KeithR's "Dream Speaker" Search

[Ron Resnick]

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.

Have you heard the Fyne F1-12, Chuck?

If not, since when do we in subjective high-end audio land make conclusions about sound quality from parts lists?

I heard the Hailey 2 numerous times in Keith's room. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that I preferred the F1-12 on every parameter except fire resistance.

 

[Al M.]

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

Yes, I know that he owns YG (far above the Hailey model), which would color his opinion. I am still curious to know what he would list as the expected sonic virtues in favor of YG Haileys over the Fyne, hence my question.

 

[213Cobra]

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.

Well, it's not like Fyne is compressing newspaper for the 12" woof cone. That "paper" cone is a multi-fibre engineered material that happens to have the benefit of naturalistic acoustic propagation, stiffness, strength, tone and lightness for its size. The titanium tweeter isn't my favorite but it sounds more musically acceptable than any YG tweeter I've heard. Yeah, the F1-12 is a "ported speaker." But it's not like this is a '70s JBL L100 with a paper-towels-tube port stuffed into the front. Its port is a visually simple but sophisticated downfire diffuser that's also the foundation for the speaker's supporting and energy transfer structure. The design choices made by Fyne impose their own set of liabilities, because no speaker is perfect. But the YG is engineered for linearity at the expense of all else. Fyne is engineered for reasonable and credible accuracy with consideration for other equally-vital characteristics including dynamic elasticity, easily-driven, responsiveness, not being funneled into a small handful of bloated amplifiers, for convincing musicality. Most of us in the room had extensive listening experience with Keith's YG interregnum. Ron and I installed the Fynes so heard them at their choked and harsh-highs worst before burn-in / break-in, and at intervals since. I spent some time with Keith about 10 days ago dialing in placement and trim settings, by which time break-in was complete or close enough.

Keith's SO commented months in the YG tenure, something to the effect of "...you don't listen to albums anymore; just a few songs and you put them away...." YG lacked engagement. That's already starting to be different with Fyne. Those of us listening Friday hear why. I'm reminded of when the Dahlquist DQ-10 was introduced 48 years ago, and in the context of 1973, it was a startling advance in sound from dynamic speakers. All the drivers were pedestrian; below ordinary. The functional cab was the cheesy 70s version of MDF. Take those Quad ESL-imitating grilles off and you had ugly, unimpressive guts. Materially, there were many speakers with more impressive bits. But Jon Dahlquist designed for synergy and time aligned coherence, despite getting mocked by higher-tech companies like Infinity for pedestrian parts, at the time. The Fyne components aren't at all pedestrian. But fewer discrete components are needed for a well-made two-way, regardless what it's made from. Fyne made its choices and within the limits imposed by those choices, every component is chosen and executed well. There is a whole class of speakers with exotic guts that sound completely unconvincing. We buy a design, not the pieces.

Phil

 

[christoph]

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

BD

Put the racket down, Sir

 

[christoph]

Something around 20 watts would work just fyne...

Nice pun

 

[Al M.]

Well, it's not like Fyne is compressing newspaper for the 12" woof cone. That "paper" cone is a multi-fibre engineered material that happens to have the benefit of naturalistic acoustic propagation, stiffness, strength, tone and lightness for its size. The titanium tweeter isn't my favorite but it sounds more musically acceptable than any YG tweeter I've heard. Yeah, the F1-12 is a "ported speaker." But it's not like this is a '70s JBL L100 with a paper-towels-tube port stuffed into the front. Its port is a visually simple but sophisticated downfire diffuser that's also the foundation for the speaker's supporting and energy transfer structure. The design choices made by Fyne impose their own set of liabilities, because no speaker is perfect. But the YG is engineered for linearity at the expense of all else. Fyne is engineered for reasonable and credible accuracy with consideration for other equally-vital characteristics including dynamic elasticity, easily-driven, responsiveness, not being funneled into a small handful of bloated amplifiers, for convincing musicality. Most of us in the room had extensive listening experience with Keith's YG interregnum. Ron and I installed the Fynes so heard them at their choked and harsh-highs worst before burn-in / break-in, and at intervals since. I spent some time with Keith about 10 days ago dialing in placement and trim settings, by which time break-in was complete or close enough.

Keith's SO commented months in the YG tenure, something to the effect of "...you don't listen to albums anymore; just a few songs and you put them away...." YG lacked engagement. That's already starting to be different with Fyne. Those of us listening Friday hear why. I'm reminded of when the Dahlquist DQ-10 was introduced 48 years ago, and in the context of 1973, it was a startling advance in sound from dynamic speakers. All the drivers were pedestrian; below ordinary. The functional cab was the cheesy 70s version of MDF. Take those Quad ESL-imitating grilles off and you had ugly, unimpressive guts. Materially, there were many speakers with more impressive bits. But Jon Dahlquist designed for synergy and time aligned coherence, despite getting mocked by higher-tech companies like Infinity for pedestrian parts, at the time. The Fyne components aren't at all pedestrian. But fewer discrete components are needed for a well-made two-way, regardless what it's made from. Fyne made its choices and within the limits imposed by those choices, every component is chosen and executed well. There is a whole class of speakers with exotic guts that sound completely unconvincing. We buy a design, not the pieces.

Phil

Excellent post, Phil. Yes, you can't have linearity above everything else. That type of approach reminds me of Avalon speakers of the Nineties. Impressive timbre, but dynamically dead. Sonic wallpaper instead of living music.

(I am just speaking of Avalon from that time, haven't heard YG, but giving an example of where this all can lead in the extreme).

My own Reference 3A speakers may not be perfectly linear too, but boy, are they lively, and do they make vivid music!

That's what counts, in the end.

 

[ctydwn]

Glad to see this thread back in full swing. Particularly interested obviously as an owner of the Hailey 2.2s. So not biased at all lol.
But in all seriousness, as I embark on my next speaker move, were the Fyne's a/b/a'ed w the Hailey's with all the same components (dacs, amps, etc.)? I can't recollect when/if the Hailey's left.

For me, the H 2.2s did not reach their current potential until I upgraded to my two ss mono amps. The bottom cabinet woke up and everything from top to bottom filled out. (Also their headroom has seemed endless as I have upgraded my other components). So I can see that clearly as a drawback of the H 2.2s (need lots of 'good' power) and limited selection of amps perhaps. That said, I never want to leave my chair, remain immersed in the music, foot tapping, shaking my head at the gorgeous vocals, or traction and timber of the cello or explosive dynamics of reggaeton. I never feel fatigue or lack of emotion. Of course, a bad recording sounds etc. BUT maybe I don't know what I am missing with the Fyne's. Anyways, really appreciate hearing about everyone's experiences.

 

[Ozan K]

Count me in to the group of people of who has not heard the Fynes but would be very surprised if there are many speakers out there that would best Haileys on every parameter, let alone the Fynes.

I am in this hobby for more than 25 years now and it is my understanding that YG Haileys belong to the highest echelon of speakers

 

[Al M.]

Count me in to the group of people of who has not heard the Fynes but would be very surprised if there are many speakers out there that would best Haileys on every parameter, let alone the Fynes.

I am in this hobby for more than 25 years now and it is my understanding that YG Haileys belong to the highest echelon of speakers

Everyone has different experiences and listens for different things. Therefore there are vastly different opinions.

 

[cal3713]

All that matters is that Keith heard them both in his room and preferred the Fynes. If you're buying for someone else's ears, you're doing it wrong.

 

[213Cobra]

Count me in to the group of people of who has not heard the Fynes but would be very surprised if there are many speakers out there that woukld beat Haileys on all parameters, let alone the Fynes.

I am in this hobby for more than 25 years now and it is my understanding that they belong to the highest echelon of anything available

I am in this hobby for more than 50 years, and that means I grok why it is easy for someone to come to an understanding that YG Haileys belong to the highest echelon of anything available in loudspeakers. But it also means I understand why Hailey does not, and something simpler like the Fyne can thoroughly outclass YG on convincing musicality and realism. Maybe someone who's been doing this over 60, 70, 80 years will chime in. How many decades does it take?

I've heard a lot of highly-engineered, complex speakers over the decades, with reputations in their time equal to YG's today. And they were all controversial and ultimately amusical. YG is from the school that sacrifices everything else elemental to the musical illusion, to measured linearity - frequency, phase, time. Unfortunately given today's technology, these obsessions, pursued equally together, strangle practical amplifier choices, and otherwise fail to address what are often more important cues for musical realism, like authentic tone, dynamic elasticity, coherence of driver behaviors, etc. YG, like Magico, has a clear point of view on this, and they execute against that PoV very well. Unfortunately none of that assures a musically-convincing speaker, nor that a musically-tenable amp can be mated to it. It takes a balance of factors. Time, frequency and phase linearity matter but the way YG achieves them at the expense of all else -- and still not reaching perfection -- sacrifices too much of the organic origins of sound propagation of real music. Perhaps that's why they sound most convincing on electronica, where there's no organic origin reference. Yet still, when too much was going on at once in crescendo, Hailey lost the threads in the densest music.

Anyway, it was really no contest. Fyne isn't perfect but the simpler Fyne FT-12 is a higher fidelity instrument than YG Hailey, and that's the comparison we were describing. To put a finer point on it, I can buy lots of speakers but if I won a pair of YG Hailey 2s, I would immediately sell them at whatever price got them out the door the quickest.

Phil

 

[jeff1225]

Count me in to the group of people of who has not heard the Fynes but would be very surprised if there are many speakers out there that would best Haileys on every parameter, let alone the Fynes.

I am in this hobby for more than 25 years now and it is my understanding that YG Haileys belong to the highest echelon of speakers

Well if you haven't heard them....how can you comment?

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . .

But it also means I understand why Hailey does not, and something simpler like the Fyne can thoroughly outclass YG on convincing musicality and realism.

. . .

I've heard a lot of highly-engineered, complex speakers over the decades, with reputations in their time equal to YG's today. And they were all controversial and ultimately amusical. YG is from the school that sacrifices everything else elemental to the musical illusion, to measured linearity - frequency, phase, time. Unfortunately given today's technology, these obsessions, pursued equally together, strangle practical amplifier choices, and otherwise fail to address what are often more important cues for musical realism, like authentic tone, dynamic elasticity, coherence of driver behaviors, etc. YG, like Magico, has a clear point of view on this, and they execute against that PoV very well. Unfortunately none of that assures a musically-convincing speaker, nor that a musically-tenable amp can be mated to it. It takes a balance of factors. Time, frequency and phase linearity matter but the way YG achieves them at the expense of all else -- and still not reaching perfection -- sacrifices too much of the organic origins of sound propagation of real music. Perhaps that's why they sound most convincing on electronica, where there's no organic origin reference. Yet still, when too much was going on at once in crescendo, Hailey lost the threads in the densest music.

. . .

+1

A very intelligible and penetrating reply, Phil.

 

[ctydwn]

Agreed quite convincing and well said. Really helpful to read
Writing again what I wrote last month as I am still curious:
...as I embark on my next speaker move, were the Fyne's a/b/a'ed w the Hailey's with all the same components (dacs, amps, etc.)? I can't recollect when/if the Hailey's left.

 

[213Cobra]

Agreed quite convincing and well said. Really helpful to read
Writing again what I wrote last month as I am still curious:
...as I embark on my next speaker move, were the Fyne's a/b/a'ed w the Hailey's with all the same components (dacs, amps, etc.)? I can't recollect when/if the Hailey's left.

The YGs and the Fynes were not AB'd together. But all of us had hours and hours and hours (and Keith, 11 months) of experience with the YGs, then heard the Fynes in near-term juxtaposition. Gear upstream of speakers was the same for the reference chain, though later some addition power amps were brought in for audition. We all have had a couple of years experience with the room. And the Fynes ended up optimally-placed very close to where the YGs stood. Core audition recordings were the same.

Innuous-MSB digital chain. Brinkmann-EMT analog. Linear Tube Audio (David Berning 12sn7 circuit) preamp > SST Ampzilla 2000 2nd Edition. Cable loom same. The differences between speakers are not subtle, nor the preference between them difficult to decide. This wasn't a knife's edge conclusion. Five guys with distinctly different systems among us.

Phil

 

[jeff1225]

Agreed quite convincing and well said. Really helpful to read
Writing again what I wrote last month as I am still curious:
...as I embark on my next speaker move, were the Fyne's a/b/a'ed w the Hailey's with all the same components (dacs, amps, etc.)? I can't recollect when/if the Hailey's left.

It looks like you've gone through some extraordinary steps to deal with the Haily's deficiencies, including two subs and 1500 watts of solid state amplification. When Keith bought the Hailey's, I'm convinced that he didn't expect to spend $9,000 on subs and $40,000 on amps to make them sound full range.

The Fynes are full range in his room with 50 watts of tube or solid state power. I actually quite enjoyed them with my 18 watt SIT-3.

 

[ctydwn]

Refreshing to hear. Thanks for the reply. Yes the Hailey 2.2s in my room did not fully open up until upgrading to the monos. And yes I do pair them w one sub which I do think they benefit from. I can see how that can be characterized as deficiencies.

I am very intrigued by the ‘convincing musicality and realism’ of the Fynes. Hoping to find a way to hear. Also considering the sonja 2.2i. Really enjoy reading this thread. Thank you

 

[jeff1225]

Refreshing to hear. Thanks for the reply. Yes the Hailey 2.2s in my room did not fully open up until upgrading to the monos. And yes I do pair them w one sub which I do think they benefit from. I can see how that can be characterized as deficiencies.

I am very intrigued by the ‘convincing musicality and realism’ of the Fynes. Hoping to find a way to hear. Really enjoy reading this thread. Thank you

The Sim amps are impressive, I've heard them many times. I can imagine that you have the Haileys working nicely.

 

[DaveC]

I am in this hobby for more than 50 years, and that means I grok why it is easy for someone to come to an understanding that YG Haileys belong to the highest echelon of anything available in loudspeakers. But it also means I understand why Hailey does not, and something simpler like the Fyne can thoroughly outclass YG on convincing musicality and realism. Maybe someone who's been doing this over 60, 70, 80 years will chime in. How many decades does it take?

I've heard a lot of highly-engineered, complex speakers over the decades, with reputations in their time equal to YG's today. And they were all controversial and ultimately amusical. YG is from the school that sacrifices everything else elemental to the musical illusion, to measured linearity - frequency, phase, time. Unfortunately given today's technology, these obsessions, pursued equally together, strangle practical amplifier choices, and otherwise fail to address what are often more important cues for musical realism, like authentic tone, dynamic elasticity, coherence of driver behaviors, etc. YG, like Magico, has a clear point of view on this, and they execute against that PoV very well. Unfortunately none of that assures a musically-convincing speaker, nor that a musically-tenable amp can be mated to it. It takes a balance of factors. Time, frequency and phase linearity matter but the way YG achieves them at the expense of all else -- and still not reaching perfection -- sacrifices too much of the organic origins of sound propagation of real music. Perhaps that's why they sound most convincing on electronica, where there's no organic origin reference. Yet still, when too much was going on at once in crescendo, Hailey lost the threads in the densest music.


Phil

Interesting, electronica can be pretty simple relative to acoustic instruments and vocals. So in many ways it's just not that demanding... until you ask for concert-level SPLs then it has different requirements vs classical anyways.

My main criticism of YG that I've mentioned many times is you have to spend a fortune on Sonyas to get enough driver surface area. I've heard some excellent YG systems, including at YG's factory with D'Ag amps so I know they can be really good. But I don't think the Haileys have the same potential as the larger and more expensive Sonyas, and I'm not sure the Haileys are enough to do a great job on complex music.

Whether the compromises and design approach YG takes is right for you is another issue. I just don't think the YG approach scales down that well, I'd rather have a less technically perfect speaker with larger drivers!

 

[morricab]

Interesting, electronica can be pretty simple relative to acoustic instruments and vocals. So in many ways it's just not that demanding... until you ask for concert-level SPLs then it has different requirements vs classical anyways.

My main criticism of YG that I've mentioned many times is you have to spend a fortune on Sonyas to get enough driver surface area. I've heard some excellent YG systems, including at YG's factory with D'Ag amps so I know they can be really good. But I don't think the Haileys have the same potential as the larger and more expensive Sonyas, and I'm not sure the Haileys are enough to do a great job on complex music.

Whether the compromises and design approach YG takes is right for you is another issue. I just don't think the YG approach scales down that well, I'd rather have a less technically perfect speaker with larger drivers!

Interesting observation about the driver surface area. There was a demo at a show in Switzerland in 2019 (the last time before Covid) and the Carmel 2 was playing...it sounded nice...but small. Yes, I know it is small but it really sounded like it looked, unlike many other small speakers I know that sound way bigger than their physical size. I heard the Hailey's with Nagra...again it was "nice" but not able to scale sonically like you expect for that money.