# Unofficial Bookshelf Evaluation Suggestion Thread



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

So with the tower speaker evaluation going on I'd like to suggest a Bookshelf evaluation. This is of course unofficial and just to get some chatter started around the topic. 

Most manufacturers of tower speakers offer a variety of bookshelf options as well. Usually enthusiasts will make room for larger more imposing speakers; but what about the people who want quality but their living space doesn't lend itself well to floor standing speakers?

Very often we have members joining these forums looking for advice on solutions that don't require a total room remodel or dedicated space. We make suggestions usually bookshelf or satellite speakers with or without a sub. 

What speakers would you like to see reviewed with the detail of the recent evaluations of towers?

I'd love to see:
Definitive Technology
Bowers and Wilkins
Klipsch
Polk
Pioneer
Martin Logan
Swan
Axiom

What models or other speaker brands should be included?

How should they be evaluated? Maybe both on stands with ideal placements and on countertop/bookshelf placement closer to a rear wall?


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

*Re: Unofficial Bookshelf Evaluation Thread*

So how should the speakers be evaluated. It seems to me that we should have two thoroughly evaluated placements, one on bookshelves and one on stands placed for optimal sound stage.

Bookshelves present a problem for objectivity. Do you place them on a shelf with books, if so how close? What about rear ported systems? One would want to treat all speakers fairly, but some may not lend themselves to certain conditions.

I also think that there need to be two categories, budget, say $500 and under, then $1500 and under. The interest in the two ranges will likely be very different. 

Other questions is what about reference quality over $1500 and what about powered systems?


----------



## skeeter99 (Jan 24, 2007)

*Re: Unofficial Bookshelf Evaluation Thread*

I would definitely think you should put the HSU HB-1's on the list. They look like quite the giant killers, especially at the entrance price. 

As far as eval goes, I think doing them on stands for 2-channel eval out in the room (such as the other speaker evals have gone) as well as one that would be done in a living (IE non-dedicated) room so possibly in a bookcase or on shelves that are empty. 

Another application is for those with dedicated rooms but limited on height/width due to non AT screen/limited room width to maximize screen/etc. I'm thinking specifically of my room (basement) which is 13' wide and with a large screen doesn't leave much room on the outsides for towers so having three matched high performance bookshelves underneath would be ideal. Possibly even having them sit on top of three matching subs 

Scott


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

lcaillo said:


> So how should the speakers be evaluated. It seems to me that we should have two thoroughly evaluated placements, one on bookshelves and one on stands placed for optimal sound stage. Bookshelves present a problem for objectivity. Do you place them on a shelf with books, if so how close? What about rear ported systems? One would want to treat all speakers fairly, but some may not lend themselves to certain conditions. I also think that there need to be two categories, budget, say $500 and under, then $1500 and under. The interest in the two ranges will likely be very different. Other questions is what about reference quality over $1500 and what about powered systems?


 I'd expect a scaled down system would be ideal stereo receiver or integrated amp. SACD player, Turn Table, and maybe a digital source like appleTV (May need a dac) or Sonos connect. 

Maybe 3 placement tests: 
Stands 
Bookshelf placement 
Sitting on a hutch/dresser/buffet 

No subs


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

I like the idea of two ranges in price. Do the lower price point first then if there is a clear outstanding performer include it in the next tier reviews


----------



## phreak (Aug 16, 2010)

I wound suggest the under $500 include one serious budget friendly bargain basement performer. The Dayton Audio B652. It probably won't keep up with any of the $3-500 offerings from the major players , but it would be interesting to see how close they come for $40.


----------



## nova (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: Unofficial Bookshelf Evaluation Thread*

I can think of quite a few I'd like to see in a shootout.
<$500.00:
EMP Tek E5Bi
Ascend Acoustic CBM-170
Cambridge Audio S30
Aperion Audio Intimus B5
Klipsch RB-51
ARX A1b
and maybe a Primus and Pioneer

<$1500.00:
Seems to be an odd price point for me and bookshelf's, not all that many I'd be interested in but...
PSB Imagine B
Monitor Audio Silver 2
Ascend Sierra-1
Dynaudio DM 2/7


----------



## mpednault (Dec 20, 2012)

Not to derail this into another topic, but how about also evaluating / comparing surrounds. I know that could get a bit dicey comparing configurations such as dipole vs others but I'm interesting in knowing which produce the best (read: emersive) surround experience.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

PSB would defiantly be a good one, so would Paradigm


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

It is going to be difficult to simulate every possible scenario for setup. There are a ton of possibilities for bookshelf/monitor type speaker placements.

However, this may not a lot different than towers... simply because you probably are not going to be able to get that "critical" listening sound out of bookshelves when they are on a bookshelf or near a back wall. Depth of soundstage is going to be limited. In order to get the most/best sound out of them, you will need to pull them out into the room. Nearly all the bookshelf speakers we listened to at shows are out from the wall... for a reason.

So... are you going to be doing critical listening? Or are you just going to get a pair and stick them on a shelf and leave them there, never really sitting down to try to get some quality listening time with them?

I purchased the Carnegie's for my great room entertainment center (left, center and right), which are pretty expensive, but I NEVER pull them out and listen to them. I am in no way getting my money out of them... so I just recently purchased a very inexpensive set of Infinity Primus bookshelves with a center... actually sounds better for TV, but still far from anything that I would consider really good... and mostly because of their location. I plan to sell the Carnegie's and not be wasting that money. If I were going to be doing some critical listening, I might keep the Carnegie's, if I found them to sound good enough considering what I paid for them. But as it is... the closest they get to music is the music channels on Dish Network while my wife is cleaning the house... or if she watches one of them shows where all those nice dressed folks get trophies and there is a lot of singing going on between them making a fool of themselves.


----------



## callas01 (Oct 24, 2010)

$1500
Totem rainmakers
Focal 806
Dynaudio excite x14
Dali ikon 1
Paradigm studio 10
Psb imagine B


$500(although I think it should be $750)
Totem dream catcher or Mites
Dali zensor 2
Salk song surround
Psb image b5
Paradigm mini monitor
Dynaudio dm2/6
B&W 685
Monitor audio rx1

I also think there should be a higher end category, $2500ish. 

I personally think that a quick blurb on how the speakers perform against a wall similar to the last evaluation but the majority of the eval's should be on stands out in the middle if a room.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

I think I forgot to finish my point... being that with sooooo many different variables for bookshelf placement, and the probability that actual shelf placement is not going to be ideal for critical listening, it does not make much sense to try to test them in their bookshelf placement. If we did it here at my home (or anyone's for that matter)... there is a low probability that anyone else would have a setup like my entertainment center, which is custom built onto my wall... and we have a fairly large great room... with lots of big openings. There are just tons and tons of variables to make literally endless differences in setups.

My thinking is that we simply test them out in the room to learn how they sound for critical listening. Then buy your bookshelves based on the best ones for critical listening. They will probably sound about as good as the next one when placed on a bookshelf or near a wall with other stuff all around them.


----------



## skeeter99 (Jan 24, 2007)

Sonnie said:


> I think I forgot to finish my point... being that with sooooo many different variables for bookshelf placement, and the probability that actual shelf placement is not going to be ideal for critical listening, it does not make much sense to try to test them in their bookshelf placement. If we did it here at my home (or anyone's for that matter)... there is a low probability that anyone else would have a setup like my entertainment center, which is custom built onto my wall... and we have a fairly large great room... with lots of big openings. There are just tons and tons of variables to make literally endless differences in setups. My thinking is that we simply test them out in the room to learn how they sound for critical listening. Then buy your bookshelves based on the best ones for critical listening. They will probably sound about as good as the next one when placed on a bookshelf or near a wall with other stuff all around them.


Sonnie

I would think keeping bookshelf speakers out in the room, similar to how the speakers have been evaluated previous, would be the most consistent as you said. Otherwise there are just too many variables. So, yes, I'm amending my previous statement  

Just as speakers that sound best out in the room won't always sound better close to the wall than others I would think its the best comparison keeping as many things as even as possible. That said, I think most bookshelf speakers are used actually in bookshelves or in less than optimal placement, at least in the more inexpensive category. I wouldn't be doing any critical listening with a set that I have (speaking from experience, it's never happened besides on rare occasions where I set up comparisons). Obviously people do critical out in room listening with bookshelves as I've seen countless high end systems showing that but I think that's the key, HIGH END. 

Scott


----------



## natescriven (Jan 12, 2011)

$1500
Ascend Sierra-2 (price should be released around beginning of next week)

Less than $500
Arx A1b, I'm curious if these are a standout like their big brother A5s.


----------



## skeeter99 (Jan 24, 2007)

Oh I'd throw the HTD Level 3 bookshelves in the <500 mix too.


----------



## callas01 (Oct 24, 2010)

skeeter99 said:


> Sonnie
> 
> I would think keeping bookshelf speakers out in the room, similar to how the speakers have been evaluated previous, would be the most consistent as you said. Otherwise there are just too many variables. So, yes, I'm amending my previous statement
> 
> ...


what do you consider high-end? cause i consider my speakers mid-fi, and to me they werent cheap. however i do sit and listen critically to music. i dont have a great room either its a living room where i split ht and 2-ch equally, but i have worked to set them up to get the most out of them. 

high-end imo is when you have speakers like the vienna kiss, dynaudio c1s, kef 201/2, wilson audio duettes and of course things like TAD CR1s and Raidho D1, high-end is a relavtive term.


----------



## skeeter99 (Jan 24, 2007)

callas01 said:


> what do you consider high-end? cause i consider my speakers mid-fi. when you have speakers like the vienna kiss, dynaudio c1s, kef 201/2, wilson audio duettes and of course things like TAD CR1s and Raidho D1, high-end is a relavtive term.


I don't know the specific models you're referring to but was thinking speakers like the Evolution Acoustics MMMicroOne and up. Evolution Acoustics makes some of the most phenomenal looking speakers I've ever seen and they seem to be exceptionally well received as well. 

That said, keeping with the thread I would love to see the two categories compared similar style to the tower comparisons. I'm thinking bookshelves for my basement might be what I have to do so this is great  

Scott


----------



## callas01 (Oct 24, 2010)

skeeter99 said:


> I don't know the specific models you're referring to but was thinking speakers like the Evolution Acoustics MMMicroOne and up. Evolution Acoustics makes some of the most phenomenal looking speakers I've ever seen and they seem to be exceptionally well received as well.
> 
> That said, keeping with the thread I would love to see the two categories compared similar style to the tower comparisons. I'm thinking bookshelves for my basement might be what I have to do so this is great
> 
> Scott


never heard them. at $2500 they seem like a great speaker with some very good tech, IMO, that price range is mid-fi, but it sounds like their performace is much higher then their price dictates.


----------



## browndk26 (Jan 3, 2011)

Energy, klipsch and Polk would be brands I would like to see evaluated. My budget and setup will never allow for high priced speakers. So lower priced speakers would interest me. An evaluation of Internet speaker dealers would be a good idea too.


----------



## shinksma (Aug 12, 2010)

The HSU HB-1 certainly piques my interest for an under-$500 evaluation. As does the Arx A1b. And of course the Klipsch bookshelves, all the way up to RB-81s.

I am following the $2500 tower speaker thread with interest, but I honestly don't know if I would prefer towers or a good set of bookshelf speakers for my HT/music room. With bookshelf speakers I could use 7 identical units, but I'd want to make sure they could handle the typical volumes expected of a center and mains in a HT setting. On the other hand, using towers up front, with a big matching (but not identical, unless MTM) center, would allow HT use to abuse them fully, while still providing for the possibility of matching bookshelves for the sides/rears. Or maybe I could use towers for the sides too (raised up a bit?), and just need bookshelves for the rears. That's how my current set-up works - it's not ideal, but the room is not ideal, and I have too much stuff in there for ideal placements.

Anyway, I'm trying to say that any evaluations of bookshelf speakers done by the HTShack group is likely to be of great interest to me...

shinksma


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

For the record... scratch Klipsch off the list... they do not want their speakers participating in our evaluations. The RF-62's were included in the first round because I purchased them... I have not done this since and do not plan to do it going forward. If a company will not send us speakers on their dime, we simply will not include them, period. We will not borrow them from members or obtain them in any other fashion, because the company has spoken... they DO NOT want to participate, therefore we will respect and honor their request.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I agree, Sonnie. There are plenty of other speakers out there, to the point where it will be hard to decide how to narrow them down to manageable sessions. While we are not beholding to any vendor, even sponsors, we do try to respect their views regarding their products. Too bad for both Klipsch and us, as I think they have products that merit consideration and are likely to hold their own in most comparisons.


----------



## callas01 (Oct 24, 2010)

shinksma said:


> The HSU HB-1 certainly piques my interest for an under-$500 evaluation. As does the Arx A1b. And of course the Klipsch bookshelves, all the way up to RB-81s.
> 
> I am following the $2500 tower speaker thread with interest, but I honestly don't know if I would prefer towers or a good set of bookshelf speakers for my HT/music room. With bookshelf speakers I could use 7 identical units, but I'd want to make sure they could handle the typical volumes expected of a center and mains in a HT setting. On the other hand, using towers up front, with a big matching (but not identical, unless MTM) center, would allow HT use to abuse them fully, while still providing for the possibility of matching bookshelves for the sides/rears. Or maybe I could use towers for the sides too (raised up a bit?), and just need bookshelves for the rears. That's how my current set-up works - it's not ideal, but the room is not ideal, and I have too much stuff in there for ideal placements.
> 
> ...


IMO, if you have 7 identical monitors crossed over to a pair of subs at 70-80 hz, or whatever your measured room response would suggest crossing over at, they would play plenty loud and make a magnificent setup if you ask me.


----------



## Jon Lane (Oct 9, 2010)

Leonard, since you asked in the $2,500 thread, methods for using stand monitors mirror those for floorstanders, with one additional recommendation.

See if a Sound Anchors or Target et al will loan you their single heaviest, best, double-spiked stand and then fill them with silica sand (Home Depot, Lowes, etc.) Stands are critical to good sound from monitors, and just as or more important as firmly rooting a floorstanding speaker in place. For stand height, I'd put the tweeters at an average of about forty inches.

A great stand can double the image while focusing sources in it to a surprising degree - a great set of stands pulls a wealth of information out of the mix by taking extraneous energy out of the speaker. I think this owes to a proper stand's ability to prevent reactive movements as the drivers work - every action has an opposite reaction.

Good designs get to more music by generating less racket. Good stands fit this philosophy.


----------



## phreak (Aug 16, 2010)

Sonnie said:


> For the record... scratch Klipsch off the list... they do not want their speakers participating in our evaluations. The RF-62's were included in the first round because I purchased them... I have not done this since and do not plan to do it going forward. If a company will not send us speakers on their dime, we simply will not include them, period. We will not borrow them from members or obtain them in any other fashion, because the company has spoken... they DO NOT want to participate, therefore we will respect and honor their request.


When I have been shopping for speakers I have always had Klipsch on my audition list, and always chosen not to purchase them. Though I do not find them to cater to my personal tastes, I do recognize them as being high in quality and value. I often recommend to others that they should have Klipsch on their audition short list. When others finish their selection process and choose to purchase Klipsch, I congratulate on making an informed choice that suits their taste and will provide them with pleasure for years to come. After reading the reviews that your team have done it is clear that you guys are open, honest, and fair. When you have a beef with a particular product (a bottomed driver comes to mind) your team reports not just the problem, but every defence that the manufacturer may have. I can not imagine a better team to have review a well built product. If a vendor was putting junk in a box and trying to pass it off as a quality audio product, they would be wise to shield their product from your team. But everyone here knows that is not the case with Klipsch. It is to their detriment that they choose not to participate. Yet it is a sign of great integrity that you honour their wishes in this regard.


----------



## Dougme57 (Sep 4, 2013)

I would like to see stan mounted monitors also, But would love to read reviews on some higher end brands. I have been listening to ACI Sapphire lll LE's since 1999-2000. I bought them new unheard and based on reviews online. These were $1200 in 19999.

I have heard a few brands since but still love these. I have always tended to prefer soft tweeters and great mids and wonder about some of the newer stuff. Curious about the new tweeters and how they compare. I did pick up an Aperion Grand Verus center channel and love it for movies.

Vapors
Salk
Aperion Grand Verus
Selah


----------



## fschris (Oct 31, 2009)

phreak said:


> I wound suggest the under $500 include one serious budget friendly bargain basement performer. The Dayton Audio B652. It probably won't keep up with any of the $3-500 offerings from the major players , but it would be interesting to see how close they come for $40.


I like that idea


----------



## mpednault (Dec 20, 2012)

I have the budget Dayton's and they are okay. They run out of steam very fast though at higher volumes but they're certainly better than internal TV speakers. They do sound better than their price suggests but I'm looking into doing the XO upgrades to them since the mid has nothing to speaker of (plays full range). I've also read up on some budget tweeter replacements and even mid replacements people have done with them with great results but that's bringing them over the $150 range which gets you into a better line of speaker out of the box so most likely not worth the effort. If you want better sound for your bedroom TV they are a great pair of bookshelves for that purpose which is exactly how I'm using them. No sub, mini two channel amp straight from the TV outputs (no AVR). Sounds better than the TV speakers on my Sharp AQUOS!


----------



## bkeeler10 (Mar 26, 2008)

I would nominate the Legacy Audio Studio HD and the Monitor Audio Silver 1 or Silver 2 for a bookshelf event. I also support the idea of following the guidelines used for previous events regarding placement -- that is, place them for optimal overall performance. No reason to compromise them by actually putting them on a bookshelf.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

Jon Lane said:


> Leonard, since you asked in the $2,500 thread, methods for using stand monitors mirror those for floorstanders, with one additional recommendation.
> 
> See if a Sound Anchors or Target et al will loan you their single heaviest, best, double-spiked stand and then fill them with silica sand (Home Depot, Lowes, etc.) Stands are critical to good sound from monitors, and just as or more important as firmly rooting a floorstanding speaker in place. For stand height, I'd put the tweeters at an average of about forty inches.
> 
> ...


Here is a thought. Have two pairs of quality stands like those suggested, put one pair on the stage close to the wall at what someone determines to be a "kinda standard for our purposes" location that never moves, the other pair is closer to the LP and can move (assuming we can lift them) wherever they need to go for best location in the room for a pair of speakers. Then each speaker pair gets a brief audition on the stage pair of stands, aimed straight at the LP for simplicity, and a full audition at its best location in the room. Kinda like has been done with the towers only the close-to-wall part would be even simpler, no setup variables.

Would like to see included: Recently heard Vapor Stiff Breeze pair that Tesseract is evaluating - with RAAL tweeters - absolutely dreamy smooth. Yummy!


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

Speaking of those fabulous RAAL tweeters, TAI is soon releasing the A4 & A6. Both bookshelf & if I rebember correctly, the A4 is optimized for near wall placement. Consider them voted for.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

If we can lift the Seaton speakers... no reason we can't lift any other bookshelf. Those monsters are HEAVY!

Also... for near wall placement up on the stage, we can easily get stands that are shorter so that the height is the same if on the floor out in the room.


----------



## bkeeler10 (Mar 26, 2008)

Another bookshelf that would be interesting because of the company's reputation is the GoldenEar Aon 2 ($800) or Aon 3 ($1000). And they (along with the Legacy Audio Studio HD) use a version of the always-intriguing folded ribbon tweeter. I might also suggest the Phase Technology PC 1.5 ($1200).


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I like Wayne's (AudiocRaver) suggestion above. It simplifies yet also gives an idea of what can be expected in a more typical bookshelf placement. 

After looking at the many fine speakers that might be included, I think we will start compiling a list ranked by retail price and see where logical divisions might fall in relation to the most interesting and available products. As Sonnie has pointed out, any vendor who does not want to supply a sample will not be considered.

Since some brands have many speakers, please note the model that is of most interest when making a suggestion. I will start compiling a list.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

Excellent idea Leonard.


----------



## DougReim (Mar 2, 2013)

Bookshelf speakers I'd like to see in the evaluation:

Aperion Verus Grand @ $699/pair
Tekton Mini Lores @ $625/pair
Ascend Sierra 1 @ $848/pair
Paradigm Mini Monitor @ $598/pair
Paradigm Studio 10 @ $1098/pair
Monitor Audio Silver 2 (price not announced yet)


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Most living rooms I see that lens themselves (esthetically) to bookshelf speakers are those with a builtin entertainer center that houses the equipment and TV (mounted or not with/without a fireplace) I'd remind such a configuration for the casual listening environment. 

Do you think it's better to have the same equipment used to power the speakers or down size the av rig for this evaluation?


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

rab-byte said:


> Most living rooms I see that lens themselves (esthetically) to bookshelf speakers are those with a builtin entertainer center that houses the equipment and TV (mounted or not with/without a fireplace) I'd remind such a configuration for the casual listening environment.
> 
> Do you think it's better to have the same equipment used to power the speakers or down size the av rig for this evaluation?


Good question. You do not want amp distortion to become a factor. If you go smaller with the amp, how small is the right size? Have to think about that one.


----------



## bkeeler10 (Mar 26, 2008)

I wouldn't go smaller on the amp. There's no benefit sonically. There is only perhaps a desire to keep the price of the amp reasonable with respect to the speakers being evaluated. Not many people will pair a $1000 bookshelf with a $10k amp. In the $1k event, you had suspected that the amp was clipping a bit into a couple of those speakers, but you couldn't be certain if it was the amp or the speaker that was limiting you. I would think it would be best to take the potential of amp clipping out of the equation for an event like this.

As far as how big of an amp to use: You probably have an idea (from the past couple of events) of how loud you will be listening at the loudest, subjectively. So just measure how loud that is with an SPL meter, make the room gain and speaker-to-listener distance adjustments, then calculate how much power it will take to get the lowest-sensitivity speaker of the test group to output that much SPL. Then roughly double it for headroom. That's how much power you need. That's how I would do it, FWIW.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

You are right, it is not a difficult calculation. And it is worth considering the use of a well-powered AVR or something like that for the job.


----------



## moparz10 (Sep 21, 2010)

If I may chime in I'd like to nominate the definitive technology gem xl's


----------



## callas01 (Oct 24, 2010)

rab-byte said:


> Most living rooms I see that lens themselves (esthetically) to bookshelf speakers are those with a builtin entertainer center that houses the equipment and TV (mounted or not with/without a fireplace) I'd remind such a configuration for the casual listening environment.
> 
> Do you think it's better to have the same equipment used to power the speakers or down size the av rig for this evaluation?





AudiocRaver said:


> You are right, it is not a difficult calculation. And it is worth considering the use of a well-powered AVR or something like that for the job.


that might work for the low-end evaluation, but not as you go up the chain into the higher end speakers. IMO you need good amplificaiton to power bookshelf speakers well as they usually less efficient then their tower counterparts and youll typically get better sonics from a better pre-amp section. And as an owner of higher-end bookshelf speakers there is no way they are going in a bookshelf or on a mantle, or built-in entertainment center. my speakers are on some nice sturdy stands.


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Hi i would like to see Proac Tablette Anniversary amongst the mix please.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

From the suggestions it looks like $500 is a good break point. I am thinking $500 and under and then everything else in another group. There are so many options it will be very hard to narrow it down, but I suspect the vendors' willingness to provide review samples will help.

Anyone who has suggestions please include model numbers, not just the brand.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Here's my list:
Martin Logan Motion 15
DefTech Studio Monitor 45/55/56
Bowers and Wilkins CM-1/5, M1, and 686/685
Pioneer SP-BS22-LR
Bose 301 (you'll never get them but it would be fun to see a real review)
Klipsch RB-61 (again not happening)
Sonus Faber Toy or Olympica I
HSU HB-1 MK2
Swan M3+


----------



## phreak (Aug 16, 2010)

rab-byte said:


> Here's my list: Martin Logan Motion 15 DefTech Studio Monitor 45/55/56 Bowers and Wilkins CM-1/5, M1, and 686/685 Pioneer SP-BS22-LR Bose 301 (you'll never get them but it would be fun to see a real review) Klipsch RB-61 (again not happening) Sonus Faber Toy or Olympica I HSU HB-1 MK2 Swan M3+


Great list. I would add Paradigm Mini Monitor. Be nice to see how the $40 Dayton B652 or $100 Pioneer SP-BS22 would stack up against the $4-500 crew.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

This is what I have so far.

View attachment Shelf Speaker Eval Suggestions.xls


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I would like to find someone with an old pair of Rogers LS3/5a monitors to include as a reference just for fun. This was a classic which has been modeled and copied many times and was a standard to which we compared everything else years ago. I am sure things have improved considerably since then but it would be interesting to see how they rate.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Have you started thinking about gear yet?
Curious what you're thinking. 

As for the list looks great, but if you're going to start looking into legacy product to include then you may want to see about seeking donated/loaned product to fill the holes in what manufacturers won't provide.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

I see no reason not to use my XPR-5. Let's give them the best there is to offer, plenty of power. That way there are no limitations.


----------



## bkeeler10 (Mar 26, 2008)

^^ +1


----------



## K1LL3M (Jan 30, 2010)

Not sure if your still open for suggestions, but these JBL Studio L820s would be interesting if you could source a review pair

http://www.jbl.com/estore/jbl/us/products/Studio-L820/STUDIO L820_JBL_US


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

I think we will take suggestions up until a month to six weeks out from the schedule we set to do the evaluation... or maybe 60 days out and do a poll for 30 days to narrow them down to the top 6-8 speakers.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

We don't even have a tentative schedule yet, so all suggestions are welcome. With respect to equipment, I see no reason not to use equipment that will be unquestionably adequate, as opposed to suggestions to use less expensive AVRs that might be more likely to be paired with these speakers.

We want to get the best we can out of each speaker and want to remove as many variables as possible. We will want some excellent stands that are overkill and the best positioning, just like with the freestanding speakers. We will also listen in a more typical position near the front wall.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

lcaillo said:


> We don't even have a tentative schedule yet, so all suggestions are welcome. With respect to equipment, I see no reason not to use equipment that will be unquestionably adequate, as opposed to suggestions to use less expensive AVRs that might be more likely to be paired with these speakers. We want to get the best we can out of each speaker and want to remove as many variables as possible. We will want some excellent stands that are overkill and the best positioning, just like with the freestanding speakers. We will also listen in a more typical position near the front wall.


A good integrated amp could serve both masters. Providing power and a smaller form factor more suited to compromised layouts.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

We don't want to potentially short-change any speaker, therefore, we do not want any compromises. We do not want to be limited to a particular volume in evaluating a speaker... to a point we are not able to find out if it can handle higher listening levels. Bottom line, we won't be able to give our best review of the speaker if there are compromises... and it is difficult to fairly review a speaker when it is limited by the amp.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Fair


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

While a less expensive AVR was worth _considering,_ I ultimately agree that the wiser approach is the one that reduces variables. We will have plenty of planned variables to deal with, and there are always a few that show up uninvited. Amplification is a critical element that could make a challenging process unmanageable and results meaningless if inadequate. Having lots of clean power is the right way to go.


----------



## bkeeler10 (Mar 26, 2008)

^^ +1 (again)


----------



## mpednault (Dec 20, 2012)

Couldn't agree more. All things considered, utilizing the same equipment to power each pair for evaluation will provide an "even keel" for each to be judged from. Transparent amplification with as little equalization as possible should be the goal to reduce "colored" audible reproduction. Granted, EQing could bring a mediocre pair above a higher ranked pair but the evaluation needs to remain as "out of the box" as can be achieved. The whole basis for the evaluation of each pair is predicated on each receiving the same soundtrack, thru the same equipment so that it's truly a one to one comparison. Let's face it, these evals are very subjective to the listeners ears and while having a panel of judges helps, it is impossible for the results to make decisions for future bookshelf customers. It CAN, however with the level of quality in the recent evals, give them a great starting point for their own evals. Can't wait for the poles so I can vote!


----------



## kingnoob (Mar 12, 2013)

lcaillo said:


> From the suggestions it looks like $500 is a good break point. I am thinking $500 and under and then everything else in another group. There are so many options it will be very hard to narrow it down, but I suspect the vendors' willingness to provide review samples will help.
> 
> Anyone who has suggestions please include model numbers, not just the brand.


Great idea $500 is a good price range. That is Pair price or single?? single is reaching into Tower speaker price ranges.
But if your going for pure performance $1000+ price range is understandable Audiophile quality sound is most important.

Klipsch Ref http://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-Reference-Series-Bookshelf-Loudspeakers/dp/B0040LRI96/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&qid=1385449582&sr=8-11&keywords=klipsch+reference Suggestion.


----------



## mpednault (Dec 20, 2012)

Klipsch won't join in on the fun and as such have left a bitter taste in the mouths of many members of this forum.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

With respect to klipsch or any other manufacturer, they don't have to participate in these evaluations. Some may not want to give away their product and others may not like the way the evaluations are done. Ultimately the reason that we don't get product boils down to them not seeing a sufficient value in participating in these reviews.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Klipsch and any other vendor that decides that such evaluations don't fit into their marketing plan have every right to do so. I think it is unfortunate for them, and am intrigued by their products and won't hold their position against them. There will be plenty of other speakers to include. They just make the process of narrowing the field easier.


----------



## kingnoob (Mar 12, 2013)

lcaillo said:


> Klipsch and any other vendor that decides that such evaluations don't fit into their marketing plan have every right to do so. I think it is unfortunate for them, and am intrigued by their products and won't hold their position against them. There will be plenty of other speakers to include. They just make the process of narrowing the field easier.


I did try a pair of Klipsch had a hard time keeping a steady volume it seemed.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Do you mean the volume was too dynamic with loud parts being too loud and soft too soft, or do you mean that the volume/pitch would fluctuate during playback, or do you mean something else?

The former could just be the byproduct of high sensitivity, the latter could be an issue with amplification.


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

OK, it's time for me to open my big mouth and throw in a contender; Wave Crest Audio HVL-1. I'm listening to them as I type this. In the under $500 category they will be hard to beat. Trust me.  Full review to follow shortly...


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I will add them to the list for consideration.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

What's that list look like so far? I'm never on a computer so it's a little harder to review all posts/make a list from my phone.

:edit:
Never mind just saw you posted it a little while back. Sorry.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Sonnie said:


> We don't want to potentially short-change any speaker, therefore, we do not want any compromises. We do not want to be limited to a particular volume in evaluating a speaker... to a point we are not able to find out if it can handle higher listening levels. Bottom line, we won't be able to give our best review of the speaker if there are compromises... and it is difficult to fairly review a speaker when it is limited by the amp.


Do you plan on bi-amping any speakers with dual binding posts?


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Biamping would not present an even playing field. The additional cost of equipment to biamp would make the price comparison difficult. There would be endless debates about the choices of equipment, etc. We want to compare the speakers under the same equipment conditions. If there are enough speakers with biamp capability we could perhaps group all of them together and do a comparison. At that point we might include powered speakers. I think the biggest interest by far will be the lower price evals, however, so it won't be as much of a question there.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Sonnie said:


> I think we will take suggestions up until a month to six weeks out from the schedule we set to do the evaluation... or maybe 60 days out and do a poll for 30 days to narrow them down to the top 6-8 speakers.


Looking forward to it! :T


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Perhaps I missed it, but will these speakers be tested both full-range and >60/80hz with a subwoofer?


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Full range with no sub.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

*The $3,000 Speaker Evaluation Nomination Thread* is now open... be sure to nominate the speakers you would like to see in the voting poll.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

lcaillo said:


> ...At that point we might include powered speakers...


Powered speakers/biamping - a whole new class of speakers and a lot of new process/support questions to be worked through.

One thought: It might be worth tackling one example from this class as a side project on one of the upcoming tower eval events, just to see how prepared we could be for it and see what issues arise, get us down the path of knowing what we are doing with the new variables and processes.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

That would take a lot of preparation and a really good pair of amps and a really good versatile crossover. We would have to tweak the crossover points and levels to some relative target levels. Messy with lots of variables. 

My guess is that this type of evaluation should be done in one-off reviews as there are many questions and variables. At best, it would have to be after the $3000 speaker eval, the lower priced stand speaker eval, and the higher priced stand speaker eval. That could easily be a year away if we get that far, and we may come up with other priorities in the meanwhile.

We could start a biamp speaker eval thread to start talking about the variables and what the priorities and questions should be. It is always good to have that kind of discussion as a thought experiment. We are bound to come up with a variety of suggestions and priorities.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

It may be hard to get but Vienna Acoustics Haydn bookshelf speakers would be very cool to add to the eval. We used to sell them before we picked up Bowers and I always loved their celerity and imaging.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

lcaillo said:


> That would take a lot of preparation and a really good pair of amps and a really good versatile crossover. We would have to tweak the crossover points and levels to some relative target levels. Messy with lots of variables.
> 
> My guess is that this type of evaluation should be done in one-off reviews as there are many questions and variables. At best, it would have to be after the $3000 speaker eval, the lower priced stand speaker eval, and the higher priced stand speaker eval. That could easily be a year away if we get that far, and we may come up with other priorities in the meanwhile.
> 
> We could start a biamp speaker eval thread to start talking about the variables and what the priorities and questions should be. It is always good to have that kind of discussion as a thought experiment. We are bound to come up with a variety of suggestions and priorities.


No doubt. Just thinking of a way to start working in that direction, if it makes any sense at all.


----------



## pharoah (Jul 21, 2012)

havent read the entire thing.id like to see totem rainmaker's in this one.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

AudiocRaver said:


> No doubt. Just thinking of a way to start working in that direction, if it makes any sense at all.


Maybe an amp evaluation thread first. I know their is less sonic differences but still less esoteric then bi-amping.


----------



## ajinfla (May 10, 2009)

rab-byte said:


> Do you plan on bi-amping any speakers with dual binding posts?





AudiocRaver said:


> Powered speakers/biamping - a whole new class of speakers and a lot of new process/support questions to be worked through.





lcaillo said:


> That would take a lot of preparation and a really good pair of amps and a really good versatile crossover. We would have to tweak the crossover points and levels to some relative target levels. Messy with lots of variables.


Hi Leonard,

I'm a bit puzzled by you answer, since it seems to follow the trail of the original question from rab-byte.
To me, he is clearly talking about "passive" biamping. Your response is about active biamping, which actually couldn't work with what rab-byte referred to, unless major surgery was performed (removing speaker internal crossover....unless you planned to cascade the filters)!
Like so many topics in audio, there seems to be a great deal of confusion generally speaking (this is not directed at you) about "biamping".
I am in no way suggesting it be done in your testing, but "bi-amping any speakers with dual binding posts" simply means removing the jumper and powering each leg of the XO with a separate amp, often times utilizing an already in use HT mch receiver, with "bi-amp" capability.
This requires no additional external (active) XO, or added expenditure for amps in the above case. Just another pair of wires.
Now, regarding active speakers, they are indeed possibly outside what your intended audience wants to see. But in terms of your test system, it seems, just utilizing any of the existing pre-outs would be all that was needed.
Anyone with an HT receiver with main outs can use active speakers. It is actually quite system beneficial, but perhaps outside the scope of this comparison.

cheers,


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

ajinfla said:


> Hi Leonard,
> 
> I'm a bit puzzled by you answer, since it seems to follow the trail of the original question from rab-byte.
> To me, he is clearly talking about "passive" biamping. Your response is about active biamping, which actually couldn't work with what rab-byte referred to, unless major surgery was performed (removing speaker internal crossover....unless you planned to cascade the filters)!
> ...


Not speaking for Leonard, just my own thoughts. Of course, bi-amping using an existing crossover is not difficult. Neither is getting a preamp signal to a powered speaker or monitor. We are more concerned with being able to ensure we are doing apples-to-apples comparisons, and keeping all speakers in an evaluation on an equal footing so the results are as meaningful as possible to our readers. And not adding unnecessary variables.

I am sure you can appreciate that every little change or detail that sounds like a simple thing on the surface means preparations, equipment purchases, many discussions and posts back and forth to resolve minuscule issues. It's more a matter of management than technical difficulty, and maintaining a smooth process flow for a weekend with minimal special decision points along the way, staying sane and having some fun. We are not afraid of taking on new levels of technical complexity, just want to make sure the result will be worth the time and energy investment.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

Would not bi-amping be more or less to supply more power to the speakers? Like AJ says... more particular helpful when you are using a receiver that has the bi-amp capability. I would add especially if it were ask to drive difficult speakers, such as the reason I bi-amped my ML Prodigy's with my Denon 4520.

We have plenty of power with my XPR-5, so I do not see any benefit of bi-amping any of the bookshelf speakers, unless we plan to literally blow them up.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Sonnie said:


> ...We have plenty of power with my XPR-5, so I do not see any benefit of bi-amping any of the bookshelf speakers, unless we plan to literally blow them up.


Don't do that! Then you won't be able to give them away in another great drawing. Also some of the venders may get mad


----------



## ajinfla (May 10, 2009)

AudiocRaver said:


> Not speaking for Leonard, just my own thoughts. Of course, bi-amping using an existing crossover is not difficult. Neither is getting a preamp signal to a powered speaker or monitor. We are more concerned with being able to ensure we are doing apples-to-apples comparisons, and keeping all speakers in an evaluation on an equal footing so the results are as meaningful as possible to our readers. And not adding unnecessary variables.
> 
> I am sure you can appreciate that every little change or detail that sounds like a simple thing on the surface means preparations, equipment purchases, many discussions and posts back and forth to resolve minuscule issues. It's more a matter of management than technical difficulty, and maintaining a smooth process flow for a weekend with minimal special decision points along the way, staying sane and having some fun. We are not afraid of taking on new levels of technical complexity, just want to make sure the result will be worth the time and energy investment.





ajinfla said:


> *I am in no way suggesting it be done in your testing*....
> ...*but perhaps outside the scope of this comparison*.


Hi Audiocraver,
My apologies for not being clearer initially.
I was only highlighting what I though might be a misunderstanding of what rab-byte was referring to (passive biamping).
Regarding active speakers (say, bookshelf in this case), there would be no "additional equipment", other than another RCA, or RCA>XLR cable, depending on model. Plug into "pre-outs" of Anthem 225, rather than speaker out terminals...and hit play.
Now of course, if the comparison is strictly "passive bookshelf", this is all moot.



Sonnie said:


> Would not bi-amping be more or less to supply more power to the speakers?


Maybe. In the passive/HT recv case, the increase would be marginal at best.



Sonnie said:


> Like AJ says... more particular helpful when you are using a receiver that has the bi-amp capability. I would add especially if it were ask to drive difficult speakers, such as the reason I bi-amped my ML Prodigy's with my Denon 4520.


Hi Sonny. There are different forms of "biamping". What Rab-byte referred to, is "passive" biamping. Then there is active. And combinations. The benefit with the HT recv scenario has little to do with "more power" per se. It's more complicated than that...and outside the scope of this thread. If you're curious, start a "tech" (?) thread. I'd be happy to explain.
I would have to look at your setup to see how you biamped.



Sonnie said:


> We have plenty of power with my XPR-5, so I do not see any benefit of bi-amping any of the bookshelf speakers, unless we plan to literally blow them up.


In that scenario, there is no benefit.
I agree, as I previously noted (perhaps not clearly enough), that it should be outside the scope of your comparisons.
Now, active speakers, whole 'nother story.
No idea of what percentage of members have HT recvs with pre-outs, vs not.

Thread jack over

cheers,


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I guess I have never seen the point in passive biamping. Regardless, it is not something we will be doing in these evaluations. We want to remove as many variables as possible while being somewhat realistic with respect to how the speakers might be used. This is a difficult task without introducing something like biamping.

I don't know if or when we will even get to the bookshelf speakers, and when we do we will be starting on the low end of pricing so it is unlikely to be a meaningful question at that level anyway.


----------



## Erin H (Aug 26, 2009)

jumping in the ring here... hope it's not too late.

I'd like to add Kef's Q100 or Q300 bookshelves to this mix. I picked up a used set of Q100's on eBay last year for just under $400 and was INCREDIBLY surprised by them. They convey a soundstage like nothing in it's price range that I had heard; and even beyond it's price range. If we can time it right, I'd be happy to lend mine to the demo.

And, forgive me for asking if this has been stated (it's a 9 page thread, you know ), but where will this be done? Sonnie, I'd be happy to open up my house some weekend or travel to yours to help assist, depending on when this goes down. 

Finally, have you guys discussed doing a spatial average measurement to correlate what the subjective review is with objective data? I think that would be invaluable and might help lend itself to determining why a certain listener thought it sounded one way and another thought differently. For example, if the overwhelming consensus is that Speaker A sounded bright, then we'd possibly be able to match this with the data and a peak in response in the high frequency range. I'm a huge proponent of providing measurements with subjective listening. This would be a great opportunity to really give the community some meat with their potatoes. 


- Erin


----------



## ajinfla (May 10, 2009)

lcaillo said:


> I guess I have never seen the point in passive biamping.


Most don't. As I mentioned, it is largely misunderstood.



lcaillo said:


> Regardless, it is not something we will be doing in these evaluations. We want to remove as many variables as possible while being somewhat realistic with respect to how the speakers might be used. This is a difficult task without introducing something like biamping.


I agree with you 100%.

I do think it would be interesting if active speakers, at the same price points as their passive counterparts, were included. Most 2ch setups could easily accommodate this. If the slant is towards HT, then I'm not sure, as many (lower-mid line) HT recv's don't have the requisite preouts.

cheers


----------



## Utopianemo (Dec 12, 2012)

Sonnie said:


> It is going to be difficult to simulate every possible scenario for setup. There are a ton of possibilities for bookshelf/monitor type speaker placements. However, this may not a lot different than towers... simply because you probably are not going to be able to get that "critical" listening sound out of bookshelves when they are on a bookshelf or near a back wall. Depth of soundstage is going to be limited. In order to get the most/best sound out of them, you will need to pull them out into the room. Nearly all the bookshelf speakers we listened to at shows are out from the wall... for a reason. So... are you going to be doing critical listening? Or are you just going to get a pair and stick them on a shelf and leave them there, never really sitting down to try to get some quality listening time with them? I purchased the Carnegie's for my great room entertainment center (left, center and right), which are pretty expensive, but I NEVER pull them out and listen to them. I am in no way getting my money out of them... so I just recently purchased a very inexpensive set of Infinity Primus bookshelves with a center... actually sounds better for TV, but still far from anything that I would consider really good... and mostly because of their location. I plan to sell the Carnegie's and not be wasting that money. If I were going to be doing some critical listening, I might keep the Carnegie's, if I found them to sound good enough considering what I paid for them. But as it is... the closest they get to music is the music channels on Dish Network while my wife is cleaning the house... or if she watches one of them shows where all those nice dressed folks get trophies and there is a lot of singing going on between them making a fool of themselves.


True, but there are a lot of standmounters that are designed to be placed near the front wall, such as some sealed boxes and others like the Wharfedale 121's. Their "port" is on the bottom, and the low frequencies exit through a space between the box and the plinth. It's actually recommended to place those speakers near a wall. 

In any case, it seems to me a good idea to split the entries into two categories: rear ported vs. sealed or front ported.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

I don't think categories is necessary since this is not a shootout and each review stands on its own. Plus... it is going to be hard to get a speaker up against a wall to sound its best (in all likelihood) regardless of its design... particular with regards to depth of image. We might be able to still get good imaging... and might even get slightly better bass, but if we can move it out into the room more and improve the soundstage by getting more depth, it is going to improve the over all sound. At least this is what we have experienced thus far. I don't see that changing with bookshelf speakers... and we are always going to want to find the best placement for speakers during the evaluation.


----------

