Eyediver: If you go with Merlin, you will need to replace your entire system. Bobby insists on Cardas cables, it used to be Joule electronics, etc. It seems as though his speakers are voiced in such a way that they only sound "right" with certain -- and expensive -- equipment. That always struck me as odd, but that's the reality. They're also lacking in coherence. I think you can do a lot better for less money. (Bobby certainly doesn't skimp on the quality of the stuff he puts into the boxes, and that is reflected in the price.)
You might want to check out Von Schweikert, Spendor and Totem's The One. There are lots of good choices out there. |
Thanks so much for the detailed response. So adjusting the tightness of the screws holding the tweeter in place, changing batteries in the BAM, using lead-free solder and removing the tiny amount of lead contained in the drivers has led to a $6,000 increase in price and a night and day difference in the VSM's sound. Well, those and the other tweaks you mentioned. That certainly works for me. I'm glad so many people feel the same way and are willing to spend $11,500 plus another $20,000 to $30,000 for the recommended cables and electronics. Dedication and passion deserve to be rewarded. |
I had the VSM SE and used all Cardas cables along with an Audio Research LS25 preamp and various amps, including the ARC VT100, the VT100MKII, a Rowland Model 2 and Rowland Model 10. When I switched to the Dunlavy SC-IV/A it was a HUGE improvement. Bobby told me my amp and preamp were not good matches for the Merlin. Anyway, the room wasn't the problem -- and it was not heavily damped.
So, Marty, please tell us about your associated equipment. Also, are you a fan of pro audio gear? I get the impression that you are, and that's an entirely different world compared to the refinement that I seek in a strictly two-channel system.
From what you write, it's doubtful that you've heard a phase- and time-coherent speaker -- like the Dunlavy, Vandersteen, Thiel or Von Schweikert. These speakers truly disappear. When I had the Merlins, a non-audio friend (but a music lover) said he could hear the tweeter and midrange/woofer drivers distinctly (separately). That's not a good thing.
I have nothing but praise for Bobby's commitment to excellence and his customer service. I just think he's pushed a small two-way design to its limit -- plus you can do a lot better for less money. I'd look to Totem for openers. |
Bobby: It's still a speaker that isn't phase- and time-coherent. Plus you equalize it to achieve your desired results and upgrade it continuously, making all previous models virtually worthless in the audio world. Also, the cost is prohibitive compared to the competition. Be totally objective and listen to a pair of Totem Arros -- at about 1/10th of the price. Then ask yourself if your speaker represents a good value.
The ARC LS25 was actually highly regarded and still is by many members of Audiogon.
Again, your passion is admirable, but the speakers you made many years ago were better. |
Marty: Thanks for the thoughtful response. My system consists of a Wadia 861SE with Steve Huntley's Statement upgrade -- about as good as it gets for anything close to the money -- an ARC VS115 amp, Acoustic Zen interconnects and speaker cables and a pair of Von Schweikert VR-4Srs. I also use a REL Stadium III crossed over at about 27 hertz and have a pair of Totem Arros and Dunlavy SC-II's as backup speakers.
Incidentally, the Dunlavy SC-IV/A was infinitely better than the SC-IV. I wish I had kept mine. There's no emphasis in the bass region, which is evident by measurement and by listening.
Finally, accuracy isn't a matter of personal taste. A system is either accurate or it isn't, and not all people are qualified to judge accuracy. Granted, no system is 100 percent accurate -- meaning true to the source -- but the degrees of deviation vary considerably. To just dismiss this all as a matter of personal opinion is fine, but that's not the goal of a true audiophile. |
Marty: Frequency response is just half of the equation. The other half is phase- and time-coherency. Bobby's latest designs may in fact be a lot better than the speakers I owned, but I wouldn't be willing to spend $10,000 or more to find out. You're still limited by the basic design in terms of dynamic capability and coherency. Like it or not, but properly designed large speaker systems simply have greater capabilities. This may not matter if you have a small room, prefer intimacy and don't care about a sense of realism. |
Marty: Thanks a lot, but I think Bobby's last post covers everything. By the way, do you still own a pair of Merlin speakers? If so, what do you use with them? Thanks for sharing. |
Marty: No offense, but unless you've published papers in peer-reviewed journals, I don't think there's a whole lot you can teach me about audio. I've been at this a long time, have heard hundreds of high-end systems and am a trained musician. I have a pretty good idea of what live acoustic music is supposed to sound like.
Your comment about the REL sub is totally unfounded, for example, as REL used to make a fine product. My Von Schweikerts operate full range and have plenty of dynamic capability. REL doesn't use a crossover between the sub and the main speakers. I've gone that route with other subs and hated the results.
My guess is that you prefer a pro audio high impact kind of sound instead of the refinement and purity that I demand. To each his own.
As for Eyediver, the Totem Arro is hard to beat for about $800 used. It is simply amazing at its price and in some ways makes it hard to justify purchasing speakers costing a lot more. |
Bobby: Aren't your speakers using the same drivers -- or drivers that are extremely similar -- to the ones I had in the late 1990s? If not, how are they different? And aren't the cabinets pretty much identical? If not, how are they different?
Also, when I purchased a pair of VSM SE's from one of your dealers, you both knew what preamp and amp (ARC -- hardly garbage) I was using and didn't bother to tell me that it wouldn't sound good. I'm not sure who you're referring to when you say "mean spirited comments." It certainly isn't me, and none of this is personal. |
So it appears as though Marty no longer owns a pair of Merlin speakers. I wonder why that is. |
Bobby: You're incredibly defensive for having done this for such a long time. I would think you would have developed a bit thicker skin. Besides, I'm certainly not being mean spirited, and you're certainly not answering my questions about the drivers and the cabinet. So it must be a new crossover that has dramatically changed the sound of your speakers, right? While you are convinced that the sound of the latest generation -- how many iterations is it again, I've lost count? -- is a night and day improvement, many trained ears probably wouldn't hear much if any difference.
I've been out of the house where the Dunlavy SC-IV/A stomped the VSM SE for many years. The Von Schweikerts have sounded fantastic in two houses, as did the Dunlavys.
If you reread my posts, you'll see that I have not made this personal. I just think your product costs too much for what it delivers, plus it takes at least $20,000 to $30,000 in associated gear to sound "right." These days, that's difficult for some people to justify.
By the way, is the recessed midrange of the ARC preamps something that you have measured? I'd like to see those measurements. You didn't like the ARC VT100MKII amp, either. And I guess the Rowland Models 2 and 10 and the ARC 100.2 were at fault, too. |
Bobby: I'll drop this when you do. First, my room wasn't big at all. It was about 13 by 20. Is that big? Also, I'm not losing my cool at all, but you seem to be. And you simply refuse to answer my questions about drivers, crossovers and cabinets. Is that because they're basically the same with some minor tweaks that you think are huge? Maybe that's not the case, but you won't answer my question so no one will ever know.
As for preferences, I love the Totem Arro. Is that a huge speaker with lots of drivers? Is the Dunlavy SC-II? Hardly. And I'm certainly not trying to fill a football field with sound. That's just an attempt to misrepresent what I've said. I listen almost exclusively to acoustic music and value neutrality, refinement and coherency.
Enjoy your weekend. |
Yeah, where's Mr. T when you really need him? He can derail a thread with the best of them. But then his threads are derailed from the beginning.
Eyediver is learning that some people take this very seriously, as they should considering the kind of investment that can be involved. Besides, I think his question has already been answered. |
Of course. My mistake. It's been so many posts ago that I had forgotten that the VSMs are one of his many pairs of speakers. I'm surprised he hasn't had to replace that horrible ARC LS25. |
Good reviews, which these days are a dime a dozen, and your enthusiasm are what got me to buy a pair of VSM SE's in the first place. While they weren't by any means terrible speakers, they never lived up to the promise -- at least not for me.
So I don't care if you point me to a dozen rave reviews, which are often the result of buying ads and being popular with writers and publishers as much as anything else.
Also, I forgot to mention that another preamp I had with the Merlins was the Levinson 380. When I replaced it with the ARC LS25, you said it was an improvement over the Levinson. It was, but I guess it still wasn't what's needed to make the Merlins sing. That's what I was referring to when I entered this thread. The Merlin speakers are incredibly fussy about associated gear. If that's not the case anymore, I stand corrected.
So while you make a generous offer for me to call you on a holiday weekend, I think I'll pass. I do wish, however, that you would tell everyone about how exactly the drivers, crossover and cabinets differ from the ones I had in 1998. I'm sure you can summarize.
And, finally, I have often praised you as an individual for your passion, the quality of the components and the build quality of your speakers, and your customer service. I don't know of any better. Thank you. |
Marty: You are so wise and knowledgeable. That must be why you were so baffled by my putting phase- and time-coherent speakers like Thiel, Dunlavy and Vandersteen in the same category. And your treatise on first-order crossovers is something that needs to be studied by Jim Thiel and Richard Vandersteen. It's just a shame that John Dunlavy isn't still around to learn from you. Please let me know when you expect to have your next paper published. |
Marty: They obviously didn't teach you English. Master's needs an apostrophe "s," LA-based should be hyphenated and what's the name of that school again? Also, was the cathedral or Passau the largest such instrument? Oh. You meant the organ. You have yet to show me where I'm wrong, except that you still have a pair of Merlin speakers. I had forgotten that tidbit because I was bored to death with your drivel. |
Marty: Did you even go to school? Based on your posts and your writing prowess I tend to doubt it. Your ability to misinterpret is almost as impressive as your arrogance. I never claimed that you said "1st order crossovers were worse than any other design." Comprehension clearly isn't one of your strengths.
Perhaps you should go into your office, your gym, your living room, your sauna -- you have so many systems -- and just kick back and enjoy listening to Madonna -- or whatever it is you use to evaluate a system. Also, I clearly state that I like the Totem Arro a lot, and I am fully aware that it does not employ a first-order crossover design. Over several decades, though, I tend to gravitate to speakers that do because they tend to capture the realism a bit better. Some of the most brilliant speaker designers of our time have believed that, too.
I'll be happy to read what Linkwietz has written, but what matters most can only be judged by how a speaker sounds. I think you can agree on that. Perhaps you should enter the speaker industry. You obviously know so much about it. |
Marty: I'm not kidding. You are a moron. You weren't taking liberties with the English language. You're sloppy and you obviously don't know better. You can be thankful people edit -- probably heavily -- anything you may have "authored."
The only pattern I see is that you think you know a lot more than you will ever know about most things in life. My conjectures were merely intended to reinforce that fact, which was made evident by your posts. It's called sarcasm.
Well, I have already wasted too much time on you. Enjoy your system. |
