Have you seen the VR9SE Review?

i'm not sure what you would call my collection of thoughts either......as my first paragraph states.

i agree it is not a review in a strict sense.

likely a better title may have been; "Adapting the System to the new room.....featuring the VR9's"......as the focus is on the VR9's in the context of the room and the changing components as opposed to the VR9's by themselves.

to be clear; the review did not take a year to write. there simply was no conclusion to express until things sorted themselves out......which took a year. then i wrote the article in a couple of nights.

as i stated a few times in the article; the adjustability of the VR9 had it's dark side; but once mastered it is IMHO far superior to any 'one size fits all' design......in the same way that some talk of the very best audio components they have yet heard are not commercial products. there is nothing like properly executed truely custom built stuff.

there was a time that i did adjust the settings for different friends and even different software. but that was when i was lacking confidence in where i was at......and you do run the danger of getting caught up in adjustments for adjustments sake. i'm past that point now and now only in vary specific situations i will make very small adjustments when i know the musical involvement gain is significant.

over on my system thread i have detailed many of the design decisions that i went thru in the last year with component changes that i glossed over in the article as i felt that more detail about those would just get tedious (or more tedious:)) if you have questions regarding the room design itself please follow the link provided in the article to my previous room design and construction article.

i have done a good bit of listening to other 'Statement' speakers but felt that (other than the Kharma Exquisites) i really did not want to get into that. i will just say that i state at the beginning of the article what my target speaker performance was.....there are ZERO other speakers that i have heard that fit that bill in my experience.....particularly after my experience.....but i have not heard everything.

yes; i could have got into particular cuts of music; but i think i made my opinion clear on the sonic attributes of the VR9 in my summation at the end. the VR9's sound like music if your system does.

you need to understand that you can actually choose how you want things to sound......almost without limit. so what characteristics do you then assign to the speaker? the only valid characteristic is that the VR9's serve the music in your tastes.

to my ears voices sound like voices; pianos sound like pianos; trumpets sound like trumpets......to the degree that the software can render them.

the VR9's are limited by software, the characteristics of the supporting gear and little else.

Rum, first thanks, i'm happy you enjoyed my musings. i do know you seriously considered the VR9's and i wish i had had a better handle on them back then to relate.

to be clear; i don't view the adjustments that are provided with the VR9 as an equalizer, although maybe in a strict sense any gain adjustment on a driver can be viewed as a sort of equalizer. there are gain adjustments on 4 drivers; the three tweeters and the subwoofer. none of those gain adjustments changes the slope of the crossover or the frequency. there is the adjustable crossover on the subwoofer which allows the sub to crossover anyplace from 50hz to 100hz (my article said it crossed over at 80hz which i have realized was wrong). i don't know if the crossover slope changes as this crossover is adjusted; but i doubt it.

also understand that my room presents big challenge/opportunity due to the extensive bass trapping and very reflective but diffusive surfaces including the hardwood floor. most speakers are not designed for a room like mine as far as the retention of high frequency energy. the adjustability allowed the speaker to project a maximum of energy without overloading.

in any case; it would be difficult to say whether a speaker with a non-adjustable crossover between the lowest bass driver and the next driver up (woofer or mid-range) could be as 'perfectly' tuned for my room.....but i seriously doubt it. i also doubt whether other non-adjustable speakers could have the bass integrate so perfectly. or whether the tweeters could be made to sound so natural and yet so extended. or speakers without an adjustable rear-firing tweeter could get the bed of air the music has just 'right'.

and practically speaking; the fact that things can be continuously adjusted 'on the fly' allows much more incisive adjustments to be done compared to other adjustable speakers that may require a diferent resistor or other less user friendly adjustment scheme. OTOH it does make the process more 'work' and less simple.

there are other great speakers that have adjustments; and it's possible that you may find the perfect speaker for a room by luck. i have not heard any speaker/room work together like i am now hearing.

EQ or a PARC can be the right thing for some rooms; but that is a band-aid to other issues that is a compromise which exacts a price if SOTA is your goal. it would not be my choice of solutions......and at the risk of starting a 'brawl' any digital EQ considerations are really not an option if ultimate resolution and naturalness in a system is important (that is essential for me).

Holenneck (btw, nice moniker), the speakers were personal purchases and not review samples. the review was not central to my direction. i purchased the 3rd retail set built of these speakers so it wasn't going to be out-of-date anytime soon.

i happen to disagree with your premise that the room should be adapted to the speakers.....even though most of us are stuck with that program. rooms are forever (at least relative to speakers) and are way more spendy than a speaker when done right. if one has the opportunity to design the perfect room first; and then find the correct speaker for it.....there is a much better chance of success. this thinking is basically my whole premise for building my room and then choosing the VR9's. also; you won't really know whether the speaker actually works correctly until the room is measured with that speaker playing in that room. if there are then 'issues' there becomes lots of finger pointing. it was much easier for me to figure out what sort of speaker i needed for my new room after hearing and measuring the Kharma Exquisites in the new room.

some rooms are designed for particular speakers; but after going thru the design process my perspective is that that approach would end up being quite frustrating in the long run but maybe easier in the short run.

i respect your right to disagree.

i went thru 9 years of quite intense efforts to adapt my existing room to my speakers. it was a success on some levels but ultimately had clear limits of how far i could go and frustrated me.

i am frustrated no longer.

Tim, thanks.

my previous speakers to the VR9's were the Kharma Exquisites which were a prime example of simple signal path. they had a very simple 'serial' crossover and the mid-range ran free. when i had compared the Kharmas to most anything they had that mid-range clarity and open naturalness that was so important to me.

when i initially looked at the VR9's i had a similar reaction as you.....why would i want all that 'stuff' in the signal path? then i heard them at CES back to back with Kharmas and clearly i was hearing as far (maybe farther) into the music as the Kharmas. i can tell you that as clear, open and uncolored as the Kharmas are the VR9's are another level or two beyond that.

the key is in the execution and component choices not in the overall circut scheme. all things being equal simpler is cleaner....but all things are not equal. Von Schweikert choose some very expensive autoformers (over $500 each x 3 for each speaker) for attenuation for the tweeters and similar for the woofer. these autoformers maintain the same impedence at all positions. from my conversations with Von Schweikert these components were transparent in the signal path thru the design stage.

the proof is in the listening. every time i listen i find it hard to believe i am listening to a 6-way 7 driver speaker with 4 attenuators.....but i am.

as far as ANY digital crossover i have NEVER heard one that is transparent.....and if you can do the room and speaker correctly they have no purpose. i will never dumb down my sources by digitizing (or re-digitizing) them.

Sirspeedy, i know you are a Kharma fan as am i. i have spent many hours listening to Kharmas in many systems. i have owned the Exquisite Ref for three years and had the Midi Exquisite (with Diamond tweeter) in my system for 4 months.

my opinion is that the Kharma Exquisite Ref amd Midi Exquisite were optimized in my room for clarity. yes; i have upgraded my racks and power cables since the Kharma's have left my system. i did switch from the Placette passive to the darTZeel pre but i listened to the VR9 for 6 months with the Placette. i did upgrade the EMM to the Signature Edition but listened mostly over the last year to the standard EMM, the same as with the Kharma.

i did use both my Tenor Hybrids as well as the darTZeel with both Kharma speakers as well as both amps with the VR9's.

i have listened to the Kharma's and VR9's back to back at three different shows in various systems.

with my extensive experience with Kharma's as well as the commonality of the room, amps, cables and sources i am confident that i am in a position to give a pretty solid judgement on the relative merits of the Exquisites and the VR9's. i stand by my comments.

i respect you for your typically well thought out viewpoints, i respect your Kharma Experience as well as your listening time with the VR9's....and.....i respect your perspective but don't agree with it.

i'm just one guy with an opinion...and that is all it is.