Stand Mount Speakers for 300 DR / 252

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Zipperheadbanjo posted:

 

Interesting insight Simon. My floors are hardwood... the listening room is on the main floor of the house so the hardwood sits on top of floor joists... any thoughts on how this impacts selection of stands?

no recent experiences with suspended flooring.. sorry so can't comment.

I have recently purchased Carbon Blocks from Audio Tekne in Japan for under my speakers. They far and away eclipse my Chord Silent Mounts and cast just $160AusD for the eight of them!!!! Carbon nanotubes which absorb so well I bought some for my horn speakers as well. If you like, put them under stands AND speakers and you will be amazed. The best bargain in my life!!!    note, Audio Tekne make $60K tube amps, turntables, speakers ect. The Japanese are very switched on with audio gear and science.

AussieSteve posted:

...The Japanese are very switched on with audio gear and science.

Having been here for over 15 years I can't say I agree with that at all. I've posted on this topic at length so won't regurgitate what I've already posted since it is in the forum history. But to counter that argument I would say that the following:

• Equipment is indeed designed to ridgid specifications. But the ear rarely comes into it. The design philosophy is that intruments and specs don't lie and that is all you need. So whether you can actually hear that or not or whether it translates as an imporvement is irrelevent. If the specs are better it IS an improvement.
• The buyer buys on the same philosphy. Mainly because even if you feel like forking out GBP50K worth for gear you still won't get a quiet demonstration room. You'll get a noise shop floor with 50 speakers going through a switchbox. A brochure for a amp out here is a like a booklet of whitepapers on each chip and capacitor used - utterly useless for judging quality but it is an article of faith here.
• You have to be suspicious from a hifi point of view of a country where the concept of earthing and the use of any transformer other than switchmod is nigh on unheard of. The high end foreign brands that exist on Japan typically are the ones that can work okay when not earthed and have switchmodes. So no Naim and no NAD (yeah it's not high end but I am sad it isn't available) out here.

But please don't interpret that is disagreeing with the statement that the Japanese don't make some decent stuff. I use Japanese made Kripton spike shoes and they wipe the floor (no pun intended) with all other ones I've used like Linn Skeet.  And I have been known to use Japanese electronics for my AV setup.

Simon, thanks for the kind words, but unfortunately I don't have authoritative knowledge in this area, just a but of experience.

My experience covers...

Cement screed floors (effectively solid concrete), suspended concrete floors (using pre-stressed beams) and suspended wooden floors.
Heavy rigid plinths and spiked direct into the floor.
Light open 3 and 4 leg, heavy single pillar, and medium weight multicolumn stands.
Light BBC monitor style boxes on each speaker stand type on all floor types
Heavier denser boxes on light and heavy stands (but only on cement screed)

My experience indicates the best choice of stand depends on both the speaker and the floor.  It's further complicated by differences in speaker design including the weight of the bass, mid and/or bass/mid cones.

There have been several "Rules of Thumb" produced such as "Lightweight speakers need heavy stands and vice versa."  "Heavy speakers need heavy stands and light speakers need light stands"; all of these have been justified by quoting a particular example (usually without noting design differences in the speakers, the floor on which they stand or even the room dimensions).  The only thing I've been able to demonstrate to myself is that using stands where the weight can be adjusted by adding materials is a good approach, just in case you particular speaker needs something other than your first guess!

I'd like to do a concrete study (pun intended!) using accelerometers and microphones, but I don't have the kit (that is a wide enough range of speakers or the test kit), so it won't happen any time soon.

The best I can suggest is that we conduct a survey of what people use.  This would need replies to specify...
Speakers (including specifying several design elements).
Speaker to stand interface (spikes, adhesive, compliant mount)
Stand type, construction type, height and weight
Stand to floor/plinth interface (spikes, adhesive, compliant mount)
Plinth type / weight (if any)
Floor type
Room dimensions

One we have these data from a number of people it may be possible to see some trends emerging.  We may also be able to see examples of speakers that go against the trends.

P.S.  Timeo technocratos et donae ferentes

Ok here goes:

Speakers (including specifying several design elements).

• ATC SCM 19 - 2 Way Sealed/Infinite Baffle/approx 20litre enclosure/ 17.8 kg

Speaker to stand interface (spikes, adhesive, compliant mount)

• Pulsar Points x3

Stand type, construction type, height and weight

• Wooden open frame - light construction - Oak and Torlyte, 550mm tall, tripod construction

Stand to floor/plinth interface (spikes, adhesive, compliant mount)

• Steel spike

Plinth type / weight (if any)

• NA

Floor type

• Wool carpet on underlay on hard concrete

Room dimensions

• Approx 3x7m - although not perfect rectangle

Lindemann's Bl- 10 has had great reviews. Has the most open frame support I have ever seen

OK, my setup:

Spendor SP2s on Custom Design CS104 Signature, 3/4 mass loaded.

Speaker:
Light Cabinet (8.5kg total weight, sealed / infinite baffle - ports are bunged)
6" driver on 8" frame, heavy cone, heavy magnet (2.8kg)

Interface to Stand
Adhesive (blue-tack)

Stand
Semi-open frame (open frame + central column) 500mm height
Medium weight (3kg + 3.5kg fill)

Interface to plinth
4 spikes

Plinth
Ceramic, non resonant, 35kg

Floor
Thin wool carpet over pine floorboards over wood joists, moderately flexible, slightly resonant.

Room
4.25m x 3.75m, Room correction applied using a DSP interface to a sub-woofer.

Simon,

Three additional pieces of information:
ATC SCM 19:  110mm cone 150mm frame, Heavy Cone, Heavy Magnet.

TOBYJUG posted:

feeling_zen posted:

PMC Fact3 ?

Really , they look like a one legged wooden funny thing.

So funny 

So easy to set up and PMC have done the hard work regarding performance.  Loving mine in graphite poplar.  

I would imagine that a 252/300DR would be a good match as would higher end stand mounts from PMC.

I didn't want to put any one out , just being onest.  Getting a stand mount right from a speaker designer is probably the most hardest of  things - considering there are so many limitations already bestowed into the nature of such a thing - getting the best out of an already compromised fact of physics interference. + the reality of most listeners rooms  - a stand mount that gets everything right would be onto a gold winner for everyone.

A little over your budget on the second hand market I've seen Raidho D1s for sale lately or there is always the new XT-1 which uses the same tweeter but doesn't play as low. The X2 is a small floor stander that has the same footprint as a stand mount with stands. It would be around your budget depending on how much of a discount your dealer is willing to give. 

ZHB - if you like the ProAc with Naim combination, the Response D2s are excellent; the ONLY reason I moved from mine to the D28s is because my listening area is so large because it is an open floor plan, and I felt I needed the extra oomph of a decent sized floor stander. 

In a smallish room such as your they should be great. In fact, if I move from here to a situation where I have a less cavernous listening room (over 30' from firing position till there is a wall, with 11' ceilings) , I will probably wish I had the D2s back...regardless of which amp I have.

And I have also heard them on the end of a 300 and a 500 at my dealer (with a 552/SC), so I know they can shine with those amps.

Thanks DrMark... shall put the D2's on the list :-)

I've just booked a full demo in a couple of weeks time of the KEF Reference 1 standmounts (on their dedicated stands). Not sure if you can source them in Canada but they are an impressive package technically. I had a brief listen to them and was really impressed. A year or two back I had the Totem Embers at home for an extended listen. I was impressed with what I heard, particularly the treble and soundstage, but I missed the bass that I get from my PMC's transmission line design - the Embers just did not go quite deep enough. When they left and the PMC's (GB1i's) were re-installed I was quite happy - traded some openness for a more powerful sound. My wife was happy as well as she though the Embers looked odd sitting on heavy duty stands. Since then I have made quite a few changes to my electronics (DR'd everything and replaced the 282 with a 252). I am also extending my listening room so thought I would use it as an excuse to look again at speakers (and wiring) solutions. The KEF's are a slightly odd shape - being very deep - but I am hoping that the overall physical volume at about the same as my PMC's and the dedicated bass unit will provide the scale of sound I like but with the added benefits of greater detail and soundstage information. I am not a bass freak by the way - almost the opposite - but I do like it to be there when it should be.

An interesting thread.... Does the forum have any thoughts on what size room constitutes moving from stand mounts to floorstanders? Reading the thread made me think of that question.....suspect, as usual, there will be no hard and fast 'rule' as it will be what works for each individual set of circumstances and ears, but I am interested to hear people's thoughts...

I've never understood stand mounts in the normal use of the phrase (excluding speakers like the big ATCs and PMCs in this consideration, as they are quite different): There are good small or relatively small footprint floorstanding speakers that take no more room than standmounts, yet that extra volume gives greater scope for better bass design. PMC Fact 12, for example, isn't much different in size from Fact 3. Cost of course is another matter entirely...

I have yet to find a smallish standmount that sounds as integrated, seamless and natural as a good stand mount for the music I listen to in my environment - and across many makes bass in the smaller floor standers, smearing, box colourations and imaging have often been a weakness to my ears but then I admit  I am fussy - also good standmounts with stands are not always a cheaper option - but yes I use 20 litre infinite baffle ATC19 standmounts so not run of the mill speaker.

Personally I would always go infinite baffle unless in an extremely large enclosure where the port resonance is outside the frequency response. I have heard a few good infinite baffle floor standers but these have been large affairs - and too large for my listening room. Infinite baffle equals more music and less boom and tizz hifi....

I just put my 300 back into my second system - outing the NAP150 - 252/300 into Harbeth Monitor 30's on Target stands. They really showed their appreciation

Innocent Bystander posted:

I've never understood stand mounts in the normal use of the phrase (excluding speakers like the big ATCs and PMCs in this consideration, as they are quite different): There are good small or relatively small footprint floorstanding speakers that take no more room than standmounts, yet that extra volume gives greater scope for better bass design. PMC Fact 12, for example, isn't much different in size from Fact 3. Cost of course is another matter entirely...

Usually, stand mount box dimensions more closely match the ideal H/W/D ratio of 2.3/1.6/1 that help dissipate internal standing waves that leak through the woofer membrane.

Simon, assuming you mean "... yet to find a smallish floorstanding ...", then I agree, but I suspect I have partially different reasons.  I agree on the colourations, particularly in the upper bass and midrange.  At the these frequencies, a floorstanding cabinet effectively acts as a semi-resonant box stand for the rest of the speaker, and good dedicated stands can be made to work better than a wooden box.

As regards infinite baffle, I find that with all the ported speakers I've heard, the leading edge of low bass transients is smeared a little bit (for a reflex or open transmission line enclosure, then at the speaker system's f0(anechoic) there's one pulse rise at 90° phase lag, followed at another one at 450° phase lag).

With the Spendor SP2 Mk1s I use (again, not exactly run of the mill!), the f0(anechoic) is 52Hz, but the Helmholtz resonance of the cabinet is 37Hz.  Despite these meeting your criteria for separation, in practice I still hear the smearing; hence I have bungs in the ports on mine (and use a sealed sub for the low bass, controlled by a DSP crossover filter).

I believe the boom is often a case that to get the semblance of deep bass, many manufacturers of small ported boxes implement a small bass hump at or a bit above the port resonant frequency.  To me this adjustment is almost always obvious and sounds artificial as it interferes with instrumental timbres.

Transmission line speakers can give deep, smooth, fast and controlled bass - and they need space for the line, dictating tall and sometimes deep boxes (and 'golden ratio' consideration is irrelevant).

Though I don't have personal experience, I'm aware of suggestions that isobarics like the Neat SX5i can do similar things with bass, using the floorstand volume to good effect.

IB, I assume you're referring to closed transmission lines.  Open transmission lines still have the 450° phase shift.

Huge posted:

IB, I assume you're referring to closed transmission lines.  Open transmission lines still have the 450° phase shift.

My experience is with open transmission lines not closed ones, specifically 1/4 λ, tapered, heavily damped. These have negligible (effectively zero) upper bass output from the line, while the line output around bass driver res freq is approx 90º phase shifted, however even at that point the output from the line is lower than that from the front of the bass driver, quite unlike a bass reflex design where at the driver res freq the main output is from the port. (And the TL line exit is generally much larger than that of a ported reflex speaker, so even if at comparable port SPLs air velocity effects would be considerably less.).

I'm unaware of an 'echo' output delayed 360º from the main output in such TL designs (?)

Hi IB,

It works like this...

The cone working against its mechanical suspension and the compressibility of the air in the box is a second order high-pass filter; this results in a 90° phase shift in the cones output at f0.  The TL is connected to the back of the cone and hence is 180° out of phase.  The TL length is 1/4λ adding another 90°.  The taper slows the flow of the pressure wave (its own distributed volume acting with the volume of the main chamber creates a second order low pass filter) adding another 90°; so bringing the port's output back in phase with the output from cone, just delayed by one full wave cycle.

That's why it's important to not have any higher harmonics transmitted all the way down the line, or else they'll destructively interfere with the main output of the cone (a comb filter effect would result).

I can vouch for the Neat XLS. Work great with a 300 non DR, CDX2 + 555ps and SL cables. The Neats are an isobaric design with twin super tweeters and sit on Track Audio stands. They sound great. 

Acred posted:

I can vouch for the Neat XLS. Work great with a 300 non DR, CDX2 + 555ps and SL cables. The Neats are an isobaric design with twin super tweeters and sit on Track Audio stands. They sound great. 

Neat's XLS look like a super speaker - but how do you deal with dust that will eventually settle on the tweeters ?