High end speaker size.....when smaller actually sounds better.

[bluegrassphile]

Do smaller speakers often out perform larger speakers in smaller rooms? My theory.....smaller speakers, that are pushed with power, often sound "better" in smaller rooms than larger speakers that are not being pushed. Is my theory true.....or, not?? Please discuss.

 

[steve59]

At axpona last year, in the hotel rooms my favorite speakers were the little speakers by Neat. also Raidho stand mounts were my favorites. The big rooms were another story... The Carver line source sounded good in a small room and the maggies also were a couple exceptions to the usual crummy sounding large speaker/small room condition.

 

[mep]

Do smaller speakers often out perform larger speakers in smaller rooms? My theory.....smaller speakers, that are pushed with power, often sound "better" in smaller rooms than larger speakers that are not being pushed. Is my theory true.....or, not?? Please discuss.

My theory is that speakers with high sensitivity won't need you to push them with power. You need to size your speakers to the room they will be used in and make a decision if you want high sensitivity speakers that don't require monster amps or if you want low sensitivity speakers that you will have to push them with power.

 

[Audiophobiac]

Do smaller speakers often out perform larger speakers in smaller rooms? My theory.....smaller speakers, that are pushed with power, often sound "better" in smaller rooms than larger speakers that are not being pushed. Is my theory true.....or, not?? Please discuss.

Not necessarily. It depends on the size of the room, the acoustical properties of the room and set up and it's not really a performance issue in and of itself. It is performance with your system and the room.
It also depends a little on the sound you are looking for. If you want highly revealing, full-range and lows that go down to just above sub territory or a little bit into it, then bookshelf speakers alone won't be up to the task. You could add a sub to get there though. Even with that, it is unlikely the bookshelves will be true full-range or highly revealing. They will likely be highly resolving though.
So rule of thumb is if you are after highly revealing, the best bet is full-range towers or the like. If you are after highly resolving then the doors open wider for both bookshelf speakers and floor-standers. However, it is not just that, you must take room size into account. You don't want a pair of say, floor-standing Elac Adantes in a room that is 11 x 12.

Keep in mind that what you may hear in a shop from said speaker will likely be not even close to the way they will sound in your room even if you use the same electronics in the shop. Set up is everything...or almost everything. I've heard a pair of $250 bookshelf speakers sound very good (if looking for resolving rather than revealing). however, that was in a small room, that same trick won't work as well in say a 20 x 14 room unless you listen near-field.

You might want to look for efficient speakers either way, say something in the 89db min and higher range. This will widen amp choices as well.
Just my take on it.

 

[Al M.]

Not necessarily. It depends on the size of the room, the acoustical properties of the room and set up and it's not really a performance issue in and of itself. It is performance with your system and the room.
It also depends a little on the sound you are looking for. If you want highly revealing, full-range and lows that go down to just above sub territory or a little bit into it, then bookshelf speakers alone won't be up to the task. You could add a sub to get there though. Even with that, it is unlikely the bookshelves will be true full-range or highly revealing. They will likely be highly resolving though.
So rule of thumb is if you are after highly revealing, the best bet is full-range towers or the like. If you are after highly resolving then the doors open wider for both bookshelf speakers and floor-standers. However, it is not just that, you must take room size into account. You don't want a pair of say, floor-standing Elac Adantes in a room that is 11 x 12.

Keep in mind that what you may hear in a shop from said speaker will likely be not even close to the way they will sound in your room even if you use the same electronics in the shop. Set up is everything...or almost everything. I've heard a pair of $250 bookshelf speakers sound very good (if looking for resolving rather than revealing). however, that was in a small room, that same trick won't work as well in say a 20 x 14 room unless you listen near-field.

You might want to look for efficient speakers either way, say something in the 89db min and higher range. This will widen amp choices as well.
Just my take on it.

Can you please explain what in your view is the difference between highly revealing and highly resolving? I don't really see one.

 

[Audiophobiac]

Can you please explain what in your view is the difference between highly revealing and highly resolving? I don't really see one.

Well, as I have come to understand "highly resolving" is where the subtle flaws in a recording or what have you are masked in a way by the native color signature of the speaker or system for lack of better explanation. It is usually subtle, but highly resolving speakers or systems are super fun and pleasant to listen to and can draw you into the music very effectively, gets you toes tapping fast.
"Highly revealing" speakers or systems are more analytical in nature (usually closer to dead neutral as possible although no such thing as perfect), every detail including subtle flaws in a recording are revealed without mercy. Can also be an interesting and fun listen. It really depends on personal preference.
I'm a detail person primarily (even though I sometimes am disappointed for a few seconds at least when a recording I thought was stellar has a subtle but audible flaw revealed). That said though I have two systems, one highly revealing and one resolving. The resolving one is vintage based and yes, I do enjoy it a little more even though I like both my systems. There is a certain "fun factor" I'll call it, to resolving systems.
Just my personal experience and take on it, your mileage may vary.
In my view neither is better than the other by any "standards". If music plays through it, its good.

 

[Projectman]

I previously owned a pair of Wilson Audio Sophia 2s and replaced them with Focal Sopra No.1 speakers. In my system and to my ears the Focals sound better. I used a subwoofer with the Wilsons and use a subwoofer with the Focals. My room is small measuring 11.5' X 15' by 9' tall.

 

[Mr Peabody]

It's the sensitivity/efficiency of the speaker that dictates how much power. As well the impedance curve, which is actually better handled by an amp with current.

The size of the speaker should match the room. That's not saying bookshelf vs. floorstanding, that's a separate debate to me, with other pros/cons.

 

[JayT]

I have my primary system set up in my home office which is a fairly small room (and not ideal acoustically since it's almost square). It's roughly 14' x 15' x 8'. I started with a pair of Magnepan 3.6Rs. I could get them to sound pretty good (at least on some songs) if I pulled them fairly far from the room boundaries, but in this position, they were just way too imposing and inconvenient. I had a pair of Totem Mani-2s in another room that I moved into this system, and these worked much better overall. They lacked some of the airiness, sound stage, and resolving power of the Maggies, but were considerably more dynamic with more authoritative bass. But I still wasn't happy with the overall sound.

I had read some good reviews on the Goldenear Tritons so I tried a set of Triton Ones. There was a lot I liked, but the bass was a bit overpowering, and i couldn't get far enough away from them to get a well integrated sound and precise imaging. They also visually dominated the room.

So I tried the Triton 2+ which are a few inches shorter (moving the midrange drivers and tweeters down a few inches), and have a bit less bass power. These sounded dramatically better in my room. Much better balanced and much better presentation. I'm actually pretty blown away with the overall performance. My priorities are natural sounding vocals, deep tight bass, dynamic, powerful sound, and low distortion. In my room, these speakers provide pretty amazing performance, particularly for a relatively modest price. I've certainly heard (and owned) systems that sounded better in certain areas, but bang-for-the-buck, I don't think I've had or heard a speaker system I'd be happier with. As I get closer to retirement (and my hearing isn't what it used to be), I can no longer justify spending more than the price of a high-end luxury car on my sound system.

I've owned some pretty big speakers (in much larger rooms) in the past - Magneplaner Tympani 4 with Entec subs (early 80's), Duntech Sovereigns (late 80's), Revel Salons (last 90's) - so I do believe a large speaker in a big room can sound pretty phenomenal, but I do agree that a smaller speaker is a better choice to get the best overall sound in a smaller room.

 

[Al M.]

Well, as I have come to understand "highly resolving" is where the subtle flaws in a recording or what have you are masked in a way by the native color signature of the speaker or system for lack of better explanation. It is usually subtle, but highly resolving speakers or systems are super fun and pleasant to listen to and can draw you into the music very effectively, gets you toes tapping fast.
"Highly revealing" speakers or systems are more analytical in nature (usually closer to dead neutral as possible although no such thing as perfect), every detail including subtle flaws in a recording are revealed without mercy. Can also be an interesting and fun listen. It really depends on personal preference.
I'm a detail person primarily (even though I sometimes am disappointed for a few seconds at least when a recording I thought was stellar has a subtle but audible flaw revealed). That said though I have two systems, one highly revealing and one resolving. The resolving one is vintage based and yes, I do enjoy it a little more even though I like both my systems. There is a certain "fun factor" I'll call it, to resolving systems.
Just my personal experience and take on it, your mileage may vary.
In my view neither is better than the other by any "standards". If music plays through it, its good.

Thanks for your thoughts on the matter. Yet this is is confusing. How can something be "highly resolving" if it masks things?

In any case, my current monitor/subwoofer system is uncolored and neutral, and both highly resolving and highly revealing.

My previous monitor/sub systems were somewhat colored in comparison. Coloration can be found in both monitors and floor standers. In fact, I would say that it is much easier to make a monitor uncolored or, in lower price ranges, relatively uncolored (the latter of which my previous monitors still were), than a full range floor stander. The reasons are simply cabinet size and associated resonance modes. It's plain physics.

I do know some uncolored full range floor standers, but these are very expensive, like some top model Magico speakers. They do partition the cabinet into rather inert sub chambers, again, due to simple necessities of physics. To do that right is expensive, no way around it.

 

[mep]

Thanks for your thoughts on the matter. Yet this is is confusing. How can something be "highly resolving" if it masks things?

In any case, my current monitor/subwoofer system is uncolored and neutral, and both highly resolving and highly revealing.

My previous monitor/sub systems were somewhat colored in comparison. Coloration can be found in both monitors and floor standers. In fact, I would say that it is much easier to make a monitor uncolored or, in lower price ranges, relatively uncolored (the latter of which my previous monitors still were), than a full range floor stander. The reasons are simply cabinet size and associated resonance modes. It's plain physics.

I do know some uncolored full range floor standers, but these are very expensive, like some top model Magico speakers. They do partition the cabinet into rather inert sub chambers, again, due to simple necessities of physics. To do that right is expensive, no way around it.

I doubt there is any speaker on the planet that is truly "uncolored." All drivers have a sound, crossovers introduce their own colorations due to the passive parts used, and even inert cabinets are adding to the color palate. I think the best we can hope for is a speaker that appears to sound uncolored to us in our systems vice speakers that always tell you that you are hearing colorations.

 

[tube-vds]

this speaker sounds great in a smaller room:

https://guruaudio.com/?page_id=118

regards

vds

 

[Al M.]

I doubt there is any speaker on the planet that is truly "uncolored." All drivers have a sound, crossovers introduce their own colorations due to the passive parts used, and even inert cabinets are adding to the color palate. I think the best we can hope for is a speaker that appears to sound uncolored to us in our systems vice speakers that always tell you that you are hearing colorations.

Of course you are completely right. I implied -- perhaps not explicitly enough -- that my speaker system sounds uncolored to me compared to most.

 

[jonfitch]

I think the closer you can get to a point source, the better. That's why speakers that have a low tweeter crossover point or a coaxial tweeter-mid arrangement have better imaging.