Cube Audio Nenuphar Single Driver Speaker (10 inch) TQWT Enclosure
----------------------------------------
Parameters (from Cube Audio):
Power: 40 W
Efficiency: 92 dB
Frequency response: 30Hz - 18kHz ( 6db)*
Dimensions: 30 x 50 x 105 cm
Weight: 40 Kg
Just to complicate things, I was reading back through the thread and came across toetapaudio's comment from a year ago (6/20/19): "We are getting great results driving the Cubes with Mola Mola Makua/Kaluga’s and look forward to trying Bakoon amplification soon with the Cubes." The Kaluga's output impedance is listed as <0.003 ohm with a damping factor >4000. www.mola-mola.nl/kaluga.php Go figure. |
Yes, it is high. Here is a link from FirstWatt on the F1: www.firstwatt.com/f1.html "It has both balanced and single-ended inputs. The input impedance is nominally 80 Kohm, and the output impedance is 80 ohms." And from the F1 manual: www.firstwatt.com/pdf/prod_f1_man.pdf "Input Impedance, unbalanced 50 Kohms, 8 ohm load Output impedance 80 ohms" In his 2004 review of the F-1, Dick Olsher wrote: "Current drive offers a major alternative to the speaker-amplifier interface. A transconductance amplifier is operated as a current source with a high source impedance relative to that of the speaker. The output impedance must also be linear and frequency independent. An ideal current source would possess an output impedance so large as to be considered infinite relative to that of the speaker. The F1's 80-ohm impedance is certainly adequate in this regard." |
The F1 and F2 amps really have output impedances that high? This seems impractical for use with most any speaker. 80. and 15. ohms? Is there a missing decimal point? Particularly elevated for a transistor amplifier. What would be Nelson Pass' rationale for those levels? The S.I.T.-1 and 2 at 4 ohm I can understand. Charles |
It is generally recognized that overdamping the Nenuphars is not a good idea. At 6moons Srajan wrote in his review of the First Watt SIT-3 about driving the Nenuphars: "...you won't be surprised to learn that the SIT-1 and SIT-3 were the perfect antidotes; better than the F5 and F7, very much better than the Pass Labs XA-30.8, radically superior to 200-watt class A/B specimens of the 1Mhz ultra-bandwidth persuasion." As an example of the last, the Soulution 501 has a damping factor of 10,000 (which would correspond to an output impedance of 0.0001 ohms). The Mola Mola, a class D amp, has an output impedance of 0.003 while the Bryston 4B clocks in at 0.016 ohms. Still too low to be of interest. Moving on to a couple of tube amps, the Audio Research VT80 has an output impedance of 0.12 while the Aesthetic Atlas is 0.25. With OTL amps, the LTA Z10 impedance is 1.2 ohms and their Ultralinear is at 1.6 ohms. Looking at the solid state amps that Sjaran ranked we see a consistent pattern: SIT-1 4 ohms SIT-3 0.26 ohms F-5 0.025 ohms F-7 0.01 ohms Pass XA 30.8 0.007 ohms Here are the output impedances of the First Watt stable: F-1 80 ohms F-2 15 ohms SIT-1 4 ohms SIT-2 4 ohms J-2 0.4 ohms SIT-3 0.26 ohms F-4 0.2 ohms F-3 0.12 ohms F-6 0.06 ohms M-2 0.05 ohms F-5 0.025 ohms F-7 0.01 ohms Which leads to the exit question: Has anyone listened to the F-1 or F-2 with the Nenuphars? Robert |
@rwpollock Obviously it's *best* to just let the speaker designer make all the decisions for you, but there are a lot of subwoofer options out there that have all the basic features of the BASiS subs. The full range driver is indeed "rocket science-ish", but looking at the subs makes me think there are plenty of other more cost effective solutions that might work just fine. The pandemic has hit almost all of us, so I'm also on long delay, but I'm still thinking about building the sealed box diy version of their monitors and pairing with my existing subs (the 2 x 12" bass units of Coincident PREs) and subwoofer amplifiers (Dayton audio SA1000 monoblocks). Won't look as pretty and may not sound quite as good, but it should be close at the worst. |
Robert and Robert, thanks for your responses. If anyone owns / has had ears on the Nenuphar BASiS, please post. RY: given the costs (and performance), that makes sense... as well as room sizes in the UK and Europe. My move has been seriously postponed due to the current pandemic. Probably a year out now. It will be interesting what I end up with, listening room wise...and whether I will be able to try out the BASiS or an alternative future offering from Cube Audio. |
Robert, that was slightly’ tongue in cheek’...though it is a simpler (and wishful) solution to the previous few posts on the topic. : ) BTW, have you had a chance to hear the BASiS units? If so, thoughts? Like you, I’m impressed with low frequency level, performance and quality from the ’standalone’ Nenuphar. |
Reference coupling to Townshend Podiums. This is a good thing I believe but difficult to achieve in practice. At the moment I have only gone as far as fixing down the cups with industrial double sided tape to the Podiums to stop sliding. It also means I can change from 10 to 8 inch Nenuphar’s using the same Podiums by detaching the cups and repositioning. Any material change under the speakers ( or under any piece of equipment for that matter) will change the sound of course. If I were to make new block feet, out of wood for example, then I would make use of the existing threaded inserts in the speaker bottom and fix them using counterbored threaded bolts. The feet would then be fixed to the Podiums with DS tape or even better ( but more extreme) drilling a hole and fixing with screws from under the top plate. Candidates for best feet material: perhaps Maple, Ebony, brass? Regarding amplification compatibly with the Nenuphar’s I just want to emphasis that the little (but giant in performance) Bakoon 13R should be added to the list of suitable amps imo. |
@rwpollock I've had an interest in Valvet for some time and came close to purchasing the A4 instead of my Pass Labs 30.8 to drive my previous speakers. I just took a quick look at Valvet's website but couldn't find the information I was looking for. I recommend reaching out to Alfred (the importer/retailer) and Valvet directly to find out the following: - Feedback (preferably zero; or very low levels) - Damping Factor (the lower the better) If the above holds, I can see Valvet being an alternative along the lines of First Watt, which (as you probably know) has proven to be a terrific pairing with the Nenuphars. |
David Meniscus tears are no fun. Lived with one far too long. Wish I'd gone to the surgeon first thing. I suppose that's deemed an elective surgery right now? Good luck. My bad, I didn't understand your point at first. Yes, the wood strips do close off the space front and back between Platform and bottom of speaker. And you're right, that space was no doubt tuned for the size and output of the port. I'm going to do some A/B listening with and without the wood strips to see if I can get a handle on what it's doing to the bass. (Ok, I have to admit when I first put the wood under the speakers my ears gave a double thumbs up and they haven't moved since.) But I have to say when I was listening to the Symphony Fantastique the other day (at near live level) I was amazed by the depth and reverberation of the kettle drums...so I don't think it's diminishing the bass... On another note, I ran into the Townshend Super Tweeters I used to use with other speakers in my storage closet. I think I'll experiment with those. I remember SE effusing about the addition of omnidirectional super tweeters (forget the name right now) on top of the Nenuphars. This makes me sound like I'm unappreciative of the Nenuphars as is. Hardly. It's more like having a hyper sensitive instrument that responds to everything it interacts with. Fun stuff. |
I’ve added two photo closeups on my virtual system page, for visual reference. Hopefully the photos help clarify my prior post (above). https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/6658 I believe the photos (clearly) illustrate the ’open’ area, across the entire speaker bottom. The spikes are from Eden Sound. The platform is the Townshend Audio Seismic Isolation Podium. |
Stephen, thanks for the additional details and information. For clarification, I was referring to the area [open and unrestricted on all sides, in stock configuration/setup] for the "air" / "energy" generated by the driver to exit from the bottom ported transmission line. In your setup, the energy would only ’exit’ on the left and right sides of the speaker bottom. From what you have heard and shared, you are clearly very happy with the results. My concerns are around restricting the outflow of air/energy AND limiting it to a left/right dispersion. I know I will not know, one way or another, unless I try it out. With my setup: - the delta in performance upside was far greater with the Eden Sound spikes vs. the stock spikes/rubber bumpers [on my hardwood flooring] over the, - the delta from the speakers with the Eden Sound spikes on the Townshend Platforms Illustrated another way: Stock on floor <<<< Eden Sound on floor < Eden Sound + Townshend This may support Max’s point to couple as much of the speaker contact areas to the platform, OR, it may point to the stock spike/bumper setup being subpar and easily improved upon (in my case with aftermarket spikes, front and rear). I’m open to trying your method, however, it will have to wait until the meniscus tear in my knee is resolved. : ) |
David, You make good points regarding the placement of the Nenuphars on the Townshend Seismic Platforms. 1. When I first placed the Nenuphars on the Platforms I noticed a distinct improvement in bass response, as well as other other SQ issues that have been well documented in this thread. The speakers were on their original spikes and rubber feet. I mention this because I too was worried about the Platform negatively impacting bass response because of the having the double surface you mentioned. 2. The strips of wood do not interfere with the port of the Nenuphar. The front 1x2 is underneath the solid portion of the speaker bottom between the spikes and the front plane of the speaker. The rear strip has less bottom surface to work with but rests underneath the maybe 3/8" between the port and the back plane of the speaker. 3. I have been careful to maintain the angle of backward slant that the original spikes and rubber feet created. So even though I have not coupled very much of the speaker's bottom surface area to the platform, it is obviously significantly greater than the surface area touched by the spikes and rubber feet. I have to emphasize that this way of coupling the speaker to the Platform created an immediate change in sound--not subtle as they say. I thought the change improved virtually all aspects of the speakers performance, including bass. It would be great for some Nenuphar/Townshend Platform owner to corroborate this: obviously a change in sound this strong could be interpreted negatively by other people. My friend who passed this info on from Max does not have Nenuphars, so didn't have to deal with the port issue. He had a special bottom plate built for his Spatial Audio Lumina's by Clayton Shaw, the designer, who was also impressed by the benefits. |
@stephendunn Steven, thanks for the response / answer. I’m of two minds on this. First, from your posts regarding what Max shared with your friend...it seems coupling the entire speaker bottom / surface to the Townshend Platforms is recommended. It makes sense (intellectually to me) for a traditional speaker with a fully enclosed bottom. In other words, the greater the coupling, the better. When I connected with Grzegorz about Height and Tilt for the Nenuphar, my takeaway was that both Angle and Height differentials from a solid floor would lead to differences in low frequency performance. And that the ’stock’ setup was what Cube found best based on the configurations they tried out. He also said that playing with both to meet the owner’s specific needs / preferences was fine. Of significant concern to me is that solid wood strips (both front and rear) mean that the Nenuphar would then only port via the gap on the left and right sides of each speaker. Given that (1) the Nenuphar is already raised beyond what Cube "ideally" chose (due to sitting higher on the Townshend platforms) and (2) porting is over an ’uneven’ double surface... I am concerned about further additional deviations and their likely impact on sound quality. Can you comment more on your experimentation in the area as well as the results from your friend (assuming he/she also have the Nenuphars)? I’d also love to hear from others active in the thread regarding your thoughts on the pros and cons of doing this? Thanks! |
Steve, There was a remote version of the CSL a few years ago. Israel Blume did subsequently discontinued this version. The latest MK II CSL is further evolution and refinement of my original model and I'm sure even better. Given the level of satisfaction you have with the Pass SP 22 I'd imagine that you have very little incentive to replace it. It seems an ideal match with your S.I.T.-1. Charles |
Charles, Thanks for the insight into the CSL. I do think it might be a great match for my system but I have one reservation: I have been spoiled by using a remote volume control. I understand there was a version of the CSL made with a remote but that they had trouble with it. Also, I've heard the MkII version has significant improvements over it's predecessor--I assume it was the MKII that came out briefly with a volume remote. Any insights would be helpful. |
Steve, Your comments concerning the Shindo is in a sense surprising in regard to the level of perceived coloration/editorializing it imparted to your system. I do believe the Nenuphars unapologetically reveal all the is placed before them in the signal chain. So I feel that you heard the innate character of the Shindo Giscours as combined with your components and speakers. I believe you would like the Coincident Statement Linestage (CSL) very much. It utilizes a pair of the 101d DHT tubes and has transformer volume controls rather than one that is resistor based. Of its many attributes what stands out most IMO is the purity and transparency of its presentation. The natural tone/timbre/harmonics are rendered without gratuitous warmth or tint. Yet it’s the antithesis of clinical/threadbare/dry/analytical. The sense of flesh on the bone and living breathing performers is present.It has excellent dynamic capability and is very adept in revealing the nuances and subtleties of music reproduction. You are very pleased with your Pass SP-22 and I can understand why. There’s no way I could say you’d be even happier with the CSL but I genuinely feel that you’d be pleased with it as well given your desire/preference of purity versus imposed sonic colorations. I suspect that the Vinnie Rossi DHT and the Trafomatic 10y DHT preamplifiers are excellent. Charles |
Thanks Charles, much appreciated. And you’re right that my preference, like yours apparently, is for tubes: I’ve been enthralled for the last ten years with a Shindo Giscours. But played through the Nenuphars, the Giscours imprinted the music too much for me. I believe a DHT pre, as Srajan claimed in his review of the SIT-1, is probably the way to go, although a reader posted on 6 Moons that he ordered a DHT from Thomas Mayer but was unhappy with its pairing with the SIT-1. I’m drawn to Vinnie Rossi’s latest DHT, but Srajan didn’t rave about it the way he did with the Trafomatic 10Y, which apparently was a one-off prototype. There are affordable DHT pre’s from Supratek and private builders like Radu Tarta, but scarce reviews make them seem like a shot in the dark. I believe you owned--and maybe still do--the Coincident DHT pre--forget the name. Any impressions or feelings about compatibility you might relay? |
Stephen, Thanks for your latest listening impression of your evolving audio system, your posts/comments are always interesting and fun to read. I would not be surprised if our listening preferences overlapped in the range of 80 % or so. . The other 20 % we 'd make different choices (variety is the spice of life). In my experience solid state (SS) preamps 'generally' sound drier, less tactile and 2 dimensional compared to the very good category/level of tube preamps (For certain not every tube preamp is a good one). I am fully aware that there are exceptions to my generalizatons. For example I have always been intrigued by the SS Robert Koda preamp. I strongly suspect that I'd find it truly excellent. Your Pass SP 22 and S.I.T.-3 pairing could easily be another exception. I have no doubt that your current audio system sounds fantastic! I'm glad it is providing you such music listening joy. Charles |
Hi David, Yes, I was using original spikes but I think Townshend's point would over-rule different spikes mattering altogether--at least when the speakers are on the Seismic Platforms. My updates relate to refining components upwind of my Nenuphar/SIT-1 combination that still sounds like a marriage made in heaven. My focus has been on my pre, which took an unexpected detour when the dealer who sold me my SIT-1's brought over a Pass Labs SP-10 to try. To my surprise (I thought I was doing HIM the favor) I quickly acquiesced to it's obvious benefits over the tube pre I'd been using (all the tube pre's for that matter I'd been using): truer pitch and tonal definition, much tighter and engaging bass, a more open soundstage with much better focus, and deeper, darker space. My tube prejudice was soundly put in it's place. After extended listening my only qualm with the SP-10 was that it could sound--with some recordings, not all--a little mechanical and dry. With Ella's Clap Hands Here Comes Charlie for instance. (But I'm pretty sure the CD of that recording has been digitally enhanced.) Realizing the SP-10 was on the lower tier of the PL line of pre amps, I did some research and found what I thought was the sweet spot of the line, the SP-22. I soon purchased a used one from Mark at Reno Hifi. Not surprisingly the SP-22 was even better in all areas than the SP-10 without a whiff of the latter's short comings. After 10 days with the SP-22 in the system, I am still listening with new born amazement. I think it corroborates that the Nenuphar speaker cries out for a kind of organic neutrality up front, white on white if you will that leaves the purest palette for it to paint its true colors. But then again if you do prefer the color of a certain component--let's say the sunshine of a Shindo pre--it will give you just that it all it's saturated glory. I just find any global tint grows tiresome over time--at least with this speaker. |
I have a tweak for those of you who have your Nenuphars sitting on Townshend Seismic Platforms. This was inspired by an email I recently received from an audiophile friend who was considering the Siesmic Platforms and ended up speaking with Max Townshend himself. Max strongly encouraged him to get as much of the speaker’s bottom surface touching the Platform’s plate. And mentioned spikes accomplished the opposite. I pondered this for a while and remembered I had some 1" x 2" maple trim in the garage. I cut the trim into two pieces the width of the speakers. I tilted the speakers back and placed the wood strips underneath the very front spanning the width of the speaker--the height of the trim (which is really 1 and 3/4") was just slightly higher than the spikes. Voila, after just a few minutes of listening I had audible proof that Max might know what he’s talking about. Better focus, separation and very noticeably better depth. I haven’t tried a thinner strip of wood to support the speaker’s rear but I think I will. (I’ve got a little time on my hands.) If you spend $20 on this tweak only to end up thinking I’m crazy, well, blame Mr. Townshend. |
Thanks, David. The information that you and others have provided in your thread has gone a long way to helping me better understand and optimize these wonderful speakers. Of late, I've been auditioning cables. I've been comparing Synergistic Foundation cables against their higher-priced stable mates Atmosphere X and against the hodge podge of my existing cables (Teresonic, Dueland and Teo Audio GC). I started with the Foundation replacing my Dueland speaker cables and was startled by how much better they were. In fact, it prompted one of those classic moments where my wife came in and said, "You just changed something." The Dueland cables sounded vintage, rolling off highs and smoothing transients, very pleasant, but the Nenuphars don't need that tonic. The Foundation cables brought out their best, even to a higher degree I thought than the Atmosphere X Excite speaker cables at more than four times the price. Interestingly the X Excite cables exhibited some of the Dueland characteristics, being smoother and mellower. (An added plus to the Foundation speaker cables, for those with white Nenuphars like myself, is they come in white!) The Foundation speaker cables made the most impactful difference, but the interconnects reinforced their benefits in audible ways. I'm now auditioning the Atmosphere X USB cable against the Atmosphere X Reference USB. The homebound joys of landscaping and falling into the Nenuphar's musical spell are helping to keep me sane in these harrowing times. |
...the SIT-1 poked through the clouds to a performance peak I have not experienced with the Nenuphars--or any other speaker for that matter. Stephen, first let me say how much I love your writing style and reading your prose. It flows so easily and expresses so much. Second, congratulations on acquiring the First Watt SIT-1 monos and their contribution to your system and the resulting peak connection to it via the Nenuphars. |
Steve, It has been fun following your listening impressions and reporting as your system has evolved. After all isn't this the entire point ? Discovering ways to improve our music listening experiences. and engagement. It really makes me happy when someone gets ever closer in connecting with their music be it streaming or a collection of recordings. Charles |
Congrats Stephen. That's great to hear. And I know it's not a diy-heavy crowd, but if people find a SIT-2 and want to convert it into a SIT-1, I believe there are only two core differences... separate power supplies for the monos, and the adjustable aspect of the 2nd harmonic on the SIT-1s. In the end, a SIT2 with one channel broken out into its own chassis and with its own power supply will probably get you most of the way there. Anyone who's built a DIY first watt amp could easily make the conversion. I've found a huge impact of adding a separate power supply for each channel. I'll never go back to a stereo amp again. Please keep us updated on the journey Stephen. |
Hi Charles, It feels more like I've fallen rather than stepped--not really knowing what I was getting into. As you know, when you replace a critical piece of gear, like a loudspeaker, one thing leads to optimizing another and before you know it, you've replaced almost everything in your system! I'm not there yet, but I have auditioned some cables (I was using vintage wire), so probably my next update, if I can keep myself from crowing more about the SIT-1's, will be that. The Nenuphars make quick work of comparing cables. Thanks for following along on this much needed, alternate world trek. |
Hi Steve, I am also not surprised that the S.I.T.-1 is even better with the Nenuphar than the excellent S.I.T.-3. It is a closer match to the type of amplifier the Nenuphar was designed for. More in line with (as you identify) a high quality zero NFB high output impedance tube SET. Yet one can still achieve stellar results with other types of amplifiers. I did also feel/sense that Srajan tempered the differences between the two First Watt amps when I read the initial Nenuphar review. Steve if sounds as if you have stepped deep into the realm of music lover’s heaven with the addition of the S.I.T.-1 mono blocks. I suspect you are hearing (certainly very similar) what David is hearing with his system.. Charles |
It is hard if not impossible to find silver linings to these times, but if there was one it might be my local First Watt dealer's change of heart to let go of his precious pair of SIT-1 demos, prompted by both a need to whip up some business and cull his equipment closet. He was gracious enough to let me first audition them, providing white-gloved delivery to my doorstep, then giving the boxes an alcohol wipe down before waving goodbye from a more than acceptable social distance. Into my listening cave I carried these surprisingly heavy and legendary monos. I gave them an hour to warm up and then sat down and by a gradual accumulation of degrees proceeded to be overwhelmed. I had expected from Srajan's Nenuphar review that the SIT-1 would come out swinging with more speed and light than the SIT-3, but what I hadn't expected was how completely different the 1's presentation was. It was a different sound altogether, larger, wider, deeper, more detailed, more intense tonal colors, livelier tempo and beyond everything, more engrossing. In fact, as I listened through my Roon album file named Sound Check, I was emotionally pulled into music I had simply put there as a test of say instrument separation and had played hundreds of times. This amp performs that rare magic trick of illuminating every nuance of recording space and technique, while at the same time bringing music to life in a way you can resist. Don't even think about having these play some harmless tune in the background while you do your taxes: you'd have to turn it way down so as not to be sucked in completely. (I know you're thinking this smacks of euphonics, that I must have had the bias set to pull in second harmonic distortion. But not so, I preferred the needle straight up in neutral.) I think Srajan downplayed the SIT-1's superiority over every other amp he tried with the Nenuphars because he felt it unfair to tease with the unobtainable. My hunch is the same synergy is attainable with the best of the no feedback, low damping factor, low powered SET's that several people here drive their lotuses with. A/B ing the 1's against my LTA Ultralinear showed how close Berning's ZOTL design comes to Nirvana, but the SIT-1 poked through the clouds to a performance peak I have not experienced with the Nenuphars--or any other speaker for that matter. Long live Nelson Pass. |
Reaching out to the Cube Audio Cognoscenti for your advice on Nenuphar placement / positioning and to get a feel for what's been working for each of you? Mine are pulled out in the room, from both the front and side walls. Listening position is 'fairly' near-field. I'll be testing other positions and your feedback will help guide me. Thank you! |
If budget is a concern there is the excellent Cube Magus, available fully built at £6,900.00 a pair or the Cube Magus Drivers at £2,570.00 a pair. I’ll make this a separate thread in due course since this thread should remain about the Cube Nenuphar’s. There are a few makes of full range drivers on the market but can I suggest that we keep this thread to the Cube Nenuphar’s and that any other makes of full range speakers have there own thread unless somebody actually has direct experience of both. |
Considering the acknowledged superb sound quality of the Nenuphar, if Lii Audio drivers approach 90% of their performance that would be some feat given the cost differential. I hav6no idea if this is a possibility. Obviously someone who has access to both would have to compare them and submit a listening impression. In the big picture the more of these types of high quality higher sensitivity drivers that are easy to drive the better. Match them with excellent quality low power amplifiers and you'll have the recipe for really natural and emotionally involving/organic sound. This is a good path to travel. Charles |
Another full range speaker company getting ravs is the Lii Audio. The 15 and the best 10 inch drivers are 97-99db sensitive....made quite well. People on the Decware forum are going crazy over them. Just talked to a friend who likes his Lii F-15s better than his quad amped crazy system. You can get a pair of the F-15s for $400 plus shipping. The best 10 incher is $1000 a pair plus shipping and you can get the 10 inchers delivered to your home for $3K in serious speaker cabinets that let them play down to 30Hz. Are these as good as the Cubes? I hope not considering the price difference.....but, what if they are 90% as good? No Lowther shout....no peakiness has been reported. Of course, they need the usual several hundred hours of break in. According to those that have heard the 10 and the 15....the 10 is more articulate but the 15 is more fun to listen to (more balls). You could mount a 15 and a 10 on an open baffle and put a coil on the 15 and a cap on the 10 so they are crossed over around 3-4 hundred cycles and you would get the balls of the big one and the more articulation of the smaller one and still the whole shebang is 97+db efficient. A single stack of great caps in series with the 10 would not limit their sound (you know Clarity cap CMRs bypassed by copper foils or better). Another way to run these two would be to use a tube amp on the 10 that has a very small coupling cap in it......That way you have a natural roll off of bass.....and you have a less expensive super sounding cap in the amp. This way you have zero xover again on the 10 incher. Then run another amp on the woofs. Pretty cool stuff. |
