Cube Audio or Charney

Reach out if you have specific questions about Cube Audio and the Nenuphar speakers.

Check out Bache Audio. I have had many speakers, including different types of speakers and Lowthers were among them. I have not heard Cube Audio but have heard both Charney and Bache at audio shows and decided on Bache. I even considered using the Voxativ in Bache’s Tribeca speaker but after hearing the modified Tang Band drivers in them I went that route. The midrange is beautiful. And I have rebuilt Quad 57s in my stable. 

Anyone else?

I know rodge827 has a pair of Charney’s and is absolutely gobsmacked with them. He lives in Jersey though and was able to listen before buying. Do a search and check it out   All the best

Yes I do own  pair of Charney Audio Maestro with the Omega RS7 driver, Listening to them now as I write this. I have never listened to Cube Audio but have listened to everything that Charney produces. I live about an hour from Charney and occasionally stop by for a listen. Brian is a great guy and will call to set up a listening session from time to time.
His speakers are designed on the Tractrix theory and not "boxed in" like other designs. In a nutshell the horn expands on all sides as the sound moves through it. No nasty corners that cause congestion and cancellation. Music is lifelike with a spooky real image and soundstage. Bass is clean, quick and deep with no need for augmentation even with the 6" drivers. Charney's goal is to create a speaker that sounds "real" and conveys an artists emotion and intent. He has succeeded on both counts! When I listen, I'm engaged in an emotional and intimate way with the artist. No matter what you listen to from Bach to rock Charney will get you there and keep you there.

True story, my niece and her boyfriend stayed with us last May over the Memorial Day weekend. After dinner we retired to my offfice/listenig room to spin some discs. I never knew she could sing! She was soloist in her high school chorus that won all state in GA. She sat in the chair and couldn't get enough! Her boyfriend just kept movin' and groovin' as we went through a bunch of songs from Eva Cassidy, Tracey Chapman, Pink Floyd, and demo tracts that really shine. What I though was going to be a quick session went for 3 hours. When we were done she said to me "This system is the kind were you listen to the whole album and not just different songs. Next time when we come back can we do that?" Uhh Yes! I replied. She gets it! A 26yr old Millennial got it!

Any of Charneys creations will do you right. If your budget and room can suppot them, the 8" Voxativ is a great way to go. My room is 11x15x8 which is too small for the 8" but the 6" shine in here. Charney lent me a pair of the 6" Voxativ Companions for a week. Just wanted to hear then in my room to possibly upgrade. Well I was sold and saving up to make the change next year.  

Chris   

I've heard both a Charney with Voxativ drivers and a Charney with AER drivers and the Cube Audio Nenuphar.  I much prefer either Charney speakers.  The bass and midbass are much more complete and rich sounding on the Charney speakers.  I like the Nenuphar speaker, but, in addition to the bass deficiency, it has a more prominent midrange peak that makes it sound more like typical fullrange systems than the Charney speakers.  The Charney speakers are amazingly "normal" sounding while retaining the liveliness and vivid qualities of full/extended range driver systems.

The AER driver, in particular sounds fantastic.  It has more extension at the top than the Voxativ and is very smooth for a full range driver.  In my opinion, it is a worthwhile upgrade.

At a fraction of the price of either, there is the Rethm Bhaava (full range driver with a built in powered woofer).  This is one of the better $3,000 speakers I've heard.

Rodg827 & Larryi,
Thank you both for your detailed and enthusiastic recommendation of the Charney speaker.   I have owned both Lowther & AER drivers in the past and loved both but the AER was alot smoother.  I have talked to Brian a few times by email & phone and he believes his speakers compete with anything on the market.  I know Brian also doesn't get alot of press but the few that have listened love them.
Rogd827 our rooms are similar in size, how did the Voxative add to the listening experience?

Thanks @jdal  for you comments,  i began my speaker disign life with single driver crossoverless loudspeakers , it looks very attractive to speaker guys, no need to design crossover , just get very good driver, make good cabinet , probably some back loaded horn, get screwdriver
install the driver and you are winner,  If you have good account you can participate in Audio Shows and go to the Market.  Sounds good, If not enough base - make good sub and offer package deal, But what is problem ? Why the majority speaker company still making traditional 2-3-4 way speakers with " Stupid Crossovers"  , The main issues is high sensitivity crossover less design speakers-- are thin sound ( not enough midbass) piano sound and man vocal is not real , 
and whizzer cone coloration, The whizzer cone working like addition tweeter and not compare with high end tweeters.     

Bache, can we agree that all speakers are a compromise?  My crossoverless AER was not thin sounding at all.   I guess my question to you have you heard either the Charney or Cube audio in a room  you know and with familiar equipment?  It has been suggested by numerous listeners that both of these speakers have eliminated the usual single driver problems.

Of course i listen all of them , but to be agree or not you have to compare
you not thin sounding speakers with traditional for example  Kef or any one using speaker selector switch
Best

Thanks Bache.  I am 67 and over the past 40 - 45 years have heard every type of speaker imaginable.  I have also owned multi way box speakers, electrostatic, single driver,  open baffle, ect.  My current speaker is a great 2 way in a 1/2" granite cabinet.  I have enjoyed all the different types of speakers I have owned but my curiosity has me looking at these two speakers.  Btw your speakers look fantastic.  I am sure they are great performers.

 Ok   you little bit older (2years) ,   my suggestion--
 all 2 get fantastic sound

I have heard both the Charney w/ Voxativ-AC2.8 and the new Cube Audio.  Without a doubt the Charney is superior.  Good clean SET power is needed to get the most out of either.

Tinear in what way was the Charney superior to you vs. Cube Audio?

Do people still own and love their Charmey speakers? I live about 50 minutes away.

Cube audio Sounds fantastic but need a SET amps with allot of grunt to drive the 10 inch harder.  Speaker Placement is critical on these drivers.

i compared Vox cube Lowther & Aer

Cubes need more power to get the cone moving and overall the bass was better on the cube compared to the above 3 as mentioned.

Speaker Placement, Cables, Amps, Pre-amps all make a difference. To my Ears Cube was an overall better speaker to live with you can throw anything at them and it just does not break down in complex music.

I would say about 20 watts of power is required from Tube, to get cubes working well.

What you get, above all else, with high efficiency single driver systems is explosive dynamics, a vivid and lively sound that engages the listener.  But, that often comes with the tradeoff of frequency response peaks, un-natural tonal quality of instruments, bass deficiency and a "rough" sound.  Similar problems are common to horn-based systems as well.  I like the sound of these types of high efficiency systems enough to live with these trade-offs (I have a horn-based system).  The trick is to find designs that minimize the trade-off while still being able to deliver the goods.  What represents the best balance of trade-offs is a matter of taste.  To me, the Charney speakers are shockingly good because they do a great job of minimizing problems while still delivering the excitement. 

The Cube Audio speakers deliver the dynamics and are reasonably devoid of some of the extreme peaks I've heard with other full-range systems, but, they are not at all close to the Charney speakers in terms of tonal balance, smoothness, and suitability for all types of music.  They are also more efficient than the Cube Audio speakers, making them more suitable for use with very low-powered amps (my favorite kind).

I think anyone in the market for these types of speakers should hear both and make their own decision; certainly, they are both contenders.

@larryi   In what settings and with what component chains have you listened to the Cube Audio speakers? Thanks.

David_ten,

I heard both the Charney Audio and Cube Audio speakers at the Capital Audiofest, although not in the same year.  I've heard the Charney speakers at two such shows, in both showings the company used a low-cost 300B SET amp.

At the latest Capital Audiofest, I heard the Cube Audio speakers with the 10" woofer.  I don't recall what electronics were being used, but, I believe it was solid state.  

I've heard quite a number of full range systems with drivers ranging from cheap Tangband drivers to systems with very costly Feastrix fieldcoil drivers and Western Electric fieldcoil drivers.  I've heard systems with Lowther drivers (permanent magnet and fieldcoil), Voxactiv systems, AER systems, Jensen fieldcoils, and a few others I don't recall the specifics.  For my taste, the Charney was the first fully satisfying single-driver system.  But, that is not to say that I didn't like what I heard from Cube Audio and Voxativ, and I can see how these two, and others, can be favored by someone over the Charney.

I've heard a number of systems that utilize fullrange drivers in multi-way systems and that approach can be quite satisfying.  I particularly liked a system with an old Jensen M10 fieldcoil fullrange driver (13" cone) and a simple high-pass first order crossover to a Jensen RP302 tweeter in an open baffle configuration.  

Have not heard any Charneys, but did listen to two Cube speakers at the AXPONA a few years ago and they sounded fantastic.  Looking at the Chareny site and the descriptions of their speakers in this thread, I have no doubt they also sound wonderful.  That said, may I suggest you take a look at Omega speakers (I have owned the SAM with 6.5" Alnico driver for 5 yrs now with no desire to change).  Rodge827 mentions " I do own pair of Charney Audio Maestro with the Omega RS7 driver".  Omega offers some great single driver speakers (at considerably less cost than either Cube or Charney, if that is an important consideration for you). And Louis Chochos, founder, owner, designer, and builder of all Omega speakers is very willing to chat about his speakers and what you are looking for in a speaker.

I spent 3 hours in July listening to Charneys speakers and they do sound nice but ultimately not for my taste.  Also the one I really liked for my room was very expensive esp given the build quality so I couldn't justify it or resale value if i got tired,, but that point is taste as well. 

I am told the Charneys are warmer than the cube audio Speakers the same guy says the Cube is more transparent and open. 

bobheinatz OP622 posts12-13-2019 12:58pmBache, can we agree that all speakers are a compromise?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes but the sacrifices we all have to make with xover designs.
Been there done that.
I had the worlds finest(well one of the worlds top tweets) tweeter in my Seas Thors.
For jazz its a great tweeter, For full symphony orchestra the Seas had serious issues. .
Just about any speaker will work just fine with a jazz quartet, trio.
But when it comes to classical chamber/full orchestra, something more than your average box speaker will be needed.
xovers do not work well with full symphony orchestra.
Xovers havea tendency to filter out the pure musical source.
The biggest benifit of wide band is the xover is eliminated thus allowing more of the processed signal from source/line stage/amp to pass through more freely and a huge bonus is the higher sensitivty.
Win-Win-Win
I see too many sacrifices in xover designs.
Not my cup of tea.
Pity I never researched wide band years ago.
Most folks /newbies have no idea what a wide band is all about.
Its something like from another planet. They are confused as to how they work, and what are the advantages over xover designs.
So , no, I am not buying into the **all speaker designs are a compromise* any longer.
That mantra needs to be put to rest. 

You ask me, : 
Do you know how a  wide band/xoverless works?
No I  do not know. I failed science and math.
Its not important, as many of us here really do not understand how xovers work either. Except I know I do not like xovers in acoustics. 
Sensitivty is too low.  
Looks like september,,,wait  a  minute, she just NOW said **Get them whenever you want** as we know there are hooks in something like that. 
I better wait another month, test the waters.
So looks like I;'lll have the wide band a  month earlier than planed.
I'm thinking Aug1st I;'ll order when my $900 ss ck comes. Already have 900 in cash/paypal. 
Its like 2100 ship included

I really like the Charney speakers, and I also like the Nenuphar speaker too.  I don't think I can attribute what I like to the lack of a crossover, but, that certainly is a possible reason why they both sound so good.  I think I could live with the Charney, particularly with one of the better AER drivers in it.  

But, I own a three way system that, on balance, I like even more than either of the speakers mentioned above.  Yes, it costs far more than either speaker (the midrange horn/compression drivers alone cost more than either systems), and it is certainly not better in all respects and I can easily understand why someone would prefer either of the two models under discussion.  My system is 99 db/w efficient, so it has not suffered too much from loss of efficiency from having a crossover.  A friend has a three way horn system that is 107 db/w efficient.  A crossover does soak up some power, particularly if it is complex and it is used to correct phase/timing and to correct frequency response anomalies, but, utilizing drivers optimized for performing over a limited frequency range has its pluses.

Why don’t more speaker designers embrace the crossover less concept ? 

mozartfan, there is no such thing as a loudspeaker without compromises.
There are so any ways to skin this cat. Given the variance in taste and the multitude of solutions it is no wonder we have so many opinions on the subject. I prefer simple solutions, fewer drivers and crossovers so, full range speakers are very attractive however there are so many factors involve such as linearity and uniform controlled dispersion that are extremely difficult for one driver to encompass. Crossovers become a necessary evil. I have heard speakers with crossovers succeed in achieving the absolute sound...twice. The only full range loudspeaker I have ever heard get there is a full range, line source, ESL. The compromises being size and low bass. Low bass is solved with subwoofers. Size is solved by divorce. 
Please, I would love to see you come up with a loudspeaker that has no compromises. Show me a person who thinks he has a speaker with no compromises and I will show you a person with bad hearing.

I own the charney companion Excalibur with voxitiv AC 2.6 (12,100.00) out the door…I HAVE MANY DIFFERENT amps and preamps to try on them my fav is the worlds most perfect monoblocks the quicksilver triode 6c33c’s with the music first passive v2 preamp and have a second room with the MERLIN VSM mme (13,000.00) all duelund equipped BAM and my fav is the atmasphere m60 mono block otl amps with the hattor pre all duelund equipped ……which is my favorite room???….. well…let’s put it this way …I would not want to give up either room do I have a fav room…depends on my mood