"ome of the very best sound i have every heard came from these types of set-ups"
In my home, I run setups in 5 different rooms. The small 12X12 room set up this way is by far the best overall and hard to fault IMHO even with no special room treatments used.
The only problem I have in there is the room is still relatively small. Smaller scale ensemble recordings appropriate for a room that size and pop/rock type music leaves little to want. Larger scale ensemble recordings (classical symphony, big band, etc.) where there is more going on on a larger scale tend to benefit in a larger room where there is more room for everything to breathe. But the bigger room is more a matter of quantity, not quality. I use much larger speakers there and its L shaped configuration requires a much different setup there in order to be able to make good use of the size of the room. |
|
if you think about it, you are horn loading your system.
no 90 degree surfaces to reflect energy as in a square or rectangular room.
and you can propagate a longer bass wavelength down the diagonal that any other dimension in the room with the speakers anchored to the floor.
if you set it up with a door as a bass vent behind you, now you can even micro tune the room.
some of the very best sound i have every heard came from these types of set-ups.
on day 1 of the sf show i was the only one set up this way and by the end of the show there were 9 rooms like this. news spread quickly.
b |
Let me also add that, reading articles such as, "How to set up a dedicated listening room without fancy treatments", was a tremendous help.
It is written by Steve Deckert, where he discusses at length, the benefits of a diagonal set up.
http://www.decware.com/paper14.htm
Enjoy.
David |
Here are the general rules I followed to find a good location for my monitors in the 12 X 12 room.
1) Determine primary listening position
2) locate speakers to distribute sound evenly from left to right across the room. Dispersion pattern of the design is a big factor in determining what works best. Locations closer to side walls may work best.
3) Avoid exact symetrical placement of any kind relative to teh room walls
4) Best results for soundstage and imaging together may require tweeters firing to left and right of listening position and not beaming at listener. This will depend on room acoustics and tonal balance of speakers as well.
5) For best soundstage and bass results together, rear or bottom ported designs may need to come out several feet from rear wall. Front ported or sealed designs may go closer to rear wall.
6) Small changes in placement and/or orientation relative to the listening position can have big effects. Liten carefully with a variety of music over time and fine tune as needed. |
toudou has vsm mx's.
for those who remember, back in san fran for the 98 sterophile show i used it in a 14 by 14 by 12 cube and the sound was fabulous. then for years in vegas in the 20 by 22 foot room at the alexis. i think it was roon 620 or 622.
most of these should be on the merlin site in the picture gallery. i have been recommending this set up for almost 25 years and it works like a dream. do not boo foo it!
:-)
best, b |
I'm using my Mx in a diagonal set up in a 13'X13' room with tremendous results. This was of course, recommended to me by Bobby. A single trap in corner behind speakers, ceiling corners treated, and of course floor is carpeted.
Speakers are spaced 5'5" apart, and seating approximately 7' away.
By pulling the speakers out into the room, cancels out room boundaries! Also, moving the chair forward or back, also gives me some reinforcement in the tonal and bass department.
The rewards are tremendous, but requires patience. |
I have heard similar positive comments on this diagonal alignment over the years, but few folks seem to take this approach in anything but a dedicated listening room as might very have the lowest WAF in audiophilia. |
"a square can be turned into something other by firing the speakers down a diagonal."
yes, good suggestion.
I ended up doing this to some extent to optimize in my 12X12 room with both monitors and more full range floor standers and the results in both cases are top notch. I would expect similar results with other designs as well, including either Merlin. |
if you treat the corners/ceilings for slap echos, carpet the floor, drape or damp the wall behind them and damp primary and immediate reflections on the sides the sound will be killer.
and a square can be turned into something other by firing the speakers down a diagonal.
did this at many shows with superb results.
this is a non issue.
imho.
looks a litle strange at first but...
b |
Goatwuss, I disagree that the Merlin VSMs will not work in a 12' X 12' room. I use a pair in my second system, with tube amplification, in a 15' X 13' room - not far off from those dimensions.
The caveat I've found with this room is that speaker placement has proven far more critical than in the 26' X 17' room that houses my main system. But, with care, the end result can still be incredibly good. |
Is the OP's room 12x12? If this is the case, that's too small for either the Merlin floorstanders or the Gallos. Not to mention identical dimensions that will cause havok in your end result...
The TSM or the Gallo Strada with a small sub would be far better matched to the room size IMHO. |
m, "A sub can always be added later if needed, but the benefits would likely be marginal as indicated and only with some recordings/music types in a smaller 12X12 room."
was that so hard? thank you!
b |
If the OP is still out there and cares, after reading through things further, and getting past all the noise, I realize that you are comparing used versus new at a particular price point. That's important.
Used MErlin VSM-MXes at a good used price will probably not depreciate as much as new anythings.
Given that, I personally would be even more hard pressed to go for new Gallos over floor standing MErlins with Bamm.
This is just my opinion of course. I have never heard MErlins but would feel confident trying them in your situation if it were me.
A sub can always be added later if needed, but the benefits would likely be marginal as indicated and only with some recordings/music types in a smaller 12X12 room.
Of course, some people feel more comfortable buying new, all other things aside. Only you as the buyer can make that judgement. |
"why does it seem like you prefer to spout your opinions more in merlin threads"
Because that is the topic you happen to be monitoring maybe?
I offer opinions and observations on many topics of interest to me based on what I learn over time from various sources, including others whose opinions I respect.
IS that a problem too?
In general, I try to keep discussions positive and sometimes humorous. I seldom get into threads about topics or products I do not like and would not consider buying myself or recommending to others. The exception is when I suspect people may be making a flat out mistake or throwing their money away for no good reason.
If I start talking about MErlin less, you can take that as a bad indicator and a negative trend, FWIW. |
mapman, yes it is true that i am a vendor, i am proud to be one and of my work. have i seen you posting in all maker's threads of mini monitor speakers? why does it seem like you prefer to spout your opinions more in merlin threads? as i said before, use the right tool for the job and if you want the lowest octave get a sub. what is wrong with that???
rarely do you discuss the many attributes of monitors in general. yet you seem to fixate on the lack of bass extention and weight. everyone here knows where your taste falls. as i said you have to hear it to know for sure because anything you say is "mostly" speculation and when you speculate you should say "imho".
your opinion is not a given for everyone.
do you know how many people have told me that their vsms totally over power their room with bass and the sound is unlistenable because of it? i was also at a home recently where an individual had a moderate sized room with speakers that on their own, imho have too much bass and he had two subs hooked up at 120 hz. he asked me what i thought but i did not comment. it takes all kinds i thought.
odds are that you will not like my work if or when you hear it. come to rmaf to room 9014 and hear them for your self. then make comments that are based on first hand knowledge. judging my work based on your dyn's and other similar designs is unfair imho.
best,
b |
|
I FOund this chart I thought useful while looking for information on exactly what kinds of sounds we might want to hear that fall into the lowest audible octave. Audible Frequency SpectrumIt helps to understand what one might be missing if a speaker is challenged below 40hz and whether or not it matters. I'm sure there is other similar info out there as well that might help add additional insight. In addition to the sounds listed that fall into the lowest audible octave, I would add that many electronically generated sounds from synthesizers and other modern electronic music sources commonly used in much modern pop music deliver output that can fall in this range. I find a lot of better quality modern pop recordings and remixes from teh last 10 years or so in particular sound best FWIW when the lowest octave is fully present. |
Mapman, VSMs might not be everyone's cup of tea, but well worth tasting if only to know. But alas there are other tasty offerings also worth listening to - that is the fun of it. Though, I have owned MX then MXe for 9 years and I've not heard a speaker I would prefer to own in my mid-size listening room, and I stopped looking. NOS EL84s? that is another story. Cheers. |
I've heard the Magico mini in a smaller dealer showroom off good tube amplification. They are lovely sounding speakers, but again not as full and muscular, weighty, meat on the bones, whatever as other good larger designs I have heard. That is the only criticism I would have with them and I suspect that is why Magico makes larger models also.
Personal taste is always a big factor.
I've not heard the most recent Gallos, but have heard the prior version. I liked them at first but preferred Quad ESLs overall in that setup when I then heard them based on overall clarity and detail top to bottom, though the Quads are generally not considered the nth degree in dynamics either. The better monitors I have heard (magico, Totem, Dynaudio) compare favorably with the Quads in my assessment.
All things considered, I would lean towards any good monitor most likely over the Gallos based on my limited exposure, but I'll stick to my comments noting that smaller monitors are not likely to be the nth degree in macrodynamics, weight, meat on the bones etc., though likely still very fulfilling in that regard.
MErlin vsm may well be the cream of the crop and not even the most expensive. Most people who own them seem to hang on to them, always a good sign. BP is obviously quite passionate about his products and has seemingly spent years refining the design rather than changing directions, a very good omen. Don't know for sure. Haven't heard the buggers. Would like to someday.
|
System matching is key, but in my not so humble opinion, the latest version of the VSM, actually beginning with the lead free MXe, is the antithesis of "lean." My experience is that it sounds best with tubes in the amp chain (I prefer tubed preamp and solid state power amp), but I agree with Tubegroover that ANY speaker this resolving can sound a bit strident when interfaced with lesser-quality gear (including CABLES). I'm picky like most audiophiles and I went through several amps before settling on my current setup (tubed Bel Canto preamp with Belles 150A Reference amp). Tried Ayre AX-7, YBA Passion Integre, Coda Continuum Ultra, and other solid state integrated amps, but having tubes in the pre section brought out the magic that these speakers can conjure. The BAT 300X-SE with its tubed preamp section was my favorite (and used previously with Tyler Acoustics speakers) but did not have a tape loop, and I have multiple sources so opted for the Bel Canto SEP2 and Belles amp. Love the combination of nuance and power that this combo provides, conveyed via Audience AU24E interconnects and AU24 speaker cables. No desire to upgrade further except when that aforementioned subwoofer hits the market :) |
The VSM can sound lean but with careful matching this can be ELIMINATED, but maybe not enough for some tastes. I have owned the VSM-M for 10 years and do not note any leanness at any frequency but it hasn't always been the case. I tend to believe that any 2-way speaker that is ultra resolving will exhibit this tendency without careful system matching, especially one with the aspirations of the VSM. I'd bet the same issues could be the case with the Magico Mini's as well. I can't compare with the Gallos which I haven't listened to. I listen to a fair amount of large scale orchestral music without the feeling that anything is missing or out of balance, just one man's perspective with plenty of experience, trials and experimentation with this design. There are absolutely no issues with bass in this set-up although some might want more. My priorities are natural resolution and control not quantity, ymmv. I really feel that the continuous comments concerning leanness with reference to highly resolving speakers in general is often an issue with other aspects of set-up and ancillaries. Of course some want a different presentation, warmer, fuller etc. and this can also be taken into consideration when attempting to read into listening impressions. You can't have it all in a 2-way but you get quite a bit with the Merlins, coherence, tonality and resolution being their strong suits.
My room size is 16X18X10 into an L shaped area 12X8X10. The speakers are on the 16' wall out 30" from the back wall and approximately 5' from either side wall. |
"you have not heard them so why comment."
BP, as the vendor, you are undeniably biased on this subject, so why comment?
I won't stop commenting.
Will you?
|
goatwuss, my appology. i saw mx as the header and when i re read your post in full i saw that you had mxe's.
sorry about that but you can see why it happened.
best, b |
mapman just wants to grind this out some more.
first of all the mx is notceably leaner than the mxe that the op was asking about and profoundly leaner than the same speaker with a master bam and master rc. to be truly indicative of the potential you have to hear or discuss a current design. however, i really do thank you for your input gaotwuss as you see that there is more to sound than the bottom octave. and if you want more get a sub... that is why i am working on one. you see, i like bass too. :-)
m, i also never said the the vsm was designed for 12 by 12 foot rooms, you did. it thrives in rooms of around 2500 to 3300 cubic feet.
there is a lot of personal taste involved here and we know yours m. why not let it alone. you have not heard them so why comment.
best, b |
Goatwuss,
How big was the room you used these in?
BP's argument as I understand it is that the VSMs are optimal for a smaller 12X12 room like the OPs.
My experience based on other highly regarded smaller monitors I have heard including my own in similar size rooms tells me that may not be the case if the goal is meat on the bones in addition to all the other good stuff I know good smaller monitors can deliver. Small monitors are an excellent fit for smaller rooms in most regards but not necessarily optimal from a "meat on the bones" perspective. |
"No losers here IMHO" - and mine too. |
With regards to the original topic, I've owned Merlin VSM-MXe (bought used) and currently own Gallo 3.1 (bought new).
Which do I prefer? It's hard to say, they have different strengths and weaknesses, but in my experience they are both truly excellent speakers.
Merlins
Strengths:
* Most coherent and "clear" sounding speakers I've ever heard probably
* Incredibly transparent
* Reference quality tonality for music with mid to smaller ensembles
* Great imaging and staging
Weaknesses:
* With the disclaimer that in my personal system, my room, my preferences, IMHO ,etc. and everything, they were ultimately a bit on the lean side for me, in the lower mids and upper bass. I used a Cary Sixpac EL34 amp.
* Macrodynamically challenged with bigger music, ie. orchestral and big rock compared to speakers with more and bigger drivers
Gallo 3.1
Strengths:
* Excellent Macro and micro dynamics (beats Merlin in Scale)
* Staging and imaging at least as good as the Merlins (for me)
* Very holographic and airy presentation
Weaknesses:
* Not quite as clear and crisp as the Merlins in the mids and highs.
Ultimately these are two speakers in similar camps - they are both ultra high resolution speakers capable of sounding very very good. Both are created by very talented designers. If you want a bit more meat in the lower midrange and the bass, go for the Gallo. If you want more clarity and open-ness in the mids, go for the Merlin. No losers here IMHO |
g has a room that is 12 by 12 so moving the speakers to find a null point or using bass traps are probably out of the question. since small rooms have an abundance of bass reinforcement modes, having a large footprint speaker will also limit him greatly. using the right tool for the right job will get him much farther down the road to musical enjoyment. all this talk about 5% of the bandwidth that is not even there in all of the music or recordings is imho, fruitless. his situation is what it is. now perhaps if he was in a larger room and he personally wanted the lowest octave... he was talking about midrange fullness imo.
b |
"it is designed for more intimate settings where the lowest octave would overpower the room or bigger speakers/room treatments would dominate the appearance. in these intimate settings large wave launch systems would have too much stratification of the output and sound too complicated losing the appeal to most."
BP,
I hear you and understand completely.
Good monitors or other similar floorstanders that also tend to feature a high degree of driver coherency in close quarters by design, like the OHM Walsh speakers with CLS drivers I am fond of, are the best choice generally for close quarters. Some might be a bit too much in the bass for small rooms perhaps, but there are often ways usually to tame that via placement, treatments, etc. as needed, I suspect. You definitely do not want too big a speaker in a small room just because, that is for certain. |
p, more powerful amps have more output devices and a lower output impedance. as a result you have higher damping and usually feedback.
lower wattage amps tend to sound more room filling and more relaxed. this is part of what you are hearing.
this is a great match for the imp corrected and relatively efficient vsm.
ok?
b |
I feel that way, given that I'm driving them with RM10 35watts EL84s, and 60 watts Class A, triode, Atma OTLs and never feel underpowered, but was wondering if I was missing "something" - glad to know I'm not, seems just as powerful as when I used the CAT 100 watts, and Music Reference RM9 SE 162 watts. My feeling mid wattage versions of basic circuits sound better than their more powerful iterations IF the the wattage is sufficient. Makes it alot easier to find a nice amp to drive the VSMs. |
imho no.
you should be able to produce about 105 db with 60 watts and a little left in reserve would be good for dynamic peaks. 106 is as loud as a symphony can play but in 3000 cubic feet that is extremely loud even if you have the room damped for reflections relative to the sitting position.
60 or 70 watts is all that is needed for most listening. the vsn 100's are 100 watts a side and great for shows. but remember how loudly i played it with the fila in nyc?
and that was about 2800 cubic feet with a 30 watt amp.
i feel most people are 110% happy with 30 watts.
ok?
best, b |
Bobby, is there any advantage to going much beyond 60watts with the VSMs? How much power is really needed to get the most out of them. They always seemed to sound exceptional with the VSNs at 100 watts? Any reason to go beyond that? |
I was a bit suprised myself when I went from Vandersteen 3A Signatures with two 2wq subwoofers to the VSMs and first listened to the VSMs expecting a drop off in bass satisfaction - I simply could not believe what I was hearing from these "small" speakers with one 7" woofer - it did not seem possible. Is it the deepest bass possible - most certainly not, but I never felt short changed - though I do mostly listen to acoustic jazz where the demands for real low bass power is probably not the most challenging. Now that was my impression 9 years ago, and things have only gotten better, incrementally with the "e" version and then the Master BAM. Too me, the VSM is a very sane speaker for the types of rooms most of us use them in - at 13x18x9 - just about perfect to my ears. |
i said earlier that you have to hear it properly set up to experience what it can do. without doing this, all comments are speculation. it is not meant for huge rooms. it is designed for more intimate settings where the lowest octave would overpower the room or bigger speakers/room treatments would dominate the appearance. in these intimate settings large wave launch systems would have too much stratification of the output and sound too complicated losing the appeal to most.
use the right tool for the right job.
thank you miker.
b |
Mapman wrote.."....However, most very good small monitors I am familiar with do not go that low. For example, I use a pair of Dynaudio COntour 1.3mkii monitors in a 12X 12 room. I think these do things down below 50hz to some extent. VEry nice in that room! Until you compare to larger floorstanders that also fit well into that room and go a bit lower. Then you notice you are missing something with music that benefits from response in the lower octaves...."
Mapman, I recently went from a pair of Contour 1.3mkii's (which I had for 10 years) to VSM-MMi. Didn't realize what I was missing, especially with regards to the increased bass extension and I don't even have the master BAM/RC's. That from a speaker which height/width/depth wise is virtually identical to the 1.3 mkii on stands. |
We've been waiting for a subwoofer for the VSM sans BAM - not sure it would be better overall, but one would expect deeper, more dynamic bass, but perhaps at a cost sonically in other ways. |
I would add also that for smaller rooms, monitors and other designs that more closely approximate a point source tend to perform best overall in general.
Also, I believe monitors + sub(s) is a very practical and modular solution when needed/desired. |
Mapman, I think that is a pretty good take overall. I will say that within its limitations, though suprisingly minor given its "small" size, the Merlins do what they do so well, that I don't ever really think about what they don't do that a larger, more complex multi-driver box might do better, and few of them can match the Merlin in those areas it excels - but like anything else, it might not be the speaker for everyone. As Daniel Webster said of Dartmouth, "it is small, but there are those that love it.":) |
"one day you need to hear it and experience its "total" potential. "
I'll be happy to eat my words if I hear these someday and they redefine the limits of what a smaller monitor can do in terms of weight and impact with music that demands you be able to feel it as much as hear it for teh full experience.
Monitors may do well at plumbing the depths of the low end to a decent extent, but all good ones I am aware of tend to start to roll off at at higher frequencies than good true full ranges so the energy delivered in the lower octaves may still be quite good, but not the best, even in a small room and with a circuit like the BAMM providing a boost.
Typically, the only way to really know what is missing is to experience it first.
Also, I will say that for a lot of genres, like smaller ensemble jazz and classical, it is not a big issue. For most else, it can be and often is, I believe, at least with better recordings.
That's really the only limitations I hear with very good monitors compared to larger designs typically, even in a smaller room where I have experimented with both. |
paul, some people like and undertand how to work with linearity/high res and some do not. some want to hook up anything and have good sound and that is ok. but that should tell you something knowing how different components can sound. cables can show this to an even greater degree.
but do not forget that i stated that there is a cable out there that is about $3 a foot that sounds imho, stupid good for the money. $6000 for cables, no. only if you want champion class sound and are prepared to go that route with the rest of the system. the more that the speakers are capable of, the more careful you have to be.
and mapman, this is not a usual monitor. the woofer has an fs of 28 hz and has a 1 inch excursion. for 99% of moderate rooms this speaker is more than enough. one day you need to hear it and experience its "total" potential.
best, bobby |
Juan I agree that cables are important with the Merlin philosophy but I don't think table top radio is fair. Besides, with copper costing what it does high end cables can be a money maker! I purchased two new meter long Cardas GR 4 years ago which I sold after 2 years with swapping out systems. I recently changed up again only to find the same cable was up by 35%. Anyway, your point is well taken as bobby has looked at all the options to maxamize his speaker which of course includes cables. You wouldn't buy a ferrari and use regular gas would you? |
I think the 3.5s will give a richer presentation than the Strada's, and will represent a nice upgrade.
Now that I think about it, in hearing the descriptions here, both the Gallos have an "airy" (baffleless?) sound. I think they are lovely (esp. for the $), and I'm particularly keen on the 3.5, but if G is looking for more "heft" in sound, he might want to think about a box design. (I have not heard the v3.5s with the bass amp, though.)
John |
Juancgenao, you have very unique hearing if the Merlin sounds like a table top radio to you, with ANY cables (well, most any, I'm sure you could find something to screw up the sound of any amp/speaker). Do like the ProAcs though, owned two version over the years. |
the problem with the merlins is, that you need to spend,
close to $6000 in cables, let alone the amplification,
to mask the lean nature of the sound they produce,
withought cardas cables, they sound like a table top radio,
switched to proac D38, and I'm in heaven:
cheers; |
"m, i asked if you have heard them?"
No, but I have heard a lot of top notch similar monitors and have a good feel for what is possible out of a speaker that size. I've also read a lot about the MErlins.
As I said, I have no doubt they can perform extremely well as do the others, especially in smaller rooms.
But the fact is there is only so much you can wean out of a small box with small drivers.
For some rooms, that may be enough though, granted. |
m, i asked if you have heard them?
not only would they suffice in a small room and potentially over power it but i have used them in much larger rooms at shows and many ask, "were is the sub or subs?" if you carefully set them up so that the boundary reinforcements embellish the bottom end, you would be surprized what you can get out of them. and this is with no 2nd or 3rd order harmonic distortion in the bass. mf in sterophile had them going down to 26 hz but i was the one who set them up. i use them in an 8000 cubic foot room at the factory and i am sure "you" would be very surprized at what they can do in this regard.
i like bass every bit as much as you do but there is a time and place for the lowest octaves.
best, b |
BP,
If they do 30hz up, then agree that should most likely suffice in a small room.
However, most very good small monitors I am familiar with do not go that low. For example, I use a pair of Dynaudio COntour 1.3mkii monitors in a 12X 12 room. I think these do things down below 50hz to some extent. VEry nice in that room! Until you compare to larger floorstanders that also fit well into that room and go a bit lower. Then you notice you are missing something with music that benefits from response in the lower octaves.
It is very dependant on room acoustics, agreed. Those same floorstanders that shine in the 12X12 room I mentioned tend to be a bit bass heavy as you describe in the 12X12 sunroom with cathedral ceilings above it. But that can be tamed. It is sometimes easier to subtract what is there to start with than to add it later. |
mapman, g has a very small room and it is common knowledge that weighted deep bass will do nothing but aggrivate room resonances. the vsm is not made for large rooms and should not be compared to larger floor standing speakers that can go down to dc. it is a highly finnessed thing that can do great magic from 30 up. surely if i wanted to go lower i would not use a 6.5 inch woofer to knock your livingroom into the street. i am after linearity and lack of distortion. still, they can be very impressive in this regard.
it is just my opinion but there is a lot more than coherence going on here. have you ever heard them. new ones sound very different.
"always use the right tool for the right job."
best,
bobby |
