I realize it's liable to get ugly quickly even asking, but wondering if anyone had tried out the Strata Mini's and M80's and had thoughts? I'm shopping for 2 channel speakers for the living room and stumbled across the Mini's. The idea of diversifying my gear is appealing for whatever reason. Eggs in once basket and all that. I welcome any other speakers you'd recommend considering in the 1-2k range.

The speakers will be paired with some sort of stereo receiver. I'm thinking either the Outlaw RR2150 (pseudo-retro) or a truly retro stereo receiver and a USB DAC to get audio from my macbook into analog. Vinyl will probably be added later.

I have M60's in my HT setup in the basement so I'm familiar with their sound. They're the first "expensive" speakers I've ever owned or really listened extensively to so of course I think they sound fantastic. Ignorance is bliss and all that. I assume the M80's would sound even better (and reduce the need for a sub woofer)?

-Nick

check out the measurements at soundstage.com The minis have a pronounced midrange and quite a bit more distortion than the M80. The enhanced midrange will give a warmer sound from what I have read. The distortion will color the sound as well. I would imagine that increased distortion would also have a negative effect on the level of detail the speaker will deliver, but don't know for sure.

In all, I would expect the M80 to deliver a better sound at a lower price, but if you are looking for something different...

I always wanted to hear some comparisons between the M80's and the Rocket RS850's.... but have yet to come across any

Maybe I'm oversimplifying, but it seems like "distortion" would always be a bad word in the world of audio.

There's no point in wanting 'lossless', well recorded albums if the gear I'm going to use makes is sound differently than intended.

Thanks for mentioning the measurements, I missed them on there.

Very true. If accuracy is your thing then you definitely do not want distortion. Accuracy can also be measured, so it's easier to compared speakers for this feature.

However, good sound is subjective for some people. Some will prefer an enhanced mid range or really dig an exaggerate bass. Also, certain changes to the sound can sometimes compensate for poorer quality recordings. If all someone's music is going to play from their iPod, maybe super accurate speakers are not the best choice.

So yes, I agree with you but in the end, people have different tastes and preferences. Like those crazy tube amp guys! Just kidding, of course!!!!

Only a little, though.

I agree with you murph. However, what I find is that most people seem to first pick a sound they like, and then define it as neutral and clean. I have also told that warm sound means neutral/flat.

Turbo. I have seen one review of the Rocket 750 (older speaker) with measurements and it does not measure particularly flat either. I have run across one 850 owner that did a direct comparison of the M60 and the 850. He felt the M60 was slightly better for music, but chose the 850 system for movies because he liked the bigfoot center better.

In the end, if you want something different, give them a listen and if you like what you hear, what does it matter how they measure or what other people like.

I agree with Fred, order up a set of each do a comparison, let us know your thoughts, with some pics of course, and keep the ones you like the best.

I think someone around here got a pair awhile back. Try searching for it (using the search thread in the Water Cooler).

And now that I've found it, I'd take it with a grain of salt. Any review that says the Axioms are metallic means the reviewer was listening with his eyes, not his ears.

Reviews like that are what happen when one does not have a perspective on what flat/neutral sounds like combined with a lack of vocabulary to describe what one is hearing.

I found (and didn't bookmark :rollie-eyes:) an article in which Dr. Tool discussed this. That famous "most people prefer flat with a rolled off high end" quote has when properly trained in front of it. I have yet to find a detailed description of what 'trained' means, but from what I gather it is a combination of prompting for what to listen for and a vocabulary to describe what one is hearing.

Anyway, it seems a fairly large segment of the 'untrained' audiophile population likes the richer/warmer sound of an enhanced mid range: which the do minis deliver.

I would have to say that I very much enjoyed several auditions of the Strata Minis. The sound is like sitting in the back of the room and hearing the music well in front of you.

My former 80's seemed to be very much in your face. Sometimes I felt more like being in the middle of the sound as opposed to in front of it.

Like most speakers - two very different sounds. I recommend auditioning both.

Thats a nice description of the differences. I suspect I would not like the minis because I like being elveloped by the music. I quite enjoy how PLII processing can put you even more in the middle of things.

In years of dealing with countless people on the issue of speaker preference, in the end, the choice is very subjective and IT IS just a personal choice. Some will, however, succumb to the temptation of making that choice by strictly reading reviews. I have mentioned this a number of times before in comments, that MOST of the major speaker companies in Canada have taken the engineering approach of producing speakers that are as neutral as possible in their sound, regardless of size. I would, however, say that the M80 is definitely a little more "in your face" compared to others, not only because of the size of the speaker cabinet and number of drivers but of particular note, the "dual" tweeter configuration. This is quite unique, hence, when you are watching a movie or listening to music, you will hear sounds and detail in the 5000-10000 hz range that might be less noticeable in another brand with a single tweeter. I personally like this more detailed, "crisper" sound. Others may not.

I think everyone is being very diplomatic...which is fine.

Let me say this - when I drive my M60's with my RX-V2700 in pure direct mode (bypassing as much circuitry as possible and the sub) -vs- incorporating my EP500 in 'straight' stereo mode (2.1), I like the M60's alone better.

I do miss the bass in pure direct, but somehow the 'thick' sound (presumably brought on by the lows and richer middles) seems to muddle the sound field so it's a catch-22. It's richer, stronger, warmer, whatever (all 'good' terms) - but the soundstage is more centered and less like a vivid, broad 'wall' of sound. These are all terms I'm making up, but perhaps you'll understand what I'm getting at.

I've been trying to tweak to find the middle ground in that setup, but in the case of the M80's (or whatever I go with), I'd expect it to be that ideal compromise.

I can't say I would have appreciated the the 'wall' of sound if I'd never known better - the warmth is intoxicating and what most shelf systems probably go for. But now that the curtain is pulled back on the wizard so to speak, I may be ruined.

-Nick

On a related subject, I'm weighing the Outlaw RR2150 (pseudo vintage) and something like the Samsui 9090 (truly vintage) to drive the speakers. Any thoughts?

My library will largely be PC based so I'm going to have to convert digital to analog somewhere. This will either be done by the 2150 via it's USB port or with an external USB DAC if I go the vintage route.

The other concern is that my living room (in it's current furniture layout) isn't that big. Am I going for overkill with 80's and a powerful receiver? I don't want to limit myself with bookshelf speakers in case I move or come up with a differnt seating/listening position. I assume that the M80's are so pleasant that even if I never gave them a workout I'd love them?

The 60's are brilliant and I could probably just buy two more of those. But as I mentioned above, I've heard the 'warmth' missing when I listen to the 60's without the EP500 so I know there's room to grow and presumably keep the detail.

-Nick

No, we are showing good maners and respect. On so many other sites its usually brand A rocks and brand B sucks which is neither informative, or respectful towards those who prefer brand B.

I expect that the harsh criticizms leveled against speakers a particular person dislikes are usually greatly exagerated. I'm note sure why people feel the need to do this.

This is a good site and people will tell you what they think without the sillyness.

Having compared the M60 to M80 I did find the M80 to have a greater/wider soundstage than the M60s, more of a wall of sound in front of you, albeit you are in the front row and not in the back. The sounds appear to come from much wider than the speaker positions. I would order up some M80s or at least try to get to an owners house for an audition and do the same for the mini's, by all accounts they are a very good set up as well but mellower sounding as has been stated.

As long as the amp can handle a 4 ohm load I don't see why not.

Is it possible for components in an amp/receiver to wear out over time?

Jake,

I probably didn't use the right words (I'm a bit out there right now), but I meant that 60's sounded pretty broad already (minus the EP500). It's only when I add the sub in that the wall seems to shrink. You just never forget where the two speakers converge if that makes any sense.

I know exactly what you're saying about the sound being broader than the speakers. I get the same effect with the 60's. If you're saying that the 80's will do an even more impressive job, that's a good thing.

-Nick

I'm sure like all electronics things will wear out over time. One of the ones I was looking at had been pro-actively maintenanced. I wouldn't really be looking for a project receiver - would rather save up my pennies and pay a little extra for someone else's hard work to just enjoy the music.

-Nick

You may want to try a lower crossover setting. For example, set your mains on large and then turn the crossover on the sub down to 60hz

I have found crossing at 80hz is too high for my tastes because as you say you can start to hear the voices through the subwoofer. It may be ok for movies but for music It does seem to take away.


Also, The Sansui 9090 is at the age where it would be a good idea to have a thourough going through which involves replacing all of the electrolytic capacitors, Rebiasing, Adjusting the DC offset, cleaning all the switches and pots and if need be replacing any other components that are failing. One of the best people I know of to do such a task goes by the name of "Echowars" on the Audiokarma forums, Glenn knows his stuff and I think he might even live in MI.

Personally I would not reccomend that particular reciever for the M80's

And even if you do go with the M80 I think you'll still find them lacking without the subwoofer once you try them with it. At least I do. And I used to think they were perfectly sufficient in the bass region for a number of years.. Until I tried with a good sub.

Isn't that always the case, ignorance is bliss, you don't know what you're missing, etc........

I have yet to hear a setup that didn't sound better with a sub, at least to me.

I find it depends very much on the music. For some songs, I can't tell the difference with or without sub.

As part of my experimentation, I have moved down to 60hz. I also set the 500 to 'half' from 'flat'. It's definitely improved the overall 2.1 sound experience but it still feels like it could be better. The best analogy I can come up with is the 60's on their own feel like layers...you can actually 'see' the music rising in pitch (or whatever). Highs are high and on down from there. The lows are correct in that setup but they just don't have the strength of other. When you bring the 500 in that problem is of course solved, but the lows don't 'fit' anymore. They just seem to warm the whole picture.

The unknown factor is what slipping in and out of pure direct mode is doing. I will say that if you disconnect the sub and A/B the two modes I can tell a difference anyway. Unfortunately I can't use 'pure direct' and keep the sub (yamaha limitation). That's part of the reason for the interest in a stereo receiver.

The specific receiver I was looking at has had all that work done to it. It's interesting you wouldn't recommend that receiver though. Any particular reason? Any others you would suggest? I'm all ears people :-)

-Nick

If your looking to stay in that era there are no others I can suggest as I am not familiar with all of whats available, although I am pretty familiar with the sansui. I just think that if you want to get the most out of the speakers you would be better off getting a good power amp vs that reciever. Not to say that its amplifier section is any less powerful than those of today's recievers. Infact im quite sure the opposite if probably true. But I dont believe it can match that of a good power amp.

Is it possible that it is that particular sub? I know that in comparisons between the EP600 and the PB13 ultra, the 600 is described as having a warmer, softer sound. I wonder if this is the low end distortion creeping in and colouring things (runs and hides under nearest chair).

I can't say that I notice any colouration with the EP350. In fact, I was surprised that I did not need to make any effort to blend in the 350. However, it does not use DSP and does not go nearly as low as the EP500.

Anything is possible, but I'd wager on me using stupid placement or not doing a good job calibrating before I blamed the sub.

As far as the receiver goes - the more I think about it, the more likely I'll go with an outlaw. I'm a pretty low maintenance guy and pseudo retro implies less headaches.

Anyone have a nice thorough (yet understandable) explanation as to what a power amp is supposed to do other than make music louder? Does a good power amp make the actual receiver less important? I've been resisting the idea of separate gear so I've never researched this at all. I'll dig around myself (there's probably even an article at axiom?) but wondered if someone had a quick easy link.

Thanks for the feedback so far.

Setup was the other thing I wondered about. I have been reading in the REW forum at hometheatershack.com a lot. There is quite a bit that can be done to improve in room response for bass.

On the amp question, the amp is there to provide enough power to deliver nice clean, unclipped sound. Too much power is better than not enough power. There are a couple of good articles in the newsletter/learning section of this site.

Nick, that's it: an amplifier, whether it's in a receiver or a separate unit, only has the job of increasing the incoming voltage(a gain of typically about 29dB, which is about 30 times)so that it's high enough to drive the speakers to an audible level. Competently designed units, which are available at quite low cost these days, don't add audible coloration, they just make things louder. The typical moderate cost receiver with a power rating somewhere in the 100 watt area not only handles the 1 watt or so used at an average loud listening level well, but for the vast majority of uses has plenty of headroom to handle brief peaks. Nothing more is required for transparent amplification.

In the words of Mojo ...1/2 watt.

On that note, for those interested, I talked to him today and he is doing well. He has been having the kitchen/main floor of his house renovated over the summer.

Great, so it sounds like receiver alone should be fine. What about when they talk about some receivers sounding "warmer" etc? Or is that only an issue when it's decoding digital signal? In analog context it's just a straight pass through and power so there's very little difference in receivers?

Considering that I'm already concerned about the 80's being too loud for day to day listening I can't imagine driving them hard enough to tax anything.

Anyone auditioned the 80's and 60's to know the difference? Given that I like the 60's already will I enjoy the 80's even more for 2 channel? Or are they just capable of being louder?

By the way, I realize I'm asking crazy questions and bringing up a lot of possibilities. My ears are the only ones that will know for sure. But I'm always curious about others experiences.

-Nick

May I refer you to this thread re M60 M80 comparison

So far as amp/receivers go I tend to believe more along the lines they all pretty much sound the same from the well known manufacturers, especially as you stated when using analog inputs.

Sweet, thanks for the comparison.

-Nick

Nick, the object of amplification is transparency without the addition of an audible sonic characteristic. Those who make claims of hearing "warmth" or any other such characteristics(with controls set flat)haven't grasped the fact that you(meaning anyone)can't simply "Just trust your ears".

Excuse me being dense...What does that mean? If I think something sounds warm it's actually me hearing things?

Even if you were listening to two speakers or two receivers at once and detected a difference? Weird.

-Nick

Personal taste vs. scientific experimentation maybe? Chalk it up to the fact that we (humans) have a hard time describing things in complete factual ways exactly the same as the next person. We interject emotion (even into audio) as to how we perceive sound. We may even have differences in our own physical abilities to hear things the same... Hearing damage, larger ears, smaller ears, elvish ears.... Oh wait... Familiarity with certain sounds makes us more or less "sensitive" to certain sound frequencies...

If you can take a speaker and set it up in a room that doesn't "color" the sound, and you set all of the controls to be flat, the target goal is to have a perfectly even/flat frequency response out of the speaker. That is the ideal...

However, again, interject that we are human and not a bunch of carbon-based SPL meters with legs running around, and we inject our own human skew or perceptions into the audio. That is where the phrase "you can't always trust your ears" or some variant of that comes in. So no, you aren't dense, but yes, in some case you ARE hearing things... That is your personal interpretation of what something should sound like, or some frequency bias due to your room acoustics, etc... Heck, I know that my room is HORRIBLY injecting and removing frequency ranges from my setup. I have just been to busy (and/or lazy) to figure it all out since I think that my speakers still sound great. Some day I'll make the room stop battling with them and they will sound awesome...

Nick, you can be sure that the "something" that sounds warm isn't the receiver when controls are set flat and the other variables, especially precise sound level, are controlled for. Properly controlled blind listening illustrates that competently designed power units don't add an audible sonic coloring. They simply don't have the substantial deviation from flat frequency response that would have to exist for them to cause sound to be "warm", "bright" or whatever.

JohnK, do you still have that link you posted in the past from the amp shootout in Home Stereo Review (I think was the magazine?) It was an old article but an amazing read and right on topic for this discussion.

Sure, Jason; the classic Stereo Review blind listening tests are still unchallenged(i.e., unchallenged by solid evidence to the contrary, not just stubborn disagreement). Among the several points of interest are that the $12,000 pair of tube amplifiers(which were correctly designed and didn't have a "tube sound")were indistinguishable from the $220 Pioneer receiver and the stark contrast between some of the flowery language used to describe the "sound" in open listening before the blind listening sessions and the actual results. Especially noteworthy was the confident comment of a "believer" after the tests, but before he was shown his result(apparently he was the 7/16 result Hafler vs Futterman listener).