[Early B.]

After 25 years in this hobby, I formulated two bold conclusions:

1. Nearly all audiophiles have hyper-artificial systems that are “pseudo-musical.” The reference for “real music” is live music. However, we’ve become accustomed to the sound of studio recorded music which is constrained and polite, at best. It’s analogous to the difference between the attending a rock concert vs. watching it on TV.   

2. For an improved stereo sound, you need at least four speakers plus multiple subs. Just like an audiophile has separate components to improve the sound quality, you need separate speakers.

For two-channel listening, you need two things to replicate real music -- a humungous soundstage and incredible dynamics. Two speakers simply won't get the job done, no matter how high end they are. Look at it this way -- if you go to a small jazz club, it will have at a bunch of speakers from the ceiling to the floor. At home, you're trying to duplicate live music with only two speakers, and often with a pair of puny bookshelf speakers. Not gonna happen.

Some speaker designers resort to tricks to re-create ambient sound such as rear firing drivers, supertweeters, open baffle, etc., but all of these attempts are insufficient. Just like HT enthusiasts, many audiophiles have already experienced the benefits of multiple subwoofers. However, the 2-channel guys haven’t yet recognized the value of expanding their main speakers.

Audiophiles should learn lessons from HT enthusiasts regarding the use of presence speakers along the front stage. Personally, I use Audiokinesis LCS speakers and they’re a game changer. There's more bass, more dynamics, and a broader sound. Simply amazing.

I'd like to see audiophiles experiment with presence speakers to get more ambient sound from their systems. My audiophile buddy recently purchased an inexpensive pair of presence speakers and placed them on the floor alongside his open baffle speakers. It was immediately apparent that the presence speakers significantly improved the sound across the entire spectrum. Literally a night & day difference.

Don’t believe me? Just ask the HT crowd.

[Craig B]

I can't speak for all 2-channel enthusiasts, but I'm not trying to replicate a club or concert sound system in my listening room.

[Zuman]

As in most things, I'm sure that the truth is somewhere between the two extremes.
Have you ever heard a TRUE high-end two-channel system? Especially one with cost-no-object hyperspeakers? Those systems - usually with multiple drivers moving massive amounts of air and carefully matched to a well-prepared room- can be awfully convincing, with a sound decidedly less "comic-book-style" than a typical HT installation.  I'm talking about close-your-eyes believability, not impressive but artificial special effects.
But I agree that many two-channel systems are focused on providing a "precious" sound.  I think it's very cool and intimate when I can hear the texture of a violinist's bow or the intake of a singer's breath when seated twelve feet from my precisely-aimed standmounts, but I'll admit that I don't think I've ever experienced that in a live concert with any amplification. On the other hand, I HAVE heard it when seated among instrumentalists or when they are performing in an intimate setting.
I think two-channel and HT enthusiasts can learn from each other and we should certainly not oppose productive cross-pollination.

[Early B.]

I can't speak for all 2-channel enthusiasts, but I'm not trying to replicate a club or concert sound system in my listening room.

Your approach isn't wrong by any means. However, if you're not attempting to replicate live music, then what's your yardstick for exceptional sound in your listening room? Whatever it is, it's unnatural and that's precisely the point being made. But what if your system could sound better (however you define it) with a minimal investment of a pair of presence speakers? Would it be worth considering?

[kingdeezie]

Just like HT enthusiasts, many audiophiles have already experienced the benefits of multiple subwoofers. However, the 2-channel guys haven’t yet recognized the value of expanding their main speakers.

Same approach to two completely different issues. HT enthusiasts are usually attempting to crack the foundation of their neighbors house and want the output and headroom.

Using multiple subwoofers for 2-channel listening is usually done to smooth out in-room bass response.

The problem with implementing multiple channels into music reproduction is the sheer cost of the endeavor. Most HT equipment sounds poor with music reproduction. Even the best processor is going to get handedly trounced by any competent stereo preamplifier IME. 

There are other mechanisms to adding presence channels, especially if using DSP, but doing it to the same quality level of a great 2-channel system becomes quickly cost prohibitive.

All I know is the greatest reproduced sound I ever experienced was in a two-channel system. Never heard a multi-channel system come close. YMMV.

 

[opnly bafld]

.

[Early B.]

The problem with implementing multiple channels into music reproduction is the sheer cost of the endeavor. Most HT equipment sounds poor with music reproduction. Even the best processor is going to get handedly trounced by any competent stereo preamplifier IME. 

There are other mechanisms to adding presence channels, especially if using DSP, but doing it to the same quality level of a great 2-channel system becomes quickly cost prohibitive.

All I know is the greatest reproduced sound I ever experienced was in a two-channel system. Never heard a multi-channel system come close. YMMV.

Noooo!! We're not talking about establishing a multi-channel system. Adding presence speakers doesn't require processors or DSP. My presence speakers are connected to the extra set of binding posts on my monos. That's it. For some setups, it may require a small amp. Of course, if you choose to do so, you make it more complex by adding volume control, DSP, etc.     

[Tyson]

Even rock shows are artificial events because they are amplified.  A better reference would be something that was all acoustic.  Like a symphony or string quartet performance.  Or taiko drums like Kodo. 

[WGH]

I listen to what makes my brain happy. 2 channel audio is pleasurable and my preferred method to listen to music. Live music is completely different, it is charged with an electric energy as the musicians interact with the audience. Trying to re-create the live concert experience in your home through a HT setup is like making a chimera, a monster with a lion's head, a goat's body, and a serpent's tail - a thing that is hoped or wished for but in fact is illusory or impossible to achieve.

I have listened to surround music, the concert Blu-rays are fun to demo but 99.99% of my music is mixed in stereo so I listen to it as the artist intended. Not that I couldn't change the artists intent, I have a 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos surround sound setup integrated into my stereo with an Anthem AVM60, 4 big amps and a REL Gibraltar G2 sub with a total of 36 individual drivers driven by 1740 class AB high current watts. I just choose not to.

[AKLegal]

I've heard Early B's AudioKinesis system with and without the LCS speakers. The system is more dynamic, fuller and spacious with LCS than without. The improvement was obvious. I haven't heard his friend's system yet. As Early B has said, LCS is 2 channel audio just with more speakers. The extra speakers do not directly face the listener and are positioned so that their output arrives the listener delayed in time. There isn't any processing involved to create a separate signal like the various HT 7.1, 9.1 surround sound stuff. I don't think comparisons to surround sound systems are apt.

I have played around with a LCS system since hearing Early B's system. My main speakers are GR Research Super 7s. I used Emotiva ERM-1 monitors as LCS speakers. I set the ERM1s about 3 feet behind and 2 feet to the outside of my main speakers facing directly up at the ceiling. I powered the ERM1s with a fantastic Folsom 7293 amp. My mains have their own monoblocks.

Going into this I thought that adding 2 monitors that are clearly outclassed by my mains would drag the whole system down to their level but for the most part this didn't happen - I'll explain more about this a bit later. Sound quality-wise, the midbass was immediately better and soundstage depth increased without sacrificing the Super 7s ability to project solid 3d images towards the listener. Vocals had more body. Since I can quickly cut the Folsom amp on and off I was able to hear the differences without the delay of hooking and unhooking speakers etc. 

However, the biggest sonic beneficiary of adding LCS speakers to my system is how well it handles out of phase information and spatial cues. The Super 7s are already outstanding in this department but the added speakers focused out of phase information with greater precision - which doesn't make sense because this is out of phase information - but if the track has wrap around effects like Madonna's "Vogue" or Michael Jackson's "Jam" those effects now appear more solidly directly to your left, right, rear or above your head etc. Recording venue spatial cues are also more solid - this might be because spatial cues are also sometimes out of phase.

The first downside to LCS, at least with the monitors I used, are that with some music the speakers can draw attention to themselves. I have not determined if this is because the ERM-1s have poorly braced, resonant cabinets or if I need to feed them frequencies above 150hz to 200 hz or both. When the resonant issue wasn't rearing its head I couldn't localize them at all, the ERMs added their positive benefits and nothing else.  That was one of the most surprising things I have ever experienced with any addition to my system. This was all at low to moderately loud listening levels.

The second downside I experienced was that at loud to very loud volume levels the benefits of the extra speakers dissipate - but again this was mainly because I could increasing localize them. At loud volumes the Super 7s sound better on their own. I might be able to remedy this with further tweaking.

I have several other projects going on at the moment so the emotivas are not currently in my system. My plan is to put a high pass filter on them and place an attenuator between my preamp and the amp driving them (a minidsp 2x4 would be perfect for both). I could then permanently set the volume to say 70 percent of whatever the mains volume is and test various high pass frequencies. I think this would eliminate most of the issues I had with them. Then I could go about finding better (more inert) speakers to replace the emotivas. I would also bet that monitors with flatter frequency responses with tweeter crossover points a little lower than normal would be better in this application than speakers with midbass humps with woofers handling higher frequencies. 

If you have a spare set of monitors collecting dust you should try LCS out for kicks. People with systems that are a bit on the cooler side of neutral will probably benefit the most. YMMV.

[Craig B]

Your approach isn't wrong by any means. However, if you're not attempting to replicate live music, then what's your yardstick for exceptional sound in your listening room? Whatever it is, it's unnatural and that's precisely the point being made. But what if your system could sound better (however you define it) with a minimal investment of a pair of presence speakers? Would it be worth considering?

I'm still attempting to replicate live music, but just not amplified live music. My yardstick is what I've learned over the years to recognize as the sound of an unamplified acoustic instrument in a real space, typically acoustic stringed instruments and piano. If I can get the cleanest of those recordings to sound even a little bit close to that "realism" paradigm in my listening room, I'm happy. And I've found that if I can accomplish that with the system and room I have, then even other types of music and recordings sound satisfying to me, whether it's Sonny Stitt or the Rolling Stones. Frankly, I would never want to realistically recreate most of the live amplified concert experiences I've had, whether an intimate jazz club or a large rock concert, because I've found over the past 48 years that their sound is almost universally horrible. Even the ones that sound clean and balanced are still very obviously a "larger than life" projection to the back seats of the hall. That's not the sound of a real instrument. A very small handful have been good, but by and large they've just been awful auditory experiences. If my system consistently sounded like those concert events, I'd sell the whole thing and just watch TV.

If your proposed system can increase the realism of the sound of an individual acoustic instrument (and not simply better "locate" it in a given three-dimensional space), then I could be interested, but I suppose it would ultimately depend on what "minimal investment" means. My system is modest by anyone's high-end standards, but it still stretched my budget to the limit. I think twice before spending even $500. And then I stop and think a third time. Having to shoehorn another pair of speakers (and/or associated multi-channel electronics) into my budget would usually mean having less to spend on each piece. While that certainly doesn't always correlate to lower quality, I don't think that's a chance I'd like to take.

[Digi-G]

Thanks for elaborating and defining what "presence" speakers actually are and how you are using them.  It sure wasn't obvious until you spelled it out.  It actually does sound very interesting.

Many years ago a friend of mine bought some DAK speakers.  Remember them?  They were a catalog company, probably before Crutchfield existed.  I kind of rolled my eyes at him and gently tried to talk him out of buying them.  The speakers had many drivers, including a one or two on top of the cabinet, facing the ceiling.  They weren't hifi but dang, they sounded a whole lot better than they had any right to.  Especially in regards to spatial cues.  I also heard some Bose 901s that sounded fantastic (they were set up correctly).  Was it hi-fi?  I'm not sure but it was impressive and I like to keep an open mind about such things.

Very nice post, btw.

I've heard Early B's AudioKinesis system with and without the LCS speakers. The system is more dynamic, fuller and spacious with LCS than without. The improvement was obvious. I haven't heard his friend's system yet. As Early B has said, LCS is 2 channel audio just with more speakers. The extra speakers do not directly face the listener and are positioned so that their output arrives the listener delayed in time. There isn't any processing involved to create a separate signal like the various HT 7.1, 9.1 surround sound stuff. I don't think comparisons to surround sound systems are apt.

I have played around with a LCS system since hearing Early B's system. My main speakers are GR Research Super 7s. I used Emotiva ERM-1 monitors as LCS speakers. I set the ERM1s about 3 feet behind and 2 feet to the outside of my main speakers facing directly up at the ceiling. I powered the ERM1s with a fantastic Folsom 7293 amp. My mains have their own monoblocks.

Going into this I thought that adding 2 monitors that are clearly outclassed by my mains would drag the whole system down to their level but for the most part this didn't happen - I'll explain more about this a bit later. Sound quality-wise, the midbass was immediately better and soundstage depth increased without sacrificing the Super 7s ability to project solid 3d images towards the listener. Vocals had more body. Since I can quickly cut the Folsom amp on and off I was able to hear the differences without the delay of hooking and unhooking speakers etc. 

However, the biggest sonic beneficiary of adding LCS speakers to my system is how well it handles out of phase information and spatial cues. The Super 7s are already outstanding in this department but the added speakers focused out of phase information with greater precision - which doesn't make sense because this is out of phase information - but if the track has wrap around effects like Madonna's "Vogue" or Michael Jackson's "Jam" those effects now appear more solidly directly to your left, right, rear or above your head etc. Recording venue spatial cues are also more solid - this might be because spatial cues are also sometimes out of phase.

The first downside to LCS, at least with the monitors I used, are that with some music the speakers can draw attention to themselves. I have not determined if this is because the ERM-1s have poorly braced, resonant cabinets or if I need to feed them frequencies above 150hz to 200 hz or both. When the resonant issue wasn't rearing its head I couldn't localize them at all, the ERMs added their positive benefits and nothing else.  That was one of the most surprising things I have ever experienced with any addition to my system. This was all at low to moderately loud listening levels.

The second downside I experienced was that at loud to very loud volume levels the benefits of the extra speakers dissipate - but again this was mainly because I could increasing localize them. At loud volumes the Super 7s sound better on their own. I might be able to remedy this with further tweaking.

I have several other projects going on at the moment so the emotivas are not currently in my system. My plan is to put a high pass filter on them and place an attenuator between my preamp and the amp driving them (a minidsp 2x4 would be perfect for both). I could then permanently set the volume to say 70 percent of whatever the mains volume is and test various high pass frequencies. I think this would eliminate most of the issues I had with them. Then I could go about finding better (more inert) speakers to replace the emotivas. I would also bet that monitors with flatter frequency responses with tweeter crossover points a little lower than normal would be better in this application than speakers with midbass humps with woofers handling higher frequencies. 

If you have a spare set of monitors collecting dust you should try LCS out for kicks. People with systems that are a bit on the cooler side of neutral will probably benefit the most. YMMV.