I think the brightness is a facet of the larger omnidirectional driver. I hear no brightness in the 116F. I do in 101E and 101E Xtreme.
It's not extreme brightness, just a hint of metallic brightness caused by the driver material I think. Some sort of very mild resonance possibly? . . .
101E Xtreme is a fantastic speaker, though, all things considered. At a cost. I've heard it twice now for extended periods. It's up there. But if the slightly crystalline nature of the metal omni driver annoys, they aren't for you.
I do not know what caused the brightness I heard on the 101E Mk. II. I assume it was the tweeter. I kept wanting throw a wet ski mask over the tweeter. If Jurgen Reis would include a -1 dB and -2 dB tweeter attenuator on the back of the speaker (like many SOTA speaker designers do) I probably would buy it, and so would a lot of other people who also find it bright. (In my informal survey of 10 or so audiophiles the people who did not like the 101E Mk. II did not like it only because they, also, found it bright.)
I have been considering going to Berlin to hear the MBL X-Treme. But if my issue is treble energy from the tweeter I do not see how adding a second tweeter on each side will help. I would like to find the MBL X-Treme to be perfect. But no matter how great it may be in every other area, if the brightness causes me to stop listening, it just does not work for me.
I do not know what caused the brightness I heard on the 101E Mk. II. I assume it was the tweeter. I kept wanting throw a wet ski mask over the tweeter. If Jurgen Reis would include a -1 dB and -2 dB tweeter attenuator on the back of the speaker (like many SOTA speaker designers do) I probably would buy it, and so would a lot of other people who also find it bright. (In my informal survey of 15 or so audiophiles the people who did not like the 101E Mk. II did not like it only because they, also, found it bright.)
I have been considering going to Berlin to hear the MBL X-Treme. But if my issue is treble energy from the tweeter I do not see how adding a second tweeter on each side will help. I would like to find the MBL X-Treme to be perfect. But no matter how great it may be in every other area, if the brightness causes me to stop listening, it just does not work for me.
Go to Stockholm. Nice set up of Extremes with Torus, since you have the Torus as well. Stockholm's a great city too. Also you can AB with the Spectral and see why it is sounds much better to the MBL amps, IMO
Ron, I'm really not sure it comes from the tweeters. They are carbon fibre in 101E, 101E Xtreme and 116F. I hear no brightness in 116F but I do in 101E and Xtreme. It is not the sort of material I expect to sound overly bright given good engineering.
Rather, I think it comes from the large metal omni drivers - some sort of higher frequency resonance. I could be very, very wrong, though. 12KHz subjectively is quite high treble or quite low treble if you are 16 years old!
Go to Stockholm. Nice set up of Extremes with Torus, since you have the Torus as well. Stockholm's a great city too. Also you can AB with the Spectral and see why it is sounds much better to the MBL amps, IMO
I am sure you are correct! That is why I was happy to hear the 101E Mk II with tubes and vinyl -- and they still did not fully ameliorate my brightness issue. (But even that was not definitive because my friend did not want to switch the tweeter jumpers from neutral to the softer setting.)
I was going to say I didn't think it'd really solve the situation. But nonetheless I'd find it interesting
TBH when I was in the nice situation of having ML CLX being driven by Jadis JA200 and an ARC front end, with the MBL 101E just a minute's walk away with MBL amps & front end, I know full well which I would have chosen.
CLX - more room filling, much better scale/believable sound stage/easy on the ear. Very nice apart from - well - no dynamics to speak of and not a lot of deep bass. But the bass that is there is very nicely articulated.
TBH when I was in the nice situation of having ML CLX being driven by Jadis JA200 and an ARC front end, with the MBL 101E just a minute's walk away with MBL amps & front end, I know full well which I would have chosen.
CLX - more room filling, much better scale/believable sound stage/easy on the ear. Very nice apart from - well - no dynamics to speak of and not a lot of deep bass. But the bass that is there is very nicely articulated.
Brightness issue aside, were you not attracted to the MBL 101E Mk. II's dynamics? Open soundstaging (albeit more defuse than we are used to with panels)?
Brightness issue aside, were you not attracted to the MBL 101E Mk. II's dynamics? Open soundstaging (albeit more defuse than we are used to with panels)?
I think at the time I rated 101E as 8.5 and CLX as 9 on a comparative scale. It will be on the ML website years back when the CLX came out. Those ratings are over the top on the world stage.
So therefore I do think it is very good. Its is open and detailed. But I will repeat I don't think the bass is good enough for a speaker at that price level.
101E Xtreme is better again by a margin - adding extra height to that open sound.
Dropping right down to the 116F - I put my 211 based monos on them and it wasn't entirely good. The 211s cast a big soundstage that is way too big for an omni - they just became way too open sounding for comfort - far too diffuse. Solid state may well be the best option for them at the end of the day.
EDIT: that said a Graaf 50/50 was great on the 116Fs. Nothing is clear cut in this hobby.
The 116f don't have that small dome for the mids that the 101s and 111s have. That driver makes the bigger ones harder to drive. I have heard the bigger ones with MBL integrated, Ypsilon integrated, MBL 9011, and Spectral so far. They sound the best with Ypsilon and Spectral, but not my choice of tone. I wanted to like them given how convenient they are. There is a system in Sweden that does a MCH of MBLs, the guy apparently has 40000 records and was featured on BBC. Small room. Auro 3d processor. He has 7 MBLs on the floor and 7 Genesis for ceiling speakers
This is a picture of the room in Sweden you are talking about. The best way nowadays to properly control the treble and the rest of the spectrum because of the omnidirectional charateristic is using many many diffusors, preferably of the SMT brand as they have, apart the diffusion, a time delay which calms down the treble and enriches the timbres.
This 'black' room is effectively fitted with SMT diffusors all around at the ear level.
check out other similar pictures on my facebook page
The 211s cast a big soundstage that is way too big for an omni - they just became way too open sounding for comfort - far too diffuse. Solid state may well be the best option for them at the end of the day.
What you describe is down to a room acoustic which is not fit for the polar dispersion characteristics of the MBL which is probably enhanced by the use of the - other wise unique sound - of the 211. Too many reflections taking place and probably some flutter echo adding to it leading to a more agressively perceived sound, not only in the treble by the way. This leads to a cruel lack of density and focus. The ear is getting too much information during too long a time basically...
I would say that either you choose for such speaker and get to terms with its effect in your room or you seek the quintessence of what those speakers are capable of and hence need to treat your room acoustically. Let me advance you that putting absorbers left and right will not do the job, except reducing the unique dynamic capability of that speaker.
