As a prospective future customer for the Joseph speakers, my worry remains based on the many reports of "richer bass" that the Perspective 2s may overload my room. The original Perspectives were on the edge.
My room is actually very good for getting even bass from most speakers, and I've yet to have any speaker truly be a problem bass-wise, but it always depends on the design of the speaker, too.
|
I think 2 feet from the back wall to the tweeter is not enough space for any speaker. Really depends on the speaker, and the room's inherent gain, and how it was designed. Rarely you'll get true bookshelf speakers, and they need close wall reinforcement. I've designed some, and the only other one I know of like this is the Crystal Cable Minissimo Diamond. Wilson also from time to time makes speakers like this. Oh, and let us not forget Allison, who famously insisted that speakers should be against a wall, and designed accordingly. |
My Joseph Audio Pulsar 2 Graphenes are 73 inches apart, 33 inches, (measured from the port) from the back wall in a 12 deep x 11.5 wide room with the listening chair in the near field at approximately 6.5 feet and the bass is overwhelming the room on many recordings. It may be worth noting that I probably have around 40 hours playing time on them and it's my sincere hope things tighten up over time. If not, these may not be the speakers for me. |
markalarsen
Wow, you also have YG Carmels? Those are supposed to be terrific speakers! I guess you have two systems? What do you like about your YG speakers?
BTW, agreed about pulling speakers out from the back wall as a general principle. It's almost always worked best for me, and since I switched my room around some years ago giving me more restricted placement options, fortunately speakers still end up about 4 feet out from the back wall to the back of the speaker. (Currently my Thiel speakers are about 66" from back wall to the tweeters, and I get really even sound).
|
I am not limiting my comment to Joseph Audio speakers. I think 2 feet from the back wall to the tweeter is not enough space for any speaker. Speaker set up is critical. I would recommend Jim Smith’s’s book, “get better sound.”
|
BTW, this is the same location as my original Perspectives. |
It may vary room to room. My Perspective2s are 55” from the rear wall to the tweeters. This is the same distance as the Magnepan 20.1s they replaced.
My YG Carmels are 40” from the rear wall even though they are sealed.
Pulling any speakers away from that rear wall IMHO is always a good idea. There are a few exceptions.
|
Is 2 feet too short for the perspective 2's as well? |
I have owned the Joseph Audio Pulsars, the original Perspectives and the Perspective2s. I gave the Pulsars to my father-in-law, who has them set up in a small room. I doubt two feet from the back wall is enough.
They are rear ported. You need to get the bass right first. Try the bass plug, both in and out. I do not use it. Move them forward and then backwards. Keep adjusting them in this plane. Once the bass locks in, they should not be boomy. Then use the Cardas site for sidewall computations.
If this does not work, call Jeff Joseph. |
Hello, I'm hoping to reach Mark Larson or anyone (who like myself), may have owned a pair of the original Joseph Audio Pulsars and now owns a pair of the JA Pulsar 2 Graphene. To those who may be interested, IMHO, the Pulsar 2 Graphene offers a substantial level of improvement across virtually every audible parameter, not the least of which, in the frequency range relative to bass response. Which leads me to my question. I have a small listening room that currently allows for the speakers to be 2 feet from the back wall. This worked great for the originals, however now with about 25 hours of playing time in, I'm beginning to feel like the Graphenes need a bit more breathing room as they're sounding a little "boomy" on some of the more bass heavy recordings. Unfortunately, in my room moving the speakers even a few inches to experiment wouldn't necessarily give me an accurate picture as I would first need to move a rather large piece of furniture in order to compensate for the speakers move forward. Can I expect the bass response to become even more prevalent as they continue to break in? Also interested in hearing from others which regard to where they may have their Pulsars located and their experiences with break-in and placement. Thank you, Jay |
I would not describe it as a little tweak. The new drivers are something else |
Yes Mark, that whole review was as high praise as I've seen from Atkinson. He was clearly taken by the speaker.
Funny how even a little tweak can change things. I bet Jeff Joseph was eager to get the new speaker to Stereophile knowing it was tweaked in just the ways Atkinson would approve of.
(Not that Joseph did the design just for Stereophile of course).
|
It started a Stereophile Class A (lower frequence restricted) speaker. In the follow-up review, John Atkinson concluded, " I recommend it even more highly than I did the original."
@prof My favorite line from the review was "it send shivers down my spine." John Atkinson normally is fairly reserved.
|
I just received my digital version of the July Stereophile in which John Atkinson does a follow up review of the new Perspective2 Graphene speakers.
JA’s review of the original Perspectives caused some head-scratching because it seemed somewhat reserved, with some obvious caveats - the speakers "didn’t work" in one reviewers room and JA, despite saying some good things about the clarity and imaging, mentioned concerns about too much high frequency presence leading to brightness and less than well controlled bottom end.
I’d say that I generally agreed with JA’s original review. Though I was far more smitten with the Perspectives than JA, I did find that some tracks I’m used to sounded a bit ear-squelching on the Perspectives, and the bottom end could get a bit bloomy. Those were my main concerns with the speaker - especially as I have sensitive ears - so I was very interested in JA’s follow up on the new version.
Turns out he was super impressed. He wrote that the high frequencies were now a bit more linear and less emphasized (both measurably and audibly), allowing him to listen at high levels with no discomfort at all, to the same recordings that he had found too bright in the first version.
He was really impressed with the bass punch and depth, saying the pitch control rivaled sealed-box designs.
As well, JA mentioned he could play the speakers very loud without a sense of compression or harshness or obscuring of fine orchestral detail.
Measurements showed the Perspective2 to be essentially the same sensitivity as the previous (even a tiny bit lower possibly), with slight changes in impedance here and there, and with a more linear high frequency.
Overall it seemed to me a clear, unreserved...even rave. review, saying the Perspective2 is a "superbly balanced" loudspeaker that he recommended over the original.
Sounds like just the ticket for me if I ever get the funds together!
|
The new Joseph Graphene speakers sure have received a lot of great reports, especially the perspectives. They seem to be featuring in many people’s Best Of Show for Axpona and Munich. Jonathan Valin included them as BIS for Munich, Myles Astor as well, Part Time Audiophile, as well as great notices from many other audio web sites. It suggests Jeff Joseph has some real winners on his hands. A couple more notices: Positive Feedback: https://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/impressions-my-audio-oasis-awards-from-axpona-2019-par...
"Yep, a great room. Organic, musical, makes-you-glad-to-be-listening fine audio."
The Sound Advocate: https://www.thesoundadvocate.com/2019/05/joseph-audio-perspective-and-pulsar-updates-axpona-2019/the Joseph Audio “Perspective”and “Pulsar” updates heard at this years Axpona, but to one of the finest loudspeakers (Perspectives 2 Graphene) made today at any price! The improved Perspective 2 Graphene was something that one does not hear to often, particularly at its relatively modest price. This is an ability to display an open, rich, natural and tonally neutral midrange to treble reproduction along with a firm, solid and almost “perfect” (not over blown or huge…. just naturally aligned and integrated within the complete design of the loudspeaker) bass response! The soundstage perspectives and image localization were just something to behold and totally inspiring. It is hard to say just how much of an improvement the new perspectives are over the original model, but there is no doubt that this is the “sweetest” no less audibly pronounced and close to perfect model in the Joseph lineup.
|
Since they are upgraded to the standard of the new version why would they sound better than the new version? |
That's not what he meant erik. |
That's kind of a shame, as you'd hope an upgrade would sound better somehow. :)
|
I have the upgraded Perspectives and they leave me pretty twinkly as well. I know the crossovers were either replaced or modified in some way and Jeff said they would be indistinguishable in sonics from the new ones. I am not good with the hyperbole but these speakers are amazing and I only have them paired with a little Mac MA 252 integrated. Lyrics and acoustic instruments are what impress me the most with these speakers. |
I can tell you how the new version sounds, and I am twinkly eyed.
|
I appreciate the experience and knowledge you bring to this, erik.
I personally am downplaying my own expectations of what I’ll hear with the new graphene version. Thank you for your kind words! I’m not saying it’s not a better driver. I’m just saying Seas did a lot of work in the motor. Let’s not get twinkly eyed over the word "graphene" as being the cause. :) While I cannot tell you how well the new version sounds, I can tell you with some certainty based on specs that the old and new driver require different crossovers, so the idea that they would require a great deal of rework and possibly ending with a different sound is not surprising to me at all. From what I saw of the previous version, his crossover was impeccably designed, with attention to detail and a nod to tube fans. I would expect JJ to take the same level of care with this one. Best, E |
I appreciate the experience and knowledge you bring to this, erik.
I personally am downplaying my own expectations of what I'll hear with the new graphene version.
As to inferring the sonic significance of the new drivers, it seems to me that we'd have to consider both whatever alterations have been made to the drivers AND whatever alterations Jeff Joseph may have made to the design in redoing his crossovers etc. A number of people reporting conversations with Jeff say Jeff talked about significant work on the new design, so perhaps it includes some alterations that re-voice slightly, or further optimize the design.
Does that make sense?
|
Reading the Seas graphene white paper, I noticed that while they go into some detail about manufacturing, and oxidation inhibition I didn't see any major claims for it affecting the sound of the drivers.
Being a serious driver manufacturer, I'm sure they would not make claims they could not back up, or fail to mention benefits if there were any.
On the other hand, the paper on the 6" or so Magnesium/Graphene driver lists a number of improvements to the motor.
I'm in no way disparaging Seas or Joseph. I'm sure they make excellent products, and as I read it, the new driver is improved, and will be less likely to oxidize. All good things.
|
|
Predicting changes in sound based on specs is hard to do. Have you heard these speakers? I make no claim to. I'm only stating that several improvements in the motor structure have occurred, and that I would guess these improvements are probably more important than the graphene coating. Best, E |
@erik_squires Predicting changes in sound based on specs is hard to do. Have you heard these speakers?
|
Hey @markalarsen :
Yes, what's interesting is that they discuss graphene mostly as being a protective coating. If you read the paper on the driver itself, it is clear that several improvements have been made to the driver motor, and that these are likely to be the source of most changes in the driver properties, which are subtle, not really earth shaking. The resonant peak expected with any mid woofer, but especially metal cones is still there.
Best,
E
|
|
Compare the 2006 Porsche Cayman with the 2019 model. The 2006 Cayman is a great car. The 2019 model is even better.
|
|
So, here's my confusion ... the original JA's got rave reviews as do the new ones. So, does that mean or imply that, comparisons notwithstanding, the originals now are less terrific than they were previously? |
More reports... http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/munich-high-end-2019-loudspeakers/ABSOLUTE SOUND: "Joseph Audio’s $15k Perspective2 Graphene two-and-a-halfway sourced by a Technics tape
deck was, alongside the Elac Carina (see below), the best buy I came
across in Munich—just wonderful on an Elvis tape of spirituals and a Wes
Montgomery tape as well. The sound was outstandingly solid, edgeless,
powerful, and well defined." |
|
@astewart8944 I would take one step further. The Joseph Audio speakers respond well to the front end electronics. The better the front end, the better the music. They, however, are not capable, like any other speaker, of a fixing a flawed signal fed to them. |
I always thought JA's reviews of speakers curiously always perfectly reflected his measurements. I've always been of a mind that he lets his measurements unduly influence his reviews. After all, it's much easier to justify and defend your observations when measurements back you up. Me, I'd rather have a reviewer do their listening and form their conclusions before seeing any measurements. That's what I did because I wanted to give my honest observations without being influenced by what I "should" hear from measurements.
|
IMO an often overlooked positive feature of Joseph speakers is their ability to match well with many different amplifiers, tube and solid state. |
|
Minor note:
I noticed that the original impedance spec for the Perspectives was a minimum of 6 ohms, the new Persepective2 spec is 5.5 ohms minimum.
FWIW....
|
In the final analysis, I think all that’s important is whether a component sounds good ... distortion and other of JA's measurements be damned.
|
When it comes to speakers and electronics, JA measurements correlate to what he hears. The Revel Salon2 speakers review indicated that the speaker is ruler flat (compared to other speakers) and sounds that way. His review of two amps (I think one was a Cary amp) indicated that the tubed amp had 10%+ distortion at rated power, high levels of distortion at a few watts while the other amp was nearly perfect in measurement. However, the reviewer found the tube amp to be more musically enjoyable. He laid the cards on the table and let the listener determine if that's what he/she prefers. I wouldn't trust reviews for purchasing speakers or electronics. They are a guide though. I wouldn't own Magicos, Wilsons or B&Ws and I've heard dozens of their models. Absolute Sound loves Magicos.
|
I own the Perspective2s and will decide if a review is accurate after I read it. I think everyone who hears them will love them. |
|
My opinions, however, are completely reliable, as long as your room is the same size, you set up the speakers correctly and you use the same electronics. |
Interesting debate. I owned B&W 803Ds 20 years ago, too long ago to say anything meaningful about them now. Whatever the reviewers say about them, I have heard the new models at shows, and they do nothing for me. No review would make me consider buying them.
Without listening to a speaker in your own home, everything else is an approximation. Show conditions in the US are difficult. Dealer show rooms are better. Reviews should be viewed as leads.
|
Essentially JA has lost his hearing and wants you to hear like he does, and for the most part he’s accomplished it. You can’t possibly mean that the speakers I like has been decided by my reading what JA has written....can you? I mean, it couldn’t be that I have heard the speakers in question, before JA did his review, and found he reported what I heard? I liked the Perspectives more, it seems, than JA did. He raved much more about speakers that leave me cold. I also love the Devore speakers which JA would never want to own.
He has crap taste, bad hearing and we’d never deliberately build anything he thinks is superb.
Really? Atkinson has raved about the Revel Salon2 speakers, stating: John Atkinson wrote: That the Salon2 can offer such resolution along with the ability to play at high levels with full-range low frequencies, and has a neutral, uncolored midrange, and offers superbly well-defined and stable stereo imaging, and has silky-smooth top octaves courtesy its beryllium-dome tweeter, and features sonic coherence from bottom to top of the audioband, makes it both a Class A speaker in Stereophile’s "Recommended Components" listing, and gave me no choice but to make it my "Editor’s Choice" for Stereophile’s 2008 Component of the Year. And enough of the magazine’s reviewers agreed with me that the Salon2 was also voted Joint Loudspeaker of 2008. The Revel speakers certainly do not fit this standard B&W wonky frequency response profile you insist JA favors to the exclusion of more neutral speakers. Are you saying you DIYers would never build anything like the Revel speakers that JA found to be superb? That would say more about you guys, than JA ;-) This is why, when I actually look at the breadth of Atkinson’s comments and reviews, I find that you need to cherry-pick your examples in order to support your thesis, ignoring instances (as you are again downplaying his Perspectives review) that don’t support your view of him. Anyway, been through this before. That’s my last comment on that, back to the Joseph Audio discussion. |
@erik_squires B&w are very flat speakers. Used in Abbey road as a reference point. JA says There appears to be a slight excess of on-axis energy centered on 10kHz, but the response trend through the region covered by the midrange unit and tweeter is otherwise very flat. https://www.stereophile.com/content/bw-nautilus-801-loudspeaker-measurements-part-2we’d never deliberately build anything he thinks is superb. Have you read the kef blade review he did? They are very flat sounding speakers. |
Prof - If you like JA that’s fine. Follow him to the ends of the earth.
I find his descriptions curiously slanted towards B&W as his reference, and if it sounds like that it is good and if not, it’s bad, and they aren’t that neutral sounding, objectively or subjectively.
As for me, I don’t need JA to tell me what a good speaker is.
As my blog has shown, he likes a particular type of ragged treble, which to those of us who haven't lost much of our hearing, is a hearing aid. If your tweets match this odd signature, he’ll praise it, and otherwise pooh pooh it. JA is exactly why DIYers give High End audio such a bad wrap. He has crap taste, bad hearing and we’d never deliberately build anything he thinks is superb.
Essentially JA has lost his hearing and wants you to hear like he does, and for the most part he's accomplished it.
|
erik,
Then how do you explain that JA found the Perspectives to be on the bright, unforgiving side, and his later measurements (taken afterwards) supported what he perceived?
He correctly perceived what his measurements later showed. And he didn’t like the brightness.
Having auditioned the original Perspectives numerous times, and in my own room as well, I found JA’s review quite perceptive - he heard what I heard. I could find the Perspectives brighter and a bit more "scrunch down my ears" on material that don’t sound as bright on many other speakers. I also found the bass could be a bit "woofy" at the bottom.
Obviously that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t buy them, as I’m clearly enamored by the Perspectives. I think the way the Perspectives manage to sound so smooth and free of grain or etch allows them to have that rising top end without the usual costs of uncomfortable treble found in other speakers. So in most cases what you get is a superb sense of clarity, aliveness and detail retrieval, but sometimes that rising top end does show itself.
That’s one reason why I’m intrigued by comments by Mark and others that the speaker’s top end and midrange sounds even smoother and more refined in the new model. And with tighter bass. If Joseph Audio has managed to keep what I love about the Perspectives while addressing those concerns, that would be just the ticket. As JA was pretty much the only reviewer who reported exactly those characteristics, I’m glad he’s the one doing the follow up review.
I've found JA to be among the most perceptive, straight-shooting reviewers in the subjective reviewing trade.
|
JA is really good at measuring, which makes the fact that he can barely interpret his own measurements more than a little frustrating.
He likes speakers that sound like hearing aids, and he is not above making up shade. If he hears things others miss, it’s probably because he made it up.
Feel free to like or dislike the Pulsars as you see fit, but using JA's opinion as to sound quality is not something I'd ever recommend.
|
JA at Stereophile is the last person whose hearing I would trust. Disagree. I know dissing JA is a hobby horse of yours, but I find him to be quite perceptive. The measurements of the Perspectives showed characteristics (e.g. rising treble response, bass node at least in his room) that matched his subjective report pretty well. (He also often hears artifacts, ratified in his measurements, that his other reviewers sometimes miss). |
