 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: eofung
Date: 2008-05-13 02:27
hey everyone -
i'm trying to buy some speakers for next year and have heard some mixed reviews from people, and was wondering what fellow clarinetists would have to say. my price range is limited - (under $500), and i'm looking for a small setup (bookshelf/tiny surround sound).
i've heard that Bose systems can alter the sound (??), and that the altech lansing iPod base speaker system is really good.
anyone care to rave about their speakers?
thanks so much -
erin
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2008-05-13 03:34
Hi,
For years I used Advents or ARs
They were certainly wonderful players
Now a sub-stat's no joke
I use Cambridge and Polk
They're fine and not big bulky weighers.
HRL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2008-05-13 06:09
The quest for the ultimate speaker,
Plays great tone and isn't a squeaker.
But the falling dollar
Makes one want to holler:
"Affording gets bleaker and bleaker".
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2008-05-13 11:29
I've always felt that Bose were way overpriced. I have my Mac hooked up to a Klipsch system....two small desk tops and a subwoofer. The sound is as good as any system I've ever had....and I've had "a few" including speakers I made myself. In the kitchen I connect my iPod to a "iHome" unit....about $95 which is also a radio and alarm. Sounds great.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Merlin_Williams
Date: 2008-05-13 12:01
Since the original poster is in Canada, they'd do well to look at high-quality bookshelf speakers by either PSB or Paradigm.
I have speakers by both companies. PSBs are on my home office desk. They're nice small bookshelf size speakers and they sound great.
It's a good idea to invest in some really nice headphones too.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JJAlbrecht
Date: 2008-05-13 12:26
Then there's the old saying among cognoscenti:
"No highs, no lows...
It MUST be Bose!"
Personally, I like B&W speakers, but they might be a bit more than you want to spend.
Jeff
“Everyone discovers their own way of destroying themselves, and some people choose the clarinet.” Kalman Opperman, 1919-2010
"A drummer is a musician's best friend."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Kel
Date: 2008-05-13 14:37
I agree with Merlin Williams. Both PSB and Paradigm make excellent speakers, and their small speakers are particularly good and well priced.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Merlin_Williams
Date: 2008-05-13 14:59
Thanks for the endorsement Kel.
I'm listening to the PSBs right now. Phenomenal, and this is an old pair of Model 20 Mk III's. No sub, but great low end.
I'm listening to Paul Anka's "Rock Swings", but I think I'll follow that up with The Planets to really give things a workout.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2008-05-13 21:13
Hi,
I remember going it a hi-fi store (now that dates me a lot) and the sales person asked "what kind of music do you listen to..." That was pretty much a turn-off since my concept was that accuracy was the most important thing.
The speakers I have found highly accurate were the ones I mentioned above (AR, Cambridge, Polk, Advent) but I must add Boston and KLH. Funny, many were designed in part by Henry Kloss.
Yes, Paradigms were always a favorite but I never owned any.
HRL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ryder
Date: 2008-05-14 01:27
I have a set of old technics stacks. They have surprisingly good sound considering their age. Good highs and nice deep lows. I've always wanted Bose though. My only beef with bose is the excessive bass. some speakers have little control over that.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bubalooy
Date: 2008-05-14 20:40
I am not sure why it seems quite popular on web sites dedicated to stereo equipment to slam Bose. I find very few speakers that sound as good. With the limited amount I wanted to spend last year, I bought the Bose 201 speakers and I like them very much. They have also been praised by other musician friends who have heard them. I'm not saying they are necessarily the worlds greatest, but I like them. Particularly, I find that they make acoustic instruments sound more acoustic and a bit less electronic. I don't think it is worth it to pay more for the 301s as in my opinion, they don't sound as good, even thought they're more expensive.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rgames
Date: 2008-05-15 01:30
Before you invest in speakers, remember that ~90% of your audio quality will be determined by the room.
rgames
____________________________
Richard G. Ames
Composer - Arranger - Producer
www.rgamesmusic.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MartyMagnini
Date: 2008-05-15 01:41
I am also a Bose fan, although I agree their prices are a bit too steep. That old "no highs, no lows - must be a Bose" saying comes from the fact that many (if not most) speakers artificially enhance low and high frequencies because it "sounds better" to the untrained ear (like the stereo systems that have 3-4 preset EQ's - one for rock, one for jazz, etc. - they all boost the high and low frequenceis and/or pull back the mids to some degree or another - it's what many are used to)
I suppose the CSO (or any major orchestra or instrumentalist) might sound better to some people if we E.Q.'d the musicians to emphasize the extreme high and low frequencies, but I prefer a more natural sound. Bose is one of the most accurate speakers out there - check the specs. Opinions vary, but specs don't lie!
They would not be my speaker of choice if I were listening to loud rock music, and really wanted to thump some bass, but accurate reproduction of acoustic music is where Bose speakers excel.
just my $.02
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2008-05-15 11:10
"90% of your audio quality will be determined by the room."
Sorry to disagree, but it's the listener's ears, imo.
"Opinions vary, but specs don't lie! "....another fallacy. Specs don't mean anything if you can't hear them. Statistics don't lie either, it's the people who use them.
Bose has done a great marketing job on the Baby Boomers. "Accurate" speakers are useful as Monitors in the Sound Recording Room but in a typical home environment get "colored" by the furnishings. What you hear is what you get.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2008-05-15 11:37
Draz,
Right on. A corner location couples the speaker to the horn dimensions of the room adding low end and drapes or heavily padded furniture can damped the highs very quickly. Attention to listening room is important.
When the day is done though, I know I like a speaker with more presence which in my ear more clearly matches my place within a certain type of musical group. Although that sound may not be as accurate (looking a frequency chart), it is still my "preferred" sound and what I like best (aka "but it's the listener's ears" as you have so correctly stated).
But then, I always thought Bozak speakers were very silking and really fine sounding.
HRL
PS And then there are audiophiles that swear that tubed amps sound better. Give me a wire with gain every time.
Post Edited (2008-05-15 11:38)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dgclarinet
Date: 2008-05-15 11:41
A speaker conversation is very similar to a mouthpiece conversation. Everybody has their own opinion, and if it works for them, they're right.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: doublej
Date: 2008-05-15 20:23
For the money take a look at tivoli products. The are far less expensive and I like like them more than bose. I have a component system in the house with B&Ws and the tivoli 2 and a bose wave radio. I would definately take them in that order.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: awm34
Date: 2008-05-15 22:13
I recently listed to Paradigm bookshelf speakers (atomics?) and found them wanting. The comparable B&Ws ($480) sounded much better to my ears.
Alan Messer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GeorgeL ★2017
Date: 2008-05-16 16:11
I would like to broaden the question a little from brands of speakers to types of speakers we use to listen to classical music. Many receivers these days seem to be geared for the home entertainment (i.e. movie) market and use multiple front and rear speakers as well as a powered subwoofer.
My impression is that a subwoofer may be great for movies or for the boom-booms of contemporary "music" (assuming people play that music in venues other than very-loud cars), but it has no place in a system for listening to the kind of music clarinetists, concert bands and orchestras would play. However, not having a subwoofer, my impression could be wrong.
Do you use a subwoofer while listening to classical music?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Merlin_Williams
Date: 2008-05-16 17:50
Classical music can certainly benefit from a well setup system with a subwoofer.
There are many sounds in the orchestral palette which dip into the the sub 50hz frequency range. Assigning these tones to a sub can help lessen distortion in the main speakers.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2008-05-16 18:08
> Before you invest in speakers, remember that ~90% of your audio quality
> will be determined by the room.
I strongly disagree - it's mainly determined by your hearing capabilities.
If you really really really really really want to listen to it how it was recorded (and how your trusty old grammophone plays it) but don't want to be distracted by the ambient noise, buy a pair of headphones. Not the $9.99 kind, I'm talking something along the lines of a Jecklin Float (or whatever is de rigueur these days).
(no affiliation whatsoever)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chauncey
Date: 2008-05-16 23:39
Do you use a subwoofer while listening to classical music?
I do; I just turn the bass way down ;P
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: eofung
Date: 2008-05-17 23:55
thanks for the great suggestions, everyone!
a roommate heard us talking about speakers the other day and rushed in to also blurt out his two cents about bose - apparently once he'd taken apart some speakers and found that cones were made out of paper? perhaps bose aren't worth every extra dollar they charge.
as for contemporary classical "music", would anyone listen to julia wolf or michael gordon without a subwoofer? also, i think there's a lot of great non-clarinet, non-orchestral/wind music that i personally like listening to, so what would be ideal would be accuracy; and that certainly should fall in the sub 50hz category. : )
i have a couple of great headphones, but there's nothing like a visceral, full-body charge for listening to music some times that just doesn't quite seem safe, or satisfactory when cupped to the ears (varese's nocturnal, anyone?).
so far, it looks like polk, PSB, paradigm, and B&W are favourites here. i'll definitely look into these, and thanks again for the suggestions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rgames
Date: 2008-05-18 06:06
I love having these discussions with my audiophile buddies. I'm no audiophile but I've spent a fair amount of time in recording studios. Here are a few points I always bring up with them:
1. The markets for audiophiles and recording studios are dominated by different brands of monitors for some reason. If you want to hear how it sounded to the mix/master engineer, use the same monitors!
2. Any studio worth its salt will have multiple types of monitors. Mix/master engineers adjust the mixes to sound good across all of them, from the high-end customs to the mid-level Genelecs and down to the lowly NS-10's. There is no "ideal" sound, only "different" sounds.
3. The differences in performance (e.g. frequency response) among different brands of monitors is EXTREMELY small compared to the changes in frequency response caused by most listening environments. So, like I said before, most of your listening experience will be determined by the room where you listen. Think about concert halls - the same performance will sound very different in different halls.
Oh yeah - nobody mixes/masters on headphones.
rgames
____________________________
Richard G. Ames
Composer - Arranger - Producer
www.rgamesmusic.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
