Non-fatiguing speakers..........

[RedGrant]

Can anyone recommend a good sounding, but non-fatiguing speakers?


I recently purchased Celestion Impact 15, an excellent price, $60ish range, and working.

One thing I noticed about Celestion is their non-fatiguing sound.


I also like the sound from Anthony Gallos and B&W, B&W seems it can be a little too bright for my taste.

Has anyone had experience with these two?

[DaveInVA]

I find electrostatic speakers to be the least fatiguing but if those are out of your price range I'd had have to go with DCM Time Windows. I've owned a set of series 1's since '74 when I bought them new and now use them on my "office" system. They come up on Fleabay time to time for anywhere from $100 to around $250. Very clean non fatiguing midrange, They are not big on bass so a sub is needed to really enjoy them. They sound like a match made in heaven with a Sherwood S5000 tube integrated amp.
Here is a pair (not mine, no relation) on Fleabay now:
http://cgi.ebay.com/PAIR-VINTAGE-DCM-TIMEWINDOW-1A-SPEAKERS-NICE-SHAPE_W0QQitemZ230402604930QQcmdZViewItemQQptZSpea kers_Subwoofers?hash=item35a510bf82

Dave

[RedGrant]

I find electrostatic speakers to be the least fatiguing....

Which electrostatic speakers would you recommend?




...but if those are out of your price range ....



Well, I am willing to pay corresponding amount of money for relevant corresponding improvement, just not for marketing, fancy package. In fact, I've given up on Mcintosh, when I finally build my "cost no object" system, it will be electrocompaniet amps, and either anthony gallos reference or Nautilus speaker, truly lifelike sound.


I've become an audiophile very recently, much less an analoguephile.



I'd had have to go with DCM Time Windows. I've owned a set of series 1's since '74 when I bought them new and now use them on my "office" system. They come up on Fleabay time to time for anywhere from $100 to around $250.

I just recently checked the reviews, sounds like what I'm looking for.




Very clean non fatiguing midrange, They are not big on bass so a sub is needed to really enjoy them.

Sounds similar to celestions. Btw. I'm not particularly keen on thumping bass, my music room is pretty small, so I wouldn't want too much bass.

They're rated up to 200w, so it would be compatible when I eventually upgrade the amps.

[DaveInVA]

Which electrostatic speakers would you recommend?


I now use DIY electrostats and couldn't be happier with the sound, I have more about them on the thread previous to this one.
In the past I've owned many commercial ESL's.
Martin Logan CLSII(z) I liked a lot except they needs TONS of power to get a reasonable SPL level so that leaves out most tube amps. I ended up using a Carver TFM-75 to drive them (750 watts dual mono). They sounded better with various tube amps I tried but non had the power to drive them properly. Most of ML current stuff is hybrid stuff meant for Home Theater (except for the Statements of course)

Most of the Acoustat line sounded really nice especially if they had the Medallion transformers. They were more beamy then most ESL's because they used fluorescent like grids for stator panels and that made the sound even more focused than ESL's usually are. Pretty much single person speakers but great sound.

I also had Dayton Wright ESL's but they have the stators in bags with an inert gas to help keep them from arcing and trying to find a pair now that doesn't need repair would be tough I imagine.

For a while I was running 2 pairs of DCM Time Windows stacked and that sounded fantastic. They are cheap enough its worth considering also....

Dave

[Fast Forward]

Magnapan MMG,s Electrostats,,,599.00 ,,and a money back guarantee

[DaveInVA]

Magnapan MMG,s Electrostats,,,599.00 ,,and a money back guarantee

Magnapan speakers are planar and not electrostats, totally different technology. That being said some of the Magnapans sound great.

Dave

[Fast Forward]

Magnapan speakers are planar and not electrostats, totally different technology. That being said some of the Magnapans sound great.

Dave
Your correct ,I,m not a speaker expert,,my expertise lies in making perfectly fine working Audio equipment inoperable

[Nakdoc]

You have good speakers. What you are hearing is the ugly side of digital. Try a tube pre or power amp.

[RedGrant]

Try a tube pre or power amp.

You know what, I kinda agree with you, but after some extensive auditioning, I found out being tube doesn't necessarily make good sound.

There are some tubes that sound horrible, and some ss that sound very tube like.

Besides, dollar for dollar, tube amps simply don't have the power the solid states do.

I've heard r2r with Mcintosh pre and power amps, both solid, and Celestion ditton 66 speakers sound incredibly tube like.

Eventually what I'm thinking of is to get myself, high quality tube pre-amp and solid state amp, with non-fatiuing speakers, with r2r to run.

That would be my dream system.

I think it's the input stage, control amp is where tube will make the most contribution.



As for now, both for budgetary reasons, and as a way of educating my ears, I'll have to settle with high quality vintage ss pre and power amps.

I've givn up on Mcintosh, too over priced, too many people chasing the brand name.


I'm going to decide between B&O, Luxman as far as amps are concerned.

[jbeckva]

Ah... I still say Polk SDA's if you can find 'em in good condition. I've been listening to mine all day long, and the only fatigue I feel is because of all the dang work being done... *fit**eyepop*

Seriously tho... said it before, say it again.. if you never heard the SDA's you'll either love or hate them (no in between). Make sure your amp is common ground however - with the SDA cable that goes between the L and R speakers, any amps with floating grounds will melt usually.

[8mmag]

I'll cast a 2nd positive opinion on the Maggies...just make sure you have a real amp to drive them not some receiver. They are very hungry speakers.

[elroy]

I am partial to vandersteens, you can usually find a set of 2c's for around $350 or less with the stands, they can be a bit picky with setup, but i have never been told mine were fatiguing,

elroy

[Marek]

Magnepans have some of the advantages of an esl, they're boxless and have a large diaphram driven over most of there surface which is closer to an esl than a dynamic speaker. They also are very fast mating well with drivers like infinitys classic emim's and emit's. They also have a very easy to drive resistive load which is an advantage over the esl.

They were designed to have esl like performance without the disadvantages.

Magnapan speakers are planar and not electrostats, totally different technology. That being said some of the Magnapans sound great.

Dave

[Marek]

Polk SDA's...incredible value.*thumbsup*

Ah... I still say Polk SDA's if you can find 'em in good condition. I've been listening to mine all day long, and the only fatigue I feel is because of all the dang work being done... *fit**eyepop*

Seriously tho... said it before, say it again.. if you never heard the SDA's you'll either love or hate them (no in between). Make sure your amp is common ground however - with the SDA cable that goes between the L and R speakers, any amps with floating grounds will melt usually.

[RedGrant]

Ah... I still say Polk SDA's if you can find 'em in good condition. I've been listening to mine all day long, and the only fatigue I feel is because of all the dang work being done... *fit**eyepop*

Seriously tho... said it before, say it again.. if you never heard the SDA's you'll either love or hate them (no in between). Make sure your amp is common ground however - with the SDA cable that goes between the L and R speakers, any amps with floating grounds will melt usually.

Thanks for your input. Polk SDA would have been my choice if I couldn't get a hold of a Celestion.

I agree it's pretty non-fatiguing, but to my ears, celestion is less so.

[RedGrant]

Polk SDA's...incredible value.*thumbsup*

I find celestions going for far less money on ebay.

[RedGrant]

I am partial to vandersteens, you can usually find a set of 2c's for around $350 or less with the stands, they can be a bit picky with setup, but i have never been told mine were fatiguing,

elroy


Well, I guess my ears are made of ceramics, then?


$350 or less? Way out of my budget for the purpose for now.

[RedGrant]

Magnepans have some of the advantages of an esl, they're boxless and have a large diaphram driven over most of there surface which is closer to an esl than a dynamic speaker. They also are very fast mating well with drivers like infinitys classic emim's and emit's. They also have a very easy to drive resistive load which is an advantage over the esl.

They were designed to have esl like performance without the disadvantages.

I don't know about esl now after this. Since I'm not that much into magnepans.

[RedGrant]

Thanks to you all.

Of all the speakers suggested, I find Polk to be the least fatiguing speaker, but still more so than celestion.

I think I settled on Celestion till I get Anthony Gallo Reference. I find Gallo to be less fatiguing than Nautilus.

[DaveInVA]

I don't know about esl now after this. Since I'm not that much into magnepans.

Please don't discount ESL's because of Maggies. I've owned many ESL models and and many Maggies. I've had both SMG and Tympani's on my office system but when I went to a smaller room I dropped back to my DCM Time Windows as they do much better in a small room. They seem to be a great bargin used these days though I've owned mine since new,
Yes Maggies do have some of the advantages of ESL speakers but not all. In my main system I ALWAYS ended up going back to ESL speakers after trying various Maggies. To me they always ended up being a "stop gap" solution that to me sounded better than most cone speakers but just not quite there for me compaired to a decent ESL design. I use a stock Sherwood S5000 integrated amp on my office system with the DCM Time Windows and its a match made in heaven. It even has a very decent phono preamp. Though I do listen to vinyl on it I usually have a digital source playing through it and it sounds great for what it is.
Some advantages ESL designs have:
1) Lighter diaphragm as they don't have the added weight of the voice coil and material to secure the voice coil. Also, some electrostats now have diaphragms as thin as 0.3 mil.
2) Electrostats are true push pull drivers and therefor can be more linear in their excursion range.
3) The entire surface of the diaphragm is a powered part of the driver "motor"
4) As many Maggie models use separate tweeter panels a full range electrostat is more phase coherent as its the same driver for every frequency and with no crossover.
5)When you have the right combo of components going through electrostats the synergy is amazing and unbeatable with good source material.
Some disadvantages of electrostats:
1) As was previously mentioned you need an amp that can handle complex loads without becoming unstable or even blowing up. For instatance, Phase Linear 400 and 700 amps were notorious for not liking ESL's. Tube amps usually work great with ESL's as long as you have enough power.
2) Electrostats (and Maggies to some degree) can be hard to set up in an asymmetrical space. One channel may sound "Bigger" than the other without spending time to site them properly and/or adding room treatments.
3) With ESL (and Maggies) you don't have the worries of cabinet resonances, internal standing waves etc coloring the sound. But you do have to set them up properly to avoid room coupling problems.
4) As ESL speakers can be extremely detailed they can be absolutely brutal in showing up shortcomings with your equipment and source material.
5) Full range electrostats with no subwoofer can be power hungry and not move enough air in the bass for a convincing presentation. It will be very "clean" bass but might not have the "oomph" most people like.
6) It can be very difficult to cross over a sub to an electrostat because you may notice the "seam" where the ESL crosses over to the sub unless the sub is a very fast design.

That all being said, I prefer to stick with Electrostats even so. I "hybridized" mine by adding mid bass towers using sixteen 5.25" drivers from 225 hz to 90 hz to keep the speed of attack up and spred the waveform over the same height as the ESL panels and dipolar subs for below 90 hz. To me that gets me the best of both worlds.

I'd also like to respond on your comment on tube equipment. If you are talking about "classic" vintage tube gear, especially stuff thats still stock with no mods with much of it (though not all) you are likely to get some degree of "woolly bass" and "euphoric midrange". Having a certain amount of this can help cure the dreaded "digititus" fatigue from some digital sources. Also, some vintage tube amps don't have good enough damping ratios if you are using sealed suspension speakers to control the bass properly. Many of those amps were designed before sealed speakers were popular. There are many tube designs that are very accurate and clean. Many older amps have excellent output transformers and can be rebuilt and/or modded for cleaner sound.


Dave

[Marek]

Much good info in this post.

I would like to add a little info.

Maggies do not sound anything like esl's...maggies are fast and uncolored compared to box speakers, but this voicing is different than an esl. Esl's are hard to beat at what they do best.

Amps: for maggies a big high current amp like an arc d350b will make them sing. Esl's are incredibly difficult to drive having a reactive load that will blow up or sound not good with many mid fi amps. In addition they often have a huge impedance swing going from several to several hundred ohms which can present a difficult variation to the amp. Tube amps are good at driving this type of load and acoustat built in tube amps into some of their models. Also otl tube amps can be ideal for speakers like soundlabs.

Reliability: many esls are some what fragile...this is a large topic but the acoustats were famous for not being fragile.

Bass and dynamic range: this is traditionaly esl's weakness, and as mentioned because of the clarity and speed it's difficult to mate any non esl driver to an esl, but as Dave has mentioned it can done.

Please don't discount ESL's because of Maggies. I've owned many ESL models and and many Maggies. I've had both SMG and Tympani's on my office system but when I went to a smaller room I dropped back to my DCM Time Windows as they do much better in a small room. They seem to be a great bargin used these days though I've owned mine since new,
Yes Maggies do have some of the advantages of ESL speakers but not all. In my main system I ALWAYS ended up going back to ESL speakers after trying various Maggies. To me they always ended up being a "stop gap" solution that to me sounded better than most cone speakers but just not quite there for me compaired to a decent ESL design. I use a stock Sherwood S5000 integrated amp on my office system with the DCM Time Windows and its a match made in heaven. It even has a very decent phono preamp. Though I do listen to vinyl on it I usually have a digital source playing through it and it sounds great for what it is.
Some advantages ESL designs have:
1) Lighter diaphragm as they don't have the added weight of the voice coil and material to secure the voice coil. Also, some electrostats now have diaphragms as this as 0.3 mil.
2) Electrostats are true push pull drivers and therefor can be more linear in their excursion range.
3) The entire surface of the diaphragm is a powered part of the driver "motor"
4) As many Maggie models use separate tweeter panels a full range electrostat is more phase coherent as its the same driver for every frequency and with no crossover.
5)When you have the right combo of components going through electrostats the synergy is amazing and unbeatable with good source material.
Some disadvantages of electrostats:
1) As was previously mentioned you need an amp that can handle complex loads without becoming unstable or even blowing up. For instatance, Phase Linear 400 and 700 amps were notorious for not liking ESL's. Tube amps usually work great with ESL's as long as you have enough power.
2) Electrostats (and Maggies to some degree) can be hard to set up in an asymmetrical space. One channel may sound "Bigger" than the other without spending time to site them properly and/or adding room treatments.
3) With ESL (and Maggies) you don't have the worries of cabinet resonances, internal standing waves etc coloring the sound. But you do have to set them up properly to avoid room coupling problems.
4) As ESL speakers can be extremely detailed they can be absolutely brutal in showing up shortcomings with your equipment and source material.
5) Full range electrostats with no subwoofer can be power hungry and not move enough air in the bass for a convincing presentation. It will be very "clean" bass but might not have the "oomph" most people like.
6) It can be very difficult to cross over a sub to an electrostat because you may notice the "seam" where the ESL crosses over to the sub unless the sub is a very fast design.

That all being said, I prefer to stick with Electrostats even so. I "hyrided" mine by adding mid bass towers using sixteen 5.25" drivers from 225 hz to 90 hz to keep the speed of attack up and spreed the waveform over the same height as the ESL panels and dipolar subs for below 90 hz. To me that gets me the best of both worlds.

I'd also like to respond on your comment on tube equipment. If you are talking about "classic" vintage tube gear, especially stuff thats still stock with no mods with much of it (though not all) you are likely to get some degree of "woolly bass" and "euphoric midrange". Having a certain amount of this can help cure the dreaded "digititus" fatigue from some digital sources. Also, some vintage tube amps don't have good enough damping ratios if you are using sealed suspension speakers to control the bass properly. Many of those amos were designed before sealed speakers were popular. There are many tube designs that are very accurate and clean. Many older amps have excellent output transformers and can be rebuilt and/or modded for cleaner sound.


Dave