Powerful enough?

May 31, 2009

I recently purchase an NAD C315BEE integrated amplifier. Now I need to buy speakers. I know that the amp doesn't put out much power. What do you suggest? What do I need to be careful of?

Dan White

I looked at NAD's website to find out the power ratings. The C315BEE will deliver 40Wpc continuously into 8 ohms and can deliver peaks of 95W. It's NAD's smallest integrated amp, but if those specs are true, it's actually more powerful than many tube amps. It should drive most speakers quite well.

Still, you have to be careful that you don't drive it into clipping -- exceeding its power-output capabilities and basically delivering distortion to the speakers. The things to watch out for are speakers with low sensitivity (less than 85dB is considered low and means that the speakers will require more power from the amp), and playing the amp too loudly, particularly in a very large room. The amp is a modest one, so you have to keep your expectations for power delivery modest too.

Measurements that matter

May 27, 2009

I think your stance on blind testing is good, but I am more interested in the measurements. I look at measurements and believe that they must matter. I scroll through your SoundStage! Network speaker measurements all the time. However, I can't help but notice that many expensive speakers measure badly. Do you have an explanation for this?

Troy Miller

That's an interesting question because this topic came up this weekend at High End 2009 in Munich, Germany. We were having a discussion with Kevin Voecks, the chief designer for Revel, about measurements. Revel makes very expensive speakers, but they measure very well because the company believes, like many, that certain key measurement parameters must be met for a speaker to be truly "high end." These are: flat frequency response, well-controlled dispersion, and low distortion. There are others, too, but these are the main ones. This all goes back to the research done at Canada's National Research Council (NRC) in the 1980s, which explains why they are so important. Voecks remarked to us that he's found that although they know this to be important, he's run into many designers over the years who think that when it comes to building expensive speakers these things don't apply to them. Hence, the messy measurements you sometimes see.

We agree with Voecks that speakers, whether inexpensive or very expensive, should measure very well when it comes to these parameters. And if they don't, look at that design with a great deal of suspicion.

Imagine

May 23, 2009

I am thinking about buying the PSB Imagine T speakers. You reviewed the Imagine B some time ago, but is there any plan to review the Imagine T?

Charles Toller

At this point, we won't be reviewing the Imagine T. However, we visited Paul Barton a short time ago, and he's working on the newest version of the PSB Imagine series. We'll probably review at least one model in that line when it's available.

Applause

May 18, 2009

I saw your article on blind testing and applaud it. It amazes me how resistant some are to listening only with their ears and their brains. Well done!

Randy Bessinger

We don't think they only listen with their ears and brains, but their wallets, too. Look for more on the topic of blind listening next month.

Cheap versus expensive

May 15, 2009

I read the article on blinding testing with great interest. When (if) you do this, are you willing to put very cheap equipment up against stuff that's expensive? If so, how do you think it will turn out?

Stuart Tremblay

Of course we will, but obviously the results will vary from component to component, test to test. Undoubtedly, there are some very good expensive products out there that will outperform less-expensive items. On the other hand, I know from experience that there are some components that can't standup to competitors that are a fraction of the cost. When you test "blind," the results are always interesting and often not the same as when testing sighted.

From Allison speakers to...?

May 11, 2009

I am hoping you will take pity on me and finally help me replace my old stereo speakers. It seems that I want to buy something that retail stores do not sell anymore (stereo speakers), and if they are available, it's via the Internet, and I cannot conduct sound tests. I just want the equivalent of what I had. I do not want surround sound, I do not want to manage three to four different sets of speakers, and I never needed a separate subwoofer before, so why does it seem that I will need one now?

I paid $500 for a pair of Allison Two speakers from Allison Acoustics back in 1980 with the following basic specs:

Floorstanding, 57 pounds, veneered with walnut, oiled finish
8-ohm nominal impedance
30 watts per channel to produce 100dB
Effective system Q: 1.0
Low-frequency response: -3db at 41Hz, -6dB at 34.5Hz
System resonance frequency - 52Hz nominal
Two 8" woofers
Two 3 1/2 " convex diaphragm midrange units
Two 1" convex diaphragm tweeters

The speaker enclosure had three sides. The front two sides each had a tweeter, midrange unit, and woofer. They sounded great.

Whenever I read reviews for floorstanding speakers, they do not seem to have the full complement of drivers, and usually have recommendations for other speaker purchases needed to complement the floorstanding speaker.

Can you let me know what I should be looking for if I want to find equivalent capabilities? Or if I am stupidly fighting progress (surround-sound speaker systems), please help me "get with the program."

Note: Using a basic inflation-adjustment calculator, I have discovered that $500 would be $1290 in 2009 terms, although this may not be a valid measure where sound technology is concerned.

Barbara Mulder

I had to do a search on the Internet to find your Allison Two speakers to remind myself of exactly what they were and what might best suit you. What I'm gathering from your message is that you're looking for a close-to-full-range pair of stereo speakers that will give you good sound and never require a sub. Luckily, there are lots of options -- more than it seems.

But, before I get there, one thing you won't get from most speakers today is the kind of sound that an Allison speaker gives by nature of the way the drivers are mounted on the speaker. You're correct in that speaker has three sides, with drivers mounted on two. I haven't heard the speaker, but I suspect that it has an immersive, enveloping quality. The only company that I know of that produces something similar today is Mirage. They use a different type of technology to disperse the sound, but the end result is similar: an immersing soundfield. The most expensive speaker in their line is the incredible OMD-28, which was reviewed on our sister site, SoundStage! A/V. They also have a much more affordable model, the Omnisat v2 FS, which we was also reviewed.

Outside Mirage, you're likely to be confronted with more traditional technology -- front-firing speakers. Still, that can result in very good sound, and that's what most people use today. Of the companies that I'd recommend, a couple of them sell only through the Internet -- Axiom Audio and Aperion Audio -- whereas Paradigm and PSB, two more I like, sell through traditional retail stores. Look for those brands and I'm pretty sure you'll find something you like.

Blind listening

May 7, 2009

Nice editorial this month. I agree with the merits of blind testing 100%. I'm tired of the naysayers and their arguments for not wanting to do blind tests. If you want to be unbiased, this is the only way. Why can't people see this? Maybe it's because I come from a background in which the scientific method is the only way to approach these sorts of problems that I tend to favor this approach, but it's the only way to guarantee that personal bias is removed.

Frankly, I think you stated what everyone is thinking: People who don't like blind tests are afraid that maybe their ears aren't so golden so the easiest thing to do is criticize the approach. In the sciences though, all of those people who argue against the merit of a double-blind test would be ignored. In the simplest terms, they are wrong.

I appreciate that someone (i.e., you) in the audio community took a definitive stance on this. I imagine you'll be receiving an e-mail or two.

Philip Beaudette, GoodSound! reviewer

Glad you liked it. You're right -- I have received some e-mails and, as well, it stirred up a few things on some forums. I'm happy about that because I believe it brings the issue into the light and has people thinking and talking about it....Doug Schneider

New classical music on LP

May 4, 2009

I've read the article "CD Dies as the LP Survives. Are You Surprised?" I'd like to ask only one question: Do you know any analog recording of classical music of any pianist of today recorded in the last three decades, like Grigori Sokolov, Andras Schiff, Alfred Brendel, Lang Lang, or of any symphony orchestra like Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Philadelphia or New York Philharmonics or others? I don't!

So what sense does it make to discuss the sonic advantages of an LP if you cannot buy even one LP produced in the last decade? All recordings of Decca, Deutsche Grammophone, Philips, since 1980 are recorded and mixed in digital!

Wolfgang Rosenlechner

I'm a listener of mostly non-classical music, so it matters. But you make a good point -- at least as far as classical music goes. If what you say is true and you only listen to classical, then you shouldn't give a hoot about LP. But, I wanted to dig a little deeper into this, so I've asked one of our SoundStage! Network writers, S. Andrea Sundaram, who's a big fan of classical music and listens to LPs and CDs. Here's what he says:

"I've often asked myself the same question. The vast majority of new LP releases are really repressings of decades-old recordings -- no matter the genre. There are some rock and jazz albums that are recent and were recorded and mastered entirely in the analog domain.

"For classical music, which represents at least half of my listening, there are a very few modern recordings on LP. None of them are with major labels, major artists, or major orchestras. The most recent release of which I am aware -- brought to my attention by a fellow SoundStage! Network reviewer -- is the Jung Trio's recording of Dvorak's Piano Trio in F minor on Groove Note Records. This recording was made in summer of 2008 direct to 30ips tape. Stereophile has some recordings of Robert Silverman that are older, but still within the last few decades. Reference Recordings no longer releases on vinyl, but some of their recordings from the '80s are still available.

"While it is true that there is essentially no new classical music released on LP today, there is 60+ years of classical music available on LP ready to be found at record stores and especially thrift stores. If you are a classical-music fan and love analog playback, you have more of a reason to rejoice than someone into rock or jazz, as you have a far greater selection to choose from and the prices are reasonable -- or almost free.

"As a music lover, I find the selection of classical vinyl to be pitiful. On the other hand, for comparison of sonic virtues, recordings made in the '70s can be just as good as those made today. As lovers of classical music and analog, we are fortunate to have 60+ years of releases available, used at record stores and thrift shops -- some selling for next to nothing."