[vinnievidi]

 
My trusty vintage Pioneer stereo is finally on the outs, which puts me in the market for a new setup.  I was going to have it repaired, but the cost of the repair is the same as a new stereo receiver.  Also, I am looking to upgrade my speakers.  My total budget is about $1000, so I thought that maybe I should just go to a computer-based setup instead. 
 
I was looking into a pair of A5s + the Audioengine sub.  They would be connected to a Pro-Ject USB Box DAC (will be upgraded later) and an iMac.  Also, I have a Turntable, which I was thinking of passing through the iMac, or sending directly from the phono preamp to the A5s.  A good headphone source is not a factor, I have that covered.  
 
The reason I was thinking of abandoning the receiver idea is twofold: my listening area is quite small (300 sqf --- a typical size for a basic Manhattan living room), and my wife doesn't want too many objects "cluttering" the space (though she will accept the HK 3940 stereo receiver or the Pioneer Elite SX-A9-J, as she likes their looks).
 
This will be my primary setup, so it will need to fill the space and offer decent stereo separation from across the room.  So I guess my question is if anyone can offer advice or suggestions on whether I should go with the AudioEngine setup or look into something different. 
 
I mainly listen to classical, with the occasional Coltrane and Sigur Ros thrown in now and again.
 
Thanks for any advice.  

 

[mkoskenoja]

 
As a long time music/audio lover I was shocked at how good the A5's sound. For $345 they are a screaming bargain so yes, you should buy them.

 

To start I wouldn't bother with the sub as they bass is quite good. I have owned Totem Staffs, two pairs of Magnepans, Paradigm Studio 40's and smallish Mission and PSB bookshelfs so I have an idea about good but not super deep bass sounds.  

 

 

I have the A5's in my 12x14 home office, placed 10' from the rear wall, sitting on a coffee table, six feet in front of my desk, with Vibrapods underneath the speakers. They are angled upwards by the front Vibrapods. I use the AE W2 iPod wireless device (my wife likes to use this with her iPod as well) and/or a cable connected to a hotaudio USB DAC that connects to my laptop. I listen to 80% classical (concertos and symphonies) and find the sound very satisfying.

 

I had experimented a lot with placement and found the rear ported design problematic unless I placed the speakers away from the back as well as side walls. Tilting them upwards also made a big improvement in the sound. If I had them on speakers stands or a higher sofa-type table I am sure tilting them upwards would not have been necessary.

 

If you can manage the 6 to 12" inches the speakers need to be from the wall then I would suggest buying them. 

 

[vinnievidi]

Mkoskenoja:
 
Thanks for the reply.  I just checked Audioengine's website and it looks like they have a pretty generous trial/return policy.  With such a policy, and given your experience with the A5s, I think that I can take the plunge with little regret.  
 
I will be placing the monitors on stands (24" lead shot-fulled) and will keep in mind what you said about placement from the wall. I will also take your advice about forgoing the sub... for now.   I am coming off of KEF iQ30s, which I am happy with and seem to have a similar frequency response to the A5 (on paper that is).  I'll give them some time and see if I feel something is lacking. 
 
Worse case scenario is that I have the A5s for a week or two and then send them back (with only a loss in shipping and time spent at my inefficient local post office).  Second worse case scenario is that I breakdown and buy a sub from Aperion or HSU to fill-in the lower registers.
 
As you listen to a lot of symphonic works like me—actually, I mainly listen to chamber music and opera—do you find that the A5s give a good sense of space and depth?  Also, do you think that as they are engineered for digital music reproduction that they will sound equally as good with the turntable?
 
Thanks again, you were most helpful.
 

 

[Townyj]

Oh how i want some KEF iQ30's I have been looking at them.. or im going to head for some balanced monitors as my next upgrade. Rokit Rp5's.

 
Quote:

Mkoskenoja:
 
Thanks for the reply.  I just checked Audioengine's website and it looks like they have a pretty generous trial/return policy.  With such a policy, and given your experience with the A5s, I think that I can take the plunge with little regret.  
 
I will be placing the monitors on stands (24" lead shot-fulled) and will keep in mind what you said about placement from the wall. I will also take your advice about forgoing the sub... for now.   I am coming off of KEF iQ30s, which I am happy with and seem to have a similar frequency response to the A5 (on paper that is).  I'll give them some time and see if I feel something is lacking. 
 
Worse case scenario is that I have the A5s for a week or two and then send them back (with only a loss in shipping and time spent at my inefficient local post office).  Second worse case scenario is that I breakdown and buy a sub from Aperion or HSU to fill-in the lower registers.
 
As you listen to a lot of symphonic works like me—actually, I mainly listen to chamber music and opera—do you find that the A5s give a good sense of space and depth?  Also, do you think that as they are engineered for digital music reproduction that they will sound equally as good with the turntable?
 
Thanks again, you were most helpful.
 

 

[mkoskenoja]

You might consider something like this-http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=300-383 That way you could make use of your existing speakers.
 
My A5's are only 4 feet apart and I sit 8 feet away or so. Therefore the space and depth image is not as good as they could be. I will buy some stands at some point that will help in that regard.
 
I think the A5's will sound as good as the source material permits regardless of whether the sound comes from lossless MP3's on an iPod, a CD or a turntable.  I have just listened to CD's of "Kind of Blue" and "New York Reunion" by  McCoy Tyner-they both sound superb. 

 

[vinnievidi]

Wow, that little amp seems pretty cool.  I do really like the way the KEFs sound.  They aren't too bad through the old Pioneer, but they truly sounded the best when they were driven by my previous Rotel preamp/NAD amp setup (sadly, I was asked to sell this configuration when I went off to grad school).
 
 
I think that I'll head to J&R when I get back to the CIty next week.  Maybe they'll let me check out the A5s in their listening room before taking them home to audition.  Again, worst case is that I return them after two weeks and start looking into "conventional" sources again.
 
Thanks for all the advice.  You helped me get passed the my indecision over whether to try the A5s or not. 

 

[vinnievidi]

Well, I spent a week with the A5 and here are my thoughts:
 
Sound-wise—especially in a small space—they are really fantastic for the price.  You were right about not really needing a sub for casual listening, but I think adding one would make the A5 set up sound amazing for movies and large symphonies.  
 
Connection-wise, the A5 is a deal breaker. I tried three ways to connect all of my sources:
 
(1)  the iMac, a turntable preamp, and a FM tuner (for NPR and the local classical station, WQXR) attached to the speakers via RAC splitters.  Using all of the splitters in option (1) was just too much of a mess and not very practical.  On the plus side, with option (1) we were able to listen to the radio or TT without interruption when the iMac was doing heavy processing.  
 
(2) running the TT preamp through the iMac's line-in (which worked well) and using internet radio.  This only required 1 lead to the speakers.  Option (2) was convenient in one sense, but inconvenient in that we were completely reliant on the iMac.  This especially became a problem when my wife (who is a designer) would take her work home and use some pretty intensive programs.  
 
(3) connecting all of the sources to my old and dying receiver, then connecting the A5 to the receiver's pre-out.  This was by far the most convenient, for connection, selection, and FM tuner reasons. Yet since the receiver is on its way out, I would soon have to buy a new preamp or some sort of switching device.  In light of this, I will probably just return the A5s and get a new receiver.  
 
This was an interesting experiment.  If I already had a preamp/switching device I would kept the A5s without question.  But seeing as I already have decent speakers, a new receiver is probably the most practical way to go.
 
 
If I needed speakers for the iMac alone (not multiple sources) I wouldn't think twice about getting the A5.  For the cost, they are pretty exceptional.  
 
 
Thanks to all that gave their input.  You were most helpful.
 

 

[mkoskenoja]

Thanks for the update

 
 
Too bad the A5's didn't work out for you but having to connect a turntable made a new integrated amp/receiver the best choice for you. You might want to check audiogon or craiglists for good used 2 channel products (like NAD) for cheap prices. They will have a phono input whereas new receivers might not.

 

[Operandi]

How do the A5s compare with the KEFs?

 

[vinnievidi]

Well, a lot depends on what the KEFs are connected to.  I can only offer a comparison of the A5s connected to an iMac and the KEFs connected to a vintage Pioneer (and what I can remember of them connected to the Rotel/NAD).
 
The KEFs in both cases were warmer. To my ears they had cleaner highs and smoother bottom end; but they really shinned in the mids.  The KEFs had more punch—or tighter mid bass—connected to the R/N than with the Pioneer.  That may be because the NAD was a 150 wpc high current amp and the Pioneer is 35 wpc and reaching the end of its 36-year life... I really have no idea.  I'm not that technically minded when it comes to wattage, voltage, etc.
 
The A5s (again, to my ears) had more of a slight 'V' shaped sound signature compared to the KEFs; though the mids were not too recessed... maybe I should have made it a lowercase 'v'.  This is not to say the A5s are sterile sounding.  On the contrary, they are pretty involving, but are probably tuned for a modern audience and to present music in an exciting way (which they do on all accounts).  The KEFs connected to the R/N had a solid mid bass kick, but nothing like the A5s—when pushed, the A5s really hit you in the chest.  
 
The A5s seemed to be more consistent (punchy bass, clean highs) at low volumes when compared to the KEFs connected to the receiver.  Again, that may be because of the receiver... I don't know.  But the A5s were more enjoyable for low-level nighttime listening.    
 
If I had to equate each set of speakers to a pair of headphones (pardon the loose analogy): the KEFs would be something like a pair of Sennheiser HD600 to the A5's Grado RS1.  
 
 
I hope this makes sense.  I don't have the ability to AB test at the moment so all of this is from memory.

 

[Operandi]

Interesting comparison it seems like the KEFs are probably the better and more accurate speaker.  Not surprising considering the A5s cost, and the fact they include the amps.
 
A friend of mine has the iQ3s which I think is the previous model to the iQ30s but seems to be nearly the same speaker.  We didn't do a head to head comparison with my TriTrix MTs (DIY design) but I remember thinking the KEFs had a bit of "v" profile to their sound as they seemed to drop a bit of midrange detail that was obvious on the TriTrix (the TriTrix have a very flat response), other than that they seemed like nice speakers.

 

[vinnievidi]

Interesting. The sound that I am recalling from the KEF may have much to do with the receiver. Either way, I thought that in comparison with the A5 they had more mid presence.

 

[Operandi]

Yeah we meant to do a head to head comparison to really hear all the differences in the speakers but never got around to it.  Both are good speakers and I think the major differences are due to how they are voiced in the crossover which made the TriTrix sound more engaging on good recordings but might have been less forgiving on really bad stuff (one of the things we didn't get to test).
 
Generally speaking there isn't too much of a difference between good amps (your Pioneer might have on its way out) but it would have been interesting to try his KEFs with my Adcom since he was only using a nuForce Icon which is a lot less power than my Adcom. 

 

[vinnievidi]

Quote:

Yeah we meant to do a head to head comparison to really hear all the differences in the speakers but never got around to it.  Both are good speakers and I think the major differences are due to how they are voiced in the crossover which made the TriTrix sound more engaging on good recordings but might have been less forgiving on really bad stuff (one of the things we didn't get to test).
 
Generally speaking there isn't too much of a difference between good amps (your Pioneer might have on its way out) but it would have been interesting to try his KEFs with my Adcom since he was only using a nuForce Icon which is a lot less power than my Adcom. 

 
Just a question to clear up some confusion on my part: ceteris paribus (all other things being equal) will a higher wattage amp produce better performance out of a pair of speakers at low and moderate volumes?  I don't doubt that my NAD amp was significantly better than the Pioneer, but neither was driven hard at all (even with the 35 wpc Pioneer I never go past 8 o'clock).   
 

 

[BaboonGuy]

subbed for interest