WOW this thread had a little bit of everything, very positive, negative, off topic and more off topic.
I've decided I love the VR4jrs quirks as they be.
If I had to describe their sound with one word it would be
"RICH". Not too bright, not too bland, not too slow. Their balance from top to bottom, their excellent imaging, huge soundstage, deep reaching(tight)bass,
make these one of the few speakers I've heard near their price that do it right.... for me at least. |
There are a few lessons to be learned here. The first is that not everyone is qualified to assess the accuracy of a speaker. It would be like me trying to judge poodles in a dog show. There would be a lot of unhappy dog owners -- and rightfully so.
Despite their good intentions, a lot of people simply don't have the trained ears or the points of reference to know whether a speaker (or entire system) is accurate. And if you fall into the camp that doesn't care if a speaker is accurate (i.e., it's all a matter of personal taste and what you like is what counts), that's fine, but I think the majority of audiophiles are in search of an accurate system. And accuracy isn't subjective.
I've owned lots of high-end speakers (amps, preamps, transports, processors and CD players, too), including Dunlavy SC-IV/A, Vandersteen 3A Signature, Quad 988, and the VR-4Jr. definitely holds its own against any of these. For example, it's far more revealing than the Vandersteen, which is a fine speaker, but no matter what I did, in my room at least, it couldn't approach the transparency and resolution of the Von Schweikert. And the VR-4Jr. offers better dynamics and bass extension than the 988. I can't say they're better -- or even as good -- as the SC-IV/A, but they're less than half the price and they don't get embarrassed by the big (and that's a problem) Dunlavy.
As for Opalchip's assertion that you can't judge a person's hearing by his/her equipment, on the contrary. I think it speaks volumes. If someone is slamming something, I want to know what he listens to. If it's Bose 901s and a Yamaha receiver, that's all I need to know. Also, like Kevziek, I'm a musician and studied for several years with a member of the Detroit Symphony. I know what live unamplified instruments are supposed to sound like.
The VR-4Jr. speakers are far from perfect, but they're mighty good at the $4k price point. |
Kevziek,
Thank you for the support.
Opalchip,
Get some professional help soon. I'm worried about you. I do care.
Rob |
Hi Arkio - Yes it did cut into my listening time tonight, but you just can't let that kind of bull be perpetrated on a personal level. Heated debate about speaker design is fine, or audiophile vs. musicphile is fine*** - that's what the Audiogon boards are for. But nothing I posted even remotely justifies these falsefications and personal attacks. It's just nuts. I've really never encountered this kind of thing here before.
Also - one admission to Kevziek - in my first response to you where I said you were bashing me, I was incorrect. I had been looking at Robm's post and mixed it up with yours. So maybe it put you in a bad mood, but even before that you were warping my statements and intentions in your post, and put things on a personal level. With statements like:
"you criticize a brilliant engineer like Albert Von Schweikert for his engineering choices" - which I absolutely didn't and wouldn't do anywhere.
And "So, your implication is that... I'm an 'audiophile' with a negative connotation" - which I patently stated you misconstrued based on zero evidience, and that you're still asserting.
And you ask "What qualifications do you have in speaker design to so strongly criticize...?" - Of course, if you look back objectively at my first post, I hadn't strongly criticized ANYTHING. I had said the JR's weren't for me and stated why - plain and simple.
So it wasn't "bashing", and I apologize for calling it that - but it's sure wasn't nice, and I did nothing to provoke it. And it's completely out of place on a board where speaker design is the main topic of conversation.
And now, the obsequious "apology" to Robm321 for "how you've been treated here" must appear very odd to anyone who has read his insulting fusillades at other posters. (Sorry for the big words again.)
***BTW - Just for fun, here are the top 3 defintions of "audiophile" found on Google / Answers.com:
"1.au·di·o·phile (ô'dē-ə-fīl') pronunciation
n. A person having an ardent interest in stereo or high-fidelity sound reproduction.
2. audiophile
An individual who is very interested and enthusiastic about the sound quality of a stereo or home theater system. Sometimes, audiophiles are more passionate about the equipment being used than the music itself.
3. An audiophile (literally, "one who loves sound") is one who is concerned with achieving high-quality results in the recording and playback of music. Audiophile values may be applied at all stages of the chain: the initial audio recording, the production process, and the playback (usually in a home setting). The adjective "high-end" is commonly applied to audiophile vendors, products, and practices.
There is great skepticism outside the audiophile community surrounding whether these practices and products have the claimed effects on the listening experience, and there are often accusations of self-delusion. People on both sides of the debate concede that, since many audiophiles are laymen, they are vulnerable to exploitation by fanciful claims made by unethical vendors."
------------------------------------------------
Interesting, eh? Anyway, I really am done this time as I can't justify putting any more energy into this idiocy. |
Opalchip
LOL - you must sure have a lot of free time on your hands LOL
No offence man... its just funny the lengths some folks go to make a point on this forum... Did you actually go back and go thru all those threads?... thats funny.
Good listening |
I'm baaaaaack - I can't let this kind of behavior go, and I'm tempted to report it. Robm is an angry guy, that's OK with me. His post wasn't exactly accurate (that's an understatement) but so be it. But the intentional, in-your-face-lying by Kevziek is not excusable. There have been 26 posts previous posts asking for direct advice on vr4-jr's qualities for a prospective purchase. I made comments on 4 threads, all of which were solid advice and 2 of which were tilted in favor of the VR-4 JR's. IMHO the type of behavior exhibited by these two has no place on Audiogon.
Here is a list of the thread titles followed by whether or not I posted. In addition my relevant quotes are copied verbatim below along with a couple of their direct quotes from these same threads (an interesting read):
Thread Title----------------------------------------Post by opalchip
Von Schweikert VR-4 GEN.III SE -VS- VR-4 JR?........No
Von Schweikert VR-4 Jr Room and amp Requirements....No
Von Schweikert VR-4,Jr..............................No
Thiel CS6 to Von Schweikert VR4 JR - Am i Crazy?....Yes
Vandersteen 3A Sig vs. Von Schweikert VR4 Jr........Yes
Speakers that work close to the back wall...........No
Schweikert VR4-Jr vs. Gallo Reference 3 with SA.....No
Best Speaker Match for JC-1's : VMPS or Von S.?.....No
What speakers to replace Paradigm 100.2? Help.......No
Vr4jr and Contour 3.3, In the same league??.........No
Finish Quality of Von Schweikert VR4jr's............No
Von Schweikert VR4jr................................No
Finish Quality of Von Schweikert VR4jr's(#2)........Yes
Von Schweikert VR4jr's in a 15' x 12' Room?.........No
Please help me on a speaker selection...............No
Are the Von Schweikert VR-4JRs really all that?.....No
Is this nuts? (urge to try the VSA VR4Jr).............No
VR-4JR or USHER 6371.................................No
vr4 Jr vs. B&W Signature 805.......................... No
von Schweikert VR4 Jr ............................... No
Bag End TA15 vs. Von Schweikert VS4 series.............No
Von Schweikert VR-4,Jr. .............................No
B&W 703 or VR4 jr?.....................................No
VR-4jr or Gallo Nucleus Reference 3....................Yes
Von Schweikert VR-4 GEN.III SE -VS- VR-4 JR?............No
Von Schweikert VR4-Jr: Urgent Opinions Needed...........No
THREAD-- Thiel CS6 to Von Schweikert VR4 JR
Should poster replace Thiel CS6's with JR's? OPALCHIP says -"VR4 Gen. III se's maybe, VR6 maybe - not VR4jr's"
THREAD-- Vandersteen 3A Sig vs. Von Schweikert VR4 Jr
OPALCHIP says -"(Choose Vr4-jr's for) Rock, yes. Large scale Classical, maybe. Hip Hop, definitely. Jazz and acoustic - no way. The Vandersteens are what you would be happier with."
THREAD-- Finish Quality of Von Schweikert VR4jr's
OPALCHIP says -"Used JR's are showing up pretty frequently with resale prices fairly low (for some reason). Some sellers have priced them under $2000 already, and at that price I wouldn't complain."
THREAD-- VR-4jr or Gallo Nucleus Reference 3
OPALCHIP says -"I'm not going to get into what I would buy, because that's purely a personal preference. But if you must pick one of those 2 - my opinion is that the VR4jr's are both more versatile and musical."
KEVZIEK says in this same thread "Yes, the Cherry veneer is way too revealing of flaws, and I think the speakers should be finished better, particularly the Cherry. My pair is African Hazelwood, and they were a handpicked pair. My finish is quite good, but I do agree there could be more coats of a better urethane."
INTERESTING - "HANDPICKED". HMMMMMMM...
THREAD--Bag End TA15 vs. Von Schweikert VS4 series
Robm says - "Good for you! I love my VS speakers, but they aren't for everyone."
FUNNY - THAT'S ABOUT ALL I'VE SAID HERE AND BEEN BASHED OUTRAGEOUSLY FOR IT. |
It may be of interest to readers here that Opalchip has posted critical commentary on nearly every thread about VR-jr speakers on Audiogon. It almost appears to be a crusade...
His overly verbose prose and personal barbs directed at me and other posters should probably not be dignified with a response, since they are transparent attempts at one-upmanship and having the last word.
However, I will make a few comments regarding this.
Opalchip's statement that I'm bashing people personally is absurd. Self-projection is probably the best explanation for that. I bashed no one, but simply stated my opinion that there may be listeners who make criticisms of these speakers, based on using poor-sounding recordings to make those judgments. This hardly equates to personally bashing people.
Despite his denial, he did give "audiophile" a negative connotation. Read his first post---and this will be clear.
By the way, not all recordings that are great music and a great performance have bad sonics. Some have exceptional sound, others have listenable sound, and others are shrill and unlistenable, or worse.
Robm321, let me apologize for how you've been treated here, and thanks for your contribution. |
Newbee,
I was not offended at all. You may have used tact, but you did personally attack me. Your post said "You define yourself far more than you define others - your choice - ;(". It may be a passive aggressive way to attack rather than the straight, harsh attacks that I dish out. I can accept it however. I expected that after my post. I still stand by it. I appreciate your candor and I have nothing against you or Opalchip, but when someone starts making claims, I have to call them on it - especially if he is going to make some crazy claims, contradicting himself, and then running off so he would not have to answer speculation. I should be more dignified instead of ugly about it (something for me to work on). I see my own shortcomings, and I'm sure if you turned that mirror around you would see some as well. That's neither here nor there.
I think the criticism about recordings that are less than optimal has more to do with the speakers not masking the flaws than the fact that these speakers don't sound good on less than optimal recordings. Most of what I listen to is less than optimal and these speakers sound great with that. If a recording is forward sounding in the treble however, these speakers will sound forward in the treble. Given some of the criticisms above make me wonder what in their system or recording is causing these sounds that I don't hear in my systems with average recordings, and I am a long way from having perfect gear. That's all.
Rob |
Rob, I was not personally attacking you, I was commenting on your conduct in this thread. There is a meaningful difference. All I did was hold up a mirror for you - you looked and admitted that it revealed an ugliness. If it matters not to you, it matters not to me. If my post offened you, or other Audiogon members I appoligize for not finding a more civil way of expressing myself.
Something else for you to reflect on - consider that generally only folks who have your best interests at heart will tell you when your fly is open. The rest stand about and giggle about how ridiculious you appear and wait for your Johnson to appear.
FWIW, on the original inquiry I have nothing I consider of value to say about the 4Jr's. I've followed their entry into the market place, the initial marketing, the reviews, and the different reactions folks have had to them. I've heard them a few times under unfamilar conditions. I've simply assumed that they are good speakers which may not have risen to the elevated initial expectations some folks may have had for them. This happens often in this hobby. That they would meet all of your expectations is wonderful.
I would agree with you that speculating why any group of folks would be drawn to, or not, any particular sound system, would be specious at best, and I think very few would actually fit into the stereotypical profiles advanced. There are a few audiophiles who listen to train whistles and planes taking off on high end systems as well as musicphiles who listen to Mahler on Bose speakers. I would expect the the total of both would be less than 1% of the Audiogon contributors, and that the majority of us enjoy well recorded music on revealing systems, but can easily listen to music which is less than optimally recorded over these systems when it is music and/or performance which truly engages us.
|
Newbee,
I meant the truth as opposed to making stuff up. But that's just my opinion - I could be wrong.
I wasn't getting into a philosophical discussion about truth; I thought that was obvious, but I guess I should have been more clear.
Yes, I reveal my true self. I see no reason to hide it or to be artificial. I apologize for the ugliness of that. I feel justified with my post. You obviously feel justified in personally attacking me, and I will take accept your criticism.
Rob |
Newbee, thanks for refering to the "truth" thread - I meant to get to that. |
Since we've veered off a little bit here, I decided to reread the original post. I'm under the auditioner category and this sums up my experience: I found the 4jrs to be involving (which is a good thing, I wasn't looking around the room or checking the time on my watch...), but rather than an emotional connection to the music/performance, I felt more of a connection to the sound quality of the recording. So there WAS a connection, it just wasn't the one that I ultimately look for.
I think that's why I categorize them as fun to listen to. If someone's particular priorities are different than mine, then it's very possible that the 4jrs can provide emotional connection for them - that's fine. It's ok, we don't all have the opportunity to hear every piece of gear in the world, but I'm just very used to the seamless integration that my speakers provide, and that's what I listen for in other brands. I would still recommend anyone in the price range to try them, because we all hear things differently. |
Rob, Just read this thread including all of your posts. You sound like your ox has been severly gored, however I find little justification for the 'personal' nature of your posts which attack others, including Opalchip. So be it. You define yourself far more than you define others - your choice. :-(
But, in passing, I would ask you to reflect on and qualify one of your statements. Exactly what do you believe constitutes the "truth" that "people" are seeking? Assuming that you can define this "truth" how do you know when you are in its presence? And how do you know that "people" are seeking this "truth"? IMHO most folks are seeking that in which they find the greatest pleasure, but aren't so presumptious as to call it "truth" in any universal sense. Last I heard Diogenes was still walking about with his lamp. |
Opalchip: Thank you for not posting again. You are an ignorant - bombastic fool. You contradict yourself and insult everyone on Audiogon by saying that "audiophiles" put equipment above music as a priority. What else is the equipment for but to listen to music?
You supposedly are an expert speaker designer who could teach VS how to better design speakers, you supposedly play several instruments, have had extensive musical training - I suppose your a Navy Seal, fighter pilot, and astronaut also.
Your post did nothing but put down VS's design, sound, finish, and you assumed that everyone who bought them is dumping them. Then, in your next post you say VS is a "very fine speaker designer".
I could go on and on about your inconsistencies, but I think it is transparent. By the way if this post was about any other piece of equipment that I was familiar with, I'd call you on your ignorant statements just the same. This has nothing to do with VS – I have no special interest in him or these speakers other than my enjoyment.
I buy CDs that I listen to only in my car, because they sound so horrible, but I like the music. We are trying to get closer to the music and bad recordings hide and distort the original music that was recorded. If your a music lover than I would think that would be important to you.
There were several criticisms that were posted above, and although I may not have noticed the same sounds from these speakers in my system, you could tell that they were legitimate and from actual experience. You say youÂ’re a music lover, but all youÂ’ve talked about is the design and other physical characteristics - everything but the sound.
If you would have said that it is a very revealing speaker that won't hide bad recordings or equipment - that would have been a contribution. But, when you say that it's for gear head audiophiles and not for music lovers, then go on to explain who fits in what box - then you just sound ignorant - and do a disservice to people seeking the truth.
Rob |
Opalchip, As one of the owners who is not happy with the finish quality of the speaker, I will agree on that point. We are all buying what we enjoy, and I have no doubt any trained musician has a heck of a lot more knowledge as to what insturments should actually aound like. I guess there are several schools of thought as to what sounds most "realistic", and depending upon ones exposure, he or hshe chooses accordingly. Thanks for your perspective....interesting .
I enjoy the sound, and to each his own is what it's really all about.
Carl |
First off - it ain't me who's pissing. You bash people personally, and then hide behind the implication that if we respond we're turning this into a pissing match." Nice strategy, but, if you review my 2 posts I have not personally attacked anyone the way you are. To respond:
1. It was YOU who stated that non-audiophile, "flawed" recordings "SOUND BETTER" on other speakers. It wasn't me. Is "better" not better now? Your direct quote: "some audiophiles choose equipment that makes their favorite flawed recordings sound better, rather than carefully choose recordings that are musical".
And frankly, the reason I was sucked into this quagmire to begin with, is that with those particular remarks you were attempting to discredit other posters here who don't personally enjoy the JR's by questioning their equipment, music choices, and/or audiophile sensibilities. I objected to that - which was at the heart of my first post. Discrediting those who don't agree as probably having inferior systems or software is not cool. The original poster asked for our opinions on the speaker, not on what we imagine are each others' qualifications for liking or disliking them.
2. Nowhere did I imply "audiophile" to have a even a remotely negative connotation - that's in your imagination. If you think otherwise, then show us the direct quote. I posited that the audiophile's priorities are in a different order than the musicphile - which is a self-evident and accepted fact. You brought a value judgment to that, not me. And of course, no one is 100% audiophile and 0% musicphile or vice versa.
3. Albert Von Schweikert is obviously a knowledgable engineer and a very fine speaker designer. And a very astute marketer who crafts a sound that a lot of people like. So? We don't all have to personally prefer his choices. And I certainly DO know enough to know where the inevitable compromises lie. But that's theory - what matters is if we like how they sound enough to make them our primary "window" into the music, and some of us don't. No big deal, but according to you that must be because we don't know enough or don't have ears as good as yours.
Of course there is one other possibility - Have you for a moment considered that maybe we're hearing something you're not? If YOU don't hear something, does that mean it doesn't exist?
And by the way - have you asked anyone who LIKES the JR's what THEIR qualifications for liking them are? No? I didn't think so...
Post whatever you'd like - I'll refrain from any more posts to this thread. |
Opalchip, being a trained musician and a lover of music all my life, I think I know of which I speak, and I don't agree with your incorrect and slanted interpretation of my comments.
So, your implication is that because I seek out and prefer recordings that are outstanding in sonics (& performance), I'm an 'audiophile' with a negative connotation, and can't possibly be a true music lover, or I'd be listening to flawed recordings.
I also listen to flawed recordings, but listening to the compression, grain, brightness, thinness, distortion, squashing, etc. -- has become something less tolerable to me over time. If you prefer a speaker that editorializes the sonics, fills out a thin, dead, flat, sizzly, equalized recording, and rolls off detail enough to make these recordings sound more palatable, that's your perogative. But don't claim this makes you a "musiclover" rather than an "audiophile."
Further, you criticize a brilliant engineer like Albert Von Schweikert for his engineering choices. What qualifications do you have in speaker design to so strongly criticize someone who knows speakers inside and out?
These types of posts turn a good thread into a pissing match & bashing exercise, rather than a positive interchange.
|
Whooooo.....! First of all, I DO like to stir things up a bit. Sorry for the delay in responding to all this, but I've been out all day.
But 2nd... Who said I haven't heard these? I've got better things to do than yabber about something I have no knowledge or interest in. I was seriously interested in the JR's as bedroom speakers when they first showed up, and I have about 2 hours of daytime cell phone bills talking with Kevin at VS to prove it. Kevin, BTW, was very helpful, very knowledgable, and had some interesting stories, too. The speakers just aren't for me. I didn't say they were bad. Maybe some people had that impression because I used the word "apparently" in regards to the finish? I said it that way because the complaints have been that the polyester satin finish is not durable in the long run, and there's no way I can know that without owning them. An audition doesn't tell you that. "Apparently" means that I'm granting some validity to those claims - not that I've never heard them.
re: Robm - My post was not about MY "logic". I was exposing the logic inherent in Kevziek's post, who said "I also wonder what recordings people are listening to...I'm afraid that some audiophiles choose equipment that makes their favorite flawed recordings sound better, rather than carefully choose recordings that are musical and coherent."
Well, if 95% of the recorded music over the last 50 years sounds better on other speakers, because they're supposedly "not as revealing" of the recordings' drawbacks, well then I'll take the other speakers right quick, Thank You. I was stating that KEVZIEK's OWN internal logic implies the JR's are not for musicphiles. I have no opinion on that except in regards to myself.
I obviously didn't make it very clear, but when I said, "So the audience that will be truly happy with JR's is "audiophiles" who can't presently afford more, or "music lovers" without very discerning ears," I was summarizing with some tongue in cheek, the outcome of Kevziek's reasoning.
"Complicated 4th order crossovers, rear-firing "ambience" tweeters, and ported cabinets disqualify it as far as I'm concerned." ---- I'm not going to get into a speaker design argument - been there, done that - but this is far from an ignorant statement. If you think it is, you need to do some study. A ported design actually limits ultimate extension, and a tweeter firing backwards out of phase - well you may like the "enhanced" sound, but there's no argument that it's accurate. 4th order crossovers - No. VS's version of cascaded 1st orders into a 4th order topography - Maybe. But not for me - and that's all I said - "as far as I'M concerned". Again, I didn't say that they suck and anybody who likes them is crazy.
re 9rw: I don't like to respond to that kind of question re: equipment - because it misses the point of the hobby. I don't believe in judging someone's ear by their equipment - which is more often than not determined by their pocketbook. Everyone's ears are different and we are all qualified to judge for ourselves, and post our opinions.
But to answer anyway, since you were so obnoxious about it - I'll just say that the equipment or $$$ end of the equation is not a limiting factor for me. I spend, on average, 3 hours a day, 7 days a week listening - which, like Arkio, doesn't thrill my wife. I've also studied music extensively and play 4 instruments. And I probably have more audiophile and non-audiophile rare vinyl than everyone posting on this thread put together. So there! :)
Anyway - I'm not sure why the JR crowd is so touchy about this, but clearly, they're not for everyone. There ARE quite a few changing hands rather soon after being purchased - I know, because I've been watching. Why, who knows. But it's not because the sellers are wildly in love.
So what? If YOU love 'em keep them - and tell other people you love them - but you don't have to bash people who don't. And vice versa, of course. If anyone interpreted my sarcasm as bashing, I apologize. The original poster asked for opinions. Presumably, that would include both sides of the aisle. |
I love my VR4jr. I would consider myself a music lover, gear head and audiophile. Depends on the time of day or night. So that theory is for shit. My wife could add a few more adjectives when I ignore her when I get into the groove listening to my system :) and beleive me thats very easy to do these days.
These speakers are excellent 4K speakers and great value. They do outperform many speakers costing much more. (to these ears anyway). Are they the best...certainly not...but they do alot more right than wrong, atleast better than any other speaker I have ever owned or seriously auditioned anywhere near their price point.
The key is auxillery equipment. You gotta get serious up front equipment... a Rotel amp will not cut it. (nothing against Rotel, I love their stuff) the thing is these speakers are very revealing and unless you have some very good stuff with good synergy, chances will be that you will be blaming the speakers. Perhaps rightfully so... Designing speakers that need better than average up front equipment might not be the best policy. But I doubt Albert is going to compromise his design to satisfy the average Yamaha owner.
Good listening. |
I wonder how many of the pairs for sale got truely broken in. I know mine changed for the better about a month ago, and I thought I'd gotten them broken in earlier, but they seemed to come to life then. Wish I could put a finger on it, and maybe I just got used to the sound, but they did seem to smooth out and really satisfy me .
And at 53, maybe my hearing is getting worse, and I'm less particular!!Whatever, I'm content, for a while at least. |
Robm321, you're proving Opalchip's point about audiophile when you say "You need quality recordings to and quality equipment to get closer to the music." Only an audiophile would say that. But then again, you love your speakers, just like Opalchip said you would.
Let's be reasonable folks and agree to disagree. I mean it's not like anyone's claiming the VS4Jrs are as good as the speakers I own. |
It's not that I don't like Opalchip's reasoning. It's just that it is fundamentaly wrong. His logic is confused also. And it would help if he actually listened to the speakers that he has an opinion on. Everything he mentioned was from previous posts in this thread. He mentioned nothing from actual experience.
First of all, his assumptions about audiophiles and music lovers priorities was made up out of his head. Where is it written as fact that those are the priorities?
Secondly, there isn't a speaker out there that can reveal less on bad recordings and reveal more on good recordings. You need quality recordings to and quality equipment to get closer to the music. There is no cure for bad recordings. Some speakers reveal less detail and hide some bad recordings, but then they would have to do the same on good recordings.
he says "(Complicated 4th order crossovers, rear-firing "ambience" tweeters, and ported cabinets disqualify it as far as I'm concerned.)" --> an ignorant statement that would disqualify him as anyone with a lick of sense. These all enhance the sound quality, extension, and soudstage. These speakers wouldn't sound as great as they do without them.
Did you ever think that the reason there are so many VR4jr's for sale is because so many people bought them in the first place (you can't sell what you didn't get to begin with) and are upgrading just like a lot of people on Agon. The $4k price point tends to be a middle ground not where people stop and say they've arrived. In fact, I know a couple of people that are moving up to the VR4sr's and that's why they are selling their VR4jr's.
Rob |
I think both Kevziek and Opalchip make very good points. Kevziek, a knowledgeable and experienced audiophile, has purchased a product that satisfies his musical needs. I cannot think of a single product that will truly satisfy a majority, let alone all audiophiles. Audiogon attracts people who are looking for the best bang for the buck, giant killer products and based upon the rave reviews and owners' comments the VS4Jr would seem to be a perfect example. The fact that so many then show up for resale simple proves the one size doesn't fit all in the audiophile world. You might not like Opalchip's reasoning, but it's nothing to get defensive about. |
Opalchip: This post sought opinions from people who have owned or auditioned the VR-4JR. Have you? Based on your comments I tend to doubt it. Also, a fair number of everything shows up on Audiogon. That's just the nature of this hobby and it means nothing. What do you own and what qualifies you as a judge of these or any speakers? |
re: Kevziek's comments -
"Music lovers" generally choose the material (software) they listen to based on these 3 factors in this order:
1st. How much they enjoy the composition/songwriting
2nd. The quality of the performance
3rd. The sonic attributes of the recording
"Audiophiles" one could argue, reverse those priorities.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of music that rates highly by 1. and 2. above was NOT recorded with audiophiles in mind. Therefore, if your analysis is correct, you have just established that these speakers will not produce an experience that appeals to "music lovers" most of the time.
Now "audiophiles" on the other hand, generally are looking to go a little more high end than the JR's which apparently are not finished particularly well and certainly have arguable sonic compromises. (Complicated 4th order crossovers, rear-firing "ambience" tweeters, and ported cabinets disqualify it as far as I'm concerned.)
So the audience that will be truly happy with JR's is "audiophiles" who can't presently afford more, or "music lovers" without very discerning ears.
This probably explains why a fair number of JR's started showing up for sale used pretty early on in the product's life/hype-cycle. Which is not to say they don't work for some people - but clearly there are valid reasons that they don't work for others. |
Kevziek, your right on the money with your assessment. They are uncolored and realistic sounding. They will bring out sonic charateristics of the other components. |
I certainly wouldn't lay out $4k for a Chinese-built speaker. |
For some reason, some people seem bent on bashing the VRjr. I own them, and they are great speakers.
I have very discerning ears, and am a musician. When I listen to audio components, I listen for what sounds more real, more musical. I can nitpick as well as the most critical here, but I listen to the totality of the sound. If something sounds more like the real thing, I can live with small anomalies --- nothing is perfect.
On those who make so many criticisms of this speaker, I wonder what associated equipment they are using, as these speakers ruthlessly reveal the sound of every component in the chain. I also wonder what recordings people are listening to. First and foremost, I use exceptional recordings to make my judgments. Even exceptional recordings have their tonal quirks. For example, some Cheskys are tipped slightly bright and forward balanced, yet have exceptional detail and musicality. Some Verve Jazz recordings are exceptional, but exhibit some brightness in certain ranges. Some tracks on the same recording vary in quality and tonal balance. One must be familiar with the quirks of the recordings used, and adjust one's opinion and evaluation accordingly.
The VRjr has revealed many of these nuanced differences to me, that prior speakers have not. No, they are not perfect, but, most importantly, they provide that certain "clear window on the sound" that is basically coherent. I don't hear the discontinuities in driver integration people are claiming here.
I'm afraid that some audiophiles choose equipment that makes their favorite flawed recordings sound better, rather than carefully choose recordings that are musical and coherent, and then judge the equipment accordingly. In that light, the VRjr reproduces something closer to the musical truth than many other speakers on the market.
|
I have the original VR-4. I have had these hooked to several Large tube mono blocks and large solid states. I can clearly hear the diffrences between designs.To me solid state amplification is not what these were designed for. Although these need big time power to really shine it needs to be tube power the amps that I thought would rule were horrible. (Krell MDA 300). Bets amp ive heard on these are rogue 120's but run out of power. Hurricanes are okay but are much less involving. VTL's have the power but are like a misadjusted EQ. Carys are nice and tubey, rogue zues handle these the best but I miss the immedicy of the 120's.
To think these speakers cost me 1300.00 is something to think about. If you dont like what you hear, you can change it trust me. |
Rob, Couldn't agree more. I am , sadly, one of many who like in the boonies, and getting to hear any of this stuff is almost impossible, so I rely like most on reviews and the sage advice of the great people on forums like this. I almost alwaqys buy used, as I can't get to areas where they are on display, so I look for used and if something isnot to my taste, I resell and consider the expense an audition fee. I think in there near future stores will have to charge an ëntrance"fee to let us audition stuff, and try to sell at near the online prices,in order to be competitive. Somehow, they need to compete on price while charging for the additional service they provide, and something like this might work. You might be able to apply the audition fees to the purchase at the store as a way of enticing you to buy there.
The internet has made it tough to compete for many...
Anyway, back to the VR4jr's...I like mine, and hope you find the sound that thrills you. |
Well that's what you get in a public forum as apposed to professional reviews. The professional reviews are all positive among different camps, not just one or two magazines that are connected to VS. So, I would put more weight on that than a public forum where anyone can chime in.
The negatives that people have mentioned (aside from the typical "they suck" type comments which most people don't give credibility to) were very small compared to all of the positives about the speakers. It comes down to taste. These speakers are "giant killers", but not everyoneÂ’s taste. They are my taste, but some people such as Dracule1 who is very sensitive to high frequencies may not enjoy the solid high frequency extension on them and should look elsewhere. But all and all I enjoy the music when I listen, and thatÂ’s why you should audition if at all possible along with other speakers in your price range before making a decision.
Rob |
Brrgr, I agree with you completely about enjoying the music and not get caught up with the equipment. Bravo, very well said! |
Brrgrr
well said! I am not a big Von Schweikert fan but I may try your suggestion in the future.
Enjoy |
I've had mine since late October, and think I've finally gotten past the breakin period, as they have changed greatly for the better in the last mont. Either that or the wine is affecting my ears more than I imagine!
They have impressed me more every day with the fine music they reproduce...and I now just enjoy the music and forget about nitpicking the speakers. They aren't perfect, but they help me relax at the end of a long day slinging burgers and that was the whole point of getting them. I'm curious what affect bi-wiring might have , and am even considering bi-amping, just out of curiosity, but all in al they make great music.
We all listen too much to the equipment sometimes,and forget to enjoy the music and ignore the imperfections that all of this gear has, and I think it affects our pleasure that the artists give us. Hell, buy a used, well broken in pair and give em a whirl. If you don't like em, sell them, and look at the small cost as a great in-home demo!
If they really sound like shit to ya, sell them to someone you don't like!!...))
Really, they are a fine speaker...to my ears...not perfect, but what one is?
I think you'll be impress by them, tho
Take care |
If, by the number of positive reviews about this speaker, the conclusion here is that the VR-4jr's are pretenders, one could postulate that the reviews of them are also. I for one don't believe that equipment reviews are political but the reviewer is linked to the reviewed component. |
For a speaker (VR4jrs) that have never received a bad professional review, in fact they've all been glowing or better from some sources that do not usually hand out glowing reviews automatically, these speakers are taking some heavy criticism.
Are they really that bad? Are they really Sony speakers with a different name? Are they really speakers that only sound good with certain, limited, expensive electronics?
Most reviews refer to them as "giant killers", performing well above their price range. Is this just hogwash/hype?
What do you guys think?
Great speaker for the money or
just another pretender? |
Luciahd, you misquote me. I said the VR4jrs sounded "unnatural" when I auditioned them prior to the NY Highend Show, and I did not say they sound "midfi" if you read my posts carefully. At the Show, as I have stated over and over, the speakers really impressed me driven by the DK. I'm very sensitive to high frequency information - I literally can not walk a city block if I hear car brakes squeak. I hear what I hear, and I couldn't get over the high fequency "grit" of the VR4jr room at the Show.
I can't comment on the wood version of the 938s you heard because I was not there. But I can comment on the black 938s you heard at the Show because I was there. The room was small and I do agree with you to some extent on the bass and high freq performance at the Show. I also heard them at the '94 NY show, and they sounded so different. They were in a larger room, the same size as the VR4jrs were in at this years show, and they were the best sound at the Show for me in '94. So much so I bought them based on the show performance. They're comparable and in some ways better than Apogees and stat setups I was used to because of the dynamics of the 938s.
As for Pink Floyd's DSOTM, I have the SACD version and played it through my 938s using the 70lb class A Junson integrated amp. Let me tell you, the imaging, bass, and dynamics were on par with the VR4jr setup at the Show and without the high frequency "grit" I heard through the VR4jrs. Too bad the Jungson developed a problem just as it was starting to open up, and I had to return it for a replacement. So I can't agree with you when you say the 938s are only good for small jazz combo or pop.
I don't know if the high freq anomaly is inherent in the VR4jrs, but I have heard similar anomaly on different setups through the VR4jrs. May be a really high quality class A amp may get rid of the problem. I have not heard this problem with the higher models from VS.
Hey, if the VR4jrs do it for you, congradulations! I'm happy for you. In the end, it's your ears that matter, not what others say. But it's always fun to have a friendly discourse. |
Funny how we all hear presentations slightly different, in the same set-ups, same place at the same time using the same recordings. I too attended the Stereophile Show and felt the VR4jr presentation was near flawless. Far from fatiguing after 30 minutes("mid-fi hi-fi, unnatural", etc) as Dracule experienced, I felt drawn into the audition by the Jr's warm musical depth, the ambient bubble surrounding vocals and instruments, the well extended and accurate bottom end, colorless midrange and sweet hi freq. The Jrs seemed to handle timbrally complex recordings extremely well while providing impressive bottom weight without congestion. Seamless to my ears, top to bottom.
FWIW, I first heard the $6000 Hyperion in walnut at CES and left the room scratching my head wondering what all the hype, fuss and fanfare was about. The sound was flat, forward, and lacking full-bodied dynamics, impact and weight. I chalked the audition up to the "show experience" (room interaction, cold electronics, etc). I then had my next experience with the $4500 Hyperion 938 in piano high-gloss black (the original and only finish available in this price range)at the Show in NYC. Though the presentation was better, I do find the overall character of the 938's tipped foward. So much so, that the bottom end is left somewhat compressed and lean sounding. It is this driver/crossover "dis-integration" that left me "wanting",, to hear the full orchestral weight and space around the instruments, the chesty impact of the kick drum, the tingling on the souls of my feet while listening to Stevie Ray's "Tin Pan Alley". I think for pop and small combo jazz the Hyperion's would be wonderful. But for Pink Floyd's "DSOTM", or to capture the feel of a orchestra hall, I'd prefer the VR4jrs over the Hyperion's for all musical tastes. I placed my 4Jr order in African Hazelwood last week BTW. Wish I could afford the new VRSr's that I heard at the show in NYC but, at half the price for the Jr's,,,,, I'm a happy camper!
Cheers! |
I can't say that I would argue with the integration criticism. I don't think any dynamic speakers can compare to the seemless integration of electrostats and planar speakers. These speakers have their own shortcomings which is why I went with the VS. They cannot compete with bass, which is very poor in most cases (not all). Also dynamics are very important to me and I just don't hear the that with the electrostats that I've listened to (at least near the same price range). That's where individual taste comes to play.
The only speakers that I'd consider in place of the VS right now is Analysis Audio (starting at twice the price of the VS).
http://www.audiblearts.com/aa-index3.htm
They are good at bass and smooth all around. But I'd still miss the VS.
Rob |
I think most who have not had a chance to hear speakers with seamless integration of drivers such Apogee planars, full range electrostats, Source Technologies mentioned above, or Hyperion 938s (which I own) would not appreciate the mild lack of driver integration that the VR4jrs can exhibit. VR4jrs are very dynamic, alive sounding with great imaging, but they do lack that coherence you hear with the speakers I mentioned above. For me it was very enjoyable to listen to the VR4jrs for a short time, but in the long run I don't think I could live with it. |
They ARE nice sounding speakers, but we'll see if they pass the long-term test. |
I bet they sound good, but I wonder why there is such a flood of them on here...upgrade-itus? |
As I mentioned above, my time with the VR4jrs was much less than After_hrs, but my impressions were the same. I felt the same driver "dis-integration" and although they were lots of fun to listen to, I still felt like I was dealing with audio gymnastics - very close to music making, but just not quite. |
I have a chance to listen to these fine speakers several times at a friends house over the last couple of months.
I think that from the lower octaves through the midbass and lower mid they are exceptional. As the sound moves through the mid to upper mid there is what I call a bit of a hollowness or slight honkiness. I find this common with some speakers that err slightly on the clinical side of natural. I have heard these speakers with different sources and amplification and this is part of its inherent sonic signature. This isn't a dig. They have many great virtues; Speed, clarity, aliveness, pace, smoothness.
We compared them side by side with a pair of Source Technologies 2268's (manufactured on the east coast)and we both agreed the blend between the mid and tweeter was more seamless and natural and there was a greater sense of a whole musical event with substantially more acoustic from the recorded venue coming thru in that region with the 2268. The music had more of an "event" sense as the VR4jr's were faster with greater emphasis on dynamics and impact and clarity. The 2268's were equal in clarity.
Both are tremendous.
At the end of the day it was apparent that the more seamless crossover through the mid of the 2268 was allowing more mid info to come through and a more natural harmonic sense of space and openness. The VR4jr's were open but not as naturally so... If that makes any sense.
The jr's do things at there price point that are exceptional, but for me the bit of a honkiness drives me nuts. I've heard the same thing from the Red Rose speakers. I believe that a good 60% or so of the speakers at this price point suffer from this problem.
It's a combination of resonant peaks of a driver along with using certain metalized caps and of course driver/s compatibility. Anyway the jr's are very special but they have too much of their own sound where you want it least. |
What Nrchy - your sex life?
sorry to hear that. |
Great, at least! I actually own a pair! |
|
Uru97,
I've noticed a lot of that. I've seen a demo that was using a transmittion line, and the manual suggests clearly that the sound will be hampered unless you bi-wire. I think these speakers will not sound near their potential unless you bi-wire, put them on spikes, and add leadshot. I've heard significant improvements to the point where, I couldn't imagine listening to it stock. I haven't heard the 4sr, but VS is a terrific speaker designer. Not everyones taste, but works for me. |
Robm321
It turns out my review of what I heard was also not fair to the VonSchweiker4jr. Went back to the stereo store and discovered that instead of being by-wired as they are intended to be they were but rather using somesort of cord that allows the top to be connected to the bottom. Anyway what I heard was the new Vonsheiwker4sr and at twice the price they were a definet hit. So when I hear them as they were meant to be set up I can give a better review and one much more worth reading. |
Uru975,
You're right. I must have been in a bad mood yesterday because I was harsh on a couple of posts. This is the second time I am going to apologize today. I apologize.
I have a modest system, and they sound nothing like what a lot of people have posted above - fatiguing, "hi-fi", below what you'd expect for $4k, highs sounding harsh and gritty.
Here are some reviews of what of how they sound properly set up.
The Stereo Times-03/05
Positive Feedback Online-Issue 17
The Absolute Sound, Dec/Jan 2004/5 issue
EnjoytheMusic.com, Dec 2004
Audio Asylum - Dec. 2004
Rob |
