SPEAKERS for MUSIC

Geoff4rfc

I have a dilemma.

My A9's are amped with tons of power and sound great for 2ch. The louder they go, the better they sound.

By popular recommendation, the LSiM703 is reported to knock the socks off the A9 for 2ch if not at least be a decent upgrade.

I recently acquired a pair of Grado 225i headphones, and while I've lost the fullness of a large soundstage and good 'ol bass (comparatively), I have gained unbelievable detail.

On good recordings, I can hear most to all of the instruments front, back, side to side and inbetween, I'm hearing stuff I haven't heard before and to tell you the truth, it's pretty bitchin'.

Now, the Grado's image really well too but I do miss the large soundstage yet I'm getting spoiled rotten on the detail these little cans put out.

Can I get a witness??? Can anyone relate???

Can anyone by experience say that the 703 could possibly bridge the gap between the A9's and the Grado's?

jeremymarcinko

The only thing that will bridge the gap between good headphones and loudspeakers will be extensive room treatments. That's the thing with cans your taking the room out of the equation.

Geoff4rfc

jeremymarcinko wrote: »

The only thing that will bridge the gap between good headphones and loudspeakers will be extensive room treatments. That's the thing with cans your taking the room out of the equation.

I agree, and though I've not added any acoustic boards to my room, I've done a lot placement work and tons of Audyssey to achieve some pretty decent imaging, I had a fellow polkie over (Ken and he had a difficult time believing the center channel wasn't on. I'm not hearing the detail out of the A9's like my Grados. On another note, I did pick up more detail when I upgraded from Monotor70's to A9's.

nbrowser wrote: »

I dunno, my RTiA7s do a damn fine job with music, with 205wpc..nicely detailed full sound. But the system needs a good pre-amp/receiver with prre-outs to get it just right.

You haven't listened through the 225i's

DSkip wrote: »

The 703's are an excellent foundation for a budding 2 channel system. Just remember that every component is a piece of the puzzle and finding the matching pieces can be an absolute headache. I'm going through that headache again right now.

I hear you Skip, I'd love to pick up a pair of 703's, I'd just hate to be disappointed that I won't get close to the detail I'm looking for from a bookshelf.

txcoastal1

Geoff just needs to get his butt back to Texas for real BBQ, tacos, tunes, and beers...and I'll take him to listen to the whole LSiM line...remember the Alamo Geoff ;-p

Geoff4rfc

DSkip wrote: »

A bookshelf will better disappear than a tower and usually offer much better details at a given price. The benefit of a tower is full impact and a bigger body to the music, but it loses the transparency of a bookie. I think you're right to be looking in the direction you are. With that said, you might consider Totem as a possible route given your desire for detail.

Thanks, I've heard good things about Totem, I'm going to try to find some locally for a listen.

nbrowser wrote: »

Geoff, if your close enough to the border and can cross, a few select retailers up here in the Vancouver area have 703s on listenable display...just sayin

I appreciate the advice, I've been wanting to get my ears on a pair of 703's for some time now before I bought blind.

Geoff4rfc

txcoastal1 wrote: »

Geoff just needs to get his butt back to Texas for real BBQ, tacos, tunes, and beers...and I'll take him to listen to the whole LSiM line...remember the Alamo Geoff ;-p

LOL, I can't wait!! I'll be in SanAntonio here in a few weeks to visit my family. For one whole week I'll be knocking back everything I can get my hands on

Oh yeah, my wife hasn't ever been to Texas, I'll be showing her the Alamo

jeremymarcinko

There's no question the 703 will offer more detail, but at the expense of impact. A great stereo sound will have both. Sure use a sub, but that has its own challenges. Audyssey can help with the room issues but at the expense of added noise and digital artifacts. I don't use audyssey with music, careful placement in a balanced room rewards a more natural sound no matter the version of audyssey. I only see a worthy speaker to bridge the gap from your A9's within Polk's line up to be lsim 705/07, even then room treatments are still so important if your wanting a similar sound as the Grado.
Respectfully IMO.

txcoastal1

I can check with distributor in showroom in SA for a demo for you, they are located just south of Bitters of 281 if you are interested in hearing the 703's. I haven't visited SA showroom I'll make the call.

Also Galen Carol is a well known audiophile shop that is within 20 minutes from there on Wurzbach/Nacodoches north of 410

PM me if you have any questions

Geoff4rfc

txcoastal1 wrote: »

I can check with distributor in showroom in SA for a demo for you, they are located just south of Bitters of 281 if you are interested in hearing the 703's. I haven't visited SA showroom I'll make the call.

Also Galen Carol is a well known audiophile shop that is within 20 minutes from there on Wurzbach/Nacodoches north of 410

PM me if you have any questions

Awesome!!

drummer86

I think you'll blow through your retirement trying to get speakers to give the experience of good headphones.

That being said, try some Totems just for fun because, well, they're loads of fun to listen to. They're headquartered up there in Canadaland so it shouldn't be too hard to find some shops that carry em.

cnh

I can't say I can identify with your preferences. I don't particularly like the sound of Grados, fatiguing, overly bright, no bass, some sound stage--but there are a LOT better! I also PREFER speakers to HPs, almost always.

Even with open phones it's never quite the same since cans do limit you to L/R near field, whereas a good speaker system fills up the entire room.

That said, 703s would be good, and if you want to save a little, get some used Totem Rainmakers or the like, and match everything to them (room treatments, cables, amp, you know the drill).

cnh

Geoff4rfc

drummer86 wrote: »

I think you'll blow through your retirement trying to get speakers to give the experience of good headphones.

That being said, try some Totems just for fun because, well, they're loads of fun to listen to. They're headquartered up there in Canadaland so it shouldn't be too hard to find some shops that carry em.

Skip and cnh both recommend the Rainmaker, what's your fave?

cnh wrote: »

I can't say I can identify with your preferences. I don't particularly like the sound of Grados, fatiguing, overly bright, no bass, some sound stage--but there are a LOT better! I also PREFER speakers to HPs, almost always.

Even with open phones it's never quite the same since cans do limit you to L/R near field, whereas a good speaker system fills up the entire room.

That said, 703s would be good, and if you want to save a little, get some used Totem Rainmakers or the like, and match everything to them (room treatments, cables, amp, you know the drill).

cnh

The description you gave sounds like the 325i's, have you ever spent time with the 225i's? Most Grado owners report those to be the sweet spot in the Prestige line up.

I listened to three CD's and the Eagle's "Farewell 1 Tour in Melbourne" bluray one a half times the other night and couldn't get enough. The only thing I found fatiguing was the ear cups...ugg, very uncomfortable after long periods of time, but the sound.......unmeasurable.

4xoddic

I posted this on a thread back in Nov & got no response:

? on Audyssey: http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?154718-AVR-with-Audyssey-DSX

"Recently, David A. Rich, of Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity, has shown evidence that the Marantz AV8801—and likely every other model that includes Audyssey software—downsamples all higher-resolution signals to 24/48. While Audyssey itself does not downsample high-rez signals, the MIPS required to process 24-bit/192kHz data would effectively quadruple the load placed on the host pre-pro and, of course, increase its cost. The decision to downsample, therefore, is left to the pre-pro manufacturer."

http://www.stereophile.com/content/m...ound-61-page-2

We have similar power pushing our a9s. With great source material (mentioned Jeff Beck Live At Ronnie Scott's on Blu-Ray) that I can hear the ice tinkling in the glasses of rock stars seated around the room (I didn't immediately recognize them, cousin's 19YO did!).

My receiver is the Pioneer SC-07 using MCACC in my 11' X 19' HT/2 channel room. Of course, the calibration mike was set in MY spot; but the spatial effects on blu-ray are appropriate from the other seats in the house (haven't tried this for 2-channel).

Here's what mantis had to say about MCACC and Audyssey:

"mantis
06-15-2012, 08:50 PM
Ok
I've done MCACC and Audyssey and I have mixed feelings.

MCACC seems like it goes piece by piece and checks levels a few times. It checks phase , levels , EQ , placement , distance etc etc etc. I takes much longer to check these points then Audyssey.
As far as the sub is concerned , it checks for distance , level and phase. I'm not exactly sure when it stops at 63hz for testing and eq. There has to be a good reason or they would full sweep the sub and eq it as well. ARC from Anthem sweeps the sub and calibrates eq's. Audyssey does this as well. But MCACC been around longer in receivers then both of them and I have 2 schools of thought. 1) It doesn't require and more eq after level and phase or they simple need to rethink this and update MCACC.
MCACC is only found in Pioneer receivers. No one else uses this technology. Like Anthem with ARC which no one else uses it , pioneer and AIR Studio's have some kind of agreement with MCACC.
Auydyssey based receivers like Onkyo , Integra , Denon , NAD , Marantz are all fine AVR's. But in the early days of Audyssey , I felt it sounded worse after a calibration. I re tested the room and still found it to sound thin , weak and lifeless. I was very puzzled by these results and decided to manually calibrate system and turn Audyssey off.
Today and for the last year now I have been doing Integra receivers and I'm waiting on a pro calibration kit. I just did a full dedicated 9.2 theater with Integra separates ran factory Audyssey. All my theaters and surround rooms , media rooms with Integra with Audyssey used seemed to thin out and shallow out the overall experience. Maybe I'm not a full Integra sound quality fan since we also do many Pioneer Elite theater rooms , media and surround rooms and if I decide to do a manual calibration , the system performs extremely well , if I run Mcacc , it seems to really add space and depth with no noticeable drop in performance.
Now over the years I have ran MCACC on every single model that had it , yes I mean every single Pioneer Elite receiver made from the very first vsx49 to the current and soon to be replaced SC-57. Never have I ever felt that MCACC ruined the experience. Now I have gone in on a few rooms and boosted or cut some levels due to 2 or 3 rows of seating. MCACC What I usually do is place the mic in a theater room in the center of the seating or the KING seat. That seat gets perfect sound and all others get whatever they get being out of the sweet spot.
This really works as I run clips and sit in different seats and rows for detailed testing. Once I figure out how each seat sounds , I make a professional decision to alter MCACC or leave it as factory set."

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-133407.html?

IMHO & I know nothing about your TX-NR807, it might be considerably cheaper to swap in a Pioneer SC to audition for any improvement in your a9s for 2-channel over the Onkyo. Perhaps a PM to mantis would provide insight?

Geoff4rfc

4xoddic wrote: »

IMHO & I know nothing about your TX-NR807, it might be considerably cheaper to swap in a Pioneer SC to audition for any improvement in your a9s for 2-channel over the Onkyo. Perhaps a PM to mantis would provide insight?

Thanks man!!

drummer86

Geoff4rfc wrote: »

Skip and cnh both recommend the Rainmaker, what's your fave?

Love my Mite's. The Mite-Ts are similar but go a tad lower and have a little more oomph to them. It depends on your budget. I've been told that Totem's don't necessarily get "better" as you go up the price range, just that each speaker sounds a little different.

Never heard Rainmakers so I can't comment on them. I'd think either those or the Model-1s would be a good place to start.

Geoff4rfc

drummer86 wrote: »

Love my Mite's. The Mite-Ts are similar but go a tad lower and have a little more oomph to them. It depends on your budget. I've been told that Totem's don't necessarily get "better" as you go up the price range, just that each speaker sounds a little different.

Never heard Rainmakers so I can't comment on them. I'd think either those or the Model-1s would be a good place to start.

How'bout those Forest's, I see they now put out the Forest Signature with better caps and wiring(?) or caps and XO's(?), caps and something was improved with the Signatures.

drummer86

I think it was the Forests that DSkip had for a while. IIRC he loved em but felt that his amps weren't a good match. Mantis also just posted a thread giving the Rainmakers some love. Those seem to be the go-to speaker in the lineup.

suprafantx

I ended my speakers search for music with flat panels with room treatment. Go flat never go back.

eclypse

705's.. no need for subs for music. No worries about where to place a single or two subs for stereo.. buult in woofers sound just fine and go plenty low.. they surprise me everytime i hear some low bass in music.

Geoff4rfc

eclypse wrote: »

705's.. no need for subs for music. No worries about where to place a single or two subs for stereo.. buult in woofers sound just fine and go plenty low.. they surprise me everytime i hear some low bass in music.

That's good to know you're enjoying your 705's, did you happen to read my opening post?

I don't believe the 705's are going to get me where I want to go, if that were the case, I would settle on the 703's before I got the towers.