Speaker Challenge . . .
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
"Drums in the room" happens when the combination of amp and speaker are working well - the best I've heard was at a show, Bryston monoblocks driving big Dynaudios; this was the real deal, the drumkit was in the room, the transient hits were spot on, an overwhelming sound ...
The Neoliths have a special type of active subwoofer optimized for the panel. Each speaker has two large bass units, with separate equalization for phase, delay and frequency response for each driver in order to match the dipole panel. It is not just "adding subs to panels".
"What's wrong with the Neoliths? Seems like that would be your top choice according to the traits you value."
Heard them. Could not tolerate the discontinuity between the panels and the woofers. Classic problem. I had CLS's many years ago and couldn't solve that problem then and it seems Martin Logan can't solve it now. IMHO of course.
Heard them. Could not tolerate the discontinuity between the panels and the woofers. Classic problem. I had CLS's many years ago and couldn't solve that problem then and it seems Martin Logan can't solve it now. IMHO of course.
Ked, the problem is that the FRs can only be run biamped. That requires the Pass crossover and a second amp, cables etc. Frankly, after 40 years of experience of trying to put together speaker systems of various complexities to cover the full frequency range, I'm not inclined to go down that path again. I have been down the bi-amped and tri-amped routes. Always tempting, generally always a trade off, but no longer interesting. I think Dave C's post resonates' more with me. A modern speaker manufacturer who can control all the important parameters (frequency response, first and most of all, then distortion and phase uniformity) in a full range design capture my attention. If I was 40, I might try to bastardize something with FR Apogees, but not anymore. The Diva's might however be the rewarding compromise, and could be a great success in that they are a 1 speaker /1 amp solution that allows for some significant adjustability of all 3 panels (at least in the Henk Version but NOT in the TSW version). I consider this last piece of paramount importance. Ron, yes, you are sort of correct. I used to like that painstaking work, but I only did it for lack of alternatives as well as partial satisfaction to my mild OCD
Nowadays I think there are other solutions I may wish to explore. BTW, I am sorely tempted to re-try Magnaplanars, as that was where I entered this game many years ago (Model 1U, then 1C, ARC SP-3, D76 circa 1973). However while I know Maggies have come a long way, I just don't think they will satisfy my real orchestral level volume requirements without blowing something, but I may be wrong.
Last edited:
Ked, the problem is that the FRs can only be run biamped. That requires the Pass crossover and a second amp, cables etc. Frankly, after 40 years of experience of trying to put together speaker systems of various complexities to cover the full frequency range, I'm not inclined to go down that path again. I have been down the bi-amped and tri-amped routes. Always tempting, generally always a trade off, but no longer interesting. I think Dave C's post resonates' more with me. A modern speaker manufacturer who can control all the important parameters (frequency response, first and most of all, then distortion and phase uniformity) in a full range design capture my attention. It I was 40, I might try to bastardize something with FR Apogees, but not anymore. The Diva's might however be the rewarding compromise, and could be a great success in that they are a 1 speaker /1 amp solution that allows for some significant adjustability of all 3 panels (at least in the Henk Version but NOT in the TSW version). I consider this last piece of paramount importance. Ron, yes, you are sort of correct. I used to like that painstaking work, but I only did it for lack of alternatives as well as partial satisfaction to my mild OCD
BTW, I am sorely tempted to re-try Magnaplanars, as that was where I entered this game many years ago (Model 1U, then 1C, ARC SP-3, D76 circa 1973). However while I know Maggies have come a long way, I just don't think they will satisfy my real orchestral level volume requirements without blowing something, but I may be wrong.
+1.
the more ambitious one might be about full frequency and uber dynamics, the more significant fully ground up integration is. as you push things any distortion/incoherency gets more and more in the way.
not to say that one cannot add subs to large speakers......or mix ribbons/planers/stats and dynamic drivers; but if you push things there will be a point where things will start to go south. keep things a bit tame and sure lots of things can 'work'.
full tilt boggie orchestral reproduction is best served by designed in integration. not mix and match.
Last edited:
You're right about the Apogees contributing way more to the bass and pushing air but I disagree with your comment on the Divas, you never heard them with the right amps. I loved the FR but Divas for me where the sweet spot of the line. They play louder than the FR and Diva's bass panels are easier to move than FR which is very difficult get going even bi-amped.
david
I might end up with the divas but like one grand owner (Florian) who also owned the FR and the diva before said, they are a toy compared to the FR. They will sound very good, but that "wow, that was just so fukn good" jump factor won't happen.
I understand the bi-amping issue Marty doesn't want to go through. It can turn into a project.
I disagree with your friend Ked but then he's a Grand owner
! Divas are different from the FR but given the right amplifier/amplifiers will sound just as big and as deep.david
Hi
I find myself in agreement with many here but think I am on a slightly different bent:
For starters, audiophile orthodoxy will have that subs cannot be used with some speakers or some driver technologies. Nothing could be further from the truth. Dynamic subs, can be used with any type of driver to extend the FR in the lows. At this point in time there isn't a better way to get low bass. Cones reign supreme down low. There is no substitute for displacement when you go down low. There is one technology that has successfully being implemented and seems to be better than cones in the ultra low: The ET "fan" sub and this one does its magic under 20 Hz where few if any notes is ever played.
Subs took a while to get some hold in the audiophile community, I remember how much I sneered at the old Janis subwoofer in spite of it bringing some much needed oomph to my Maggies in my room back then, I didn't keep it for long and know now I didn't know much about what needed to be done to use it properly in the room with my speakers. To this day, our hobby has that amusing mixture of Science, technology and mysticism. The "slow" cone for example and the "fast" panels myths will no die any time soon, they persist right here in this thread. Using subs in any system requires: An open mid, knowledge, patience and measurements. Some are loathe to the latter. Mating subs with mains is not a walk-in-the-park , plug'n'play type of thing. It takes time, it takes knowledge and one has to be ready to work at it for weeks, even months. It is not for everyone but properly executed brings immense benefits to the reproduction and is extraordinarily cost effective. I'll revisit this part soon in this post
On the Apogee issues, I believe like ddk that the Diva was/is the sweet spot. It may not do what all the Grand or the FR could do but remain a more balanced speaker that could do bass as well as most cones in its time.. Right now cone driver technology has taken the very lowest frequency to a different (higher level) so.... The Diva did it all with few fuss and a tri-amp Diva can be something to behold. Of course the OCD in all of us will call : Wolf! at the Apogee active crossover but I believe its performance could and can be improved with careful modification. THen the Diva becomes something else of course, with the appropriate amount of power and amplifier stability. I have heard many attempts to drive Apogee with Tubes and while it can work, yet Apogee play nicer with SS with lot of power: They crave clean power.
On the subject of Maggies only Marty responded to the idea. I think Maggies don't register in the Ultra High End because of their low prices. There! I said it. You will never see a Boulder /Maggie combo or a Dar Tzeel/Maggie or Lamm/Maggie for that matter. The tradition of Maggie and ARC is still strong but too often with the lower powered ARC models, Maggies would prefer 250 wpc. they're for the most part 85 dB/W/m efficient , perhaps less thus require power. The combination of Magneplanar speakers and upper tier electronics is startling. I know it from experience. The Maggies do bass but relieving them from the duty of going below 50 Hz makes then much better reproducers of music.. If a person is adverse to active crossovers, then supplementing Maggies with subs is the next best thing and it works. A pair Maggie 3.7 will have open minded people wondering why they need to pay 10 times to get 10% better sound or not even that .. The Maggie ribbon remains as one of the best ever. There aren't many better tweeter around in term of extension and purity. You add a swarm of subs with a 3.7 and prepare yourself for an adventure. And that could be for much less than $20K! One of the reasons I keep on dancing around but seems to always come back to Maggies. The Price to Performance ratio is off the chart!
I would add that some of the better speakers out there are a combination of different drivers technologies. The VS VR9, VR 11, VR 101 etc are cone, come and ribbon. The Evo Acoustic is Cone, Ceramic dome and ribbon tweeter, the Genesis is cone, Ribbon and circular ribbon tweeters, The Acapella are cone , horn and Ion Tweeters... The list is long: mating different technology is not as rare as some would believe.
I find myself in agreement with many here but think I am on a slightly different bent:
For starters, audiophile orthodoxy will have that subs cannot be used with some speakers or some driver technologies. Nothing could be further from the truth. Dynamic subs, can be used with any type of driver to extend the FR in the lows. At this point in time there isn't a better way to get low bass. Cones reign supreme down low. There is no substitute for displacement when you go down low. There is one technology that has successfully being implemented and seems to be better than cones in the ultra low: The ET "fan" sub and this one does its magic under 20 Hz where few if any notes is ever played.
Subs took a while to get some hold in the audiophile community, I remember how much I sneered at the old Janis subwoofer in spite of it bringing some much needed oomph to my Maggies in my room back then, I didn't keep it for long and know now I didn't know much about what needed to be done to use it properly in the room with my speakers. To this day, our hobby has that amusing mixture of Science, technology and mysticism. The "slow" cone for example and the "fast" panels myths will no die any time soon, they persist right here in this thread. Using subs in any system requires: An open mid, knowledge, patience and measurements. Some are loathe to the latter. Mating subs with mains is not a walk-in-the-park , plug'n'play type of thing. It takes time, it takes knowledge and one has to be ready to work at it for weeks, even months. It is not for everyone but properly executed brings immense benefits to the reproduction and is extraordinarily cost effective. I'll revisit this part soon in this post
On the Apogee issues, I believe like ddk that the Diva was/is the sweet spot. It may not do what all the Grand or the FR could do but remain a more balanced speaker that could do bass as well as most cones in its time.. Right now cone driver technology has taken the very lowest frequency to a different (higher level) so.... The Diva did it all with few fuss and a tri-amp Diva can be something to behold. Of course the OCD in all of us will call : Wolf! at the Apogee active crossover but I believe its performance could and can be improved with careful modification. THen the Diva becomes something else of course, with the appropriate amount of power and amplifier stability. I have heard many attempts to drive Apogee with Tubes and while it can work, yet Apogee play nicer with SS with lot of power: They crave clean power.
On the subject of Maggies only Marty responded to the idea. I think Maggies don't register in the Ultra High End because of their low prices. There! I said it
. You will never see a Boulder /Maggie combo or a Dar Tzeel/Maggie or Lamm/Maggie for that matter. The tradition of Maggie and ARC is still strong but too often with the lower powered ARC models, Maggies would prefer 250 wpc. they're for the most part 85 dB/W/m efficient , perhaps less thus require power. The combination of Magneplanar speakers and upper tier electronics is startling. I know it from experience. The Maggies do bass but relieving them from the duty of going below 50 Hz makes then much better reproducers of music.. If a person is adverse to active crossovers, then supplementing Maggies with subs is the next best thing and it works. A pair Maggie 3.7 will have open minded people wondering why they need to pay 10 times to get 10% better sound or not even that .. The Maggie ribbon remains as one of the best ever. There aren't many better tweeter around in term of extension and purity. You add a swarm of subs with a 3.7 and prepare yourself for an adventure. And that could be for much less than $20K! One of the reasons I keep on dancing around but seems to always come back to Maggies. The Price to Performance ratio is off the chart!I would add that some of the better speakers out there are a combination of different drivers technologies. The VS VR9, VR 11, VR 101 etc are cone, come and ribbon. The Evo Acoustic is Cone, Ceramic dome and ribbon tweeter, the Genesis is cone, Ribbon and circular ribbon tweeters, The Acapella are cone , horn and Ion Tweeters... The list is long: mating different technology is not as rare as some would believe.
Frantz, to start with, I am a big fan of Marty's Pipedreams to subs. So "not your audiophile who believes different drivers should not be rolled off to subs" kind of guy.
As far as Maggie prices, go, restored divas from Henk are 12.5k Euro, FR is 17.5k Euro, and from True Sound Works is also similar with some dollar conversion. So no difference in Maggie 20.7 type of prices. Maggies are no apogees.
Henk himself used subs on his FRs. To your statement, cones reign supreme down below, it is the crucial mid bass where the FRs just blow the backside of cones.
Marty's JL/Spectral system which I heard with TacT crossover remains a firm favorite in my book, so I am not at all against the idea of crossing over subs using DRC (though I would continue to differ with you on using Devialet and class D amps to run the Apogees) and I have heard the FRs and Duettas and a Diva (though not a proper Henk restore). The FR - Diva difference is similar to an Alexandria Alexia difference. You put an Alexandria in a bigger room, and you will get much more weight, presence, and density. The ribbon of the FR is a pure foil, and not kapton backed like the Divas.
In most rooms which are not big enough, Divas will image more cohesively and sound right, will be easier to set up (one amp) but they will never sound as grand as the FR or the grand, which are a project
The room I heard the FRs in was pretty long and he had his Divas on sale for 4 - 5k Euro.
As far as Maggie prices, go, restored divas from Henk are 12.5k Euro, FR is 17.5k Euro, and from True Sound Works is also similar with some dollar conversion. So no difference in Maggie 20.7 type of prices. Maggies are no apogees.
Henk himself used subs on his FRs. To your statement, cones reign supreme down below, it is the crucial mid bass where the FRs just blow the backside of cones.
Marty's JL/Spectral system which I heard with TacT crossover remains a firm favorite in my book, so I am not at all against the idea of crossing over subs using DRC (though I would continue to differ with you on using Devialet and class D amps to run the Apogees
) and I have heard the FRs and Duettas and a Diva (though not a proper Henk restore). The FR - Diva difference is similar to an Alexandria Alexia difference. You put an Alexandria in a bigger room, and you will get much more weight, presence, and density. The ribbon of the FR is a pure foil, and not kapton backed like the Divas. In most rooms which are not big enough, Divas will image more cohesively and sound right, will be easier to set up (one amp) but they will never sound as grand as the FR or the grand, which are a project
The room I heard the FRs in was pretty long and he had his Divas on sale for 4 - 5k Euro.
The closet thing to what you describe WAS the Martin Logan Statement E2; having low frequency dynamic woofers, mid bass dynamic cones and ribbon midranges and tweeters.
The only other speaker I am aware of that fits your "wish list" is Transmission Audio from Sweden. I'll say right off the company is off the beaten path and no one other than myself has ever mentioned it on this or other high end audio forum. Go to http://www.transmissionaudio.com and scroll down half way on their website to see the model I am referring to -- the Extreme Performance Series. They make extensive use of ribbons in midranges and tweeters, and their mid bass and sub-bass woofers are all baffle free. They are costly, but you have already invested so much, this might be what you are looking for. For where to hear, go to http://www.transmissionaudio.com/home/wheretobuy.html
You can read their specs and descriptions better than I can paraphrase them.
Last edited:
Oy! 2 Million bucks for the full monty. I could build a tropical mansion on a powder white beach front property with that.
Very interesting! Thanks for posting this link...it appears Transmission Audio are the people who designed Red Rose Music's R3 speakers? http://www.transmissionaudio.com/overview.html
Essentially, setting his tech aside, he has taken the approach to an extreme...13 meters of speakers, 500kg subs...30,000 watts...to try to make the speaker as effortless/low distortion as possible. sounds like fun.
I have to admit...must be great on the one hand...truly great if done right.
On the other hand, i equally have to hand it to designers who can build a 6'-7' tall speaker with a relatively small footprint (18 inches by 24-30 inches) perhaps plus a sub or 2 tucked away someplace that really fill the room and be adjusted to that room.
Hi
I have owned both Apogee Divas and Maegnepan. Similar technology, different sounding speakers... I prefer Maggies. I haven't heard Graz speakers I would like to.
@Ron
Allow me to share my own experiences
I am/was a panel person too. I have had ESL at home when I was not even a teen ager (Audiophile father) . As an adult I went through the requisite ESL, then Quad ESL 63 then Quad ESL 63 Crosby mod and finally to the Martin Logan original and maddening CLS.. A speaker that always hinted at its potential but ultimately was too limited in what it actually did. Martin Logan the company must have seen that and spent their entire existence trying to mate their particular panel to a woofer. I haven't heard the latest ML but did hear briefly the Statement III (?) and this particular speaker was something special. The Monolith and Sequel were OK by my book but nothing supreme. I needed a speaker that could do bass and midrange and treble. I needed full range and panel. During those times I was staunchly a tube person, so Apogee would not do it for me. They seemed to require Krell or equivalent ( I have never seen an Apogee /Mark Levinson combination, has anyone?). I went panel, of course, and I went Magnepan, virtually through the entire line from SMG to 20.1.
In the midst of this I had the opportunity to live with several serious cone -based seakers ( Thiele, Hayes, Aerial, Vandesteen , Duntech and Dunleavy) They were the real deal. In the uber end not much mention of those anymore but a Dunleavy V or VI can challenge, to this day, many uber-end speakers. The midbass from Dunleavy designs in particular is not matched by anything out there to this day. Magnepan with the proper (powerful SS) hint at this midbass excellence but the operative word is "hint". So do Wilson and Rockport ... in my opinion. I heard a Legacy speaker once that was very close can't remember the model. To this day there isn't a speaker that approach what Dunleavy designs could do int he midbass (some would say elsewhere I differ slightly).
For the longest time I thought that nothing would ever come close to the midrange of a Quad ESl 63 ... Well... I have now heard a number of speakers that put this notion to rest: TAD, Magico, Wilson, JBL ( yes! horns ), Rockport, B&O (please don't laugh the Beo 90 is the real deal), Tidal, Dynaudio, Triangle, Harbeth, Von Schweikert, etc... You see that is a long list and there are many I may have forgotten... The list is 99% cone speakers.
At this point in time as it stands, I know enough of what the contribution of the room can be up to the midbass. Down low (<100Hz) however much we protest, huff and puff... Multi subs is the solution. There are different school on how low to cross.. 50? 60? 80 ? There is a debate but to my ears 80 Hz crossover preserve Left and Right to the point I can not discern individual LF sources... so...
From the midbass up to the treble I would leave it to the mains and there one needs to put some prejudices aside: Cones have arrived. They are as good as it gets, Execution is the thing. There are out there some serious speakers... cone and ribbons-cone based. The choice is large and vast and some make a special effort to address room issue int he bass. On this VOns Schweirkert much more than any Uber End manufacturer seem to take the idea of correcting the bass in the room seriously. They were the first and so far only major uber end brand to take the chance of using subwoofers int he back of the listening room and that with startling effect (as it should if implemented properly, multi subs by another name) and they seem to do the same in the VR 11 by allowing to act on the individual drivers in the bass column.
And of course there are horns... A technology I took a long time to look at but that is likely my next move. They do it all and well. Of course the purist will want a bass horn at all cost .. To do low bass (<40Hz) with horn requires a Yuuuuuge horn, meters long in some case and frankly down there, I wouldn't bother .. Cones reign supreme... To match the usual high sensitivity of horns ( I put CD in the horn category) one may need to use multiple subs.. To me that is even better...
Part of this hobby is OCD but at some point one needs to listen to music and to me there are out there cones ( in my book domes are cones too ) that do it all. To repeat they have arrived.
P.S. There is always the MBL leaf drivers... Some love it, I don't
There were perhaps too many "I" in the above post, i apologize. just sharing my experience with the collective and Ron Resnick in particular. All that of course IMHO, IME, YMMV, etc
I have owned both Apogee Divas and Maegnepan. Similar technology, different sounding speakers... I prefer Maggies. I haven't heard Graz speakers I would like to.
@Ron
Allow me to share my own experiences
I am/was a panel person too. I have had ESL at home when I was not even a teen ager (Audiophile father) . As an adult I went through the requisite ESL, then Quad ESL 63 then Quad ESL 63 Crosby mod and finally to the Martin Logan original and maddening CLS.. A speaker that always hinted at its potential but ultimately was too limited in what it actually did. Martin Logan the company must have seen that and spent their entire existence trying to mate their particular panel to a woofer. I haven't heard the latest ML but did hear briefly the Statement III (?) and this particular speaker was something special. The Monolith and Sequel were OK by my book but nothing supreme. I needed a speaker that could do bass and midrange and treble. I needed full range and panel. During those times I was staunchly a tube person, so Apogee would not do it for me. They seemed to require Krell or equivalent ( I have never seen an Apogee /Mark Levinson combination, has anyone?
). I went panel, of course, and I went Magnepan, virtually through the entire line from SMG to 20.1. In the midst of this I had the opportunity to live with several serious cone -based seakers ( Thiele, Hayes, Aerial, Vandesteen , Duntech and Dunleavy) They were the real deal. In the uber end not much mention of those anymore but a Dunleavy V or VI can challenge, to this day, many uber-end speakers. The midbass from Dunleavy designs in particular is not matched by anything out there to this day. Magnepan with the proper (powerful SS) hint at this midbass excellence but the operative word is "hint". So do Wilson and Rockport ... in my opinion. I heard a Legacy speaker once that was very close can't remember the model. To this day there isn't a speaker that approach what Dunleavy designs could do int he midbass (some would say elsewhere I differ slightly).
For the longest time I thought that nothing would ever come close to the midrange of a Quad ESl 63 ... Well... I have now heard a number of speakers that put this notion to rest: TAD, Magico, Wilson, JBL ( yes! horns ), Rockport, B&O (please don't laugh the Beo 90 is the real deal), Tidal, Dynaudio, Triangle, Harbeth, Von Schweikert, etc... You see that is a long list and there are many I may have forgotten... The list is 99% cone speakers.
At this point in time as it stands, I know enough of what the contribution of the room can be up to the midbass. Down low (<100Hz) however much we protest, huff and puff... Multi subs is the solution. There are different school on how low to cross.. 50? 60? 80 ? There is a debate but to my ears 80 Hz crossover preserve Left and Right to the point I can not discern individual LF sources... so...
From the midbass up to the treble I would leave it to the mains and there one needs to put some prejudices aside: Cones have arrived. They are as good as it gets, Execution is the thing. There are out there some serious speakers... cone and ribbons-cone based. The choice is large and vast and some make a special effort to address room issue int he bass. On this VOns Schweirkert much more than any Uber End manufacturer seem to take the idea of correcting the bass in the room seriously. They were the first and so far only major uber end brand to take the chance of using subwoofers int he back of the listening room and that with startling effect (as it should if implemented properly, multi subs by another name) and they seem to do the same in the VR 11 by allowing to act on the individual drivers in the bass column.
And of course there are horns... A technology I took a long time to look at but that is likely my next move. They do it all and well. Of course the purist will want a bass horn at all cost .. To do low bass (<40Hz) with horn requires a Yuuuuuge horn, meters long in some case and frankly down there, I wouldn't bother .. Cones reign supreme... To match the usual high sensitivity of horns ( I put CD in the horn category) one may need to use multiple subs
.. To me that is even better... Part of this hobby is OCD but at some point one needs to listen to music and to me there are out there cones ( in my book domes are cones too
) that do it all. To repeat they have arrived.P.S. There is always the MBL leaf drivers... Some love it, I don't
There were perhaps too many "I" in the above post, i apologize. just sharing my experience with the collective and Ron Resnick in particular. All that of course IMHO, IME, YMMV, etc
Last edited:
When you liked Maggie over your stock Diva, was that because of more midrange involvement with the maggies? Fwiw, I haven't liked many of the other apogees I heard before because I found them a bit sterile in the mids and hence used to prefer the Analysis mids over those.
Regarding Krells, that is required for the Scintilla which was the one that dropped to 1ohm. Multiple choices available for Divas, Duettas, FRs and Grands when restored.
Regarding Krells, that is required for the Scintilla which was the one that dropped to 1ohm. Multiple choices available for Divas, Duettas, FRs and Grands when restored.
The midrange of the Apogee was good and the bass from the Diva superior but the highs have always been recessed in many Apogee and the Diva was no exception: Extension wasn't their thing. Lest I sound absolutist, there is lack of "snap" in the Apogees They don't seem to stop on a dime like some speakers can... especially horn and Stats but also the new cones technology seem to do that, exemplified by Magico.
Another notion which I can only attempt to describe, is the amount of "noise" a speaker generate. Some speakers are "silent": Music emanates from them with the strange impression of a lack of "noise", of extraneous, not needed sounds... Supreme in this area: Magico. They start playing without seeming to have been turned "on".... They're followed by some other speakers at a good distance...Rockport, Wilson, Tidal, Burmester, B&O 90...not an exhaustive list... The Apogee last I remembered, weren't as "silent" as Magnepan... IME, not the Diva, not the Grand... IMO. The Maggies were more "quiet", more open, more defined... I haven't heard any restored or current-day Apogee modification, my impressions could be dated.
Last edited:
I agree completely on Statement E2.
I amazed that speaker companies of which I was not aware keep turning up! Thank you, Gary. The Transmission Audio speakers look amazing!
How can it be that these are not talked about? They look like a very interesting take on full range ribbons mated with a vertical array of cones -- like a two ribbon version of the Pendragon but in one frame.
If I saw them in Munich I would have investigated them.
Similar threads
