New Joseph Audio Pulsar Graphene 2

Same tweeter, but not quite as bright. Minor distinction. 

@erik_squires & @prof Erik’s prediction was mistaken. They are slightly more efficient, say 2dB. They also sound better at lower volume.

Awesome! Of course, this may be a custom driver, with different impedance and sensitivities than listed at Seas.

@erik_squires & @prof Erik’s prediction was mistaken. They are slightly more efficient, say 2dB.  They also sound better at lower volume. 

Compare @diminches vs. @fsonicsmith comments.  They may not be for everyone. I do not think increased resolution diminishes musicality. 4K TVs do not have worse or better color than 1080p TVs. Also, they are in my home with my electronics, not in crowded rooms with show conditions. Some people, not me, like electrostatics.  Martin Logans at shows sound either wonderful or horrible. I hate B&Ws at every show I have attended. 

@rib61 They are new. BTW, the original Perspectives were always and still are a great speaker.   I do not know about percentages. Let me say they are the cure for upgrade fever. They are everything I have been looking for in a speaker, without taking price into account. 

@markalarsen ... Mark, did you get your original Perspectives upgraded or did you purchase new ones? Also, on a percentage basis, how much of an improvement was there over the original Perspectives? When it comes to audio equipment, I try to be cognizant of the law of diminishing returns. Thanks.

I listened to them at Axpona. Granted, the room was crowded and I had to stand in a less than ideal spot (right next to Jeff Joseph). I had no idea the drivers were so small-five inch or so? The sound was good but after five minutes I identified the general nature at play-highly detailed and precise-what I call "hi fi". They are beautiful and WAF friendly with a relatively small footprint and I can fully understand the praise, they are just not my cup of tea from what I heard in Schaumburg. Listening to these brought to mind some relative newbie on an audio forum who once asked "what speaker sounds like laser beams?". IMHO there are speakers that appeal to the head and those that appeal to the heart. I don't care for speakers that mimic headphones. I prefer headphones that mimic loudspeakers. 
If I may elaborate just a bit more, I believe that the Volti Audio Rival room was at the other end of the spectrum and also not in my sweet spot though I again recognize the appeal. This room was crowded both times I entered and the Volti Rivals being played had a prominent "Sold" sign on them. They were champions of texture and tone but were a bit plodding and slow, and just a shade dull. And though beautiful to look at, they were certainly not svelte or likely to meet approval by a non-audiophile spouse. 

I spend some time in the Joseph Audio room every year at Axpona and I am never disappointed.  This year he was playing the upgraded Perspective speakers and they sounded wonderful.  So musical.  I believe these are in the $15k range and compete very well with other speakers at or above that price point.

On a side note, Jeff is a very nice guy and fun to chat with during the show.

Thanks for that, Mark! Sounds exciting. I’m so glad your upgrade seems to be working out for you.And you are in a particularly rare position to comment. I doubt we'll see many others who have had the chance to live with both the original and the upgraded Perspectives.

Interesting about the Perspective 2s being slightly more efficient in your experience. Having looked at what Eric said, and some DIYers discussions about those new drivers, I was under the impression that efficiency should have gone down a bit (a db or two).

Erik?

There are so many hyperbolic statements on this site that accurate praise is lost in the hyped marketing. Anyway, here goes.

This is is the best speaker I have owned and one of the best I have heard. It is a destination speaker. Compared to my original Perspectives, it has more and better defined bass. Kick drum sound realistic. It is simultaneously richer with better definition. Silky smooth midrange. Lyrics are clear, smooth and accurate. Same tweeter and cabinet.

Slightly more efficient. Excellent off-axis response anywhere in the room. They throw a wide sound stage, almost wall-to-wall, in part because they are locked into the room.

Any initial impressions yet Mark, or too early still?

I own a pair of Joseph Audio Perspective2 Graphene speakers. I am breaking them in.   

I would expect, based on the specs at Seas, that the Pulsar two would demand a new crossover, and may loose 1-2 dB of sensitivity.


However, that doesn't necessarily change the tonal balance, that's something the designer could keep more or less consistent. 

Shame I haven't heard these speakers in a very long time, but they were some of the few at shows I liked, and seem to remember liking them more than the plasma tweeter speakers too.

I think new woofers with slightly different properties pretty much mandate fiddling with the crossovers.
I note that Jason S of Stereophile wrote in his brief impressions of the Perspectives 2 at Axopona,  that he found a familiar track sounded

"far more mellow and toned down than on my system."
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/rowland-conductor-phono-preamp-joseph-audio-perspective2-graphen...

Hard to know if that is due to any changes to the Perspectives.

From my correspondence  with Joseph Audio the upgrade to the Perspectives would be all new woofers and modified crossovers.  

Have you heard the Joseph Audio Profile or Prism?  Lower price points and amazing performance. 

I think having an iconoclastic point of view really helps. At the genuine high end of speakers, I honestly think half the listeners can't hear a damn thing.

I'm not at all knocking the Pulsars, they're middle ground, high value in my mind.


I'm just saying, being your own taste master can help you save a lot of money. :)

Even at half price it’s still beyond  me. I’m not the target audience evidently

I think it is helpful to hear a lot of different speakers even if they are beyond your budget. Sometimes when you hear what you really like, you can then determine whether the manufacturer make a different model closer to your price point. Or you can wait for a used pair to come up for sale. It might take a while--in this hobby patience is often rewarded in the used marketplace. But, if you haven't heard it, then it is hard to pull the trigger when a good deal pops up because you don't have personal knowledge about how the speaker sounds.  

So much great things about these speakers; part of me wants to hear them while the other part knows ill never have the kind of money to spend so why bother.

i feel like prices keep rising which keeps otherwise loyal people out of the game entirely.

PS - I do see enough changes to the impedance and overall sensitivity that I expect this will require nearly completely new crossovers, and slightly lower efficiencies.

Good find Prof, reading the specs on their site, the big difference I see is power handling. Long term power handling has more than doubled.

This is by no means a simple graphene coating though, as the article points out, significant changes to the voice coil and suspension have occurred, while the overall frequency response is barely touched. This makes me wonder if the graphene coating is anything more than a paint job? Their white paper mentions corrosion protection as one of the first benefits, a good thing:


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


Also, linear travel remains the same 14mm in both, so the maximum limits are going to be similar.


From what I read here, no one should be worried their original Pulsars will be suddenly and severely upset by the new version.


OTOH, if you are Prof and looking for a deal, wait for A’goners and dealers to put the original versions on sale. :)

Bunch of info here on what I presume to be the same or similar new SEAS graphene drivers:
https://www.audioxpress.com/news/seas-announces-new-excel-graphene-woofer-series

markalarsen,

Yes I know.  I just find it odd that IF the updates for the Perspectives go well beyond merely a new coating on the drivers, that that information isn't included in the announcement of the new Pulsar 2.

I mean, audiophiles always want as much as they can get for their money in upgrades, which is why audio companies are typically at pains to depict upgrades with as much significance as possible.  So "new woofers with entire new motor system" would sound much more exciting and appealing than just "woofers with a new coating."  Which is why I"d expect such details to be part of an upgrade announcement.

The Pulsars and Perspectives use the same drivers. 

I just read this announcement about the Perspective on Joseph Audio Facebook:

April 12, 2019
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - WORLD PREMIERE - Perspective2 Graphene! Suite 1521 at the Axpona show.
Building on the original Perspective design, the New Perspective2 now includes Graphene coated Magnesium woofers that have been completely re-engineered using Finite Element Analysis.

What has me a little puzzled is that it only mentions a coating/re-engineering of the woofers.  Whereas the Pulsars upgrade supposedly goes beyond replacing woofers to re-engineered motors etc.I would have thought that if the Perspective upgrade went beyond just a new coating on the woofers that it would be mentioned as well.
?

@rlb61 is correct. Jeff told me today that Perspective owners will be offered an upgrade path. He just doesn't have the pricing nailed down yet.

FYI, I believe that Jeff will be offering an upgrade path for owners of the Perspectives. He told me already that he will be doing that for current owners of Pulsars. So, I don't think that many folks will be trading in their JA's any time soon.

Now that he's updated them, before I could buy a pair of the original, I may not ever be able to afford the new higher price. Sigh....

Sit tight, Prof!! You'll see many people upgrading and selling their used one's here on A'gon.


Just keep looking and I'm sure Santa will come for you.

Best,
E

Thanks for the info astewart!

Ugh.   On one hand I was hoping Jeff would do an upgrade on the Perspectives as I've been angling to own a pair of Perspectives.  Was about to buy a pair in the summer when tragedy hit.

Now that he's updated them, before I could buy a pair of the original, I may not ever be able to afford the new higher price.  Sigh....

At AXPONA this morning Jeff Joseph's room featured the new Perspective 2 speakers that have the same upgraded features as the Pulsar Graphene 2. I asked Jeff if he expects to do the same on the Pearl 3 model and he said that he does but that will be in the future. The new Perspective retail price is $15,000 USD.

@ashoka posted that the Pulsar was originally less than $5000, and Jeff Joseph raised the price after the positive reviews.

This is not true. Pulsars were introduced at $7000 in 2009. A few years later, with no changes, the price increased by 10% to $7,700. The new price is 15% higher to cover costs of new woofers and increased overhead. 

 https://www.stereophile.com/ces2009/josephs_pulsar/index.html

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/joseph-audio-pulsar

 

 

 

I just had to chime in (new member virgin post) after reading most of this nonsense/bs of people *assuming* they know more than Jeff Joseph. It's actually quite embarrassing. Heads up I do own the Pulsars for 4-5 years or so. I didn't make the purchase after one stellar review but after a plethora of stellar reviews from all over the world and MOST IMPORTANTLY auditioning them first. Without question they have been rated and still one of the best sounding speakers in the world (yes very true)  and now the first upgrade since 2012. Hmm odds are 100% that this upgrade / modification will significantly better the sound... will comment after some replies to make this more of a conversation..... 

I think people say that about JA Pulsar's because the drivers are available on OEM supply sites like Madisound and it isn't using anything unique that a DIYer can't easily replicate, such as a custom waveguide.

Yeah...Magico’s using those cheap drivers with their under hung speaker designs. Anything to help lower distortion is a good thing in my book.

I didn't say their drivers are cheap, just that the use of underhung voicecoils is not remotely uncommon these days, nor are they expensive. For example, some of Monitor Audio's entry level stuff has underhung coils. The potential for greater expense comes from underhung-coil-drivers of unusually high excursion and power handling. Makes for a larger/heavier motor assembly. Like all choices in speaker design, it's a matter of tradeoffs. An underhung coil is more linear (in theory), but when pushed to the limits, the resulting distortion is quite nasty compared to the softer distortion of an overhung design. 

Once anyone says that their DIY speakers sound as good or better than a commercially produced speaker, I'm interested in knowing who else has heard them and agrees with the builder's assessment. I readily admit that ownership of a particular brand reveals an inherent positive bias towards that brand. But, the ultimate bias is for one's own creation. If others aren't asking the builder to make them the same speakers after they hear them, then the speakers might not be as good as the builder believes.   

"theres no evidence these speakers are better than a diy pair at a fraction of the cost. or is there?"

This line of reasoning makes little sense. Most anything one makes themselves will be cheaper than that made by someone else.

theres no evidence these speakers are better than a diy pair at a fraction of the cost.  or is there?

Can you figure out why DIY speakers are a fraction of the cost of retail speakers?  Even IF they happen to be as good?
Can you figure out why cooking for yourself at home is cheaper than ordering at a restaurant, even if you can make a meal that tastes as good as the restaurant meal?

Yeah...Magico’s using those cheap drivers with their under hung speaker designs. Anything to help lower distortion is a good thing in my book.

One of the benefits in the Magico design is the use of underhung voice coils to lower the distortion..expensive..but worth the cost!

Nothing special, rare or expensive about an underhung voicecoil. It's quite common, even among some relatively cheap speakers. 

theres no evidence these speakers are better than a diy pair at a fraction of the cost.
or is there?

BTW, I am not of the idea that the only way to value a speaker is by driver costs.


Manufacturer reputation, and relative performance to other products in the same price range are important, as is attention to part quality in the crossover, cabinet construction, etc.


If you want to look at a speaker based on parts, I strongly and without sarcasm, suggest you DIY a pair. I do. :)


Best,
E

In beginning Pulsar price was below 5K , as more positive review came pricier it became. Point to be noted that it is regular advertiser in Stereophile.

For me the big advantage of crossing over low is the speaker becomes way less height sensitive, and the majority of the sound should seem like its coming from the tweeter. With most retail speakers crossed somewhere around mid 2000s or even up to 3K, just crossing over this low helps it stand out a lot in the imaging department for a 2-way. But I think anyone who likes the Pulsars should give the Revel M126BE a listen. It’s half the price and is similarly crossed over very low with a a high end SB Acoustics Be tweeter that has very good dispersion but should be capable of more output with a larger woofer.

soix,

Agreed.  That was one weird post!

@kenjit

"the best way to do infinity slopes is active. its hard enough doing 4th order using passive. The use of passive crossovers has no advantages. That alone diminishes the quality.

You need to eliminate that passive crossover first before you judge the quality of these joseph audios.

Then you can actually judge how much cabinet coloration there is and how much detail the drivers produce without worrying about what the crossover is doing."

Um, I don’t even know what to say to this. Are you just making this stuff up in your own mind? Almost all speakers use passive crossovers. What planet are you from? Please get off this site for the benefit of us all.

the best way to do infinity slopes is active. its hard enough doing 4th order using passive. The use of passive crossovers has no advantages. That alone diminishes the quality. 

You need to eliminate that passive crossover first before you judge the quality of these joseph audios. 

Then you can actually judge how much cabinet coloration there is and how much detail the drivers produce without worrying about what the crossover is doing. 

Magico design is the use of underhung voice coils to lower the distortion..expensive..but worth the cost!

whats that?

One of the benefits in the Magico design is the use of  underhung voice coils to lower the distortion..expensive..but worth the cost!

Judging from the :

• Driver slopes
• Impedance curves
• Off-axis response (the real killer)

The speaker JA measured did not perform differently in any meaningful way from a traditional 2nd order speaker, except for a dip in the middle of the crossover impeadance peak which is very likely an impedance compensation circuit. A nice add.

That doesn’t make it a bad speaker, at all. In fact I would say the performance is top notch for a 2-way speaker, but I see no evidence of it being more than a well designed 2-way with good drivers and traditional crossover design.

It doesn’t appear to me to be a simple second order xover,

Please explain from the data in the review.

I believe that Jeff has improved it over time.

Except that the review claims the measured speaker has their infinite slope crossover.

I read another Stereophile review of a JA speaker and it did seem to use a very high crossover slope, but only in the woofer of a 3-way. The rest seemed rather traditional.

Best,
E

@erik_squires ... Well, we certainly disagree on the purported simplicity of the xover and Jeff’s integrity. Here’s a link to the initial patent application for the xover by Modafferi ...https://patents.justia.com/patent/7085389

It doesn’t appear to me to be a simple second order xover, and I believe that Jeff has improved it over time. JA’s measurements in SP are not always the final explanation.

If Jeff says that graphene covers the cones, then I would take that to be the truth. I have found Jeff to be an honest and forthright guy, and I believe his representations without hesitation.

Except as noted above, he's selling the Pulsar as using an exotic crossover when it really seems to be quite a common design.