I've been reading up lately on all kinds of monitors, and have been intrigued by Merlin's TSM. The latest iteration is the mmi, I believe.
If you've heard the TSM lately, especially in comparison to other, current monitor offerings out there, I'd love to hear your opinions. I know that there are other Merlin threads on Audiogon but I am especially interested in hearing from folks who have compared them to others, especially if you've lived with them.
I can't see a sub solving the problem of a thin sounding speaker, it might help a little, but if the fundamental design of the speaker is flawed there is only so much a sub can do. The balancing act of detail and a too lean sound is a fragile one and the TSM's allow one to have their cake and eat it. This is where a talented speaker designer can make all the difference.
paul, the rc network does two things. it is an hf filter at 1.6 mghz for filtering rfi and emi. imo a must in a city environment. and the second is to offer an unterminated amp a 10 ohm load at 100 khz. speakers are open circuits and the 10 ohm load on the amp in the extreme hf allows it to settle down and sound as good as it possibly can. if you have a dull speaker you may prefer the sound with the rc off but in a high res system it is better with it on. ok? best, b
I wonder how the TSM might compare to the Magico monitor. Quite a difference in price, but I do find it hard to see how much better you could get than the Merlins, especially the VSMs which are essentially bookshelf/monitors with "integrated" stands. After many years of looking, I still have not found a speaker I prefer to the Merlins.
"but if the fundamental design of the speaker is flawed there is only so much a sub can do'
It depends on what is meant by "thinness", but thinness can result with a very good monitor that does what it does very well but does not attempt to plumb the depths for low end by design because that is not generally what monitors are designed to do, although there are always ways to stretch performance if desired.
Merlin uses an equalization circuit called the "BAM" I believe to good effect to wean more low end than most small monitors I believe much like the OHM speakers in my system use a similar circuit called a "sub bass activator".
I like that Bobby provides expertise and solutions for his customers like the BAM and the RC network (to help adapt the speakers better to more amps apparently) that allow users to get more out of his speakers in more common listener scenarios as needed. That is a value added service that might not be had from many vendors.
I am in my second week of breaking in a new pair of TSM-XMr monitors. Yes, the cult-like love for these speaker systems is founded on reality. They are quite amazing. I will be posting a full review in tomorrow or Wednesday.
I don't view a sub as a band aid. That infers it fixes something that is damaged or defective otherwise. If integrated well with good small monitors in particular, it is there optionally to add something that was not there to start with, and only as wanted or needed.
There are many threads around arguing the pro/cons of subs so no sense re-hashing all that.
OK, but not meeting listener expectations does not mean the fundamental design of the speaker is flawed, only that the buyer chose the wrong speaker.
I've heard magico mini but never Merlin.
Even the mini's sounded "thin" to me on an absolute scale, despite being one of the best speakers I have heard in most every other regard.
I've heard higher end Totem monitors in the past as well and they were also quite good as has been similar Dynaudio (not thin).
I have some pretty good Triangle monitors ($500 new) also. These are thinner than 5X as expensive Dynaudio at higher volumes, but competitive with most anything at low volumes.
The opposite to a thin sound is one with weight, authority and power behind it, like a big band or symphony orchestra playing full throttle, or even feeling the weight of the synthesized bass in a BEP tunes in your gut beyond just hearing it. For me, much of the weight comes from the low end where a lot of the power in music occurs.
Ok, so you mean no bottom heft. It seems like the great speakers always have a mid-band and highs in balance with their bass output, however deep that bass might be. One thing Bobby gets right as that balance,which is why both the TSMs and VSMs, with considerably different bass outputs sound so natural, and never thinned out, which seems to be a problem of balance and not actual bass depth, and why I agree that a subwoofer, while it might help, is a difficult thing to pull-off well, when it is not part of the overall design of the speaker - but I guess it can be done, just not easy.
paul, there are many aspects of thinness but i think in this case it is a foundation to the music that adds expanse and a breath of life. some speakers do a better job than others but monitors in smallish rooms with the resulting bass reinforcement modes can be superb. however these monitors in too large a room volume can sound lost. this is where a sub can help. the hardest aspect of sound reproduction is the range below 30 hz. just having the output is not everything to everyone. making it sound like it fits the performance is more important to me. best, b
I have heard some like Dynaudio and Totem that can also sound very convincing in a larger room, but in general I would go with a larger speaker, monitor or otherwise, in a larger room or else add a sub.
Also I should note that I find thinness with good moniters relative to larger designs generally only becomes an issue for me when volume goes up. At low to moderate volumes, in adequately sized rooms, most any monitor I would call good does fine.
I agree with you Robbob about the great sound the Merlin TSM's deliver, I own TSM-MXE's, and a person who hasn't owned or spent a good amount of time with Merlin speakers viewing the comments of their owners as possessing a cult-like devotion to Merlin speakers. It is not a cult, but the appreciation of a terrific product that gives them a great deal of enjoyment. There are some who always have to criticize because a product is praised by many and so many seem very happy with their purchase. It is fine if someone tries a product and finds it is not for him or her or prefers another product,no speaker is for everyone, but I feel some people are just contrarians. I appreciate the Merlins because they enhance my enjoyment of one of life's great pleasures-music.
If you look at the reviews, by owners of Merlin speakers, at audioreview.com, I would say it is a pretty large cult:) Bobby is either a great designer, or a great hypnotist - looking for another speaker just never crosses my mind at this point and I have heard an awful lot of speakers in my life.
Just because many people appreciate an excellent product that gives them pleasure and they share their feelings doesn't mean it is a cult. A cult insinuates to me an excessive admiration. The admiration of Merlin speakers by its owners is justified because they are great speakers and have developed over time a large following because of so many satisfied customers.
"it is an hf filter at 1.6 mghz for filtering rfi and emi. imo a must in a city environment"
Bobby, I have heard differences in sound resulting from shielding low level signals like that in an MC phono stage from EMI produced by nearby amps, transformers, etc.
Can you explain why this is a relevant feature for a speaker? How intense must these fields be to have an audible effect on teh speaker circuitry?
Also, why is this filtering bundled into the same add on circuitry as the circuitry in the option for better performance with some amps? These would seem to be two different problems that might not always occur together.
The interesting thing is that I came from a set of Magenpan 1.6, fed by a Odyssey/Rogue combo. The Maggies were a lot of fun, but the size was an issue. A friend suggested that I "upgrade" to the little Merlins. "UPGRADE?!" I said, "Are you kidding? The Magnepans are not about to be bested by some small monitor, even if it is highly regarded. But he had a set of Totem The One which had been demoted in favor of TSM-MMe and he felt the Merlins were a top design. I still doubted that they would be better than my Maggies. Boy, was I wrong! A side note: like most high end speakers, you need a good amount of time with the Merlins to really appreciate what they do so well. It doesn't hurt that they are beautiful to look at if you pop for the special finish.
I guess if you read all of the positive comments by owners of Merlins without having heard them, you could feel it is sort of like a cult because many owners are very passionate about their speakers, but because the speakers are so good once you spend some time with them you realize it is not a cult, but a valid appreciation of an outstanding product. Before I owned my TSM's I had only heard Merlins at a few Stereophile shows and I never got a real good listen because the room was always so crowded and even with a very bad listening spot they still sounded very nice, but until I owned them I didn't fully appreciate how good they are and understood the passion people had for them.
mapman, imo, the amplifier termination issue is something that almost 98% of the amps need so it did not seem incorrect to combine it with the hf filtering poetential. speakers that are very linear with gobs of resolution can reveal things in the way of complication/confusion to the sound. we filter both ends of the bandwidth in the bam and by using the ers paper on chip sets in the system. how intense must these fields be? strong enough to be heard i suppose. i am not the only one that can hear them. best, bobby
Guppy...what CD player are you using with the TSM's?
My associated gear: Manley Stingray II, Cardas SE9 speaker wire, Skylan 4 post stands, MJ Acoustics 150 MKII sub. CD player is a 4 year old Oppo with a few mods. I tried the Rega Apollo, but did not find it a big upgrade.
Robbob, I took the cult idea as intended. The hardest thing to believe is that (and it is the VSM with which I am most familiar) a small two-way speaker would be able to compete with the mega$$$$, large, multi-driver speakers with a claim to being among the best. The truth this "humble" speaker is state-of-the-art for what it is, and in most real world rooms it should be at least considered, no matter how much you can, or are willing, to spend for speakers. They are not for everyone, but for many they are the core around which they can build a long-term system. The fact that they work especially well with tube amps, and that 30-60 watts is more than enough to drive them is all the better.
I once saw a thread question the evolution of the VSM and questioning the cost increases over the years, it was clear this fella did not actually listen to the VSMs over time. I for one have always appreciated that Bobby continued to find ways to improve what had already been a very good speaker right from the start.
Pubul, I agree 100%. My friend with the MMe's is quite certain my new MXr's are quite a bit better than his already excellent versions. It is my understanding that Bobby has improved his line of speakers on every level, from cabinets to crossovers. Evolution appears to be what Merlin is all about. Bobby says the TSM and VSM are his life's work. They are unlike any speaker I've owned before; more of a musical instrument themselves. I did feel that way about my old handmade Royd speakers many years ago!
Hello Robbob. I am using a Thule Space DVA250B CD/DVDA player and a TRL modded Sony 900 CD/SACD player. Both players sound excellent. I have Skylan 2 post stands and JWN EL34 push pull 35wpc amp and a Jolida JD50A passive. The JWN amp is excellent for the money, $750., and a few reviews are listed under in tube amp section of The Audio Asylum reviews and the JD50A passive is a nice unit for $250. especially since it has a remote, but I will buy better electonics when the funds allow. Despite these relatively modest electronics the Merlins sound fantastic with all types of music.
Guppy, that's all good gear. With the Manley Stingray II I find the Merlin's amazing, but it's hardly inexpensive for an integrated amp. I usually leave it in triode mode which is barely pushing 20 watts and the Merlins sing, even at fairly loud volumes. As I'll explain in more detail in my review, I also connected the Merlins to a Denon home theater amp! I won't say that the match was made in heaven, but I will say that the speakers still sounded fantastic....just less so than with the Manley. I'm mostly at a loss when it comes to CD players for this system, at least for now.
Also I am interested specifically in opinions regarding which TSM configurations might offer improvement over the monitors in my system in that the cost of TSMs appear to fall nicely between the cost of what I own and the cost of one of there reference monitors I have heard, the Magico Mini.
The monitors in my system currently are Triangle Titus XS that retailed for $500 new when I bought them in the mid 90's and the Dynaudio Contour 1.3mkii's that retailed for about $2500 I believe about ten years ago.
Mapman, two of the speakers I considered early on were the Revel M22 (I had previously enjoyed the M20) and the Dynaudio Contour s1.4.
I generally don't like racing speakers and all three were heard in different rooms with different gear. My preference, by a large margin obviously went to the Merlins. They achieve a boxless quality that remains unmatched in my experience. I haven't heard Triangle Titus, so I can't comment on those.
I find the Triangle Titus to achieve a "boxless quality" more readily than the Dyn Contour 1.3mkiis, however I have found that both can achieve similar levels in this regard with proper setup and suitable amplification. The Triangles exceeded my prior Maggies in this regard off of decent but less than high end perhaps Carver gear. The Dynaudios required different and more costly amplification to achieve similar results.
The Triangles are perhaps one of the most clear and resolving speakers I have heard at low to moderate volume, competitive even with Magico in this regard.
At higher volumes, the Dyns tend to clearly outperform them in terms of top to bottom tonal balance.
I'd love to do some a/b comparing between what I have and good small Merlins. The nice thing about small monitors is that they are easy to ttransport to facilitate this kind of thing.
I can honestly say that I owned a lot of speakers that sounded "boxless", but the Merlin' vanishing act is even more absolute.
Most speakers have some level of beaming, however subtle, that shatters the illusion. Again, I'd like to point out that the Contours are splendid and a lot of fun to listen to, but they sound less refined to my ears overall.
I don't know where you can hear the Merlins, but if you ever get near Mahopac a bit upstate in NY, you can come hear mine.
I sold my Triangle Cometes around six months ago and I thought they were fine speakers, especially for the money, and did well at low volume levels, but the Merlins clearly best the Cometes in every area I can think of including low volume listening which is important to me because I live in an apartment building. I auditioned the Triangle Titus at In Living Stereo in NYC a few years ago, but I actually preferred the Cometes of course I only spent about an hour with them so it is not a really thorough evaluation. I think the electronics used were the Quicksilver amp and preamp.
m, room volume/size, wires and electronics? then i will recommend one. one is better suited to all out tube systems and the other to ss and leaner tubes. the mmi to leaner tubes/ss and the mx-r to all out tube systems. both are available with the master rc's as an option. best, b
Rooms where I commonly use monitors to best effect are 12X12. One has typical 7-8 foot high drywall ceiling and the other (sun room) where I use monitors most often has Cathedral ceiling, windows on three sides and tile floors with large heavy oriental rug. The Dynaudio monitors are pictures there currently in my system though I have used both Triangle and Dynaudio in there to good effect.
Mapman, I think they bested the Cometes, a speaker that I feel is an excellent high value monitor, very clearly in just about every area. They are much more transparent, have much greater tonal accuracy, a bigger and more natural sound stage and better imaging, much better bass and I am not talking about quantity here, but the Merlins have tighter and better detailed and much more satisfying bass. I felt the bottom end was not as natural with the Cometes with a little void in that area, but I have that feeling in most monitors with them either having a sluggish midbass emphasis or just a not sufficient bottom end. The Merlins are much more balanced than the Triangles having superior performance from top to bottom without emphasis on any particular area, the music just flows and they disappear much more than the Cometes or just about any monitor I am familar with. That is just off the top of my head.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
