Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Do large speakers sound worse at low volume? (Read 29082 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #25 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
Smugness aside, I am open to hearing what specifically you object to about the 60s and the 10x20 room I described.

Sitting 14' back in such a narrow room, unless anechoic, you are going to have high indirect/direct ratio, i.e, get a huge contribution from the off axis radiation of your speakers, to the "sound" you hear at the listening position. I specifically pointed out the poor off axis of the ML in the previous thread, but perhaps you didn't understand. Or possibly, you don't find this sort of coloration unbearable. Many possibilities. Do the existing MLs sitting on the bookshelf sound acceptable outside of lacking bass? Does the spatial rendering (or complete absence) suit your tastes?

Quote from: John 31415926 on
I'm not looking to persuade or impress anyone.

Me neither. This is all just internets chit-chat for moi. 

Quote from: John 31415926 on
The absolute best listening room for both recorded audio and my digital organ are all I'm interested in.

Well, the room you're probably stuck with. What you put in there and its arrangement is key.

Quote from: John 31415926 on
I'm just asking all the questions I can think of so that in five years I'll still believe my choice was the right one.
Yes, I did remove the desk.

5 yrs??? Definitely not an audiophile (with the ever ending itch for new)  .
Good, so how far out from (bookshelf) wall can speakers be placed sans desk? Pic?

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer
 

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #26 –
Quote from: ajinfla on
...Do the existing MLs sitting on the bookshelf sound acceptable outside of lacking bass?

...Does the spatial rendering (or complete absence) suit your tastes?

...so how far out from (bookshelf) wall can speakers be placed sans desk? Pic?


Thank you, AJ.

•  The ML XT35 bookshelf speakers sound absolutely unbelievable. But of course, I've never owned quality speakers before. I have however test driven a few at Magnolia so I'm not completely unaware. I am very pleased with the sound, bass notwithstanding.

•  I'm not sure what spatial rendering means. If by that you mean the sweet spot, ML does seem to be true to its reputation of having a very narrow sweet spot. I could move literally only one foot off to one side and the magic lessened considerably. It sounds "good" anywhere in the room, but the magic is in a very small space.  These are definitely speakers for a guy who sits in a chair and listens intently to his music without moving around.  I guess that makes them ideal for practicing an organ as well ... just need to angle them in sharply when I play as the organ sits between the speakers.  (Maybe speaker stands on a lazy susan?  Ha!)

•  I've since learned about the equilateral triangle in speaker positioning. Yep, that sweet spot was at exactly the top of the triangle and exactly where the tweeter is at ear height.  So no, I won't be sitting 14' away as planned.  About 8' actually.  I'm vacating most of the furniture in the room so it can be used exclusively for playing the organ and listening to audio.  That will allow me to move up to the right spot.

Since I got rid of the desk, I have about three feet on either side of the organ where the 60's were going to stand.  That probably won't happen as it sounds from the universal consensus that a sub is the way to go.  However, the 35's are on a shelf with the tweeter six feet high.  I'm getting speaker stands this week and they'll be down at ear level when seated.  Back of the speaker could easily be one to two feet from the back wall.

This is not my music room - I just pulled this off image-google ... but it's essentially identical to what I'll have once I pick up some speaker stands.  Right now they sit on shelves up above the organ.  I also probably won't have the speakers that far away from the wall.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #27 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
Thank you, AJ.

•  The ML XT35 bookshelf speakers sound absolutely unbelievable. But of course, I've never owned quality speakers before. I have however test driven a few at Magnolia so I'm not completely unaware. I am very pleased with the sound, bass notwithstanding.

You're welcome. Ok, let's start from the start. The only ears/eyes that matter here are yours and your preferences. Not mine or anyone else here. So with that said, my advice would reflect what I might do.
I can't help but wonder if your AVR might not be a serious compromise. Google shows this which probably means your main LR are crossed high and at a fixed frequency. Not going to scour the manual for you, are there any adjustments in the menu for sub/LR crossover frequency, etc?
If not, forget floorstanders, your biggest bottleneck might be the AVR. If you're going to spend more, budget $200-300 for a new receiver. BB seems to carry a 2ch Onkyo for less than $200, with a subwoofer pre output. If you don't mind the complexities of a MCH AVR menu, several are available in that range and will have greater flexibility and connectivity, albeit with more complexity.

Quote from: John 31415926 on
I'm not sure what spatial rendering means. If by that you mean the sweet spot, ML does seem to be true to its reputation of having a very narrow sweet spot. I could move literally only one foot off to one side and the magic lessened considerably. It sounds "good" anywhere in the room, but the magic is in a very small space.  These are definitely speakers for a guy who sits in a chair and listens intently to his music without moving around.  I guess that makes them ideal for practicing an organ as well ... just need to angle them in sharply when I play as the organ sits between the speakers.  (Maybe speaker stands on a lazy susan?  Ha!)

Stereo means 3D. that means your reproduction should have width, depth and some height. With say female jazz, the singer should be somewhere between the speakers, perhaps several feet back behind the plane of the speakers, with the instruments placed around her. IOW, a sense of space. its all an illusion, mostly an artificial construct in a studio. No right or wrong rendition. Tastes and preferences vary. With your narrow room, the MLs poor off axis and close proximity to front wall on bookshelf, I would expect the spatial reproduction to be abysmal.  But my expectations are not what matters, your taste is. Not surprised at the narrow sweet spot either, but that's moot if you plan to just sit and listen.

Quote from: John 31415926 on
I've since learned about the equilateral triangle in speaker positioning. Yep, that sweet spot was at exactly the top of the triangle and exactly where the tweeter is at ear height.  So no, I won't be sitting 14' away as planned.  About 8' actually.

Much better. That will mitigate some of the poor off axis of the MLs in the 3k range and increase your direct/reflected ratio, but, an 8' triangle still places the speakers 1' or so off side walls. Not a good place for a speaker with poor off axis, as the lateral reflections will be strong contributors at the LP an thus a stronger influence on timbre, especially with typical drywall.
What is BBs return policy? I see that they carry JBL, though perhaps not in your store? If they have these or these, try to audition, with your own music if possible.
That sort of design will physically fare much better in most rooms, including yours. Whether you like the sound and looks is another matter entirely.

Quote from: John 31415926 on
I'm vacating most of the furniture in the room so it can be used exclusively for playing the organ and listening to audio.  That will allow me to move up to the right spot.

Be careful not to make it too empty. That furniture adds absorption and diffusion, some is necessary for good sound to most folks. Judicious placement is key.

Quote from: John 31415926 on
Since I got rid of the desk, I have about three feet on either side of the organ where the 60's were going to stand.  That probably won't happen as it sounds from the universal consensus that a sub is the way to go.  However, the 35's are on a shelf with the tweeter six feet high.  I'm getting speaker stands this week and they'll be down at ear level when seated.  Back of the speaker could easily be one to two feet from the back wall.
This is not my music room - I just pulled this off image-google ... but it's essentially identical to what I'll have once I pick up some speaker stands.  Right now they sit on shelves up above the organ.  I also probably won't have the speakers that far away from the wall.

The nearer you sit, the less the poor off axis of the MLs contribute. So perhaps all you need is stands, a receiver and two subs. 
For your type music (which is mine also), I would recommend spending your $$ on floorstanders and a single sub. New receiver already suggested. All for less than the XT60s.

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #28 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
These are definitely speakers for a guy who sits in a chair and listens intently to his music without moving around.
  I called it.

 
Quote
... just need to angle them in sharply when I play as the organ sits between the speakers.  (Maybe speaker stands on a lazy susan?  Ha!)
Interestingly there have been speakers made with an electronic rendition of your lazy Susan idea where the listener, from the comfort of their listening chair, could electronically "rotate" the direction of speaker's output (often referred to as the "toe-in") via wireless remote control.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #29 –
Quote from: ajinfla on
The nearer you sit, the less the poor off axis of the MLs contribute.


AJ, what is "off axis"...?

I googled it, but all I get is NASA looking graphs.


I figured out one thing that is more influential than personal taste when it comes to speakers.  Availability!

Best Buy online shows the JBL you referred to.  I'll have to call my Best Buy Magnolia store to see if they actually have some in stock so I can give them a listen.

Right now, I'm inclined to keep the ML 35's and use a sub, but other than a trip to BB, it doesn't cost me anything to give one or two other speakers a listen before settling in - assuming they have some to show me.

Also, it only today occurred to me that it might be wise to do the bookshelf+sub thing because serious organ badasses eventually get these multi-channel thingies where different "pipes" of a digital organ are routed to different speakers.  Sort of like 5.1, but they are all true distinct channels.  That might be in my future, so starting with two bookshelf speakers and a sub puts me halfway there.



.
.
.
.

Now, about that off axis...

Whazzat?

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #30 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
Also, it only today occurred to me that it might be wise to do the bookshelf+sub thing because serious organ badasses eventually get these multi-channel thingies where different "pipes" of a digital organ are routed to different speakers.  Sort of like 5.1, but they are all true distinct channels.  That might be in my future, so starting with two bookshelf speakers and a sub puts me halfway there.
 

This is a bad idea from the perspective of reproducing any pre-recorded, conventional stereo (2 channel) music you listen to from CD, radio, TV, download, etc. Arguably there are benefits for reproducing a singular performer on pipe organ this way, however the stereophonic image of normal 2ch. music is ruined if you divvy up the range of frequencies into many speakers spraying their sound at the listener from several different distinct locations beyond just two, left and right. We can get away with doing this frequency division in a singular loudspeaker such as your new 35s because the tweeter reproducing the highs is just inches away from the woofer reproducing the lows, and from any reasonable listening distance of several feet, most listeners can't tell that they come from two different points of direction. If instead you separate frequency ranges by a foot or two, using a bank of many speakers in a row like Luca Raggi has in that image, instead of just an inch or two in a normal speaker, this problem rematerializes and kills imaging and the stereo effect. The stereophonic sound becomes a blurry mess even though you have attempted to stay in the sweet spot.

Subwoofers are an exception to this rule and can be placed many feet away because they usually don't reproduce the frequencies which give us cues as to what direction their particular limited range of sound comes from. In our mind's eye we can place their very deep frequencies wherever it seems to make sense to us based on the other higher frequency content coming from the other main speakers at the same time.

I assume your new audio system is for general entertainment from numerous sources. If it is exclusively for the organ then disregard my warning.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #31 –
Quote from: mzil on
This is a bad idea from the perspective of reproducing any pre-recorded, conventional stereo (2 channel) music you listen to from CD, radio, TV, download, etc.



No worries.  I don't yet own the hardware involved in getting multiple audio signals out of a digital organ and amplifying and sending each signal to a distinct speaker.  Certainly was not planning to try to listen to recorded music that way.

It would be two different listening scenarios.  Two channel stereo for recorded music.  Numerous distinct multi-channel outs for organ. 

But that multi-channel organ thing is way off, yet.  It's all just stereo for now.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #32 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
Also, it only today occurred to me that it might be wise to do the bookshelf+sub thing because serious organ badasses eventually get these multi-channel thingies where different "pipes" of a digital organ are routed to different speakers.  Sort of like 5.1, but they are all true distinct channels. That might be in my future, so starting with two bookshelf speakers and a sub puts me halfway there.
This might be a viable situation for the production of organ music, but a horrid concept for music REproduction of any other music.  Just like certain distortion is desirable when playing an electric guitar for certain effects, but would be out of place on a system designed to reproduce all music.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #33 –
Quote from: The Mighty Favog on
This might be a viable situation for the production of organ music, but a horrid concept for music REproduction of any other music.


I probably should never have brought up the organ thing.  Anyway, see above reply. 

Really was just looking to understand the difference between two ML floorstanders vs two bookshelf ML's and a sub.  Most of the replies here have been fantastic in educating me.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #34 –
On-axis means where the speakers are 'pointing' at.

Speakers don't radiate all frequencies equally. In a light analogy a 'bad' speaker would radiate low frequencies like a light bulb, but high frequencies like a laser pointer. Now if you move off-axis with such a speaker, sound will completely change, imaging will suffer ... the sweet spot will be tiny.
"I hear it when I see it."

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #35 –
Quote from: xnor on
On-axis means where the speakers are 'pointing' at.

Speakers don't radiate all frequencies equally. In a light analogy a 'bad' speaker would radiate low frequencies like a light bulb, but high frequencies like a laser pointer. Now if you move off-axis with such a speaker, sound will completely change, imaging will suffer ... the sweet spot will be tiny.



Got it.  Very cool.

Thanks. 

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #36 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
AJ, what is "off axis"...?

I googled it, but all I get is NASA looking graphs.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=loudspeaker+off+axis 

Quote from: John 31415926 on
I figured out one thing that is more influential than personal taste when it comes to speakers.  Availability!

Best Buy online shows the JBL you referred to.  I'll have to call my Best Buy Magnolia store to see if they actually have some in stock so I can give them a listen.

Right now, I'm inclined to keep the ML 35's and use a sub, but other than a trip to BB, it doesn't cost me anything to give one or two other speakers a listen before settling in - assuming they have some to show me.

Yes, your personal taste is all that matters and since you already own and like the MLs, they may well be your best option. I'm suggesting the JBLs because they are similarly priced and will have much better overall in room performance, thought that does not mean you will prefer them. As you note, free to listen if they are available. Unfortunately, hearing them at BB will not be the same as hearing them in a 10' wide room....
Miraculously, it does appear your Onkyo has an adjustable crossover (XO). Follow the instructions on page 29 of the manual and try setting your XT35/Onkyo sub at 80hz, then adjust up or down to see whether you can localize the sub, i.e. "hear" sound coming from it, rather than just hearing extended bass from your XT35s. Once you get to that frequency, crank the system up to as loud as you would ever would with your music selections and listen for any distortions distortions from either XT35 or sub.

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #37 –
I'm wondering (now) if the existing Onkyo sub (do we know the model number?) might be of the "one note" subs I warned about earlier, like this one from a $900 5.1 system they once made?



If it is, it could easily scare a person away from using subs and it might be best to use the ML XT35s alone until a real deal sub can be obtained with a smooth, natural, multi-note capable, broad plateau in the low bass, more akin to say this $800 sub I'm showing merely for contrast:



Onkyo HTIB (5.1 system) review: http://www.soundandvision.com/content/onky...t-labs-measures

SVS sub http://www.soundandvision.com/content/svs-...2000-subwoofers

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #38 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
Miraculously, it does appear your Onkyo has an adjustable crossover (XO). Follow the instructions on page 29 of the manual and try setting your XT35/Onkyo sub at 80hz, then adjust up or down to see whether you can localize the sub, i.e. "hear" sound coming from it, rather than just hearing extended bass from your XT35s. Once you get to that frequency, crank the system up to as loud as you would ever would with your music selections and listen for any distortions distortions from either XT35 or sub.


Holy Schmokes, AJ.  That's about as helpful a post as I've seen.  Thanks.  I'll be on it this evening or tomorrow.  I'll post the results.


Quote from: mzil on
I'm wondering (now) if the existing Onkyo sub (do we know the model number?) might be of the "one note" subs I warned about earlier, like this one from a $900 5.1 system they once made?

If it is, it could easily scare a person away from using subs and it might be best to use the ML XT35s alone until a real deal sub can be obtained with a smooth, natural, multi-note capable, broad plateau in the low bass, more akin to say this $800 one I'm showing merely for contrast.


Onkyo SKW-390

Note that that data sheet shows my exact sub, but in the context of a different 5.1 system than the one I have.  I'm curious how you determine from reading whether a sub is a "one-note" sub.

I did have it hooked up for eight seconds and it sounded awful ... but that was before I read the posts about adjusting it.  Didn't even know about adjusting a sub.  Doh!

I seem to be the kind of guy this forum was made for.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #39 –
The one note sub I showed, top blue trace, has a specific peak, in this case at 65Hz. It can reproduce that one note nicely but not the others in the low bass range with the same, equal intensity. The symptom is that despite all efforts to set the level and crossover [important to do with all subs] the  sub is either "too boomy/muddy" or "completely absent without contributing to the main speakers at all." but never "just right". So one asks themselves "What's the point?" They are also a bear to integrate with just any old speaker even once you dial in the right settings.

A good frequency response instead should be a broad, flat plateau, like the SVS sub I showed for contrast (not that I'm suggesting it is necessarily the one you should get).

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #40 –
Quote from: mzil on
The one note sub I showed, top blue trace, has a specific peak, in this case at 65Hz. It can reproduce that one note nicely but not the others in the low bass range with the same, equal intensity. The symptom is that despite all efforts to set the level and crossover [important to do with all subs] the  sub is either "too boomy/muddy" or "completely absent without contributing to the main speakers at all." but never "just right". So one asks themselves "What's the point?" They are also a bear to integrate with just any old speaker even once you dial in the right settings.

A good frequency response instead should be a broad, flat plateau, like the SVS sub I showed for contrast (not that I'm suggesting it is necessarily the one you should get).



Yep, out of my league.  So I assume we can't tell much just from the data sheet I provided in the last post.  We would need one o' them line-thingie tests?

Otherwise, I need to hook it up, adjust it properly, and see if it can be optimized.

I'm happy to spend for a proper sub if necessary.  And much happier still to find out the one I have is adequate for now.

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #41 –
Quote from: greynol on
Early exposure (~3-6 years old) to music and training makes you a good listener; good speakers don't.

Huh. That's actually interesting. Is there any study about it? Well, I'll google for it later.

I don't know whether early exposure makes some difference but my father's  vinyls of rock bands have marked my musical preferences forever (starting from age of 4 years old or so).

Do large speakers sound worse at low volume?

Reply #42 –

I think I have some closure on the first level of getting my sound room set up.

AJ, I tried to get a listen to the JBL floorstanders you recommended.  No luck.  Could not find a local retailer that had them in stock and able to demo.  Bummer. 

I remained displeased with the low-end of the 35's - in addition to the fact that even the high-end had a little shrillness to them that I did not find ideal.  They were very good, but not perfect.  I spent the whole danged day on Saturday attaching my little 5.1 Onkyo sub and going through every possible settings in the receiver as well as placement, per all the suggestions in this thread.  I could not get the ensemble to sound "whole".  I don't know if that's because I just don't know what I'm doing, or because I have a cheapo sub or because the 35's are just not made for what I'm trying to accomplish.

By the way, I played a couple of recent and digitally mastered CDs, quality stuff like Diana Krall, and they sounded great.  The 35's seem made for new recordings.  But as soon as I put in anything dated, even from the 80's, the sound didn't satisfy.  Some albums sounded awful.

I decided to go back to Magnolia Best Buy with the old offending CDs to see if they sounded all that great on their 35's.  They sounded a little better (I assume it was the room or the amp) but still not ideal.  I had them play their 35s with their $1000 sub ... still not ideal.  As close as I can get to describing the problem, it was all high-end and low-end ... nothing in between. 

So, I went through every floorstander they had.  Four different brands, about eight models.  I came to the conclusion that those ML 60's were way too much for my little room ... but for $1200 less, the next step down was the ML Motion40's.

Jackpot.  Absolute jackpot.  Sweet sweet sound, even on my old analog master vintage jazz CDs. 

Not $3000 for the pair, either.  I ended up negotiating down to $1800 for the pair.  $1200 less than the 60's.  $600 more than my bookshelf 35's (which are now going back).

Got 'em home ... absolute magic.  Set up the triangle, positioned the chair, closed my eyes ... could not hear the music coming "from" the speakers.  All the parts just floated in between and it felt just like being in the front row of a small unamplified jazz club. 

Plenty of clean low-end ... exceptional mid-range ... clean and smooth highs.  Everything factory tuned to perfection for an audio-illiterate like myself.  No adjustments needed.


There will still be a sub coming - a substantial one - for when I get to playing the low notes on the digital church organ.  But for recorded music listening, the low-end on the Motion40's are ideal. 

A big THANK YOU to everyone who responded to my questions.  I'm surprised at how this ended up, but I'm 100% happy - downright giddy - with my speakers right now.