Rockport Technologies Introduces Orion Loudspeaker
- Thread starter MAXPWR
- Start date
Reference Analog
Fleetwood Sound Owners Group
The system sounded absolutely fantastic Phil! Thanks for trusting us through the whole process. It's always a pleasure working in your room.
Congrats Phil! We share the same dealer and I currently have the Cygnus. This review makes me want save up some pennies
Reference Analog
Fleetwood Sound Owners Group
I can’t wait for you to come hear the Orions and LynxCongrats Phil! We share the same dealer and I currently have the Cygnus. This review makes me want save up some pennies
I hear you! I said the same until I compared them to the Cygnus, then made the switch. Now I see people wilding out with the Orion....Glad I haven't heard either and will happily sit here enjoying my Avior II's!
I loved my Cygnus. They are world - class speakers. The Orion's are wonderful in their own way. The realism due to the exceedingly low noise-floor is really remarkable with them. For some reason, at least in my room, the 13 inch bass driver functions incredibly well, better than the two 10's in the Cygnus. Bass is more natural, deeper and faster. Much bass characteristics though are room-interaction dependent. That said, the Orions wound up literally in the same position the Cygnus were in, with just a little less tow-in.Congrats Phil! We share the same dealer and I currently have the Cygnus. This review makes me want save up some pennies
I've heard both now - Orion in my listening room and Alexx V in a well - treated room at a Wilson Dealer in Texas. I realize not a great comparison situation (different rooms, gear, different points in time, etc). The Alexx V were driven by Boulder with Transparent cables and I can't remember what the front end was. The Alexx V imaged very well but didn't seem to have the depth or width in soundstage the Orion has. Bass slam was good in the Alexx V but didn't seem detailed or textured when acoustic bass was played, the Orion has slam and speed and texture. The Alexx V treble seemed 'tipped up' to me and not natural. The Orion tweeter is smooth yet retains all the subtle cues that give a great sense of realism. Midrange detail and presence was much more full-bodied in the Orion. For me the comparison wasn't very close and I far preferred the Orion. Listening preferences are certainly in play here too as I have rarely been 'drawn into the music' with the Wilson house sound.
Obviously, try to listen to both if possible and your conclusions could certainly be different than mine.
I would simply say you would just have to hear them. I'm guessing the cabinet, enlarged drivers and implementation is the key. The Orion sounds much 'bigger' than the Cygnus did with less drivers. I think what's been said by Andy and Josh are that the Orion was developed for more real-size space in most homes but will allow the listener to experience what a very large loudspeaker in a larger space will do.
That was the whole point behind their creation. How can you make the best 3 driver 3 way speaker in the world? To quote Einstein “any fool can make things bigger and more complex. It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction”. Every extra crossover cuts the signal one extra time which is never a good thing in and of its self. The ideal loudspeaker would actually have one single driver which could produce all frequencies. Driver surface area is important but every extra driver is a potential source of error in terms of its focus, coherence and naturalness. My voice is coming from a 4 inch opening not spread over several feet. Questioning the cost is a fair thing. To see why it costs what it costs go on the website or Google it and watch the video on how the cabinet is constructed. No one goes to this length. Cast aluminum. 3 total parts. No bracing. No bolts or screws. The drivers are all designed in house not “modified”. They are built using around 10 or so fabricators from around the world for parts built to spec. Then they are assembled. There is no economy of scale to that. Only the lowest distortion drivers currently possible. Then the crossovers are left out while Andy and Josh listen to each and every speaker they have ever made and make very fine adjustments to the cross because no 2 drivers are exactly the same despite all human efforts. When they are perfect they are signed off on. Having the Owner and the designer spend time on this level of quality control is not “cost effective” but it creates the very best speakers. Hope this helps. It’s a question I once had myself.
By your logic the Orion, being simpler in terms of driver compliment and XO design should sound better than the Lyra, right?
Also, there is a flipside to less drivers - each driver needs to cover a larger frequency range and needs to work harder versus multiple drivers. This increases distortion, there is no free lunch; it's physics.
Also, you state, they use the "lowest distortion drivers currently possible", based on what?
Again, Rockport makes some excellent speakers, but your logic is flawed. Something to ponder; I hope this sheds some light and helps.
Last edited:
I personally prefer Orion but the Lyra has the advantage of its even better/quieter cabinet construction (Google it and compare) and a larger internal cabinet volume. You’d have to listen for yourself to determine what trumps what. Of course there is a flip side. I meant “ ideally “. This has been attempted in the past. It has not been mastered. Extra crossovers cause some real problems. That is not logic that is a physical fact. Rockport like some others “ collect” drivers from other companies and measure them. They have told me personally that their drivers have lower distortion than any of their competitors. I can’t prove it but when I listen I believe it. My logic is not flawed. You just needed to better understand what I was saying.
I'm understanding perfectly, and I've heard quite a few Rockports and know of their technology; reality is - you're contradicting yourself. Go back and re-read your last posts.
Specific to drivers, you believe Rockport has the lowest distortion drivers, without evidence and based on a designer saying so. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” Sagan once said.
Also, the days of XOs degrading sound quality have long passed. The best speakers in the world I'd argue are more complex with more drivers, 4 way or 5 way designs. If I may, I'd suggest spending some time researching / listening and put down the Maine Kool-Aid. And as always, Happy Listening!
There is no contradiction. You are confusing your experiences with the science. We spend a fortune to get a perfect signal from your front end through your amplifier and to your speakers. Today most well made components accomplish this with very little error/ distortion. Now even the best speakers add relatively large distortion to the signal. Look at the curves of any good speaker. +\- 3dbs or more. Any amp or cd player doing that you’d throw out the window. You take the near perfect signal and split it into multiple part via (usually) passive parts put together by human hands and then ask multiple drivers to reconstruct perfectly. Some do better than others but there is no debate that this is not an issue no matter who you are. Stop and think about it.
We require multiple drivers not because that’s optimal but because we have no good alternative at this time. It’s not a good thing in and of itself. I raised the point as a thought experiment .
Josh and John may not have told me the truth about their driver specs but they do have and did measure all the usual suspects. I won’t name names for obvious reasons. I retract my assertion because I can not prove it.
I’m not really sure what you are missing. The question was why were they so expensive which I answered. The cabinet expense. The expense of how they create their drivers and the time expense of two key employees/owners overseeing each crossover. As for the rest you believe what you believe. I’ve done my best to give the the theoretical reasons behind a simpler approach. Of course right now large multi drivers have some very real advantages. I never said they do not. Buy them if you like them. There are some awesome examples I’d love to have. That does not mean there aren’t some real advantages to a simple 3 driver 3 way some of which I laid out for you. Remember Andy made the Arrakis and he will someday make another. Right now the smaller simpler Lyra is better in every way both measurable and subjectively. Does that make sense?
We require multiple drivers not because that’s optimal but because we have no good alternative at this time. It’s not a good thing in and of itself. I raised the point as a thought experiment .
Josh and John may not have told me the truth about their driver specs but they do have and did measure all the usual suspects. I won’t name names for obvious reasons. I retract my assertion because I can not prove it.
I’m not really sure what you are missing. The question was why were they so expensive which I answered. The cabinet expense. The expense of how they create their drivers and the time expense of two key employees/owners overseeing each crossover. As for the rest you believe what you believe. I’ve done my best to give the the theoretical reasons behind a simpler approach. Of course right now large multi drivers have some very real advantages. I never said they do not. Buy them if you like them. There are some awesome examples I’d love to have. That does not mean there aren’t some real advantages to a simple 3 driver 3 way some of which I laid out for you. Remember Andy made the Arrakis and he will someday make another. Right now the smaller simpler Lyra is better in every way both measurable and subjectively. Does that make sense?
Would any of the Alex V or the Orion be suitable for a room whose size is 4x5meters? Or would they be too much? Thanks.
Similar threads
- Sticky
