Another nice show report on the Perspective2:
https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2019/05/15/joseph-purist-alluxity-doshi-high-end-2019/
New Joseph Audio Pulsar Graphene 2
Just wanted to update my prior thread where this topic may have gotten lost. As many of you may know by now, Joseph Audio has come out with the new Pulsar Graphene 2. This new iteration of the venerable Pulsars has a graphene coated magnesium midrange-woofer cone, and the drive motor, suspension system, etc., have been revamped. From what I have been told, the upgrade is pretty significant ... the sound is fuller and has greater ease, yet is very resolved. Jeff Joseph advises that an upgrade path will be available for existing owners of the Pulsars, too. Also, note that the price quoted in the Soundstage piece was in Canadian dollars ... Jeff informs me that the price in USD is $8,999 per pair. I am eager to hear the new Pulsars.
483 responses Add your response
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." |
I found this white paper on the Seas Graphene drivers very interesting. http://www.seas.no/images/SEAS_Graphene_White_Paper.pdf The cones are cast magnesium and then machined, so the edge of the cone is thinner than the center. They are then coated with graphene. |
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 |
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. |
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? |
I appreciate the experience and knowledge you bring to this, erik. 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 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. |
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...
The Sound Advocate: https://www.thesoundadvocate.com/2019/05/joseph-audio-perspective-and-pulsar-updates-axpona-2019/
|
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! |
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). |
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 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. |
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. |
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). |
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. |
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. |
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. |
With the Joseph Perspectives I think it would be difficult to overload a medium-sized room simply because the rear porting comes with plugs that you can adjust to your taste/needs. If memory serves me correctly the Perspectives manual recommends the front baffle be 36" or more from the wall behind the speakers. So, if you have that much room to play with, you're going to be fine with Perspectives IMO. I have no experience with Pulsars. I'm currently running Pearl 3s (which have small rear port on the "satellite" and large bottom port) approximately 69" from the back of the shelving directly behind the speakers. The room probably measures somewhat more than 4500 cubic feet taking into account the open stairwell with high ceiling that feeds into the listening room itself. |
prof, while I don't have any experience with the Perspectives, I do have considerable experience with the Pulsars, both the originals and now the Graphenes and based on that, I would venture to say the Perspectives are going to need a fair amount of breathing room. Hell, the Pulsars need a medium size room. |
Lol. A few years back, I contacted Joey Audio to inquire about basic build quality/construction details of a particular model. Specifically driver-to-baffle attachment method (bolted or wood-screwed) and baffle material -wood, metal, composite whatever. In no time flat did I receive an accusatory response suggesting I was looking for information regarding a DIY build -for myself !!!!??? It didn't take long at all for me to lay-into this a-hole to set the record straight. I couldn't believe this idiots disposition, remarks and frankly, insults. The guy I was speaking to ? Why it was Joseph himself (Joker). I reminded him it was of interest to me (as a consumer) to know some basic loudspeaker construction details concerning a $10K loudspeaker investment before I promptly ended communication. Sooo, you want to talk "goofy" ? There's your goofy. pj (P.S> Kef Blades and/or LS50 are the shitty KEF's (with plastic enclosures). The KEF Reference are considerably better) |
Cool story, bro! They way you tell it, I'm sure it was Jeff Joseph who was being the jerk in that conversation. I'm never going to buy a pair of his speakers! And thanks for the insight on those speakers! I'm definitely going to heed your balanced, considered words of wisdom on the sound of Joseph speakers, Kef LS50 and Blades, over the many rave reviews and my own ears. |
Hey "Bro"/prof: You are waay-cool. I'll check who it was (if it was email). " ...I'm sure it was Jeff Joseph who was being the jerk in that conversation. I'm never going to buy a pair of his speakers!" EXACTLY. Why would one ? Joey has more technical resources/ expertise than KEF (who reportedly spent millions-of-dollars toward the Blade/Reference R&D) ? Too funny. " .. I'm definitely going to heed your balanced, considered words of wisdom ..." No, not mine, but perhaps every single professional review on any of the current KEF Reference -and critical/expert listener's/owners themselves. pj |
allhifi, No, not mine, but perhaps every single professional review on any of the current KEF Reference -and critical/expert listener’s/owners themselves. ....^^^^ Says the guy who wrote this: allhifi: Kef Blades and/or LS50 are the shitty KEF’s Vs this:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-blade-two-loudspeaker-measurements#gLZULFLJp20LuMl1.99 The Blades were universally raved, and the LS50 were so widely praised they became a hugely popular modern classic. Note also that reviews for the Joseph Pulsar speakers are universally RAVE reviews. But don’t let that little "consistency" problem bother you of ignoring opinions that don’t support your claims. You go right on telling us what’s-what in the hi-fi world. |
| Post removed |
For anyone who doesn't have a Stereophile subscription and who was interested in JA's follow up review of the Perspective 2 Graphene, that follow up review is not online here: https://www.stereophile.com/content/joseph-audio-perspective-loudspeaker-perspective2-graphene JA now seems to recommend the Perspectives without any reservations. |
A few years back, I contacted Joey Audio to inquire about basic build quality/construction details of a particular model. Specifically driver-to-baffle attachment method (bolted or wood-screwed) and baffle material -wood, metal, composite whatever. I can totally see that. These are not really questions which are often asked except by people looking for trade/construction secrets. While he could have simply declined to answer, I can also see his view point. As I've written before, compared to a lot of commercial speakers, the part to purchase cost is very fair here. You could pay a lot more if the speakers said Gamut or Wilson. JA speakers are a decent value, based on parts alone, more so if you like the sound quality. Of course, some keep trying to price the steak they eat and insist that's how much the meal should cost. Woe to them. Best, E |
