• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Speaker Shootout

How good the Mac Mini setup will sound will depend on the source material, the DAC that you choose, the USB/SPDIF converter in some cases as well as your choice of music player app. The sky is the limit which is only limited by your bank account.

I've seen many mega $$$ setups at shows using a Mac Mini setup as their source of choice. Simply put, the Mac Mini itself, would not be the weak link in any system IMO.

newworld said:
Yeah, it's just that after $600+dac+software, I'm not sure if it will even sound good. Convenient? Absolutely. Up to the level of my new speaker-to-be? I don't know...
Click to expand...
 
The DAC section of the Touch is pretty good and underrated. It uses an Asahi Kasei AKM4420 chip, similar to the one found in the much higher priced Transporter, and is capable of 24/192. Logitech, crippled the Touch to work only up to 24/96 out of the box although that can easily be remedied in 5 minutes.

davidro said:
Many shows use Squeezebox Touch/Duet on its own without an external DAC, too.
Click to expand...
 
I like that the Japanese Stereo magazines show how different reviewers rated equipment and describe which music they used

RGA said:
First not everyone migrates the KEF - the reality is there is always going to be huge Hype on a speaker under $2000 that sounds good. The Magnepan 1.7 gets huge hype and me I find them just ok. Just as many will find the KEF just OK. Most people can't afford more expensive speakers so more budget products will garner more praise and more people will buy them and more voices saying something is great makes them seem better than they really are.

Not to take anything away from the KEF - it's a "great" $1500 monitor speaker but it's not killing giants. I have the Audio Note AX Two - a no name non advertised speaker - here is the extent of the advertising "The AX range as designed as a general purpose small loudspeakers, and will work well with almost any amplifier."

This speaker is $1200 so you'll get it for $1k and is not outclassed by the KEF. Each brings something to the table. And the AX Two is one example - The ATC SCM 11 or the Roksan TR-5 (that I reviewed not long back) also bring things to the table.

Hype is largely an extension of the size of the company. The bigger the company the more readily available they are to consumers - every major city sells a B&W and probably a KEF (and many cities have several dealers selling these) - not every major city sells Audio Note, Spendor, Harbeth, Trenner and Freidl, Devore Fidelity etc. This means less reviewers hear them and that means less reviewers who ask for reviews. Further, some smaller companies have trouble supplying their products for review. Big Companies don't have these issues. John Atkinson of Stereophile for example noted that if a scheduled amplifier review falls through for shipping or production issues he has many Musical Fidelity amplifiers and products readily available - which is why people often complain about too many MF reviews - but often it is because some small company could not get him one to meet their scheduling demands. That means MF gets more hype and the other product is lost in the under the radar territory. Further, some companies come to the magazines asking to get a review - other companies like Audio Note do not - you ask them. Shindo has never sought a review - you buy them - you can review it if you want.

This is the problem with magazines IMO that put out "Product of the Year" like Stereophile. No one bothers to ask how they come up with it. When a big magazine like that gives "Product of the Year" to the KEF LS-50 that's going to generate huge amounts of hype. People will buy them on the strength of that without investigating how the award was derived at. AND IMO it is derived at dubiously.

They have 12-13 reviewers on their staff. The speaker must have been reviewed by one of their 6-7 core reviewers. The speaker only needs to have been auditioned by 3 reviewers on their staff (but as noted before BIG companies like KEF and B&W have been heard by far more people far more often than a Trenner and Freidl where maybe only one of their reviewers have heard them outside of show conditions.


The score products on a ballot point system. 3 points for first place, 2 for second and 1 point for third. Whichever gets the highest vote total wins the award.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the problem. If all 12 reviewers heard the KEF and all 12 gave it 3rd place votes it would have 12 points.

Speaker B is heard by 4 reviewers - 3 give it first place votes and the other reviewer gives it second. All four reviewers like speaker B MUCH better than the KEF - but the speaker gets 11 points because 8 reviewers never heard it and thus can't vote on it.

SO in fact a product of the year can be awarded by the magazine when in fact not a single reviewer on the staff thought it was the "best" product.

It also goes to their class A, B, C etc rankings which are equally absurd. Art Dudley recently purchased the Devore Orangutan and before that the Audio Note E - both loudspeakers he believes should be class A. But because of the measured performance which doesn't correlate to what people hear they were downgraded to class B.

Meanwhile the Devore 3XL was given class A. Now remember John Atkinson is a measurements guy and smaller standmount speakers typically measure better because none of them are forced to do things like Bass, Dynamics, or lifelike scale. So they win on things like box resonance and flat on axis frequency response and occasionally distortion though not the KEF. JA believes that anything in class A is better than anything in class B. Of course this runs counter to the fact that the actual reviewer - Art Dudley bought the class B Orangutan over the much cheaper class A 3XL. The Orangutan beats the ever loving snot out of the 3XL which IMO is quite overpriced for a standmount.

What about the British press? Well they're not much better. The Sugden A21a lost to the Roksan Kandy years back in their amplifier shootouts. People will see 5 star award to Roksan - hype hype hype. Not it's a good amp (I reviewed it too) and I can see why they gave it the overall winner in their shootout but if people actually read the reviews they would note that on sound quality all of their blind listeners chose the Sugden A21a as being "easily the best sounding."

But the review factored in watts per channel 125watts for the Roksan versus 20 for the Sugden and that the Roksan looked better and had remote control and more features etc etc. All of which is valid but many people buy for sound quality not because it has a remote control.

Roksan gets the hype but a much better sounding amplifier flies under the radar.

As mainstream products go the KEF is excellent and it doesn't deserve some of the backlash I see it getting on other forums. It's well balanced - the treble is quite good for a metal tweeter though it's not perfect and my AX Two (no name from who?) is smoother and more natural sounding and is just as well integrated even if the tweeter isn't in the middle of the woofer. The KEF has more slam and bigger bass but at the expense of efficiency. The KEF looks better and feels far more substantial in terms of technical prowess and design. And the KEF is more able than the AX Two to play harder hitting music at higher levels. But on vocals - like a Loreena McKennitt or Eva Cassidy - the kind of smaller music the AX Two wins hands down and it's not close over the KEF. The KEF is a better all-rounder - you can play Lady Gaga or Guns and Roses at loud levels and get more feeling thump. Neither one is perfect which is why I like them both - because I love Eva Cassidy but I also like Guns and Roses, some trance etc. The Kef is better able to negotiate amplified music - the Audio Note is better on acoustic instruments.

In the end don't let the hype make the decision for you - the hype at most should perhaps get you to the store to audition them.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting post. There are obvious problems with reviews in magazines and on line. For me, the most glaring is that only a small percentage of products are reviewed. There will always be great products that never get reviewed, especially by Stereophile or TAS. Another problem is the perceived conflict of interest because of advertising. On his web site, Harry Pearson pretty much says he left TAS because new management wouldn't allow negative reviews to be published. I have read (so due caution concerning accuracy) that some magazines and web sites simply return products that don't impress without publishing a review, thus protecting against manufacturers withdrawing advertising. And there are many other issues, some pretty simple. For instance, I have been reading a lot of reviews of stand mount speakers and only a small percentage publish the dimensions of the listening room and what kind of room treatments are present. As my room is not small, that is the sort of info that would be very helpful.
I have taken to trying to "read between the lines." If a positive review is written without much enthusiasm, I take that as a sign that maybe the reviewer is just following orders. Who knows?
RGA said:
First not everyone migrates the KEF - the reality is there is always going to be huge Hype on a speaker under $2000 that sounds good. The Magnepan 1.7 gets huge hype and me I find them just ok. Just as many will find the KEF just OK. Most people can't afford more expensive speakers so more budget products will garner more praise and more people will buy them and more voices saying something is great makes them seem better than they really are.

Not to take anything away from the KEF - it's a "great" $1500 monitor speaker but it's not killing giants. I have the Audio Note AX Two - a no name non advertised speaker - here is the extent of the advertising "The AX range as designed as a general purpose small loudspeakers, and will work well with almost any amplifier."

This speaker is $1200 so you'll get it for $1k and is not outclassed by the KEF. Each brings something to the table. And the AX Two is one example - The ATC SCM 11 or the Roksan TR-5 (that I reviewed not long back) also bring things to the table.

Hype is largely an extension of the size of the company. The bigger the company the more readily available they are to consumers - every major city sells a B&W and probably a KEF (and many cities have several dealers selling these) - not every major city sells Audio Note, Spendor, Harbeth, Trenner and Freidl, Devore Fidelity etc. This means less reviewers hear them and that means less reviewers who ask for reviews. Further, some smaller companies have trouble supplying their products for review. Big Companies don't have these issues. John Atkinson of Stereophile for example noted that if a scheduled amplifier review falls through for shipping or production issues he has many Musical Fidelity amplifiers and products readily available - which is why people often complain about too many MF reviews - but often it is because some small company could not get him one to meet their scheduling demands. That means MF gets more hype and the other product is lost in the under the radar territory. Further, some companies come to the magazines asking to get a review - other companies like Audio Note do not - you ask them. Shindo has never sought a review - you buy them - you can review it if you want.

This is the problem with magazines IMO that put out "Product of the Year" like Stereophile. No one bothers to ask how they come up with it. When a big magazine like that gives "Product of the Year" to the KEF LS-50 that's going to generate huge amounts of hype. People will buy them on the strength of that without investigating how the award was derived at. AND IMO it is derived at dubiously.

They have 12-13 reviewers on their staff. The speaker must have been reviewed by one of their 6-7 core reviewers. The speaker only needs to have been auditioned by 3 reviewers on their staff (but as noted before BIG companies like KEF and B&W have been heard by far more people far more often than a Trenner and Freidl where maybe only one of their reviewers have heard them outside of show conditions.


The score products on a ballot point system. 3 points for first place, 2 for second and 1 point for third. Whichever gets the highest vote total wins the award.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the problem. If all 12 reviewers heard the KEF and all 12 gave it 3rd place votes it would have 12 points.

Speaker B is heard by 4 reviewers - 3 give it first place votes and the other reviewer gives it second. All four reviewers like speaker B MUCH better than the KEF - but the speaker gets 11 points because 8 reviewers never heard it and thus can't vote on it.

SO in fact a product of the year can be awarded by the magazine when in fact not a single reviewer on the staff thought it was the "best" product.

It also goes to their class A, B, C etc rankings which are equally absurd. Art Dudley recently purchased the Devore Orangutan and before that the Audio Note E - both loudspeakers he believes should be class A. But because of the measured performance which doesn't correlate to what people hear they were downgraded to class B.

Meanwhile the Devore 3XL was given class A. Now remember John Atkinson is a measurements guy and smaller standmount speakers typically measure better because none of them are forced to do things like Bass, Dynamics, or lifelike scale. So they win on things like box resonance and flat on axis frequency response and occasionally distortion though not the KEF. JA believes that anything in class A is better than anything in class B. Of course this runs counter to the fact that the actual reviewer - Art Dudley bought the class B Orangutan over the much cheaper class A 3XL. The Orangutan beats the ever loving snot out of the 3XL which IMO is quite overpriced for a standmount.

What about the British press? Well they're not much better. The Sugden A21a lost to the Roksan Kandy years back in their amplifier shootouts. People will see 5 star award to Roksan - hype hype hype. Not it's a good amp (I reviewed it too) and I can see why they gave it the overall winner in their shootout but if people actually read the reviews they would note that on sound quality all of their blind listeners chose the Sugden A21a as being "easily the best sounding."

But the review factored in watts per channel 125watts for the Roksan versus 20 for the Sugden and that the Roksan looked better and had remote control and more features etc etc. All of which is valid but many people buy for sound quality not because it has a remote control.

Roksan gets the hype but a much better sounding amplifier flies under the radar.

As mainstream products go the KEF is excellent and it doesn't deserve some of the backlash I see it getting on other forums. It's well balanced - the treble is quite good for a metal tweeter though it's not perfect and my AX Two (no name from who?) is smoother and more natural sounding and is just as well integrated even if the tweeter isn't in the middle of the woofer. The KEF has more slam and bigger bass but at the expense of efficiency. The KEF looks better and feels far more substantial in terms of technical prowess and design. And the KEF is more able than the AX Two to play harder hitting music at higher levels. But on vocals - like a Loreena McKennitt or Eva Cassidy - the kind of smaller music the AX Two wins hands down and it's not close over the KEF. The KEF is a better all-rounder - you can play Lady Gaga or Guns and Roses at loud levels and get more feeling thump. Neither one is perfect which is why I like them both - because I love Eva Cassidy but I also like Guns and Roses, some trance etc. The Kef is better able to negotiate amplified music - the Audio Note is better on acoustic instruments.

In the end don't let the hype make the decision for you - the hype at most should perhaps get you to the store to audition them.
Click to expand...
 
RGA said:
What about the British press? Well they're not much better. The Sugden A21a lost to the Roksan Kandy years back in their amplifier shootouts. People will see 5 star award to Roksan - hype hype hype. Not it's a good amp (I reviewed it too) and I can see why they gave it the overall winner in their shootout but if people actually read the reviews they would note that on sound quality all of their blind listeners chose the Sugden A21a as being "easily the best sounding."
Click to expand...

Have you ever come across the little known British magazine Hi Fi world? They very much plough their own furrow and don't tend to gush about the same stuff What Hi Fi do. Knowing you like the Sugden I think you may find their favourites and reviews more interesting.
 
I only think of reviews as advertisements. It just makes me look twice. There was a time when I didn't have so many dealers around me as I do now, and had to rely on reviews. I guess it was bound to fail because what I've read and what I've heard recently are often at odds. And probably most importantly, they only listen during the review....and I SEEK.
 
Last edited:
I can have confidence in some reviewers tho. Importantly they get to listen to the sample for a few days at their own abode with their own gear which is a massive plus.
 
Reviewing is a balancing act and reviewers have their own systems and methods and you do best to find reviewers with experience and observations that ring true based on your own experience and observations.

If you pay attention, you can find reviewers like that.
Perhaps it's not the most analytical of approaches, but what fun is analytical gear anyway? This hobby is about taste.
 
crouse said:
Interesting post. There are obvious problems with reviews in magazines and on line. For me, the most glaring is that only a small percentage of products are reviewed. There will always be great products that never get reviewed, especially by Stereophile or TAS. Another problem is the perceived conflict of interest because of advertising. On his web site, Harry Pearson pretty much says he left TAS because new management wouldn't allow negative reviews to be published. I have read (so due caution concerning accuracy) that some magazines and web sites simply return products that don't impress without publishing a review, thus protecting against manufacturers withdrawing advertising. And there are many other issues, some pretty simple. For instance, I have been reading a lot of reviews of stand mount speakers and only a small percentage publish the dimensions of the listening room and what kind of room treatments are present. As my room is not small, that is the sort of info that would be very helpful.
I have taken to trying to "read between the lines." If a positive review is written without much enthusiasm, I take that as a sign that maybe the reviewer is just following orders. Who knows?
Click to expand...

You are correct about TAS and Pearson. I don't read TAS but that's not necessarily the problem they have.

Th reality is all magazines print or online have marketing pressure - and not because companies advertise. I write for Dagogo and I have no idea who advertises with us nor do I care - it probably changes a lot year to year anyway.

Reviewers with us and others typically choose the gear they want to review so chances are we already like the product. Thus, the chance of a negative review is quite low but if something goes wrong it should be pointed out in the review.

Print magazines like Stereophile have policies in place to review an item only if it meets a minimum number of U.S. dealers (I believe at least 5). That does give smaller magazines like dagogo, enjoythemusic, 6moons etc an advantage on smaller manufacturers. FOr instance I was the first reviewer in North America to review Line Magnetic's 219IA and CD 215 because I liked them in Hong Kong and could get a head start on them before they were being rolled out in the US.

On the flip side of the coin Stereophile is likely better able to get the mainstream brands which are after high numbers of sales and "unique" hits to their websites. Manufacturers often ask how many unique (there is anther term for it which escapes me) hits the website garners. Stereophile is the biggest by a fairly wide margin so big companies are after them. Smaller companies without the dealer numbers will go the to E-zines.

Lastly, the negative review has issues that extend beyond the one product. If I write something bad about Manufacturer A's product then I seriously limit my chance of getting products from other manufacturers as they don't want to run the risk of getting a negative review. And a negative review probably carries more weight than 10 positive reviews of the same product because a negative review is usually viewed as more "truthful" because they're rare. This is perception not reality however. Reviewer rooms are hardly perfect and even if they seem to be really well set-up and have buckets of treatments etc does not mean the treatments will serve every type of speaker. Ray Seda has gone to great lengths to set us listening room and has numerous compliments by manufacturers who send and set up the gear in his room - It's much better than what you see from Art Dudley or John Atkinson's rooms. But as good as it the room is - he probably could not properly review the Audio Note E or my J. Due to them being corner loaded it requires a different set-up than what his room caters to.

Reviewers may get a heads up that the product may not work in the reviewer's set-up and perhaps (although I don't know) that an agreement is made wherein the manufacturer feels the reviewer's room probably won't work - Reviewer tries it - it indeed does not work and the product is returned. I have no real problem with that. I may like the B&W Nautilus but no matter how good it may be - it will probably suck in my room. But hey I figure worth a try. It would be dishonest to then write a review ripping the Nautilus loudspeaker because I went against manufacturer directions on room size/placement/power requirements etc.

UHF used to give negative reviews - but they also have trouble getting products in to review. Word gets around and I don't think they've been able to get B&W, Arcam, Paradigm in for 25 years based on negative comments/reviews.
 
Last edited:
Enjoyable thread. It will be interesting to see what you end up with.

If I was in the market for a new pair of standmounts I'd want to hear the Paradigm Signature S2, Epos Elan 15, and the Nola Boxer. Haven't seen much discussion on the Epos Elan line. Love the look. The Nola's are known as one of the best values in their price bracket. And the S2, well that I'd have to buy used as it's quite a bit more expensive than the other two.

I have a pair of AN AX Two, which was discussed earlier. They are a fantastic speaker. I perfer a 6.5-8" woofer on standmount speakers, but in a small room listening about 7' away, they acquit themselves very well, even with rock music. I'm going to have to bring them out again for a few months I think to compare to my ProAc's. If placing your speakers close to the corners makes sense, I'd probably also look at the AN-K.
 
I haven't listened to the Elan's yet. I have listened extensively to the Paradigm S2's and had a nice audition of the Boxers a while back. If the Elan is a more refined Epic then it should be a nice speaker at the going price.
 
I'm starting to feel really silly wanting spend that much on a pair of speakers. I can buy a new set of appliances for the same money! Maybe I should start looking at some budget options like real people...
 
newworld said:
I'm starting to feel really silly wanting spend that much on a pair of speakers. I can buy a new set of appliances for the same money! Maybe I should start looking at some budget options like real people...
Click to expand...

When considering the purchase of something, I ask myself:

"I may be thrilled with this right away, but will I still be happy with it in 5+ years?"

Back in the late '80's, when I was making $5.07 an hour, it was a very big deal for me to spend $425 on my Celestion DL8 series II. 25 years later, I still wouldn't part with them.. my friends praised their sound when new, and still do today. Funny thing is, you could probably buy a decent ebay set right now, for a Ben Franklin :music:

Would my DL8's compare to anything you have auditioned? Not likely, but that's not the point. Think long-term ... good luck
 
newworld said:
I'm starting to feel really silly wanting spend that much on a pair of speakers. I can buy a new set of appliances for the same money! Maybe I should start looking at some budget options like real people...
Click to expand...

Fair point. Then again, you only live once ;)
 
Chad Michael said:
When considering the purchase of something, I ask myself:

"I may be thrilled with this right away, but will I still be happy with it in 5+ years?"

Back in the late '80's, when I was making $5.07 an hour, it was a very big deal for me to spend $425 on my Celestion DL8 series II. 25 years later, I still wouldn't part with them.. my friends praised their sound when new, and still do today. Funny thing is, you could probably buy a decent ebay set right now, for a Ben Franklin :music:

Would my DL8's compare to anything you have auditioned? Not likely, but that's not the point. Think long-term ... good luck
Click to expand...

I was thinking long term, and that's what's freaking me out.

If it ends here I would be perfectly content. But I wanted to switch to a tube amplifier somewhere down the road. And I need a computer and a dac immediately. Maybe better cable later as well. I will have spent well over $7500. That's an extraordinary amount of money to be spent on something that's not a necessity. I'm just thinking about my priorities is all.
 
I guess you probably know what to expect from some speakers by now.
What you can do is to wait for a nice example of secondhand speakers to come up.
 
That's what i did.
Not only that, they were expensive and I waited while they sat on audiogon for a week less than half a year before springing. By then the seller was ready to deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom