Not quite sold on the single driver SET setup

[Hyfi]

I did not have a big choice in single driver speakers that day. I merely asked to hear a nice SET amp with single drivers to get an idea of what Poultry has been raving about as well as the future downsizing search.

They had no Flea-Watt amps except a 4wpc 300B, so I chose the 15wpc JAS. When they could not find the pair of Omegas they thought were there, they hooked up the real efficient SQ10s that Steve Monte designs himself.

They were effortless but lacked the midrange I am used to. Before I listened to the Gemmes, he hooked up a recent bookshelf model of KEF with a 6"driver and the uniQ tweeter. Oddly enogh, with the amp I was using, the $800 KEFs sounded better than the $4800 SQs and the $4000 Gemmes.

My problem is that if a $2500 15wpc could not properly drive a single fostek or the 10 plus horn 94db speakers, how is a $300 2wpc unit going to handle it?

I used to hate going to the gear stores because I would always come home wanting and thinking my setup was sub-par. Now when I get home I smile and think to myself "my system sounds so much better than all of what I just listened to".

I keep forgetting that regardless of the name on the speaker, I have Von Shweikert speakers and my 17 y/o VAC and Counterpoint kick the life out of lots of newer gear. They are just big units and at downsize time, I will go with some type of all tube integrated.

If midrange is what you say is the single/SET highlight, I already have it. And since I like the Bass Guitar, any system I own will need to be able to reproduce it.

When I got home, my setup was using the Stratos amp and I was still happier than anything I heard that day. Yesterday I swapped in the Counterpoint and the mids opened up more, while the forwardness of the Stratos bass and a small drop in overall volume. But, the bass it tight, distinct, and fast without being bone thumping. I flip on the sub if I want more.

Anyway, the jury is not out yet and I will continue to listen with an open mind but I listen to more than acoustic and background light jazz and need a system that not only excels at low volume but can also properly rock out at 90db without lacking something. Right now, I already have all that but in a footprint larger than I will be able to carry to a smaller house when the time comes.

I think my VAC is still one of the better pre-amps out there, even at 17 and no upgrades.

[RGA]

Several things at play with all audio gear - we get used to the sound our system makes - for all the people who say their reference is live - recordings are not live - the live venue is not their room's venue and reproduced audio isn't the same.

So we get used to the way our system presents things. Ideally perfect reproduced sound comes from a point in space - the single driver (from a small point (not a large line array or panel) is the purist theoretical way to achieve that. There is no crossover no unnecessary garbage getting in the way no sonic signature matching of two very dissimilar drivers etc etc and another etc.

Long ago they realized the fact that while there is the theory the practice is that a 4 inch woofer can't possibly hope to reproduce music at loud levels and certainly not with any real bass or treble. Sure you can put in a 10 foot high 5 foot deep box but now you have a MASSIVE speaker that doesn't fit in the normal home. It's simply much simpler to have 7 drivers each doing one small part of the frequency spectrum and them put in a bunch of crossovers. And for Rock music they simply DESTROY single drivers and every sanely sized planar and electrostat. I don't understand why people WILL NOT accept these facts.

The single driver (done right) has a purity within the frequency spectrum it covers that is not matched by other designs - they just never are matched. A good SET (and not all of them are good) have transient timbral acuity that (without distortion generating negative feedback (that isn't seen on the scope) is easily far and away superior. But they sacrifice power in a huge way.

I have heard Von Sweikert's top of the line mega priced loudspeaker and in no way shape or form does that speaker remotely - not even in the same league, get the cohesion of a single driver or the better two ways that a Single Driver offers.

Having said that - if you know me - you know I value dynamics and fuller range presentation and in no way does a any single driver that I have ever heard even remotely - not even in the same league at all get the bass, loudness, "scale" that the big VonSweikert speakers (and many other larger multi-way speakers) possess.

For me personally I choose the Big VS speakers or something like the Usher 10 Be over a small 4 inch single driver in some sort of folded horn.

The reason this hobby is so fascinating to me is that after awhile you can hear something about the technology being used that has some sort of weakness. The best speakers IMO hide their weaknesses better - the weakness doesn't deter you from the presentation. High Negative feedback I constantly hear as a shallowness on notes. Most reviewers seem to like the word "glassy" or "thin" or sometimes "analytical" (which simply means bright, edgy) and ultimately fatiguing and unlistenable.

There was a fellow on the AN Kits site at audioasylum who had single driver speakers and basically said something along the lines that the AN E is like a single driver but with bass, treble and dynamics. D'uh - I've said that for 6-7 years. For a single driver to approach the bass and treble and dynamics of the AN E it STARTS with The Silbatone Aporia Full range and the Teresonic Ingenium - neither of which has the bass depth or the dynamics. And this is only a two way standmount. The AN E does not have the bass or volume capability that the top of the line Von Sweikerts, Sony's flagship, Usher's big speakers possess. The AN E in corners may get the bass to compete with many of them but not at high volume levels.

But my argument has always been how much are YOU willing to trade and WHERE will you trade it? The AN E still doesn't have the cohesive purity in the midrange of the best Single drivers - you give that yo for bass/treble/dynamics/volume. I make that trade because I listen to a wide array of music and rock is part of that.

Do I then want to trade even more of that cohesiveness away for a 5-6 way box.I may get more treble and even more bass. Maybe some people will opt for that but I continuously hear the drivers operating in their own isolated spheres. It's not coherent and the illusion falls apart. With subs they tend to sound weighted to whatever part of the room they're placed in and the illusion crumbles.

I was impressed by the Zu audio Essence - but I need to go back with harder hitting music just to be sure. ~30hz is plenty and 101db sensitive is easy and they use the big 8 inch driver. But it still ain't going to compete with the SCM 150 from ATC that the store also carries. I am very interested to try that speaker on the SET.

ATC is one of the only companies that places a premium importance on loudspeaker matching as a pair. Audio Note is the other - and lately KEF has followed suit. But it is more interesting than an all Tube/SET dealer is using the ATC speakers which typically are driven with high power SS. And ATC has sounded edgy with SS at times which is puzzling due the soft dome drivers they use. So me thinks they're showing up the high negative feedback sound.

[E-Stat]

Ideally perfect reproduced sound comes from a point in space - the single driver (from a small point (not a large line array or panel) is the purist theoretical way to achieve that.

I've never heard a single live, unamplified instrument or concert that sounded as if it emanated from a point in space. Everything I've ever heard comes from an acoustic space ranging from a couple of feet wide (solo guitar) to over a hundred (symphony).

There is no crossover no unnecessary garbage getting in the way no sonic signature matching of two very dissimilar drivers etc etc and another etc.

Now that does relate to my experience which is why I prefer that approach. A single pebble in the pond.

[RGA]

I've never heard a single live, unamplified instrument or concert that sounded as if it emanated from a point in space. Everything I've ever heard comes from an acoustic space ranging from a couple of feet wide (solo guitar) to over a hundred (symphony).


Now that does relate to my experience which is why I prefer that approach. A single pebble in the pond.

The latter is the former it starts from a single point and radiates out - UHF magazine describes it well in their book which I don't have with me. The single driver point in space as the originator which ideally is a very small speaker with one driver. If you stood 50 feet from the guitar then your perception would not be that it is 2 feet wide - that perception only exists if you were playing the instrument or very close to it. The live comparison is an odd one to me since the room acoustics of the recording is different than the home which would be of varying sizes. Further many live symphonies have all of the instruments in a pit - there is no stage awareness to such an even they're lumped together - the spatial cues will also be hugely dependent on your seat. Amplified events are a non starter for spatial cues since it comes out of loudspeakers place on the stage which differs from concert to concert. (symphonies differ from venue to venue as well).

It is far simpler to make instrumental comparisons - there really is no point in worrying about symphony perception of staging if you do not know exactly where all of the instruments were at the time of the recording. Unless there is a seating plan that comes with the CD that states that Joe the Violinist was 18 feet to the left of center and the oboe is in the middle and the French horn over on the right and there were three french horns and one bassoon in the back 4 feet then it winds up being - whichever is biggest will be deemed best by the listener - when biggest may in fact be completely wrong.

That's why I prefer getting the instrument sound down first. Doesn't matter where it is if the instrument itself doesn't sound real. Transients, Decay, tone, timbre, dynamics, and the sound pressure to make it have that live visceral sensation. I liked Soundhounds demo of a speaker I was listening to. There is a high 6 foot partition in the middle of the room. A woman who could not see over the partition popped her head around and was stunned that it was not someone actually playing a piano. That is what it ought to be able to do. Granted the recording needs to be up to it but a lot are.

[E-Stat]

The single driver point in space as the originator which ideally is a very small speaker with one driver. If you stood 50 feet from the guitar then your perception would not be that it is 2 feet wide - that perception only exists if you were playing the instrument or very close to it.

I understand the theory - just find it never works in practice. I recently heard the new "full range point source" KEF Blade in SF and found that it's apparent image size is unrealistically small to these ears.. Unless you're listening from the lobby.

Further many live symphonies have all of the instruments in a pit

Many? I've never been to one. You're thinking of theatrical performances where the stage is dominated by actors or singers. That is not the reference I use for music.

Amplified events are a non starter for spatial cues since it comes out of loudspeakers place on the stage which differs from concert to concert.

Which is why such recordings are useless to evaluate a system's soundstaging capability.

there really is no point in worrying about symphony perception of staging if you do not know exactly where all of the instruments were at the time of the recording.

Worry? Just listen! With good systems playing good recordings, you can hear where the sections are located. And something of the hall acoustic.

[Feanor]

...
Further many live symphonies have all of the instruments in a pit - there is no stage awareness to such an even they're lumped together ....

Not at all -- you're thinking of opera, not orchestral performance.

...
It is far simpler to make instrumental comparisons - there really is no point in worrying about symphony perception of staging if you do not know exactly where all of the instruments were at the time of the recording. Unless there is a seating plan that comes with the CD that states that Joe the Violinist was 18 feet to the left of center and the oboe is in the middle and the French horn over on the right and there were three french horns and one bassoon in the back 4 feet then it winds up being - whichever is biggest will be deemed best by the listener - when biggest may in fact be completely wrong.
....

It is conventional for a symphony orchestra to have all the violins on the listeners' left, etc.; see the diagram. Most often the producer/recording engineer tries to place the instruments acoustically in those locations from a imaging perspective.

If your speakers are delivering an amorphous, non-directional blob of sound then you can definitely "worry".

[Hyfi]

Awesome, that explains why this recording sounds just like that.



ah there, my pic wasn't showing.

[E-Stat]

If your speakers are delivering an amorphous, non-directional blob of sound then you can definitely "worry".

Amen.

[/QUOTE]

While string location is pretty standard, I find that woodwind and brass location varies a bit. Sometimes the woodwinds are lined up more centrally behind the violas, English and French horns behind them. Trumpets, trombones and tuba back right. Tuned percussion more centrally located.

Naturally, it all depends upon the symphony size. One time the ASO performed the Carmina Burana, the risers for the chorus changed instrumental positions a bit. It was the first time I've seen string basses to the left. Nevertheless, that is something you can clearly hear.