WC,
If the Sanders electrostatics are handicapped by a small room at Axpona the way they were in NY, you can get a free month or so trial at home. He probably pays shipping at least one way, and maybe roundtrip if you return them. The package will come with his amp for the bass section. You can also try this amp full range in your present system. It is highly thought of as being accurate but not sterile, powerful and cheap.
|
WC,
Ah, do you now mean that the midrange from your 3F is more accurate (words, etc) than the Neo, even though the midrange of the Neo is bigger? Now see if the midrange of the Rockport is more accurate than the 3F. My guess is that the Be midrange driver of the 3F is superior. The 3F enclosure is no slouch, even though the Rockport enclosure is more ambitious. Since the 3F is not that heavy, I hope the seller permits you to bring them over to his room to A/B. His Boulder amps are very different from any of your amps, so at present it may be difficult to make this apples/orange comparison.
|
MrD,
No system even most perfectly set up, has it all. You have noted how electrostatics are more detailed but less powerful than dynamic speakers, but you happen to like the fleshy body and ultimate dynamics of your Klipsch La Scala speakers. The conductor of an orchestra hears it all better than any orchestra member or listener in the audience. If the listener is far back, he is hearing much less of everything than a closer listener. The car radio has better sound than that heard by the distant concert listener, but no "perfect" system comes close to any aspect of the live sound heard by the conductor.
|
maplegrovemusic,
When I heard an older Sanders hybrid 10B well set up at a home, it was superb, rivaling the ML CLX for accuracy at least in the range of the stat panel. The panel of all Sanders models is flat, and the vertical height of the panels is modest, giving superior HF. The Neo gives a reasonable trade-off with strong points of dynamics and great stat midrange, but weak point of HF rolloff compared to the CLX, due to its large curved panel. The original King Sound King was better than all of these for clarity, but its major disadvantage was its 6 foot height of the flat panel. I like the tweeter design of 3 inch wide small height segments, so the horizontal dispersion of HF is excellent. My experience with tall panels is that at the extremes of the top and bottom, the HF are rolled off. So the HF from the most accurate ear level portion of the panel gets added to the HF from the extremes where there is rolloff in proportion to the distance off axis vertically. The total HF perceived at ear level is reduced compared to a shorter speaker, such as my Audiostatic. The most dramatic demonstration of this was when I heard the Stax F81 against the F83 which was two F81's stacked vertically. The F83 was rolled off compared to the F81. When you offered the KS17 for sale, I considered them, but their height caused me to pass. But you may prefer the Adam Audio because its modest size may provide greater clarity than the KS17. I like the panel design of the KS17, but I wish King Sound came out with a short 4 foot model of the same concept. Of course it would be less efficient, but the clarity might be superior to most everything else. And the marketing distribution of King Sound is terrible. No North American dealer carried the Hummingbird electrostatic tweeter.
|
ihasaguy,
I partially agree with your points about preferences. But the goal of high fidelity is accuracy, literally. The absolute sound of the real thing is different depending on room or hall size or outdoors, listener distance, etc. Here is where preferences play a role--someone might like live music from a distance, and others might prefer close upfront sound. The real purpose of the reference point of the absolute sound is to give one an idea of what a hifi system should be striving for. It is OK to create a sound system of whatever sound one may fantasize about, even if it sounds nothing like the real thing. Just admit that one's goal in that case is subjective fantasy, not high fidelity. |
grey9hound,
Excellent point you made about how efficient speakers enable you to use low powered amps. For clarity and purity of sound, low power amps can be better than their high powered siblings. This is because fewer devices have less distortion than more devices with their likelihood of imperfect matching. I have no experience with low powered tube amps, but they are said to be ideal for very efficient horn speakers. My experience with the Bryston 2.5B SST2 is that it is vastly superior to the 4B SST2 despite the company's claim that they sound the same, have identical specs except for power, blah, blah.
|
goodsource,
Totally agree. As a violinist, I have played over 1000 instruments made from 1600 to the present, at prices from hundreds to millions of bucks. They range from sweet/romantic to tight/cold. I appreciate the varied tone colors of natural, unamplified brass and woodwind instruments also. But I believe, like you, that hifi is meant to be a passive conduit of the varied colors of the recorded music, revealing them to the max. The hifi should not be colored itself, which then superimposes the artificial electronic color on top of the real natural color, creating a mess. Congratulations on ordering the Sim 860 V2, which I believe is the most truthful amp heard here. I look forward to your findings.
|
MrD,
It is not important whether any stranger might LIKE a particular system. My comments to ihasaguy were simply to say that if the goal of a system is high fidelity, the reference point is the sound of live music. High fidelity is about accuracy, as best as you can get it. It is OK to engage in audio fantasy which has nothing to do with high fidelity, and here anything goes according to your pleasures. Each piece of live music has its own reality, according to how many players in the ensemble, types of instruments, voices, natural volume levels, etc. Large horn systems best reproduce large scale instruments like church organs, 9 foot pianos heard up close, etc. Small scale pieces like string quartets, solo banjo are more realistically reproduced by small electrostatics and mini monitor dynamic speakers. Actually, any solo instrument is best reproduced by a MONO system, not a stereo or multichannel system which create multiple sources that are contrary to the reality of a single, solo instrument or voice. A solo tuba which has a large horn is obviously better reproduced by a single horn speaker than a single minimonitor. A small banjo is more realistically reproduced by a single mini monitor or electrostatic. These examples show how depending on your main type of music, a certain speaker will be more suitable. It isn't realistic (pun intended) to expect that any one speaker is best for all types of music.
|
yyzsantabarbara,
I enjoyed my 60 day trial of the Benchmark AHB2 on my electrostatic speakers. The tone quality was neutral and detailed. But the specs didn't reveal that they clipped and shut down at fairly low volumes. This told me that at the very low impedance at HF of my electrostatic, the output was low. It wouldn't help to bridge 2 amps, because the output at low impedances is paradoxically less even if the output at 8 ohms is much greater. Too bad that the revealing tone quality is not matched by enough power for the crazy loads of electrostatics.
|
MrD,
I agree with all the definitions of high fidelity you just posted. So we agree that high fidelity to your particular live music is the goal. People prefer certain types of music, listening at different distances, etc, so this is a legitimate factor in the choice of different systems. |
WC,
It is great that you acknowledge the strong points of both the 3F and Neo. As I said to MrD, and you agree with me, no one speaker does everything perfectly. I recommend that you keep the 3F as a cheap reference for top-notch clarity. For me, in all aspects of life, I value clarity. In my field of medicine, sometimes I don't quite understand a new concept, but then when someone explains it in a new way, I am thrilled that I finally understand it better. Music appreciation is similar. A more revealing system will let you enjoy the music you have always enjoyed, but at a higher level.
|
MrD,
You are quite right that my Audiostatics compress at 95 dB. When my father built his custom enclosure for the Altec VOT drivers, he stressed how no other speaker could play at high volumes without breakup, compression or distortion, the same words as you. I was so taken in by his words and loved the naturalness and power of the music from the Altecs that I brought my college friend home to hear them. HIS father had the large Advent speakers. When I played a string quartet on the Altecs, my friend shook his head, and said, no, the Advents reveal more of the exciting sizzle of string instruments. I was crushed, but admitted that he was right when I visited his house and heard his father's Advents. Of course, the Advents didn't have the large scale dynamics of the Altecs. The strongest advantage of the Altecs were voices which showcase the midrange dynamics and naturalness. I really love classical pieces of both small and large scale, but I realized that to best reproduce my favorite pieces, electrostatics are the choice. For low level detail extending up to comfortable levels of about 85 dB, they excel. When I hear cymbal crashes peak at 100 dB, I realize that the lower freq component of the cymbals are compressed, but most of the energy is in the HF which compress very little because HF excursions of the stat diaphragm are small compared to lower freq. Yes, cymbals are still compressed to a degree, but the exciting transient clarity of the electrostatic wins me over and more than compensates for the compression. Then to hear tiny taps of cymbals and moderate levels of snare drum transients, there is nothing better than my Audiostatic plus my newer electrostatic super tweeter, the Enigmacoustics Sopranino.
I enjoy your comments and thank you for your invitation to hear your system. There is much that we agree on, and I acknowledge the truth of your comments, so keep it up.
|
WC,
You are right that we don't know what the live event sounded like. But after numerous exposures to different live events in different halls and sitting in different seats in the same hall, I realize that live sounds vary so much that you cannot use any one example as a reference. That's why I emphasize clarity above all other criteria. It is hard to get an ideal seat at the concert hall. So I stand up at my seat, scouting out the closer seats that are not taken, and scramble for those seats in the last few seconds before the performance starts. These seats will have the best clarity. I don't care about imaging, depth of field, separation. Get the most information out of your music, regardless of where it comes from. Don't pre-occupy yourself about whether you are reproducing the best space or the unknowable space of the recording. It's about music, music, music, NOT location, location, location. |
MrD,
Back in the 70's, I heard the La Scala and Belle Klipsch at a midfi dealer driving them with receivers, etc. The La Scala was about $600/pr, and Belle about $900/pr retail. I wasn't a sophisticated hifi listener at the time, but somehow I liked the Belle better--it seemed more coherent and focused than the La Scala. They were both about the same size and I didn't understand why I preferred the Belle. The Belle was more attractive and compact, so maybe that biased me in its favor. So I agree with you that close together horn drivers is a good design. My father emphasized that the ideal speaker is a point source, not a bunch of widely spread out drivers. That is one reason for my criticism of the Neo. The horn gives the power to the point source. The AG Trio is not a point source, so the imaging is not as focused as either the Altec 511 driver which covers 500 to 22 kHz or your La Scala or Belle whose midrange/HF drivers are point sources.
|
MrD,
Before I became an audiophile and when my major musical activity was playing for myself and in orchestras, I was only concerned about clarity of sound, while listening carefully to improve the precision of my violin playing. The vocabulary of "soundstage, depth of field, left/right separation, imaging" seems to be specific to audiophiles. Musicians don’t speak that language, because they realize that these aspects are much less important than the clarity of the music. Most musicians have inferior, mediocre systems--just good enough to hear their recordings or to listen casually. They spend most of their money on getting the best musical instruments they can afford, so hifi takes a back seat. They don’t obsess about hifi also because they realize that all hifi is far from the real thing in nearly all aspects. Certainly my system is far from the real thing in many respects, so I choose to concentrate on clarity where my system does come very close. It has more clarity than a midhall seat and approaches the clarity of the best position like the conductor on stage. Kind of like a specialist like a dermatologist who concentrates on the skin mainly, although a good dermatologist will have some knowledge of the entire body which of course is intimately connected to the skin. Also, philharmonicpete is an educated classical music lover who agrees with us that clarity is more important than spatial effects.
Thanks for your reminiscences of the Belle and La Scala. What did you think of the sounds of the Belle, and of course, the K-horn flagship? How did you modify your La Scala? Are the newer horns like AG or Vittora using better horn materials and/or better compression drivers?
|
dep14,
Thanks for your informative comments about different speakers. It is telling that you found the Persona's more detailed than an electrostatic. Which stats did you hear?
|
philharmonicpete,
Totally agree. For me, even the 4th row is too distant. I go for the 1st row, slightly left of center so I am closest to the soloist where the sound is the most clear. The only disadvantage of the 1st row is that the stage is about 4 ft high, so you have to crane your neck to look up at the musicians. Maybe I should have become a conductor, who has the best position of all. When I played violin solo in the Lalo Symphonie Espagnole, I had the thrill of immersion in all of it, with the brass blasting in my face, etc. Anyone who says this is too much detail is unfortunately missing out. One of my favorite pieces is the opening overture to Lohengrin. There are 8 violin parts which I have never heard on any system. I have the score and look forward to a live performance from the 1st row, where I can hear and see it all. It is absolutely necessary to strive for the most detail in your system, so you can approach the detail of a live performance from a very close seat. If you are in NY, let's get together, since we have so much in common. russlaud (at) gmail (dot) com.
|
tjassoc,
Nice to hear from you. Agree with your points. I would add that even bad recordings are listenable if you don't listen too loud. Philharmonicpete said that the lady at the concert said that the orchestra was too loud. And that's live music. The message is to always refrain from blasting, just as it is better to enjoy alcoholic drinks in the manner of the connoisseur, not for the purpose of getting drunk from too much. Neutrality is important at every level of the audio chain, because there is so much detail missing from audio systems that you have to strive not to submerge anything with euphonic components. Just keep the volume sensible.
|
MrD,
I agree that for clarity, a speaker should direct its sound towards the listener, not diffuse it to other parts of the room. Your horns do this, although there is some dispersion off axis. But my flat electrostatic panel is highly directional, so that if I move my head to the side only a few inches, I am losing some HF. Curved stat panels disperse the sound to other listeners off axis, but everyone hears the same rolled off HF, sacrificing detail. My speakers are best heard by a single listener right on axis. I offer a guest listener my best seat while I go elsewhere. Also, I lower my head to my chin to get the best detail, although I don't know why this works. Anyone will find the best position for love making, no matter what it takes, LOL.
|
mrdecibel,
Totally correct. The stage of a large symphony orchestra is about 100 ft wide. No system, not even the Neo in a large room comes close to this. So no system as proper full scale imaging. So you might as well concentrate on getting the best clarity from your music. You said it well--"without detail and clarity, you cannot get a realistic portrayal of the playing of instruments or voices, tone structure, attack and decay, ambience." I go further and say that all the audio fantasy of IMAX imaging is useless without ultimate detail and clarity. The bigness and space of IMAX is not more realistic unless the projector has greater resolution.
|
MrD,
Forget about the hybrid JTR speakers. What's so good about the Vittora system, which costs $30K and doesn't look much different from the Klipsch La Scala or even the Belle K? I don't like wood horns. Wood is a soft material and absorbs HF, so that's why Volti may be trying to create a softer sound which you know I think sacrifices detail. My father's Altec 511 horn is hard metallic, so the sound is more neutral. Perhaps the ideal is concrete. He showed me a 1964 cover of High Fidelity magazine I recall. The headline was "a half ton of sound" which showed pictures of large concrete horn speakers being shown at an AES convention.
|
Even the $549/pr bookshelf Klipsch RP600 was favorably reviewed recently in Stereophile, having excellent clarity, although this model is not on the Klipsch website. It seems like the midrange/HF horn(s) are the key to the greatness of the whole K line.
WC, definitely hear Klipsch at Axpona, even the small cheap models to see if they compete in clarity with your 3F. The Klipschorn or La Scala is a serious contender for many things you want. I am skeptical that the big expensive Volti is any better than mrD's La Scala, and it might be worse for the reasons I speculated about above. I am waiting to see what mrD thinks. |
dep14,
Interesting. How do you compare the Klipsch Palladium vs Persona's for midrange/HF detail, tone quality. Horns get the best out of drivers, but Be has its advantages for lower distortion, so which is the better mousetrap? The best solution for the future will be horn loaded Be drivers.
|
I know all about various statistical methods and interpretation. I still appreciate psnyder’s diligent analysis. I am not offended by his efforts to "enlighten me" but view his efforts the same way I view my efforts to enlighten readers about audio and live music. Important matters bear repetition. But never cross the line by telling people they are stupid or saying their equipment got butt-kicked. The latter is mere hyperbole, but the former is just plain inappropriate behavior.
Mikem and yyz--great wisdom from both of you, well said. I just bought a new CD of Saint Saens’ "Carnival of the Animals" which also includes the Organ Symphony. The conductor is Antonio Pappano, and the 2 pianists in the shorter Carnival piece are Pappano, and the reigning greatest pianist of our times, Marta Argerich. This Carnival recording is the smaller chamber version rather than the usual large orchestral version. The chamber version enables close microphone placement, and the sound is exciting and immediate. The percussive aspect of the pianos and other instruments is a great tool for audio system assessment, and the brief solo double string bass in the right channel on track 13 (I think) is the best recording of that instrument I have ever heard. Your right speaker should "become" the bass. Even my wimpy electrostatic speakers show the tight, but deep bass. At 50-70 dB playback, it doesn’t shake the walls, but its lifelike quality is astonishing. Jay and others who may not be familiar with this piece--this is a great opportunity to learn this most popular timeless classical piece, and I promise this recording will become part of your best demo pieces. Even mediocre speakers and the stock car stereo will bring this music to life better than super systems playing typical recordings. This shows the all important benefits of great, natural recordings, like this one.
I am less impressed by the recording of the Organ Symphony, which for a large orchestra, is recorded more distantly and at a lower level to accommodate the huge dynamic contrasts between very soft parts and the loud transients of the cymbal crashes. Track 2 contains soft sustained organ bass at 35 Hz, track 4 contains loud sustained organ bass at 32 Hz.
Enjoy. Happy holidays.
|
MrD,
Very interesting mods to the horns. It is desirable to damp the ringing and vibrations of the metal horns, so I like what you did. I am skeptical of wood horns, since wood is a soft material and could soften the sound of the horn too much. Rooms that are all wood have lots of reverberation and soft sound with rolled off HF. My guess is the sound of wooden Volti horns is soft compared to Klipsch or Altec. What do you think of the material in the AG horns? AG should also get all the drivers of the Trio model closer together to improve the imaging focus. And what do you think about the concrete horns on the cover of that 1964 mag? Don't go too far with the damping or you will get dullness, which I found with turntables and tonearms. |
alexbpm,
I have not heard the Alsyvox models, but I don't know why they are so expensive. The best ribbons I have heard are from Wisdom Audio. Even the middle Sage series is large and much cheaper than the Botticelli. The GT Audio planar/ribbons are great, better than Maggies, and reasonably priced.
|
MrD,
Certainly the LaScala is a purer implementation as a full range horn, unlike the hybrid Palladium series. However, the P's may have a smaller more focused image than the LaScala which some like I may prefer. Focus is due to clarity in the midrange and especially HF. Bass gives fullness and power. Horn bass is more accurate than conventional bass drivers, but since more melodic content is in the lower midrange up to HF, the smaller K models with the crucial horns in the mid/HF have a lot going for them. So even the $549/pr bookshelf RP-600M reviewed in the April Stereophile is reported to have excellent clarity due to the horn midrange/HF. As for smoothness, in hifi, it usually comes at the price of detail due to rounding off of "edges." Some hifi reviewers talk about "burnished" sound, which means smoothing out the edges and rolled off HF. But only in live music is there smoothness AND clarity, because the "edges" are present, without being artificially edgy. |
MrD,
Also, perhaps the smaller Klipsch speakers, even though they are hybrids, are a better match for smaller rooms, but the LaScala and K-horn are better for large rooms, especially for listeners who demand more powerful and accurate bass. That Stereophile reviewer who loved the small RP 600M said his only reservation was with larger symphonic and operatic works.
|
mrD, Wouldn't it be a marriage made in heaven if the wife were supportive of a husband's audio passions, as long as she is not another strong-willed phile with contrary tastes. |
WC,
Totally agree about not buying expensive products with no resale value. GT Audio's speaker is largely unknown, but the modest low teens price given the quality makes it a low risk proposition (still not an investment). On the other hand, if the market wakes up to its quality/cost ratio, the brand will get the recognition it deserves and have better resale value. Just remember, almost no products even from well established brands are investments. You take a sizable loss from even well known brands. If a famous speaker sells retail for $100K and you only take a 20% loss, your absolute loss is $20,000. The Rockport is still a risk--how are you doing with further listening? But if you get the GT Audio for $14,000 and take a 100% loss, you did better by only taking a $14,000 loss. Very few people are as skillful as you in buying wisely so you take minimal losses. Your main risk for the attractive buy price is that you often don't get to hear the item properly before purchase. I am not pushing the GT speaker, but just using it as a good example of my point. If you like the GT on first hearing, you can go back a few times at the show. If it doesn't pass the last hearing test, you can feel safe in rejecting it and not lose any money at all, just the relatively modest travel/hotel expenses.
|
alexbpm and gwalt,
I do admire and appreciate the designs of the Alsyvox speakers. The 5 mm super tweeter is probably near SOTA, and is very likely superior in response and accuracy to the large curved panel of the Neo, which rolls off the HF. This is due to theoretical considerations as well as the listening experience of WC who also found the Be tweeters of the Persona 3F and the Magico to be more detailed and revealing than the Neo. The 15 mm width of the midrange/tweeter is a great design whose narrowness would create a focused range from 850-6000 Hz. Again this is superior to the large curved panel of the Neo which creates an artificially magnified image with time smear effects. The question is whether the wonderful design of the midrange planar driver creates better accuracy than the flawed electrostatic design of the Neo. I wonder the same thing about whether the superior Be midrange driver of the Persona 3F is more accurate than the inherently superior, but flawed electrostatic design of the Neo.
I do believe that the design of the smallest Alsyvox, the Tintoretto is better than the Botticelli, which is better than the next larger Caravaggio, which is better than the largest Michelangelo. As I have written, larger panels create more time smear effects than smaller ones of the same material design. Flat panels like the Alsyvox are superior to curved panels which roll off HF and a lesser extent the midrange, in proportion to the greater horizontal distance from on axis pointed straight to the ears. The same principle applies regarding vertical rolloff from taller panels. I discovered this when I A/B'ed the Stax F81 to its sibling, the F83 which was 2 stacked F81's. Of course, the F83 was louder with more bass extension, but the HF were rolled off compared to the F81. In a similar manner, I feel that the shorter Tintoretto will have more accuracy than the Botticelli and taller models from 850 Hz to ultra HF. The smallest Tintoretto is still reasonably tall with high 93 dB efficiency, so should satisfy anyone in even fairly large rooms, who values quality but not blasting to unnaturally high volumes. I wish some dealer would have both the Tintoretto and Botticelli in the same listening room so I could confirm my suppositions.
Thanks for relating your experience with Alsyvox.
|
gwalt,
I saw a video of that exclusive US dealer of the Alsyvox, DrVinyl, in Laurel, Maryland, run by an attractive lady. There are a few female audiophiles, but I never heard of a female run dealer. Although I like the design, I still don't see why it should be many times more expensive than the GT Audio planar/ribbon, even accounting for import expenses. What is the retail price of the Tintoretto, smallest model? The larger models have the same midrange and HF drivers, but just more woofer panels. A real ripoff just to get more bass. There are plenty of cheaper and more compact ways to get more bass, such as the REL mentioned by bigdesign3. And mrD's La Scala will kill any planar bass panel.
|
gwalt,
Don't get me wrong--I love the design of the Alsyvox but hate its price considering its relatively simple technology. I would guess that the designer of the GT Audio planar/ribbon put as much R&D into it as the designer of Alsyvox. When I heard the GT at faxer's home, by itself it was quite satisfactory for most music, but the subwoofer addition was useful for just a few very deep bass notes. It wasn't a question of proper integration because the panels themselves go down to 40 Hz and their mid bass accuracy enables you to hear accurate overtones of the deep bass. This is a much better strategy than having a typical dynamic woofer in a box that goes down to 20 Hz but is muddy up through the lower midrange, poisoning much of the music.
I have heard nearly all the ML models of the past 40 years, including the original Monolith and CLS. They are merely good but not great, largely because of the large curved panels. Same goes for Soundlab's large curved panels. Even a large flat panel like the Dayton Wright was terrible. Quads after the original great 1957 ESL are mediocre and very veiled. My theories are not trolling, but help to predict the sound of any speaker, because you can't go out and hear everything. You have to use good theoretical common sense to narrow the field. My theory DOES predict superb sound of any Alsyvox in midrange/HF at least, so it is worth making a trip to the dealer to hear them. I read some of the WBF, but can you just be a sport and quote the price of the Tintoretto to save me time? Thanks.
An interesting electrostatic speaker of the past was the good sounding Koss 1A. It was a large panel with a dynamic tweeter. At first, I thought it was stupid to have a dynamic tweeter when electrostatics are superior. But then I realized that good dynamic tweeters are better than large curved stat panels which roll off HF. There is no question that Alsyvox has the best ribbon design for midrange/HF at least. In particular, the narrow 15 mm midrange ribbon promises better focus and accuracy than the much wider ribbon of the GT. Of course, listening is the ultimate criteria for judging. I really do understand your passion based on your listening, and agree that my theories are not the ultimate arbiter, but only serve as a starting point.
Where do you live? Thanks for your invitation and valuable comments.
|
WC,
Before you go to Axpona, I should mention that the GT Audio speakers may not be set up with full toe-in. When I moved them to full toe-in at my friend faxer's home, they were MUCH better in clarity, etc. Although ribbons and planars have more dispersion than flat stats, they still benefit enormously from full toe-in if you want to hear the maximum clarity. Many people like straight ahead without toe-in for looks and spacious sound, but unfortunately few people are aware of the benefits of full toe-in. If the exhibitors refuse to do full toe-in, you can listen to 1 speaker facing it so you can get the full clarity, but obviously this is not as good as full toe-in of both speakers. The GT speaker is relatively light and easy to move. But a real advantage of the very narrow midrange and HF elements of the Alsyvox is that full toe-in is not critical. Too bad Alsyvox won't be at Axpona, but the dealer in Maryland is not that far from you. I like the endgame philosophy of alexbpm and gwalt, so consider Alsyvox before spending any more money on anything audio.
|
closenplay,
Thanks for this valuable info about Alsyvox. If they are the best sounding speaker for almost all criteria, they could still make a lot of money if they cut their prices in half. Let's say the manufacturer's cost of the GT is $2000. At retail of $14K, he is making $12K if he sold direct. Alsyvox probably has a somewhat higher cost of production if the materials are finer and construction is more involved, maybe $5K. At retail for the Tintoretto of half of $65K, or $32K, that is still $27K in profit, sold direct. More people will buy the cheaper GT, but the Alsyvox as the hypothetically SOTA speaker will stimulate more people to stretch their budget and go for the Alsyvox if they significantly drop their prices. But even at present retail prices, the SOTA Alsyvox buys better sound than blowing comparable money on a full set of crazy expensive cables from Nordost, expensive famous brand mediocre sounding electronics, etc.
You started out here with a bang. Welcome, and keep it coming!
|
Muraudio, Sanders (electrostatics), GT Audio (planar ribbons), Volti, Klipsch (horns). Concentrate on these SOTA contenders so you can go back several times. Don't waste much time on electronics which are hard to evaluate in an unknown system.
|
WC,
Don't forget to have the Sanders and GT Audio panels fully toed in and sit in the sweet spot, otherwise you will not get anywhere near what these speakers are capable of in clarity. I know from my experience with them, even if the exhibitors don't. This may not be as critical with the Muraudio quasi-omnidirectional stat. MrD said that even with his horns, the direct sound is best. Even though horns spread the sound, there may be a subtle benefit fully toed in, listening at the sweet spot.
|
WC,
I will add to others’ appreciation that the latest video is the finest I have heard of that song, Keith Don’t Go. But I heard clarity, not sweetness. The stand turned the rolled off Dag 250 into a high clarity Sim. The guitar and voice were both startlingly clear, but there was no harshness. It was just REAL, the unvarnished truth, smoothness without sweetness. From now on, all amp shootouts should be done WITH the stand. Further listening will show whether the stand is truly responsible for the great clarity, to rule out the possibility that what you heard was just a lucky moment when the power line quality was superb. This has happened to me many times, when I realized that my power quality was superb only for an hour or so.
Also, you don’t need to wait for the Merrill Christine preamp. Just use the stand, the Dag preamp, and A/B the Gryphon and Merrill 118. (Oops, you need a 2nd stand. Worth the money!) The fireworks will be even greater than with the Dag 250 amp.
As an aside, I met someone today whose car was damaged by a nearby car that burned up from blasting the car stereo too much. I saw the pictures of both cars, horrible. Boom boom bass blowup.
|
WC,
GT--yes, they are coherent, big, smooth, but how about their clarity, which no $120K dynamic speaker will have at the level of GT. GT is a contender for you, so go back and hear them again, and insist that they do the full toe-in with the midpoint of the flat panels facing your nose/eyes. When I first heard them not toed in, they were smooth, coherent, big, but when I toed them in fully, they had MUCH greater clarity without fatigue or edgy HF. To get the full benefits, they are really a one listener speaker, enjoyable in the sweet spot both sitting and standng. And the price is right, in the low teens without the sub. There is very little risk--as alexbpm and gwalt say, when people recognize the high quality/cost ratio, resale value will be decent. But you may not find a better speaker for a long time, so if you enjoy them for a few years, you will have gotten good value. (Before buying, take a short trip to Laurel, Maryland to see if the Alsyvox are better and can justify the much higher price. Laurel is a very short ride from DC. I am tempted). Listen without the sub, and you will still get enough quality bass for most music.
|
WC,
Also, klh007 on the last page said that the Alsyvox Tintoretto had the most live/real percussion. That really says it all. That speaker is the proper size--big enough for spaciousness, but not too big that you get time smear which detracts from clarity. $65,000 for that, a much better proposition than any big monster at the show. I would say that this speaker or the Sanders, Muraudio, GT are the leading contenders for you. |
WC,
It is highly unlikely that a dynamic speaker at any price will have the accuracy/resolution at all freq of very low mass drivers of properly designed ribbons and stats. The big Focal may have excellent HF due to the Be tweeter, but the rest of its range is likely inferior. Again, don't be impressed by mere bigness, etc. I bet that the Be midrange driver of your Persona 3F has more accurate midrange than all these big dynamic speakers with their midrange drivers. Can you hear the words and instrumental details more clearly in any of these speakers compared to your 3F? Don't miss the Sanders stats. Someone on the previous page loved the 10e. Roger Sanders admitted his mistakes in his past curved panel designs, and is now the leading advocate of flat panel designs, so you will be welcomed there when you insist on full toe-in and listening precisely at the sweet spot. I hope you do the same at GT so you will maximize the value there. Still, listen to the Muraudio stats, even though I am suspicious of their quasi-omni design. You never know who has the best materials technology for stator and membrane, and transformer design, which may compensate for flawed radiation patterns.
A meaningful trip for you might be coming to Laurel, Md to hear the Alsyvox, then less than 200 miles to NJ to hear GT Audio's setup, then back again to Alsyvox. You could easily bring your 3F in your car so you can have the ultimate A/B's for details and clarity. These are all the finest examples of their technologies at very reasonable prices. If the Alsyvox is the best, judging from the long experiences of alexbpm and gwalt, then you could say that the Alsyvox is even the best value, since you are salivating over ridiculously priced big dinosaur dynamic speakers.
|
audiotroy,
I only heard the GT at my friend faxer's home, in a nice setup of large room with high ceiling. (At first I misinterpreted your statement. If you had written "Viber, I heard the GT ....." that would have stated what you mean). What did you think of the Sanders electrostatic? Thanks for your unbiased opinion that the Muraudio is an excellent electrostatic. Hopefully you can become a dealer for this superior speaker at a nice price. Merrill W uses the Muraudio as his reference speaker, and you might like to become a dealer for the Merrill Element amps. They promise to be a bargain for SOTA revealing, neutral sound.
|
WC,
Thanks for your honest description of all these speakers. What you say about the Muraudio makes sense, because omni speakers are even more curved and dispersed than the curved panels of ML, so the HF are even more rolled off, mids are also smeared and warm. Read the intelligent review of the Sanders 10e by Robert Greene in the Absolute Sound. Greene is an intelligent musician, recording engineer and scientist. I agree with him about the correctness of flat panel design and direct sound. This also applies to the GT speaker as a flat panel, so it must be heard fully toed in to realize its full clarity. Isn't it nice that these 2 contenders are reasonably and competitively priced? No accident--proper design and value, compared to almost everything else.
|
WC,
Note how the relatively narrow ML 13a sounds good. It has enough panel area for good sound output, but focuses the sound better with more HF content than the Neo. The neutral Constellation electronics help. They are probably using the cheaper Con amps which use the same circuit module as the more expensive and powerful Con models, so the sound is about as good. Don't miss Sanders and Muraudio for stats. How does the ML 13a sound compared to the GT Audio and Persona 3F for clarity?
|
closenplay,
Well said about how big speakers in big rooms, listening at far distances don't give musical intimacy/engagement. This is also true outside of shows, in homes. The best hybrid ML may be the 13a which is large enough to have good sound output, but listening at 8-10 feet away still yields intimacy/clarity. The CLX is a special case, because it is a pure electrostatic, and the midrange/HF panel is actually very narrow, which enables the best clarity of the ML line.
|
WC,
No doubt your home 3F system sounds so much better than at the show. Audiotroy admitted the same. As you listen at home again, you will probably find that the 3F still has great clarity. A good discovery at the show was how the ML 13a was so excellent. Although it doesn't have the huge spaciousness of the Neo, its better accuracy plus good spaciousness (which is more true to life than the Neo) showed you how important clarity is. Although the Constellation electronics helped, they are probably no better than your Block amps, although the ARC ref 10 is probably veiled and euphonic compared to the Con preamp. So you had an excellent demo of the ML 13a itself, which serves as a great reference for you. The Rowland 535/Block comparison should be very informative.
Speaking about vocals, I heard male and female singers up close in a rehearsal yesterday. The sound comes out of the mouth which is only a few inches, so live singers are like a point source with narrow imaging and great focus/clarity. If a hifi system makes them sound big, that is totally unnatural and not true high fidelity. So listen to your 3F again and appreciate what they do well. I always like to confirm my ideas with more experiences like this, to keep me honest.
|
psynder149,
You raise good points. Warmth is found to some extent in live music. In live music, there is no distinction between clarity and warmth, because clarity enables the revealing of subtle harmonic information which is natural warmth. The problem with warmth in hifi systems is that subtracting details does create a certain kind of warmth, but this leaves the hifi listener with a feeling that subtle musical detail is missing.
|
psynder149,
Very true about the Holy Grail of hifi being able to combine clarity and natural warmth without any sacrifice of either, like live music. After all my experiences, I am still amazed that live music may sound warm at times, but cold and even sterile at other times. In a hall with lots of wood and reverberation, at a distance, the sound is too warm and muddy with poor detail. In contrast, in open air without acoustical coloring, it is more ruthless and neutral, without the warm aspects. A close seat in the hall, approximately where microphones are placed, the sound is closer to the neutrality of open air. But the important common finding is that no matter what the distance and environment, live music is always smooth. In open air at fairly close range, it is smooth and dry; in the reverberant hall at a distance, it is smooth and warm. Smooth dry wine vs smooth full bodied, with many gradations in-between.
|
WC and klh007,
At Steve's home, I heard the GT with a Pass amp, I think XA 60.8. Usually Pass is sweet sounding, but the system sounded tonally neutral and accurate, a tribute to the GT speaker. A big advantage of the GT is its fairly high efficiency, which enables use of smaller amps of highest quality.
|
psnyder149,
I noticed that when I use the pause button on my CD player, there is soft mechanical noise as if there are still moving parts. This may cause wear, so now I just press stop. When I come back to listen, I start the track again.
|
