@bdp24 - Vinyls? Um, they’re called LP’s. Or records. ANYTHING but vinyls, for gawd’s sake. @ozzy62 - Please don’t call records “vinyls” I disagree. “Vinyl” (singular) is the common term referring to vinyl LPs. Google “online record store” and you’ll see many websites use the term “vinyl”. Even DISCOGS, perhaps the largest used record website uses the term “vinyl”. @adversam- the Kirmuss Audio KA-RC-1 ULTRASONIC RECORD RESTORATION SYSTEM is about $1k. It cleans at least as well as the Degritter and Audiodesk but is a manual process |
@kennyc thank you so much, i'll check it! this thread is getting more and more interesting:)
|
some personal thoughts and observations based on the discussion and opinions expressed so far...
1 - spendors are truly excellent speakers, but one must understand that today’s spendor has two parallel lines of speakers, one called 'classic' (their historical, brilliant, bbc-design speakers, modernized somewhat over time) and the other. 'd-line' of floorstanders (e.g., d7 or d9), which are modern design, heavily braced, dead cabinets, more contemporary, more detailed, ’more hifi’ and vivid kind of sound -- think of the classic series as harbeth competitors, and the d series as proac competitors -- my personal favorite among all these is the spendor sp100 series (old or newer revised ones) and am quite lucky to have finally chased down another set again, after selling amy first pair in 2009/10 to try harbeth mon 40’s, and regretting the sale since that time...
2 - it is certainly worth pursuing higher efficiency speakers, as there are so so so many benefits to having one which you like the sound of --- which is the key, and, the key challenge imho --- i have been at this since the early 80’s in a serious way, been through cabasse, zu, klipsch 2-3 times, avant garde horns at one point even, smaller audio notes --- each time driven by the desire to use brilliant low powered s-e tube amps by gordon rankin, dennis had, air tight and so on... but i personally have never (in all those attempts over the years) been able to warm up to their sound, their slight ’honkiness’ and paper cone/nasal coloration which, to my ear, all have, more or less
3 - i have not heard the volti nor the latest klipsch cw4... perhaps these are now finally free of those troublesome colorations
no doubt a great deal of this depends on what one listens to, your room, your set up, your ancillaries, and most importantly, your personal tastes -- as a listener, what you have been conditioned over time to view and accept as good, proper, ’real’ sounding music
|
@kennyc: Actually, we are in agreement. My post in this thread did not mention "vinyl", but rather "vinyls". In another thread I addressed the issue of the difference between the singular and plural usage of the term vinyl in relation to LP’s, and went on to provide the fact that LP’s are actually made of not vinyl, but PVC---Poly Vinyl Chloride. I approve of calling LP’s PVC’s. ;-) |
You are right on target with The Klipsch Cornwall IV. Your Pass amp will crack the concrete with those speakers. You need not look elsewhere. |
I also have the Pass XA25 driven by a 6SN7 tube preamp (Aric Audio). As I believe one responder stated, the XA25 leans more to the neutral side than other Nelson Pass products, highly transparent. I would look towards a speaker that leaned toward the warm side.
You have a large space to be sonically pressurized. When considering speakers please consider speaker sensitivity and impedance across the frequency range. Both equate to the resultant efficiency of the speaker.
Also keep in mind that with a vinyl based system the cartridge, as the other transducer, also makes a great impression on the character (overall presentation) of the system. |
@adversam, I have heard the Voltis and own the Cornwalls. Both are spectacular. I think, but am not sure, but Voltis can get pricey as an upgraded finishes cost you and the intro finish is really drab. Properly finished they are beautiful though.
I think you are smart to have carved out a place or higher efficiency speakers like the Rival and Cornwall given the size of your room and your amp.
You have a nice system already, which should make this part of your journey fun. Your preamp is special!
PS-- The comment above about your post being "dumb" is absurd. A brief review of that poster's comments on the forum will easily reveal the poster has used that exact, childish and uncool language before--dare I say, troll-esque? Your post is exactly what is appreciated here.
|
Adversam, I put together a CleanerVinyl system around 4 years ago when CleanerVinyl was still trying to get off the ground, so to speak. The last time I checked their website it seemed they were much more geared to offering packages, now, and less flexible about a la carte options for people wanting to put together a bare bones or inexpensive system. What I have is the basic motor that turns the records in the ultrasonic bath + a generic ultrasonic cleaner that's necessary for a system like this + 2 adapters that allow me to clean 3 records simultaneously + the lifter device that raises and lowers the records in & out of the bath. I use this system to clean records and a Knosti Disco Antistat to rinse the records. The Knosti is, basically, the German version of a Spin-Clean but, IMHO, better because the Knosti uses brushes instead of pads. After rinsing the records, I lay them onto large record-sized high-quality microfiber cloths to absorb the rinse water. Then, I set them in the Knosti drying rack to air dry completely. The last step is using a product called "LAST" (no pun intended), a record preservative. Al my records are placed in high-quality antistatic inner and outer sleeves. This is, admittedly, more labor intensive than a fully automatic machine but considerably less expensive. As I think I may have stated earlier, if Degritter could convince me that a cleaning frequency of 120 kHz/300 watts is as good and as safe (for the records) or better than 40 kHz/300 watts I'd buy one for the shear convenience.
The Revel F208 are great speakers but, like all speakers, need to be paired with the right amplification source. Again, I am not familiar at all with your amplification source and certainly don't mean to disparage it. However, based upon specifications alone, it doesn't appear, to me, that it has enough power to drive the F208 to their fullest potential. When I auditioned the F208 with a McIntosh MA5300 they sounded very nice but I thought they needed more power and current than the MAC MA5300 can generate. The F206 sounded significantly better with that amp.
With regard to vacuum record cleaning machines like the Project you mentioned, I don't have any experience using vacuum cleaning machines. My research indicates that good vacuum RCM's are effective but ultrasonic cleaning provides the best results. You could put together a CleanerVinyl system for less than what you'd pay for that machine. Take a look at Michael Fremer's reviews of record cleaning machines on Analog Planet. |
A design of Speaker that could change your whole belief system for a Speaker is the Open Baffle Design.
Triart is a Brand that is based in the eu.
A demonstration of these High Efficient Speakers would be a great experience to be undertaken. |
@mesch @jbhiller thanks a lot for sharing your opinion, very much appreciated! |
@oldaudiophile thanks again for sharing your cleaning system. Regarding the F208, the dealer used a Teac preamp nt500b with a jeff rowlands 625 s2... No idea, probably just bad sinergy, more likely the speakers needed more hours for breaking in... They sounded really compressed and with no emotion. Also the bass that was supposed to be the Revel's strenght was muddy and slow. Anyway, I was curious the hear the Revels, but after the inputs I'm receiving on this thread, I will update my list considering just high efficiency speakers. At the moment CW IV that I still have to audition in august, the Focal Kanta (at 91db is still decent) and Volti. Still hope to get on this thread some more feedbacks related to Volti Rivals'. Can't demo them, but I have like the sensation that Greg does unbelievable speakers. And in a couple of months he's going to introduce the new Rivals'! |
Interesting! Not familiar with Jeff Rowlands amps or Teac preamps. Regardless, I'm very surprised at your findings of the F208 under those circumstances. The specifications for the JR are very impressive and 325 watts into 8 ohms should have been more than enough to push the F208 to what they are designed to deliver. The F208 have a tweeter and low frequency compensation switches on the back of the cabinet. Perhaps those were not dialed in correctly. You are likely correct about the faulty matching of those components and/or the F208 not being broken-in. All the more reason to do critical listening or auditioning under controlled conditions (e.g. size & dimensions of sound room; acoustics of same; listening position; proper speaker placement; component matching; etc.). Generally speaking, high-end audio shops should not be auditioning speakers or anything else, for that matter, that hasn't been properly broken-in. Regardless, this is always a good question to ask. My present 2 channel speakers took approximately 75 to 90 hours to break-in. It wasn't until they passed around 30 hours before all thoughts of the possibility of bringing them back passed. A good question to keep in mind, especially when shopping for speakers, is the audio shop's return policy. Make sure you'll have enough time to judge new speakers at home and bring them back if you are not totally satisfied with them. |
@oldaudiophile I think you re perfectly right. They sounded so weird that probably were even wrongly dialed in. The amp was a powerhouse and I also heard raving opinions regarding this speakers' measurements. Plus I asked the guy for how many hours they played, he replied: "few hours"... I had like the feeling that they came straight from the box, to be honest... |
@ oldaudiophile btw now I'm really curious to know which speakers you have in your system:) if I can ask... |
Speaker specifications & measurements are, relatively speaking, not very helpful. Sometimes, those specifications & measurements are obtained in an anechoic chamber. Every speaker's performance is going to be affected by the size, dimensions and acoustic properties of the room you play them in; not to mention a host of other factors, as well (e.g. placement; listening position; power & other sources; etc.).
As I normally do prior to any substantial cash outlay for a new component, I spend months (sometimes a year or more) doing lots of reading & research before actually scheduling critical listening sessions. If you're interested in my madness, check out "Sequel to 'Time to Upgrade Speakers'" in the Stereophile forums. If I recall correctly, I spent months in critical listening auditions (as controlled as I could get them) of somewhere around 18 different pairs of speakers, in something like 60 to 70 hours of serious seat-time before finally deciding to bring home a pair of Revel Performa3 F206. In the budget I had, those were the best I heard for my particular purposes (i.e. room; components; musical tastes; etc.). You should NOT let this influence you! More than any other component, speakers are a very subjective and personal choice. ALWAYS let YOUR EARS decide what sounds best TO YOU! |
Speaker specifications & measurements are, relatively speaking, not very helpful. no more useless than specs on other gear ... but the two to pay close attention to for speakers are: -3db freq point for bass extension... (of course the room matters, and bass reinforcement from the room) but it is important to know how deep the speaker goes - critical to decide if subs are needed impedance plot ... quoted ’nominal’ impedance is bull kaka... you need to see the minimum impedance and at what frequency with what phase angle, critical to match proper amplifier to speaker and avoid those amps that would not suffice |
|
@jjss49 definitely a good recommendation! |
@adversam, Reality is that it's hard to audition speakers in a showroom and extrapolate from that experience what they will sound like in your listening room. Even more so 'se ti piace basso profondo'.
So do your research carefully for that big room they're going to live in.
I can't comment on all the suggestions that you've received as I've never heard most of them, and none of them in my basement which also has a 7' ceiling.
I've owned the same speakers for 35 years! Ohm Walsh 4's.
One huge advantage of this model is that it can somewhat modified to suit your preferences and room acoustics by simply removing 4 wing nuts and unhooking one connector and that will give you access to the internal baffling inside the cabinet. Takes less than 2 minutes per speaker.
By experimenting on the depth, quantity, density and shaping of the baffling one can fine tune the speakers to ones preferences in their listening space. Huge advantage.
Ironically I happened upon this after the original baffling started to deteriorate.... I'd owned the speakers 15 years by then.
Here's the bad news, the current Ohm equivalent to my Walsh 4's is the Walsh Tall 3000... no wing nuts. The cans are screw mounted to the non removable base and I do not recommend messing around with these as you will quickly strip the screw holes and lose sealing.
Good luck Luigi.
Zio
|
I disagree. “Vinyl” (singular) is the common term referring to vinyl LPs. Google “online record store” and you’ll see many websites use the term “vinyl”. Even DISCOGS, perhaps the largest used record website uses the term “vinyl”.
Vinyl? Yes Vinyls? No |
If vinyl is another word for LP then vinyls is another word for LPs. Duh.
|
No duh.
Its like deer and sheep. You wouldn't say deers and sheeps.
Same thing. |
@uncleang thanks for sharing your experience... i m actually considering the Walsh tall 3000... the problem is that the only dealer in europe is in Germany...So not easy to test... The open baffle is intriguing me a lot... How do you evaluate the bass in your Walshes? Is it deep and punchy enough? I ve read that they are difficult to drive, which amp are you using? |
The Ohm Walsh speakers are not difficult to drive compared to most. The larger models in particular do tend to like lots of current and damping. They will respond to any improvement or change made upstream so the actual sound can vary significantly. |
Ciao @adversam, as mapman said they're a fairly easy load on the amplifier; also they're nominally 6 ohm, my 37 year old model is less efficient then the current models but they do like high current amps.
I'm using a Nakamichi PA-7A amp (225 watts into 8 ohms), the European version is a PA-7E. And the matching pre-amp (which I also have) is the CA-7A.
The bass: Ohm uses what it calls a 'Sub Bass Activator' which kicks in a 60 Hz. My understanding is that it diverts frequencies 60 Hz and lower to the cabinet vent whose outlet is on the bottom of the cabinet.
If the speakers are on carpet (like mine) this has a tendency to attenuate the bass somewhat, however if placed on hardwood or any solid material floors it reinforces the bass. If you are in an apartment you're going to have a lot of pissed off neighbors.
For music listening I doubt you will need or even consider a separate sub.
In the average room they will go down to the mid 30 Hz... cleanly, and best of all will not affect the tonality of the lower mid-bass as most box speakers do resulting in clear and accurate male and female voices.
I recently listened to $30,000 Focal speakers with a CD I brought and know well, they were very nice but not as accurate as my 37 year old Walsh 4's. |
+1 @uncleang. How the speaker and the bottom port interacts with the floor is a big factor. I use Auralex Subdude pads under mine on suspended plywood floors but not on solid concrete foundation (finished room with thin dense carpet and pad). More on the sub bass activator: https://ohmspeaker.com/news/sba-what-is-sub-bass-and-how-do-you-activate-it/I bought the SBA circuit a few years back ( not expensive prices for normal people) and installed it to a pair of old Ohm Ls I refurbished myself as well. |
Mine are in the basement on 5" of concrete covered also with dense carpet and thick under-pad.
Years ago I experimented by putting the speakers on 16"X16" acrylic pads, augmented the bass considerably but I didn't think the overall sound was as musical, so out they went. |
@mapman @uncleang these are extremely useful informations, thanks a lot! So basically i ll need a good amount of watt... Wondering if a Van Alstine could be a good match... If I remember well I read that the Ava Vision Set 400 sounded even better than a Parasound A21... Are you also playing lp records on your system? |
Yes, @adversam I play lots of LP’s via my Heybrook TT2/LVX tonearm and OC-9ML cartridge... just bought an AT33/PTGII.. not mounted yet.
Nirvana’s ’Unplugged in New York’ is too unbelievable to describe, the sound-stage, depth and bass guitar are so lifelike you think you’re at the concert.
Pink Floyd’s ’Dark Side of the Moon’ LP (I have the 1973 original pressing - no not some fancy re-mastered 180 gr. version) rattles all my pictures on the wall and that’s with the volume at 11 o’clock!
The Ohm’s would love an Ava Vision SET 400 (or the A21 for that matter).
For $6K you’ll have your cake and eat it too.
|
@uncleang thanks for great recommendations... I ll send a message to the dealer in Germany... They probably have the same policy regarding eventual returns... So unless I go to Berlin for trip, I could at least try the 3000 or 2000 at home and decide... that' s something I'd really consider... I also wanted to ask something more technical... I read in an old thread that the new Walshes are very different from the old ones. They are made up of different materials and they are not omnidirectional... did you have any occasion to the test the new Walshes and compare them with yours? |
The original OHM F from the 70's was omnidirectional.
Since the early 80's till current the Ohm Walsh series speakers, they have been quasi omnidirectional by that I mean the the sound propagating from the rear of the speaker is around 20 db less then what is radiating from the front.
Ironically there hasn't been a lot of changes from my 1984 Ohm Walsh 4's to today's Ohm Walsh Tall 3000.
I'll give you some specs that are not on the Ohm website; maybe even the German distributor may not be aware of them.
Mapman will correct me if I'm wrong.
Common specs between Ohm Walsh 4 and Walsh 3000
Weight: 63 lbs. per speaker
10" downward facing time aligned driver
1" soft dome super tweeter angled inwardly at 45 degrees from front of cabinet (ferro-fluid cooled)
Crossover: 1st order Butterworth @ 8K Hz (6 db per octave)
Sub Bass Activator kicks in at 60 Hz to manage bass response
Impedance: 6 ohms
NOTE: there is no crossover(s) till you reach 8,000 Hz
That's one of the reasons the sound is so coherent.
They sound more like an electrostatic speaker than a box speaker but unlike most electrostatics these have some serious bass
|
@ uncleang thanks a lot for all specs... sounds like I have to plan a trip to Germany to audition a couple of Walsh 3000 and 4000
|
Make sure the dealer has those models in stock before you go.
PS: the 4000 is the same as the 3000 except it's a 12" driver and can go a little lower and also louder. |
