I have an itch to upgrade my speakers on my desk. Currently have the SB Acoustic ARA and borrowing my friend’s BMRs. Tonally they’re fairly similar with ARA being a little more midrange forward and a bit more midbass compared to the BMR but the BMRs have this really tall wall of sound with good imaging but not as concentrated as the ARA.
On my mind are the Qln Prestige and Borresen Z1. Does anyone have any experience with these two? Or maybe something around that price range (under $10k, Qln is $7k and Z1 is ~$7k used). I’ll be using them on my desk. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks!
EDIT: forgot to say what I’m looking for. I appreciate good vocal clarity and I’m just looking to see if I can get more out of my system. I would think moving up that much in price should net me some improvements but since ARA isn’t that well known, I’m not 100% sure. Besides the presentation of BMR, I’d say ARA is roughly the same in terms of resolution and detail.
They all read like great speakers. Personally my brain is having a hard time wrapping itself around that caliber of speaker to sit on a desk. So much of the magic of two channel happens when you give the speakers some distance and that’s something very difficult to do near field unless a speaker is specifically designed for nearfield.
Both the Qln Prestige and Borresen Z1 seem like they’re stand mounted monitors not intended for a desktop as their primary use? I loved the BMR and they punch well above their price point but from what I remember of them their strenght was first and foremost in their wide dispersion which created a wonderful and large sweet spot. Something that’s lost on a desktop application.
I don’t know enough to tell you but it would be the first thing I’d ask, is; does a great bookshelf speaker make for a great desktop speaker because I suspect the answer is no, or… that you’d be best served by looking at what’s out there designed for desktop use and choose from those options as you may wind up being able to save a chunk of change if you’re not going to be benefiting for the magic a high end bookshelf brings by putting them in a desktop environment.
To me, desktop and nearfield are not the same thing. Nearfield can be five or six feet away,and that’s twice the distance as desktop listening.
I mean, monitors meant for desktop use are basically limited to active speakers. I don’t think any manufacturers really advertise for desktop use except for maybe a few like the Mini Maggie System or audioengine.
With regards to losing something on a desktop application, I don’t lose out on the wide dispersion for BMRs at all. They’re exactly what you said about them. They have a very big sweet spot but then that spot seems bigger and not as defined as when I’m listening to my ARA which are more traditional speakers (as in doesn’t use a ribbon).
I don’t think I want to go down the route of buying Genelecs or whatever other active speakers pro audio users use even if they’re meant for desktop use. AFAIK, they generally have two drivers in a box cabinet with some DSP. I don’t think they do anything different than bookshelf speakers when it comes to accommodating reflections off a desk or smaller width between speakers. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
I’m not trying to say nearfield and desktop are the same. That’s why I was specific in saying that it’s for my desk setup. Maybe a desk setup should be considered a really near field setup.
I don’t really have any experience with Borresen, but I have a pair of Raidho and they share similar DNA. If they are designed similarly, I would say they really really need to be placed wide apart. I think you will really limit its capability to do what they do best (throw a huge sound with superb soundstage) by keeping them on a small desk or close together.
If you want a cheaper way to dip your toes, you can try the Scansonic MB-1 B. Same designer, but with budget in mind.
Gotcha so you would say they need even more room than the BMRs? I think the BMRs have a really huge sound too. Just curious is the borresen or raidho would be similar but better
I don’t have any BMR experience, so I cannot comment there. The Raidhos are huge enough to where if I close my eyes, I swear I was listening to floorstanders or something. They sound larger than my Harbeths, even though they are smaller.
I currently have mine about 9.5 feet apart or almost 3m.
Another downside is that they are particularly insensitive, so you need a beefy amp to stash somewhere on your desk
Yeah my M225’s do 225w so I’m ok for now I think. My speakers are about 4 ft apart but could be a little more. I guess maybe I’ll look for something more traditional compared to the borresens then
You can spend silly money on them, for active speakers I wouldn’t, anything with a decent Pot will be fine.
They come in 4 varieties of increasing cost/Quality
Pot’s, Stepped attenuators, Relay based and Transformer based.
To be fair there are some more esoteric designs, like those that use optical devices and attenuate an LED to change their conductivity.
For what you are trying to do stick with Pot’s, and just find something that doesn’t have terrible imbalance.
I use an old Creek OBH-12 and a couple of Relay based passive pre’s I made up when I need remote volume comntrol.
The gold point is a stepped attenuator, and can’t really have any channel imbalance.
But for what your doing the Schiit one is probably more than adequate.
I gave this a try, but didn’t find it to be transparent in my system. I’ve had good experience with Goldpoint, although I have no current need for a passive pre.
Ok that’s good to know thanks for sharing!
I’ll start with the speaker connected to my Rockna but might need to move things around later so I’ll keep that in mind.
Listened for a few hours today with my Genelec G Threes at my desk. They’re connected straight to my Rockna Wavedream with the Auralic Aries G1 as the source (with Roon).
I’ve never had speakers of this quality on my desk and listening nearfield like that.
It was honestly an eye and ear opening experience. That’s not the first time I’ve used that term here.
Three months ago I started my return to 2ch after a similar shaking experience with a cheap system I assembled from parts that just lay around the house that suddenly reminded me how fun and different speakers are compared to headphones. I’ve been far and away from speakers for too long.
That led me to getting a new/better integrated, new tower speakers and two subs.
Today I looked at them and asked myself “why?”. It was so easy with the active monitors and sounded really amazing. Sure they can use a subwoofer if I really want to get that chest beating sensation but even without them the clear, enveloping sound coming out of the genelecs was just mesmerizing. Stage size was limited to my desk but instruments placement was great, it had depth and height. Speed of moving sounds from left to right in electronic music was accurate and clear. Psychedelic trance music is partially created to mess up with your mind a bit, raise your energy levels to the maximum or take you on a journey when you’re under the influence of some nice consciousness altering stuff. Suddenly it was easier to really understand the artist’s intentions. Maybe that’s why I gravitated to headphones for a long time, it’s much easier (I think) to get it right for that sound.
That “why?” moment was so fun and depressing at the same time lol
Yeah these monitors are active Class D amped (although completely analog and done the right way) but damn do they sound good. And yes I haven’t treated the room yet and maybe I can spend even more hours on speakers placement but should I really?
Fuck this left me confused.
We keep talking about downsizing philosophies, finding the right gear for your preferences and use cases, and most importantly the importance of trying stuff and listening at home and gaining more experiences. I wonder how many more like today I’ll have. And why did it have to happen again so fast.
Let’s see where my gear is at in three months from now. You bet I’m already reconsidering everything.
