[Tyson]

By tonality I mean the ability to make musical instuments sound real. As it is, this seldom if ever happens and since it doesn't, no matter the perceived objectve performance of a given speaker, I wiil just resign myself to the theory that there is some magic involved.

Do instruments sound real when played through the LGK? Are there other models whch would be better suited to this sngle aspect (let's say I don't care at all about any other parameters) of tonality as I describe it?

NX-Studio would be my choice for realest sounding speaker outside the big OB speakers like the NX-Otica.

[Hobbsmeerkat]

NX-Studio would be my choice for realest sounding speaker outside the big OB speakers like the NX-Otica.

I'm going to second this comment as well.
The better quality your source/gear they more they continue to give,
Every upgrade/change I've made so far is noticable.

The X-series comes close, especially the bigger models, but not quite.
The LGKs aren't far behind, esp considering they're just a tiny 3" woofer. Vocals, mid-range and imaging are their strongest attributes

Rolling off the bottom end, and letting a sub take over gives them a lot of extra head room, and allows for better performance in the upper ranges.

[whydontumarryit]

I'm going to second this comment as well.
The better quality your source/gear they more they continue to give,
Every upgrade/change I've made so far is noticable.

The X-series comes close, especially the bigger models, but not quite.
The LGKs aren't far behind, esp considering they're just a tiny 3" woofer. Vocals, mid-range and imaging are their strongest attributes

Rolling off the bottom end, and letting a sub take over gives them a lot of extra head room, and allows for better performance in the upper ranges.

NX-Studio would be my choice for realest sounding speaker outside the big OB speakers like the NX-Otica.

All I want is for someone with a microphone to record  someone with any musical instrument playing a single note and say that it sounds real when they play that recording on their system. I don't care what system, speakers, room or the listener's personal impression of what is real or not. Anyone, anywhere with any perception of his ability to distinguish a real instrument and the reproductiion of the sound of a real instrument. Why is this so complicated?

[Hobbsmeerkat]

Because truely "accurate" reproduction of audio is incredibly difficult. You're trying to mimic the spunds of an instrument with something that isn't said instrument.

If the recording is poor, it doesn't matter how good the speakers or gear are, it won't sound "accurate."
Same goes if your recording is perfect, but your gear is poor quality.
Even when everything is good, there are still going to be ways in which it falls short from the real thing.
If there was a way to get perfect reproduction, there would be no "if"s "and"s or "but"s about it and there would be no need . But that simply isnt reality.

That's why for *literally everyone* in this hobby, it's a journey, not a destination.

[mlundy57]

Because truely "accurate" reproduction of audio is incredibly difficult. You're trying to mimic the spunds of an instrument with something that isn't said instrument.

If the recording is poor, it doesn't matter how good the speakers or gear are, it won't sound "accurate."
Same goes if your recording is perfect, but your gear is poor quality.
Even when everything is good, there are still going to be ways in which it falls short from the real thing.
If there was a way to get perfect reproduction, there would be no "if"s "and"s or "but"s about it and there would be no need . But that simply isnt reality.

That's why for *literally everyone* in this hobby, it's a journey, not a destination.

Add to that you are trying to capture multiple instruments in one setting (i.e. with classical over 100 different instruments in a huge venue) then play it back over two speakers in a small room. No matter how great a stereo system is, it will not sound the same as a live orchestra in a concert hall. That’s a given. A stereo system produces an illusion of a live event. The objective is to have a convincing enough illusion that you can turn off the lights, close your eyes, feel like you are there.

Some equipment, including speakers, do a better job of this than others. For many in this hobby, the quest is to get as close get as you can to a live performance with a stereo system for a particular situation at a price you can afford. Even in the best of times I can usually only get to a live performance once or twice a year but my main open baffle system can take me so far into the music I can easily experience the illusion of the event whenever I want.

The desire to get as close as feasible to the live sound extends to situations where getting lost in the music would be counterproductive or dangerous such as the LGK desktop system in my office or the stereo system in my car. While the car system has a long way to go, the LGKs are the best speakers I’ve had in the desktop system by a considerable margin.

As someone who played trumpet, baritone, and tuba and who now plays Native American flutes (and whose father played guitar, brother drums, and sister clarinet), it is possible for a stereo system to create a remarkably realistic sound, be a total dud, or somewhere in between.

[whydontumarryit]

Add to that you are trying to capture multiple instruments in one setting (i.e. with classical over 100 different instruments in a huge venue) then play it back over two speakers in a small room. No matter how great a stereo system is, it will not sound the same as a live orchestra in a concert hall. That’s a given. A stereo system produces an illusion of a live event. The objective is to have a convincing enough illusion that you can turn off the lights, close your eyes, feel like you are there.

Some equipment, including speakers, do a better job of this than others. For many in this hobby, the quest is to get as close get as you can to a live performance with a stereo system for a particular situation at a price you can afford. Even in the best of times I can usually only get to a live performance once or twice a year but my main open baffle system can take me so far into the music I can easily experience the illusion of the event whenever I want.

The desire to get as close as feasible to the live sound extends to situations where getting lost in the music would be counterproductive or dangerous such as the LGK desktop system in my office or the stereo system in my car. While the car system has a long way to go, the LGKs are the best speakers I’ve had in the desktop system by a considerable margin.

As someone who played trumpet, baritone, and tuba and who now plays Native American flutes (and whose father played guitar, brother drums, and sister clarinet), it is possible for a stereo system to create a remarkably realistic sound, be a total dud, or somewhere in between.

Because truely "accurate" reproduction of audio is incredibly difficult. You're trying to mimic the spunds of an instrument with something that isn't said instrument.

If the recording is poor, it doesn't matter how good the speakers or gear are, it won't sound "accurate."
Same goes if your recording is perfect, but your gear is poor quality.
Even when everything is good, there are still going to be ways in which it falls short from the real thing.
If there was a way to get perfect reproduction, there would be no "if"s "and"s or "but"s about it and there would be no need . But that simply isnt reality.

That's why for *literally everyone* in this hobby, it's a journey, not a destination.

You both have misquoted what I asked about.

[mlundy57]

You both have misquoted what I asked about.

No, we didn’t. We may have given a more in-depth answer than you wanted, though my last sentence is a direct answer. To put it another way, I have been recorded on both brass and woodwind instruments. When played back, how real the sound is depends on the fidelity of both the recording and playback systems.

[Tyson]

All I want is for someone with a microphone to record  someone with any musical instrument playing a single note and say that it sounds real when they play that recording on their system. I don't care what system, speakers, room or the listener's personal impression of what is real or not. Anyone, anywhere with any perception of his ability to distinguish a real instrument and the reproductiion of the sound of a real instrument. Why is this so complicated?

Having a speaker/system that sounds exactly like the original is like wanting a film/picture to look exactly like real life.  Ain't gonna happen. 

The good news is that within the confines of the technology, you can still get excellent performance.  With today's high performance gear, you can get close to what live music sounds like.

You mention that live instruments have a bite and a snarl that gets squashed in reproduction.  You are right, a lot of speakers smooth that over.  Usually it's because the speakers are mid/low efficiency.  Which is why I tend to buy speakers that are highly efficient.  Because there's a strong link between having a low efficiency speaker and the dynamics getting compressed.  Both my systems have speakers with 97db efficiency and large amounts of driver area, particularly in the mids.  That's where the life of the music is and it sounds better when you use speakers that are dynamically unconstrained. 

Historically there's always been high efficiency speakers around in audio that sounded very lively.  The problem is that in the past, it was hard to get a speaker that did high efficiency PLUS didn't screw up tonal information.  So in the past you had to choose one of the other - either you bought a lively speaker that was screechy, or you bought a tonally accurate speaker that had no life. 

Lucky for us, that issue's been solved with speakers like the NX-Otica, NX-Treme, the Spatial Audio X series, and a few others.  If you haven't heard what these types of bleeding edge systems are capable of, you should do yourself a favor and give them a listen.  I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

[la80vette]

My first impressions are these are very nice speakers.
Having no experience with hi-fi builds, I found assembly to be fairly easy. I had a friend glue up the flat pack and route the edges. I applied white duratex that I had on hand and spray coated two coats of Rust-oleum flat black enamel. They look beautiful and professional, the perfect look in a studio. The filter is where I had some issues. this being my first filter/crossover wiring, I neglected to remove the coating from the inductor wire and it wouldn't solder. Hobb's suggested I try removing the solder and start over but that was not going well. Instead I began scraping the coating from all the areas that were exposed then I re-soldered. That's probably a big no-no but I was frustrated that I had screwed up the build. At some point I think I'll reorder the small parts kit and start from scratch. I lined the top, sides and rear with insulation. There is very little room to work in this box once the network is in. I was able to drill for one screw to hold the network down and it seems fine. I think I might try heavy duty Velcro strips if I had to do it again. Anyway, now having a little experience under my belt I would now consider this a very easy build.
Now to the sound. I'm not and Audiophile by any means. I've never owned any Hi-Fi equipment, so I probably don't know the correct terms for anything I'm about to say. I beg for your forgiveness in advance.
The soundstage presentation of the LGK to me is amazing. The singers are dead center. it really weird closing your eyes and hearing a voice or instrument and knowing there's no speaker there. The cone excursion is very limited and playing through my current setup (PS Audio Sprout 100 with Spotify bluetooth) I have to be mindful of the volume control because all tracks come in at different levels. You can't crank the speakers and rock out and I'm fine with that., that's not why I bought them. I wanted a secondary speaker to check mixes on, mainly for vocal clarity and spatial cues. These speakers have that in spades. LGK's are not hyped in any way frequency wise like so many studio monitors I listen to. There very natural sounding if that's a thing. However, if these were going to be main monitors for mixing (and they might be) a good sub needs to be blended in. Here's a thing I've noticed and maybe someone could chime in. A lot of the vocals on tracks I'm familiar with are down in level, like I'd want to raise the vocal a db or two. I thought this was weird so I had an idea. What singer was very picky about her mixes? Then I thought of Barbera Striesand. I played her track of Women in Love and the vocal was right where is should be in my opinion. That leads me to think engineers are maybe not mixing on monitors that image that well. I've been through a lot of studios and haven't heard speakers that image like LGK's.
Congratulations on the designs guys. You have a winner in my book. I look forward to the next iteration of the LGK's. On a side note: I like the form factor of the previous generation LGK 1.0 (tall and skinny cabinet) and I would love to here this in Wedgie's.
Thanks and God bless,
Stephen

[Cheytak.408]

My first impressions are these are very nice speakers.
Having no experience with hi-fi builds, I found assembly to be fairly easy. I had a friend glue up the flat pack and route the edges. I applied white duratex that I had on hand and spray coated two coats of Rust-oleum flat black enamel. They look beautiful and professional, the perfect look in a studio. The filter is where I had some issues. this being my first filter/crossover wiring, I neglected to remove the coating from the inductor wire and it wouldn't solder. Hobb's suggested I try removing the solder and start over but that was not going well. Instead I began scraping the coating from all the areas that were exposed then I re-soldered. That's probably a big no-no but I was frustrated that I had screwed up the build. At some point I think I'll reorder the small parts kit and start from scratch. I lined the top, sides and rear with insulation. There is very little room to work in this box once the network is in. I was able to drill for one screw to hold the network down and it seems fine. I think I might try heavy duty Velcro strips if I had to do it again. Anyway, now having a little experience under my belt I would now consider this a very easy build.
Now to the sound. I'm not and Audiophile by any means. I've never owned any Hi-Fi equipment, so I probably don't know the correct terms for anything I'm about to say. I beg for your forgiveness in advance.
The soundstage presentation of the LGK to me is amazing. The singers are dead center. it really weird closing your eyes and hearing a voice or instrument and knowing there's no speaker there. The cone excursion is very limited and playing through my current setup (PS Audio Sprout 100 with Spotify bluetooth) I have to be mindful of the volume control because all tracks come in at different levels. You can't crank the speakers and rock out and I'm fine with that., that's not why I bought them. I wanted a secondary speaker to check mixes on, mainly for vocal clarity and spatial cues. These speakers have that in spades. LGK's are not hyped in any way frequency wise like so many studio monitors I listen to. There very natural sounding if that's a thing. However, if these were going to be main monitors for mixing (and they might be) a good sub needs to be blended in. Here's a thing I've noticed and maybe someone could chime in. A lot of the vocals on tracks I'm familiar with are down in level, like I'd want to raise the vocal a db or two. I thought this was weird so I had and idea. What singer was very picky about her mixes? Then I thought of Barbera Striesand. I played her track of Women in Love and the vocal was right where is should be in my opinion. That leads to think engineers are maybe not mixing on monitors that image that well. I've been through a lot of studios and haven't heard speakers that image like LGK's.
Congratulations on the designs guys. You have a winner in my book. I look forward to the next iteration of the LGK's. On a side note: I like the form factor of the previous generation LGK 1.0 (tall and skinny cabinet) and I would love to here this in Wedgie's.
Thanks and God bless,
Stephen

They beat the hell out of Auratones!  90% of music is in the midrange and the LGK does it right... in spades.  Everything sounds better at high levels in a mix.  Mixing at low levels is what identifies spatial integrity, so enjoy!

[la80vette]

I completely agree Cheytak.

[Cheytak.408]

I completely agree Cheytak.

[Hobbsmeerkat]

We've had the LGK 2.4 towers up and playing for the last few days.
They're taking a page from the old Skinny 6s, using another 2.0 driver on the back, playing the treble giving them a great sense of spaciousness.
We'll have more info to follow soon. 

[howburger]

You both have misquoted what I asked about.

The only question you asked was pretty snarky. I think they addressed your comments pretty accurately and nicely.

[HT1278]

Great job, how exciting.  The speakers look beautiful!

What is the freq range of the 2.4's?

[whydontumarryit]

The only question you asked was pretty snarky. I think they addressed your comments pretty accurately and nicely.

Even though I had the LGK 2s I am still a potential customer and being civil is mandatory for those in any business no matter my lack of decorum or triggerability to the public at large.
Point to point connections are ugly, inappropriate, confusing, hideous, tacky, and… inconsistent, based n the ability of the users here having so much difficulty with it. The inconsistency makes them question if they got what they paid for or if what they hear is their fault.

About the 2.4.
Can we get BW from 50hz to 10k?
Where is the best listening distance, post 8 ft. I hope
Is there time delay from the xover for the rear firing driver. details?

[77SunsetStrip]

Even though I had the LGK 2s I am still a potential customer and being civil is mandatory for those in any business no matter my lack of decorum or triggerability to the public at large.
Point to point connections are ugly, inappropriate, confusing, hideous, tacky, and… inconsistent, based n the ability of the users here having so much difficulty with it. The inconsistency makes them question if they got what they paid for or if what they hear is their fault.

Really? Claiming to be a potential customer removes any responsibility for decorum on your part?

What is the point of constant complaining about point to point connections?  Where are you getting the idea that users here have so much difficulty with point to point connections?  Inconsistency, based on what?  DIY is a learning experience that requires some effort and is not for everybody.  If DIY is not your cup of tea, nobody here will force it upon you.  In turn, GR Research should not be expected to bend to your whims.

[whydontumarryit]

Really? Claiming to be a potential customer removes any responsibility for decorum on your part?

What is the point of constant complaining about point to point connections?  Where are you getting the idea that users here have so much difficulty with point to point connections?  Inconsistency, based on what?  DIY is a learning experience that requires some effort and is not for everybody.  If DIY is not your cup of tea, nobody here will force it upon you.  In turn, GR Research should not be expected to bend to your whims.

Sorry, I thought it was obvious that I was responding to howburger/Danny/Hobbsmeerkat.
I respect your opinion.

[NoahH]

Point to point connections are ugly, inappropriate, confusing, hideous, tacky, and… inconsistent, based n the ability of the users here having so much difficulty with it.

Point-to-point wiring is the preferred way for doing audio equipment. Connection points are a main area of degradation, and the traces on circuit boards are general poor. Many commercially built high end products proudly call out being point-to-point wired.

It might be better to ask more questions (and not rhetorical ones) instead of leading with declarations

[hawkeyejw]

We've had the LGK 2.4 towers up and playing for the last few days.
They're taking a page from the old Skinny 6s, using another 2.0 driver on the back, playing the treble giving them a great sense of spaciousness.
We'll have more info to follow soon. 

These are really nice looking! Should be really good for small to medium listening spaces. Looking forward to hearing more about them.