Speaker model consistency
dragon1952
Posts: 4,907
in Speakers
Just wondering what your thoughts are on this. Given, say, 10 different pairs of the same model speaker, do you think that one or more could sound or perform better than the others or would you say that consistency is pretty solid these days?
2 channel - Willsenton R8 tube integrated, Holo Audio Spring 3 KTE DAC, audio optimized NUC7i5, Windows 10 Pro/JRiver MC29/Fidelizer Plus 8.7 w/LPS and external SSD drive, PS Audio PerfectWave P3 regenerator, KEF R3 speakers, Rythmik F12SE subwoofer, Audioquest Diamond USB cable, Gabriel Gold IC's, Morrow Audio SP5 speaker cables. Computer - Windows 10/JRiver, Schiit Magni 3+/Modi 3+, Fostex PMO.4n monitors, Sennheiser HD600 headphones
Comments
-
Well you do usually have +/- 10% on some caps and inductors so it's a possibility.
-
speakers "these days" are very consistent, IMO.- Not Tom ::::::: Any system can play Diana Krall. Only the best can play Limp Bizkit.
-
Most manufacturers, especially mass market ones, don't go to the expense to build speakers in matched pairs but I would agree that individual speakers are made to consistent standards. There may be some tiny amounts of variability but not enough to be audible unless something went wrong in production.
I recall Spendor used to say they built speakers in pairs matched as closely as they could in performance and appearance. That costs money to do. -
Most manufacturers, especially mass market ones, don't go to the expense to build speakers in matched pairs but I would agree that individual speakers are made to consistent standards. There may be some tiny amounts of variability but not enough to be audible unless something went wrong in production.
I recall Spendor used to say they built speakers in pairs matched as closely as they could in performance and appearance. That costs money to do.
Hence the name SPENDor. 😉CD Players: Sony CDP-211; Sony DVP-S9000ES; Sony UDP-X800M2 (x2); Cambridge Audio CXC
DACs: Jolida Glass FX Tube DAC III (x2); Denafrips Ares II (x2)
Streamers: ROKU (x3); Bluesound Node 2i and Node N130 w/LHY LPS // Receivers: Yamaha RX-V775BT; Yamaha RX-V777
Preamps: B&K Ref 50; B&K Ref 5 S2; Classe CP-800 MkII; Audio Research SP16L (soon)
Amps: Niles SI-275; B&K ST125.7; B&K ST125.2; Classe CA-2300; Butler Audio TDB-5150
Speakers: Boston Acoustics CR55; Focal Chorus 705v; Wharfedale Diamond 10.2; Monitor Audio Silver-1; Def Tech Mythos One (x4)/Mythos Three Center (x2)/Mythos Two pr.; Martin Logan Electromotion ESL; Legacy Audio Victoria/Silverscreen Center; Gallo Acoustics Reference 3.1; SVS SB-1000 Pro; REL HT-1003; B&W ASW610; HifiMan HE400i
Turntable: Dual 721 Direct-Drive w/Audio Technica AT-VM95e cart
Cables: Tripp-lite 14ga. PCs, Blue Jeans Cable ICs, Philips PXT1000 ICs; Kimber Kable DV30 coaxial ICs; Canare L-4E6S XLR ICs; Kimber Kable 8PR & 8TC speaker cables. -
True. A current model like the Spendor S3/1, roughly equivalent in size to a Polk Reserve R200, costs more than five times as much. They market them as "Calibrated and matched to broadcast reference standard."
Nice speakers that are pretty much hand built to a high standard but overpriced to me if they're purchased new. -
True. A current model like the Spendor S3/1, roughly equivalent in size to a Polk Reserve R200, costs more than five times as much. They market them as "Calibrated and matched to broadcast reference standard."
Nice speakers that are pretty much hand built to a high standard but overpriced to me if they're purchased new.
Of course, the irony is that Polk, starting out, was compared to Spendor in its sound quality... and contrasted to Spendor in terms of value.
