Raidho D1 audition
Just to share some experience with Raidho d1, I was very fortunate to have lar and Boressen visit my room in BKK after S'pore show, I was running my D1 with Hi diamond cables pc, sc,ic , all top of the line , the sound was very satisfying, Little laid back , good speed, 3d sound stage, good impact and little warm. I also have hi fidelity ct1e IC, sc for unbalance system which is also very good but in different way, more quiet background , deeper soundstage , faster and more detail but less relaxing. Lar show me his Ansuz cable and slow plug in to my system first sc then pc, IC , to my ear it outperform my cable significantly,as it is already late at night, he left the cables with me so I have a chance to do whatever I like, these 3 days I keep comparing, mix and match, and at the end have to admit that my belove cables are in different leage with Ansuz , it give everything hi diamond and hifidelity combine and more, hard to describe into words, singer and instrument came out of a very black background with full body, sometime I feel like I could touch them . The interesting part is that ,this is not top of the line . I've no idea how this compare to Odin, but for Valhalla, I sold it and bought hi fidelity ct1e |
Hi Kiwi, I recently bought a pair of Raidho C1.1 monitors. I know you use Nordost Heimdall (version 2) for interconnects and speaker wire. Have you tried other brands of cables with your Raidho D2 speakers? If so, did you the Heimdall to be significantly better (presumably due to the synergy between Raidho speakers and Nordost cables)? I would appreciate if you could also mention the other brand cables you have tried (if any). Also, have you had a chance to compare with Frey and Tyr (version 2) speaker cables? Thank you! |
Hi Dracule1, Yes, there seems to be a thought collective out there subscribing to the notion that accuracy equals a ruler flat anechoic frequency response from 20Hz to 20 KHz. Objectively this may be true  but there is a world of difference between what is measured in an anechoic chamber and what we actually end up listening to. For one thing, and as you point out, our listening room acts like a big tone control. Many audiophiles are not aware of how badly their room damages sound quality. No matter how much one has paid for their loudspeakers, amplifiers and source and regardless of their published specifications, as soon as you put them into a typical living / listening room they will exhibit a horribly skewed frequency response. Without some form of correction, much of the sonic benefit therefore derived from more expensive hardware can to a large extent be masked by poor room acoustics. For another, while our listening rooms are non-linear [with some exceptions like the terrific work of Stereotaipei] so are our ears! Not only are our ears less sensitive at frequency extremes they are also more sensitive in the 2-5 KHz range and have maximum sensitivity at around 3-4 KHz. For these reasons I earlier wrote that criticizing the performance of a loudspeaker solely from a review of select measurable parameters is a bit like writing a restaurant review directly after reading the list of the food ingredients . To your second point, yes, the Raidho D-Series is special. They are unique and by all accounts they are selling very well. Last weekend both Lars Kristensen and Michael Børresen of Raidho Acoustics were in Singapore to exhibit at a modest local audio show. Sales for Raidho have climbed rapidly in Asia so it was no surprise to see them both present. The Raidho D-1 held centre stage in a massive 110 square meter room and judging by the post show commentary was very well received by patrons. I was also pleased to meet Sabai at the show. He was collecting new RaidhoÂs to replace his Joseph Audio Pulsars. |
Kiwi, sorry I forgot to respond to your post. I agree with you wholeheartedly. People who think they are objective and can distill the sound of a speaker based on anechoic FR measurement show there lack of understanding of how a speaker performs in our homes. The Raidho D series are special, aren't they? |
Stereotaipei, you have an amazing setup, better than 99.99% of the so called reviewers out there. I can only imagine the length and expense you've put in your setup. IMO, the room is the most important audio component. Get that right, and you can make mediocre speakers sound great. And a treated room does not have to be expensive. Often times a couple grand of room treatment will do wonders. A lot of audiophile spend more on their cables. And I am not surprised; a good 2-way monitor speaker is more coherent and give a better illusion of the performers being in your room than a big 3- or 4-way speaker. The Q1s are not my cup of tea, but that's not important. It's what you like in the end. My hats off to you. |
Ngchaisooon, Raidho's are better in almost every way, but the D1s are twice the cost of the Sasons. Raidho's have more refined and extended high frequency response, are more coherent and holographic, have better microdynamics and blacker background, and more accurate in reproducing timbre of instruments. The Sasans do have more extended and dynamic bass. The C1.1 are in between the Sasans and D1s. |
guys... let's stop the pissing contest... People have different opinions and taste, that's fine. Forums should be about sharing personal opinions, not criticizing each others... Dracule1: Before my purchase, I have heard probably more speakers than 99% of Audiogon people, for the simple reason that I travel 250 days a year across 3 continents. I have a fully treated room, with dedicated power supply and a 10kW equitech power conditioner. Electronics are APL NWO-M player and Dartzeel amp. MIT MAX2 and HD120 cables. Room nodes are treated with more than 30 Helmholtz resonator. Room response is +-2dB down to 24Hz (and around 35Hz with the Q1). You can see my system with measurements on the Magico section of WBF ("new home for my Q1"). Besides the Q7 and the Magico Ultimate (that I have on order), I have not heard a more convincing system than what I am hearing now on the Q1 (and yes, everybody thought I am crazy when I replaced the MM3, a 600lbs/piece monster speaker by a small monitor). |
Dracule - I am not interested in sharing opinions, I can assure you that we will not agree on much. I am interested in facts. You already dismissed objectivity and, quite frankly, subjectivity as well (ÂWho cares what JV saysÂ). So basically, it looks to me that unless I agree with you, we will go nowhere with this. So, as you suggested to me, go enjoy your speakers and have a good weekend. BTW, I think that we both picked our usernames appropriately (-; |
Usermanual, what is the extent of your experience with the D1? Have you actually auditioned it in your home? What electronics did you use with the D1? What is the dimension of your room? What room treatments do you have? Have you measured your room modes and decay times? Do you have dedicated audio room with dedicated AC lines? Since you make yourself out to be such and expert on the Magico and Raidho, tell us how, where, and with what electronics you evaluated these speakers. I will happily provide you with the above info for my system. |
Usermanual, Actually they did back in 2001 to 2006, including the discontinued martin logan 4 tower statements. you really need to do your fact checking. Who cares what JV says. If you buy equipment based on reviewers, you are in a sad state. He uses different electronics and cables than the rest of us. His hearing is no better than most of us. What matters is how the speakers sound to the end user, not what a reviewer says. So if Magico gets you off, go enjoy them if you can afford them. |
Dracule  I have been to Goodwins few times, and just for the record, they do not carry Wilson, nor have I seen any top of the line Avalon there. Again, you should be a bit more factual with your comments. In any case, I have never heard anyone describing the Magico the way you do. I mean, if Magico sound to you as if they were a Wilson, what would Wilson sound like? Since this is all subjective to you, one has to take in to account your comments on the Magico and conclude that the Raidho are extremely lean and anemic. Kiwi_1282001 - the >>fabulous Magico Q1 loudspeaker was also measured by MC to You never heard me declaring that the Q1 are Âmost tonally accurate speaker I've come across (Although , objectively they are more accurate than the Raidho). Nor did I say that the Raidho are not fabulous. One thing the Raidho are not and it is ÂaccurateÂ. Even JV admits that they are more Âbeautiful (i.e. colored) then ÂaccurateÂ. |
Usermanual, you have a knack for coming to erroneously oversimplified conclusions to complex subjects, as you did with FR. Now you assume I have never heard the Magicos based on a sentence from this single thread. If you did your homework, you would see I have talked about them on multiple occasions. I first heard them at Goodwins in Waltham, MA. If you know anything about high end dealers, they probably one of the best dealers in the country with dedicated acoustically treated rooms costing up several hundred thousand dollars. They also carry Rockport, Avolon, Wilson, etc. Unlike most dealers, they have flagship speakers from each manufacturer. I've also heard them at a dealer in Austin and several times at RMAF. Each time Magicos did not sound like the thing. Just because its the first time you've heard them described as dynamic as hell with chest thumping bass doesn't mean it isn't so. I know other audiophiles who have described them similarly. They are certainly not adynamic and anemic in the bass. |
Keeping auditions short is a good way of hearing what you will continue to hear each time you turn on your system. The initial impression will always remain the same in my experience. However, after sitting and listening to the same speakers for a while I find that my brain begins to adapt the sound, effectively changing what I hear. I have a set of Focal Utopia Micro Be monitors that do exactly this. When I turn them on I like them but after five minutes, I love them. It is another interesting part of this hobby - that patience is rewarded. |
Hi Dracule, I think you make some valid points. Taken alone, a measurement of frequency response provides little more than an indicator of the spectral-balance; which, although an important audible parameter, is hardly an accurate indicator of overall reproduction accuracy. Further, I believe the measurements Usermanual cites are for the earlier version C-1.0 loudspeaker, since superseded by the C-1.1 which introduced refinements to both the tweeter and woofer. If we are being strictly objective about things, the fabulous Magico Q1 loudspeaker was also measured by MC to have a depression from 1.2 to 4.5 KHz which Âaveraged 3dB, and an energy prominence at 5 KHz. Does that make the Magico a poor speaker? Not at all. Criticizing the performance of a loudspeaker solely from a review of its measurable parameters is a bit like writing a restaurant review directly after reading the list of the food ingredients . |
After 4.5 years with a pair of Evolution Acoustics MM3 (2 12" woofers, 2 ceramic mids, 1 ribbon tweeter), I went for new speaker hunting a bit more than one year ago. I have heard probably 150 speakers, and the best ones (Magico, TAD, Vivid, Raidho...) in different set up. I ended up buying a pair of Magico Q1. With all the buzz from JV, I went of course to hear the different Raidhos. They are good speakers, with a sweet sound, but would have been a lateral move compared to my MM3, not a real upgrade. Ribbon tweeter are very pleasing at the beginning (light, airy), but my experience is that they never fully integrate with the medium, probably because of the very different dispersion pattern. Compared to the beryllium of magico tweeter, it lacks to my ears a bit of weight and sound density. Also, after several years with ceramic mids, I realized that there is always a "ceramic coloration" that you find back on different brands (Marten, Tidal, EA, Raidho...). Last, the Q1 are much more dynamic and transparent. Level of realism on female voices gives me goose bumps. Not sure how much is coming from the driver vs. the cabinet construction (rigidity of a braced aluminum cabinet is of course not the same as MDF.... but cost to produce is also not the same). At least to my humble ears, they are in a different league. Actually, after 10 mths with them, I realize that I am listening to much more music than with the MM3, which is a good sign (my tastes are mainly baroque music and jazz). One remark however: given the very high transparency of magico speakers, they behave like "real chameleon" on different amps. They don't have a sound by themselves. I find for example the sound cold and analytical on Spectral. But gorgeous on my Dartzeel (or with Vitus or Gryphon). SO you cannot judge them based on a single audition, upstream sources are key. Talking about other good speaker brands I encountered in my upgrade journey, I would personally prefer a pair of small Vivid than the Raidho monitors. The Vivid would have been my second choice after the Q1. The TAD and Raidho would come after that. Hope it helps- just my opinion... |
Freq response measured by a reviewer or by the manufacturer tells you little about how the speakers will measure in your room. So extrapolating some published freq response (measured in anechoic or quasi-anechoic condition) to someone's home environment is about as useful as putting bicycle tires on a Porche. Unless you do your listening on an anechoic chamber. FR measured in that manner doesn't take into account room modes, reflections, slap echoes, etc that we hear at home. And it tells you nothing about transient response, imaging, timbral correctness, etc. Why don't you consider these factors before posting a misguided response about "objective" lab measurement that has little to do with what we hear in the real word. |
Dracule1 - I can handle anything, don't you worry. Your comments are indeed subjective and quite imaginative. It started with the "I know a dealer who..." and now claiming that Magico sound is "dynamic as hell... and have chest thumping bass". I bet you never heard a Magico, you are the first person who ever described their sound that way (Oops, I forgot, it is all subjective, you can say anything...). Hope that was not too condescending for you, it is the best a douchebag can do |
I'm breaking in a pair of Raidho D1 at the moment, driven by Aesthetix electronics (Romulus/Callisto/Atlas) and Nordost Valhalla all through in a medium sized living room with modest acoustical treatment. My findings after about 10 hours of listening (the time needed for suitable break-in is stated at about 250 hours by Raidho) is close to what Dracule1 describes above. If you value a natural, open and truly homogenic musical experience you owe it to yourself to audition this speaker. Raidho is not about the dissection and/or the exaggeration of individual parts of the frequency spectrum (which makes a lot of modern speakers academical, clinical and uninvolving to these ears). Instead, they're all about the delivery of music in a way that relaxes your brain in favour of the completeness of the musical experience. I hope that makes sense. |
Hey this is subjective. If you can't handle that then you're in the wrong forum. And by tonally I meant timbral accuracy, not frequency response, which I find to be one of the worst objective measurement to assess speaker sound. But if freq response is your thing, have at it. I've heard both C1.1 and D1 in my dedicated audio room with the same electronics. Granted I have not heard the Magico in my room, I have auditioned them 5 separate times and each time I get the same impression, dynamic as hell, extended bass chest thumping bass and hard in the upper midrange. Clinical sounding is a good way to describe them. It's not my type of sound, but I know a lot of people prefer this. Your last sentense is condescending and has douchebag written all over it. |
Michaelkingdom, You touched an important point here. Our auditory memory is very short. Our brain will adjust to just about anything. People Âpreferences is mainly what they are used to, not necessarily what is good. When I A/B a products, I usually keep it short, so my brain does not have much chance to interfere and Âcolor my judgment. |
>>It is the most tonally accurate speaker I've come across Interesting. In MC measurements of the C1 there is a 5dB broad depression, starting at 1K all the way up to 5K where a bump is starting, climbing 4dB up till 10K. The swing from 2K to 10K is almost 10dB high! There is no evidence that the D1 will be much different in fq response (It is mainly the tweeter climbing behavior, which is typical of ribbons). It will most definitely not have Âmore dynamic, or subjective more extended bassÂ. Even Raidho doesnÂt claim it (It starts to roll off, quite rapidly after 50Hz). Great speaker nevertheless, but I would not claim it is Âmore accurate then just about anything else. Now before the flames begin, please consider objective data availability to any claims made. BTW, you are the first person who said that ÂMagico are better suited for rock and the like where bass thump and dynamics are the primary virtuesÂ. This thread is hilarious. |
I have a strong music background having trained in classical guitar mostly and regularly attend live performances at very good halls for classical, jazz, big band music. The Raido D1 is the closest thing to the real thing I've heard as long as you don't play them at 105+ dB continuously and are willing to as sacrifice sub bass. The D1 play at a different level than C1.1. It is more dynamic, has greater purity in the midrange, better sound staging at high volume, subjective more extended bass, and is quieter between notes. Most importantly,it is the most tonally accurate speaker I've come across for vocals, stringed and wind instruments, and percussion within its volume limitation. It is only equalled by the finest electrostat and ribbon planar speakers (eg, Quad 57, CLS, Apogee). The Raidho tweeter is one of the most accurate no fatiguing tweeter available. The Magico I've heard are better suited for rock and the like where bass thump and dynamics are the primary virtues. They are not tonally accurate as th Raidho. |
To elaborate on my audition a little bit, I was impressed by both speakers tremendously. I found the Magico S5 to be the most thrilling 2 channel experience I have had in terms of spacial presentation, imaging, separation of instruments. It was easy to independently follow any instrument separately from the rest. That being said, I did find them to be without warmth - which may be a good thing. I also found them to be great at intellectually defining the music while not drawing me in emotionally. From the very first minute I heard them, I was amazed and my opinion of them did not evolve over the listening experience. I was just as amazed at the end. The Raidhos were a different story. The depth of their presentation was not immediately apparent. On first hearing them (within 3 minutes of switching off the Magicos) I noticed more conservative, less apparent dynamics. They sounded warmer, cozier and less over the top. BUT, after a few minutes my brain adjusted to what I was hearing and the presentation really opened up. The soundstage was deep and wide, the midrange had a rich sweetness and the tweeters revealed every noise unmasked. I, personally, found myself enjoying them immensely. This is what I heard. I liked them both. Cheers! |
Razmika, I assume that in your last post you were refereeing to me, and by mistake you typed "Nep" instead of "Nvp". I certainly do not want to argue with anybody here. On the contrary, I am trying to have a civilized dialog. I certainly did not attack anybody here, neither did I say anything bad about any speaker manufacture. I would very much like to know how did you arrive at the conclusion that Raidho speakers are colored and Magico speakers are not? What type of measurements did you do? Where did you performed these measurements? Also, since you are so knowledgeable and I am so ignorant and impolite, I would very much like to know what is the relation between the Young modulus and: 1) the level of odd and/or even harmonic distortions in a conical membranes 2) the eigen modes of a conical membrane 3) the degeneracy of the eigen modes of a conical membrane |
Hi Kiwi, your answer is fair. I've read your blog twice, i.e. the discussions about Raidho. Also, if I remeber correctly I have actually advised Lapierre who pm me to contact you about Raidho. I think I am not the only one here who would have preferred to read here a few short bullet points highlighting the main differences. Like you said, your post is wordy. I am certainly not criticizing you as I often write too long posts :). Moreover, your experience with these monitors seemed to be a bit limited as you did not compared the monitors in your room so I can understand your reluctance. Regarding Razmika, he behaves like a 5 years old, i.e. asking stupid questions and invoking silly arguments because he did not received the answers he wanted immediately... Regarding your remark about the physics lab, I believe you are hinting to the fact that I am a physicist. Indeed I am. Unfortunately, while our labs/experiments may be well organized the results are often chaotic. Consequently, the situation in the lab is pretty much like the one in the real world, i.e. it takes many months to actually learn something useful. Regarding the hi-tech and ground breaking science that goes into all these speakers, IMO opinion it is 90% marketing mambo-jambo. Neither Magico nor Raidho has the technology and/or the proper understanding to develop any of these technologies. In fact these techniques are around for quite some time and are rather well understood and mature. Razmika was right when he said that chemical vapor deposition is a common technique, but then so is finite element analysis employed by Magico. IMO opinion neither Magico nor Raidho brings anything that new to the table. On one hand there are many manufactures putting expensive drives in rectangular boxes, and on the other hand ribbon tweeter are expected to outperform dome ones as they are much much lighter. Of course, I am bashing here the ridiculous advertisements, not the way the Magico and/or Raidho speakers sound. Paul |
>>That should be called out because the comments were reckless, ignorant and demonstrably without factual knowledge.. And what kind of information do you have to counter my factual knowledge? Are you disputing YoungÂs modulus or the fact that the same process is used on drill bits? Please explain to us why a 10 um thick carbon is consider a Âdiamond when Accuton pure diamond diaphragm is about 250 um? If you have nothing to add but to regurgitate Raidho marketing scheme, at least have the curtsy to tone down your attack on me. |
Hi Nvp, In reply to your note: First, for a comparison between the Raidho C1.1 and D1 I linked Boon (who asked) to the page on my blog that covered that. Just scroll down to post #116. Not too hard for you I hope? The post was way too wordy to cut and paste here. Second, after chiding the thread about Âmudslinging and fabricated Magico opinion, Razmika disingenuously (as in hypocritically) goes on to state that RaidhoÂs diamond woofers are Âmarketing bullshitÂ, Ânot expensive and Ânot effectiveÂ. That should be called out because the comments were reckless, ignorant and demonstrably without factual knowledge and precisely an example of what he was asking others not to do. Finally, this is a forum not a physics lab. Forums are about opinion - you are wasting your time trying to bring method and order to that. Reality does not speak for itself here. MagicoÂs are Âcold and dry and RaidhoÂs are Âfast and sweetÂ. The reality is neither statement is meaningful since there are too many uncontrolled variables. One of the biggest problems in subscribing attributes to loudspeakers comes down to the unavoidable fact that the speaker is at the end of a chain of other components, and that chain (particularly the amplifier) will impose its own character on the signal the speaker reproduces. |
Michaelkingdom, thanks for sharing your experience with Magico S1 and Raidho D1 speakers. Though, I fear this thread has run its course for quite some time now. Razmika and Kiwi, the reason I usually post on audiogon is because I like to share my experience with other and I like to get feed-back from other in the hope that we all learn something useful. Aren't we bombarded/confused enough by dealers, reviewers and advertisement with all this hi-tech crap? I honestly, do not understand what are you trying to achieve. Kiwi, you obviously have experience with the Raidho C1.1 and D1, yet you did not bother to write here a single line about these speakers even though quite a few people seem to be interested in this comparison. You could have written a few short lines, (and, of course, also direct us to your blog) and not expect us to read your entire blog which is quite extended. On the other hand, when Razmika "attached" Raidho, you have written a rather extensive post. If you are happy with your Raidho D2 speakers, why are you so defensive? Razmika, the first post about Audio Salon was by Mes on Apriel 8. He only claimed that that respective store in Miami carries both brands, i.e. he did not claimed that the store has both the D1 and the Q1 models on the floor. In fact, except Dracule1, nobody has claimed somthing like that. My guess is that Dracule1, did not answer your question because it was too brief/naive, i.e. you should have mentioned at least the state were you are going as USA is big (but of course I can not be sure about this). Also, IMO all of the contributors here that said something about Magico vs. Raidho, did it in a rather benign way making rather clear that they were talking about personal preference (I too made it very clear in my opening post that it was the dealer's opinion and that I can not make any further comments as I did not listen the Q1s.) Consequently, I do not understand your attitude. Finally, from your comments above I get the feeling that eventually you have listen the Raidho D1 speakers, and also that you have experience with the Magico Q1s speakers. Why don't you share with us your experience about these two speakers? |
I can put in a good word about Audio Salon in Coral Gables (Miami). I was just there this past week and had the chance to hear the Raidho D2 and the Magico S5. John the dealer was very kind and patient and made the experience great. Both speakers were great speakers and about as different as sounds come. If I had to choose between the two, I would choose the Magico S5 because of the amazing presentation. They are cold and dry and as expressive as a Kandinsky painting. They don't cuddle you up in sound but rather just express what is being played with the highest degree of spatial / tonal precision I have ever heard. The Raidhos were also excellent but in a different way. They took a bit to grow on my ears. Once I had understood their sound, they become more and more interesting. They are fast and sweet. Sorry for the short review but if I HAD to pick, I would pick the Magicos - based on 30 minutes with each speaker. They soar. However, the Magico dryness might cause a detached feeling after a while which might cause me to yearn for the Raidho. |
The process of building a VERY thin layer of carbon on a surface is quite common (See drill bits), Âparticle accelerator in this case is simply a more sexy name to a vapor deposit. The 10 um thick carbon they add can hardly be called a Âdiamond layer (you really canÂt have much more than that due to the substantial increase in weight it will add). BTW, YoungÂs modulus of Ceramics is 435 vs. diamond 1220 GPA. Only 3 times stiffer, not 140 or 200. Anyway, I am not trying to rain on your parade, these are fabulous speakers, try to enjoy them without having the need to justify how much better they are then a Magico or a Vivid, cause they are not. |
Hi Razmika, Please illuminate what evidence you have to substantiate the claim that the diamond layer applied to Raidho D-series mid/woofers amounts to marketing BS?
I hope IÂm wrong but the above comment has the look and feel of uninformed mudslinging to me. To begin with, the diamond layer has nothing to do with vaporized carbon. The process is made by a particle accelerator and has nothing to do with vapor deposits. The layer built by Raidho is structurally very close to pure diamond and is approximately 140 times harder than the ceramic material on their ceramic cones. Pure diamond would be 200 times harder. The fact that itÂs Âonly skin layers can be looked upon like building a composite sandwich material, using the incredible strength and hardness on the outside skin layers, separated by a softer and damped aluminum/ceramic core. This really has two major benefits that you just canÂt achieve with a solid diamond material the first is being stiffer and better damped for a much lower weight, second is the ability to use diamond on the bigger drivers. Raidho claim that the Diamond membrane has its resonance breakup above 20 KHz and the Ceramic driver is at 12.5 KHz which reportedly was already better than any other manufacturer. More details can be found on RaidhoÂs D-Series CES 2013 press release. Suggest you have a read. To your other point on AccutonÂs diamond domes  yes indeed Accutone have a small tweeter (not a woofer, like the Raidho D1 employs) which uses a different CVD process to apply the diamond. Why youÂd apply diamond to a tweeter is open to much debate, but what we can be more certain of is that the Raidho ribbon has a weight which is approx. 1/30th of the Accuton diamond dome and because of that it has approximately 30 times more speed and micro resolution as the critical current required to make the diaphragm move is also 30 times less than any dome! Little wonder then that audio reviewer after audio reviewer (Valin, Gregory, Thomas, Fritz, Kershaw et. al.) report the Raidho tweeter to have incredible resolution sans listener fatique. |
