Hi everyone,I haven’t heard the R2 version, but I do think the SP100s would fit the bill. They might not play as loud as Klispch Chorus’, but they’re certainly better in every other regard. Their Scanspeak tweeter is exceptional - very detailed with zero harshness or grain. Their imaging is such that most modern designs pale in comparison. Every bit of their bandwidth is coherent, with nothing that stands out in contrast. They are a no -compromise type of speaker, one’s for which no excuses need be made. When fed through high quality gear, it’s hard to imagine someone needing anything more. That’s just my honest opinion.
I have searched quite extensively recently, some names that come up are:- Josheph Audio Pulsars
- JMR Offrande Suppreme V2- Spendor SP100 or SP100R2
The seller are not in my area so I can’t demo them.
In search for speakers of "natural" sound
Hello,
I am using a pair of Harbeth speakers. However, I am not satisfied with the 'naturalness' of the sound (it could be that I am so demanding). I am looking for a pair of speakers that can produce the more natural and organic sound than Harbeth if there is any.
I know that it depends on the amp, cables, and other variables. However, let's assume that with the appropriate gears, which speakers do you think can produce the "most natural sound"? By "natural", I mean the sound that we hear directly from musical instruments, from the singer without going through any amplification.
There is a user mentioning that speakers from the past used that 'natural sound' as a reference when designed speakers. In contrast, the sound today (even the hi-end one) is to "hi-fi". He guessed it could be less people have chance to listen to live / acoustic music than before.
Is it right?
Thank you for your experience and recommendation!
Best,
Huy.
P.S: I know that my questions are silly and dumb, please bear with me.
I am using a pair of Harbeth speakers. However, I am not satisfied with the 'naturalness' of the sound (it could be that I am so demanding). I am looking for a pair of speakers that can produce the more natural and organic sound than Harbeth if there is any.
I know that it depends on the amp, cables, and other variables. However, let's assume that with the appropriate gears, which speakers do you think can produce the "most natural sound"? By "natural", I mean the sound that we hear directly from musical instruments, from the singer without going through any amplification.
There is a user mentioning that speakers from the past used that 'natural sound' as a reference when designed speakers. In contrast, the sound today (even the hi-end one) is to "hi-fi". He guessed it could be less people have chance to listen to live / acoustic music than before.
Is it right?
Thank you for your experience and recommendation!
Best,
Huy.
P.S: I know that my questions are silly and dumb, please bear with me.
80 responses Add your response
Hi everyone, Just an update. As mentioned, I tried look for Audio Note AN/E but couldn’t find a good used pair. I accidentally stumble upon Devore O/93. Which share very similar design with AN/E and was chosen to be the speakers of the year in Japan (don’t remember which year). So I switched to look for Devore O/93s and again, an ex-owner of O/93s (currently the owner of Nines) shared that he prefers his Devore Nines, because as he said: " O/93s have too much sound going on, not as articulate and refined as the Nines (in my opinion). " Luckily for me, there is a guy who wanted to sell his Devore Nines since he said his Shindo 12W couldn’t drive the Nines to their best. He is about 2 hours away from my place. I decided to give them an audition. In his big living room, he played Norah Jones then some other vocals, at the beginning, I found that the sound is as much organic and smooth as my Harbeth 30.1. The bass is better (but not considerably better). However, since I believe in the comments of the ex-owner of O/93s, I pulled the trigger without after only about 15 mins and brought them home. Another 2 hours of driving back home, I hooked them to Quad 909 power and Quad preamp 99, play my favorite songs to test. The mid was quite harsh in high notes. I tried to position the speakers further away from corners and played the songs again. I played from vocals to classicals and here is my experience. In general, the sound of Devore Nines is not as warm as Harbeth 30.1. 30.1 tends to make the sound round and smooth so there is no hint of grain in it. I guess this is a reason why it’s very relaxing and zero-fatiguing when listening to 30.1. However, in my opinion, because 30.1 ’softens’ spikes and edges in the sound which could be due to bad recording, noise,etc. but also could be the character of the voice of the singer or the sound of the music instrument. That’s why all singers voice are so smooth and this makes various singers have a kind of ’uniform’ sound, which leads to boring listening session. On the contrary, on Nines, some singers sound silky smooth ( like Ayako Hosokawa, Lara Fabian) but some other singers sound quite edgy (like Adele). The voice is less warm and very much similar to what you hear when someone talking in a room with you. I hope I could call this "neutral" and "natural". In addition, what makes a significant contribution to this "natural-ness" character of Nines is the ability to create the *dead* silent background. I hope you can believe me that this is true since I think only who has experienced this can understand, I’m sorry that my words are limited, I don’t know how to explain further. As for the bass of Nines, according to specs, they can reach 32Hz (some other reviewers said they can measure Nines can reach 25Hz at some volume). This ability makes Nines a clear winner over 30.1 in bass area. When listening to Je t’aime by Lara Fabian (live version), everytime the pianist hit the notes in the last octave of the piano, I feel extremely satisfied - "YES, this is how it should be". The bass is tight and round (not as round as 30.1) and absolutely not boxy or boom. Another strength that Nines possess over 30.1 is the speed, like in the "Keith don’t go", the guitar is much less confusing on ’strumming parts’ ( I don’t know if it’s the term). Nines give me a different (positive) ’image’ of the record compared to 30.1. Yet another strength is that Nines throw out a bigger sound stage than 30.1, not much bigger but I think about 70% bigger. In general, Nines are more accurate, natural, dynamics, emotional, open and faster than 30.1. However, Nines are a little more fatiguing than 30.1 in my small room due to the fact that more bass and edges in some voices/instruments are not ’softened’ as in case of 30.1. As a result, Harbeth 30.1 can be a great choice for those who don’t care much about accuracy and bass but just need beautiful and relaxing sound. For now, I am satisfied. I will listen for a while until my ears get used to what Nines offer and demand more. When the time comes, I will find a high quality tube amp for them. Regarding the search for natural sounding speakers, I believe Nines are not the destination, they are just a 'somewhere' near the destination and they are also not the ONLY. But I think I will stay for a very long time in this ’resting area’. Best, Huy. |
If you like big black and heavy boxes, try to find yourself some old Westlake monitors. Most neutral and beautiful sounding I heard so far. If they were good enough for Mr. Jones and Mr. Jackson then they're good enough for us... Agree on better to spend your time hunting for fine and well recorded music than speakers. More variance there. Skip all the bad sounding. Just discovered Nancy LaMott - Talk to me baby :-) |
"
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't fix a wife. That's a WAF joke." ...also known as 'gallows humor', the initial response to the Trojan women's 'strike', or another aside from the current _resident.... ('P' deleted on purpose) ;).... I'm lucky, I suppose...my spouse generally likes what I make music Sound like....it's what I occasionally choose to Play on it that invokes 'THE LOOK' that made Medusa infamous... She likes the AMT's, Loves the Maggies' (but can't sit still...*shrug*), and is actually looking forward to when I can make the Walsh's a bit more *ah* LRF (Living Room Friendly) if there's going to be 4 of them....(*...rubbing hands with glee*).... |
*chuckle* Invoke 'natural' and they're off and running.... ;) Me? Just an absurder...'scuse, an Observer....*G* audiokinesis has some good observations on the subject, as does fsonic...mapman (Hi, guy! *G*) and I are Walsh omni fans, although our taste in 'device applied' is somewhat Different (Ohm vs. DIY, respectively), although the basic desire and concept is the same. All recorded music is subject to all the tech and tricks that I'm sure you're aware of....in short, a construct. At the end of the day, all we can strive for is what sounds 'correct'...IMHO, YHO, Anyones'... I've got the usual 'inputs'...TT, CD, tape, digital sources.... i've got direct radiators, ribbons, my Walsh's...even a pair of Maggies.... Working to add a pair or two of DMLs', just to add to the 'reference mix' of having at play just to be able to 'sample' what they sound like. My 'stack' of equipment can't go into the typical 'living room'; it looks like a Frankenstack of consumer/pro/DIY/'puter 'stuff' that I can apply 4 levels of eq AND xover AND switchgears so that any or ALL can be running at once....so I can either make them sound like themselves, alone... ...or like each other....in a (granted) crappy space I find more variance in the recordings. Pick what sounds good to you. Until you fall out of love with it. Happy hunting, and good variable factors. *S* |
Huy; again, I am not in your room. Everything matters. The flatscreen in between the speakers has to go. It is not about being on or off, it is about that highly reflective surface where you need a sound absorbing surface. If it can’t go, you must find a way to temporarily cover it up with sound absorbing material. Look up GIK Acoustics. Your Harbeths coming out into the room will decrease gross bass but once you get out of the room nodes (look this up), your bass will sound tight and more realistic (less bloated). Tiny changes make a huge difference, most times. The only proper way to do this is to lay down painters tape into grids so that you can keep your changes consistent. Let me say it again because it can not be said enough, everything matters. You must nullify first reflection points at the side walls and ceiling. You must have complimentary cabling. You must have a clean power supply. You must have the right seating position. Pick up Jim Smith’s book "Get Better Sound". Jim has a hundred or more tips and some will apply and some will not. If you take the time to try his tips, most of which are labor intensive but not expensive, you will find the sound you are missing. Please trust me-it is not your speakers and simply looking for some magic speaker to obtain your desired "natural sound" is, uh, not natural. |
Hi fsonicsmith, Thank you for your input. You are correct. There is a flat screen between (but not close to) 2 Harbeth speakers and they are quite close the the wall. How does it badly influence the sound (even when the TV is off?). Please bear with my ignorance. I tried to place it further away from the wall, the sound is clearer but the bass is weaker (the weight in the bass decreases). I have Nakamichi 1000 tape player. Is it counted as a good source of analogue? Sound from Nakamichi is much better than the DAC I use but that analogue sound not close to the 'natural' I am looking for. I know I'm very demanding in sound but I get familiar with any sound although it's good enough and search for more refined. Thank you. |
Digital has a natural sound. It’s the sound of paper mache.This just goes to show that talk with someone enough, and some commonality can be found 99% of the time. To anyone who posts with a specific model or brand of loudspeaker to the OP, you have exhibited your own foolishness. There are only conceptual answers to be given validly to the OP, not specific. His choice of source has already self-limited his experience. I don't care which Harbeth he has or whether he has Harbeths at all. He could have 30 year old Realistic by Radio Shack (rip) speakers for all I care. Get a better source, preferably analogue, and position your speakers properly, make sure your room is not causing problems, and you will be on the right course. The problem with this Board (well, among lots of others) is that it does not allow posting of photos. I would love to see good photos of the OP's listening room. I bet his Harbeths are up against the front wall with a flat screen in between or close. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't fix a wife. That's a WAF joke. |
Hi everyone, I have searched quite extensively recently, some names that come up are:- Josheph Audio Pulsars - JMR Offrande Suppreme V2- Spendor SP100 or SP100R2 The seller are not in my area so I can't demo them. I used to have Klipsch Chorus 2. I still remember the big sound stage, the weight and mass of the bass. However, the mid and hi-mid is quite harsh and grainy. Is there anything in the list can offer big sound stage, weighty bass and the organic mid of Harbeth? Thank you. |
I too was searching for a natural sounding speaker. I wrote a review of 15 different speakers I home demoed. I ended up with Boenicke speakers. The designer seems to spend much time recording concerts and as far as I understand it always aims to create a speaker to reproduce the sound of a live acoustic instrument. The other most natural sounding speaker I came across was the Sonus Faber. Review here: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/a-brief-review-of-15-high-end-speakers-on-home-demo-including... |
Have you EVER heard "Natural Sound" in your room with any speakers?.... Maybe your room acoustics are the problem? Different speakers react differently in different rooms and setups. A very wide dispersion speaker may not sound good in a more reverberant room. Also.... what is YOUR definition of Natural Sound?.... It may not be the same as MY definition... ie... the sound in my head that I am seeking. We simply need more information to answer your question intelligently. |
One day I was walking down the street in the French Quarter in New Orleans. Through the slightly-open doorway of a shop I heard the sound of a saxophone. Instantly I could tell that it was a live saxophone instead of a good recording through speakers. I had no line-of-sight to the saxophone, not even close as it turned out. All I could hear was the spectral balance of the reflections, and the dynamic contrast. I have yet to hear a speaker that struck me as "natural sounding" which did not do a good job in the reverberant field. Bonus points for preserving dynamic contrast, but ime that’s a bit less critical. Let me try to explain why getting the reverberant field right matters if the goal is "natural sound". First a bit of background: All new incoming sounds go into a short-term memory, and then all sounds are compared with those sounds in the short-term memory. If there is a match, then the sound is a "reflection", and it is largely IGNORED for localization purposes, but INCLUDED for its influence on loudness and timbre and ambience. If there is no match, then it is a NEW SOUND, and the ear/brain system figures out where it’s coming from (localization) and puts it into that short-term memory, so that its subsequent reflections can be correctly classified. The way that the ear/brain system identifies a reflection is by looking at its SPECTAL CONTENT. If the spectral content of an incoming sound matches that of a sound in the short-term memory, then it’s a reflection. If not, then it’s a new sound. So far, so good. But what happens when an incoming sound is in between - it kinda matches a sound in that short-term memory, but not very well? This can happen when a speaker’s off-axis response, which is responsible for most of the reflections, has significant glitches. What then? Well, in that case the brain literally has to work harder to correctly classify the incoming sound as a reflection. This extra CPU usage can actually be fatiguing, and can even cause a head-ache. You’ve heard the term "listening fatigue"? This can be one of its causes. I’m not saying that a spectrally-correct reverberant field is the only thing that matters in the pursuit of natural sound, but imo it is one of the things that matters. One of the reasons unamplified instruments in a good recital or concert hall sound so delicious and utterly non-fatiguing is that the reverberant field is so well done. When auditioning speakers, you may not always have time to find out if listening fatigue sets in. One way to quickly put a spotlight on the spectral balance of the reverberant field is to step outside of the room and listen through the open doorway, with no line-of-sight to the speakers. Does that saxophone still sound real? Duke dealer/manufacturer |
Take a listen to speakers by Vanderstein or Thiel (used). Both built only with first order crossovers which provides phase coherence through the crossover regions. And since both had "music-loving" rather than "hi-fi" sensibilities they tended to avoid anything that didn't sound like real music. There may be others as well that meet this criteria, but I (and countless others) can attest to the fact that these two manufacturers delived the goods when it came to "natural". |
For naturalness you need a very dynamic and unforgiving speaker. Preferably a pro studio monitor, active or passive. Great suggestions would be ATC, Westlake, Quested, PSI, Unity the Boulder, Barefoot, dual centric Tannoy and many more. Westlake is a "new" favourite of mine. Note - with these your bad recordings will sound bad and the good will sound good sometimes fantastic. They will not all sound mediocre as with most HIFI home speakers. Your Harbeth should be ok although being a home speaker. I found it a bit uninspiring. Harbeth also have studio versions. Don't know if they are different. If you with natural sound means concert sound, then visit a live venue. I don't want that sound in my home because it's very seldom enjoyable. You don't go to a concet for the sound. Maybe Roger Waters... Not sure about the open baffle suggestions. Can't think of a speaker technology that interacts more with the room. But would like to try in the future. Also, as someone already pointed out, try to find the good recordings and skip the bad. Discover new artists that really try to also present a fine sound. There are lots of them. Also the same artist may hav a big spread between good and bad recordings. Sometimes on the same cd. Listening to John Fogerty when writing this and he is a good example. Tidal is great for this. Just my ideas and Good luck! |
Tough question to answer when you omit the primary style of music you listen to, info on your romm size and treatments if any and your other components and of course your budget. All of this info is required to be able to properly recommend a pair of speakers, As mentioned above your present speakers are from a highly respected company known for producing a natural sound. For this reason I suspect your room and / or other components are in need of examination prior to the speakers. This is assuming you are looking to improve your systems sound. If you are just exploring other peoples idea of what they think a natural sounding speaker is in a general context then this info isn't required. |
@quanghuy147 this is may be of interest https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/a-brief-review-of-15-high-end-speakers-on-home-demo-including... If if you are in the UK please get in touch for a demo. What is your system? |
Consider KEF Blade II loudspeakers with VAC amplification (at any price level).......remarkably natural sound and soundstage! .....near totally removed from the loudspeakers. Some great suggestions above as well. If you prefer a solid state amplifier, Clayton Audio matched with a VAC mk5 Preamplifier is a very close second with the Blade II. Enjoy! |
Hi i have owned many high end speakers from Avalon,Genesis,Proac etc. i recently saw and read some comments on this website about a speaker by the name of Usher Mini Dancer ll with Diamond tweeters i read a lot of great reviews and decided to buy a pair and to my surprise probably the best pair I have owned so far. very natural and life like. Give it a try. |
If a "natural" sound is what you are after the Harbeth's are going to be very hard to beat. You will need to take a look at electrostatic or planer speakers but should be prepared for the many trade offs associated with those designs. They may get you closer but at a cost. The only other dynamic speaker that I have found that sounds as "natural" as the Harbeth's are those from Daedalus Audio. I went from Harbeth to Daedalus years ago and have never looked back--super "natural" sounding and damn pretty to look at. |
There are two requirements to be met in speakers in order to come close to 'natural' sound: 1)NO crossover, 2)ONE full range driver. Even the best designed and constructed crossovers introduce sound compressions, phase distortions... More than one driver leads to different sound characteristics, different speeds... Single full range drivers are difficult and expensive to make, and speakers with such drivers are difficult and expensive to design - but when you find one the experience is divine. Check out Audience, Teresonic, Zu... |
You don't mention which Harbeth's you have but my Harbeth 40.1's are about as natural and neutral as any on the market....and I have been using Quad 57's for over 30 years(retired after getting the Harbeths). What these speakers need are a rather large room and plenty of power(i'm using Classe CAM 200's). For true realism, one needs to sit at the approximate apex point of an isocoles triangle.....my speakers are about 8 feet apart, 4 feet from the back wall, and sitting position is about 10 feet away. Also Harbeths need to be elevated off the ground so that the tweeter portion is about at ear level.....put on some good vinyl and revel in the lushness and natural timber of a string quartet, symphony orchestra, or whatever else you might enjoy..... |
quanghuy This question is perfect. It addresses an important issue. Here we are in 2018. Sixty years after the first quads came out and we have hundreds of speakers available.....for the prices they are asking shouldn't they all have a natural sound......don't these reviewers car about natural sound when they listen to speakers. What is wrong with the speaker industry. Why would they even make a speaker that did't have a natural sound... |
perhaps you need to define what is natural ... each concert venue has it's own characteristics ... so what are you really shooting for? 3rd row center at Carnegie Hall, first balcony at the Auditorium Theatre, a box at LaScala (old or renovated), the slope at Red Rocks, on the field at an outdoor stadium, the picnic grounds at Ravinia or a college rehearsal hall? You get the idea ... no one can tell you what is natural in a speaker it is up to you. |
Did you read Arthur Salvatore's review of his reference speakers "Pure Reference" from Coincident? To my ears these are among the most natural sounding speakers I have ever heard. http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Speakers.html |
ATC is a studio monitor builder first. Their consumer versions are dressed up studio monitors. They want a "natural" sound in the studio, so it stands to reason that the consumer versions will all sound "natural" I second @inna’s post, digital does not sound "natural". Listen to the same song on a quality record, played on a quality turntable with a quality cart and you’ll hear "natural". Rollin |
You should try a pair of Open Baffle speakers. Natural sound for me is not only how the instruments sound on the speaker but also how well the speaker can produce a setting (as part of the soundstage) that sounds natural, unrestricted and life like. I have a pair of Robert Bastanis OB speakers. Very Natural sounding to me. |
Huy did not mention what kind of music he listens to most often. My experience is that a certain set up will sound best for certain type of music. I have yet to experience a system that sounds natural for all types of music. Some people believe that the amps used to voice the speakers during their design would give you the best synergy. I subscribe to that idea. In Hut’s case, you should find out what amp was used by Harbeth, and try the same amp with your speakers. And room treatment as some have mentioned. |
I'll add another possibility here, which is that the audio magic you seek may lie more in the recordings that you choose to play than the equipment on which it is played. There are many brilliantly recorded albums that playback on even somewhat modest systems with a spooky, they're in my room, realness. It could just be that your sources aren't that great to begin with and nothing is going to make them sound the way you'd like. I know I have many albums that are disappointing from this standpoint. I still listen to them because I love the music, but it doesn't give the wow factor. |
Silverline SR17 Supreme (USD $7500). I'll have a review coming out imminently, but I believe this is one of the premiere speakers < $10k for reproducing acoustic music. Not the best at electronic/harder music, but great for e.g. classical and jazz - very organic and balanced with just a hint of warmth. Very high resolution too, without being too fussy - a forgiving load and easy to match with both solid state and tubes. Cheers, TAWW http://taww.co |