Wow! What can I say about these beautifully crafted speakers? They completely disappear with wall to wall soundstaging and naturally precise imaging. They are oh so smooth, detailed, and utterly nonfatiguing. They were about the only speaker at the show that I could just relax and listen to hours on end. You just emotionally connect with the music through these transducers. I had Robert of RSA play Somewhere Over The Rainbow/It's A Wonderful World by "IZ" a Hawaiian singer who lost his battle with obesity at a young age. It almost brought me to tears.
They were being riven by all Fi gear including their 20 watt(?) SET amps, DAC, and transformer volume control. All RSA wiring too. I would have loved to hear the Sasons with more power, like the 100 watt Atmasphere MA-1 amps. I had the pleasure of meeting Rhythmace4218 who already owns a pair driven by MA-1. He confided the MA-1 will give the Sasons real bass impact which surpasses a highly respected 300 watt solid state amp.
The upgraded SI version is 5 inches shorter than the standard version because they moved the Xover into the base stands. The stands are now necessarily taller to keep the same overall height. IMHO, the SI version looks much better because they look more proportioned. The older version looked a little pot bellied with the wider base and shorter stands. Just awesome aesthetics.
Let me just add that Robert and Steve are first class acts. They are genuine music guys who are down to earth and easy to talk to. Kudos to both of you.
Podium 0.5 Speakers:
I must admit I was sadly disappointed with the sound of the their flagship P1 speakers at the '97 RMAF. It's treble was very grainy and irritating, and the presentation just didn't seemed right. This year their smallest speaker produced some of the best sound at the show. It was hooked up to some very expensive electronics (Art Audio Jota 22 watts? at $18k, Esoteric digital, Memory player, etc). But the synergy was there in spades. The presentation was similar to the Sason's, but slighty cooler sound with wonderful imaging and staging. Because they are crossoverless, the have a very coherent sound - as coherent as the Sasons. Piano and vocals sounded natural as one can hope for. Bass was very tuneful - stand up bass was in your room real, but lacked the deep extension of cones. But what do you expect from a panel speaker? But there was one quality that bothered me. The treble was still ever so slightly grainy and irritating. I'm not sure if I could listen to these for hours on end if the music contained a lot of treble energy. These speakers can still draw you into the music like the Sasons. Overall, these were my second favorite. And the price is still reasonable at $6k (but going up to $8k in couple of months) in terms of performance, but not really in terms of aesthetics and build quality. The Sasons take top honor for that IMO. Peter, the dealer/distributor for these speakers, was a real gent.
Sorry, these were the only two speakers that really stood out in the end for me. I heard the mega expensive speakers from Acapella and Lansche (both using ion tweeters), YG acoustics, Hansen, etc. None of them could emotionally draw me into the music like the Sason and Podium.
I've only heard De Muzik from the Klimt series, but I have high hopes for the whole series, mainly because the midrange is so astounding. Apparently the midrange driver covers around 100hz to 18kHz with no crossover. I immediately heard the smoothness of the mids, as soon as De Muzik was taken out of its boxes, a week or two prior to RMAF.
De Muzik has tons of bass energy and the bass drivers need a good bit of break in before they can be properly set up. At RMAF they were just getting into their own. (They'ver since improved further). With improper setup they'll have too much bass energy. Someone with a smaller room will probably want to look further down the Klimt line. I'm anxious to hear the next step or two down, but I'm a very likely buyer of De Muzik.
Soundings plans to carry most of the Klimt series, so I'll give reports as they come in.
Pefstratiou said: "I liked the big Vienna Acoustics with Boulder electronics. "
Which room was that my friend? Soundings had the new Die Muzik reference speakers by Vienna Acoustics. They were driven by Rowland electronics and a Playback Designs MPS-5 CD/SACD player. Perhaps you got Boulder and Rowland confused. (Boulder makes Rowland seem like the bargain of the century, IMHO).
I liked the big Vienna Acoustics with Boulder electronics. Whoever earlier said about the total experience is right. They had a prototype CD player by someone who used to work for Meittner. On Sunday as they were winding down, the guy removed his player from the system and half the magic was gone.
I also liked the Wilson Sofias, the Charios and the little black cubes from Norway (I forget the name now) that work by reflecting low frequencies from the floor. I was unimpressed by the Marten Coltrane Supremes that cost at 299,000 as much as a pretty good house.
I heard Curve's and they wasn't half bad;) You had very expensive player which added to the experince. I liked Indra and little white speakers in Kubala-Sosna room.
My favorite speakers at the RMAF were the Wilson benesch Curves in our room. The odds are they would not have sounded nearly as good without the excellent and modestly priced electronics we used. The new deHavilland prototypes 50A, a remake of the original 1954 Fischer model 50A's.
Comments welcome here but I would prefer them from those who attended the show and spent more then 30 seconds in our room. It is so easy to overlook a simple and understated system and move towards those big brand or big speaker rooms. We are all guilty of that.
Emaillists, to answer your question regarding the Lansche - that was my favorite room at the RMAF '08. The round was mesmerizing. It's hard to tell what components were working the charm - the amp/rep was WAVAC, which was likely contributing. Anyways, I was with two friends, and both were equally impressed.
The Podium speakers that the original poster mentions were also in my top few speakers. The sound was so surprising from these planars - effortless, full and so engaging.
There were so many bad systems I heard at RMAF (including many systems costing several hundred $$k, but the above two systems were stellar. Just one other mention would be the Verity Lohengrin/Artemis Labs/Schroeder analog system - also fantastic, but only on vinyl. Once they moved to Nagra digital, things became quite ordinary.
Emaillists, to answer your question regarding the Lansche - that was my favorite room at the RMAF '08. The round was mesmerizing. It's hard to tell what components were working the charm - the amp/rep was WAVAC, which was likely contributing. Anyways, I was with two friends, and both were equally impressed.
The Podium speakers that the original poster metions were also in my top few speakers. The sound was so surprising from these planars - effortless, full and so engaging.
There were so many bad systems I heard at RMAF (including many systems costing several hundred $$k, but the above two systems were stellar. Just one other metion would be the Verity Lohengrin/Artemis Labs/Schroeder analog system - also fantastic, but only on vinyl. Once they moved to Nagra digital, things became quite ordinary.
Dracule1, off the top of my head I imagine it would be about $1250 (including the set up for the paint), based on the work that the paint guys did with the tank on my Laverda :)
Seriously, I would like to see custom automotive paint for the black part of the chassis on the MA-1s and chromed finish for the polished metal part of the amp. How much would this add Ralph?
I'm sure Ralph wouldn't mind adding some bling bling to his amps, like one of those auto-rotating rims you see on those pimped out Cadillac Escalades :)
Atmosphere - Point taken. I think your signature appearance is just what it needs to be. I like the retro look too.
After all, tubes are inherently vintage. When you make solid state amps (I'm betting that never happens) you can go modern with them and produce macho trophy amps.
For now, you should continue with your hard earned reputation and well known cosmetics.
People who want a Mercedes that looks like a Cadillac should just buy a Cadillac.
Macrojack, FWIW we have long had a tradition of keeping the cosmetic cost down in our gear. I imagine there are plenty out there who will say that it shows too :) but I've never been a fan of the idea that the cosmetics alone are going to double the price of the unit, something that IMO is too common in high end audio.
What we did was to create something that has a lot of vintage cues- sort of like a collectible vintage piece that you previously did not know had existed. To do that we get the indicators, meters, placards and the like from sources who were making those parts the same way 50-70 years ago. This way the price of the products more accurately reflects what is inside; a lot of hand-wiring with custom wire and a lot of custom components.
Although my taste tends towards cool vintage gadgets, that's not true of everyone. Custom finishes can help with a lot of that and does not add a lot to the price, although it can add a bit to the lead time...
Hmm...So a guy who's into cars shouldn't care about how his car looks as long as it goes fast? So lets stick a Porche twin turbo engine into a Pinto and call it a Porche. Not many will buy it, right? A component's aesthetic design is an art, and I can appreciate fine art. Performance comes first, but appearance is important to me too.
Custom finishes. Very important to the "all about the music" crowd. Maybe a hearty, masculine Pendleton plaid, or camo or something in paisley. Certainly more chrome would improve the sound. Big brass handles might be nice. Leather with studs? A Harley logo? Do you offer an autographed model? Perhaps limited edition?
Isn't this whole thing getting pretty silly? All you need from your amplifier is amplification. Get your ego assistance and self validation from your automotive self-expression in the fine American tradition and just let the amps sit there and invisibly provide music. You don't buy wine for the bottle, do you?
Thanks, Dracule1. Yes, we have done custom finishes in the past. We have several options on the power supply panel, which is normally polished. The chassis can be done in a variety of finishes also, but the lead time is usually longer.
Emailists, I did hear that system on two occasions, both times analogue sources. Sounded very natural, warm and smooth but lacked imaging and staging. Considering all the god awful expensive electronics (Wavac, Continuum, etc), I expected a much more but I think it needed a much bigger room. The plasma tweeter does emit a lot of heat - the speakers are ventillated at the top where the tweeter sits.
Just thought I let you know. Robert of RSAD says MA-1 driving the Sasons is the best he's heard from his speakers. Do you do custom finishes on your amps? The look is a little too industrial for me.
I don't get the Acapella design. Seems like a lowest common denominator design, a mishmash of horn and dynamic drivers that would compomise the best qualities of each.
This is just my impression from what I have seen and read about them. Never actually heard a pair.
In comparison, at least Avantgardes are pure horn designs that have a chance of doing something exceptional with the distinct merits horn technology provides.
Just my impressions....I could be way off base having never heard either.
Macrojack, I really, really liked the Oswalds Mill horn loudspeakers at RMAF. In fact, it was easily one of my favorite rooms. My only problems with the design were the extreme looks/low WAF and what must be an absolutely stratospheric pricetag, though Jonathan assured me I could afford it.
As far as sonics go, the Oswalds Mill horns were the most natural sounding loudspeaker of this type I have ever been around. They combined the immediacy/suddenness along with large variance between quiet and loud that a horn should provide, with the lack of irritating or unnaturalness. I felt it truly to be a coup of not small measure. Given their extreme looks and the poor quality of the rooms at RMAF, that surprises me. I have no idea how much they cost, but if I had the money, I would most definitely make the drive up to give them another listen.
The Avant Gardes seemed to have an "amplified" nature about them, where even acoustic music took on the feel of being played through electronics, along with that feel you get when you listen to a Victrola. It wasn't necessarily a bad sound, and oftentimes, it worked. Just that when you are listening to some music, because of it, it leant kind of an unnatural quality to the sound.
Personally, I thought the Acapella room was the worst sound at the show by leaps and bounds. Other than their ability to completely dominate a room and make a visual statement or play at jet engine volumes, I have no idea what anyone could see in such a product.
I don't have any experience with the Oris or Haigner, so anything I would say in relation to them would be a lie.
Macojack, I happen to stop by the Oswald room. Very unique lookin huge horn speakers, but I liked the sound. I was clear and dynamic but obviously needed a bigger room for the sound to open up. They sounded much more natural than the AvantGarde at the show. I think Jonathan (or whoever was showing off the Oswalds) went to the AvantGarde room to listen. When asked by the AvantGarde people what he thought about them, I think he answered "they sound interesting". The huge Acapella sounded bloated in the bass.
Trelja - I've spoken with Jonathan on the phone and would concur that he's a great guy. If I ever return to N.J. by car, I'll certainly make a point of stopping by New Tripoli for a look.
Apparently, from what you've said here, you have good familiarity with the speaker in question. What does it sound like, in your estimation, and how does it compare to Oris, AvantGarde, Acapella, Haigner and any other large horn system you can think of?
I was there, and was really hoping to meet you, Macrojack.
The Oswalds Mill speakers were one of my favorites as well. Thankfully, I'm only an hour from Jonathan Weiss, and have been fortunate enough to attend his annual Tube Tasting. He's a great guy, and it's a really great time.
Naw..differences in opinion doesn't bother me much. But people who form opinions on components based on what others say and not having heard them themselves do bother me.
i thought one of the better sounding speakers there , were a brand called AYRA by raidho acoustics, pretty expensive stuff, but a top rate presentation of music played through some lindeman gear , that if i won the lottery would purchase.
Dracule I wouldn't put too much sense into what others think If your ears like it that all that matters
I'm a big fan of Ridge Street Audio Designs and everything i've heard from them thus far has been a home run. I'm sure the newer Sasons in a correct setting will impress those who thought they were "ordinary"
i was not able to attend rmaf, but given what i've seen over the last decade at ces and t.h.e. show, there is an ever widening divide between the fun, practical, well engineered stuff, and the shiney-happy-weird-as-hell stuff that never quite 'makes it' in the sonic 'or' business sense.
Dracule1, If you liked them, your opinion is just as valid as those who thought they were "ordinary". It's a personal thing and that's all that matters despite what those highly regarded persons thought. I sure wouldn't worry about it! That's my opinion!
"Synergy is very important, but very difficult to achieve by the consumer unless he/she has the cash to try many combinations. "
Synergy is key.
Focusing on this at all times in the end will cost you less to get to a good place than otherwise.
Without it, the best individual components alone may also be the biggest waste of money.
That's why its called a stereo "system". Its the overall combination of components (including the listening room) and how they synergize together that matters most.
I wasn't at the show to hear the new Sason SI to provide any further commments on the sound But I have heard the Magico Mini in a similar room to mine with very good electronics and much prefer the Sason (which I currently own)
For the money, the Original Sasons were ridiculously underpriced and the Mini would be overpriced imo
Mapman, what you say may be true. But I don't think lots of speakers will sound as good as the Sasons - not in my 23+ years in this hobby. Synergy is very important, but very difficult to achieve by the consumer unless he/she has the cash to try many combinations. My last speaker was purchased based on audition at the '04 Stereophile Show in NY. It was the Hyperion 938 which I love to this day. It sounded great when I set them up in my home - different room and electronics. A speaker that is not so finicky in set up will sound good in most rooms and gives credit to its designer.
What made them spectacular? Simple. It was the most enjoyable listenng session I had in a long time. So it's highly personal.
To put things into perspective, let's compare the Sason to another highly regarded 2 way speaker - the Magico Mini. I have heard these speakers at a dealer in Massachusetts within a dedicated treated 2 channel audio room (cost for the room alone topped $200k) with some of the most expensive electronics known to man (Boulder, Spectral, Nagra, etc). The Magico Mini has impeccable build quality, but the sound IMO was not as open and natural as the Sason. Now they cost almost 3x the cost of the Sason SI. Obviously, a valid comparison is a side by side shootout using the same electronics, but very few are able to do that.
Jfz, I agree with much of what you said. I can't see how anyone could evaluate an upstream component at a show. Perhaps I should have titled my post "My favorite SYSTEM at RMAF".
Thanks again, Dracule. I understand (and understood) the analogy. Seemed confusing to call it the "common" pathway, though; i.e., if one switches speakers, there's no commonality at that (final) point anymore. My point wasn't at all about whether it's hard to judge upstream components, however - which of course it is. You were talking about speakers in your initial post, and I didn't see how you judge *them* independently, given diffences in upstream components, rooms, etc. I personally don't see how one makes a "valid" comparison of two different loudspeaker systems unless everything else stays the same. Even then (as I'm sure you know), there are combinations that work better together,etc. In the end, I guess, I disagree with "All you hear is the speaker in the end...".
Jfz, "final common pathway". Think of your speaker as the faucet in your home and the water comming from it is the sound. The water travels from the cloud, to the mountains, gets collected in multiple steams, rivers, to the aquaduct, to the reservoir, to the treatment plant...to your home faucet. Like the faucet, speakers are where the final music (water) comes out of. So it's hard to judge how upstream component sounds - it's like trying to determine where the water came from upstream. All you hear is the speaker in the end, so that's what I can make a valid assessment, unless like I said I already know the sound of the speakers beforehand from personal experience. Sorry, but that's the best crappy analogy I can come up with.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
