Q5 Wins Stereophile 2011 Speaker of the Year Award

[mauidan]

Q5 Wins Stereophile's 2011 Speaker of the Year Award

Unlike the Wilson Sasha last year, it didn't win the Product of the Year Award.

That award went to another speaker, the Voxativ Ampeggio.

In case you miss it, here's the review:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/voxativ-ampeggio-loudspeaker

 

[mep]

Product of the year? Really?

 

[mauidan]

Product of the year? Really?

Yes, really. All yours for just $29,750. in black or white

 

[microstrip]

Devert,

Thanks for pointing it. I remember reading the review in Stereophile - and I am very interested in listening to it someday, as a speaker with connections with Mercedes Benz and Schimmel pianos seems a promising association! . Unhappily it is really expensive, even in Europe.

 

[mep]

I don't care how well the cabinet is built by some piano maker or how pretty the paint is, it's one more butt-ugly speaker with a single driver trying to reproduce everything in the music spectrum which of course it can't. The speaker looks like a Lowther with tweaks. If you can't do better than this for $29K and change in today's highly competitive speaker market, I'd throw in the towel.

 

[RogerD]

"What the Voxativ Ampeggios had that those speakers don't was the sort of spatial presentation that some audio perfectionists cherish: a deep and sizable chunk of pure, open sound, mined from the original quarry and transported to the listener's room, "air" and all. The Voxativs, more than any other flea-watt-friendly speakers with which I'm familiar, did the soundstaging thing. In spades."

LMAO, Why is this so unusual, any serious speaker should be able to pull this off.

 

[KeithR]

I don't care how well the cabinet is built by some piano maker or how pretty the paint is, it's one more butt-ugly speaker with a single driver trying to reproduce everything in the music spectrum which of course it can't. The speaker looks like a Lowther with tweaks. If you can't do better than this for $29K and change in today's highly competitive speaker market, I'd throw in the towel.

You read the measurements mep? The in-room was superb as JA candidly admits. I, too, am surprised a Lowther-based system can measure that well. They usually sound very rolled off and thin to me.

I still prefer my Zus at 1/3 the cost however---with supertweet and powered subs. Best of both worlds.

 

[mauidan]

You read the measurements mep? The in-room was superb as JA candidly admits. I, too, am surprised a Lowther-based system can measure that well. They usually sound very rolled off and thin to me.

I still prefer my Zus at 1/3 the cost however---with supertweet and powered subs. Best of both worlds.

The Voxativ Ampeggio doesn't use a Lowther drive.

"In time, Adler shifted her engineering efforts from rebuilding Lowthers to designing and making her own 7" dual-cone driver. "I saw three things that I disliked about the Lowther driver," she says. "One, it was impossible to make good bass: The cone had insufficient stability at high excursions. Two, it had the famous Lowther 'shout' that made voices sound sharper than real: The louder the driver played, the worse the shout—but turning them up was something people wanted to do, to get good bass. And three, the top range was missing: There was nothing over 15kHz. So it was clear, I had to design my own driver."
Cosmetic similarities aside, Adler's Voxativ AC-3X driver is indeed a different animal. For one thing, the Voxativ's convex surround is the reverse of Lowther's. "We do that to hide something," Adler says, laughing again. "We give the cone more material, more paper, so it goes past the surround at the rear. The cone is effectively larger for the rear wave than the front wave." Adler also says that her surround, the foam for which was developed for Voxativ by a German chemical company, is designed to accommodate a much greater excursion: 10mm total, compared with the Lowther driver's 2mm. The cone geometry, too, is different, and the generously sized whizzer cone has a very slight roll on its outer edge, as compared with the much larger roll Lowther added to their own whizzers beginning in the late 1990s: Adler says that too much of an overlap creates unwanted reflections, and that her more modest crease is just enough for some added rigidity."

I like the look of the Voxativ Ampeggio. IMO, it's a lot more attractive than the butt-ugly Zu speakers.

 

[fas42]

A couple of interesting things: the longer the reviewer listened the better they sounded, a definite sign that the speakers were on the right side of the SQ hump; my feeling is that this is a general, signature behaviour for dynamic speakers, they all have to be hammered hard to loosen up and stabilise the suspension from cold, for many hours sometimes, to give of their best.

The other is the pretty wacky frequency response figures: yes, the spatially averaged were good, but what does that mean? That you have to keep moving your head around to different spots while listening to get an even listening experience, perhaps? Anyway, the obsession by some that FR deviations are the cause of wayward sound again is demonstrated to be highly questionable ...

Frank

 

[mep]

You read the measurements mep? The in-room was superb as JA candidly admits. I, too, am surprised a Lowther-based system can measure that well. They usually sound very rolled off and thin to me.

I still prefer my Zus at 1/3 the cost however---with supertweet and powered subs. Best of both worlds.

Yeah, I read the measurements with the review when they were first published. The bottom end starts dropping off below 70 Hz and nosedives at 40 Hz. The upper frequency response goes wacky above 8 kHz. But somehow when you plop them in a room all is right in the world. Whatever. And Devert, I know the driver isn't a Lowther, but it's damn sure copied from a Lowther only with refinements that out Lowther the Lowther. I don't care how good a single driver is, it's still a single driver. Compare the cost of these speakers with the Wilson Sasha and tell me which one represents much better value in terms of fit, finish, cabinet materials, and quality and number of drivers.

However, if you are off the beaten path and love 3 watt flea amps and single driver speakers, I guess you have died and gone to heaven with these $29K superstars.

 

[es347]

The only thing this speaker should have won is "greatest profit margin of the year".

 

[KeithR]

The Voxativ Ampeggio doesn't use a Lowther drive.

"In time, Adler shifted her engineering efforts from rebuilding Lowthers to designing and making her own 7" dual-cone driver. "I saw three things that I disliked about the Lowther driver," she says. "One, it was impossible to make good bass: The cone had insufficient stability at high excursions. Two, it had the famous Lowther 'shout' that made voices sound sharper than real: The louder the driver played, the worse the shout—but turning them up was something people wanted to do, to get good bass. And three, the top range was missing: There was nothing over 15kHz. So it was clear, I had to design my own driver."
Cosmetic similarities aside, Adler's Voxativ AC-3X driver is indeed a different animal. For one thing, the Voxativ's convex surround is the reverse of Lowther's. "We do that to hide something," Adler says, laughing again. "We give the cone more material, more paper, so it goes past the surround at the rear. The cone is effectively larger for the rear wave than the front wave." Adler also says that her surround, the foam for which was developed for Voxativ by a German chemical company, is designed to accommodate a much greater excursion: 10mm total, compared with the Lowther driver's 2mm. The cone geometry, too, is different, and the generously sized whizzer cone has a very slight roll on its outer edge, as compared with the much larger roll Lowther added to their own whizzers beginning in the late 1990s: Adler says that too much of an overlap creates unwanted reflections, and that her more modest crease is just enough for some added rigidity."

I like the look of the Voxativ Ampeggio. IMO, it's a lot more attractive than the butt-ugly Zu speakers.

No need for personal attacks devert.

 

[mauidan]

No need for personal attacks devert.

I think the whole Zu line are butt-ugly boring looking boxes.

I wouldn't want any of them in my home.

Nothing personal.

Aloha,

Dan

 

[mep]

Devert-I wouldn't classifiy the Zu speakers as butt-ugly. I would say they are boring looking though. They are Just another six-sided box. However; as we know, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The Voxativ are anything but six-sided boxes, but they look like retro 1950s furniture to me.

 

[mauidan]

Devert-I wouldn't classifiy the Zu speakers as butt-ugly. I would say they are boring looking though. They are Just another six-sided box. However; as we know, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The Voxativ are anything but six-sided boxes, but they look like retro 1950s furniture to me.

I like the retro look, here's another one from Shindo starting in the Voxativ Ampeggio's price league:

 

[Ron Party]

I don't care how well the cabinet is built by some piano maker or how pretty the paint is, it's one more butt-ugly speaker with a single driver trying to reproduce everything in the music spectrum which of course it can't.

I'm with you Mark, although I don't know if I'd go as far as you. After all there are some people with some good lookin' butts!

Seriously, though, are there other examples of single driver speakers which are highly regarded?

 

[Orb]

Ron,
depends if you accept their limitation on low frequency/loudness, if one takes that into account then some are well regarded.
One speaker that I think was well received but acknowledged with those compromises is the Fujitsu Eclipse model, meant to be very very good for temporal/time-coincident presentation.
In fact if I remember several different reviewers have been surprised by the speaker in a good way, and some would love to buy this speaker but it would not work as a reference tool due to its limitations and compromises.
Sound a bit damning, but it does some aspects incredibly well and would be purchased within its limitations (same could be said about monitors with their bass and considered ideal when combined with a seperate subwoofer).

Never heard it myself but I must admit I am curious.
Cheers
Orb

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I don't like passive crossovers, so the concept of single-driver systems has some appeal to me (I came very close to going that way before I headed down the active path). I could just never personally own a speaker with something called a "wizzer." Is that wrong?

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I don't like passive crossovers, so the concept of single-driver systems has some appeal to me (I came very close to going that way before I headed down the active path). I could just never personally own a speaker with something called a "wizzer." Is that wrong?

Tim

ON EDIT: Sorry, "whizzer." Even worse.

 

[KeithR]

Devert-I wouldn't classifiy the Zu speakers as butt-ugly. I would say they are boring looking though. They are Just another six-sided box. However; as we know, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The Voxativ are anything but six-sided boxes, but they look like retro 1950s furniture to me.

Mark- not to persuade you by any means---but the Soul/Superfly and Experience/Dominance models are not typical "six-sided boxes." Yes, my Definitions are--but with the incredible paint jobs they have (rival Wilson), they look a bit better. I've owned Wilsons among other speakers and the Zus look better in my room---and interestingly enough, the ladies really disliked my former Sophias much more from an aesthetics point of view. I like modern looking stuff without wood, so both brands work for me. This is one reason I would never own Evolution Acoustics.

Devert- pretty sure those Shindo speakers are more like 70k!

All- I actually like the Schimmel look. For the CEO to say what he says in the review speaks volumes about the sound as well---they know what a piano really should sound like. and I trust JA more than most in this industry. My guess is that cabinet is spectacular in person. If it's like a real Schimmel piano--there is a reason this speaker is expensive. Tidal seems like a far worse value proposition to me from overseas.

Cheers,

Keith