Marty, I agree, I've heard someone, other than Dhaan, not like the Verities (that doesn't mean that they don't sound good to him, could be). I did not know that opinion was actually divided on Merlin, certainly not from Merlin owners. One of the most remarkable statics of seen are the from the Audioreview.com site where 121 owners of the Merlin speakers give them an overall rating of 4.97 out 5 - that is pretty overwhelming evidence that some folks really like the Merlins. |
Pubul,
Many contributors to these threads maintain that the speaker is top heavy (insufficient bass). The VSMs IME are very sensitive to room and partnered electronics. Their impedence curve probably contributes to the latter. In my home, particularly before I had the SEs upgraded, a number of people made the same comment - generally after direct comparison to the Verity, which is a bit warmer. However, the vast majority like both.
Over the years, I have wavered between them, switching them in and out of my system. Over time, I migrated more to the VSMs. Recently, I have added a couple of new speakers into the rotation, so both the P/Es and VSMs are sidelined for a while. I assure you, when they return to action both speakers will once again delight with their respective strengths and satisfy with their common lack of significant weaknesses.
Marty |
Marty,
There are endless viable possibilities to a sensible design. If we take the car analogy, it can be the difference between a good sport car like the Porsche and a good luxury car like the BMW. Both are sound designs and may cater to a different personal taste. Nothing wrong with that. However, when basic design elements are not address properly (Or at all), it gets difficult to make any intelligent comparative assessment of preferences. That is why there are so many cynical, and unfortunately, quite worthless comments on audio forum. You very seldom read an intelligent comment about the actual merits of the issues in question. |
Dhaan,
I understand your point. It would be difficult to design high performance into any product without some sense of best practices. But....
Performance of a loudspeaker is, as a practical matter, only meaningful in room. Room contributions often overwhelm the intrinsic (to the extent that this word has any meaning in this context, you can probably substitute "anechoic") character of any loudspeaker. Hard as this may be for a disciplined designer to swallow, a "poor" design may perform very well in an unanticipated environment.
I have used the P/E in 4 rooms. The last should count as two, pre room treatment and post room treatment, as the character of the room changed so drastically after treatment. In 4 of these rooms (#4 pre-treatment excepted) the Verity produced an exceptionally "natural" sounding tonal balance. Not merely my opinion, but that of literally everyone who's heard it and offered a comment (lots of folks).
I only see 3 possibilities here:
1) My speaker does not have the same performance issue as the Ovation, presumably due to differing design.
2) The speakers do sound similar and the vast majority of listeners (admittedly not tested for statistical reliability) mistakenly think they sound natural when they are obviously poor sounding.
3) The speaker - despite its design - sounds natural to most people in many real world environments, but your evaluation is different.
#1 or #2 is possible, but I suspect that #3 is at play here.
To explain this, you point to biases (owners love everything they just bought) among listeners. Certainly possible.
I'd only note that you ignore your own potential bias. You produced "Exhibit A" to support your argument: an anechoic graph that was of limited indicative value to me. "Exhibit B" was listing certain Verity design decisions that violate commonly accepted (I hope I'm characterizing your position fairly) best practices.
Clearly, you disagree with the design choices and believe that the raggedy anechoic response illustrates the cost of these decisions. (It certainly wasn't pretty, I'll give you that!.) I'm merely stating that - despite the design choices and anechoic result - I have not found a soul in my home, in print, or on-line, who shares your judgement that these speakers present an obviously and significantly flawed tonal balance.
My point is that these factors might be coloring your judgement. Or you may be right.
Marty |
But Dhann you are assuming that eveyone purchases their speakers for same reasons that you do. They do not. They purchase and enjoy them all for their own reasons. They may not want faithful recreation of the recording on the disc. They prefer 'sound creation' versus 'sound recreation'. People who enjoy Sonus Faber probably enjoy an agreeable "warm" deviation from neutrality and people who like Wilson probably enjoy " impressive" sounds. So what ? You may not understand it but the fact is that these people do gravitate towards these presentations. Who knows why ? "Accuracy" may be the only way to go for studio moniters when your mixing etc and precision is essential. I personaly like this kind of speaker. Other than that speakers are just sources of enjoyment. A "good design" is one which lots of people like the sound enough to buy it. The vast majority of people , even " audiophiles", are not used to listening to a truly flat/neutral speaker. They just don't want what YOU want and successful speaker manufacturers give them what THEY want. I once started a very illconcieved thread questiong the sanity of Wilson Audio purchasers and the motives of the manufacturer based upon MY listening and MY view of the (pretty poor) meaurements. How could anyone part with that kind of jack for what I think are vastly overpriced and underperforming ( from the viewpoint of 'accurate' sound reproduction) speakers ? Well, the fact is that they do " impressive" in spades and if people buy them then they are "properly designed' for THAT purpose. - Jim |
Interesting discussion. It seems Stereophile's John Atkinson had issues with a Verity design a few years back. Can't recall the model or year but remember the measurements being the least favorable part of the review.
In my brief experience with the Verity's, under show conditions I have found the Parsifals, Sarasto and Ovations exceptional in stimulating goosebumps which is a quite involuntary reaction. Can this be measured? I'm not sure but maybe someone can take a stab. All I know is that few systems I've listened to could illicit this response. The Verity's I've found are exceptional in recreating timbre and the art of the performance. This is to say they draw you into the music. Of course this may sound trite and maybe cynical to some on the other hand knowledge in the form of measurements and what should sound right based on design principles might also lead to blindness if it is the primary criteria for speaker design.
Careful listening must have a significant role in creating speakers that sound any of the following subjective characteristics; bright, dark, recessed, pleasant, accurate, tonally balanced, real. Which is to say that not every designer is looking for or maybe even hearing the same things in musical reproduction hence all the different choices, aren't we lucky! After all the discussions I've read over the years I'm sure what we hear and value in live music, let alone reproduced, varies from listener to listener so there is no clear cut winner. The losers are the ones that don't survive the marketplace. I am unaware of ONE speaker system in audio that doesn't have at least one detractor including Vandersteen, Verity and Merlin, three of my favorites the latter I own, and isn't it funny they each sound different with their own virtues.
Dhann you make a quite lucid case for why the Verity should sound offensive and I truly appreciate your input to this discussion. If only measurements could predict how a system at a given time in a given room will convey music to a given listener. Art or science, which comes first, that might be the question. After all, which component in an audio system is more a combination of the two?
|
Tube,
If I recall correctly, JA noted measurement issues with the Sarastro, but later in the review endorsed the sound based on subjective listening tests. My own belief is that the complex, dynamic behavior of a speaker reproducing music in-room has evaded the ability to produce a definitive test. Obviously, the same speaker sounds different in different rooms. It probably also sounds different at different spls in the same room. I suspect that it's gonna be quite a while before we see any test that allows meaningful quantitative testing of loudspeakers.
Marty
PS Notwithstanding the above, you seem to have fine taste in loudspeakers (i.e. the same as me!) |
You are raising good points that can help advance the discussion.
Aldavis
I know very well that people buy audio for different reason. But there is a different between a warm speakers that was design properly to be voiced slightly warmer (A controlled elevated lower region), and a speaker, like some Sonus, that is generating way to much energy form its enclosure, and therefore is extremely colored. Some do mistake it for warmth and musicality when it is basically acting like a musical instrument that is adding lots of uncontrolled and uncalled for energy to everything played into it. Same goes for the impressiveness of the Wilson. Elevated midbass, and grungy highs will do the trick. I am saying that you can be accurate and warm (Or cold if the recording is) and impressive yet articulated when you design and build it right. Music is all of the above if you can reproduce it accurately.
Tubegroover,
It is not difficult to get goosebumps from a design without a step correction. The elevated midrange is impressive to the ear on first listen. Especial on a tube amp that has a real easy time with the elevated impedance at that region. But you are listening to a very colored and unnatural representation of the source. I can see why some would like, and I admit that it is fun some times, but not all the time. Not to mention that these kinds of effects work on very specific recordings only. So as an avid audiophile, you do end up listening to a very narrow band of music because of that.
|
To me, listening in room with you electronics, and yes, using your ears is the only that really matters. Yes, the Merlins definitely sound best with tubes, they can work with SS, but they are not the same speaker, they are optimized for the way tubes amps work. And yes, rooms make a lot of difference. The difference between my system with room treatement and without significantly changes the perfomance (better with bass traps and side defraction panels)and in that setup, the Merlins are very coherent and balanced from top to bottom (maybe not the very bottom - but you can't have everything in a speaker - I don't think. It is interesting that Merlin lovers seem to like Verity - there is something they are both doing I right - not sure measurements would tell us why. |
Well of course your right Dhaan but SF actually uses the 'transducer as a musical instrument' implicitly in their advertizing. In sense they "voice" the cabinets. The crazy thing is lots of people like this. What can you say? THEY think this is musical and THEY like it. The Wilsons elevated midbass , I think, is intentional and aimed at a consumer who thinks this is normal and indeed expects it. The people at Wilson Audio are not dummies and I have no doubt that for a fraction of what they charge they could produce a better behaved speaker if they so chose. They don't so choose and they are making a hell of alot of money not doing it. Hip hop, boom boxes, the ubiquitous poorly designed sub, even alot of R&B have conspired over time to place an unnatural emphasis on the midbass. If you don't listen to much unamplified music it's hard to unlearn this. Most people don't. - Jim |
The people at Wilson Audio are not dummies and I have no doubt that for a fraction of what they charge they could produce a better behaved speaker if they so chose I have asked myself that same question many times. You may give them too much credit. Yet, I may be be given them too little
|
Al and Dhaan,
I agree that Wilson's speakers are usually voiced this way. Did you ever wonder how they sound in a 50,000 cu/ft space? I bet the bass region falls substantially back to a more "normal" balance? I don't want to overstate the room thing, but I wonder whether Wilson voices their speakers for palatial rooms - maybe appropriate for their clientele. I've had the same question about the big MBLs.
Marty |
the car analogy is interesting too.
many love to associate their speakers or even amps with car brands.
'this model is the Ferrari on loudspeakers'.
so what is the 'best' car then?
if measurements is the parameter and the only parameter, then laptimes would rule for the 'best' car. ie fast equals to best.
an F1 could so qualify as the car to which all other cars must be judged and compared to.
could be, but the thought of driving an F1 on the road to enjoy? the clutch action alone is a nightmare.
it is a human thing to compare and draw an analogy with whatever.
what is the best airplane? what is the best speedboat?
what is the best wristwatch?
it all depends on what you want to measure, judge or 'proof'.
another human thing is to get right over anything.
that is only fuelled by the ego and has seen even worldwars as a result.
a best car is the best car to your liking and driving needs.
beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
everything is subjective.
live music is very subjective too. a Cello on the street has a very different sound than as played in a small church.
and this difference can be measured absolutely.
we never listen to loudspeakers.
we listen to a whole gear put together, in a certain room which contributes or not to the experience.
roomacoustics is of such a great influence that any highend gear is a big compromise if not taken into account.
once listened in a truly dedicated room and you cannot go back.
like you have put on slick racing tires for the first time.
a truly good audiorig should reproduce and represent the biggest differences in recordings. and on absolute terms that's the only thing it can do.
we never listen to music we listen to recordings of music.
btw i really just love the BMW Z4 coup.
subjectively that is... |
Well Dhaan, I agree that goosebumps can be gotten on specific recordings with specific gear, yes this is indeed true. The first time I remember hearing it was with a Single ended triode driving hi efficiency Swan speakers many years ago and was duly impressed. Understand mind you that this was with specific midrangy jazz and vocal recordings. Such a system would make one gravitate towards certain types of music to the exclusion of others since the sound can be so intoxicating.
I probably wasn't clear enough in that a system that can consistently stimulate this reaction with a variety of recordings and different music for a sustained period is what I was referring to. Recordings I am familiar with that I brought and not necessarily good recordings so much as great performances. I was speaking specifically of a system in a specific room that was seemingly doing everything right which is to say recreating the natural dynamics, timbre and subtle nuances that I hadn't ever heard before to this degree making the performance more believable, not a single-ended triode system for sure. It wasn't a matter of sound anymore, more the performance. This was with the Verity Parsifals and while I noted similar characteristics with the other Verity models the systems and rooms could not produce this same emotional response. Moon in the 7th sun Jupiter aligning with Mars....etc. Actually the room had non parallel walls and was larger than most of the others which probably helped quite a bit.
Marty when it comes to loudspeakers I am quite dismissive of the majority of them, especially most large systems. They always seems to do something wrong in their quest to overwhelm you with sound often missing the nuances that separate good sound from drawing one into the musical performance, maybe their interaction with rooms too small comes into play to a greater degree?
Actually I went to the show to hear the Merlin's with this particular system which was substituted with the Parsifals just prior to the show. Interestingly enough not everyone heard what I did which goes to show that while I may be convicted that my opinion is greater than everyone else that didn't hear it my way, maybe in reality it is that I was prejudiced because I primarily went to the show to hear a particular system. Actually there were numerous folks that did hear what I did not excluding some of the Verity folks. |
Marty, your it is the room solution to the problem of incompetent loudspeaker design simply does not cut it. If you are designing a speaker with a particular room in mind, how would it works in other rooms. And if your room has problems, do you fix it by introducing even more problem in the speaker? So is wrong on wrong makes right? You can always treat a room, move to a different one or build one, but you can never take a 10db boost at 80Hz, or a shelved mids and flatten it. No room will correct a disasters XO integration. You can never take out the THD these design have either. Not to mention so many other flaws that simply show a lack of basic loudspeaker engendering knowledge. If you had any idea of what it is that you are doing, you will have absolutely no reason to desing a speaker like that. Sorry, but you always going to listen to your music through a pretty dirty filter. No matter what room you are in. |
Dhaan,
Speakers sound different - in tonal balance - in different environments and at different spls. A speaker that is absolutely perfect at high spl in a small volume room will be imperfect at either lower spls or in a larger room. Sorry, but this is true.
Room gain below 150hz will typically range from a few db to 15db, with larger rooms tending to provide less as the speakers are moved further from the boundaries. Response anomalies from reflective surfaces above 1khz are utterly impossible to predict. A speaker like the Wilson - which to many people (including, evidently, you and me) - sounds overblown in the bass area, will sound less overblown when moved further from room boundaries. Ironically, this will make the anechoic measurements more useful, though - to me - still of very limited value. I am not suggesting that this will "cure" the Wilsons. I was merely wondering how they sound in a very large space and speculating that they will likely sound better than in the smaller spaces I've previously heard them.
My point is that 2 wrongs ABSOLUTELY make a right. If every room was identical - and had the identical single anomaly (let's say a 10db rise at 100hz) - then a speaker that is 10db down at 100hz WILL sound more natural tonally! I am not suggesting that you should design for this only because every room is not identical. My point in the first place!
Sorry, but it is impossible to judge the tonal balance of a speaker in anything but the context of a specific room.
BTW, this discussion is strictly limited to tonal balance as it grew from your contention that the Verity has an obviously skewed tonal balance. It has nothing to do with THD. Or many, many other performance parameters which may make or break a speaker in the opinion of any given listener.
Marty |
But Marty, it is all related. The suck out in the Verity FR is due to a very poor integration between the drivers. It has nothing to do with voicing or room integration issues. It is simply very poor XO design. |
Once again,
Indeed, the Verity may have a thousand problems due to its poor design (or it may not). I have not commented either way. You heard an obvious tonal balance problem with the Parsifal. I know of no-one else who has. I merely suggested that tonal balance is not a function of a speaker, but of a speaker in a specific room and that, in the vast majority of rooms, the Verity's anechoic suck-out is either barely audible or completely inaudible. I made the statement based on my own 10 years of experience, the experience of many, many hobbyist listeners who have heard the speaker in my home(s), a survey of print reviews, and a survey of on-line reviews (including the one you linked to).
I noted that this qualifies you as an outlier in this regard and that there are many possible explanations for this - including the possibilty that your judgement has been colored by your knowledge of the speaker's design and anechoic performance. I do not believe that I have made any other claim and, if I have, it was certainly unintentional.
With that, I think I've said what I have to say.
Best luck with your on-going efforts.
Marty
And to clarify my comment re: Wilson, I was merely speculating and I believe I made that quite clear in the post. |
So if we are concluding, I take it you see no correlation between your listening experience and objective assessments like measurements. Not only that, but you are suggesting, that since I do actually hear the speakers the way they actually sound, I am the outlier. Very interesting but totally irrational. BTW, I know quite a few that do not care for the Verity and share my opinion on them. And you know quite a few that do. So what? That does not change the fact that these are objectively poorly design speakers. |
I have no exp w/ WB but did audition a variety of models from Verity and Magico. Plus I am no tech guru so I'll leave that to others. One thing that they really differ I found was speaker positioning. For the Verity's you really need them out further in the room due to their rear firing bass. One can turn these speakers around so to speak so its front facing bass but then probably not as effective as the original design concept I would suspect. I also thought the Verity's had a more precise sound stage re location of instruments but overall size of sound stage was smaller than the magicos. Personally I also came with an impression that the Magico's are better letting a nautral beauty of tonality to come through. Having said it was via different amps and different rooms so that could explain a lot of things. Happy hunting |
Another famous reviewer who didn't like the Parsifals at all was J. Peter Moncrieff, of IAR. |
Dhaan, what are five objectively good speakers you think we should consider? |
PSB, Ravel, TAD, Focal and MAGICO. They are all different and skin the cat in a their own way. I have my preferences but they are all design by people who knows what they are doing. |
