-
First impressions at California audio Show
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
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.
-
Thanks for the feedback on the show...
I'm looking forward to more impressions.
LeRoy
-
Adam are Marantz there? Check em out.
-
Just curious if Conrad Johnson is there?
-
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
Adam are Marantz there? Check em out.
I didn't see anything by Marantz there Poppa.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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 $.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
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.
-
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.
-
BTW, I'm off to the show. You can't miss me as I'll be the only one with several vinyl records.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
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.
-
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
-
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
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), 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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
According to Audio Note, ( here), 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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian K
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.
-
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
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).
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
...
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). 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)".
-
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.
-
Is Hansen Audio represented at the show?
-
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).
-
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.
|