[RoadTripper]

Two cheap active speakers of nearly the same price are the Emotiva Stealth-8 and the Neumann HK 120A. Does anyone know if the similar price translates to similar value? One has a pedigree and the other is a newish kid on the block. But it sure looks to me like the Emotiva gets you a lot more for the money -woofer size and its corresponding bass figure as well as the power of Emotiva's two amps. Could the direct sales business model of the Emotiva account for that or what?

Anybody have any experience with these two speakers?

[JohnR]

Part of your answer is here:

[maty]

-> http://www.soundandvision.com/content/emotiva-pro-stealth-8-speaker-system-test-bench

This graph shows the quasi-anechoic (employing close-miking of all woofers) frequency response of the Stealth 8 L/C/R (purple trace) and Stealth 6 surround (red green trace). These active/powered loudspeakers were measured at a distance of 1 meter and scaled for display purposes. Grilles are not included with either of these models, and all controls were set to the default (off) position...

Maybe the Emotiva Stealth 6 but not Stealth 8, to listen good recordings.

In a recording studio or to listen good recordings: Neumann HK 120A.

In Europe Neumann has most reasonable price.

A tip: avoid cheap monitors with class D amplifier for the tweeter if you want to listen good recordings (classical, jazz and others). Like JBL LSR305 / 08.

To play "chunda chunda" (aka commercial FM Radio, Spotify,...), MP3 or films you do not need to spend a lot of money or be so demanding => JBL LSR305 / 08 and after you can tweak.

-> http://noaudiophile.com/JBL_LSR305/

-> http://noaudiophile.com/JBL_LSR308/

LSR 308 front tweak

BIG image -> http://noaudiophile.com/JBL_LSR308/JBL_LSR308_Alumifoam.jpg

LSR305 board

and you can change the cheap capacitors.

BIG image -> http://noaudiophile.com/JBL_LSR305/JBL_LSR_305_Amp.jpg

capacitors -> http://www.head-fi.org/t/779350/review-of-jbl-lsr305/15

[maty]

NoAudiophile.com Recommended Systems

-> http://noaudiophile.com/System_Search/

-> -> http://noaudiophile.com/Vanatoo_Transparent_One/

-> [Customer reviews] http://www.amazon.com/Vanatoo-Transparent-One-Powered-Speakers/dp/B0080K2KUK

BIG image -> http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81NCHX80oIL._SL1500_.jpg

[JLM]

First your out of the C&C price range, but the concept can be applied here.

What is your intended use?  Something the size of the Neuman would be good for desktop/small room use, while the Stealth really needs to be in a medium/large room. 

Neuman is well respected, almost unassailable in it's price range, for studio use, but Stealth 8 will go lower.  But studio use is work, not pleasure.  Studio monitors f you want exactly what's in the recording in a dry, warts exposed presentation.  I've heard the Stealth but not the Neuman.  It seemed rough, perhaps brutal, but it was under show conditions with unknown music.

Like consumer audio, you can buy more displacement at the same price and give up quality.

Yes, the direct internet sales approach should save money.

Keep in mind that Emotiva's niche is value more than quality.

[RoadTripper]

Thx all. Yeah I had a hard time trying to find a "Circle" to put this question in. Sorry.

I don't really get the repeated stuff about Neumann (and others) studio monitors leaning toward dry "warts exposed" sound. To me that translates to accurate. The other thing I don't get is how a non-studio monitor builder designer would go about making sure their speakers would not commit the sin of accuracy. How could one engineer accuracy in or out of a design?

[JohnR]

Well, you've no doubt seen people refer to "voicing." The other thing is that speaker design is a whole set of compromises. I'm not sure my earlier graphic showed up but if you go here and click on "Measurements" down the right you will see (what appears to be) true engineering data. They aren't claiming that the speaker is anything that it isn't. Ask Emotiva for the equivalent.

[maty]

One thing, a flat response is good to listen in a recording studio but it can be tiring to listen music, hence the rear controls to adjust bass and treble.

To listen with pleasure and long hours the graph must be as the new (and expensive) Tony Gee's DIY Loudspeaker kit:

Humble Homemade Hifi: Plutone

-> http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/Plutone.html

[JohnR]

Could you state some reason why you say "To listen with pleasure and long hours the graph must be as the new (and expensive) Tony Gee's DIY Loudspeaker kit"? The graph itself gives no particular reason to be excited, nor does the anticipated off-axis response.

[maty]

You are right, but I was referring only to the frequency response.

I prefer Neumann HK 120A (5 1/4" woofer -> small rooms) and after you can change bass and trebble to generate the previous frequency graph.

In a big room you need a big woofer, more woofers or subwoofers.

[JLM]

Thx all. Yeah I had a hard time trying to find a "Circle" to put this question in. Sorry.

I don't really get the repeated stuff about Neumann (and others) studio monitors leaning toward dry "warts exposed" sound. To me that translates to accurate. The other thing I don't get is how a non-studio monitor builder designer would go about making sure their speakers would not commit the sin of accuracy. How could one engineer accuracy in or out of a design?

The studio professionals scratch their heads at audiophiles.  Typical audiophiles "think" they want accuracy but what they really want is entertainment and go to extremes to achieve it.  Consider the $1500/pair Neuman KH120 - a wonderful active speaker from one of the most respected companies in the industry.  When used in a near-field setup in the hands of a skilled person it can be used to efficiently analyze and assemble fantastic recordings.  But at home we easily spend ten times that amount to simply reproduce the same sound it helped to produce.  Ah, but is it the same sound?  Probably not.  First we have a wide variety of rooms and setups that each affect the sound differently.  And we connect our speakers to a vast array of gear. 

But the biggest variable is our tastes.  What experience with music do you bring to bear?  What aspects of music to you favor?  What sonic attributes of reproduced sound really "floats your boat"?  Being human we each have our subjective preferences that hit our personality button.  The studio folks don't have those luxuries, they're being paid to be completely objective (within the producer's idea of what will sell).  So accuracy might be supreme in the studio, but at home we want to like those attributes (a lot to pay those huge consumer prices).  We want to be entertained, whether it's "real" or not.  Consider an action movie, do you want realistic or exaggerated "effects"?  Would space ships really swoosh by you in space?  Would they leave a blue trail?  No, that would be dull, not entertaining.

And for some reason audiophiles want world class finishes on their gear and will pay double to get fancy veneers or milled face plates.  Then they spend hundreds/thousands for cables that can't beat $20 cables in double blind testing while not really understanding or examining the guts of their gear to question parts or construction quality.  (Ever read about a studio that bought boutique cables?)  Next they spend more money on various accessories (again never seen in a studio).  Yet we depend on their setups for the music we listen to.  No wonder studio people scratch their heads.

[gregfisk]

The studio professionals scratch their heads at audiophiles.  Typical audiophiles "think" they want accuracy but what they really want is entertainment and go to extremes to achieve it.  Consider the $1500/pair Neuman KH120 - a wonderful active speaker from one of the most respected companies in the industry.  When used in a near-field setup in the hands of a skilled person it can be used to efficiently analyze and assemble fantastic recordings.  But at home we easily spend ten times that amount to simply reproduce the same sound it helped to produce.  Ah, but is it the same sound?  Probably not.  First we have a wide variety of rooms and setups that each affect the sound differently.  And we connect our speakers to a vast array of gear. 

But the biggest variable is our tastes.  What experience with music do you bring to bear?  What aspects of music to you favor?  What sonic attributes of reproduced sound really "floats your boat"?  Being human we each have our subjective preferences that hit our personality button.  The studio folks don't have those luxuries, they're being paid to be completely objective (within the producer's idea of what will sell).  So accuracy might be supreme in the studio, but at home we want to like those attributes (a lot to pay those huge consumer prices).  We want to be entertained, whether it's "real" or not.  Consider an action movie, do you want realistic or exaggerated "effects"?  Would space ships really swoosh by you in space?  Would they leave a blue trail?  No, that would be dull, not entertaining.

And for some reason audiophiles want world class finishes on their gear and will pay double to get fancy veneers or milled face plates.  Then they spend hundreds/thousands for cables that can't beat $20 cables in double blind testing while not really understanding or examining the guts of their gear to question parts or construction quality.  (Ever read about a studio that bought boutique cables?)  Next they spend more money on various accessories (again never seen in a studio).  Yet we depend on their setups for the music we listen to.  No wonder studio people scratch their heads.

Very often I don't agree with you, but I do enjoy your posts. This time however I couldn't agree more. Frankly, I just don't understand why people spend so much money on certain aspects of their gear and only use measurements to purchase it. Why would someone buy equipment by the sole fact that it measures well, then talk down about gear they have never heard. They argue that it must sound bad even thou they haven't heard it because of how it measures? The most accurate measuring gear that I have listened to just hurt my ears, had no soul and all I wanted to do was turn it down. When someone tells me that measurements are the only thing that matters I pretty much figure they really aren't that into music. Humans are a very interesting race indeed.

Good Post JLM.

Regards,

Greg

[maty]

Good measurements are necessary but not sufficient, with amps and speakers. Without DSP.

Flatten the frequency response with DSP should be done well, without altering much the phase > 180 Hz.

[maty]

We need to know the spectral decay too and not only the frequency response.

Class A and AB amps with more negative feedback to get good numbers is a bad practice.

Traditional equalizer (hard or soft) modify the phase.

The real problem is the user that avoids any intellectual learning effort or the builder looking for the easy way.

Get the frequency response of the Plutone speakers with few passive R, L, C (passive components) involves a very wise choice of speakers and is very commendable.

[maty]

Repeat

Troels Gravesen is the designer of Jantzen Audio JA-8008 HMQ

-> http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/JA8008-HMQ.htm

and QUATTRO mkII speakers with this woofer and Jantzen/Audax TW034 tweeter.

-> http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/QUATTRO.htm

Worse response and more complex woofer crossover!

And box with more reinforcements.

So what has been achieved by Tony Gee is meritorious.