KeithR's "Dream Speaker" Search

[Ron Resnick]

I think Jeff's comments, above, are spot on.

I heard the new speakers briefly the day they were installed. Then, pre-break-in, the sound seemed constricted, but I could immediately hear the promise.

I think the speakers are spectacular sonically and build quality-wise in an absolute sense, and a true value in a relative sense. It is no surprise that the coherence and organic wholeness of the sound of the Tannoy Westminster is inherited by the F1-12, as Fyne was founded by ex-Tannoy designers. But the F1-12 has, as Jeff correctly says, a more contemporary sound, without losing the coherence and musicality of the Westminster. The bass of the F1-12 is not as catapult powerful and ever present as is the Westminster's bass with its back-loaded horn, but which single box speaker's bass is?

The finish and quality of the speaker is so high that you wouldn't blink if you were told that it cost $100,000 or more. Sonically, for me personally, I think this speaker slays so many equally-priced and more expensive conventional multi-way/complex crossover/lower sensitivity speakers that I would get in trouble if I posted what I really think more specifically.

Keith proved on Friday that the speaker is, indeed, easy to drive with a wide variety of amplifiers. My personal preference of the day was the EL-34 amp which Phil brought over. But the SIT-3 acquitted itself beautifully, and I think it literally is the best sounding solid-state amplifier I have ever heard. To me it somehow truly has an SET-sounding aura about it -- which is exactly what Keith does not care for about it

More than anything else I am just so thrilled for Keith! It might have been a circuitous route but Keith finally made it to the promised land with this speaker!

Congratulations, Keith!

 

[morricab]

I think Jeff's comments, above, are spot on.

I heard the new speakers briefly the day they were installed. Then, pre-break-in, the sound seemed constricted, but I could immediately hear the promise.

I think the speakers are spectacular sonically and build quality-wise in an absolute sense, and a true value in a relative sense. It is no surprise that the coherence and organic wholeness of the sound of the Tannoy Westminster is inherited by the F1-12, as Fyne was founded by ex-Tannoy designers. But the F1-12 has, as Jeff correctly says, a more contemporary sound, without losing the coherence and musicality of the Westminster. The bass of the F1-12 is not as catapult powerful and ever present as is the Westminster's bass with its back-loaded horn, but which single box speaker's bass is?

The finish and quality of the speaker is so high that you wouldn't blink if you were told that it cost $100,000 or more. Sonically, for me personally, I think this speaker slays so many equally-priced and more expensive conventional multi-way/complex crossover/lower sensitivity speakers that I would get in trouble if I posted what I really think more specifically.

Keith proved on Friday that the speaker is, indeed, easy to drive with a wide variety of amplifiers. My personal preference of the day was the EL-34 amp which Phil brought over. But the SIT-3 acquitted itself beautifully, and I think it literally is the best sounding solid-state amplifier I have ever heard. To me it somehow truly has an SET-sounding aura about it -- which is exactly what Keith does not care for about it

More than anything else I am just so thrilled for Keith! It might have been a circuitous route but Keith finally made it to the promised land with this speaker! Congratulations, Keith!

I want to hear them with a really good SET.

 

[PeterA]

Jeff, Ron, thank you for your comments. You have both now used the phrase "contemporary sound". Could you both explain what you mean by that? And compared to what? Has Keith always had contemporary speakers, or are you suggesting this is a 2020's type of sound?

I am also curious about the amplifier comments. From past reports, or perhaps emails, I understand Keith did not like Jeff's SIT3 very much, yet Jeff loves it, and they both seem to like the speakers. Could you briefly describe the sound of the SIT3 both in the context of Jeff's system and now in Keith's system, and how would you distinguish the sound of the SIT from the new speakers in Keith's system context?

Finally, what aspect of the nice new sound would you attribute to the new MSB DAC? I'm very happy that Keith has found his speakers. I will say that they look quite attractive in the room, and pretty big.

Congratulations, Keith!

 

[PeterA]

I want to hear them with a really good SET.

How much power are you thinking they need?

 

[cal3713]

I still need to try the F4.

From Nelson Pass: "The combination of a simple Class A circuit operated without feedback and the good objective performance gives us a superb sounding amplifier. The low distortion, bandwidth extension, and high damping results in midrange clarity, treble detail, and control on the bottom end. While these are available from most good solid state amplifiers, the F4 also brings depth, imaging, midrange warmth and top-end sweetness. Overall, it is one of the best sounding amplifiers, and if you can live with unity voltage gain in your amplifier, it is possibly your best choice."

 

[cal3713]

I think Jeff's comments, above, are spot on.

I heard the new speakers briefly the day they were installed. Then, pre-break-in, the sound seemed constricted, but I could immediately hear the promise.

I think the speakers are spectacular sonically and build quality-wise in an absolute sense, and a true value in a relative sense. It is no surprise that the coherence and organic wholeness of the sound of the Tannoy Westminster is inherited by the F1-12, as Fyne was founded by ex-Tannoy designers. But the F1-12 has, as Jeff correctly says, a more contemporary sound, without losing the coherence and musicality of the Westminster. The bass of the F1-12 is not as catapult powerful and ever present as is the Westminster's bass with its back-loaded horn, but which single box speaker's bass is?

The finish and quality of the speaker is so high that you wouldn't blink if you were told that it cost $100,000 or more. Sonically, for me personally, I think this speaker slays so many equally-priced and more expensive conventional multi-way/complex crossover/lower sensitivity speakers that I would get in trouble if I posted what I really think more specifically.

Keith proved on Friday that the speaker is, indeed, easy to drive with a wide variety of amplifiers. My personal preference of the day was the EL-34 amp which Phil brought over. But the SIT-3 acquitted itself beautifully, and I think it literally is the best sounding solid-state amplifier I have ever heard. To me it somehow truly has an SET-sounding aura about it -- which is exactly what Keith does not care for about it

More than anything else I am just so thrilled for Keith! It might have been a circuitous route but Keith finally made it to the promised land with this speaker!

Congratulations, Keith!

"And so it was said... after 154 pages of posts, ye' shall reach the promised land."

 

[DaveC]

From Nelson Pass: "The combination of a simple Class A circuit operated without feedback and the good objective performance gives us a superb sounding amplifier. The low distortion, bandwidth extension, and high damping results in midrange clarity, treble detail, and control on the bottom end. While these are available from most good solid state amplifiers, the F4 also brings depth, imaging, midrange warmth and top-end sweetness. Overall, it is one of the best sounding amplifiers, and if you can live with unity voltage gain in your amplifier, it is possibly your best choice."

Living with no voltage gain will require a high gain preamp, something with at least 20 dB gain if not more, and it's not trivial to find an excellent voltage amp. So I don't think you can look at an F4 by it's self since it can't operate on it's own.

However, I think that having separate voltage and current amps makes sense, it's the way I do it. I use a voltage amp with ~30 dB gain using 6SL7 and 6SN7 that pairs with an EL34 SET that has around negative 4 dB gain as it doesn't have a driver. I've been tempted to build an F4 as well as a MOSFET type output section for it, but I don't really need more than the ~7W or so I get from the EL34s. I've also considered building a GM70 or 211 based output my EL34 amp would drive w/o the OPTs.

I do think the F4 would be a good match with the right driver, but it might have to be custom made...

 

[cal3713]

Living with no voltage gain will require a high gain preamp, something with at least 20 dB gain if not more, and it's not trivial to find an excellent voltage amp. So I don't think you can look at an F4 by it's self since it can't operate on it's own.

However, I think that having separate voltage and current amps makes sense, it's the way I do it. I use a voltage amp with ~30 dB gain using 6SL7 and 6SN7 that pairs with an EL34 SET that has around negative 4 dB gain as it doesn't have a driver. I've been tempted to build an F4 as well as a MOSFET type output section for it, but I don't really need more than the ~7W or so I get from the EL34s. I've also considered building a GM70 or 211 based output my EL34 amp would drive w/o the OPTs.

I do think the F4 would be a good match with the right driver, but it might have to be custom made...

Agreed. You'll need to love your preamp.

If you have sensitive speakers, you can get by with a pre that won't drive the F4 to clipping. I have a single stage dht that uses a single eml 20a high-mu driver tube to provide all voltage gain. Custom built by Radu Tarta.

Regardless, according to Nelson, Keith's pre should fit the bill (at least in terms of gain): "Virtually all active line stages achieve adequate gain and voltage swing to drive the above combination. Basically you need a linestage with about 12+ dB gain and 10+ volt maximum output."

 

[christoph]

Sorry they were the 12", I'll edit my original post.

Ok, that makes them 96 dB instead of 94 dB, even better if the impedance is similarly friendly with the F1-12

 

[chuck]

The Fyne speakers are a titanium tweeter, paper cone driver, ported speaker. They may be very good ones but that is a downgrade from YG Hailey 2s.

 

[PeterA]

The Fyne speakers are a titanium tweeter, paper cone driver, ported speaker. They may be very good ones but that is a downgrade from YG Hailey 2s.

Your opinion seems to be at odds with the three members who have actually heard both speakers in the same room and system.

We are lucky there are so many choices. Everyone can get what they want.

 

[dan31]

I can pick up Keith’s YG’s and get them out of sight so he can enjoy the new Fyne’s.

 

[213Cobra]

I am also curious about the amplifier comments. From past reports, or perhaps emails, I understand Keith did not like Jeff's SIT3 very much, yet Jeff loves it, and they both seem to like the speakers. Could you briefly describe the sound of the SIT3 both in the context of Jeff's system and now in Keith's system, and how would you distinguish the sound of the SIT from the new speakers in Keith's system context?

I've heard the SIT-3 on Jeff's speakers and system and on Keith's. The problem with the SIT-3, which doesn't bother Jeff and Ron, is that it loses ability to trace discrete instrument and voices in music crescendo combined with complexity. It just doesn't handle many simultaneous swelling events well. You hear smearing and congestion right where you don't want it. I've heard SIT on multiple speakers and it's always present, even with crossoverless, 101db Zu. Also the SIT-3 seems to have no headroom. When it's at max, clipping isn't graceful; no elasticity to it approaching clipping. Keith and and I hear this; Ron and Jeff either do not or don't think it is significant. Probably because.....

On the other hand SIT-3 has unusually good tone density for a solid state amp and on simpler music, it has a more liquid presentation than just about any other solid state amp. The Pass XA-25 by contrast does a better job of keeping its events composure as complexity and level rise, but it is comparatively flat sounding, spatially, and toneless. It's just a very clean, 2-dimensional amplifier. And that's been true on every speaker I've heard any XA on.

The custom Williamson EL34 tube mono amps showed none of these problems at an available 20w with outputs in triode, and drove the deepest, most controlled bass, too. The speaker is easy to drive so while the Ampzillas remain good, they have more absolute power than is needed, which also means a higher-than-ideal ganged devices count. So there is a wide variety of amp possibilities where, say, 25 - 75w output allows for keeping things simple and amplifying with minimal number of active output devices.

Phil

 

[BruceD]

The Fyne speakers are a titanium tweeter, paper cone driver, ported speaker. They may be very good ones but that is a downgrade from YG Hailey 2s.

To quote the immortal words of J McEnroe-- "you can't be serious " !!

BD

 

[PeterA]

I've heard the SIT-3 on Jeff's speakers and system and on Keith's. The problem with the SIT-3, which doesn't bother Jeff and Ron, is that it loses ability to trace discrete instrument and voices in music crescendo combined with complexity. It just doesn't handle many simultaneous swelling events well. You hear smearing and congestion right where you don't want it. I've heard SIT on multiple speakers and it's always present, even with crossoverless, 101db Zu. Also the SIT-3 seems to have no headroom. When it's at max, clipping isn't graceful; no elasticity to it approaching clipping. Keith and and I hear this; Ron and Jeff either do not or don't think it is significant. Probably because.....

On the other hand SIT-3 has unusually good tone density for a solid state amp and on simpler music, it has a more liquid presentation than just about any other solid state amp. The Pass XA-25 by contrast does a better job of keeping its events composure as complexity and level rise, but it is comparatively flat sounding, spatially, and toneless. It's just a very clean, 2-dimensional amplifier. And that's been true on every speaker I've heard any XA on.

The custom Williamson EL34 tube mono amps showed none of these problems at an available 20w with outputs in triode, and drove the deepest, most controlled bass, too. The speaker is easy to drive so while the Ampzillas remain good, they have more absolute power than is needed, which also means a higher-than-ideal ganged devices count. So there is a wide variety of amp possibilities where, say, 25 - 75w output allows for keeping things simple and amplifying with minimal number of active output devices.

Phil

Thank you Phil. That is a very clear and detailed description and explanation of what is going on. I appreciate it. It sounds like a very enjoyable listening session.

 

[Al M.]

The Fyne speakers are a titanium tweeter, paper cone driver, ported speaker. They may be very good ones but that is a downgrade from YG Hailey 2s.

Could you please explain in which way this is a downgrade, in your opinion? Thanks.

 

[jeff1225]

The Fyne speakers are a titanium tweeter, paper cone driver, ported speaker. They may be very good ones but that is a downgrade from YG Hailey 2s.

It’s funny how five experienced audiophiles heard a speaker that was far and away better than the YG’s. How do you explain that Chuck?

 

[jeff1225]

I've heard the SIT-3 on Jeff's speakers and system and on Keith's. The problem with the SIT-3, which doesn't bother Jeff and Ron, is that it loses ability to trace discrete instrument and voices in music crescendo combined with complexity. It just doesn't handle many simultaneous swelling events well. You hear smearing and congestion right where you don't want it. I've heard SIT on multiple speakers and it's always present, even with crossoverless, 101db Zu. Also the SIT-3 seems to have no headroom. When it's at max, clipping isn't graceful; no elasticity to it approaching clipping. Keith and and I hear this; Ron and Jeff either do not or don't think it is significant. Probably because.....

On the other hand SIT-3 has unusually good tone density for a solid state amp and on simpler music, it has a more liquid presentation than just about any other solid state amp. The Pass XA-25 by contrast does a better job of keeping its events composure as complexity and level rise, but it is comparatively flat sounding, spatially, and toneless. It's just a very clean, 2-dimensional amplifier. And that's been true on every speaker I've heard any XA on.

The custom Williamson EL34 tube mono amps showed none of these problems at an available 20w with outputs in triode, and drove the deepest, most controlled bass, too. The speaker is easy to drive so while the Ampzillas remain good, they have more absolute power than is needed, which also means a higher-than-ideal ganged devices count. So there is a wide variety of amp possibilities where, say, 25 - 75w output allows for keeping things simple and amplifying with minimal number of active output devices.

Phil

The SIT3 does lack headroom. For normal listening in my system (85 to 90 dB), there is no issue. When pressed over 90db, the SIT3 does clip.

 

[jeff1225]

Your opinion seems to be at odds with the three members who have actually heard both speakers in the same room and system.

We are lucky there are so many choices. Everyone can get what they want.

Chuck owns YG’s. It’s an emotional response not based in fact.

 

[morricab]

How much power are you thinking they need?

Something around 20 watts would work just fyne...