[audiojerry]

I'd like to hear from others, but especially the comments of speaker designers.

I have made the transition from large floor standing full range speakers to mini monitors (and it may be permanent this time ).

I have become a strong believer in the application of minimal crossover electronics. I have gone round trip on the speaker merry-go-round several times owning many dozens of speakers and auditioning many more going from monitors to full range and back again with dynamic drivers, electrostats, ribbons and hybrids.

I have slowly been developing and evolving my listening skills and personal values regarding speaker virtues, and over time I am realizing that the strongest virtue in a speaker for me is transparency. More than than bass extension, dynamic range, or power handling, I cannot accept a speaker that lacks transparency.  I have owned some outstanding full range speakers including Vienna Acoustics Mahlers, B&W 801, Dunlavy SC-IVa, and more, and while I may sometimes miss some of the things that those speakers offered, I am totally addicted to the transparency, intimacy, and musicality of my small monitors, which are ProAc Response 1SC's. This week I just acquired a pair of Dynaudio 1.3SE, and so far have been very impressed by them as well. I have not been a Dynaudio fan in the past because I always felt they were too dry and lacked air, but the 1.3SE is an entirely different animal (at least when driven by Audio Research tube amplification).  

Some of what I'm saying may sound conflicting, because I cannot verify if the crossovers of either the ProAc or Dynaudio is 'minimalist', but I think the fact that there are only two drivers with a crossover point set very high is crucial to producing a clean sound. To me lower crossover points degrade the smoothness of the very important upper midrange lower treble region of the music, and a much smaller cap and inductor is required. When you go to a 3 way driver you must insert another crossover into the mix with the need for even larger inductors and caps. Regardless of their quality, these crossover components will still compromise transparency.

Does anyone have any opinions to offer on effects of caps, inductors, and resistors in crossovers and whether cumulatively they can adversely affect sound? I realize that they are necessary, but I believe they must be applied intellegently and frugally. I believe the ability to properly design and mate a crossover with great drivers is what separates the great designers from the others.

PS: I orinally entered this post in the Ellis forum, but felt it was a good topic for a general discussion.

[Pez]

Jerry,
    I can't speak for crossover components and all that jazz, but I can verify your experience with monitors is the same as mine. To be honest with you I bought the 626R's (BTW I have heard the proac's and the dynaudio speakers you have tried) as sort of a "stop over" to buying the RM40's from VMPS. When set up with tubes and a pair of subs, the 626's are easily the best I have heard in all areas you have discussed including imaging, soundstaging, intamacy, and something that big speakers just can't do, realism.  Big speakers make everything sound..... well big. Their massive size prevents them from imaging in a manner that, to my ears, sounds realistic. Everything is more disperse, less focused, and larger than life.

Now that I have the 626's in the arrangement they are in, I have absolutely no desire to go to anything bigger. Sure you may be able to achieve a more dynamic performance, but you lose the magic in the process. I'm begining to think that large speakers with higher price are not necessarily a "sell up" you ultimately are just buying "bigger", not necessarily "better" .

[brad b]

I have heard Pez's system, sounds absolutely involving, detailed, and "You are there'ish).  

Another consideration would be economics.  For those of us with a litttle H.T. as well as 2 channel, you may have a sub, which could be integrated with monitors, if the quality if there.  

Then we could talk about ribbons and cones, the differences you hear in different monitors.

[Tyson]

Another thing to be said for monitors is that they tend to "fit" most rooms better.  In a larger room, you need larger speakers, unless you sit close to the speakers.  In medium and small roooms, where you have to sit fairly close to the speakers, having only 2 or 3 drivers that need to "converge" and blend is a lot better than having 9 drivers. . .

[John B]

I too have gone from large floor standers (Dynaudio Contour 3.3) to a mini-monitor (Dynaudio Special 25th Anniversary).   I and everyone who has heard my previous 3.3's have concluded the 25's are more transparent, more detailed, and simply sounds better overall.    Admittedly the drivers in the 25 are superior to the 3.3's,  but I also find that mini-monitors on good stands are more forgiving of room acoustics issues than the big floor standers.

[Bwanagreg]

I'd have to think that another large contributor to transparency in a minimonitor is the small cabinet. There is less material to store (and then release) acoustical energy, and the smaller cabinet radiating surfaces get less in the way of the primary radiation coming from the drivers.

I also tend to value transparency higher than most other qualities. I find that within reason I can adjust to the tonal quirks of different speakers (and they ALL have them) more easily than I can forgive missing information from the recording. I'm one of those guys that likes to hear old recordings on new equiptment just to see what's been lurking in the mix that I never noticed before.

[Pez]

In a larger room, you need larger speakers, unless you sit close to the speakers.

I agree with everything you said but this. I'm not so sure that a larger room necessitates a larger speaker regardless of how close you sit to the speakers.  I argue that a small speaker is capable of producing plenty of SPL in a large room. I think people use large speakers in a large room because they can't use a larger speakers in a small room.  I have heard some small monitors in a HUGE room. It was 30' by 35' and it sounded incredible. Great imaging, good dynamics, large-deep soundstage.  Lacking in bass, but hey add some subs and your problems are solved.

[audiojerry]

Another contributing factor is that smaller monitors allow for closer near field listening, which reduces room reflections, but they also often have better off-axis characteristics.

[DVV]

I'd like to hear from others, but especially the comments of speaker designers.

I have made the transition from large floor standing full range speakers to mini monitors (and it may be permanent this time ).

And I made the transition from big speakers to big speakers. Actually, I magnanimously let my young 'un (just over 17) have my AR94s while I progressed to B&M Acoutsics 1041 monitor, which was my idea anyway.

Jerry, I'd sign away a year of my life to have you come over and listen to them for just a couple of hours, no more. I know this sounds like shouting "I'm the greatest!", but it really isn't, a year down the road and I still find them hard to believe, they are that good. The only problem is that the guys making them don't operate any more, which is a damn shame.

I have become a strong believer in the application of minimal crossover electronics. I have gone round trip on the speaker merry-go-round several times owning many dozens of speakers and auditioning many more going from monitors to full range and back again with dynamic drivers, electrostats, ribbons and hybrids.

I have slowly been developing and evolving my listening skills and personal values regarding speaker virtues, and over time I am realizing that the strongest virtue in a speaker for me is transparency. More than than bass extension, dynamic range, or power handling, I cannot accept a speaker that lacks transparency.  I have owned some outstanding full range speakers including Vienna Acoustics Mahlers, B&W 801, Dunlavy SC-IVa, and more, and while I may sometimes miss some of the things that those speakers offered, I am totally addicted to the transparency, intimacy, and musicality of my small monitors, which are ProAc Response 1SC's. This week I just acquired a pair of Dynaudio 1.3SE, and so far have been very impressed by them as well. I have not been a Dynaudio fan in the past because I always felt they were too dry and lacked air, but the 1.3SE is an entirely different animal (at least when driven by Audio Research tube amplification).  

Some of what I'm saying may sound conflicting, because I cannot verify if the crossovers of either the ProAc or Dynaudio is 'minimalist', but I think the fact that there are only two drivers with a crossover point set very high is crucial to producing a clean sound. To me lower crossover points degrade the smoothness of the very important upper midrange lower treble region of the music, and a much smaller cap and inductor is required. When you go to a 3 way driver you must insert another crossover into the mix with the need for even larger inductors and caps. Regardless of their quality, these crossover components will still compromise transparency.

Does anyone have any opinions to offer on effects of caps, inductors, and resistors in crossovers and whether cumulatively they can adversely affect sound? I realize that they are necessary, but I believe they must be applied intellegently and frugally. I believe the ability to properly design and mate a crossover with great drivers is what separates the great designers from the others.

PS: I orinally entered this post in the Ellis forum, but felt it was a good topic for a general discussion.

In my view, in speakers, you should always go for composite caps. As an example, say you need 3 uF; put in parallel caps made from polypropylene, polyethylene and polycarbonate, film types the lot of them, each rated at 1uF. I used Wima, but there are other good products out there.

I am not going to say this will eliminate them as a factor in sound, but I will say it will minimize their effects as much as possible.

Also, if it's a two way system, put the crossover board on not one, but two pieces of plywood (each secton by itself). Drill the plywood so you can solder component pins against other component pins - no printed ciruits, direct connection only.

Lastly, use silver wiring for midrange drivers (in 3 way systems) and tweeters; in my view, they are unbeatable for naturalness.

Just my 2 cents' worth.

Cheers,
DVV

[audiojerry]

Dejan,
It's not fair to gush about a speaker that no one else will ever have  

[nathanm]

I'm trying to make the transition from minimonitors to full range floorstanders, but there's this issue of money you see, and my distinct lack of it.  As long as the speaker fits through standard doorways it ain't too big for me.  I wouldn't mind schlepping in a pair of Tannoy Kingdoms if anyone wants to loan me a pair.  Hey, I'll rent a truck & dolly if I have to - no big whoop!

Usually the room\speaker size scale has to be balanced to sound "right" IMO.  Perhaps an issue of radiating area vs. room volume or something.  My small monitors sounded weak in my living room in the usual 10-12ft. apart position but moving them into the middle of the room and about 6-7 feet apart was pretty good.  Highly obtrusive though, from a walking standpoint.

[Sa-dono]

In a larger room, you need larger speakers, unless you sit close to the speakers.

I agree with everything you said but this. I'm not so sure that a larger room necessitates a larger speaker regardless of how close you sit to the speakers.  I argue that a small speaker is capable of producing plenty of SPL in a large room. I think people use large speakers in a large room because they can't use a larger speakers in a small room.  I have heard some small monitors in a HUGE room. It was 30' by 35' and it sounded incredible. Great imaging, good dynamics, large-deep soundstage.  Lacking in bass, but hey add some subs and your problems are solved.

While I do agree with you for the most part, I also feel that larger speakers have their place. This is mainly in the area of lower distortion at very high SPL levels. Of course MOST people don't ever listen at these levels....otherwise there wouldn't be the amount of tube lovers there are  

[nathanm]

While I do agree with you for the most part, I also feel that larger speakers have their place. This is mainly in the area of lower distortion at very high SPL levels. Of course MOST people don't ever listen at these levels....otherwise there wouldn't be the amount of tube lovers there are  

That's something I always wondered about.  What actually makes a speaker able to handle more power?  Aren't the drivers used on monitors often the same ones used on large floorstanders? (barring of course big woofers)  Does the cabinet volume alone help with this?  A tweeter or a midbass driver wouldn't be able to take any more juice on a big speaker than if it was on a minimonitor, right? Or does it?

[John Casler]

I think I understand what you (AudioJerry) are saying and for the most part I agree.

But I do have to dissent when it comes to the RM40 and the RM/x.

The VMPS ribbons take care of some of your concerns regarding crossovers and transparency.

1) for all practical purposes, the VMPS floor standers have only 1 crossover that affects "transparency" and if they aren't the most tranparent speaker you have ever heard, then I would suggest they might not have been set up well.  The crossover at 166Hz is low enough that no "detail" is affected in the area of transparency.

2) It is generally argued that because of the wide face or baffle of a floorstander, the reflected sound will cause less detail and transparency.  While this is true with many cone based speakers, the limited horizontal dispersion of the Ribbons used in the VMPS ameliorates this artifact to basically negligible.

The reduced face of the RM/x reduces this even further.

3) The specific dispersion character of the ribbons causes less room interaction than a high dispersion speaker and it also has a much better SPL to distance from the speaker ratio, that makes the small amount of reflected sound less of a problem due to the "precedence effect".

As far as "size" of image.  I think that is a function of actual speaker height and angle.  When I go to the Symphony or a live concert, it is "HUGE".  When I go to a club and get a good seat close to the stage, James Taylor or Diana Krall is singing from a higher position that 3-5 feet off the floor.

In trying to reproduce the original event, I want Wide Screen Panavision and not a 50" RPTV.  I want 5th row center, not seats in the back of the hall.

Just my feel for Floor Standers "IF" they are VMPS Ribbons.

And I say this after ordering a pair of 626R FSTs today.

Go Figure.

Regards,
 
John Casler
 
VMPS LA CA USA
SUMMIT Audio Video
310-446-0138
800-320-6884 (order desk)
bioforce.inc@gte.net
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=systems;system=72
http://my.register.com/summitaudiovideo.com/index.html

[Psychicanimal]

Nearfield is the ticket to intimacy...

Mini monitors offer what no other type of listening can.  I wouldn't trade my Modwright Swans for anything else that's commercially available out there.

[audiojerry]

John, I never heard the RM40 or RMX (but I'd like to) so I can't comment on them.

[DVV]

Dejan,
It's not fair to gush about a speaker that no one else will ever have  

Oh, we'll see about that, Jerry. It may not be made just now, but who's to say it won't be back in production in the near future? You really think I'll give up on it that easy? A company breaks up and that's supposed to stop me, when the designer of that company is such a close friend?

Also, I am not the only owner, you know - people from Austria, Italy and Belgium also have it. They got lucky, I guess.

Bascom King (avid readers of "Audio" will remember Bascom by his countless texts over the last 35 years) told me that if ever a pair reached the shores of USA, he wanted to test it, and I plan on reminding him of this.

Point is Jerry, it's unavailability now should he thought of as a hitch, a passing inconvenience.

As of its smaller brother, the Monitor. That is also a hell of a good speaker, especially for the money (used to cost $300 a pair, if memory serves).

And I had just convinced Mirko he needed a third, a floorstander, to complete the series of three.

Oh, you haven't heard the last of it, Jerry, not if I can help it.

Cheers,
DVV

[DVV]

That's something I always wondered about.  What actually makes a speaker able to handle more power?  Aren't the drivers used on monitors often the same ones used on large floorstanders? (barring of course big woofers)  Does the cabinet volume alone help with this?  A tweeter or a midbass driver wouldn't be able to take any more juice on a big speaker than if it was on a minimonitor, right? Or does it?

Nate, power handling is a VERY relative term, because it is intimately linked to efficiency. If your speaker has an efficiency of say 90 dB/1W/1m, you would need 100W for 110 dB SPL at 1 m. But if your speaker has an efficiency of say 96 dB/1W/1m, for the same sound pressure you can get away with less than half that power. Mind you, this is quick'n'dirty figuring, it doesn't quite work out that simple, but it's near enough to illustrate the point.

Also, the drivers themselves are very different, a bass driver will by default need and be able to soak up far more power than a tweeter, which is small and light, and really requires very little drive on its own, although crossovers tend to soak up power.

Next, you need to investigate where in the spectrum do you actually need the power, and the answer is in the bass. That's where most of the energy goes, that's where things tend to get very mean. But again, this is simply a general way of looking at things.

Lastly, you need to take into account the number of drivers (because the more you split up the spectrum, the more actual power you can soak up, but also may need more power), since this also tells you how much of the energy spectrum each driver will face in normal operation. In conjunction with this is your crossover, its function, design and components.

A special consideration is the declaration of power. It has become traditional that US manufacturers quote peak power levels speakers can handle (in most cases, anyway), which can be well into several hundred of watts. European manufacturers are more influenced by German DIN standards, which are rather stringent in their requirements, and thus quote two figures - nominal continuous (what it can handle on a permanent basis) and music power, which is related to peak power, one burst in four, repetative. Consequently, European speakers tend to have lower power rating figures, but when for example my old AR94s, declared as capable of 250W in the US, cross over here, their power rating "deteriorates" to 120W continuous and 160W "music" power.

Cheers,
DVV

[Curt]

I also like small loudspeakers. The music can be so involving and real.

I’ve looked at: Revel M20; N805; Joseph Audio RM7si mk2; ProAc; Quad; Celeston; and a few others. The one thing that bothered me was the lack of bass extension, I like bass.

The Revel M20 and JA RM7si mk2 have been receiving some attention. Stereophile has the M20 on their “A - Restricted Extreme LF” recommended list, that was a surprise to me  

Most of the small loudspeakers use ported enclosures. They try to get some bass. IMO it would be better to use sealed enclosures and cut off at around 100Hz. Add two subs for L&R CH bass.

Use an active crossover to drive the small (passive XO) loudspeaker’s amp (HP out) and a pair of sub amps (LP out) driving the two subs. This could be quite nice if well executed.

A slightly larger option:

Recently I have been looking again at small floor standers. There are some interesting offerings that may retain some small loudspeaker characteristics. We just ordered a pair of the Joseph Audio RM25si mk2s to see how they work out in our demo room. The RM25si mk2 surprisingly reaches 32Hz. There are several more small floor standers, I heard some Quads that blew me away yesterday at an audio show. The search is part of the fun.

It would be nice to have 3-4 different systems (in different rooms) and just bounce around as the mood sees fit. Guess dreaming is healthy

[Scott F.]

Hi Guys,

Thought I'd jump in and add my 2 cents FWIW.

I have made the transition from large floor standing full range speakers to mini monitors (and it may be permanent this time ).

I think I know where you are coming from. At MAF, Klaus sent me home with a pair of his Epiphany's (his small mini-monitors). If you guys have been keeping up at the site (TNT), I've been doing a speaker shootout that has been mainly mini-monitors. The reference pair that I chose to gauge all others against whas the Dyn 42's. Not a bad speaker at about $700 or so. When I plugged in Klaus' speakers and got them dialed in for the room, my world changed. Granted, they aren't perfect but what they get right outweighs everything they do wrong. These little speakers image like you wouldn't believe. They absolutely disappear in my room (on the right material of course). I've yet to roll another pair through here that have been able to do that.

In turn, I've turned into an Epiphany junkie. I can't take these out of the system (which makes it damned tough to write about other speakers  

I have become a strong believer in the application of minimal crossover electronics.

Me too. Want to take a trip to the poor-house? Go over to the site and look at my big system. It's tri-amped with an active crossover (between the pre and amps). Dejan is actually the one that started me down the active crossover path (Dejan, one of these days I'll make it over to pay you back proper, you better hide from Laura though You want to talk about accuracy, transparency, detail and absolute control.

After listening to Klaus' Epiphany's, I've decided to redesign those huge cabinets and break them up into a mini-monitor for the tweets and mids (doing away with the carvers and using a different ribbon) and a pair of separate sub cabinets for my Shiva's.

Over the past few years I've turned into a connoseur of active crossovers (of sort). I've collected and listened to quite a few. I've got the Audio Research EC-3 tubed, the Sony TA-4300, the Pioneer SF-850, one of the really cheap DJ ones (I forget the name), plus several pro-sounds like DOD and DBX. Of all of them, the best sounds I've gotten out of my system are the solid state descrete designs. The Sony is my favorite but it's down right now for a total rebuild (it's almost 30 years old and long over due).

Some of what I'm saying may sound conflicting, because I cannot verify if the crossovers of either the ProAc or Dynaudio is 'minimalist', but I think the fact that there are only two drivers with a crossover point set very high is crucial to producing a clean sound. To me lower crossover points degrade the smoothness of the very important upper midrange lower treble region of the music, and a much smaller cap and inductor is required. When you go to a 3 way driver you must insert another crossover into the mix with the need for even larger inductors and caps. Regardless of their quality, these crossover components will still compromise transparency.

I agree with what you are saying. I'd like to add a point too. When you go with a higher XO point, you are driving your midbass much (more) like a fullrange driver (ie; Lowther, Fostex, etc). In doing so, the XO point is moved from the critical midband vocal range (where you can hear any design mistake) and moves it up the frequency scale. If you can get a midbass driver to sound transparent in the 3k range then you apply the XO, you now have the makings of a killer speaker (generally speaking). You have few(er) worries about XO slopes especially on the tweeters and all you have to worry about is cone break up on the midbass (well not all, but close).

Thats not to say that only speakers crossed at 3k (or better) work. There are some good designs that will cross smack-dab at 1.5k, right in the heart (essentially) of the vocal range.

Does anyone have any opinions to offer on effects of caps, inductors, and resistors in crossovers and whether cumulatively they can adversely affect sound?

When it comes to crossover caps, my fav's are AuraCaps. They are the least expensive of the boutique caps on the market and they sound fabulous. I (and loads of others) use them in small signal circuits too. When it comes to crossover resistors, Richard at Audience turned me onto this one. Go to Mouser and buy the Ohmite TCH35P series thick power film resistors (there is no minimum orders at Mouser, one at a time is OK). These come in a TO220 case (like a mosfet transistor). They are rated to 35 watts. They come in values starting at 0.1 ohm and go up to 2k2. In singles they cost on average of $5.66 each. In bulk they drop about a buck or so. These need some serious time to burn in as you might think. BUT when they break in, your highs will open up like you never would have imagined.

Best Regards,
Scott