First impressions at California audio Show [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : First impressions at California audio Show



tube fan
07-30-2010, 06:37 PM
Well, not too good at most rooms. I expected much more from the Lotus speakers. On my Adgio d'Albinoni vinyl (Gary Karr on Double-bass). the sound was not emotionally involving, with no feeling that the double-bass was in the room. The sound was a little better through the Teresonic Speakers, but still far short of what I am used to (through 30+ year old Fulton J Speakers, Audio Research SP-8, Audio Research D-70, Counterpoint SA-2 pre-pre amp). Still better at Magico, but I never thought Gary was in the room, as I do at home.

The best sound I heard was at the Audio Note room with E/Lexus Signature speakers, but, unfortunately, no vinyl. Still, using an Audio Note SET amp (22 big SET watts!), and CDs, I consistently felt that the music was in the room (way too small to do the system justice). Micro and Macro dynamics were perfect; ditto for male and female singers. No problem with low or high notes.

Tomorrow I'll check out some more systems.

Mr Peabody
07-31-2010, 05:57 AM
The Audio Note mirrors what RGA says so either the AN is pretty good or they just know how to set up at shows. :) My only experience was with one of AN's DAC and it had a very natural sound, not at all like digital.

atomicAdam
07-31-2010, 06:37 AM
I'm going to jump in with a thread soon - with photos and details.

So far the show is going well. Some rooms are having some issues with setting up - but I heard by about 2pm or so most had dealt with the issues. I think there were like 650ppl on a Friday. I think the Bay Area is happy to have a show.

So far I've enjoyed the AN and the Sonist/deHavlland/WireWorld room (it had tape!) Duke Ellington was like shooting heroin. (wait, I haven't actually done that, but I had emotional reaction to that sound that made me almost cry)

Anyways, more to come - time for breakfast now.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
07-31-2010, 07:52 AM
I am going to be there today to check things out since I am in town. I will also give my impressions of what I have seen.

RGA
07-31-2010, 09:50 AM
I'm going to jump in with a thread soon - with photos and details.

So far the show is going well. Some rooms are having some issues with setting up - but I heard by about 2pm or so most had dealt with the issues. I think there were like 650ppl on a Friday. I think the Bay Area is happy to have a show.

So far I've enjoyed the AN and the Sonist/deHavlland/WireWorld room (it had tape!) Duke Ellington was like shooting heroin. (wait, I haven't actually done that, but I had emotional reaction to that sound that made me almost cry)

Anyways, more to come - time for breakfast now.

Is Peter Qvortrup there in the AN Room? If not bring your own hard rock/metal/trance music.

Crank the damn room up - WAY WAY up.

If Peter ain't there all they play is classical soft stuff and frankly most of what most rooms play is easy and doesn't flesh out the dynamics or drive of a system.

atomicAdam
07-31-2010, 10:01 AM
Is Peter Qvortrup there in the AN Room? If not bring your own hard rock/metal/trance music.

Crank the damn room up - WAY WAY up.

If Peter ain't there all they play is classical soft stuff and frankly most of what most rooms play is easy and doesn't flesh out the dynamics or drive of a system.

Mario (i believe) is here - we played some Nationals and Skinny Puppy yesterday.. not much soft stuff from that room actually. A good variety I'd say. But I was stuck in there for about 3hrs yesterday.

RGA
07-31-2010, 10:08 AM
Mario (i believe) is here - we played some Nationals and Skinny Puppy yesterday.. not much soft stuff from that room actually. A good variety I'd say. But I was stuck in there for about 3hrs yesterday.

Mario is their turntable engineer - I met him up here at Soundhounds. He is big in the design and engineering of the tables and he brought a good diverse CD collection.

The Jinro is the amp I want - in silver not black. It's basically a copper wired Ongaku (for considerably less money). We played Nightwish and Evil 9 and that type of stuff. If they have an Evil 9 disc on them I recommend track 9 and turn the volume to around the 3 position LOL.

Wish I could be there.

RGA
07-31-2010, 10:17 AM
Well, not too good at most rooms. I expected much more from the Lotus speakers. On my Adgio d'Albinoni vinyl (Gary Karr on Double-bass). the sound was not emotionally involving, with no feeling that the double-bass was in the room. The sound was a little better through the Teresonic Speakers, but still far short of what I am used to (through 30+ year old Fulton J Speakers, Audio Research SP-8, Audio Research D-70, Counterpoint SA-2 pre-pre amp). Still better at Magico, but I never thought Gary was in the room, as I do at home.

The best sound I heard was at the Audio Note room with E/Lexus Signature speakers, but, unfortunately, no vinyl. Still, using an Audio Note SET amp (22 big SET watts!), and CDs, I consistently felt that the music was in the room (way too small to do the system justice). Micro and Macro dynamics were perfect; ditto for male and female singers. No problem with low or high notes.

Tomorrow I'll check out some more systems.

I have found that it takes them a couple of days to get the bass right. Every room is a bit different and trying to get the bottom end right seems to be an issue. Fred noted that the first day at CES it wasn't right, and a reviewer at 6 moons said the same. They usually figure it out by the last day of the show but usually if there is an issue it's with the bass. Perhaps they have gotten there faster this show. Usually, they don't get them far enough in the corners and if they are a few inches too far out they yield some bass boom. Closer to the wall usually gets rid of that problem which runs counter to established theory. Which says more about established theory being wrong IMO.

LeRoy
07-31-2010, 10:52 AM
I'm looking forward to more impressions.

LeRoy

poppachubby
07-31-2010, 02:08 PM
Adam are Marantz there? Check em out.

Mr Peabody
07-31-2010, 04:58 PM
Just curious if Conrad Johnson is there?

Sir Terrence the Terrible
07-31-2010, 07:51 PM
I just got back from the show, and it was really quite an ear opening event for both my buddy and I. First, no one except for myself brought music that truly challenged any system there. It was all low key, almost zero dynamic range vocal stuff that while revealing in the midrange, had too stark and empty of a mix to really give us a chance to hear the speakers stretch their legs. Secondly, I have to give a major props to my friend who designed my mini monitors I am currently using in my small home theater in Oakland. There were no small speakers that came close to sounding as good as these speakers - and this is something that both my friend and I agreed with. Just about every room had tube amps and solid state together, but I didn't get a chance to hear both on the same speaker system. There were also alot of beautiful turntables there, but only one demo really blew me away. Another observation - there are a shocking amount of bad systems out there that cost a arm and a leg, and left me less than impressed.

I brought two recordings with me. The first was High Altitude Drums which is a Ray Kimber Isomike recording on DSD. It features the Denver Blue Knights Drum and Bugle corps recorded at Weber University in Colorado. If your system survives the dynamics of this recording, it are truly worth their salt. While this is a multichannel mix, there is a separate and quite capable two channel DSD mix as well.

The second recording is called A Gospel Celebration, a recording I did in multichannel and two channel DXD, transferred to SACD. It features my church's 150 voice gospel choir, some of the best soloists in the Gospel music field, my church's five piece band, and the 100 person strong Oakland Symphony Orchestra. It has everything from a full bore dynamic, to a single soloist with a piano. If you can hear the air conditioning system during the quietest passages, then the system has excellent noise floor. If your system can play this recording back while keeping things layered and uncongested when everything is going, it has excellent overall resolution and dynamics.

Starting off with the bad:

The JBL Room by Design Interaction.

JBL's Everest II systems quite frankly costs a fortune. However, the sound of those speakers (and the entire system) was just so underwhelming I was speechless. It sounded like a JBL speaker system for sure, nice clear mids, but airless highs, and bass with absolutely no impact or depth, indistinct, and just not right. The speaker has a super tweeter, but it revealed no air, and no space between the instruments and vocalist. With my recordings, the system did not image well, was not tonally correct, but it certainly was dynamic. The demo left us both dry as a bone. One of the worst of show for sure.

Clair Audient 2+2 Room

First, the guy didn't want to play my recordings for fear he would blow his system up. That was one tick on the presentation just for his lack of confidence in his product. What he did put on showed me nothing, and did not impress me at all. First the speakers had a deep a toe in, which meant no clear sound stage, but you got stereo everywhere in the room. It had no bottom end to speaker of, and the whole presentation was full of lacks. No air around vocals or instruments, and no dynamic punch whatsoever. They only played music that would not challenge the system in any way.


The Earthquake Room.

Featuring their Cinenova amp driving the Tigris speakers, the sound mirrored just what the review I read in Stereophile described. The speaker was too bass heavy, and too tweeter heavy, leaving a recessed midrange with no sense of presence to anything. It reminded me of the smiley face setting on a 1/3 octave equalizer. While the bass went deep, it was ill defined and just too fat sounding for my taste. It made my recordings sound like they were in another room, and they are not supposed to sound that way at all. This was another big let down, but not totally unexpected.

The Audio Note Room.

This was clearly a step up from everything we had heard so far. I understand why Richard likes these speakers, they had a lot going for them. Everything sounded clear, and clean, and quite surprising being pushed by a 21 watt amp. It was not a perfect demo however. The fact that the audio note speakers have to be pushed into corners really revealed the rooms modes and nodes, which caused a chestiness with male vocals. It also flattened the sound stage depth to the point that it was really a flat sound stage, but with excellent lateral imaging. All the vocals I heard from the various demo's material had a wolly character - not fully revealing the true tonality of the voice. The entire system has excellent resolution, but it sounded a bit "washed" with timbres and overtones. Bass was also a bit wolly, and the mids had just a hair of forward bite that almost approached shouty when pushed during the demo (this could have been the recordings fault). I was impressed otherwise with the sound of this system, and can clearly see it having some very vocal fans. It certainly did more things right than wrong, but some of the wrong things were pretty audible.

The Acoustic Zen Room

I am going to be honest, I loved the sound of these speakers, and so did my best friend. Tt played back my recordings with all the power, nuance, imaging, dynamics, timbre and tonality that I heard in my recording studio. This was the first room we came across where the bass was tight, deep, and sounded realistic. It was also the first room we came across that projected sound in a way that was very realistic - at times I felt like the Blue Knights were in the room.

Teresonic Room.

I really liked the sound of this system. Very natural and easy, with excellent coherence. The speakers are a single driver design, and as such should have excellent uniformity in dispersion in both the vertical and horizontal plane. This one had it in the horizontal, but clearly when you stood up, you got a very different tonal characteristic than from sitting down. As long as you stayed seated, the presentation was excellent. The moment you stood up, everything got tilted towards the treble. The sound was smooth, but in the presence of any deep bass, the whole system just broke down to my ears. That is the drawback of using one driver to carry 10 octaves worth of music.

The YG Acoustics Room

Oh what a sound from this room, and I know that the electronics behind the speakers played a big role in that. Featuring an all DCS system of which I am totally familiar with, the sound was present, pure, sweet, relaxing when it should be, dynamically powerful and big sounding when it needed to be, and just plain mind blowing overall. We stayed in the room a while listening to everyones recordings. This system could do no wrong to these ears. Whether it was Drum corps, or Opera, this system excelled in creating the appropriate space, timbre and tonality of the recording. When I put on my recordings, the room got very crowded very quickly; to the point it got hot as hell in the room. My recordings (and everyone else's) sounded totally right on the spot with this system.

The Best of Show (at least so far) to me came from:

The Lotus Group Room.

Featuring the absolutely gorgeous sounding Granada speaker, this demo was totally stunning and perfect in every way. No matter what was played, this system was dynamic, clean, and at times extremely spooky real. The speakers have a totally seducing open quality that really drew me in to the music, no matter what was played. I almost missed this room, but standing at the elevator I heard this excellent Jazz recording featuring a three piece group highlighted by Jimmy Smith on the Hammond B-3 organ. Since I own this organ, and have played it my entire life, I am very familiar with its tube like sweet tonal quality. The bass pedals sounded just like they should, deep, full and powerful, with no overhang between notes. The organ sounded like it was in the room, and I thought it really was before entering the room. When I asked the gentleman to put on my recordings, he had no reservation in playing them at realistic levels. The sound was enveloping, extraordinarily powerful and effortless with VERY accurate timbre and tonality. From the bottom up, nothing stuck out in the mix, which had a very wide and deep sound stage(again as they should) which allowed you to hear the air mix with the horns and drums in a way that sounded like I was at a drum corps show. The inner voices of the horns were clearly rendered, highs wide open and clear, and bass that was tight and impactful without being overwhelming and wolly. I was in this room for 30 minutes and didn't want to leave. This system was addictive to the hilt, and I wanted to take it home.

I am going back tomorrow and will have other observations to reveal. I have yet to hear the Legacy Whispers, Magico speakers, the Emerald Physics speakers, Acoustic Technology speakers, Sonist speakers, and several other systems.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
07-31-2010, 07:52 PM
Adam are Marantz there? Check em out.

I didn't see anything by Marantz there Poppa.

tube fan
07-31-2010, 09:01 PM
I just got back from the show, and it was really quite an ear opening event for both my buddy and I. First, no one except for myself brought music that truly challenged any system there. It was all low key, almost zero dynamic range vocal stuff that while revealing in the midrange, had too stark and empty of a mix to really give us a chance to hear the speakers stretch their legs. Secondly, I have to give a major props to my friend who designed my mini monitors I am currently using in my small home theater in Oakland. There were no small speakers that came close to sounding as good as these speakers - and this is something that both my friend and I agreed with. Just about every room had tube amps and solid state together, but I didn't get a chance to hear both on the same speaker system. There were also alot of beautiful turntables there, but only one demo really blew me away. Another observation - there are a shocking amount of bad systems out there that cost a arm and a leg, and left me less than impressed.

I brought two recordings with me. The first was High Altitude Drums which is a Ray Kimber Isomike recording on DSD. It features the Denver Blue Knights Drum and Bugle corps recorded at Weber University in Colorado. If your system survives the dynamics of this recording, it are truly worth their salt. While this is a multichannel mix, there is a separate and quite capable two channel DSD mix as well.

The second recording is called A Gospel Celebration, a recording I did in multichannel and two channel DXD, transferred to SACD. It features my church's 150 voice gospel choir, some of the best soloist in the Gospel field, my church's five piece band, and the 100 person strong Oakland Symphony Orchestra. It has everything from a full bore dynamic, to a single soloist with a piano. If you can hear the air conditioning system during the quietest passages, then the system has excellent noise floor. If your system can play this recording back while keeping things layered and uncongested when everything is going, it has excellent overall resolution and dynamics.

Starting off with the bad:

The JBL Room by Design Interaction.

JBL's Everest II systems quite frankly costs a fortune. However, the sound of those speakers (and the entire system) was just so underwhelming I was speechless. It sounded like a JBL speaker system for sure, nice clear mids, but airless highs, and bass with absolutely no impact or depth, indistinct, and just not right. The speaker has a super tweeter, but it revealed no air, and no space between the instruments and vocalist. With my recordings, the system did not image well, was not tonally correct, but it certainly was dynamic. The demo left us both dry as a bone. One of the worst of show for sure.

Clair Audient 2+2 Room

First, the guy didn't want to play my recordings for fear he would blow his system up. That was one tick on the presentation just for his lack of confidence in his product. What he did put on showed me nothing, and did not impress me at all. First the speakers had to deep a toe in, which meant no clear sound stage, but you got stereo everywhere in the room. It had no bottom end to speaker of, and the whole presentation was full of lacks. No air around vocals or instruments, and no dynamic punch whatsoever. They only played music that would not challenge the system in any way.


The Earthquake Room.

Featuring their Cinenova amp driving the Tigris speakers, the sound mirrored just what the review I read in Stereophile described. The speaker was too bass heavy, and too tweeter heavy, leaving a recessed midrange with no sense of presence to anything. It reminded me of the smiley face setting on a 1/3 octave equalizer. While the bass went deep, it was ill defined and just too fat sounding for my taste. It made my recordings sound like they were in another room, and they are not supposed to sound that way at all. This was another big let down, but not totally unexpected.

The Audio Note Room.

This was clearly a step up from everything we had heard so far. I understand why Richard likes these speakers, they had a lot going for them. Everything sounded clear, and clean, and quite surprising being pushed by a 21 watt amp. It was not a perfect demo however. The fact that the audio note speakers have to be pushed into corners really revealed the rooms modes and nodes, which caused a chestiness with male vocals. It also flattened the sound stage depth to the point that it was really a flat sound stage, but with excellent lateral imaging. All the vocals I heard from the various demo's material had a wolly character - not fully revealing the true tonality of the voice. The entire system has excellent resolution, but it sounded a bit "washed" with timbres and overtones. Bass was also a bit wolly, and the mids had just a hair of forward bite that almost approached shouty during the demo. I was impressed otherwise with the sound of this system, and can clearing see it having some very vocal fans.

The Acoustic Zen Room

I am going to be honest, I loved the sound of these speakers, and so did my best friend. Oh it played back my recordings with all the power, nuance, imaging, dynamics, timbre and tonality that I heard in my recording studio. This was the first room we came across where the bass was tight, deep, and sounded realistic. It was also the first room we came across that projected sound in a way that was very realistic - at times I felt like the Blue Knights were in the room.

Teresonic Room.

I really liked the sound of this system. Very natural and easy, with excellent coherence. The speakers are a single driver design, and as such should have excellent uniformity in dispersion in both the vertical and horizontal plane. This one had it in the horizontal, but clearly when you stood up, you got a very different tonal characteristic than from sitting down. As long as you stayed seated, the presentation was excellent. The moment you stood up, everything got tilted towards the treble. The sound was smooth, but in the presence of any deep bass, the whole system just broke down to my ears. That is the drawback of using one driver to carry 10 octaves worth of music.

The YG Acoustics Room

Oh what a sound from this room, and I know that the electronics behind the speakers played a big role in that. Featuring an all DCS system of which I am totally familiar with, the sound was present, pure, sweet, relaxing when it should be, dynamically powerful and big sounding when it needed to be, and just plain mind blowing overall. We stayed in the room a while listening to everyones recordings. This system could do no wrong to these ears. Whether it was Drum corps, or Opera, this system excelled in creating the appropriate space, timbre and tonality of the recording. When I put on my recordings, the room got very crowded very quickly; to the point it got hot as hell in the room. My recordings (and everyone else's) sounded totally right on the spot with this system.

The Best of Show to me came from:

The Lotus Group Room.

Featuring the absolutely gorgeous sounding Granada speaker, this demo was totally stunning and perfect in every way. No matter what was played, this system was dynamic, clean, and at times extremely spooky real. The speakers have a totally seducing open quality that really drew me in to the music, no matter what was played. I almost missed this room, but standing at the elevator I heard this excellent Jazz recording featuring a three piece group highlighted by Jimmy Smith on the Hammond B-3 organ. Since I own this organ, and have played it my entire life, I am very familiar with its tube like sweet tonal quality. The bass pedals sounded just like they should, deep, full and powerful, with no overhang between notes. The organ sounded like it was in the room, and I thought it really was before entering the room. When I asked the gentleman to put on my recordings, he had no reservation in playing them at realistic levels. The sound was enveloping, extraordinarily powerful and effortless with VERY accurate timbre and tonality. From the bottom up, nothing stuck out in the mix, which had a very wide and deep sound stage(again as they should) which allowed you to hear the air mix with the horns and drums in a way that sounded like I was at a drum corps show. The inner voices of the horns were clearly rendered, highs wide open and clear, and bass that was tight and impactful without being overwhelming and wolly. I was in this room for 30 minutes and didn't want to leave. This system was addictive to the hilt, and I wanted to take it home.

I am going back tomorrow and will have other observations to reveal.


I have an opposite view of the Lotus system: I was NOT allowed to play my vinyl at anything approaching realistic levels. My Gary Karr double bass and Mudy Waters (folk singer vinyl) at background levels? I was told that some objected to louder levels! Whatever the "real" sound is from this system , what I was allowed to hear was boring. And those albums are anything but boring!

Audio Note was really turning up the sound. I jumped right out of my seat on a drum CD! Tight, loud, with no boom. Both male and female vocals were great, and this was only on CDs. IMO, no other speakers sounded good on CDs. Their 22 watt SET amp rocked! I would love to hear some of their pre-amps/amps on my system.

The best sound I have heard so far: in the Evolution Acoustics room, but ONLY through the Studer Reel to Reel Vintage Tape Machine. All types of music were stupendous!
Totally effortless, with limitless dynamic range. The same speakers via CDs were nothing in comparison to the tape (and much less realistic than the Audio Note system via CDs). I love vinyl, but, I have never heard vinyl sound close to tape. Progress: tape to vinyl to CD to MP3???

The best sound, ignoring tape, was in the Teresonic and Music Surrounds room. All types of music at realistic (in my case this means loud) levels. Speakers were Teresonic Ingenium Silver ($15,000). Totally beautiful. No crossover, 104 dB efficiency.
Driven by a big 2 1/2 watts!!! A Teresonic Reference 2A3 integrated amp and a Fosgate Signature phono amp (a HUGE steal at $2,500). The tube amp has NO feedback and NO capacitors. However, if you buy the 2A3 integrated, you MUST match it to high efficiency speakers.

I would LOVE to hear several of the Audio Note speakers via analogue. But then, it might cost me big $.

theaudiohobby
08-01-2010, 03:01 AM
The best sound, ignoring tape, was in the Teresonic and Music Surrounds room. All types of music at realistic (in my case this means loud) levels. Speakers were Teresonic Ingenium Silver ($15,000). Totally beautiful. No crossover, 104 dB efficiency.
Driven by a big 2 1/2 watts!!! A Teresonic Reference 2A3 integrated amp and a Fosgate Signature phono amp (a HUGE steal at $2,500). The tube amp has NO feedback and NO capacitors. However, if you buy the 2A3 integrated, you MUST match it to high efficiency speakers.

I would LOVE to hear several of the Audio Note speakers via analogue. But then, it might cost me big $.I am not surprised that Teresonic and Audio Note do well in hotel rooms because neither has much output below 100Hz, so there will no boom and certainly no need for bass traps! And it has to be said there is absolutely no way the Teresonic Ingenium has a measured sensitivity of 104dB/1m, it's simply too small to reach such lofty heights across most of its operating bandwidth.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-01-2010, 07:10 AM
I am not surprised that Teresonic and Audio Note do well in hotel rooms because neither has much output below 100Hz, so there will no boom and certainly no need for bass traps! And it has to be said there is absolutely no way the Teresonic Ingenium has a measured sensitivity of 104dB/1m, it's simply too small to reach such lofty heights across most of its operating bandwidth.

The Teresonic sounded very good until the mix got really complex(which means it had to clearly sort things out like other speakers did), or when the bass got really deep and powerful for which the High Altitude recording had a plenty, and then things just fell apart. Once the percussion came in, that was it with this speaker. It began to compress, and when the full horn line of 70 popped in with the percussion section of 25 all played together, it was nothing more than a compressed mush. The guy running the system took my recording off right away, and I don't blame him.

The Audio Note speakers had a lot to like from the mids up, but because the speaker engaged the room nodes and modes being corner loaded, it sounded a little too wolly and heavy chested on male voices, and you are right, the bass was not all that deep, though some was definitely there. It could not reproduce the fundamentals of the pedals on the organ in the opening prelude to A Gospel Celebration. It produced the octave above the fundamental pretty good, but that is when the bass got uneven from note to note. If a speaker cannot reproduce the fundamentals on the pedals, it could not do anything from 40hz downward.

I had not heard vinyl records in a long time, though I often listen to my 4 track studer tape machine. Aside from sounding a bit warmer in the mids than most of the CD's I heard, there was nothing really spectacular about its presentation that would get me to invest in it. My buddy agreed with that observation, and also noted that it was probably because the digital gear we heard was so good.

I finally got a chance to hear the benchmark DAC that I heard folks around here talk about. I hated it's sound, and I mean hated it! While things were clean and clear, every digital recording I heard through the thing had an over prominent midrange that just shouted at you. If was piercing to the hilt, and both my buddy and I felt the same way. It could have been the speakers, or the amp, or the recordings themselves, but four recordings in a row with the same effect?? I don't know......

Leaving now to finish listening to the remainder of what I didn't hear yesterday.

tube fan
08-01-2010, 08:48 AM
Well, Sir TTT, we totally disagree, and I suspect we always will. If you cannot hear the difference between the best CDs and tapes, copies played only a very few times, I give up! Via tape, you could hear every detail in full tonal saturation, with NO compression; everything was effortless. Via CDS, the sound was HIGHLY compressed, harsh, with little real tonal saturation. EVERYONE in the room at the time I was there agreed (including the salesmen, who were NOT selling the tape machine). BTW, they were using a Playback Designs MPS-5-Reference SCAD/CD Player with 24/192 input, $15,000.

You favor solid state, I'm a tube lover. I suspect I would hate your Onkyo amps, and you would hate my Audio Research amp. From the looks of your system, you probably play music at loud levels, and thus I'm very surprised that you liked the Lotus room (unless, of course, they allowed you to crank up the sound). I do hear live music 3 or more times a week, and I think tubes and analogue come much closer to real music, especially in micro/macro dynamics and tonal saturation. You would have to pay me to listen to CDs for more than a few minutes straight.

tube fan
08-01-2010, 08:52 AM
BTW, I'm off to the show. You can't miss me as I'll be the only one with several vinyl records.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-01-2010, 09:13 AM
I have found that it takes them a couple of days to get the bass right. Every room is a bit different and trying to get the bottom end right seems to be an issue. Fred noted that the first day at CES it wasn't right, and a reviewer at 6 moons said the same. They usually figure it out by the last day of the show but usually if there is an issue it's with the bass. Perhaps they have gotten there faster this show. Usually, they don't get them far enough in the corners and if they are a few inches too far out they yield some bass boom. Closer to the wall usually gets rid of that problem which runs counter to established theory. Which says more about established theory being wrong IMO.

No,the theory is not wrong, not by any stretch of the imagination. I completely understand why you like audio note speakers, at least from the mids upward. From the mid bass down, the audio note speaker truly engaged with the room modes and nodes, and you could plainly hear it in male voices, with drums and percussion, and at least through the mid bass frequencies in the form of chestiness on male vocals, and mushiness with bass drums and percussion with loud transients. The soundstage also have zero layering, but excellent lateral imaging. Everything seemed to bunch up depth wise to the same plane.

No box speaker can defy the modes and nodes theory when it is pushed into a corner. The corner is a high pressure zone, and any speaker in that zone whether it is a main speaker, or a subwoofer with fully excite all of the rooms modes and nodes when in that space.

RGA
08-01-2010, 09:13 AM
It's really strange that Art got ruler flat bass at 25hz and Hi Fi Choice in their buyers guide puts the AN E at 22hz-3db. Not getting any much bass under 100hz as The Audio Hobby suggests seems curious to me. Perhaps you are not used to hearing bass with such low distortion.

Incidentally I have the High Altitude Drums and auditioned it with Ray Kimber himself doing the demonstration along with the Recording Engineer who lives about 10 minutes from my house. It sounded better on the AN E than it did with the equipment (Sony/Pass Labs.EMM Labs/Kimber cables). Though I would not really rank it up with the most engaging of music. It's a bit more of a "stunt" disc which will play to certain strengths. The Joe McQueen 10 at 86 from the same RE and ISO Mike isn't a "stunt" and sounds quite excellent.

Though I do find people's listening experiences fascinating - people who actually listened and found issue with certain aspects is completely acceptable.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-01-2010, 09:26 AM
Well, Sir TTT, we totally disagree, and I suspect we always will. If you cannot hear the difference between the best CDs and tapes, copies played only a very few times, I give up! Via tape, you could hear every detail in full tonal saturation, with NO compression; everything was effortless. Via CDS, the sound was HIGHLY compressed, harsh, with little real tonal saturation. EVERYONE in the room at the time I was there agreed (including the salesmen, who were NOT selling the tape machine). BTW, they were using a Playback Designs MPS-5-Reference SCAD/CD Player with 24/192 input, $15,000.

Ummmm, I don't think we disagree about tape, as that is my favorite analog medium. You cannot make blanket statements though, because there was zero compression in the material I brought to the show(both SACD's one of which I recorded myself), and only a few speakers were capable of handling it.


You favor solid state, I'm a tube lover. I suspect I would hate your Onkyo amps, and you would hate my Audio Research amp.

I do not 'hate" anything I have not listen to, and you should follow the same practice if you listen to stuff with your ears, and not your mouth.


From the looks of your system, you probably play music at loud levels, and thus I'm very surprised that you liked the Lotus room (unless, of course, they allowed you to crank up the sound).

I play music at all levels - from soft subtle stuff to loud dynamic stuff. That is why I picked and purchased the equipment I do. I do not like stuff that is dynamically constrained. The Granada speaker system performed my demo disc to perfection, and since the stuff I brought is dynamically challenging for any system, it earned my respect.


I do hear live music 3 or more times a week, and I think tubes and analogue come much closer to real music, especially in micro/macro dynamics and tonal saturation.

This is of course your opinion, but Bernie Grundmann says that both tubes and vinyl stray far away from the masters tapes they are cut from, and that tubes do change the sound to a degree that it becomes far from transparent to the master tapes. I am an audio engineer, and have been one for 22 years. I have not heard one of my masters played through a tube amplifier that sounded anywhere close to what was heard on some of the master tapes I have recorded. This is especially true with the DXD format I have been using for the last three or so years.


You would have to pay me to listen to CDs for more than a few minutes straight.

Redbook CD does have its drawbacks, but even those engineers that worked on the Mercury Presence transfers to CD said the CD sounded more true to the tapes than the vinyl did. Euphoric abilities may be pleasing to the ear, but it is not exactly a faithful effect when you are considering accuracy and faithfulness to the master tapes.

RGA
08-01-2010, 09:52 AM
No,the theory is not wrong, not by any stretch of the imagination. I completely understand why you like audio note speakers, at least from the mids upward. From the mid bass down, the audio note speaker truly engaged with the room modes and nodes, and you could plainly hear it in male voices, with drums and percussion, and at least through the mid bass frequencies in the form of chestiness on male vocals, and mushiness with bass drums and percussion with loud transients. The soundstage also have zero layering, but excellent lateral imaging. Everything seemed to bunch up depth wise to the same plane.

No box speaker can defy the modes and nodes theory when it is pushed into a corner. The corner is a high pressure zone, and any speaker in that zone whether it is a main speaker, or a subwoofer with fully excite all of the rooms modes and nodes when in that space.

And that is why they still need to find the hot spot in that room where the depth comes back. I have the speakers (well the J which is mostly the same speaker) and there should be significant depth to the soundstage. If it is just left and right (lateral) imaging and staging then there is a problem. From the picture of the room I would toe the speaker in such that the center of the rear port is in line directly with the corner. The listener should "see" the outside of the boxes prominantly. And the toe in should go further if the results still don't get there to the point where both the speakers are literally facing eachother.

The Stage should have a multitude of layers extending far beyond the back wall. I have a Loreena McKennit album with pipers and drummers coming seemingly 20 feet from behind the wall as the procession drums move into the room - there should be greater front to back depth of stage than free standers (at least all of the free stander systems I have had here and have heard in the last 20 years). Nevertheless, it is the job of the people setting up to do it right so there you go.

I still say you guys should play Lady Gaga's at high level - or Madonna. Get some trance in there (ask them to play the "Evil Nine" Seriously - get some of the Cerwin Vega "FUN" back into the show. Not the High Altitude boring drum stunt discs that don't really have a true frame of reference. It's like playing a disc with a car explosion - that's great but there's no real reference for that and the music is uninteresting - great stunt but who cares.

RGA
08-01-2010, 10:19 AM
Tube Fan

It is frustrating that rooms won't play your discs - if you go again try again. The Lotus room is close to half a million dollars. That I suspect would be a serious system. I have heard the Technical Brain amplifiers with magico and the sound was outstanding. I think the Lotus room would be seriously good.

I think we all need to not let the preference get in the way - I was very impressed with a lot of systems at CES that were not tube based. I decided to go back and look.

Take the AudioFederation - they sell uber accurate speakers in the $300,000 Marten Supreme's top of the line Sound Labs (which some will argue are also accurate) and they note that Audio Note speakers are not "accurate" in the same terms.

Just as Tubes and SET are not accurate in the same terms - let's just accept the fact that they clearly are NOT the same sounding and present material differently and in terms of measurements less accurate. Though it is interesting that they can still offer high IMO higher resolution.

There is a "kind of" control and ability to hit hard that a big SS system with geared for SS speaker systems have that a SET system doesn't possess.

I think though that Sir T was pretty fair in his assessment and I bet despite the bass issues in the room he was surprised that adding SET, and a Zero times no error checking, no digitial or analog filters would produce a rather clear presentation and that when looking at the technology of the system it does a terrific job of conveying the even. Even if it is not accurate in the sense of a YG Acoustics kind of way.

What I find interesting is that most people hear this the same way - it's when we then associate a perception to it "our brain" which is the ultimate filter. I took numerous psychology courses and the brain hemispheres work differently. The simplistic one is that one hemisphere controls logic mathematics, reasoning while the other is responsible for music, art, creativity.

I hear high impact slam, grip, tight, impact the same as anyone else but the part of the brain that responds is different just as it is different in me hating rap music but likeing Beethoven another person will react oppositely even though they are hearing the exact same piece of music. Music that may draw you to tears may bore another person to death.

Tubes have a second order harmonic distortion and Single Ended topology have a certain something there that for those that respond to that then really there is nothing else.

Take the big Boulder/Focal or YG Acoustics or the big hard hitting system. I can never get away from the word Hard. They have a brute force kind of sound to everything and it sounds clear enough it is more "accurate" in the established sense. The AN E system with the warts in and the softer clipping and the radiated bass pattern instead of the high excursion impact vairiety will seem softer and comparatively polite.

On the other hand for my ear the systems like the Focal/YG Acoustics can do better at shows and shorter auditions with the "stunt or show off discs" that reveal the high impact slam and spectacle material. The better tube systems sound more inviting and perhaps play to people who are controlled more by the creative artisitc hemisphere of the brain.

I suspect if one were to do a study that engineers, and math majors would gravitate more to a YG acoustics big slam system then Ennglish majors artisits creative writers where I suspect many of whom are more controlled by the creative hemisphere.

I never really thought about this much until now and it would be an interesting research study.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-01-2010, 10:59 AM
And that is why they still need to find the hot spot in that room where the depth comes back. I have the speakers (well the J which is mostly the same speaker) and there should be significant depth to the soundstage. If it is just left and right (lateral) imaging and staging then there is a problem. From the picture of the room I would toe the speaker in such that the center of the rear port is in line directly with the corner. The listener should "see" the outside of the boxes prominantly. And the toe in should go further if the results still don't get there to the point where both the speakers are literally facing eachother.

The Stage should have a multitude of layers extending far beyond the back wall. I have a Loreena McKennit album with pipers and drummers coming seemingly 20 feet from behind the wall as the procession drums move into the room - there should be greater front to back depth of stage than free standers (at least all of the free stander systems I have had here and have heard in the last 20 years). Nevertheless, it is the job of the people setting up to do it right so there you go.

I still say you guys should play Lady Gaga's at high level - or Madonna. Get some trance in there (ask them to play the "Evil Nine" Seriously - get some of the Cerwin Vega "FUN" back into the show. Not the High Altitude boring drum stunt discs that don't really have a true frame of reference. It's like playing a disc with a car explosion - that's great but there's no real reference for that and the music is uninteresting - great stunt but who cares.

RGA, I hate to bring this to ya, but the High Altitude recordings are acoustical recordings taken from a live event. Lady Gaga or Madonna's stuff is studio manufactured, and not live at all. If the speakers and associated equipment is up to snuff, you will hear a very wide image of horns in one layer, the pit(bells, xylophones, tympani and chimes) in another layer, and the percussion section (7 snares, 5 quad toms, 5 bass drums, and 5 cymbals) in another layer. There is no compression in the recording, at its contents covered almost the entire 10 octaves of musical signals. They are playing symphonic music with acoustical instruments, so there is nothing "stuntish" about this type of recording. If the system has the dynamic power to reproduce all of this accurately, and can lay it out naturally as it was live recorded, it is a good system. If it cannot do this, the system is compromised in some way. The AN system got it half right in this case, and this recording would definitely be more revealing of any acoustical attribute than both Lady Gaga and Madonna recordings. At least there is a frame of reference to it, of which there is not to any manufactured studio recording. Ray Kimber has said these recordings almost cover the entire dynamic range of SACD and are unaltered from the live recording session. I was there, I know he is right. He recorded this drum corps in the right environment for the instruments themselves. Outside, in a stadium where the air can mix with the output of the horns to create a perfect mix of fundamentals and harmonic overtones. It sounds like a real live recording, of which neither Lady Gaga or Madonna's stuff does. It is certainly more dynamically challenging for sure.

From where I was sitting in the front row I could see the outside of the boxes quite clearly.

Feanor
08-01-2010, 11:15 AM
It's really strange that Art got ruler flat bass at 25hz and Hi Fi Choice in their buyers guide puts the AN E at 22hz-3db. Not getting any much bass under 100hz as The Audio Hobby suggests seems curious to me. Perhaps you are not used to hearing bass with such low distortion.

...
According to Audio Note, (here (http://www.audionote.co.uk/products/speakers/an-e_01.shtml)), the spec for the AN E is 18 Hz to 23 kHz at -6 dB; in a basic vented box this implies a -3 dB in the low 20's. This is extraordinary performance from an 8" driver assuming maximal fidelity parameters. That is, with corner placement we canimagine say, 23 Hz at -3 dB easily enough, but not without distortion.

Is the any information about what woofer AN uses? (I'd like to get one one day!) I'm wondering about the manufacturer. Of course AN will say that it is "custom build to our requirements" -- which is the usual assertion of OEM users.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-01-2010, 11:51 AM
It's really strange that Art got ruler flat bass at 25hz and Hi Fi Choice in their buyers guide puts the AN E at 22hz-3db. Not getting any much bass under 100hz as The Audio Hobby suggests seems curious to me. Perhaps you are not used to hearing bass with such low distortion.

Well, my H-PAS subs can do 115db at 20hz with only 2 percent distortion in my small 12x15x10 room with a 150 watt amp. I know for a fact the Audio note speakers cannot come anywhere near that loud with that low distortion figure. So reality might be counter to your assertions.


Incidentally I have the High Altitude Drums and auditioned it with Ray Kimber himself doing the demonstration along with the Recording Engineer who lives about 10 minutes from my house. It sounded better on the AN E than it did with the equipment (Sony/Pass Labs.EMM Labs/Kimber cables). Though I would not really rank it up with the most engaging of music. It's a bit more of a "stunt" disc which will play to certain strengths. The Joe McQueen 10 at 86 from the same RE and ISO Mike isn't a "stunt" and sounds quite excellent.

Well, putting our personal bias aside, it did not sound great(it did sound good) in this instance, and it certainly didn't sound as good as the Lotus Granada speaker system reproducing it, , the YG system reproducing it, or the Acoustic Zen system reproducing it.

I find it rather amusing that you would find a live acoustical recording a "stunt" recording, but would lend any credence to a Lady Gaga or Madonna recording manufactured in the recording studio. There is nothing "stuntish" about acoustical brass horns, various acoustical drums, or an totally acoustical pit section recorded live outdoors(where it should) and properly mixing with the air as these instruments should be recorded. I think in this case, the word "stunt" is an extremely poor choice.


Though I do find people's listening experiences fascinating - people who actually listened and found issue with certain aspects is completely acceptable.

Agreed. Some folks listen for one thing, others another. As a recording engineer, I listen for timbre, texture, and tonality mixed with dynamics, accuracy and subtleties. If a speaker can do all of these, it is a good speaker or system. If it cannot, then it is good with what it is good with.

RGA
08-01-2010, 12:24 PM
RGA, I hate to bring this to ya, but the High Altitude recordings are acoustical recordings taken from a live event. Lady Gaga or Madonna's stuff is studio manufactured, and not live at all. If the speakers and associated equipment is up to snuff, you will hear a very wide image of horns in one layer, the pit(bells, xylophones, tympani and chimes) in another layer, and the percussion section (7 snares, 5 quad toms, 5 bass drums, and 5 cymbals) in another layer. There is no compression in the recording, at its contents covered almost the entire 10 octaves of musical signals. They are playing symphonic music with acoustical instruments, so there is nothing "stuntish" about this type of recording. If the system has the dynamic power to reproduce all of this accurately, and can lay it out naturally as it was live recorded, it is a good system. If it cannot do this, the system is compromised in some way. The AN system got it half right in this case, and this recording would definitely be more revealing of any acoustical attribute than both Lady Gaga and Madonna recordings. At least there is a frame of reference to it, of which there is not to any manufactured studio recording. Ray Kimber has said these recordings almost cover the entire dynamic range of SACD and are unaltered from the live recording session. I was there, I know he is right. He recorded this drum corps in the right environment for the instruments themselves. Outside, in a stadium where the air can mix with the output of the horns to create a perfect mix of fundamentals and harmonic overtones. It sounds like a real live recording, of which neither Lady Gaga or Madonna's stuff does. It is certainly more dynamically challenging for sure.

From where I was sitting in the front row I could see the outside of the boxes quite clearly.

I was at the session that Ray kimber himself presented at CES - I own this disc - it sounds considerably more layered on the AN system that did on the gear that Ray brought. Having said that the Sony/Pass/Emm System sounded astoundingly powerful macrodynamically but the AN system at CES sounded better with this disc than what Ray himself was presenting. Not that the Sony set-up was anything less than superb and I understand why Ray felt that the Sony speakers were the best $25,000 speakers on the market but at the same time a number of people felt they had a sandpaper like quality to themin the upper mids. And some roundly "hated" the Kimber presentation. They were in my top 10 so people simply don't always agree.

The AN E has a limit - they are standmounts after all - pedal organ and huge scale stuff is going to put them under duress. If Pedal Organ and and the high altitude drums is what you're after then NO standmount from anyone is going to do it. The E there is $7k. The Lotus room is over $400,000 and You can always budget say $100,000 for subwoofers for the E if you really want to rack plaster. I am not under the delusion that the speaker has ultimate bass slam or depth. You take the compromises as they come. That said I would rather listen to music long term on the AN E over the Sony or the Focal JM Labs Utopia or the YG Acoustics which while they have some plusses don't have the overall balance IMO across other recordings. Certainly I would understand your liking any or all of those three speakers over the AN E. I get it - I hear it too. The laws of physics can be stretched and pulled only so far.

The point with the studio material is that I view all recordings as valid and need to be represented well IMO. A quad 2905 (and lesser extent Magnepans) is quite wonderful on strings - any strings and it sounds unique and truthful but handles pop/trance/rock horribly. Owners know it going in and judging by their taste in music you can understand why they bought them in the first place. Equally, another person's music collection can illustrate why they would not touch a Magnepan/Quad with a 50 foot pole.

RGA
08-01-2010, 12:38 PM
According to Audio Note, (here (http://www.audionote.co.uk/products/speakers/an-e_01.shtml)), the spec for the AN E is 18 Hz to 23 kHz at -6 dB; in a basic vented box this implies a -3 dB in the low 20's. This is extraordinary performance from an 8" driver assuming maximal fidelity parameters. That is, with corner placement we canimagine say, 23 Hz at -3 dB easily enough, but not without distortion.

Is the any information about what woofer AN uses? (I'd like to get one one day!) I'm wondering about the manufacturer. Of course AN will say that it is "custom build to our requirements" -- which is the usual assertion of OEM users.

The Woofer is from SEAS. They are custom but it's because they have I believe 6 different woofer magnets and wiring as they go up the line. The woofers are either hemp or paper and the upper speakers use progressively different Magnets - one is Alnico silver wired and one is copper and smaller. And the Tweeters are Foster Tonnegan (sorry I forget the corresponding numbers for the non "custom" model numbers). The Alnico tweeter is in house. http://www.audionote.co.uk/comp/speakers.shtml

The AN K on down uses drivers from Vifa.

I don't think it would be too hard to find in the catalog - not as many 8 inch drivers as the other types.

As for bass - Art measured 25hz flat in room response. As engineer Donald North noted - corner loading adds 18db to low bass notes. Looking at the Stereophile graphs - look where db level is at at 18hz and then add 18db. Audio Note only needs about 13-14db of those 18db to meet their spec of 18hz-6db. In fact they're usuable to 12hz. Peter once said to me that it is more likely that people are not use to such low distortion characteristics which is why they perceive it to be less than it clearly is. Soundhounds did a level matched blind session and listeners felt the AN E was the louder speaker even though it measured 3-6db lower the competition they sell. The reason for that is because it sounds so much cleaner. Distortion was measured by Hi-Fi Choice as "commendably clean" throughout its badwidth up to 108db which is where the speakers begin to compress. Unfortunately Hi-Fi CHoice no longer puts their reviews online for free anymore - I have the AN E and J reviews in a box but it will take some time to find them. Both were Best-Buy/Recommended respectively.

But if you are looking for that kind of "accurate" sound that people perceive from the tall slim multiple stacked woofers you will NOT get it from the AN E. I mean if you think about you can't. If it sounded the same as those others I would not be passionate about them. They have to sound considerably different. If you "perceive" them to sound "right" and many people do then the other designs have to be perceived as some how "wrong." I think you know where my perception is.

If I didn't own Audio Note speakers and I had more money - I would buy KingSound or Quad Electrostatic panels or some other panel in one room and in another room a big Tannoy or big Horn based system.

You are a panel guy but you know the limitations and you know the "plusses" that a big horn can bring to the table. You also know which you prefer and you also know the weaknesses of the horns you have heard. I have always felt that the AN E and the Tannoy Westminsters are some what of a compromise between the two poles. The non damped box to get rid of stored energy as fast as possible (rather than damping and retaining unwanted resonances in the box and Higher efficiency mimicks a LOT of what a Quad 2905 does on the speed, agility, and openness front. (This is also why guys like Jack Roberts and Constantine Soo and the distributor for Quad in the US Dave Cope switched to the Audio Note E. If you are going to leave the best Quads (the 63 isn't one of them IMO) then the speaker has to sound open and clean and unboxy - despite the measurements they just have to convince a Panel guy.

The corner loading waveguide and efficiency mimics the dynamics and impact and scale of the bigger horn based systems without the shouty bright nature that is so unrelenting about a lot of horns. Of course the E doesn't have the dynamics or dynamic Ease of a big horn like a Klipschhorn but it's in the ballpark.

Thus, the E is a compromise between the two - it does not do Dynamics and Scale as well as the best horns or big time large speakers like a YG Acoustics nor is is as completely open as the better stats or single drivers like the Teresonic Ingeniums.

In other words if a Stat or Teresonic does the openness and transients at a 10/10 the E may score 8/10.

The horns have the dynamics scale at 10/10 the E gets an 8/10. The big expensive statement speakers like the Focal/YG Acoustics may get the impact and grip thing and lack of frequency variation at 10/10 the E scores two rungs down at 7 to 8/10.

It's just that IME the E scores across the board well in every area. The Panel that gets the 10/10 on the openness lack of colouration thing may only score 5/10 in the scale and dynamics arena and maybe only 2/10 in the high impact bass grip department.

The horn may be a 10/10 on dynamics and scale but a 4/10 in the other areas such as frequency or matching up to the woofer (sound treble heavy way out in front of the bass.

So they may be state of the art in some areas and rather lacking in others while the AN E is not state of the art in any area at all but good at everything. I want a system that allows me to enjoy the music and relax than one that has me sitting up front in my chair trying to pull apart everything.

Terry, my favorite dealer, who has been in this for 35+ years now has said that Audio Note is a sit back in the chair and relax speaker - his B&W's are a sit in the front of the chair and try to figure out what the next cd player or amplifier or cable will be to make it better trying to listen for things instead of to things. That's why all the guys there have AN E's at home and whatever they used to have is on the shop floor. Regardless of accuracy comments I believe that the AN E has a seductive sound - it is not a snap judge speaker - it will lose - I disliked them the first time I heard. Ray Seda a reviewer said the same thing on several occasions he could not understand the appeal - and then had a longer session and gets them and changed his mind.

I'd rather listen to music than trying to place distance between one guitar and another. If I am paying attention to that - I am out of the event. But that's just me. Obviously, others feel differently.

Mr Peabody
08-01-2010, 12:52 PM
Tubefan, your facination with tape is interesting because the content on the tape would have to come from a CD or LP unless some one is walking around with master tapes. To my knowledge those aren't availabel to the general public. So it seems you prefer a copy over the original. Reel-to-reel was dead by the time I got into high end audio so I have no idea if you could buy pre-recorded reels but I've never seen one.

Sir T, you brought up something noticed in my AN DAC but never really mentioned it as it was the only piece I heard, the sound stage was flatter than anything I've ever compared it too. What i mean by that is most sound stages seem to arc upward where the top of the AN went straight across. I was indifferent to the effect but found it interesting you heard the same thing, if that is indeed what you were talking about.

Brian K
08-01-2010, 01:40 PM
Hi, I'm new to the site but definitely not new to audio. I just had to post about my experience at the show.

I spent quite a while in the Audio Note room on Friday and Saturday. According to the guys working the room, the woofer is the hemp cone with a silver voice coil. I went in being a bit skeptical of Audio Note gear. Obviously high end audio equipment isn't cheap but Audio Note sells relatively 'simple' gear for quite a bit of money. Upon walking into the room I saw a very simple, moderately sized 97db sensitive 2-way speaker powered by 20watts of SET power. I really started to wonder if this room was even worth listening to. I left thoroughly blown away.

Whoever said the speakers don't have much response below 100hz is completely wrong. They played a bass 'rumble' track that was easily hitting down to the low 20's. It was literally making things accross the room rattle. You could feel the bass in your chest, something I can't say about any other system I heard. Of course, very few rooms played anything other than jazz and female vocals or at volume even close to the Audio Note system.

After that they put in a Neil Peart drum solo from the Rush 30 anniversary concert in Frankfurt. These stand mounted speaker were able to reproduce drums at mind boggling SPL levels. Someone at the back of the room - a good 15 feet from the speakers - had an SPL meter and it registered 95db. My friend who worked as a recording engineer said it was the highlight of the show for him to hear a drum kit reproduced so realistically at those volume levels. I have to agree. On some 'softer' material the system did seem a bit colored compared to other systems I heard but the Audio Notes were definitely one of my favorites from the show.

Also extremely impressive were the Salk Soundscape 10 loudspeakers. Not many people know of him but Jim Salk makes some AMAZING loudspeakers. Walking into the room and seeing the build quality and finish of the speakers was unreal. They were absolutely the most beautifully finished speakers I've ever seen. The scary thing is that they sound just as good as they look.

The RAAL tweeter is everything it's been hyped up to be. The was just an incredible amount of 'air' and depth to the sound these speakers produced. The sound was extremely clean, dynamic and the imaging was unbelieveable. Along with the Accuton ceramic midrange the whole room was filled with a wall of sound. It was quite literally impossible to discern that the speakers were the source of the sound, even when sitting well out of the sweet spot.

I think they were in the running for Best of Show for sound quality - up there with the Magico's - at a cost that won't require a second mortgage on your house. The only part I didn't like about the room was the source equipment. It was definitely the worst of any room at the show. He used a Squeezebox as a digital source which actually sounded alright but his CD player was simply awful cheap consumer-grade gear. I don't recall what exactly it was but it looked like he picked up at a garage sale for $3 after it had been sitting in a garage since 1993.

RGA
08-01-2010, 02:05 PM
Well, my H-PAS subs can do 115db at 20hz with only 2 percent distortion in my small 12x15x10 room with a 150 watt amp. I know for a fact the Audio note speakers cannot come anywhere near that loud with that low distortion figure. So reality might be counter to your assertions.

I would never disagree with this. I don't know if you have misread me but the AN E is not a bass hound loudspeaker. What it has is exceptional bass in room for the size and efficiency of the speaker. Audio Note uses a Snell Type A as their master curve. Peter Qvortrup is the only manufacturer I know of that on a public forum listed the speakers he likes better than his own. There is a "domestic" aspect and "sale ability" aspect at play here. The AN E is rated to 108db so it's not a wall cracker. Constantine Soo for what it's worth is using a big Genesis sub or two with the AN E. Peter has been working with some British Subwoofer manufacturers for quite some time as well. So yes there are limits and certainly with the Ultimate Drums disc - the AN E is not capable of that. But you can't say that Any standmount with a 6inch woofer has the capability either - in fact you can't say that most floorstanders from the likes of Wilson or Sonus Faber or B&W are truly capably of 115db at 20hz with less than 2% distortion. Art Dudley reviewed the Wilson Sasha (Wilson the brand that most reviewers drool over) and he mustered more bass from the AN E. $27,000 floorstander with big drivers versus a relatively small box with an 8. The point is that it hangs in with most floorstanders at far greater cost.

That would leave a LOT more cash for subwoofers. You could spend $20k on Subwoofers for the E and place them out in the room if corner loading is bothersome.




Well, putting our personal bias aside, it did not sound great(it did sound good) in this instance, and it certainly didn't sound as good as the Lotus Granada speaker system reproducing it, , the YG system reproducing it, or the Acoustic Zen system reproducing it.

That's fine. I have not heard the Lotus (though the amps with the Magico Q5 was one of the ten best rooms I heard at CES, I'm not a big fan of the YG Acoustics but less than great equipment where I heard it. The Acoustic Zen room was outstanding at CES - I did my top 5 rooms and they were in 6th place. The Audio Note dealer in Colorado and arguably one of the biggest high end dealers in the world liked the Acoustic Zen so much they picked up the line. So I am with you there. It's odd that we can agree on so many things and not quite on the other things. Although I am glad that you liked the AN set-up and can see why I and some others like it so much. That's all you can ask. Who knows maybe they will grow on you with more auditions. I disliked them intensely when i first auditioned them - so you are a step ahead of me.



I find it rather amusing that you would find a live acoustical recording a "stunt" recording, but would lend any credence to a Lady Gaga or Madonna recording manufactured in the recording studio. There is nothing "stuntish" about acoustical brass horns, various acoustical drums, or an totally acoustical pit section recorded live outdoors(where it should) and properly mixing with the air as these instruments should be recorded. I think in this case, the word "stunt" is an extremely poor choice.

Don't take it the wrong way - it is live s a showstopper but for me it is not music that I would ever just sit down and listen to for the enjoyment of listening to it. I would not sip wine listening to it, I would not want to get up and dance to it, I would not relax to it, or get involved in that CD in any emotional way shape or form. It is a "spectacle" to me similar to the scene in Terminator 2 where the sales guy puts the movie in to show the treble when T2 is frozen and gets shot into a million pieces. Certainly it's well recorded and certainly it can show off parameters of a system.

Like I said above - the AN E is still a stanmount speaker and they use a massive Type A speaker as their reference master. Peter Snell made the Type A because the Type E has limits. And this is why you are correct that speakers that bigger speakers have more capability on pedal organ or this drums CD. I own AN J speakers and they are further limited on that disc. The issue is that since I don't own a lot of Pedal Organ music (or even like it) - the Saint Saens is incredibly boring to me - and listening to the Drums CD is more about speaker testing than any sort of enjoyment what is the point of paying a huge premium to listen to music that most people will never buy? And besides for the difference in price you can always add the subwoofer - or better yet two.



Agreed. Some folks listen for one thing, others another. As a recording engineer, I listen for timbre, texture, and tonality mixed with dynamics, accuracy and subtleties. If a speaker can do all of these, it is a good speaker or system. If it cannot, then it is good with what it is good with.

Most audiophiles listen for those things and most of us hear petty good. Perception of the information that is fed to the brain is an entirely different thing. The hearing mechanism is a machine - the brain is an interpreter. Most people hear things similarly - they have to in order for recognition to work. On a bad car radio - Sarah Mclachlan's voice is recognized within seconds over Dido(assuming you were familiar with both) - even if you have not heard either singer for 5 years - you will "remember" who they are and tell them apart - $3 clock radio or 20 billion dollar stereo. People hear and recognize sound in a similar way.

The Percpetion of sound being "right" or "wrong" entirely takes place in the brain. So while you say you listen for X, Y, Z in a speaker so do I as do others. The interesting thing is that perceptions cross over from time to time and differe. Both of us like the Acoustic Zen and I think we both liked the Teresonic room similarly and both know the weakness of the room. This proves that we are "sharing a similar ear" part of the time at the very least.

I also like that Acoustic Zen can be driven with flea watt gear. It's nice to have options. Anyway, enjoy the show - hope you are able to pick up albums for cheap. CES was nice - that High Altitude Drums I got for $10 including tax. Sweet.

RGA
08-01-2010, 02:23 PM
Hi, I'm new to the site but definitely not new to audio. I just had to post about my experience at the show.

I spent quite a while in the Audio Note room on Friday and Saturday. According to the guys working the room, the woofer is the hemp cone with a silver voice coil. I went in being a bit skeptical of Audio Note gear. Obviously high end audio equipment isn't cheap but Audio Note sells relatively 'simple' gear for quite a bit of money. Upon walking into the room I saw a very simple, moderately sized 97db sensitive 2-way speaker powered by 20watts of SET power. I really started to wonder if this room was even worth listening to. I left thoroughly blown away.

Whoever said the speakers don't have much response below 100hz is completely wrong. They played a bass 'rumble' track that was easily hitting down to the low 20's. It was literally making things accross the room rattle. You could feel the bass in your chest, something I can't say about any other system I heard. Of course, very few rooms played anything other than jazz and female vocals or at volume even close to the Audio Note system.

After that they put in a Neil Peart drum solo from the Rush 30 anniversary concert in Frankfurt. These stand mounted speaker were able to reproduce drums at mind boggling SPL levels. Someone at the back of the room - a good 15 feet from the speakers - had an SPL meter and it registered 95db. My friend who worked as a recording engineer said it was the highlight of the show for him to hear a drum kit reproduced so realistically at those volume levels. I have to agree. On some 'softer' material the system did seem a bit colored compared to other systems I heard but the Audio Notes were definitely one of my favorites from the show.

Also extremely impressive were the Salk Soundscape 10 loudspeakers. Not many people know of him but Jim Salk makes some AMAZING loudspeakers. Walking into the room and seeing the build quality and finish of the speakers was unreal. They were absolutely the most beautifully finished speakers I've ever seen. The scary thing is that they sound just as good as they look.

The RAAL tweeter is everything it's been hyped up to be. The was just an incredible amount of 'air' and depth to the sound these speakers produced. The sound was extremely clean, dynamic and the imaging was unbelieveable. Along with the Accuton ceramic midrange the whole room was filled with a wall of sound. It was quite literally impossible to discern that the speakers were the source of the sound, even when sitting well out of the sweet spot.

I think they were in the running for Best of Show for sound quality - up there with the Magico's - at a cost that won't require a second mortgage on your house. The only part I didn't like about the room was the source equipment. It was definitely the worst of any room at the show. He used a Squeezebox as a digital source which actually sounded alright but his CD player was simply awful cheap consumer-grade gear. I don't recall what exactly it was but it looked like he picked up at a garage sale for $3 after it had been sitting in a garage since 1993.

Yeah I never get the lack of bass comments either. Peter brought trance music that is easily in the 20hz range - synthesizer but nevertheless a synthesizer can produce the enitre human frequency spectrum and more. Track 9 of Fabriclive 28 album at stupid levels with bass that overpowers most of the rooms beside them generating complaints.

Bass is kind of funny and it's my belief that one needs to bring several different kinds of bass recordings because the AN E shows up some recordings differently. Though certainly if the speaker latched on to a room mode at 32hz then it will seem like it has a lot more bass than a speaker that doesn't but may actually produce a flatter bass at 25 hz. Personally I want the speaker that produces the discs that people actually purchase than producing a disc that no one wants to listen to.

That's the problem with the "supposed" accurate speakers. They may be but if you can't listen to 99.9% of the world's recorded music because it sounds irritating but the .1% of the spectacle Organ and drum solo stuff sounds better on it then maybe you have bragging rights but that's all you got.

When you put on Madonna like stuff and you want to get up and dance - frequency humps and some colouration aside then it is doing its job. If the other speaker is more accurate in the measuring sense but you sit in your seat and try to analyze where the drum set is in relation to where Madonna's mic is and then try and figure out how the bass is slightly tighter on one track versus the other then you've lost the plot.

If you liked the AN E I highly recommend you try and audition the Trenner and Freidl RA Box. It is a two way box (LOL) bigger than the AN E and also can be placed in corners near wall - but has a down firing port and thus can be sealed. It's $25,000 and if you like it loud with bass - I have heard nothing better. It has much bigger scale and impact than the AN E. Personally the E is more than most would need in terms of scale and bass for all non pedal organ music. You can always add a sub or two.

The RA Box is not that tough to drive. It was the loudest room at CES by a mile. You could actually sense that the room was compressing as if breathing in and out. Say waht you will but that's pretty awesome. Out of my price range though.

tube fan
08-01-2010, 04:11 PM
Today I got them to play my vinyl at realistic levels in the Lotus room. Fantastic sound in all respects. On Cds I prefered the Audio Notes. Best sound, by far, was still via tapes (made from masters or close copies) in the Evolution Acoustics room. Not close. I went to the room 5 times, and everyone who was there with me agreed that it was the best sound, by far.

Gordon Holt used to use the goose bump factor to rate equipment. The rooms that brought me goose bumps (or tears, in two cases) were the Lotus (today at proper volume), the Evolution Acoustics (via their close-to-master tapes), the Teresonic, and the Audio Note rooms. The King electrostatic, the Quad, the YG (I hope this was one of their lesser speakers, as I hated the sound), and the Magico speakers did not move me.
For me, all art is chiefly about comunication of beauty and emotion. Numbers are fine, but, live music often gives me goose bumps, and I want my musical system to elicit the same response.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-01-2010, 04:21 PM
I was at the session that Ray kimber himself presented at CES - I own this disc - it sounds considerably more layered on the AN system that did on the gear that Ray brought. Having said that the Sony/Pass/Emm System sounded astoundingly powerful macrodynamically but the AN system at CES sounded better with this disc than what Ray himself was presenting. Not that the Sony set-up was anything less than superb and I understand why Ray felt that the Sony speakers were the best $25,000 speakers on the market but at the same time a number of people felt they had a sandpaper like quality to themin the upper mids. And some roundly "hated" the Kimber presentation. They were in my top 10 so people simply don't always agree.

I have never heard it on Ray Kimber's system, I first heard it on two of my own reference recording studio systems. The mutlichannel 7.1 ATC system, and the 7.1 mutlichannel Dunlavy all SC-V system with the two of his TSW -VI tower subs driving the bottom octaves. The multichannel presentation was breath taking to say the least. On two channels, it was very very good, but without the enveloping effect. This is what I hold all speakers to in terms of overall resolution, realistic power, effective presentation, tonality, timbre, and harmonic texture. It is a hard reality to follow for most speakers on the market, but the Legacy Whispers, The Granada, The Emerald Physics CS2.3, The Acoustic Zen, YG Acoustics did an excellent job, the Magico system and the AN system did very well to, and the other systems I tried it on just could not handle it(and some wouldn't even try).


The AN E has a limit - they are standmounts after all - pedal organ and huge scale stuff is going to put them under duress. If Pedal Organ and and the high altitude drums is what you're after then NO standmount from anyone is going to do it. The E there is $7k. The Lotus room is over $400,000 and You can always budget say $100,000 for subwoofers for the E if you really want to rack plaster. I am not under the delusion that the speaker has ultimate bass slam or depth. You take the compromises as they come. That said I would rather listen to music long term on the AN E over the Sony or the Focal JM Labs Utopia or the YG Acoustics which while they have some plusses don't have the overall balance IMO across other recordings. Certainly I would understand your liking any or all of those three speakers over the AN E. I get it - I hear it too. The laws of physics can be stretched and pulled only so far.

I agree with your first assessment, you cannot expect pedal notes from a book shelf speaker. It takes a really good subwoofer, or a speaker the size of my SC-V to do that.

I heard the YG Acoustics playing quite a large variety of music over the last two days(I went back today) and they sounded first rate on everything thrown at it. So I cannot agree with your assessment on those speakers. I certainly agree with you on the compromise that has to be made on all speakers - as none are perfect in every way.


The point with the studio material is that I view all recordings as valid and need to be represented well IMO. A quad 2905 (and lesser extent Magnepans) is quite wonderful on strings - any strings and it sounds unique and truthful but handles pop/trance/rock horribly. Owners know it going in and judging by their taste in music you can understand why they bought them in the first place. Equally, another person's music collection can illustrate why they would not touch a Magnepan/Quad with a 50 foot pole.

Speaking of the Quad 2905 (or was it the 2805 not sure), there was a setup centered around the Quad speaker. IMO this speaker would be a great midrange driver, because it had nothing in terms of bass, and next to nothing in terms of air in the highs. It's midrange was liquid beauty, stunningly present, and breathtaking though.

poppachubby
08-01-2010, 04:50 PM
Today I got them to play my vinyl at realistic levels in the Lotus room. Fantastic sound in all respects. On Cds I prefered the Audio Notes. Best sound, by far, was still via tapes (made from masters or close copies) in the Evolution Acoustics room. Not close. I went to the room 5 times, and everyone who was there with me agreed that it was the best sound, by far.

Gordon Holt used to use the goose bump factor to rate equipment. The rooms that brought me goose bumps (or tears, in two cases) were the Lotus (today at proper volume), the Evolution Acoustics (via their close-to-master tapes), the Teresonic, and the Audio Note rooms. The King electrostatic, the Quad, the YG (I hope this was one of their lesser speakers, as I hated the sound), and the Magico speakers did not move me.
For me, all art is chiefly about comunication of beauty and emotion. Numbers are fine, but, live music often gives me goose bumps, and I want my musical system to elicit the same response.

Dude, you honestly cried twice?!? You're a sensitive man. To me, there's no emotion like that, :cryin: if it's not my gear. Seems logical rather than emotional that gear priced in the 10's of thousands should sound good.

Feanor
08-01-2010, 06:31 PM
...

As for bass - Art measured 25hz flat in room response. As engineer Donald North noted - corner loading adds 18db to low bass notes. Looking at the Stereophile graphs - look where db level is at at 18hz and then add 18db. Audio Note only needs about 13-14db of those 18db to meet their spec of 18hz-6db. In fact they're usuable to 12hz. ...
Accepting the 18 dB corner boost for "low" notes, then the numbers are more or less plausible.

The closest standard Seas 8" woofer is the Presitige CA22RNX, (here (http://www.seas.no/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=115&Itemid=137)). According to my Bass Box Pro program, in a 2.7 cu.ft box, (about the size of AN's), the -18 dB point is about 16 Hz. (This make sense since the -3 db point is around 31 and the roll-off for a standard vented box is 18 dB/octave.) So AN's spec is arguably conservative stating -6 dB at 18 Hz.

On the other hand with the steep 18 dB/oct roll-off it's pretty difficult to imagine a smooth compensation with corner placement -- what is the roll-off of Donald North's 18 dB boost with rising frequency??? For me it's easier to imagine setting up for smooth response with the closed box AN-K model with a 6 dB/oct roll-off. BassBox estimates a -22 dB at 17 Hz for the same woofer in the AN-K's approx. 1 cu.ft box-- yet for that model AN makes the much less extravagant claim of "50 Hz to 20 Hz (-6 dB)".

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-01-2010, 06:53 PM
Before I get on to the other systems I heard on today I just want to give a note to Richard. I went back the audio note room, and my opinion(nor my buddies) was changed from the day before. In saying that my buddy was probably a lot less critical of this system than I was, and I think it is based on the fact that I had very high expectation of this system (probably beyond what the system was truly capable of) based on your opinions and experience with the system. If I had went into the listening sessions with the same expectations as my friend(which was none), I would have probably enjoyed it a lot more. In saying that, the same issues I had with it on Saturday, I had with it today. I do not think this speaker is capable of 20hz signals, even when tucked into a corner. I say this because my understanding of the ear /brain mechanism tells me that we absolutely cannot tell a 60hz signal from a 40hz one, and cannot tell a true 20hz or so(which you feel far more than you hear) from a 40hz (of which we can hear and and still feel as well). Not even a person blessed with perfect pitch can do it because our ears are just not as sensitive to pitch as it is at 120hz and up. What may feel like the low 20hz could really just be around 35-40hz unless you truly feel the pressure wave of 20hz, and the excitation of the air which is caused by the change in pressure. I just don't think a 8" woofer is capable of those kinds of excursions, even when ported and pushed into a corner. A 15" definitely, but not a 8".

The Electrocompaniet Room.

Generally I liked the sound of these speakers, but I had two problems with its presentation. They had two different speaker on display in two different room, and both of their presentation were totally opposite to me. The Model 1 was too low, so the presentation was a little bright without much bottom to it. The other model(can't remember) had the opposite effect - it was aimed its tweeters dispersion over my head, which made the sound just a little to dark for my taste. However, when I stood up, or sat down lower to the floor, it corrected both of the problems, but in the case of being close to the floor, brought up others.

The Acapella Room.

Featured the Acapella High Violoncello with a pair of huge tube mono blocks(if I am not mistaken). I love the sound of this system. It was very natural, relaxed, at times exciting. The presentation was not exactly forward like some horn designs I have heard, but it was just as dynamic. Driver integration was excellent, so what you heard was wave after wave of very coherent sound hitting your ears. This was another presentation that I thought was at the top of everything we had heard overall.


The High Value AV Room.

This room featured the Emerald Physics CS2.3 point source dipole speaker partnered with some very impressive electronics. The same impression that I had of the Lotus Granada speaker, I had of this one. Beautifully realistic sound, excellent tonal, timbre, and textural rendition, and nice wide open sound from top to bottom. It had dynamics to spare, and an excellent tight as a drum bass response that plummeted to the deep depths. It is no secret that both the Granada and this speaker system are dipole designs, and I really do like the way the dipole sounds with these driver implementations. Linkwitz is definately on to something, but one really has to properly place these speakers to get the best out of them.

The Eficion Room

This is another presentation dogged by the speakers being too low. The speakers frequency response seemed tilted upwards when at a seated position, leaving not much body to the sound on some of the recordings I heard on it. Once again I had to get lower towards the floor to appreciated its sound. A note to some presenters at this show - getting the right imaging height is just as important as getting the right frequency response. This is where the systems that really sounded excellent had it right, and where everyone else had it wrong.

The Highend Electronics Room.

This room featured the Conspiracy Loudspeakers by Consensus Audio. These speakers and associated equipment sounded superb. They sounded authoritive, exceptionally clean and clear, and just the perfect portions of bass, mids and highs. Great sound staging that made the performers feel like they were standing right in front of you when in a seated position. That didn't change much even when standing up. Some big band music was playing when we walked in, and it was a very realistic presentation to say the least. The depth and lateral width of the soundstage was excellent, and I could imaging this system sounding better in a larger room.

The Fritz Speaker Room.

This room had a variety of Fritz speakers on display, but the focus of the presentation was the Carbon 7's(if I am not mistaken). This speaker shares some of the same design principles in terms of crossovers as my mini monitors such as no capacitors or resistors in the crossover to the tweeter, and just one small inductor on the mid/bass driver. It uses ScanSpeak drivers, and had a very nice presentation. While this speaker went just a little deeper than my own, my had a much more precise imaging, better tonal, textural and timbre characteristics, more neutral in presentation, and quite a bit more open and extended at the top (thanks to their beryllium tweeters). Very good sound from a relatively compact speaker.

Just to curve the length of my review, I will just make small comments on the rest of what I saw.

The Sonist Rooms.

This speaker was voiced just a bit hot for my taste, as it seem like the tweeter was more prominent than the mid/bass driver. The sound was not rejectable at all, just a little more bright than I would have liked.

The Legacy/Win Room.

One of the things I noticed when walking in this room was how low the volume was, but how very balanced the speaker sounded regardless even down to the low bass. However this speaker snapped to when I put in the High Altitude drums disc. This system had great coherence, but was able to separate the individual elements when passages got thick and complex, always remaining exceptionally clean and clear and keep its composure. Imaging was excellent, and the Whispers had where very balanced from top to bottom. One of the best of show IMO.

The Salk room.

Very good sound coming from this room, but because of the choices in music I couldn't really hear what these speakers could do. The system was very competent in reproducing what I did hear.

The
Genesis/Soundscape Room

This system sounded good, but not remarkable, and once again the choice of music really didn't give me a fair evaluation of this system.

The Magico/Audio Image Room.

Man what a sweet sound from this system. I heard a four part acapella gospel group on it, and what a gorgeous sound, nice and smooth but highly detailed without sounding clinical or etchy. Another speaker that got the bass right, without it being overly ripe. Good stuff here.

Overall I really enjoyed this show, and really heard some outstanding systems, even when placed in small rooms - far too small for the system to stretch its legs. If I could take the Emerald Physic, Acoustic Zen, The legacy Whisper, YG Acoustics, or The Lotus Granada system home with me, I would be in heaven.

PeruvianSkies
08-01-2010, 09:22 PM
Is Hansen Audio represented at the show?

tube fan
08-01-2010, 09:31 PM
WOW! TTT's hearing and mine are 180 degrees off. The sound from the YG speakers was hard, strident, hot, and unlistenable (yes, to me). Ditto for the Emerald Physics (cheap in price). BTW, I own a pair of Dunlavy SC-IV speakers (from my brother), but 95% of the time I prefer the sound from my 30+ year old Fulton J speakers. IMO, all the Dunlavy speakers measure flat (in frequency response), but, IMO, all lack tonal saturation.

The Adagio d'Albinoni version by Gary Karr on Double-bass and Harmon Lewis on Organ
always brings me to tears played on my system. An interesting note: a man played a vinyl record of the Adagio by a full Orchestra and got it played in the Teresonic room. It sounded great, but I got them to play the Gary Karr version immediately after, and it was fantastic (yes, to me, but also to others present). I suspect TTT has a high tolerance for bright, hard sound (he would say clear). I go to many blind wine tastings, and I have a similar dislike for high alcohol and oaky wines, while most find them big and robust. I will continue to like low alcohol wines with good acid. Most younger drinkers love high alcohol and super ripe fruit. Rating sound systems is every bit as subjective as rating wines. It's clearly not a science at this point.

At any rate, I'll continue to listen to the Fulton Js, with the Dunlavys as backup, and continue to drink my older, lower alcohol wines (mostly pre 1986).

blackraven
08-01-2010, 09:58 PM
Hey Brian K., were the Salk speakers paired with Van Alstine gear? I've heard the Salk Veracity HTR-3's and the Song Towers. The HTR's are awesome and the build quality is excellent. The finishes he puts on his speakers is a piece of art.

tube fan
08-01-2010, 10:14 PM
Hey Brian K., were the Salk speakers paired with Van Alstine gear? I've heard the Salk Veracity HTR-3's and the Song Towers. The HTR's are awesome and the build quality is excellent. The finishes he puts on his speakers is a piece of art.
Yes, they were paired with Van Alstine equipment. To me, the sound was good (much better than the similarily priced Emerald Physics system).
..

RGA
08-02-2010, 12:01 AM
Accepting the 18 dB corner boost for "low" notes, then the numbers are more or less plausible.

The closest standard Seas 8" woofer is the Presitige CA22RNX, (here (http://www.seas.no/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=115&Itemid=137)). According to my Bass Box Pro program, in a 2.7 cu.ft box, (about the size of AN's), the -18 dB point is about 16 Hz. (This make sense since the -3 db point is around 31 and the roll-off for a standard vented box is 18 dB/octave.) So AN's spec is arguably conservative stating -6 dB at 18 Hz.

On the other hand with the steep 18 dB/oct roll-off it's pretty difficult to imagine a smooth compensation with corner placement -- what is the roll-off of Donald North's 18 dB boost with rising frequency??? For me it's easier to imagine setting up for smooth response with the closed box AN-K model with a 6 dB/oct roll-off. BassBox estimates a -22 dB at 17 Hz for the same woofer in the AN-K's approx. 1 cu.ft box-- yet for that model AN makes the much less extravagant claim of "50 Hz to 20 Hz (-6 dB)".

Peter unfortunately doesn't much care about the website - it was created by a fan of his stuff - 2 points -

1) the 8 inch woofer you linked does not look much like the AN woofer so we can't be sure it's the same - it is possible that when AN says it's a custom woofer that it truly is a custom woofer and they don't make it for anyone else. For instance there is a Tonnegan tweeter that AN uses but AN has had all the Ferro-Fluid removed - the speakers are air-cooled and there is a completely different magnet on the speaker. That's a big custom change so while you can buy the shell it's not really the same. Also, the AN E woofer is not a long throw woofer so if you see any of those cross them off consideration. Hemp, not long throw, foam surround.

2) The AN K is rated free standing according to Peter and not corner loaded like the J and E. I asked him on another forum about this and I can't remember why he said he placed a spec for free standing position. According to Peter in a corner the AN K is 36hz -6db. I also know that he is not entirely happy with the AN K in the sense that it has some compromises in the speaker that he was forced to make due to the size of Audio Note as a company. For instance he wanted a foam surround for the AN K but to get that driver he would need to order 500 pairs at a time. So he is using a rubber surround. That is an upgrade to make for the K. I think there are plenty of things he would do personally to a lot of things but it has to fit an end price that has some possibility of sale. I think the majority of companies are in the same boat.

theaudiohobby
08-02-2010, 12:02 AM
It's really strange that Art got ruler flat bass at 25hz and Hi Fi Choice in their buyers guide puts the AN E at 22hz-3db. Not getting any much bass under 100hz as The Audio Hobby suggests seems curious to me. Perhaps you are not used to hearing bass with such low distortion.

The raggednes below 200Hz in the linked in-room response graph (http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=335552&postcount=61) (in Art's room) from the "Speaker characteristics' thread strongly suggests that Art did not get ruler-flat bass to 25Hz his room, A room mode lifts the bass output somewhat between 50-100Hz, however it is pretty clear that the bass output starts dropping off from 200Hz.

RGA
08-02-2010, 12:20 AM
The raggednes below 200Hz in the linked in-room response graph (http://forums.audioreview.com/showpost.php?p=335552&postcount=61) (in Art's room) from the "Speaker characteristics' thread strongly suggests that Art did not get ruler-flat bass to 25Hz his room, A room mode lifts the bass output somewhat between 50-100Hz, however it is pretty clear that the bass output starts dropping off from 200Hz.

Yes and entirely different results in the same band with the black graph done by JA where there is a pronounced level in the same band. At 100hz-200hz the speaker is +2db - +5db with the note that this is about 2db too high according to the way JA measures. So it's 0db to +3db across the 100hz-200hz band. Art's room that area is a mess and it's also a mess for the other speaker he had - that's a room issue.

According to this graph the speaker is -2.5db at 29hz. The speaker at 18hz is down -20db maybe -22db and this is a free standing measurement. Corner gain provides an 18db gain. It's simple math. -22db +18db = -4db or -20db +18db = -2db. The speaker is 18hz -4db or 18hz -2db and Audio Note is using a conservative 18hz-6db rating which both Hi-Fi Choice and Hi-fi Critic confirm and is completely clear in JA's graph. 18db is an "ideal" with rigid walls and correctly positioned. Audio Note knows that no one will correctly do things so they don't use the whole 18db corner gain they use 14db or so. And the point is it doesn't matter - no one here is going to tell the difference between an 18hz tone and a 23hz tone. So even if we cut the 18db gain in half and say 9db and look at the -15db point which is about 22hz that would -15db +9db = 22hz -6db. Hell the tune port frequency of 29hz is more than enough for 99.999999999999999999% of all recorded music in existence. Hell 35-40hz is more than required for most music. I don't understand the persistence on this - the measurement is clear. If it makes you feel better consider it a 95hz speaker -80db for all I care. It's not like AN needs any more sales - they can't stock the dealers let alone provide any for customers. I doubt they're sweating it much.

Art has two listening rooms so it is not clear which room he took his measurement in and which one JA took his in or how close to room boundries they placed them - an inch matters.

theaudiohobby
08-02-2010, 01:28 AM
Yes and entirely different results in the same band with the black graph done by JA where there is a pronounced level in the same band. At 100hz-200hz the speaker is +2db - +5db with the note that this is about 2db too high according to the way JA measures. So it's 0db to +3db across the 100hz-200hz band. Art's room that area is a mess and it's also a mess for the other speaker he had - that's a room issue.

Different graphs that say essentially the same thing if you understand the data, The 'black graph' is a complex sum of quasi-anechoic >=300Hzand nearfield@1m <300Hz, as noted it shows a rising response (+3db) for a flat measuring speaker. However what you see here below 200Hz is falling response that suggest that the speaker's output is tailing off below this frequency, At 40Hz, it is off approx 9dB off the 300Hz response level.


Corner gain provides an 18db gain. It's simple math. -22db +18db = -4db or -20db +18db = -2db. The speaker is 18hz -4db or 18hz -2dB But we have real in-room measurements and they suggest otherwise. As you note, those lofty figures are not representative of real-world listening rooms. looking at an actual in-room response, save the for the peak centered at 60Hz, at all times the speaker is off it's midrange peak by worse than 6dB.

Art has two listening rooms so it is not clear which room he took his measurement in and which one JA took his in or how close to room boundries they placed them - an inch matters. You might want to read the comments that accompany those measurements you've just done discussing.

theaudiohobby
08-02-2010, 01:45 AM
Upon walking into the room I saw a very simple, moderately sized 97db sensitive 2-way speaker powered by 20watts of SET power. I really started to wonder if this room was even worth listening to. I left thoroughly blown away.

er no.....it's 92dB with the caveat of it's reduced output below 200Hz. I think it is probably advisable to stick to discussing to sound of the rig without quoting the specs which are a can of worms :eek6: IMO

Feanor
08-02-2010, 06:16 AM
Peter unfortunately doesn't much care about the website - it was created by a fan of his stuff - 2 points -

...
If the AN-E`s woofer is hemp and foam then it isn`t the CA22RNX for sure. Conceivably that woofer is the one used in the AN-K.

I still have misgivings about boosting below the -3 dB roll-off frequency, at least with the steep, vented box 18 dB/octave. A real expert, (with all due respect), would have to assure me that corner placement has at least a roughly complementary boost effect.

I like the idea of closed boxes. In this case boost below -3 dB is often recommented, albeit usually by electronically means rather than by corner placement. Of course the electronic boost isn't efficient in terms of the amp power required.

RGA
08-02-2010, 08:37 AM
As you note, those lofty figures are not representative of real-world listening rooms. looking at an actual in-room response.
You might want to read the comments that accompany those measurements you've just done discussing.

You might want to note that the "real world response" that JA measured in Art's room is "free standing" measurement and again not how Audio Note recommends them to be placed. Putting the speaker neart he side wall and in a corner is not the same - the Red blue graph that is shown had the speaker measured not from a corner and according to JA "they were a little more than 15" from the wall behind them" according to JA. 15 inches is more than a foot away from the corner and as such that is not corner loading - (the viscinity of the corner is not in a corner) it's free standing. I am impressed that it did well free standing against a much larger built for free standing position Harbeth. The E manual also notes that bass boom will be an issue if it is out from the corner too far - and that result is pretty clear with the "enetertaining" 31.5 hz boost.

Since it's not designed for free standing and sounds worse free standing then whatever the conclusion of how it sounds there is totally irrelevant. It would be like me putting a speaker not remotely designed for a corner in a corner and blaming the speaker for sounding muddy. The speaker is supposes to be as close to the back wall and side wall as you can get without actually touching - 1or 2 centimeters - not 15 inches. 2 inches it booms so the temptation is to do what Art did and pull them far out from the wall. I don't blame him I did the same thing for a couple of months.

RGA
08-02-2010, 09:49 AM
If the AN-E`s woofer is hemp and foam then it isn`t the CA22RNX for sure. Conceivably that woofer is the one used in the AN-K.

I still have misgivings about boosting below the -3 dB roll-off frequency, at least with the steep, vented box 18 dB/octave. A real expert, (with all due respect), would have to assure me that corner placement has at least a roughly complementary boost effect.

I like the idea of closed boxes. In this case boost below -3 dB is often recommented, albeit usually by electronically means rather than by corner placement. Of course the electronic boost isn't efficient in terms of the amp power required.

Unfortunately the AN K woofer is not a SEAS it's a Vifa.

The problem is that all the measurements that have been done have been free standing. And most of the time they're not positioned in corners because most people are not used to it. In England Audio Note will drive to your house and set it up for you to try so there is absolutely zero excuse for people living in England not to try them - costs nothing but some time (Peter also runs a high end shop in Denmark so people living there also probably have the same in home service). Here where I live you can take home anything to try so it's not like that costs anything but some gas and some time. And a couple of dealers in the US will mail you stuff so to me it's a try it and see. All speakers and gear should be a try it and see. It's not like they're the only game in town. There are other ways to get deep bass. A popular one is the old small two ways standmount with a sub in between or two subs (IMO better) and a good sub will play deeper and louder. I have never heard a truly good system doing this except for George Lucas' favorite M&K gear but even then I didn't care for the treble.

I think Peter relies heavily on the acoustics papers done by Bell Labs, L.L Bearanek the opera house designer acoustician, speaker designer who designed the boxes, Peter Snell, and N. W. McLaughlin's Loudspeakers, McGraw-Hill 1934 (Peter believes this is the best book on loudspeaker basics that has been written) and Any of Harry Ohlsons books.

And hey why not skip the AN E and look into speakers Peter thinks are the absolute best of the lot?

"The treble and midrange on the Lowthers [PM4] was one of the best I have ever encountered, and I have owned pretty much everything over the past 35 years, from Voigt's field coil driven horns, Tannoy's original 1950's Westminster's, Siemens Klangfilm and WE cinema systems to B&W DM70s, stacked Quad 57's, Beveridge System 2's, Acoustats, to Hill's Plasmatronics, Heil's full range AMT, Snell A/IIIs you name it, I have at some time or another had them all and what they all has taught me is not insubstantial.

I rate the Lowther PM4 system and the Siemens systems as the best overall, but they are domestically almost impossible unless you live in a mansion, and very few of us do, so something smaller is needed.
Which is why we are here!" http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=192627&highlight=McLaughlin+Peter+Qvortrup&r=

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-02-2010, 10:44 AM
WOW! TTT's hearing and mine are 180 degrees off. The sound from the YG speakers was hard, strident, hot, and unlistenable (yes, to me). Ditto for the Emerald Physics (cheap in price). BTW, I own a pair of Dunlavy SC-IV speakers (from my brother), but 95% of the time I prefer the sound from my 30+ year old Fulton J speakers. IMO, all the Dunlavy speakers measure flat (in frequency response), but, IMO, all lack tonal saturation.

For folks that love the more ephonic side of listening, yes the SC-IV would be a little short on tonal saturation. For those of us that prefer accuracy over euphonics, the Dunlay SC-V is a revalation. I want to hear what is exactly on my tapes or hard drives. I don't need it sprinkled with salt and pepper just to make it palatable.


The Adagio d'Albinoni version by Gary Karr on Double-bass and Harmon Lewis on Organ
always brings me to tears played on my system. An interesting note: a man played a vinyl record of the Adagio by a full Orchestra and got it played in the Teresonic room. It sounded great, but I got them to play the Gary Karr version immediately after, and it was fantastic (yes, to me, but also to others present). I suspect TTT has a high tolerance for bright, hard sound (he would say clear). I go to many blind wine tastings, and I have a similar dislike for high alcohol and oaky wines, while most find them big and robust. I will continue to like low alcohol wines with good acid. Most younger drinkers love high alcohol and super ripe fruit. Rating sound systems is every bit as subjective as rating wines. It's clearly not a science at this point.

What sounds good to me does not need any co-signing from others. The gentleman I was with like the AN system a little more than I did, and he didn't like the Acoustic Zen set up, and I did. Personally I think he sat too close, which is why is didn't like it. I told him there is a fusion point for each speaker, and you need to either sit at the point, or futher away. The second day he stood back more, and end up loving the system as I did. Our own taste is highly subjective, and not easily transferable.


At any rate, I'll continue to listen to the Fulton Js, with the Dunlavys as backup, and continue to drink my older, lower alcohol wines (mostly pre 1986).

Enjoy!

tube fan
08-02-2010, 10:50 AM
The sources for the tapes in the Evolution Acoustics room were all master tapes or "safes" of master tapes. They worked with The Mastering Labs, Mobile Fidelity, Reference Recordings, and the Super Audio Center to get these priceless tapes. The sound they produced was, far and away, better than anything else. I simply cannot understand how anyone could fail to appreciate the beauty and clarity of that sound. Unfortunately, unless you get access to master tapes, you cannot buy that sound.

All this stresses the importance of the source of various musical systems. For me, master tapes, or close copies, come first in fidelity, followed by vinyl, followed by CDs.
I was totally surprised by the realistic sound in the Audio Note room using only CDs. I usually fled any CD based system within a few minutes, enough time to know I hated the sound. To my delight, the Audio Note, driven by all tube (?) CD players (either the $5,500 CD3.1/Il or the $9,500 CD4.1) sounded anything but bright and hard. I stayed for hours each day listening to the beauty coming from this system, driven by the 27 watt
Jinro integrated amp. No, the speakers could not be positioned correctly (air conditioner). Yes, the room was far too small. Yet the sounds were wonderful and realistic on the type of music I usually play at home. For example, I went to Pearls Jazz Club each monday for months to hear a full jazz band. I went with many different people, and all were SHOCKED by how mellow the live sound was compared to their stereo systems. They played a big band jazz CD in the Audio Note room that sounded very close to what I heard dozens of times live. The same applies to classical music live and what I heard via the Audio Note system. When it comes to pop music live, you are not hearing direct sound, but a whole amplification system and speakers. Ditto for trance or club music. I wonder how the cheaper Audio Note speakers and integrated gear sounds compared to what I heard. If it's close, I'll be tempted to buy.

Brian K
08-02-2010, 10:53 AM
er no.....it's 92dB with the caveat of it's reduced output below 200Hz. I think it is probably advisable to stick to discussing to sound of the rig without quoting the specs which are a can of worms :eek6: IMO

Not according to their website (http://www.audionote.co.uk/products/speakers/an-e_01.shtml). There's alot of different versions of the AN-E and I'm not sure which was on display but it was certainly VERY loud for a 20watt amp so I am inclined to believe their numbers.

RGA
08-02-2010, 11:06 AM
Tube fan.

Personally speaking you don't really need to look at the expensive stuff from Audio Note. The lower stuff gets you there. It's a refinment process going up the lines. Art's AN E/Spe HE is $7,500 and that's the speaker I have my eyes on. The external crossover in the more expensive lines is better but unless you really sit them side by side it's not like it's going to be terribly noticeable. To me it is more about refinment but the general frequency response and drive and bass is unchanged. Resolution increases though but you then need the partnering gear so the amount of money gets stupid fast.

I saw the picture of the room by a fellow reviewer - what a stupid place for the air conditioner - why don't they use those top of the wall air conditioners like they do in Asia - those are not placed in corners. Close to the side wall kinda is okay but since they factor the back wall into the meausrements - well I guess it's the best they could do given what they had. Still it's tough to lose 12-18db in the 20hz range by placing them the way the did. Still, sounds like people felt they did okay given the hands behind their back positioning. :12:

RGA
08-02-2010, 11:45 AM
Not according to their website (http://www.audionote.co.uk/products/speakers/an-e_01.shtml). There's alot of different versions of the AN-E and I'm not sure which was on display but it was certainly VERY loud for a 20watt amp so I am inclined to believe their numbers.

Sensitivity is not all that much of an indicator anyway. Audio Note SETs are generally quite robust. My OTO Phono SE is a 10 watt amp (4.2 watts undistorted according to Hi-Fi Choice) and my J is rated 93db sensitive - 89.2 db not in a corner (though it is easier to drive than the AN E as the J never dips below 5 ohms while the E drops to 3.6 ohms).

The funny thing is does any of that blather matter. I never pay attention to the manufacturer specs - I actually wish Audio Note simply would pull them all off the net. Anyone buying them off the spec is not worthy as Wayne and Garth would say. The AN E will belt it out with deep bass with an 8 watt (4 undistorted) amp. That tells you that the speaker is easy to drive - so posting the spec is meaningless. The AN E in Art's room has more bass than the Wilson Sasha with 2 8 inch woofers and a 7 inch midrange unit and weighs in at 200lbs each http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product_html/sasha_specs.html

I heard them at CES and Art is not deaf. The E easily takes them out. (Though the Wilson will play it all a lot louder to be fair and they are a first rate sounding loudspeaker!

Put them in a corner hard with the same 8 watt amp and play a synthesizer note at 20hz (or a frequency test disc from Sound and Vision or the like) and feel it - if you can feel it it is outputting the frequency. That tells you it can can do 20hz. It's not rocket science. One doesn't need a graph - the CD is cheap - something like $10. In fact with that CD and an SPL meter you can make your own graph. Cheap SPL meters are not terribly accurate at the frequency extremes though - but still - there are better ones.

Heck for free you can download frequency toneburst files and do this for free (assuming you trust the quality of the files). But for $20 this one probably works ok http://www.linkwitzlab.com/burst-cd.htm

This one looks good too - http://www.graniteaudio.com/phono/page7.html

RGA
08-02-2010, 11:51 AM
Tube Fan

I would like to get into the tape arena. I know absolutely ZILCH about tapes. I see a store downtown selling reel to reel machines and several tapes to go with them - is this what you are talking about?

I would definitely like to explore this route - any suggestions where to start?

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-02-2010, 12:25 PM
You might want to note that the "real world response" that JA measured in Art's room is "free standing" measurement and again not how Audio Note recommends them to be placed. Putting the speaker neart he side wall and in a corner is not the same - the Red blue graph that is shown had the speaker measured not from a corner and according to JA "they were a little more than 15" from the wall behind them" according to JA. 15 inches is more than a foot away from the corner and as such that is not corner loading - (the viscinity of the corner is not in a corner) it's free standing. I am impressed that it did well free standing against a much larger built for free standing position Harbeth. The E manual also notes that bass boom will be an issue if it is out from the corner too far - and that result is pretty clear with the "enetertaining" 31.5 hz boost.

Since it's not designed for free standing and sounds worse free standing then whatever the conclusion of how it sounds there is totally irrelevant. It would be like me putting a speaker not remotely designed for a corner in a corner and blaming the speaker for sounding muddy. The speaker is supposes to be as close to the back wall and side wall as you can get without actually touching - 1or 2 centimeters - not 15 inches. 2 inches it booms so the temptation is to do what Art did and pull them far out from the wall. I don't blame him I did the same thing for a couple of months.

Richard,
Here is where I am running into problem understanding this placement choice. You state the the AN speaker gets an 18db boost in the low frequencies by corner placements, but that cannot be true for a stand mount speaker. In order to get the full 9db per speaker (3db gain per surface per speaker) the speaker must couple directly with the floor and wall directly, or coupling efficiency takes a hit. Since the speaker is on a stand, it is not coupling with the floor efficiently, which means the gain is going to be somewhat less than 3db. Again, since the speaker is facing inwards towards the listening seat, there is no direct coupling of the driver to the wall. So you lose another 6db of efficiency for a number a bit smaller than that .

In order to gain the full 9db boost per speaker, the speaker must be tucked in flat to the wall(which would created a port resonant frequency) which would allow the bass driver to effective couple with all wall surfaces, and place the speaker directly on the floor which would allow it to more effiecient couple with the floor, much like a subwoofer in a corner is placed. Putting the speaker in the corner as you state will give it a proximity boost, but it will not be a full 9db per speaker.

RGA
08-02-2010, 04:17 PM
Yes from my reading of it the speaker does not achieve a full 9db per speaker but it doesn't need the full 9db to meet spec. The port is designed for corner loading. The original Snell was quite a bit different. The AN E is measured by Audio Note in the corner on a stand and they have all the best measuring equipment that is available. So the matter comes down to trust. Do people think they lied. I don't see the point because even if you cut the 18db gain in half it still would be 22-23hz -6db and usable at 18hz. Since next to nothing is recorded down there it's a non issue. Unfortunately, I can't find the thread on your question at AudioAsylum. If I run across it I will post it. Send em an e-mail if you're curious.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-02-2010, 04:24 PM
Yes from my reading of it the speaker does not achieve a full 9db per speaker but it doesn't need the full 9db to meet spec. The port is designed for corner loading. The original Snell was quite a bit different. The AN E is measured by Audio Note in the corner on a stand and they have all the best measuring equipment that is available. So the matter comes down to trust. Do people think they lied. I don't see the point because even if you cut the 18db gain in half it still would be 22-23hz -6db and usable at 18hz. Since next to nothing is recorded down there it's a non issue. Unfortunately, I can't find the thread on your question at AudioAsylum. If I run across it I will post it. Send em an e-mail if you're curious.

I don't think they lied per se, but they appear to do an industry standard...fudge the numbers a bit. But having the port that close to a wall might confirm some of my impressions on its corner loading, and its effect on the mid bass.

RGA
08-02-2010, 05:18 PM
I don't think they lied per se, but they appear to do an industry standard...fudge the numbers a bit. But having the port that close to a wall might confirm some of my impressions on its corner loading, and its effect on the mid bass.

I looked at the picture of the Audio Note room at California Audio Show - they did not have the speakers in the corner. An air conditioner seemed to be placed against the wall. So sadly this was not ideal. At CES Peter and the people he brought had the cheaper room and AudioFederation had the half million room and Peter's room sounded better until AudioFederation put them hard in corners. Like I say - inches matter - it has to be practically touching both the side and the back wall. The pictures I see of the California Show it looks like at least a foot from the back wall and right next to the side wall. I dunno - I don't like My J positioned there - a little muddy and wompy in the bass - but I guess that's the best Mario could do with it.

I found this - on AudioAsylum http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=260343&highlight=floor+peter+qvortrup&r=

Actually this one is closer but I still can't find the one that addresses the floor specifically and it was there someplace http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=223004&highlight=floor+peter+qvortrup&r=

RGA
08-02-2010, 05:37 PM
The most recent response was when Peter discussed both the measurements done by Stereophile. http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=287138&highlight=18db+peter+qvortrup&r=

theaudiohobby
08-02-2010, 05:41 PM
Not according to their website (http://www.audionote.co.uk/products/speakers/an-e_01.shtml). There's alot of different versions of the AN-E and I'm not sure which was on display but it was certainly VERY loud for a 20watt amp so I am inclined to believe their numbers.

Independent measurements indicate that the actual sensitivity is closer to 92dB which is a more believable figure for a speaker of this size and design. And given the appropriate material a 20W amp can drive 92dB/1m speaker to very relatively high SPLs.

theaudiohobby
08-02-2010, 05:45 PM
I don't think they lied per se, but they appear to do an industry standard...fudge the numbers a bitThat a huge understatement, specifying a 92dB speaker as 98dB is a huge fudge.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-02-2010, 06:49 PM
I looked at the picture of the Audio Note room at California Audio Show - they did not have the speakers in the corner. An air conditioner seemed to be placed against the wall. So sadly this was not ideal. At CES Peter and the people he brought had the cheaper room and AudioFederation had the half million room and Peter's room sounded better until AudioFederation put them hard in corners. Like I say - inches matter - it has to be practically touching both the side and the back wall. The pictures I see of the California Show it looks like at least a foot from the back wall and right next to the side wall. I dunno - I don't like My J positioned there - a little muddy and wompy in the bass - but I guess that's the best Mario could do with it.

I found this - on AudioAsylum http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=260343&highlight=floor+peter+qvortrup&r=

Actually this one is closer but I still can't find the one that addresses the floor specifically and it was there someplace http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=speakers&n=223004&highlight=floor+peter+qvortrup&r=

Everytime I see the name Richard "BassNut"Greene, I just want to cry. I really miss that man, he truly was my mentor when he was here.

Getting back to the issue at hand; it is my understanding (and it was confirmed by RG) that in order to get the kind of boost you are looking for the room has to be totally sealed, and the room dimensions must be able to support any boost at 23hz and below by its length(it would have to be at least 25' down a wall for a boost at 23hz). So it would stand to reason that in smaller rooms less than 25' in length, you are not going to get much support at 23hz, and that boost that AN relies on won't support a 23hz extension. As the room gets smaller and smaller, the cutoff point of the AN speaker would presumably get higher and higher. This is why I feel that the AN speaker did not have the frequency extension to reproduce the bass pedals of a Hammond B-3, the room was not big enough to get the gain. So that makes all claims of low frequency response a moving target based on the size of the room. Plus, the amount of driver movement to reproduce those low notes would have a doppler effect on the higher frequencies that the driver also has to reproduce. That can't be good on the upper bass and midrange frequencies when deep bass is playing through the driver. That is why it is better to separate the deep bass drivers from the ones playing the mid bass and higher frequencies(a subwoofer for example)

Also the walls would have to be stiff as bricks, otherwise it will release any energy to the other side of the wall and not provide much boost at all. This is especially so

The second issue is having a speaker that close to a wall really does effect image depth, as you are effectively using the walls and an extension to the front baffle of the speakers, and in setups like this, image depth is compromised in favor of bass boost.

Richard Greene also makes another point, and it completely correlates to what I heard in the AN room. Corner placement is most advantageous to the upper bass, much more so than the deepest bass. In the AN room, every piece of music with the male voice, every piece of classic music that had lower strings, and brass had either a chestiness, or sounded overly ripe and much too warm than reality would have them be.

Just some food for thought.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-02-2010, 06:52 PM
Not according to their website (http://www.audionote.co.uk/products/speakers/an-e_01.shtml). There's alot of different versions of the AN-E and I'm not sure which was on display but it was certainly VERY loud for a 20watt amp so I am inclined to believe their numbers.

I must tell you this, I have a speaker with a 92dpw sensitivity, and a 20 watt amp would drive that speaker to senseless levels. So, 92dpw is more realistic than 98dpw, given that most speakers with the higher numbers are horn loaded and the AN is not.

tube fan
08-02-2010, 09:20 PM
I've just spent several hours playing the same vinyl on my home system that I played at the show. The Adgio d'Albinoni sounded better on my system than on any at the show (I played it at Magico, Teresonic, and Lotus rooms, and at a few others). The double bass and pipe organ are a tough test of a system. You have to FEEL the organ (and the lowest notes of the double bass). However, on this stupendous record you also should feel the power and beauty of Karr's playing in your heart. It's not a matter of frequency response. Karr sounds like he is playing for the gods. A lot of it has to do with flow and momentum and tiny subtle details. The Chet vinyl (with an all-star group of Chet Baker, Herbie Mann, Pepper Adams, Bill Evans, Kenny Burrell, Paul Chambers, Connie Kay, and Philly Joe Jones) also sounded better through my Fulton Js than through any of the rooms I played it at (almost all with a tt). Ditto for the great Muddy Waters folk singer vinyl recording. I played this in the JBL room, and several people thanked me for suppling some real music. The sound of the John Coltrane and Jonny Hartman vinyl was matched at the Lotus room (for, what, $400,000?). Here I got to play it at the proper volume. They were going to play the same cut on their record, but the record was defective, so I offered my copy. Perhaps this was why they allowed me to turn up the volume.
The moral of this is: don't believe that the best older equipment cannot match, and often, surpass what is considered the current best. For example, I have yet to hear an electrostatic speaker that matches the KLH 9 or the Quad ESL 57 (with the possible exception of the new King electrostatic). Unfortunately, the turntable in the King room was giving off too much flutter for the super sensitive King, so I had to listen to CDs. The sound was quite good, and nothing like the CD sound in the Audio Note room. The strenghts of each system matched the weaknesses of the other: super detail vs tonal saturation; deep bass vs limitless highs. The King sounded like an almost full range version of the Quad 57, and that is saying a lot. The King seems to be quite hard on other equipment, but, at $8,000, they are a steal. Still, I prefered the Audio Notes, especially driven by the outstanding Jinro.

tube fan
08-02-2010, 09:50 PM
Tube Fan

I would like to get into the tape arena. I know absolutely ZILCH about tapes. I see a store downtown selling reel to reel machines and several tapes to go with them - is this what you are talking about?

I would definitely like to explore this route - any suggestions where to start?

Unfortunately, close copies of master tapes, if available, would cost hundreds (and would be worth it!). Maybe someone is going to bring back tapes at an affordable price. There was a time we could buy tapes, but then came the crapy cassette. CDs almost killed off vinyl, but it now seems vinyl will outlive CDs! Turntables and cartridges are far from perfect, and, IMO, current vinyl cannot come close to matching master tapes (or very close copies). Tapes through the Evolution Acoustics speakers sounded better than the best of the King, Audio Note, and Lotus systems: clear, but not hard; tonally saturated, but not soft or slow; unlimited dynamics both micro and macro.

RGA
08-02-2010, 10:02 PM
Sir T.

I think you are right in the sense that AN puts the speaker in their best theoretical light - correct size room, perfectly rigid walls but to be fair to Peter he is in Europe and probably lives in a home where the walls are not made of plaster like they are here. So he may very well have the room and rigid walls to get those numbers. Martin Colloms may as well. And some may say he should advertise to where most of his consumers live - only 5% of AN's business is in North America. So it's a lot of European solid walls.

The interesting thing about all the measurements is how it seems people measure them so differently. It is kind of nice to see so many AN E reviews. Hi-Fi Choice measured them and they got both the -6db point and 94.5db on the non high efficiency version of the AN E. That actually bettered the AN spec for the model. So did the J in their bass test.

Stereophile has yet to do a corner measurement - well except for Art Dudley and for some reason people seem to assume he doesn't know how to measure - he does.

"for maximum bass reinforcement (footnote 3). I tried that, and while I was amazed by their extension—flat to 25Hz!

Footnote 3: For the newbie: This isn't a horn effect, but rather a simple means of countering the difficulty that a small loudspeaker has when it tries to disperse low-frequency sounds toward the listener. (As notes descend below the frequency whose half-wavelength equals the diameter of the radiating surface, dispersion becomes increasingly spherical and nondirect.) To place a loudspeaker near one or more room boundaries is to close off that many paths to the meandering low-frequency waveform, and thus increase the likelihood that bass energy will make its way to the listening area.—Art Dudley"

Brian K
08-02-2010, 10:07 PM
Independent measurements indicate that the actual sensitivity is closer to 92dB which is a more believable figure for a speaker of this size and design. And given the appropriate material a 20W amp can drive 92dB/1m speaker to very relatively high SPLs.

Have you ever even heard the speakers we're talking about? I honestly don't know what you're basing your assertations on. I'm assuming you weren't even there and you haven't cited any sources. I sat in the room with this system for at least an hour on two seperate occassions at the show. I was in the room with someone who had an SPL meter that measured 95db at least 12 feet from the speakers during a bass track. I spoke with at least 7-8 people in in that room who agreed the sound levels were "unbelievable".

I'm not an Audio Note fanboy and I don't care about 'winning' but based on my listening experiences of the system setup by Audio Note themselves, I'm inclined to believe their (Audio Notes) sensitivity numbers.

EDIT:

My response was probably overly harsh. I'm not trying to start a flame war and I understand why people are skeptical of numbers that seem so unbelievable. The number one rule in audio is "Don't believe it unless you've heard it with your own ears". I also believe very little of what I read from manufacturers and reviewers. So far that skepticism has served me very well. I went into the room extremely skeptical and walked out convinced that the system was the real deal.

RGA
08-02-2010, 10:09 PM
Unfortunately, close copies of master tapes, if available, would cost hundreds (and would be worth it!). Maybe someone is going to bring back tapes at an affordable price. There was a time we could buy tapes, but then came the crapy cassette. CDs almost killed off vinyl, but it now seems vinyl will outlive CDs! Turntables and cartridges are far from perfect, and, IMO, current vinyl cannot come close to matching master tapes (or very close copies). Tapes through the Evolution Acoustics speakers sounded better than the best of the King, Audio Note, and Lotus systems: clear, but not hard; tonally saturated, but not soft or slow; unlimited dynamics both micro and macro.

Hi

I read a review at the VSAC show where Audio Note had a Tape machine and the guy loved the sound of the room. So that had my interest up and your comments mirror those. I am sure Peter has a deep collection of tape and reel to reel machines. He has warehouses of stuff from competitors. I am always amused to see a Picture of an Avante Garde Duo in his closet behind a bike. Put $25,000 speakers in the closet -

Check out the ridiculous size of this room the AN E was in - Probably didn't have enough speaker cable to put them in the corners.

http://www.theanalogdept.com/vsac08.htm

Brian K
08-02-2010, 10:49 PM
Unfortunately, close copies of master tapes, if available, would cost hundreds (and would be worth it!). Maybe someone is going to bring back tapes at an affordable price. There was a time we could buy tapes, but then came the crapy cassette. CDs almost killed off vinyl, but it now seems vinyl will outlive CDs! Turntables and cartridges are far from perfect, and, IMO, current vinyl cannot come close to matching master tapes (or very close copies). Tapes through the Evolution Acoustics speakers sounded better than the best of the King, Audio Note, and Lotus systems: clear, but not hard; tonally saturated, but not soft or slow; unlimited dynamics both micro and macro.

I agree completely about the Evolution Acoustics system. Hearing that system was one of the highlights of the show for me. The thing that impressed me the most was that it was one of only a couple systems that just seemed to disappear completely and play the music as if it was floating in the air. The RAAL tweeter/Accuton midrange combos in that system and the Salk SoundScapes really were terrific at presenting a huge, holographic soundstage. It was really something special to hear. I literally could not discern that the music was coming from the speakers. They just seemed to form a holographic layer that came from the space around the speakers and enveloped me with sound. I thought these systems beat out my other favorites from the show (the Magico and JBL systems) in alot of aspects.

RGA
08-02-2010, 10:59 PM
Have you ever even heard the speakers we're talking about? I honestly don't know what you're basing your assertations on. I'm assuming you weren't even there and you haven't cited any sources. I sat in the room with this system for at least an hour on two seperate occassions at the show. I was in the room with someone who had an SPL meter that measured 95db at least 12 feet from the speakers during a bass track. I spoke with at least 7-8 people in in that room who agreed the sound levels were "unbelievable".

I'm not an Audio Note fanboy and I don't care about 'winning' but based on my listening experiences of the system setup by Audio Note themselves, I'm inclined to believe their (Audio Notes) sensitivity numbers.

If you need sources - Hi-Fi Choice is saying it meets the bass spec and the sensitivity spec (bettering it as AN posted 94db at that time and Hi-Fi Choice for 94.5db).

Then you have

Martin Colloms (the measurements guy for Stereophile, Hi Fi News, Hi-Fi Critic, and is an expert witness and electroacoustics engineer from Oxford - and chaired the Audio Engineering Society, author of several volumes of loudspeaker design books and the founder of Monitor Audio loudspeakers. (What do you have to do in order to be accepted as a guy who can hold up an SPL meter and measure a frequency tone. If Martin Colloms can't do it nobody out there can. Do we have to show his resume http://www.colloms.com/

Quote from his AN E review: "I checked out the speaker in the lab and confirmed the high 94dB sensitivity, with 3.6 ohm minimum impedance, a wide 28Hz to 20kHz (+/-3dB) response when adjusted for near wall placement, and a 29Hz tuned port with an in-room -6dB point of 18Hz at reasonable drive levels. Hi-Fi News June 2002

Corner gain adds 3db to sensitivity - AN gives you the corner spec. 95db corner. 98db on the HE models. Measured not in a corners you get 91-92db and 94-95db respectively. Seems reasonable to me .

Geoffcin
08-03-2010, 02:43 AM
I don't think they lied per se, but they appear to do an industry standard...fudge the numbers a bit. But having the port that close to a wall might confirm some of my impressions on its corner loading, and its effect on the mid bass.

And I think your being way too generous. As you know (probably more than anyone here), ALL sensitivity readings are done at 1m anechoic. This is the industry standard and EVERYONE uses it except one funny little speaker company that thinks it's OK to measure their speaker in a way that adds many dB to the numbers. It's inaccurate to call these 98dB speakers when the way they measure them add 6-8dB or MORE (depending on frequency) to the readings.

Brian K
08-03-2010, 08:39 AM
And I think your being way too generous. As you know (probably more than anyone here), ALL sensitivity readings are done at 1m anechoic. This is the industry standard and EVERYONE uses it except one funny little speaker company that thinks it's OK to measure their speaker in a way that adds many dB to the numbers. It's inaccurate to call these 98dB speakers when the way they measure them add 6-8dB or MORE (depending on frequency) to the readings.

You make a valid point about 1m anechoic being the industry standard for measurement. Their numbers wouldn't be as high as they are if they used that setup for the measurements. To measure the system in a setup that's completely contrary to the way the designer intended (and has stated numerous times) just doesn't make alot of sense. The whole speaker is designed around this corner loading and to measure it in an anechoic environment will give results that are completely irrepresentitive of the actual performance when the setup is done as intended by the designer. In order to get flat frequency response from them they must be corner loaded as the designers intended.

Geoffcin
08-03-2010, 08:55 AM
You make a valid point about 1m anechoic being the industry standard for measurement. Their numbers wouldn't be as high as they are if they used that setup for the measurements. To measure the system in a setup that's completely contrary to the way the designer intended (and has stated numerous times) just doesn't make alot of sense. The whole speaker is designed around this corner loading and to measure it in an anechoic environment will give results that are completely irrepresentitive of the actual performance when the setup is done as intended by the designer. In order to get flat frequency response from them they must be corner loaded as the designers intended.

Actually the frequency response from them is far from flat, corner loaded or not.

Many speakers are designed for specific placement. This does not mean that the manufacturer has the right to claim a specification that is in total disregard of standard measurment practice. FWIW; you could corner load any speaker and come up with wildly enhanced readings. It would be very tempting to fudge the data that way but as far as I know there's only one speaker company that does.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-03-2010, 10:11 AM
And I think your being way too generous. As you know (probably more than anyone here), ALL sensitivity readings are done at 1m anechoic. This is the industry standard and EVERYONE uses it except one funny little speaker company that thinks it's OK to measure their speaker in a way that adds many dB to the numbers. It's inaccurate to call these 98dB speakers when the way they measure them add 6-8dB or MORE (depending on frequency) to the readings.

I know Geoff, but I am trying to be nice....something I obviously have not been this week on this site. :devil:

Geoffcin
08-03-2010, 11:16 AM
I know Geoff, but I am trying to be nice....something I obviously have not been this week on this site. :devil:

Foo-eee!! :mad5: In any case this argument was leading the thread way off line, and I've already heard way too much about that one brand for one lifetime! :crazy:

Thanks for posting your thoughts about the show. Sounds like it was a real blast!

RGA
08-03-2010, 11:25 AM
You make a valid point about 1m anechoic being the industry standard for measurement. Their numbers wouldn't be as high as they are if they used that setup for the measurements. To measure the system in a setup that's completely contrary to the way the designer intended (and has stated numerous times) just doesn't make alot of sense. The whole speaker is designed around this corner loading and to measure it in an anechoic environment will give results that are completely irrepresentitive of the actual performance when the setup is done as intended by the designer. In order to get flat frequency response from them they must be corner loaded as the designers intended.

Don't bother - these are the same people who believe that testing a Ferrari in off road tests represents the capability of the Ferrari. And conclude that the Ferrari sucks because it can't go over a bolder like a Hummer. You design a test for the capability of that which you are testing. In psychology you call this "validity" - You do not test something in conditions that it was not remotely designed to operate. The AN is designed to operate in a corner and to use the room as part of the overall sound - all testing must be done with the speaker operating in that environment or it's not a valid test. All they have is what is known as "reliability."

Reliability is a test that will yield the same results over and over and over. Which is fine if what you are testing is valid. Thus, if you create a test made for off road vehicles to see how the shocks hold up going over bolders then for ALL vehicles designed for that you can get highly reliable and accurate results and you can make very accurate and reliable comparisons. In audio the test is designed for free standing speakers - all speakers compared for that would be valid - all other kinds of speakers should not be measured because they will be unfairly treated. Just as the Ferrari is unfairly treated against a Hummer and a Hummer would be unfairly treated against a set of tests designed for speed and handling. This is not rocket science - it is science 9 - validity (the range rule for old geezer posters) vs reliability. And the people arguing against it merely have an axe to grind.

No one treats all the different car designs in the same way and yet people are willing to do so with speakers (those people need a searchlight to find their IQ). The fact that 99% of cars are not built for off road does not mean that we should force the 1% that are built of off road cars to be tested like the other 99% - And the silly thing is it is the panel guys if anyone who should "get" that.

bobsticks
08-03-2010, 11:31 AM
I know Geoff, but I am trying to be nice....something I obviously have not been this week on this site. :devil:

Lolz...

frenchmon
08-03-2010, 11:37 AM
I've just spent several hours playing the same vinyl on my home system that I played at the show. The Adgio d'Albinoni sounded better on my system than on any at the show (I played it at Magico, Teresonic, and Lotus rooms, and at a few others). The double bass and pipe organ are a tough test of a system. You have to FEEL the organ (and the lowest notes of the double bass). However, on this stupendous record you also should feel the power and beauty of Karr's playing in your heart. It's not a matter of frequency response. Karr sounds like he is playing for the gods. A lot of it has to do with flow and momentum and tiny subtle details. The Chet vinyl (with an all-star group of Chet Baker, Herbie Mann, Pepper Adams, Bill Evans, Kenny Burrell, Paul Chambers, Connie Kay, and Philly Joe Jones) also sounded better through my Fulton Js than through any of the rooms I played it at (almost all with a tt). Ditto for the great Muddy Waters folk singer vinyl recording. I played this in the JBL room, and several people thanked me for suppling some real music. The sound of the John Coltrane and Jonny Hartman vinyl was matched at the Lotus room (for, what, $400,000?). Here I got to play it at the proper volume. They were going to play the same cut on their record, but the record was defective, so I offered my copy. Perhaps this was why they allowed me to turn up the volume.
The moral of this is: don't believe that the best older equipment cannot match, and often, surpass what is considered the current best. For example, I have yet to hear an electrostatic speaker that matches the KLH 9 or the Quad ESL 57 (with the possible exception of the new King electrostatic). Unfortunately, the turntable in the King room was giving off too much flutter for the super sensitive King, so I had to listen to CDs. The sound was quite good, and nothing like the CD sound in the Audio Note room. The strenghts of each system matched the weaknesses of the other: super detail vs tonal saturation; deep bass vs limitless highs. The King sounded like an almost full range version of the Quad 57, and that is saying a lot. The King seems to be quite hard on other equipment, but, at $8,000, they are a steal. Still, I prefered the Audio Notes, especially driven by the outstanding Jinro.


Send me the Chet Vinyl....I want to see if it sounds better on my system as well.:biggrin5:

Feanor
08-03-2010, 11:48 AM
And I think your being way too generous. As you know (probably more than anyone here), ALL sensitivity readings are done at 1m anechoic. This is the industry standard and EVERYONE uses it except one funny little speaker company that thinks it's OK to measure their speaker in a way that adds many dB to the numbers. It's inaccurate to call these 98dB speakers when the way they measure them add 6-8dB or MORE (depending on frequency) to the readings.
The more I consider the actual design of the AN speakers, the more I realize that they are, objectively, nothing special. Just simple drivers with a simple crossover in a simple box-- hemp, silver, and Baltic birch notwithstanding. The bottom line consequence is a primitive design with primitive results. Indeed what AN is really good at is cultivating mystique.

Sadly, audiophilia isn't about accuracy at all -- the great efforts of people like Sir Terrence with the goal of accuracy are all in vain. It's about what sounds pretty to the audiophiles, (euphonic: smooth & bloomy). Further, they have no intention of learning the truth; to a remarkable degree they like what they're used to and/or what their audiophile gurus tell them is "organic", "holistic" or similar billsh!t. What can be said of AN, most generously, is that they have nailed this sound.

RGA
08-03-2010, 12:55 PM
The more I consider the actual design of the AN speakers, the more I realize that they are, objectively, nothing special. Just simple drivers with a simple crossover in a simple box-- hemp, silver, and Baltic birch notwithstanding. The bottom line consequence is a primitive design with primitive results. Indeed what AN is really good at is cultivating mystique.

Sadly, audiophilia isn't about accuracy at all -- the great efforts of people like Sir Terrence with the goal of accuracy are all in vain. It's about what sounds pretty to the audiophiles, (euphonic: smooth & bloomy). Further, they have no intention of learning the truth; to a remarkable degree they like what they're used to and/or what their audiophile gurus tell them is "organic", "holistic" or similar billsh!t. What can be said of AN, most generously, is that they have nailed this sound.

It would be more credible if the stone wasn't being thrown by a guy who owns magnepans :Yawn:

Geoffcin
08-03-2010, 01:47 PM
Don't bother - these are the same people who believe that testing a Ferrari in off road tests represents the capability of the Ferrari.



A poorer analogy has never been postulated!

Have you ever driven a Ferrari? Sat in one at least? Perhaps ogled one from afar maybe?

Ferrari is all about performance, and the use of modern technology to achieve it.

Performance that can be tested against other cars on the track, where numbers (as in lap times) are king, and bullsh!t (like your fake sensitivity readings) gets smacked down hard, and often.

I know you would like to consider your speakers in the same breath as a Ferrari, but they're a better fit with a Yugo. Unsophisticated 60's tech at it's best!

theaudiohobby
08-03-2010, 02:10 PM
A poorer analogy has never been postulated!

Have you ever driven a Ferrari? Sat in one at least? Perhaps ogled one from afar maybe?

Ferrari is all about performance, and the use of modern technology to achieve it.

Performance that can be tested against other cars on the track, where numbers (as in lap times) are king, and bullsh!t (like your fake sensitivity readings) gets smacked down hard, and often.

I know you would like to consider your speakers in the same breath as a Ferrari, but they're a better fit with a Yugo. Unsophisticated 60's tech at it's best!
Now that's funny :lol:

jpaik
08-03-2010, 02:23 PM
.. Indeed what AN is really good at is cultivating mystique.

Indeed. And there is a fanboy cult constantly oiling the AN mystique machine. The truth is an absent feature.

PeruvianSkies
08-03-2010, 03:03 PM
Looks like no one cares when it involves certain people around here, interesting indeed.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-03-2010, 03:19 PM
Looks like no one cares when it involves certain people around here, interesting indeed.

PS, don't get your fanny in a crack on this. Let it be their issue, not yours.

E-Stat
08-03-2010, 03:36 PM
The bottom line consequence is a primitive design with primitive results. Indeed what AN is really good at is cultivating mystique.Sadly, audiophilia isn't about accuracy at all...
Yes, but let's not throw everyone into a single AN pile! Most of us are not company disciples. :)

rw

Feanor
08-03-2010, 04:07 PM
Looks like no one cares when it involves certain people around here, interesting indeed.
Truth is more admirable than hypocracy. :yesnod:

Geoffcin
08-03-2010, 04:17 PM
Looks like no one cares when it involves certain people around here, interesting indeed.

Yes, I agree!

But,when you have a topic called; "First impressions at California audio Show" which starts off brilliantly, but then becomes a rant about one speaker in particular, a rant that we've all heard incessantly in numerous threads over and over ad nauseum, THEN you have even the most tolerant moderator on AR fuming that he has to wade through piles of "fanboy fiction" to get to hear what people who were actually THERE feelings about what they heard and saw.

bobsticks
08-03-2010, 04:32 PM
A poorer analogy has never been postulated!

Sure there has been...Melvin Walker did it with great frequency before his untimely departure:biggrin5:



. And the people arguing against it merely have an axe to grind.

That may well be part of it but at the same time I'm sure others have some frustration over the fact that every thread that has the letters "A" and "N" within close proximity becomes a treatise on corner placement.

Clearly you have an immense knowledge about music and sound reproduction theory (as well as great many other things).This was a thread about the California show. Personally, I would've loved to have read about a wide variety of equipment...and in the beginning that wish was granted until the whole got squashed by the particular. Even I forgot the original intent of the thread...which is fine on occasion but it happens an awful lot...

Since we're making bad analogies, watch this and whenever the words "battling/have (prostate) cancer are heard substitute "like/support Audio Note"...and smile a bit, it ain't that serious...:wink5:

<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FbI2BuoN2iw&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1?rel=0&amp;color1=0x5d1719&amp;co lor2=0xcd311b&amp;border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FbI2BuoN2iw&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1?rel=0&amp;color1=0x5d1719&amp;co lor2=0xcd311b&amp;border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>

Mr Peabody
08-03-2010, 05:21 PM
Sure there has been...Melvin Walker did it with great frequency before his untimely departure:biggrin5:




That may well be part of it but at the same time I'm sure others have some frustration over the fact that every thread that has the letters "A" and "N" within close proximity becomes a treatise on corner placement.

Clearly you have an immense knowledge about music and sound reproduction theory (as well as great many other things).This was a thread about the California show. Personally, I would've loved to have read about a wide variety of equipment...and in the beginning that wish was granted until the whole got squashed by the particular. Even I forgot the original intent of the thread...which is fine on occasion but it happens an awful lot...

Since we're making bad analogies, watch this and whenever the words "battling/have (prostate) cancer are heard substitute "like/support Audio Note"...and smile a bit, it ain't that serious...:wink5:

<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FbI2BuoN2iw&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1?rel=0&amp;color1=0x5d1719&amp;co lor2=0xcd311b&amp;border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FbI2BuoN2iw&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1?rel=0&amp;color1=0x5d1719&amp;co lor2=0xcd311b&amp;border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>

LOL, that was good. Remember the Geore Carlin old west bit where he substitutes the word "kill" with another four letter word that begins with "f" and ends with uck?

RGA
08-03-2010, 05:21 PM
A poorer analogy has never been postulated!

Have you ever driven a Ferrari? Sat in one at least? Perhaps ogled one from afar maybe?

Ferrari is all about performance, and the use of modern technology to achieve it.

Performance that can be tested against other cars on the track, where numbers (as in lap times) are king, and bullsh!t (like your fake sensitivity readings) gets smacked down hard, and often.

I know you would like to consider your speakers in the same breath as a Ferrari, but they're a better fit with a Yugo. Unsophisticated 60's tech at it's best!

So Geoff - how do you compare a Dodge Ram V10 to a Ferrari. Do you believe that both shoppers are after the same goal with said purchase? If you do you're clueless.

The person that buys a Ferrari is after a performance sports car - you SHOULD compare the Ferrari against all other sports cars - they are designed for speed and handling.

A person buys a Dodge Ram V10 for pulling a big ass trailer. USE A BRAIN and THINK! If you have a test that measures handling and speed the V10 will suck donkey balls. But nobody is buying it for that. Likewise the Ferrari isn't going to pull a fifth wheel.

You test the Car for which is was designed for. So you test the Ferrari handling ability and off the line scores and top speed. You don't really have interest in the tow ability because it can't do the job. Of course IF you are remotely intelligent then you KNOW this. That is why there are several different kinds of tests. You don't JUST have the speed and handling test and ignore the rest.

Get it now Geoff? A truck is designed for one type of task while a Ferrari is designed for another. Excellent analogy. And you test accordingly for the job it does. Speakers are speakers but automobiles are automobiles. Free standing speaker you test free standing - corner you test in a corner. That simple.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-03-2010, 05:52 PM
LOL, that was good. Remember the Geore Carlin old west bit where he substitutes the word "kill" with another four letter word that begins with "f" and ends with uck?

Oooooooooo, you said the "F" word in two pieces....I'm tellin on ya!

Geoffcin
08-03-2010, 05:57 PM
Oooooooooo, you said the "F" word in two pieces....I'm tellin on ya!

Sorry to change the topic, but did anyone get any pics of the rooms at the show?

jpaik
08-03-2010, 06:00 PM
How nice of the Dagogo "reviewer" to call some of us stupid, and morons. Wasn't Dagogo the sponsor/lead agency of this show?

I would also like to know more about the products at the Show. Stereophile's coverage was somewhat interesting, in a travelogue kind of way.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-03-2010, 06:09 PM
In all fairness to AN, from the midrange up, the speaker's sound was quite good, and once again, I know why Richard likes them as there is much to like. My concern is corner placement and its effect on the mid bass and depth of the front sound stage.

Another issue I would have with these speakers is they cannot be used in a wide room. In a 16+ft wide room, there is no way these speaker will be able to create a coherent sound stage, they would be too far apart to do it. While the left and right side of the sound stage would hold together, the center would be fractured because of the distance between the two speakers. In a room less than 15ft wide, I don't think this speaker would have a problem.

While the spec's definitely seem fudged because of proprietary testing methods(not industry standard testing) i think while misleading it does not take away from the good qualities of this speaker. It was hard to gage the performance of a filterless CD player, because you don't really know the role that other components are playing in getting the good sound I heard. I would love to hear them separately in my own system where I can really gage the benefits of this approach. I really don't think the speakers deserve a trashing, but one can't help but think the proprietary testing methods are used to create a much better picture of the speaker than it might deserve, and it creates a very unique and persuasive marketing angle.

The reality is, there is no way this speaker sensitivity is 98dpw, as the huge Klipschorns with all horn loaded drivers are only 105dpw, and these speakers are not 7db less efficient than that speaker, and no way they are the same efficiency as the Palladium speaker. I will never believe that in a thousand years even if they are corner loaded.

RGA
08-03-2010, 06:33 PM
Sir T

On the other hand the K-Horn could be speced too low. It is more sensitive than any Audio Note E and you can clearly tell that. Although the guy to ask might be Constantine Soo since he owns the K-Horn and the AN E. He said the K-horn is considerably more efficient.

I don't see what the issue is - no one hear as explained it to me. A corner speaker gets a 3db gain in sensitivity (in fact all speakers would). So what is the exact problem with a speaker company that designs for a corner and gives you the corner measurement? Why the uproar over that? 92db speaker - stick it in a corner it is 95db. Stereophile measured 92.5 db - stick em in a corner you get 95.5db with a margin of error of possibly 1db. Why on earth is that so wrong? I don't get it.

Why should the manufacturer follow what everyone else is doing when none of them make corner loaded speakers? I would say the same for Allison or any corner horn maker.

I found the Constantine's old review of the very entry level AN E/D made from chipboard some time back. He compares them to an Apogee Duetta II arguably Apogee's best sounding panel, K-Horn and his big Genesis VI servo subwoofer system http://www.stereotimes.com/speak071701.shtml

Geoffcin
08-04-2010, 03:32 AM
How nice of the Dagogo "reviewer" to call some of us stupid, and morons. Wasn't Dagogo the sponsor/lead agency of this show?

I would also like to know more about the products at the Show. Stereophile's coverage was somewhat interesting, in a travelogue kind of way.

Actually he called a moderator silly names. Luckily the mod is very tolerent of childish behavior or he might have had all of his posts removed along with his screen name. (a few mods here who would of done exactly that!)

Yes, there's a lot of us who want to hear more about this show. Hopefully we can clear the all the static soon and get back to the threads main topic.

Geoffcin
08-04-2010, 03:37 AM
In all fairness to AN, from the midrange up, the speaker's sound was quite good, and once again, I know why Richard likes them as there is much to like. My concern is corner placement and its effect on the mid bass and depth of the front sound stage.

Please don't mis-understand me. I have no problems with the speaker itself, only the incessent hijacking of threads by a certain fanboy of said item.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-04-2010, 08:58 AM
Sir T

On the other hand the K-Horn could be speced too low. It is more sensitive than any Audio Note E and you can clearly tell that. Although the guy to ask might be Constantine Soo since he owns the K-Horn and the AN E. He said the K-horn is considerably more efficient.

No, the K-horn is spec properly. Still, even if you took the K-horn out of the equation, do you really think the AN speaker is the same as the Palladium? I don't think so, no way, no how. The Palladium is a horn loaded ported design - the AN has no horns on its mid/tweeter driver.


I don't see what the issue is - no one hear as explained it to me. A corner speaker gets a 3db gain in sensitivity (in fact all speakers would).

That would be boost in output in the mid and lower frequencies, not the higher ones. You need a horn to make the mids and treble more efficient. So in this case, it boosts the mid and low frequencies, it does not effect the sensitivity of the speaker overall.



So what is the exact problem with a speaker company that designs for a corner and gives you the corner measurement? Why the uproar over that? 92db speaker - stick it in a corner it is 95db. Stereophile measured 92.5 db - stick em in a corner you get 95.5db with a margin of error of possibly 1db. Why on earth is that so wrong? I don't get it.

To claim a sensitivity change, the speaker has to be more efficient with its output over all frequencies, not just the mid bass and below. If you stuck a horn in front of the mid/tweeter driver, I could understand the claim of increased sensitivity of the speaker, but the AN speaker does not have one.


Why should the manufacturer follow what everyone else is doing when none of them make corner loaded speakers? I would say the same for Allison or any corner horn maker.

Klipsch follows the industry standard, and they make corner loaded speakers. The K-horn uses the corner to efficiently load the entire frequency range, not just the midbass and lower like on the AN. Since a non horn loaded driver becomes increasing directional as frequencies increase, you cannot use a corner to load the frequencies when the wavelength of the signals become smaller. There is a point when a speaker output becomes less spherical, and more directional. The more directional it becomes, the less efficient the corner can load it. At that point you need a horn to increase(or maintain) the sensitivity. This is why I doubt the sensitivity specs listed. He is using a bass boost in the mid and lower frequencies as a sensitivity change on the speakers entire operating range. No fair I say.

RGA
08-04-2010, 11:28 AM
Please don't mis-understand me. I have no problems with the speaker itself, only the incessent hijacking of threads by a certain fanboy of said item.

Four posters on this board have actually Auditioned the AN E. All four of them commented on the AN E. All Four posters like the AN E. Sir T liked them a little less than Brian K, Myself and Tube Fan. The people who took it off track were all the people who have NEVER heard the AN E but wish to knock them continually at every opportunity. Yourself, Feaner and others. This thread was taken off track by YOU and them. And you know it.

How can a thread be said to be taken off track when the thread is about auditioning many rooms one of which is the AN room? All that happened was one room was being discussed - this thread can also discuss other rooms which has also been done. If Sir T felt his thread was de-railed he should be the one making that argument and not you. Pretty horrible moderating. As for comments I never called anyone any name - I said "If you think X then Y" - And no one thinks X I am pretty sure so no one was called anything. But I did delete the comments because some may not read the word "If" closely.

We talked about some other gear here as well. Lotus, YG Acoustics, Teresonic, Acoustic Zen - but this thread had more interest in discussing Audio Note. And that's the facts. Moderators who fan the flames should not be moderators.

RGA
08-04-2010, 11:38 AM
Sir T

I still am not sure about that because Colloms, Hi-Fi Choice, and Audiophile in German all get 94db or higher sensitivity. And they would measure the speaker the same way they measure all speakers. I just can't see how all those other acoustic engineers could be wrong?

I understand what you say in the respect that Peter is not measuring the same way that Stereophile measures (because Peter says that he doesn't - this is how Peter measures his speakers http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=hug&n=107586&highlight=efficiency+Peter+Qvortrup&r= ) so those other magazines investigated what Peter has done and confirmed the real world in room sensitivity.

Duke is a speaker designer who argued most of the case against Peter some time back. This is what he says:

" Martin [Colloms] recorded a 2.83 volt sensitivity of 94 dB, noting that the speaker's minimum impedance was 3.6 ohms. So this version of the AN/E is apparently a 4-ohm speaker, and its 1-watt efficiency would be 91 dB. Nothing earth-shaking here.

Martin also measures the speaker as -3 dB at 28 Hz when placed near a wall. That also seems within reason to me.

He identifies the tuning frequency of the vented enclosure as 29 Hz, and then notes:

"...an in-room -6 dB point of 18 Hz..."

This is better than I would have expected from a 91 dB efficient woofer
in a 2.1 cubic vented enclosure assuming the theoretical maximum 9 dB of gain due to rigid corner loading. Theory predicts -9 dB at 18Hz under those conditions, so according to Martin Colloms you beat the computer by 3 dB."

And

"Peter, I think that Donald North has nuked my theory. As far as I can tell the theoretical maximum gain from corner placement is indeed 18 dB because the energy reflected off the floor and walls (or directed by the floor and walls) is in-phase with the rear-firing port's output.

Simply put, I was wrong.

I apologize for saying that your speakers cannot do what you claim they can even with corner loading. I gave you a hard time about it and you took it like a gentleman.

I guess that different people are convinced by different kinds of evidence, and as long as I had the mistaken conviction that 9 dB was the theoretical maximum gain from corner placement I wasn't going to believe your claimed in-room measurements bass extension. Now I have no solid basis for disputing your claim of -6 dB at 17 Hz with corner loading.

Ah, there's my dessert now. Yum.

Duke"


Sir T - I have a question. Many years ago I was told by a dealer (back in the days when Horns were sold everywhere) that there is a difference in measuring a speaker in terms of 1 watt per meter and the 2.83Volts. My Hand made British Horn Wharfedales also have a spec on the back as 2.83v. From what Duke is saying above it looks like this means that the 2.83v method is 3db higher than the 1 watt per meter rating often found in North America. According to Duke them the 94db speaker is 91db in watts per meter. If this is true then all of the AN speakers would be 3db higher than the North American standard of 1 watt per meter - and so could many other British made speakers? This may be like the different size gallons and liters. ??

tube fan
08-04-2010, 11:42 AM
WOW! I almost wish I had not even mentioned the Audio Note room, but, as I spent hours in their room, and as I throughly enjoyed what I heard (especially when played at realistic levels), I had to included Audio Note. My concern with the Audio Note was not with the bass, but with the treble. My Fulton Js are very alive in the highs. The highs are covered by an RTR ESR- 6. Only the King matched the highs of the Fulton IMO. Many times, music heard live (say from a trumpet) has tremendous impact. Can the Audio Notes, with SET amps, match the realism in the highs of my Fulton J when the music requires it? Unfortunately, I could not play my vinyl in the Audio Note room as they had no tt.

My Fulton Js are BIG, and the woofer enclosure is 26 inches wide by 20 inches deep by 32 inches high with two speakers, one forward firing, and one down firing. They go down as low as anything I have heard (felt in this case). Not much music down to 20 hz except for pipe organ music. The double bass goes down to about 33 hz, and when it does, you both hear it with your ears and feel it in your chest. That is one reason why I brought the Gary Karr vinyl record to test the different speakers.

Aside from the Audio Note speakers, I would love to hear my vinyl on the following speakers: the Salk Soundscape and Songtower, both bargans; the Evolution Acoustics
MM Mini One $22,000 with stand and with integrated subwofer (the best sound at the show IMO, and that was driven by solid state, the $20,000 darTZeel); and the King electrostatic.

The Sound in the Salk room was impressive considering the source (a ?CD player), and the modest price. I have always been impressed by Van Alstine's mods. The Ultravalve Vacuum Tube Amp deserves more listening. BTW, my brother had a Van Alstine modified Dyna ST-400 which we could get to clip (on loud, deep music) on the Fulton Js.

The Evolution Acoustic speakers were as beautiful to look at as to listen to. Many at CES 2010 thought they produced the best sound. I hope they have a local dealer.

The King, at a very reasonable $8,000, could be an absolute killer on vinyl, but they seem to be extremely demanding of associated equipment.

RGA
08-04-2010, 12:20 PM
At CES I actually preferred the sound of the Prince II to the KingSound "King" speaker - perhaps it was the room. The Prince II is $6k and even with mediocre gear running it it sounded really good. I think it's a better speaker than the Quad 2905 ($14,000) and the Prince actually has some bass. And sure the KingSound stuff is made in China - but so is the Quad.

Dagogo's resident panel guy bought the King speakers.

I think the thing to always consider is how big a speaker can you really support. Panels for me are just so damn big. On the plus side you can mark your carpet with tape and then pull them out to the tape and listen and then when down you can push them up against the wall. They're not all that heavy.

I have never heard a Kingsound with vinyl though. I also wonder how easy they are to drive. My OTO is 10 watts and was driving the Quad 2905 wonderfully well at reasonable levels. I suspect the KingSound stuff requires more oomph.

RGA
08-04-2010, 12:59 PM
RE: AN's spec

Okay I am seeing some issues here. The Audio Note speakers are not 8ohms. They are 4-6ohms and this changes things. At 4ohms it takes 2 watts to get the 95db figure and would lose 3db under the 1 watt per meter if yiou assumed it was an 8ohm speaker. Their website does not list the ohm rating but a minimum of 3.6ohm implies that it is a 4ohm speaker - but my AN J says 6ohms (but it never dips below 5ohms).

"2.83 volts into 8 ohm resistance is 1 watt. Speakers are not resistive loads and the impedance is not constant with frequency, so finding one watt can be tough or impossible. Using a standard voltage allows the amp to deliver any amount of current demanded by the speaker. Speakers respond to voltage, so this probably a better way to rate a speaker. The downside is that the method can allow a low impedance speaker system to hide its true efficiency. If 2.83V is applied to a 4 ohm system and the results are 100 dB, it got that loud on 2 watts, not one."

in other words:

8ohm @ 2.83V = 88dB
4ohm @ 2.83V = 91dB

This would mean by my reading that AN E speakers if they are 4 or 6 ohm rated compared to an 8 ohm speaker is roughly 1.5db to 3db higher than 8ohm counterparts. Thus, the AN E spec should be reduced 1.5 - 3db if you compare them to 8ohm speakers.

Edit:

Okay according the manual they rate the AN E speaker at 6ohms not 8ohms so that puts the speaker specs on their website at least 1.5db higher than an 8ohm rated speaker. You could argue 3db though due to min impedence under 4ohms. The manual - http://www.audionote.co.uk/downloads/manuals/AN-E_Manual.pdf

Moreover
Looking at some 4 ohm panels like the maggie 3.6 - the makers gave Stereophile figures of 86dB/2.83V/m and JA measured them as 83.5dB(B)/2.83V/m. I think the makers are providing more real word figures.

Geoffcin
08-04-2010, 01:00 PM
WOW! I almost wish I had not even mentioned the Audio Note room, but, as I spent hours in their room, and as I throughly enjoyed what I heard (especially when played at realistic levels), I had to included Audio Note. My concern with the Audio Note was not with the bass, but with the treble. My Fulton Js are very alive in the highs. The highs are covered by an RTR ESR- 6. Only the King matched the highs of the Fulton IMO. Many times, music heard live (say from a trumpet) has tremendous impact. Can the Audio Notes, with SET amps, match the realism in the highs of my Fulton J when the music requires it? Unfortunately, I could not play my vinyl in the Audio Note room as they had no tt.

Do not feel bad. I am glad you've posted about what you heard. With TT as a counterpoint it makes for very interesting comparisons. It's not your fault that even a mention of said speakers will bring a volumous discourse on their merits by a certain fanboy.

Geoffcin
08-04-2010, 01:57 PM
How can a thread be said to be taken off track when the thread is about auditioning many rooms one of which is the AN room? All that happened was one room was being discussed - this thread can also discuss other rooms which has also been done. If Sir T felt his thread was de-railed he should be the one making that argument and not you. Pretty horrible moderating. As for comments I never called anyone any name - I said "If you think X then Y" - And no one thinks X I am pretty sure so no one was called anything. But I did delete the comments because some may not read the word "If" closely.


Perhaps your thinking that your lawering of the language will change the way anyone interpreted the post you made to me but be forewarned; Hijacking of threads will not be allowed. Name calling will not be allowed. Disrespecting moderators will not be tolerated.

Oh, and for your information the thread was not started by TT, (although he did make quite a detailed review of the show) but by Tube Fan, a new AR forums member that I would like to keep here. While only here a short tome he has already stated that he regrets even bringing up the word AN! This is ironic because I was really interested what a dis-interested party would have to say about these speakers, but his post got drowned out in all of the noise you generated.

So, based on what I've read I would say that you are doing that company a DIS-service by your incessant postings and over-the-top praise of them. This is the ultimate irony in that their biggest fanboy has now become their greatest detractor!

RGA
08-04-2010, 02:24 PM
But if people didn't get on my case then it would never have went anywhere. Can you not see that you didn't help this in any way shape or form? Cleary you always find yoursefl the perfect poster. Calling members fanboys is name calling. Clearly it's do as I say and not as I do.

And yes I get the doing AN a diservice a lot. Soundhounds and Peter are quite fine with my posts. Peter would prefer reviewers to come and call things dog poop and rave about the good stuff more often. I probably don't go nearly far enough for his liking.

But I'll be happy to talk about the other rooms I liked at CES and that people here liked at CAS. Anyone want to discuss Teresonic or Acoustic Zen. I heard the latter with Tri tube gear and it sounded great - people here seemed to like it with SS.

I'd be happy to discuss the Reel to Reel machines and some brands to look at used. There is a used shiop downtown that has some Sony Reel to Reel machines. Any good?

And you have to admit that when I am in a thread it usually goes many more pages. That generates more posts and more discussion. This board was one of the busiest on the net back int he day when Soundmind(Skeptic), Mrtycrfts, RGA, Eyespy, and some others were ranting away. And then a rule change and this place became a complete ghost town.

In real life people converse and the subject can change. The first post in this thread mentioned Audio Note - how did it get off task - people who never heard it disputing what he heard? Ahh.

PeruvianSkies
08-04-2010, 02:55 PM
Were SS uniforms on sale in bulk around here?

E-Stat
08-04-2010, 03:04 PM
But if people didn't get on my case then it would never have went anywhere.
I have been posting on audio boards for about ten years now, and of the thousands of contributors I've encountered, you are part of a precious few individuals who can steer most any post to a discussion about the praises of one single brand with such regularity. Or at least respond to every mention. George Mann over at AA is nearly your equal about Accuphase. Don't you see that? Even Melvin trumpeted the accolades of both McIntosh and Bozak. :)

rw

theaudiohobby
08-04-2010, 03:32 PM
But if people didn't get on my case then it would never have went anywhere. Not so, on this page alone, you have about 4 posts where are you effectively responding to yourself.

RGA
08-04-2010, 03:36 PM
Well - this shall be my last post in the thread.

Cheers,

LeRoy
08-04-2010, 04:40 PM
Would anyone who was at the show and listened to the Salk speaker care to elaborate on the musicality of the Salk product? I'm trying to understand what the Salk speakers sound like in comparison to products say like from from Usher, Reference 3A, Sonus Faber, and Canton...similar tonalities, slam, mids, dispersion, emotion,etc.

Thanks!

Leroy

tube fan
08-04-2010, 05:53 PM
Would anyone who was at the show and listened to the Salk speaker care to elaborate on the musicality of the Salk product? I'm trying to understand what the Salk speakers sound like in comparison to products say like from from Usher, Reference 3A, Sonus Faber, and Canton...similar tonalities, slam, mids, dispersion, emotion,etc.

Thanks!

Leroy
As stated before, both Salk speakers, the Soundscape and the Songtower were sounding good with Van Alstine amps. These speakers are priced right, and the soundscape also looked beautiful. However, they didn't have any tt, so I couldn't play my vinyl. I have found that it is useful to play music that you like and are very familiar with when comparing audio systems. Dealers usually play software that is exceptional in sound quality. I took several records that would put an audio system to different kinds of tests. The Adgiod'Albinoni with only two instruments, double bass (going down to somewhere around 33 hz) and pipe organ (down to 20 or lower) is a severe test if played at realistic levels. When Gary Karr goes deep, you both hear it with your ears and feel it in your chest. Accurately capturing the sound of a pipe organ is extremely tough, and, here, you mostly feel the deepest notes. None of the speakers could match what I am used to with the Fulton J, which has two huge woofer modules. The Firebird recording by Dorati on Mercury is also an extreme test. Here the system has to deal with an orchestra going full out, with some extreme drum action. The Mudy Waters folk singer on the Original Master recording has severe micro and macro dynamics and some great guitar playing by Muddy and by Buddy Guy. The Chet record has stunning trumpet and sax parts, and most systems failed to capture the full beauty and power of either.

I am going to make an effort to hear these speakers with my vinyl as the potential is there, and the price is real world. I know Dick Olsher gave the combination of the Van Alstine Ultravalve Power Amp ($1,700) and the Salk SongTower QWT ($1,800) a rave review in the Absolute Sound: "In my estimation, the Salk Sound SongTower and Ultravalve combo represent the most musical audio dollars you're ever likely to spend during a lifetime of consumption. Pricewise, at under $2k each, this coupling represents but a fraction of some of the amps and speakers that pass through my listening room. Yet, it proved to be one of the most enjoyable in some 30 years of audio reviewing, and enjoying the music is what this passion of ours should be all about. A four-star recommendation!"

LeRoy
08-04-2010, 07:38 PM
I appreciate the energy and enthusiasm of your Salk speaker review.

LeRoy

atomicAdam
08-04-2010, 08:50 PM
Hey guys - lets knock off the AN good/bad argument. ok, please stick to thread topic. Actually, damn, I think I'm just gonna make a new thread about AN at the CAS and move all those post into there, if I can.

To answer the photo question - I have a lot - I will edit and start posting as well as room observations. I just got back from a trip to Bishop (climbing,skinny dipping[oh yummi]) and haven't had a chance to deal with all the show photos and notes. Not that my opinions are anything more worthy than anyone else's who WENT THE SHOW AND IS STAYING ON THREAD TOPIC, but I didn't have many expectation to jade my mind.

Anyways - bed time now - got to wake up at 4am and go running - so - have to wait till tomorrow.

But overall, an amazing show, so many people came, and for a summer show. Just shows you, there is a whole host of audiophiles in the Bay Area. sleep well y'all.

atomicAdam
08-04-2010, 08:54 PM
I have been posting on audio boards for about ten years now, and of the thousands of contributors I've encountered, you are part of a precious few individuals who can steer most any post to a discussion about the praises of one single brand with such regularity. Or at least respond to every mention. George Mann over at AA is nearly your equal about Accuphase. Don't you see that? Even Melvin trumpeted the accolades of both McIntosh and Bozak. :)

rw

E-Stat - While this might be the case, many hear egg him on and helped to steer this thread way off track, starting w/ RGA and STTT going back and forth, actually talking about, the speakers. After that it became a bloody mess with other jumping in and leading the thread even more off track.

Please, everyone, just post about the California Audio Show, do those reading the thread this favor.

tube fan
08-04-2010, 11:06 PM
At CES I actually preferred the sound of the Prince II to the KingSound "King" speaker - perhaps it was the room. The Prince II is $6k and even with mediocre gear running it it sounded really good. I think it's a better speaker than the Quad 2905 ($14,000) and the Prince actually has some bass. And sure the KingSound stuff is made in China - but so is the Quad.

Dagogo's resident panel guy bought the King speakers.

I think the thing to always consider is how big a speaker can you really support. Panels for me are just so damn big. On the plus side you can mark your carpet with tape and then pull them out to the tape and listen and then when down you can push them up against the wall. They're not all that heavy.

I have never heard a Kingsound with vinyl though. I also wonder how easy they are to drive. My OTO is 10 watts and was driving the Quad 2905 wonderfully well at reasonable levels. I suspect the KingSound stuff requires more oomph.

You could play the Quad ESL 57s with Dynaco St-70s wonderfully. BTW, it's interesting to note how many audio reviewers own the Quad 57s (ditto for the Audio Notes). Perhaps I should buy a set (or two) of Quad 57s for my second system. Or, perhaps I should buy a system like RGAs (one of the men running the Audio Note room stated that the Audio Note J would have sounded better in that room). RGAs system is within most of our price range, as is the Quad 57. I know my wife would love the sound of the Audio Note System.

Fortunately, I have an open floor plan, and am able to position my speakers wherever they sound best. Right now my Dunlavy SC-IVs are against the wall, with the Fulton Js three feet in front on them. I prefer the speakers to be pointed slightly to the front of my listening position (much like in the Audio Note room). Fortunately, my wonderful wife has never complained about my speakers/equipment/vinyl record racks once! I'm sure the Dunlavys would sound better in another room (on the long wall). But, then, the Fulton Js would probably also sound better positioned there.

I do take my wife on a six week vacation to Europe every other year. Plus, a twice weekly meal out at a nice restaurant. Plus, I do the cleaning and most of the cooking. Still, it's a great bargan for me. I just finished listening to the re-release of Venice, the Solti version, on RCA Victor, at FULL volume. FANTASTIC! Just before that I played "The Power and the Majesty" an Original Master Recording, a record of steam locomotives on one side, and, on the other side, a recording of a thunderstorm. At FULL REALISTIC volume! Back in the day, when I was living in an apartment in North Beach, I used to play the thunderstorm side, when it rained, at MORE than full volume, and, the next day, many neighbors would always ask me if I had heard the thunder!

Jack in Wilmington
08-05-2010, 08:33 AM
Full volumne, that would hurt my ears. What kind of db's are you calling realistic levels? I work in a loud environment, that is the last thing I want when I come home is loud music.

frenchmon
08-05-2010, 12:04 PM
You guys still arguing over gear at the Cali Audio Show??? Where are the pictures?

I had to hi jack at least one.

http://a.imageshack.us/img820/4447/cashow18413222.jpg (http://img820.imageshack.us/i/cashow18413222.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Jack in Wilmington
08-05-2010, 01:48 PM
You guys still arguing over gear at the Cali Audio Show??? Where are the pictures?

I had to hi jack at least one.

http://a.imageshack.us/img820/4447/cashow18413222.jpg (http://img820.imageshack.us/i/cashow18413222.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Hi Frenchie, Is that your new setup? Nice HaHa.

tube fan
08-05-2010, 02:10 PM
[QUOTE=frenchmon]You guys still arguing over gear at the Cali Audio Show??? Where are the pictures?

I had to hi jack at least one.

http://a.imageshack.us/img820/4447/cashow18413222.jpg (http://img820.imageshack.us/i/cashow18413222.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)[/QUOTE

Thanks for posting the picture of the Salk speakers. IMO, the quality of the finish was remarkable. Both speakers can be driven by a few tube watts.

frenchmon
08-05-2010, 02:29 PM
Jack...I only wish...

tube fan....yes they are some fine looking speakers. The place where I got the picture from had many good pictures of that room...and the Van Alstine aint looking to shabby either.

tube fan did you listen to the Salks? If so what sound characteristic do they have? Are they dark in character? lively mids? Extended tweets? Very proknounced in the bottom end like Dynaudio? How did they sound to you?

Also I've been to the Salk web site to see if they made their own drivers but I cant seem to find any information on them. I assume they have them made from several different company's. Even a few of their speakers looked like they had Scan Speak or either Seas drivers. Do you have any information on them?

blackraven
08-05-2010, 03:27 PM
Tube Fan, I live 3 minutes from Frank Van Alstine and have been to his house which is also his studio and design and manufacturing area. I own his hybrid DAC and Preamp. His gear has this magical synergy with Salk speakers. You can check out the reviews by multiple Salk and VA owners on www.audiocircles.com

By the way, in the pictures of the Salk room, the Ultravavle amp on the left is sitting on top of Franks old and cheap CD player that he uses as a transport in his studio. It's either an old HK or Onkyo player that Frank likes to use with his DAC's to show that you don't need a good source with his DAC's. It looks like he has his FET Valve 550 hybrid amp, new vision DAC and an Ultra Hybrid preamp as well.

Brian K
08-05-2010, 05:58 PM
Jack...I only wish...

tube fan....yes they are some fine looking speakers. The place where I got the picture from had many good pictures of that room...and the Van Alstine aint looking to shabby either.

tube fan did you listen to the Salks? If so what sound characteristic do they have? Are they dark in character? lively mids? Extended tweets? Very proknounced in the bottom end like Dynaudio? How did they sound to you?

Also I've been to the Salk web site to see if they made their own drivers but I cant seem to find any information on them. I assume they have them made from several different company's. Even a few of their speakers looked like they had Scan Speak or either Seas drivers. Do you have any information on them?

I spent quite a while in the Salk room and was very impressed with the SoundScapes and Van Alstine equipment. Unfortunately, their CD player - a Denon midfi unit - was downright bad and there was no vinyl. Music from the Squeezebox actually managed to sound good but when Jim put a CD of mine into the Denon the sound was just horrible. I think he knew it and stuck to the Squeezebox almost entirely.

As far as drivers, the speakers use a RAAL 70-20XR (OEM-only) ribbon tweeter, a 3" Accuton ceramic midrange and a 10" (optional 12") Acoustic Elegance woofer with dual passive radiators. The RAAL tweeter has extremely flat frequency response up to 30khz+ and excellent vertical dispersion which makes for a wide sound stage and lots of seperation and sparkle to the sound. The highs from that tweeter were without a doubt the best I heard from any room at the show. The midrange was equally as transparent and revealing with a holographic sound that seemed to float in the air. I was quite surprised at how much bass the 10" woofer was able to reproduce. The first couple tracks I heard were a little shy on the bass and then Jim played a track that had a nice acoustic bass recording and it was extremely tuneful, fast and deep. These are the kind of speakers where you forget you're listening to speakers and just hear the music.

I liked these speaker just as much as if not more than the Evolution Acoustics speaker that had similar drivers but cost $30k/pair instead of $10k. I wouldn't think twice about buying them if I were in the market.

</fanboy>:6:

Disclaimer : I have a pair of speakers being custom built using the RAAL tweeter with Accuton mids (albeit a different one). I think I'm still fairly objective however. Another Accuton system, the Conspiracy by Consensus Audio, which was at the show and has the same midrange driver being used in my speakers, sounded absolutely horrrrrible to me. I'm curious to hear how other people liked the Salks or Evolution Acoustics systems.

tube fan
08-05-2010, 06:37 PM
I spent quite a while in the Salk room and was very impressed with the SoundScapes and Van Alstine equipment. Unfortunately, their CD player - a Denon midfi unit - was downright bad and there was no vinyl. Music from the Squeezebox actually managed to sound good but when Jim put a CD of mine into the Denon the sound was just horrible. I think he knew it and stuck to the Squeezebox almost entirely.

As far as drivers, the speakers use a RAAL 70-20XR (OEM-only) ribbon tweeter, a 3" Accuton ceramic midrange and a 10" (optional 12") Acoustic Elegance woofer with dual passive radiators. The RAAL tweeter has extremely flat frequency response up to 30khz+ and excellent vertical dispersion which makes for a wide sound stage and lots of seperation and sparkle to the sound. The highs from that tweeter were without a doubt the best I heard from any room at the show. The midrange was equally as transparent and revealing with a holographic sound that seemed to float in the air. I was quite surprised at how much bass the 10" woofer was able to reproduce. The first couple tracks I heard were a little shy on the bass and then Jim played a track that had a nice acoustic bass recording and it was extremely tuneful, fast and deep. These are the kind of speakers where you forget you're listening to speakers and just hear the music.

I liked these speaker just as much as if not more than the Evolution Acoustics speaker that had similar drivers but cost $30k/pair instead of $10k. I wouldn't think twice about buying them if I were in the market.

</fanboy>:6:

Disclaimer : I have a pair of speakers being custom built using the RAAL tweeter with Accuton mids (albeit a different one). I think I'm still fairly objective however. Another Accuton system, the Conspiracy by Consensus Audio, which was at the show and has the same midrange driver being used in my speakers, sounded absolutely horrrrrible to me. I'm curious to hear how other people liked the Salks or Evolution Acoustics systems.

I heard exactly what you heard. I think the only significant limit to the sound was the CD player. I would LOVE to hear the Salk speakers with the Audio Note $5,500 CD player, or with a good vinyl system. The Evolution system with stand costs $22,000, so I'd spend the extra $5,000 and get the powered subwoofer if I went for an Evolution speaker. I think you can get the RAAL ribbon tweeter on the Songtower.

PeruvianSkies
08-05-2010, 07:27 PM
There is no doubt that a speakers main priority is to bring music to life in the most realistic way possible, but there is also a fine art to the speaker and the aesthetic qualities of the cabinets, etc.

So with that in mind, what speakers have been the most impressive in both sound and looks?

atomicAdam
08-05-2010, 07:35 PM
::: SORRY FOR CRAPPY PHOTOS :::

Also - disclaimer - all comments are based on the performance of the speaker w/in the room at the show and my short or long listening time - obviously a hotel room w/ little treatment can only show so much of a set ups performance.

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CIS-2010-01.jpg

This was the line at opening time Friday morning. It was a good chaotic start to the event. Friday morning was a great time to be at the show. Almost now one in the rooms - though a lot of rooms were still figuring out speaker position and room acoustics, so it was good to be able to come back to those rooms through out the weekend.

I have to say, many of the folks at the show were very nice, both attendees, staff, and manufacturers.

Electrocompaniet Room

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Electrompaniet-04.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Electrompaniet-02.jpg

I was very interested to hear the floorstanding speakers in the Prelude line, happily they were as I expected, fuller low end versions of the bookshelf speakers with the same sweet, slightly rolled off high (the harsher highs it seems to me are rolled off). (review of the bookshelf prelude speakers, PC-1 CDP, PI-2 Amp, to come on Dagogo.com)

I very much enjoyed these speakers, and for the sub $3000 price range, probably the best I heard at that price point. But you do have to like the sound.

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Electrompaniet-01.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Electrompaniet-05.jpg

The Classic Line was very good. It had a similar sound to the Prelude line Scanspeak tweeter but much more detail and a much faster and cleaner low end. I was able to listen to track 4 off of Dead Can Dance Toward the Within. Lisa Gerrard voice was captivating and the drum circle that gets going towards the end of the song was awesome. There was some issues with room acoustics - I mean, that much power in that small a room.

Peder from Electrocompaniet was very nice, and overall the sound from their systems was very pleasing to my ears, especially at the Prelude price point. Though, in that room, the floorstanding Prelude speakers were a big blurry and boomy at the lower mids and lows. I don't think that is all the fault of the room, the bookshelves I have in my house have had a bit of that issue as well.

MORE TO COME .... but imma gonna go throw done some music for the rest of the night. hommie just burned me his new CD and I can't wait to hear it!

Byron4
08-05-2010, 08:18 PM
This is my very first post. First of all a big thank you to Constantine Soo and his staff for hosting this wonderful event. My wife and I stayed at the Hilton and really enjoyed the three days spent at the California Audio Show. This was an opportunity to listen to a number of different gear for the first time. We plan on attending next year.

I currently own the Acarian Alon 1 descended from the Dahlquist DQ-10's. I heard these were based on the original Quads. I also own a pair of Magnepan MMG's because I also enjoy listening to planar speakers. This may explain why my favorite rooms were the Audio Image Room with the King speakers and the Tone of Music room with the Quad speakers. My other favorite that I really enjoyed was the Legacy/Win room.

I wish I could have heard the High Altitude drum corps recording at the show as my kids were/are active in the activity.

atomicAdam
08-05-2010, 08:51 PM
This is my very first post. First of all a big thank you to Constantine Soo and his staff for hosting this wonderful event. My wife and I stayed at the Hilton and really enjoyed the three days spent at the California Audio Show. This was an opportunity to listen to a number of different gear for the first time. We plan on attending next year.

I currently own the Acarian Alon 1 descended from the Dahlquist DQ-10's. I heard these were based on the original Quads. I also own a pair of Magnepan MMG's because I also enjoy listening to planar speakers. This may explain why my favorite rooms were the Audio Image Room with the King speakers and the Tone of Music room with the Quad speakers. My other favorite that I really enjoyed was the Legacy/Win room.

I wish I could have heard the High Altitude drum corps recording at the show as my kids were/are active in the activity.

Welcome Byron to AudioREVIEW. Glad to hear you and your wife had a good time at the show. Sounds like your ears are on a bit on an opposite side of spectrum of mine- but no worries.

Enjoy!

frenchmon
08-06-2010, 06:06 AM
I spent quite a while in the Salk room and was very impressed with the SoundScapes and Van Alstine equipment. Unfortunately, their CD player - a Denon midfi unit - was downright bad and there was no vinyl. Music from the Squeezebox actually managed to sound good but when Jim put a CD of mine into the Denon the sound was just horrible. I think he knew it and stuck to the Squeezebox almost entirely.

As far as drivers, the speakers use a RAAL 70-20XR (OEM-only) ribbon tweeter, a 3" Accuton ceramic midrange and a 10" (optional 12") Acoustic Elegance woofer with dual passive radiators. The RAAL tweeter has extremely flat frequency response up to 30khz+ and excellent vertical dispersion which makes for a wide sound stage and lots of seperation and sparkle to the sound. The highs from that tweeter were without a doubt the best I heard from any room at the show. The midrange was equally as transparent and revealing with a holographic sound that seemed to float in the air. I was quite surprised at how much bass the 10" woofer was able to reproduce. The first couple tracks I heard were a little shy on the bass and then Jim played a track that had a nice acoustic bass recording and it was extremely tuneful, fast and deep. These are the kind of speakers where you forget you're listening to speakers and just hear the music.

I liked these speaker just as much as if not more than the Evolution Acoustics speaker that had similar drivers but cost $30k/pair instead of $10k. I wouldn't think twice about buying them if I were in the market.

</fanboy>:6:

Disclaimer : I have a pair of speakers being custom built using the RAAL tweeter with Accuton mids (albeit a different one). I think I'm still fairly objective however. Another Accuton system, the Conspiracy by Consensus Audio, which was at the show and has the same midrange driver being used in my speakers, sounded absolutely horrrrrible to me. I'm curious to hear how other people liked the Salks or Evolution Acoustics systems.

Thanks Brian K. All Salk speakers are just beautiful in my opinion. I only wish I could listen to a pair. Its too bad there are no audio shows in St. Louis or surrounding area.

frenchmon
08-06-2010, 06:08 AM
Adam...thanks for the pictures...

Brian K
08-06-2010, 06:28 AM
Thanks Brian K. All Salk speakers are just beautiful in my opinion. I only wish I could listen to a pair. Its too bad there are no audio shows in St. Louis or surrounding area.

Frenchmon, I agree wholeheartidly that the Salk speakers are gorgeous. The finish is truely impeccable. Have you seen his forum on AudioCircle.com? There are people who are willing to allow you to come to their homes for demos if you're interested. Jim Salk sells his speakers direct from the manufacturer so it will be very difficult to find them on display anywhere. It will be impossible to find a speaker that sounds that good for anywhere in that price range. You could also try to find a pair of Evolution Acoustics speakers since they do have a dealer network and listen to them. The tweeter and mid drivers are nearly the same and they sound very much like the Salks.

On another note, who here had a chance to listen to the JBL Everests? I've heard very different opinions on these speakers from people at the show.

frenchmon
08-06-2010, 06:51 AM
Frenchmon, I agree wholeheartidly that the Salk speakers are gorgeous. The finish is truely impeccable. Have you seen his forum on AudioCircle.com? There are people who are willing to allow you to come to their homes for demos if you're interested. Jim Salk sells his speakers direct from the manufacturer so it will be very difficult to find them on display anywhere. It will be impossible to find a speaker that sounds that good for anywhere in that price range. You could also try to find a pair of Evolution Acoustics speakers since they do have a dealer network and listen to them. The tweeter and mid drivers are nearly the same and they sound very much like the Salks.

On another note, who here had a chance to listen to the JBL Everests? I've heard very different opinions on these speakers from people at the show.

Yeah I've been to audiocircle a few times...never registered. I'll check to see if any one is in my part of the world. Have you ever heard any Dynaudio Speakers? IF so how would you compare Salk's sound to them...cons and pros? Thanks.

tube fan
08-06-2010, 09:58 AM
Frenchmon, I agree wholeheartidly that the Salk speakers are gorgeous. The finish is truely impeccable. Have you seen his forum on AudioCircle.com? There are people who are willing to allow you to come to their homes for demos if you're interested. Jim Salk sells his speakers direct from the manufacturer so it will be very difficult to find them on display anywhere. It will be impossible to find a speaker that sounds that good for anywhere in that price range. You could also try to find a pair of Evolution Acoustics speakers since they do have a dealer network and listen to them. The tweeter and mid drivers are nearly the same and they sound very much like the Salks.

On another note, who here had a chance to listen to the JBL Everests? I've heard very different opinions on these speakers from people at the show.

I heard the JBL Everests. They can put out more volume than the human ear can take, and the bass will shake the room. You need a HUGE room for these speakers. Driven by thousand watt ss amps, the sound was hard, and unlistenable to me. The smaller JBL speakers sounded smoother.

For my tastes, the Evolution Acoustics and the Teresonic speakers were, by far, the most beautiful, and, they both sounded great.

They were driving the Teresonic Ingenium Silver ($15,000) with a Teresonic Reference 2A3 ($15,000), a 2 1/2 watt SE class A amp, zero feedback, zero capacitors, with NOS tubes by RCA. The tt was the Clearaudio innovation Wood ($13,000 with arm). Cartridge was the Benz Micro Ruby Z ($4,000). I use the Benz Ruby 3 in my main system, so I am familiar with the sound. The phono preamp was the new Fosgate ($2,500, and a steal), with tube power supply. The Teresonic speaker, one driver, a Lowther DX4 unit, has, of course, no crossover and is extremely efficient. The sound on several of my vinyl records was extremely close to what I hear from my main system, but they would not turn up the volume, so they probably would sound even better played at realistic levels (to me, this means something close to the level you would hear live). The speakers did not go low enough to play my Gary Karr record, with all the low bass. All things considered, a very pure sound. I would like to hear them with something like the Audio Note Jinro, a 27 SE integrated amp ($22,000).

The Evolution Acoustics MM one ($22,000 with stand) and MM Two ($27,000) are also totally beautiful, both in looks and sound. Unfortunately, though they were playing tapes, close copies to masters, they had no tt, so I could not play my vinyl. Playing the tapes, the sound was as lifelike as anything I have ever heard: effortless on both micro and macro dynamics, clear, tonally saturated, and, just "real". W AY better than my system. Brian says the drivers in the Salk Soundscape (20-60KHz) are similar. I am not sure about the exact price of the soundscape speakers, but they would seem to be a steal.

theaudiohobby
08-06-2010, 11:17 AM
I heard the JBL Everests. They can put out more volume than the human ear can take, and the bass will shake the room. You need a HUGE room for these speakers. Driven by thousand watt ss amps, the sound was hard, and unlistenable to me.The dealer who brought these speakers to the show should be spanked.....wrong environment given it's prodigous bass output. Or if they must exhibit the speaker, an electronic LF filter to drastically cut its LF output. What amplifier was driving the speaker?

frenchmon
08-06-2010, 11:46 AM
From reading the review of the Everests it was noted that they are not audiophile speakers.

"While possibly missing the audiophile cache of their sister brand, Revel or other brands like Wilson Audio, Bowers & Wilkins, JM Labs and Aerial Acoustics, the Project Everest hangs right in there with the big boys of audiophila, but they play extremely loud."

One person said "They lack finesse, sibilants are emphasised, the high notes can be too sharp, the tempo is too fast and the images are much larger than life.But they can give you the sonic equivalent of a roller-coaster ride - the thrills and spills and sonic booms that only a pair of big, loud and fast speakers can create."


So...there you have it. While they are stunning to look at, they are more suited for an amusement park, dancing halls, big clubs or big concert hall where loudness is needed rather than in your two channel room.


I dont know about you, but I'll take a speaker that has finesse, emotion, and romance over a speaker that only plays loud.


http://hometheaterreview.com/jbl-project-everest-dd66000-loudspeaker/
http://hi-fi-avenue.blogspot.com/2010/03/jbl-everest-summit-of-sound.html

theaudiohobby
08-06-2010, 02:05 PM
From reading the review of the Everests it was noted that they are not audiophile speakers.

"While possibly missing the audiophile cache of their sister brand, Revel or other brands like Wilson Audio, Bowers & Wilkins, JM Labs and Aerial Acoustics, the Project Everest hangs right in there with the big boys of audiophila, but they play extremely loud."

One person said "They lack finesse, sibilants are emphasised, the high notes can be too sharp, the tempo is too fast and the images are much larger than life.But they can give you the sonic equivalent of a roller-coaster ride - the thrills and spills and sonic booms that only a pair of big, loud and fast speakers can create."


So...there you have it. While they are stunning to look at, they are more suited for an amusement park, dancing halls, big clubs or big concert hall where loudness is needed rather than in your two channel room.


I dont know about you, but I'll take a speaker that has finesse, emotion, and romance over a speaker that only plays loud.


http://hometheaterreview.com/jbl-project-everest-dd66000-loudspeaker/
http://hi-fi-avenue.blogspot.com/2010/03/jbl-everest-summit-of-sound.htmlI have never heard the JBL Everest nor seen any measurements so I'll reserve judgement. After listening to the JBL K2 9800, I find it hard to believe that JBL would build a flagship thats effectively unlistenable.

E-Stat
08-06-2010, 02:33 PM
... but they play extremely loud."
That has always been JBL's credo. ;)

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-06-2010, 06:32 PM
I have never heard the JBL Everest nor seen any measurements so I'll reserve judgement. After listening to the JBL K2 9800, I find it hard to believe that JBL would build a flagship thats effectively unlistenable.

They did, and trust me on that one.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-06-2010, 06:37 PM
I heard the JBL Everests. They can put out more volume than the human ear can take, and the bass will shake the room. You need a HUGE room for these speakers. Driven by thousand watt ss amps, the sound was hard, and unlistenable to me. The smaller JBL speakers sounded smoother.

Tube fan, I told you that you spoke to soon. We do agree on something!


One person said "They lack finesse, sibilants are emphasised, the high notes can be too sharp, the tempo is too fast and the images are much larger than life.But they can give you the sonic equivalent of a roller-coaster ride - the thrills and spills and sonic booms that only a pair of big, loud and fast speakers can create."

This about sums it up perfectly.


The Teresonic speaker, one driver, a Lowther DX4 unit, has, of course, no crossover and is extremely efficient. The sound on several of my vinyl records was extremely close to what I hear from my main system, but they would not turn up the volume, so they probably would sound even better played at realistic levels (to me, this means something close to the level you would hear live).

They wouldn't turn up the sound because those speakers don't do loud that well - it cannot hold its composure. They also have issues when the mix is complex, dynamic, and touches on the frequency extreme's

When they played High Altitude Drums through it, it sounded good on the horn prelude at the beginning. But when the horns ALL came in along with the percussion, this speaker turned a very good but complex mix into a sonic mush that had zero definition. It is much like using you kitchen's drain to empty a large lake. It is very difficult to design a single driver that covers 10 octaves without giving up the ghost somewhere.

blackraven
08-06-2010, 07:09 PM
Frenchie, I've heard the $6000pr base price, $8000pr well equipped, Salk HTR-3's and they are a very well balanced speaker with a 10" woofer, midrange and ribbon tweeter. Big open transparent sound with lots of air and strong tight bass. They have a slightly warm sound but I heard them on Van Alstine tube and hybrid gear. The sound is smooth, detailed and they move a lot of air. You can feel the deep bass hit you in the chest.

http://www.salksound.com/ht3%20-%20home.htm

http://www.salksound.com/ht3%20-%20images.htm

They would be my first choice for a speaker upgrade. I briefly heard the Song Towers with out the ribbon tweeter upgrade and they sounded just ok but Fank VA had some crappy music on so it was hard to get a handle on how good they actually are. I was over at Franks house waiting while he upgraded my op amps in my DAC which took him all of 5min. So I didnt; have much time with the Song Towers.

As far as comparisons to Dynaudio's, I think the Salks have them beat although I am a fan of the dyn's. The Salks have a larger sound stage and great transparency and depth which is hard to find in a speaker. Unfortunately the electronics used for listening to each was different so its not a fair comaprison.

tube fan
08-06-2010, 10:21 PM
Tube fan, I told you that you spoke to soon. We do agree on something!



This about sums it up perfectly.



They wouldn't turn up the sound because those speakers don't do loud that well - it cannot hold its composure. They also have issues when the mix is complex, dynamic, and touches on the frequency extreme's

When they played High Altitude Drums through it, it sounded good on the horn prelude at the beginning. But when the horns ALL came in along with the percussion, this speaker turned a very good but complex mix into a sonic mush that had zero definition. It is much like using you kitchen's drain to empty a large lake. It is very difficult to design a single driver that covers 10 octaves without giving up the ghost somewhere.

I was afraid of exactly this. Almost all rooms seemed to play their systems at lower than live levels. Only in the Audio Note room, and only with one of the salesmen, did I hear realistic, live levels. Turning up the volume can stress a system, and the Audio Notes were totally effortless in producing live volume levels. Despite playing their speakers at live volume (something I have found that women usually hate), of the 4 women who I asked what was their favorite room, 3 stated "the Audio Note room". Once, when I was in their room, a woman turned to her husband and said: "honey, you HAVE to buy those speakers". I suspect that, despite the high volume levels, the tonal saturation won them over. Of course, critics call that euphonic coloration. I know if my wife was there, she would have also told me that I "had" to buy the AN speakers. BTW, some say that the $7,500 AN AN-E HE speaker is BETTER that the $15,000 one at the show.

theaudiohobby
08-07-2010, 12:36 AM
They did, and trust me on that one.
That's a pity :shocked:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-07-2010, 09:11 AM
That's a pity :shocked:

Dang, I got the evil eye!!! LOLOL

Brian K
08-07-2010, 09:51 AM
They wouldn't turn up the sound because those speakers don't do loud that well - it cannot hold its composure. They also have issues when the mix is complex, dynamic, and touches on the frequency extreme's

When they played High Altitude Drums through it, it sounded good on the horn prelude at the beginning. But when the horns ALL came in along with the percussion, this speaker turned a very good but complex mix into a sonic mush that had zero definition. It is much like using you kitchen's drain to empty a large lake. It is very difficult to design a single driver that covers 10 octaves without giving up the ghost somewhere.

Although I think they make a nice piece of sculpture, the Teresonic speaker didn't really do it for me sonically. I had never heard a Lowther driver before and was very eager to hear what some people rave about. There's definitely a nice sound to them but it had a slight coloration and dullness to the sound. It reminded me a bit of the Bose stereo my old Infiniti came with that used a single full range paper cone. Being that there's no crossover you do get a nice uniform sound across the frequency spectrum but it lacked the depth and detail of other speakers. I didn't get to hear any complex passages on it but it did seem like giving it too much volume or a very dynamic range would push it outside of its comfort zone.

Brian K
08-07-2010, 10:30 AM
I heard the JBL Everests. They can put out more volume than the human ear can take, and the bass will shake the room. You need a HUGE room for these speakers. Driven by thousand watt ss amps, the sound was hard, and unlistenable to me. The smaller JBL speakers sounded smoother.


Interesting response. I spent more time in the JBL/Revel room than any other at the show, mostly because they had 3 different systems setup and rotated so it was a nice comparison versus 'room hopping'. I think the presenters actually did a good job of playing loud enough to get a sense of realism but without going overboard. The room they were displayed in was very large (roughly 60ft x 30 ft with 12 foot ceilings) so I think it was a reasonable choice to bring the Everests. The amplification for the Everests was monoblock Pass XA30.5 (30watt class A) on the top and some discontinued Levinson 400watt monoblocks on the bass with a Pass active crossover. The Revels and JBL Project Arrays were powered by some Levinson amp as well, but not actively crossed and bi-amped like the bigger system.

I've had some Klipsch horn speakers in the past that were really obnoxious sounding when turned up and I was a bit scared the JBL's would do the same thing. It was quite the opposite with the Everests. I thought they sounded very clean and detailed and never sounded harsh. They played alot of acoustic recordings and it was very easy to seperate out the instruments. Each one seemed to have its own distinct location in the soundstage. Having the massive room definitely helped in this respect since most systems at the show in the smaller rooms were really limited in their imaging by the close proximity of the side walls. I would definitely rate the Everest in my top 5 of the show.

Also in the room was the Revel Ultima Salon II system. These speakers have some serious 'bling' factor to them. Big shiny toweres stacked with metallic cones galore. They certainly have a very hi-fi look to them. The sound was equally as hi-fi. They have a very clean and somewhat forward presentation. Whereas some systems seem to disappear and you hear the music coming from behind them, these speakers do the opposite. There was no mistaking this system for a live perfomance. The midrange was a bit overwhelming for me. It was a bit too in-your-face than I like to hear and had a somewhat unnatural tone to it. The bass was very deep and had nice impact and presence. They certainly have a distinct sound that wasn't quite like anything else I heard at the show. It may seem like I hated these speakers but that's not really the case. I can see how some people would like them but they weren't my cup of tea.

Then there were the JBL Project Arrays... :out: They just didn't do it for me. They were clearly a step down from either of the other systems in the room they seemed out of place. I can't think of anyything that really stood out to me about these speakers. except that when these were playing I got restless and wanted them to turn on the Everests or the Revels again.

tube fan
08-07-2010, 08:42 PM
I did not like the Everests at all. Just horrible IMO. Nothing like live music. Tonal purity and tonal saturation at around 0! They can play loud.

theaudiohobby
08-07-2010, 11:17 PM
Interesting response. I spent more time in the JBL/Revel room than any other at the show, mostly because they had 3 different systems setup and rotated so it was a nice comparison versus 'room hopping'. I think the presenters actually did a good job of playing loud enough to get a sense of realism but without going overboard. The room they were displayed in was very large (roughly 60ft x 30 ft with 12 foot ceilings) so I think it was a reasonable choice to bring the Everests. The amplification for the Everests was monoblock Pass XA30.5 (30watt class A) on the top and some discontinued Levinson 400watt monoblocks on the bass with a Pass active crossover. The Revels and JBL Project Arrays were powered by some Levinson amp as well, but not actively crossed and bi-amped like the bigger system.

I've had some Klipsch horn speakers in the past that were really obnoxious sounding when turned up and I was a bit scared the JBL's would do the same thing. It was quite the opposite with the Everests. I thought they sounded very clean and detailed and never sounded harsh. They played alot of acoustic recordings and it was very easy to seperate out the instruments. Each one seemed to have its own distinct location in the soundstage. Having the massive room definitely helped in this respect since most systems at the show in the smaller rooms were really limited in their imaging by the close proximity of the side walls. I would definitely rate the Everest in my top 5 of the show.
Thanks Brian for writing up a different perspective as previous show reports had led me to believe that JBL made a total cock-up of the K2 Everest Demo.

atomicAdam
08-08-2010, 12:16 PM
more...


again sorry about the crappy photos

Legacy Audio / Win Analog / MIT Cables
http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-LegacyWin-01.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-LegacyWin-02.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-LegacyWin-03.jpg

Some big speakers and amps. The tubes in those WIN amps are big enough to choke an elephant - sound awesome when playing larger classical pieces - but a solo guitar just isn't 50ft big. Either I'm not used to this large a speaker or just not my thing because I was pretty bored listening to these except when classical was playing. They also still had that speaker in the room feel. Maybe there was a volume issue, they never played them that loud and the sound never really felt solid. Maybe to thin and dispersed. anyways - other people seem to lov'm so maybe just me.

Salk and Van Alstine

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-SalkAVA-02.jpg

my lord does my crappy photo not do these beauties justice

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-SalkAVA-03.jpg

Salk speakers are probably the best looking in the show. The finish on these is seductively glossy and entrancing. Sound wise, with the AVA gear (http://www.avahifi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=153&Itemid=210), it is as I expected. I have noticed the sound out of my AVA OmegaStar250EX amplifier is a little laid back and warm. And at CAS 2010 with the 550 W Hybrid amp the sound was the same. It is very pleasing and easy on the ears. The Soundscape (http://www.salksound.com/soundscape%2010%20home.htm) speakers won a lot of affection from people at the show and apparently here at the AR forums. Jim is also a nice guy, easy to talk to and very down to earth. Hearing the Soundscape speakers has rekindled my desire to get the a pair of V-3 speakers from Salk. The soft by present highs and nice clear mids and fast bass made them very enjoyable to listen to.

Salk seemed to be the only one to using a squeezebox and from what I understand that put a lot of people off. Not really sure why. The data was being feed into a new AVA DAC (http://www.avahifi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=247&Itemid=170), the transport shouldn't really matter.

poppachubby
08-08-2010, 12:45 PM
Great write up Adam, thanks for sharing.

atomicAdam
08-08-2010, 12:53 PM
Sonist - deHavilland - Wireworld - Glow Audio

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Sonist-dehavilland.jpg


"Why have pot when you can have heroin?" - the owner of the tape reel

Yeah jackass, you know the point of a free sample is that people will come back for more, but when you have a one of a kind you kind of defeat the purpose!

This was by far the most emotionally engaging music I have ever heard. I got into the room early Friday morning and had center seat for a good 20min. The Duke Ellington reel that was played made my gut move. I was somewhere between wanted to cry and wanted to commit seppuku. It wasn't loud, it wasn't big, but it is was by far the best thing I think I've ever heard. Granted, I wouldn't want to listen to rock/pop/modern music on it. But I can't imagine ever hearing jazz again without wishing I had this set up.

On the flipside, when I went in again on Saturday the Glow amp (http://www.glow-audio.com/home.html) had been replaced with some more powerful deHavilland (i believe) amplifiers. I guess the 5W into 95db sensitive Sonist Concerto 3 floorstander (http://www.sonist.com/SONIST_PRODUCTS.html#ProdC3) wasn't cutting it.

Sonist Room 2

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-SonistRoom2.jpg

These are another pair of Sonist speakers. They aren't on the Sonist website yet. They are being driven by another Glow Audio amplifier and I believe a Cambridge Audio $600 CDP. I'm guessing the Azur 650 or similar. I'm not really sure what to say about this room. The sound was distorted in the lows and mids when the sound was peaking. I am guessing that the amplifier was being over driven. Then again, there were about 4 older guys sitting in the room saying how wonderful the sound was when I was hearing distortion, so I wonder if my ears decided to take a nap while I was visiting this room. I didn't stop back unfortunately to see if anything had changed. I'm going to assume that these probably would have sounded better with a more powerful amplifier or at a quieter volume like they did in the other Sonist room with the tape reel.

atomicAdam
08-08-2010, 01:41 PM
Wadia Digital

Sorry, I didn't get the name of the bookshelf speakers being used, maybe someone can let us know.

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-WadioDigital-Trans.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-WadiaDigital.jpg

I think Wadia might be onto something with this set up. I heard the 171i iPod transport (http://www.wadia.com/products/transports/171i.php) with a 151 PowerDAC (http://www.wadia.com/products/amplifiers/151.php). Cost is somewhere around $600 (if I remember correctly) for both the 50Watt Integrated Power Amp/DAC and the iPod Transport. I'm sorry I don't know the speakers, I'm sure someone here does. Everyone in the room I was in was very pleased with the sound, and I have to say, for the cost and the size (i really love how dang small this set up is) it was very pleasing. Now, comparing it to some higher cost components, the sound was clear and bass was extended and the sound was very solid. It was present in the room and not airy or dispersed. The problem I had with it was it sounded too clean and there was little depth to the sound. For an analogy to help explain, it was like seeing a photo of the Grand Canyon, but if you've never been, you don't really get the feel for how amazing it is. Most of the folks in the room were talking about the system and were pleased, but they also agreed with my analogy. But, lets face it, for the iPod generation this maybe one more tool and an affordable price point that can get them into hi-fi.

The speaker, I think, they were pretty bling bling for bookshelfves if I remember correctly. They are great looking and had a pretty trick grill. The lack of depth in the mids made the music a bit too clinical for me, but the highs weren't piercing in the least and the lows were present and engaging.

I can say I was impressed with this set up, but it is something I'd never have in my house. Its sound is the complete antithesis to what I love about vinyl.

Design Interactions - JBL - Revel - Mark Levinson - MIT Cables - Acoustic Science Corp.

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/CAS-2010-JBL-room-listing.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-JBL-room-2.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-JBL-room.jpg

I think enough has been said about this room already. I would just add, they were at least playing something that had been recorded w/in the last 15 years. A brother/sister guitar duo with some amazing chops. They were doing a cover of Metallica's Call of Ktulu (i think - honestly so many Metallica songs from Ride the Lighting and Master of Puppets sound so similar when done acoustically) - Anyways - great guitarist.

more to come later...

Mr Peabody
08-08-2010, 02:03 PM
Any one know what happen with Wadia after they went out of business some years ago? Is what we are seeing today the same company or did some one buy them?

Adam you could have weighed in with your opinion on the Everest.

JohnMichael
08-08-2010, 04:41 PM
Adam the bookshelf speakers are from Sonus Faber an Italian brand. I am not sure of the model.


Here is a link.

http://www.sonusfaber.com/eng/collections_cremona_auditorm.html

atomicAdam
08-08-2010, 05:24 PM
Adam the bookshelf speakers are from Sonus Faber an Italian brand. I am not sure of the model.


Here is a link.

http://www.sonusfaber.com/eng/collections_cremona_auditorm.html


I think you got it - the Cermona line.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-09-2010, 02:09 PM
::: SORRY FOR CRAPPY PHOTOS :::

Also - disclaimer - all comments are based on the performance of the speaker w/in the room at the show and my short or long listening time - obviously a hotel room w/ little treatment can only show so much of a set ups performance.

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CIS-2010-01.jpg

This was the line at opening time Friday morning. It was a good chaotic start to the event. Friday morning was a great time to be at the show. Almost now one in the rooms - though a lot of rooms were still figuring out speaker position and room acoustics, so it was good to be able to come back to those rooms through out the weekend.

I have to say, many of the folks at the show were very nice, both attendees, staff, and manufacturers.

Electrocompaniet Room

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Electrompaniet-04.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Electrompaniet-02.jpg

I was very interested to hear the floorstanding speakers in the Prelude line, happily they were as I expected, fuller low end versions of the bookshelf speakers with the same sweet, slightly rolled off high (the harsher highs it seems to me are rolled off). (review of the bookshelf prelude speakers, PC-1 CDP, PI-2 Amp, to come on Dagogo.com)

I very much enjoyed these speakers, and for the sub $3000 price range, probably the best I heard at that price point. But you do have to like the sound.

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Electrompaniet-01.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Electrompaniet-05.jpg

The Classic Line was very good. It had a similar sound to the Prelude line Scanspeak tweeter but much more detail and a much faster and cleaner low end. I was able to listen to track 4 off of Dead Can Dance Toward the Within. Lisa Gerrard voice was captivating and the drum circle that gets going towards the end of the song was awesome. There was some issues with room acoustics - I mean, that much power in that small a room.

Peder from Electrocompaniet was very nice, and overall the sound from their systems was very pleasing to my ears, especially at the Prelude price point. Though, in that room, the floorstanding Prelude speakers were a big blurry and boomy at the lower mids and lows. I don't think that is all the fault of the room, the bookshelves I have in my house have had a bit of that issue as well.

MORE TO COME .... but imma gonna go throw done some music for the rest of the night. hommie just burned me his new CD and I can't wait to hear it!

I had the same impression of these speakers you did, but I thought it was because the speakers were so low to the ground. I have to rethink that explaination.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-09-2010, 02:15 PM
Sonist - deHavilland - Wireworld - Glow Audio

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-Sonist-dehavilland.jpg


"Why have pot when you can have heroin?" - the owner of the tape reel

Yeah jackass, you know the point of a free sample is that people will come back for more, but when you have a one of a kind you kind of defeat the purpose!

This was by far the most emotionally engaging music I have ever heard. I got into the room early Friday morning and had center seat for a good 20min. The Duke Ellington reel that was played made my gut move. I was somewhere between wanted to cry and wanted to commit seppuku. It wasn't loud, it wasn't big, but it is was by far the best thing I think I've ever heard. Granted, I wouldn't want to listen to rock/pop/modern music on it. But I can't imagine ever hearing jazz again without wishing I had this set up.

On the flipside, when I went in again on Saturday the Glow amp (http://www.glow-audio.com/home.html) had been replaced with some more powerful deHavilland (i believe) amplifiers. I guess the 5W into 95db sensitive Sonist Concerto 3 floorstander (http://www.sonist.com/SONIST_PRODUCTS.html#ProdC3) wasn't cutting it.

Sonist Room 2

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-SonistRoom2.jpg

These are another pair of Sonist speakers. They aren't on the Sonist website yet. They are being driven by another Glow Audio amplifier and I believe a Cambridge Audio $600 CDP. I'm guessing the Azur 650 or similar. I'm not really sure what to say about this room. The sound was distorted in the lows and mids when the sound was peaking. I am guessing that the amplifier was being over driven. Then again, there were about 4 older guys sitting in the room saying how wonderful the sound was when I was hearing distortion, so I wonder if my ears decided to take a nap while I was visiting this room. I didn't stop back unfortunately to see if anything had changed. I'm going to assume that these probably would have sounded better with a more powerful amplifier or at a quieter volume like they did in the other Sonist room with the tape reel.

I had the same impression you did on these speakers as well - I was part of the saturday crowd, so I heard these speakers at their worst.

Too much tweeter, not enough bass was my comments.

bobsticks
08-09-2010, 02:18 PM
Great write-up Adam, thanks for sharing!

The bookshelves in question were indeed the Cremona line. While I haven't heard them with Wadia they can sound fantastic with the right accompanying equipment. A little dark for some folk's tastes but mighty nice to these ears.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-09-2010, 02:51 PM
Wadia Digital

Sorry, I didn't get the name of the bookshelf speakers being used, maybe someone can let us know.

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-WadioDigital-Trans.jpg

http://gallery.audioreview.com/data/audio//500/medium/CAS-2010-WadiaDigital.jpg

I think Wadia might be onto something with this set up. I heard the 171i iPod transport (http://www.wadia.com/products/transports/171i.php) with a 151 PowerDAC (http://www.wadia.com/products/amplifiers/151.php). Cost is somewhere around $600 (if I remember correctly) for both the 50Watt Integrated Power Amp/DAC and the iPod Transport. I'm sorry I don't know the speakers, I'm sure someone here does. Everyone in the room I was in was very pleased with the sound, and I have to say, for the cost and the size (i really love how dang small this set up is) it was very pleasing. Now, comparing it to some higher cost components, the sound was clear and bass was extended and the sound was very solid. It was present in the room and not airy or dispersed. The problem I had with it was it sounded too clean and there was little depth to the sound. For an analogy to help explain, it was like seeing a photo of the Grand Canyon, but if you've never been, you don't really get the feel for how amazing it is. Most of the folks in the room were talking about the system and were pleased, but they also agreed with my analogy. But, lets face it, for the iPod generation this maybe one more tool and an affordable price point that can get them into hi-fi.

The speaker, I think, they were pretty bling bling for bookshelfves if I remember correctly. They are great looking and had a pretty trick grill. The lack of depth in the mids made the music a bit too clinical for me, but the highs weren't piercing in the least and the lows were present and engaging.

I can say I was impressed with this set up, but it is something I'd never have in my house. Its sound is the complete antithesis to what I love about vinyl.

Wow, I hated the sound of this set up, and so did my buddy. Too much midrange, too clinical, too etchy, and just plain too cold for my taste. My mini-monitors are smaller than these speakers, and my buddy just kept commenting on how much better my speakers sounded compared to these. The crispness of these speakers might appeal to those who have lost the high end of their hearing, but I am not one of those people, and neither apparently is my buddy.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-09-2010, 02:52 PM
Great write-up Adam, thanks for sharing!

The bookshelves in question were indeed the Cremona line. While I haven't heard them with Wadia they can sound fantastic with the right accompanying equipment. A little dark for some folk's tastes but mighty nice to these ears.

These speakers were not dark, not by any stretch of the imagination.

bobsticks
08-09-2010, 03:01 PM
These speakers were not dark, not by any stretch of the imagination.

I didn't find them to be either but I've read that descriptor several different places. The set up I heard was with Levinson gear...a little bit beefier of an amp and no bells and whistles from the source. I'll agree that the mids can be artificially extended but I never caught any etch.

...just goes to show how crucial system and room synergy can be.

tube fan
08-09-2010, 07:29 PM
In the latest issue of "The Absolute Sound" (September) Jonathan Valin reviews the tape system I raved about at the show: "The Tape Project Open-Reel Tapes". So far, they only have 20 copies of master tapes for sale and they are not cheap. $500 per tape. Valin admits that the best of the tapes are better than any other source he has heard. (he uses a phono system that costs upwards of $100,000). He suggests that some are taping their vinyl records to capture analogue sound without ticks and pops. That i will have to look into.

PeruvianSkies
08-09-2010, 07:39 PM
Any one know what happen with Wadia after they went out of business some years ago? Is what we are seeing today the same company or did some one buy them?

Adam you could have weighed in with your opinion on the Everest.

I am not sure of what all happened, about 3 years ago though I nearly got a Wadia reference CD player, but lost the bid on eBay in the last few seconds....I am still bummed about that one. A few days later though I got the Parasound universal player instead though and have been satisfied, but still want a dedicated CD player of Wadia-like caliber.

atomicAdam
08-10-2010, 11:39 AM
These speakers were not dark, not by any stretch of the imagination.


Yeah - super not dark. Off the gear I heard I'd say they have a clean midrange but certainly not too much. Maybe w/ the larger gear there was too much.

I think with right gear they might sound better, but off of an iPod and 50 Integrated Amp/DAC that I believe is under the $1000 range, they did sound really good for that.

atomicAdam
08-10-2010, 11:43 AM
In the latest issue of "The Absolute Sound" (September) Jonathan Valin reviews the tape system I raved about at the show: "The Tape Project Open-Reel Tapes". So far, they only have 20 copies of master tapes for sale and they are not cheap. $500 per tape. Valin admits that the best of the tapes are better than any other source he has heard. (he uses a phono system that costs upwards of $100,000). He suggests that some are taping their vinyl records to capture analogue sound without ticks and pops. That i will have to look into.

I thought I heard you get each tape for $500 or all for $700, something something. Anyways - lets be real, for those price points you can pretty much higher a band to play in your livingroom for the night.

Feanor
08-10-2010, 12:43 PM
In the latest issue of "The Absolute Sound" (September) Jonathan Valin reviews the tape system I raved about at the show: "The Tape Project Open-Reel Tapes". So far, they only have 20 copies of master tapes for sale and they are not cheap. $500 per tape. Valin admits that the best of the tapes are better than any other source he has heard. (he uses a phono system that costs upwards of $100,000). He suggests that some are taping their vinyl records to capture analogue sound without ticks and pops. That i will have to look into.
Without disputing the virtues of tape, if the objective is to converting vinyl in such a way as to capture the analog sound, capture them to CD. As I've heard, the "analog" quality is preserved quite well taking this approach; (I haven't tried it myself but vinyl-loving members around here have reported so in the past). Also, some people suggest the recording to lossless computer file works well too.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-10-2010, 12:54 PM
In the latest issue of "The Absolute Sound" (September) Jonathan Valin reviews the tape system I raved about at the show: "The Tape Project Open-Reel Tapes". So far, they only have 20 copies of master tapes for sale and they are not cheap. $500 per tape. Valin admits that the best of the tapes are better than any other source he has heard. (he uses a phono system that costs upwards of $100,000). He suggests that some are taping their vinyl records to capture analogue sound without ticks and pops. That i will have to look into.

I have about 35 open reel tapes I have kept from previous recording sessions that I did. They are excellent recordings captured on an excellent deck. However, in transferring those tapes to disc via the DXD format, I could not tell which were the tapes, and which were the disc during an improptu blind test. I ended up trancoding the DXD files to PCM 24-192khz, so the comparison was definately worth doing.

I would suggest that these guys get out more, and hear more formats. DXD is a far better capture format, and can pretty much losslessly be transferred to SACD or PCM at 24/192khz.

RGA
08-10-2010, 02:22 PM
I said I would not comment in this thread and I won't. Here is Jack Robert's of Dagogo's show report

Part 1 page 1 Legacy Audio, Magico V2s

http://dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=778

Part 1 page 2 covering JBL Project Everest loudspeakers, The Lotus Group’s room, Teresonic/Musical Surroundings, Evolution Acoustics, Audio Note UK (I don't need to comment :22: ) Looks like at least a foot from the corners - uggh. Might be getting 60% of what they're about. Mario must have been having fits. Oops I commented so I'll stop. http://dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?bShowUnpublished=&hArticle=778&PageOfArticle=1

tube fan
08-10-2010, 07:44 PM
I have about 35 open reel tapes I have kept from previous recording sessions that I did. They are excellent recordings captured on an excellent deck. However, in transferring those tapes to disc via the DXD format, I could not tell which were the tapes, and which were the disc during an improptu blind test. I ended up trancoding the DXD files to PCM 24-192khz, so the comparison was definately worth doing.

I would suggest that these guys get out more, and hear more formats. DXD is a far better capture format, and can pretty much losslessly be transferred to SACD or PCM at 24/192khz.

I've heard all the formats, and NO digital format comes close to analogue. First, sound is analogue. Thus, you have to convert the analogue signal to digital, and then, because we listen only to analogue sounds, the digital information has to go through yet another distorting process: a digital to analogue conversion. Sound is flattened, tonal saturation is lost, and micro dynamics are reduced.

One of the rooms was playing the Bill Evans "Waltz for Debby" recording in ever higher CD formats. Yes, the sound got more realistic, but, fortunately, I had a vinyl record of the recording, and after playing the vinyl, EVERYONE, including the salesmen, admitted that the vinyl DESTROYED the best CDs. Yes, especially in micro dynamics (like the small details of Paul Motian's cymbal strokes, and Scott LaFaro's subtle bass playing).
Yes, in producing three dimensional sound. Yes, in tonal saturation.

BTW, in the latest Stereophile, it's highly informative to look at John Atkinson's measurements of the Audio ResearchVSi60 integrated tube amp (he dismisses the amp as having less than outstand measurements) compared to his own full review of the Acapella High Violoncello II speaker ($80,000) . He found the Acapella less than realistic driven by the Classe CTM-600 ss monoblocks and the ss Simaudio Moon Evolution W-7. The BAT VK-55SE tube was much better, but, the very same tube Audio Research unit which he said measured just OK, the VSi60 (priced at just $4,000), drove the Acapella to an outstandingly realistic level of performance. He said that only the Audio Research tube unit got the balance between the high and low treble regions correct, and that the AR unit fleshed out the low frequencies!

CD sound, even the very highest resolution, falls short of vinyl, as vinyl falls short of master tapes (or direct copies of master tapes). Ditto for ss and tube amplification, and mm and mc cartridges.

Mr Peabody
08-10-2010, 07:59 PM
That ARC integrated has been around some time, why is he reviewing it now? i know you are an ARC fan but I didn't like the sound of the VXI-60. The Classe amps no better.

RGA
08-10-2010, 09:27 PM
Tube fan

This is a bit O.T. but related to a point I have made for years. There are two kinds of uses that a stereo system has and a recording engineer looks at a system and wants a "hyper" reality of the event in a sense that he wants to hear every aspect compartmentalized and pulled apart so that each part can be scrutinized. It's not a relaxing experience.

Looking strictly at the end user (which is the only one of relavence) then arguments over vinyl and CD or master tapes don't matter. Master Tapes may sound better but can I buy Lady Gaga on master tape? Probably not. So you have to have other mediums. CD and Vinyl have more program music on those formats than anything else. There is a TON of vinyl out there that is not available on CD - if it is about music you need a turntable to get those recordings. This is also true of CD - there is a LOT of music on CD that you can't get on vinyl. Then there are the strange albums on both. Sarah McLachlan has her new album on both but on the LP the album is short 3 songs. Jewel has an album where the vinyl version has 2-3 extra songs.

Then there are the vinyls out there from other countries that have a different mix - I believe Phil Collins has an album or two like that where the British cut is different from the American ones.

The best sound I have heard has come from vinyl - best doesn't mean accurate - it means best. It means that the sound of the instrument sounds better and "sounds" more like the real thing than the CD versions of the same albums, even the remastered versions of the CD. Even on relative dumpy stuff like Madonna. But, even if people should disagree with that - there is still thousands and thousands of albums on vinyl that isn't on any other format. A turntable is at the very least a necessary evil - if it is about the music and not the gear.

Tubes and SS - Audiophiles tend to leave SS for tubes and don't go back. I grew up on SS and CD not vinyl and tubes. I find vinyl to be a royal pain in the arse - and tubes are not a lot better.

Consider the work involved. A turntable has a lot of moving bits and you have to learn a bit about it. There are VTA tonearms, you have to set it up properly, you have to change the stylus, most of the higher end tables make you take the platter off to change the belts for 45rpm - PAIN IN THE BUTT.

Tubes are a pain - they blow and that is after a slow steady degrading process. They can blow and if they do they can take boards with them. They're arguably more fire prone. Add to that the whole thing about bias adjusting. Sure it's not hard but to the average non electrician folks out there when you tell them to buy a voltmeter they run scared. Granted I am fortunate that the company that makes my amps don't need biasing but they're not the norm.

Having said all that to get me, Mr Bryston, to buy an 8 watt tube amp with no remote and a 1 year warranty (and doesn't even look sexy like a Shanling) over an 160 watt power amp with matching preamp and 20 year warranty with no fussy issues like tube replacements, and is also from my homeland, has to have something brought to the table that so profoundly outclasses the amp with all the many and deep tertiary advantages. The synic will say it is Euphony. That's fine - Euphony means "pleasing" and as an end user I would like my stereo to sound "pleasing" - my other choice is "not" to sound "pleasing" and if you want something that doesn't sound "pleasing" then be my guest. Other analogies fail as well. SS is like meal without any spices or things to add flavour. Tubes alter the ingredients. I suppose so - a Tube may be like a marinated cooked filet mignon prepared by Gordon Ramsey to perfection. A SS amp may be a raw hunk of beef. I dunno a lot but I know which one is worth paying for and which is worth actually eating. Altering the meat makes it better and here it comes "more pleasing" or "euphonic." Granted you run the risk with some tube amps to push too much or to "over marinate" or to use too much salt which can ruin the food. So it's important to have a good chef at the helm.

CD versus LP - buy both. CD is great and so are some of the recordings I heard done by the Pudget sound recording guys where there resolution rates are some of the highest out there - they did a great job with Usher loudspeakers. The other aspect to consider is the specific CD versus LP of the same artists. Sometimes the CD version just sounds better and more often of what I have bought the LP version sounds better. This is arguably the recording process more than the format. LP can't save a bad recording and those early CDs were so darn awful that CD got a poorer reputation than was probably fair. It also didn't help that those early machines were terrible.

I saw a TEAC reel to reel machine in a used shop today going for $55 and it looked to be in great condition - I almost went for it but I don't know which brands are considered the A-list machines. TEAC has been into high end gear and also made some truly disastrous junk over the years.

tube fan
08-10-2010, 10:35 PM
You can't go wrong for $55. Yes, tubes are a pain. Yes, tts and cartridges are a pain. But then, I grind my coffee beans and use a french press to make my coffee. I work out 1 to 2 1/2 hours a day. If you are lazy, stick to ss and cds. My ears simply won't let me settle for inferior, but convenient, musical sources. They keep saying CDs are getting better. Ditto for ss. I don't want to settle for "better", when the alternative is clearly superior. IMO, keep a backup analogue system for the times when something goes wrong with your main system. Right now I am looking at low power amps and high efficiency speakers as a potential new backup to my main system. I still get a big kick out of the fact that JA had to go to a "cheap" tube integrated to get great sound out of an $80,000 speaker!

theaudiohobby
08-11-2010, 12:49 AM
Another hijacked thread coming your way :frown2: :rolleyes5:

Brian K
08-11-2010, 07:20 AM
I hate to contribute to the pirating of a thread but ....

I'll briefly say that if you compare CD sound quality vs vinyl sound it's a pretty easy choice in favor of the vinyl. Fortunately, we're not stuck in the 80's and there are alot of alternative digital recording mediums being used now. Some of the super high res (172khz PCM, 24bit 192khz) digital stuff sounds absolutely fantastic and you don't have to have a reel to reel tape machine with master tapes. The problem is finding your favorite music in a high res format you can playback. There's no clearcut choice for what format to use like there was when 'redbook' CD came out. Fortunately, I use my computer as my main source at home and can playback virutally anything. The super high res recordings I've been able to get my hands one really do stand apart from their redbook counterparts and I believe beat out vinyl recordings in sound quality.

Unfortunately, new formats in audio really have a hard time finding consensus and not many producers and product developers want to waste money on a 'fad'. Hopefully in another 5-10years redbook will be history and will be replaced by a single super high res digital format. When that happens it is going to be alot harder to see a clear winner in the vinyl vs digital argument. Until then, I'm stuck listening to a few choice cuts over and over :(

Geoffcin
08-11-2010, 08:02 AM
The topic is "First impressions at California audio Show'

One more off topic post and ALL of your off topic posts will be deleted.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-11-2010, 08:06 AM
I hate to contribute to the pirating of a thread but ....

I'll briefly say that if you compare CD sound quality vs vinyl sound it's a pretty easy choice in favor of the vinyl. Fortunately, we're not stuck in the 80's and there are alot of alternative digital recording mediums being used now. Some of the super high res (172khz PCM, 24bit 192khz) digital stuff sounds absolutely fantastic and you don't have to have a reel to reel tape machine with master tapes. The problem is that finding your favorite music in a high res format you can playback. There's just clearcut choice like there was when 'redbook' CD came out. Fortunately, I use my computer as my main source at home and can playback virutally anything. The super high res recordings I've been able to get my hands one really do stand apart from their redbook counterparts and I believe beat out vinyl recordings in sound quality.

Unfortunately, new formats in audio really have a hard time finding consensus and not many producers and product developers want to waste money on a 'fad'. Hopefully in another 5-10years redbook will be history and will be replaced by a single super high res digital format. When that happens it is going to be alot harder to see a clear winner in the vinyl vs digital argument. Until then, I'm stuck listening to a few choice cuts over and over :(

I don't think the new formats really have a hard time finding a consensus as much as most engineers(and record companies) are very slow to adopt new tools. DVD-A and SACD were really just protection measure to the format, and really were not taken all that seriously by the record companies. Because of that lack of seriousness, they didn't promote either format, and largely the audio engineers that adopted them got burned by the cost of the equipment upgrade without the ROI.

There is a breed of emerging audio engineers coming from Europe that are setting the bar for high resolution recording in both stereo and multichannel. 2L and Surround Records are releasing most of the high resolution stuff now, and they are adopting DXD as the capture format, and delivering their work losslessly via SACD and 24/192khz PCM, Dts-HD Master Audio or Dolby Digital TruHD on the Blu ray disc format. I have about 40 recordings of high resolution music on Blu ray disc, and quite frankly I have never heard anything close to the quality i am hearing from it on any format.

Audiophiles also need to adopt more sources of music on other formats. Downloading is just beginning to take off, but the Blu ray disc isn't even being considered. That is a shame since a download cannot replaced when you have computer issues, but a disc is always there.

You do have one important point - that is there is not a lot of offerings out there if you are not into classical music. We do have to start somewhere though, and for classical music lovers there is more to life than just vinyl or CD. Audiophiles should embrace the opportunity to hear classical music at a resolution that in the past was unheard of.

Geoffcin
08-11-2010, 08:10 AM
Please start another thread if you want to pursue this dialog.

Jack in Wilmington
08-11-2010, 01:36 PM
Back at the California Audio Show. Sounds like an excellent show BTW. For the antendees, was there talk of a second annual show? My friends were just at the Star Trek Convention in Las Vegas and you could make your reservations for next years convention at this years show. What's the next big show Rocky Mountain Audiofest? Like to start planning some vacations around a show or two.

Brian K
08-12-2010, 07:19 AM
I didn't overhear any discussion of a show next year but judging by the turnout I'd be surprised if they didn't do it again. Even on Friday while most people should be at work it was hard to find a seat in alot of the rooms. I believe RMAF is about 8 weeks from now. If I wasn't so broke from buying audio equipment I would probably be going!

Since this is AudioREVIEW.com.... maybe a few people who attended the show could put a vote in for their favorite systems from the show?

I'll kick it off with my top 5 (in no particular order) -

- Salk Signature Sound
- JBL Everests
- Evolution Acoustics
- Magico V3
- Audio Note

There were definitely other systems that impressed me, but these were the rooms where my butt spent the most time.

tube fan
08-12-2010, 08:24 AM
My favorites in order:

Evolution Acoustics (only when playing tapes)
Teresonic (playing vinyl)
Audio Note (here they only had CDs, but the sound was great; I think it would have been my favorite if they were using tapes or vinyl)
Magico V3 (playing vinyl)
Lotus (vinyl)

blackraven
08-12-2010, 07:41 PM
Was there any Outlaw gear at the show?

Mr Peabody
08-12-2010, 07:53 PM
Is Outlaw even still in business? The roar from that area has been really quiet for a long time.

blackraven
08-12-2010, 10:15 PM
Outlaw is now selling a Marantz AVR instead of the Onkyo!

frenchmon
08-13-2010, 12:29 PM
Does not surprise me that they are selling Marantz. The Onkyo MRP and I listened to was just down right awful.

Feanor
11-13-2011, 04:51 AM
FOAD ... know what that means, DS?


Firms Settlement Consolidation nationalrelief com/DebtResources/DebtReduction aspx]debt reduction
debtconsolidation com/articles/debt-settlement html]debt settlement debtconsolidation com/articles/debt-settlement html]debt settlements
Being delinquent on bank card debts isn't any laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and anxiety about bankruptcy can establish many insomnia But, a credit card debt negotiation agreement will take away a great deal troubles The following statistics explain why everybody is selecting credit cards credit card debt settlement letter via this superior way of debt elimination:

nationalrelief com/DebtResources/DebtSettlement aspx]irs tax debt settlementnationalrelief com/DebtResources/DebtSettlement aspx]debt settlement lawyer in
debt relief (http://forums.audioreview.com/fastdebtsettlements)debt settlement (http://forums.audioreview.com/fastdebtsettlements com)
debt settlement (http://forums.audioreview.com/fastdebtsettlements)debt settlements (http://forums.audioreview.com/fastdebtsettlements)
legal debt settlement (http://forums.audioreview.com/nationalrelief)www debt settlement (http://forums.audioreview.com/nationalrelief)

Being delinquent on bank card debts is not any laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and anxiety about bankruptcy can cause many insomnia But, a debt negotiation agreement will take away a whole lot troubles The following statistics explain why everybody is deciding on a bank card debt negotiation letter via this superior kind of debt elimination:
Being delinquent on credit card debts isn't laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and anxiety about bankruptcy can produce many difficulty sleeping But, a debt negotiation agreement might take away a good deal troubles The next statistics explain why everybody is picking a charge card debt consolidation letter via this superior kind of debt elimination:
Being delinquent on credit card debts isn't any laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and anxiety about bankruptcy can produce many insomnia But, a debt negotiation agreement will take away a good deal troubles These statistics explain why everybody is deciding on a charge card debt consolidation letter via this superior kind of debt elimination:
Being delinquent on charge card debts isn't laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and concern with bankruptcy can cause many sleepless nights But, a debt negotiation agreement will take away lots troubles These statistics explain why everybody is opting for a card debt negotiation letter via this superior form of debt elimination:
Being delinquent on credit card debts is no laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and fear of bankruptcy can create many difficulty sleeping But, a debt negotiation agreement may take away a lot troubles This statistics explain why so many people are choosing a credit card unsecured debt settlement letter via this superior form of debt elimination:
Being delinquent on credit card debts is not any laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and concern with bankruptcy can produce many difficulty sleeping But, a credit card debt negotiation agreement may take away lots troubles The following statistics explain why everybody is choosing a card unsecured debt settlement letter via this superior form of debt elimination:
Being delinquent on plastic card debts is no laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and concern about bankruptcy can create many problems sleeping But, a credit card debt negotiation agreement usually takes away lots troubles The following statistics explain why everybody is deciding on a credit card unsecured debt settlement letter via this superior way of debt elimination:
Being delinquent on debit card debts is no laughing matter The endless annoying collection calls, torturous threat of lawsuits, and concern about bankruptcy can establish many sleeplessness But, a credit card debt negotiation agreement may take away a whole lot troubles These statistics explain why so many people are deciding on a credit card debt consolidation letter via this superior type of debt elimination:

nationalrelief com/DebtResources/DebtManagement aspx]commercial debt management

nationalrelief com/DebtResources/MedicalBillsRelief aspx]medical bill negotiation
nationalrelief com/DebtResources/MedicalBillsRelief aspx]how to deal with medical bills

nationalrelief com/DebtResources/CreditCardDebt aspx]credit card debt consolidation helpnationalrelief com/DebtResources/CreditCardDebt aspx]business credit card debtnationalrelief com/DebtResources/CreditCardDebt aspx]credit card debt factsnationalrelief com/DebtResources/CreditCardDebt aspx]credit card debt garnishmentnationalrelief com/DebtResources/CreditCardDebt aspx]credit card debt consolidate nonprofit