1. Home
  2. speakers
  3. 132865-105325

What are the best loudspeakers under $4000 to re-create lifelike piano

Over the past 4 months I've spent time with five loudspeakers.  On a scale of 1-10 I'd rate them as follows in their ability (with my equipment in my room) to recreate a lifelike piano.  Tekton Lore - 6.5 (great scale but tonal accuracy and clarity somewhat lacking),    Kef LS50 - 7.0 (moderate scale but slightly better clarity and tonal accuracy)  Kef R500 - 8.0  (great scale and very good clarity and tonal accuracy), Spatial Audio M3TurboS -8.1 (great scale and very good clarity and tonal accuracy and very smooth)  Magnepan 1.7i - 9.0 (very good scale with excellent clarity and tonal accuracy - very lifelike).

In your room with your equipment, what loudspeakers are you listening too and how would you rate them for their ability to recreate a lifelife piano and if possible a few comments as to why?
snapsc
bondmanp
1,465 posts
 

snapsc - My room is on the larger side of the size range for the 2000s, although I sit only 9' back.  Without the subs, the 2000s seem to go well into the 30's, probably around 35Hz, with a good amount of output. (Sadly, with my amp in the repair shop, I am listening now without the Vandy subs, but only my HT sub, an old Def Tech PF15.  Even through my cheap AVR, these speakers sound lovely!)   But with your sub properly dialed in, you should have no bass issues. 


Your guess on the need for larger Ohm Walsh models in bigger rooms is correct.  The thing about this line of speakers is that the sound is very consistent model-to-model.  You gain low-end extension, higher dB output and perhaps some better macro-dynaimcs as you move up in size.  But timbre, resolution, soundstage characteristics, etc., are all about the same, whether you have the Micro-Walsh Tall or the 5000s.

asvjerry's avatar
asvjerry
609 posts
 
bondmanp....MINE *G* ;)
asvjerry's avatar
asvjerry
609 posts
 
(as in your commentary to snapsc re speakers Walsh...)

A pair: Nice....
Add a sub: Improves..
But, if one adds a 2nd pair.... 5.1, that sort of thing....
Amazing is just a word....;)


snapsc OP
148 posts
 
ASVJerry.  Ok, this is a little off subject but it looks like you built your own style of walshes. What kind of transducers (paper, titanium, etc) did you use and why. 

It it seems strange that so few loudspeaker companies have adopted then marketed a Walsh based product???
bondmanp
1,465 posts
 

snapsc - If I can chime in while we wait for ASVJerry, Ohm does not use Walsh drivers these days, but they do use the Walsh principle of bending wave propagation, in which the back of a cone driver radiates sound in a quasi-omni pattern.  Getting this type of speaker voiced right requires, IMO, a different skill set than voicing other speaker types.  A few are really good at it, including John Strohbeen at Ohm and German Physiks (which does use a Dicks Dipole Driver). 


Part of the reason so few do this is, perhaps, marketing.  Many consumers expect a bunch of forward facing drivers in a box.  Many assume omni's can't image well (which is false, IME).  And in the early days, true Walsh designs were, um, finicky about associated gear and had some reliability issues.  And then there is the price.  Ohm Walsh speakers are not expensive, and since Ohm doesn't sell a $75,000 Reference model, they don't get a lot of love from the audio press or high-end folks.  Selling factory direct is a two-edged sword, too, which keeps prices low, but means there is no dealer network to talk up the brand.  Just my 2 cents.

More to discover