency limit, the material below that limit is simply not there. So 50 Hz will not work well with MMG's. You get a hole. 80 Hz is excellent with MMG's.

Another consideration is the space between the mains and at what lower frequency do cancellation effects begin.

ESL's are faster than Magnepans? I care not. My criteria was the realism of the sound. ESL's could never deliver that. The detail was outstanding but the realism was not.

[thedj]

I use KRK for studio sound. Love them!

[madarahr]

I am really enjoying the music from the system now with the MMG's. It is not as clear as I heard at the auditioning at the dealer with the 1.6 and 1.7's but he mentioned it old take time. The dealer does not carry MMG's and hence had to get them from the manufacturer. The speaker placement issue is no longer an issue. I re-arranged furniture and threw the TV out to another room. We watch TV very rarely anyway (once in two weeks). I followed the recommendations in the manual and the dealer for placement and it fit so perfect and the music is so clear. They are really meant for small rooms and that's why they are working fine for me.
I am a bit worried about the subwoofer you mentioned Mash. Dont you think it's too big for the small room I have have ? Would the subwoofer make the MMG's perform better by taking the strain away and letting it work on its higher frequencies ?

[JoeE SP9]

Seeing as how I went from owning Maggy 1's, 2's and 3's to ESL's I guess I don't agree with Mash about the realism of ESL's.

My mentioning 50Hz as a crossover was mostly to illustrate that many people use way to high a crossover setting on powered subs. With most of them having no high pass filtering on the line level connections proper woofer integration becomes difficult. It's probably easier with MMG's because of their limited low frequency extension.

Unless the sub woofer has some high pass filtering it won't take any work away from the MMG's. A full range signal is still going to the MMG's. It will however fill in the missing bass that MMG's can't produce anyway.

[ArKay QAtech]

Just a thought. Think about the age of the Vinyl/Music and then think - - - What was used as a monitor to mix/master the recording? Hint .... British or American. Either one. Some of the best speakers I've heard are from the seventys. You may need them refoamed ( surrounds ) and you might use up some $ but ...

[JoeE SP9]

The art of speaker design and manufacture has improved over what was available in the 70's. Of course you must spend some money to reap the benefits. Even CV now makes some speakers that sound good and not just loud.

The best of 70's speakers is generally not as good as the best of current designs.

[Mash]

The MMG is never carried by a Magnepan dealer as far as I know...... it is a "factory introductory" speaker INTENDED to draw you into the Magnepan world and you (usually) order the MMG's directly from the Magnepan site. Still, it is a fine speaker and a bargain at about $625.

However I still feel that a tube amp is best for Magnepan speakers because I found that the "sound" of a Magnepan speaker will vary, and often disagreeably, with a solid state amp.

[ I only use tube gear with Maggies so I am not interested in any arguments. You pay your money & you make your choice.]

So... w/r/t your comments:

1. It is not as clear as I heard at the auditioning at the dealer with the 1.6 and 1.7's ........

A. I do not believe the nonsense about "breaking in". But first I suggest that you CAREFULLY check the bias on your tube gear. Use a GOOD DMM (I use autoranging units, which means I must carefully check what units are displayed, i.e. mV (milivolts, or .001 Volt) versus Volts, or whatever. Read the adjustment instructions carefully, and then measure what bias is set in your units. Overly high bias can soften the sound & shorten tube life.

B. Then too Russian, Telefunken, etc. tubes will probably be clearer than the original Chinese tubes.

C. The MMG should be pretty clear if you do not overdrive them. The 1.7 should offer more frequency extension and louder sound without distortion, i.e. for use in larger rooms.

D. Also an overly bright (live) room can reduce clarity because of reflections and room modes.. There are companies that sell reasonably-priced wall-mountable sound control panels finished if a wide array of attractive fabrics. Clap your hands sharply and listen for any echoes (slap echo) as you move about the room.

2. I am a bit worried about the subwoofer you mentioned Mash.

2.A Dont you think it's too big for the small room I have have ?

... Start with the volume *very low* and "turn it up" SLOWLY until you can *just barely notice* the sub. Use that level as your starting point. Or wait until you move into a place with a larger listening room.

2.B Would the subwoofer make the MMG's perform better by taking the strain away and letting it work on its higher frequencies ?

... The only reason for a sub is to produce the lower frequencies CLEARLY that the MMG cannot manage. The crossover must be sufficiently above the lower freq limit fo the MMG's for a smooth transition blend.

... A (quality) servo-sub will be clearer than non-servo subs. And you will be forever comparing the subs clarity with the MMG's clarity. If you hear that the sub is less clear that the MMG's it will bug you. This is the problem with ESL that have a non-servo cone woofer: There is a noticable difference in clarity.

.... Think about this: With a servo-sub the sub's designer NOT ONLY knows what amp you are using with the sub he designed, but the cone motion of the sub is continuously being corrected back to match the input signal.

[Mash]

You are comparing one speaker to another to upgrade to (or retain) the best that you can afford. If this pleases you, then fine. But you are pursuing a holy grail that you will never reach. Are the new speakers better, or only just as good but different?

There are other fun things to do in life. So, I do not do this.

My goal was to build a system that matches what I hear in the concert hall. I had this result when my final #1 system was in a perfect room (*very* large with 20 ft ceiling.... and solid-as-hell construction.) Other rooms fell short to different degrees, but if the room is impeding one's efforts to obtain the best or most accurate sound, even ever so slightly, then why go on a continuous search for the ever-more-perfect new speaker?

My approach was intended to do the job once and be done. If the sound matches the live music I hear, why worry further.

One can spend a lot of money on the high-end merry-go-round. I preferred to be able to retire while relatively young and in an excellent financial position. But although I still spent some real money, I added to my knowlege of EE along the way which opened more doors providing a career benefit with the company.

Mine is not an audio-purist approach, but then what really is?

[madarahr]

Every component is tube based and I biased the amp following the instructions in the manual. It has Russian valves. As I mentioned earlier, I did not play much at all with the positioning of the speakers other than follow the instructions and within the limitations I have. It is clearly accurate than anything I previously owned but not as good as the auditioning with the 1.6 and 1.7. My source of music is also pretty good quality. I am very much satisfied with what I have right now as it suits the budget and what I wanted to achieve, I will include a sub in some time and a DAC.

[Mash]

Then I would examine the room. It may be too "live" and need some dampening.

Start with "The Master Handbook of Acoustics" by F. Alton Everest. It is an easy read and a practical resource.

Then you can try "Noise & Vibration Control" by Leo Beranek.

Olsen's "Theoretical Acoustics" is an excellent read but it is also oriented toward engineers.... The math is ... well...

I use MMG's in the bedroom for serious (tube amp) listening, and Mackie HR824's for TV sound. Both setups have Velodyne 15" subs.... That room is about 20 ft by 11 & 1/2 ft with a volume ceiling and substantial damping.

[madarahr]

The room is neither live nor flat. I will do some reading. I am almost certain it would lead me to rearrange the room slightly. I will include a picture tomorrow. Regardless, it's very clear and enjoyable. My wife echos those comments despite the fact that she would never care for these things. That's a good sign of achievement already. I might go and do auditioning again just for a comparison!
Does the 15" sub provide more tighter frequency range than the smaller ones? I mean what would be the advantage over a smaller sub if the room volume isn't that large ?

[JoeE SP9]

You are comparing one speaker to another to upgrade to (or retain) the best that you can afford. If this pleases you, then fine. But you are pursuing a holy grail that you will never reach. Are the new speakers better, or only just as good but different?

There are other fun things to do in life. So, I do not do this.

My goal was to build a system that matches what I hear in the concert hall. I had this result when my final #1 system was in a perfect room (*very* large with 20 ft ceiling.... and solid-as-hell construction.) Other rooms fell short to different degrees, but if the room is impeding one's efforts to obtain the best or most accurate sound, even ever so slightly, then why go on a continuous search for the ever-more-perfect new speaker?

My approach was intended to do the job once and be done. If the sound matches the live music I hear, why worry further.

One can spend a lot of money on the high-end merry-go-round. I preferred to be able to retire while relatively young and in an excellent financial position. But although I still spent some real money, I added to my knowlege of EE along the way which opened more doors providing a career benefit with the company.

Mine is not an audio-purist approach, but then what really is?

You are at least a little mistaken.

Maggy's do respond to being broken in. The manufacturer says so and my experience of owning three (Model 1's, 2's and 3's) new pairs of Maggy's says so.

I am pursuing nothing. I've been using the same main speakers since before I started posting here, They have been driven by the same tube amps all this time. I admit that I have my eyes on some 120 Watt tube mono blocks. Probably later in 2012 they'll be driving my ESL's.

I switched to ESL's because IMO they were and are more real sounding than the Maggy's I've owned and heard. The sole exception being the 20.1's I've heard.

Sure servo subs do a good job. My "holy grail" speakers (IRS-V's, IRS Beta's and Apogee Grand's) use servo subs. However working within their limits transmission line subs offer all that I need including equalized response to 18Hz and +105dB levels. They are also as DIY's considerably less expensive. Each of my subs has 900 Watts to play with.

All my gear is in a dedicated treated room.

BTW: I too am a retired EE.

[JoeE SP9]

The room is neither live nor flat. I will do some reading. I am almost certain it would lead me to rearrange the room slightly. I will include a picture tomorrow. Regardless, it's very clear and enjoyable. My wife echos those comments despite the fact that she would never care for these things. That's a good sign of achievement already. I might go and do auditioning again just for a comparison!
Does the 15" sub provide more tighter frequency range than the smaller ones? I mean what would be the advantage over a smaller sub if the room volume isn't that large ?

All things considered a larger sub will generally play louder and deeper. However IMO a better alternative is distributed bass. This is accomplished with two or more, preferably three subs placed asymmetrically in the room. They will give higher SPL's and deeper response. Multiple subs also help cancel room nodes (peaks and dips) thus providing smoother bass response.

[Mash]

Well, Joe, "breaking in" implies "wearing out" or "fatigue failure".

I have not worn any audio equipment out except some tubes and a power supply cap that failed c1974. I have fried a cone speaker, and I have had a cone surround rot (long ago). I would not classify any of these as fatigue failures.

To "break something in" means that you have introduced a permanent and irreversable inelastic change, a redistribution of retained stresses, or a wearing away of material, and so it stands to reason that any real "change" that had resulted from "breaking in" a product will continue to accumulate with further product use until a plastic, wear, or fatigue failure occurs. If a flexing system is operated safely within its fatigue and elastic limits then no change will occur beyond any enviromental or oxidative degredation. This applies to all solids (materials having a grain structure) with the exception of Aluminum which does not demonstrate a fatigue limit.

"Breaking in" an item is a harmless fad in the audiophile world which manufacturers go along with so as to NOT alienate any potential customers. "Breaking in" is a harmless concept so no risk is thereby posed to the manufacturer. But audiophiles will swear that they hear a difference........

Automotive engines do "break in" and (eventually) they will also wear out.

[Mash]

"The Master Handbook of Acoustics" will provide a method to predict room modes based on room dimensions, but this procedure is best done in EXCEL (or equivalent) so that you can then reorder the calculated modes in numerical sequence from lowest to highest to determine how smooth, or how uneven, your room is. You want to see a smoothly rising graph with a uniform slope rather than a series of steps with bunched modes. Note that some judgement will be required when that room's volume is joined to another significant volume by a large opening.

Using more than one sub leads to a lot of work both with regard to placement in the room considering modes and also allowing for cancellation effects between or among subs as a result of their distances apart. If you have two sounds of the same magnitude, frequency, and phase combine, they add to a combined sound 3dB louder than the two original sounds. But if those two sounds are 180 degrees apart in phase, they add to ZERO dB. I have done the two-sub exercise in a large room and it was a good bit of calculating. I am not convinced the work was cost effective but it was fun.

[Claudio 1949]

The JD9A looks like a great choice. The 12AX7 tube is a dual channel durable workhorse. They last a long time and are plentiful. Look for some Eurorean or Russian (Soviet) tubes because JoLida may be using Chinese tubes. I replaced the Chinese tubes in my JoLida 302B and that was a real improvement.

My translations for info on the Yaqin SM12B were faulty so I have no opinion. I do wonder how you would ever get parts or service if there is a language problem.

Hey Mash - Thinking of buying a Jo-Lida, but am concerned that it might take a while to use it until the tubes warm up.....is that so?

[Mash]

So 10 to 30 seconds should make everything fine. Some fret about letting tubes warm for minutes or even hours to get the purest sound, but that is like letting your car warm up for 2 hours so that you get the best gas milage & performance....

[madarahr]

Hey Mash - Thinking of buying a Jo-Lida, but am concerned that it might take a while to use it until the tubes warm up.....is that so?

It takes a few seconds like mash mentioned.

When you bias the tubes make sure they have warmed up for 5 minutes.