Horn Speakers at Munich High End 2016
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
Frantz,
We can start a new thread but I think we should wait and see what's going on with the forum's technical issues first.
david
My mileage indeed varies.. Sorry Brucebut here I go!
Goodness gracious ... If there is a better illustration of the audiophile penchant for hyperbole that would be it! I am now a SS person and would gladly say that to my ears now the better Ss do the job for me but in no way would I ever call VTL "slow" as in syrupy as in molasses textured or colored. Not the old VTL not the new . I have had the pleasure to own was the VTL 300 back in the days, late 80's early 90's? and they changed the way I perceived tubes and I was a tube enthusiast then. I had come to accept the lack of bass power, bass defintion and extended treble as "normal", especially compared to the SS competition , namely the krell amps and the Goldmund mimesis, then came the VTL amps. I loved the VTL 500 but couldn't afford it so I waited and got a 300 ... I have heard these on various speakers from Quad ESL 63 to Magnepan 3.5 through Thiel, Vandersteen, Hales Audio and even at one point Aerial, slow wouldn't be something I associate with VTL. I would come with the " slow" qualifier however for one of my favorite amp the CJ-MV75 but never for the early VTL especially the 300 but as you put it MMV...
Back to the subject which is that of Horns speakers in Munich. My current state of mind is that, High End audio is a Luxury Market. Some audiophiles are rediscovering the virtues of horns. The Luxury market is too happy to oblige and we have the extreme things such the $500,000 Living Oympians, the >$500 K Magico Ultimate, Acapella Sphaedrons , etc ... How good are these compared to much less expensive JBL and other horns is an open debate? I would surmise that something like the K2 is as good as these and the Japanese market which has never wanned on horns and particularly on JBL horns would tell you they (JBL) are as good or better than most of those things out there and believe you me it not because of Japanese audiophiles lack of choice or financial means. So this is a case where the often-used open mind needs to be practiced and applied. We have come to a point where a low price is a negative qualifier. We are too happy to jolt the "for its price" qualifier to most "inexpensive" offerings. Some of those offerings in shows such RMAF and AXPONA and T.H.E Show are scantly if at all covered. We flock toward audiophiles darlings such as Magico, Wilson, Rockport but give no attention to the Audio Kinesis, Vittoras, Sarduni, etc ... and strangely not even JBL. We are almost trying to bring these speakers down in many of our reports.., Of course we would say how bad the Wilson xxx speakers sounded in those shows but .. we know it was because of set-up because once properly set-ups they will sound right, frankly they do but so would many of the unknown (horn) speakers in RMAF. Set-ups is a very important aspect of performance. We are willing to invest a lot of time in our darlings but no so much in unknown offerings.. up to 600 (!!??!! WTF!!??) hours is considered normal for some products... To focus on horns, there is something to horns. Their premises is that they are Acoustic transformers they couple the moving elements to air in a way direct-to-air drivers be these cones or panels don't and can't. New techniques of manufacturing as well as designing ( CAD, 3-D printing, CNC, powerful Workstations) has made these better. We should be respectful of the great designs past and learn from them. The potential of new horns being better than the old ones is there and perhaps the reality.
Long winded perhaps, repetition? Of course! We, audiophiles need new air on and in High End Audio. It is getting stale. Re-sassing the same formulas with new names and new (always higher) prices are touted as innovations or sometimes evolution. More of the same with a different name and slightly different sound. We are not evolving the SOTA, we are merely moving it sideways...
Ha!-- No worries Fellas--an old dude here is bringing the times VTLs were called into question as I remember--couple of examples spring to mind---
A:Stereophile show Los Angeles mid 90s --Ballroom demo Manley tapes/VTL electronics /Klipschorns -- awful sounding nothing to impress to audition for ones usage there!--I commented on another site re this and Eva Anna disowned responsibility for the poor sound.
B:Wilson XLF Demo RMAF Vivaldi stack /VTL amps-- good sound--but on tracks I was familiar with no leading edge goosebumps inducing attack--like as if the Amps just rolled over and played "dead"--sorry
I've owned Klipschs and Wilsons so know what both brands are capable of
Pardon the exclusion from the VTL Fanboi Club but as I stated
YVMV
Good Listening
BruceD
Ha!-- No worries Fellas--an old dude here is bringing the times VTLs were called into question as I remember--couple of examples spring to mind---
A:Stereophile show Los Angeles mid 90s --Ballroom demo Manley tapes/VTL electronics /Klipschorns -- awful sounding nothing to impress to audition for ones usage there!--I commented on another site re this and Eva Anna disowned responsibility for the poor sound.
B:Wilson XLF Demo RMAF Vivaldi stack /VTL amps-- good sound--but on tracks I was familiar with no leading edge goosebumps inducing attack--like as if the Amps just rolled over and played "dead"--sorry
I've owned Klipschs and Wilsons so know what both brands are capable of
Pardon the exclusion from the VTL Fanboi Club but as I stated
YVMV
Good Listening
BruceD
I know where you're coming from Bruce
! But I feel that that way about most high powered amps I heard and specially find tube ones over 100 watts per generally musically lacking, but then I'm a SET guy...david
Hello David
I have to run to diner but Yes we are. I have a stock system that has changed very little where I have changed out the compression drivers over time and able to do comparisons where in most cases only the driver changed. I am not surprised about Aluminum but I am about your dislike for Beryllium. I love it especially when coated with aguaplas to damp the diaphragm.
So you don't like Everest or the Arrays?? We have to have a talk about horn types as I prefer CD horns like the Bi-radials used in the Arrays and Waveguides. If you like the more vintage systems it very well could be you prefer the older exponential and radial types which sound very different off axis compared to a more modern design. The overall power response is significantly different as well as the integration to the woofer. That could easily trump any difference between the drivers as the horns are key to what they sound like especially when integrated into a system.
Rob
I know where you're coming from Bruce
david
Any thoughts on the big Wavac or the Ypsilon 100 watt? I have no idea if these are 'true' SETs, but i thought the description 'seemed' to a non-techie like me as SETs.
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
The issues are solved David. I think many would be interested in such a thread
Hi Rob,
Compared the aluminum the beryllium is a little hot, hard? hence the need for aguaplas. I have them in my M9500, even sent them back to Greg Timbers to apply additional aguaplas, better but still wish for aluminum.
Compared the aluminum the beryllium is a little hot, hard? hence the need for aguaplas. I have them in my M9500, even sent them back to Greg Timbers to apply additional aguaplas, better but still wish for aluminum.
So you don't like Everest or the Arrays??Aside from the S9800, I very much like the K2's, Everests, 434x series and many many early JBLs. While I like the DD67000 but prefer the earlier ones like the original DD55000 and S9500, everything after that is too low in sensitivity for me. Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with the Arrays to have an opinion.
We have to have a talk about horn types as I prefer CD horns like the Bi-radials used in the Arrays and Waveguides. If you like the more vintage systems it very well could be you prefer the older exponential and radial types which sound very different off axis compared to a more modern design. The overall power response is significantly different as well as the integration to the woofer. That could easily trump any difference between the drivers as the horns are key to what they sound like especially when integrated into a system.
Rob
I don't think that my preference for vintage horn speakers is necessarily because of the horn design, its an over all sound that I like better and find more natural. Coherence is the other issue many modern horn speakers need a very long distance to sound integrated and even then current cones are no match for compression drivers. Worse still are the ones with active bass units!
david
I suppose I should have quantified "low power" SETs. You & I have had some private exchanges in the past you know that I'm Married to Lamm electronics and specially Lamm SETs for nearly 20 years now and as a dealer/distributor I've had many other electronics in my room over the same period, but none changed my opinion. Given the current direction of the industry I really don't see myself changing positions in the future either...
david
Hello David
OK so we are not that far off at all. I absolutely love my 4344's! I consider them a reference system and will always keep them. I hear you on the sensitivity I use E-145's in my baseline set-up which gives me a 98db starting point like the DD5500 same woofer. The sensitivity issue is two fold. You can't get bass out of a woofer without mass and of course they have changed the horns to CD which is a real game changer. If you compare say the 4344 design to a 4430 the horns and woofers used are key to the sensitivity differences.
The 4344/4345 had a biamp option and if you look at the power requirements and sensitivity the top end 2122 and up were based around the 10" mid-range's sensitivity. The horns and UHF driver were padded to match that. They were straight up pads with no response tailoring. If you look at the 4430 which as the replacement it completely changes. Because the 4430 uses a CD horn you have to set up a network that effectively performs a passive EQ on the response so you trade off efficiency to flatten the on axis and off axis response of the compression driver horn combo. The use of CD horns/ wave-guides has contributed to the drop in sensitivity because of the response tailoring needed to use this type of horn.
Rob
Last edited:
This goes beyond aspects of horn speaker behaviour, into system characteristics: if a system doesn't subjectively compress as the volume is raised - something I address by optimising the electronics - then there will be a natural inclination to listen at higher sound levels, in general. The downside of this is that it becomes much easier to pick holes in the sound, subtle misbehaviour that was barely noticed at lower volumes now becomes very apparent, it stands out strongly in the listening.
In simple terms, the louder a system can intrinsically go, the more work is need to refine every aspect - one's hearing will easily notice that little anomaly that was "masked" when listening at less intense levels ... just like cars: the faster the vehicle is capable of going, the more work has to be put into steering, suspension, braking for the package to actually work in a balanced fashion, when attempting to exploit its potential.
Thanks...yes, just thought i'd ask. Like great horn setups...i need to listen to Lamm when i get a chance.
Thanks and interesting...in my own system (before mechanical isolation, good power conditioner and grounding emi/rfi) i use to listen quite loud and did sometimes feel the need to crank louder and louder. However, after 3 years of mechanical isolation (an 'isolation sandwich' for each 16 boxes/speakers), good power conditioning, and grounding emi/rfi, i then found NO desire to crank the volume anymore as i was able to hear detail, bass, at very low levels. Whereas before i was listening at 25 going to 35...i started listening at 3-15 and incredibly happy at 1-3 in the late evenings. Having moved and not yet done the 'refinements' on set up, we are still now listening at 3 to 20 depending on recording.
Well, I would not expect it - IMHO in a system that does not compress we will listen at the sound level that sounds natural for this specific recording. As far as I know sound engineers are the ones responsible for this task - there is one optimum sound level for each recording. Surely this mostly applies to acoustic music and is a long term tendency - it excludes the occasional audiophile manifestations, such as shows and audio shops.
What I find intriguing is the concept of a sound level that is "natural" for the instrument - if a violinist is playing, and another member of the string quartet is listening to him, and there is an audience member in the front row 10 feet away, and then there is someone standing in the doorway to the room - of those four, which is hearing the 'correct' level to the sound? For me, the answer is that they're all correct, each experience is valid in itself - how it seems to me is that the intensity of the energy of the music as perceived by each varies, but they all hear the "same thing".
Of course we all have our own inclinations, and I acknowledge that many people would prefer to hear as a member of the audience a short distance away; my instinct when I come across live, acoustic music where I'm not tied to a fixed "viewing" distance is to approach as closely as possible, so that the energy of the music making is more intensely felt. And I have a similar approach to recorded music, I often move around while listening, so can be quite some distance away part of the time, but at any moment will also approach to within a foot or so of a speaker - the sound should always be "natural" in the same way as for my violinist example above.
If you go to different concert halls you will get different perspectives of acoustic sounds, also depending on where you sit, but while listening to hifi it is easy to pick out those which confirm to NO definition of natural - they are totally plastic
Last edited:
The sound engineer must choose which perspective wants to give you in the recording - there is much more in sound reproduction that just loudness. Surely a single instrument playing in a stage is not a good example of my point of view, I am addressing for example chamber music or a singer with some people playing acoustic instruments.
And yes, one of the good things about large planar speakers such as Soundlabs is that you can move around and you do not feel as if the music is collapsing. Surely they do not have the focusing or the holographic detail of some point like speakers at the sweat spot. But I also never get row A-F tickets in concerts.
