Just to clarify I don't change the crossover points on any of the speakers, but I do adjust the top end circuit on the Duetta usually on site to what the owner wants to hear. They often gets used to the falling top end (high frequency drop-off caused by old stretched ribbons) the owner has ended up tuning the system to suit, so the speakers are set the the "standard" setting but end up sounding too bright, experienced this recently.
Apogee vs Electrostatic
- Thread starter gian60
- Start date
Just to clarify I don't change the crossover points on any of the speakers, but I do adjust the top end circuit on the Duetta usually on site to what the owner wants to hear. They often gets used to the falling top end (high frequency drop-off caused by old stretched ribbons) the owner has ended up tuning the system to suit, so the speakers are set the the "standard" setting but end up sounding too bright, experienced this recently.
Thank you for your extensive answer, micro.
But if you had maybe spent a tenth of the time and effort it took you to extract good sound from your dcs stack (your own words), you would maybe think differently about the Duetta Sigs...
The question is that the reward of tuning the system for the DCS was foreseen from start and was worth the effort. I already knew the limitations of the Duetta Signature - it was not my first pair. It is surely a good speaker, and in this case great value for money. Although we can not compare apples with oranges, in my relative scale of types of equipment the DCS Vivaldi is much higher than Duetta's. Even the friend who got the Duetta's admitted that the XLF's eclipsed them - he had listened to them several times in my room. All IMHO and preference, YMMV!
BTW, the panel area of the Soundlab A1 Px is more than four times the area of the Duetta.
Enjoy your maxxed out dcs
But kind of strange that a + 100k unit needs that much time, effort and expense to sound right
The Soundlab may have way more surface but a LOT less trevel than an Apogee, hence the more ooomph on the Apogees in the bass
Enjoy your maxxed out dcs
But kind of strange that a + 100k unit needs that much time, effort and expense to sound right
The Soundlab may have way more surface but a LOT less trevel than an Apogee, hence the more ooomph on the Apogees in the bass
Well, it may look strange for someone who does not know all the details or has no experience in ultra-high performance stereo systems.
When I got the Vivaldi I already owned a complete system built along the years around a Metronome CD playing system - a very different sounding digital system and I decided to change a few thinks. Surely the Vivaldi sounded great, but in this hobby the threshold of acceptance depends on the owner exigence - I had listened to the Vivaldi in other systems and wanted to get the best of it, not just a little better than I had before. It is why my system become centered around it and as long as I fed it the sound improved behind what I could expect. But this hobby is filled with temptation and a few other subjects entered the game meanwhile, creating confusion along the main line... The important thing for me is that, except for a few days, most of the time I was always able to have excellent sounding music.
Concerning the Soundlab's it is much more than that - the whole Mylar panel is driven uniformly full range by variable size rectangles disposed in curved array. This means that the pattern of radiation and ratio of direct versus reflected sound of the two speakers is very different.
Wow.
Let me get this straight...
Are you really saying that I have no clue?
Or are you saying my stuff can not Sound right?
Or are you saying my stuff is not expensive enough?
Or is it a combo of all the above?
Be it as it may but I take my underperforming and cheap Lampi DAC over your precious dcs Vivaldi heap any day because every time I heard a Lampi GG it sounded very good to excellent and every time I heard the dcs Vivaldi heap it sounded unnatural, thin, metallic and strident to me
It seems that you are one of the very few People worldwide who are able to extract the Magic Sound out of the dcs Vivaldi heap, while so many others fail to do so miserably
At least for my inexperienced ears :b
Wow.
Let me get this straight...
Are you really saying that I have no clue?
Or are you saying my stuff can not Sound right?
Or are you saying my stuff is not expensive enough?
Or is it a combo of all the above?
Be it as it may but I take my underperforming and cheap Lampi DAC over your precious dcs Vivaldi heap any day because every time I heard a Lampi GG it sounded very good to excellent and every time I heard the dcs Vivaldi heap it sounded unnatural, thin, metallic and strident to me
It seems that you are one of the very few People worldwide who are able to extract the Magic Sound out of the dcs Vivaldi heap, while so many others fail to do so miserably
At least for my inexperienced ears :b
Apologies for offending you. Sorry but I am not here for a fight concerning equipment or your imagination and preferences. My words were clear and need no interpretation. Bye.
It is interesting that Sanders - the guy that came up with the Martin Logan curvelinear panel, decided it was a bad idea and now makes ESL speakers with flat panels.
The curelinear panel of MLs is interesting in that it literally chucks sound all over the place. It makes for some entertaining imagery, but in the hybrids, especially the smaller ones, it leads to a tiny sweet spot and comb filtering effects. You have to hold your head in a vice to make it work. And inch either way won't do!.
Neolith and CLX seem much better in this regard. Size of panels is an important factor for a good electrostatic.
Doesn't Soundlab's use of relatively small rectangles seriously compromise excursion or am I wrong here?
I would take Duetta Sigs or Soundlab A1px over any Wilson speaker. Just MHO...
There are two Sanders making electroststs. One was ML and the other was Innersound, now Sanders sound.
As to excursion, MLs curved panel greatly restricts excursion and increases non-linearity. It was an idea to minimize beaming but there are better ways (like Spectra from Acoustat). Soundlab has flat facetes on a curved frame. It is still one continuos panel though and excursion is likely somewhere between ML curved and flat like Acoustat.
Although I like a lot the Soundlab A1px, I would take the XLF's any second. IMHO they can not be compared - bass depth and articulation, dynamics, realistic soundstage, vocals, even timbre are much better in the XLF. I clearly noticed it when the XLFs left. But if someone valuates mainly airiness and easiness within their dynamic range and accepts the bass limitations he can choose differently.
The Duetta's bass has punch but no real depth compared with the XLF. All IMHO, YMMV.
It's one and the same chap for all three, I thought. I am fairly sure on this. He left ML and started Innersound.
Some are small, but some are longer. See http://www.soundlab-speakers.com/dist-res.html
The gap of Soundlab's is wide than most electrostatics, allowing high excursion without discharges. Although at limited level, I could measure output down to 22 Hz in my long room. The usual problem of most Soundlab users is excessive bass, not too less.
SoundLab has an excellent section on the technology they use in their site: http://www.soundlab-speakers.com/technology.html
I saw some once years ago at a London hi-fi show. Only heard them at very low levels no real clues as to how good they really were. Rare over here.
They did look cool - no fabric the drivers were bare.
Despite having used ESLs (MLs) for many years I know I'll never go back. I've genuinely gone off them. I could live with Neolith, though. That's probably my fave one these days. It's a hybrid, though, and that's cheating.
True. But check the post from tonepub out here:http://www.martinloganowners.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-7531.html.
Roger at least claims he did. I read an interview where I am sure he stated so.... whether he did or not I can't say.
It's real simple. Gayle Sanders founded ML and Roger Sanders founded Innersound and later Sanders Sound. Roger always believed in flat panels ( I own his electrostatic speaker cookbook).
The question is is what Roger supposedly claimed founded in any fact? I'll see if I can find the interview or other stuff to support it. Tonepub is right WRT to Roger's claim I am sure - he's the author of the magazine Tonepub.
Although Roger prefers flat electrostatics for his own designs, he carried work with curved panels and acknowledges they can give excellent results. He asked a friend to write of a chapter on curved panels in the electrostaic design cookbook.
Sometime ago someone wrote in a Soundlab forum that there were two Sanders and two Rogers in electrostatics - Roger Sanders and Roger West.
(...) I could live with Neolith, though. That's probably my fave one these days. It's a hybrid, though, and that's cheating.
Great speakers, but too expensive. Mylar film is cheap!
Similar threads
