Joseph Audio Pulsar – Original vs. Graphene opinions?

Thanks jpremm, that's really good to hear.

I'm really hoping to send my pair to Jeff for the upgrade this spring.

I sent them in for an upgrade.  I am not far from them so it was the way to go.  
 

I don’t listen super load, more into moderate levels as I enjoy details over blowing out my ear drums.  Thus about 18 inches works for me.  
 

The upgrade improved everything I enjoy about his speakers.  They are very accurate and simply put forth the source sound. You can listen and feel like you are are almost live in a Bitter End like setting.  A lot of speakers emphasize their own build and bring a character to the music.  I think speakers should play what’s on the album and his does just that.  Pre amps should not need tone controls and speakers should not be built with tone biases.  

 

Thanks for chiming in @jpremm 

Wow, 18 inches off the rear wall seems like fairly close for the Perspectives.   Good to hear they work well for you.

You mention upgrading to the newest version of the Perspectives.  Did you purchase brand new Perspective Graphenes?  Or did you send your Perspectives in for the graphene upgrade?

 

I'm planning on sending my original Perspectives to Jeff Joseph at some point for the graphene upgrade so I'm wondering what differences you heard when you upgraded.

 

Thanks.

Room is about 18 x 18 and set up to listen about 14 or 15 ft from speakers. Speakers are about 10 ft apart.  I changed out larger pro acs to the pulsers when they first came out.  They did not last long.  I jumped on the perspectives when they first came out which was a few years after the pulsars.  Money well spent as was the upgrade to the latest version.   They are actually on a per piece measure cheaper than the turntable or the amps but I feel the pearls would be overkill here.  The perspectives are better than a few speakers at 2x if you like smooth analog though out.  I have tubes behind them which truly open them up.  Super detailed as well.  I don’t have a bass issue but they are 18 inches off the rear wall. 

Ok thanks rlb61
As far as the Perspectives, the reports generally seem positive about the bass and upper frequency changes.

@prof  I heard the graphenes in someone else's system, in a small room somewhat similar to mine. I was not able to hear them side by side, but I could hear the difference almost immediately.

mozartfan,
Although Joseph is emphasizing the "graphene" in the name, apparently it's really the re-design of the rest of the driver including motor etc that brought improvements, leading Joseph to also re design his crossover.
So it's quite plausible they sound different, and perhaps improved (even if it came from tweaking of the crossover).   The Perspective Graphene model does measure different from the original - highs are a bit more flat.

Thanks rlb61.  That's good feedback.

How did you compare the original vs the graphene version?

rlb61666 posts11-01-2021 5:10pm@prof No, that wasn’t me. As I recall, that person put up his graphenes for sale shortly after purchasing them. As to the originals and the graphenes, the mids and highs are identical ... the sole difference, to me, is the bass bloat on the graphenes

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I asked Josh at madisound about the Graphenes, said they were slow sellers, wonder why?
$$$$$
IMHO the Excel Magnesius's have low ~~87db ~~ sens, so its doubtful a  special nano coating is going to make any ~~wow~~ factor.

Note in the descript
**nano coating higher dampening factor**
Thing is the E and EX magnesium are already  **damp** with zero resonances in the lower ,,in fact throughout the entire fq range of the driver.
IMHO magnesium is the ideal and best choice in cones for a  midwoofer.
The one characterist that defines how magnesium performs is ~~Neutrality~~
= No coloration, no muddyiness. 
Unlike paper type cones, which suffer  from both  flaws.
Seas does have a  new paper mix cone the Nextel which Troels loves in his designs, but then its not really paper as its heavy coated so as to completely dampen the paper flaws.
Some labs employ carbon fiber, which to me is like the plastic type cones from the 1980's. Sonus faber uses the Carbon Fiber in  its 2 way @ 16G's.
The CF will offer a tighter low end, but how does the upper bass past 100hz sound through the entire midrange?
This ism what i would like to know.
Stick with Magnesium, as its the best compromise of any midwoofer cone material.

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-8-woofers/seas-excel-w19nx-001-e0076-08-7.5-graphene-co...

Have any Pulsar owners compared them to Harbeths? I ask because I'm currently using a pair of 30.1

@prof No, that wasn’t me. As I recall, that person put up his graphenes for sale shortly after purchasing them. As to the originals and the graphenes, the mids and highs are identical ... the sole difference, to me, is the bass bloat on the graphenes.

Interesting rlb61

where you the one a while back who switched to the graphene Pulsars and found the bass too big in your room?

I auditioned the Perspective graphene and the bass was a bit too much, but they weren’t set up well - too close together and near the back wall so I couldn’t get an idea of how they perform in the bass.  Midrange and highs were fantastic 

I have the original Pulsars, and have heard the graphenes. The original, to my ears, is smoothe all-around ... there is no one particular area that’s emphasized over another. OTOH, the graphenes to me have a slight over-emphasis in the bass region which muddies the sound somewhat, particularly in a small room. I prefer the originals and have passed on the upgrade. Newer is not necessarily better.

Maybe someone will come along and really break down the difference. Some of the commentary on this thread is ludicrous.

Thanks for additional input.

"Harsh" is just about the last word to describe Joseph speakers. 


This is a case where the unanimous reviews have it right, where they basically all note how smooth, unmechanical and hash-free the Joseph Pulsars sound.   It would be even moreso likely with the Graphene version (if they follow the Graphene Perspectives in flattening the very highest frequencies some more).

I have very sensitive ears and my Joseph Perspectives are just about the smoothest sounding speaker I've ever heard.

Jump on the graphene upgrade ASAP!!

Yeah, you’re wrong. It’s a silk-dome tweeter. You’ve no idea what you’re talking about and your opinion is counter to most audiophiles in the world. And your opinion is worthless, IMO.

https://www.josephaudio.net/pulsar

"Seamlessly married to a newly developed precision cast Graphene coated Magnesium cone long throw woofer" -- tweeter, yeah I dunno if it's metal, my bad -- the woofers are metal, and I found the speaker I heard at the show harsh and unpleasant. 

@soix Seas Excel tweeters with the copper horn use Magnesium domes. Seas' Graphene is coating over Magnesium.

http://www.seas.no/images/SEAS_Graphene_White_Paper.pdf

Have a great day

Some who owned the Originals in smaller rooms found that the Graphene version overloaded their rooms with the bass response. So that should be your 1st concern if you have a smallish room. Learn by others misadventures.

JA loudspeakers are not bright, just clear sounding, i.e., transparent to the source. There is a difference.

@motokokusanagi

Your take is too rigid. 

@mofojo 

Thanks. That would also be my take, and while those who have heard both are likely to prefer the newer version, I'd be interested to hear why.

A monitor with sub can do very well. Also depending on your music style may not matter much. Haven’t heard either Pulsar but by all accounts they are amazing. I’ve seen the originals going for mid 3k probably a good buy you could get your cash back for later if you choose. 
I would bet lotsa cash if you were blinded for a listening session it would be very close the new to the old. I could be wrong but usually I’m not;-). 

How much do you find the originals going for used? My point still stands, pound for pound, get the biggest speakers in your budget that suit your room size and listening levels. Only go for 2-way bookshelves if you have no room for anything bigger.

Hmm, just looked up the list price - for $10k...I dunno, I think the only reason to spend that much on 2-way bookshelves is if you can only accommodate small speakers

But the originals are available for far less used, hence my question.

Well, it may have been a bad demo room....or the XO is just not to my taste. They were seriously zingy and not smooth. I generally dislike metal tweeters, FWIW.

Hmm, just looked up the list price - for $10k...I dunno, I think the only reason to spend that much on 2-way bookshelves is if you can only accommodate small speakers.

 although the metal Excel drivers are just too bright/fatiguing for my ears.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have the Seas Excel Magnesium, Not bright at all, 
smoothhhhh and perfect, 
zero fatigue as they have zero resonances and zero coloration.
Have not heard the Nextel, but the design looks very nice.

I heard Pulsars at THE Show some years ago. Very impressive bass for a 2-way monitor, although the metal Excel drivers are just too bright/fatiguing for my ears. I prefer the smooooooth Nextel Excel drivers.

Haven’t heard the Graphenes.