Monitor Audio Gold 300 loudspeaker Page 2

The speakers were single-wired, and the spikes weren't used. (The speakers sat on a large rug but with hardware floors underneath.) The provided grilles remained in the shipping boxes. All the source material was from CD.

Listening
Pomp & Pipes, a 1994 Reference Recordings disc (CD, RR-58CD) recorded by Keith Johnson at the Meyerson Symphony Center in Dallas, combines that hall's powerful organ with the Dallas Wind Symphony conducted by the legendary Frederick Fennell. It includes a range of showpieces with astonishing dynamic range. They're not all gems, but the closing number, Weinberger's Polka and Fugue from the opera Schwanda the Bagpiper, certainly is. It's also a potential system killer. As I gingerly increased the volume to a level at least 3dB higher than I find comfortable, the Monitor Audio Gold 300s hung in there. There was some strain on the loudest bits, but it could have just as easily originated from the rest of the system, from my room, or from my ears. I'd be lying if I stated that the deep bass knocked me off my chair; in a room of this size I haven't yet reviewed a full-range speaker that will do that. But running full range and unaided by a subwoofer, it did nearly as effective a job as it did when I briefly fired up my Revel B15 sub to join in the fun. (The sub was left off for the remainder of my listening.)

The same was true of other bass showcases. The "Napalm for Breakfast" cut on The Apocalypse Now Sessions (CD, Rykodisc RCD 10109) offers a genuine bass challenge. In its final moments, there's a deep bass growl that holds for a few seconds then drops in pitch to what appears to be roughly an octave lower. Through the Gold 300s the drop was clean, powerful, and clearly differentiated from the frequency where it began. Some speakers blur this bass passage, but there was no overhang from the Monitor Audios. To the extent that the bass here wasn't subwoofer-like—and it wasn't—I wasn't troubled by the loss. And even though my room still hypes the mid and upper-bass ranges somewhat (confirmed by measurements), I heard no muddiness at all.

1019monaud.2

But with this recording the Gold 300s had more than just bass to feast on. The album, made by a group that called itself the Rhythm Devils—led by Mickey Hart, who also produced the recording—arose from sessions held in the late 1970s to enhance the soundtrack of the movie. It includes some of the sounds that can be heard in the film, plus others that didn't make the cut. It's pure percussion with no piano or xylophone (both technically percussion) to cheat-in a melodic line for the musicians to work around. Most of it was clearly improv and filled with both fine and big-boned detail, presented with first-rate soundstaging and depth. The Monitor Audios captured it all spectacularly well.

The original Broadway cast recording of The Lion King (CD, Walt Disney/WEA 60802-7) isn't, overall, a particularly great recording. But parts of it, particularly the opening tracks, position the soloists and musicians at various points across the stage. The Gold 300s did a superb job of precisely locating these players in both width and (at least insofar as the recording allows) depth. The center channel of my setup was of course idle throughout this review, but from my center seat, on this recording I could easily believe it was on. Center vocalists, and those in the otherwise empty space just left and right of center, were locked firmly into place.

I have no idea what Tholen's album Sternklang (CD, Cyclic Law, 20th Cycle) is trying to say. It's not really music, though the definition of music has been watered down considerably in recent decades. Music or not, this is basically a single, long track of low-frequency electronica, droning on constantly and punctuated by electronic sparks and other eruptions of various sorts. I saw a reference to it online, where it was recommended as a good test for subwoofers. But it would be equally at home as dance music for a zombie rave. Why bring it up here? Because the low-frequency drone, while well shy of subwoofer territory, could convince many listeners otherwise. On the Monitor Audios, it filled every corner of the room, with the bass and higher frequency highlights seemingly coming from anywhere and everywhere.

I could have been convinced that surrounds were involved, but they weren't. The effect was even more enveloping than any two surrounds might have provided. Whoever produced this oddity, it was seriously playing with phase. I'm not a big believer in imaging outside the boundaries of the left and right speakers, unless it's a phasing thing in the source material or an oddity in the room. While the Gold 300s never suggested a soundstage extending beyond them to the left and right on any other material, they certainly did a mind-blowing job of it here.

1019monaud.white

Live concert recordings of pop music can be a mixed bag, but Dead Can Dance's In Concert (CD, PIAS57CD) certainly isn't. The low end was solid: From my listening position the warble tones on the first Stereophile Test CD (STPH 002-2) were still strong at 50Hz, and while certainly not powerful at 31Hz were still audible. And the top end on this recording vividly demonstrated the strengths of the Gold 300's MPD tweeter. While not "ruthlessly revealing," it wasn't a wallflower either. The top end was delicate, open, airy, and detailed. This was clearly evident on a wide range of other recordings as well, including Mokave: Afrique (CD, AudioQuest Music AQ-CD1024) and The All Star Percussion Ensemble (CD, Golden String & Company GS CD005). Nor did the Gold 300's midrange leave me anything to criticize. It was free of any obvious coloration and did a superb job on emale vocals, including favorites such as Jennifer Warnes' Famous Blue Raincoat (CD, Cypress Records YD 0100/DX 3182), Loreena McKennitt's Nights from the Alhambra (3 CDs, Verve), and Sinne Eeg and Thomas Fonnesbaek's Eeg Fonnesbaek (CD, Stunt Records STUCD 15082). The Gold 300's imaging, soundstage depth, and timbral neutrality strengths were clearly evident.

Comparisons
Monitor Audio's Silver 10s aren't obvious candidates for a comparison test against the Gold 300s. As noted earlier, they're one generation removed from the latest equivalent in the Silver Series, the Silver 500s (which I haven't heard), and they are, of course, significantly less expensive than the Gold 300s. But they're what I have on hand, and I'm intimately familiar with them.

It should surprise no one that, at 2.5 times the Silver 10's price, the Gold 300 isn't 2.5 times better: The world doesn't work that way. The differences are significant but far from crushing. The Gold 300s were more delicate and refined in the midrange and highs — and despite in-room measurements that showed the pricier speaker's treble to be lower in level (see fig.2 in "In-Room Measurements" sidebar), particularly at 10kHz, they sounded a trace more open and airy than the Silver 10s.

The room responses of both speakers show an elevation in the midand upper bass, a characteristic of my room that so far only room EQ can cure. No room EQ was used here, but see my comments on using Anthem's ARC on the Silver 10s in my 2018 Stereophile review of the Anthem STR integrated amplifier. Bass irregularities are endemic to all domestic spaces, though the specific issues will vary from room to room. But the bass on the Silver 10s, while subjectively a bit more powerful than on the Gold 300s and extending about as low, was less tight and tuneful. The in-room mid and upper bass on the Silver 10s, in the same speaker and listener locations, was roughly 4dB higher than from the Gold 300s. This will have the additional effect of reducing the subjective treble on the Silver 10s, even though it measures higher than that of the Gold 300s. The ear responds to the entire frequency balance top to bottom. This is why some automated room EQ can leave the audible result sounding far too lean when it flattens the bass while barely touching the top end.

Conclusions
The Gold 300s were a consistent delight on a wide range of program material. Yes, they're expensive, but in today's high-end loudspeaker market you can spend a lot more and get much less. The Gold 300s earn a serious recommendation and deserve an extended audition.

1 See here and here.

COMPANY INFO
Kevro International
US distributor: Monitor Audio USA
902 McKay Road, Suite 4
Pickering, ON L1W 3X8, Canada
ARTICLE CONTENTS

COMMENTS
beave's picture

From the review: "The design's benefits are a largely resistive load, no significant inductance (dome tweeters have an inductive voice-coil that complicates crossover design)..."

From the measurements: "...the phase angle exceeds +40° above 10kHz, presumably due to the inductance of the MPD tweeter's drive system."

JRT's picture

Air Motion Transformer tweeters exhibit flat resistive impedance response with respect to frequency in the audible frequency range. Not sure about impedance a decade or two higher.

Look at the data sheets of the Dayton Audio AMT series of tweeters.

http://www.daytonaudio.com/index.php/loudspeaker-components/loudspeaker-drivers-by-series/amt-series.html

beave's picture

That's what the review says.

But the measurements show a significant phase angle in the impedance in the highest frequencies.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

That significant phase angle you are mentioning (above 10 Khz) is not the region of the cone upper midrange frequency ........ It is in the MPD ribbon tweeter frequency range :-) .........

beave's picture

My post referenced the tweeter, not the midrange.

JRT's picture

I'm not sure what they might be doing in the crossover in the tweeter's filter network to clean up the tweeter's wave guide response, and what they might be letting happen in the ultrasonics to reduce component count. It does seem to exhibit a high Q low pass rolloff in the top octave, the high Q peak providing a little lift and associated rininging, the peak visible in figures 4 and 5. The associated peaking filter in that top octave shows as a sag in the rising impedance curve in figure 1.

edit: It was pointed out to me that JA1's measurements include some resonance present in the top octave in all of his loudspeaker measurements, and that seems to be obfuscating the behavior of the low pass here.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

There is a little peak at appox. 16 to 18 Khz region in the frequency response, but it is not anything significant ........ I have seen worse 'oil can resonance' peaks and dips in the frequency response of some metal dome tweeters ....... But those peaks and dips are usually above 20 Khz :-) ......

JRT's picture

With exception of a slight psychoacoustic dip in the range of 2kHz to 4.5_kHz, the response appears to be within a few dB of nominal above the baffle edge diffraction step and associated correction.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

That is the famous 'BBC dip' in that frequency ....... But that dip is not much in this speaker ....... Usually that dip is purposefully engineered to be -5 db or more :-) .......

JRT's picture

Psychoacoustic dip at the link:

https://www.linkwitzlab.com/models.htm#H

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Yes .... Your reference mentions the name 'H.D Harwood, BBC research department 1976' ....... Anyway, that dip is popularly known as 'BBC dip' :-) ........

beave's picture

I see a similar response in the datasheets for the drivers you linked to previously from Dayton Audio. I think it's inherent in the driver and not due to any crossover design.

But I don't see any ringing in figure 9. Isn't that little black slice always there in JA's plots and something he has mentioned as being the line rate of his monitor?

JRT's picture

...for pointing out the issue of the monitor.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Also, that significant phase angle is not in the crossover region between upper midrange and MPD tweeter, which is 3 Khz :-) .........

JRT's picture

Look in the top octave, not the crossover frequency. They are shaping response up there.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

True ..... There is significant drop-off of FR, say from above 18 to 19 Khz ....... I don't know whether that makes any significant audible difference ...... Look at the TJN's in-room FR measurements ........ There is a lot of drop-off of the FR in the top octave :-) .........

JRT's picture

If the high frequency low pass response exhibits high Q, then the associated peak near the corner of that low pass would provide some lift in the response, and there would be some ringing associated with that.

Note that graphics show eight curves while the keys at the bottom of each identify nine. Regardless that error in identifying curves, the graphics are good enough to show Q affecting peaking and ringing. The brown curves look like textbook 2nd order Butterworth (Q=0.7071) and the yellow curves look like textbook 2nd order Linkwitz-Riley (Q=0.5000).

Source of graphics: https://e2e.ti.com/blogs_/b/analogwire/archive/2015/06/12/is-your-op-amp-filter-ringing-look-at-q

edit: It was pointed out to me that JA1's computer monitor causes a problem that falsely shows some resonance present in the top octave in all of his loudspeaker measurements, and that seems to be obfuscating some of the behavior of the low pass here.

beave's picture

Again, as mentioned above, hasn't JA said that it's an artifact of his video monitor?

JRT's picture

I do appreciate that you pointed that out to me, but did not see your comment before this morning. My comment has been edited to reflect that problem associated with the monitor. I would not want to mislead anyone with erroneous observations.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

BTW ..... Hi-Fi News has reviewed the Monitor Audio Gold 100 bookshelf/stand-mount speakers (EISA award winner) which probably use similar type of tweeters ....... Hi-Fi News measurements show similar type of peak around 15-16 Khz, with a sharp drop-off of FR above 20 Khz :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

If you want to see how 'oil can resonance' looks like (which I mentioned above), see the Hi-Fi News measurements of KEF R11 (EISA award winner) ......... But, those peaks and dips are way above 20 Khz ...... KEF is one of the companies, which uses Aluminum domes for tweeters :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Another example ...... There seems to be some type of filter being used for high frequency roll-off for the GoldenEar speakers ....... GoldenEar also uses ribbon tweeters ....... Look at the FR measurements of GoldeEar Triton Reference by Hi-Fi News ......... There is a sharp drop-off of FR above 20 Khz :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Here comes the 'king' of all FR measurements ......... See Hi-Fi News measurements of Dali Callisto 6C ...... Nice 'BBC dip' in the presence region and a sharp drop-off above 20 Khz ...... Very 'dramatic' FR :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Interestingly TJN used +1 db boost in the treble frequency :-) .......

JRT's picture

Its a subjective choice in voicing the crossover.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Goes to show the usefulness of tone controls/EQ :-) ........

JRT's picture

Al₂O₃ aluminum oxide, aka Corundum, aka Alumina ceramic, and in single crystal natural gemstone or synthetic is Ruby and Sapphire.

Al₂O₃ is also the surface coating result of aluminum anodization.

https://sundoc.bibliothek.uni-halle.de/diss-online/04/04H055/t2.pdf

MIL-A-8625
Type I chromic acid anodizing
Type II sulphuric acid anodizing
Type III sulphuric acid hard anodizing

There are processes that can produce a significantly thicker anodize, and some might refer to that as ceramic coating. It probably sells better than anodized aluminum. The Alumina ceramic is more rigid and more brittle than the aluminum substrate. It is more difficult to get a consistent thick layer of Alumina on a thin substrate of aluminum of a controlled shape without breaking the resulting item, because it can be fragile. Ask anybody who suffered through breaking an Accuton diaphragm, not inexpensive.

https://accuton.com/en-home/produkte/lautsprecher/keramik

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Revel is one example company, which uses DCC (deep ceramic composite) Aluminum cones :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Additional note ........ The Beryllium dome tweeters used in Revel speakers show almost flat frequency response to 20 Khz :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Time for Stereophile review of Polk Audio Legend L800 floor-standing speakers, with SDA technology ..... About in the same price range, $6,000/pair ....... See S&V review :-) .......

ringmeraudioguy's picture

I don’t understand the above commenters, seemingly trying to show their knowledge of test results and exhibiting blatant, ‘I know better than you’ statements. Such pedantry is boring. Just listen to the music!!

Chris Gramer's picture

These "Monitor Audio Gold 300" speakers look markedly different than those being sold by Crutchfield. Does MA reuse model names for multiple generations of speakers?

Example:
https://www.crutchfield.com/p_893G300PB/Monitor-Audio-Gold-300-Piano-Black.html?cc=07&tp=185

Just wondering. Thanks!

beave's picture

The model under review here is the 5th generation of Monitor Audio's Gold series, so it's sometimes referred to as the Gold 300 5G.

The one in your Crutchfield link is the previous generation Gold 300 (although it was just known as the Gold 300, not the Gold 300 4G).

Usually Monitor Audio doesn't reuse model names for multiple generations of speakers. But in this case, they sort of did.

hdkeith's picture

I have been auditioning the Gold 300 and Silver 500 7G and I am struggling to justify the price delta. As pointed out at almost 3X the price it is not even double the performance. The strength of the Gold is the tweeter. I have spent hours going back and forth and on some track the Silver 500 seems to have tighter bass vs. the Gold being a tad more laid back. The Gold tweeter is amazing and strings are just so lifelike. the silver highs are a tad bright, maybe just becasue the Gold is so neutral. Most of the cost is the better cabinet with more reinforcement, but again, not sure it justifies 3X the cost. I would have zero hesitation if they dropped the mid/tweeter from the Gold in the Silver 500 and called it a Silver 700 and added $1K per speaker and I would pay it, but the difference in US is 3X which I can't really justify.

hdkeith's picture

I had auditioned these 3 times against Silver 500 7G and these are more refined with higher end due to the ribbon. Here in the US they are just too darn expensive. Here the Gold run about 3X the Silver 500 and most of that I am sure is the beefier cabinet and materials in the cabinet. I just can't bring myself to spend this much as much as I love their sound.

X