# Vapor Audio Perfect Storm Speaker Review Discussion Thread



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

[img]http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=49209&w=s[/img]*Vapor Audio Perfect Storm Speaker Review Discussion Thread*



*Vapor Audio Perfect Storm: $27,000 per pair*



*by Wayne Myers*


*Introduction*

The Perfect Storm is the new flagship speaker from Vapor Audio, introduced in April at AXPONA in Chicago. I immediately liked the Perfect Storm and felt it deserved a thorough review. Weighing in at almost 400 pounds per channel, it would not be practical to ship them anywhere for this to happen, so I contacted Ryan Scott, owner of Vapor Audio, and proposed a trip to home base in St. Louis for that purpose. Along the lines of full disclosure, we agreed it would be reasonable for him to cover gas and lodging for the trip in lieu of having to ship the speakers for a review.


*Go to the Vapor Audio Perfect Storm Speaker Reviewhttp://www.hometheatershack.com/for...perfect-storm-speaker-review.html#post1251698*​


----------



## fschris (Oct 31, 2009)

These are how quality speakers should be built. They should weight 400 pounds per channel and have massive bracing. Pricey but expected. How about a DIY kit


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

fschris said:


> ...How about a DIY kit


Now THERE'S an idea!


----------



## fokakis1 (Feb 29, 2012)

Hi Wayne,

Great review! I didn't read it because it featured $27k, 400lb speakers. I read it because YOU wrote it. No one pays closer attention to setup details and room integration, regardless of the sticker price of the gear in question. The simple fact that you can be 'difficult' is the very reason I trust you impressions. Thanks again.

Seth


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

You are too kind. Thank you for the feedback.


----------



## Folsom Audio (Jul 13, 2015)

Hi Wayne

I'm the maker of the chip amp. But I was unaware Ryan was going to use it for this.... Glad he did! 

Very nice review, and thanks for forcing SS&I, as well as clearing clutter of speakers. I can understand from Ryan's point of view he moves speakers around all day, but really you did him and you a favor. 

I tried to e-mail, but I don't imagine it got to you. If you'd please change the name from Salis to Folsom, I'd appreciate it. (Salis was just a moniker that didn't get changed soon enough, sorry about that). 

Thanks


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

Correction made, thanks for letting me know.


----------



## theJman (Mar 3, 2012)

Wow, amazing looking speakers! And it seems their sound equals the appearance. Very nicely done Wayne.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

Nicely done, Wayne! You captured in print the intangible sound qualities of a company doing it's best to push the state of the art.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

theJman said:


> Wow, amazing looking speakers! And it seems their sound equals the appearance. Very nicely done Wayne.


I've heard most of their offerings, and the sound does indeed match the appearance. So much so, that I had to make the Sundog my reference speakers.












​


----------



## KLH007 (Feb 27, 2011)

Wayne, After reading this; Without a doubt, the Cirrus were the closest to perfection of any of the speakers I heard that week, or have heard in a long time. Absolutely everything that needed to be there was there in just the right amount, and absolutely nothing extra or annoying or off-putting or questionable of any kind was present in their sonic delivery. I and another visiting listener whose ears I highly respect both agreed that the 2-way with 7-inch woofer and RAAL tweeter was the best 2-way speaker we remembered ever hearing, and for me the hour spent with the Cirrus was among a handful of top listening experiences ever, period, absolutely delightful and extremely difficult to pull myself away from. The Cirrus easily leapt to near the top of my list of "gotta have" speakers, regardless of price; I have to ask, Cirrus Black or White?


----------



## KLH007 (Feb 27, 2011)

Wayne, can you briefly compare the Vapor Cirrus to the Power Sound Audio MTM-210 which you recently reviewed? Thanks.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

What we heard was the Cirrus Black, and I believe it had a modified crossover. As you have probably noticed, the Black and White versions of Vapor speakers have paper or ceramic drivers (except tweeter) for softened attack vs. sharp attack. In general, I like a speaker with speed, and have liked all of the White versions of Vapor speakers that I have heard, so I would probably choose the Cirrus White if buying a pair today, although ideally I would like to hear a Cirrus White pair first. The photos on the Vapor web site show a different enclosure design for the Cirrus White, with separate tweeter unit, and I like the appearance of the Cirrus Black integrated enclosure better. I do not know if the enclosure version is a definite Black/White design "must," or if either version can make use of either enclosure, I will ask Ryan. That might make a difference for me.

The Vapor Cirrus is different from the PSA MTM-210 in several ways:

The Cirrus design engages the room very actively, so the soundstage character reflects the character of the room. Its soundstage sounds like the room it is set up in, so it is a bit like bringing the performance of the recording into your room with you. The MTM-210, with the directivity of its horn, has a tendency to negate room effects, so you are pulled into the recording and hear the soundstage native to way the recording was made and mixed. The one (Cirrus) is a bit more friendly, the other a bit more "in your face," by nature of the design type.
MTM-210 soundstage is more stable. When you move left/right a bit, the center image appears not to move with you.
MTM-210 is very picky about being placed correctly. Cirrus is very easy to set up, much more forgiving.
Cirrus integration and refinement are simply in a different class. It goes way beyond the _disappearing in the room_ experience, to _this can't be coming from speakers._ When everything about the experience is so natural, so convincingly real, so precise, so even, so clear, so easy to forget it is being reproduced from a recording, then the act of being "carried away, transported" by the music is complete and inescapable, and reality seems cheapened a bit by it -- THAT is what GREAT sound can do, and what the Cirrus did for us.
$5k sounds like a lot for a two-way speaker. Until you hear a really great two-way speaker, then you "get it." The Cirrus are the best two-way I have heard, including some upwards of $10k per pair.

Edit: As theJman started to say, it really is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison - different price class, different target market, two very different types of speakers.


----------



## KLH007 (Feb 27, 2011)

Thanks Wayne for your comments. I haven't heard any White Vapors, but the Joule Blacks at 2014 RMAF were astounding, riding the line between detail/transparency, and edge/bite, sounding like an electrostat on steroids, transparent with explosive dynamics. I think Vapor is upgrading the Cirrus with a slightly more efficient/improved mid woofer and the same longer version of the Raal ribbon as used in the Joule/PS. I could be happy with a pair of Cirrus Black/Whites and a pair of top notch subs, Rythmik/PSA. Thanks again for your excellent comparison of the Cirrus/PSA 210s.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

The Cirrus Black left nothing wanting for dynamics / attack capability, one might almost need to hear White and Black side by side to note the difference.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

The Cirrus White works best with subs, the tweeter module on top is user adjustable.

An alternative to the Cirrus would be the slightly smaller Sundog. Take the money you saved and get a decent subwoofer or two.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

No kidding, Dennis's Sundogs - with tweeter upgrade, I believe - are really amazing.

Right, didn't notice before late last night, with a combination of some feedback from Ryan and Pete, plus looking close at specs, the Cirrus White's woofer requires smaller cabinet size, and LF cutoff is -3 at 54 Hz vs -3 at 37 Hz for the Black. Not sure which way I would go at the moment if I had to choose between Cirrus W vs B, and probably have a good while to consider it before that day comes. I am sold on the amorphous core RAAL tweeter, in Dennis's Sundogs and in the Perfect Storms, and would pay extra for that for sure.


----------



## KLH007 (Feb 27, 2011)

The Cirrus White is 3.5 dB more sensitive than the Black version, and the time alignment feature may be significant sonically, but the Black looks better.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

Yes, forgot about the efficiency difference. I definitely prefer the look of the Cirrus Black.


----------



## KLH007 (Feb 27, 2011)

I see the amorphous core RAAL tweeter is a $400 upgrade, did you hear both RAALs or just the better one? Differences?


----------



## KLH007 (Feb 27, 2011)

AudiocRaver said:


> No kidding, Dennis's Sundogs - with tweeter upgrade, I believe - are really amazing.
> 
> Right, didn't notice before late last night, with a combination of some feedback from Ryan and Pete, plus looking close at specs, the Cirrus White's woofer requires smaller cabinet size, and LF cutoff is -3 at 54 Hz vs -3 at 37 Hz for the Black. Not sure which way I would go at the moment if I had to choose between Cirrus W vs B, and probably have a good while to consider it before that day comes. I am sold on the amorphous core RAAL tweeter, in Dennis's Sundogs and in the Perfect Storms, and would pay extra for that for sure.


If I'm planning on using subs, then maybe a pair of tricked out Sundog Whites with amorphous core RAAL tweeter, upgraded caps & posts might be the ticket vs a Cirrus? And there would be dollars left for a nice pair of subs.


----------



## tesseract (Aug 9, 2010)

KLH007 said:


> I see the amorphous core RAAL tweeter is a $400 upgrade, did you hear both RAALs or just the better one? Differences?


I've heard several different RAAL tweeter models, some AM, some not. In my opinion, the difference is slight, but more than one can expect from an amplifier or cable change. The 70-20XR AM is just a smidge more detailed, and I have not been able to find the bottom of it's dynamic capability, even while hitting it hard with an Emotiva XPA-3 amplifier. It is a lovely beast of a tweeter.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

The Perfect Storm had the amorphous core tweeters and the Cirrus had standard tweeters. Dennis's Sundogs have amorphous core tweeters, I have heard them recently, too (he lives across town). To be honest, the _big differences_ captured my attention in those situations and I have never focused on trying to hear a difference between the tweeter types. Let's say it is subtle and nothing has stood out. I would pay the difference knowing the technology involved. One of those "it feels good to me to do it" differences even though I might not have actually heard sonic evidence. I have heard enough hash from slow tweeters in the last year that I will pay for _fast_ - within reason - on principle alone with a tweeter known to be as good as the RAAL.


----------



## KLH007 (Feb 27, 2011)

Thanks Wayne & tesseract for your responses!


----------



## Todd Anderson (Jul 24, 2009)

Fantastic review, Wayne. I would LOVE to spend a day with this speakers.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

Thanks. It was indeed a treat.


----------



## KLH007 (Feb 27, 2011)

Wayne, Where on HTS can I contact Dennis about his Sundog experiences?


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

KLH007 said:


> Wayne, Where on HTS can I contact Dennis about his Sundog experiences?


Beg pardon, Dennis = *tesseract*, in previous posts on this thread.:bigsmile:


----------



## bkeeler10 (Mar 26, 2008)

fokakis1 said:


> Hi Wayne,
> 
> Great review! I didn't read it because it featured $27k, 400lb speakers. I read it because YOU wrote it. No one pays closer attention to setup details and room integration, regardless of the sticker price of the gear in question. The simple fact that you can be 'difficult' is the very reason I trust you impressions. Thanks again.
> 
> Seth


+1, and well said. This is the sort of speaker I would normally ignore in fact (so far out of budget), but I'm interested in reading anything Wayne writes, frankly. It was an interesting read, and although even the Cirrus is out of range budget-wise for me, Vapor Audio now has my attention. Would love to hear that Cirrus.

I suppose the question I might have, Wayne, is how they differ from the much-loved ML electrostats you've heard extensively.


----------



## Folsom Audio (Jul 13, 2015)

bkeeler10 said:


> +1, and well said. This is the sort of speaker I would normally ignore in fact (so far out of budget), but I'm interested in reading anything Wayne writes, frankly. It was an interesting read, and although even the Cirrus is out of range budget-wise for me, Vapor Audio now has my attention. Would love to hear that Cirrus.
> 
> I suppose the question I might have, Wayne, is how they differ from the much-loved ML electrostats you've heard extensively.


They're more expensive than the speakers I've had, or would immediately be able to purchase. However the more I read on them, I too think setting a goal so I'll be headed towards them is a good idea. I've been inspired to look towards some really pro-made speakers as opposed to making my own (personal use, I don't do speakers for business of any kind). They have a look to them that would make me feel like I could give them to a child or grand child and they'd be happy before they even heard them.


----------



## AudiocRaver (Jun 6, 2012)

bkeeler10 said:


> +1, and well said. This is the sort of speaker I would normally ignore in fact (so far out of budget), but I'm interested in reading anything Wayne writes, frankly. It was an interesting read, and although even the Cirrus is out of range budget-wise for me, Vapor Audio now has my attention. Would love to hear that Cirrus.
> 
> I suppose the question I might have, Wayne, is how they differ from the much-loved ML electrostats you've heard extensively.


They probably come as close to the transparency and effortlessness of the electroststics as any non-electrostatic I have heard, and in terms of point-source integration and polished refinement, they are right up there with a small handful of speakers that seem to define the "there is no speaker involved" experience. Gotta say, though, every time I come back to the ML, a part of me says, "Ahhhhhh, I am home!"


----------



## red99 (Dec 10, 2014)

I wonder if these were ________ speakers. _Link removed._

My biggest concern would be the stacked plywood with a veneer over it. I have heard from other speaker builders this is not a good idea and can cause problems. It would be best to just finish the sides without a veneer. Very interesting concept of the baffling though.


----------



## Folsom Audio (Jul 13, 2015)

I believe Ryan actually regards how to use plywood the right way as a guarded secret. This having to do with other companies rejecting it due to the lack of the secret which must be glue and sealing related I'd think. I did see a DIY guy have a monster tower of plywood separate on a chamber awhile back, probably on DIYAudio.


----------



## NBPk402 (Feb 21, 2012)

Folsom Audio said:


> I believe Ryan actually regards how to use plywood the right way as a guarded secret. This having to do with other companies rejecting it due to the lack of the secret which must be glue and sealing related I'd think. I did see a DIY guy have a monster tower of plywood separate on a chamber awhile back, probably on DIYAudio.


Klipsch has used veneered plywood for years. I think switching from plywood to MDF is a financial reason.


----------



## Folsom Audio (Jul 13, 2015)

ellisr63 said:


> Klipsch has used veneered plywood for years. I think switching from plywood to MDF is a financial reason.


Klipsch doesn't laminate plywood. They just use it as walls. Vapor's is superior in strength. 

Vapor,


----------

