KeithR's "Dream Speaker" Search

[Ron Resnick]

Vitus in class AB does not sound anywhere as good as it does in class A, so if he Rockports require more power he should do it with another amp rather than using. Vitus in AB

On the Altair II and on the Lyra I would nominate ARC 750, VAC 450, VTL Siegfried, Aesthetix Atlas, Absolare Hybrid, Lamm M2.2.

KeithR! I forgot about the Atlas for you! That is a perfect high power answer to any hard to drive speaker question!

I have heard at length Jim’s newest version of the Atlas and it sounds very, very good (giving up only increments to high power, all tube amplifiers costing far more) absolutely and is a great value relatively!

 

[KeithR]

Vitus in class AB does not sound anywhere as good as it does in class A, so if he Rockports require more power he should do it with another amp rather than using. Vitus in AB

He feels the sound is much better than with the big BAT 600 watt SS amp he used to carry (which I asked if he still had).

 

[DaveyF]

Davey, I agree with most of your points here. I was not suggesting that I necessarily agree with Keith’s view but, to date, no planar has worked for him with regard to this sonic attribute.

I commented that I understand Keith’s view here, not necessarily that I agree with it.

You are correct that I am assuming things (based on Apogees and other planars) but I certainly understand the view of KeithR and MikeL, for two, that it takes cones to move enough air to be convincing — for them — in the area of dynamics and oomph.

IME I have to agree with everyone who states it takes cones to move enough air to be convincing. Particularly in the area of dynamics and bass punch/slam ( I don't want to use the word 'oomph' here). OTOH, I am more than curious to hear the new Alsyvox's, as several have now reported that they can indeed do massive bass punch and slam. Obviously massive bass slam and punch to some might be marginal to others; this is where the interesting talking points in this hobby seem to stem from.

 

[DaveyF]

Keith, I am not sure I would be so enamored of a speaker that very few amps are going to be able to drive properly. To insure that the speaker is working to its best required a stout ss amp means to me that there are too many limitations with said speaker. IMO, there are a number of excellent low/mid powered tube amps that currently offer some attributes that no ss amp I have ever heard can deliver. For example, your own ARC Ref 75 is certainly an excellent mid powered tube amp...and one that I think most ss amps cannot really compete with on a number of levels.

 

[treitz3]

Eh, a lot of folks did just that with Bob Carver's Original Amazings. I believe that's why he built the Silver 9t's...

Tom

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Guys - this use of the term “cones” like this doesn’t make any sense at all.

Let me explain. When people use the term “cones” they are referring to a box speaker or I suppose an open baffle. Or put another way, not horns or planars or stats.

So above it is claimed that “cones” achieve the most slam / oomph / punch.

This is where it all goes awry. The vast majority of multi-way horn systems are using the exact same technology (a cone) but loaded in a manner that generates greater efficiency. So put another way, the above statement suggests that a less efficient cone directly radiating into the air has more punch / slam / oomph than a similar cone coupled to the air to radically improve efficiency. Clearly this makes no sense.

Back to real world examples. It is not surprising that night clubs use bass scoops (horns) to generate the enormous levels of bass punch/oomph/slam required of the dance music being played.

 

[DaveyF]

Guys - this use of the term “cones” like this doesn’t make any sense at all.

Let me explain. When people use the term “cones” they are referring to a box speaker or I suppose an open baffle. Or put another way, not horns or planars or stats.

So above it is claimed that “cones” achieve the most slam / oomph / punch.

This is where it all goes awry. The vast majority of multi-way horn systems are using the exact same technology (a cone) but loaded in a manner that generates greater efficiency. So put another way, the above statement suggests that a less efficient cone directly radiating into the air has more punch / slam / oomph than a similar cone coupled to the air to radically improve efficiency. Clearly this makes no sense.

Back to real world examples. It is not surprising that night clubs use bass scoops (horns) to generate the enormous levels of bass punch/oomph/slam required of the dance music being played.

Personally, when I refer to cones I am talking about dynamic speakers...not horns. Level of bass slam and clarity of bass are not always the same thing. Just because the bass driver...horn or whatever type you care to mention, can move copious amounts of air does NOT mean it can reproduce a clean note. The typical night club bass scoop ( horn) can move a lot of air....but it is not a clean reproduction IMO. Therefore, to my ears, it is not something that i would want in a high end system.YMMV.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Personally, when I refer to cones I am talking about dynamic speakers...not horns. Level of bass slam and clarity of bass are not always the same thing. Just because the bass driver...horn or whatever type you care to mention, can move copious amounts of air does NOT mean it can reproduce a clean note. The typical night club bass scoop ( horn) can move a lot of air....but it is not a clean reproduction IMO. Therefore, to my ears, it is not something that i would want in a high end system.YMMV.

As a genre (and excuse the stereotype but we are talking stereotypes), horns produce less distortion than direct radiators including in the bass. Good horn loaded bass is much cleaner than cone box bass imho.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

http://kolbrek.hoyttalerdesign.no/index.php/horns/why-horns

Here is an interesting article FYI.

 

[bonzo75]

Davey, I agree with most of your points here. I was not suggesting that I necessarily agree with Keith’s view but, to date, no planar has worked for him with regard to this sonic attribute.

I commented that I understand Keith’s view here, not necessarily that I agree with it.

You are correct that I am assuming things (based on Appogees and other planars) but I certainly understand the view of KeithR and MikeL, for two, that it takes cones to move enough air to be convincing — for them — in the area of dynamics and oomph.

I really think it's unfair to bring in Mike here. If someone wants to use Mike to represent a cone system, it is like me buying a schopper and a few classic records and pretending I will have an analog sound like the General's. At least the schopper 124 is musical. Mike is an exception and we are talking general cone systems vs general high efficiency systems or apogees, more of which is easily adaptable to the average Joe without trying to be a General Mike's

Usual cones move much less air than apogees, they do it by a small woofer out of sync with the top in a Cabinet. Let alone horns with two 18 inch drivers in either speakers. Mike had to get two massive towers, not what Keith is considering.

 

[jeff1225]

As a genre (and excuse the stereotype but we are talking stereotypes), horns produce less distortion than direct radiators including in the bass. Good horn loaded bass is much cleaner than cone box bass imho.

Don't waste your time arguing with him Bill. He hates horns, all types, but is totally enamored with a speaker he's never heard.

 

[KeithR]

Keith, I am not sure I would be so enamored of a speaker that very few amps are going to be able to drive properly. To insure that the speaker is working to its best required a stout ss amp means to me that there are too many limitations with said speaker.

I've made this exact point several times in this thread and its a big hurdle. And when you think of it the founders of Rockport, YG, and Magico, etc. all drive their speakers with large SS amps.

I will also say, not many have had as much bad luck with tube amps. My 75SE has been in twice since December. I've had tube arcs, blown fuses, down OPTs, shot resistors, etc. in the past. Meanwhile, a tube friend of mine has had one issue in 10 years.

 

[microstrip]

I've made this exact point several times in this thread and its a big hurdle. And when you think of it the founders of Rockport, YG, and Magico, etc. all drive their speakers with large SS amps.

I will also say, not many have had as much bad luck with tube amps. My 75SE has been in twice since December. I've had tube arcs, blown fuses, down OPTs, shot resistors, etc. in the past. Meanwhile, a tube friend of mine has had one issue in 10 years.

I must say have been systematically lucky with ARC amplifiers or in general other tube equipment. The few issues were tube noise, something that is easily solved just replacing the guilty tubes. I think it is partially due to having a very stable mains. A friend of mine who gets most of my equipment when I makes changes to the system had some trouble in the past. About ten years ago he introduced an ExactPower SP15 that reduces maximum fluctuation of mains to +/- 1% his problems ceased.

 

[microstrip]

As a genre (and excuse the stereotype but we are talking stereotypes), horns produce less distortion than direct radiators including in the bass. Good horn loaded bass is much cleaner than cone box bass imho.

This is an objective claim that can be justified with measurements. I have seen articles with measurements proving this and the opposite - IMHO this suggests that such claims are strongly dependent on the speakers being compared, not just on the type of speaker.

Unfortunately we do not have systematic measurements of distortion on horn speakers - it would be funny to see how preference correlates with distortion. I have the feeling that many people would find that they are not preferring the lowest distortion ones ...

Most of the horn community is known for their disbelief in measurements, such as frequency response or distortion. I can not understand why they refer to distortion as an argument in the horn versus direct radiator speakers debate.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

This is an objective claim that can be justified with measurements. I have seen articles with measurements proving this and the opposite - IMHO this suggests that such claims are strongly dependent on the speakers being compared, not just on the type of speaker.

Unfortunately we do not have systematic measurements of distortion on horn speakers - it would be funny to see how preference correlates with distortion. I have the feeling that many people would find that they are not preferring the lowest distortion ones ...

Most of the horn community is known for their disbelief in measurements, such as frequency response or distortion. I can not understand why they refer to distortion as an argument in the horn versus direct radiator speakers debate.

Hey Micro,

I have also seen a paper recently that claims the reverse but if we were to do this correctly and undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis, I am pretty sure that the pooled effect size from the meta-analysis would demonstrate favour to horns at this juncture. But I am not volunteering to do this meta-analysis lol (even though an area of expertise of mine).

I agree that it is dangerous to pool genres though but in this instance we are needing to do so.

I also agree that it is highly likely that we don’t collectively prefer lower distortion systems. I am nearly certain that if we conducted a meta-regression, we would find very weak association at best.

In terms of the horn community - yeah I think they tend to be more pragmatic music lovers first and foremost - definitely not normally “measurebators”

 

[Gregadd]

Speaker criteria:

I don't like bright sound or anything with "hi-fi fireworks" that unnaturally presents detail as a red herring. Metal tweeters and ceramic drivers have usually bothered me in prior speaker hunts. I require excellent dynamics and hence have always had an interest in horns - but concerned their negatives may outweigh this area. I don't crave "ultimate transparency" or detail. Basically I'm looking for a big soundstage with excellent dynamics and good tone. I also need adequate bass as I listen to electronica/trip hop/down tempo for a third of my listening. The other two thirds of my listening includes rock/Americana and classical - I don't really listen to jazz at all. Tone, immediacy, and presence are somewhat related and one thing Devore does really well. One last thing, as a former Zu owner - coherency is more apparent to me than others. It bothers me when I can hear different instruments out of different drivers or can point to the bass, etc.

First of all what is ""trip hop"? I assume that is a typo.

I am going to go out on a limb here. My last exposure to a wide variety of speakers is at the 2018 CAF. I am going to describe the speaker before I name it. Despite what members may have assumed, I was not critical of the speaker. I was underwhelmed by the exhibit. I was especially confused because it appeared no effort or expense was spared. My only serious complaint was imaging. The room was so large don't think any speaker could cast a realistic image.
This may be the first and only time I say a speaker may have benefited from a smaller room.

A dream speaker should be inter alia:
Exotic
Big
Expensive(100k+)
Able to handle large and small ensembles(orchestra and solo}
Be capable of wide range dynamics and low level resolution
Transparency
Frequency extension
Do all the above with ease and lack of strain.
If your attention is called to the bass, it is probably wrong!
Imaging should be three dimensional but not etch-a -sketch
Remember this is a dream system.Nor it is apology for earlier comments. It is not the only choice. This comes combined with VAC elctronics. Your choice of source should be vinyl.

Von Schwiekert Ultra 11.

 

[DaveC]

Hey Micro,

I have also seen a paper recently that claims the reverse but if we were to do this correctly and undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis, I am pretty sure that the pooled effect size from the meta-analysis would demonstrate favour to horns at this juncture. But I am not volunteering to do this meta-analysis lol (even though an area of expertise of mine).

I agree that it is dangerous to pool genres though but in this instance we are needing to do so.

I also agree that it is highly likely that we don’t collectively prefer lower distortion systems. I am nearly certain that if we conducted a meta-regression, we would find very weak association at best.

In terms of the horn community - yeah I think they tend to be more pragmatic music lovers first and foremost - definitely not normally “measurebators”

It's completely dependent on implementation. There are pros and cons to either.

At low volumes it's going to be difficult to overcome the coloration produced by the physical structure of the horn and a box is likely to be lower distortion, but as volume increases the value of the horn's efficiency increase becomes more valuable as less excursion is required. Horn also gives the effect of greater membrane surface area so it makes comparing 2 15" drivers with one in a horn and another on a flat baffle like apples and oranges... It should really be comparing ~4 15" drivers vs a single 15" + a horn.

Then with a box you have more or less ideal implementations and drivers. I settled on a ported box which reduces excursion vs sealed combined with a woofer with a stiff cone and massive motor. The measured distortion is incredibly low and for most folks would sound a bit odd at first because very few have heard such low distortion bass reproduction. So, it's very possible to have exceptionally low distortion out of a box speaker but if you want the same impact, "jump factor", and SPL capabilities vs a horn you simply need more drivers.

With a horn you also have compromised implementation in all but the largest built-in bass horns, so you have to deal with this is some way. Boxes can be tuned to the 20 Hz range easily.

 

[KeithR]

About ten years ago he introduced an ExactPower SP15 that reduces maximum fluctuation of mains to +/- 1% his problems ceased.

My ARC is on a Torus.a tube went bye bye taking out a bias resistor. Unit went back as now power meter not working correctly.

 

[thomask]

For most home, Lansche 4.2 speaker could be dream speaker with pristine high, excellent soundstage, good extension to bottom and high efficiency for SET amplifier.

https://www.lansche-audio.com/products/s-series/no-4-2/

I had been happily using Lansche 4.1 speaker since 2007.

 

[KeithR]

This is where it all goes awry. The vast majority of multi-way horn systems are using the exact same technology (a cone) but loaded in a manner that generates greater efficiency. So put another way, the above statement suggests that a less efficient cone directly radiating into the air has more punch / slam / oomph than a similar cone coupled to the air to radically improve efficiency. Clearly this makes no sense.
.

Bill, have you heard Cessaro?