I've noticed that many systems seem to have difficulty reproducing orchestral music.
So what does it take to make a good classical speaker? I dont really mean what are the audible attributes of a such a speaker, but rather, what type of design and components are most suitable.
Personally, I think detail, soundstange, and the ability to create a sense of space are critical. I also crave accurate timbre since one of the great qualities of an orchestra is the varied colour and texture thats possible.
Im sure electrostatics will come up, and I have heard them do a great job on orchestral music, but I think these are to much for all but the most gung-ho diy'er. For me at least these are out.
So what does it take to make a good classical speaker? I dont really mean what are the audible attributes of a such a speaker, but rather, what type of design and components are most suitable.
Personally, I think detail, soundstange, and the ability to create a sense of space are critical. I also crave accurate timbre since one of the great qualities of an orchestra is the varied colour and texture thats possible.
Im sure electrostatics will come up, and I have heard them do a great job on orchestral music, but I think these are to much for all but the most gung-ho diy'er. For me at least these are out.
IMHO, classical demands accuracy across the frequency range even though we are most sensitive to issues in the 400hz-3kHz range. A violin, for example, goes down below 200Hz (to 196Hz). And also above 3kHz.
However, there are other issues - many (most?) of the instruments have very strong harmonic resonances which don't work right if the phase is all screwy or multiple drivers used don't mesh cleanly. Not to mention details in timbre and tone that are influenced by frequencies much higher up. Same goes for lower notes - to me, a system isn't capable if it can't at least hit the 16.35Hz pedal tones of an organ (32foot pipe). I certainly can not hear below 23hz or so based on sinewave testing and setup of my sub (which registers flat below 15hz...
Gotta love IB setups). But NOT having that last octave solidly reproduced similarly changes things.
To me, speed, accuracy, clarity, coherence are all top issues, and I guess dynamics really should be in there too - a system not able to swing from finely detailed quiet passages to full bore without compressing the sound on one end or the other (or both as it seems many do) is just not going to cut it.
Soundstage and imaging are all icing on the cake. Fun and cool to have, but completely unnecessary. They're dreams of the recording engineers, and sometimes annoying. I have a wonderful recording of solo unaccompanied violin, where on certain passages the sound swings strongly to one side. WTF?! It is very distracting.
All this from someone that grew up immersed in classical music - mom was a conductor (professional choir, private chamber group/choir/orchestra) and I've personally played violin since I was three. Not to mention my dad being a one-time championship jazz musician.
I find modern rock to be the easiest to get sounding acceptable. Classical seems capable of highlighting the deficiencies in any speaker design in less time than it takes for the builders smile to turn to a look of dismay. None of my own speakers meet my expectations, for what that's worth.
C
However, there are other issues - many (most?) of the instruments have very strong harmonic resonances which don't work right if the phase is all screwy or multiple drivers used don't mesh cleanly. Not to mention details in timbre and tone that are influenced by frequencies much higher up. Same goes for lower notes - to me, a system isn't capable if it can't at least hit the 16.35Hz pedal tones of an organ (32foot pipe). I certainly can not hear below 23hz or so based on sinewave testing and setup of my sub (which registers flat below 15hz...
Gotta love IB setups). But NOT having that last octave solidly reproduced similarly changes things.To me, speed, accuracy, clarity, coherence are all top issues, and I guess dynamics really should be in there too - a system not able to swing from finely detailed quiet passages to full bore without compressing the sound on one end or the other (or both as it seems many do) is just not going to cut it.
Soundstage and imaging are all icing on the cake. Fun and cool to have, but completely unnecessary. They're dreams of the recording engineers, and sometimes annoying. I have a wonderful recording of solo unaccompanied violin, where on certain passages the sound swings strongly to one side. WTF?! It is very distracting.
All this from someone that grew up immersed in classical music - mom was a conductor (professional choir, private chamber group/choir/orchestra) and I've personally played violin since I was three. Not to mention my dad being a one-time championship jazz musician.
I find modern rock to be the easiest to get sounding acceptable. Classical seems capable of highlighting the deficiencies in any speaker design in less time than it takes for the builders smile to turn to a look of dismay. None of my own speakers meet my expectations, for what that's worth.
C
I find that a good horn system does better than any other design I have ever used. To do a good job on orchestral music, you cant underestimate the need for dynamics. A good vented bass section (I like 6th order alignments for tight extended bass. This is not the same as a 6th order bandpass), crossing over at 500 Hz to a good compression driver, and then again after 4k to a good tweeter, will provide the listener with a very capable system, in a reasonable sized enclosure. Go here to get info on 6th order alignments. Another good design is the Jensen Imperials, either the sidewall/corner version, or the build-in. This same site may have these available in a knocked down version soon.
http://www.highefficiencyloudspeakers.com/Downloads.html
http://www.highefficiencyloudspeakers.com/Downloads.html
Personally, I think detail, soundstange, and the ability to create a sense of space are critical. I also crave accurate timbre since one of the great qualities of an orchestra is the varied colour and texture thats possible. >
Completely agree - I'm an ex-musician and I'd say the crucial things are:
Detail - you have to differenciate clearly all the instruments, and there may be up to 100 playing!
Timbre - it's pointless if you can't tell a basson from a cor and a french horn from a trombone.
Smoothness - good violin tone and vocals is crucial, so no resonances in the mid and treble
Less important:
Soundstage - this is mostly illusion, and can even be resonance
Bass - There's not that much down there (basses and tubas, bass trombone etc), but I agree it counts quite a lot in weight, particularly on a Steinway Grand. Less important than smooth mids and treble though - some music has little bass e.g. string quartets.
How to get it? bloody good crossover networks, smooth amps (I use tubes, but that's me), a very smooth DAC (again I use tubes), a smooth and detailed CD transport, decent cables and a mains conditioner like a large isolation transformer (like 8Amps). I think that smoothness and detail in the system goes way beyond the speaker.
Completely agree - I'm an ex-musician and I'd say the crucial things are:
Detail - you have to differenciate clearly all the instruments, and there may be up to 100 playing!
Timbre - it's pointless if you can't tell a basson from a cor and a french horn from a trombone.
Smoothness - good violin tone and vocals is crucial, so no resonances in the mid and treble
Less important:
Soundstage - this is mostly illusion, and can even be resonance
Bass - There's not that much down there (basses and tubas, bass trombone etc), but I agree it counts quite a lot in weight, particularly on a Steinway Grand. Less important than smooth mids and treble though - some music has little bass e.g. string quartets.
How to get it? bloody good crossover networks, smooth amps (I use tubes, but that's me), a very smooth DAC (again I use tubes), a smooth and detailed CD transport, decent cables and a mains conditioner like a large isolation transformer (like 8Amps). I think that smoothness and detail in the system goes way beyond the speaker.
RJ said:
It won't matter if it doesn't mesh well with the rest of the frequency range. Really. Well, tweeter is probably less critical if you cross around 4khz, but too much happens in the 80hz-400hz range to dismiss that out of hand - if you can't reproduce that accurately as well, you might as well give up.
I honestly can't say what does a superb job because I don't have any experience specifically with drivers that do. I think a lot of "full range" drivers nail this range wonderfully, some going even lower, especially in a horn setup. I think that is part of why some folks really like single driver horn rigs. Or just single driver rigs, or single driver plus super-tweeter...
No bass is no go though. A LOT happens low. Try listening to Mahler without notes. Or Durufle. Or... 30hz low point is OK, but that last octave still makes a big difference. And that's pretty much at the loooow end of "bass" so I'm surprised anyone can claim that bass isn't important for Classical.I will say that I find dipole/open baffle, so far, goes a looong way to giving some of the detail I crave, but the only setup I have of this type is only good for nearfield listening and has no bass to boot.
It's a very very cheap driver though (plus tweeter crossed at 3800hz).C
I appreciate the thoughts so far but most of what has been mentioned is about the attributes a good classical speaker should have.
What i want to know is what types of designs, drivers, crossovers, etc make a good classical speaker.
For example, based on what I have been reading and the few experiments I've done on my own, I would guess that open baffles would be well suited. I have read that ribbon tweeters have a very open sound and that sounds like something that would be suitable. Some drivers seem to be aclaimed for their detail and so might be a good classical driver, whereas some other drivers with excellent reputations lack detail and so are probably better suited for other purposes.
I have no idea if TLs are particulairly suited to classical.
Im not sure about full range drivers. They seem to be popular with people who like classical but I wonder if having one driver reproducing so many instruments is a good idea.
Anyway, compared to most of the people here I have essentially no experience, so I am just stating my thoughts as an example of the kind of things I would like input on.
Thanks
What i want to know is what types of designs, drivers, crossovers, etc make a good classical speaker.
For example, based on what I have been reading and the few experiments I've done on my own, I would guess that open baffles would be well suited. I have read that ribbon tweeters have a very open sound and that sounds like something that would be suitable. Some drivers seem to be aclaimed for their detail and so might be a good classical driver, whereas some other drivers with excellent reputations lack detail and so are probably better suited for other purposes.
I have no idea if TLs are particulairly suited to classical.
Im not sure about full range drivers. They seem to be popular with people who like classical but I wonder if having one driver reproducing so many instruments is a good idea.
Anyway, compared to most of the people here I have essentially no experience, so I am just stating my thoughts as an example of the kind of things I would like input on.
Thanks
There's a lot to like about FR drivers but sometimes it's like a philosophical discussion. I was listening to Berlioz on my FE207E pipes and was surprised that the instrument I heard on other speakers were actually two instruments playing together, a bassoon and a baritone from the same spot in the soundstage. We recently had a speaker building contest (very small) and the winning design was a three-way system with the Morel MDM55 mid-range that was very enjoyable to listen to. There was nothing exceptional about this design (standard BR box, 2nd order XO) other than the use of very good drivers. I'm still impressed with that Morel driver. Our club's reference system includes Lynn Olson's Ariels that do well on almost everything. I think it's important to have drivers that are light and "quick" so full-range fits as do ribbons and light large woofers that can handle tympani and bass drums. Sorry I don't have one good answer but maybe that gives you some things to consider.
dvdwmth said:
Eh... you have one basic membrane on the receiving end of things.
Full range drivers nearly always succeed because they cover the most critical range form a single source, cleanly and accurately, with all those important characteristics we look for in a top notch driver. Filling in the top and bottom many times require help - horn setups, tweeters, etc. That isn't to say they're the only option.
I think that every person is going to have their own ear on what works best. Heck, I know this. Some people insist that low order slopes (or natural driver roll-off only if it can be done) is the ONLY way to go. Others insist that you need ultra high order fancy termed slopes. Look at the drivers they use and prefer, and it may make sense. Both can sound excellent when properly executed. That isn't to say that one or the other is right or wrong specifically, and every person will likely have their preference.
It's like things such as "BBC" curves and a rolled off top octave. Many folks prefer this. Heck, we know some people think bass only plays at 50hz. My experience is that my ears find rolled off top end to be lacking, and all but the most subtle midrange suck-outs to be, well... midrange suck-outs. On the other hand, it could be that my ears don't work as well on the top end, etc. Who knows?
Design philosophies are going to be as varied as there are designers. This is good. Somewhere out there is a setup that works for you.
I should add, room and equipment can also make a difference, particularly room! But also equipment to a big degree (depends how drastic your comparisons). Focus on just one aspect and you'll be missing a LOT.
C
David,
Since you are in Toronto you can hear by yourself if having one driver reproducing so many instruments is a good idea or not.
I am one of the single driver/horn addicts, and I really enjoy unbelievable classical live concerts on CBC 2. If you are interested
just drop me an e-mail for details.
Ioan
Since you are in Toronto you can hear by yourself if having one driver reproducing so many instruments is a good idea or not.
I am one of the single driver/horn addicts, and I really enjoy unbelievable classical live concerts on CBC 2. If you are interested
just drop me an e-mail for details.
Ioan
cjd said:
Im not focused on one aspect but I cant deal with every part of the system simultaneously. Also, there are not so many amplifier plans out there so its easier to narrow down.
As far as design philosophies are concerned, I have no doubt that you are right about that. What I'm most concerned about at the moment though is being able to hear the instruments, the various melodic lines and harmonic structure, and the different tones and textures. Im not looking for definitive answers just hints at what direction to move in.
i would say that in most cases the room is the most important part of this equation. i have seen many a good set of components make bad sound due to the room and their placement in them.
i recently went to a "taste test". the speakers in question were the Wilson Audio WATT/Puppy, Joe Joesph's Pearl (which he claims are named after his Mother in Law), and a Manger speaker using a single Manger driver and a 8" Vifa woofer.
The music covered everything from Mahler, Sting, and some Jazz. listenig sessions were about 2-2.5 hrs long with breaks for tea, and lunch.
Electronics were mostly NAD silverline brought by the Manger dealer. the room was fairly well treated. We had heard a pair of Magneplanars and a triangular Gradient speaker in this room on an earlier occasion (the Gradient on that occasion to me sounded more natural) so we wer familiar with the room's characteristics.
The listeners were 2 unbiased audiophiles (incl. myself) , the local Manger dealer, the owner of the Pearl's, and the owner of the WATT/Puppy (whose house it was).
The Wilson's and Pearl's were dynamic and walked all over the Manger in a lot of areas but when it came to chosing one speaker that we would listen to after evening tea, till dinner was served and later with dinner (albeit in less a critical enviroment) I prefered the Manger. The other audiophile prefered the Pearls (he owns Acoustic Arts). In difference to the lady of the house we however hooked up the WATT/Puppy.
After a while I noticed that the W/Ps were doing a nice job. I did not miss the Manger. I wondered if we get used to a particualr speaker over time and learn to love it.
I have heard all these speakers (Wilson, Pearl, Manger, Gradient, Acoustic Arts, B&W 801, Magneplanar III/R etc...) on occasions and they all do a decent job of most music. Each has it's strong points and I doubt I will ever find a speaker that can excel in all areas. Critical listening forces us to look for a speaker's weaknesses and take the strengths for granted. By that token every speaker will be weaker in one area and stronger in others.
i recently went to a "taste test". the speakers in question were the Wilson Audio WATT/Puppy, Joe Joesph's Pearl (which he claims are named after his Mother in Law), and a Manger speaker using a single Manger driver and a 8" Vifa woofer.
The music covered everything from Mahler, Sting, and some Jazz. listenig sessions were about 2-2.5 hrs long with breaks for tea, and lunch.
Electronics were mostly NAD silverline brought by the Manger dealer. the room was fairly well treated. We had heard a pair of Magneplanars and a triangular Gradient speaker in this room on an earlier occasion (the Gradient on that occasion to me sounded more natural) so we wer familiar with the room's characteristics.
The listeners were 2 unbiased audiophiles (incl. myself) , the local Manger dealer, the owner of the Pearl's, and the owner of the WATT/Puppy (whose house it was).
The Wilson's and Pearl's were dynamic and walked all over the Manger in a lot of areas but when it came to chosing one speaker that we would listen to after evening tea, till dinner was served and later with dinner (albeit in less a critical enviroment) I prefered the Manger. The other audiophile prefered the Pearls (he owns Acoustic Arts). In difference to the lady of the house we however hooked up the WATT/Puppy.
After a while I noticed that the W/Ps were doing a nice job. I did not miss the Manger. I wondered if we get used to a particualr speaker over time and learn to love it.
I have heard all these speakers (Wilson, Pearl, Manger, Gradient, Acoustic Arts, B&W 801, Magneplanar III/R etc...) on occasions and they all do a decent job of most music. Each has it's strong points and I doubt I will ever find a speaker that can excel in all areas. Critical listening forces us to look for a speaker's weaknesses and take the strengths for granted. By that token every speaker will be weaker in one area and stronger in others.
dvdwmth said:
I think a few people missed that you said orchestral music. The biggest issue here (for speakers) is the high dynamic range of orchestral music. The difference between average and peak levels can be 25db or more. The average level must be audible while the peaks remain unstrained. Hard to do.
IMO, flat frequency response is important with deviations being dips rather than humps - even small ones. Sins of omission rather than comission.
Another important factor is efficiency. Ideally you want to be at or above 93db/w/m. This is quite hard to do full range - but IME big amps can't make up for inefficient speakers.
The problem is that the more efficiency you seek, the harder it is to get flat frequency response. It's a trade-off.
You also need a large speaker reproducing the upper bass/lower midrange to convey proper scale and power. An 8 inch driver will never move enough air to sound like an orchestra at fortissimo.
I'd suggest not losing your way by seeking laser imaging or hyper-detail. Start with 3 or 4 well-behaved, reasonably efficient drivers (no monster cone break-up modes!) and see where that takes you.
Okay, how about this low cost system which should keep our classical enthusiast happy:
Vifa M18 woofer crossed over at around 200hz to a
Vifa p13 mid-woofer (seperated enclosure from M18)
with a high crossover to say a Vifa XT25? Or if your budget extends to it a better spec' Scanspeak tweeter.
The M18 provides punch, extension and timbral accuracy.
The P13 handles the critical range all to itself without having to deal with the bass. This woofer is well respected for it's midrange reproduction (but not it's bass extension)
The tweeter is free to reproduce the highest octaves only. Some experimentation with tweeters could be performed to see which one matches weel with the midrange. The Xt25 has a very sharp off axis fall-off but it is a good mid priced unit.
It's just a starting point but at least it gives some definite options.
Over to you DVDwmth.................................
Vifa M18 woofer crossed over at around 200hz to a
Vifa p13 mid-woofer (seperated enclosure from M18)
with a high crossover to say a Vifa XT25? Or if your budget extends to it a better spec' Scanspeak tweeter.
The M18 provides punch, extension and timbral accuracy.
The P13 handles the critical range all to itself without having to deal with the bass. This woofer is well respected for it's midrange reproduction (but not it's bass extension)
The tweeter is free to reproduce the highest octaves only. Some experimentation with tweeters could be performed to see which one matches weel with the midrange. The Xt25 has a very sharp off axis fall-off but it is a good mid priced unit.
It's just a starting point but at least it gives some definite options.
Over to you DVDwmth.................................
Orchestral music often sounds annoying on stereos, specially during forte passages. And I think this is mostly because IMD etc is muddying things up. With live orchestras you don't have this effect at all.
Even though small two-way speakers or systems like my Mangers (and many single-driver fullrange systems) have a much better naturalness and "being-there" feeling with small formations - they are easily outperformed by large three-way systems when it comes to clean reproduction of loud orchestral music. My personal conclusion is that this is because of less IMD of the three- or more- ways.
So there's no speaker that can do everything.
Regards
Charles
Even though small two-way speakers or systems like my Mangers (and many single-driver fullrange systems) have a much better naturalness and "being-there" feeling with small formations - they are easily outperformed by large three-way systems when it comes to clean reproduction of loud orchestral music. My personal conclusion is that this is because of less IMD of the three- or more- ways.
So there's no speaker that can do everything.
Regards
Charles
phase_accurate said:
which manger system do you have. the small 2 way with 8" vifa woofer?
it all depends how loud you like your music. for most things i listen too the manger sufficed. At "live"or "realistic" levels maybe not but one could always add a sub and gain a few more dbs in SPL capability.
what seakers?
Magneplanars
Full range ribbons or ribbon hybrids
Only a very few electrostatics - e.g. Quad 57, I find MLs coarse.
2-way bookshelf speakers.
I think the common factor is very simple crossover networks and integration of drivers - either they sound the same as in Maggies or the man driver does all the work as in 2-ways. I just heard a dem of Wilson Watt/Puppies (7) with Nagra DPA 845 amp which was pretty impressive for a large room. But I went next door where they had a small system and a single driver and the music just came to life - I liked it more. So I guess it's a question of scale - if you want actual volume of an orchestra you want a big room and big speakers, like W/Ps. For chamber music I'd much prefer a really good 2-way with a 5" or 6.5" driver - even something like Dynaudio Audience SE - or better still a ribbon or ribbon hybrid. I'm personally happy scaling down the sound to a small room - at least I get the timbre and the details. Ultimately the W/Ps sacrificed the last level of resolution.
The ear quickly makes allowances for what isn't there as long as what is there is as good as possible.
Magneplanars
Full range ribbons or ribbon hybrids
Only a very few electrostatics - e.g. Quad 57, I find MLs coarse.
2-way bookshelf speakers.
I think the common factor is very simple crossover networks and integration of drivers - either they sound the same as in Maggies or the man driver does all the work as in 2-ways. I just heard a dem of Wilson Watt/Puppies (7) with Nagra DPA 845 amp which was pretty impressive for a large room. But I went next door where they had a small system and a single driver and the music just came to life - I liked it more. So I guess it's a question of scale - if you want actual volume of an orchestra you want a big room and big speakers, like W/Ps. For chamber music I'd much prefer a really good 2-way with a 5" or 6.5" driver - even something like Dynaudio Audience SE - or better still a ribbon or ribbon hybrid. I'm personally happy scaling down the sound to a small room - at least I get the timbre and the details. Ultimately the W/Ps sacrificed the last level of resolution.
The ear quickly makes allowances for what isn't there as long as what is there is as good as possible.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.