Active Ascent of Mount Olympos

[Young Skywalker]

There is a lot worse out there and I am yet to hear another complete "system" which makes me contemplate any changes (aside from acoustic room treatments) or teaches me something new about the realistic reproduction of acoustic music.

Component line up includes:

Keith Monks RCM Mk.IIc record cleaning machine
Minus K Technology WS-4 Vibration Isolation Workstation
Brinkmann Audio Lagrange turntable
Acoustical Systems Axiom tonearm
Lyra Olympos LOMC cartridge
Miyabi Alnico LOMC cartridge
Acoustical Systems Syntax 1:12 step-up transformer
Brinkmann Audio 12.1 tonearm
Lyra Dorian Mono LOMC cartridge
Finite Elemente Pagode Master Reference HD03 equipment rack
Lamm Industries LP2 Deluxe phono preamplifier (modified)
MSB Technology Data CD IV optical disc transport
MSB Technology Signature DAC IV Plus digital-to-analogue converter
MSB Technology Signature Power Base
Lamm Industries LL2 Deluxe linestage preamplifier (modified)
Finite Elemente Pagode Signature E12 equipment rack
SGR Audio MTX active line level crossover
SGR Audio EL-15S stereo power amplifier
SGR Audio EL-15S stereo power amplifier
SGR Audio EL-30S stereo power amplifier
Basis Audio PSTT loudspeaker cables
SGR Audio MT3F Loudspeakers
Custom made power cables
Custom made line level interconnects
IsoTek EVO3 Premier power cables
IsoTek EVO3 SOLUS power distributor/filter

And since I know that us men only look at the pictures, drum roll please...

 

[Young Skywalker]

... and a few more photos.

 

[Young Skywalker]

A photo which shows the overall room layout (along with wide angle lens perspective distortion)...

 

[JackD201]

Looks like a system done by Yoda trained Skywalker to me.

 

[Young Skywalker]

Looks like a system done by Yoda trained Skywalker to me.

Indeed, Jack. A few Jedi Masters have had considerable influence in guiding me in the ways of the Force.

 

[LL21]

Beautiful.

 

[Jazzhead]

Very Inviting room & set-up , Nice !!!

 

[andromedaaudio]

Nice system , nice axiom tone arm .
its not often you see a active system which I think it is

 

[MylesBAstor]

Nice system , nice axiom tone arm .
its not often you see a active system which I think it is

Active or triamped?

 

[jazdoc]

Wow. I mean just WOW! Congrats.

 

[Young Skywalker]

Thank you for the nice compliments, gentlemen; I know that you all have wonderful systems yourselves so it means a lot to me.

It is true that one does not see many active loudspeakers these days. People often fear the active approach, feeling that their opportunities to voice the system through component selections is diminished because the amplifiers are built into the loudspeaker cabinet. This need not be the case as my system illustrates. My active line level crossover is in a separate chassis, as are the three stereo amplifiers (or six monoblock amplifiers) required to power each of the drivers within the three-way loudspeakers. I can choose whichever amps I like for each of the bass, midrange, and high frequency ranges (with the ability to gain match between them over a fairly broad range). I can go one step further and choose the type of interconnect cable, speaker cable, and power cable for each of those amplifiers. The number of variables is very large but here I have elected to keep things as simple as possible. Sometimes I do wonder how a well engineered tube amplifier would go on the midrange drivers and tweeters, perhaps a pair of Music Reference RM-200 MkII with their 100 watts of output into 1, 2, 4, or 8 ohms?

Myles, I can confirm that my loudspeaker system is indeed active and not simply passively tri-amplified. Within each loudspeaker, the tweeter has its own channel of amplification (sees frequencies above 3,500 Hz only) which is connected directly to the voice coil with no intervening passive components (save for a capacitor which operates waaaaaaay below the active crossover point as "last resort" driver protection), the midrange driver has its own channel of amplification (only sees frequencies between 200 Hz and 3,500 Hz) which is connected directly to the voice coil with no intervening passive components, and the pair of 10" bass drivers have their own channel of amplification (only sees frequencies below 200 Hz) with no intervening passive components. As you might imagine, each channel of amplification has a much easier time of it with only a handful of octaves to deal with and is better able to control the respective driver (maximising the amplifier's damping factor - particularly important in the bass range).

 

[MylesBAstor]

Thank you for the nice compliments, gentlemen; I know that you all have wonderful systems yourselves so it means a lot to me.

It is true that one does not see many active loudspeakers these days. People often fear the active approach, feeling that their opportunities to voice the system through component selections is diminished because the amplifiers are built into the loudspeaker cabinet. This need not be the case as my system illustrates. My active line level crossover is in a separate chassis, as are the three stereo amplifiers (or six monoblock amplifiers) required to power each of the drivers within the three-way loudspeakers. I can choose whichever amps I like for each of the bass, midrange, and high frequency ranges (with the ability to gain match between them over a fairly broad range). I can go one step further and choose the type of interconnect cable, speaker cable, and power cable for each of those amplifiers. The number of variables is very large but here I have elected to keep things as simple as possible. Sometimes I do wonder how a well engineered tube amplifier would go on the midrange drivers and tweeters, perhaps a pair of Music Reference RM-10 MkII with their 100 watts of output into 1, 2, 4, or 8 ohms?

Myles, I can confirm that my loudspeaker system is indeed active and not simply passively tri-amplified. Within each loudspeaker, the tweeter has its own channel of amplification (sees frequencies above 3,500 Hz only) which is connected directly to the voice coil with no intervening passive components (save for a capacitor which operates waaaaaaay below the active crossover point as "last resort" driver protection), the midrange driver has its own channel of amplification (only sees frequencies between 200 Hz and 3,500 Hz) which is connected directly to the voice coil with no intervening passive components, and the pair of 10" bass drivers have their own channel of amplification (only sees frequencies below 200 Hz) with no intervening passive components. As you might imagine, each channel of amplification has a much easier time of it with only a handful of octaves to deal with and is better able to control the respective driver (maximising the amplifier's damping factor - particularly important in the bass range).

IC thanks!

 

[Bruce B]

I may be wrong, but I thought an "Active" loudspeaker actually has the amps built into the cabinet. If not, what differentiates it from a bi/tri-amped system?

Is the difference an active or passive x-over?

 

[PeterA]

Very interesting system and a great and comfortable looking room. Could you describe the type of music you listen to and also the differences between the two tonearms? Have you done a direct comparison using the same cartridge? I understand the wiring is different. I'm envious of the large space and ability to host more than a couple of friends at one time for a listening session. Well done.

 

[audioarcher]

I may be wrong, but I thought an "Active" loudspeaker actually has the amps built into the cabinet. If not, what differentiates it from a bi/tri-amped system?

They don't have to be built in. Active means that the crossover network is an active circuit. It will have active parts like op amps. A passive crossover has only passive parts like caps, resistors, and inductors. These can be outside the speaker as well. His speakers just have most of the amps outside the speakers. Not sure if the crossover itself is inside or outside though. My speakers are considered active as well. The active crossover for my speakers is in the bass amplifier. The amp that powers the panels, gets the signal from the bass amp.

 

[Bruce B]

Thanks!

 

[Young Skywalker]

Bruce,

It is not an uncommon assumption, regarding active speakers, that they have the amplification built into the loudspeaker cabinet. This actually defines a self-powered speaker which may or may not employ an active line level crossover.

An active system uses a powered line level crossover as opposed to a speaker level passive crossover. The technical (and in my opinion, sonic) benefits of the former FAR outweigh the few negatives which one might raise. It is a different story if one looks at active speakers from a commercial standpoint. Very few skilled and knowledgable (rarer than you might imagine) loudspeaker designers also happen to be talented enough to build reference quality electronics and to amalgamate the two into an ultra-high fidelity package.

In the future we will no doubt see more digital-to-analogue converters using their prodigious on-board DSP power to provide a digital active crossover function with multiple dedicated line level analogue outputs for each of the low, mid, hi, etc (each requiring a separate channel of amplification). The real trick is designing the optimum crossover in the first place (be it passive, active digital, or active analogue) since this is not something that one can master in situ. A digital active crossover approach mandates a strong collaboration between the digital manufacturer and the loudspeaker designer (e.g. Devialet partnering with Vivid Audio to develop an active version of their GIYA G1).

Being somewhat dedicated to the vinyl path (cough, cough) I gravitated strongly towards an active system where all filtering is performed in the analogue domain. I know that some people will scoff at the idea of using op-amps to perform the crossover filtering but this is BY FAR the lesser of two evils compared to the large value passive components inside most loudspeakers (where steeper slopes are desirable - and I would argue mandatory in the absence of THE perfect driver/s). No doubt someone will be concerned about phase shift with higher order crossovers (be they passive or active) but I am yet to read a paper in a peer reviewed journal where the effects of "modest" group delay are audible to the human ear under unbiased conditions.

 

[Young Skywalker]

Peter,

Thanks for your kind comments.

I love classical music first and foremost, specifically large scale symphonic works and operas. RCA Living Stereo, Decca, and Mercury Living Presence are labels which dominate my LP collection (sadly many of them reissues in the face of high used prices for original pressings, not to mention the highly variable vinyl condition). I enjoy the digital recordings from Reference Recordings and wish that there were more modern labels just like them. I also have a rather large collection of jazz LPs, mainly Blue Notes. The list of LPs on my "wish list" is consistently very long indeed. I don't discriminate against musical genres in terms of my tastes or what the system can reproduce. An associate, when asked what sort of music he liked, once replied "I like good music". I think that it is hard to top that.

I have not compared the two tonearms in a back-to-back fashion although the Lyra Olympos used to occupy the Brinkmann 12.1 before the Axiom settled into its new home. Despite seeing them in a wide range of different tonearms, the Lyras are known to be demanding in terms of a tonearm's ability to transfer energy away from the stylus/groove interface, lest they sound bright and unrefined in the upper frequency range. The Axiom tonearm is no doubt one of the better choices in this regard (along with the now fabled Fidelity Research FR-64s/66s arms) so it comes as no surprise to me that the Olympos sounds completely different in its new home. The Axiom/Olympos/Lamm LP2 combination has a super low noise floor where groove noise is essentially non-existent. This enables previously obscured details to emerge in a wholly natural way, i.e. every single LP is a totally new experience. High frequencies now soar with abundant tonal colours and never any hint of grain or harshness. The layering of the soundstage is unlike anything I have ever experienced and the cushion of air supporting each instrument or voice is effortless laid out. The word that most comes to mind is "natural" as opposed to "showy".

 

[Young Skywalker]

I thought I would post a few comments about the day-to-day ergonomics of the Minus K isolation platform based on my experience.

Yes, the payload (turntable and the shelf it sits on in this case) does wobble around like a plate of jelly in response to an external stimulus (less than careful handling the tonearm, adding or removing an LP from the platter, adding or removing the record clamp, etc). One gets used to this very quickly and it doesn't warrant a second thought. I can set up a phono cartridge with zero concerns that the platform will move uncontrollably beneath me resulting in an expensive accident.

In order to level the turntable one must ensure that the centre of mass is located appropriately over the centre of the Minus K platform. For this reason it helps to have a shelf which provides some room to move for the turntable. Having a turntable without any major asymmetry also helps. It is still a potentially frustrating iterative exercise but luckily something that only need be performed once unless you break the system down for relocation. In this case I would recommend marking the turntable location with some painter's tape.

Yes, the steel top plate of the Minus K platform rings if you excite it by tapping on it with some force. This may have a sonic influence on the sound of the turntable which sits on top of it. To combat this, particularly given the large contact footprint of my particular turntable, I used a layer of Poron damping material between the steel top plate and a constrained layer damped marine ply shelf (finished in timber veneer) - the same material used for my loudspeaker internals. The resultant sandwich is very well damped. The theory is that the Minus K platform's ultra-low natural frequency of 0.5 Hz in both vertical and horizontal axes ensures that low frequency resonances do not reach the stylus/groove interface with any significant amplitude (compare the performance in this regard with any air table solution) while the constrained layer damped shelf with Poron interface deals with any residual motor/turntable/bearing noise (likely to be higher in frequency). I have a solution (yet to be implemented) for preventing any turntable/bearing noise from finding its way into the stylus/groove interface (stay tuned). This same solution will ensure that residual energy from the groove tracing process is not reflected back into the pick-up.

If your turntable has an external motor and you choose to place it on a different surface to the turntable atop the Minus K platform then you are asking for trouble (potential speed variation by the motor setting the platform in motion). You must view the turntable and its drive mechanism as a closed system to be located atop the Minus K platform. Once the platter is up to speed, in my set up, the whole closed system "appears" completely serene with no visible motion. One can gently set the platform in motion without disturbing the tracking process.

So what did all of this do for the sonic presentation? It is not something that hits you over the head but rather an across the board improvement which results in a new level of calm and naturalness in the music. In other words the reproduction is less mechanical sounding with fewer barriers between the listener and the music. I have used the analogy elsewhere that using the Minus K (properly) is like the sonic difference between a well engineered sealed bass alignment and a well engineered vented solution. Since sealed bass alignment is on the rare side among commercial loudspeakers this might not be the greatest analogy.

 

[PeterA]

I would also like to commend you on the quality of your system photographs. They are outstanding. Great light, focus and composition.