Speaker question - "engaging" vs. "tiresome" midrange

Posted by: Bart on 12 November 2018

NOTE: This isn't about speaker brands, but a basic characteristic of speakers.

I don't have NEARLY the experience listening to speakers that many of you do.  So help me out here.  I do love fantastic vocals, and something that attracted me to my current speakers (Devore Nines) right away (and some others I auditioned back in 2012) was the engaging and highly transparent (my language) midrange especially on female vocals (think Nora Jones, Holly Cole).  The vocals really stand out in the sound stage. I heard this too on some Martin Logan electrostatics; very airy midrange.

But 6 years later, I'm finding that a listening session of over 30 minutes leaves me fatigued.  At volume that gets me really engaged, I think that the midrange is what's fatiguing, despite how "musical: it is.

I listened to what reviewers say is a much more "accurate" speaker (Magico A3), and while I immediately found the midrange (female voices) better integrated into the total sound stage, they were not immediately toe-tapping engaging. (But it was in a very dead audio room; tbd in my home.)

Is this a common trade-off??

My theory as I listen to more speakers is that I need to find a balance with the midrange between the 'fatiguing' and 'boring' ends of the spectrum.  Should I be thinking about this in other or additional ways?? Better vocabulary??  TIA!

Posted on: 14 November 2018 by Folkman

The diffusers v absorbers question can really only be answered on a personal level by trial.

When I treated my room with GIK panels I ended up with 20 absorbing panels only .  I tried diffusion but did not like the results.

Posted on: 14 November 2018 by Loki

Linn Keilidh, Kaber etc, Naim 400 and 600 B&W diamond700 and 800 series, Kudos Titan 808: all have it, but limited/ invigorated by the source and partnering amplification.

Posted on: 14 November 2018 by johnG
Folkman posted:

The diffusers v absorbers question can really only be answered on a personal level by trial.

When I treated my room with GIK panels I ended up with 20 absorbing panels only .  I tried diffusion but did not like the results.

Yes proceed with caution - I have the opposite experience where absorption had minimal effect and the diffusers are beneficial. I think you do need the Vicoustic DC2 or equivalent type diffusers, the flat panels described as diffusers is somewhat optomistic. There is a good article available online at Hi-Fi+ by Chris Martens describing his experience in treating a listening space with the DC2s and worth reading.

Posted on: 14 November 2018 by Hook
Bart posted:
Hook posted:

I’ve played around quite a bit with absorption panels in my 11’x13’ room.  Best result for me has been a live wall/dead wall approach. I use panels behind my head and at first side wall  reflection points. I also have bass traps in the corners behind my speakers.

I think it works well (or perhaps I’ve simply become acclimated to the sound), but I have always wondered if adding diffuser panels to my live wall between the speakers would be beneficial. 

Thanks Hook - which bass traps? Of all the 'devices' these might have more WAF here than anything else, other than a rug, which suffers low DAF (dog acceptance factor).

Nothing fancy, just basic GIK Tri-Traps. They are wedge-shaped and fit into the room corners. Probably low odds, but if you spec’ed a fabric that goes well with (or matches) your wall colors, then maybe they’ll disappear enough to pass the WAF test?