Chronosonic XVX.

[metaphacts]

Hello Bill, many thanks for sharing this great review. Lots and lots of info in it. The only thing Robert didn't cover was performance at low listening levels. Wondering if you have heard the Chronosonic XVX system in Asia (HK I think) with top Goldmund electronics and if so, was there any aspect of that system that really stood out for you? Many thanks

Robert makes numerous comments that allude to XVX' prowess at low levels. "But the XVX wasn't only about bombast. At the other end of the dynamic scale, the XVX was equally adept at portraying very fine transient information such as gentle shakers toward the back of the mix. Low-level information was rendered with tremendous clarity, making instruments sound like distinct objects in space rather than undifferentiated sounds buried within the musical fabric."

I believe Daryl and the Wilson team's latest designs have an uncanny ability to scale from very soft levels to the loudest levels in a very lifelike manner. The characteristic is most evident in XVX, hence I believe, Robert's use of the term "physicality." Even straight out of the crate and assembled without any real set up other than initial nomograph settings, there is a sense of something right in that regard. With each/all of the set up steps, the noise floor drops and the transient fidelity gets tighter and tighter. The final steps, including adjusting for precise nomograph settings and amplifier group delay, once the speakers are off the sliders take XVX to the level of realism over which Robert enthuses.

Unfortunately I have not heard any XVX outside of the US. With the exception of a 3 day auto trip, I have not left Utah since early March. Certainly it would be interesting to hear modern day Goldmund amps on XVX. I was running Goldmund's US company in the 1980's when we introduced the Mimesis electronics to the world.

 

[howiebrou]

Unfortunately I have not heard any XVX outside of the US. With the exception of a 3 day auto trip, I have not left Utah since early March. Certainly it would be interesting to hear modern day Goldmund amps on XVX. I was running Goldmund's US company in the 1980's when we introduced the Mimesis electronics to the world.

Bill, I can attest that it sounds pretty good with Goldmund's top of the line electronics

 

[microstrip]

I always give an example like this one .


Would you like be stuck in a closet with 2 xvx s facing you from 1 feet distance , no i bet it sounds horrible .

Would you like to listen to 2 xvx s set up in a stereo setting in an open field .
I bet it doesnt sound good .

So there definetively is an optimum in space volume in which a speaker can breathe energize the space correctly
And that differs regarding speakersize .
With the woofertowers incl it would be different again .

Defining that space is going from good to mindblowing .
With an investment like xvx(incl subs )i would like that part to be 100 % as well.
Whats best forum lol

Just laws of nature

IMHO such examples are of little meaning is these discussions - your opponent can always present another one showing the opposite. Let's try to be analytical - what dimension (width, length or height) and characteristics of speaker do you consider to be relevant to correlate with the minimum room size?

To add confusion to the issue some small speakers I owned only sound great in large rooms - I always think about the Sonus Faber Extrema or the Magico Mini II's. But the B&W Silver signature, that had similar volume and units size, sounded its best in much smaller rooms.

IMHO the issue is also correlated to our expectations - visually we expect from large speakers the sound that only large rooms can give us. But the XLF, for example, is much more than just scale. IMHO in aspects such as coherency, resolution, easiness and micro dynamics it is significantly better than all lower size Wilsons, perhaps excluding the Allex.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Regarding roomsize i think the golden ratio is pretty good .
3 meter high ceiling ,1.618 ratio from then on .
Full range speakers( large and a non resonant housing) are at least twice as good as small ones imo.
The 20 hz - 100 /200 hz region produced by large woofers counts double in sound quality making it a speaker at least double as good as a 2 way .
What is relevant to me is the amount of moving membrane surface compared to the roomsize
To find that out :


I sometimes play with the idea to have the backwall sliding on rails making it easy to increase /decrease the volume of the room .
And do some testing while listening .

 

[andromedaaudio]

To do a proper golden ratio one should start of course with :

3.236


Ps or another idea 1.618 meter high front wall .
Backwall 3.236 with a sloping ceiling and from then on ....

 

[Ron Resnick]

https://www.wilsonaudio.com/media/912/TAS-Chronosonic-XVX-Review.pdf

 

[Mike Lavigne]

What is relevant to me is the amount of moving membrane surface compared to the roomsize.

+100!

 

[LL21]

...What is relevant to me is the amount of moving membrane surface compared to the roomsize...

+100!

I have also been thinking this in our system.

I have been doing amateur surface area calcs as a sanity check...though I understand that actually air displacement is a better metric...(its just not a metric as easily calc'd presumably without knowing the excursion capability of the cone and probably a host of other variables).

Nevertheless, the basic physics of cone surface area is something I am focusing on particularly when it comes to all-out bass (not necessarily to generate explosive noises) to create that concrete sense of the venue, spacial cues, and true surround-you dimensionality...not to mention added effortlessness of scale.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Indeed there are a lot of variables in calculating that
I dont know exactly how much air is displaced by a group of musicians either .
I dont know if there is any data on that or if there has been a study at all.
Displacement is may be also not the right term as its a waveform.

 

[microstrip]

Regarding roomsize i think the golden ratio is pretty good .
3 meter high ceiling ,1.618 ratio from then on .
Full range speakers( large and a non resonant housing) are at least twice as good as small ones imo.
The 20 hz - 100 /200 hz region produced by large woofers counts double in sound quality making it a speaker at least double as good as a 2 way .
What is relevant to me is the amount of moving membrane surface compared to the roomsize
To find that out :


I sometimes play with the idea to have the backwall sliding on rails making it easy to increase /decrease the volume of the room .
And do some testing while listening .

I was asking what dimension of the speaker, not of the room! Can I interpret your words as stating that bass response determines the ideal room size?

BTW, considering panels can play excellently in small rooms, are you just addressing box speakers?

 

[Alrainbow]

Regarding roomsize i think the golden ratio is pretty good .
3 meter high ceiling ,1.618 ratio from then on .
Full range speakers( large and a non resonant housing) are at least twice as good as small ones imo.
The 20 hz - 100 /200 hz region produced by large woofers counts double in sound quality making it a speaker at least double as good as a 2 way .
What is relevant to me is the amount of moving membrane surface compared to the roomsize
To find that out :


I sometimes play with the idea to have the backwall sliding on rails making it easy to increase /decrease the volume of the room .
And do some testing while listening .

Linear XMAX is very important to consider as much as cone size , when calculating displacement ..

An 8 inch woofer with 15MM linear xmax can displace as much low frequency energy as a 15 inch woofer with 5MM xmax.

The difference being effective throw distance and much better stop start of wave form due to not having a time restrains long throw ..

This is where that relaxed sound from large displacements woofers come from ..

 

[andromedaaudio]

I was asking what dimension of the speaker, not of the room! Can I interpret your words as stating that bass response determines the ideal room.


integration.

More or less yes.
Because bass drivers are mostly responsible for the amount of air moved in the room .

Im not so much a panel guy cant give much of an opinion there .
I have heard some very transparent sounds coming from martin logans .
But they lacked impact/ overall integration

 

[andromedaaudio]

Linear XMAX is very important to consider as much as cone size , when calculating displacement ..

An 8 inch woofer with 15MM linear xmax can displace as much low frequency energy as a 15 inch woofer with 5MM xmax.

The difference being effective throw distance and much better stop start of wave form due to not having a time restrains long throw ..

This is where that relaxed sound from large displacements woofers come from ..

Most 8 inch woofers have an fs ( free air resonace of high 20 s low 30 s certainly not able to go 20 hz - 3 db .
Larger woofers have usually a lower fs so they can go both lower and displace more air doing it .

I m talkiing passive systems here .
For the rest i agree with you , the rubber roll membrane surround also needs to work more with a 15 mm excursion woofer
A possible distortion cause .

 

[bonzo75]

Pointless if you don't have two high sensitive 15 inch woofers moving quickly

 

[Alrainbow]

Most 8 inch woofers have an fs ( free air resonace of high 20 s low 30 s certainly not able to go 20 hz - 3 db .
Larger woofers have usually a lower fs so they can go both lower and displace more air doing it .

I m talkiing passive systems here .
For the rest i agree with you , the rubber roll membrane surround also needs to work more with a 15 mm excursion woofer
A possible distortion cause .

You can load the cones for lower FS and with proper tuning and room gain -3db at 25 hz is easily possible .

You maybe talking sealed enclosures ..!

 

[Alrainbow]

Pointless if you don't have two high sensitive 15 inch woofers moving quickly

Sensitivity has a lot to do with Moving mass and motor BL, small woofers sound faster due to their lower moving mass
( stop start) over larger 15 inch types ..

Fast 15 inch woofers , yep

 

[andromedaaudio]

Alrainbow
For me all this loading / room gain /tuning has never sound logical /made sense to me .

Free air resonance is the lowest freq that the woofer can produce while connected to an eletrical signal in open air .Cleanly .
Thats it , you cant go lower , going lower and it will just distort go in uncontrolled resonance.
Again im talking passive systems .
Sealed enclosurers usually make the woofers fall of more sharply

 

[Alrainbow]

Alrainbow
For me all this loading / room gain /tuning has never sound logical /made sense to me .

Free air resonance is the lowest freq that the woofer can produce while connected to an eletrical signal in open air .Cleanly .
Thats it , you cant go lower , going lower and it will just distort go in uncontrolled resonance

Andromediaaudio ,

You can mass load woofers to lower their FS, room gain works and does help F3 response , if not for sealed boxes bass would be non existent ..

FS is important for TS design structure , once in the enclosure FB is the dominant resonance number ..

Unless i read my Newsweek report wrong ..

 

[andromedaaudio]

You mean by mass loading making the membrane heavier ?
That would also have enourmous disadvantages in a passive system off course.
I m talking fast clean bass .
Not some rumbling sub in the background

 

[Alrainbow]

More or less yes.
Because bsss drivers are mostly responsible for the amount of air moved in the room .

Im not so much a panel guy cant give much of an opinion there .
I have heard some very transparent sounds coming from martin logans .
But they lacked impact/ overall integration

Yes panels lack percussive energy for slam , unless pretty big ( ESL) or like apogee .

They have good bass slam ..!