Thread: Bad Speakers

I mean no disrespect in starting this thread, but I continue to be flabergasted as to how many high priced bad speakers are out there. I do not mean to insult anyone or say what anyone is buying is not right for them. And like anything else, audiophiles come in many colors and flavors. We all have our right to our opinions. But I have lusted for many a speaker based on their “flooding the airways” with advertisements, or the many rave reviews. I would then hear the speaker at a store or audio show and be amazed as to how bad they are. Unlike electronics, anyone with enough capital can build a speaker with zero expertise or acoustical knowledge. I for one think it’s rare to find a person who can build a credible transducer. And just because a speaker company is well respected, does not mean they don’t produce a clunker now and again. In addition, when I attend audio shows I find more bad speakers than good ones. So I would ask that we don’t go into detail here, but to just express our opinion as to what speaker(s) make no sense to us. And just because someone gives a speaker a booby prize does not mean we all feel the same way. Hey, there are bad speakers out there that I actually owned. Hopefully we grow more discerning with the passing years. Two speakers I would like to give a dubious award to, are the Magnapan 30.7’s and the Kef Blades.

Originally Posted by Joseph R.

I mean no disrespect in starting this thread, but I continue to be flabergasted as to how many high priced bad speakers are out there. I do not mean to insult anyone or say what anyone is buying is not right for them. And like anything else, audiophiles come in many colors and flavors. We all have our right to our opinions. But I have lusted for many a speaker based on their “flooding the airways” with advertisements, or the many rave reviews. I would then hear the speaker at a store or audio show and be amazed as to how bad they are. Unlike electronics, anyone with enough capital can build a speaker with zero expertise or acoustical knowledge. I for one think it’s rare to find a person who can build a credible transducer. And just because a speaker company is well respected, does not mean they don’t produce a clunker now and again. In addition, when I attend audio shows I find more bad speakers than good ones. So I would ask that we don’t go into detail here, but to just express our opinion as to what speaker(s) make no sense to us. And just because someone gives a speaker a booby prize does not mean we all feel the same way. Hey, there are bad speakers out there that I actually owned. Hopefully we grow more discerning with the passing years. Two speakers I would like to give a dubious award to, are the Magnapan 30.7’s and the Kef Blades.

I can’t argue with your two picks. The Blade 2’s are vastly better than the original Blades. The Maggie 30.7’s are real stinkers.

There really isn’t much of main stream current production I haven’t heard. They go from good to bad to abominations.

My list of top speakers is pretty short.

Let’s keep in mind that speaker preferences are very personal. One man’s garbage is another man’s gold.

Having been in and out of this hobby for a long time I have heard many many speakers.
Time after time I read glowing reviews of a certain pair of speakers and then hearing the actual speakers I often wonder how it is possible that the reviewer could rate the speakers so highly. It certainly was not what I heard from those speakers.
Situations like this are not an isolated incident.
To me, there are some top rated speakers that I would not allow in my home. And on the flip side there are some underground/little known speakers that do not receive the praise that they deserve.
One of the most critical aspects in having speakers sound good is to get them to play well with the room. (to steal a phrase from Jim Smith),
This alone can make or break the speakers ability to properly strut their stuff and can distort your opinion on the true potential of them.

Originally Posted by jadedavid

One of the most critical aspects in having speakers sound good is to get them to play well with the room.

I agree, if not the most critical. But the speaker has to get past the initial listening session before it even gets close to a purchase.

At Axpona last (or the one before that), the Bang and Olufsen Beolab 90 was such a disaster I ran out of the room after five minutes.

Originally Posted by Joseph R.

I agree, if not the most critical. But the speaker has to get past the initial listening session before it even gets close to a purchase.

At Axpona last (or the one before that), the Bang and Olufsen Beolab 90 was such a disaster I ran out of the room after five minutes.

Joseph - those B&O’s were an attack on one’s hearing. I couldn’t believe the reps actually thought it sounded good. One of the funniest demos was a few years back when they demoed the new Paradigm speakers. There was about 30 people in the room. After a few songs, the rep says: “well, what did everyone think?” One guy yells out “bright!”, then the next guy yells out “sibilant”, the next guy yells out “thin”, then it went on...the rep was all flustered.

On the flip side, I will NEVER forget hearing the big Quad’s with MSB or MBL’s this year or MSB with Magico M3’s. Lots of great demos to remember too.

At shows there has been so many funny moments too. I will never forget the Lampizator room and the Vapor audio speakers at RMAF 2015 (I think). That was a classic. The Lampi amps weren’t working at the time, so they had some $500 cheapo backup solid state amp. It played fine for a while and then made a BANG and a puff of black smoke came out of the backup SS amp and it stunk up the whole room. Listening to one of the “booth babes” describe it (all serious) had me on the floor laughing. “Well, it was sounding awful, then it made this loud bang and all this black smoke started piling out the back. Then this horrible smell.”

My friend Bart raced down the hallway to find a backup (to the backup) amp. Jeff Rowland graciously loaned them a 625 S2. Bloody hell did that sound good. That amp was incredible. If anyone has met Jeff, you know how tall he is. Well, given how high the drivers were on the Vapor speakers, Jeff was the only one who could hear the full audio spectrum of those speakers. The drivers were like 5 feet high. The Vapor audio speakers did sound good though, you just had to sit a little further back.

So many funny stories.

Hope I don’t insult people here. But speakers I don’t like are often hybrids. Like MBL with the strange mid high units and more or less conventional woofers. I’ve never heard speakers like that sound homogeneous. The mid and high can sound wonderfully and the low end will sound bonk flubber bonk.

Also I have no love for BBC type speakers.

I remember when one of our club members had a bunch of us over to his house to listen to the new $30k (I think) electrostatic speakers that he was going to be reviewing. No one liked the speaker and I think most of us thought there was an issue, out of phase or something. His older much cheaper Martin Logan sounded better.

I predict this thread won't end well.

Originally Posted by Mordante

Hope I don’t insult people here. But speakers I don’t like are often hybrids. Like MBL with the strange mid high units and more or less conventional woofers. I’ve never heard speakers like that sound homogeneous. The mid and high can sound wonderfully and the low end will sound bonk flubber bonk.

Also I have no love for BBC type speakers.

A member of our local audio club has a new set of MBL. I felt they were very amazing; then again at $70k they had better be.

I have never been a fan of electrostatic speakers... to me they seem too bright and way to directional. I also do not like ribbon tweeters much (although I have not listened to any recently) and I have never been a fan of horn loaded speakers. I am also sure there are very good version of each of these categories that I would like ... I just have not heard them.

Originally Posted by mep

I predict this thread won't end well.

I predict you are right... so I might as well get it started...

Those are fighting words ....

Interesting post. Of course, audio is mostly subjective and lots of things can influence sound with the main culprits being the room, speaker and listener position. And we must not forget synergy of the electronics and cables.

I don't have the same experience as many of the people here with $20K plus speakers but the speakers that I have heard that I thought were meh, are the Martin Logan Neoliths, Jantzen (which were god awful), ML CLX, Golden Ear and Rockport, Philharmonic.

I certainly have an open mind about these speakers, that they can sound good in the right environment but they may not be my cup of tea.

I am surprised about the lack of love for the Maggie 30.7's after reading glowing reviews professional and non pro. Of course I am a Maggie fan but have heard them sound terrible when not set up properly and when the wrong electronics were used. They are a polarizing speaker for sure. You either like them or not.

I do like the sound of Wilson Alexia's, Tidal, Dyn Audio, Harbeth and the higher end Revels.

Come on guys. Although I love taking about great vintage speakers, I am also finding this topic equally enjoyable. Even in disagreement I can appreciate and respect other audiophile opinions. This is a great hobby that we all enjoy. Let’s stop censoring ourselves and finally call a spade a spade. We all think it. Why not just say it once and a while. We may find ourselves closer to the mark than we once thought.

I already stirred things up on another thread with my opinion of Yg, although reviews of the Karmel sort of shows I was correct. One reviewer used about four amps to try to get them to sound "right" and ended up using the least expensive which was an Arcam. A reviewer got the larger model to sound decent after the company came to set them up, no easy task from what was written.

So far Joseph and I have similar hearing. That $80k B&O thing sounded like the world's largest boombox and very strained. The Blades aren't terrible but I couldn't listen to them for myself, I much prefer the Reference series.

I'm not the biggest Wilson fan, although I'd take them with Doshi or top ARC, like 160M's.

I know someone hear owns them, so keep in mind this is all subjective. A speaker that had me scratching my head when I learned they were $100k was the Marten. Many things contribute to an audition but I was anxious to leave. Another speaker used the same type drivers and my ears felt the same way, wish I could remember the name.

In contrast I was an instant Magico fan and have yet to hear them sound bad. A first listen and love was TAD. Although I've never heard much music I'd listen to played through them, the Tidal speakers are incredible. I like Revel's Untima 2 models, not so much a fan of Performa 3. I like the JBL Synthesis I've heard. I like what I've heard of the Monitor Audio newer models, especially the Platnum.

I heard an all Quad set up a couple of years ago and although I could find certain aspects I could criticize, I think I could have sat an listened to that system all day. Hard to describe, it just sucked you in and felt comfortable.

I like MBL, first audition was a master Reel-to-Reel of Telarc's James Newton Howard & Friends, blew me away, clean, clear and powerful without anything sounding offensive.

I don't think we have any owner's, I am a Dynaudio fan. I like Sceania. So many more.

Anyway, more about my taste than you wanted to know, smiling

I'll agree with Mr. Peabody on B&O and Wilson. I will add Von Schweikert VR5 Anniversaries to the list. Owned a pair. Awful.... Sorry.....

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

I already stirred things up on another thread with my opinion of Yg, although reviews of the Karmel sort of shows I was correct. One reviewer used about four amps to try to get them to sound "right" and ended up using the least expensive which was an Arcam. A reviewer got the larger model to sound decent after the company came to set them up, no easy task from what was written.

So far Joseph and I have similar hearing. That $80k B&O thing sounded like the world's largest boombox and very strained. The Blades aren't terrible but I couldn't listen to them for myself, I much prefer the Reference series.

I'm not the biggest Wilson fan, although I'd take them with Doshi or top ARC, like 160M's.

I know someone hear owns them, so keep in mind this is all subjective. A speaker that had me scratching my head when I learned they were $100k was the Marten. Many things contribute to an audition but I was anxious to leave. Another speaker used the same type drivers and my ears felt the same way, wish I could remember the name.

In contrast I was an instant Magico fan and have yet to hear them sound bad. A first listen and love was TAD. Although I've never heard much music I'd listen to played through them, the Tidal speakers are incredible. I like Revel's Untima 2 models, not so much a fan of Performa 3. I like the JBL Synthesis I've heard. I like what I've heard of the Monitor Audio newer models, especially the Platnum.

I heard an all Quad set up a couple of years ago and although I could find certain aspects I could criticize, I think I could have sat an listened to that system all day. Hard to describe, it just sucked you in and felt comfortable.

I like MBL, first audition was a master Reel-to-Reel of Telarc's James Newton Howard & Friends, blew me away, clean, clear and powerful without anything sounding offensive.

I don't think we have any owner's, I am a Dynaudio fan. I like Sceania. So many more.

Anyway, more about my taste than you wanted to know, smiling

I find this interesting since IMHO YG sounds very much like Magico. This weekend I listened to the YG Hailey and Magico Q5 and found them very similar in sound. The YG high was not as good as the Magico but the YG had better bass.


where can I find the YG discussion.

Originally Posted by kzhtoo

Magico has evolved so much more since Q5.

Yes they became even more outrageously expensive. :p

I think there are far more bad rooms/setups than there are bad speakers.

Originally Posted by Mordante

I find this interesting since IMHO YG sounds very much like Magico. This weekend I listened to the YG Hailey and Magico Q5 and found them very similar in sound. The YG high was not as good as the Magico but the YG had better bass.


where can I find the YG discussion.

Q5, ugh. Wait until you hear the latest S and M series.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by kzhtoo

Magico has evolved so much more since Q5.

Current products are indeed very different from Q5.

More coherent, easier to drive, more complete sound.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by nicoff

I have been a Maggie fan for decades. I still own a pair of 3.6s.
But my 3.6s have the same tweeter that the 20.1s and the 20.7s use. By the time the 30.7s were announced, I was ready to jump in. Then I learned that... the tweeter and also the midrange is the same as that of the 20.7. So the only difference is bigger and separate bass panels.
But... do the extra bass area make it twice as good? I never bothered to check. I already had a 20.7 and a nice sub that I could move around for perfect placement. I felt that I was already in 30.7 territory for much less money.
I cannot say the 30.7 are bad since I never heard them, but twice the money? That sounded bad to me.

Are you sure that the crossover and parts are not different?

I have no comment. Coz listened at the show or someone else's place don't count in my book. I'm sure some one won't agree with me but I had experienced the room/gear/synergy will give another life on some bad sounding speakers at the show.

I owned Magico Q5's when they had just come out. Nearly impossible to drive. I ended up having the best results with Spectral gear. One of my happiest audio moments was the day I sold them. I find my S3's a more satisfying speaker at less than half the price....

Originally Posted by Mike

Q5, ugh. Wait until you hear the latest S and M series.

I bought my original S5 unheard, but I also spent a year researching new speakers, and bought them based on what I felt were honest posts on audio forums, and reviews. I upgraded to the S5 Mk II again based on research, and my experience with the v1 S5. No regrets here.

Let me preface by saying, I've never heard a Magico Q series. I beg to differ, the only thing Yg and Magico have in common is both use aluminum for the cabinet. I thought they sounded quite different.

If you see the speakers I like, you'll notice I gravitate to a darker sound. Something about music coming from a dark background does it for me.

I'll have to look through my history to see if I can find the Yg thread. It was started by a new guy.

Check out those Stereophile reviews on the Yg.

Originally Posted by Mordante

I find this interesting since IMHO YG sounds very much like Magico. This weekend I listened to the YG Hailey and Magico Q5 and found them very similar in sound. The YG high was not as good as the Magico but the YG had better bass.


where can I find the YG discussion.

Ha, you would say that. Just teasing.

I definitely believe in treating the room.

Originally Posted by still-one

I think there are far more bad rooms/setups than there are bad speakers.

https://www.audioshark.org/audionet-...ore-15473.html

Originally Posted by Mordante

I find this interesting since IMHO YG sounds very much like Magico. This weekend I listened to the YG Hailey and Magico Q5 and found them very similar in sound. The YG high was not as good as the Magico but the YG had better bass.


where can I find the YG discussion.

I think something like this may have been going on when I heard Yg. To be fair there are also flattering reviews to be found, and, this one isn't bad, it just points out some honest experiences. Did he say "lumpy". Also, to be fair, one should never use Bose in a thread with what is thought of as high end, it's an immediate distractor.

As written by JA
Setup
Despite its size and complexity, YGA's Sonja 1.3 had been relatively straightforward to set up in my room; the Carmel 2 proved more problematic.

When you position speakers in a room, you want the woofers' distances from the floor, the nearest sidewall, and the wall behind the speakers to be maximally different from each other, to ensure that the low-frequency room resonances are evenly spread out. (As a rule of thumb, this will be achieved if you make the difference between each distance and the next smaller distance conform to the Golden ratio of 1.618:1, footnote 1) Yet the Carmel 2's single woofer is 29" from the floor—and, with the YGAs set up in the positions where the KEF Blade 2s had worked well when I reviewed them for the June 2015 issue, that was too close to the distance of each woofer from its sidewall. As a consequence, the midbass was lumpy, and while I didn't expect the Carmel 2 to have extended low frequencies, they were missing in action.

When you buy a pair of relatively expensive speakers, the dealer should be responsible for setting them up in your room, but in this case, YGA's Dick Diamond and Kerry St. James visited to optimize the positions of the Carmel 2s. Diamond played a selection of recordings with which he was familiar, and kept shifting each speaker until he heard the transition between the low midbass and the mid–upper bass smoothing out. He then adjusted the speakers' toe-ins until the central image was solidly and stably defined but the top octave wasn't being emphasized. That toe-in ended up being around 5°, and the speaker positions were asymmetrical. Although each speaker was 7' 2" from the wall behind it, the right speaker was 4' 7" from the books that line the sidewall nearest it, while the left speaker was 3' 2" from the LPs that lined its sidewall. (All distances were measured from the woofer dustcaps.)

Even then, with the Carmel 2s driven by Pass Labs XA60.5 monoblocks and fed directly from a PS Audio DirectStream DAC, the speakers sounded on the lean side, with a little too much top-octave energy. Diamond explained that while these review samples had been played for many hours back at the factory, the time spent in shipping probably meant that their woofers needed more break-in. We spent the next couple of hours listening to a wide variety of music, and yes, the midbass began to free up and the lean quality decreased. These changes continued for the next two weeks of my noncritical listening until, finally, the Carmel 2s' bass balance plateaued.

Amplifiers
Other than the presence of its lowest-frequency diagonal mode, at around 32Hz, I have optimized my room's acoustics for low-frequency articulation rather than bloom (footnote 2). So even though the Carmel 2s' bass had loosened up as much as it was going to, and even with the Pass Labs amplifiers and their rather soft bass character, the YGAs still sounded more lean than generous in the lows. Changing to the MBL Corona C15 monoblocks tightened up the bass—a step in the wrong direction—though the top-octave balance was now smoother. Replacing the MBLs with Parasound Halo JC 1 monoblocks, which Michael Fremer had described as being "perhaps a tad polite," the YGA speakers sounded a touch too vigorous in the midrange, and again, the Parasound's superb control of the bass emphasized the leanness of sound. Of all the solid-state amplifiers I had to hand, it was the softer-sounding treble of the Arcam FMJ P49, which I reviewed in November, that worked best with the Carmel 2s, bringing the midrange and treble into an overall neutral balance.

Since we are talking of bad speakers, I hate to get started with bad reviewers. This JA guy (I know who John Atkinson is) is profit driven. Have you since noticed that every recent review contains a full page add of the reviewed piece in the same issue. This is blackmail plain and simple. I read Stereophile and “The Absolute Joke” but don’t take either one seriously. I would rather hear opinions of pure hobby-ests than to hear from these jokers. Now they are putting themselves in the “greatest audio contributors” list. Oh please.......

Originally Posted by still-one

I think there are far more bad rooms/setups than there are bad speakers.

Yes there are lots of bad rooms and setups. But in my years in this hobby, I have personally heard hundreds of bad speakers. Actually more bad speakers than good ones.

Originally Posted by Joseph R.

Since we are talking of bad speakers, I hate to get started with bad reviewers. This JA guy (I know who John Atkinson is) is profit driven. Have you since noticed that every recent review contains a full page add of the reviewed piece in the same issue. This is blackmail plain and simple. I read Stereophile and “The Absolute Joke” but don’t take either one seriously. I would rather hear opinions of pure hobby-ests than to hear from these jokers. Now they are putting themselves in the “greatest audio contributors” list. Oh please.......

Oh, yes posters on the internet are so qualified to give advice.

Originally Posted by bzr

Ha! Now this just got interesting... Mark the spot...

I told everyone at the beginning of this thread that it won't end well. Joseph R will personally see to it. He started this thread to trash expensive speakers he doesn't like and wanted everyone else to pile on. Now he has already switched gears to attack reviewers. Brilliant.

The JA speaker measurements based reviews, over time, have proven very useful in my loudspeaker speaker journey.

The two worst speakers I’ve heard tower over all the other bad speakers I’ve been subjected to:
# 1 First gen WAAM’s. Super etched, shrill, totally unmusical. Dealer showroom circa 2000.
#2 Zu Omen. Super big HF resonance made everything sound really unnatural. Very high distortion. RMAF 2017.

I am sure it is just me but I have found more over priced speakers that I do not like. Speakers I've heard that I would take my low price (by comparison, but not low price for non-audiophiles) KEF's over... Very expensive YG's, equally expensive Martin Logan (both listened to in a room I am familiar with, a Stereophile reviewer who is in our audio club), and a $50k pair of Acoustic Zen speakers that I lived an entire weekend with at RMAF... they are terrible in my view. My R series KEF were much better in my view then any of these $50k plus speakers. Just saying.

I have listened to KEF Reference speakers and loved them.. would love to hear/own Blade 2's... but definitely out of my affordable range now .

Originally Posted by Randy Myers

I am sure it is just me but I have found more over priced speakers that I do not like. Speakers I've heard that I would take my low price (by comparison, but not low price for non-audiophiles) KEF's over... Very expensive YG's, equally expensive Martin Logan (both listened to in a room I am familiar with, a Stereophile reviewer who is in our audio club), and a $50k pair of Acoustic Zen speakers that I lived an entire weekend with at RMAF... they are terrible in my view. My R series KEF were much better in my view then any of these $50k plus speakers. Just saying.

I have listened to KEF Reference speakers and loved them.. would love to hear/own Blade 2's... but definitely out of my affordable range now .

How did you "live with" a pair of speakers over an entire weekend at RMAF? Were you part of the demo team?

Originally Posted by still-one

I think there are far more bad rooms/setups than there are bad speakers.

One consistent theme here. Almost all of the ‘worst’ were heard at shows or dealer’s, a few in other people’s homes, and almost none were owned outright. I’ve found my speakers sound better in my system than they ever have at a show or dealer audition. So maybe the worst just need a little setup TLC.

If the Omen had distortion it was from the electronics. Zu uses Eminence drivers which are Pro drivers. I owned a set of Omen with Soul Superfly drivers and they played as clear at very high volume as they did at lower volume. I was only using CJ 100 watt monoblocks. I'd say the Zu were one of the best composed speakers at high volume I've heard.

Originally Posted by W9TR

The JA speaker measurements based reviews, over time, have proven very useful in my loudspeaker speaker journey.

The two worst speakers I’ve heard tower over all the other bad speakers I’ve been subjected to:
# 1 First gen WAAM’s. Super etched, shrill, totally unmusical. Dealer showroom circa 2000.
#2 Zu Omen. Super big HF resonance made everything sound really unnatural. Very high distortion. RMAF 2017.

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

If the Omen had distortion it was from the electronics. Zu uses Eminence drivers which are Pro drivers. I owned a set of Omen with Soul Superfly drivers and they played as clear at very high volume as they did at lower volume. I was only using CJ 100 watt monoblocks. I'd say the Zu were one of the best composed speakers at high volume I've heard.

They were using something from Peachtree - not sure what. It was also way too loud like a lot demo’s seem to be.

Reviews are just another source of information to weigh, sometimes you get better information than the manufacturer website.

I can't speak to the integrity of Stereophile but I doubt an advertiser would be happy with the way at least that magazine points out shortcomings in gear. For example, the snip I shared from the Carmel review.

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

Reviews are just another source of information to weigh, sometimes you get better information than the manufacturer website.

I can't speak to the integrity of Stereophile but I doubt an advertiser would be happy with the way at least that magazine points out shortcomings in gear. For example, the snip I shared from the Carmel review.

How about how JA torched the Nyquist DAC? JA doesn’t pull punches.

Stereophile, and especially John Atkinson have been VERY helpful to me. John is one of my favorite reviewers. He’s always spot on. JVS is another I like.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by mep

How about how JA torched the Nyquist DAC? JA doesn’t pull punches.

I guess JA got burned on that one, after five other reviewers rated it top notch .

As this defeat was so embarrassing for him they pulled the Nyquist review and rating from their site after less than a year. I guess the leaning from that is, if you act political as a reviewer you better know what you’re doing, or you end up looking as stupid as JA did.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Mike

Stereophile, and especially John Atkinson have been VERY helpful to me. John is one of my favorite reviewers. He’s always spot on. JVS is another I like.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JA tells the truth and points out any and all problems with the gear he measures. He has integrity.

Originally Posted by Kuoppis

I guess JA got burned on that one, after five other reviewers rated it top notch .

As this defeat was so embarrassing for him they pulled the Nyquist review and rating from their site after less than a year. I guess the leaning from that is, if you act political as a reviewer you better know what you’re doing, or you end up looking as stupid as JA did.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What are you talking about? Did anyone dispute that the measurements JA took were incorrect? If yes, please post a link because I neve saw it.