The sound of the Beveridge is delicate and well defined but it lacks the dynamics one would wish for, feeling the need to get it more or less right.
I've long lived with a Quad 63 and Gradient sub combination, driven first by Jadis gear and later by two sets of Atma-sphere 60 watt monos and an Atma
MP-1 Mk. III phono pre. Timbre, presence and subtle cues were there, dynamics were fair, but not as right as I would have wished for ( I am initimatley familiar with the sound of a grand ) and the lowest octave, when "thunder" was called for, lacked both power and presence in spite of the Gradients, which performed fair otherwise . All the same, the middle octaves of the grand were there, the very highs almost and the lowest lacked punch. Liszt made me not quite happy, Schubert or Mozart mostly completely. I mention this, because if you buy used, you could perhaps make it, including a good TT plus arm and cart. I am still waiting for good piano rendition on digital. If someone could point me to good recordings of classical piano, I would be grateful.
To get it really right is not cheap. I am at a point where I am truly happy, but at what cost!
To wit:
TT.Goldmund Reference I, highly modified with space age plinth and pivot.
Arm: 1.Highly modified Goldmund with adjustable VTA from listening position
2.highly modified Souther with Air Tight PC-1 (best for dynamics)
other cart: Suchy's Goldfinger on the Goldmund arm
Phono pre: Wavac and Boulder 2008
Pre: Wavac
Amp: VTL Siegfried monos Pentode mode (700watts)
Speakers:
High: aCapella plasmas driven by Zanden
Main: Sound Labs U1-PX, wide dispersion
Bass: 2 Soutien self powered bass systems with room control
Sub bass: Rel Studio III
Wires: Stealth and custom made.
I bought much of the above used or at discount, but all the same it came to well over 5x your budget. Perhaps you can get the same result for less money, though frankly I doubt it, if you want to get satisfactory results from top to bottom octave, from ppp to fff, have all the resonances and decays right, knowing exactly how a Steinway, a Bösedorfer, or a Bechstein with what music can sound and be enabled to sometimes almost forget that your're only listening to facsimile of the thing.
|
Very good points Newbee, Guido. In fact, I found for myself, that the sound that satisfied me the most, was not the sound I heard in concert, but that playing a grand myself (badly, alas) or sitting right next to one and thus hearing the full spectrum of sounds, those beasts are capable of. Apart from a few Phillips recordings of Brendel, the closest I came to this my perception of "reality", was with a Deutsche Grammophon, no less, Martha Argerich ( in her heyday ) playing the Liszt Sonata in B Minor on DG 2530193. I more or less fine tuned my system on this recording for piano. Also here you will practically hear all the side-effects Guido so expertly writes about and yes, I must try to hunt up that Brilliant classics Box and see how it does through my Spoiler. |
Wireless200,
" I would say no the former and yes to the latter question. "
I completely agree. (:
Jax2, You've brought two points up, which mirror my experience:
I've pondered extensively as well as listened two various SET and horn combinations and came to similar conclusions as you did. I didn't try the biggest aCapellas though. I couldn't and wouldn't afford them, quite apart from their size.
Also I've found that OTLs pleased my ears most with really big orchestral music doing big dynamic swings without losing important detail, so I settled for the 200watt Atmas, which however proved a tad weak on the chest together with my Sound Labs on that very DG recording of Argerich's playing Liszt which I had mentioned above. I would have loved to have bought Ralph's biggest offering in amplification, which however would have busted my budget, so I settled for second choice, the Siegfrieds, which I could buy used here on A. I could have avoided the Sound Labs of course, but I've gotten so used to the sound of stators and to build systems around them for practically the last 50 years that can't help to find most cone speakers either colored or slow or lacking in homogeneity. Question of hearing-habit I suppose. I know this is neither factual nor "objective", but I listen to my ears. (; |
Shadorne,
How true, but I hate to have my head mimic a soundstage. |
not wishful thinking, I'd say, but self delusion. However, like being freshly infatuated with " the most wonderful, most intelligent, most considerate and gentle person", it is one of the most enjoyable temporary mental disorders in this here our world I submit. (And I would not miss either for anything in the world!) |
Dave,
Yes in theory, but it very much depends on the room, finding the right volume, the phase- and crossover points , the proper placement of the sub(s) to get such a blend with the mainspeakers that the sub disappears. It is quite tricky to get it right. I would suggest to first get everything else right to sound to your satisfaction and then later play around with the deeper frequencies and ...if you can find a sub fast and controlled enough within your budget, aim for 20 not 30 hz. |
Again, I would advise against getting a sub first. Have everything else set up to your satisfaction first. After that, yes I would say that a sub is essential. ( or even one for each channel) A sub is not only about getting the bottom octaves more right, but if set up correctly, will give you a lot of ambient cues about the recording venture and you can fine tune soundstage and transparency. Also finding the right sub to sound right in your room will depend on wether you decide on SS or tube amplification. Many subs of today have digital amplification, which according to my experience does not homogenize properly with the rest of the system, if you use tubes. I'd advise not to rush it and later, once you are happy with your system, try out a few brands if you can until you are satisfied. |
Dave,
then you should know how difficult it is to get it right. Don't forget Plaser is new to this and as you should know with your experience, it is the easiest thing in the world to ruin your entire system with subs which are not blended right into the rest. Having had a look at your system, which I find impressive, I don't think it is built around the idea of getting classical piano right foremost and all. Plaser however seems to aim at that and I had that in mind, when I issued my warning.
Sorry, should I have stepped on your toes, in my over 50 years experience (; I have learned that many ways lead to Rome but it mostly brings mediocre results if you rush on the way. |
OOps, yes I must repent, being even much much slower than Newbee, I only now realized that Plaser had pictures of his room here! I've always had a mental picture of his "new room" in my head. Considering the room pictured here, I'd fully agree with what Mapman and others had to say and 30hz would indeed do.
So sorry folks, didn't want to be complicated.
Happy listening,
Detlof |
Greg,
Thanks for voicing your understanding of the true core or rather coeur of my efforts. Wished it could have been done more cheaply. But for that the technical resources, outward as well as inward ones were wanting.
Dave,
dipole bass with planars is actually a must, I agree. Another reason why Quads with Gradients sounded so good in combination and your planars were rightly famous for this. For this very reason I tried to keep the Grads when I changed to the Sound Labs but found they were bettered after all by the Soutiens plus Rel combination. The latter by the way is -6db@9hz in room. Helps to chase burglars away (and scare the shit out of you) but also to get the lowest registry of the grand piano in (almost) all its authority with (almost) perfect timing and pitch after much much fiddling, sweating and swearing. Since subbass systems are not only important for bass but for ambience cues ( the Rel is linear down to below 12 hz) which are more felt than heard, all that fiddling was certainly worthwhile. |
Plaser,
In case you did not want to spend the extra money for the sub controller or are unhappy with the results, here is what I found useful when setting up subs. Probably you have already done all that and are happy. In that case just ignore me, if not, perhaps I may be of some use.
1. Place the sub, just as Mapman has suggested behind one of your main speakers in to the corner of the room.
2. Get an LP or a CD with steady really deep bass. The Rel people suggest here the "Sneakers" CD, film music composed by James Horner on Columbia. You can find that on eBay usually for little money. Use track four, which has a timely evenly spaced deep bass drum. Play your system at normal levels with the sub powered up and play around with the phase switch. Ignore the midbass music on the disk, just listen to the really deep bass drum and find out the loudest setting at either normal or inverted phase. Once you've found that, stick to that.
3. Next move the bass unit a few inches to and fro on an imaginary diagonal line through your room aimed at the opposite corner to where you've placed your bass unit. Have a friend at hand to listen where the bass drum gets loudest. This is probably the best spot for your sub.
4. Next settle for the right X-over points. If at all possible run you main system never ever through your sub's X-over. It practically always ruins the sound. To find out where to best let the sub cut in and at what slope, if the latter is possible with your unit, familiarize yourself well with the the sound of your test cut on the cd, WITHOUT the sub first and then experiment with the sub switched on. The sub must not interfere with, cloud or blot out in any way tjhe subtle information in the music on the disk, but be clearly heard when the bass drum is put into play. With the Sneakers cd this can be achieved very easily if you listen and have a friend fiddle with the X-over points. I've had very good success with this method, which also the Rel people use.
Good luck and happy listening,
Detlof |
