# Sticky  The Official $2,500 Speaker Evaluation / Home Audition Event



## Sonnie

This is... 

*The Official $2,500 Speaker Evaluation / Home Audition Event*










*Introduction*

On November 1st and 2nd we will come together for another speaker evaluation in my home in Luverne, AL. Attending the event and participating in the evaluation and auditions, in addition to myself (*Sonnie*), is Wayne Myers (*AudiocRaver*), Joe Alexander (*ALMFamily*) and Leonard Caillouet (*lcaillo*), all members of the *HTS* staff. All of the speakers are here and being broke-in as recommended.

This is not a shootout, but instead it is an evaluation and home audition of six speakers. You might even consider this a combined review of six different speakers, although not by one individual, instead by three or four individuals in a very controlled and organized evaluation. This evaluation is not conducted to determine the best speaker, as there are too many variables from home to home for us to tell you which speakers are the best for you. Therefore, ranking them may encourage you to buy speakers that may not accurately suggest which speakers will be right for you. Your room size, acoustics, speaker location, amplifier type, amplifier power, other electronics, and your very own ears, will all play a significant part in how a speaker will sound to you. What we will do is carefully measure and listen to these speakers, then provide you with the objective and subjective results. This will be influenced by the equipment on hand and the dedicated home theater/listening room... which is fairly well treated acoustically, and is setup to allow flexible placement of the speakers. In this evaluation, we hope to be able to tell you what speaker locations sound best for this room, including close to the front wall and out into the room. Unfortunately, we cannot completely mimic your room, so there is no way we can guarantee you that the speakers will sound the same in your room. As always, we encourage you to evaluate speakers in your own home to be absolutely certain you get what is best suited for you. Hopefully this can be a guide that in some way will aid you in the differences we hear, but ultimately your ears are what is most important in determining what speakers are right for you.

This event will include speakers from two of our sponsors, SVSound and Underwood HiFi (Emerald Physics). There are four other speakers that were voted on in our *$2,500 Speaker Evaluation Event - Nominated Speakers Voting Poll*. Pricing for these speakers is for the pair. We do realize that these speakers may not necessarily cost exactly $2,500/pair. We get that number from the fact that the average of all 20 speakers that were nominated is right at $2,500. However, all of the speakers in this evaluation can be purchased for $2,500/pair or less (add $350 to the Emerald Physic speakers if you get the DSP). That may not always be the case in future rounds. Actually most of these are closer to the $2,000 range than $2,500. We are basically covering speakers that range from $2,000 to $3,000... capping the max MSRP at $3,000. I suspect in the next round we will be closer to the $3,000 range on most of those.


*The Speakers*


 *Dynaudio DM 3/7 *
* Emerald Physics CS2P *
* Magnepan 1.7 *
* MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL*
* Paradigm Studio 60 *
* SVS Ultra Towers*
 
*Associated Equipment*

*OPPO BDP-105 Universal Player* - We will again be using the 105 as the source for the evaluation. There have been some questions about recorded CDR's being used because they are a copy of a copy (extracting from original disc to computer and then burning to a disc). Personally I cannot tell a difference one way or another from the original and a burned copy. As a matter of fact, I know of a double blind listening test where a gentleman was unable to tell the difference from an original CD and a burnt copy of a computer copy, although he insisted he could tell a difference beforehand. However, to eliminate any questions, we will use either dBpoweramp or Exact Audio Copy (EAC) to extract the tracks from the original CDs to a USB thumb drive and use it in the 105 for our evaluation music. We will use the XLR balanced outputs on the 105. Be sure to check out our *review of the OPPO BDP-105* by Luther Ward. We appreciate OPPO being a sponsor here at HTS.




*Anthem Integrated 225 Amp (i225)* - At 225 WPC (8Ω) and 310 WPC (4Ω), this integrated amp from Anthem should provide plenty of power to drive any of the speakers we are evaluating. It boast a 105dB signal to noise ratio and is built with high quality, close-tolerance parts. The main power supply includes an advanced generation toroidal transformer, which contributes to its low-noise floor. The conservatively rated massive transformer is designed with high rail voltage, fed by two oversized low-ESL, low-ESR Nichicon filter capacitors that employ a total capacitance of 30,000 microfarads. The preamp audio circuits are fed by two precision voltage regulators, thanks to the ±15 V rails in the main power supply. The input and voltage amplifier stages are a differential design, although the output power stage has a fully symmetrical complementary Class AB design with three pairs of high-quality bipolar output devices per channel. The amps design significantly reduces distortion and ensure extreme linearity. This is one solid built amp that is no doubt one of the best in its class and price range. We will be using the XLR balanced inputs on the 225. We sincerely appreciate Anthem lending us this unit for use in the evaluation.

  


*Specifications* 















*Onkyo PR-SC5509* - We will use the heavy duty 5509 as our preamp processor during our home theater speaker system review and our $20,000 speaker system review (see last part of this post for more info on those). It may also serve some duties as a preamp in the two-channel speaker evaluation. Of course the Onkyo does not really need any introduction. It is well known and owned by several members in our forum. It is a beast of a processor and very well regarded as one of the top preamp processors available. You can learn more about it by clicking on the link above or visiting our Onkyo PR-SC5508 - PR-SC5509 SSP / Integra DHC-80.2 - DHC-80.3 SSP thread. Be on the lookout for upcoming reviews on the Onkyo TX-NR929 9.2-Channel Network A/V Receiver and the TX-NR626 7.2-Channel Network A/V Receiver, as well as a couple of their soundbars. We appreciate Onkyo being a sponsor here at HTS. 




*RAM Electronics Custom Speaker Cables* - "Ram-Flex Custom Series" 11 AWG Canare 4S11 speaker cable sleeved with ViaBlue braid and terminated with gold plated locking banana plugs. These are also good looking high quality speaker cables that will not break the bank. We all fell in love with these speaker cables... they performed flawlessly and in no way hindered or colored the sound. These locking banana plugs are awesome! I have already ordered several of these since our last event. We appreciate RAM being a sponsor here at HTS.




*RAM Electronics Custom XLR Cables* - RAM "Custom Series" XLR Balanced Cables includes the Mogami 2534 with Neglex Quad Cable and Neutrik Connectors wrapped with the ViaBlue braided sleeve... as well as CBI Ultimate ML with Belden Wire and Neutrik "X" Connectors. RAM will custom build just about any cable you can think of... just tell them what you want and they will fix you up. Their service is awesome, as is the quality of their cables. These are good looking, good quality cables that are very reasonably priced. RAM does not play around... you order up what you want and in a few days it is on your doorstep. Compare RAM to places like Blue Jeans Cable and you will see the savings, using the same quality wire and connectors.




*The Listening Room*

As with the previous event, we will use Cedar Creek Cinema, our dedicated home theater/listening room that is a converted two car garage. The interior dimensions are 19.5' wide x 23.5' deep x 8.5' high. There is a 6" high x 4' deep stage across the front of the room, and a 12" riser in the back that is used partially as a ported enclosure for the rear subs. The room is excellent for our purposes with ample acoustical treatment on side walls and ceiling, large corner bass traps in front from floor to ceiling, a centered Primary Listening Position (PLP), lots of space to work with, and well-controlled early reflections and ambiance. 



As shown below, the RT60 reverb time for the room is very well-controlled, 0.2 seconds overall, and below 0.3 seconds clear down almost to 100 Hz. This is a nice level of control with enough ambient liveliness to aid soundstage and image development. There has also been some additional acoustic treatment from GIK Acoustics that has been added to the side walls and back wall since the last event.

 


*After Hours Fun... with a Few Surprises!*

As a bonus to our members and readers, we will also be reviewing a $20,000 two-channel system. This review will be published later in our Reviews forum, but we will introduce you to the company and the products during the event. This system is truly to die for... just plain awesome and worth every penny of its price. 

But that's not all... we plan to enjoy a little late night fun at Cedar Creek Cinema, and this event is sure to spark some excitement with a special guest, who will also be providing a truly unique 5.0 home theater speaker system (costing well over $10,000) for us to review. This will be the first review of this product. Our plans will be to watch a movie each night of the evaluation, hopefully Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. Then on Sunday evening and Monday, we plan to do more testing and evaluation for a complete review of this speaker system, which will also be posted later in our Reviews forum. I don't think you will want to miss this review. We will announce the manufacturer, the owner and the product a little closer to the event. 

We believe you will truly appreciate these extra reviews we have in store for you. Personally, I think they are pretty significant... huge in fact!

I don't know about everyone else, but I am EXCITED!!!

BTW... :shhh: Remember... it's a secret! :whistling:


*Results

*As you can see below, we have reserved several posts for the results, which will be posted as soon as possible after the event. We will post some of the known information about the speakers between now and the event. You will want to subscribe to the thread. After the results are posted, we will post in the thread that the results are complete and the reserved posts have been updated.

The REW measurement .mdat files will be uploaded to each speaker thread and available for download.

...


----------



## Sonnie

*Evaluation Music*
No code has to be inserted here.

*Optimal Speaker Placements*
No code has to be inserted here.*
*All measurements are to the center of the speaker baffle, typically the tweeter or midrange area... about mid-way up the Magnepan.*


*NOTES:* In my HT room, which also serves at my two-channel listening room, the front area (front wall where the screen is located) has a stage that spans from side wall to side wall and is 4' (four feet) deep and 6" (six inches) high, therefore when speaker are placed near the front wall, they are 6" higher than when placed out into the room on the floor. Keep in mind when reading that when you read "on stage" or "on floor" that this refers to either being up on the 6" high stage nearest the front wall, or on the floor out into the room and farther away from the front wall.


----------



## AudiocRaver

*Dynaudio DM 3/7*

     

*Optimal Placement*
No code has to be inserted here.*Best Placement Near Front Wall*
No code has to be inserted here.


*Wayne Myers (AudiocRaver)*

*Configuration/Specifications*


Design: 2-Way rear-ported bass-reflex with two mid/bass drivers and one dome tweeter
Frequency Response: 40 Hz – 23 kHz (± 3 dB)
IEC Power Handling: > 200 W
Sensitivity: 86 dB (2.83 V/1 m)
Impedance: 4 Ohms
Woofer Size: 6.7”
Tweeter Size: 1.1”
Crossover: 1800 Hz
Dimensions: 37.9” H x 8.1” W x 10.7” D
Weight (Each): ~40 lbs. (18.0 kg)
MSRP (Pair): $1,995
The Dynaudio DM 3/7 features two 6.7 inch (17 cm) MSP (magnesium silicate polymer) mid/bass drivers equipped with large 3 inch (75 mm) diameter aluminum voice coils and rigid, low-resonance die-cast aluminum driver baskets, one tweeter featuring a specially-coated 1.1 inch (28 mm) diameter textile dome, an ultra-lightweight aluminum voice coil, ferro-fluid damping and a powerful magnet, a 1-inch (25mm) front baffle, and a rear port for bass tuning.

Dynaudio Website

*Setup and Placement Flexibility*

Getting the DM 3/7's placed for top performance was fairly easy, one of the easiest of the speaker models evaluated. They only took a few minutes, moving very little from the room's favorite placement spots for cone speakers, mainly needing proper toe-in adjustment. Listening position flexibility was quite relaxed, the soundstage shifted only a little with normal head movement.

*Impressions* 

Since first hearing the Dynaudio models at the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest in Denver a few weeks ago, I had looked forward to spending more time with them during this evaluation. The high-end quality first grabbed my attention, not quite as forward as some of the models we were hearing over the weekend, very easy-going. Easy-going might be the best overall description for the way the Dynaudio's performed. Everything they did, they did well and made it seem easy, with the exception of the drivers bottoming out with deep bass - more on this later. I knew in seconds I was going to really like the DM 3/7's.

Bass response was strong, deep, and solid. It seemed much deeper than the 50 Hz limit we measured. The peak at 60 Hz probably contributed to this impression. Bass was reasonably tight, never mushy or loose.

*Frequency Response, Bass Extension*

The DM 3/7 frequency response profile follows a common pattern for speakers. A slight dip in response at and below 1 kHz relaxes the midrange somewhat. On either side, the bass and treble frequencies rise gradually. Highs peak in the case of the DM 3/7's at 4 kHz, falling off beyond that. The falloff results partly from the amount of off-axis angling required for a deep soundstage. Bass response rises toward the low-frequency peak at 60 Hz, and extends to a steep drop off at 50 Hz. Room modes undoubtedly contribute to that drop off being above the 40 Hz spec, and cause the notches at 80 and 100 Hz, affecting all models similarly. The upper mids are lacking the often-heard peak at 2 kHz, a frequency range commonly emphasized for the amount of detail it tends to reveal. The DM 3/7's have slight peaks above and below that frequency, giving them a distinctive tone while still being generously detailed. I found that tonality refreshing, perhaps a contributor to the Dynaudio signature sound. The 2 kHz peak often found in other speakers is easily overdone and can be a sure fatigue-button if emphasized even slightly too much. The DM 3/7's gave no hint of fatigue and were extremely easy on the ears. The overall treble profile being just laid back enough to produce that easy-going Dynaudio tonality without going dull.



*Room EQ Wizard MDAT file for download: *
View attachment Dynaudio DM 3_7 final for download.mdat


The DM 3/7's could pump out some serious deep bass. Perhaps they over-reach a bit for the two small woofers used in the design, thus the bottoming incident already mentioned. Short of that, they seemed in tight control and gave no other indication of being close to losing that control. The amount of bass seemed just right, solid without over-emphasis. The big bass drum on _The Spirit Remains_ felt tight and controlled.

The ringing of acoustical guitar strings through _Ode to a Butterfly_ stood out as an example of accurate tonality. Vocals, as on "Breezin' Along with the Breeze," were warm and detailed, with a hint of sharpness but still very easy, very real and accurate. The brass section performing the _Star Trek Main Theme_ was commanding and clear, tonally accurate.

The deep lead vocal on the marvelous _These Bones_ track was warm and resonant while only slightly peaky. Melody Gardot's voice, singing _Baby I'm a Fool,_ was more tightly controlled than many speakers are able to hold it, still warm and personal, not overly resonant.

*Soundstage and Imaging*

The soundstage projected by the DM 3/7's was first-rate, completely natural and arresting in its sense of reality, exceptionally sharp and clear. Imaging was tight - roughly baseball size for a recorded point source - and almost completely free from smearing and wandering on odd tones and sibilants. The DM 3/7's projected a deep soundstage - for our tastes the "spark of life" of a soundstage and one of our primary setup goals - and the depth detail and acuity were of a caliber I have heard from only a handful of speakers. Throughout _Ode to a Butterfly,_ the first song on our track list, the impression of precise placement and distance to the mandolin, fiddle, guitar, and standup bass almost distracted me from the music itself. I usually listen to about one-third to one-half of that track and skip ahead. I listened to the entire track with the DM 3/7's.

_Chant,_ with its spacious ambiance, gave us a good chance to hear how open and wide the soundstage really was. The DM 3/7's did not seem to push at the walls for more space, rather were very comfortable with using all the space available for their soundstage. The trumpet on _Your Latest Trick_ was real enough to occupy its own space in the room.

*Power Handling*

The DM 3/7's performed SO well that it was a disappointment when the drivers bottomed out on the deep booms at the beginning of the Cincinnati Pops' _Star Trek_ theme. It was not pretty. The "boom" was more of a "boom-crunch" as the bass driver - one or both, we could not tell for sure - bottomed out in its magnet/support structure. One could not help but cringe.

It was interesting to note individual reactions to this. With one of the group, a very black-and-white kind of person, you could almost see the mental check marks for good performance in other categories being erased because of the fault. _Can't handle the bass? Then no check marks for YOU._ Being a shades-of-gray kind of person, I noted it and continued to enjoy the DM3/7's other qualities.

Through that passage, the volume level was set to vary between 90 and 95 dB SPL (c-weighted, slow averaging), occasionally peaking at 100 dB. Yes, we were pushing them a bit, but the DM 3/7's were the only speakers we evaluated that bottomed out on that passage.

The _Port of Morrow_ segment of our medley track accidentally got a 6 dB boost in the compilation process. It ended up being a good, rocking power-handling test, so it was left that way. The DM 3/7's had no trouble with the boosted volume, handled it easily as though to make up for the bass-handling faux pas of a few moments earlier.

*Performance Close to the Front Wall:*

Up on the Cedar Creek Cinema stage (Sonnie's home theater), the DM 3/7's sounded OK, but not great. The high frequencies seem veiled and the bass was quite boomy. Even with fairly quick placement there and only a little fine tuning, it was apparent that a nice soundstage and good imaging were possible, although depth of soundstage was not apparent at that location. All-in-all they performed fairly well there, although that performance fell far short of what they would do later at their optimal location closer to the listener. 

*Physical and Visual*

They definitely have the Dynaudio look. They are not huge speakers, and will fit nicely in practically any room. The front face leans back slightly and hits the Listening Position just right from the distance we set them at. The finish is adequate. Dynaudio's laminate finishes look a little fakey to me, but fit and finish are always top-grade, so it is only a minor point, and will not matter in the least to many.

*Overall Listening Experience*

The surest sign that I - along with others in the group - can use as an indication of overall speaker quality in satisfying one's individual preferences comes at the end of the evaluation. It is time to surrender the listening position to the next evaluator, and you just do not want to stop. What you want to do is run grab an armful of CDs or crrrrrrank up your music server and make up an excuse to keep on listening, like nearing the end of a great first date and thinking of more things to talk about so it can be drawn out as long as possible. My first date with the DM 3/7's was something like that.

The DM 3/7's _almost_ completely disappeared in the soundstage on most songs, and on a few, like _Joan of Arc,_ managed it altogether. The tang of each cymbal strike seemed so clear and truthful that it served as a clarity polygraph for the speakers.

The latter part of the session was dampened somewhat by the bottoming-out of the woofers. I found myself riding the volume control with caution to prevent it from happening again. Other than that one incident, the performance of the DM 3/7's reminded me of the title of a favorite Radiohead song: _Everything In Its Right Place._

*What These Speakers Are Best For*

You name it. They even got some Dillinger Escape Plan very-complex-very-heavy metal loudly thrown at them at one point, in defiance of our track list. No apologies from us or from the DM 3/7's, they did not mind it one bit.

The DM 3/7's handle the delicate and the powerful equally well. If lots of deep bass at extreme volumes is a high priority, the bass-handling capacity of the two 6.7-inch woofers might be a limitation. Other than that, they got high marks from me in every category.


*Leonard Caillouet (lcaillo)*

The DM 3/7 was physically one of the less imposing speakers in the group. Prior to listening, I had little expectation, other than by reputation the company has produced well regarded products for quite some time. The size and design did not suggest a particularly unique nor "big" sound, though the apparent quality of the build is very high. I had not heard any of their speakers in a few years and then only once. I was previously impressed but not wowed. 

When we started with the speakers on the stage, the results were much as expected. The bass was a bit exaggerated, but not oppressive. The imaging was actually quite good in the midrange and highs, considering the position and early reflections off of the screen at center front. Almost immediately, however, something caught my attention in the sound. This was going to be a speaker that I wanted more of. I probably spent a bit more of my fair share of time listening in this position, even though we were trying to keep the stage position short.

Once the speakers were moved to a more optimum listening position, they ended up near the spot that most of the other speakers sounded best. They took very little time to place in the optimum location. The bass settled in and became very detailed and precise and the lower mid and down now produced a very solid and stable image. The bass goes solidly down to the specified limit, with surprising clarity and detail. For an inefficient speaker, they produce a surprisingly dynamic sound, effortless right up to their limit. That limit was extreme excursion at very low frequencies where we bottomed the woofer on the opening to the Star Trek track. A disappointment, but we were stretching the speakers intentionally. Obviously this limit is the result of the small drivers and cabinet, as well as the low sensitivity. The compromise, however, was acceptable from my perspective. I rarely listen at the levels that a certain Alabama red neck does, and my soft spot for loudspeakers is detail and a smooth silky sound. There was no shortage of either in these.

One area where I am particularly demanding is lower midrange and mid bass. Even on the stage, the detail in the mids and mid bass was quite pleasing and called for more listening. Once we placed the speakers properly, it was apparent that there was something special here. While the speakers were easy to position, getting just the right toe angle revealed a level of detail and imaging precision in the mid bass that I really loved. Lower strings on an acoustic guitar, higher notes on a string bass, or the tone of a cello were all very precise and musical. There was no thinking or listening effort needed to know just where the instruments were placed in the sound field. Top to bottom the character of the speaker was intact. Dr. John's piano on "One Way Ticket" tends to move around over several octaves, partly due to the recording and partly due to changes in speaker dynamics and tonal character across a large bandwidth (relatively speaking with respect to audio). For the first time in a while, I got a solid location on the piano and slight movement of the image as he moved up or down the keys that was more proportional to what one would hear live sitting right next to the piano.

Vocal harmonies were distinct. Ability to reveal vocal detail is superb. On "Reasons Why" there is a male and female harmony that is very hard to reproduce. On the DM 3/7 the distinct character of each came through, with the voices independently placed in the sound stage. The guitar and percussion on this track were the most detailed, yet delicate, with pinpoint precise imaging.

I have heard "Last Chance Texaco hundreds of times. It was one of my standards for auditioning speakers when I was in the audio business. Rickie Lee has a very complex voice and there is nice image detail on the very best speakers. On lesser products, it can get a little muddy and indistinct. Some speakers don't get muddy at the cost of excessive detail with overshoot or ringing. These performed superbly on this track, among the best I have heard. the subtle trembling in her voice was perfect. The edge on Donald Fagen's voice was so real it brought me back to hearing it live, yet there was none of the annoying resonance on his drone that some speakers add. 

Silk and delicacy, glass-like transparency, and musicality describe these speakers. A superb combination of design and execution, in my opinion. These begged for more time listening.


*Joe Alexander (ALMFamily)*

For appearance, the Dynaudios have a standard box shape and appear to be shorter and thinner than many of the other brands I have seen making them more flexible from a location standpoint. The finish would work well for a home theater use as well.

When these were placed on the stage, the first thing I heard was that being on the stage really kills any depth although at that location the Dynaudios did project a wide soundstage. They did have very nice low end extension – I was getting some vibration in the chair which was pleasantly surprising. Directionality was off by having them on the stage, as sitting up presented a better on axis feel. Female vocals seemed to lack a “live” feel – they sound veiled which I attribute to the lack of depth in the soundstage. 

When these were moved out into the room and away from the front wall, the instrument imaging was pinpoint - moving them really deepened the soundstage giving that "live" feel I really enjoy, and they also maintained the width they showed while on the stage near the front wall. On the "Ode to a Butterfly" track, the different instruments imaged perfectly with each coming from a different location in the soundfield. That imaging was consistent through the entire listening session - instrument clarity was excellent for all instruments and instrument imaging separated really well throughout my entire listening session. Vocal and low end imaging was tight to the middle and low end was really clean. Vocal dynamics were handled well with no signs of compression until you really pushed the volume, but the vocals just don’t quite have the open, airy sound I like, although it was so close to that sound that I could own a set of these and be a happy man. 

Overall, a great speaker - the Dynaudios have everything I look for in a speaker with the clarity and "live" feel to the sound. The only real issue I had with these was that they are lower sensitivity speakers, and there were points where I turned the volume up a bit and there was some compression and signs of strain, but that was at a level that I would not normally listen to music.


*Sonnie Parker (Sonnie)*

Okay... I am raising my hand. I am the ******* who listens to loud music, and then when speakers bottom out, I toss them. If you ever passed through Alabama back in the 80's... I was the guy who had three 18's in my vehicle and was rattling your windows... yeah, the one you were shaking your head at in either amazement (cause you know you wanted to bump like I was bumpin') or in disgust (cause you know how silly it was). I think I have mellowed out a bit since then... although I do have eight 18's in my HT room... at least they are not in my truck. 

Yes, I was about ready to ditch the Dynaudios because they bottomed out, and NOT while I was in the listening position, thank you. However, they only bottomed on that one song, and I believe it was only the left speaker. These were a demo or review pair, so we cannot discount the possibility that they had been damaged. Nonetheless, on all the other music I listened to, including other songs with low bass, they did very well. 

There is no doubt these have a big sound, despite their small size. I did think the bass near the front wall was a bit heavy, but still good, and I could live with these in that location for HT, but would have to pull them out for music, as I would any of the speakers in this event or the previous event. Overall, when placed in their best location for my room, they produced a very nice soundstage and near pinpoint imaging. They are definitely a speaker to like... however, I think I would be trying to figure out a way to move up to the Excite model, even though their price tag is considerably more. Keep in mind too, that these are on the lower side of efficient at 86dB, therefore you will want to have plenty of power on hand. These are not speakers I would try to power from a receiver at anything other than lower volumes.


----------



## AudiocRaver

*Emerald Physics CS2P*

     

*Optimal Placement*
No code has to be inserted here.
*Best Placement Near Front Wall*
No code has to be inserted here.*Tilted plumb due to stage height.


*Wayne Myers (AudiocRaver)*

*Configuration/Specifications*

2.5-Way open-baffle dipole with two mid/bass drivers and one compression waveguide tweeter
Frequency Response: 40 Hz – 20 kHz (± 3 dB from target curve)
Recommended Power: not specified
Sensitivity: 93 dB (2.83 V/1 m), 97 dB when biamped
Impedance: 4 Ohms
Woofer/Midrange Size: 15”
Tweeter Size: 1” compression driver with 12" Treble waveguide
Crossover: 1000 Hz
Dimensions: 50.5” H x 22” W x 16” D
Weight (Each): ~80 lbs. (36.0 kg)
MSRP (Pair): $2,990 ($2,490 New on Audiogon via Underwood HiFi - high grade finishes are extra)
The Emerald Physics CS2P features dual 15 inch pulp fiber cone mid/bass drivers, one open and one quasi-tuned, a custom Emerald Physics ultra-low-distortion 1 inch compression tweeter with 12 inch waveguide, an external passive network crossover, optionally upgradable to active DSP2.4 crossover for biamping with EQ for 24 Hz bass extension, and a 3 inch baffle, all contributing to a controlled-directivity dipole design with an 80° radiation angle.

Emerald Physics Website

*Setup and Placement Flexibility*

Setting up the CS2P's took a bit of care and attention. They were not the touchiest speakers to position correctly, but not the easiest, either. Part of the difficulty came in trying to get the soundstage stabilized, which never quite happened. More on this below.

Lest the reader be alarmed, this is not to say that the soundstage was not good - it was. But as we tried different positions and angles it did not reach the point where the sweet spot settled nicely into place and with a "welcome home" firmness. It always seemed to be slightly in flux, our efforts just one step away from finding that ideal setup combination, and after awhile we decided the CS2P's ideal location was more like a peak than a plateau, and the narrow sweet spot would be something for the listener to deal with.

The height of the Listening Position never seemed quite right, either. Unless the listener stepped up to the elevated second row of seats or boosted himself up several inches, there was a sensation of missing out on the main sound stream as it passed by just out of reach. The tight dispersion pattern is of course largely responsible for these setup quirks.

I had to sit up straight to stay on the edge of the sweet spot. At 6' 3", I am second tallest of the evaluation squad, and none of us are "shorties." A smaller listener might have been frustrated, or needed a thick extra seat cushion as a booster.

Putting it all in perspective, a longer room might have worked better for the CS2P's, allowing longer reflection paths behind them to help develop the deeper soundstage we were looking for, and the LP - the Listening Position - to be farther away from them where the cone of directivity is broader and allows more LP flexibility. As stated in the introductory post, all these assessments are for the speakers in _this room._ Given the room constraints and the listening preference goal of achieving the deep soundstage, the CS2P/room combination never quite let us get the kind of developed soundstage stability we were looking for.

*Impressions* 

There was a lot to like about the CS2P's, a dynamic liveliness that could be quite engaging. They have a raw, organic nature about them that I can see being addictive with he right program material.

*Frequency Response, Bass Extension*

The CS2P's are quite even above 400 Hz, with presence peaks just above 2 kHz and at 4 kHz, a dip at 1.2 kHz, and a gradual rolloff above 5 kHz due to our off-axis setup. The overall profile is fairly bright, with good detail provided by those two peaks. The 1.2 kHz dip helps keep the brightness under control. Bass response is strong and even below a 230 Hz peak with a broad 100 Hz dip - caused by room modes - and falls off steeply below 45 Hz. Not bad for open-baffle bass. The optional DSP unit was not in use.



*Room EQ Wizard MDAT file for download: *
View attachment Emerald Physics CS2P final for download.mdat


The high frequencies from the CS2P's sat right on a the edge of being too bright, too forward. A lot of nice detail and liveliness was contained in those two presence peaks, and much of the time they worked just right. But about the time I was deciding I liked it, the highs for a track would be too bright or a vocalist's sibilance would sizzle too hot, and I would want them to be pulled back a couple dB. _Joan of Arc_ was a track that had me reaching for the "less detail" knob, and _Some Kind of Nature_ was another, while it was just right on _Them Bones._

We were impressed by the strength and clarity of the bass, especially when we saw the big notches around 100 Hz. The CS2P's were more broadly affected by those room modes than the other speakers at this event, but still felt like they provided solid bass, having almost a full octave of strong bass available below the notch and the same above it. The CS2P's tonality held together very well as a whole, with the strength of the highs being the one factor causing me to have some reservations. On _Reasons Why_ and again on _Way Down Deep_ and _The Spirit Remains_ there was a boxy tone from that 230 Hz peak, and some of the standup bass notes on _Tricycle_ rang out a bit strongly from lower resonances. But the saxophone on _Tricycle_ sounded exemplary.

The specifications for the CS2P's state frequency response within ± 3 dB *from target curve.* Not knowing that target curve, one cannot say for sure how much of the 100 Hz region dip might be corrected with the DSP unit we did not have time to try out. The dipole design with it's "quasi 2.5-way configuration" could have some response quirks going on in that region independent of the room, but that is only a guess. If I was serious about owning a pair of CS2P's, finding out more detail about that bass region would be a must.

The DSP upgrade would have been fun to play with. Never having been afraid to touch up a speaker's tonal characteristics with a spot of EQ, I would normally be one to jump at this option, which Emerald Physics says will extend the low end - we felt it quite strong, but what could be the harm in some added depth? - and allow tailoring of the overall frequency response - that I would not be able to resist. "Tailoring" might mean choosing among existing presets or having filter parameters to adjust at will, or both. More flexibility means more ways to trash the already-very-good sound of the CS2P's so handle such power with care. I would take the bass extension, relax the range from 1.5 kHz to 5 kHz by one or two dB, resist the temptation to flatten the highs above 5 kHz (SO sensitive to LP angle and head movement), and call it good. Our time constraints and "basic configuration" assumption did not allow for any such tweaking, however, or with the biamp option, even though the DSP hardware was in the next room ready to play. But then similar opportunities exist for any speaker, so the possible variables quickly approach the infinite. Thus our self-imposed limitations. Plus there is an element of adventure in accepting and working with a speaker in its most basic form, organic personality quirks and all.

*Soundstage and Imaging*

The soundstage we got with the CS2P's was wide and deep. We had them angled outward slightly from pointing straight at the LP, necessary to deepen the soundstage. That might be why our setup position was always on the edge of achieving the desired stability. We noted that a number of individual instrument performances were in different soundstage positions than we had heard them with every other speaker we had worked with before. With other instruments the image would shift for different parts of the song. Other than that, the soundstage was spacious and lifelike, and the imaging fairly tight, about grapefruit size for a recorded point source. The mono version of _Revolution Earth_ was a handy quick imaging tightness check, indicating a fairly tight vertical image line, again roughly a grapefruit's width.

On _Ain't it a Shame_ and _Reasons Why,_ the high gloss and the vocal 'S' sounds stayed tightly centered. I found during _Life is a One Way Ticket_ that leaning far forward in the LP seat made the soundstage deeper, but tonality suffered and highs rolled off, so it ended up being another confirmation that our compromises were balance about right with the current positioning.

On _Joan of Arc_ and again on _Your Latest Trick,_ the imaging was particularly crisp. Dire Straits' percussion and vocal imaging were clean and precise in their placement. _Sprach Zarathustra plus Star Trek Main Theme_ imaged and filled the soundstage so nicely they almost begged for more "live track" play time.

*Power Handling*

The CS2P's gave us all the volume we wanted, even with bass-heavy tracks, and did not show signs of running out of dynamic range or of being on the verge of bottoming out.

*Performance Close to the Front Wall:*

Up on the Cedar Creek Cinema stage near the front wall, the CS2P's were definitely too high and did not sound natural to me. We had to prop up the backs of the base plates to get a better angle on the LP. Then the sound was acceptable with decent soundstage and imaging, but no depth of soundstage. To me, their performance close to the wall was seriously compromised.

A note on propping them forward like we did: The baffle angle with respect to the floor and the distance to the LP are both critical. We did not spend as much time playing with setup variables close to the wall as we did in finding their ideal location. These angles and position measurement are absolutely critical.

*Physical and Visual*

The Emerald Physics look is unique - lots of exposed cone on thick, massive baffle plates with attention-getter finishes. Their tonality and responsiveness are supported by the raw, organic nature of their looks. They are hard to confuse with any other brand of speaker that I have run across. Toddler-finger and pet-claw friendly they are not. Conversation pieces they most certainly are.

*Overall Listening Experience*

The overall impression I was left with of the CS2P's was a raw, organic nature that was mostly easy to enjoy but could get a little out of hand at times, too. They were occasionally rough and unrefined where I wanted more smoothness and control, especially on more complex tracks.

*What These Speakers Are Best For*

In the right room, ideally a longer room than our evaluation space, and especially one short on acoustical treatment, the CS2P's might be exactly what is called for. I see the prominent occupation of a large dedicated listening room, where they can sit wherever they sound their best, being their calling. They definitely have a character of their own, so they are a speaker you would want to audition in your space with your music - for me the focus would probably be on more simply recorded material mixed with a live feel, and on live recordings. One should audition them without time pressure, as placement experimentation can take awhile. Given the right room with the right material and some patience setting up, the CS2P's could make for lots of lively listening fun.


*Leonard Caillouet (lcaillo)*

The CS2P certainly was the speaker that we were most curious about in the group. A unique design and look were certainly consistent with the sound. The open baffle design has an airy, natural feel to it much like many dipoles and planar speakers. I would characterize the sound as stoney, or rocky, with a potential edge that can be either pleasing or disconcerting, depending on one's preferences and program material. I found myself vacillating between the things that I really liked and those that I did not. Detail is abundant in the mid and high end. They are certainly revealing and are unforgiving of poor recordings. I found a bit of sibilance on both leading and trailing transients that I did not care for on some recordings, like the Melody Gardot track. 

The soundstage was wide but not as deep as expected, with image precision limited to midrange. The upper mids and lower bass seemed to move around with changes in level and frequency. The mid bass image seemed to hang with the speakers a bit. I think these speakers demand a large room and flexibility in placement and listening position that Sonnie's room does not have. I also think that the open baffle and planar speakers suffer in the lower midrange to deep bass in this room because of the placement limitations and the massive amount of subwoofer area and the room modes interacting. This could be a great speaker in a large room with some distance to the listener and the ability to adjust distance to the walls and listening position. I just felt like it was constrained by the situation.

My preference for detail made me want to really like this speaker, but it seemed lacking in my critical mid bass area in this respect. I could certainly parse harmonies to individual voices tonally but image precision was somewhat lacking.

I would characterize these as a curiosity and a niche product for those who like the combination of high detail and airy sound. Marble as opposed to glass. Cotton as opposed to silk. Not wrinkle free cotton, however. Plan on a challenge placing these properly and the need for a large room and a very small listening window. In that window, however, expect to be intrigued and want for a wide range of music. These are dynamic and present, with much to experience that is unique.


*Joe Alexander (ALMFamily)*

I like the design of the cabinet – some of the other open baffle designs I have seen tend to be designed with more rigid lines where these have some contouring that gives the speaker some character. The finish would work well in a HT setup and it has enough beauty to be used in 2 channel as well.

As for how these performed on stage near the front wall, it seemed the best position was to spread them out as wide as possible with toe-in outside the MLP – it created a wide soundstage, but having it that close to the wall really killed the depth and live feeling that I feel you would normally get from the open baffle design. Due to the stage, I thought the second row of seating on the riser was a better place to sit as they sounded much fuller from that distance. We did prop up the face a bit as well before we started listening as it really seemed to "overshoot" the first row.

The first track in our lineup was Nickel Creek's "Ode to a Butterfly", and it is a great track to get a feel for how a speaker handles instrument imaging as there are several instruments that image from all across the stage as well as at varying depths. The CS2Ps did well here - the mandolin imaged perfectly - with the only instrument that felt a bit fuzzy being the violin at around the 1:30 mark as it was hard to pinpoint its depth in the soundstage. Vocals imaged really well - the Roger Water "Three Wishes" track had the female vocal part image directly left and the genie part panned across the soundstage as expected.

Instruments dynamics - the Flim and the BB's "Tricycle" track is an excellent track to test a speaker's ability to handle large dynamic swings - were handled easily with no signs of compression as were vocal dynamics. Instrument clarity was excellent - I especially liked the how horns sounded on the CS2Ps. The Bluesiana Triangle "For All We Know" and Dire Straits "Your Latest Trick" tracks both had horn sequences that were so clear with no sense of "shoulder cringing" - I could even hear the buzz of the horn player blowing into the mouthpiece in the Dire Straits track which really impressed me. 

The "Chant" track showed really good low end impact, but the image was not as tight to the middle as I was expecting, and I noticed this on the "Way Down Deep" track as well. The other thing I noticed was that female vocals and certain piano sequences - such as in Bluesiana Triangle's "Life is a One Way Ticket" - did not have the open, airy sound that I have heard on other open baffle designs which is not a bad thing, just a personal preference.

Overall, I thought this was a really good speaker. I really liked the instrument detail and the imaging was very good. We did not use the DSP functionality so I cannot speak to how that integrates.


*Sonnie Parker (Sonnie)

*After hearing the Emerald Physics speakers at RMAF, I was anxious for us to get these in the room and setup. They were actually our first speakers in the room for evaluation. I was curious as to what they would sound like here versus what we had heard at RMAF, and if we could improve on that sound, albeit our model a step down from those at RMAF. In the smaller room there, the back row did more for me than the front row... and the vocal image was slightly left of center. In the larger room (still a relatively small room) where the Wyred4Sound amps were running, again the second row seemed like the better seating position. I know that at least a couple of us that visited those rooms agreed, thus confirming our thoughts here at my house that it might help to be farther back from the speakers than what we could accommodate. 

Having got them setup in their best location, as best we could get them, I personally thought these sounded better here than the two higher end models at RMAF. I can only assume this is because of the constraints the rooms put on the speakers at RMAF, as we would all be of the opinion the higher end models would also deliver even better results in my room than at RMAF. Yet, as we found, ultimately they may all be much better in an even larger room than what I have. 

There is no question about it, these are not going to be favorable for home theater use, as they just did not work close to the front wall. While they were not terrible or even bad, they were not what I would expect. However, they are not really meant to be home theater speakers to begin with... at least from what I can gather. These are two-channel speakers, and they sound a whole lot better out from the wall. I did think they had somewhat of a unique sound that I favored, although I might would have liked a little more precise imaging. The soundstage was nice, as was the bass extension. I never felt like we needed the DSP module, but it might be needed in a larger room. Despite what seems like a lot of issues we might have had with these, I still liked them... and I really like the look. The finish is impressive with that metallic automotive paint. They are solid, thick and just plain look manly. If I am going to be honest, and you know I am, I am not sure I can justify these being worth their MSRP. Thankfully you can get them for considerably less through Underwood HiFi on Audiogon... and maybe even less than that if you call up Walter and do some dickering. 

Overall... I was not disappointed with the CS2P's, but was more so disappointed that we might not have had the best setup to evaluate them. Naturally this might not be what those with smaller listening rooms will want to hear, but we did spend some additional time working with their placement in order to try to give them the benefit of the doubt, particularly out into the room and away from the wall. It is hard to blame the speaker when you don't know if your room is the best setup for it, but at least I know it is better than what was at RMAF, which would lead me to believe their higher end models would also prove much better here.


----------



## AudiocRaver

*Magnepan 1.7*

      

*Optimal Placement*
No code has to be inserted here.*Best Placement Near Front Wall*
No code has to be inserted here.


*Wayne Myers (AudiocRaver)*

*Configuration/Specifications*

Design: 3-Way quasi-ribbon magnetic planar dipole panel
Frequency Response: 40 Hz – 22 kHz (± 3 dB)
Recommended Power: 100 - 250 W @ 8 Ohms
Sensitivity: 86 dB at 500 Hz (2.83 V/1 m)
Impedance: 4 Ohms
Woofer Size: not given
Tweeter Size: not given
Super-Tweeter Size: not given
Crossover: not given
Dimensions: 64.5” H x 19.25” W x 2” D
Weight (Each): ~42 lbs. (19 kg)
MSRP (Pair): $1,995
The Magnepan 1.7 is a quasi-ribbon magnetic planar dipole panel featuring separate tweeter and super-tweeter driver areas.

Magnepan Website

*Setup and Placement Flexibility*

Setting up the dipole 1.7's did not take terribly long because we were already well-attuned to the absolutely critical nature of setup symmetry for panels and dipoles in general. Especially critical are the toe-in angles and distances to the LP (Listening Position), although we have become exacting about all setup measurements for all speaker types. Still, getting the best sound from the panels took a number of successively smaller repositionings. We ended up with the 1.7's widely spaced and almost directly pointing at the listener's ears. Their center-to-center spacing was the widest of all the speakers in this evaluation group.

It is worth noting that with panels the setup angle relative to the listener becomes a matter of splitting degrees, or to be more accurate, or careful definition. Which part of the panel is pointed straight at what part of the LP? The center of the panel at the center of the seat back? The tweeter portion of the panel at the ear? The term "pointed at" ends up needing qualifiers, and eyeballing those angles never gets them close enough. Our laser distance meter doubled as a laser pointer and more than once an evaluator during setup was told to close his eyes while the laser beam aided the fine trimming of those angles relative to his head or ears. It sounds like obsessive behavior until you have heard for yourself the difference that such attention to detail can make. Comments by long-time Magnepan owners tend to confirm these findings.

One refinement to our LP captain's chair for critical listening and evaluating was the inclusion of a folded-up plush blanket draped over the back of the chair. It extended down to shoulder height and helped soften reflections off the chair back surface, reducing sensitivity of the sonics to head movement and closeness to the chair back. Without the blanket in place we were finding it difficult to get most speakers to sound "quite right" unless we leaned forward in an unnatural and uncomfortable position. (These effects are exaggerated with high-directivity speaker designs - dipoles, panels, etc.) I had absent-mindedly failed to notice that the blanket had slipped out of place when first sitting down to listen in detail with the 1.7's, and was leaning forward on _Reasons Why_ wondering about the reasons why the soundstage would not settle down. Realizing the oversight and replacing the blanket relaxed that effect dramatically, making for a much more enjoyable session. The need for that blanket, or something to deal with those reflections, was reconfirmed.

*Impressions* 

At our $1,000 speaker evaluation event in August, I was bitten by the planar speaker bug while listening to the smaller Magnepan MG 12/QR's. Perhaps my expectation level had gotten over-inflated for the 1.7's, but they did not grab me the way I thought they would. The separation and detail and clarity were all there, and I loved them for it, jotting "only Truth allowed here" in my notes. Cymbal clarity on _Life is a One Way Ticket_ was absolutely wonderful. But the frequency response was just uneven enough to be distracting, and the _SNAP_ of the MG 12/QR's was missing.

*Frequency Response, Bass Extension*

The 1.7's are _very_ flat from 2 kHz to 10 kHz, and fairly flat from 350 Hz to 42 Hz with a strong peak at 48 Hz. The high-frequency range is joined to the low-frequency range by a 1-octave-wide peak at 1.2 kHz. The overall profile shows the highs recessed by 3 to 4 dB relative to the lows.



*Room EQ Wizard MDAT file for download: *
View attachment Magnepan 1_7 final for download.mdat


The tonality of the 1.7's seemed dark to me, which was surprising. The highs are flat, clear, clean, instruments and sounds are all well separated and detailed, but above that presence peak the response is held back enough to feel muted.

The tightly-packed "hill and valley" response seen between 150 and 500 Hz is characteristic of Magnepan's - with the MG 12/QR's this occurred through the low- and high-frequency ranges and they sounded very even - and is not a big concern, but with the 1.7's there was enough peakiness that they sounded uneven, almost coarse. This was first noticeable on the quieter _Reasons Why_ track.

The standup bass was handled evenly and tightly through _Life is a One Way Ticket._ The saxophone and cymbals were tactile, seemed live in the room. Next time you are in a music store, sneak a couple of medium-hard cymbal strikes with a proper drum stick and absorb the wonderful clarity and complexity of the tones produced. The 1.7's sounded just like that. And the piano tones on _Breezin' Along with the Breeze_ had a "tinkle" that many speakers would have left out. Melody's voice through _Baby I'm a Fool_ was super detailed and clean, as were the accompanying strings, and the standup bass was solid and tight.

*Soundstage and Imaging*

The soundstage was very good: wide, open, deep, and well-developed - the instrument separation was particularly strong, lots of air between the phantom sources - and imaging was quite good, very stable. _Ain't it a Shame_ contains widely-spaced background synthesizers that reached the walls of the room. _Dance to the Drummer Again_ also reached out to the walls. The matching between our panels was dead-on above 1 kHz, and enviable below it. Imaging from panel speakers in general is not as tight as with speakers using smaller radiating surfaces, but can still be very good and completely stable. We got roughly grapefruit-sized images for point-source recordings with the 1.7's and heard no signs of smearing or wandering.

_Your Gold Teeth Too_ was a good track to illustrate the distinct separation between instruments. And almost in defiance of our understanding of psychoacoustics and low frequencies, the deep drum on _Way Down Deep,_ even its lowest reaches, had a separate and distinct location in both the width and depth dimensions of the soundstage. _Joan of Arc_ also contained percussion and cymbals that stood out in their clarity and distinctness.

*Power Handling*

I heard it first at the beginning of the Cincinnati Pops' _Star Trek_ theme. The opening deep thumps were accompanied by a quick fuzz of distortion in the upper-mids of the horns and strings. It happened on each of the thumps. Sonnie heard the same thing during _Way Down Deep._ For the _Star Trek_ passage, the volume level was set with the SPL varying mainly between 90 and 95 dB SPL (c-weighted, slow-averaged), occasionally peaking at 100 dB. This is about as loud as any of the evaluators likes to push the volume, and it does not get this loud very often, but we do want to be able to get there without fear of distortion.

Once you are aware of this "fuzzy-upper-mids-with-strong-bass" problem, you end up focused on it all the time. "It shouldn't be a problem on _this_ track." "How loud can I play _this_ one?" Our listening tastes require being able to crank the volume into the lower 90's (dB SPL) at will without having to fret about distortion on certain notes or ride the volume to avoid it.

In terms of power-handling capability, this was the only blemish in the 1.7's performance. They are low in efficiency, calling for plenty of high-current-capable power for higher volumes. We had plenty of clean power available, though, and even when pushed hard with complex music - minus the deepest bass - the 1.7's had no trouble keeping all the parts of the music clear and separate.

*Performance Close to the Front Wall:*

Close to the front wall, the 1.7's were easy to place. Their first location was where they stayed. At that distance from the LP, the aim was not as critical. The soundstage was _very_ wide and imaging was solid, but - you guessed it - there was no depth of soundstage at all.

The 1.7's were definitely too high on the six-inch stage. They sounded much better for listeners on the elevated second row of seats.

For a brief experiment, we moved the 1.7's as close to the wall as their feet would allow. The imaging went completely soft and diffused.

*Physical and Visual*

Magnepan speakers do not look like loudspeakers at all to the inexperienced eye, but - when properly set up - more like a pair of decorative or acoustical treatment panels at really odd locations in a room. When one realizes they are speakers, they become attention-getters of a different kind. I like the way they look - simple, understated, big, and important all at the same time. At around 40 lbs. apiece, the 1.7's are manageable by a single person needing to move them around. They are quite impervious to curious little fingers and pet claws, functionally anyway. Gracie (Cedar Creek's feline mascot) would have no trouble fraying the attractive fabric outer covering with a few good claw sharpenings, and was banished from all speaker storage areas.

*Overall Listening Experience*

As we were finishing up our round of evaluation turns with the 1.7's, I turned to another evaluator and commented, "I really wanted to like them more than I did." Even with all that clarity and detail, the two factors that held back my listening joy with the 1.7's were the uneven tonality with its recessed highs and that occasional upper-mid fuzziness when a strong bass event came along. Another tweak or two on the angle might have fixed the recessed highs - but we surely did plenty of tweaking during our setup, so maybe not. (The measured response was the same from the less-exacting position near the front wall.) And a subwoofer to relieve the panels of having to deal with the lowest octaves of bass would no doubt fix the distortion problem - but our assumptions were firm, and we were evaluating all speakers in their right-out-of-the-box state, no mods, no subs, no special processing allowed.

In other hands, rooms, or conditions, the essence of the magnetic planar sound might very well be coaxed to its full glory with the Magnepan 1.7's. For me, their performance was a lackluster "Pretty Good."

*What These Speakers Are Best For*

It takes a lot of patience to get the best out of a pair of planar speakers. If you want to set 'em and forget 'em, look elsewhere. As we experienced the Magnepan 1.7's, their ability to deliver clarity and detail will serve any kind of music well, as long as loud, deep bass is not a high priority.


*Leonard Caillouet (lcaillo)*

The Magnepans performed well on the stage in terms of frequency response, maintaining bass definition that most of the others lacked here. The very deepest bass lacks detail, but this behavior was similar out into the room at the final position. Imaging suffered on the stage as one would expect. Once moved to the floor and considerable experimenting, the soundstage was wide and tall, but outside of the sweet spot collapses rapidly. Detail is exceptional from mid-bass up to lower treble. Balance is good, other than a small peak in lower treble that emphasizes sibilance on rise at high levels. The lower midrange seems somewhat relaxed and gets lost a bit at high levels. The bass seems to go deep but lacks the power and authority of the other speakers in the group.

With well-defined mid-bass, my sensitivity to lower strings on acoustic guitar and the subtleties of a string bass is satisfied. While these areas are very present, notes are not fat and bloated. Vocals are rich and delicate when appropriate, even where they are lacking a bit of presence or a bit forward. Suzanna McCorkle’s quirky jazz sound is the richest of all the speakers yet. The trembling edginess of Rickie Lee Jones is among the best I have heard, but just a bit low in level in the lower ranges. Drums and bass in “Gold Teeth II” by Steely Dan are crisp and tight. The harmonies of Jennifer Warnes and Leonard Cohen are distinct, but as levels rise and music becomes complex the detail seems to smear, as in “Joan of Arc”, where I hear sibilance and edginess in the upper midrange and lower treble that overwhelm lower mid tones.

These Magnepans are a conundrum for me. There are aspects of them that I really like, such as the smoothness of the width of the image and the sweetness of Melody Gardot’s voice. That is until the levels rise and the sweet peachy sound becomes brass. Not steel and technical, just hard where it was not at lower levels. The openness and detail on less busy music at moderate levels leaves one wanting more on a track like Dire Straits “Your Latest Trick” but the large sound with depth of sound field that is expected on big orchestral pieces just is not there. I think this change of character is one of the reasons that Sonnie is not a fan. These are not Tektons, Klipsch, or EPs in terms of dynamics. If it were just that, I would be more of a fan, but the speaker loses its primary advantages as levels and complexity grow. Orchestration feels thin on “Baby I’m a Fool” yet vocals can be seductive. Definitely a speaker that I can appreciate, but no way I could live with them and enjoy them all around.


*Joe Alexander (ALMFamily)*

The Magnepans are a different breed for me – they look like a standard box from the front, but of course have no depth. After trying to pinpoint what I was seeing, it finally dawned on me that they really look like you have a GIK acoustic panel that plays music. With that being the case, they would obviously blend well for HT.

We started off on the stage, and I noticed right off that they seemed to have a subdued sound which I honestly was not expecting from a panel. Female vocals had a very "processed" feeling to me - there just seemed to be no "life" in the vocals. The bongos in the Cassandra Wilson "Dance to the Drummer Again" image on the left panel rather than to the left of that panel. Low end and midrange were really fuzzy from an imaging standpoint - instead of being able to pinpoint location, it was very indistinct and bloated from a middle image.

Once we got them to the floor, imaging did tighten up a bit. The mandolin in the "Ode to a Butterfly" track imaged inside the right speaker as expected where it was not as clear on the stage. However, bass imaging never tightened up - it just felt really bloated. Also, there were a couple tracks - "Life is a One Way Ticket" in particular - where once the low end kicked in, the male vocals fluttered which was very distracting. Instrument clarity was good - the piano in the "Life is a One Way Ticket" stood out most for me. As I continued to listen, I noticed that the soundstage was not very deep - everything seemed to be located right over Sonnie's rack.

Overall, I just did not connect with these speakers at all. I came to the conclusion that I felt these would be good for vocals and high end instruments, but once you add in the low midrange and low end, they lose their luster for me.


*Sonnie Parker (Sonnie)

*I am suppose to really like panel speakers... so why am I having such a difficult time liking the these quasi-ribbon planars. I keep asking myself what it is about these speakers that so many others love? Did we still not have enough power for them? Did we just not work at setting them up for long enough? Is my room just not the right room for them? I do not know what the answer is, but I do know that they simply do not do much for me. I suppose maybe I am expecting too much, especially when I pick up my copy of The Absolute Sound 2014 High-End Audio Buyers Guide, which includes "The Best Audio Products In Every Category At Every Price" (that I snagged for free at RMAF), and see that Magnepan is listed not just once, but THREE times under their speaker section. Huh? What? Seriously? Of course I understand that most of those guys at TAS have equipment, rooms and possibly ears that I could only dream about, so maybe it is a combination of all of those that make the Magnepans sound so good to them. As I continued to read TAS, flipping back and forth in no logical order... I caught some of the album listings for the various TAS writers. In curiosity I followed it back to the beginning and the section is titled, "Our Writers Pick Ten Little-Known But Great-Sounding Recordings". I start scrolling through them and it all starts to make sense. All these writers listen to is elevator music... it's all classical. THAT is where the Magnepans are going to shine and that is why they are not really doing much for me, because I fall asleep in elevators? No... because I have absolutely ZERO love for classical music... and I won't be apologizing if I offend anyone that does like it... you may not like what I listen to either. 

In all seriousness... the 1.7's are not by any means terrible speakers and I like them okay. I could actually listen to them for quite a while at lower levels, as they have respectable imaging, a really wide soundstage and pretty good depth of soundstage. I did notice that the big bass on _Ode To A Butterfly_ sounded more like it was coming from the right speaker instead of just to the inside left of it. I had in my notes that they did not seem to disappear as well as the MG12's did in the $1,000 event. However, the part that really struck me bad is that if you plan to ever play them very loud, you MUST cross them over to a sub... there is no other option. Otherwise you get a fuzzy rippling distortion in the panel that ruins the sound. We are certainly not the first to note this. And... low and behold, AFTER we had noted this in our listening sessions (something that we could not help but to share), I had a chance during a break to pick up my copy of TAS, and realized a few comments they had written about the 1.7's and the 3.7's... "_And be aware that above a certain very loud level, the quasi-ribbon drivers will begin to show audible signs of strain, though the 1.7s will fare better at low listening levels than previous Maggies._" Flip on over a couple of pages, "_Note that the 3.7 does not produce deep bass below about 45Hz and, like all planars, it runs into membrane excursion limits. slightly limiting dynamic range (particularly in the bass) at extremely high SPLs._" Hmmm. Actually these statements are somewhat inaccurate because "all planars" do not run into membrane excursion limits... some of them will play "extremely high SPLs" without so much as thinking of reaching their excursion limits. Perhaps they meant to say "all Magnepans". Also... it does not "slightly" limit the dynamic range... it greatly destroys it. Nonetheless, this did help reaffirm what we were hearing. 

Please do not discount the Magnepans because we seem to not favor them that much. There is a reason that there are numerous Magnepan owners out there loving every minute of their music. Unfortunately they did not work out well for us, but that does not mean they will not work out for you. One good thing about the 1.7's is that you can now try them out in your home, direct from Magnepan. I encourage you to do so if you have been considering them... and even if you haven't.


----------



## AudiocRaver

*Paradigm Studio 60 v5*

     

*Optimal Placement*
No code has to be inserted here.*Best Placement Near Front Wall*
No code has to be inserted here.


*Wayne Myers (AudiocRaver)*

*Configuration/Specifications*


Design: 2-1/2-Way front- and rear-ported bass-reflex with two woofers, one mid/bass driver, and one dome tweeter
Frequency Response on-axis: 45 Hz - 22 kHz (± 2 dB)
Frequency Response 30 deg off-axis: 45 Hz - 20 kHz (± 2 dB)
Recommended Power: 15 - 220 W
Maximum Input Power: 170 W
Sensitivity: 92 dB room, 89 dB anechoic (2.83 V/1 m)
Impedance: Compatible with 8 Ohms
Woofer Size: 5.5”
Mid-Bass Size: 5.5"
Tweeter Size: 1”
Crossover: 2nd-order electro-acoustic at 2.0 kHz; 2nd-order electro-acoustic at 500 Hz
Dimensions: 40.125" H × 7.875" W × 11.875" D
Weight (Each): 50 lbs. (22.7 kg)
MSRP (Pair): $2,498
The Paradigm Studio 60 ver. 5 features a 1 inch G-PAL™ dome, ferro-fluid damped/cooled, die-cast heatsink chassis, IMS/SHOCK-MOUNT™ Tweeter, a 5.5 inch S-PAL™ cone, 1.5 inch voice-coil, AVS™ die-cast heatsink chassis, IMS/SHOCK-MOUNT™ Mid/Bass Frequency Driver, two 5.5 inch mineral-filled polypropylene cone, 1.5 inch voice-coil, AVS™ die-cast heatsink chassis, IMS/SHOCK-MOUNT™ Low Frequency Drivers, and front and rear ports for bass tuning.

Paradigm's Website

*Setup and Placement Flexibility*

One of the things I have long admired about Paradigm is that for most of their models they specify frequency response at 30 degrees off-axis and it is just as flat as their on-axis response. That puts them squarely in the family of controlled-directivity loudspeakers which promise the kind of soundstage and imaging we look for at these events with a minimum of fuss.

They almost set themselves up. Both up on the stage for a brief listen and in their ideal location on the floor, they were set in place, squared up with the laser, brought to life with our first track, and the reaction from the listening position was, "Well, that sounds pretty good right there." And it was not that anyone was getting lazy and did not feel like making fine adjustments, which we always did in such cases to be sure they sounded their absolute best - they really did sound that good right where we first placed them. _Thank you, Paradigm._ I was truly grateful.

*Impressions* 

The Paradigm Studio 60's were the last of our sets of $2500 speakers to be evaluated for the weekend. I had almost forgotten about them altogether, and when I saw their gleaming gold domes and white midrange cone and show-off appearance, my brain got an interest boost. "Oh, yeah, the Paradigms." It was like a refreshing little wake-up slap.

After two long days of critical listening, one has to be on one's toes to give the last set of speakers as much careful attention as the first. The Studio 60's have a commanding presence in both appearance and audio presentation that says they will not be put to disadvantage by a little thing like being last in line. The first sounds out of them said _Wow, flat response._ That was from up on the stage close to the wall. The same happened when they were moved to the floor.

Back when polling was determining which models would be included in this evaluation event, the Studio 60's almost sounded like a boring choice. That was when we were thinking about possibly being able to hear exciting new designs and outlandish tweeters and the like. Of course Paradigm was a solid choice and was included in this group with good reason. Even "boring" can be good in its own way. The Studio 60's are no-nonsense, all-business, let's-get-it-done speakers.

*Frequency Response, Bass Extension*

The Studio 60's have very flat response above 600 Hz, with highs rolling off slightly above 8 kHz and a small notch at 700 Hz. Lower-mids and bass are slightly accentuated. 



*Room EQ Wizard MDAT file for download: *
View attachment Paradigm Studio 60 final for download.mdat


The Studio 60's were flat-sounding speakers. The 700 Hz notch was due to a floor reflection, the highs rolloff from our off-axis setup and the lowest peaks from room modes. About all that was left other than the slightly forward lower-mids and bass was wonderful flatness. Tonality was true and even. The mid-bass did stand out on some tracks but did not seem tubby or resonant, only a little on the strong side. On _Reasons Why,_ it made the fiddle and guitar sound like they were recorded using larger-sized instruments. The highs bordered on being overly bright on a few tracks, like _Breezin' Along with the Breeze,_ but for the most part were vibrant and lively. Cymbals were perfect on _For All We Know_ and _Life is a One Way Ticket,_ The sax on _For All We Know_ was missing something, but the 700 Hz notch surely explains that anomaly.

Drums jumped through he Studio 60's, cried _DYNAMICS!_ I enjoyed the dynamic punch about the guitar sting plucks on _Your Gold Teeth Too._

Then there was that annoying little 7 kHz peak. The other evaluators did not complain about it, but it definitely got on my nerves after awhile. Sibilants especially tended to land on that peak and it ultimately became a bit distracting. Now I will make it clear that this is probably a non-issue for 99% of listening situations. The peak itself was within spec and is one of those little things that will show up when you get to a certain off-axis angle, even with off-axis specs as noteworthy as those of the Studio 60's. But there it was and it became fatiguing after awhile. Listener fatigue, after two days of critical listening? Of course that was a factor, I was aware of it then and it has been carefully considered in making these comments now. Little things can make a big difference when they stand out in just the right way and that little peak would matter to me even with fresh ears.

The solution? Probably as simple as turning the speakers a few degrees more or less off-axis. A slightly different setup distance might clear it up. That frequency is down slightly in the plots taken closer to the wall, evidence that dispersion variations are at work, so it would probably only take a minor positioning tweak to clear it up. The main point here is not that those wonderful speakers had an annoying little problem at that particular setup, it is that a lot of speakers have potentially annoying little characteristics that can show up under just the right conditions. While we did not have time to work on solving this particular one, they can often be fixed with minimal effort. But do not overlook them. Little annoyances become big ones if not tended to.

*Soundstage and Imaging*

The soundstage from the Studio 60's had great depth and width and was natural and cohesive. Soundstage depth had acuity and precision that was quite good, but not great. That is not a slam but a high compliment. Few speakers that give a deep soundstage are able to do so with much of the kind of depth precision that approaches the horizontal imaging precision we demand and take for granted. The Studio 60's stand out as big winners in this regard, just not as stellar as a few other speakers we have heard.

Imaging was particularly sharp, with golf-ball sized images from point-source-recorded sounds. The image clarity had me looking for instruments in the room, even from the second row while other evaluators occupied the listening position, particularly with the percussion on _Dance to the Drummer Again._

*Power Handling*

The Studio 60's liked to play loud. They are a medium-efficient design that can handle lots of power. I noticed no sense of strain at all with the volume turned high on any of our tracks.

*Performance Close to the Front Wall:*

Up on the Cedar Creek Cinema stage near the wall, it only took a minute to tell they would perform almost as well there as they would closer to the LP. There was even a _small_ depth of soundstage, something most speakers could not produce at all close to the front wall. Soundstage width, tonality (almost flatter here than close to the listener), imaging, tight bass - if placement flexibility is a must, the Studio 60's will provide it.

*Physical and Visual*

The tall Studio 60's look sharp and techie without grilles and look sharp with them. The tweeters hint at wanting to bust out of the top of the cabinet and really shine. The wood veneer finish looked like a lot of time went into it, very dressy, and refused to be ignored. One would want to compliment them daily - a small price to pay for the way they perform.

*Overall Listening Experience*

The first impression is the one I go back to. With the few seconds of music, the Studio 60's said, "I am your next reference speaker." It is easy to understand why there are so many Paradigm Studio series fans out there. They are boring speakers - boring in giving you just what you are looking for, no more, no less, the kind of boring you get attached to quickly and will not easily let go of.

*What These Speakers Are Best For*

The Studio 60's will handle any kind of music you can throw at them, allow the listener full driving privileges with no limitations.


*Leonard Caillouet (lcaillo)*

Paradigms are a speaker for which my distant experience was considerable. When their products came to the US a few decades ago, we were a fairly large dealer. The design factors that were important then seem to have been maintained and improved upon over the years. Detail, low distortion, good balance, and overall high listenability remain characteristics today. These were certainly no disappointment. Not having heard their recent products I was a little skeptical if they would be up to par with other elite speakers in this range. I was pleasantly greeted with a similar experience that I had with the ML and Arx in the last sessions. We typically rely on Wayne to tweak the position as his ear for image location and accuracy is very reliable. I usually help with the moves and make suggestions on direction and angle based upon his description of what he hears. After getting them in the right place I usually retire to the second row to let him do more serious evaluation. From that vantage point a lot can be learned. When detail pops out at me from outside the prime listening window it tells me two things. First, the speaker is going to be forgiving of position. Second, there has to be very high resolution and low distortion. The Paradigm and the Dyn both caught my attention in this way. 

These were, in fact, easy to position. They were the easiest to get good basic sound from and even performed reasonable well on the stage, probably the best of the lot up there, and definitely one of my two favorites overall. Unlike the others, I heard more changes in the mids and highs from the stage to the floor. On the stage the midrange seemed a bit hollow and the highs smeared a little that I heard none of on the floor out into the room. My guess is that the excellent off axis dispersion that they appear to have (we did not measure this, so this is a purely subjective impression, FWIW) resulted in more reflective issues off the front wall (mostly screen) and equipment. Out onto the floor these really became speakers that were pleading for more listening. Considering that these are what I consider moderately inefficient, they have great dynamics and sound bigger than they appear physically and bigger than expected. These are precise in the sense of the best of the Magnepans, without the dynamic strain. Rather than brass, I would describe this sound as warm, wet, becoming icy at worst, which is rare. I heard a very slight tendency to post transient sibilance, but not a hint on the rise of notes. Even that was only on the highest vocals and very high levels. 

Like most speakers, as they get to the limits of the bottom of their bass response they get thick and less detailed, but they go as deep as most music needs and are in no way offensive. My Achilles heel for speaker and my personal quirky sensitivity in mid-bass detail was never triggered by these. Everything seemed very pleasant to listen to and tracks that I have heard many times kept showing me more, which is the mark of a great speaker with detailed reproduction.

Imaging was very tight and precise. Width and depth were among the best of the group. The Magnepans had a taller soundstage, but not by much. I never got the sense that the image collapsed back to the speakers in dynamic passages or in difficult image detail like harmonies or the bass/acoustic guitar just inside of the right speaker in “Ode to Butterfly”. As you move out of the sweet spot for listening some speakers pop out as the source of sound. These tended to do this less than others, except perhaps the Dynaudio. This would be a very nice speaker to live with. Overall it does much exceptionally, with very few places to critique.


*Joe Alexander (ALMFamily)*

I really like the look of the Studio 60s even though they have a standard box shape. The front baffle breaks it up and the different colored drivers give it some character. Plus, the base has a very unique design. The cabinet has a good finish for HT, but leaving the grilles off may be distracting with the different colored drivers.

When we put them on the stage, I noticed right away that these had a very wide soundstage as well as probably having the deepest soundstage of the speakers we listened to from the stage. Low end was also very impressive - imaging was very tight and had really good impact as I could feel it in my seat! The rainstick sequence at the beginning of the "Chant" track imaged perfectly as it panned from left to right across the soundstage. Vocal imaging was also locked dead center and the female part of the "Three Wishes" track imaged directly left as expected. 

Then, we moved them to the floor. The "Ode to a Butterfly" track really opened up here - instrument imaging separated really well and showed really good depth. The low end imaged really tightly and was very clean – there was not one track that felt boomy, but the 60s still had that really good impact. And, the genie sequence in the "Three Wishes" track was probably the most "menacing" I heard from all the different speakers. Vocal imaging was locked dead center and instruments separated extremely well on every track. As far as vocals and instruments, there were just a few instances where I felt the sound came across as slightly "veiled" - such as the piano in the "Life is a One Way Ticket track and the horn in the "Your Latest Trick" track.

Overall, there is a lot to like here as this is a really good speaker. The low end was very impressive, midrange showed excellent punch, and they imaged beautifully, but the Studio 60s are not what I would personally be looking for as I just felt that high end instruments and some vocals felt held back.


*Sonnie Parker (Sonnie)
*
Crank it up! Man I like these speakers. From the minute I sat down to the minute I DID NOT want to get up, I felt energized. I felt like I wanted to go for a jog when I was finished listening (and probably needed to with all we ate over these few days). These speakers really have a big sound from such a small speaker... and they are fairly heavy too, considering their size. I was no doubt surprised, because I had it in my mind that they were not going to be able to live up to all the hype I have read about them over the years. I think I may have felt that way because they have been so heavily advertised... which always seems to make me think advertising is the reason they have so many owners. Like Wayne, when I saw they were leading the polls, I was disappointed... with a "blah" thought about them. Think about the definition of "paradigm"... a typical example of something. These speakers are anything but typical, yet maybe the example of a rarely found fine speaker. They have great imaging, soundstage width and depth... and have some of the best dynamics I have heard in a speaker. I am seriously going to have to give a complete Paradigm system a go in my room at some point in time. I would love to try out the top end of their Signature line in a 5 channel setup, although I imagine I would be quite impressed with a full compliment of their Reference line. Despite my "blah" thoughts, I have to admit that I have always thought their C5 center and C8 towers looked super impressive and muscular... and that center would look impressive sitting up on my cabinet below my screen. I am still not crazy about the woodgrain finish, but I could easily get past that with great sound.

Clean, crisp and clear (clarity) with extreme dynamics is how I describe these speakers. I was totally wrong to think the way I thought about these speakers in the early nominations and polling process. It just proves that biases can be misleading in the biggest of ways. The 60's sounded good up near the wall... the best I have heard from nearly any speaker in my room as far as music is concerned, with regards to them being placed near the screen wall. I have a heavy suspicion they would be an excellent home theater speaker. Without question they make an excellent two-channel speaker and I highly recommend anyone looking for speakers in this price range to give these an audition.


----------



## AudiocRaver

*SVS Ultra Towers *

     

*Optimal Placement*
No code has to be inserted here.*Best Placement Near Front Wall*
No code has to be inserted here.
*Wayne Myers (AudiocRaver)*

*Configuration/Specifications*

Design: 3.5-Way rear-ported bass-reflex with two woofers, two midrange drivers, and one dome tweeter
Frequency Response: 28 Hz - 32 kHz (± 3 dB)
Recommended Power: 20 - 300 W
Sensitivity: 88 dB (2.83 V @ 1 meter full-space, 300-3kHz)
Impedance: 8 Ohms
Woofer Size: 8"
Midrange Size: 6.5"
Tweeter Size: 1"
Top midrange-to-tweeter crossover: 2 kHz
Bottom midrange taper frequency: 700 Hz
Dual midrange-to-woofer crossover: 160 Hz
Dimensions: 45" H X 13.8" W X 16.25" D
Weight (Each): ~75 lbs. (18.0 kg)
MSRP (Pair): $1,998
The SVS Ultra Tower features a 1 inch tweeter with FEA-optimized diffuser; two 6.5 inch midrange drivers with composite glass-fiber cone and an aluminum shorting ring to reduce gap inductance, lower distortion, and enhance high frequency response, a cast aluminum basket to ensure precise alignment of critical components and additional heat-sinking capacity, and a Vented voice coil former to minimize air compression artifacts at high drive levels; two 8 inch woofers with aluminum shorting rings to reduce gap inductance and lower distortion, a long stroke motor and suspension for high output, and vented voice coil formers to minimize air compression artifacts at high drive levels. The ForceFactor Woofer Array consists of dual 8" side-firing horizontally opposed SVS woofers resulting in mechanical force cancellation, enhanced modal density and reduced distortion for a smooth, accurate bass at all listening locations. The SoundMatch Crossover Network consists of a 3.5-way crossover with premium-grade capacitors, air-core inductors and heavy-trace printed circuit boards.

SVS's Website

*Setup and Placement Flexibility*

Getting the SVS Ultra Tower to behave the way we wanted it to was an ordeal. They really taxed our patience. Admittedly, not every speaker out there is made to do what we what them to do, even some really nice ones. As we have emphasized, we are looking for a deep soundstage and that requires off-axis orientation relative to the Listening Position (LP). Some speakers handle that well, some do not. The Ultra Tower did not like the idea. Although we ultimately got satisfactory results, we were not blown away by them, and it took degree-splitting toe-in matching and precise measurements double- and triple- and quadruple-checked to get there.

Those final minute adjustments, though, as ridiculous as they seemed even as we were making them, made a huge difference in settling the sound down from rough and undeveloped to very natural and satisfying. And we got a pretty nice soundstage, the main reward for our struggles.

Before we moved them out of the room, their spots on the floor got thoroughly marked with tape and their laser-alignment reference points on the back wall were carefully documented. No way we were going to go through that exercise again.

We are a speaker-designer-stressing bunch, and we are first to admit it. Our listening requirements and goals are NOT TYPICAL. But we also believe we have come across a quality of listening experience that few have an appreciation for, and so there we were, lasers in hand, splitting hairs and complaining about things that have speaker designers wondering what planet we hail from, all for the purpose of spreading the word about that mesmerizing soundstage and what it takes to achieve it.

*Impressions* 

A lot of people like the SVS Ultra Tower, and there are things about the way it sounds that I really like, too. It is capable of DEEP bass for a speaker its size. It is an innovative design - very cool, forward thinking, with the opposing woofers, non-parallel cabinet walls, the tweeter sandwiched between mid drivers for tight integration of imaging information, innovative driver design. Most innovative speakers do one or two things differently, SVS did almost everything differently, at least a little.

They play loud, handle bass well, have a high end that goes on forever.....

As reviewers and reporters in the audio realm, we have to learn to trust our ears and hearing and impressions. I have learned to do that more and more in recent years, but have also become very aware of how impressionable they can be, susceptible to bias and expectation. They even get overconfident and get fooled sometimes, other times confused. That is when we have to exercise some tough love on them, be willing to test them, question their results. _Am I really hearing that? Does it make sense? Why would I hear it, what does it mean?_ There is nothing wrong with letting our hearing impressions roam free and have a good time with whatever they come up with in private, but when we hope to be able to share them with others meaningfully, even make purchasing recommendations, those impressions need boundaries. We end up walking a line that bounces between devotee and skeptic, advocate and cynic, in relation to our own abilities.

After spending much of the last 24 hours digging through notes and comparing REW plots and reviewing psycho-acoustical principles, I am ready to say this about the SVS Ultra Towers:

They sounded a little over-bright to me.

Overly dramatic? Downright obsessive? Going crazy? Sonnie - bless his heart - will say yes to all three. There are reasons why I struggled with making this statement, and had to be sure it made sense.

My introduction to the SVS Ultra Tower came in October at the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest. One big impression I came away with was that the highs had an _iron fist_ quality about them like they were machined out of steel with the edges left rough and covered with little burrs and snags. I listened at different heights and angles and distances to different kinds of material and could not get past that impression.

I was so relieved to hear the Ultra Tower pair in Sonnie's room. The highs, while quite strong, had an even, honest smoothness that was very listenable, the edges smoothed and rounded, still with the strong shininess of steel, but not harsh or dangerous.

Only later did Sonnie reveal how bright he had found that same Ultra Tower pair when he first heard them (he thought they sounded great at RMAF), and that he found them sounding so much better at our evaluation weekend.

Add to this the difficulty we had in setting them up. These experiences and comments by the other evaluators add up to questions about stability and repeatability. Will they sound the same next time I set them up? Will they be as hard to place? Harder? Part of the character of a speaker is what you grow to expect from it over time. To me, _touchy_ and _finicky_ are not as inviting qualities as _dependable_ and _easy._

And over-bright. Which does not make sense when you look at the data, which says they are pretty flat. I have heard flat speakers plenty of times in plenty of rooms and did not think of them as over-bright. But I believe there is an explanation. It will be published in the general observations post, as it applies to the entire weekend of listening and to our listening goals and methods for achieving them. For now, let us say the Ultra Tower high end had a lot of nice qualities, but sometimes was just too hard, too much, too bright.

*Frequency Response, Bass Extension*

The SVS Ultra Towers have exceptionally flat response above 2 kHz, extending well beyond 20 kHz with no sign of drooping. There is a slight presence peak between 1 and 2 kHz, then steadily increasing bass response down to 60 Hz. 



*Room EQ Wizard MDAT file for download: *
View attachment SVS Ultra Tower final for download.mdat


The SVS Ultra Towers were simply a bit bright in Sonnie's well-treated room. The bass was very strong, on some tracks pushed way too much. But I prefer flat bass, and the majority of HTS readers lean toward at least _some_ bass emphasis, some a LOT of it (you know who you are!), so the Ultra Tower's bass might be just right for the average reader. Note that the Cedar Creek Cinema room has an audio black hole that gobbles up most vibrations below 50 Hz, except those produced by the eight 18-inch subs themselves - hmmm, the subs acting out on some bass-envy issues, absorbing it all? Intriguing idea. Worth ripping them out to see the difference it makes? Sonnie might object, have to do it when he is not looking. Not a word!

The bass seemed mushy, not as tightly defined as I expected. I remember it being very articulate at RMAF, not stellar, but good for the amount of deep bass coming from a cabinet that size. There is a sense of unevenness to the Ultra Tower sound, through the mids mainly, that made the tonality and definition clarity murky on busier instrumentals.

Those flat tweeters handled cymbals beautifully on _Breezin' Along with the Breeze._ Cymbals and complex synthesizer harmonics on most tracks really stood out with strength and clarity. The vocal duet on _Joan of Arc_ had a wonderful quality of blending and contrasting at the same time. The delicate drum stick clicks starting _Weird Fishes_ seemed ultra real.

I liked the way sharp vocals sounded, like Lou Reed on _Some Kind of Nature,_ although it was an almost surreal tonality that might wear thin with time.

*Soundstage and Imaging*

The soundstage was fair-to-good, although the depth definition was rather vague. This is the case with most speakers we have evaluated, so it is not a crippling complaint. The Ultra Tower is a quite listenable speaker.

Imaging was good, a bit soft - grapefruit-sized images from pinpoint-recorded sources - and fairly stable. Driver matching has to be very tight for the best imaging, and the REW plots showed that mid and tweeter matching between cabinets was good but not as good as with many other speakers we have looked at.

The tilted-back front baffle was working against the Ultra Tower now. They were located well away from the LP. That is where we got the best soundstage, but imaging seemed to never settle down to its very best. Experimenting, I raised up about six inches, and there it was - a really solid image and much better clarity in the soundstage. A thick, firm pillow gave the amount of lift needed to reach that high sweet spot nicely. But it broke our LP assumptions and added another variable and had to go. We made do with the lower "normal people" LP.

*Power Handling*

The SVS Ultra Tower can handle lots of power and play loud comfortably. They are on the low-efficiency side, but we had plenty of clean power to drive them with and I noticed no tendency toward sounding compressed or strained.

*Performance Close to the Front Wall:*

Up on the Cedar Creek Cinema stage, they were far from their best. Their front face has a backward tilt that wants to sit closer to the listener. There was always a _must... sit... higher..._ sensation with them that far away. Home theater users might want to consider this carefully, as typical setups will locate theater mains well away from listeners. It is not a stage-friendly design, for those with stages in their rooms.

*Physical and Visual*

I really enjoy working with speakers that look different and that break the rules for how speakers should look. The Ultra Tower boasts a form-follows-function design theme with a futuristic yet simple appearance. They are heavy. The oak veneer finish is easy to like and place in a room.

*Overall Listening Experience*

As I finished my turn in the LP, I had no trouble turning it over to the next evaluator. I had enjoyed many aspects of the SVS Ultra Tower listening experience, but was ready to move on, felt no compulsion to fight for more listening time.

I AM intrigued by all of the design work that went into those speakers, though. Something tells me we are going to hear great things from SVS in the coming years, and maybe that is the best way to look at the Ultra Tower:

Many good qualities.
Far from perfect.
Jam-packed with innovation and well-thought-out design features -- those guys really did work overtime on these speakers.
A little over-bright in our room.
In summary, a speaker that many will like, some will love, and some will find a bit finicky to work with. If you are nuts for the deep soundstage and want to be able to play them off-axis to achieve it, they are not the best choice to work with. But that is not going to be their typical use. If you want to use them on-axis and have a room that is fairly dead at high frequencies, you are going to love the tweeters - if my assumptions are correct about their high end in our room.

*What These Speakers Are Best For*

The SVS Ultra Tower in a home theater setting almost does not even need a subwoofer in a smaller room that will not be run at bone-crushing volumes. I know, I know, the bass-lovers are already posting about the need for proper sub support, 5-Hz extension, heavy lifting, etc., and they are absolutely right if those are your priorities. For a two-channel guy, remembering how they sounded at RMAF, away from any low-frequency-vibration black holes, their bass would sound pretty awesome to me.

They might be a little unrefined for the most serious two-channel listener. But watch those SVS guys, I have a feeling some really great speakers are going to come through their doors.


*Leonard Caillouet (lcaillo)*

SVS Ultra Towers on the stage were the most predictable. Closer to the wall the bass emphasis was too much for me and the reflections in the mids and highs smeared detail and left the image flat. Overall it is a good sound, with nice transients, wide soundfield, even on the stage. It was clear that this would be a fine speaker when placed more optimally.

These were a significantly harder to place for a really detailed and precise depth of image and image stability. Even at their best location, image detail seemed to change with frequency. I attribute this to a slight balance difference between the left and right speakers. The toe angle seemed particularly critical. Detail was good, with nice balanced character top to bottom. Overall I found the speakers to lean toward a slight brightness with a little sibilance. The brightness was not extreme, nor offensive, on most tracks, but more a slight emphasis that assists in providing ambiance and clarity. In some cases, however, the edge is too hard, such as trumpet or electric guitars. There is sometimes a fine line between enough detail and brightness. Most speakers that cross that line seem to do so because of either poor balance between the drivers or poor ability to handle transients. I did not hear either here, other than a very slight tendency to sibilance on rising notes. The overall balance is good. Maybe a bit like having a slight loudness contour if you had the speakers near walls or just a little extra treble when placed optimally.

I would like to hear a pair of these with better matching between speakers. Some of the issues may be due to a slight problem with one of the tweeters. If we have learned anything in these listening sessions with many speakers is that there is much more variance within models that we ever expected. Some of that may be shipping related, but some is obviously parts variability. That said, these would perhaps move into the upper tier with a better matched pair. The midrange was clear and musical, the mid-bass that I am very critical of was no issue at all, and bass was both powerful and detailed as deep as just about any of the speakers. They won’t knock you down, but you don’t feel lacking at any point.


*Joe Alexander (ALMFamily)*

The SVS Ultra's cabinet design starts out with a standard box design, but the front baffle has some contouring and the rear of the cabinet slants back giving the Ultras some character. The finish is the black oak which blends really well in the HT – if I was doing 2 channel I would go with the high gloss.

We started on the stage as usual and had the ports sealed, and these still felt a bit too bass-heavy – they sound a bit boomy to where it seems to overpower the vocals and other instruments in the Jennifer Warnes "Way Down Deep" track. Soundstage was not very deep which we have noticed on pretty much all the speakers - check out our general thoughts and reflections for more on that. Vocals – especially female – do feel a bit bright in comparison to the midrange.

When we moved them to the floor, these seemed to be a bit tricky to locate as we were moving a matter of parts of an inch to try to get the image to tighten up. In the end, we located them closer to the stage and toed them in a bit. After lots of maneuvering, we swapped speakers and discovered a difference in the tonal balancing of the speakers of about 3 db through the midrange. Once we had figured that out, we pressed on realizing this difference existed.

The first thing that I noticed during my listening time in the PLP was there was nowhere near as much boom in the low end - there were several tracks where you could tell a noticeable difference in the tightening of the low end image as well as a tempering of the boom such as the Jennifer Warnes "Way Down Deep" and the Rory Block "The Spirit Remains" tracks. Instrument detail was very good - piano and high hats stood out especially for me on the Ultras. I did note that the female sibilance was a tad harsh on a couple tracks - notably the Nickel Creek "Reasons Why" track. As far as imaging, they did image a bit forward for me which gave me the feeling they were a bit on the bright side. However, they did disappear for me entirely - I could not really point to a specific speaker and say 'the sound is emanating from there'.

Overall, I thought this was a really good speaker - the instrument detail and low end (once they were moved off the stage) both stood out for me. For me personally, I would probably go a different way for two channel speakers as I prefer a bit less low end and more of an open, airy tonality for vocals and high end instruments, but could definitely see myself with these in a HT setup.


*Sonnie Parker (Sonnie)

*In chatting with Dan Marks at SVS, we had it set for them to ship the Ultra Towers to me right before RMAF, so that they would be waiting on me when I got back. However, to my surprise they got here the first part of October, about two weeks early. Naturally I could not resist taking them on to the house and setting them up for a listen. At that time I did not have the Anthem 225 in yet, so I connected them to my Rogue Cronus Magnum integrated tube amp... which we used during our $1,000 evaluation. After a few placements I was able to get a pretty good soundstage and fairly good imaging, so I continued to listen. The more I listened, the faster my heart beat. I was having a nervous flash because I was hearing a very bright speaker, and was dreading the fact I would have to say so publicly. I even connected them to my Denon 4520 just to make sure it wasn't the amp... yep, same brightness. I had heard these at the Capital AudioFest and never remembered them being anywhere close to this bright. I enjoyed them very much at CAF and was excited about how well they sounded there. I ultimately decided I just needed to wait until they had more time on them and until I had more time to focus on placement, as it could simply be the combination of those two things that were causing the issue. 

Fast-forward a couple of weeks to Rocky Mountain Audio Fest and the SVS room. Once again, I did not get a sense of brightness in the Ultra Towers... although I have to admit they did not sound as good in that small room as they did in the much larger room at CAF. I was somewhat relieved and just kept things to myself, not mentioning the brightness to anyone.

Fast-forward to the event. For whatever reasons I had not really thought much more about the brightness I had previously heard... until about the time we were getting ready to bring them into the room. My mind started to working... what would they sound like and would the other guys think they were too bright like I was thinking? I could not tell whether they were bright or not when I was not in the PLP, so I continued to keep quiet. When I first sat down, up near the wall I did not notice them being bright at all... although the bass did seem a bit heavy (and a lot of people will like this bass, especially for movies). For the record, we plugged the ports to help tame some of that bass. However, we knew this would not be their best location for two-channel listening. At CAF and at RMAF, SVS had the Ultra Towers pulled out from the walls, and for good reason, as it improves the sound all around. When it came my time to listen to them out from the wall... I was totally surprised by the difference in what I was hearing. This is when I finally said something to the other guys. Seriously, it was like night and day difference. Was it the break-in time? I have never been one to think much about break-in, but being one that doesn't think I would hear that kind of difference between a tube amp and receiver versus an integrated amp, what else can it be attributed to? Can our ears change what we hear from one day to the next? After giving this even more thought over the last few days... I am now convinced it may have very well been placement. My memory is escaping me for absolute sureness, but I think I had them a good bit closer to the listener, maybe just behind the Arx A5 tape that seems to be a permanent marker on my floor. Moving them farther back could very well tame some of the brightness I was hearing. Whatever the reasons, I was totally relieved, to say the least. I see now that Wayne mentions them being "over-bright", but I think he might be overly dramatic, possibly downright obsessive, maybe even going crazy. After all... he did just get a little older between the event and this write-up. (You know I love you Wayne!) 

I liked the SVS Ultra Towers, especially the bass when they were out into the room a little, although the move was not a lot. We moved them about two feet closer, but it did tame the bass a little and got them down on the floor level, improving a lot of things. So... we can partially blame the stage once again for being in the way. I did note on a few songs they might have still been a bit on the bass heavy side (not excessive by any means)... but on most songs they were just right. As for imaging... I was happy with what I was hearing. Soundstage was good and so was depth of soundstage, although maybe not quite as deep as I have heard, likely because we had them farther back from the listener than most of the other speakers. I think in a home theater setup where these are likely going closer to the front wall and crossed over at 60-80Hz... or serving dual use as mains and subs with Audyssey equalization, they will be excellent. We did not get a chance to hear them this way, but I suggest what I do because of what I heard at CAF and RMAF (I believe the only home theater setup at those shows). The Tron movie sounded spectacular... as was the Sting concert... and even the little bit of opera music we heard (and I am NOT a fan of opera). I wish we had a chance to hear them in my room with the full home theater compliment of Ultra's, but it wasn't to be. To be fair... there were several of these speakers I would like to hear in a full HT setup. Overall, the SVS Ultra Towers are a very good speaker and with a free in-home trial, you will not go wrong giving them a round in your room to see if they fit your wants and desires.


----------



## AudiocRaver

*General Observations & Summing Up*

*Room Modes and Common Themes*

This is the curve we get by averaging together all of the final measurement data (six per model, 30 total - Leonard's excellent idea) from final speaker locations with various amounts of smoothing. It shows the typical trends we heard, although there were exceptions to some of these trends with certain models.



All that is worth noting in the overly-detailed 48th-octave smoothed plot is the sharp peaks and dips due to room modes, right where Room EQ Wizard's Room Analysis function says they should be. This was expected, since our speaker placement made no effort to reduce these effects. At the $1k event in August, we started out trying to use the Cardas placement guidelines, which focus on reducing room mode effects, but quickly realized that we had to prioritize the soundstage or we would never be satisfied with the end result. We should look at this again and see if there is a way to accomplish both and the same time (great soundstage and more even bass by paying attention to room modes). 

The one-octave and third-octave smoothed plots show an overall emphasis trend below 500 Hz. This says that all of the models tested probably had some bass emphasis built in by design.

All the plots show that none of the models could produce bass below the 48 Hz room mode peak, and some should have been able to. Bass traps working overtime? Perhaps. Another area to investigate.

The little emphasis areas at 1.4 and 2.2 kHz on the third- and twelfth-octave smoothed plots show the common elements of designed-in peaks from the various models. This is where designers like to add some emphasis for detail and presence.

The rolloff above 5 kHz in the one-octave smoothed plot resulted from our off-axis aiming to get soundstage depth.


*Why The Speakers with the Flat High End Sounded Too Bright*

My comments in the SVS Ultra Tower comments inferred some extra thoughts about how we are hearing things in Sonnie's Cedar Creek Cinema. Should a speaker with a super flat high end sound overly bright in a well-treated room? Of course there are many factors that can contribute to this. But it was really bugging me and I had to do some digging. Here is what I think _might_ be going on.


In looking at various RT60 plots from measurements taken at the event, there are indications that the room might be more live above 5 kHz than at mid and lower-mid frequencies.
Some will argue that this is immaterial, quoting the Precedence Effect, that we tune into the direct wave and it provides the perception of frequency response. To that argument my response is:
The Precedence Effect does not state an absolute, it defines a tendency, a propensity. Reflected sound contributes to that perception, and the amount of that contribution depends on a host of factors.
In creating the immersive soundstage we are looking for, we are creating a psycho-acoustical illusion in which the reflected and direct sound waves become a unified entity not directly addressed by the Precedence Effect. The fiddle in _Ode to a Butterfly_ does not appear to be coming from either loudspeaker at all, but from a spot just right of center in between and about five feet _behind_ the speaker plane. This way we perceive this unified soundfield entity gives higher priority to the reflected waves in their contribution to perceived frequency response. This is probably the case any time we perceive a deep soundstage that seems completely independent of the speakers.

Add these factors together - flat speakers, a room more live at high frequencies, a soundstage that gives reflected sound higher priority than usual - and maybe we have an explanation for that over-bright perception.

Note:

Three of four listeners thought the SVS Ultra Tower, very flat above 1 kHz, was a bit over-bright, if I remember correctly.
The Paradigm Studio 60's slightly cooler at 10 kHz, were bordering on bright.
The Dynaudio DM 3/7's, 4 dB cooler than the SVS at 10 kHz, seemed "just right" to everyone.


*Three Critical Tools*


Our dependence upon a laser for alignment has become so critical that it is hard to call it an accessory any more. It is a critical setup tool. You are wasting precious time if you do not have one for speaker setup. We thought we were being accurate by eyeballing setup angles. When we realized we were not getting good results, we checked with the laser - we were way off, and that was when we thought we were being super careful. It was embarrassing how far off we were. Never again.

The same applies to having a calibrated mic with REW for basic speaker measurements. At both of our evaluation events we had speakers with driver issues. If you are buying, borrowing, setting up, or listening to speakers, get one. Buying speakers without a way to verify you got a good matching pair is downright silly.

And you need a folded-up plush blanket behind your head. Why? Well, it feels good. It also breaks up, or at least softens, reflections off a high chair back that disturb tonality, soundstage, and image clarity and stability. We have found it to be a must-have LP accessory. Plus if you really want to relax with a track that takes you way back, curl up, and suck your thumb, well, you have a nice, soothing, soft blanket handy.

*Abolish Home Theater Stages*

If you are planning a home theater where 2-channel is at all likely to be a priority, leave out the stage. It might be great for cinema, but for 2-channel listening it puts the speakers too high if you want them close to the wall, and creates a zone around the edge of the stage where you can do nothing at all. The six-inch stage in Cedar Creek Cinema has gotten in the way enough that Sonnie is starting to talk about tearing it out, a major undertaking since all the support lumber is glued to the base slab.

If you are planning a home theater at all, please, please, please do yourself a favor and plan an odd number of seats for the front row so you will have a centered LP. 

*Speaker Setup Methods*

There have been many questions about our speaker setup methods. Ever-evolving, there is an attempt to document the approach, recently posted in the 2-channel forum, you can follow the link to it here.


*Too Many Test Tracks?*

For this round of evaluations, we cut many of our tracks down to the portions we listen to the most in order to simplify the listening process. We thought it would be nice not to have to jump around so much. Then we added a bunch more track segments.:bigsmile: Hey, we love music, and they are some of our all-time favorite tracks. Can you blame us?

There is ongoing debate about whether we need to cut back again. I go back and forth, you can be surprised with an important impression or catch something that you ad not notices before at any point on any track. But some times it is just too much. Most of the critical listening is done with a total of about seven or eight minutes of music total. We might be better off with a reduced set to simplify.

Answer to be determined.


*In Praise of Five Loudspeaker Designers*

Knowing just a little about what it takes to design and produce products like these really helps give you an appreciation for the fine work they do. Speaker designers are a unique breed. As you work with and listen to these speakers, you start to feel like you are getting a unique view into their minds and passions through their brainchildren brought to life and presented to you for listening pleasure.

Think about it. They take wire and wood and strange matter and metals and they carve and mold and solder and forge and paint and -- plop, there is a speaker that plays music for you. I conversed in detail with two individuals in the last year who took big rusks and started companies designing and building speakers. They both started out pretty much solo as designer, builder, office manager, shipper, and accountant, and built successful companies making speakers for people who love to hear music and movies at home. Kinda cool and kinda scary at the same time. Lesser men might have been driven to crime or mental illness by the pressure they must have put up with. I did circuit and system design for a couple of companies way back, and I can tell you the amount of stuff that ends up buzzing through your brain sometimes seems like it could just as easily power a Deathstar or turn your gray matter in jelly, and sometimes you're not sure which is happening at a given moment. Hats off to Dynaudio, Emerald Physics, Magnepan, Paradigm, and SVS Sound, especially to the nutty-obsessive-visionary-audioloving brains who think of the DM 3/7, CS2P, 1.7, Studio 60, and Ultra Tower as their little wooden boys brought to life. You guys do good work.

If you have read our assessments, you know there were favorites and models that did not fare so well. It was a mixed weekend. In our listening order:

I think of the CS2P as a unique kind of speaker for a certain kind of listener, completely out of the box - heh, heh, they left the box right out of the design - and raw and primal, like a speaker that started out as a single cell and crawled out of the slime and and grew up from there. It did not quite mold to our wishes, but it showed us it knew how to put on a concert. The CS2P takes me back to early rock concerts with stacks of speakers and exposed cones and horns looking like leftovers from from a hundred audio garage sales all piled up on the stage and searing your ear drums with wicked, loud, clean rock and roll magic. Kinda like that. A fun speaker, the CS2P. (Probably lost a few hearing sensors just thinking about it.)

In the Ultra Tower, I see great possibility, real innovative stretches. Again, we made it jump through hoops it had little or no training for. Ever go to a junior-high track meet and get told to run the high hurdles in a race for the first time in your life? Was that me that did that? Not sure, kinda blocked it out. Let's just say it wasn't pretty, gut banged up a bit. But survived to run another day. The Ultra Tower will run in a lot of races, and win some, might even have a relative show up at one of our future meets and extract a little friendly revenge, and I would love it. A lot of cool things going on with that speaker.

The DM 3/7 cast a bit of a spell on me, a box made in the northern-European forests by elves and wizards, full of fine gears and clockwork and when you plug it in a scene is reenacted before your ears and pure audio somehow ends up in your brain. I kinda liked 'em, yeah, and they got the soundstage thing like they had practiced it for decades, "Oh, sure, the deep soundstage trick, you mean like _*this?*_ Easy, want to hear anything else?" What I did not like about them was..... well, I got nothing. It was a nice speaker.

The Maggie 1.7 is like from another dimension with different physics and carrying a virus from which there is no recovery - my initial infection was by the MG 12/QR. The 1.7 showed up and performed some marvelous feats of clarity and transparency, and while it did not do _quite_ what we asked, it managed to remind me what panels are capable of. I still see a strong possibility of being a panel speaker owner some day. 

The Studio 60 had me at "Hello." Not perfect, but so versatile and so wonderfully boring that you could forget you owned it - except for the looks - and just hear a lot of great music with no fuss or bother. "Speakers? Oh, yeah, Studio 60. Over there somewhere, must be, because the tunes sound so right. That's Paradigm for you." Probably do dishes and yard work, too.

Another great round of speakers. Hats off to their makers.:hail:


*Should We Be Reported As Loudspeaker Abusers?*

At the risk of being overly repetitive, At the risk of being overly repetitive, At the risk of being overly repetitive...

Sorry, getting a little post crazy here.

Seriously, we have said it before but it bears repeating...

In some ways, our evaluations turn into a kind of speaker stress test. In order to get the kind of deep soundstage we are looking for, we often end up breaking _normal_ recommended setup rules and forcing these poor speakers to do things they were not intended for by their designers.

I can hear them cringing as they read about our methods, "Are you crazy, do you not know what an equilateral triangle is?" "What, you are almost thirty degrees off the tweeter axis, are you insane?" "You idiots, my speaker design was never meant to do that! What are you thinking? *Who do you think you are, treating my speaker like that and writing a review about it?*"

Here is who we think we are:

We love good music like you would never believe! More than once I have seen some of these guys wipe a tear or take a moment to compose himself after hearing a favorite track over a new favorite set of speakers set up just right.
We love great sound. The deep, precise soundstage that we describe is *not* the only way to listen to music. But it is terribly addictive, and the only way any of us would dream of listening to our music. Give one of us a $20,000 setup - even cut the price in half, let us have it for a mere $10,000 - perfect in every way, but not able to deliver that kind of soundstage, and we will yawn and pack it up and send it back for a refund. I have seen it done. Recently.
We love trying out new speakers. Man is it fun! It is work, too, the way we do it, long days and nights, heavy lifting, late flights, days away from family - but it is more fun in a weekend than most people have in a year.
We love (meaning _obsess over_) paying attention to detail and using the most rigorous and objective methods imaginable.
We love sharing what we have discovered. Hearing it is fun. Figuring out how to share the experience with all the fine HTS readers is a whole new dimension of fun.
We love reading someone's post that they have just had a neat new kind of listening experience that we have helped in some small way to lead them toward.
THAT is who we think we are. A few audio nuts spreading the word about a certain kind of listening experience with all kinds of neat, fine speakers.

Are we unfair in how we go about it? Some might think so. We hope not. We do not feel we are being unfair. We are being honest about our approach and giving every benefit of the doubt and pointing out all the positives we can think of, even with speakers that do not meet our objectives.

Be sure that we never set up a speaker to fail. You might say that we are _loudspeaker liberals_ (or you might not) in that we wish every speaker we work with to succeed and give it every possible chance to do so. (Please, no objections to my use of a normally politically charged term, just using it to make a point in a lighthearted way! Pretty please!:innocent Truly, we treat every speaker with care and appreciation for its efforts, and every willing sponsor or supplier with appreciation for supporting our events. Where we run into a problem, we work with suppliers constructively - in August we ran into a driver issue which led a supplier to improve quality processes and will ultimately improve their product and satisfy more customers. Win-win!

We believe we are doing something that benefits the home theater/two-channel audio community. The fact that we break a few conventions and bend a few rules of thumb along the way says only that we will not settle for reporting on a second-rate kind of listening experience. We think you deserve the best information of this kind and hope you are thinking of Home Theater Shack as the surest place to find it.

Speaker abusers? Nay, we are PIONEERS! OK, ok, that is pushing it a little. I can feel Sonnie revving up one of his death stares down in Alabama. Just joking, easy Sonnie!

Final thought on the topic: _No speakers were harmed or abused in the completion of these evaluations._

Final final thought on the topic..... Zowie! My music server just broke into song spontaneously! Must be a sign, time to wrap it up!

Until our next evaluation event - HAPPY LISTENING!

Wayne Myers
AudiocRaver


*P.S. THANK YOU!*

Thanks, Leonard and Joe. These are great guys, truly professional, and a treat to work with. I learn something from them every time I turn around.

Thanks, Mark Seaton, special guest, and another great guy. My next task is writing a detailed review of his speakers and his absolute wizardry with Sonnie's subwoofers. Coming right up.

Thanks, Angie and Gracie, wonderful hostess and funny furry feline mascot. Thanks for putting up with us again.

Thanks, sponsors, for trusting us with your products.

Thanks, HTS members and readers. Serving and communicating with you is a pleasure.

Thanks, Sonnie. You throw one mean audio party! You Rat! And the BBQ absolutely rocked! Thanks for everything.


----------



## Sonnie

*Closing Thanks and Appreciation!*

This completes our first round of $2,500 speaker evaluations... although we will probably bump the second round to $3,000 (2,500 - 3,500). More on this later.

We appreciate all the manufacturers who participated and apologize for anything that may have possibly hindered any of the speakers from sounding their best, namely the 6 inch high stage I have up near my front screen wall. We also know that you take a hit on these speakers, especially when you send us new speakers, and again, we appreciate your willingness to do so, and the willingness to hear us out with our thoughts, despite them not always being what you may want to hear. We hope you respect our integrity and honesty in reporting our thoughts.

I want to also give a huge thanks to Wayne, Leonard and Joe for leaving their families behind for a few days and joining their other families (the Parker family and the audio enthusiast family) for a few days. Then going back home and doing more by taking time to write-up their impressions. 

Thanks to Mark Seaton for driving down with a Jeep load of his speakers and letting us review them... and especially thanks for helping me get better results from my subs... a remarkable improvement just when I thought they could not get any better.

And once again to Wayne... for doing all the extra leg work for us... for having fabulous ears and for having near OC behavior about all you do, desiring it to meet a high standard of excellence. I am not sure what more we or our readers could desire. We truly appreciate your efforts.

Last but certainly not least... we appreciate our readers and members, along with your comments. We truly hope you have enjoyed it and that it has been and will be a great reference tool for you in your search for the perfect speakers in _your_ room. Please always keep in mind that NOTHING can replace the need for you to hear these speakers for yourself to make a final decision. Your ears are ultimately the most important ones to help you select the right speakers for you.


----------



## whubbard

This is a really fantastic idea and I'm looking forward to the results. I feel the $2,500 price range, while "high" is a fantastic area where price meets quality. With a test like this, the results, while subjective, should give future buyers a good understanding of the products in that range.

One thing that may be nice to do would be have the listeners post their own home setups so we get a feel for their own personal tastes.


----------



## devast8r3436

Wow, this is truely a great idea. More places should have great things like this. Things like this is why we are apart of the best forum on the planet.


----------



## omholt

It's a very difficult task to evaluate speakers that are so different. They need to be placed differently, each one optimized based on measurements. And is one going to deal with the backwave from dipoles or not? If not, they will sound very different from a speaker with a baffle because of all the reflections that are coming off from the frontwall.


----------



## tele1962

This is fantastic idea and I only wish more AV sites would do the same as hands on comparison is I think truly the best form of evaluation, as has been shown at the Flat Panel Shootout in NY. This leads me to ask if it would be possible for the event to maybe be recorded and edited highlights shown on HTS if possible.
Many thanks from the guys in the UK and good luck.


----------



## Mw182006

Jealous of those who get to attend. I would love to hear some of the super-high end equipment that will be on display. It seems you guys have put a lot of thought into this and I'm sure it will pay dividends, enjoy!


----------



## JBrax

I think this evaluation would be a blast to attend. There are some very interesting looking speakers and some that I haven't ever heard of. I think you should instal cameras and offer a live feed so we can all attend! Now that would be pretty cool!


----------



## GusGus748s

I have been a Home Theater enthusiast for approximately 3 years. Unfortunately, I have spent a significant amount of money on something that I believed was a good buy.

It wasn't until I started joining Home Theaters forums such as this one that I realize I had made a mistake. It is my personal opinion that equipment evaluation such as this one are very important for people such as myself. I am starting to get more serious about my "sound."

I have learned that you do not have to spend too much to achieve good sound, but you do need to know what you are buying is worth it, and it will do what you want.

Again, I cannot thank you guys enough for doing such good work all of the time. I have learned a lot from you, and I can't wait for the evaluation to be finished.


----------



## Danielson99

I always love seeing shootouts. I'd also love to see the speakers you've chosen to test be compared to some of the DIY offerings we have all come to know and love. It would be interesting to see how Statements or even Mini-Statements would compare in this evaluation, but there are many other great builds in this price range also.


----------



## Sonnie

omholt said:


> It's a very difficult task to evaluate speakers that are so different. They need to be placed differently, each one optimized based on measurements. And is one going to deal with the backwave from dipoles or not? If not, they will sound very different from a speaker with a baffle because of all the reflections that are coming off from the frontwall.


Actually we have been optimizing based on imaging and soundstage, instead of measurements, although if we could get better measurements without sacrificing imaging and soundstage we will move them slightly.

For back waves... in my room we have what is called the Precedence Effect. This is where the rear radiation is delayed to a point that our ears only pay attention to the direct sound from the front. Of course my front wall has absorption panels also, so a good bit is absorbed anyway. 





tele1962 said:


> This is fantastic idea and I only wish more AV sites would do the same as hands on comparison is I think truly the best form of evaluation, as has been shown at the Flat Panel Shootout in NY. This leads me to ask if it would be possible for the event to maybe be recorded and edited highlights shown on HTS if possible.
> Many thanks from the guys in the UK and good luck.


That would probably be a good idea, although the write-up and editing of it is sooooo time consuming that it would have to be someone else willing to come in and handle the video recording. Then again, we would have to give up some secrets... hmmmm. ::scratchchin:


----------



## Sonnie

Danielson99 said:


> I always love seeing shootouts. I'd also love to see the speakers you've chosen to test be compared to some of the DIY offerings we have all come to know and love. It would be interesting to see how Statements or even Mini-Statements would compare in this evaluation, but there are many other great builds in this price range also.


This is something we hope to do at some point in time. The biggest issues is getting someone to lend us the speakers... then shipping them, since they don't generally have boxes pre-made for them.


----------



## intgenx

This is quite a list of contenders...all worthy of their reputation and price.

It must be quite a tough exercise to put this evaluation together...
If getting a set of simple speakers delivered without damages and on time is a huge task in itself - imagine the logistics and effort to put all these together and to top it some of them are Electrostatic...

anyways... I suggest a future evaluation include some Active speakers in the price range like the Neumann KH310 too - so as to get a better idea how the studio/pro grade stuff compares to these hi-fi stalwarts...


----------



## perceval

I am also a big fan of shootouts!

The only thing is that I am always too far to be: A) present B) invited ! 
I have to believe the judgment of the persons in attendance.

But what I really like about HTS reviews / shootouts, is that they are *not* made by some involved and pedantic individuals that are above the regular users.... 

All the reviews and shootouts that I have read about on this site were really down to earth and in the interest of the regular (but enthusiast) user / customer.

With that in mind, I have to ask (and maybe suggest), because most of the time this company is overlooked (and I have to root for products coming from my adopted country!), but would it be possible to add some products by Usher?

Usher speakers have always surprised me as being up there with most of the greats, but seldom gets the attention. (I just own some Usher products, I have no part in the company! 

Enjoy the shootout (that means no Halloween party ending too late!)


----------



## tane0019

Have you already nail down the materials to be use ?
(ie which CDs, ablums ?)

Materials chosen should be able to test out the speakers dynamics, vocal presentation, bass extension & etc ...
(comparing speaker to speaker in the same setup).


----------



## Vin Vendel

Great event and interesting line-up with speakers! 
Maybe the only way to actually compare speakers and give a proper feedback. 
You could go even further and not tell which speaker it is playing and let the listeners go in blindfolded and write down hearingimpressions after each listening. In that way the brain can´t add attributes to the speaker they have read articles about. 

//Mattias Vendel
Sweden


----------



## OniJon

Loving the shootouts and unbalanced tests with great measurements too. Can't wait for the results of the different speakers, all the speakers in the world sound so different and would surely like to know what these ones sound like. They're not over the top expensive either.


----------



## brokencrank

This is great!
I love the idea of a 'shootout' or 'speaker review' pure and simple. It seems that too many events turn into a competition which to me, takes the fun out of it. Music and movies are about enjoyment and it seems that this event is about the experience. While my #1 vote is not listed as part of the event, I always like reading reviews and learning how various equipment fares...looking forward to it.


----------



## pddufrene

I can't wait to see how the SVS Ultras compare to the other speakers chosen, I'm interest in purchasing these one day. But you never know after the results come out I may check out some of the other competitors, depending on what you guys think of there overall performance.


----------



## finalrinse

Thanks for the opportunity. The results will be very useful to many. This seems to be the perfect price range where quality meets value. I look forward to following and reading the progression of the test and full results.

-Tom


----------



## seepra

Even if it's not a direct comparison between speakers, it's going to be most interesting to see an evaluation with similar criteria, equipment and ears, when auditioning electrostatic/magnetoplanar/quasi-ribbon AND traditional dynamic transducers. Even better news is the inclusion of measurements and having some context about the listening room. Combined with the subjective evaluation you're possibly offering lots of very valuable data for us people on the other side of the internet who possibly couldn't arrange any of this for themselves.

Subscribed!


----------



## jorden_23

This Is A Great Idea Can Wait To See The Results of This. More Page/ People Should Do This. The First Home Theater I Got Is The Only Thing I Could Afford Its The Onkyo Hts7300 I Believe. .. One of The Home Theaters In A Box For $500..Wish I Had Enough Money To Start A Real Setup.. I'm Into Great Sound and Video and Love To WatWatch Blu rays With My Family But Its Not The Best Setup But It Works For Now....


----------



## MX48

Man, I only live a few hours from there in SE Georgia and would love to go. Right now doesn't look like I can make it but you never know. I have never been to any GTG or anything like it and have been waiting for one to get close enough. Maybe my plans will change.

Everyone have fun,
Moto


----------



## omholt

Sonnie said:


> Actually we have been optimizing based on imaging and soundstage, instead of measurements, although if we could get better measurements without sacrificing imaging and soundstage we will move them slightly.


Hopefully that has been done by using ETC measurements and not just listening.


Sonnie said:


> For back waves... in my room we have what is called the Precedence Effect. This is where the rear radiation is delayed to a point that our ears only pay attention to the direct sound from the front. Of course my front wall has absorption panels also, so a good bit is absorbed anyway.


The Precedence or Haas effect only makes one avoid hearing the signal from another place. You still hear the signal (first wavefront) from the speaker, despite of the delayed specular reflections. This is the case to a certain point in time and then we start to hear echoes.
But that does not mean that those reflections don't effect sound quality or aren't audible. They are audible and effect the sound quality, even when delayed. How much depends on the level compared to other reflections, but even after 30 ms strong specular reflections can be audible. It's a common mistake to mix the precedence effect with combfiltering effect. Two different things.
If you are using absorption on frontwall to attenuate reflections, that will make it a pretty even game though in this regard. 

Another challenge is the bass. A dipole woofer disperse differently. Meaning that it often requires another placement then a monopole to even out the freqeuncy response. If this isn't done properly, the only answer you may end up is finding out is which dispersion pattern fitted the spesific placement best.
It's not uncommon that dipoles work best along sidewalls in a room and monopoles closer to the corners, but it depends on the room and needs to be measured.

So like I said; To compare speakers like this in a fair matter is a very difficult task. But good luck.


----------



## Huz

Sounds like a great event to attend. Looks like you have some impressive gear on test, also an impressive venue. Just shoot me a plane ticket, and I will come over from Australia and attend! I would be interested to see if changes in your room setup change the ratings of each product. This may highlight any directional performance differences between speakers, and how tolerant each is to setup changes. This may be useful for some users who don't always have the perfect room layout or treatment. It may also highlight the importance of room treatment, or rather the lack of it having a negative impact on what should be a very positive experience.


----------



## ticopowell

Wow, you guys keep showing off and all it makes me want to do is spend more money(that I don't have lol) , Keep up the great reviews, I can't wait to read this next one.


----------



## Khron

Kinda too bad all this "good stuff" mostly takes place on THAT side of the pond 

I guess the closest i got to something like this, was on my first visit to a local friend, who has a pair of the big Maggies. With my "tin ears", i'll admit they were pretty detailed and "effortless", but pretty bass-shy 

I wonder if/when i'll get the chance to put together anything close to a home-cinema type thing, and/or a home-studio... Ah well, hope dies last, eh?


----------



## patchesj

Looking forward to the final postings. I will add to what others have already commented, I think that it would only be fair to attempt/spend as much time as reasonable, in optimizing placement. This is what a typical home owner would do with a set of $2500 speakers (For that much $$ I would spend a few days tweaking the setup, but I know that is not possible in this scenario). They will all have varying sweet spots, toe in, perhaps even height needs. 

Overall this is a very good mix of speaker types and characters. Like you mentioned, not a shootout. I would highly recommend that folks listen to as many speakers as possible before making a purchase, hopefully at least a few in your own room.

I think having a full post of the room measurements with a "control" set of speakers would be nice too so we can evaluate what the room itself sounds (or at least tests) like.

And maybe some comments on what subs/center/surround options are available or recommended to pair with the 2 channel setup? 

And thanks for introducing me to the Emerald Physics line. Very interesting stuff...


----------



## Bluenoser

I'm looking forward to this evaluation. I realize that the results from your room aren't directly transferable to everyone else's, but it can certainly give an indication of how different designs will perform in a given room. As a Paradigm owner, I'm hoping the Studio 60's do well. I have the impression that $2500 is the "sweet spot", when it comes to performance/price ratio.


----------



## dschlic1

I think that all of us need more comparative evulations of audio equipment. Far too often reviews are standalone with out any measurements or comparisons to other "equal" devices. When I selected my speaker system I did it based on sound auditions. I hope that the reviewers take measurements using say REW and post them.


----------



## mayhem13

Events like these are what makes related forums such great places. From such, you get clear and accurate opinions and data from true enthusiasts who love the hobby. I think the topics brought up in the original post deserve some attention as well as Sonny and the gang have really covered all the bases. For those considering a speaker purchase in the near future, I say refer to post one of this thread before you buy. I look fwd to the results.


----------



## sgkent

We are presently in the market for a new sound system. Between older age, hearing aids and other factors the old speakers don't sound very good. I know part of it is the compression used by our sources, however the other part is that the speakers we have are exploited by these weaknesses. Sometimes on the right song the music will be fine but most of the time I hear the holes in the sound or the one area that booms. I trust this forum as it has helped me out once already save a big screen - and the last sound evaluation was well done. We look forward to reading the results of this year's tests - and undoubtably will use it to determine which set of speakers to buy. I think they will be the ARX 5 or Klipsch set but the test will tell. Thank you for doing these tests - we will just be back in California that week or we would attend. Take care and happy listening. - Steve


----------



## bmoney003

Im very interested in seeing the results if this thread. I have recently purchased my first set of 1000$+ speakers and am interested to see if the 2500$ area shows improvement. My interest will lie with the svs ultras. I have heard nothing hut praises for them. I am looking forward to following this thread


----------



## browndk26

This is a great thing to do for the forum. I would never be able to compare a group of speakers like that. Hopefully I will be able to put together a higher quality setup than my 3.1 system in the near future.


----------



## SteveY

I can't wait to hear the results of this shoot out as I fall right into this bracket. I recently sold my Salk Songtowers and center and moved to the SVS Ultras up front. This was a big improvement from me and I am glad i did it. This will be a great thread to follow.


----------



## JQueen

This is going to be a great read, can't wait for the $2500 dollar shoutout


----------



## cavchameleon

SteveY said:


> I can't wait to hear the results of this shoot out as I fall right into this bracket. I recently sold my Salk Songtowers and center and moved to the SVS Ultras up front. This was a big improvement from me and I am glad i did it. This will be a great thread to follow.


Hi Steve, I'm curious about the 'big improvement" moving from Salk's to SVS Ultras as Salks have a very good reputation on speaker building. What part was a 'big' improvement (response, detail, imaging, etc.)? I really like the SVS Ultra looks and also SVS products, so not doubting you, just that Salks are made with some nice drivers/parts also with a good designer behind them.

I'm also very interested in this evaluation! I've heard some of the speakers on the list, but not a all (such as the SVS Ultras and the Emerald Physics). This should be interesting.


----------



## jmilton7043

This is a great event, however, will this prove which speaker is truly better... Or that each speaker sounds differently? Comparing them is part of the fun of being an audiophile. The giveaway is fun too of course!


----------



## gorb

That top picture with all the speakers looks awesome! What a great collection of products. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing all the measurements and reading your thoughts on each system. While I'd be happy to own any of these speakers, the ones that interest me the most are the SVS Ultra Towers and the Emerald Physics CS2Ps, and I'm hoping one of these two will come out on top. What are the details of the $20,000 stereo system?


----------



## JonCash

Another great shoot-out to look forward to. I probably should have done a little forum digging before posting this, as the question I am about to pose may have already been answered, but it is early and i am already posting this response, so here it goes: 

Have you done shoot-outs like these where a DIYer builds a set of speakers in the same price range that are then used in shootout and compared to the retail speakers? Or perhaps a restored vintage set that were either a) the same relative cost when new adjusted for inflation - or - b) similar in cost now if you take into account finding them, having them shipped if required and then the cost of rebuilding, re-foaming, etc? After a few years chasing the latest new speakers around, I have now collected and restored a decent size collection of vintage speakers. I am always surprised how in-expensive some of these units can be purchased for (25$ set of B&W's DM3000's at a garage sale anyone?) Or, sometimes they are even free when they only need new foam (I have a plethora of RS series Infinty's - they were all either cheap or free due to foam rot). 

Just thought about this after seeing a few postings from members who say they don't have this kind of $$$ right now to spend on speakers. A few hours of time spent here on HTS helped me learn enough to put together some quite respectable sounding vintage systems on the cheap.

Anyway, I just thought about this due to one of my other hobbies that runs on money (vintage cars). You can spend 1k to 100k on a reconstruction, but some of the best hot-rodding comes from either re-purposing old parts in new ways or making some yourself. 

On that note, I am looking forward to the shoot-out results...with the direction my HT addiction has taken the lately, I may own some of these units in 10 or 12 years


----------



## ManCave

I'm really looking forward to seeing how all these speakers stack up. I think the price point is just about where it needs to be for this evaluation. Kinda wish I could conduct this kind of test in my studio!


----------



## gazoink

This kind of thing is what makes the forum great. A really well thought out comparison that most of us could never do on our own. My only wish is that I could loan you my own ears!


----------



## Muser

Good luck with this project.

One thing about shootouts is that it looks like you’re asking each product to do the same thing, which implies “fairness” or a level playing field. Except that everyone has different taste. This might manifest as a preference for one type of material for the participants in this “shootout”, i.e. action movie, drama, fantasy, etc. This is going to be true of all reviewers, so don't take this personally. 

If you subject all of the systems to “one” type of movie, you might miss out on qualities that will revealed by and appreciated by a different type of listener. You may well reveal to your readers what your preferences are, but that may not be the same profile of preferences as your readers. 

If you can, I’d suggest that your evaluations be further focused on reporting that might read “On drama with a lot of dialogue, the X system, dialogue intelligibility was higher making for a more relaxed, intimate experience; while on action movies the dialogue intelligibility didn’t matter, but the speakers shortcomings on macro dynamic swings was more evident; and finally, with music videos . . . .

Doing this lets the reader know what products “sing” under what conditions. Each listener reads with their own “agenda” and grading performance more finely will provide a more useful report.

Despite my long windedness here, I think this will be a fun event to be at. Hope you all have fun.


----------



## mpednault

A DIY versus Manuf. evaluation would be incredible and would most likely let those of us building DIY speakers if there truly is fruit to be had of our labor. Although I can't afford a pair of $2500 speakers, this will be an interesting read. I enjoy reading listening impressions over interpreting graphs.

I too think this should be a blind folded evaluation for the listeners so that it erases bias, preconceived notions and any other irregularities that could skew the comparisons. Dedicate someone to place and wire up the speakers. Blind fold the listeners before entering the room and in no way let them know which speakers they will be listening to (making sure they are blind folded before seeing which speakers AREN'T in the room!). After they've heard the test material, as soon as they leave the room they write down their impressions WITHOUT TALKING TO EACH OTHER. Only after they write down their opinions can they share their thoughts. I know this would require more time and strict "rules" but would offer up the most "accurate" way to evaluate the speakers without influences.

Looking forward to reading more!


----------



## gajenn

I'd have to say after looking at and reading about the speakers in the test, and my own life experiance being somewhat of an audiophile for 40 years the Martin Logans would be what I'd prefer in my home. The speed at which the information comes thru and the details you just don't hear on a piston type speaker makes them as close to live as I've ever heard.:wave:


----------



## |Tch0rT|

I'd love to be a part of a shootout like this! Those MartinLogan's in the back sure make the ElectroMotion ESL's look small LOL. It'll be interesting to see how the ML EM ESL's compare to the Magnepan's (well the others too).


----------



## RLouis

No reason to limit this concept to speakers. Could also do receivers at various price points (low, mid, top end) and TVs/displays. Although TV are a bit tougher because of the complication of calibration for best performance. I'm sure people would love to see a properly staged apples-to-apples competitive comparison of the major top end AV receivers. Denon, Pioneer Elite, Onkyo, Yamaha, Anthem, maybe Cambridge if avaialbe


----------



## cavediver

This looks like a great speaker evaluation. I'm looking forward to the results. I'm assuming you're evaluating the speakers by themselves full range without the addition of a sub? Also, I'd like to see a list of the music you're going to use for the evaluation.


----------



## jaymz

What! No Bose?????? But seriously, this is a great idea and it should be an interesting attempt at an impartial evaluation of some interesting speakers. Can't wait for the results. Would've liked to see the TOTL GoldenEar speakers, however.

Jim


----------



## jb5200

This is awesome! I wish forums would do this more often other than just reviewing one speaker - here's a chance to see how one speaker compares to a bunch so if you are in the market for a new pair and are deciding between a few in the shootout I think it provides valuable information to help someone make their decision on which one to go with!

I would like to see a few shootouts in categories up to about $10,000 - I think after that point you start to reach diminishing returns!

Keep up the good work!!!


----------



## dawgfan

I look forward to your detailed evaluations including pictures of the equipment as well as surroundings. So many times speakers sound different from room to room. We have tried various sound treatments and floor coverings with varied results. Your descriptions of the furniture, room size and other factors will be appreciated. I am very interested in your findings regarding higher end speakers as I am unable to evaluate any of those brands locally. Thanks for going to all the trouble to arrange this!


----------



## Bikr

Sounds like a great event and I really like the emphasis that it's an audition and not a shootout. Everyone has different ears and tastes so it's pointless to try and claim one piece is "the best". Can't wait to read the results!


----------



## The_Nephilim

Hi, It is good to see the Magnepan and Martin logan electrostatic speakers in a shootout.. I am interested to see how they fair compared to a Cone Speaker..

Since I am in the market and was thinking of getting some Maggies. I am wondering what others thought of them..
I was wondering since you are using a Oppo and it proally has SACD/DVD-Audio capabilities are you going to play and multichannel disks either SACD or DVD-A??


----------



## zryder

I am definately interested in seeing the SACD capabilities of this system. I can think of a few disks that would be ideal tryout SACD's!


----------



## mustang

Wow that's a great line of speakers up for the TEST, cant be there in person but looking forward for the results, Lets get ready to rumble and enjoy the show guys. 
PS: Hope someone can post a short video on youtube later !


----------



## rfish

I look forward to finding out about the results. Information like this helps us consumers make better buying decisions without having to spend endless hours searching for locations that sell the various combinations - if they do at all. Thanks for "working" hard at getting these evaluations done.


----------



## only126db

At $2500 all these are way out of my budget, however I am glad this is being done. I always enjoy getting the truth about products. I wonder if, it may sound crazy, but if internal cabinet design could be explored and commented on. I am sure most people would think :unbelievable: when reading about opening up a set of $2000+ speakers to see its guts, I just find it interesting what the big players do to the guts, if they brace them, if they are double baffled, material thickness etc etc etc.


----------



## Bullitt5094

Awesome. I've been interested in the SVS Towers for a while. I would like to see how they stack-up to the competition.


----------



## SteveY

cavchameleon said:


> Hi Steve, I'm curious about the 'big improvement" moving from Salk's to SVS Ultras as Salks have a very good reputation on speaker building. What part was a 'big' improvement (response, detail, imaging, etc.)? I really like the SVS Ultra looks and also SVS products, so not doubting you, just that Salks are made with some nice drivers/parts also with a good designer behind them.
> 
> I'm also very interested in this evaluation! I've heard some of the speakers on the list, but not a all (such as the SVS Ultras and the Emerald Physics). This should be interesting.


What I meant was for my listening environment and material (rock/hard rock music) the Salks just didn't seem like a good fit for me. Don't get me wrong, I loved the Salks and they sounded great but I wanted something different and for now the SVS have done it. The soundstage is definitely bigger with the SVS and I really like the ultra center for movies better than the Salk. I don't know how else to put it, just that they sound better to my ears, and that's what I've always been told is what counts.


----------



## gfrancis0

I have not seen this posted anywhere, although it may exist somewhere on the web. I would absolutely LOVE to see a blind comparison of the CABLES used in this test versus generic, if only a quick one. I notice that you are using XLR cables, which I always thought were only a benefit for longer runs between components, is that the case for this test? If you could at least test the speaker wires versus generic 12 gauge wire from Monoprice or whatever. Not sure how much of a premium the RAM cables command, but it adds up fast when you are running a 7.x or 9.x system. I realize that RAM is a sponsor, but I would hope that you could indulge us. Especially when it comes to digital cables, like HDMI, I fail to see how one cable could be better than another, so long as it actually works, since they transmit only 1s and 0s.


----------



## hyghwayman

:wow:​ ​HTShack is at it again and I personally wish to shout out a big :thankyou: to all of the HTShack members and sponsors involved, :yourock: 

The lineup of speakers here is utstanding: and I can't wait to see/read yalls impressions! I learned a lot before/during/after the 1k speaker evaluation and I expect the same this time around as well.



fftopic2:

*Spoiler* 





JQueen said:


> This is going to be a great read, can't wait for the $250 dollar shoutout


:rofl: , +1 JQueen
I have a feeling the Pioneers designed by Andrew Jones would be a top performer in that price range lddude:


----------



## Hagarr

This is fantastic! What joy it must be to play with so many toys. This is really helpful since how do we ever get the opportunity to review such a variety in our own. 

We appreciate it...I am sure you do too 
Brian


----------



## Jungle Jack

Hello,
That truly is a killers row of speakers being auditioned. Better still that the room and associated equipment are stellar. While many stores might satisfy the latter, most of the stores I have been to have been lacking in respect to acoustics.

Many props to all involved and I look forward to the results. 
All the best,
Jack


----------



## RTS100x5

Great Timing

Coincidentally, I am neck deep in my first paying DIY speaker build for my #1 client.... I have invested apprx $2500 in drivers and xover components from PE... Wishing my design could be evaluated at your event (sigh) I was up til 2 am last night wiring the cabinets as Im pushing for a delivery and install next weekend... I have certainly learned alot from my time spent reading speaker reviews and studying the speaker build projects here at HTS.... Ill be posting up my project soon and am looking forward to reading the results of your evaluations.... Maybe the next trip could have a member sponsored to attend.... Thanks again for all you that contribute... I benefit much as do my clients, and it is highly appreciated... Thanks again Sonnie... :T


----------



## squish72

Im mostly looking forward to the $20,000 two channel setup since all of these are simply a dream for me, I might as well dream BIG! Excited to see the results. 

You guys live the dream life with all these "toys" you get to play with


----------



## Horrorfan33

I love these tests!!..I just finished up my dedicated home theater and thinking of making an upgrade, so this is perfect timing!!..I trust your opinion and it will highly influence my decision..I can't wait to hear your evaluation on the SVS Ultra Towers!!..Have fun guys and thanks for the info!!


----------



## gbreda

Great idea here and I am really looking forward to the results. The speakers chosen are some of the ones that I would like to audition but dont have access to in this area without driving 1.5-2 hours. Even then, I may get to listen to 1 or 2 or drivers that have been chosen.


----------



## billy p

Looking forward to the panels comments on all the said speakers. How they interact with the room what each individual likes and dislikes and how they describe their strenght and weakness with the various source material. Fwiw...I own the Ascend Towers and voted fro them eariler....but GTG or listening sessions as this I always fine very compelling & interesting to read.

Thanks HTS....Bill...


----------



## Jason1976

This is very cool. I wish I had a way to come and hear how the system sounds. I have won some of the contest they have here on the Home theater shack. I won some great speakers twice! I am still using them and love them but I am thinking these maybe better then my current speakers. I love the look of a lot of these speakers I just hope they sound as good as they look!


----------



## blekenbleu

Muser said:


> Good luck with this project.
> 
> One thing about shootouts is that it looks like you’re asking each product to do the same thing, which implies “fairness” or a level playing field. Except that everyone has different taste.


Yes, in my limited experience, it is difficult to agree on material with which all listeners are sufficiently familiar
to identify reproduction differences, not least because folks will become so tired of that material that they
may not want to hear it again for quite a long time.



> I think this will be a fun event to be at. Hope you all have fun.


It would be interesting for comparison to have participants, prior to the event,
document what results they anticipate.


----------



## Tommy077

Sure wish I could be a part of that! I guess some guys have all the luck. I do look forward to seeing the results since I will not be able to hear the results. It's nice to know though that there is a forum out here that you have some serious minded people that are willing to slave themselves into watching and listening to great A/V equipment and willing to post the results so others can have a little of something to go on. This makes for an easier task for the DIY that wants a good starting point. You sure you want to wait for such a long time to run this test? Tomorrow would be a good starting time!


----------



## mpompey

This looks very compelling. I would love to watch video highlights of the event, but I can understand about all the work that would require to record, edit, post, etc. But there's always a next time. But what might be cool in the meantime:

onder: Maybe we could have a mini-contest/poll to decide which blu-rays you guys evaluate on? onder:

I'm sure all the discs will be demo/reference grade titles by all accounts.

I'm really curious as to how the Paradigms do in this event and will be waiting to see the results. Paradigms and Axioms have been my favorites for a long time. Granted, I am an unabashed Axiom fanboy. But still I like good sound wherever it comes from.


----------



## KelvinS1965

I've heard a lot about this event, but just felt that it's not really of great interest outside of the USA. Many of the models listed aren't available over here so it's of limited interest I'm afraid. Added to that I've just spent £4,500 (sterling) on speakers since I could find anything cheaper that was suitable.

(Hope that wasn't too negative, but it did exceed 25 words  ).


----------



## Mike0206

omholt said:


> It's a very difficult task to evaluate speakers that are so different. They need to be placed differently, each one optimized based on measurements. And is one going to deal with the backwave from dipoles or not? If not, they will sound very different from a speaker with a baffle because of all the reflections that are coming off from the frontwall.


 Well all things considered Sonnie and team have a dedicated room that is well treated and if you notice in the graph up top, very well controlled. That will lend its hand to being able to make an equal comparison to the best of anyone's ability. In the last evaluation they scrutinized every speaker as far as proper placement was concerned and no doubt they will do the same thing in this evaluation as well. They worked tirelessly and late in the night to achieve the best results possible and being in a room that is treated will help all speakers for the most part and level the playing field if you will. It will be a great evaluation and a very fair one at that. I'm really looking forward to this eval and the few to follow. I am intrigued by the emerald physics speakers but at the same time due to what was stated in the reviews at RMAF, I'm really looking forward to the SVS evaluation.


----------



## david yurik

JQueen said:


> This is going to be a great read, can't wait for the $250 dollar shoutout


I just picked up two sets of polk RTI A4's right there in that $250 dollar range! Bring on the $250!!



mpednault said:


> A DIY versus Manuf. evaluation would be incredible and would most likely let those of us building DIY speakers if there truly is fruit to be had of our labor. Although I can't afford a pair of $2500 speakers, this will be an interesting read. I enjoy reading listening impressions over interpreting graphs.


Absolutely would love the DIY vs. Manuf. Vote #2 here.



jaymz said:


> What! No Bose?????? Jim


Ha no bose!!



gfrancis0 said:


> I have not seen this posted anywhere, although it may exist somewhere on the web. I would absolutely LOVE to see a blind comparison of the CABLES used in this test versus generic, if only a quick one. I notice that you are using XLR cables, which I always thought were only a benefit for longer runs between components, is that the case for this test? If you could at least test the speaker wires versus generic 12 gauge wire from Monoprice or whatever. Not sure how much of a premium the RAM cables command, but it adds up fast when you are running a 7.x or 9.x system. I realize that RAM is a sponsor, but I would hope that you could indulge us. Especially when it comes to digital cables, like HDMI, I fail to see how one cable could be better than another, so long as it actually works, since they transmit only 1s and 0s.


I read a really interesting article where the tester ( unbeknownst to the listeners ) swapped in a coat hanger to replace the pricey RCA cables. Not one listener noticed anything. I too would love to see a double blind on the cable debate / myth?!?!

If I may suggest - please include some information about the people doing the evaluation. I always find it helps me to know what the judge likes and listens to at home. Thanks for the coming evaluation!!

Dave


----------



## antr

Well, this would definitly be something to look forward too. Speakers look great and i would be happy to help out on this great ooportunity


----------



## daddieo

Wow, what a selection. Looking at just the features of the 6 my guess is for the CS2P's or the SVS Ultra's coming out on top. I was wondering, are there any plans to throw in the Arx A5's and give them a head to head against the choosen one from this competition? It might be considered counter produtive to what you are doind but would be very insightful.


----------



## claudej1

Nothing like putting people in the drool mode over all this great gear. Excuse me while I go and get my Lobster Bib to keep my clothes intact!


----------



## Eskimo

That's such a cool event, and a great idea... I am secretly pulling for the MartinLogan's, but am quite interested to see how it finally plays out.

The detail in the $1,000 speaker thread was impressive, looking forward to seeing this!


----------



## JRace

claudej1 said:


> Nothing like putting people in the drool mode over all this great gear. Excuse me while I go and get my Lobster Bib to keep my clothes intact!


My thoughts exactly!

I commend you guys on this task. It wont be easy, but it looks like fun!
As a ML panel user and dipole fan i am quite impressd to see your selection.

Will be watching this thread!

Will the speakers be adjusted for ach listener? I know my panels angle in reference to my listening height is crucial and yet is rarely considered when people compare panels to conventical cones and domes.


----------



## Sonnie

intgenx said:


> I suggest a future evaluation include some Active speakers in the price range like the Neumann KH310 too - so as to get a better idea how the studio/pro grade stuff compares to these hi-fi stalwarts...


We do want to have an evaluation on active speakers and have discussed it for a future evaluation. It is indeed an excellent idea.




perceval said:


> With that in mind, I have to ask (and maybe suggest), because most of the time this company is overlooked (and I have to root for products coming from my adopted country!), but would it be possible to add some products by Usher?
> 
> Usher speakers have always surprised me as being up there with most of the greats, but seldom gets the attention. (I just own some Usher products, I have no part in the company!
> 
> Enjoy the shootout (that means no Halloween party ending too late!)


Absolutely... let's be sure to nominate Usher when we have our next nomination thread. I have read a lot about Usher, particularly back when I was helping out at Next Level Audio Video forum. 

I forgot all about it being Halloween. Hmmm... maybe some more surprises are in order. onder:




tane0019 said:


> Have you already nail down the materials to be use ?
> (ie which CDs, ablums ?)
> 
> Materials chosen should be able to test out the speakers dynamics, vocal presentation, bass extension & etc ...
> (comparing speaker to speaker in the same setup).


Not yet, although we have some favorites we will use that are pretty demanding... and we use the same music for every speaker. :T




Vin Vendel said:


> You could go even further and not tell which speaker it is playing and let the listeners go in blindfolded and write down hearingimpressions after each listening. In that way the brain can´t add attributes to the speaker they have read articles about.


That is actually a good idea, although it might get time consuming. I thought I would have some bias towards some speakers in our last shootout. For example... never read anything but good about Vandersteen and fully expected them to do VERY well in the evaluation, however, while not bad, they were not nearly as good as the others.


----------



## whitey019

I'm glad to see that you chose to include the Paradigm Studio 60s v.5. I almost bought them two years ago, but elected to go with their bigger brother the 100s, primarily because I just couldn't except the look of the smaller drivers. It had nothing to do with the sound and shouldn't have influenced my choice, but what can I say. In hindsight, I should have gone with the 60s, because now I have the awesome SVS SB13 Ultra and probably do not need what the 100s provide over their little brother. Anyhow, I'm very interested in how they rate as the Studio line was my choice when I went through the evaluation process in 2011.


----------



## FJR

Wow, I guess I am not alone in looking forward to this review! I have long thought that the team approach to audio review in a dedicated location should be the standard. I also feel that one should create an audition library to use on all reviews. Granted, this content can/should evolve over time but helps keep things relative. 

While I am not in the market for this level of speaker I always want to know what to recommend for those who could be - we need to increase participation in this hobby. Thanks for doing this!


----------



## sealkojac

Definitely a nice line up of speakers on the docket. I'd personally love to see some GoldenEar Triton's tossed into the mix. With all the positive press on the folded ribbon tweeters lately it would be interesting to see how the group likes them compared to the Magnepan's and MartinLogan's.


----------



## macdon

Its not easy holding such an event, so I wish you guys all the best and definitely wish for its success. 
We've had a few speaker shootouts with our local group here in Manila and these events are very interesting to say the least. Normally, you can gauge which would be favorable for you from the list of speakers being tested most specially if you've heard or auditioned them before.
However, its always best to attend these events with an open mind or clear thoughts ........ treat it as if you're listening to them for the first time. Just be mindful that the same speaker will always sound differently from one place to the other - even if they were driven with the same gear.

One memorable event for me was a blind shootout between 5 different brands of bookshelf speakers wherein a large wooden frame was covered with speaker cloth so we cant see what brand is playing. Only the host knows and we all have to turn around while he does the switching. Each of us was given a paper and pen to score. When it was done and scores have been tallied, the favorable speaker will be played again - then only will it be revealed.
Everyone was so surprised about the outcome as the brand was never expected to win  Thats the reason why I love attending those events. It may move you and it may not, but you always leave with more knowledge than when you came in.

I cant wait on your results and Im also eager to know how the SVS Ultra towers will score. I use SVS M series 1 for my theater and have heard/auditioned the new Ultra towers as well.

Goodluck!


----------



## Sonnie

seepra said:


> Even if it's not a direct comparison between speakers, it's going to be most interesting to see an evaluation with similar criteria, equipment and ears, when auditioning electrostatic/magnetoplanar/quasi-ribbon AND traditional dynamic transducers. Even better news is the inclusion of measurements and having some context about the listening room. Combined with the subjective evaluation you're possibly offering lots of very valuable data for us people on the other side of the internet who possibly couldn't arrange any of this for themselves.
> 
> Subscribed!


Very well said... we may need to get you to help us write these up. :T




patchesj said:


> I will add to what others have already commented, I think that it would only be fair to attempt/spend as much time as reasonable, in optimizing placement. This is what a typical home owner would do with a set of $2500 speakers (For that much $$ I would spend a few days tweaking the setup, but I know that is not possible in this scenario). They will all have varying sweet spots, toe in, perhaps even height needs.
> 
> I think having a full post of the room measurements with a "control" set of speakers would be nice too so we can evaluate what the room itself sounds (or at least tests) like.
> 
> And maybe some comments on what subs/center/surround options are available or recommended to pair with the 2 channel setup?
> 
> And thanks for introducing me to the Emerald Physics line. Very interesting stuff...


Yes... we spent more time with placement on our previous evaluation that anything else. We also have ETC measurements for each speaker showing how the room interacts with the speakers. 

Please be sure to tell Walter with Underwood HiFi that we introduced you to Emerald Physics... he is the owner. He will also make you a great deal on a pair. :T




dschlic1 said:


> I hope that the reviewers take measurements using say REW and post them.


Yes... we plan to use REW. 




jmilton7043 said:


> This is a great event, however, will this prove which speaker is truly better... Or that each speaker sounds differently? Comparing them is part of the fun of being an audiophile. The giveaway is fun too of course!


Not really (and we explain that in the first post)... the only way to prove which is better for _you_ is to get it in your environment and listen. 

:dontknow: I KNEW it wouldn't be long before someone would let the cat out of the bag. However, I thought it might slide for at least a few days. :whistling: Okay... back to being quiet about it. Only one disqualification thus far... better odds for you others. 




gorb said:


> What are the details of the $20,000 stereo system?


It cost $20,000... and... uhmmm... well... Now you know it's a surprise. :R




JonCash said:


> Have you done shoot-outs like these where a DIYer builds a set of speakers in the same price range that are then used in shootout and compared to the retail speakers? Or perhaps a restored vintage set that were either a) the same relative cost when new adjusted for inflation - or - b) similar in cost now if you take into account finding them, having them shipped if required and then the cost of rebuilding, re-foaming, etc?


We haven't gotten there yet, but these are all possibilities for future evaluations.


----------



## Airgas1998

cavchameleon said:


> Hi Steve, I'm curious about the 'big improvement" moving from Salk's to SVS Ultras as Salks have a very good reputation on speaker building. What part was a 'big' improvement (response, detail, imaging, etc.)? I really like the SVS Ultra looks and also SVS products, so not doubting you, just that Salks are made with some nice drivers/parts also with a good designer behind them.
> 
> I'm also very interested in this evaluation! I've heard some of the speakers on the list, but not a all (such as the SVS Ultras and the Emerald Physics). This should be interesting.


yeah, this has my curiosity as well. I have the ultras as well, but I'm a little shocked to here "big improvement" compared to the salks. now if he's talking about mid/low bass extension I can see that, the ultras are packed with bass with those dual 8"s.


----------



## chashint

Dynaudio DM 3/7
Emerald Physics CS2P
Magnepan 1.7
MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL
Paradigm Studio 60
SVS Ultra Towers
This is certainly an interesting list of speakers y'all are going to be evaluating.
The only pair I have ever given any listening time to is the Studio 60s and even that was just enough to move on to the Studio 100's for serious evaluation.

It was a lot of fun to read the write ups for the first shoot out (evaluation) and I am looking forward to this one too and seeing how this collection is described.

There is such a tremendous amount of real work involved in putting an evaluation like this together I really do not understand the couch critics agendas.
Having said that, maybe I am a little warped (ok maybe medium warped) but I do get a kick out of reading about all the things that invalidate a speaker evaluation and if you don't do this or that or something else then you might as well not do it at all. I just find those posts very humorous. Most people live in places with real room compromises that have to be dealt with or ignored.
Sonnie does a real good job describing his room and the setup process for each speaker. The source material used for evaluation is fully disclosed so readers can weigh it compared to their own tastes.
All in all it really does not get a lot better than the way the HTS staff does a multi speaker evaluation.

Y'all did a very good job with the shoot out reviews, easily equal to any magazine write up I have read, really looking forward to this round.

I see reviews and posts regularly claiming speaker X performs better than speakers costing $$$ more.
My personal experience does not generally support claims like this.
Keep those ARX speakers close by and if time permits throw them on the system to see how they fare against speakers at >2x the price.


----------



## apilon

The Paradigm studios 60 columns are speakers that really set themselves apart, because for the price , they offer a listening experience that is never tainted or halftone on a particular point. The designers have managed to find one of the best compromise between minimal space for a column, and offering a rigorous diffusion for one of the best stereo image i had the chance to listen to. Budget allowing it they will be my next acquisition


----------



## LordX

Always nice to have a wide variety of opinions when it comes to speaker selections. I know that the listeners 'ear' is always something that can differ between listeners - however, if many agree that one speaker colors the audio too much etc that is nice to know!

My Speakers in my setup are a little older - and while they work and sound great (to me) - I am sure the day will come when replacement is necessary - so thanks again for having a review like this to look forward to!!!

PS - Now I am jealous about your other equipment.


----------



## dguarnaccia

Great idea folks,

I love that this isn't a shootout. Audio is such a diverse and subjective experience, I like the fact that you are force ranking them. Perhaps as a part of this you can even make recommendations as to they best applications for each speaker combo in terms of Music Genre, Theater style, etc. 

I'm always bummed all these events seem to happen out east. Would love to attend something like this on the left coast


----------



## robsong

When I was auditioning new speakers I had to drive around town. By having all these great speakers in one place is so much easier. This one store had the KEF Q900 and Studio 60's together and for me and my son the KEF's SQ was better. Then I went to the next store and it had the Studio 60's and the SQ was much better in that store. It all comes down to the room that's what I've learn in auditioning speakers. I hope you guys have a great time because I'm jealous. :crying:


----------



## gferrell

I can't wait to see the results, I have a pair of 20 year old $2500.00 speakers ( when they were new) I would live to hear the difference in modern day speakers to compare.


----------



## fbczar

Magnepan speakers are fast, if placed properly seem to disappear and by virtue of their midrange performance are incredible with live recordings. However, placing them correctly is the key. With stereo it is possible to place them perfectly and create a magnificent sound stage. Home theater is another matter. For instance, I have a 110 inch screen and the 1.7's would need to be far enough apart to flank the screen. Not ideal for the Magnepans. I am curious to see if you can place them to maximum advantage in your home theater. Once upon a time, subwoofers were extremely difficult to integrate with Magneplanars because of the speed advantage the Magneplanars membrane construction. Happily, subs like the Kreisel DXD 2012 have cured that problem. With the right placement and the right sub Magneplanars provide one of the most realistic performances I have heard.


----------



## filecat13

Sonnie _et al:_

Good luck in your latest adventure. It's sure to be entertaining and informative.

When I read the title, I wasn't sure if it was about $2500 speakers or $2500 speaker pairs. Since I'm not familiar with the specific models under evaluation, I checked a couple out and it's $2500 speaker pairs in case anyone else is unsure like I was.

Again, you guys will have a blast and do a service to the community at the same time. Thanks! :T


----------



## tasdisr

Looking forward to the results of the speaker evaluation, especially the Magnepans. I have always wondered how they sound and compare to traditional cone type speakers. I have thought at times of upgrading my current speakers to Magnepans. 

This evaluation has peaked my interest and I may have to go to the dealer in town to have a listen.


----------



## shaolin95

I am as well interested in these results, specially the Magnepan 1.7. I have always being curios about them and many people use to bring up the Magnepans when I bought my av123 Strata Minis.
From what I am reading, Magnepan behaves similar to the Strata MInis in which you do not want to place them too far apart or the stereo soundfield will collapse.


----------



## SinCron

Awesome. I was wondering when we'd see the speaker comparison. Will all of it be evaluated by ear or will there be special equipment brought in? I'd love to see the real world frequency response of these speakers to help me better understand when it comes to speaker building and matching.


----------



## RBTO

Great Idea!
I'm looking forward to the results from your testing. I've considered Magnapan products before, but couldn't decide since I didn't have any actual test data at my disposal at that time. I'll be really interested in all the results of your testing.


----------



## Tonto

So glad to see this thing kicking off now. I've been anticipating it since the last eval. I'm not going to be there for this event, but if it's anything like the last one, I know you guys are in for a great time. 

I can speak to how serious these evals are, having been part of the last one. We did not give any precidence to any speaker ahead of time. We set them up, spent the time necessary to position them to the best of our ability, and had no time limits on each evaluator...even allowed for extra music. We truely stated what we heard. Those were some great speakers, I can only imagine how these are gonna sound!

Sonnie has a great forum here & all I can say it it's great to be a part of it.

PS: Guy's, don't let Sonnie get out of smoking the ribs this time!


----------



## agthorn

Sounds like a great event. Although since I live in San Diego, this is a bit far to travel. I hear there is a rocky mountain event which is closer, but obviously southern California would be idea. I currently have a 5.1 theatre system using Onyko TX-NR616 receiver, and a Optomo HD33 3D projector. Would love to upgrade to a 7.1 or 7.2 configuration which my receiver supports. I use two Boston 8 inch ceiling flush speakers for my two surround sound positions, and Polk (replaceable) for my other 3 speakers which are adequate but definitely not optimized. I do have a woofer, failing to remember the name at the moment, but definitely in market for getting the most out of my sound system. 

I am wondering if wireless is possible for my last two speakers (upgrading from 5.1 to 7.1 or 7.2), as I would like to get away from pulling wires if at possible. Perhaps a complete 5 speaker system that includes a pair of wireless, while still using my ceiling mounted Boston speakers for the 6th and 7th speaker? Anyway, open to as much guidance and recommendations as possible.


----------



## mdanderson

I am very interested in this speaker evaluation because you have 2 brands of speakers that I particularly anxious to hear about. That would be the Paradigm 60 and the SVS Ultra line. I have had my Paradigm Ref. 20's for 14 years now and while they still sound very good and I have been thinking about upgrading after all these years to something like the Paradigm 60s or even the SVS Ultra.

This is a great idea and comes at an appropriate time for me with my interest in these speakers. Thanks again.


----------



## treky11

I wish I could be there to hear them all myself. Way too much fun, I wish my job was like that.

I will be very curious to see how the SVS speakers stack up against the others. 

Please get the results posted quickly so we don't have to wait much longer.


----------



## Lwbee

I can't make the audition! !! Glad to see some of the speakers I thought should be reviewed will be included, particularly interested in the SVS and Paradigm feedback and with that Anthem amp....oh my goodness!!! Great event, looking forward to the results!


----------



## EndersShadow

I am personally very interested in your thoughts on the SVS towers, particularly because they have a similar design to my Polk LSi 15's.

Now I realize they utilize different parts and crossovers, but I have been curious as to how those towers sound.

I am also *significantly interested* in how the Maggie 1.7's sound. My wife and I have heard the MMG's and she loved them and actually gave me the "OK" to purchase a set someday. With that said I know they get better the higher up the line you go. I dont think she would like the size of the 3x models but the 1x models are not much wider than the MMG's, just a bit taller, and also dont need to be out as far as the 3x models.

This should be a very interesting read and I look forward to the results.


----------



## mtbdudex

Looking forward to the evolution of this thread and the shootout.
A good price point and selection for lots of people moving up from their 1st set of speakers.
Also, thx for posting the acoustic chart in post#1, if possible I'd like to see some gated ETC charts 0 - 50ms to truly see how dialed in your treatments are for managing the 1st reflections.

I am particular to 2 of the brands below - having done extensive listening to them via local brick-n-mortar, however will see how everything plays out, so I'm un-biased.


> The Speakers
> 
> Dynaudio DM 3/7
> Emerald Physics CS2P
> Magnepan 1.7
> MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL
> Paradigm Studio 60
> SVS Ultra Towers


btw, a lotta reserved posts in the thread.....all 1st page....


----------



## onhope

Hi..I am onhope, yes specialy on this event. I will got the best review on the Paradim 60. Because of I may 
buy it .


----------



## gbanco

Wow, looks like an awesome line-up. Wish I could be there to check it all out myself. You guys have great jobs – testing out the coolest, latest and greatest equipment, and then relaying the info to all of us at home drooling over it all! Look forward to seeing the results! :clap:


----------



## luka3rd

What a nice test! I love the price range, but I believe that special treat of this test is that it's without the burden of proving anything!
It is simply meant to show what trusted people think of selected "sweet spot" group of speakers! At least IMHO this is the price wise sweet spot... 
Well, enjoy, and do share as much of your impression as possible!


----------



## mtbdudex

Here is a good white paper by Nyal Mellor "Acoustical Measurement Standards for Stereo Listening Rooms"
http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/static/513e1e34e4b00efcff5b05fd/51523db2e4b05218a1268532/51523db3e4b05218a126876f/1340681100537/acoustic_measurement_standards.pdf



> Some of the many questions that can be found scattered across the internet and overheard in conversations amongst audiophiles today relate to room acoustic measurements:
> 
> What are the key measurements?
> How do I interpret them?
> What does good look like?
> How do they relate to each other?
> 
> These questions arise from the recent availability of cheap and accurate 'consumer' acoustical measurement products like XTZ Room Analyzer, Room EQ Wizard and Dayton Audio Omnimic. Whist these packages allow you to measure your room they do not provide any guidance on how to interpret the results relative to the audiophile situation of two speakers in a room.
> 
> In April of 2011 Nyal Mellor of Acoustic Frontiers and Jeff Hedback of HdAcoustics recognized this and started work on creating a set of measurement standards specific to the requirements of the two channel audiophile. Many hours of hard work have culminated in the release of the white paper Acoustic Measurement Standards for Stereo Listening Rooms which you can download as a pdf by clicking on the link.
> 
> This paper is recommended reading if you are interested in understanding how room acoustics can influence sound quality. It also provides clear targets for the acoustic measurements that characterize your room's performance.


----------



## 16hz lover

Thanks so much for going through all the trouble to do this for us. I'll be pulling for the Maggies as an owner of the Tympani IVa flagship models


----------



## mjaros

I really enjoy reading about high end speaker systems and especially speakers that I may purchase because of this evaluation. Thank you for doing this and go Magnepan!!!


----------



## tcarcio

I was sad to see that the Philharmonics didn't make the cut. I was really interested in what you guy's thought about them. My next choice would be the SVS ultras. I am not in the market for speakers at this time but this will help in choosing or giving advice to someone in the future. Thanks guy's.....:T


----------



## Radorod

Reading several of the replies so far I can already tell this event will be a big success. Sonnie, you truly seem dedicated to the community here. Love that Cedar Creek Cinema space, you've created - great name too  ! 

Like everyone else, I'm looking forward to the reviews, but mostly I hope everyone involved enjoys themselves and becomes that much better off for having participated.


----------



## Sonnie

Muser said:


> One thing about shootouts is that it looks like you’re asking each product to do the same thing, which implies “fairness” or a level playing field. Except that everyone has different taste. This might manifest as a preference for one type of material for the participants in this “shootout”, i.e. action movie, drama, fantasy, etc. This is going to be true of all reviewers, so don't take this personally.
> 
> If you subject all of the systems to “one” type of movie, you might miss out on qualities that will revealed by and appreciated by a different type of listener. You may well reveal to your readers what your preferences are, but that may not be the same profile of preferences as your readers.
> 
> If you can, I’d suggest that your evaluations be further focused on reporting that might read “On drama with a lot of dialogue, the X system, dialogue intelligibility was higher making for a more relaxed, intimate experience; while on action movies the dialogue intelligibility didn’t matter, but the speakers shortcomings on macro dynamic swings was more evident; and finally, with music videos . . . .


We will be watching several different movies with the home theater system we will be reviewing, but for the two-channel evaluation speakers, it will be strictly music. I may toss the $20,000 speaker system into my home theater system, but that will be later on after the evaluation.

For music listening, we use several types of music. :T




|Tch0rT| said:


> I'd love to be a part of a shootout like this! Those MartinLogan's in the back sure make the ElectroMotion ESL's look small LOL. It'll be interesting to see how the ML EM ESL's compare to the Magnepan's (well the others too).


I know it... don't they. I was thinking the EXACT same thing when I was setting them up and standing back from them to take the photo. It is amazing how much smaller they are. Those Maggies are pretty big too.




RLouis said:


> No reason to limit this concept to speakers. Could also do receivers at various price points (low, mid, top end) and TVs/displays. Although TV are a bit tougher because of the complication of calibration for best performance. I'm sure people would love to see a properly staged apples-to-apples competitive comparison of the major top end AV receivers. Denon, Pioneer Elite, Onkyo, Yamaha, Anthem, maybe Cambridge if avaialbe


I have done a couple of receiver reviews (Denon 4520 and Yamaha 3010) and man... those things take a LOT of time to review properly. The setup alone is very time consuming. I think we would need at least a full day with each one to make a fair comparison... as there are too many features to compare. I think it would boil down to comparing features and room EQ results, otherwise I think they all have about the same amp sound when played "Pure" or "Direct".




cavediver said:


> This looks like a great speaker evaluation. I'm looking forward to the results. I'm assuming you're evaluating the speakers by themselves full range without the addition of a sub? Also, I'd like to see a list of the music you're going to use for the evaluation.


Yes... full range and no sub. We will list the music as soon as we nail it down.




The_Nephilim said:


> I was wondering since you are using a Oppo and it proally has SACD/DVD-Audio capabilities are you going to play and multichannel disks either SACD or DVD-A??


I have a couple of each, but have not given it much thought since this is two-channel. However, it maybe that we can squeeze in some time for an SACD song. We try to streamline the listening process by having all of our music on a single source so that we don't have to get up and change media.




only126db said:


> I wonder if, it may sound crazy, but if internal cabinet design could be explored and commented on. I am sure most people would think :unbelievable: when reading about opening up a set of $2000+ speakers to see its guts, I just find it interesting what the big players do to the guts, if they brace them, if they are double baffled, material thickness etc etc etc.


That would get rather time consuming and perhaps something that would be more suited for a reviewer who is going to have a set of speakers for 30 days or more with plenty of time to do so. Not a bad idea though.




gfrancis0 said:


> I would absolutely LOVE to see a blind comparison of the CABLES used in this test versus generic, if only a quick one. I notice that you are using XLR cables, which I always thought were only a benefit for longer runs between components, is that the case for this test? If you could at least test the speaker wires versus generic 12 gauge wire from Monoprice or whatever. Not sure how much of a premium the RAM cables command, but it adds up fast when you are running a 7.x or 9.x system. I realize that RAM is a sponsor, but I would hope that you could indulge us. Especially when it comes to digital cables, like HDMI, I fail to see how one cable could be better than another, so long as it actually works, since they transmit only 1s and 0s.


I have never been able to identify differences in cables... not saying they do not exist, but I have not heard any. It would have to be proven to me via a DBT to confirm it. The RAM cables are not very expensive (at least what I consider expensive), although they cost more than the Monoprice cables. The primary reason we suggest RAM is quality of build, quality of parts used, functionality and looks... and they are indeed a sponsor. There are some who are simply not going to buy Monoprice, but will quickly buy Blue Jeans cables because of the wire and connectors used... and the build quality appears to be superior. This is where we believe RAM will be of benefit... to those seeking that type of quality in a cable and having piece of mind about it. Compare RAM before you buy BJC or other similar cables.

I don't think we will have time to do a properly conducted DBT.

I believe one of the benefits of balanced cables is to reject noise and interference... perhaps a more stable signal to noise ratio is maintained, but technically I will defer to someone more in the know than myself.




RTS100x5 said:


> Coincidentally, I am neck deep in my first paying DIY speaker build for my #1 client.... I have invested apprx $2500 in drivers and xover components from PE... Wishing my design could be evaluated at your event (sigh) I was up til 2 am last night wiring the cabinets as Im pushing for a delivery and install next weekend... I have certainly learned alot from my time spent reading speaker reviews and studying the speaker build projects here at HTS.... Ill be posting up my project soon and am looking forward to reading the results of your evaluations.... Maybe the next trip could have a member sponsored to attend.... Thanks again for all you that contribute... I benefit much as do my clients, and it is highly appreciated... Thanks again Sonnie... :T


All hope is not lost... as the DIY speaker comparison is something we have discussed and hope to work out. We will continue to discuss it and see what we can eventually come up with. It is good to know you may be interested in having your speaker involved. We will definitely keep that in mind.




squish72 said:


> I'm mostly looking forward to the $20,000 two channel setup since all of these are simply a dream for me, I might as well dream BIG!


I am most definitely looking forward to this system as well. I have heard it and it is astounding to say the least.


----------



## AudioNewb

It WOULD be neat to be able to attend that, indeed.  I have an HTIB system that meets my needs, but having something like those would be awesome - wish I could afford something like all that.


----------



## labman1

Wow, I'm green to the gills. I have heard a few of these speakers but have not heard the Oppo 105 yet. I guess I have to live vicariously through all that attend this event. I was hoping there might be a Goldendear tower in the mix this evaluation. Oh well, I know all will have a good time! Looking forward to hearing the results.


----------



## needspeed52

I want to extend my thanks and appreciation to HTS for this outstanding event and to the members involved, Sonnie, Wayne, Leonard and Joe. I had the pleasure of getting to know Joe (ALM Family) since he first came to HTS, I was selling an amp (which I regret), no just kidding, he was so courteous and such a friendly guy and I know how much he appreciated the condition of the amp and made that known to me on several occassions, great guy as well as all the staff here at HTS. This place was my first home and always felt welcomed and people seemed to actually care what I had to say, that doesn't happen at a lot of other forums. I am also extremely pleaseed with the $1000 shootout as my speakers were chosen. More forums should follow the lead of HTS and offer a wonderful and informative place to spend some time. Well done guys with the $2500 comparison, is it true that the ARX5 will also be there? This what I heard. Thanks again to all whom have made my feel at home here at the Shack. I look forward to the results of this event, take care my friends.
Best Regards, Jeffrey


----------



## callas01

i think one of the most interesting things about this multi-speaker review is that all these speakers offer something different and will appeal to a wide audience. I also think that when you get to this price range, there certianly arent any losers, there are just varying degrees of winners. 

A quick look at the speakers reveals so much about each thats different

Emerald Physics - open baffle 2.5 way design with 15" woofers and a compression tweeter with 12" waveguide, completely unique to me.

Dynaudio - classic minimalist design outside, 3" voice coils on the woofers in a 2-way design(the only 2-way design using a simple 1st order crossover) and a soft dome

Magnepan - a full range ribbon speaker... if im understanding that right? very interesting. 

Martin logan - electrostat speakers, with 8" woofer. that appears not to use a crossover

Paradigm - another minimalist design in a 2.5 way speaker but uses metalized drivers with popularity that probably unmatched

SVS - a 3-way speaker with a unique cabinet design involving an 8" woofer and dual 6.5" mids, soft dome tweeter... a company whose fame comes from their awesome subwoofers. 

in some ways a few of these speakers are similar, but they are all still very different. I cannot wait to see what the reviewers think of each speaker. As a Dynaudio owner, i hope to see them do well, but the competition is VERY tough. 

good luck guys and have fun.


----------



## colofan

I wish to second the idea of DIY HT speaker systems with maybe the cost constraint being the factor.

Maybe covered elsewhere but in a multi channel setup of HT interested also in differences in seating position and how that affects performance. If you optomize around the center seat that can be a lonely place 

Basic suggestion is if you have the listeners move positions side to side and up and back a bit to see how sensitive each speaker system is. Part of the voting could be ease of setup and how easy it is to get good sound at every seating position. Power response and phase control are key to this from my experience.


----------



## Lonely Raven

Wow, what a great looking room! I'm glad to see an "evaluation" done in a properly treated and measured room! (with the graphs to prove it! LOL). I'm looking forward to seeing people's thoughts on the speakers. I myself am looking for a decent upgrade to my Home Theater Speakers, and while I might have the finely tuned and measured room, I'm close! So it's good to see that your evaluation can be in near ideal setup to I know if I were to purchase speakers, they are a known good commodity and it's other areas in my setup that need addressing. 

I also wish I could hear that two channel setup...I'm a fan of separate 2 channel setups, and have a hand built SET powering a separate pair of speakers in my theater, with the same Oppo BDP-105 as a source! So I'm looking forward to seeing how you set that up and what your impressions are in a room treated and setup for theater (As mine is as well). 

Great thread!


----------



## My Self

Nice.
I like the idea of a speaker evaluation rather than a shootout. Looking forward to the results.
What I also like is the idea of converting a 2 car garage into a home theater. :T
Will work on the wife... :gulp:


----------



## gimp

Since starting in 1977, the Danes at Dynaudio have learned a thing or two about building great speakers. There are some fairly positive reviews about the Dynaudio DM3/7. Some of its strengths include build quality, finish, low end response and efficiency. I'm looking forward to the results.


----------



## peter5992

Very interesting - I'll look forward to your posts about the test and the results. I would have liked to be there but I don't have the time and live several time zones away. It's funny that one of the speakers is probably more expensive than my entire (not so great) Panasonic home theater system.

Three questions / comments:


What music / movies are you going to listen to as reference material? Are you going to be watching any movies at all, are video displays part of the test as well, or is it just audio?
Most speakers / room setups require a careful positioning of the speakers to get optimal flat frequency response (that is somewhat dependent on the size and construction of the room, but it's the norm for professional studios). Are you going to be moving the speakers in different places to get the sweet spot for each of them? I assume they are pretty heavy, it's not going to be easy hauling that stuff around.
For reference material I'd recommend to at least include the Sony Classical recording of Bartok's Concierto for Orchestra, a very fine recording on Super Audio CD. For movies, Wall-E has a spectacularly good sound design.


----------



## jmhenrie

This should be a great shoot out, the only speakers in this line up I have heard are the Dynaudios and although in a smaller room they sounded as good as a pair of Wilson Watt puppies.
interested in seeing the results of the comparison.


----------



## pharoah

i heard a set of mqgnepan mmg's a few years back.they were playing some violin music on them.unfortunately i only had a very brief listening experience.from what i remember that was very realistic sounding violin playing.ive not had a chance to listen to any martin logan speakers.ive heard a bunch of different paradigm models.i do have a paradigm dealer about 30 mile drive.

so im definetly curiois to hear the results of the magnepan's,and the paradigm's


----------



## Tony~M

This is going to be a very interesting shootout. These shootouts are a lot of work, I wish you all the best of luck and eagerly await the results. Very curious how the Magnepans sound vs the conventional speakers.

I would love to see something similar in the $1,000 and $500 and under categories for us budget minded folks. 

Later,

Tony


----------



## txredxj

This is a great event and i will be paying close attention to the results since i have no way to demo anything like this where i am. Most info i can get on stuff like this are from actual owners and most of the time they have limited exposure to other products in the same range so they are swayed. Here i can get 6 great speakers compared very thoroughly. Will the top speakers from the last review be compared to these as well? Im really interested in the CS2P, ML ESL and Magnepan 1.7 since they are different from regular box enclosure speakers.


----------



## Sonnie

billy p said:


> I own the Ascend Towers and voted fro them eariler....but GTG or listening sessions as this I always fine very compelling & interesting to read.


I believe the Ascend Towers will be automatically included in the next round, provided Ascend will oblige us with a pair. 





Jason1976 said:


> This is very cool. I wish I had a way to come and hear how the system sounds. I have won some of the contest they have here on the Home theater shack. I won some great speakers twice! I am still using them and love them but I am thinking these maybe better then my current speakers. I love the look of a lot of these speakers I just hope they sound as good as they look!


There may indeed be better for considerable more money, but I bet the A5's would give any of these a run for their money. I think the main differences may be more lower end. However, we would expect better at 2.5 to 4 times the cost.





blekenbleu said:


> Yes, in my limited experience, it is difficult to agree on material with which all listeners are sufficiently familiar
> to identify reproduction differences, not least because folks will become so tired of that material that they
> may not want to hear it again for quite a long time.
> 
> It would be interesting for comparison to have participants, prior to the event,
> document what results they anticipate.


We have used several songs in our evaluations and listening at the various audio shows. There are a few songs I have heard at least fifty-eleven times... and I never get tired of them. They just get better for some reason.

I learned in the last event to not anticipate anything, as I had it all wrong going into that one. It only proved one thing for me... that bias does not necessarily have as much influence as I thought it would. As macdon says below... treating each speaker like it is the first time you have heard it is the best advise IMO.





Tommy077 said:


> You sure you want to wait for such a long time to run this test? Tomorrow would be a good starting time!


No... absolutely I DO NOT want to wait... I am ready now! lol





david yurik said:


> If I may suggest - please include some information about the people doing the evaluation. I always find it helps me to know what the judge likes and listens to at home.


That is a good idea David... maybe we can do that. I am a Christian, ******* hillbilly that likes Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Boston, Pink Floyd, Spyro Gyra, Little Feat, Yello, Pink Floyd, Flim & the BB's, ZZ Ward, Adele, Pink Floyd, David Gilmour, Roger Waters, Hank Williams Jr, U2, Melody Gardot... and last but not least... Pink Floyd. 

Seriously... I like a pretty good variety, but not much on classical, country or rap. I can pretty much handle anything else. Maybe we can get some bio's written up. 





daddieo said:


> I was wondering, are there any plans to throw in the Arx A5's and give them a head to head against the chosen one from this competition?


We will sit and listen to these first, before we start the evaluation... just to get an idea of what we heard in the last evaluation.





JRace said:


> Will the speakers be adjusted for each listener? I know my panels angle in reference to my listening height is crucial and yet is rarely considered when people compare panels to conventional cones and domes.


If needed we will do this, but we have all pretty much agreed on the same positioning for the other speakers we have evaluated.





macdon said:


> Normally, you can gauge which would be favorable for you from the list of speakers being tested most specially if you've heard or auditioned them before. However, its always best to attend these events with an open mind or clear thoughts ........ treat it as if you're listening to them for the first time. Just be mindful that the same speaker will always sound differently from one place to the other - even if they were driven with the same gear.


Excellent advice and good points... :T


----------



## Josuah

When I had Magnepan speakers, I preferred the tighter sound I could get out of them by placing some acoustic absorption panels behind them. I believe this allowed the immediate rear wave to still do its magic of interference with the forward wave to focus the sound, while reducing the effect of a reflected wave off the surfaces behind the speaker.

Would you consider doing the same during your review, to see what people think of this? I imagine it would also apply to the Martin Logan, although I suspect it might have a different effect given its planar surface is curved.

Flat planars are also very sensitive to toe-in, since moving your head off-axis immediately impacts the sound. Some will prefer different degrees of toe-in, so I think that's also something worth including in your review sessions.



EndersShadow said:


> I am also *significantly interested* in how the Maggie 1.7's sound. My wife and I have heard the MMG's and she loved them and actually gave me the "OK" to purchase a set someday. With that said I know they get better the higher up the line you go. I dont think she would like the size of the 3x models but the 1x models are not much wider than the MMG's, just a bit taller, and also dont need to be out as far as the 3x models.


IMO the Magnepan 1.6's were a significant step up from the MMG's so if you get the chance you should do a comparison in a local store. You really need to get the top of planar speakers above your ear height to get the right sound out of them.


----------



## cdunphy

I really like these kinda events when magazines do reviews you hardly ever get straight comparisions.This works out good for me I was really leaning hard to buy the svs ultra towers after hearing them in the capitol audiofest( to me it was at least the best demo in the show and maybe best sound.I only have ever had bookshelf speakers and though they sound great(def tech sm 55's) I know they lack depth in comparision to good towers. this is about the top off my ability to buy at the moment I may stretch to golden ear triton 3's but wuld love to be able to buy in this range.Looking forward to the review thanks so much for the effort.
CD


----------



## Sonnie

fbczar said:


> Magnepan speakers are fast, if placed properly seem to disappear and by virtue of their midrange performance are incredible with live recordings. However, placing them correctly is the key. With stereo it is possible to place them perfectly and create a magnificent sound stage. Home theater is another matter. For instance, I have a 110 inch screen and the 1.7's would need to be far enough apart to flank the screen. Not ideal for the Magnepans. I am curious to see if you can place them to maximum advantage in your home theater.


I have a feeling they will need to be closer in, but that is just a hunch. I don't think my Prodigy's sound their best where they are due to having them spread out so far.





filecat13 said:


> When I read the title, I wasn't sure if it was about $2500 speakers or $2500 speaker pairs. Since I'm not familiar with the specific models under evaluation, I checked a couple out and it's $2500 speaker pairs in case anyone else is unsure like I was.


This has now been clarified in the first post. :T





SinCron said:


> Will all of it be evaluated by ear or will there be special equipment brought in?


We will include the .mdat files from REW measurements, which will include a LOT of useful information.





Tonto said:


> PS: Guy's, don't let Sonnie get out of smoking the ribs this time!


Agree... I MUST make this happen this time around.





mtbdudex said:


> Looking forward to the evolution of this thread and the shootout.
> A good price point and selection for lots of people moving up from their 1st set of speakers.
> Also, thx for posting the acoustic chart in post#1, if possible I'd like to see some gated ETC charts 0 - 50ms to truly see how dialed in your treatments are for managing the 1st reflections.


We will see what we can do with this... perhaps if the .mdat files are available you can adjust the graphs? I don't understand the ETC as well as Wayne, so maybe he can chime in. 





mtbdudex said:


> btw, a lotta reserved posts in the thread.....all 1st page....


Yes... reserved for the results and some other stuff in case we need them.


----------



## bassman_soundking

This is my dream job!!
I love listening to high quality audio systems, and especially love to hear a different mfg interpretation of how audio should sound.
I believe all speakers impart their own signature, but this can be a good thing when done properly.
I look forward to the results....
I have read soooo many speaker reviews/comparisons/tests over the last 25+ years.
I know my own opinion is what truly matters for my personal enjoyment, but there are several reviewers that share very similar views that I highly respect.


----------



## d12d

I love these type of threads and competition. I believe this greatly helps people decide what to buy as it is an equal comparison which is hard to do especially at the higher priced levels. I appreciate the level of detail and effort that goes into this type of work and am looking forward to the results.


----------



## Sonnie

needspeed52 said:


> Well done guys with the $2500 comparison, is it true that the ARX5 will also be there? This what I heard.


Yep... you heard correctly. :T





callas01 said:


> i think one of the most interesting things about this multi-speaker review is that all these speakers offer something different and will appeal to a wide audience. I also think that when you get to this price range, there certainly aren't any losers, there are just varying degrees of winners.


Agree... and as far as anticipation, this is what I anticipate... all very good speakers that will all will have enthusiast that will like them over the other.





callas01 said:


> Magnepan - a full range ribbon speaker... if im understanding that right? very interesting.


Yes... full range.





callas01 said:


> Martin logan - electrostat speakers, with 8" woofer. that appears not to use a crossover


500Hz.





colofan said:


> Maybe covered elsewhere but in a multi channel setup of HT interested also in differences in seating position and how that affects performance. If you optomize around the center seat that can be a lonely place


For home theater I have tested optimizing for the primary listening position vs optimizing for 3 vs optimizing for 7. For me there was not enough improvement in the other positions to make it worth NOT optimizing for the PLP. You improve one seat, make another worse... it is never ending with multiple seats being optimized. However, that could be different for others... just my experience in my room. I keep it optimized for the PLP since I am the only one in there 99% of the time. You could save a couple of setups though... if your processor or receiver allows for it. One for PLP and one for multiple when you have company.





My Self said:


> What I also like is the idea of converting a 2 car garage into a home theater. :T
> Will work on the wife... :gulp:


Buy her a new car... works EVERY time!!! 





peter5992 said:


> Three questions / comments:
> 
> 
> What music / movies are you going to listen to as reference material? Are you going to be watching any movies at all, are video displays part of the test as well, or is it just audio?
> Most speakers / room setups require a careful positioning of the speakers to get optimal flat frequency response (that is somewhat dependent on the size and construction of the room, but it's the norm for professional studios). Are you going to be moving the speakers in different places to get the sweet spot for each of them? I assume they are pretty heavy, it's not going to be easy hauling that stuff around.
> For reference material I'd recommend to at least include the Sony Classical recording of Bartok's Concierto for Orchestra, a very fine recording on Super Audio CD. For movies, Wall-E has a spectacularly good sound design.


We have not selected all of the music yet, still nailing it down. Basically a short compilation of clips from various songs... then 3 songs selected by each of us on the evaluation panel. 

For movies each night... we have ideas, but still not fully selected yet. We will probably decide each night... maybe draw straws for each one we like. The two-channel speakers will have our full attention during the day on Friday and Saturday. The 5.0 home theater system will get our time later at night.

Thanks for the suggestions, we can consider those.

Nothing real heavy... and yes... we get pretty serious about optimal placement (see our previous $1,000 evaluation - link in my sig).





Tony~M said:


> I would love to see something similar in the $1,000 and $500 and under categories for us budget minded folks.


Check out the link to our $1,000 evaluation in my signature. :T





Josuah said:


> When I had Magnepan speakers, I preferred the tighter sound I could get out of them by placing some acoustic absorption panels behind them. I believe this allowed the immediate rear wave to still do its magic of interference with the forward wave to focus the sound, while reducing the effect of a reflected wave off the surfaces behind the speaker.
> 
> Would you consider doing the same during your review, to see what people think of this? I imagine it would also apply to the Martin Logan, although I suspect it might have a different effect given its planar surface is curved.
> 
> Flat planars are also very sensitive to toe-in, since moving your head off-axis immediately impacts the sound. Some will prefer different degrees of toe-in, so I think that's also something worth including in your review sessions.


We did try placing acoustic panels behind the Magnepans we had in the previous evaluation, but it made them worse, as it did with other speakers we tried. The room is setup pretty well acoustically, so that should not be an issue... and we go to extremes to get the right placement for each speaker.


----------



## Ray3

Thius is a great idea with a simple twist! I was struck by how many people missed the opening line of Sonny's post saying that this wasn't a shoot out. With that in mind, the whole "which speaker is better/best" and"blind test methodology" tiresome arguments are eliminated and time can be better spent simply understanding the pluses and minuses of the performance of each speaker on it's own merits without ranking them. How cool is THAT????

Being able is hear what is essentially a group of independent reviews from some folks who have some pretty good knowledge of audio that can pass on their evaluations should allow for some excellent decision-making relative to high level speakers that may not otherwise have input available. 

What a fantastically clever idea! Kudos to Sonnie for this approach. Can't wait to read the output.


----------



## phreak

For a music suggestion please invest the 4:56 to check out "Shock" by John Tesh. My #1 instrumental go-to test track. 

Tons of respect for your review panel. We are all looking forward to your careful analysis. I for one would like to read a brief pre-review stating what each reviewer is expecting. Posted before the event of course. Which speakers have you previously experienced, what favourites do you have? Some will parrot on about "expectation bias", but that pop psychology can't stand up in the face of men with integrity willing to say "Hey, I was wrong. Brand X surprised me, and Brand Y didn't live up to my overblown expectations"


----------



## ericzim

I am very excited to read about first impressions and over all performance of the MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL units. They look impressive and the specs speak for themselves and paired with an already proven Oppo for the source and Anthem Amp to drive them I can only imagine these would be as close to audio nirvana as one can get. I just wish I lived closer to you guys so I can share in the fun. Just for fun can you guys test some 96/24 or higher bit rate vinyl rips? You choose the records.


----------



## Kalik

very interested in seeing the results of this Audition/Evaluation Event...I bought my first pair of home theater speakers a little over 2 years ago and now I'm hooked on audio...my current speakers aren't crazy high end but they are great for someone like me who was starting out (Aperion 5T towers, center, and bipole/dipole surrounds)...the Aperion speakers are pretty impressive in their own right...audio is definitely 50% of the experience and maybe even more...adds a whole other dimension to a movie...Pacific Rim sounded amazing on Blu-ray

lots of excellent speakers at the event and it will be interesting to see how they all fare...can't wait to see what demo material you guys bring to test the equipment as well...might even help me upgrade


----------



## Vin Vendel

Sonnie said:


> Vin Vendel wrote: View Post
> You could go even further and not tell which speaker it is playing and let the listeners go in blindfolded and write down hearingimpressions after each listening. In that way the brain can´t add attributes to the speaker they have read articles about.
> 
> That is actually a good idea, although it might get time consuming. I thought I would have some bias towards some speakers in our last shootout. For example... never read anything but good about Vandersteen and fully expected them to do VERY well in the evaluation, however, while not bad, they were not nearly as good as the others.


Yes I guess it would take to much time maybe could work as an introduction with one song with good dynamics, instrumental separation and variation.


----------



## Greenster

I am so excited. You guys really now how to get me hooked on threads. I wish I could attend it in person. I still need to buy some front and center Chanel speakers for my HT room and was planning on getting some RSL's based on the reviews. Then along came the $1000 speaker shoot out on here which made me hold off. Now along comes the $2500 shoot out. 
In the test, you guys loved the ARX's with the ribbon tweeter so much that I am now leaning toward them but I want to see the $2500 results. I really love the look of the SVS Ultras's and love love my PB12 from them. 
I am just excited for this event. Thanks so much for doing this for us.


----------



## zuijlen

I look forward to what will be coming out of this. I'm not in the market myself at this price bracket, but it will be interesting to hear (!) what the reviewers find out.

I hope there will be a variety of music being listened too, especially something with dynamics in it. The beginning of Stravinsky's Sacre du Printemps would be a good one.


----------



## rocketheo

Great idea, a really nice budget, and a great variation of speakers.

Flatpannels v.s. boxes, i'm glad I don't have to choose the winner here, good luck guys.


----------



## Jon Liu

I am incredibly interested in seeing the results of this evaluation. The previous $1000 speaker eval was a hit and definitely a useful guide to those looking in that budget range. I'm curious to see how the emerald physics and SVS speakers do compared to the rest. I've heard the rest of them, but just not those two!

I value every one of the four reviewers opinions and look forward to hearing impressions after the event has taken place!


----------



## Wooderson

I was scarred as a youth reading Audiophile and other like magazines. The floofy, subjective wording (complete even with made up words) to describe speakers and equipment sound never sat well with my scientific mind (including reviews of 6ft silver power cables that somehow improved the "sound" of the 60ft of copper to the fuse box). And it's very hard to map their lab measurements to what something would sound like (even with the accompanying subjective wording). They would compare everything to their $50K reference system, but that's not the same as comparing to other same-level components.

*Shootout* is how sound is supposed to be compared! I posted a link to the $1K shootout on my FB page and declared it the best speaker review I had ever read.

I'm really excited about this $2.5K level. This is where I live, personally (Sonus Faber Concerto's). Arrrreeee you ready to rummmmmmmmmble?????

Thanks guys, have fun!
--Myles(Wooderson - I do love those redheads)


----------



## lovebohn

I love the idea and only wish this was a little closer to me. I'm a SVS fan and would like to see how they compare to a few of the other speakers in this group. I think for most of us with a dedicated theater setup a $2500 investment is speakers is not out of line....$25,000 yes. I look forward to seeing the results.


----------



## NBPk402

This shootout will be the best one so far in my opinion... The $2500 speaker is a very good price point for a pair of speakers for a home stereo setup. While it may not be the best, it is a price point that a lot more people can afford than the exotic speakers seen in some of the magazines (although the exotics are nice to hear... Even if it is just to hear the absolute best money can buy). I would like to see more shootouts in the future too. Some suggestions would be:
1: DIY speakers (if someone can get them to Sonnie) compared to the best of the shootout speakers
2: Pro speakers compared to the best of the shootout
3: Powered speakers compared to the best of the shootout speakers
4: Video flat panels and projectors

I wish that I lived closer, and was able to attend the shootout to listen to all the different speakers in the shootout. This will be a excellent opportunity to evaluate all the speakers in a environment that is optimized for each speaker (unlike the environment most people hear the speakers in when they are evaluating), and much more like they will have in their own home.

Once again we see what makes HTS so much better than the other forums. Thanks again Sonnie, and the Sponsors for making this happen.

Patiently awaiting results.

Ron


----------



## Pilk

I was about to pull the trigger on the $1000 winner when I see the $2500 Evaluation getting ready to take shape. I think I'll wait for the results and try and get by on my old Infinity speakers from the 80's. In my area there just isn't anywhere to audition so this type of thing takes all the guess work out of it. Thanks guys...I know its a burden :T


----------



## skeeter99

I'm REALLY looking forward to reading the results of this shootout! The first one with the $1,000 max was very well done and I found it very interesting the ARX won out. There is such a broad range of speakers in this evaluation not just from looks but driver materials, tweeter materials, DSP, etc. I've gotta be honest, I am really the most interested in the Emerald Physics speakers! They're so interesting and not many others similar to them to compare to. Next to the Emerald Physics, I'm very curious how the SVS' compare to the Paradigms. I've always been a big Paradigm fan so this will be really interesting to read. 

Thanks for taking the time/money/energy to get this all put together, its definitely appreciated!

Scott


----------



## mlundy57

I'm looking forward to the results. It's just as well this isn't going to be a shootout with us guessing which one will win. I was in the minority with the $1,000 shootout and my pic wasn't even in the running. Then, of the three I voted for for this comparison, none of them made it in the first round. :dontknow: This way I can just sit back and enjoy the reports.

This type of comparison can provide some really useful insights. It is all well and good to read individual reviews of different speakers but the one question that is almost never addresses is "how did it sound in comparison to XYZ speaker?"


----------



## Emkay

Yes! This looks set to be really useful. What a great and diverse selection of speakers - the voting process has worked a treat (and my main nominees made it into the selection, so how could I think otherwise?). The room is superb, the other system components shouldn't introduce significant limitations, and you are being appropriately fastidious to optimize the placement of each pair under test before starting. Will be interested to see your test program material, and really hoping there will be at least one superbly recorded classical piece included. If you can't decide on one, I'd be very happy to make a suggestion.


----------



## Suntan

Good to see "real world" evaluations conducted for people looking to match up quality speakers with a room built and treated to complement the listening activities.

Obviously a time consuming activity to swap out a lot of big, heavy speakers. Don't hurt anything horsing them about!

-Suntan


----------



## Paulcet

While there is really nothing I could add to what others have already said, I will say that I am curious to hear (read) all of the reviewers' thoughts on these products. I don't have a dedicated listening/theater space, but will be keeping some of these concepts in mind when the time comes to either convert a garage or add to my house!


----------



## rcarlton

Neat shootout. Glad to see you are using the Oppo BDP-105 in the setup. I have the Oppo BDP-95 and it rocks. I understand that the speakers were selected by the masses. Any plans to try additional speakers at different price points?


----------



## whitey019

The SVS Ultra Towers are very interesting too. I'm a BIG Paradigm fan, but they may soon be out of my price range, so the comparison between the Ultras and Studio 60s could be thought-provoking.


----------



## NewGuy3232

The Dyanaudio tweeters are something else. It is not heavy like most dome tweeters. I have not heard the Paradigms and the Maggies but I also heard they are very good speakers. This is going to be a very good shootout once again! Thanks for making it happen again!


----------



## SRW1000

This is a really nice selection of speakers, with interesting design differences. It'll be cool to see the REW graphs for each, as an additional comparison.

Sounds like it'll be a fun event, glad we can participate vicariously.


----------



## Archaea

This looks to be a fantastic gathering! Of these specific models I've only heard the SVS Ultra towers, but I've heard Magnepan and Martin Logan Electrostatics before (different models) and both offered a unique and interesting sound characteristic over traditional speakers!

Some have stated the SVS towers might be a bit borderline boomy or muddy on bass when used in full range, but I did not think that at all during the time I spent with them at one of the recent g2gs in IA. In fact the SVS towers were one of my favorite speakers of the day at that meet --- and there were some tough contenders there - many offerings costing several times more. 

I hope this event proceeds without any major hitches and is well enjoyed by all in attendance. I'll definitely stay tuned for the results!


----------



## NBPk402

Sonnie,
Are you removing the unused speakers when you are doing your evaluations?


----------



## BrewCity

Looking forward to the results. Although this is way out of my price range, I like to see reviews of high end components to see what the money buys and what makes it worth it.


----------



## blownrx7

Dynaudio DM 3/7
Emerald Physics CS2P
Magnepan 1.7
MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL
Paradigm Studio 60
SVS Ultra Towers
It is interesting to me that the only speaker in this collection that I have not investigated at least for an audition is the Dynaudio.
This is a tough comparison when you consider that the panel speaker ML and Maggies and the open baffle CS2P's can really challenge the room acoustics while the more conventional speakers can, potentially, be more forgiving of room acoustics and placement. So the challenge will be to invest the time in placement and room treatment to unleash the full potential of the "panel" speakers so as not to game the results.


----------



## Sonnie

phreak said:


> For a music suggestion please invest the 4:56 to check out "Shock" by John Tesh. My #1 instrumental go-to test track.
> 
> Tons of respect for your review panel. We are all looking forward to your careful analysis. I for one would like to read a brief pre-review stating what each reviewer is expecting. Posted before the event of course. Which speakers have you previously experienced, what favourites do you have? Some will parrot on about "expectation bias", but that pop psychology can't stand up in the face of men with integrity willing to say "Hey, I was wrong. Brand X surprised me, and Brand Y didn't live up to my overblown expectations"


That John Tesh track is pretty good... I really like it. Just listened to it with my headphones. 

I think it will be hard to list all the speakers we have listened to... as several of us have been to a few audio shows and heard fifty-eleven speakers. Of course I have owned quite a few, which I believe are listed in our Personal Speaker Evolution Thread... mine is the first listed.

I can't say what to expect... learned better from the first one, when I got it totally wrong. I was even biased a bit (I think), but that did not seem to matter.




ericzim said:


> Just for fun can you guys test some 96/24 or higher bit rate vinyl rips? You choose the records.


I am not sure how to do this, but if you can PM Wayne (AudiocRaver) he may know how to accomplish it. I have a turntable and several albums.




rcarlton said:


> Any plans to try additional speakers at different price points?


Yes... we will likely do one more $2.500... then possibly move to the $3500-4000 range.




ellisr63 said:


> Sonnie,
> Are you removing the unused speakers when you are doing your evaluations?


Yes... they are all in the hall, even my ML Prodigy's will not be in the room, however, there will be some smaller speakers in there that we can easily move out of the way for testing other placements of the evaluation speakers.


By the way... we have our RMAF forum up and running. We don't have all of the rooms posted yet, but the guys are working on it. Expect a LOT more threads for other rooms. We have all the sponsors posted as Sticky Threads... other rooms are starting to show up below those. Again... expect a LOT more. Please check us out and let us know what you think. Comments in those threads are very appreciated. :T

*Rocky Mountain Audio Fest (RMAF) 2013 Show Coverage*


----------



## Subw00er

This will be a pretty interesting shootout.

I'm mostly a HT guy and own the Maggy 1.7's and switched from Dynaudios. I previously used the Dyn Audience 52's, 72's then the 82's, then contours, and actually still use Dynaudio for my center channel and subwoofers (dual sub300's to complement the 1.7's). I also use the mmg as my rear channels. The system sounds very good now actually and I've stopped looking to change it, imagine that! It has surround speed with the Maggy's and softness, presense and slam from the Dyns. FWIW, the rest of my gear is outlaw audio (975 prepro and 5 2200 monoblocks). 

I havent researched the newer Dynaudios, and cant wait to hear the results. Maybe I'll switch back! One of my mmg blew a tweeter, so now I have an excuse to do some rearranging, hah!

BTW, when you do your testing with the 1.7's, make sure that you test a bit while orientating perfectly ON AXIS with the listener - I'm looking at your room pic in the first post... The speakers sound good everywhere but there is a VERY tight band where they sound amazing and image/stage well. The Dyn's typically sound better a little off axis.


----------



## The Natural

Happy to see a thorough review of speakers in this price and quality range. As some have stated, speakers in this price range would not be practical for me to purchase, however seeing the designs and components may affect some of my future speaker projects. As a car audio fanatic, I am partial to brands such as Peerless, Morel and Dynaudio...so I'll be paying close attention to the Dynaudio review. :T

Thank you for taking the time to do this review and filling us in on the details of the results!


----------



## skeeter99

If we can make track suggestions, I've always loved Jennifer Warnes: Way Down Deep track. Beautiful vocals, great instrumentation and can really showcase a speakers low end prowess (or lack thereof). 

Just my 2cents 

Scott


----------



## Emkay

Emkay said:


> Will be interested to see your test program material, and really hoping there will be at least one superbly recorded classical piece included. If you can't decide on one, I'd be very happy to make a suggestion.


Here is my recommendation for a classical test piece:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000X33VYG/ref=dm_mu_dp_trk1

but preferably in a higher resolution format than this one!


----------



## Osage_Winter

Hello, Fellow 'Shacksters!

As someone with passionate roots in audio -- both mobile and home oriented (I still remember my yesteryears of blasting incredibly deep bass notes through my massive Kicker SS12 box in the rear of my 1991 Nissan 240SX :rubeyes: :rubeyes: :unbelievable -- but without, unfortunately, the necessary funds to put together a truly high-end, top-shelf system in multichannel or two-channel configuration, I truly enjoyed reading about this evaluation. Indeed, I truly wish I could afford loudspeakers of such formidable pedigree (being a contract freelance writer, even for multiple publications across a multitude of genres, is not a profession I'd recommend for anyone looking to survive or make any kind of money :sarcastic but I have instead learned to truly love more affordable, easier-to-attain gear. How I would love to sample these speakers in this roundup, though; I wonder if my Onkyo TX-8555 stereo receiver would be able to power a pair of any them comfortably...:rubeyes: :huh: :T

There is indeed something so magical about a good, solid two-channel system with formidable floorstanding tower loudspeakers and a stereo integrated amp or receiver driving them...all, of course, showing off their gorgeous black brushed-aluminum faceplates! 

Keep up the good work, Sonnie and the rest of the HTS staff that puts these wonderful roundups together! :T


----------



## MusicalFreq

This is great! As I am a mastering engineer, I constantly deal with different styles of music, so I am picky about where and thru what I listen to my projects in order to put out the best product possible. I have three rooms, the mastering room, which has a 5.1 surround speaker system in a balanced audio room, the recording room that that is pretty flat, no echo what so ever, with a stereo set of studio speakers, and a 7.2 surround sound theater system with speakers mounted in the walls with special boxes, except for the 2 subwoofers, and of course I have a small boombox to use as well. this set up allows me to test our projects and get a mix that sounds good in all the different speakers. So I am pleased to be a member here as I find that the newbie as well as the pros can come and find out whats available in audio equipment and what the so many experts that frequent here have to say. It sounds like your test room, Cedar Creek Cinema (The 2 Car Garage), is set up really nice. I will be very interested in finding out the results of these tests as I always have people asking me what they should buy for their home theaters. Have fun, and I hope you listen to some great music.


----------



## Projectorlover

Wow really cool event. Great timing as I've been researching new higher dollar speakers for my Onkyo 805. You have an awesome home theater by the way.


----------



## phreak

Sonnie said:


> That John Tesh track is pretty good... I really like it. Just listened to it with my headphones. I think it will be hard to list all the speakers we have listened to... as several of us have been to a few audio shows and heard fifty-eleven speakers. Of course I have owned quite a few, which I believe are listed in our


Sorry Sonnie I didn't make myself clear on that earlier. I meant to ask which of the speakers in the shoot out each reviewer had previous experience with, not all the speakers you had heard in general.


----------



## mtrunz

I haven't been posting much these past few months as summertime is outdoor time for me but with the cooler air rolling in, I'll soon be picking up where I left off with my home theater build and the build thread I started earlier this year.

When I read about the shootout I thought it was a good opportunity to get my feet wet again. I mean, who doesn't love a good shootout and it comes at a great time for me because I have yet to purchase my HT speakers and some of the models being tested are of genuine interest to me.

It's impossible for me to audition such a fine selection of speakers locally these days. We used to have at least a dozen stereo shops who carried different equipment back in the 70's and 80's. I used to spend many Saturdays making the rounds to audition the latest and greatest equipment and speakers but those days are long gone. Today we have 2 local stereo shops not counting the one remaining chain store. Of those 2, one carries only 2 brands and the other only 3 or 4 and both offer very limited stock for auditioning. I actually ran a small stereo shop out of my home back in the 80's and was an authorized ESS dealer. Does anyone remember the ESS brand and infamous "Heil Air Motion Transformer"? Well, that's a story for another time so lets not clutter the shootout thread with "I remember ESS" posts. 

While a shootout is not quite as much fun or beneficial as an in person audition, it serves a much needed purpose for those of us who have so little to choose from locally and I am looking forward to reading the results. 

Thanks HTS, for putting this shootout together. :T


----------



## orion

You have great sets of speakers for audition. I am most interested in the Maggies. Beautiful speakers.

It is so hard to decide on speakers I am glad you are putting this together. Even when I audition speakers I have a hard time with the different rooms the speakers are in. You guys have taken out as many of the variables as possible and we all thank you guys for giving us (I'm sure) great reviews


----------



## SALESEPHOTO

Wow sounds like a great event , I would love to attend but it's a little out of my area.Any events planed for the north east? Larry


----------



## ILOVEMYHDTV

hi all. and good day. Well i am late to the party but this would be fun. IMO: reference material would be 1) on bluray: LED ZEPPLIN: The Song Remains the Same. 2) 2010 OPENING NIGHT CONCERT AT WALT DISNEY CONCERT HALL.. with GUSTOV DUDAMEL & JUAN DIEGO FLOREZ. Even though there IS a universe of unbelievable artist out there, but these 2 pics i can say WILL leave you with a smile and feel good, jam and rock out music. But i think putting electrostatic or what ever tech they are against traditional cone, is a bit off. You should break in the panels then maybe or compare the 2 and the winner goes against the cone winner....but thats me. I would love to have this job; i wish i could understand math and engineer and build my own speaker .....winner......Paradigm....maybe  but i guess over all the winner WILL put a smile on your face no matter what your playing through them.


----------



## shinksma

Hmm, this is very interesting for me. I am once again getting an itch to upgrade my speakers. I have a weird mix of towers (mains & sides), surrounds and center, but they (especially the now very old towers and center) keep chugging along. I also have a pair of Epik Empires for subs, although one is offline (I need to find a suitable replacement amp). They do a yeoman's job for surround material, especially movies, but I think a really nice pair for 2-ch material is something I need to invest in.

So this will be monitored with great interest on my part.

shinksma


----------



## tripplej

Thanks once again for providing this great forum with exciting insight into the various speakers that are being auditioned here. Great way for us to get details on the various speakers all in one place for easy read and research. Keep up the good work!


----------



## Doc

:clap:Very interesting and exciting event. Although I am not in the market at present, I am looking forward to the results. I expect all brands should do well as they are truly great speakers, with each to offer something over the other.:unbelievable:May be I can use the results for my future setup!



mpednault said:


> A DIY versus Manuf. evaluation would be incredible and would most likely let those of us building DIY speakers if there truly is fruit to be had of our labor. Although I can't afford a pair of $2500 speakers, this will be an interesting read. I enjoy reading listening impressions over interpreting graphs.
> 
> I too think this should be a blind folded evaluation for the listeners so that it erases bias, preconceived notions and any other irregularities that could skew the comparisons. Dedicate someone to place and wire up the speakers. Blind fold the listeners before entering the room and in no way let them know which speakers they will be listening to (making sure they are blind folded before seeing which speakers AREN'T in the room!). After they've heard the test material, as soon as they leave the room they write down their impressions WITHOUT TALKING TO EACH OTHER. Only after they write down their opinions can they share their thoughts. I know this would require more time and strict "rules" but would offer up the most "accurate" way to evaluate the speakers without influences.
> 
> Looking forward to reading more!


Couldn't agree with this any more! May be in future comparisons, a DIY speaker entry be made also.:nerd: As DIY is supposedly substantial savings, cost range for the DIY could be about 30 -40% of the other speakers. To invite DIY, for this comparisons, you could ask all DIY makers to submit REW results and then choose one out of all - possibly by popular vote and REW results. (I do not have a DIY speaker build:bigsmile.


----------



## Stinn

This looks like a great line up of speakers it will be really interesting to hear the results. The extra "surprises" are very tantalizing too! I can't even imagine what a $20,000 setup would sound like? I'm not sure my ears can resolve that well! Anyway, it looks great!


----------



## Otis857

Great idea! 
Love the idea of a quasi shoot out and the brands mentioned are some I've been curious to hear about. The only brand I've actually heard myself were the Martin Logans, and that was some time ago. My current L&R speakers were in that price range when I bought them 10 years ago(Linn 5140's), so I'm curious how much more you can get for your $$ these days. 

Question. Have you considered having an independent person/party set up each speaker pair prior to the official audition? And is the WAF (Wife acceptance factor) going to be addressed? Its always a battle to get the household CEO to agree to speakers being too far out into the room for the sake of sound quality. onder:


----------



## Fazorcat

Although I've never had speakers of this quality/price, I'm interested to see the results. I am fond of Paradigm, so I'm hoping they are near the top! I'll be keeping my eye on this thread!


----------



## Owen Bartley

Well, I didn't do so well in the first round, so let's see if I can make up for it here. There are some really nice speakers in this challenge which makes it hard to choose. I am a fan of Paradigm, and although I haven't heard the Studios, they are a staple of quality systems. I also have a lot of respect for Dynaudio, who I think make some incredible speakers. But I'm going to go out on a limb here and vote for the Emerald Physics CS2P. I just have a good feeling about them... A little unconventional, and they look great on paper. Can't wait to see the results, and what else comes up in this thread!


----------



## ericzim

Otis857 said:


> Great idea!
> Love the idea of a quasi shoot out and the brands mentioned are some I've been curious to hear about. The only brand I've actually heard myself were the Martin Logans, and that was some time ago. My current L&R speakers were in that price range when I bought them 10 years ago(Linn 5140's), so I'm curious how much more you can get for your $$ these days.
> 
> Question. Have you considered having an independent person/party set up each speaker pair prior to the official audition? And is the WAF (Wife acceptance factor) going to be addressed? Its always a battle to get the household CEO to agree to speakers being too far out into the room for the sake of sound quality. onder:


Speaking of WAF, I showed the picture of the ML's to my wife from the web and she said they were stunning and wouldn't mind a pair in our living room, than I showed her the price and she didn't even flinch. I can't wait to see how they do in the shoot out. I have the best wife in the world!


----------



## boulderbass

This looks like a great event! Speakers have always been the bane of my existence (not only as a lover of audio, but as a bass player and a recording engineer), so it's great to see events like this happen. 

I'd love to check out speakers of this caliber for my home or home studio (I'm currently using ProAc Studio 100s driven by a McIntosh MC2105 in my studio and a pair of Avalon NPIIs driven by MC30s in my living room), but before I did, I would want to spend a bunch of time and effort in getting the acoustics of my rooms improved. I went through a lot of different speakers in my home studio before doing minimal treatment and it was shocking how much difference some bass traps and first reflection control made. About a month ago, Airshow Mastering here in Boulder presented Sam Berkow of SIA Acoustics for a seminar in room design and it was quite an eye, or should I say, ear opener, especially the shape of the room (I came up in the studio world when live end/dead end was the rage. I was a skeptic but it wasn't until now that I've heard the reasons why it didn't work out so well.). I've always enjoyed hearing music in David Glasser's room at Airshow and while I've always attributed a lot of it to his speakers (Dunlavy with Pass Lab amps (I think those are the amps he uses)), but now it's clear that the room/speaker synergy is where the magic really happens. It looks like the room for this test is great! Have fun, guys! I'm looking forward to the results.


----------



## htaddikt

It sounds like it will be an excellent event. I also wish it would be possible to attend, by not this time. I am still amazed at the continuing evolution going on in the speaker industry, not to push aside the lesser known designers including some very talented homebrew folks. 
Audio electronics keeps improving, but mostly in the areas of interface and compatibility with other devices and remote and other wireless features. 
But speakers are in a class of their own. The improvements you can really hear keep coming. It is more than just an art and design effort, it is truly a craft in a way I think that other audio components can not equal.


----------



## Otis857

ericzim said:


> Speaking of WAF, I showed the picture of the ML's to my wife from the web and she said they were stunning and wouldn't mind a pair in our living room, than* I showed her the price and she didn't even flinch.* I can't wait to see how they do in the shoot out. I have the best wife in the world!


You are a lucky man indeed!!


----------



## cobraguy

Looking forward to this! These are all great speakers in this evaluation.
Personally, I love the Maggie's but not sure they will be able to compete in the low frequencies. My money is on the Martin Logan's, but I think it's going to be very close.
-Great job guys. Have fun with the test!


----------



## Bones13

I am interested in OB speakers currently. I look forward to your evaluation of the Emerald Physics CS2P in your audition series. If this were not such a busy time of year, I would try and drive up there to take a listen myself. There is a lot of thought currently about an OB midrange/tweeter run by a class A amp, and having a DSP/crossover system for a plate amp running the bass drivers. Better bass than can be had with the lower wattage amp, and elimination of "box" effects on the critical midrange/tweeter section.

However, the OB systems need more room to run in than I have in my man cave. These speakers are only 18 inches wide though, much better than 24-36 like many of them.

Please be sure to detail the room placement for these speakers when you comment on them.


----------



## chashint

My wife is real good about gear too.
A long time ago she lobbied to get rid of my old 70's era speakers with something small and pretty so I brought home a Bose Acoustimass system that cost about $1200 and hooked it up.
After just a few minutes of listening she said she didn't want to spend money and have worse sound and asked if it could be taken back.
I packed it up and returned it.
About three years ago the old speakers needed to be replaced and when I wanted a RF-83 system she didn't bat an eye.
I know many of my friends have to fight for every inch of TV and a real sound system is out of the question.
After I narrow gear down to two or three choices she wants her say on the final decision but at that point it's a can't lose for me.


----------



## cobraguy

Great wife indeed!
My wife is very similar. I've been hooked on audio/video for decades, and back before we got married I was in the market for new speakers in the 2000-2500 range (similar to this evaluation). She started coming with me during my listening tests and she caught the bug. She was amazed at the differences in sound and detail that came from different speakers. After about 18 months, I narrowed my choices down to 2 models (Snells and Amrita's) and she liked them both too. In the end, I bought the Snell's and SHE bought the Amrita's for her place! LOL
Now that we are married, she has helped me with all of my upgrades (she has a good ear!). When I upgraded from the Snell's to my current speakers (PBN Montana EPS's), she went with me to all my listening tests. Again, I narrowed it down to 2 speakers (B&W's were the others) and she liked the Montana's a little better, especially when we added a sub into the mix. I agreed and they came home with us.
Now we have our home theater headed up by the Montana's, but she has her own listening room with some of my old electronics running her Amrita Summit's (yep, she wouldn't part with them even after we got married!). She say's "the girls" need a getaway room for wine and music while the guys are watching TV in the main room.
Who am I to argue with that?


----------



## Sonnie

phreak said:


> Sorry Sonnie I didn't make myself clear on that earlier. I meant to ask which of the speakers in the shoot out each reviewer had previous experience with, not all the speakers you had heard in general.


Ahh... well... of course I have heard quite a few MartinLogans... and I have heard the SVS Ultra's twice at shows. I have not heard any of these other exact models anywhere. I have heard lower end or higher end models on some of them. Never heard Dynaudio or Paradigm.




SALESEPHOTO said:


> Wow sounds like a great event, I would love to attend but it's a little out of my area. Any events planned for the north east? Larry


Not sure yet if we will have these in other locations, although we generally have to limit it to staff, as the complexity of the setup and listening is rather time consuming as it is. Having others there listening would cause us not to get finished.




Otis857 said:


> Question. Have you considered having an independent person/party set up each speaker pair prior to the official audition? And is the WAF (Wife acceptance factor) going to be addressed? Its always a battle to get the household CEO to agree to speakers being too far out into the room for the sake of sound quality. onder:


We only setup the speakers when we get ready to audition them. The other speakers are outside the room, so it would not be feasible to have someone come in and set them up. Plus, we have pretty good ears available for setting them up, which basically consist of plugging in the speaker cables and getting them placed.

WAF is something each "husband" has to address and judge for himself, based on his particular "wife". It would be difficult for us to know all of your wives and what they might like or dislike.

As far as moving them out into the room... does your wife sit and listen with you, or is she somewhere else? Personally, if I could not listen to the speakers in their best placement, I would not buy them, as you have lost the benefit of buying them if you can't listen in the proper location. I may be that you find the best placement, mark it (or record the measurements from a source point) and move them to that placement when listening. Move them back when finished. You really need the proper setup and ability to move the speakers around if you plan to do any serious listening. If you are merely using speakers for background music, you could just pick up some really inexpensive speakers for that... or something you know won't upset your wife.


----------



## twylight

This event looks awesome. If there is one in Texas I will bring Philharmonic 2s and an assortment of amps. I am entering my DIY phase of audio...not sure if this will be the pinnacle of my journey or just make me realize why beautiful finishes cost more 

For the event consider toe in, distance, and ensure all the connections are solid. I measured speakers with major toe in changes and it was different enough to be seen on calibrated graphs.

Have fun!


----------



## sub_crazy

This sure sounds like a lot of fun, I wish I was in the area and had an invite!

Happy to see the Emerald Physics in the line up, haven't heard this version but did have an older pair which were great. It is a very nice line-up of speakers so it will be interesting to see how they all stack up.

I really want to hear about the $20K 2-channel system and the special guest with a unique 5.0 system.....talked about getting my interest.

You guys are really doing great work :yes:


----------



## Owen Bartley

I wish I could attend some of these get togethers. To be able to hang out with a bunch of other guys interested in the same stuff, play around with some great gear, and audition some really nice speakers... Sounds like a really great way to spend a day or two.


----------



## dannyselder

Wow this sounds like a GREAT idea! I am new to all of the crazy parts and all that goes into these speaker setups. I appreciate good sound but don't know what it takes to get there. I've got a few thousand into my setup and thought it was a fortune until finding this forum and it making me feel like an idiot. I don't know what half of the charts and jargon means but it would be awesome to go check out a big event like this and get to see some real setups. Way cool and I'm jealous that I'm so far away!


----------



## admranger

Looks like a great line up of speakers and equipment (the Onkyo was my 2nd choice after the Marantz AV8801 I ended up with).

Really looking forward to how sensitive the speakers are to placement. I need very forgiving speakers for my system due to sidewall proximity.

Loved the $1000 challenge, so I see no reason why I won't like this one just as well.

Thanks for the great work guys! It should help some of us avoid doing this: :spend:


----------



## robsong

I was surprised on the speaker that won the first shootout. I just wished that these shootouts were happening last year when I was looking for speakers. This way I could of looked at other speakers that I couldn't listen to. These shootouts is great for people looking at upgrading their speakers keep up the good work. :clap:


----------



## olddog

It looks like someone has done their homework! I wish I could have done something like this when I was on my quest for new speakers, in this exact price range. I had to do it the hard way, (6 months of the hard way)-one listen at a time and a lot of travel-but the journey was fun, and I got to meet some wonderful people, some which I can still call "friend" today. Also along the way, I was able to bring my Wife into the hunt so now we both have a memory we can enjoy. I look forward to your results.


----------



## Captain Rex

First time to this thread and I was blown away by the initial image showing the set-up! I have a much more humble system and was instantly jealous. I look forward to the results of the tests and the methods used.


----------



## Greenster

I am curious as to how the ARX's from the $1000 shoot out will compare. $2500 is a lot more money and I am sure will buy a better speaker but how much better is the big question for me in this shoot out?


----------



## designosaur

Impressive collection of speakers you have assembled. I'll be looking forward to the results. I read with interest the $1000 audition/shootout thread, and I think you guys did a great job of differentiating between all of the speakers assembled. 

This audition should be a great event as well, but will probably be a much tougher task for you, as i'm sure the differences in measured performance will be slight, but each speaker will continue to sound a bit different, and reveal the biases of their manufacturer, and the preferences of the listener.

Moving them all around will probably do a number on your back too. Some of these look pretty hefty. Good luck with the event, I am looking forward to the write-up.


----------



## kevin360

As many others have stated, I’d _love_ to join in the fun of auditioning this lineup of speakers. It’s cool that such a wide range of designs is in the mix, but it is going to pose a bit of a challenge to set up each pair as they require for their best performance. As a Maggie owner, I can attest to their finicky disposition with respect to placement and room treatments. Regardless, I have faith that the HTS team members will do all they can to perform meaningful evaluations/comparisons. I look forward to the results and really wish I could crash that party!


----------



## hwkn

I too would love to be there but seeing as i'm nowhere near there i'll just have to wait for the results to be reported on in here.[should be an interesting read]


----------



## amco

What makes this evaluation event so special and valuable for me is the inclusion of 3 panel/dipole speakers versus 3 traditional models. I am very interested to learn if a preference trend emerges from this 50/50 design split. Might guess that the dipoles are favored for stereo music and the traditionals for HT?
Most other evaluations I have seen may just include one dipole model as "the odd man out"!


----------



## Sonnie

If you have recommendations for good demo music... we have a dedicated thread for this. Please let us know your favorites: 

*Good Demo Music - Good Imaging Music - Your Favorite Demo Music*




skeeter99 said:


> If we can make track suggestions, I've always loved Jennifer Warnes: Way Down Deep track. Beautiful vocals, great instrumentation and can really showcase a speakers low end prowess (or lack thereof).


Great song. I have The Hunter CD. Danny Richie with GR Research always plays a few of her songs in his room at the shows. Vienna Teng is another good one he plays.




Emkay said:


> Here is my recommendation for a classical test piece:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000X33VYG/ref=dm_mu_dp_trk1
> 
> but preferably in a higher resolution format than this one!


I struggle having to listen to this... just not my flavor. For whatever reasons it just not do anything for me. I guess I don't get it. No offense. :huh:


----------



## Greenster

I am curious as to how the ARX's from the $1000 shoot out will compare. $2500 is a lot more money and I am sure will buy a better speaker but how much better is the big question for me in this shoot out?


----------



## macmovieman

There is a lot of value in the Studio 60 speakers and for my money what is what I would pick given 50% music and 50% movies. If I listened to Classical and wanted the most clear details I would go with the Magnepan 1.7. The Dynaudio DM 3/7 would be a good choice between the two. The Studio 60 is going to be your best bet.


----------



## flamingeye

WOW that is quit the setup you have going there should be a lot of work and fun , I'm looking foreword to all you guys impressions of each speaker . it's refreshing to have a review instead of pitting each speaker against each other I wish I was there with you guys .


----------



## dthree

This is definitely an interesting event and I'm really looking forward to the results way more than any HT magazine or commercial review site. Would it be possible to comment on how the speakers perform in less-than-ideal acoustic conditions for those of us who have to set up our HTs in living rooms and such?


----------



## paulster

I'm really interested to see what the outcome is going to be from this selection, because of the sheer diversity of speaker types. Personally I love the effortless transparency of the top-end Martin Logans, but also love the dynamics and sheer slam of Dynaudios, and I'd still have trouble choosing between both of these types.

Add in the Maggies for another take on planars and the dipoles of the Emeralds, and I think choosing between them is going to be really tough as the characters are likely to be so different.


----------



## Sonnie

dthree said:


> This is definitely an interesting event and I'm really looking forward to the results way more than any HT magazine or commercial review site. Would it be possible to comment on how the speakers perform in less-than-ideal acoustic conditions for those of us who have to set up our HTs in living rooms and such?


It would be difficult to replicate other conditions to know if that is the way it will sound in any other given environment. My guess would be that you won't get the best sound in the "less-than-ideal" acoustic conditions. HT is different from two-channel... in that less desirable two-channel positioning of the mains might actually sound okay for movies. You will most likely need to be willing to reposition the mains for more serious two-channel listening... even if it is temporary, otherwise there may not be any value in purchasing speakers for the purpose of two-channel listening.


----------



## mconigs78

This would be so cool to be apart of. Maybe someone here in Texas could so something like this. My ears would probably melt hearing this type of setup especially coming from a beginner home theater setup. Hope everyone has a good listen. It's definitely one to remember .

Sent from my iPhone using HTShack


----------



## Picture_Shooter

This is so exciting for me to see the shoot-out of the $2500 speakers! Why? Because after coming back for this years 2013 RMAF I have my ears set on a few speakers and am excited to see that at least 3 of them are in HTS speaker evaluation!!

The three speakers I am excited to read the reports are on :
*SvS Ultras
*Maggies 1.7's
*Emerald Physics CS2P

Out of these 3 I was able to listen to the Ultra's in the SvS demo room. I was very happy to say that I really enjoyed listening to this pair in 2-channel and multi-channel along with the other Ultra family speakers that are offered through SvS.

As for Maggies, they were not at RMAF nor did I see any dealers having maggies setup, but I am very familiar with the MMG, MMGw & MMGc. Adding the 1.7 to the mix I am again excite to read the report on the 1.7's

Last are the unique looking, but very appealing Emerald Physics CS2P. These models were not at the RMAF this year, but on Sunday (last hosted day at RMAF) I decided to take another trip there just to audition the big brother CS2.3 MK2 however these were not my cup of tea because they are setup for Bi-Amplified and I do not want to purchase or own 4 separate amps just to push a 'pair' of speakers, but I did want to get an idea what Emerald Physics sounded and these were amazing sounding pair of towers that I can see I would be extremely happy with for a very long time in my casa. So with that being said and if these CS2.3 MK2s sound like this I am curious what is to offer in the pair of Emerald Physics CS2P below the $3k price point. I really have my eyes on these! So I cannot wait to read the reported feed back from the guys here.  

Picture_Shooter is standing by........ 1, 2, 3, 3.5, 4 ,..........10


----------



## mrbashfo

I feel like this line up is pretty intense as some of the speakers are still directed towards a certain crowd. However, very nice speakers to line up against each other. I liked the previous $1000 evaluation =p


----------



## marty1

Thank You Sonnie, I'm really looking forward to this 

The picture of all of those speakers is utterly mouth watering to say the least. I can imagine if I walked into that room I would be like Homer Simpson walking into a donut shop 

They all look great in their own way but I must say I am particularly interested in the Emerald Physics speakers as they look so elegant and with 15inch drivers I'm sure they will be jaw dropping 

I love to know what effect the dipole element has on the quality of sound as I am really only used to dipole surrounds.

I am truly envious, I would love to be there for this as I am sure it will be amazing.

Marty


----------



## atledreier

That lineup looks amazing! 

Really looking forward to this. The price range is perfect for a serious setup that doesn't go overboard just for the sake of it. I like my systems down to earth where you still get your money's worth!


----------



## Orange55

Looking forward to the results of this, with particular interest in the Paradigm Studio 60 and the Dynaudio DM 3/7 with the Anthem Amp. Good of them to lend that for this test.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Otis857 said:


> Have you considered having an independent person/party set up each speaker pair prior to the official audition?


This is an interesting thought. Having just returned from the RMAF show, it was surprising and enlightening to realize the variety of placement quality that we encountered. Realizing that the exhibitors have limited time and often poor rooms to work with, there were speaker/room setups that sounded terrific next to setups in identical rooms that were quite disappointing. The difference? Assuming someone had the responsibility to place speakers and perhaps apply some portable treatments, it was this person's ear and judgment against that one's.

There are people who do work like that for a living, and some are very good at it. Sonnie's approach has been to gather a group of people who

He likes being around.
He trusts in his home and around his family.
Have worked with audio for a long time, with qualifications including a seasoned audio professional and a university degree in audio technology, and who understand the electronics, acoustics, and psychoacoustics involved in room, system, and speaker setup.
Have proven critical listening skills.
Enjoy working together and get along well, can have fun while working in a focused way to accomplish the tasks at hand.
Have a lot of experience with speakers and speaker setup and placement issues.
Sonnie's approach proved itself quite well at the $1K evaluation event in August, although we will be first to admit we are still learning - any audio pro who claims they have it _all figured out_ is not to be trusted. Considering all the technical and interpersonal dynamics that go into making an event like this a success, it is hard to imagine a better approach than the one Sonnie has taken, IMO.



> And is the WAF (Wife acceptance factor) going to be addressed? Its always a battle to get the household CEO to agree to speakers being too far out into the room for the sake of sound quality. onder:


The WAF is definitely considered, as far as I am concerned. She has her part of the house, and the speakers are elsewhere, where serious audio takes place.:bigsmile:

OK, that is a little overboard, I will admit. I have the benefit of a listening room where anything goes with speaker placement, cabling, whatever. That is often not the case. As Sonnie has remarked, not placing the speakers in their ideal listening location effectively negates a large part of their value. The $800/pair A5s we heard in August would probably have sounded little better than a $300 pair of towers if forced into a decorator-friendly position against the wall by the lamp and the potted fern. Even having to move them a few feet from their ideal location dramatically alters their performance.

It is probably true that $2500 speakers poorly located will _more than likely_ sound better than $250 speakers in the same location. There are so many variables it would be impossible to say for certain and the best $2500 speakers for one non-ideal location might be totally different than the best $2500 speakers for another non-ideal location. There is a point where the nature of the selection exercise changes altogether from _which speakers do I like best?_ to _which speakers sound best in the location or area I have to work with?_ This is a legitimate selection approach for many rooms and situations. It is simply not the approach Sonnie has chosen for these evaluations.


----------



## AtomicAgeZombie

I'm really looking forward to reading the results of this event. The fact that everyone is getting to listen in the same controlled environment, should make for interesting, individual reviews. Can't wait!


----------



## green giant

Really looking forward to the Emerald Physics review. I've always been a Klipsch fan as I like a more "live" sounding speaker. It seems that is coming back around with the descriptions that Emerald gives, along with other companies like ZU and Tekton. 

Klipsch I always have liked, though sometimes the honkiness of the vocals would get to me, which is why I stepped up to the Palladium P37's. Which I really like, though they were more than I intended on spending.

Interested to hear how the EP's compare to something like the Studio 60's.


----------



## vjsanaiz

I am really looking forward to this evaluation. I live in Miami, where there are practically no Audio dealers (Magnolia anyone?) and as such have virtually no opportunity to audition audio gear. That being the case, events of this nature are one of my reference points when I am thinking/learning about audio and the many offerings out there. It sucks to "experience" audio vicariously, but we do the best we can to feed the passion through sources like HTS. Thank you.


----------



## tbaudoin

These speakers certainly sound interesting. I have been looking for a similar price point solution for about 6-8 years as a replacement for my M&Ks. I am quite hopeful more current technology can take my pseudo theater to the next level.


----------



## Muzikal-JRNE

WOW!!! This should be a very entertaining and enlightening event. I am very much looking forward to hearing everyone's listening impressions and conclusions. One thing I am curious about with these speakers is the dynamic capabilities of the different speaker types. I am guessing that the Emerald Physics CS2P will come out on top in this regard, but we will only truly know once you give them a proper go.  You have a wonderful room to do the evaluations in, and I will be jealously living vicariously through your posts. 

Cheers, Joe


----------



## bpape

Having staff that will take the time and make the effort to do something like this is one of the things that makes HTS stand out in the crowd. Even though I get exposed to a lot of speakers, it's never in the same room, with the same equipment, etc. This should be very interesting and fun.

Bryan


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> If you have recommendations for good demo music... we have a dedicated thread for this. Please let us know your favorites: Good Demo Music - Good Imaging Music - Your Favorite Demo Music Great song. I have The Hunter CD. Danny Richie with GR Research always plays a few of her songs in his room at the shows. Vienna Teng is another good one he plays. I struggle having to listen to this... just not my flavor. For whatever reasons it just not do anything for me. I guess I don't get it. No offense. :huh:


I just discovered Vienna Teng from Danny! No offense you don't like her stuff, that's one of the great things of music, there's flavors for everyone  I'll meander over to the other thread so as to not muddy up this one


----------



## tonyvdb

I agree, I really think that the HTS is a huge cut above the rest. Staff as well as many forum members go well above and beyond to give us the very best content and reviews of everything home theater related. I cant wait to see what speakers are chosen for this round. Wish I could be there.


----------



## asere

I would love to be engulfed in the presentation room to hear these nice speakers and high end equipment. Once again HTS is the forum above all other forums thanks to Sonnie and all of the staff and sponsors. I wish I could attend!!!!


----------



## roger1014

I would love to be able to attend this event. Really want to hear, and see what a professional set sounds like. For me, it would be really interesting to read the reviews on the Martin Logan ELS and SVS speakers. I currently own the Preface for the L/R, Encore for center and the Motion 4 for the sounds but like most people here I want to go bigger/better!


----------



## Irishsaab

Man, I wish I was able to be there to hear these babies! I hope you all realize that you have my dream job! Thank for going the extra mile for us members. I look forward to seeing how SVS makes out.


----------



## WRYKER

I would love to be there however the reality is, for me and I'd suspect many others out there, having the disposable income to afford two speakers for @$2,500 isn't realistic. If you can afford to spend that for two speakers then you have the income to continue and get a 5.1 or 7.1 (or even 9.2/11.2) set-up with that line of speakers. I wish I had that kind of income!

No doubt all of these speakers are going to sound fantastic! My BIC Acoustech 9.2 set-up will probably be jealous of this 2.0 set up!


----------



## ButchP

Sounds like another great roundup of some reasonably priced speakers. I'm really anxious to see how the Paradigms stack up against some of the others in the group. I owned a pair of v3 Studio 60's for about a year before trading them in for a pair of Studio 100's. I wish I could've kept the 60's for my surround channels and added the 100's, as the 60's are still one of my favorites. The upgrade bug bit, and I was unable to afford to keep them.


----------



## bpape

Not exactly relevant to this thread but the little Studio 20's are a nice voice match to the 100's and will go down plenty low to cross to a sub for surround duties.

Bryan


----------



## janick

Thanks to Sonnie and staff for taking the time and effort to measure this quality list of speakers.

Evaluation’s like this get my attention due to this not being a shootout for best speaker but a personal evaluation of each speakers strengths and weaknesses and the reader can decide what is important to them. The effort and detail is greatly appreaciated


----------



## Andre

This will be a very intereting eval that I wish I could also attend. I have always wanted to side by side compare the same priced ML to Maggy. I can see that there may be a base extension problem with the Maggies as they are the only ones in the shootout but we will see. When I heard the Maggies they were connected to a REL sub. I have never seen the CS2P before its an interesting design, I wonder if they plan to ever make a center channel. My room is smaller (14x17), however the placement info supplied by the shootout I think will be invaluable as a starting point at least.


----------



## fixr

An EVALUATION vs a shootout is a brilliant idea. We all know that everyone has different tastes as well as different levels of listening skills, so this is a great way to get a broad sampling of opinions on the same sets of speakers. It's especially helpful for me because I have abysmal listening skills. LOL To me, it's very similar to wine tasting. I know there are people out there that can specifically and accurately point out all the little nuances and tonal differences between vintages and all that, but that ability boarders on magic to me, because I don't have the slightest idea on how to even begin to do that. It's the same with speakers. I stand next to people in a sound studio, or demo room and hear them saying things like, "Oh man! Listen to low end!" or "Wow! I'm surprised the highs flatten out like that." and don't have the SLIGHTEST idea of what the they're even talking about. LOL

ME? All I hear is a Frank Sinatra song, or whatever happens to be playing. Yeah different speakers can sound a little different - but for me, I just don't hear a difference between a $20 no name wall speaker and a $400 Bose wall speaker(of the same shape and size) to justify the price difference. THIS I believe is rock solid evidence of my OVERWHELMING level of ignorance in this area, and why an EVALUATION vs a shootout is infinitely more helpful to guys like me. Telling me X is better than Y, is of no use - if I don't agree. But telling me WHY X sounds better to you than Y does - now THAT is helpful. 

Thanks for helping me learn!


----------



## pc_light

Between the earlier $1K price range and now the $2k budget I'd venture a guess that you have a large majority of us HTS "lurkers" covered - thanks for doing this and looking forward to the results.

For speaker comparisons, I think the choice of 2-channel over a 5/6/7.1 setup is actually quite brillant, less (speakers) is more (emphasis on the speakers themselves). And drawing from a panel of listeners just helps to raise confidence in the overall opinions expressed even more.

BTW, if at all possible, in addition to any "Good Demo Music" choices you receive, would it be possible to also incorporate the music selections used during the $1K eval? I know they're different animals, but it's still might help to fix an addition variable between the $1K & 2K evals.

Thanks.


----------



## Supergome

I am really looking forward to this shootout, as the $1000 shootout was extremely helpful to me in my recent speaker purchase, both in shopping and in knowing what to listen for. Thanks! :clap:


----------



## leenorm1

It is events like this that make HOME THEATRE SHACK who they are, for too long now many people such as myself have taken the word of other "corporate" magazines as gospel. Events like this where real people will evaluate the contenders for what they are and not the company that has produced them is what makes HTS special. Personally i had wanted the Tannoy speakers to be in the line up,however i am quite interested as to how the svs speakers will fair against the competition as these would be a nice match for my svs subwoofers. Over here in the uk it is hard to demo svs products as dealers are few and far between so a well evaluated opinion would be fantastic.Keep up the good work guys!


----------



## BD55

These kinds of reviews and evaluations are a ton of fun to pore over! I can only hope that someday I can build up a setup like some of these here!!!


----------



## Mark Holmes

As a long time Maggie owner, and a fanboy, I will be interested to find out how the new Maggies match up. For music, I have not had a speaker in my room that out performed the 3.6s. There used to be more get togethers in the Atlanta area, but not so much anymore. It was always interesting to go to another HT and see and hear others set ups. And also to compare gear in a decent listening environment.

Look forward to results.


----------



## jcisbig

I'm not really familiar with a few of these speakers in the shootout, so I'm quite excited to see how they stack up against the products that I am more familiar with! Wish I had the cash to do a shootout of my own! That would be fun!


----------



## bkeeler10

Well I wanted to check out this thread, but I didn't expect there would be 250+ posts in 2 1/2 days! I sorted through most of them. It's great to see so much interest and participate.

I've been looking forward to this evaluation since the $1000 event impressions were posted. You guys are taking on a lot of stuff for this one. It's a lot of work and fun, so I'm not sure whether to be jealous or sympathetic. Okay, I'm jealous!

I hope that you will feel comfortable making comments about how these speakers compare to the Arx A5 that Sonnie obviously has hanging around in his room. Seems like it will be competitive in some or many cases and/or specific areas of sound reproduction with the speakers in this competition.

I look forward to the impressions and thank Sonnie and the staff participants for providing an evaluation and comparison that simply cannot be found anywhere else in the press. It's a boon for us enthusiasts and for manufacturers with quality, competitive products.


----------



## koyaan

Like several others who have replied, I'm most intrested in the Maggies and how they compare to both the Martin Logans and the conventional speakers.I'd love to get the chance to hear some of these comparisons.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Just scanning recent questions, mostly already answered by Sonnie, and have a few thoughts to add concerning the upcoming event...

*Room Treatment:* Sonnie's room was already a very nice room before the August $1K Speaker Eval event, with full carpeting, bass traps, properly spaced panels on side walls and elsewhere - a good balance of absorption where needed with enough liveness for the room to not sound sterile as a listening room. A few more absorptive panels were strategically added before we started. And as we analyzed REW impulse diagrams while finishing up, we were able to determine a few more reflection paths that needed attention, including spots on side walls that were not a problem for his cinema setup but which were early reflection points for the two-channel setup, and several longer paths with big reflections all involving the rear wall. It is my understanding that Sonnie intends to have additional treatments om place to resolve those issues before the upcoming evaluations.

*Seating Reflections:* The impulse diagrams showed early reflections in the one-to-three second region that could only be coming from seating surfaces around the main listening position. We hope to spend some time experimenting with treatments that will help with those reflections, and will report on what we come up with.

*Adjusting Speakers for Individual Listeners:* Height relative to the listener is probably the main variable to consider, but is difficult to do much about with most tower speakers. Luckily, the range of heights of the evaluators is not too broad, and we are all fairly tall, Joe (ALMFamily) the tallest at about 6' 4". We do a lot of moving around at the LP during setup to make sure the sweet spot is centered at a comfortable happy medium sitting position for all involved. If a speaker design does not accommodate that height, then it has a problem and that will count against it - none of us are _giants._ Of course many potential listeners are going to be a little shorter than that, but seated ear height tends not to vary more than a few inches for most.

All that said, soundstage in particular can be fairly sensitive to relative ear height, and it is a variable worth keeping in mind. But adjusting the speakers for each listener, if even possible, would take too long - again, if a speaker in this price range is THAT hard to get positioned, it is a usability problem.

*Comparing to the ARX A5s:* Absolutely! The home spot for the A5s is clearly marked, and we will start with them as a reference point, and perhaps finish up with a final comparison as well.

*Using SACD or Surround Mixes:* Surround mixes tend to dilute the role of the front left & right mains. The quality surround mixes that I am familiar with actually diminish the role of soundstage somewhat as the center channel is relied upon more than phantom imaging - the result being that the soundstage is usually small with little depth. It is a different way of mixing, and while surround mixes can be a lot of fun, they usually are not revealing about speakers in a way that stereo mixes are. SACD or hi-res mixes would be good to include at some point, but we will need to figure out how to manage them gracefully. As Sonnie responded earlier, we are trying to keep the test tracks as easy to work with as possible at this point, using media and playback hardware that is know to be as near error-free as possible.

*Evaluating Amps &/or Cables:* It would be a lot of fun to get into, and I hope we do at some point, but it opens up many entirely new cans of worms complexity- and time-wise. We have talked about it, but are not near ready to jump into it. We would need additional equipment and would need to work it into our processes.

And, believe me, there is no such thing as a "quick" version of _anything_ in these evaluations. We are painstaking about every step, taking measurements (dimensions and REW plots), carefully taking notes, making sure anything we do is recorded and can be repeated. And the time does fly. One little hitch and suddenly we are behind schedule an hour or two. In August, we had to forgo Sonnie BBQing for us - and that was no small sacrifice - to get done in the time we had.

*Evaluator Background Info:* Good idea. Maybe we can work that into the final writeup or perhaps into a separate bio section somewhere.

*More Pictures, Maybe a Video or Two?* We talked about it while preparing for the $1K event, but got overwhelmed and it just did not happen. There was even a thought of streaming a live webcam view of the room over a JustinTV channel. Lighting is subdued and might not be suitable for that. A few short videos via smartphone might be manageable, and more still pics. No promises - the audio comes first.


----------



## AudiocRaver

fixr said:


> An EVALUATION vs a shootout is a brilliant idea. We all know that everyone has different tastes as well as different levels of listening skills, so this is a great way to get a broad sampling of opinions on the same sets of speakers.


Agreed, although I have to admit that the $1K event's goal of recommending a pair of speakers for Sonnie to purchase did keep us focused. For the $2.5K event, we have no such goal (although Sonnie deciding he has just GOT to have one of those pairs of speakers for his own is not out of the question, right Sonnie?)

So maybe we will need to approach the evaluations in terms of suitability for some purpose. Or maybe each of us will select his own favorite and justify that choice. Or we may end up with two or three tiers that they fall into. Or just keep it simple and evaluate each on its own merits. That is something we need to decide on. Thoughts, anyone?


----------



## swingin

Well to be honest I've never had the chance to hear any of these speakers myself. Last time I did any comparison was between Bose, and Cerwin Vega side by side, needless to say the Cerwin Vega won hands down for my style of listening. Loud, clear and powerful lower end. I have a room full of them now and I am happy with there performance! I would love to hear some of those bad boys & compare them with what I have.. May the best speaker win!! :T


----------



## AudiocRaver

Mark Holmes said:


> As a long time Maggie owner, and a fanboy, I will be interested to find out how the new Maggies match up. For music, I have not had a speaker in my room that out performed the 3.6s. There used to be more get togethers in the Atlanta area, but not so much anymore. It was always interesting to go to another HT and see and hear others set ups. And also to compare gear in a decent listening environment.
> 
> Look forward to results.


Although the Maggies did not win the $1K event, mainly for bass performance reasons, I for one was knocked out by the Maggie sound. In fact, my audiophile-minded son is purchasing those MG12's from Sonnie, largely from my raving about them. I am drooling with anticipation at getting to hear a BIG set of Magnepans next week!


----------



## AudiocRaver

pc_light said:


> BTW, if at all possible, in addition to any "Good Demo Music" choices you receive, would it be possible to also incorporate the music selections used during the $1K eval? I know they're different animals, but it's still might help to fix an addition variable between the $1K & 2K evals.
> 
> Thanks.


Very good point. Yes, most of that music will be represented, although there will be some changes. Each evaluator gets to pick 3 favorite tracks. Mine will be the same as before. Then we are compiling what can best be described as a "medley" track which will include key segments - 10 to 20 seconds each - from many of those tracks used for the $1K event, plus other segments of tracks we feel will be particularly revealing in some way.


----------



## jeff_h

Hey all, I am looking forward to the results of this evaluation. It looks like you have a great selection of speakers included in the list.

I would also like to see a future comparison/evaluation of some popular DIY speakers with similar manufactured speakers. For DIY, I would like to see the GR Research N3 compared to store bought speakers.


----------



## Sonnie

skeeter99 said:


> I just discovered Vienna Teng from Danny! No offense you don't like her stuff, that's one of the great things of music, there's flavors for everyone  I'll meander over to the other thread so as to not muddy up this one


Oh no... I like Vienna Teng. To clarify, here is my post:



> Emkay said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is my recommendation for a classical test piece:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000X33VYG/ref=dm_mu_dp_trk1
> 
> but preferably in a higher resolution format than this one!
> 
> 
> 
> I struggle having to listen to this... just not my flavor. For whatever reasons it just not do anything for me. I guess I don't get it. No offense. :huh:
Click to expand...

This refers to the classical piece that was linked in Emkay's post.

Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Sonnie

pc_light said:


> BTW, if at all possible, in addition to any "Good Demo Music" choices you receive, would it be possible to also incorporate the music selections used during the $1K eval? I know they're different animals, but it's still might help to fix an addition variable between the $1K & 2K evals.


I know several of those will be included either in full or parts of a medley recording that Wayne is working on. We want to work a few new songs in the mix too. 




AudiocRaver said:


> Agreed, although I have to admit that the $1K event's goal of recommending a pair of speakers for Sonnie to purchase did keep us focused. For the $2.5K event, we have no such goal (although Sonnie deciding he has just GOT to have one of those pairs of speakers for his own is not out of the question, right Sonnie?)


Thaaaaaaat's Right! :bigsmile:

I am fairly certain that I will keep a pair. :whistling:


----------



## bkeeler10

Keep a pair from this group and the A5s too? You looking to start a retail outlet there Sonnie?  Okay, I guess I have a couple pairs of extra speakers lying around too . . .


----------



## phreak

With all the emphasis on this being a comparative evaluation as opposed to a competition, here is my criteria for declaring an ultimate winner:
If more than half of your review panel chooses to invest their personal hard earned cash to purchase the same model after the evaluation is complete. Wouldn't that be definitive?


----------



## Sonnie

bkeeler10 said:


> Keep a pair from this group and the A5s too? You looking to start a retail outlet there Sonnie?  Okay, I guess I have a couple pairs of extra speakers lying around too . . .


Not sure they will actually be from the evaluation group. :innocent:




phreak said:


> With all the emphasis on this being a comparative evaluation as opposed to a competition, here is my criteria for declaring an ultimate winner:
> If more than half of your review panel chooses to invest their personal hard earned cash to purchase the same model after the evaluation is complete. Wouldn't that be definitive?


I would say that would be pretty definitive, although we all picked the A5's last time and I was the only one that purchased a pair. :huh:


----------



## Tonto

The only one "yet!" They are still a solid contendor for my planned upcoming purchace. I am very much looking forward to hearing how they preform plugged & closer to the wall.

It may be that I have to try & put together a shoot out in my room...if I can get a little help from some friends that is :whistling:.


----------



## Sonnie

You are more than welcome to borrow them for a few weeks. You just have to be sure to take care of them like there were your first born... and second... and third... etc.


----------



## jtalden

There are some very good speaker choices here and I am looking forward to this comparison. I found the last speaker comparison very interesting and many of the comments informative. I find this type of comparison helpful and am looking forward to this one especially. I expect the price point here to be enough to result is some very strong performance. I may be looking in this range or a little higher before too long and your impressions may help my search.

HTS is a great community. Keep up the good work.


----------



## tonyvdb

I am surprised with Klipsch stand on not being involved in this audition. It makes me not so interested towards recommending them in the future. What are they hiding?


----------



## needspeed52

Sonnie, my LCR A5s are sounding even better now that I know you bought the pair and would hold their own against the $2500 group.:T
Cheers Jeff


----------



## vann_d

Sounds like you guys are going to have a great time evaluating these speakers! Those Emerald Physics look really interesting. I've never had the chance to listen to dipole speakers before so I'll be interested to read how they compare.

I recall seeing a video about Harman's listening tests they use when evaluating speakers. Some interesting stuff on this blog...

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2012/11/behind-harmans-testing-lab.html

Also check out the "how to listen" software. I had some fun with it but the free version gets a little old hearing the same song over and over and over...


----------



## natescriven

I look forward to hearing the observations of the listeners. I'm glad that this is a comparison and not a shootout. I'm sure all of the speakers will sound excellent. It is nice though to hear about differing characteristics between the different brands and designs. I personally love the sound of my Ascend Sierra 1's and can't wait to upgrade them to Sierra 2's or Ascend Towers. I also try to remember that other people have different priorities and preferences than me.


----------



## jmschnur

In the past shoot of we discussed using a mono track. Has there been any discussion of this among your testers?


----------



## Sonnie

Not that I am aware of, as I don't really see any benefit with it, although I remember Wayne saying he would have a mono track on stand by.


----------



## Bruce

This sounds like a hoot!! Sure wish I could be a fly on the wall listening. I'm sure you guys will all have a great time. Must say I haven't really listened to any other speakers since I got my Dynaudio towers about 10 years ago. I know mine like lots of power -- Parasound 2003A (300 wpc)-- and I'm really interested to see how all the testers report on their observations. For music, I really like female vocals and instrumentals on my Dynaudios.

Picked up a Proceed AVP2 in the last year and still getting it integrated into my current htpc system, which uses OpenELEC clients connected to a VMware server running a virtual win7/WMC (with the new XBMC server add-on) talking to a HD Homerun Prime with Comcast cable. 

Good luck!!


----------



## jmschnur

It might give a sense of uniformity between the speakers as well helping with speaker placement.


----------



## Coco'sMom

Any chance you guys might need a photographer to document the event? I'm just kidding of course, but know I'll be dreaming of listening to this system in person. :daydream: 
Have fun! :wave:


----------



## Sonnie

Of course Pam... any photographer that would like is welcome to visit and take a few shots of us guys to use for any of your modeling magazines. :bigsmile:  

Oh wait... OH I see now... you want to take pictures of the speakers. uh-huh... oh yeah... now I see how it's gonna be with you photographers. :whistling:

I think we may have to do with our own cameras for this, although a professional photographer would be nice.


----------



## AudiocRaver

phreak said:


> With all the emphasis on this being a comparative evaluation as opposed to a competition, here is my criteria for declaring an ultimate winner:
> If more than half of your review panel chooses to invest their personal hard earned cash to purchase the same model after the evaluation is complete. Wouldn't that be definitive?


That would be pretty conclusive! It will be interesting to see how the evaluation results end up affecting our personal equipment "investments" over the coming months.



Sonnie said:


> I would say that would be pretty definitive, although we all picked the A5's last time and I was the only one that purchased a pair. :huh:


So far.....



tonyvdb said:


> I am surprised with Klipsch stand on not being involved in this audition. It makes me not so interested towards recommending them in the future. What are they hiding?


The Klipsch in the $1K event were _strong_ contenders. Remember that the models we favored were separated by little more than hair's widths of differences in the big scheme of things. I personally have nothing but good to say about them from the $1K evaluation experience.



Sonnie said:


> Not that I am aware of, as I don't really see any benefit with it, although I remember Wayne saying he would have a mono track on stand by.


There will be at least a portion of a track in the "medley" in mono, and perhaps a whole track. Since the $1K event, I have found a mono track to be useful during setup to help find speaker locations with the tightest imaging - ideally it should image tight in the center. So a centered mono track at the beginning of our track sequence for setup purposes, followed by a left-only and then a right-only version might prove useful, and easy to come up with by mixing a stereo track with strong L/R correlation to mono. If we find them not to be, we can just skip them.



Bruce said:


> This sounds like a hoot!! Sure wish I could be a fly on the wall listening. I'm sure you guys will all have a great time. Must say I haven't really listened to any other speakers since I got my Dynaudio towers about 10 years ago. I know mine like lots of power -- Parasound 2003A (300 wpc)-- and I'm really interested to see how all the testers report on their observations. For music, I really like female vocals and instrumentals on my Dynaudios.


The Dynaudios are one of my main speakers of interest in this group. They will get LOTS of scrutiny from my perspective.



Coco'sMom said:


> Any chance you guys might need a photographer to document the event? I'm just kidding of course, but know I'll be dreaming of listening to this system in person. :daydream:
> Have fun! :wave:


Sorry, although we are a handsome lot, we are trying to keep the focus:bigsmile: on the speakers.


----------



## Coco'sMom

The photos would be of the speakers, of course... and perhaps of the guys responding to what they heard... what else would there be? Sorry, I'm not a professional photographer, just an advanced amateur that's interested in everything concerning photography & videography, which explains the interest in home theatre & audio systems.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Coco'sMom said:


> The photos would be of the speakers, of course... and perhaps of the guys responding to what they heard... what else would there be? Sorry, I'm not a professional photographer, just an advanced amateur that's interested in everything concerning photography & videography, which explains the interest in home theatre & audio systems.


Just kidding with you!:T We would like to have the event well documented, but to be truthful, the whole thing gets a little boring in photo or video terms. One could probably video the whole weekend and then end up editing it all down to a semi-interesting 10-minute video summary.

We could probably do a _little_ better than we did at the $1K event, and will snap more stills and maybe a short video or two of the speaker setup process. Lighting is cinema-subdued, not really meant for filming, and we probably do not want to bring a variable into the room with additional lighting, or the clutter or inconvenience.

The live webcam idea is a little intriguing, to me anyway. It is fascinating what boring stuff people will sit and watch if they know it is live. Then there is the 'secret surprise" (sounds like a bad casserole recipe!) system that we would have to shut off the feed for.

When it gets right down to it, we get pretty busy and focused on the audio side of things and the video side takes a back seat, if not becoming a distraction. But we will see what we can do.


----------



## minorc

Looking forward to these reviews!! Can't wait for the day that I could actually afford to buy any one of these options. Would most likely make my current Axiom setup sound like a home theatre in a box lol.


----------



## xyrium

Most Dyns like to have lots of juice feeding them. I'm curious how well that little Anthem is going to deal with those, as others have mentioned. Nice lineup. I couldn't (read: too lazy) read through this whole thread, but hopefully these won't be evaluated with all of the speakers in the listening space. I'm of the opinion that those Maggies are going to need some space in order to truly exhibit the imaging they are capable of.


----------



## Sonnie

They recommend a minimum of 200 watts and are rated at 4 ohms, thus we have 310 watts for them with the Anthem. However, if needed, we got plenty more power.

As with the $1,000 event, each set of speakers will have their own time in the room, while others are placed in the hallway outside the room. Give us a little bit of credit for at least acting like we know what we are doing. :T


----------



## fschris

can you webstream this event or would the server requirements be to intense and expensive ? I think TWIT uses cachefly for bandwidth of videos. this would be a great podcast as well.


----------



## fschris

I also think what ever speakers are selected the manufacturer should offer a discount to HTS for its members to purchase  or even all of them. its never about one speaker being bad its just about balance.


----------



## txsmoke

Unfortunately, I am not going to be able to make the fun. Is there any way a streaming feed could be made available or an after-the-fact youtube video be made?

Thanks,
Mike


----------



## xyrium

LOL, there's no doubt you guys will be on point. I have no doubts whatsoever, and look forward to hearing more as it progresses!



Sonnie said:


> They recommend a minimum of 200 watts and are rated at 4 ohms, thus we have 310 watts for them with the Anthem. However, if needed, we got plenty more power.
> 
> As with the $1,000 event, each set of speakers will have their own time in the room, while others are placed in the hallway outside the room. Give us a little bit of credit for at least acting like we know what we are doing. :T


----------



## engtaz

I like to say that I am looking forward to this happening. I visit a lot of different sites and I have to say this site stay away from fan boy status. They like what they like because it meets their criteria. I enjoy their review very much. Thanks GTS for honest reviews.


----------



## theJman

Sonnie said:


> Not sure they will actually be from the evaluation group. :innocent:


Seems as though someone might have purchased the speakers from the $20,000 system? :spend:


----------



## theJman

needspeed52 said:


> Sonnie, my LCR A5s are sounding even better now that I know you bought the pair and would hold their own against the $2500 group.:T


Now how would you know the A5's can hold their own against the $2,500 group _before_ the eval happens? There something you want to tell us perhaps?


----------



## Sonnie

theJman said:


> Seems as though someone might have purchased the speakers from the $20,000 system? :spend:


What would make you think that I have "purchased" anything... especially $20,000 worth?


----------



## theJman

Sonnie said:


> Of course Pam... any photographer that would like is welcome to visit and take a few shots of us guys to use for any of your modeling magazines. :bigsmile:
> 
> Oh wait... OH I see now... you want to take pictures of the speakers. uh-huh... oh yeah... now I see how it's gonna be with you photographers. :whistling:
> 
> I think we may have to do with our own cameras for this, although a professional photographer would be nice.


Fly her down. You won't be sorry with the pictures. Trust me. Just don't let her drink more than 2 beers, otherwise all bets are off... :heehee:


----------



## theJman

Sonnie said:


> What would make you think that I have "purchased" anything... especially $20,000 worth?


Because in response to a question about whether you were going to buy something from this group too you replied "Not sure they will actually be from the *evaluation group* :whistling:". Since all that's in play are speakers from the $2,500 eval group, and the stand-alone $20,000 system, one can deduce that if you haven't selected anything from the 'evaluation group' there's only one choice remaining; the stand-alone system.


----------



## Sonnie

Well there is also a 5.0 home theater system that we are reviewing. And you said "purchased" as if it were a done deal. Assumptions assumptions... :nono:


----------



## Jus10W

Wow, you've really got some high quality speakers to test out. Looks like you guys have a lot of "hard work" coming up. I'm sure it will be very time consuming and appreciate that HTS performs equipment tests/reviews such as this one. Looking forward to the results and more importantly the day that I can afford these speakers. :T


----------



## theJman

Sonnie said:


> Well there is also a 5.0 home theater system that we are reviewing. And you said "purchased" as if it were a done deal. Assumptions assumptions... :nono:


I did indeed say "purchased". However, I also said "seems" and "might"...

_Seems as though someone might have purchased the speakers_

Context, context :nono: :neener:


----------



## Sonnie

Then it "seems" like there "might" have been some oxymoronic assumptions in the "context" then... :whistling:

And you could also be right, but I ain't telling. :bigsmile:


----------



## Sonnie

fschris said:


> I also think what ever speakers are selected the manufacturer should offer a discount to HTS for its members to purchase  or even all of them. its never about one speaker being bad its just about balance.


We have already selected all of them, but I don't think we can get discounts on all of them.


----------



## bkeeler10

This is totally off topic, but the last few exchanges reminded me that HTS has the best emoticons ever. Where did you get these things anyway?


----------



## Sonnie

lol... An accumulation over the years, although we dug pretty deep when we started up.


----------



## callas01

xyrium said:


> Most Dyns like to have lots of juice feeding them. I'm curious how well that little Anthem is going to deal with those, as others have mentioned. Nice lineup. I couldn't (read: too lazy) read through this whole thread, but hopefully these won't be evaluated with all of the speakers in the listening space. I'm of the opinion that those Maggies are going to need some space in order to truly exhibit the imaging they are capable of.


I power my Dyns with Naim XS-2 and it's plenty of power. I use the naim for music and movies, classical to hard rock without issue.


----------



## Sonnie

That seems like very modest power.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Relative to webstreaming the event, I have fiddled with it a little before. Depending on

preferences of all at the event
available upload bandwidth
convenience
it works without any hitches
available lighting is enough
we do not come up with a reason NOT to...
we MIGHT get something going. Sound quality would most likely be whatever a webcam mic would deliver, it has to be kept simple. If we get something going, we will post an access point in this thread. It is lower priority, though, so no promises.


----------



## MataLeo

Wow I can't wait to read the results to this fantastic post. In actuality I am jealous because I would rather hear the results. Being a Paradigm fan I can't wait to hear how they stack up against great competition and price. I don't hate to admit it, I have the audio bug and can't wait for more information about great products.


----------



## Sonnie

AudiocRaver said:


> Relative to webstreaming the event, I have fiddled with it a little before. Depending on
> 
> preferences of all at the event
> available upload bandwidth
> convenience
> it works without any hitches
> available lighting is enough
> we do not come up with a reason NOT to...
> we MIGHT get something going. Sound quality would most likely be whatever a webcam mic would deliver, it has to be kept simple. If we get something going, we will post an access point in this thread. It is lower priority, though, so no promises.



We have plenty on our server, BUT I can tell you our home ABSOLUTELY does not have the bandwidth available. We are on satellite Internet and if we calculate the current monthly usage, we can't even stream a movie from Netflix without exceeding our bandwidth limit per the FAP/DAP (whatever it is).


----------



## callas01

Don't let the low wattage #s fool you. It's a serious amp. Living in SoCal I can hear just about anything I want and I have a list of units that can't do what this amp is capable of. Including that anthem and the rogue Cronus magnum.


----------



## Sonnie

They rate it... not me.

So you have actually double blind tested the Anthem and the Rogue huh?

It would definitely be interesting to get both the Anthem and the Naim in a DBT. The Rogue is a different animal altogether. (Probably for another thread, so I won't digress.)


----------



## callas01

Don't get me wrong they're excellent amps. And have loyal following for a reason. I just won't give up mine for anything I've come across yet, or it costs me too much money. No never done a DBT. Have had a few accommodating dealers let me bring my setup in to compare or my Dyn dealer who doesn't sell naim has let me take a few things home for a week at a time.


----------



## Sunlesstrawhat

I'm definitely looking forward to the event and the results. Judging by the fantabulous job for the $1,000 speaker event, I'm sure Sonnie and team will do an excellent job. I'm interested about the Paradigm and Magnepan and how they will compare to the Arx A5 and the rest of $1,000 line up.:boxer:


----------



## pharoah

fschris said:


> can you webstream this event or would the server requirements be to intense and expensive ? I think TWIT uses cachefly for bandwidth of videos. this would be a great podcast as well.


why not just use youtube.ive seen video's there that have had 10's of millions of views.


----------



## the_rookie

This seems like a sweet idea. Wish i had something like this when i was shopping around for a setup. Lots of help but nothing compares to info like this. HTS is awesome


----------



## Infrasonic

Big thanks to Sonnie and crew for putting together another great shootout!

I haven’t heard any of the speakers personally and this will be a big help for me, and I’m sure many others, making a decision on a purchase.

A speaker that has a solid but not bloated mid-bass and that is not ‘bright’ in the higher frequencies is what I would keep an eye out for.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> We have plenty on our server, BUT I can tell you our home ABSOLUTELY does not have the bandwidth available. We are on satellite Internet and if we calculate the current monthly usage, we can't even stream a movie from Netflix without exceeding our bandwidth limit per the FAP/DAP (whatever it is).


That settles it, no live web streaming, sorry. I was afraid it might be satellite.

We will still do what we can to capture the more interesting parts, like maybe the speaker setup sequences, and with minimal editing I can upload them to YouTube when I get back home. That will have to do for this round.


----------



## eyecatcher127

I have to say I'm very excited to read about another speaker shootout here at HTS. I was hoping to see some RAAL ribbons in the mix since I personally would like to audition some but maybe next round the votes will ring in. I'm curious to hear if Audyssey XT32 will be utilized in the shoot out for each evaluation in addition to Pure Direct.


----------



## Driver_King

Audyssey XT32 utilization would require a number of receivers, would it not? In any case, hearing the speakers when they are calibrated to help alleviate influences from the room and listening position would probably allow for the most neutral comparison between the different sets of speakers and would be interesting to see how the calibrations effect the perceived, remaining differences between the speakers.


----------



## Sonnie

It would only require one receiver or processor with XT32, but generally, when you switch the receiver or processor to Pure Direct mode for two-channel listening, it defeats Audyssey.

We can discuss the idea of using the DSPeaker 2.0 that I have, which will equalize below 500Hz, which is really the critical part of a two channel system to equalize. I just don't know how feasible it will be to equalize each one before listening, as it could get time consuming... and the majority of people are not going to own an $1,100 DSPeaker.


----------



## eyecatcher127

I would think they could use the same receiver mic and strict measurement positions to get repeatable results in a timely fashion if they chose to.


----------



## phreak

Don't get me wrong, I love Audyssey. In this comparison, shouldn't the goal be to compare how good each speaker sounds? Instead of how good each speaker can be forced to sound with correction applied?


----------



## Sonnie

Yep. And if you can get good sound from it and happen to own Audyssey and want to try to improve on that sound, it could be an option for you, but not everyone has "auto-eq"... especially those listening to two-channel. I think Audyssey of more particular targeted at home theater systems and not serious two-channel systems.


----------



## alfa-74

I´m relatively new on this forum, and I have found that this is a grate place for learning about everything, sould, video, DIY,etc, and for sure this kind of projects will definitely give more material for learning as people continue sharing their knowledge.

This type of speakers are out of my budget, but is always good to learn about them, and how they perform. 

Regards


----------



## ambesolman

Really looking forward to seeing how this thing pans out. I've only ever heard the paradigms and one set I've never heard of at all. Was looking in this range earlier this year when I heard the paradigms, Dynaudio x36 and others but these others weren't even on my radar. Good luck and have fun with it!


----------



## Nec

I always love seeing shootouts. I'd also love to see the speakers you've chosen to test and compared. It would be interesting to see they perform.Good luck.


----------



## schmidtwi

Sounds like fun, should be a great shootout. Can't wait to hear the results.

These are all out of my budget range, but I'm interested in the results.


----------



## jmschnur

Clearly the evaluation should be made with no equalization applied. Rooms are very different. The first step needs to be how the speakers sound unvarnished as positioned for optimal sound. Then perhaps too distinguish between the very best XT 32 or some other EQ might be applied just to determine how such tweets affect the sound .


----------



## JayMB

I am certainly looking forward to hearing a discussion of the merits and weaknesses of each of the entries. In the future, it might be interesting to include DIY speakers as a comparison, as well. For many of us DIY types, we have our bias' regarding the quality of our homemade speakers and though we can compare measurements, having the speakers in the same room with side by side comparisons adds a whole new aspect to things. Jay


----------



## Dwight Angus

Looking forward to your review on speakers merits as I am considering a speaker upgrade. For me its movies 60% of the time vs 40% music. I have a SVS 9.2 setup and interested in your SVS Ultra findings as I am considering a speaker upgrade.
As a suggestion try AIX digital uncompressed audio. The recordings allow for either 2 channel or multi channel setup 24/96. I have several recordings and really enjoy them.
Your evaluation is a great opportunity for me to narrow my choices for my future speaker upgrade.
Many thanks


----------



## bxbigpipi

I would love to hear all these speakers in person and listen to all the differences between them. Sadly though they are all out of my price range. One of these days though I will try to get a pair of klipsch.


----------



## ButchP

bxbigpipi said:


> I would love to hear all these speakers in person and listen to all the differences between them. Sadly though they are all out of my price range. One of these days though I will try to get a pair of klipsch.


I feel your pain. I became hopelessly hooked on music at the age of 13. Over the course of my teenaged years I managed to acquire some 600+ vinyl records. Marriage and kids put an end to all that and I lived with a very modest system for many years. Reading the trade magazines about the latest, greatest audio systems was torture, as I felt I would never be able to afford any of the stuff I read about. Hang in there and Never say Never! After my kids were grown and gone, I re-entered the game. A lot had changed in the 25 years since I had purchased any audio equipment, with price being the major difference. In 1976 I paid $1250 for a complete 2-channel system with turntable (Microsieki), cassette (Tandberg), integrated amp (Tandberg), and speakers (Advent). In 2000, I couldn't find a really decent pair a speakers for that amount. The major difference between now and then? That system satisfied me for over 25 years. Since 2000, I've changed Pre/Pro and speakers 3 times. Amplifiers twice, and disc spinners 5. What have I learned? For music I'm returning to Analog. My 30 year old vinyl sounds better than any of the digital remasters I've heard. Home Theater is caught up in an endless cycle of format changes requiring new equipment way too frequently. I will continue to subscribe to the magazines and newsletters as well as web sites such as this one, but hopefully my Oppo BDP-105 will last longer than the '83 did and I can get off the upgrade merry-go-round for a little while. Meanwhile, I'm saving up for a killer turntable and a pair of small-room floor standers.


----------



## fokakis1

Sonnie said:


> Yep. And if you can get good sound from it and happen to own Audyssey and want to try to improve on that sound, it could be an option for you, but not everyone has "auto-eq"... especially those listening to two-channel. I think Audyssey of more particular targeted at home theater systems and not serious two-channel systems.


I agree. I have XT32 and love it, but I use it to "put the icing on the cake," rather than to compensate for setup compromises. It seems to be more effective for home theater than for 2 channel in my system.

I am very excited about this event. I like how you guys have followed a learning curve since the beginning of the $1000 event. You appear much more organized, and your goals and expectations are more clearly defined.  This is shaping up to be quite a show.


----------



## goyop

Hey guys,

Great idea on the comparison and also for making it fun. No doubt you had lengthy discussions on how to go about these tests and what equipment to use. There is no perfect setup for subjective listening but you have come up with a very respectable scheme. It will be very interesting to hear the different opinions on the various test systems. I want to see if there are any hands down winners and how individual preferences come into play.

One note of caution - it is possible to fatigue your ears. If you guys are partying every night and watching awesome movies on awesome systems it definitely can impact your hearing sensitivity. There are OSHA charts that show how long a person can be exposed to different SPL levels before there is temporary or permanent damage. So if you guys are sitting around listening at 100 db there is a time period after which your temporary hearing ability will be diminished. I have worked in studios and live sound and it is a real issue.

Good luck and we will all be waiting to see the results.

Greg


----------



## Airgas1998

goyop said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Great idea on the comparison and also for making it fun. No doubt you had lengthy discussions on how to go about these tests and what equipment to use. There is no perfect setup for subjective listening but you have come up with a very respectable scheme. It will be very interesting to hear the different opinions on the various test systems. I want to see if there are any hands down winners and how individual preferences come into play.
> 
> One note of caution - it is possible to fatigue your ears. If you guys are partying every night and watching awesome movies on awesome systems it definitely can impact your hearing sensitivity. There are OSHA charts that show how long a person can be exposed to different SPL levels before there is temporary or permanent damage. So if you guys are sitting around listening at 100 db there is a time period after which your temporary hearing ability will be diminished. I have worked in studios and live sound and it is a real issue.
> 
> Good luck and we will all be waiting to see the results.
> 
> Greg


good point. Better to be safe than sorry.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt

Nice choice of speakers! I’m particularly interested in the Dynaudio and SVS. I’ve been drooling over the Ultras since they came out, but unfortunately there are no wood veneer options and I don’t do piano black!

I like the “evaluation” concept vs. a “shootout”. I agree with what was noted the first post, that what the panel might pick as the winner won't necessarily translate to your taste or room. Every time I’ve bought a speaker based solely on a review or someone’s recommendation, I’ve been disappointed!

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## Airgas1998

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Nice choice of speakers! I’m particularly interested in the Dynaudio and SVS. I’ve been drooling over the Ultras since they came out, but unfortunately there are no wood veneer options and I don’t do piano black!
> 
> I like the “evaluation” concept vs. a “shootout”. I agree with what was noted the first post, that what the panel might pick as the winner won't necessarily translate to your taste or room. Every time I’ve bought a speaker based solely on a review or someone’s recommendation, I’ve been disappointed!
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


sure there is, but it's only black oak.


----------



## rubbersoul

I second the review of the Dynaudio and SVS. Two years ago I was in the market for a sub and was seriously considering SVS but along the way I ran into a few extra bucks and was fortunate to get a nice deal on the JLAudio Fathom 112. Another year down the road I was able to pick up another Fathom....the 110 which I feel I stole it from the guy selling it b/c he was moving to the Big Apple and he practically gave it away. Couldn't be happier. 
However it would be nice to read an independent, unbiased report with the Dynaudio's and the SVS.
Several months ago I purchased a pair of Dynaudio Focus 110A speakers as a second system that I use listening to a lot of music. I switch back and forth between my 804's and and the Dy's. I like different venue s as well as different styles of music. I have had a love affair with both B&W and Dynaudio since the nineties. At that time I was like a little kid looking into the window of my favorite toy store but did not have two nickels to rub together. Thank God things had changed sometime after and now now I have both the popcorn and the butter. I am very greatful.

With that said I just wish I could be there to listen to all of these great speakers and the rest of the system.
Enjoy fellow enthusiasts!


----------



## Sonnie

JayMB said:


> In the future, it might be interesting to include DIY speakers as a comparison, as well.


We have had a lot of request for DIY, but we need DIY speakers, which don't include factory boxes... and not many owners care to pay for shipping to and from us, like the manufacturers will. We might could get a few to bring some in, but we only have room for so many people. As it is, 4 is tight... 5 is crowed... and starts to severely limit our listening time. For some reason I just don't think we would get very many DIY takers.




Dwight Angus said:


> As a suggestion try AIX digital uncompressed audio. The recordings allow for either 2 channel or multi channel setup 24/96. I have several recordings and really enjoy them.


I need to investigate these a little more. I believe I have one disc, but don't remember listening to it before. Maybe I should.




goyop said:


> One note of caution - it is possible to fatigue your ears. If you guys are partying every night and watching awesome movies on awesome systems it definitely can impact your hearing sensitivity. There are OSHA charts that show how long a person can be exposed to different SPL levels before there is temporary or permanent damage. So if you guys are sitting around listening at 100 db there is a time period after which your temporary hearing ability will be diminished. I have worked in studios and live sound and it is a real issue.


We take turns all day... then take frequent breaks, although the music listening is not loud by any means. 

For the movies... we will only watch one movie per night so that we can review the system... 1.5-2 hours or so. 

No partying here. None of us drink anything outside of tea, cokes, water, coffee, etc. We try to stay focused and rest our minds when needed.




Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> I’ve been drooling over the Ultras since they came out, but unfortunately there are no wood veneer options and I don’t do piano black!


This are black, but not piano black. I have tried to get satin black, black oak or black ash for all of our evaluation units... just in case I want to buy a pair. However, we are going to start taking any color we can get going forward, so that we can open up the options a little more.

I am not a fan of shiny anything, simply because I know they will either be a part of my home theater system, or at least be in the room with the home theater. Shiny speakers shine, especially when the light is reflecting off the screen. It can be distracting. All speaker manufacturers should offer their speakers in a satin black. 

I really have no idea what some companies are thinking. Some of them sell home theater system packages and only offer them in gloss or piano black. Hello!!! It is for a home theater... who wants a shiny black speaker right below or above their screen reflecting all that light? Just doesn't make sense... and I guarantee you they lose a few sales by not offering the speakers in non-sheen black.


----------



## ericzim

Sonnie said:


> I really have no idea what some companies are thinking. Some of them sell home theater system packages and only offer them in gloss or piano black. Hello!!! It is for a home theater... who wants a shiny black speaker right below or above their screen reflecting all that light? Just doesn't make sense... and I guarantee you they lose a few sales by not offering the speakers in non-sheen black.


I have wondered about this for years. Piano black has no business being on home theater speakers, it's *Piano Black* for crying out loud! Great on Pianos but not in my home theater.


----------



## Sonnie

I think I might like it if I had some sort of fancy upscale listening room, otherwise big towers would be out of place in my house. I have a couple of piano black bookshelf speakers in our great room, but you can't really see them that much because they are on the shelves, and take up most of the opening space. I am not even sure what I have these speakers in here to begin with. I should have something cheaper for no more than what we listen to them. As a matter of fact, they are for sell... who wants them? lol


----------



## Ellisdj

Quite excited to see the results of this shootout - and its extremely encouraging that its in a room such as this where the effect of the room has been taken away to the best as possible 

To me that gives the results far more credibility - fair play


----------



## KiddLawson

I'm kind of new to the Home Theater world and love the idea of side by side evals! I do have a question: I know that all of the speakers are top quality and I would be be proud to own any of them, but when you get right down to it, isn't the actual output sound subjective to the listener. I used to have a very inexpensive theater-in- a-box and loved the center channel so much I used it for years with my pro set of speakers. My friends used to give me a hard time until they heard the center speaker. Some liked it better some didn't.


----------



## Savjac

DIY - I just finished what I feel to be one of the best speakers I have ever heard in my, or another persons listening room. I made the cabinet and zoebel but the speaker is original. An 8" Tang Band W-8-1772 in a 30 liter box that runs full range and just nails it. While it will not go too loud, say above 85db too easily and it does not have great bass, I use 2 Velodyne subs with these speakers run in stereo, so they are essentially full range.

The things just work, musical, dynamic, spaciality for days all the while laying bare everything in a recording. I have not heard such detail and mesmerizing yet emotional reproduction of music since the old Quads were with me. I still have to paint or laminate the cabinets, but I cannot stop listening. Small tube amp or several hundred watts per channel out of a SS amp, I think I have found a little part of sonic nirvana. When finished anyone is welcome to listen or place in the sound off, I believe they are that good. Better in many ways that my Martin Logans....yep true.


----------



## AudiocRaver

eyecatcher127 said:


> I have to say I'm very excited to read about another speaker shootout here at HTS. I was hoping to see some RAAL ribbons in the mix since I personally would like to audition some but maybe next round the votes will ring in.


The RAAL ribbons that we heard in products at RMAF were VERY nice, among the best-sounding tweeters there. I wish we had a set of them in the mix, too. Fingers crossed for the next round. Maybe we can talk Sonnie into ruling that the RAAL model with the most votes next poll gets in no matter what, so we have the RAAL tweeter represented.



> I'm curious to hear if Audyssey XT32 will be utilized in the shoot out for each evaluation in addition to Pure Direct.





Driver_King said:


> Audyssey XT32 utilization would require a number of receivers, would it not? In any case, hearing the speakers when they are calibrated to help alleviate influences from the room and listening position would probably allow for the most neutral comparison between the different sets of speakers and would be interesting to see how the calibrations effect the perceived, remaining differences between the speakers.


I am going to vote with the "no Audyssey MultEQ" side for these evaluations. Not saying that it does not have a place in 2-channel listening. My reasons are:

The time it would take. Every step added to the process has the potential to really slow us down. We have to take a pretty streamlined approach if we hope to get done in the two days we have to work with.
Data overload. We have to minimize our variables, or we simply cannot hope to keep our thoughts and impressions straight, even with extensive note taking.
In theory, MultEQ would have a tendency to make all the models sound the same, although it would never do so completely. It is the individual character of each design that we really hope to capture, and we see that as being the emphasis which would have the greatest overall value to readers.
Applying MultEQ is always an option in a given situation, and might be called for even with speakers of the type we will be evaluating. It seems that the delicate _individuality_ of a speaker's design gets sacrificed in the process, though, a matter which should be considered before going that route. And finding that individual speaker character that really suits one's tastes is a big part of choosing speakers of this kind.
The balance of factors that creates a great soundstage, for instance, is likely to be disrupted by a process like MultEQ.



Dwight Angus said:


> Looking forward to your review on speakers merits as I am considering a speaker upgrade. For me its movies 60% of the time vs 40% music. I have a SVS 9.2 setup and interested in your SVS Ultra findings as I am considering a speaker upgrade.
> As a suggestion try AIX digital uncompressed audio. The recordings allow for either 2 channel or multi channel setup 24/96. I have several recordings and really enjoy them.
> Your evaluation is a great opportunity for me to narrow my choices for my future speaker upgrade.
> Many thanks


There are some fine hi-res recording formats to be considered for future evaluation events. It will take some homework to determine how best to incorporate them.



goyop said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> Great idea on the comparison and also for making it fun. No doubt you had lengthy discussions on how to go about these tests and what equipment to use. There is no perfect setup for subjective listening but you have come up with a very respectable scheme. It will be very interesting to hear the different opinions on the various test systems. I want to see if there are any hands down winners and how individual preferences come into play.
> 
> One note of caution - it is possible to fatigue your ears. If you guys are partying every night and watching awesome movies on awesome systems it definitely can impact your hearing sensitivity. There are OSHA charts that show how long a person can be exposed to different SPL levels before there is temporary or permanent damage. So if you guys are sitting around listening at 100 db there is a time period after which your temporary hearing ability will be diminished. I have worked in studios and live sound and it is a real issue.
> 
> Good luck and we will all be waiting to see the results.
> Greg


Your point on ear fatigue is well taken, and we appreciate the concern. As Sonnie has said, our partying extends about as far as a second glass of lemonade or iced tea with dinner, or maybe a caffeinated soda to help stay awake through the last half of a movie. Beyond our audio and home theater interests, we are a pretty boring bunch.

While the individual listener in the LP controls his own volume, I can assure you that the average SPL level is usually in the 85 to 90 dB range, below that a fair amount of the time, occasionally bumped up into the 90 to 95 dB range for impact, but not for more than 20 seconds or so at a time. I doubt it ever gets to 100 dB average, that is louder than any of us like to listen.

We take frequent breaks, and get plenty of rest & sleep.

Thanks for the reminder, though, it is definitely a priority that we keep our ears and brains working at their peak through the weekend and beyond.



Savjac said:


> DIY - I just finished what I feel to be one of the best speakers I have ever heard in my, or another persons listening room. I made the cabinet and zoebel but the speaker is original. An 8" Tang Band W-8-1772 in a 30 liter box that runs full range and just nails it. While it will not go too loud, say above 85db too easily and it does not have great bass, I use 2 Velodyne subs with these speakers run in stereo, so they are essentially full range.
> 
> The things just work, musical, dynamic, spaciality for days all the while laying bare everything in a recording. I have not heard such detail and mesmerizing yet emotional reproduction of music since the old Quads were with me. I still have to paint or laminate the cabinets, but I cannot stop listening. Small tube amp or several hundred watts per channel out of a SS amp, I think I have found a little part of sonic nirvana. When finished anyone is welcome to listen or place in the sound off, I believe they are that good. Better in many ways that my Martin Logans....yep true.


Sure wish I was in the neighborhood to get by and hear them. There is something to be said for the simplicity of the single-driver design in the right cabinet. Sounds like you nailed it. I will have to make a note of your driver choice for future possible DIY reference.


----------



## tonyvdb

KiddLawson said:


> but when you get right down to it, isn't the actual output sound subjective to the listener. I used to have a very inexpensive theater-in- a-box and loved the center channel so much I used it for years with my pro set of speakers. My friends used to give me a hard time until they heard the center speaker. Some liked it better some didn't.


That is true, if your happy with what you have then that's the main objective. I can say though if you do try out some higher end speakers many do sound amazing. My experience with speakers is that quality does improve as you go up in price to a point, once you hit a certain level the price to quality starts to diminish. 
My opinion is that The sweet spot for speaker price and sound quality tends to be in the $1500- $5000 range.


----------



## Owen Bartley

There are so many good speaker options out there that it's tough see a direct comparison of a specific two or three that you're interested in. That's why these multi speaker comparisons are so valuable, they add more data to the field and give some more impressions for us to sift through. And I especially appreciate this kind with several reviewers at once so you can get a better idea of the tastes involved in the comments. 

I'm sure everyone has a dream set (including DIY) that they would like to see, I know I do, but if HTS makes this a regular event, we're bound to see some good DIY options reviewed.


----------



## KiddLawson

Yeah, I agree. I had a set of Klipsch that I had to sell back in the day and I so wish I had them back! At this point in my life, I have to prioritize my responsibilities with my hobby. As you said, the sweet spot is in that higher-end price point. The lower-end stuff is all over the map as far as sound and quality so I have to spend a lot of time comparing each speaker in order to get the right one for the money I have. As the lady of the house allows, I will get back up there!


----------



## ovillegas

The only bad thing about these events is that it is far away from where I live :crying:. Other than that, it is great to see that this site continually makes the effort to evaluate equipment that people like me would otherwise not have a chance to get an in depth description or review of the product. I can't wait to hear about the results so I can daydream about what would it be like having a pair of speakers like any of those in my living room.


----------



## PoTee

Although I've been reading and following this tread the only speakers in this contest that I'm familiar with are the Paradigm studios. My son has them in his man cave setup and I really like them so I envy your job of listening to the entire group of them.


----------



## jmschnur

I understand this evaluation done in terms of where the speakers are listened to. Is there any way after this study is done to provide some guidance to those of us in different locations about the merits of the speakers in different environments such as our own homes?


----------



## Sonnie

AudiocRaver said:


> Maybe we can talk Sonnie into ruling that the RAAL model with the most votes next poll gets in no matter what, so we have the RAAL tweeter represented.


The Ascend Acoustics Sierra Tower with the RAAL is automatically in the next event. :T




AudiocRaver said:


> As Sonnie has said, our partying extends about as far as a second glass of lemonade.


Ah-HA!!! Caught you. So YOU were the one that drank all the lemonade. Yep... we had our suspicions and now we know we were right.




jmschnur said:


> I understand this evaluation done in terms of where the speakers are listened to. Is there any way after this study is done to provide some guidance to those of us in different locations about the merits of the speakers in different environments such as our own homes?


I think I have elaborated on this a pretty good bit already. If it works out, we hope to be able to place them closer to the wall and report on that location vs. the best location we find, for whatever that might be worth. 

I still stand behind the thought that buying speakers that are not going to sound their best because you can't place them in their best location is a BAD idea. I struggle with it making any sense to buy a pair and not get the most out of them that they have to offer. I am scratching my head. It defeats the purpose of buying them to begin with.


----------



## jmschnur

Sure. Place them in your room in the best way that you can do. But comments your thoughts on other types placements or rooms might be useful.


----------



## Sonnie

We certainly won't have time to place them in any other rooms... that would be a whole lotta work. We can't comment on placement in other type rooms if we don't evaluate those. It would all be speculation. As stated though, we hope to try them closer to the wall to see what happens with each set. But we won't have time to evaluate them for very long in those placements, as we want to give the best placement our most amount of time.


----------



## jmschnur

Comments about now hard it is to find optimal placement might be useful .


----------



## Sonnie

Agree... we did that in the previous event and plan to do that again in this one.

I have a pretty wide area up on my front stage too, we will have some good options for placement closer to the wall. I am just not sure how much time we will have to experiment with that, but we will see. Hopefully we can gather some kind of useful info that will help.


----------



## lcaillo

jmschnur said:


> Comments about now hard it is to find optimal placement might be useful .


That is exactly what we did in the first event.


----------



## NewHTbuyer

First off, like many others, I want to thank the HTS crew for doing another great speaker evaluation. I am looking forward to the results.

Sonnie, sorry I missed you at RMAF. I forgot to PM you leading up to it. I ended up not being there as long as I had hoped. Maybe next year.

As far as the speakers, I own the Ultras and so I can't wait to see what you guys think of them. At RMAF the seats were, IMO way too close. These are big, powerful speakers not Audioengine desktop nearfield speakers. The room (like many others at RMAF) is just too small.
Also, they had them really toed in this year, less than last year. I have adjusted my toe in a few times. They definitely need some toe in, but I thought it was too much. Dan Marks of SVS told me that because of the side firing woofers, too little toe in might affect the bass. So consider that when placing them, not just imaging.

I also spent alot of time in the Emerald Physics room, this year and last. They sounded great again. I am curious to see how you guys like them when they are not part of the "system" that Wally has them set up with at RMAF, especially the bass w/o a sub (or subs, he had 2 this year).

I think the SVS and Emerald Physics will dominate in the bass department

I have no experience with maggies, but I did hear the Paradigms, Dynaudios and MLs. All sounded good, but none wowed me. Still, it was only a brief session with each in a showroom, never in my house for an extended listening session.

Also, like many others, I think having the Ascend w/ Raal in the next round will be great. I would also love to see the Tekton get evaluated. On the forums it seems there are fanboys or haters for the Pendragons, so it would be cool to see them in a non-biased evaluation with other known speakers.

Oh, another track that is a good demo is Private Investigations by Dire Straits.


----------



## moparz10

awsome selection of speakers being evaluated here,i'm excited to read about the results,what a great weekend,i'm interested in seing how the Dynaudio DM 3/7's and SVS Ultra Towers fair in the evaluation.
for the home theatre evaluation part of it have you chosen which movies will be used ? great fun and
good times i thank you and our sponsors for including us.


----------



## B- one

This will be a great event for sure. I can't wait to see what the big setup is. Did I read Sonnie is smoking ribs for the event? Maybe they can bust out the grape cookies as well. Not sure anyone will get that one.


----------



## lcaillo

ovillegas said:


> The only bad thing about these events is that it is far away from where I live :crying:. Other than that, it is great to see that this site continually makes the effort to evaluate equipment that people like me would otherwise not have a chance to get an in depth description or review of the product. I can't wait to hear about the results so I can daydream about what would it be like having a pair of speakers like any of those in my living room.


Sonnie's place is far from where everyone lives.:unbelievable:


----------



## bigt1rell

I love the selection of equipment in the lineup. It makes me want to make changes to my system. HTS keeps showing me the way to an outstanding home theater.


----------



## J&D

Great to see these shootouts. I know it takes a ton of work to pull these off but for anyone looking to purchase these can be invaluable as it provides a great baseline and at least some reference before purchasing. With the retail market going more and more ID this type of service is greatly appreciated. 

I have heard a lot about the Maggie 1.7's (pretty much all good) and am very interested in the SVS speakers as well. Not familiar with Emerald Physics but the ability to add choices to the list is always a good thing. Looking forward to the results.

JD


----------



## Sonnie

NewHTbuyer said:


> Sonnie, sorry I missed you at RMAF. I forgot to PM you leading up to it. I ended up not being there as long as I had hoped. Maybe next year.
> 
> Oh, another track that is a good demo is Private Investigations by Dire Straits.


Yep... I knew there was someone else we were suppose to meet there. It seems like once we got there it was WIDE open for us... and the little bit of spare time we thought we would have just totally disappeared into thin air. Actually we did a few things we had no idea we would do, such as some private auditions... and long discussions with various people/manufacturers, etc. Before we knew it, it was way past our bedtime.

I plan to be there next year again, it was way too much fun. I may go to Axpona in May too.




moparz10 said:


> for the home theatre evaluation part of it have you chosen which movies will be used ?


We have some ideas. Probably Pacific Rim will be one. I have several other new releases that we can watch, including some music concerts to choose from. We might let each one of us pick a selection per night.




B- one said:


> This will be a great event for sure. I can't wait to see what the big setup is. Did I read Sonnie is smoking ribs for the event? Maybe they can bust out the grape cookies as well. Not sure anyone will get that one.


Seems like I remember those grape cookies being mentioned before.

I would really like to cook some ribs and hope I can make time for it. I may cook them Thursday afternoon, so that it doesn't interfere too much with our Friday and Saturday stuff. We can eat out those nights.




lcaillo said:


> Sonnie's place is far from where everyone lives.:unbelievable:


heehee.... The backwoods of Alabama! Don't run over my goats, chickens, opossums and pigs when you start down the driveway. :bigsmile:


----------



## Phillips

This is a great idea.

Any chance of doing nearfield / close mic measurements, this would be interesting to see the difference?

Will be interested to see the difference in the Maggies and Martinlogins vs others. Looked at both of these (Maggies & ML) in different rooms, both sounded good but i think they could have been setup better, Maggies sounded quite boomy (not alot), the ML sounded very bright and very little bass.

Do all of these have matched speakers for HT?

Look forward to the results

Thanks for your time


----------



## theshummer

First, thanks for keeping this in the "realistic" range. :spend: $2500 is a lot, but I can easily see saving that much to put towards a decent system. Like another post said, this is about the price range where you really start to see quality. I'm looking forward to the results! Which leads me to my second point...

I wish this kind of thing had been around when I bought most of my stuff. I got my system 9-10 years ago when forums and "research" were not quite what they are today. I'm happy, but I probably could have done better... especially seeing as the speaker company is now out of business. :huh: Admittedly, I'm not a serious audiophile, but I am your typical frugal perfectionist. That means if I'm gonna spend the money, I'm going to do it with the long-term in mind (i.e. quality stuff) and get something I like. Maybe the results of this Evaluation will be enough to push me over the edge towards some new speakers. :innocent:

THANKS SONNIE and HTS! :T


----------



## JimmyLeggs

The fact that so many of you liked the Klipsch in your last shootout I'm starting to second guess my investment in Paradigm speakers lol, that being said I can't wait to hear your thoughts on

- Dynaudio DM 3/7
- Emerald Physics CS2P
- Paradigm Studio 60

Dyn ALWAYS gets nothing but good things said about them, Paradigm...well I'm a fanboy and the EPs, curious as to what they do. 

Sounds like a lot of fun to do the shoot out and I'm sure it's a lot of work for all those involved, but thank you!!!


----------



## Sonnie

Phillips said:


> Any chance of doing nearfield / close mic measurements, this would be interesting to see the difference?


Possibly... if we have time. I believe it will require taking them outside in an open area. If we can keep the cows, pigs, chickens and goats quite for long enough. :whistling:




Phillips said:


> Do all of these have matched speakers for HT?


EP does not have a fully 5.0 compliment, you would have to have room for a floorstanding center and surrounds. 

Similarly, Magnepan has a center, but it is not exactly small at 10.5" tall and 36" wide... and it only extends to 200Hz, so you have to either get the matching subwoofer, which can also be a stand, or cross it over a lot higher than generally recommended for HT. 

The remaining four have a fully compliment of typical 5.0 systems, some with more options than others.


----------



## Sonnie

I have noticed that "Sonnie" is getting a lot of thanks. While I certainly appreciate your thanks (thank you), please remember the other guys that dedicate their time to travel to my home in Alabama. 

Leonard drives up from Gainsville, Florida, Wayne flies in from Lincoln, Nebraska, and Joe flies in from Madison, Wisconsin. Quenten drove up from Tallahassee, Florida for our last evaluation to help us out in the absence of Joe. These guys come in on Thursday afternoon/evening and spend 3-5 nights away from home, leaving their family behind (to join another family). Then they to go back home and spend more time preparing the results. 

Granted it is fun, but there is some laboring behind it all as well. I appreciate what these guys are willing to do... flying and driving all over the country to cover the audio shows and attend these events like this... then going back home and spending literally days writing it all up. You gotta love this hobby to do it... and you gotta love them for what they do.

It could go without saying, but you also get honest and unbiased results. We do not fluff it up just because we have a sponsor or two participating... you have seen that we tell it like it is. We do not hold back... and we speak in easy to understand language. It is genuine and it is real... no spin!

Then... THEN! We have YOU... our members. Just a flat out stellar group of people that sincerely appreciate what we do. Thank you for helping us make Home Theater Shack what it is. This would absolutely NOT be possible without you. Thank you... Thank you... Thank you!


----------



## tcarcio

Sonnie said:


> I have noticed that "Sonnie" is getting a lot of thanks. While I certainly appreciate your thanks (thank you), please remember the other guys that dedicate their time to travel to my home in Alabama.
> 
> Leonard drives up from Gainsville, Florida, Wayne flies in from Lincoln, Nebraska, and Joe flies in from Madison, Wisconsin. Quenten drove up from Tallahassee, Florida for our last evaluation to help us out in the absence of Joe. These guys come in on Thursday afternoon/evening and spend 3-5 nights away from home, leaving their family behind (to join another family). Then they to go back home and spend more time preparing the results.
> 
> Granted it is fun, but there is some laboring behind it all as well. I appreciate what these guys are willing to do... flying and driving all over the country to cover the audio shows and attend these events like this... then going back home and spending literally days writing it all up. You gotta love this hobby to do it... and you gotta love them for what they do.
> 
> It could go without saying, but you also get honest and unbiased results. We do not fluff it up just because we have a sponsor or two participating... you have seen that we tell it like it is. We do not hold back... and we speak in easy to understand language. It is genuine and it is real... no spin!
> 
> Then... THEN! We have YOU... our members. Just a flat out stellar group of people that sincerely appreciate what we do. Thank you for helping us make Home Theater Shack what it is. This would absolutely NOT be possible without you. Thank you... Thank you... Thank you!


Sonnie, You are absolutley right, You guy's take the time and great effort to do the things that most of us can't or don't know how to do. Without the sacrifice that people like you, Leanord, Wayne, Joe, Qenten and others put forth we could not have the best forum on the net. I would like to thank all of you for making HTS what it is.......Thank you....:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## Savjac

AudiocRaver said:


> Sure wish I was in the neighborhood to get by and hear them. There is something to be said for the simplicity of the single-driver design in the right cabinet. Sounds like you nailed it. I will have to make a note of your driver choice for future possible DIY reference.


Aw , its only a 9 hour drive or so, should be a snap for young folks. And you can hear two sets of speakers and tube as well as SS equipment in the loop. Now that has to be almost tempting but not quite too tempting. :innocent:


----------



## english210

I know I'll be watching the results with interest. I was out of this hobby/addiction for many years, but now I'm back in, I am planning an upgrade to my main speakers. I'll be interested to read the evaluations, and try to pick up on the differences between marketing hype and real impact of the various schools of thought represented. Most of what I've looked at has been priced higher than this, but I'm also always open to the bargains - the 'you'd have to spend 3 times as much to get any real improvement' gems that always seem to pop up. 

The $20K 2 channel set up will be of particular interest. I've toyed with the idea of rounding out the theater with matching PSB mains to what I have now (for surrounds and center), then taking over another room for a dedicated 2 channel....


----------



## jon96789

This will be a pretty good reading... Unfortunately, i must admit being biased toward the Magnepans. I have owned several Maggies over the years and must admit to be enamored over their coherent sound. When you see reviews on their speakers on other sites/mags, it is pretty obvious that their freqency response goes all over the map, but their overall sound belies that fact.

Their major and primary issue is that the bass response does not go down the deep end, 50Hz is about all you can expect. You really need a subwoofer to get some bass but not many subs can match the speed of the Mag panels, resulting in some muddy bass at the crossover point.

Enough said... let the games begin.


----------



## english210

I may have missed it in the other posts, but you are integrating each of these speakers into an existing theater? How is that going to play out with voicing between the 'visiting speaker' and the 'home team' surrounds?


----------



## Sonnie

They will be evaluated on their own... not integrated into a home theater system. The evaluation is for two-channel speakers.


----------



## AudiocRaver

jmschnur said:


> I understand this evaluation done in terms of where the speakers are listened to. Is there any way after this study is done to provide some guidance to those of us in different locations about the merits of the speakers in different environments such as our own homes?





jmschnur said:


> Comments about now hard it is to find optimal placement might be useful .


By all means, we will do our best to report on factors that would affect setup in other types of rooms / other room locations. Actually trying them out in other rooms is not practical. Trying them in other room locations would be nice, but the time flies and I am guessing this will not be high enough priority to fit in. And we will report on difficulty of setup and important setup factors for each. I am going to make it a priority to try to video the setup process for each of the speakers for YOuTube posting, so those are documented. This seems to me like the single most important additional task beyond what we did for the $1K event, and adds no "extra steps" to our process, just one of us remembering to start and stop camera at the right times. And it will be a good reminder for us as we do our writeups later.



Sonnie said:


> The Ascend Acoustics Sierra Tower with the RAAL is automatically in the next event. :T


Super! RAAL tweeters are in the next event!



Sonnie said:


> Ah-HA!!! Caught you. So YOU were the one that drank all the lemonade. Yep... we had our suspicions and now we know we were right.


Doh!:doh: i thought that having to take three bathroom breaks during the movie would be a giveaway.



Sonnie said:


> I still stand behind the thought that buying speakers that are not going to sound their best because you can't place them in their best location is a BAD idea. I struggle with it making any sense to buy a pair and not get the most out of them that they have to offer. I am scratching my head. It defeats the purpose of buying them to begin with.


I agree, as previously stated. $2500 is a lot to spend on speakers that will not be allowed to perform at their absolute best.



Sonnie said:


> Seems like I remember those grape cookies being mentioned before.
> 
> I would really like to cook some ribs and hope I can make time for it. I may cook them Thursday afternoon, so that it doesn't interfere too much with our Friday and Saturday stuff. We can eat out those nights.


Now you've done it! You've started the pre-salivation sequence!

As good as that sounds, don't over-commit yourself. When it gets hectic, it is not as much fun, and we _have_ to keep it fun, or it will lose the magic. We can not allow that to happen.



Phillips said:


> Any chance of doing nearfield / close mic measurements, this would be interesting to see the difference?


This is a very good idea, but also very time-consuming. Have not mentioned it to Sonnie, but a round of outside measurements as part of the packing up process might be a consideration. Near-field in the room would have to be gated, would only be good at high frequencies, above 1 KHz or so. But that is a possibility, too.

Having done a lot of this, both indoor and outdoors, there is no way to do it quickly. It requires attention to detail or the results are meaningless.

I put together a super-ugly super-handy fixture that makes polar response curves go pretty fast, but it is big, would have to be flown in a separate suitcase or large duffel bag. We'll see.

The listener location measurements like we did for the $1K event are pretty simple, we will definitely do those again, and will _consider_ adding other measurements if time allows.

============================

ALSO: I echo Sonnie's appreciation to all the members and readers and sponsors whose support makes an event like this possible.

And the team he has assembled to help is truly a dream team... A dream to be able to work with such talented and neat people... And a dream-come-true to be included on that team. There are times I have to rub my eyes and pinch myself and ask, "Is this really happening?" It is surreal to say the least, and I personally cannot find the words to adequately express my appreciation for being selected as a participant, although I have surely tried. Thanks again, Sonnie!


----------



## its_bacon12

This is a great idea, it should help a lot of people research their future projects and evaluate where their current stands both objectively and subjectively (if that is going to be included in the reviews/conclusions). I'd love to see some of the less expensive home theater complete kits (maybe like Daytons with some assemply required) but I might be on the lower end of the home theater requirement spectrum here


----------



## chashint

I thought the $1000 dollar thread leading up to that event was good but this one is even better.
Just in the last couple of pages all kinds of gold tidbits ranging from pondering the inexplicable piano black as an only color option on some speakers (what's up with the blinding blue LEDs on everything too), to some very thoughtful discussion on speaker placement, room acoustics, and test methods have been bantered about. Well done to the forum members.
For the HTS evaluation team, you know we all love y’all and appreciate the good work y’all do so this is not intended to put any pressure on the team, but you guys set the bar pretty high the first time out of the gate....and to say a repeat performance is "expected" would be somewhat of an understatement. Y’all are going to have to hunker down and dig deep to make sure that nice juicy $1k event is not going to be held as the golden standard of excellence. Again no pressure, but once you feed the beast the beast will always want more.
:hail: the HTS evaluation team.


----------



## zuter

This range is exactly where my current speakers are priced. It'll be a very informative review for myself as well as my friends with similar set-ups.

Looking forward to it!


----------



## AudiocRaver

chashint said:


> For the HTS evaluation team, you know we all love y’all and appreciate the good work y’all do so this is not intended to put any pressure on the team, but you guys set the bar pretty high the first time out of the gate....and to say a repeat performance is "expected" would be somewhat of an understatement. Y’all are going to have to hunker down and dig deep to make sure that nice juicy $1k event is not going to be held as the golden standard of excellence. Again no pressure, but once you feed the beast the beast will always want more.


Yeah, there are some expectations alright. "Pressure" is a bit strong. "Sense of responsibility" is about right. We know that an event like this is possible only because of forum and sponsor support, and we owe you the best we can give you. And we would not have it any other way. The serious side and the challenge of what we are doing make the work that much funner, including all the PMs back and forth, the decisions being made, the details being nailed down, the prep time to have everything ready to roll the minute we get there so the event has the best chance of being a success - mostly Sonnie's work, but all are involved in the preparations. It is a major production months in the making. And a total rush when it all comes together. It is the best possible combination of work and play!


----------



## AudiocRaver

Savjac said:


> Aw , its only a 9 hour drive or so, should be a snap for young folks. And you can hear two sets of speakers and tube as well as SS equipment in the loop. Now that has to be almost tempting but not quite too tempting. :innocent:


Don't tempt me... wait, you ARE tempting me. _Don't make me come over there..._ but, er, you are _inviting_ me over. Hmmm, nine hours. Where is my calendar... Maybe combine it with a concert in Chicago.... I will work on it.:bigsmile:


----------



## Sonnie

The Axpona show in April... Chicago here we come!


----------



## AudiocRaver

Oooooo, double temptation!


----------



## Savjac

AudiocRaver said:


> Don't tempt me... wait, you ARE tempting me. Don't make me come over there... but, er, you are inviting me over. Hmmm, nine hours. Where is my calendar... Maybe combine it with a concert in Chicago.... I will work on it.:bigsmile:


Double dog dare you, although I am not sure what a double dog dare is. 
Looks like I will be adding a like new pair of Dahlquist DQ10's next week, I should have the GR Research pair done tomorrow and....I have re-tubed my Dac and upgraded to a SS Micro Mega Dac for a nice comparison. 
If I can sell me MacBook Pro soon then I can finally get a new processor. 

Lots of fun stuff going on after many years of quiet. Got rid of a lot of old stuff to bring in some more old stuff as well as new. 

Oh and btw, I am unfortunately at the south end of Indiana. I lived in Chicago for 40 years before I moved out. I travel up there a good bit but it is no longer home


----------



## mr_natural78

I am fairly new here but I love seeing things like this. With so many options available to us and the ability of sales people to always make thier gear sound like the one that is just right for you....it's nice to see real evaluations and input in a controlled setting. this is one of the main reasons I'm glad I found this forum.


----------



## Nitrofreakman

I haven't been around here enough lately due to lack of time and energy:huh:! This is another great idea with some very nice speakers in the line-up. I imagine testing equipment like this doesn't happen over night, and would require a great deal of time and effort, so kudos to the HTS team for their dedication. This forum is top-of-the-class IMHO, with so much information that it makes me realize that there is so much more I need to learn lol. Keep up the great work guys:T


----------



## PEB

Sonnie, you have a nice setup there. Hope all goes smoothly, as those events typically have hiccups that get put you behind schedule. 

Hopefully I might be on the manufacturer list the next time.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Savjac said:


> Double dog dare you, although I am not sure what a double dog dare is.
> Looks like I will be adding a like new pair of Dahlquist DQ10's next week, I should have the GR Research pair done tomorrow and....I have re-tubed my Dac and upgraded to a SS Micro Mega Dac for a nice comparison.
> If I can sell me MacBook Pro soon then I can finally get a new processor.
> 
> Lots of fun stuff going on after many years of quiet. Got rid of a lot of old stuff to bring in some more old stuff as well as new.
> 
> Oh and btw, I am unfortunately at the south end of Indiana. I lived in Chicago for 40 years before I moved out. I travel up there a good bit but it is no longer home


I am going to tentatively calendar a Chicago trip for Axpona in April with a leg either coming or going to extend your way for a visit, if that makes sense. Sounds like you have some fun gear to spend a few hours with.

I don't know what a double dog dare is either, but at some primal level it is impossible to resist.:dontknow:


----------



## AudiocRaver

PEB said:


> Sonnie, you have a nice setup there. Hope all goes smoothly, as those events typically have hiccups that get put you behind schedule.


Not gonna happen! Maybe. Hopefully.

Sonnie is pretty good at keeping us on target. On the other hand, hiccups can be great learning experiences, and make for great stories later on, which of course we will share. If not too embarrassing.


----------



## BETO

no pues est abien chido ese sonidote... lastima que esta algo lejos de mi casa jejeje... thats a great sound equipment.. its a shame its so far from my place lol... i think it will have a very great sound and very powerful to... grettings to the winner...


----------



## novisnick

I'm so glad to find a new place to learn, I'm sure y'all will give a guy some help.

I can't wait to see the winners, that said also this sight will be great for all my questions, I know


----------



## Sirbrine

This looks to be a really fun event with some high quality equipment and speakers. Since this is not a shootout, there is no pressure to try to find the "best" speaker (which is highly subjective because everyone has different tastes).


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sirbrine said:


> This looks to be a really fun event with some high quality equipment and speakers. Since this is not a shootout, there is no pressure to try to find the "best" speaker (which is highly subjective because everyone has different tastes).


Agreed. I would not be surprised if each evaluator chose a personal favorite, giving his reasons for that choice. But that might or might not happen. We have not discussed any specific goal beyond simply evaluating in detail.


----------



## Whimsic

I had a chance to play around with the Martin Logans at my local AV shop, we spent a few hours finding the perfect position for them in the show room. We set them up with a 2 channel NAD amp and as a pure stereo setup, and the speakers just disappeared. They have one of the most immersive soundstages I have ever heard! Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to give any of the others a listen.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Whimsic said:


> I had a chance to play around with the Martin Logans at my local AV shop, we spent a few hours finding the perfect position for them in the show room. We set them up with a 2 channel NAD amp and as a pure stereo setup, and the speakers just disappeared. They have one of the most immersive soundstages I have ever heard! Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to give any of the others a listen.


Wonderful! Looking forward to a similar experience in a few days!


----------



## eecyclone

That is an impressive list of equipment! And some impressive speakers to be evaluated! I hope that someday I can afford speakers and other equipment as nice as that setup. Maybe I can find the winning speakers used in my price range down the road when I am in the market for an upgrade.


----------



## sdurani

Had been lurking in this thread but wanted to post because I recently got a listen to one of the speakers (Emerald Physics) up for evaluation. While I knew that the dipole woofers wouldn't pressurize the room, I was surprised how much impact they delivered nonetheless (they really do move some air). 

The coax driver threw a detailed soundstage with terrific phantom imaging. The soundstage seemed to float above the speakers, maybe due to the baffle being angled back (careful with ceiling reflections). Will be interested to see if any of the participants in this comparison hear something similar from these speakers. 

Looking forward to reading the evaluation and seeing how the Emerald Physics compares to other dipoles in the comparison.


----------



## fokakis1

AudiocRaver said:


> Agreed. I would not be surprised if each evaluator chose a personal favorite, giving his reasons for that choice. But that might or might not happen. We have not discussed any specific goal beyond simply evaluating in detail.


I am curious to know how your impressions of the Emerald Physics will be in Sonnie's room vs what you heard at RMAF. I wonder if they will have a more consistent soundstage.


----------



## Sonnie

It will be two different speakers, but should give us a general idea. I would think my room will be a LOT better.


----------



## AudiocRaver

fokakis1 said:


> I am curious to know how your impressions of the Emerald Physics will be in Sonnie's room vs what you heard at RMAF. I wonder if they will have a more consistent soundstage.


You read my mind. I could hardly keep myself from moving speakers around at RMAF to try to figure out what was going on. We have already discussed putting first in the lineup any models that might require more time to get properly placed and performing their absolute best, and I believe the Emerald Physics will be the first we work with for that reason. Plus we know exactly what test tracks to use. The room will definitely be better, and room symmetry, which dipoles are supposed to be more immune to the lack of, but we will probably only have time to work with a room-symmetrical setup. We shall see very soon.

Edit: The dipole design SHOULD be easier to set up. It is because of that inconsistency that we want to allow them plenty of time.


----------



## Sonnie

I know everyone is patiently waiting to see what the $10,000+ home theater system will be... and what the $20,000+ two-channel system will be. So I thought maybe I would not make you wait any longer and go ahead and show you the $20,000+ system. So, without further ado... here is the entire system:

HOWEVER... you may want to wait. I don't have it completely setup yet and this could spoil it for you. For those who just can't stand it any longer... go ahead, take a peak, but DO NOT share the pic publicly anywhere else. Okay... here it is, for your eyes only:


*DO NOT OPEN... DO NOT CLICK THIS BUTTON! >>>>>* 



:rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: 









Hey... I said I didn't have it setup yet. :huh:

:rofl:


----------



## tonyvdb

LOL :rofl:


----------



## B- one

That doesn't look like enough boxes!!! Unless its DIY. Wow, I'm so funny I will keep my day job.


----------



## JQueen

Something tells me there's a remote in one of those boxes 

Edit: something tells me there's NOT a remote in one of those boxes


----------



## Sonnie

No remotes... but there is some minor DIY involved... nothing complicated though. Remember it is a two-channel system.


----------



## ericzim

Soooo, those are the "box" Speakers, right? :rofl2::rofl2::rofl2::rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## AudiocRaver

If I did not already know what was in those boxes, I would say that was downright cruel.

Actually, I am a bit relieved. I thought you had gone totally soft. But no, it is the Sonnie we know and love after all.:nono:


----------



## moparz10

Hmmm looks like a brick and mortar store front to me :scratch::rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## Sonnie

Hey... we had a LOT of folks screaming for DIY speakers. Just wait until they see these cardboard box speakers put together. The name brand is Boxstat Speakers. They are going to be great!!!


----------



## pddufrene

Sonnie said:


> Hey... we had a LOT of folks screaming for DIY speakers. Just wait until they see these cardboard box speakers put together. The name brand is Boxstat Speakers. They are going to be great!!!


Lol! Man your crazy!


----------



## Todd Anderson

mr_natural78 said:


> I am fairly new here but I love seeing things like this. With so many options available to us and the ability of sales people to always make thier gear sound like the one that is just right for you....it's nice to see real evaluations and input in a controlled setting. this is one of the main reasons I'm glad I found this forum.


I completely agree with this! This is about as cool as it gets... a showdown with some real impartial - knowledgeable - judges!!!

Sonnie, are you going to have an official unboxing of those boxes??? Maybe a live stream event? :clap:


----------



## AudiocRaver

We talked about live streaming, but Sonnie is on satellite internet with very limited upstream bandwidth, so it is not practical.

We will try to video some parts of the event for YouTube posting later, but unboxing is a solo effort ahead of time to allow burn-in, so a few still photos as Sonnie is inspired is about all we are likely to see of that part of the process.


----------



## gorb

The day is almost here  Pity about the satellite internet and limited upstream making a live stream unfeasible, but I'm sure we'll all be happy with photos and video uploaded afterwards.


----------



## Sonnie

Todd Anderson said:


> Sonnie, are you going to have an official unboxing of those boxes??? Maybe a live stream event? :clap:


Too late... as those were actually empty boxes. :heehee:

I did take a few shots of the DIY portion though, just to show how simple it is.


----------



## prerich

Sonnie said:


> Too late... as those were actually empty boxes. :heehee:
> 
> I did take a few shots of the DIY portion though, just to show how simple it is.


I'm highly excited about this session!!!! I didn't realize you guys were that close to my stomping grounds!!!!! Very interested in your choice of speakers as well. I also love the word evaluation vs shoot-out. One can never tell the personal preferences of another - this makes audio a grand hobby indeed!!!


----------



## Zeitgeist

I think that this event gets a lot of very potentially problematic things right: It's evaluating speakers that aren't incredibly expensive, it's an evaluation of different speakers in the same *room* with the same *equipment*, and it's using some typical (but good) components. All too often I see comparisons where niche or boutique stuff gets thrown in the mix and all it does is complicate the results. I particularly like the RT60 time and treatments --because it's helping to moderate yet another potentially complicated variable.


----------



## Owen Bartley

OK Sonnie, you had your fun. Now after that disappointing reveal, we're going to be expecting some VERY nice pics of the actual setups!  No speculation here, I'm just excited to see what you've come up with.


----------



## Sonnie

I have to say... these are indeed some pretty good looking speakers. I won't comment on the sound just yet.


----------



## NBPk402

Sonnie said:


> I have to say... these are indeed some pretty good looking speakers. I won't comment on the sound just yet.


So have you already mapped out the best locations for the speakers?


----------



## Sonnie

Not sure just yet... I will have to reserve that answer for a consensus vote amongst the audiophile brotherhood that will be arriving in a couple of days.


----------



## mdalehts

Musing over the possibilty of upgrading my mains and perhaps choosing electrostatics. Leaning toward the ML-ESLs, but the Maggie 1.7s are very interesting, indeed. Really looking foward to the outcome of this evaluation! The forum's choice of six contenders is intriguing.


----------



## djkimd

looking forwards to seeing what some of the conclusions are. in particular, the martin logans. have owned multiple martin logan speakers, and really interested in the esl model. particularly in the bass integration that these employ. electrostats have always had problems with bass integration. the difference now of course is that we now have more sophisticated measurement and analysis techniques to use to help understand what is being heard.


----------



## Airgas1998

Sonnie said:


> I know everyone is patiently waiting to see what the $10,000+ home theater system will be... and what the $20,000+ two-channel system will be. So I thought maybe I would not make you wait any longer and go ahead and show you the $20,000+ system. So, without further ado... here is the entire system:
> 
> HOWEVER... you may want to wait. I don't have it completely setup yet and this could spoil it for you. For those who just can't stand it any longer... go ahead, take a peak, but DO NOT share the pic publicly anywhere else. Okay... here it is, for your eyes only:
> 
> 
> *DO NOT OPEN... DO NOT CLICK THIS BUTTON! >>>>>*
> 
> 
> 
> :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey... I said I didn't have it setup yet. :huh:
> 
> :rofl:


oh that's good...only thing I can tell about that system is it was delivered by fed ex.


----------



## ALMFamily

Here is one of the traveling "audiophiles" (ha! Audiofool is more like it in my case! :dumbcrazy that is very excited to be part of this event - looking forward to hearing some great speakers and even better company...


----------



## designosaur

I really enjoy reading analysis of the character of the sound, and some explanation of how the speaker manufacturers design choices favor one attribute over another, at this level in the market there are some clear design differences. Can't wait to hear from the eval team on how they all stack up. Good luck guys!


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie, just noticed your new pic of the lineup in the first post. Ultra-cool! Just doubled my own excitement level!


----------



## Sonnie

You just now noticing that? You oughta see what's behind those right now, actually those are not there, just the others. You know the ones... the DIY cardboard boxstats. :yes:


----------



## JQueen

I can't wait!


----------



## phillihp23

I think the MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL are likely quality speakers but I get the feeling that in the end they won't be the ones ranked #1 in the review. I am very interested in seeing how the review for the SVS Ultra Towers turns out, while they seem a bit lack luster aesthetically I feel they may surprisingly rate high on the list.


----------



## alphaiii

Looking forward to this, as I enjoyed reading through the $1000 evaluation thread. 

I would have been interested in seeing perhaps the Salk Songtowers or Sierra Towers with RAAL tweeters in the evaluation as well, but still some interesting products here for sure.


----------



## Sonnie

phillihp23 said:


> I think the MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL are likely quality speakers but I get the feeling that in the end they won't be the ones ranked #1 in the review. I am very interested in seeing how the review for the SVS Ultra Towers turns out, while they seem a bit lack luster aesthetically I feel they may surprisingly rate high on the list.


Remember that this is not a ranking shootout... it is an evaluation of several speakers. Each evaluation will more or less stand on its own.




alphaiii said:


> I would have been interested in seeing perhaps the Salk Songtowers or Sierra Towers with RAAL tweeters in the evaluation as well, but still some interesting products here for sure.


The Sierra Towers with the RAAL will be in the next evaluation round, provided Ascend agrees. Not sure about the Salk yet.


----------



## mdalehts

Sonnie: Will the evaluations describe the spearkers' performance relative to the others? And will they be evaluated both objectively and subjectively?


----------



## Sonnie

We are not planning on comparing them, as this is not a shootout for all the reasons previously stated throughout this thread, particularly the first post. There may be some subtle suggestions that a speaker has a very good specific quality and describe it, whereas we may not say the same for another. 

We will have some measurements for the speakers, similar to what we did for the first event.


----------



## TheLaw612

I loved reading the $1K shootout thread so I'm eagerly anticipating this evaluation. With a baby on the way I can only dream of owning any of these speakers right now. 

I would like to see an actual shootout at this price range with the winner of the $1k shootout thrown in for kicks.


----------



## nash211

The Studio 60, in all its incarnations, is large enough to be used as a full-range speaker with nearly any program material, and yet is compact enough to be easily accommodated in my relatively small Connecticut listening room. It neither looms over me nor disappears into the space. Used as a center-channel speaker, it's just short enough to clear my line of sight to the video display. Finally, and despite inevitable price creep over the last decade, the Studio 60 still comes in under $2000/pair—my line in the sand for a reasonably priced system.


----------



## lcaillo

I am excited and ready to go as soon as I can get away from the office tomorrow. Hope to see you between 8 & 9 pm your time, Sonnie.


----------



## Tonto

Ooooooh, the fun part is kicking off!!!

*Finally!*


----------



## Pupton

Really looking forward to this event. I have some older speakers that were in a similar price range when new, and I'm really intrigued to see the results/impressions the of group, given the current speaker techonology.


----------



## JerryLove

There are a few speakers in there I'm familiar with (though not always the same releases as are being tested) and a few I am not. Personally, I consider a situation like that ideal for learning about new speakers while being able to compare impressions of speakers I already have my own opinions of.

I'm hoping that it will spark more activity in this forum as well. I look forward to reading the results and think it would be fun to be a participant.


----------



## Sonnie

Hey Leonard... we will try our best to save you some ribs. :meal:
:


----------



## kevin360

Sonnie said:


> Remember that this is not a ranking shootout... it is an evaluation of several speakers. Each evaluation will more or less stand on its own.
> 
> The Sierra Towers with the RAAL will be in the next evaluation round, provided Ascend agrees. Not sure about the Salk yet.


I think it's great that you (well, y'all) are approaching this evaluation with that mindset. In any case, a ranking shootout is rife with inherent problems (that simply cannot be avoided).

I accept "the next evaluation round" as very good news and look forward to it, but it's almost time for this round to get under way. I hope you guys have lots of fun - sure sounds like fun to me. Oh well, I've already heard a few pair of speakers that I'd love to own, but they are _well_ beyond my reach. :sob:

The good news is that hearing such wonderful speakers only ruined me for a few days.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> Hey Leonard... we will try our best to save you some ribs. :meal:
> :


"Try" is right. It might be hard. Is it my imagination, or can I smell them already?

Look at the time. Yikes, I better start packing!


----------



## dsm1212

Love the selection of speakers. I can't believe how much technology you have in there for this price range!

Will the contest focus on the main speakers from these families? I'm always interested in surround reviews because personally I have a much more difficult time finding something I like for those positions.

thanks
steve


----------



## cobraguy

Trying to match surround speakers IS a bit of a chore when you buy a different brand than the mains. But that would make an already complicated review even more complicated and very time consuming.
Just the fact that these speakers will most likely sound quite different when paired with components other than the one's being used in this test is complicated enough to think about.
But testing speakers IS fun! Can't wait for the results!


----------



## wssmith

Would there be any benefit to recording snippets of each speaker, and then uploading those recordings either here or elsewhere for forum members to hear? I know nothing can replace being in the listening room but maybe an uploaded recording could provide us with a slight taste of what each speaker offers? Please excuse me if this is a silly idea, but I'm new to all of this. Looking forward to the overall results!


----------



## btinindy

Wow, this will be interesting. I can't wait to see the comments and results. What a lineup. There are a few speakers on the list that I am surprised to see putted against some of the others. I have an idea of an "order" of preference, but will keep it to myself. 

This is exactly what I would like to see come out of these forums. Kudos to you guys for all of the effort you are putting into this!


----------



## fschris

Are there any pics being posted?


----------



## Tonto

Well it's finally November 1st, let the auditon begin. Since I'm not there this time, maybe you guy's should post results as you go, that way I don't have to wait!!!

And I expect the first review to be of Sonnies' South Alabama Ribs!

Seriously though, hope you guys have a great time.


----------



## lcaillo

It will take a while to put results together and edit. While we will be better at it the second time around, I think we will have more detailed impressions from more of us this time. I know mine will be more extensive, as I was not well for the last one.

What I will give you immediately is the review of the ribs. Overall, I have to rate them as some of the best high end ribs that I have experienced. The flavor of the sauce complimented the ribs nicely, without becoming harsh upon first touch to the tongue nor with the residual taste. The inner detail of the rib meat was maintained while the sweetness of the caramelized sauce did not provide any intermodulation distortion. The imaging was stunning. As I was eating the first rib I felt like I could reach out and touch the pig right in front of me. The aroma created a very wide nasal stage. I noticed no unnatural coloration in the meat nor the sauce.

The placement with these was quite easy. I started with ribs at 7:00, brat at 12:00, and boneless pork at 3:00. All were placed approximately 1.5 inches from the boundary to avoid any reflections, but equidistant. The duration of the evaluation was very short. A repeat trial was needed to validate the first pass. slightly different placement was used for the second trial, but the results were completely repeatable and the items all quite insensitive to placement. 

Transient response on the ribs was excellent. Very little rebound or resistance. The brat provided slightly more skin resistance. Supply capacity was far beyond what was needed, with ample flow of ribs upon demand. Ribs this esoteric might not be appropriate for the palate of a novice, however. I would leave this caliber of BBQ to those with the ability to appreciate the intent of his art. I would also only eat them with spikes under the plate and a fork made from brazilian walnut.


----------



## ALMFamily

Wait - you forgot to mention the goat!!

Had Wayne and I got here a little sooner, we could have seen Sonnie choose who was going to be dinner! :rofl:


----------



## Sonnie

dsm1212 said:


> Will the contest focus on the main speakers from these families? I'm always interested in surround reviews because personally I have a much more difficult time finding something I like for those positions.


Yes... just the mains in a two-channel setup, except for the 5.0 system we will review. For surrounds, we would have to review the full 5.0 system that included the surrounds. 




cobraguy said:


> Trying to match surround speakers IS a bit of a chore when you buy a different brand than the mains.


I am not sure it is all that big of a deal really to exactly match your surrounds, although similar dynamics in the speakers would probably be preferred. The center is more likely to matter a good bit, although we used my ML Theater tonight with a different brand speaker and it blended pretty well.




wssmith said:


> Would there be any benefit to recording snippets of each speaker, and then uploading those recordings either here or elsewhere for forum members to hear? I know nothing can replace being in the listening room but maybe an uploaded recording could provide us with a slight taste of what each speaker offers?


As Leonard eluded to (here in the theater room)... it would be like video recording screen shots of different projectors with our iPhone. It probably all sound bad.




fschris said:


> Are there any pics being posted?


Yes... we should have lots of pics. None of us have makeup on though, so you get what you get. 




lcaillo said:


> What I will give you immediately is the review of the ribs. Overall, I have to rate them as some of the best high end ribs that I have experienced. The flavor of the sauce complimented the ribs nicely, without becoming harsh upon first touch to the tongue nor with the residual taste. The inner detail of the rib meat was maintained while the sweetness of the caramelized sauce did not provide any intermodulation distortion. The imaging was stunning. As I was eating the first rib I felt like I could reach out and touch the pig right in front of me. The aroma created a very wide nasal stage. I noticed no unnatural coloration in the meat nor the sauce.
> 
> The placement with these was quite easy. I started with ribs at 7:00, brat at 12:00, and boneless pork at 3:00. All were placed approximately 1.5 inches from the boundary to avoid any reflections, but equidistant. The duration of the evaluation was very short. A repeat trial was needed to validate the first pass. slightly different placement was used for the second trial, but the results were completely repeatable and the items all quite insensitive to placement.
> 
> Transient response on the ribs was excellent. Very little rebound or resistance. The brat provided slightly more skin resistance. Supply capacity was far beyond what was needed, with ample flow of ribs upon demand. Ribs this esoteric might not be appropriate for the palate of a novice, however. I would leave this caliber of BBQ to those with the ability to appreciate the intent of his art. I would also only eat them with spikes under the plate and a fork made from brazilian walnut.


PRICELESS!




ALMFamily said:


> Wait - you forgot to mention the goat!!
> 
> Had Wayne and I got here a little sooner, we could have seen Sonnie choose who was going to be dinner! :rofl:


Nothing like having it fresh from the garden... or hog pen in this case.


----------



## lcaillo

ALMFamily said:


> Wait - you forgot to mention the goat!! Had Wayne and I got here a little sooner, we could have seen Sonnie choose who was going to be dinner! :rofl:


We'll, that is why we don't want to rush reviews. The bottom end on the goat was a bit soft and the rest was rather veiled. I just felt the image was a little weak due to the processing technology. Stove vs grille is no contest.


----------



## pddufrene

lcaillo said:


> We'll, that is why we don't want to rush reviews. The bottom end on the goat was a bit soft and the rest was rather veiled. I just felt the image was a little weak due to the processing technology. Stove vs grille is no contest.


So this is what happens to a LSU fan when you send them to BAMA country! Lol, well the food sounds delicious and has me hungry after reading this post. Now it's time to get to business and get us some speaker reviews.


----------



## ALMFamily

Sonnie and Leonard are off to bed - Wayne and I are just completing the track list we are planning to use. I will post that up when we get it finalized - likely in the morning.... well, later this morning I guess...


----------



## theJman

lcaillo said:


> What I will give you immediately is the review of the ribs. Overall, I have to rate them as some of the best high end ribs that I have experienced. The flavor of the sauce complimented the ribs nicely, without becoming harsh upon first touch to the tongue nor with the residual taste. The inner detail of the rib meat was maintained while the sweetness of the caramelized sauce did not provide any intermodulation distortion. The imaging was stunning. As I was eating the first rib I felt like I could reach out and touch the pig right in front of me. The aroma created a very wide nasal stage. I noticed no unnatural coloration in the meat nor the sauce.
> 
> The placement with these was quite easy. I started with ribs at 7:00, brat at 12:00, and boneless pork at 3:00. All were placed approximately 1.5 inches from the boundary to avoid any reflections, but equidistant. The duration of the evaluation was very short. A repeat trial was needed to validate the first pass. slightly different placement was used for the second trial, but the results were completely repeatable and the items all quite insensitive to placement.
> 
> Transient response on the ribs was excellent. Very little rebound or resistance. The brat provided slightly more skin resistance. Supply capacity was far beyond what was needed, with ample flow of ribs upon demand. Ribs this esoteric might not be appropriate for the palate of a novice, however. I would leave this caliber of BBQ to those with the ability to appreciate the intent of his art. I would also only eat them with spikes under the plate and a fork made from brazilian walnut.


----------



## skeeter99

This is definitely one of the most anticipated comparison events that I've looked forward to reading the results and thoughts on. $2500 is really a sweet spot price wise as its still within a lot of people's reach and really starting to dabble into the mid-fi space I think. 

If there's a way to take some high res shots of each of the speakers fronts/backs/etc and in their listening positions for the evaluation that would be great. Helps us feel more like we're there 

Have fun!

Scott


----------



## cobraguy

Sonnie said:


> I am not sure it is all that big of a deal really to exactly match your surrounds, although similar dynamics in the speakers would probably be preferred. The center is more likely to matter a good bit, although we used my ML Theater tonight with a different brand speaker and it blended pretty well.



I would agree, to a point. I think it depends highly on what you use your surround system for. If it's mainly for movies, then I would agree with you that it's much easier to find adequate surround speakers. But if you like to listen to music via 5ch or 7ch, then I would suggest matching your surround speakers the best you can with your mains - especially the center speaker matching.
I was into 5ch music DVD's for awhile (still am to a certain extent). It took me several tries at getting my surround speakers to match the tonal quality of my mains. I have PBN Montana EPS main speakers and I went through Amrita's, NHT's, M&K's, Snell's, B&W's, Polk's, Definitive Technology's and a couple others to try and find matching surrounds. In the end, it came down to liking the sound/tone matching of the Snell's and B&W's the best with my PBN Montana's for music playback, but I liked the M&K Tri-poles the best for movies.
Then PBN started making center/surround speakers and all was good.


----------



## smurphy522

Very nice line up of speakers. I will be very interested in how Dynaudio stacks up. The new offering from SVS looks promising. Can't wait to read the evaluations from the group!


----------



## NBPk402

Today is the day you start evaluating the speakers! :foottap::flex::boxer::T:T


----------



## ALMFamily

OK, here is the playlist we have decided upon for this event:

No code has to be inserted here. 


Listening underway!!


----------



## bkeeler10

So jealous . . .

When you say Wailin' Jennings, you must mean either Waylon Jennings or Wailin' Jennys. If the latter, what track are you using? I mentioned this group in another thread -- looks like maybe someone decided to check it out. What do y'all think?

Edit: The first time the list loaded it only showed artists. After my reply it now shows the tracks . . . Thanks.

Edit two: Looks like you got the track and album reversed on that one.


----------



## skeeter99

Great list! The only one I'd add on would be Keb Mo (one of my personal favorites) but otherwise very nice choices! We're all waiting with baited breath


----------



## Sonnie

pddufrene said:


> So this is what happens to a LSU fan when you send them to BAMA country!


It was Leonard's idea... :scratch:




skeeter99 said:


> If there's a way to take some high res shots of each of the speakers fronts/backs/etc and in their listening positions for the evaluation that would be great. Helps us feel more like we're there


We can try, but it is a fairly dark room and may be hard to get them right.




cobraguy said:


> I would agree, to a point. I think it depends highly on what you use your surround system for. If it's mainly for movies, then I would agree with you that it's much easier to find adequate surround speakers. But if you like to listen to music via 5ch or 7ch, then I would suggest matching your surround speakers the best you can with your mains - especially the center speaker matching.


Excellent point!


We are now reminiscing the sound of the Arx A5's... exhilarating to say the least.


----------



## ALMFamily

bkeeler10 said:


> So jealous . . .
> 
> When you say Wailin' Jennings, you must mean either Waylon Jennings or Wailin' Jennys. If the latter, what track are you using? I mentioned this group in another thread -- looks like maybe someone decided to check it out. What do y'all think?
> 
> Edit: The first time the list loaded it only showed artists. After my reply it now shows the tracks . . . Thanks.
> 
> Edit two: Looks like you got the track and album reversed on that one.


Thanks Bryan - can you tell it was 3am when I put the list together? 

It is Wailin's Jennys - and I applied the correction.


----------



## Sonnie

It's the country side down here in Alabama that is causing him to think ******* country music, thus Waylon Jennings came to his mind while typing.


----------



## bkeeler10

Being in Alabama + 3 am = Wailin Jennings. Got it! :bigsmile:



Sonnie said:


> We are now reminiscing the sound of the Arx A5's... exhilarating to say the least.


One of the most interesting potential thoughts to come out of this for me might be how much better the $2500 speakers are compared to the A5. You're looking at 3 - 4 times the price, but I seriously doubt the sound will be 3 - 4 times better. How much performance are you giving up by staying with something like the Arx A5 instead of the $2500 price class. Can the A5, for example, give you 90% (or whatever %) of the performance for 1/3 the price? For many, myself possibly included, that is a good proposition. And for others, paying 3 times as much is totally worth it for another 25% perceived improvement in sound quality.


----------



## Sonnie

Obviously I cannot say conclusively because I have not heard all of the speakers yet, but there does almost seem to be somewhat of a level of diminishing returns. For the money, the Arx A5's are incredible, and that may very well be becoming more evident as we continue. Perhaps the A5's are seriously underpriced. It also makes me wonder just how much better are the ML Motion 40's over the Motion 12's, if there is supposed to be an improvement. What a bargain folks got with those 12's after they were discontinued.


----------



## lcaillo

I am really happy with the mix of tracks we have. Lot's of great stuff to listen to with a range of types of instrumentation, recording techniques, and styles.

And yes, I am still enamored with the Arx5. It does a great job for the price. There will be some improvements I am sure, but as Sonnie says, they are not likely proportional to the price difference.


----------



## ALMFamily

This was my first time hearing the A5's as I was not here for the $1000 event, but I must say I was very impressed with them - really glad we did those before we got into the other speakers...


----------



## Mike0206

Sonnie said:


> It's the country side down here in Alabama that is causing him to think ******* country music, thus Waylon Jennings came to his mind while typing.


 "just the good ole boys"


----------



## moparz10

sonnie so the ribs, are they dry or wet rub?? smoked or bbq, gas wood or charcoal,and last beef or pork oh and what sides :rofl2: hoping all of you have a great time.


----------



## Sonnie

moparz10 said:


> sonnie so the ribs, are they dry or wet rub?? smoked or bbq, gas wood or charcoal,and last beef or pork oh and what sides :rofl2: hoping all of you have a great time.


lol... Let's see... dry and wet (mixed) ... grilled with some smoke... charcoal and pure pig. With sausage, bratwurst and rice cooked in pork broth.


----------



## B- one

Sonnie said:


> lol... Let's see... dry and wet (mixed) ... grilled with some smoke... charcoal and pure pig. With sausage, bratwurst and rice cooked in pork broth.


No pics?!?!?!


----------



## Sonnie

Very similar to these:http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/chat-box-swamp/34887-rib-tips-sauce.html


----------



## ALMFamily

I have a slew of pictures, but I have to download them to my computer, delete the bad ones, resize them, and load them to the Gallery. It will be a while yet for those...


----------



## Sonnie

ALMFamily said:


> I have a slew of pictures, but I have to download them to my computer, delete the bad ones, resize them, and load them to the Gallery. It will be a while yet for those...


I had no idea you took that many pics of my ribs Joe. How thoughtful of you. I can always tell who my "real" friends are... the ones who think so much of me that they take pics of my ribs. Awesome man... just awesome! I can't wait to see them. You are the greatest Joe!!!


----------



## admranger

lcaillo said:


> I am really happy with the mix of tracks we have. Lot's of great stuff to listen to with a range of types of instrumentation, recording techniques, and styles.
> 
> And yes, I am still enamored with the Arx5. It does a great job for the price. There will be some improvements I am sure, but as Sonnie says, they are not likely proportional to the price difference.


Curious how the new front end equipment affected the sound of the Arx5's.


----------



## B- one

Sonnie said:


> Very similar to these:http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/chat-box-swamp/34887-rib-tips-sauce.html


We have all seen those ones.


----------



## B- one

ALMFamily said:


> I have a slew of pictures, but I have to download them to my computer, delete the bad ones, resize them, and load them to the Gallery. It will be a while yet for those...


I hope there's one with Sonnie and his "kiss the chef" apron on. Hope you all have a great time.


----------



## Tonto

Nicely done, the ribs that is! Glad you guy's held Sonnie to the fire!!! 

I have only one request for now...you guy's have to break tomorrow @ 8 PM to watch FSU vs Miami. And you gotta pull for FSU. Once that is over you can get back to listening, but we must keep our priorities!

Insert *"Seminole Smiley doing the Chop"* here:


----------



## JQueen

Or watch the game with the different sets of speakers 2 per qt!!


----------



## MatrixDweller

Wow. I truly wish that I could be there to hear everything first hand. I haven't been around here much lately, but this shootout has really piqued my interest in home theater again. Can't wait to see all the details as they come in.


----------



## theJman

ALMFamily said:


> OK, here is the playlist we have decided upon for this event:
> 
> No code has to be inserted here.


No heavy metal, and only one Floyd-ish song? I would have been bored to tears...


----------



## theJman

Sonnie said:


> For the money, the Arx A5's are incredible, and that may very well be becoming more evident as we continue. Perhaps the A5's are seriously underpriced.


This sounds dangerously close to the conclusion of a review someone did of the the Arx speakers. Cough, cough...


----------



## jmschnur

Keith Jarret 's Koln Koncert would provide a real test I believe . Also Mile"s Davis So What gives a good evaluation of highs and mid range.


----------



## tesseract

Glad to see everyone arrived safely and is having fun. Looking forward to the results, especially where the A5 falls in comparison to the more expensive speakers.


----------



## cobraguy

Absolutely LOVE the song selection. In fact, there are several CD's in your rotation that I use myself when I evaluate speakers.
Jennifer Warnes is one of my all time favorite. Can't think of many songs that gives the bass/woofers a workout like "Way Down Deep" does. I usually follow Jennifer up with some Sara K, Holly Cole, and Rebecca Pidgeon, but that's just me.
Love me some Dire Straits Brother in Arms, but if you really want to see what's hidden in those speakers, toss in Dire Straits On Every Street: You and your friend.
There are some sections in that song that will tell you exactly what caliber of speakers you are listening to, especially the opening riff. Some speakers can handle it, and others can't.
But once you hear it on excellent speakers, you'll know what to listen for.

Have fun fellas!


----------



## Sonnie

Tonto said:


> I have only one request for now...you guy's have to break tomorrow @ 8 PM to watch FSU vs Miami. And you gotta pull for FSU. Once that is over you can get back to listening, but we must keep our priorities!


We kind or chose this weekend because Leonard and I knew BAMA and LSU are not playing. 

Who is FSU anyway? :dontknow:




admranger said:


> Curious how the new front end equipment affected the sound of the Arx5's.


It has really been too long since we have heard them with the Rogue, but I can assure you the Anthem does NOT disappoint. I was blown away a second time by how good the A5's sound. It is the first I have been able to listen to them in about 3-4 weeks, as I have had so many speakers in my room playing for break-in.




theJman said:


> No heavy metal, and only one Floyd-ish song? I would have been bored to tears...


We were going to do ACDC, but someone forgot the CD. Then we were going to include Time from Pink Floyd and someone forgot to remind me. We still got plenty of good stuff though.




theJman said:


> This sounds dangerously close to the conclusion of a review someone did of the the Arx speakers.


Well... that wouldn't be dangerous... that would actually be a good thing.


----------



## ALMFamily

We are about to watch "Pacific Rim" with our surprise 5.0 home theater system - can anyone besides Jim guess who it is and which speakers these are?


----------



## AudiocRaver

Normal listening patterns for several of us lean more toward heavier music, but it is difficult to hear what is going on at a detailed level with heavier music. We are listening for subtleties that power rock tends to cover up. Heavier music sounds GREAT on speakers, but is not great for evaluating. That is largely why you see this kind of track list.

Later on..... we are going to CRANK IT!!!!!!


----------



## mr.chill

This looks really interesting, cant wait for the results of this test. I like the fact that you use mid budget equipment aswell to test all of this. I wonder how the SVS are gonna do against the others, always been a speaker i have wondered about. Good luck with the testing and enjoy


----------



## Tonto

Joe wrote:



> We are about to watch "Pacific Rim" with our surprise 5.0 home theater system - can anyone besides Jim guess who it is and which speakers these are?


I don't have a clue who that is, but look at the size of that center! That thing should have no problem filling Sonnies' room. So you switched out all 5 speakers. Did you run Audussey to tune them to the room? Before & after graphs would be nice.


----------



## NewHTbuyer

ALMFamily said:


> We are about to watch "Pacific Rim" with our surprise 5.0 home theater system - can anyone besides Jim guess who it is and which speakers these are?


Mark Seaton. Not sure exactly which speaker though.


----------



## lcaillo

Mark Seaton is correct. And his speakers were very impressive when we watched Pacific Rim. Look for a separate review of those as an HT system after we are done with the 2 channel evaluations.


----------



## lcaillo

mr.chill said:


> This looks really interesting, cant wait for the results of this test. I like the fact that you use mid budget equipment aswell to test all of this. I wonder how the SVS are gonna do against the others, always been a speaker i have wondered about. Good luck with the testing and enjoy


I have been wondering the same thing. But no comments until we get all six done!


----------



## Sonnie

Tonto said:


> So you switched out all 5 speakers. Did you run Audussey to tune them to the room? Before & after graphs would be nice.


No... we have not run Audyssey yet. We watched last night without Audyssey to get a feel for how they sounded without any correction. They are very impressive... effortless for sure, which they should be with 1,000 watts on each speaker.

We plan to run Audyssey later this evening before we watch the next movie.


----------



## Tonto

Thanks Sonnie, you guys are doing a great job of making us feel like we are there. Keep up the good work.

And of yeah, FSU is that team with that Winston guy & all the hands. Tune in @ 8 for a treat. It's really fun to watch that guy play.

Insert that Chop thingy:


----------



## lcaillo

We have discovered another issue with our evaluation. We wanted to try each speaker on the stage to get an impression of how well it would do closer to a rear wall, in a more realistic location for most people. So far, everything sounds better farther out into the room like we found with the last sessions. Adding this location, combined with the fact that we have more tracks in our sample, is extending the time it takes. But to me, speakers of this quality beg for more listening. The dilemma is just how much time to spend on each speaker.

Of course part of the problem is that we are trying to be more thorough with the evaluations and give as much info as possible.

This is fun, but it is a challenge.


----------



## ALMFamily

lcaillo said:


> We have discovered another issue with our evaluation. We wanted to try each speaker on the stage to get an impression of how well it would do closer to a rear wall, in a more realistic location for most people. So far, everything sounds better farther out into the room like we found with the last sessions. Adding this location, combined with the fact that we have more tracks in our sample, is extending the time it takes. But to me, speakers of this quality beg for more listening. The dilemma is just how much time to spend on each speaker.
> 
> Of course part of the problem is that we are trying to be more thorough with the evaluations and give as much info as possible.
> 
> This is fun, but it is a challenge.


I am going to point out that we started talking about the time spent while I was sitting in the "Kirk" location (captains chair, MLP for those scoring at home) - obviously, I am boggarting good music listening time! :bigsmile:


----------



## lcaillo

Yeah, but it was Sonnie that we kicked out of the chair.:devil:


----------



## NBPk402

lcaillo said:


> Yeah, but it was Sonnie that we kicked out of the chair.:devil:


Man you guys are a cold bunch... Kicking a man out of his chair in his own home theater. What a tough bunch you guys are.


----------



## ALMFamily

ellisr63 said:


> Man you guys are a cold bunch... Kicking a man out of his chair in his own home theater. What a tough bunch you guys are.


Could be worse - we could have subjected him to my cooking!

After about a day and a half of activities, I must say how pleased and excited I am to be part of this. And, I have also discovered just how much more I have to learn to "catch" up to these guys.


----------



## Sonnie

lcaillo said:


> Yeah, but it was Sonnie that we kicked out of the chair.:devil:


EXACTLY! Don't let Joe poor-mouth you all... as I (moi) was the one penalized first!!! I am the one that had to suffer and shorten my time. :foottap:

Oh... and it's the FRONT wall, not the rear wall. It is in front of me, not to my rear.


----------



## lcaillo

While I won't give any hints or teasers about the speaker evaluations themselves, I don't have a problem talking about the process as we go. We are learning a lot about how to get to the best locations for the speakers and how to gather the most information.

We are concluding that stages, like the one Sonnie has for his HT, are not a good idea for serious 2 channel listening. The height of the speaker is not ideal for music, but fine for movies with the screen height. Also, we continue to confirm that for best soundstage farther out into the room is generally better, up to the point that the listening position can accommodate. Rear ported and dipoles seem to also benefit more from moving away from the front wall.

Speaker toe in angle has been consistently found to be critical for best image presentation, more with some speakers than others, but to some degree with all.

These sessions also confirm what I learned last time about listening position. I can learn a lot from listening from the second row, or even walking around the room. The limits of the sweet spot and the ability to reveal detail can be learned from outside the prime listening position. When I hear the delicacy of how some speakers handle things like harmonies from the back row, I know there is something special going on. Not having the distraction (perhaps a poor choice of words there :huh of the image and soundstage presentation can actually afford attending to other aspects of the sound.


----------



## lcaillo

I did not say "rear wall," no not me.:gulp:


----------



## NBPk402

When I had my ML setup I found that the speakers did their best 3-5' from any walls... I am assuming you are finding the same results with other types of speakers. My Paradigms were the first speakers that I had tried close to the walls and they sounded good but I imagine they would have sounded better away from the walls too. My LaScalas are in the corners against the wall and they sound awesome... I don't have the room to try them away from the walls so they will stay where they are.


----------



## Mike0206

lcaillo said:


> While I won't give any hints or teasers about the speaker evaluations themselves, I don't have a problem talking about the process as we go. We are learning a lot about how to get to the best locations for the speakers and how to gather the most information. We are concluding that stages, like the one Sonnie has for his HT, are not a good idea for serious 2 channel listening. The height of the speaker is not ideal for music, but fine for movies with the screen height. Also, we continue to confirm that for best soundstage farther out into the room is generally better, up to the point that the listening position can accommodate. Rear ported and dipoles seem to also benefit more from moving away from the front wall. Speaker toe in angle has been consistently found to be critical for best image presentation, more with some speakers than others, but to some degree with all. These sessions also confirm what I learned last time about listening position. I can learn a lot from listening from the second row, or even walking around the room. The limits of the sweet spot and the ability to reveal detail can be learned from outside the prime listening position. When I hear the delicacy of how some speakers handle things like harmonies from the back row, I know there is something special going on. Not having the distraction (perhaps a poor choice of words there :huh of the image and soundstage presentation can actually afford attending to other aspects of the sound.


 Nice post! Very insightful. If you don't mind me asking, about how far from MLP are you setting the speakers up at? 5ft,10ft etc...... How far does that put it from the front wall approx.? How far apart are they being placed? I know each speaker will vary but I'm sure by now you guys have a fairly good idea of approximate placement in the room correct?


----------



## lcaillo

We will post the measurements for the final listening positions as well as pictures. If you refer to the $1000 eval results, the position of the Arx turns out to be pretty good for most speakers. We keep finding that it is a good starting point.


----------



## hyghwayman

theJman said:


> No heavy metal, and only one Floyd-ish song? I would have been bored to tears...


 :rubeyes: When I looked at the list I thought the very same thing 



Sonnie said:


> We were going to do ACDC, but someone forgot the CD. Then we were going to include Time from Pink Floyd and someone forgot to remind me. We still got plenty of good stuff though.


How did this happen :rant:and no Talking Heads - Take Me to the River

It's addle:addle:addle: Time for Someone lddude:
​


----------



## Sonnie

Oh well... we just can't include everything that everyone else here wants, or we'd have fifty-eleven songs and never get finished.

ANYONE that would get BORED with the music we are listening to, needs to get out of the house a little bit and see the world, as there is music out there that sounds awesome... you have been missing a LOT Of GREAT music. This music we have is music I could sit and listen to for DAYS on end. As a matter of fact, while I also love Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin for my rock bands, I put what we are listening to as a must for hearing great sound on good speakers. Heavy metal does not really do speakers justice... and most of it makes my ears bleed.


----------



## lcaillo

Sonnie said:


> ANYONE that would get BORED with the music we are listening to, needs to get out of the house a little bit and see the world,...


Our favorite ******* can say something now that he has been out of LA to a few shows. How old were you before you left Alabama, Sonnie? 40? 45?

Yep, he is definitely the man of the world. Just don't offer him any Greek food.


----------



## theJman

Awesome for some, still boring for others. Counting bars, clubs, arenas and stadiums I have seen over 200 live bands, so getting out of the house and seeing the world has never been an issue for me. Yawn-inducing music is though. 




ALMFamily said:


> We are about to watch "Pacific Rim" with our surprise 5.0 home theater system - can anyone besides Jim guess who it is and which speakers these are?


Oh, I see how it is; just because I know the guy means I'm not allowed to guess? Oh, wait... 

That's a long ride for Mark, considering he's right outside of Chicago. I suppose I should withhold my guess on what he brought as well? :T


----------



## tonyvdb

Sonnie said:


> ANYONE that would get BORED with the music we are listening to, needs to get out of the house a little bit and see the world, as there is music out there that sounds awesome... you have been missing a LOT Of GREAT music. This music we have is music I could sit and listen to for DAYS on end. As a matter of fact, while I also love Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin for my rock bands, I put what we are listening to as a must for hearing great sound on good speakers. Heavy metal does not really do speakers justice... and most of it makes my ears bleed.


I would have to agree, there is so much amazing recordings that many people have never listened to and that lend themselves to testing speakers and how well they produce it.


----------



## Sonnie

Live music has absolutely nothing to do with listening to good speakers with good music. Concerts are a whole different story. We are not listening to live music, except for one track, and it sure ain't heavy metal and it ain't gonna sound like it does in the venue either. We are not in anything that even remotely resembles anywhere I have ever been listening to a live band. There is just no comparison. We will never get the live sound in our rooms that we hear at a concert... and personally I would not prefer that sound anyway. In my opinion, I would much rather listen here than live. Although that doesn't mean I couldn't get into going to a really small venue to listen to someone like Nils Lofgren.

Oh... and been there done that as well. I was a ticket scalper (licensed broker) for about 7 years. Been to fifty-eleven venues all over the south. Sat front row center... and on back to 20th row center in bunches of them. 

The head banging days of going to listen to Metallica, Ozzy Osbourne, ACDC, Kiss, Rolling Stones, Aerosmith, Nine Inch Nails... and a few others I have gladly forgotten, are all gone for me. Not that I ever spent that much time at their concerts to begin with.

I am fine right here with my Yello, Flim, Spyo, Pink Floyd and others that I have been listening to for years. The only difference is I am hearing it the way it should be heard... and it certainly does not make me want to yawn... nor any of us others. Well... okay... I think Leonard never had a chance to yawn yesterday, he went straight to cutting the zzzzzz's.

I have certainly picked up quite a bit of new music to listen to since going to the audio shows. There is some stellar music there... and much good reason why about 99% of the rooms use the music we are listening to in order to showcase their speakers... which in most cases are their best speakers. Most of those manufacturers and vendors cringe when folks bring in heavy metal to listen with... as most of that music will sound the same while it screams from about any of the speakers out there.


----------



## ALMFamily

theJman said:


> Awesome for some, still boring for others. Counting bars, clubs, arenas and stadiums I have seen over 200 live bands, so getting out of the house and seeing the world has never been an issue for me. Yawn-inducing music is though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, I see how it is; just because I know the guy means I'm not allowed to guess? Oh, wait...
> 
> That's a long ride for Mark, considering he's right outside of Chicago. I suppose I should withhold my guess on what he brought as well? :T


Just so everyone realizes, this list is not a "permanent" list - I am sure it will undergo some changes as we continue evaluating. So, suggestions are always welcome and we will of course take them into account, but this is how we decided to roll for this go-around.

Yeah, it was - and we sure do appreciate him making the trip down. I must admit - I thought Pacific Rim was a perfect choice to take his speakers "out for a jog". 

And, yes you should Jim! :bigsmile:


----------



## ALMFamily

Here are a few photos from Day 1. For those hoping for speaker pictures, these are not it! :bigsmile:


----------



## NBPk402

Sonnie said:


> Live music has absolutely nothing to do with listening to good speakers with good music. Concerts are a whole different story. We are not listening to live music, except for one track, and it sure ain't heavy metal and it ain't gonna sound like it does in the venue either. We are not in anything that even remotely resembles anywhere I have ever been listening to a live band. There is just no comparison. We will never get the live sound in our rooms that we hear at a concert... and personally I would not prefer that sound anyway. In my opinion, I would much rather listen here than live. Although that doesn't mean I couldn't get into going to a really small venue to listen to someone like Nils Lofgren.
> 
> Oh... and been there done that as well. I was a ticket scalper (licensed broker) for about 7 years. Been to fifty-eleven venues all over the south. Sat front row center... and on back to 20th row center in bunches of them.
> 
> The head banging days of going to listen to Metallica, Ozzy Osbourne, ACDC, Kiss, Rolling Stones, Aerosmith, Nine Inch Nails... and a few others I have gladly forgotten, are all gone for me. Not that I ever spent that much time at their concerts to begin with.
> 
> I am fine right here with my Yello, Flim, Spyo, Pink Floyd and others that I have been listening to for years. The only difference is I am hearing it the way it should be heard... and it certainly does not make me want to yawn... nor any of us others. Well... okay... I think Leonard never had a chance to yawn yesterday, he went straight to cutting the zzzzzz's.
> 
> I have certainly picked up quite a bit of new music to listen to since going to the audio shows. There is some stellar music there... and much good reason why about 99% of the rooms use the music we are listening to in order to showcase their speakers... which in most cases are their best speakers. Most of those manufacturers and vendors cringe when folks bring in heavy metal to listen with... as most of that music will sound the same while it screams from about any of the speakers out there.


I forgot all about a group I used to listen to when auditioning speakers... Yazz- Upstairs at Erics. In my room is my favorite one. In my room and Only you are my favorites from the album. Not sure if you have it but it was very good for auditioning. Enjoy your listening! :T:T


----------



## tesseract

lcaillo said:


> Just don't offer him any Greek food.


Truth! :rofl:


----------



## Sonnie

lcaillo said:


> Our favorite ******* can say something now that he has been out of LA to a few shows. How old were you before you left Alabama, Sonnie? 40? 45?


lol... My daddy took me to West Virginia when I was a kid. :neener:

HOWEVER, I was 51 before I went to my first show. :whistling: But those just introduced me to MORE good music. They are certainly not the best place to hear speakers at their best... or at least not all speakers. The rooms are too challenging for the majority of them. What they did do is get me more interested in two-channel.




lcaillo said:


> Yep, he is definitely the man of the world. Just don't offer him any Greek food.


Hey... I had Greek dressing with my salad last night. :huh:


----------



## Sonnie

ellisr63 said:


> When I had my ML setup I found that the speakers did their best 3-5' from any walls... I am assuming you are finding the same results with other types of speakers. My Paradigms were the first speakers that I had tried close to the walls and they sounded good but I imagine they would have sounded better away from the walls too. My LaScalas are in the corners against the wall and they sound awesome... I don't have the room to try them away from the walls so they will stay where they are.


For the most part yes.... 3-5' is the range for minimal good sound. I don't think we can get any of these to sound good at less than 3' from the front wall. I think all of them have sounded okay up on the stage, but for their best (thus far), you MUST get them on out into the room. Remember though, this is for my fully enclosed and well treated room. For a wide open room, the bass may not perform as well with the speakers on out into the room, so you will likely suffer one or the other, poorer soundstage and imaging... or poor bass.


----------



## fokakis1

I use the same Radiohead album for demos. It has great sound effects and deep, clean bass. Thom York's voice is incredible. IMO, _In Rainbows_ is one of the most well put together albums I've heard, start-to-finish.


----------



## admranger

ALMFamily said:


> Here are a few photos from Day 1. For those hoping for speaker pictures, these are not it! :bigsmile:


Oh my goodness! There's a coke bottle in the primary listening position cup holder. This is going to mess up the REW readings due to the parallax dihedral effect, or something like that.


----------



## lcaillo

Did you used to review for TAS or IAR?


----------



## AudiocRaver

Saturday afternoon, the weekend is flying by. Making good progress today. One more of the six main sets left to evaluate.

Got some webcam video of _most_ of the setups so far. Nothing special. Let's put it this way, they are not going to go viral. They will be the kind of videos that only audio nuts could love. Or like. Or make themselves watch.

The ribs Thursday night were absolutely first-rate. Almost better the next day cold from the fridge. Getting ready to have more in a few minutes.

We watched Pacific Rim last night - I'm sure the room's concrete slab was shaking.

We have a set of REALLY nice test tracks, A couple are already new favorites. "Last Chance Texaco," is going into my prime test track list.

Gotta go!


----------



## Sonnie

admranger said:


> Oh my goodness! There's a coke bottle in the primary listening position cup holder. This is going to mess up the REW readings due to the parallax dihedral effect, or something like that.


Ahhh ... yes... the parallax dihedral transfer magnitude function effect, which can also cause palpable inference from one listener to the next, if both are not drinking the soda.


----------



## lcaillo

Sounds like someone has been drinking the Kool-Aid instead of the soda.


----------



## Sonnie

One discovery I have made since preparing for this evaluation, starting back a few weeks ago when breaking some of the speakers in, is Dire Straits. Not that I was not familiar with Dire Straits... I have always liked their popular hits, Money For Nothing, So Far Away, Industrial Disease, Skateaway, Walk Of Life, etc. Yet, never owned an album or listened to any of their other stuff until I decided to pick up the Brothers In Arms Hybrid SACD - DSD from MFSL. I was quite surprised at several of the _other_ tracks and just how good they are. I liked them so much I have now purchased 4 more of their albums (Original Master Recordings on Amazon... some are very inexpensive). I can listen to their stuff for days and never get tired of it. Talk about some awesome sounding music... it indeed qualifies.


----------



## Sonnie

Oh... and by the way... the Catalyst 8c's from Mark have never been reviewed, so you can look forward to a full review by the all new SEAHARC (SouthEast Alabama Hillbilly Aficionado Review Crew)... in a separate thread of course.


----------



## lcaillo

Hmmm, not sure about that moniker.


----------



## B- one

I wonder what movie you guys are going to watch tonight? I suggest The Dark Knight Rises I'm sure it would be great in Sonnie's room,and those massive speakers.


----------



## theJman

Sonnie said:


> Oh... and by the way... the Catalyst 8c's from Mark have never been reviewed, so you can look forward to a full review by the all new SEAHARC (SouthEast Alabama Hillbilly Aficionado Review Crew)... in a separate thread of course.


If Mark brought the Cat12's as well ask him to run them with the "secret" full range DSP setting. Prepare to be amazed.


----------



## Sonnie

Nah... his Jeep was loaded down as it was with the 8c's and the stands for them too... along with his luggage. He packs pretty big for such a small guy. He did say he has a secret DSP setting in the 8c though. Should be interesting.


----------



## skeeter99

ALMFamily said:


> We are about to watch "Pacific Rim" with our surprise 5.0 home theater system - can anyone besides Jim guess who it is and which speakers these are? http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=13462


Hey it's Mark Seaton! Those are the Catalyst 8C's if I'm correct :hail: He made a comment today on FB on the HTS page and I wondered if it was gonna be him who brought the surprise setup! If you've never had the opportunity to hear any of Marks designs you REALLY owe it to yourself. He's a mad scientist genius and I'm blown away every time I hear his gear. Enjoy for sure!!

Scott


----------



## lcaillo

We are just about to listen to them in 2 channel, then a movie later. Another very exciting opportunity!


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> Oh... and by the way... the Catalyst 8c's from Mark have never been reviewed, so you can look forward to a full review by the all new SEAHARC (SouthEast Alabama Hillbilly Aficionado Review Crew)... in a separate thread of course.


Oh I quoted the original picture before I got to this page and saw that they are in fact the 8C's. Awesome!!

Scott


----------



## ALMFamily

skeeter99 said:


> Hey it's Mark Seaton! Those are the Catalyst 8C's if I'm correct :hail: He made a comment today on FB on the HTS page and I wondered if it was gonna be him who brought the surprise setup! If you've never had the opportunity to hear any of Marks designs you REALLY owe it to yourself. He's a mad scientist genius and I'm blown away every time I hear his gear. Enjoy for sure!!
> 
> Scott


Quite right sir! Mark did say that you and Jim would be the two to recognize him. 

I am the fortunate one here - I have heard the 12Cs and the 8Cs before today, and multiple times so I knew the treat the rest were in for..


----------



## theJman

ALMFamily said:


> Quite right sir! Mark did say that you and Jim would be the two to recognize him.


Ask the man something -- anything! -- about audio and guaranteed he has an answer. He forgets _nothing_, and if he hasn't done it himself he's done research on it. Ticks me off actually, because I can't remember half of what I've learned along the way... 

BTW, tell him he still owes me a phone call about the MFW Turbo I'm reviewing. :T


----------



## skeeter99

ALMFamily said:


> Quite right sir! Mark did say that you and Jim would be the two to recognize him.
> 
> I am the fortunate one here - I have heard the 12Cs and the 8Cs before today, and multiple times so I knew the treat the rest were in for..


Yeah I just saw Mark a couple months ago at our friend Kris Deering's place for a GTG he had there. Always good to see old friends  Seaton was one of the first industry people I met when I got into the hobby back in '05.

Enjoy the 8C setup, I'm sure it sounds absolutely KILLER in that room! Mark knows his stuff for sure :T

Scott


----------



## skeeter99

theJman said:


> Ask the man something -- anything! -- about audio and guaranteed he has an answer. He forgets _nothing_, and if he hasn't done it himself he's done research on it. Ticks me off actually, because I can't remember half of what I've learned along the way...
> 
> BTW, tell him he still owes me a phone call about the MFW Turbo I'm reviewing. :T


I know right?? Evil Audio Genius. He's an EAG. Haha!

Scott


----------



## lcaillo

There is that Jack Nicholson grin...


----------



## ALMFamily

Ster Trek: Into Darkness on the docket for tonight - been a busy day and ending the night on a movie with the Seatons and Sonnie's subs is a great way to end the day!


----------



## JBrax

ALMFamily said:


> Ster Trek: Into Darkness on the docket for tonight - been a busy day and ending the night on a movie with the Seatons and Sonnie's subs is a great way to end the day!


I'd purchase tickets to that one!


----------



## ALMFamily

JBrax said:


> I'd purchase tickets to that one!


We have actually spent the last hour or so working on balancing out Sonnie's subs and integrating the Catalysts. Mark has been providing his considerable expertise - it is quite amazing what they have done to the response. Maybe we can get Wayne to post it up when things wind down....


----------



## kingnoob

Amazing contest, I would love to here these in person someday. I am very interested to see which speakers win this contest. 
Do people get to here these things in person? or is it a controlled event for processionals in a sound-room?I cannot afford to go to them anyway just wondering.
I am way too far from Rockey mountains anyway but what a cool event! Top of the line speaker shootout.


----------



## NBPk402

ALMFamily said:


> We have actually spent the last hour or so working on balancing out Sonnie's subs and integrating the Catalysts. Mark has been providing his considerable expertise - it is quite amazing what they have done to the response. Maybe we can get Wayne to post it up when things wind down....


It's going to be one late night for watching a movie for you guys tonight!


----------



## kingnoob

I would love to hear a movie on a system like that, My subwoofer is only thing of high quality rest of my system is rather low end.


----------



## ALMFamily

ellisr63 said:


> It's going to be one late night for watching a movie for you guys tonight!


Fortunately, we gain an hour tonight.  This actually will probably be the earliest we make it to bed...


----------



## NewHTbuyer

Mark seems like a great guy. He kindly chatted for at least an hour with me and two other Denver locals outside the Vapor Audio room over at the Hyatt during RMAF. I don't know if I could ever afford a full Catalyst surround system, but the Submersive is what I aspire to if/when I move and set up a dedicated room for HT.

You guy must be pretty worn out. Can't wait for the results.


----------



## AudiocRaver

theJman said:


> Ask the man something -- anything! -- about audio and guaranteed he has an answer. He forgets _nothing_, and if he hasn't done it himself he's done research on it. Ticks me off actually, because I can't remember half of what I've learned along the way...


It is Sunday moring, 2 A.M. (or is it 1 A.M.? or 3 A.M.? did the time change yet? are you detecting any sleep-deprived confusion?), and we have tales to tell. Weill be part of the writeup.


----------



## ALMFamily

AudiocRaver said:


> It is Sunday moring, 2 A.M. (or is it 1 A.M.; did the time change yet? are you detecting any sleep-deprived confusion?), and we have tales to tell. Weill be part of the writeup.


Exhausted - must sleep......


----------



## marty1

lcaillo said:


> We are concluding that stages, like the one Sonnie has for his HT, are not a good idea for serious 2 channel listening. The height of the speaker is not ideal for music, but fine for movies with the screen height. Also, we continue to confirm that for best soundstage farther out into the room is generally better, up to the point that the listening position can accommodate. Rear ported and dipoles seem to also benefit more from moving away from the front wall.
> 
> Speaker toe in angle has been consistently found to be critical for best image presentation, more with some speakers than others, but to some degree with all.
> 
> These sessions also confirm what I learned last time about listening position. I can learn a lot from listening from the second row, or even walking around the room. The limits of the sweet spot and the ability to reveal detail can be learned from outside the prime listening position. When I hear the delicacy of how some speakers handle things like harmonies from the back row, I know there is something special going on. Not having the distraction (perhaps a poor choice of words there :huh of the image and soundstage presentation can actually afford attending to other aspects of the sound.


When you say not the right height does that mean the room is sloping down, are they below or above your seated listening position?

I always find it difficult to get the tow in right as I try to be a bit unselfish for my Wife's sake and toe in the speakers so they are just outside our listening positions, either side of the couch. I wonder how much difference it will make if I toe them in so they are either side of just 'my' ears, I'm sure she wouldn't even notice :heehee:

Marty


----------



## Mike0206

marty1 said:


> When you say not the right height does that mean the room is sloping down, are they below or above your seated listening position? I always find it difficult to get the tow in right as I try to be a bit unselfish for my Wife's sake and toe in the speakers so they are just outside our listening positions, either side of the couch. I wonder how much difference it will make if I toe them in so they are either side of just 'my' ears, I'm sure she wouldn't even notice :heehee: Marty


 I believe he's saying with the speakers on the stage they are above the listening position. Hence the reason they have to put the speakers so far out into the room to get them off the stage. Toe in IMO is pretty important. You toe them in to much and you seem to loose a wide sound stage but have great imaging and focus. My speakers are set to where they fire about 2 ft to each side of my head. To me it that has a very wide soundstage, very deep (2ft away from wall) soundstage and the imaging with toe in makes it seem like the vocals are dead center of the room. I hope that all makes sense. I'm sure these guys will respond when they wake up though and explain a bit better in the write up on each speaker what they had to do to set them up properly.


----------



## ALMFamily

Mike has it - having them on the stage pushes the sweet spot up. In most cases, when we had the speakers on the stage, our best listening spot was when we sat forward in the chair and raised our head.

As far as sound and where you toe them in to, to be honest if your family is anything like mine, I am the only one who cares about pinpoint imaging and depth of soundstage. My wife and kids are more there for movies, and the center channel handles the central imaging there.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Mike0206 said:


> I believe he's saying with the speakers on the stage they are above the listening position. Hence the reason they have to put the speakers so far out into the room to get them off the stage.


That is one of the reasons. Getting the ears to the right height re the speakers has also affected frequency response - to a minor degree with some speakers and in a huge way with others. Depth and quality of soundstage have always been better with the speakers farther into the room, too.



> Toe in IMO is pretty important. You toe them in to much and you seem to loose a wide sound stage but have great imaging and focus. My speakers are set to where they fire about 2 ft to each side of my head. To me it that has a very wide soundstage, very deep (2ft away from wall) soundstage and the imaging with toe in makes it seem like the vocals are dead center of the room. I hope that all makes sense. I'm sure these guys will respond when they wake up though and explain a bit better in the write up on each speaker what they had to do to set them up properly.


Right on, except with the dipole designs where the LP was straight on-axis. Lots of detail to come in the writeup.

A couple of the speakers did not sound too bad up on the stage, but none were near as good as they were on the floor - right height and closer to the listener.


----------



## SteveCallas

'Closer to the listener' is very important in my opinion - the more the distance increases from you to the speaker, the more chance there is for bad things to happen to the FR, and vice versa. I strongly recommend the golden triangle for setting the L & R speakers and your seat.


----------



## jmschnur

Parties are an important use of speakers as well as serious listening. My B&W 801s handle both well. My listening room Montis are really best only for the properly place couch and serious listening or watching.
Be good to know how versatile the speakers are.


----------



## AudiocRaver

It is probably more accurate to say that the ideal speaker placement is at a certain distance between the LP and the wall rather than "closer to the listener."


----------



## AudiocRaver

ALMFamily said:


> We have actually spent the last hour or so working on balancing out Sonnie's subs and integrating the Catalysts. Mark has been providing his considerable expertise - it is quite amazing what they have done to the response. Maybe we can get Wayne to post it up when things wind down....


Absolutely. It was fun to watch and we will do our best to present it to you in story mode. With photos and REW plots.


----------



## fokakis1

Mike0206 said:


> I believe he's saying with the speakers on the stage they are above the listening position. Hence the reason they have to put the speakers so far out into the room to get them off the stage. Toe in IMO is pretty important. You toe them in to much and you seem to loose a wide sound stage but have great imaging and focus. My speakers are set to where they fire about 2 ft to each side of my head. To me it that has a very wide soundstage, very deep (2ft away from wall) soundstage and the imaging with toe in makes it seem like the vocals are dead center of the room. I hope that all makes sense. I'm sure these guys will respond when they wake up though and explain a bit better in the write up on each speaker what they had to do to set them up properly.


Same for me. Mains are toed in so that they aim 2 feet to either side of my head at the MLP. As a result, they are aimed directly at the middle seat of my second row. My tweeters are 2 inches above my ear level, which sounds fine to me. The higher tweeter helps the sound for my second row seating.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Another way the stage gets in the way when optimizing for 2-channel listening is the edge of the stage creates a zone that is unavailable for potential speaker locations.


----------



## flamingeye

lcaillo said:


> It will take a while to put results together and edit. While we will be better at it the second time around, I think we will have more detailed impressions from more of us this time. I know mine will be more extensive, as I was not well for the last one.
> 
> What I will give you immediately is the review of the ribs. Overall, I have to rate them as some of the best high end ribs that I have experienced. The flavor of the sauce complimented the ribs nicely, without becoming harsh upon first touch to the tongue nor with the residual taste. The inner detail of the rib meat was maintained while the sweetness of the caramelized sauce did not provide any intermodulation distortion. The imaging was stunning. As I was eating the first rib I felt like I could reach out and touch the pig right in front of me. The aroma created a very wide nasal stage. I noticed no unnatural coloration in the meat nor the sauce.
> 
> The placement with these was quite easy. I started with ribs at 7:00, brat at 12:00, and boneless pork at 3:00. All were placed approximately 1.5 inches from the boundary to avoid any reflections, but equidistant. The duration of the evaluation was very short. A repeat trial was needed to validate the first pass. slightly different placement was used for the second trial, but the results were completely repeatable and the items all quite insensitive to placement.
> 
> Transient response on the ribs was excellent. Very little rebound or resistance. The brat provided slightly more skin resistance. Supply capacity was far beyond what was needed, with ample flow of ribs upon demand. Ribs this esoteric might not be appropriate for the palate of a novice, however. I would leave this caliber of BBQ to those with the ability to appreciate the intent of his art. I would also only eat them with spikes under the plate and a fork made from brazilian walnut.


sounds like to me you favored the ribs in presentation and taste most with the brats a close second ,but maybe you should of dun a third or fourth take just to be sure


----------



## lcaillo

I sure did. Two passes right off the grille and two as leftovers. Best eating of the weekend,


----------



## B- one

Still no food pics!?!?!?!?.


----------



## Tonto

B- one wrote:



> Still no food pics!?!?!?!?.


Probably best, no sence rubbing our eyes in it.

Oh well, I hear McDonald's is bringing back the McRib!!!:rofl:


----------



## B- one

Tonto said:


> B- one wrote:
> 
> Probably best, no sence rubbing our eyes in it.
> 
> Oh well, I hear McDonald's is bringing back the McRib!!!:rofl:


Mmmmm Mc Rib:drool:


----------



## marty1

Thanks for the input guys, I toe my mains in a bit further.....I'd lay money on it that she doesn't even notice  

Marty


----------



## shinksma

Sonnie said:


> Oh well... we just can't include everything that everyone else here wants, or we'd have fifty-eleven songs and never get finished.
> 
> ANYONE that would get BORED with the music we are listening to, needs to get out of the house a little bit and see the world, as there is music out there that sounds awesome... you have been missing a LOT Of GREAT music. This music we have is music I could sit and listen to for DAYS on end. As a matter of fact, while I also love Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin for my rock bands, I put what we are listening to as a must for hearing great sound on good speakers. Heavy metal does not really do speakers justice... and most of it makes my ears bleed.


The one thing you can test with heavy metal or black metal etc is that it does show how fatiguing some speakers can be after a while - if you can listen to two or three Opeth albums and still feel like you want more, the speakers are probably providing some good details in those harsh overdriven tones without turning them all into a tweeter-destroying wall-o-white-noise. And for a real test of bass and sub-bass, try some sludge-ambient-drone metal by a band called Sunn O))) (yes, the multiple right brackets are part of the band name). It may not be considered "music" by some, but I like it. Hmm, think I'll go put some on right now...

On the other hand, your discovery of non-hit album tracks from Dire Straits that you described in another post highlights another realization of music - the hits aren't necessarily representative of the whole catalog, and may, in fact, be misleading. Lover Over Gold is my favorite DS album, and I still hope endlessly that it will get the surround treatment that Brothers In Arms and some Mark Knopfler solo albums got. Telegraph Road is probably my favorite DS song.

Hope the listening sessions are going well (should be wrapping up by now?), 

shinksma


----------



## JQueen

While you guys are listening to 2500 dollar speakers and eating all this great food, I'm listening to a 4 and 1 year cry as I finish my grilled cheese..


----------



## Sonnie

theJman said:


> Ask the man something -- anything! -- about audio and guaranteed he has an answer. He forgets _nothing_, and if he hasn't done it himself he's done research on it.


You are soooo right about this. I was super impressed by his knowledge and experience. 




ALMFamily said:


> We have actually spent the last hour or so working on balancing out Sonnie's subs and integrating the Catalysts. Mark has been providing his considerable expertise - it is quite amazing what they have done to the response. Maybe we can get Wayne to post it up when things wind down....


Yes... Wayne plans to show and tell the steps of Mark's recommendations to smooth out my bass without EQ. Of course we ultimately needed EQ, but we fixed quite a few drastic/glaring issues that made EQ'ing much easier.




kingnoob said:


> Do people get to here these things in person? or is it a controlled event for processionals in a sound-room?


We have closed sessions for now, especially while we do the evaluations. It can get crowded rather quickly. If we allowed 4 or 5 folks to come in, it would be fun, but disastrous for the evaluation getting complete.




Mike0206 said:


> I believe he's saying with the speakers on the stage they are above the listening position. Hence the reason they have to put the speakers so far out into the room to get them off the stage. Toe in IMO is pretty important.


Yep... exactly. The height does not effect every speaker, but getting them away from the wall does. The stage really needs to go for two-channel reasons. It won't really matter for HT. Toe-in has indeed been very important in getting the right soundstage and imaging... and even frequency response.




SteveCallas said:


> I strongly recommend the golden triangle for setting the L & R speakers and your seat.


Rarely have we found the "golden triangle" as the best position...although some are close. 




shinksma said:


> The one thing you can test with heavy metal or black metal etc is that it does show how fatiguing some speakers can be after a while - if you can listen to two or three Opeth albums and still feel like you want more, the speakers are probably providing some good details in those harsh overdriven tones without turning them all into a tweeter-destroying wall-o-white-noise. And for a real test of bass and sub-bass, try some sludge-ambient-drone metal by a band called Sunn O))) (yes, the multiple right brackets are part of the band name). It may not be considered "music" by some, but I like it. Hmm, think I'll go put some on right now...


I will be doing a LOT of listening between now and the next event and will try to come up with some metal that we all won't get tired of after about 10 seconds of listening. :sarcastic:



shinksma said:


> On the other hand, your discovery of non-hit album tracks from Dire Straits that you described in another post highlights another realization of music - the hits aren't necessarily representative of the whole catalog, and may, in fact, be misleading. Lover Over Gold is my favorite DS album, and I still hope endlessly that it will get the surround treatment that Brothers In Arms and some Mark Knopfler solo albums got. Telegraph Road is probably my favorite DS song.


Not having been all that serious into two-channel listening, I have missed out on a lot of full album listening, outside of a few of my favorites of course. Now that I have been doing a LOT more two-channel listening, I have been experimenting with a good bit of variety of music and discovering some of the music that I have been missing. Lots of fun!




JQueen said:


> While you guys are listening to 2500 dollar speakers and eating all this great food, I'm listening to a 4 and 1 year cry as I finish my grilled cheese..


Just keep in mind that we are truly blessed because we have our A5's... :T


----------



## SteveCallas

Sonnie said:


> Rarely have we found the "golden triangle" as the best position...although some are close.


That's strange - were you going with more distance between the speakers, or more distance to the listener? In other words, approximately what angle from the prime seat to either one of the mains did you tend to use?


----------



## Sonnie

It seems almost universally that they are wider apart and closer to the listener. I haven't really checked the exact angle... I think it varies a little from speaker to speaker.

For us, it just seems to be more about depth of soundstage. If we don't have it, toss them out the door. We can get great clarity and detail, with excellent imaging... and most of the time a respectably wide soundstage, but if they lack that depth of soundstage, it is like they are missing something, so we do our very best to get that depth. That seems to be the characteristic that makes them magical to us.


----------



## ALMFamily

Well, I am back home and I really feel like I could sleep all day - staying up until 3am every night will do that to you! 

I just want to start by saying what a great pleasure it was to spend those three days with Wayne, Leonard, and Sonnie - they are great enthusiasts and even better people.

We heard some great speakers over this past weekend - and Mark's Catalyst 5.0 system was a real treat.


----------



## jamesfrazier

shinksma said:


> The one thing you can test with heavy metal or black metal etc is that it does show how fatiguing some speakers can be after a while - if you can listen to two or three Opeth albums and still feel like you want more, the speakers are probably providing some good details in those harsh overdriven tones without turning them all into a tweeter-destroying wall-o-white-noise. And for a real test of bass and sub-bass, try some sludge-ambient-drone metal by a band called Sunn O))) (yes, the multiple right brackets are part of the band name). It may not be considered "music" by some, but I like it. Hmm, think I'll go put some on right now... On the other hand, your discovery of non-hit album tracks from Dire Straits that you described in another post highlights another realization of music - the hits aren't necessarily representative of the whole catalog, and may, in fact, be misleading. Lover Over Gold is my favorite DS album, and I still hope endlessly that it will get the surround treatment that Brothers In Arms and some Mark Knopfler solo albums got. Telegraph Road is probably my favorite DS song. Hope the listening sessions are going well (should be wrapping up by now?), shinksma


Agreed completely, I feel a good quick metal song would test high quality speakers perfectly. Heavy bass lines, quick defined kick, intense highs..


----------



## AudiocRaver

shinksma said:


> The one thing you can test with heavy metal or black metal etc is that it does show how fatiguing some speakers can be after a while - if you can listen to two or three Opeth albums and still feel like you want more, the speakers are probably providing some good details in those harsh overdriven tones without turning them all into a tweeter-destroying wall-o-white-noise. And for a real test of bass and sub-bass, try some sludge-ambient-drone metal by a band called Sunn O))) (yes, the multiple right brackets are part of the band name). It may not be considered "music" by some, but I like it. Hmm, think I'll go put some on right now...
> 
> On the other hand, your discovery of non-hit album tracks from Dire Straits that you described in another post highlights another realization of music - the hits aren't necessarily representative of the whole catalog, and may, in fact, be misleading. Lover Over Gold is my favorite DS album, and I still hope endlessly that it will get the surround treatment that Brothers In Arms and some Mark Knopfler solo albums got. Telegraph Road is probably my favorite DS song.
> 
> Hope the listening sessions are going well (should be wrapping up by now?),
> 
> shinksma


Well, we have some SikTh, some Dillinger Escape Plan, Deftones, Dysrhythmia, could probably come up with some fairly interesting tracks among us. Maybe we will sneak a few snippets into the next round.


----------



## lcaillo

jamesfrazier said:


> Agreed completely, I feel a good quick metal song would test high quality speakers perfectly. Heavy bass lines, quick defined kick, intense highs..


All of these characteristics are part of many of the tracks that we have. Metal rarely affords great ability to determine how much detail there is in any of these, however, as there is so much going on in the music constantly. The bottom line is that we picked the music that we felt would allow us to evaluate many characteristics best. All of us are familiar with and even love much metal, but for our purposes it just did not seem as effective as what we used.


----------



## lcaillo

ALMFamily said:


> Well, I am back home and I really feel like I could sleep all day - staying up until 3am every night will do that to you!


I would not know about that staying up til 3am thing. I did not make it that far. I did provide some surround effect ZZZs from the back row chair at times though.


----------



## kingnoob

Forget the Mc-rib,its Probably a lot better tasting & Healthier to Grill your own ribs 
It would be mind blowing probably to hear these $2500 speakers in person


----------



## lcaillo

It was a great time. We put in long hours on it, but it was a pleasure, every minute. I can't say enough great things about Mark Seaton and his contribution to the weekend. We all learned a great deal from watching him tweak Sonnie's subs and sharing his knowledge and experience with us most of the weekend. He has some very impressive speakers himself, though not in the price range of the others. Getting to review the Saunders system was also great.


----------



## gorb

Although the ~$2500 speakers would be much closer to my price range if I could justify buying new speakers, I'm definitely more excited to read about the Seaton system  I will of course enjoy reading about all the speakers you had though.


----------



## JeffB

I too wondered about the lack of any metal music, but I am satisfied with the Admins answer. Although definitely not metal, I have often demo'd Rush's Limelight. There is something about the bass track near the end of this song. With the right speakers it will magically suck you into the music and not let go. With other speakers the song is completely dead and boring. Also near the end of the track is a very long sustain of a high pitched guitar note. You won't really notice it until you do. On some speakers this pitch will rip your ears off, and on others it just blends in. I also really like to demo cuts from the Judas Priest video "Rising in the East". The filmography and audio production is superb. There is something about being able to watch a guitarist play the fret board and simultaneously hear it. There are many places in this video where with the right speakers, the incredibly tight synchronization that this band creates between dual guitars, bass and drums is just so awesome and powerful and the video is just right there on the fret boards and drum kit. With the wrong speakers, well it just does not delineate all this music nearly so well. I have played "Rising in the East" on Magnepan's 1.7 and the speakers were just dead and lifeless. I hear synergy is everything with Magnepans, but still I am left seriously wondering. One thing I am often curious about is that I have heard say AC/DC Back in Black or Slayer Seasons in the Abyss on some high end home audio equipment and it really didn't sound all that good, like perhaps the recordings are not so great. I have heard CDs that sound much better on this equipment. Yet if you play this stuff in a night club or in your car it usually sounds great. Perhaps, it is really the bass quality of some of these high end speakers not really being that good. Multiple 6 and 7" drivers just don't sound like 12s and 15s. Oh, I should mention the first cut of "Rising in the East", "Electric Eye" is not mixed well. Its typical of a Judas Priest show. The sound doesn't get dialed in until about the 3rd song.


----------



## NBPk402

So how does this work... The first round is done now. Does this mean you will be doing the next round next weekend or will it be after we have heard the results of this round? This was definitely a huge undertaking by the Staff of HTS, and I for one am anxious to hear the results! :T:T


----------



## Sonnie

The next round will likely be in February.

We will be working on getting this round's results up over the next couple of weeks. It is a LOT of work putting it all together, but as we get each speaker evaluation competed, we will post it.


----------



## Mike0206

Sonnie said:


> The next round will likely be in February. We will be working on getting this round's results up over the next couple of weeks. It is a LOT of work putting it all together, but as we get each speaker evaluation competed, we will post it.


 When do you sleep! Lol! In all seriousness looking forward to the outcome of this evaluation. I know you guys stated it's not a shootout per say, but will you guys be offering your preference as to what your favorite speakers were in the write ups?


----------



## Sonnie

I honestly did not have a favorite myself. I liked several of them and could live with just about any of them. I would probably only toss one in that group, but that doesn't mean it is not a great speaker, it just means it is not what I would want. 

I think Wayne may have thought he had a favorite until we did a little blind comparison tonight between two speakers and he was surprised by the outcome. 

I do not plan to get rid of my A5's anytime soon... they are seriously under-priced, although they do not have quite the low-end extension most of these do, they are not far off.


----------



## GusGus748s

I can't wait to read the results. Awesome job!


----------



## |Tch0rT|

JeffB said:


> *Slayer Seasons in the Abyss* on some high end home audio equipment and it really didn't sound all that good, like perhaps the recordings are not so great.


Seasons In The Abyss sounds phenomenal on my MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL's. I have the remastered version from around 1998 (I've heard there's a newer remaster that's brick walled) though so that might be the difference. It's one of the few metal discs I can refer to as having good sound quality IMO. Metal isn't usually known for good sound quality so I can understand why it's probably not represented in shootouts like this. I'm also probably one of the few MartinLogan owners who's preferred genre is metal LOL. :bigsmile:


----------



## Sonnie

I have Prodigy's and listen to some metal, although not a terrible lot. I like Shinedown pretty well... have a recording of them in concert and own their Sound Of Madness CD. I also really like Led Zeppelin, although it ain't quite the same as today heavy metal, it can definitely get heavy on some songs.


----------



## roger1014

Sonnie said:


> One discovery I have made since preparing for this evaluation, starting back a few weeks ago when breaking some of the speakers in, is Dire Straits. Not that I was not familiar with Dire Straits... I have always liked their popular hits, Money For Nothing, So Far Away, Industrial Disease, Skateaway, Walk Of Life, etc. Yet, never owned an album or listened to any of their other stuff until I decided to pick up the Brothers In Arms Hybrid SACD - DSD from MFSL. I was quite surprised at several of the _other_ tracks and just how good they are. I liked them so much I have now purchased 4 more of their albums (Original Master Recordings on Amazon... some are very inexpensive). I can listen to their stuff for days and never get tired of it. Talk about some awesome sounding music... it indeed qualifies.


Way back in the beginning of this thread, I was going to recommend this same CD! Didn't do it as I thought you would have too many CDs/tracks to use for your evals. Listening to this CD and Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" (SACD) started me on my journey to get better speakers. Really interested in how the ML ESLs work out.....


----------



## kevin360

Sonnie said:


> I honestly did not have a favorite myself. I liked several of them and could live with just about any of them. I would probably only toss one in that group, but that doesn't mean it is not a great speaker, it just means it is not what I would want.
> 
> I think Wayne may have thought he had a favorite until we did a little blind comparison tonight between two speakers and he was surprised by the outcome.
> 
> I do not plan to get rid of my A5's anytime soon... they are seriously under-priced, although they do not have quite the low-end extension most of these do, they are not far off.



Ah, come on - you had a favorite or two.:laugh: I am surprised to read that there was one you'd actually toss, but I certainly understand the fullness of your comment and that points up one of the inherent problems with a shootout - the vagary of personal preference (you and I could have different priorities, or be willing to work with different weaknesses).

Blind comparisons can be real eye openers. It's funny how we hear when our brains are deprived of all of that _additional_ knowledge.

Low end extension is no big deal when one has subs on hand. In fact, I'm directing the bottom end away from my Magnepan 3.7s and to a pair of DefTech SuperCube Refs via a Bryston 10B Sub XO. As this is a home theater forum, most will have active bass management available. As with all things, it's a matter of give and take: in my case, I'm quite sure that the distortion introduced by the additional component and cables is more than compensated by the reduction in distortion of the speakers. Of course, that supposition has not been confirmed by a blind comparison.:scratchhead:


----------



## Owen Bartley

marty1 said:


> Thanks for the input guys, I toe my mains in a bit further.....I'd lay money on it that she doesn't even notice
> 
> Marty


Mrs. Marty1: "Honey, what's wrong with the speakers? Do they sound funny to you?"
Marty1: "uh... no, not at all, whatever do you mean?" :sneeky:


----------



## Sonnie

roger1014 said:


> Really interested in how the ML ESLs work out.....


Unfortunately were unable to include them, as we had an issue, possibly caused in shipping, that we did not discover until we started setting them up. We are having another pair sent to Wayne in a couple of weeks for a solo review of those.




kevin360 said:


> Ah, come on - you had a favorite or two.:laugh: I am surprised to read that there was one you'd actually toss, but I certainly understand the fullness of your comment and that points up one of the inherent problems with a shootout - the vagary of personal preference (you and I could have different priorities, or be willing to work with different weaknesses).
> 
> Blind comparisons can be real eye openers. It's funny how we hear when our brains are deprived of all of that _additional_ knowledge.
> 
> Low end extension is no big deal when one has subs on hand. In fact, I'm directing the bottom end away from my Magnepan 3.7s and to a pair of DefTech SuperCube Refs via a Bryston 10B Sub XO. As this is a home theater forum, most will have active bass management available. As with all things, it's a matter of give and take: in my case, I'm quite sure that the distortion introduced by the additional component and cables is more than compensated by the reduction in distortion of the speakers. Of course, that supposition has not been confirmed by a blind comparison.:scratchhead:


Seriously... I pretty much liked them all, however for two-channel, when I listen in Pure Audio mode, there is no subwoofer output... and I do not want to use a subwoofer, so I am "personally" looking for a speaker that can handle the low end without issues. You don't have much of a choice with the Magnepan 1.7's and down, not sure about the 3.7's, but the bass on the 1.7's and MG12's will cause issues in the upper frequencies when listening to some material at my preferred listening level. Therefore, I would not prefer them, despite the fact that an overwhelming amount of others love them. It is indeed a personal preference... and we heavily emphasize that in our opening post.


----------



## english210

Sonnie, re: your Dire Straits discovery, I can relate. I added that disc on a whim to a handful of discs I took to audition some speakers, and I'm very glad i did. One of my favorite tests is on 'The Man's Too Strong', with what I call the 'crashing piano section.' On more speakers than you'd think, it's not possible to be sure what that 'noise' is, but done right, it is in fact a piano being seriously abused... Ah, the little gems we find...

Oh, and Famous Blue Raincoat...that disc made me lots of money when I was in the audio biz in the late 80's. My local PSB dealer saw the disc when I brought it in and told me it was one of the 'good' originals, all he had was a later German version. Done right, Joan of Arc does take you away from dissecting what you're hearing, and just takes you away...which in itself is a good speaker test.


----------



## NBPk402

english210 said:


> Sonnie, re: your Dire Straits discovery, I can relate. I added that disc on a whim to a handful of discs I took to audition some speakers, and I'm very glad i did. One of my favorite tests is on 'The Man's Too Strong', with what I call the 'crashing piano section.' On more speakers than you'd think, it's not possible to be sure what that 'noise' is, but done right, it is in fact a piano being seriously abused... Ah, the little gems we find...
> 
> Oh, and Famous Blue Raincoat...that disc made me lots of money when I was in the audio biz in the late 80's. My local PSB dealer saw the disc when I brought it in and told me it was one of the 'good' originals, all he had was a later German version. Done right, Joan of Arc does take you away from dissecting what you're hearing, and just takes you away...which in itself is a good speaker test.


All these years I thought it was a guitar making that noise.


----------



## Nuwisha

Looking forward to the results. Wishing I could attend. 

There aren't any stores around me with a selection of higher end speakers anymore so I'm interested to hear people's reactions when they get to listen to new stuff. 

Cheers and don't forget to enjoy yourselves when lugging the speakers around the room!


----------



## jamesfrazier

Nuwisha said:


> Looking forward to the results. Wishing I could attend. There aren't any stores around me with a selection of higher end speakers anymore so I'm interested to hear people's reactions when they get to listen to new stuff. Cheers and don't forget to enjoy yourselves when lugging the speakers around the room!


Same here, not even a best buy to audition even budget and lower level speakers. All of my deciding and formed opinions come from reviews and personal opinions from this forum. Also wishing I could attend and hear some serious sound, can't wait for the results.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Mike0206 said:


> When do you sleep! Lol! In all seriousness looking forward to the outcome of this evaluation. I know you guys stated it's not a shootout per say, but will you guys be offering your preference as to what your favorite speakers were in the write ups?


Sleep? Oh, that. Do cat naps count? I took a couple of those beside Gracie, Sonnie's & Angie's cat, on the sun room couch, while others were listening, but my naps were even shorter that Gracie's, so they might not qualify.

We had several up-til-3A.M. nights. Not sure if that should be seen as a brag or as an admission of poor judgment.

It was hard to stop working, but we managed a few hours each night.


----------



## wraunch

This is a great thread. I am really looking forward to the results. I just posted updated pics in my build thread and as I have just painted the walls I can now see a livable room coming alive. Getting excited about the fun part of evaluating equipment now that the construction might finally end!


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> I will be doing a LOT of listening between now and the next event and will try to come up with some metal that we all won't get tired of after about 10 seconds of listening. :sarcastic:


Sonnie & I pulled the Dynaudio's back into the room, at my request, after Leonard and Joe were gone. Among other tracks, we heard Dyllinger Escape Plan's _Sunshine the Werewolf,_ very heavy, very complex, and very metal, and the Dyn's handled it beautifully.:hsd:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> I think Wayne may have thought he had a favorite until we did a little blind comparison tonight between two speakers and he was surprised by the outcome.


Yep. There was some discussion of possible personal favorites, but that will be up to each evaluator to point out (or not) in their own writeups.



> I do not plan to get rid of my A5's anytime soon... they are seriously under-priced, although they do not have quite the low-end extension most of these do, they are not far off.


Those A5's just keep on surprising us.


----------



## AudiocRaver

A personal note of thanks to Sonnie, Angie, & Gracie (Cedar Creek Cinema's feline mascot) for hosting and putting up with us. If you think you have an idea how much they do in preparation and support for one of these events, double your estimate, then double it again, and you might be getting close. Gracie gave up access to the sun room for speaker storage (a matter of claw/speaker cone safety), and it was no small sacrifice, as she was not shy to point out.

Sonnie, Joe, and Leonard are a dream to work with (Sonnie CAN be a rascal, you have to keep your eye on him - there is one story that will probably go to the grave:heehee, and our guest Mark Seaton fit right in. I have only the highest praise for these guys in terms of professionalism, thoroughness, fairness and open-mindedness, positivity and ease to work with and get along with, and their refined listening and evaluating and problem-solving skills.

Thank you, Sonnie, for the honor of being selected as part of this evaluation team.

NOW: Time to write it all up!


----------



## lcaillo

ellisr63 said:


> So how does this work... The first round is done now. Does this mean you will be doing the next round next weekend or will it be after we have heard the results of this round? This was definitely a huge undertaking by the Staff of HTS, and I for one am anxious to hear the results! :T:T


Next weekend?!? It will take a couple of months to recover. Especially for Mr. sleep an hour each night (Wayne).


----------



## solid7

I've been out of Home Audio for awhile, having dropped some of my projects that I had in-work here. Guess it's a good time to be back. Sonnie and crew... Good to see some old familiar names/faces.

I wish I could attend your event, but I'm really looking forward to hearing more about the Emerald Physics CS2P, in particular...


----------



## seanpatrick

Just out of curiosity, what happens to the speakers involved in the shoot out after you're done with them? will they be going back to the manufacturers - or will you have a sale for any of them?


----------



## Sonnie

They go back, although I am sure we could get a discounted price on them if anyone is interested.


----------



## Sunlesstrawhat

AudiocRaver said:


> Those A5's just keep on surprising us.


Thank you. This is great to hear :clap:


----------



## english210

ellisr63 said:


> All these years I thought it was a guitar making that noise.


I don't think I ever gave it much thought, but lately, on some of the better gear I've heard, it's been more identifiable, especially those last two chords, as piano (or equivalent)..consequently, it is a 'test' of speakers and other equipment now for me.


----------



## bobs77vet

thanks for putting the effort into doing this evaluation. many of us (me included) have smaller budgets and live vicariously on testing $2,500 speakers. it is interesting to see how the high end stuff stacks up though. thanks for the effort. bob


----------



## Savjac

Sonnie said:


> Unfortunately were unable to include them, as we had an issue, possibly caused in shipping, that we did not discover until we started setting them up. We are having another pair sent to Wayne in a couple of weeks for a solo review of those.


Trust me they sound really good, even with home theater, they can preform very well.


----------



## Sonnie

My thinking is they would be at least as good as the Motion 12's... and should be better. It will be interesting to get Wayne's take on them once he gets them in house.


----------



## jmhenrie

Thanks for doing the reviews i like to compare my opions with others


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> My thinking is they would be at least as good as the Motion 12's... and should be better. It will be interesting to get Wayne's take on them once he gets them in house.


An interesting side-effect of getting a "problem" pair of speakers for the evaluation is getting to play with a good pair at home for awhile. Can't say I am too broken up about that. I have had some good times with the HTD Level THREE Towers - review to be published in a few weeks, probably - and am not saddened in the least to have to put up with a pair of Martin Logans for a bit. My wife was excited, too.:rolleyesno:

Leonard and Sonnie have both mentioned the benefits of taking measurements early on to see what one is working with. That is now our first step in the process. In fact, Sonnie even thought of doing it next round before starting burn-in when speakers first arrive. It can save a bunch of frustration, confusion, and wasted time. I recommend that ANYONE buying speakers have basic frequency response measurement capability to see that a pair of speakers matches well. Since the measurements are relative, even an uncalibrated omni will give the information needed (if you are going to buy one, always get a calibrated one.)

Edit: We always swap L and R positions to make sure any "problem" follows the speaker.


----------



## Norcuron

The heavy metal music is an interesting subject because most of the old good stuff was not recorded very well. If you are looking for some heavy metal that is recorded well for back in the day try Winger and the song "Can't get Enuff" and also try the Mortal Combat CD Various artists where the first track is "A Taste of Things to Come". Track 5 "Control" is a good demo song. The Metallica Black CD has a couple of good tracks too. I wish I was going to be there to listen to everything.


----------



## janick

AudiocRaver said:


> An interesting side-effect of getting a "problem" pair of speakers for the evaluation is getting to play with a good pair at home for awhile. Can't say I am too broken up about that. I have had some good times with the HTD Level THREE Towers - review to be published in a few weeks, probably - and am not saddened in the least to have to put up with a pair of Martin Logans for a bit. My wife was excited, too.:rolleyesno:
> 
> Leonard and Sonnie have both mentioned the benefits of taking measurements early on to see what one is working with. That is now our first step in the process. In fact, Sonnie even thought of doing it next round before starting burn-in when speakers first arrive. It can save a bunch of frustration, confusion, and wasted time. I recommend that ANYONE buying speakers have basic frequency response measurement capability to see that a pair of speakers matches well. Since the measurements are relative, even an uncalibrated omni will give the information needed (if you are going to buy one, always get a calibrated one.)
> 
> Edit: We always swap L and R positions to make sure any "problem" follows the speaker.


How would i know if this is calibrated

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/det...g&matchtype=&gclid=CO_9nImw0boCFcw9Qgod5VMAAg

Thank you


----------



## Savjac

One of the good things about the ML's is the way they open the music up and let it float about the room in a way similar to watching Anna Pavlova move about the stage to some speakers Bill Murray. They are not as adept in the home theater when it comes to some of the more heavy handed action films, but they sure try. My wife liked them a good deal for looks and sound which is almost a first. I truly hope you enjoy them.




AudiocRaver said:


> An interesting side-effect of getting a "problem" pair of speakers for the evaluation is getting to play with a good pair at home for awhile. Can't say I am too broken up about that. I have had some good times with the HTD Level THREE Towers - review to be published in a few weeks, probably - and am not saddened in the least to have to put up with a pair of Martin Logans for a bit. My wife was excited, too.:rolleyesno:
> 
> Leonard and Sonnie have both mentioned the benefits of taking measurements early on to see what one is working with. That is now our first step in the process. In fact, Sonnie even thought of doing it next round before starting burn-in when speakers first arrive. It can save a bunch of frustration, confusion, and wasted time. I recommend that ANYONE buying speakers have basic frequency response measurement capability to see that a pair of speakers matches well. Since the measurements are relative, even an uncalibrated omni will give the information needed (if you are going to buy one, always get a calibrated one.)
> 
> Edit: We always swap L and R positions to make sure any "problem" follows the speaker.


----------



## Sonnie

janick said:


> How would i know if this is calibrated
> 
> http://www.sweetwater.com/store/det...g&matchtype=&gclid=CO_9nImw0boCFcw9Qgod5VMAAg
> 
> Thank you


If it does not state that it is calibrated and that they are including a calibration file, then it won't be calibrated. Buy from Cross-Spectrum Labs or straight from miniDSP (UMIK-1) if you need it to be calibrated, which is the only way I would buy one anyway. I think what Wayne was suggesting is that any mic you have lying around will work for comparing each speaker, but if you have to buy one, buy it calibrated.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> If it does not state that it is calibrated and that they are including a calibration file, then it won't be calibrated. Buy from Cross-Spectrum Labs or straight from miniDSP (UMIK-1) if you need it to be calibrated, which is the only way I would buy one anyway. I think what Wayne was suggesting is that any mic you have lying around will work for comparing each speaker, but if you have to buy one, buy it calibrated.


Precisely. Thanks, Sonnie.


----------



## |Tch0rT|

Savjac said:


> One of the good things about the ML's is the way they open the music up and let it float about the room in a way similar to watching Anna Pavlova move about the stage to some speakers Bill Murray. They are not as adept in the home theater when it comes to some of the more heavy handed action films, but they sure try. My wife liked them a good deal for looks and sound which is almost a first. I truly hope you enjoy them.


Well recorded music is just magical on the ML's. I don't notice what you describe with action movies with mine however I'm much more picky about music than HT. I do have a separate amp on mine and that seemed to wake them up a little bit more than running them off a receiver for the dynamic parts. My issue with the ML's is the center image is very touchy. Any slight positional movement and it pulls to a side, mine tend to pull to the right and it drives me nuts. I do think my kids plopping down hard on the couch makes it slide a little bit possibly causing that. :foottap:


----------



## AudiocRaver

|Tch0rT| said:


> Well recorded music is just magical on the ML's. I don't notice what you describe with action movies with mine however I'm much more picky about music than HT. I do have a separate amp on mine and that seemed to wake them up a little bit more than running them off a receiver for the dynamic parts. My issue with the ML's is the center image is very touchy. Any slight positional movement and it pulls to a side, mine tend to pull to the right and it drives me nuts. I do think my kids plopping down hard on the couch makes it slide a little bit possibly causing that. :foottap:


We noticed that sensitivity working with panel speakers: the Magnepan 1.7's and the 12's back in August, some with Sonnie's big M.L. Prodigy's (right model?) and with another unnamed pair fairly recently. Depending upon placement, the sweet spot - although marvelous when occupied - can be slipped out of with just a few inches or even less of head movement. Our experimenting has shown that for stereo/music use the soundstage depth and depth acuity are best with the panels (any speaker type, for that matter) away from the front wall and _roughly_ 1/2 (or more - depending on speaker) way to the LP, plus some amount of angling outward from straight-on pointing at the LP (very little for panels/dipoles, a lot for cone speakers). With panels specifically, as they get closer to the LP and soundstage gets better, sensitivity to head movement gets worse. With most models, the allowable movement has been acceptable, but not with all. It is possible for the LP movement sensitivity - or even the ability to locate it at all (and that is one seriously restrictive sweet spot - kinda takes the sweet right out of it) - to become unacceptable without the panels even reaching the point (distance from front wall/closeness to LP) where soundstage really opens up and takes on that magical depth factor.

Does that echo your experience?


----------



## Sonnie

|Tch0rT| said:


> Well recorded music is just magical on the ML's. I don't notice what you describe with action movies with mine however I'm much more picky about music than HT. I do have a separate amp on mine and that seemed to wake them up a little bit more than running them off a receiver for the dynamic parts. My issue with the ML's is the center image is very touchy. Any slight positional movement and it pulls to a side, mine tend to pull to the right and it drives me nuts. I do think my kids plopping down hard on the couch makes it slide a little bit possibly causing that. :foottap:


Yep... a leaning couch or chair can cause the leaning image effect :sarcastic: ... Kick the kids out of the house.

I have had this issue piddling around with the placement of my Prodigy's (you got it right Wayne). I found that they were just a little off in my measurements from the speaker to the listener and after a slight adjustment, the image centered right up. It can be from a slightly different toe-in too... a degree or two does not seem to make much difference, but if you are off by several degrees, it can not only cause the center image to be off, it can also upset the imaging.


----------



## jmschnur

Vertical alignment (pitch) can also affect the sound stage with panels .


----------



## AudiocRaver

jmschnur said:


> Vertical alignment (pitch) can also affect the sound stage with panels .


Sure can. Fortunately this is usually fairly well controlled, but not always. It bears verification. Point taken.


----------



## |Tch0rT|

AudiocRaver said:


> We noticed that sensitivity working with panel speakers: the Magnepan 1.7's and the 12's back in August, some with Sonnie's big M.L. Prodigy's (right model?) and with another unnamed pair fairly recently. Depending upon placement, the sweet spot - although marvelous when occupied - can be slipped out of with just a few inches or even less of head movement. Our experimenting has shown that for stereo/music use the soundstage depth and depth acuity are best with the panels (any speaker type, for that matter) away from the front wall and _roughly_ 1/2 (or more - depending on speaker) way to the LP, plus some amount of angling outward from straight-on pointing at the LP (very little for panels/dipoles, a lot for cone speakers). With panels specifically, as they get closer to the LP and soundstage gets better, sensitivity to head movement gets worse. With most models, the allowable movement has been acceptable, but not with all. It is possible for the LP movement sensitivity - or even the ability to locate it at all (and that is one seriously restrictive sweet spot - kinda takes the sweet right out of it) - to become unacceptable without the panels even reaching the point (distance from front wall/closeness to LP) where soundstage really opens up and takes on that magical depth factor.
> 
> Does that echo your experience?


Basically yes, I haven't had a whole lot of experience experimenting with placement in my room as it's pretty small and I have to make compromises due to the TV, side couch, and my stuff behind that area. The room is 12.5'w x 20'L x 8'H. The panels are 3tf from the back wall. I sit about 8ft from the center of the two. However I just measured and noticed one sticks out father than the other... ugh fixed it but haven't tested it yet. I did notice the sweet spot seeming a lot smaller when I moved my couch closer to the speakers and TV a few months ago. I've been meaning to play with the rake/pitch. It seems like over at MLO they use hockey pucks for that purpose... heh



Sonnie said:


> Yep... a leaning couch or chair can cause the leaning image effect :sarcastic: ... Kick the kids out of the house.


Yeah but I'm talking about them plopping down and it moving the couch just so slightly that it's not visible to the naked eye that it's out of alignment. :neener: I pretty much have to measure it before each listening session. It's usually out of alignment by less than an inch and the center image is like a magnet to the right. Not slightly to the right, noticeably pulling to the right. It drives me so nuts I've thought about putting spikes on the couch feet hah! I can't wait for the kids to leave, the youngest has 11 years before he has to pack his bags LOL.


----------



## SLAYER

Sonny, am I at Chuckee cheese?
Oh man the song "Bass I love you" would sound so sweet on any of these systems.
Sorry guys been out of the loop,hope I am not breaking any rules,with my comment.
These systems look pricey,would never be able to afford,but one can dream.


----------



## Radtech51

Just curious, but why weren't any of the Bowers and Wilkins speakers not part of this evaluation or shoot out? B&W are arguably one of the best speakers you can get I currently have the following set at home > 

Bowers & Wilkins

B&W CM8 FLOORSTANDING MONITOR (PAIR) CM8
http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/CM_Series/CM8.html

1 B&W CENTER CHANNEL MONITOR CM Centre
http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/CM_Series/CM-Centre.html

B&W CM1 BOOKSHELF MONITORS (PAIR) CM1
http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/CM_Series/CM1.html

B&W ASW10CM ACTIVE SUBWOOFER (ASW10CM)
http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/CM_Series/ASW10CM.html

I couldn't be happier with the sound, it's very pure.


----------



## alphaiii

Sonnie said:


> The Sierra Towers with the RAAL will be in the next evaluation round, provided Ascend agrees. Not sure about the Salk yet.


Nice - hopefully Ascend is on board.


----------



## Sonnie

Radtech51 said:


> Just curious, but why weren't any of the Bowers and Wilkins speakers not part of this evaluation or shoot out? B&W are arguably one of the best speakers you can get I currently have the following set at home >
> 
> Bowers & Wilkins
> 
> B&W CM8 FLOORSTANDING MONITOR (PAIR) CM8
> http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/CM_Series/CM8.html
> 
> 1 B&W CENTER CHANNEL MONITOR CM Centre
> http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/CM_Series/CM-Centre.html
> 
> B&W CM1 BOOKSHELF MONITORS (PAIR) CM1
> http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/CM_Series/CM1.html
> 
> B&W ASW10CM ACTIVE SUBWOOFER (ASW10CM)
> http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/CM_Series/ASW10CM.html
> 
> I couldn't be happier with the sound, it's very pure.


Initially we were only allowing speaker that are offered in a non-sheen black and I believe the CM-9, which would fall in the $2,000-3,000 MSRP allowance, is only offered in gloss black. For the next round we are not placing finish limitations on the speakers, so they can be nominated and included in the poll for voting. However, I believe our MSRP limits on this next round will be $2,500-$3,500.


----------



## flamingeye

Sonnie said:


> One discovery I have made since preparing for this evaluation, starting back a few weeks ago when breaking some of the speakers in, is Dire Straits. Not that I was not familiar with Dire Straits... I have always liked their popular hits, Money For Nothing, So Far Away, Industrial Disease, Skateaway, Walk Of Life, etc. Yet, never owned an album or listened to any of their other stuff until I decided to pick up the Brothers In Arms Hybrid SACD - DSD from MFSL. I was quite surprised at several of the _other_ tracks and just how good they are. I liked them so much I have now purchased 4 more of their albums (Original Master Recordings on Amazon... some are very inexpensive). I can listen to their stuff for days and never get tired of it. Talk about some awesome sounding music... it indeed qualifies.


I don't know if your into multi-channel music but if you really liked MFSL sacd of brothers in arms you should check out the 5.1 sacd of that album in my opinion it bested the MFSL's .


----------



## Phillips

flamingeye said:


> I don't know if your into multi-channel music but if you really liked MFSL sacd of brothers in arms you should check out the 5.1 sacd of that album in my opinion it bested the MFSL's .


I have heard that this Album in SHM SACD is great, better than SACD + all the others Dire Straits Dire Straits, Making Movies etc.

I have the Brothers In Arms SACD and quite often use this as a reference.

I have heard that anything that Dire Straits Mark Knopfler has worked with has a generally very good sound (how true i don't know but have seen and heard this).

Also Norah Jones CD Come Away With Me, has some good subtleties, have heard this on ML Vantages and sounded great.


----------



## Andre

wow look at the optimal placement so far on page one. Makes you wonder if there are any speakers "besides onwall in inwall" that sound good up close to a wall. The only one I can think of is perhaps the Kilpshorn in a corner


----------



## NBPk402

Andre said:


> wow look at the optimal placement so far on page one. Makes you wonder if there are any speakers "besides onwall in inwall" that sound good up close to a wall. The only one I can think of is perhaps the Kilpshorn in a corner


LaScalas sound good against the wall.


----------



## solid7

Phillips said:


> Also Norah Jones CD Come Away With Me, has some good subtleties, have heard this on ML Vantages and sounded great.


Yes. I would sample anything Nora Jones just to hear that amazing voice. Everything else is just a bonus.


----------



## Sonnie

Phillips said:


> I have heard that this Album in SHM SACD is great, better than SACD + all the others Dire Straits Dire Straits, Making Movies etc.
> 
> I have the Brothers In Arms SACD and quite often use this as a reference.
> 
> I have heard that anything that Dire Straits Mark Knopfler has worked with has a generally very good sound (how true i don't know but have seen and heard this).
> 
> Also Norah Jones CD Come Away With Me, has some good subtleties, have heard this on ML Vantages and sounded great.


I listened to the Love Over Gold (Remastered) and was not even half as impressed with the quality of sound on it as I am with the Brothers In Arms MFSL SACD in Pure Audio mode. I don't know if my ears were stopped up or what. I will try again later to make sure.

Norah Jones is awesome... the entire album is good.




Andre said:


> wow look at the optimal placement so far on page one. Makes you wonder if there are any speakers "besides onwall in inwall" that sound good up close to a wall. The only one I can think of is perhaps the Kilpshorn in a corner


They all sounded good near the wall (some better than others), just not great. You lose that depth of soundstage when they are placed up close to the wall... and that is true of the Klipsch speakers too. Not everyone necessary cares about the depth of soundstage and perception of depth. If they get a wide soundstage, excellent imaging and clarity and either none or maybe a little bit of depth, they are sold, because it sounds very good. However, add to that the depth of soundstage and it adds another dimension. Once I heard it, there is no turning back... now I have to have it. Although those placements without much depth still sound good and would probably please quite a few people. The depth is like adding magic for me... it's my high, so to speak... and I want more of it. 

With EVERY speaker we have listened to, we had to get the speakers on out into the room to get that depth. We don't too often hear it at the shows because most of them have their speakers up against a wall. Those that have them out into the room will usually be the ones that stand out the most for us. Danny with GR gets his out into the room... and look what folks are constantly saying about his rooms. There are a few others that get it right, but I honestly have no idea what some of those exhibitors are hearing. In many cases, if I could do no better than what they do with tens of thousands of dollars of equipment, I would not even bother setting it up.


----------



## kevin360

With dipoles, it's especially important because of the rear wave, the reflection of which _must_ be sufficiently delayed. I was surprised to see that the 'optimal placement' for the 1.7s was only 5' off the front wall. My MMGs are 4' in a very nearfield setup in a bedroom, but my 3.7s are 9'9" off the front wall (in an approximate rule of thirds setup for both systems). Regarding the narrow sweet spot, you'd be surprised at the difference the wonderfully narrow ribbon tweeter makes in the larger Maggies. Your MLs address the issue by way of their 'curvilinear' design. The dispersion of the Magnepan ribbon tweeters is practically ideal (omni), which redresses that 'head in a vise' symptom you described quite nicely. 

I've been extremely pleased with all of the MoFi and SHM SACDs I've purchased so far, but I also love the 5.1 (phantom center for me, though) presentation of 'Brothers in Arms' on the 20th anniversary Vertigo release. The SHM of the first Dire Straits album is fabulous.


----------



## AudiocRaver

kevin360 said:


> With dipoles, it's especially important because of the rear wave, the reflection of which _must_ be sufficiently delayed. I was surprised to see that the 'optimal placement' for the 1.7s was only 5' off the front wall. My MMGs are 4' in a very nearfield setup in a bedroom, but my 3.7s are 9'9" off the front wall (in an approximate rule of thirds setup for both systems). Regarding the narrow sweet spot, you'd be surprised at the difference the wonderfully narrow ribbon tweeter makes in the larger Maggies. Your MLs address the issue by way of their 'curvilinear' design. The dispersion of the Magnepan ribbon tweeters is practically ideal (omni), which redresses that 'head in a vise' symptom you described quite nicely.
> 
> I've been extremely pleased with all of the MoFi and SHM SACDs I've purchased so far, but I also love the 5.1 (phantom center for me, though) presentation of 'Brothers in Arms' on the 20th anniversary Vertigo release. The SHM of the first Dire Straits album is fabulous.


Great comments. We appreciate input from an experienced Magnepan user.

We definitely are in agreement that farther into the room is better with any dipole design, at least toward supporting that depth of soundstage effect. We have some detailed notes on the topic that I am hoping to have time to fold into the first post, or perhaps a separate discussion thread, once we get the individual writeups done. If I stopped to do that now, a certain someone in the state of Alabama would drop me in my tracks with his seldom-used death-ray stare. I have not witnessed it yet, and do not intend to!


----------



## Sonnie

:sneeky:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> They all sounded good near the wall (some better than others), just not great. You lose that depth of soundstage when they are placed up close to the wall... and that is true of the Klipsch speakers too. Not everyone necessary cares about the depth of soundstage and perception of depth. If they get a wide soundstage, excellent imaging and clarity and either none or maybe a little bit of depth, they are sold, because it sounds very good. However, add to that the depth of soundstage and it adds another dimension. Once I heard it, there is no turning back... now I have to have it. Although those placements without much depth still sound good and would probably please quite a few people. The depth is like adding magic for me... it's my high, so to speak... and I want more of it.
> 
> With EVERY speaker we have listened to, we had to get the speakers on out into the room to get that depth. We don't too often hear it at the shows because most of them have their speakers up against a wall. Those that have them out into the room will usually be the ones that stand out the most for us. Danny with GR gets his out into the room... and look what folks are constantly saying about his rooms. There are a few others that get it right, but I honestly have no idea what some of those exhibitors are hearing. In many cases, if I could do no better than what they do with tens of thousands of dollars of equipment, I would not even bother setting it up.


Echoing Sonnie's thoughts, all of the evaluators agree that the depth of soundstage - especially when it has high acuity, meaning the sense of distance from the listener to each voice and instrument is crystal clear and could be measured accurately right down to the inch - is the "spark of life" for 2-channel listening, as far as we are concerned. We have heard soundstage depths in the range of 6 to 8 feet (LP is about 12 feet from the screen wall of the room, I believe) with each voice/instrument at its own depth/distance from the LP and each so clearly defined that you want to grab a tape measure or a pole and reach right out and poke it to see if there might actually be something physical there. Once that has been experienced, anything less is simply not satisfying.

We achieved this with three different sets of speakers in the $1K roundup in August, so it does not take thousands of dollars to get there. $1K would probably do it, selecting the right speakers and allowing a bit for some room treatment. Just curious, anyone remember which three speakers pulled it off back in August? I could tell you, but it might be fun to see who remembers what they were. If nobody gets it (or bothers to guess:huh I will post the answer tomorrow (Saturday - oops, that is today now) night.:innocent: No peeking,:nono: let's see who remembers.onder:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> :sneeky:


Yep, that's it.

Back to the writeups. Hint: It just MIGHT be that the first one is fairly close to being posted, and we just MIGHT be doing them alphabetically. Let's see, which letter comes first? A? Or was it S? Or maybe M? Gonna have to Google it!:devil:


----------



## Sonnie

AudiocRaver said:


> We achieved this with three different sets of speakers in the $1K roundup in August, so it does not take thousands of dollars to get there. $1K would probably do it, selecting the right speakers and allowing a bit for some room treatment. Just curious, anyone remember which three speakers pulled it off back in August? I could tell you, but it might be fun to see who remembers what they were. If nobody gets it (or bothers to guess:huh I will post the answer tomorrow (Saturday - oops, that is today now) night.:innocent: No peeking,:nono: let's see who remembers.onder:


:jump: I know... I know!!!


----------



## jmschnur

Stereophile has a cut in its test CDS that demonstrates the depth of soundstage one can achieve with two speakers. The cut in their test cd 3 uses a number of different mic set ups . This clearly show the differences that the recording engineer can achieve. One can hear this very well with my ML speakers ( both the Vantage and the Montis) as long as they are properly placed far enough from the rear wall. BTW the Montis has a fairly generous sweet spot .


----------



## kevin360

Oh my, I was unaware of Sonnie's death-ray stare. Thanks for the warning. If it can reach you in Nebraska, I'm definitely in range. I'll mind my Ps and Qs; that's for sure.

At the risk of inciting him to look my way (in that deadly way) :hide:, I feel the need to mention one more thing about dipoles and theater rooms. In my opinion, to a great extent, they have mutually exclusive demands. Sonnie built a beautiful and ideal home theater room :drool:. My original intent was the construction of a listening room - video was the idea of some friends of mine who were itching for a better place to meet for college football Saturdays. The front row of seats in my room is a whopping 23'3" off the front wall and my 92" screen drops approximately 4' forward of that wall. My 'home theater room' is far from ideal. Likewise, I have far less absorptive treatments in my room, although I do have a few in the center of the side walls and building code forced me to include a window in the front wall which is covered with acoustic foam and then a rug. I do have some diffusion on the front wall and a dozen bass traps (which reflect frequencies above their operating range). So, my treatments are not quite up to snuff for a proper theater, but are bordering on excessive for the dipoles.

The other issue is room dimension. Ideal placement of speakers is driven by many factors, so extrapolating from what works in one setup to what should in another is rather tricky. It took me about a year of fiddling to allow my panels to grow roots - a game of inches. I cannot imagine how difficult the challenge you guys faced was with so many speakers and so little time. Regardless, I couldn't agree more with your assessment that the diploes need some space behind them. One of the benefits of a narrow (wish mine were a few feet wider, though) room is that Maggies produce better bass when they are closer to the side walls (with the tweeters in), but they suffer imaging problems when they are too far apart.

Let's face it; it's all about choosing compromises.

---

I'd expect the Montis and the Vantages to have a pretty generous sweet spot - Martin Logan's CLS transducer design helps a lot. The issue here is that ideal driver element size and frequency are inversely proportional.


----------



## phreak

kevin360 said:


> Let's face it; it's all about choosing compromises.


I think you just summed up this whole hobby.


----------



## AudiocRaver

kevin360 said:


> Oh my, I was unaware of Sonnie's death-ray stare. Thanks for the warning. If it can reach you in Nebraska, I'm definitely in range. I'll mind my Ps and Qs; that's for sure.


You are WAY too close!:heehee: Luckily, he is a pretty nice guy. I might even go so far as to call him a true gentleman, but we don't want to give him a big head. (He can be a bit of a rascal, too.)



> At the risk of inciting him to look my way (in that deadly way) :hide:, I feel the need to mention one more thing about dipoles and theater rooms. In my opinion, to a great extent, they have mutually exclusive demands. Sonnie built a beautiful and ideal home theater room :drool:. My original intent was the construction of a listening room - video was the idea of some friends of mine who were itching for a better place to meet for college football Saturdays. The front row of seats in my room is a whopping 23'3" off the front wall and my 92" screen drops approximately 4' forward of that wall. My 'home theater room' is far from ideal. Likewise, I have far less absorptive treatments in my room, although I do have a few in the center of the side walls and building code forced me to include a window in the front wall which is covered with acoustic foam and then a rug. I do have some diffusion on the front wall and a dozen bass traps (which reflect frequencies above their operating range). So, my treatments are not quite up to snuff for a proper theater, but are bordering on excessive for the dipoles.


Intriguing. You seem to be implying that with dipoles you WANT minimal absorptive treatment. I have thought of dipoles in terms of a design that helps one overcome some of the problems of having excessive room reflections, not as a design that BEGGS for more reflections. But I can see the logic, now that you put it that way.



> The other issue is room dimension. Ideal placement of speakers is driven by many factors, so extrapolating from what works in one setup to what should in another is rather tricky. It took me about a year of fiddling to allow my panels to grow roots - a game of inches. I cannot imagine how difficult the challenge you guys faced was with so many speakers and so little time.


It kinda makes the head spin. One person alone would break down in tears. Luckily, there are complementary experience bases at work that manage to produce the right ideas at needed times. Then there is Sonnie cracking the whip when we slow down. {[(And the treat of that death stare.)]}



> Regardless, I couldn't agree more with your assessment that the diploes need some space behind them. One of the benefits of a narrow (wish mine were a few feet wider, though) room is that Maggies produce better bass when they are closer to the side walls (with the tweeters in)


A combination we will have to try some time.



> but they suffer imaging problems when they are too far apart.


Precisely what we have experienced. With spacing the soundstage gets bigger... and bigger... and then the center imaging just falls apart.



> Let's face it; it's all about choosing compromises.


Boy, howdy, you can say that again.



> I'd expect the Montis and the Vantages to have a pretty generous sweet spot - Martin Logan's CLS transducer design helps a lot. The issue here is that ideal driver element size and frequency are inversely proportional.


Those compromises again.

Thanks for the detailed feedback, always appreciated. Good "future reference" material for anyone who works or plays with speaker setup, especially dipoles.


----------



## Tonto

Wayne wrote:



> A? Or was it S? Or maybe M?


If I remember right it was Axiom, Sony, & Merridian. Yeah, that's it....boy did those Axiom A5's sound sweet! :neener:

OK, OK, I'll let somebody else answer....!


----------



## bkeeler10

My recollection is that the Arx, ML and Tekton speakers were the imaging/soundstage champs last round. Do I get a prize?! Brownie points? An extra slip-up before drawing the Sonnie stare!?


----------



## Sonnie

jmschnur said:


> Stereophile has a cut in its test CDS that demonstrates the depth of soundstage one can achieve with two speakers. The cut in their test cd 3 uses a number of different mic set ups . This clearly show the differences that the recording engineer can achieve. One can hear this very well with my ML speakers ( both the Vantage and the Montis) as long as they are properly placed far enough from the rear wall. BTW the Montis has a fairly generous sweet spot .


Well... I have their original Test CD, Test CD 2 and Poem. I guess I need to pick up the Test CD 3 just so I can say I have it... and check out the depth test track.

Coincidentally... I have the Montis on order.  And a Stage X  ... and full review forthcoming for two-channel and home theater (with the Motion 12's as surrounds). :bigsmile:




kevin360 said:


> Let's face it; it's all about choosing compromises.


This is why we hammer home the point that it is imperative for you to try speakers in your own environment... and for two-channel listening to be able to experiment with placement. It just makes zero sense to me that anyone would spend a LOT of money on speakers and then restrain them where you cannot get the most out of them.


----------



## jmschnur

Try test cd 2 cut 10 "mapping the sound stage". #3 has more mic examples. Your new system sounds great. I will be curious about the motions as surrounds. We should exchange notes on the Montis and X after you begin testing . I got the X on an "exchange" after my Stage power supply started acting up.


----------



## Savjac

Sonnie said:


> Coincidentally... I have the Montis on order.  And a Stage X


Umm, luckily I am too far from you for the "Stare" so I can easily ummm...suggest you order two of the Stage X speakers and send one up here, I would not object. :innocent:

Oh a question if I might, I see we are all recommending albums to listen to, is there an actual thread for recommendations ? I have a few that test the limits of my system and I am sure can do the same for some others. 

First: California Project - Papa Do Run Run, Oh my this disc has the rare ability to fill the front end of the room like few others. It has slam that could hurt your chest, sound-stage for days, excellent instrument placement and songs that will never go bad. Oh and be careful with the subs volume, there could be issues. The sound, for me at least is smooth with vocals rendered very well indeed. On cut 7, you may just be able to detect the 16Hz note there amongst those voices. Whew, well done. Lastly, the LP sounds better than the CD but the CD is not far behind. 

Second: Well we shall wait to see if there is a better place for these.


----------



## AudiocRaver

bkeeler10 said:


> My recollection is that the Arx, ML and Tekton speakers were the imaging/soundstage champs last round. Do I get a prize?! Brownie points? An extra slip-up before drawing the Sonnie stare!?


Very impressive, you nailed it! For imaging & soundstage the Arx and ML were neck and neck and, to my ears anyway, the Tekton's were even a notch better. All three had im/ss characteristics to drool for. And we did.

Right on, you win the prize... The adulation of your HTS mates, plus a get-out-of-death-stare free card, redeemable on the third full moon of any given month, if you know the secret word, which was posted back in May somewhere in one of the forums about audio or video or home theater, something like that. Missed it? Tough break! Maybe next time!:T

Seriously, good memory. There is so much of interest to keep up on in these threads that it all becomes a blur after awhile. Nice to know folks are paying attention and benefiting from parts of it.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Savjac said:


> Oh a question if I might, I see we are all recommending albums to listen to, is there an actual thread for recommendations ? I have a few that test the limits of my system and I am sure can do the same for some others.
> 
> First: California Project - Papa Do Run Run, Oh my this disc has the rare ability to fill the front end of the room like few others. It has slam that could hurt your chest, sound-stage for days, excellent instrument placement and songs that will never go bad. Oh and be careful with the subs volume, there could be issues. The sound, for me at least is smooth with vocals rendered very well indeed. On cut 7, you may just be able to detect the 16Hz note there amongst those voices. Whew, well done. Lastly, the LP sounds better than the CD but the CD is not far behind.


We have a pretty good thread running here with demo/test track suggestions.


----------



## Sonnie

jmschnur said:


> Try test cd 2 cut 10 "mapping the sound stage". #3 has more mic examples. Your new system sounds great. I will be curious about the motions as surrounds. We should exchange notes on the Montis and X after you begin testing . I got the X on an "exchange" after my Stage power supply started acting up.


I ordered #3 just cause I can. 

Interestingly, the Motion 12's and the Stage X share the same folded motion tweeter. I know of a couple of other ML owners who use Motions for surrounds and are pretty happy. I also like the idea that the 12's are still dipole speakers too.




Savjac said:


> Umm, luckily I am too far from you for the "Stare" so I can easily ummm...suggest you order two of the Stage X speakers and send one up here, I would not object. :innocent:


:sneeky:




Savjac said:


> Oh a question if I might, I see we are all recommending albums to listen to, is there an actual thread for recommendations ? I have a few that test the limits of my system and I am sure can do the same for some others.


Good Demo Music - Good Imaging Music - Your Favorite Demo Music


----------



## AudiocRaver

Savjac said:


> Umm, luckily I am too far from you for the "Stare" so I can easily ummm...suggest you order two of the Stage X speakers and send one up here, I would not object. :innocent:





Sonnie said:


> :sneeky:


Ouch. Unfortunately no range limit has yet been identified. You are just going to have to rely on his being a pretty good guy.

Dunno what might happen if the 'Bama/LSU game doesn't go his way, though. We all better post nice just in case.:innocent:


----------



## Savjac

Thank You Gents, that was a great suggestion. I will pull my choices out of the closet and post them.

As far as college football, I am in trouble, being born in Chicago does not leave me any choices. I lived in Georgia for 10 years but that does not count either, now in Indiana and with a family of ND graduates I could go there but...the safe bet is to go with whatever Sonnie likes as that would offset that brutal stare a bit. 

Not sure how he did it, but I found sound words on the Panasonic when I came in here that said..."Jack, DO NOT go there..."

Could that be him ??


----------



## Sonnie

:sneeky: :sneeky: :sneeky:


----------



## kevin360

AudiocRaver said:


> Dunno what might happen if the 'Bama/LSU game doesn't go his way, though. We all better post nice just in case.:innocent:


I suspect Sonnie is smiling right now. The Crimson Tide is a _machine_ - in every part of the game. Of course, the old Iron Bowl is getting close, and it should be a doozy this year. Frankly, I hope 'Bama runs the table.

Maybe we can get away with a little mischief. :demon:


----------



## Sonnie

:bigsmile:


----------



## natescriven

All of this talk about depth of soundstage has got me wondering how I can possibly get that in my room. My speakers are only about a foot off of my front wall because my room is small. Would installing broadband sound absorbers increase the perceived distance of the front wall?


----------



## mtbdudex

lcaillo said:


> It was a great time. We put in long hours on it, but it was a pleasure, every minute. I can't say enough great things about Mark Seaton and his contribution to the weekend. We all learned a great deal from watching him tweak Sonnie's subs and sharing his knowledge and experience with us most of the weekend. He has some very impressive speakers himself, though not in the price range of the others. Getting to review the Saunders system was also great.


I was at a Home Theater meet in Clarkston Mich last night (Sat Nov-9-2013), Mark was there.
His passion for audio was evident in the conversion we had, he did mention doing some minor tweaking of Sonnie's subs....
Honestly, besides the forum banter this is my first time speaking with him face-face, a truly nice guy.

Are there any REW plot's to compare before and after?
I look forward to your review of his 5.0 home theater system.
When will that be done?


----------



## AudiocRaver

natescriven said:


> All of this talk about depth of soundstage has got me wondering how I can possibly get that in my room. My speakers are only about a foot off of my front wall because my room is small. Would installing broadband sound absorbers increase the perceived distance of the front wall?


Maybe. I can get it fairly easily near-field in a smallish room.


----------



## AudiocRaver

mtbdudex said:


> I was at a Home Theater meet in Clarkston Mich last night (Sat Nov-9-2013), Mark was there.
> His passion for audio was evident in the conversion we had, he did mention doing some minor tweaking of Sonnie's subs....
> Honestly, besides the forum banter this is my first time speaking with him face-face, a truly nice guy.
> 
> Are there any REW plot's to compare before and after?
> I look forward to your review of his 5.0 home theater system.
> When will that be done?


Once the individual speaker writeups from the eval event are posted, the Seaton review/article will be next, including his marvelous sub detective work, with plots and pics.


----------



## lcaillo

The story of his "sub detective work" could stand alone as an article. I think he has an extra lobe in his brain dedicated to real time FFT and impulse response processing.


----------



## theJman

lcaillo said:


> I think he has an extra lobe in his brain dedicated to real time FFT and impulse response processing.


He got a loquacious gene as well... :bigsmile:


----------



## mdanderson

Looking forward to seeing the results of the speaker evaluation. I really like Paradigm but the SVS looks very interesting.


----------



## K1LL3M

AudiocRaver said:


> Once the individual speaker writeups from the eval event are posted, the Seaton review/article will be next, including his marvelous sub detective work, with plots and pics.


Have to admit to being guilty for following this thread closely mainly for this reason. 

With a boat load of Mark's finest on the way, I am keen to consume as many of these impressions as possible. 

The other stuff is entertaining in the meantime 

Cheers


----------



## AudiocRaver

K1LL3M said:


> Have to admit to being guilty for following this thread closely mainly for this reason.
> 
> With a boat load of Mark's finest on the way, I am keen to consume as many of these impressions as possible.
> 
> The other stuff is entertaining in the meantime
> 
> Cheers


Hey, welcome, new HTS family member, and - so it sounds - soon to be proud owner of Mark's products. Will get to it as soon as possible.{[(You missed our discussion about Sonnie's death ray stare. Gotta stick to the plan!:shh]}


----------



## Sonnie

Thought you could sneak that one by me huh? lol

I know one thing... that boat that has all those speakers on it better be a BIG boat, as those speakers are seriously heavy. I just finished packing them back up and I am telling you... just the 8c's alone are heavy enough and tricky to handle. They are like HUGE concrete blocks. I think they were heavier than any of the other speakers we evaluated. Solid as a rock!!!


----------



## K1LL3M

AudiocRaver said:


> Hey, welcome, new HTS family member, and - so it sounds - soon to be proud owner of Mark's products. Will get to it as soon as possible.{[(You missed our discussion about Sonnie's death ray stare. Gotta stick to the plan!:shh]}


Thanks for the warm welcome. Just realized that was my first post after joining 3 and a half years ago. 



Sonnie said:


> Thought you could sneak that one by me huh? lol
> 
> I know one thing... that boat that has all those speakers on it better be a BIG boat, as those speakers are seriously heavy. I just finished packing them back up and I am telling you... just the 8c's alone are heavy enough and tricky to handle. They are like HUGE concrete blocks. I think they were heavier than any of the other speakers we evaluated. Solid as a rock!!!


I may be guilty of trying to push in and wrangle some early info but will hop back in the line again after "that look"  its just all the excitement. 

Says something that they are so heavy, and the quality and care that Mark constructs his products with; they should make awesome surrounds  with full range DSP as well if the even get moved. 

Sorry, back to your regular programming. I do not wish to derail the main focus of the thread for the $2.5k speakers and jump ahead to the special bonus features until its time.


----------



## Savjac

I most certainly am a dolt, I have been wondering about placement of the speakers and thinking it would be too much information for you gentlemen to put together, it would be for most of us, I look on the first page of this thread and there it is. Brilliant and down to the inch and degree. I have to say you guys are much more thorough than any reviewer I have yet read. 
A heartfelt THANK YOU.


----------



## lcaillo

See my comments in the "Reflections" thread that I just started. One has to remember that the room imposes limitations that can be very hard to deal with for some speakers. Position in other rooms will almost certainly be different. We have developed a process, however, that seems to work to extract the best of each product in the context of Sonnie's HT space. And there are some universal assumptions that are good to start with, such as some distance to front walls is necessary, and toe angle is important to achieving good imaging.


----------



## Savjac

Understood and agreed. As readers, it is very important for us to have a bases with which to understand more of what is happening, the equipment used, the room, the placement etc so as to assist us in making mental images of the listening parameters involved. It is interesting for example to see that non dipole speakers being tested can actually wind up so far from the front wall, again, based on the room and sitting positions being used. Why you might ask, because it sets a benchmark that is not vague and tends to propose thoughts and results that may differ from what other writers postulate, for example the golden triangle, putting speakers close to wall to get certain reinforcements etc, and the choice to follow the provided thoughts or try something different. As you say, all rooms and gear will pose their own set of positives and negatives, you gentlemen have provided a huge range of information with which we can use to start or finish in our own rooms.


----------



## J&D

One would think that if a particular speaker has difficulties more than others with an average room then it may be quite likely that it would be problematic in others as well. Very interested in seeing the results of the event.


----------



## lcaillo

J&D said:


> One would think that if a particular speaker has difficulties more than others with an average room then it may be quite likely that it would be problematic in others as well. Very interested in seeing the results of the event.


Generally true. I would not count Sonnie's HT as typical, however. There are several dips and crests in the room response that are managed with EQ for HT, but we are not using any correction for the 2 channel reviews. That would add too many variables to manage.

Just keep all of the info in context, if that is possible.


----------



## Sonnie

Yeah... while my room is probably far from unique, it might be less likely to imitate what most are listening to in a two-channel setup, at least from a lot of the two-channel setups I see. Also, the majority of the reviews I see on two-channel speakers seem to have varying locations and setups... and rarely have I read a "bad" review, although not all of them speak of "depth of soundstage", which if unobtainable would be unacceptable to me. So although we may struggle liking a particular speaker... and/or can't seem to get the premier placement in my room, that doesn't mean it won't sound great in a different room setup, as I have a hard time believing so many people can like a speaker so well, even though one or more of us may not have liked it that well. Surely they have found better placements or have a better setup... otherwise either the reviewers are just being nice... and/or owners are fooling themselves, which both would be harder to accept, yet not necessarily harder to believe.


----------



## Sonnie

The Dynaudio DM 3/7 Review is now posted in this thread, here.


----------



## gwdriver

*Post after first review announcement*

My neighbor has the Paradigm Studio 60's. I fell in love with them the first time he fired them up. I listened to 
them for 3 days straight. Cost me alot of beer and pizza. I talked to the wife and was ready to bite the bullet and 
buy the Paradigm's. I was perfectly content listening to my 20yr old DCM TimeWindows. 

A few years ago I bought a boat and a motorcycle and became overly consumed with both. My audio equipment 
was neglected for many years. After listening to the Paradigm's I decided it was time for a serious upgrade. 2 
days prior to buying the Paradigm's I ran into a deal that I could not pass up. I purchased 4 Energy Veritas-6.3's
and a Energy Veritas-5.2 for way less than what the Paradigm's would have cost me.

The Energy speakers are amazing. A week after I got them I added a SVS sub to the mix. Listening to 2 channel 
stereo I am in musical nirvana. In theatre mood this system awesome!


----------



## lcaillo

The Paradigms were better than I expected relative to the field. We should be getting the review up soon. The first ones go the slowest, but once we have the format down and the posts started, the rest go much faster.


----------



## DougReim

I'm thinking about the 60's for a 2 channel room so I'm looking forward to your evaluation.
Also the SVS's are interesting, although they're too big for my set up it seems that most reviewers either love them or hate them.


----------



## Sonnie

The Emerald Physics CSP2 Review is now posted in this thread, here.


----------



## Sonnie

If I did not have the ML Montis and a Stage X on the way, I might be ordering up a full compliment of Paradigm's for my HT. They were indeed quite impressive.


----------



## jmschnur

Aren't they made by the same company? Try out the Montis before reaching any conclusion .


----------



## Sonnie

Kind of sorta... made at the same plant now... I think. Definitely all owned by the same company.

I am a bona fide electrostatic freak... the Prodidy's, now that I have them in their best location, are outperforming everything else. The Montis are supposedly much improved over these 12 year old speakers.


----------



## jmschnur

In my home they perform superbly. A real step up from the Vantages that preceded them in my audio room. as you know they will need a bit of tuning .


----------



## callas01

I see that you guys were able to bottom out the DM3/7s with the Star Tracks track, I love that CD and with my single 6.7" driver played with the volume up really loud as well, almost to the halfway point, I cannot get my Focus 160s to bottom out. The 160s sensitivity is only 87dbs, not sure how much of a difference 1 dbs will make, but I was just running them thru this test after reading your write up, i didnt have any issues. 

Just thought it might make a difference to how you guys view the performance of the 3/7s.


----------



## Greenster

I love it when you do these challenges. It is so fun to read your reviews on each one. I really appreciate you doing this for us. Very fun reading for me. I can't wait to see the results of the Paridigms and SVS's. Also I am still very courious as to how the ARX's compare to the more expensive speakers. How much more does $1500 really buy you??? We shall see.


----------



## Sonnie

I don't think it really influenced our overall thoughts. I was probably the one making the most noise about it.. and even then I did not throw them out the door because it could have been a damaged speaker. It sounded like to me it was only the left speaker, hence my thinking it may have simply been a bad driver. We probably should have investigated closer, although we did repeat it a couple of times.

My disclaimer in my comments: _These were a demo or review pair, so we cannot discount the possibility that they had been damaged. Nonetheless, on all the other music I listened to, including other songs with low bass, they did very well. _

That was the ONLY song that it happened on, which seems unusual... and it was very near the end of our evaluation tracks. I suppose if we had kept cranking the volume up on enough songs we might have found another song to bottom out the speaker. I had no issues playing music as loud as I wanted to play it, but I won't say that I would never turn it up as loud as what caused it to bottom, because it was not deafening loud, just louder than average... or louder than my average listening level.


----------



## Sonnie

Greenster said:


> I love it when you do these challenges. It is so fun to read your reviews on each one. I really appreciate you doing this for us. Very fun reading for me. I can't wait to see the results of the Paridigms and SVS's. Also I am still very courious as to how the ARX's compare to the more expensive speakers. How much more does $1500 really buy you??? We shall see.


Well... it is more like $1,250 with most of these. I can tell you... you will get a little more bass and maybe a slightly better finish, if you get really picky. The Arx A5's (and the now extinct MartinLogan Motion 12's) are a BARGAIN that you do NOT find everyday. They would fit very well among these speakers lacking only "slightly" in bass response. Another octave in bass response is worth something to some people, although I am not sure how much. The A5's still have very good perceived bass... and the midbass, midrange and top end is phenomenal for a $750 speaker... this is where you start realizing they are worth more.


----------



## callas01

I hear you. I am what most people consider a loud listener, i love to rock out. I also love to play that star tracks song really loud and show off what my speakers are capable of in terms of dynamic slam. My wife hates when i play that cd. 

however, as my wife always says, you cant un-say something... and you can un-hear it either... so it happened, and therefore it must be noted. hopefully its isolated to that speaker having that issue. 

I look forward to more of your guys' reviews.


----------



## Sonnie

We liked the Dyn's well enough to hopefully get the Excites in the next round... if possible.


----------



## luka3rd

Thanks for Dynaudio DM 3/7 evaluation! Those are something I wish to have... very nice and affordable.
Especially Leonard Caillouet (lcaillo)'s part on bass extension was detailed and something I wanted to know more about. Again, thanks for great review!


----------



## o2audio

lcaillo said:


> Generally true. I would not count Sonnie's HT as typical, however. There are several dips and crests in the room response that are managed with EQ for HT, but we are not using any correction for the 2 channel reviews. That would add too many variables to manage.
> 
> Just keep all of the info in context, if that is possible.


What a great thread and surely and ambitious undertaking here. 

The reply above is perfectly put re the context and content of the information here. 

Bravo to those involved.

Mark


----------



## kevin360

lcaillo said:


> Generally true. I would not count Sonnie's HT as typical, however. There are several dips and crests in the room response that are managed with EQ for HT, but we are not using any correction for the 2 channel reviews. That would add too many variables to manage.
> 
> Just keep all of the info in context, if that is possible.


I wouldn't count Sonnie's room as typical either (_it's spectacular_), but having several dips and crests in the room response certainly isn't anything unusual (perhaps, you're intimating that his room has _fewer_ modal issues than most). All rooms have them. The best we can do with treatments is to _reduce_ the impact of the room's influence. 

Of course, all rooms are essentially unique. Hence, there will be variability in ideal speaker placement, but there are some general guidelines that apply universally. The details in these reviews are quite beneficial - good job guys! :T


----------



## AudiocRaver

kevin360 said:


> I wouldn't count Sonnie's room as typical either (_it's spectacular_), but having several dips and crests in the room response certainly isn't anything unusual (perhaps, you're intimating that his room has _fewer_ modal issues than most). All rooms have them. The best we can do with treatments is to _reduce_ the impact of the room's influence.
> 
> Of course, all rooms are essentially unique. Hence, there will be variability in ideal speaker placement, but there are some general guidelines that apply universally. The details in these reviews are quite beneficial - good job guys! :T


Right. It is a room with 2 pairs of parallel walls and a flat ceiling. It certainly benefits from bass traps and other treatments meant to disrupt certain reflections, but in essence its room modes would be fairly typical of any room with the same dimensions.

The LP is another factor. It determines where most speakers will sit to give the soundstage we wanted, and THAT puts the speakers a certain distance from walls, another predictable factor in causing cancellation at certain frequencies due to the reflection/distance/wavelength relationships.

Add to all that the symmetrical listening setup relative to the room, and those LF effects are the same for both speakers - pretty typical but not true in all rooms.

These are factors to be dealt with in almost any home listening environment until you get into serious studio-type construction with non-parallel surfaces and HUGE tuned traps sometimes the size of small adjacent rooms. With the rooms we mortals have to deal with, modal issues are a reality, the frequencies mostly set by basic dimensions, some by speaker/LP placement, and severity somewhat treatable with traps _sometimes._

If I may be so bold as to expand on Leonard's statement, trusting that he will correct me if I miss his point, the particular modal frequencies and their severity are unique to that room's dimensions and treatments and our setup constraints. Other rooms will have similar issues to be dealt with at other frequencies. Where would be the fun without them? Mother nature saw an almost perfect hobby and thought, _That's too easy. Let there be acoustics!_:devil: (Thanks, Mom!) Voila, c'est ca - and so it is! Wouldn't we be pretty bored otherwise?:dontknow:

Edit: All summing up to... The speakers will sound somewhat different in any other room. Many factors make it so.:bigsmile:


----------



## NBPk402

Would splayed walls be a better choice for a HT/ Music room?


----------



## AudiocRaver

callas01 said:


> I see that you guys were able to bottom out the DM3/7s with the Star Tracks track, I love that CD and with my single 6.7" driver played with the volume up really loud as well, almost to the halfway point, I cannot get my Focus 160s to bottom out. The 160s sensitivity is only 87dbs, not sure how much of a difference 1 dbs will make, but I was just running them thru this test after reading your write up, i didnt have any issues.
> 
> Just thought it might make a difference to how you guys view the performance of the 3/7s.


It is a _great_ CD. I was so impressed with the quality of the recording compared to so many orchestral recordings by world-renown orchestras in famous performance halls. The humble Cincinnati Pops sounds way better to my ears - recording-wise especially, but their performance is nothing shabby, either - than a lot of what I have come across.

Thanks for the comparison to your Focals. It is so tough to make those comparisons totally apples-to-apples meaningful, but the data is always fun to hear. About the best we could do was report the approximate volume level we were listening at for that track. It did not seem like an unreasonable expectation on the DM 3/7's. And, as Sonnie has said, they were demo speakers that could have been through some abuse, so we reserve ultimate judgment for that reason.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ellisr63 said:


> Would splayed walls be a better choice for a HT/ Music room?


My understanding is that they reduce standing waves dramatically, weakening the tendency for them to form (good) and spreading the remaining effect across a band of frequencies (maybe good, maybe not). They don't go away completely, but are probably far easier to deal with than parallel walls.

An alternative, if getting into outlandish construction techniques, is to keep the walls parallel so the modes are very predictable, then allow for a large part of the wall area to accommodate deep traps tuned specifically to knock out those modes.

Either way, the overall room dimensions end up having to allow for a lot of treatment volume, rarely an affordable luxury for most home theater designs.


----------



## gorb

Woohoo, nice to see some of the measurements up 

Thanks very much for all the hard work and effort that yall have put in to this event...it's an interesting read


----------



## DougReim

Which Cincinnati Pops album are you referring to?
I don't have any classical music and I'd like to give it a try, especially one that is recorded well.
Thanks


----------



## callas01

AudiocRaver said:


> It is a _great_ CD. I was so impressed with the quality of the recording compared to so many orchestral recordings by world-renown orchestras in famous performance halls. The humble Cincinnati Pops sounds way better to my ears - recording-wise especially, but their performance is nothing shabby, either - than a lot of what I have come across.
> 
> Thanks for the comparison to your Focals. It is so tough to make those comparisons totally apples-to-apples meaningful, but the data is always fun to hear. About the best we could do was report the approximate volume level we were listening at for that track. It did not seem like an unreasonable expectation on the DM 3/7's. And, as Sonnie has said, they were demo speakers that could have been through some abuse, so we reserve ultimate judgment for that reason.


Just to clear up any confusion, you put Focals, but I have Dynaudio Focus 160s. The Focus line is 2 lines above the DMs you guys auditioned.

It's a fun cd to demo and show off your system.


----------



## Sonnie

Ahh... his focal point was not focused. 

It was his birthday yesterday and he may have stayed out too late last night. :whistling:


----------



## AudiocRaver

DougReim said:


> Which Cincinnati Pops album are you referring to?
> I don't have any classical music and I'd like to give it a try, especially one that is recorded well.
> Thanks


It is the _Time Warp_ album from 1984. Here is the Amazon link.



callas01 said:


> Just to clear up any confusion, you put Focals, but I have Dynaudio Focus 160s. The Focus line is 2 lines above the DMs you guys auditioned.
> 
> It's a fun cd to demo and show off your system.


Wow, beg pardon, I totally misread.:doh: That makes so much more sense. Thanks for clearing it up.

I have only been briefly introduced to Dynaudio bookshelf models, would love a chance to really get to know some like you have. I'll bet they are lots of fun. As much as we are enjoying evaluating tower speakers, I love the tight focus you can get from a really well-integrated smaller two-way system. I look forward to a future evaluation where we might get into bookshelves, and certainly hope it will include a Dynaudio model like the Focus or even the Contour or (dare I hope for it) the Confidence (probably way above any range we will work with, but one can wish).


----------



## DougReim

Thank you


----------



## chashint

You guys continue to do great work.
It's so nice to read about the speakers from a 'normal' person's perspective that's not trying to get compensation from either selling it or endorsing it.
Taking the time to setup each speaker and the group report really makes it more meaningful in my opinion.
Adding a couple of measurements is also very much appreciated.

Even though it has not been my experience to find speakers that hold their own against speakers that cost more than 2x y'all have done more with the $2k evaluation to peak my interest in the ARX speakers than the original shoot out did.
The comment about the ARX lacking in the beauty department caught my attention though. 
If y'all can weigh in on the astethitics a little more I would appreciate it.
Since I am most familiar with the vinyl finish on the Klipsch RF-62 how does the ARX compare to that?
How does the grill compare to the Klipsch?


----------



## english210

I am surprised by the optimal speaker placement being so far from the front walls. I expected they'd sound better pulled away from the walls than they would in the 'HT placement' positions, pushed back closer to the walls, but 6-7' is more than I'd expected. Just for grins, I may pull mine that far out just to see/hear what that does to my sound quality on my existing speakers.


----------



## roger1014

Too bad you didn't get to review the Martin Logan ESLs! :dontknow:Was interested in your evals on these speakers. Right now I have the ML Preface and now I got the bug to upgrade!!!


----------



## bkeeler10

I have been surprised by the distance to the wall behind as well. In my room, 7 feet is nearly half way from the front wall to the back and would put the speakers 3 feet away from the plane of my listening position! The best I could reasonably do would probably be about 4 feet.

I had also assumed previously that speakers that far from boundaries would not produce quite enough bass. It doesn't sound like they had a problem with that here, and RMAF experiences suggested otherwise as well. So there go a couple of preconceived notions! Of course the bass issue is somewhat room dependent.


----------



## ALMFamily

bkeeler10 said:


> I have been surprised by the distance to the wall behind as well. In my room, 7 feet is nearly half way from the front wall to the back and would put the speakers 3 feet away from the plane of my listening position! The best I could reasonably do would probably be about 4 feet.
> 
> I had also assumed previously that speakers that far from boundaries would not produce quite enough bass. It doesn't sound like they had a problem with that here, and RMAF experiences suggested otherwise as well. So there go a couple of preconceived notions! Of course the bass issue is somewhat room dependent.


Bryan, 

I wonder if that distance from the wall might also have been an extension of the size of Sonnie's room. I have not really sat down and played with my system from a two channel standpoint as I have been in full on construction mode, but I wonder if I could obtain that same feel of depth with mine only 4 feet from the front wall as well as I am pretty much in the same boat you are.

An experiment for a different day - hopefully soon!

Joe


----------



## Savjac

roger1014 said:


> Too bad you didn't get to review the Martin Logan ESLs! :dontknow:Was interested in your evals on these speakers. Right now I have the ML Preface and now I got the bug to upgrade!!!


Ask me what you need to know and maybe I can help, I dont think a review is proper as that will be done by the excellent staff here, but I can answer questions.
Having said that, with proper placement and driven with adequate electronics and in a not too large room, they are positively wonderful. No ands, ifs or buts. Not sure how they would fit in with many of the speakers in the test except the maggies which I have heard, but I cannot foresee anyone being disappointed, unless they are looking for bass that will stop your heart or head banging volume levels. IMO, they need a good sub for rock, large classical and movies, but alone they give you a broad spectrum of music that is good but not great on the bottom end and great on the upper mid range on where the stat takes over. They image tremendously although the sweet spot for more spot on imaging is more or less limited to one person, but less so that the maggies i think. Once you get them dialed in, and irrespective of what the Marin Logan website says, it takes a bit of experimentation, you can close your eyes and be transported to a place and time created by the music of your choice. 

They do well for movies but may be a bit limited with ginormous soundtracks or if someone wants to listen constantly at 105db in a 30' x 30' room. To be sure of what I am saying I went ahead and put in the disk that made me a believer in ML speakers, albeit very expensive ones, and it is called U571.
Swoosh on to chapter 13 and turn it up to where the very very quiet parts occur wherein the sub crew is hiding from the depth charges, between explosions of course, is about 55-58db and let it run.
For me it was astonishing that these Logans did not blow up with the dept charges, considering the 8" woofers and a stat panel, but noooo they held on an made me move about in the chair as things were going nuts. Also, there is a scene when the camera sits outside the sub wherein the charges are going of in the far distance, the depth of image to the left side of the soundstage is stunning as the charges get closer and closer, each charge is well placed on the stage and gets louder and louder but follows the placement of the charges within inches. I was amazed at how hard those things hit us in a room, I cannot even imagine experiencing:no: the charges for real under water in a tube. :surrender:


----------



## Sonnie

chashint said:


> It's so nice to read about the speakers from a 'normal' person's perspective that's not trying to get compensation from either selling it or endorsing it.


This is very true and thanks for pointing it out. Despite having some sponsors involved, we are telling it like we hear it. I believe everyone can tell we are not playing favorites to our sponsors just because they are sponsors. Granted, TAI is a sponsor and sells the Arx, but it was like pulling hind teeth to get him to even send them to us, and then we were all pretty much NOT expecting a whole lot from from them. They were a total surprise to us. If I were a spiteful person, I would probably have tried to figure out a way to put the A5's down, just because I was none to happy with Jon Lane and his reluctance to send us his speakers... especially with his company being a sponsor. If anything I would think a sponsor would go out of their way to make sure we got their speakers included in the evaluation. 

And even though it may not have been so good for HTD up front, it will end up helping them significantly in the long run, with our help in them discovering an issue they had with their tweeters. 




chashint said:


> The comment about the ARX lacking in the beauty department caught my attention though.
> If y'all can weigh in on the astethitics a little more I would appreciate it.
> Since I am most familiar with the vinyl finish on the Klipsch RF-62 how does the ARX compare to that?
> How does the grill compare to the Klipsch?


The Arx are vinyl/PVC laminate... a simulated wood ash with seams at all edges. The base plate is more like what I would want in the entire speaker... a smooth satin black finish. The Klipsch 62's are pretty much the same vinyl laminate. If you step up to the 7's, I think you get real wood... or wood laminate... but then that's a whole different price category too. It was quite ironic that both the Arx and the Klipsch came in with crushed corners due to shipping damage. You could clearly tell they had been dropped from the box corners. FedEx ultimately took care of both (FTR).

This will give you a good idea of the finish comparison:

  

Klipsch RF62-II on left... Arx A5 on right. If I had to choose a finish based on these finishes, I would rather have the A5 finish, simply because I like the finer pitting of the wood grain and it has solid sheets on the entire sides/back/front... not wrapped side panels. They look better to me, but the drawback is having more of the seam on the edges, which might be easier to delaminate/peel. You still have some of the Klipsch seam on the top edges, but not the front and back, but I also don't like that seam where the side panel meets the back panel on the Klipsch. That just looks cheap to me, like a cheap built speaker.

IIRC, the Klipsch grills are push in like the A5 grills. Nothing really snazzy about either one, but they will do.

Suffice it to say, I don't like either finish. If I had my druthers... I would choose the HTD or Tekton finishes we had in the $1,000 round... a smooth satin black. I don't even like the finish on my Prodigy's, which is more of a rough black finish that is hard to clean. For cleaning, the smooth is the easiest... and the wood grains are not all that bad either.

What I would prefer if it just has to be wood grain is real wood veneer... and finished like MartinLogan finished their Motion 12 with seamless rounded back corners and what appears to be almost seamless front corners. I also like the magnetic grills of the Motion 12... very nice... and the top grill is all metal... again, very nice.

Front and back corners of the Motion 12, respectively:

  




roger1014 said:


> Too bad you didn't get to review the Martin Logan ESLs! :dontknow:Was interested in your evals on these speakers. Right now I have the ML Preface and now I got the bug to upgrade!!!


They are being reviewed separately and it will be posted later. :T


----------



## Sonnie

english210 said:


> I am surprised by the optimal speaker placement being so far from the front walls. I expected they'd sound better pulled away from the walls than they would in the 'HT placement' positions, pushed back closer to the walls, but 6-7' is more than I'd expected. Just for grins, I may pull mine that far out just to see/hear what that does to my sound quality on my existing speakers.


Try pulling them out, but keep them narrow to begin with. Play a relatively short section of something that has excellent imaging that you can point out. Then begin moving them outward (toward the side walls) about 6" to 12" each time until that image starts to fall apart or gets confusing. Then move them back in to the previous spot where the image was its best, but the speakers are as far apart as possible. Experiment with toe-in... and at the same time on each toe, move your head forward and back while sitting in the PLP, so that you can determine where the best sound is... particularly depth acuity. You may have to experiment with the speaker distance from your front wall. You can move them closer to the front wall until you start to lose that depth, that is typically where you know you have hit that magic spot. Some speakers we have found have a larger area to work with than others, so YMMV.




bkeeler10 said:


> I have been surprised by the distance to the wall behind as well. In my room, 7 feet is nearly half way from the front wall to the back and would put the speakers 3 feet away from the plane of my listening position! The best I could reasonably do would probably be about 4 feet.


So your room is 14' deep and you sit about 10' back from the front wall. Try the 4' and see how it sounds... but you could also try 5' and 6', which would put you 5' and 4' distance to plane. The Arx are 8' out and 5' to plane of PLP, but we found that 12-18" back did not make a drastic difference... and would be difficult to differentiate between listening sessions.




bkeeler10 said:


> I had also assumed previously that speakers that far from boundaries would not produce quite enough bass. It doesn't sound like they had a problem with that here, and RMAF experiences suggested otherwise as well. So there go a couple of preconceived notions! Of course the bass issue is somewhat room dependent.


In _my room_, I have been finding that the bass is perhaps a bit too strong when nearer the front wall and gets more refined and tighter as the speakers moved out from the wall.


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> Try pulling them out, but keep them narrow to begin with. Play a relatively short section of something that has excellent imaging that you can point out. Then begin moving them outward (toward the side walls) about 6" to 12" each time until that image starts to fall apart or gets confusing. Then move them back in to the previous spot where the image was its best, but the speakers are as far apart as possible. Experiment with toe-in... and at the same time on each toe, move your head forward and back while sitting in the PLP, so that you can determine where the best sound is... particularly depth acuity. You may have to experiment with the speaker distance from your front wall. You can move them closer to the front wall until you start to lose that depth, that is typically where you know you have hit that magic spot. Some speakers we have found have a larger area to work with than others, so YMMV.


Sonnie, great tips for setting up speakers! This post should be stickied for the many people (myself including) that struggle with proper placement and figuring out proper setup in their own rooms!

Scott


----------



## chashint

Thanks for the extended reply regarding finishes.


----------



## Mike0206

Good info on speaker placement Sonnie! I may have to fiddle with my setup a bit. My speakers are 18" from front wall and 11' apart and 10'6" from PLP. I would like to pull them out further but kind of hard when it's not a dedicated space for HT/music. Great room dilemmas!!!!!


----------



## Sonnie

skeeter99 said:


> Sonnie, great tips for setting up speakers! This post should be stickied for the many people (myself including) that struggle with proper placement and figuring out proper setup in their own rooms!


Maybe we can start a separate thread and get varying opinions, as I am sure my suggestion is only one of many that can be tried.




chashint said:


> Thanks for the extended reply regarding finishes.


:T




Mike0206 said:


> Good info on speaker placement Sonnie! I may have to fiddle with my setup a bit. My speakers are 18" from front wall and 11' apart and 10'6" from PLP. I would like to pull them out further but kind of hard when it's not a dedicated space for HT/music. Great room dilemmas!!!!!


But when you are critical listening, you are probably by yourself, right? That way you are relaxed with no interruptions, yet focused and really getting into the music. Can't you pull them out for those times? That is providing you find a better placement with them pulled out, which I suspect you can. Put them back during normal hours. 

If you are casual listening, then it really does not make a WHOLE LOT of difference what speakers you have does it? During casual listening you are not enjoying them near like you would if you are sitting down and really wanting to enjoy some seriously good sound. It seems logical that if we are going to buy speakers because they SOUND better, then we should be striving to enjoy them where they sound their best, otherwise, why do we buy them... ESPECIALLY if they cost considerable money, like over $500. 

If we can't place our speakers where were are going to get the most out of them for what we spend... which is (I hope) the primary reason we spend more on the speakers, then why not just get a pair of Infinity Primus speakers for a couple hundred... maybe three-four hundred (depending on the model), that have really good off axis dispersion, and just go with those. They will make about as good of a background noise as $2,500 speakers, possibly better, and cost only a fraction thereof.


----------



## Mike0206

Sonnie said:


> But when you are critical listening, you are probably by yourself, right? That way you are relaxed with no interruptions, yet focused and really getting into the music. Can't you pull them out for those times? That is providing you find a better placement with them pulled out, which I suspect you can. Put them back during normal hours.


 For sure and I have played with them a bit but since they are powered and they connect inside a 2 ft cubby the furthest I can pull them is 2'6" away from front wall. The cords are 5' but having the cubbies a little over 2 ft deep limits my distance away from wall. That being said if it makes a big enough difference I may just reroute the electrical to the front wall and below or to the side of the cubbies especially since I may be enclosing the cubbies and putting sealed 18" subs in them. Doing this would also give me more flexibility with distance apart from each other as well.


Sonnie said:


> It seems logical that if we are going to buy speakers because they SOUND better, then we should be striving to enjoy them where they sound their best, otherwise, why do we buy them... ESPECIALLY if they cost considerable money, like over $500. If we can't place our speakers where were are going to get the most out of them for what we spend... which is (I hope) the primary reason we spend more on the speakers, then why not just get a pair of Infinity Primus speakers for a couple hundred... maybe three-four hundred (depending on the model), that have really good off axis dispersion, and just go with those. They will make about as good of a background noise as $2,500 speakers, possibly better, and cost only a fraction thereof.


 I hear what your saying and agree to an extent because we always have to make certain compromises no matter what. Not all of us can have a dedicated two channel room or a dedicated home theater. Because of that we have to make certain choices and the speakers we choose may not sound their absolute best but they will sound as good as they can in our room. You yourself have had to make certain compromises on evaluating all these speakers because of the characteristics of your room. For example the stage presents some problems in your room as Wayne has eluded to in the past. Perhaps without the stage there you guys would not have to pull the speakers out so far away from the wall? I don't know if that's the case or not but everyone's room is going to make a speaker sound a little bit different cause no two rooms are exactly a like. That's why you introduce EQ at that point to "equalize" the playing field but even then every room is different. You shouldn't need EQ if your placement is perfect right? However Certain things will not be fixed with speaker placement and eq and room treatments. You can't do a lot with a rooms shape and dimensions once it's already built. That can be a big factor in how the room sounds. That's what most of us contend with. Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you are saying but it seems to me you are saying the only way a speaker will sound its best is to have a room designed around that speaker. If we can't then we should all get infinity primus speakers? Is that what your eluding to? Or am I reading into it too much lol.


----------



## fokakis1

When you guys say 'distance from front wall,' I assume you are measuring from the baffle and not the back of the speaker. Is this correct?


----------



## Sonnie

Mike0206 said:


> Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you are saying but it seems to me you are saying the only way a speaker will sound its best is to have a room designed around that speaker. If we can't then we should all get infinity primus speakers? Is that what your eluding to? Or am I reading into it too much lol.


Oh no... not saying the room should be built around the speakers. My latter reference was more about "how are you listening". The allusion to the Primus speakers was that if we are not able to get the best we can (with the room we have) out of the speakers we are going to buy, why spend the extra money on them. 

There are probably several questions I am going to ask myself when buying speakers... How am I going to listen to the speakers? Is this for two-channel music and am I going to be able to listen without interruption... or are they just going to be every day speakers where I am not really going to be able to ever sit down and get good listening time. I personally cannot do that with a house full of folks, and neither will my wife let me do it with her in the room. So... will there be times where I can seriously enjoy the speakers... or are they just going to be background noise makers? Do I have any flexibility that will enable me to try various placements with the speakers to see if I can get the "best sound" from them? After all... if I am going to spend any significant money, don't I want to enjoy them in their best location? Let's suppose I decide I want to do some serious listening and I am able to try various placements and I am willing to spend $2,500. I get a pair of $2,500 speakers in my home and in my room for let's say a 30 day evaluation, I am going to try them in various locations to see where they sound there best. Let's suppose their best sound came from the speakers being placed 5 feet from the wall. When I placed them 2 feet from the wall they sounded okay, but not their best. Am I going to be happy with not hearing them in their best location with their best sound? For me... (catch that now... I said for me)... it does not make sense to spend big money on speakers if I am not going to be able to get the most I can out of them in my given situation... with things I CAN do something about, especially something as simple as moving them out into the room so I get their best sound.



fokakis1 said:


> When you guys say 'distance from front wall,' I assume you are measuring from the baffle and not the back of the speaker. Is this correct?


Yes... center of front baffle.


----------



## Mike0206

Sonnie said:


> Oh no... not saying the room should be built around the speakers. My latter reference was more about "how are you listening". The allusion to the Primus speakers was that if we are not able to get the best we can (with the room we have) out of the speakers we are going to buy, why spend the extra money on them. There are probably several questions I am going to ask myself when buying speakers... How am I going to listen to the speakers? Is this for two-channel music and am I going to be able to listen without interruption... or are they just going to be every day speakers where I am not really going to be able to ever sit down and get good listening time. I personally cannot do that with a house full of folks, and neither will my wife let me do it with her in the room. So... will there be times where I can seriously enjoy the speakers... or are they just going to be background noise makers? Do I have any flexibility that will enable me to try various placements with the speakers to see if I can get the "best sound" from them? After all... if I am going to spend any significant money, don't I want to enjoy them in their best location? Let's suppose I decide I want to do some serious listening and I am able to try various placements and I am willing to spend $2,500. I get a pair of $2,500 speakers in my home and in my room for let's say a 30 day evaluation, I am going to try them in various locations to see where they sound there best. Let's suppose their best sound came from the speakers being placed 5 feet from the wall. When I placed them 2 feet from the wall they sounded okay, but not their best. Am I going to be happy with not hearing them in their best location with their best sound? For me... (catch that now... I said for me)... it does not make sense to spend big money on speakers if I am not going to be able to get the most I can out of them in my given situation... with things I CAN do something about, especially something as simple as moving them out into the room so I get their best sound. Yes... center of front baffle.


 gotcha! Makes perfect sense and now I agree completely with you. I do get quite a bit of good listening time by myself. I do scrutinize and try to get the best out if my speakers. From the front baffle my speakers sit almost 3 ft from front wall. My measurements are from the back of the speaker. Measuring from the front I could get them close to 5' from the front wall which would sit right up against my area rug. It's a little over 4'6" to be exact


----------



## rhale64

Sonnie I believe this is my first post on the Shack. I have been reading but not replying. 
I love what you folks are doing with this speaker evaluation. I wish more people would do this with other products. You people are having fun and doing it. And that is what it is all about. 
I have a question on your speaker dimensions also. When you say distance to side wall are you also referring to center of baffle to side wall? Or outside of cabinet? I would think outside of cabinet but we know about assumptions. 
Well thanks for listening and keep up the good exhausting work.


----------



## Sonnie

Mike0206 said:


> gotcha! Makes perfect sense and now I agree completely with you. I do get quite a bit of good listening time by myself. I do scrutinize and try to get the best out if my speakers. From the front baffle my speakers sit almost 3 ft from front wall. My measurements are from the back of the speaker. Measuring from the front I could get them close to 5' from the front wall which would sit right up against my area rug. It's a little over 4'6" to be exact


Glad it made more sense... I was about confused on what I was trying to say. I may have been trying to make it more complicated that it should be.

You might just try them farther out and experiment with the toe-in. You _should_ get more depth. Once you get them pulled out, maybe you could try moving yourself in closer just as a test, but try to keep your head at the same listening level. Wayne does this really well... looks like a rooster struttin' around. :gulp:




rhale64 said:


> Sonnie I believe this is my first post on the Shack. I have been reading but not replying.
> I love what you folks are doing with this speaker evaluation. I wish more people would do this with other products. You people are having fun and doing it. And that is what it is all about.
> I have a question on your speaker dimensions also. When you say distance to side wall are you also referring to center of baffle to side wall? Or outside of cabinet? I would think outside of cabinet but we know about assumptions.
> Well thanks for listening and keep up the good exhausting work.


Welcome to the Shack and thanks for the compliments. (Thanks to everyone who had been complimentary - I probably do not say that enough.)

All measurements are to the center of the speaker baffle... usually tweeter or midrange.


----------



## Mike0206

Sonnie said:


> Glad it made more sense... I was about confused on what I was trying to say. I may have been trying to make it more complicated that it should be. You might just try them farther out and experiment with the toe-in. You should get more depth. Once you get them pulled out, maybe you could try moving yourself in closer just as a test, but try to keep your head at the same listening level. Wayne does this really well... looks like a rooster struttin' around. :gulp:.


 lol the visual of Wayne strutting like a rooster is classic! I have a tendency to confuse myself with what people say so glad we got it figured out though. I will definitely place the speakers farther out to see how that works. I think I have the toe in set good. But it'll change depending on where the speakers get moved to next


----------



## rhale64

Ok thank you for the reply. And again keep up your great work.


----------



## SteveCallas

Sonnie said:


> All measurements are to the center of the speaker baffle... usually tweeter or midrange.


That seems much more reasonable now - I was thinking you guys were going a bit bonkers  Mine are at 42", and I could see about another foot improving the sound if it were a dedicated 2 channel setup.


Question - I realize only two speakers have been posted, but why does there seem to be such a dramatic top end rolloff on these as compared to the $1k round? Coincidence based on the speakers or measuring equipment, or were you guys finding the best soundstage/imaging was achieved without the tweeter toed in to be aimed right at the central seating position? Both of these are showing around a 20db drop from 4khz to 20khz.


----------



## asere

Wow 72 pages and counting. That's awesome!!


----------



## Sonnie

SteveCallas said:


> Question - I realize only two speakers have been posted, but why does there seem to be such a dramatic top end rolloff on these as compared to the $1k round? Coincidence based on the speakers or measuring equipment, or were you guys finding the best soundstage/imaging was achieved without the tweeter toed in to be aimed right at the central seating position? Both of these are showing around a 20db drop from 4khz to 20khz.


Same identical measuring equipment. 

I did not make any particular notes on the steep rolloff... my hearing is not that good above 10kHz anyway, so I doubt I would notice it... especially on out there at 16-18kHz.

I am thinking the angle of the EP's along with keeping them slightly off-axis to keep them from being too bright was the cause of their drop off. I suspect all the others were merely where they needed to be for the best imaging and soundstage. 

Wayne can probably address this better than I can.

The other three are not similar, which you will see when posted. The SVS are fairly flat from 2kHz to 20kHz with no drop off at all. The Maggies have a small dip from 12kHz to 18kHz, but then jump back up and are otherwise flat from 2kHz to 20kHz. The Paradigms drop off at 13kHz about 10dB to 20kHz.


----------



## AudiocRaver

roger1014 said:


> Too bad you didn't get to review the Martin Logan ESLs! :dontknow:Was interested in your evals on these speakers. Right now I have the ML Preface and now I got the bug to upgrade!!!


A fresh and well-matched pair of Martin Logan ESL's is supposed to be coming to my place in about a week. I have two rooms to evaluate them in, a 12 x 20 living room area with carpeting and a high ceiling and a full wall of books on shelves occupying most of one of the long walls (no kidding, floor to ceiling) and a kinda-large-kinda-chopped-up finished basement area with carpeting and a low dropped acoustical tile ceiling. Neither has any special treatment, but the RT60 times on both are quite low and I can get good sound in both of them with fair placement and seating flexibility. Neither room is near as nice as Sonnie's, but neither presents any significant limitations, either. Weather permitting, they will have a trip to the back yard for detailed measurements. Of course they will be tested for frequency response, distortion, and tight matching as soon as they are out of their cartons. They will be driven by a Crown Xs-500 power amp, rated at 400/500/750 W/channel into 8/4/2 Ohms.

There will be a full review on the ESL's, covering the parameters of our "event" evaluations as well as can be done given the different rooms, and covering other placement options. It will be done as quickly possible once I have gotten to know them well. Once the review is posted I will need to hang on to them awhile to be sure I have not missed anything that needs to be followed up on. This critical and often-overlooked phase of the review could well take years, but I am committed to being as thorough as possible for HTS and our readers.:heehee:



bkeeler10 said:


> I have been surprised by the distance to the wall behind as well. In my room, 7 feet is nearly half way from the front wall to the back and would put the speakers 3 feet away from the plane of my listening position! The best I could reasonably do would probably be about 4 feet.


You might try a little closer to the LP than half-way between the LP and the wall. That has worked well for me in smaller rooms. It seems to allow for good sound field development all around the speakers without crowding the LP. I do a lot of near-field listening, so closeness to the LP is never an issue for me, but not everyone cares for near-field.



> I had also assumed previously that speakers that far from boundaries would not produce quite enough bass. It doesn't sound like they had a problem with that here, and RMAF experiences suggested otherwise as well. So there go a couple of preconceived notions! Of course the bass issue is somewhat room dependent.


Generally, bass is accentuated by closeness to walls and is flatter, closer to spec, away from the walls, although there are lots of other variables to complicate that generalization. Speakers with a rear port need at least a few feet so they do not get too boomy and muddy.

The Martin Logan ESL's have a _bottom_ port. Intriguing, should allow for plenty of placement flexibility.



Savjac said:


> Ask me what you need to know and maybe I can help, I dont think a review is proper as that will be done by the excellent staff here, but I can answer questions.
> Having said that, with proper placement and driven with adequate electronics and in a not too large room, they are positively wonderful. No ands, ifs or buts. Not sure how they would fit in with many of the speakers in the test except the maggies which I have heard, but I cannot foresee anyone being disappointed, unless they are looking for bass that will stop your heart or head banging volume levels. IMO, they need a good sub for rock, large classical and movies, but alone they give you a broad spectrum of music that is good but not great on the bottom end and great on the upper mid range on where the stat takes over. They image tremendously although the sweet spot for more spot on imaging is more or less limited to one person, but less so that the maggies i think. Once you get them dialed in, and irrespective of what the Marin Logan website says, it takes a bit of experimentation, you can close your eyes and be transported to a place and time created by the music of your choice.
> 
> They do well for movies but may be a bit limited with ginormous soundtracks or if someone wants to listen constantly at 105db in a 30' x 30' room. To be sure of what I am saying I went ahead and put in the disk that made me a believer in ML speakers, albeit very expensive ones, and it is called U571.
> Swoosh on to chapter 13 and turn it up to where the very very quiet parts occur wherein the sub crew is hiding from the depth charges, between explosions of course, is about 55-58db and let it run.
> For me it was astonishing that these Logans did not blow up with the dept charges, considering the 8" woofers and a stat panel, but noooo they held on an made me move about in the chair as things were going nuts. Also, there is a scene when the camera sits outside the sub wherein the charges are going of in the far distance, the depth of image to the left side of the soundstage is stunning as the charges get closer and closer, each charge is well placed on the stage and gets louder and louder but follows the placement of the charges within inches. I was amazed at how hard those things hit us in a room, I cannot even imagine experiencing:no: the charges for real under water in a tube. :surrender:


Your input is well appreciated. And U571 is on order - sounds like a fun evaluation disk to have around and compare with your experience.



Sonnie said:


> Try pulling them out, but keep them narrow to begin with. Play a relatively short section of something that has excellent imaging that you can point out. Then begin moving them outward (toward the side walls) about 6" to 12" each time until that image starts to fall apart or gets confusing. Then move them back in to the previous spot where the image was its best, but the speakers are as far apart as possible. Experiment with toe-in... and at the same time on each toe, move your head forward and back while sitting in the PLP, so that you can determine where the best sound is... particularly depth acuity. You may have to experiment with the speaker distance from your front wall. You can move them closer to the front wall until you start to lose that depth, that is typically where you know you have hit that magic spot. Some speakers we have found have a larger area to work with than others, so YMMV.
> 
> So your room is 14' deep and you sit about 10' back from the front wall. Try the 4' and see how it sounds... but you could also try 5' and 6', which would put you 5' and 4' distance to plane. The Arx are 8' out and 5' to plane of PLP, but we found that 12-18" back did not make a drastic difference... and would be difficult to differentiate between listening sessions.
> 
> In _my room_, I have been finding that the bass is perhaps a bit too strong when nearer the front wall and gets more refined and tighter as the speakers moved out from the wall.


Sonnie is a master at summarizing these things. I have been working on a somewhat different approach, not negating a word of Sonnie's process, just throwing out an alternative. It will be based on and include data summarized from our two evaluation events plus other successful speaker setups I experience, sort of a setup database to be added to and refined over time. It will be posted in the 2-channel area and referenced in this thread.



Sonnie said:


> Glad it made more sense... I was about confused on what I was trying to say. I may have been trying to make it more complicated that it should be.
> 
> You might just try them farther out and experiment with the toe-in. You _should_ get more depth. Once you get them pulled out, maybe you could try moving yourself in closer just as a test, but try to keep your head at the same listening level. Wayne does this really well... looks like a rooster struttin' around. :gulp:


It is not pretty. It has not been, nor will it ever be, filmed or photographed.



SteveCallas said:


> Question - I realize only two speakers have been posted, but why does there seem to be such a dramatic top end rolloff on these as compared to the $1k round? Coincidence based on the speakers or measuring equipment, or were you guys finding the best soundstage/imaging was achieved without the tweeter toed in to be aimed right at the central seating position? Both of these are showing around a 20db drop from 4khz to 20khz.





Sonnie said:


> Same identical measuring equipment.
> 
> I did not make any particular notes on the steep rolloff... my hearing is not that good above 10kHz anyway, so I doubt I would notice it... especially on out there at 16-18kHz.
> 
> I am thinking the angle of the EP's along with keeping them slightly off-axis to keep them from being too bright was the cause of their drop off. I suspect all the others were merely where they needed to be for the best imaging and soundstage.
> 
> Wayne can probably address this better than I can.
> 
> The other three are not similar, which you will see when posted. The SVS are fairly flat from 2kHz to 20kHz with no drop off at all. The Maggies have a small dip from 12kHz to 18kHz, but then jump back up and are otherwise flat from 2kHz to 20kHz. The Paradigms drop off at 13kHz about 10dB to 20kHz.


Yeah, our nutty obsession with the deep soundstage led to some toe-in angles that might have sacrificed some high treble here and there. It was a little noticeable with the CS2P's, not at all with the DM 3/7's which were still within spec out to 10 khz. You will see that the other 3 models handled it better, hardly noticeable on the plots, and the SVS high end just went on forever. If we could hear a drop in the high end, we made adjustments. But that also ended up being one of the areas for potential MINOR compromise if needed.


----------



## K1LL3M

AudiocRaver said:


> It is not pretty. It has not been, nor will it ever be, filmed or photographed.


Chicken! 

Sorry couldn't resist a poultry pun. 

Anyway, I am sure you understand eggsactly what I am saying and wouldn't take offense, though I would of made some refference to a cock but didnt want to use any foul language. 

Sorry. Getting back in the coop now. You guys are doing an amazing job and I am plucking all this info from your reviews.


----------



## AudiocRaver

bkeeler10 said:


> I have been surprised by the distance to the wall behind as well. In my room, 7 feet is nearly half way from the front wall to the back and would put the speakers 3 feet away from the plane of my listening position! The best I could reasonably do would probably be about 4 feet.


My previous response kinda missed the mark.

Of course real-world constraints limit where we can place our speakers. In compiling the placement data from our listening events, it appears that the distance _ratio_ is the thing to shoot for rather than the absolute distance from the wall. Meaning the ratio of LP-from-the-wall over speaker-from-the-wall, the _average _ideal from our experience being about 1.8:1. So for your room, if I interpret correctly, the LP is about 10 ft from front wall, and ideal speaker location might be (if our logic holds true) about 5-1/2 feet out from the wall. Your limitation at 4 feet might give good results with wide enough spacing.


----------



## AudiocRaver

K1LL3M said:


> Chicken!
> 
> Sorry couldn't resist a poultry pun.
> 
> Anyway, I am sure you understand eggsactly what I am saying and wouldn't take offense, though I would of made some refference to a cock but didnt want to use any foul language.
> 
> Sorry. Getting back in the coop now. You guys are doing an amazing job and I am plucking all this info from your reviews.


Zowie, my pun-o-meter just exploded.:hsd:


----------



## SteveCallas

AudiocRaver said:


> Yeah, our nutty obsession with the deep soundstage led to some toe-in angles that might have sacrificed some high treble here and there. It was a little noticeable with the CS2P's, not at all with the DM 3/7's which were still within spec out to 10 khz. You will see that the other 3 models handled it better, hardly noticeable on the plots, and the SVS high end just went on forever. If we could hear a drop in the high end, we made adjustments. But that also ended up being one of the areas for potential MINOR compromise if needed.





Sonnie said:


> The other three are not similar, which you will see when posted. The SVS are fairly flat from 2kHz to 20kHz with no drop off at all. The Maggies have a small dip from 12kHz to 18kHz, but then jump back up and are otherwise flat from 2kHz to 20kHz. The Paradigms drop off at 13kHz about 10dB to 20kHz.


Did you guys notice these differences regarding top end detail and clarity in your listening - not the small dips or peaks, but something like the SVS being flat whereas the Dyns and Emeralds just completely roll off? Seems strange because the reviews I've read of the SVS tend to describe them as more laid back, warm even. The Dyns and Emeralds would be well beyond laid back....more like vegetative.


----------



## Sonnie

I can confirm that the SVS speakers in my room were anything but laid back. As a matter of fact, when I got them in (they were the first ones here the first week of October... couple of weeks early) and set them up for break-in, I was nervous because I could not get the brightness out of them, regardless of position or toe. I was using the Rogue Cronus Magnum, then switched to the Denon 4520 to see if it made a difference, and it did not. I did not hear this with these when I was at CAF. Then when I got to RMAF, again I did not notice them being bright, although not laid back either. I did not say anything to anyone at SVS at that time, as I wanted to get back and do some more listening after they were broke-in.

When I got back, I had more speakers here, the Anthem amp was here... and before I knew it, I had it hooked up, the Rogue packed up and several more speakers in the room playing. I just never thought much more about the SVS being bright... until we brought them into the room. Then I got worried again. Low and behold... they were not bright... at least nothing like they were when I first connected them. I can only assume the break-in toned them down a bit... and/or the Anthem helped soften them up a bit (?)... I am not really sure. Strangely enough, they were farther away from the listener and had more toe-in than any other speaker, minus the Maggies. I seriously cannot contribute the change in what I was hearing to any one thing. To me, they were NOT bright, but NOT laid back by any means. I can not answer for the other guys, they might have thought they were bright or laid back... we did not compare notes and I do not remember anyone saying anything about them being either or.

As far as the Dynaudio's... they sounded great to me... just right, but perhaps maybe a little more laid back than the SVS. Definitely not vegetative. The drop off with them doesn't really take any major hit until you get above 10kHz, and I am not sure how much information we are really missing up there.

I also do not remember it effecting the EP's or causing them to sound too soft, although you would think it would because it really starts falling off above 6kHz with those.


----------



## english210

Sonnie said:


> Try pulling them out, but keep them narrow to begin with. Play a relatively short section of something that has excellent imaging that you can point out. Then begin moving them outward (toward the side walls) about 6" to 12" each time until that image starts to fall apart or gets confusing. Then move them back in to the previous spot where the image was its best, but the speakers are as far apart as possible. Experiment with toe-in... and at the same time on each toe, move your head forward and back while sitting in the PLP, so that you can determine where the best sound is... particularly depth acuity. You may have to experiment with the speaker distance from your front wall. You can move them closer to the front wall until you start to lose that depth, that is typically where you know you have hit that magic spot. Some speakers we have found have a larger area to work with than others, so YMMV.
> 
> 
> 
> So your room is 14' deep and you sit about 10' back from the front wall. Try the 4' and see how it sounds... but you could also try 5' and 6', which would put you 5' and 4' distance to plane. The Arx are 8' out and 5' to plane of PLP, but we found that 12-18" back did not make a drastic difference... and would be difficult to differentiate between listening sessions.
> 
> 
> 
> In _my room_, I have been finding that the bass is perhaps a bit too strong when nearer the front wall and gets more refined and tighter as the speakers moved out from the wall.



Sonnie, thank you for the directions!! That's always a big hurdle in making changes - knowing where to start, so thanks a lot for the guidelines!! :clap:


----------



## chashint

Sonnie said:


> ?..
> Low and behold... they were not bright... at least nothing like they were when I first connected them. I can only assume the break-in toned them down a bit... and/or the Anthem helped soften them up a bit (?)...


If I recall correctly there was some chat about trying different amp/AVRs ???
Did y'all have time to try this?
Just seems like it's improbable for a solid state amplifier to tone down a speaker when every electrical parameter of any commercial amplifier is orders of magnitude better than any speakers electrical parameters.
It certainly would be interesting to see what your group has to say about an amp/AVR listening session.


----------



## english210

AudiocRaver said:


> My previous response kinda missed the mark.
> 
> Of course real-world constraints limit where we can place our speakers. In compiling the placement data from our listening events, it appears that the distance _ratio_ is the thing to shoot for rather than the absolute distance from the wall. Meaning the ratio of LP-from-the-wall over speaker-from-the-wall, the _average _ideal from our experience being about 1.8:1. So for your room, if I interpret correctly, the LP is about 10 ft from front wall, and ideal speaker location might be (if our logic holds true) about 5-1/2 feet out from the wall. Your limitation at 4 feet might give good results with wide enough spacing.



Ah, ok, I'll play with that formula too. My room is 19' deep, LP is about 16' from the wall. I'll do the math after another cup of coffee


----------



## Sonnie

chashint said:


> If I recall correctly there was some chat about trying different amp/AVRs ???
> Did y'all have time to try this?
> Just seems like it's improbable for a solid state amplifier to tone down a speaker when every electrical parameter of any commercial amplifier is orders of magnitude better than any speakers electrical parameters.
> It certainly would be interesting to see what your group has to say about an amp/AVR listening session.


Unfortunately no... we did not have time. That is pretty much going to have to be something we do on its own, as it is very time consuming to do it right. We also need someone that is not bias, as I think we are all in the relatively alike camp in that we have doubts we can hear a difference between amps (with some qualifiers of course - all better discussed elsewhere of course).

I seriously have no answer for the differences in what I heard. There is no doubt they were indeed bright and I even privately made a statement about it to Tonto (he can confirm). They were so bright that I could not continue to listen to them for any length of time with any volume on them. After hearing them at CAF, I was scratching my head trying to figure out how my room, which no doubt quieter with less reflections than those rooms at CAF, could cause the speaker to be so bright. I have never really been a big believer in speaker break-in, but I want to respect the manufacturers recommendations and thus do as they recommend. I generally want to give every speaker the same break-in time (150-200 hours) so that no one cries foul, if you know what I mean. So my next thought was break-in. Maybe speakers really do need break-in and perhaps they will mellow out with time, yet this was pretty drastic. So drastic that I would have boxed them back up and sent them back to SVS if they had been speakers I had ordered for myself. The only other speakers I have ever had that sounded that bright were the Boston Acoustics (older models) and the JBL Northridge series. Those were the worst speakers I have ever heard ... they literally hurt my ears. 

Ultimately, there are only two things that changed that I can think of... break-in time and the amplifier. I did try them within an few inches of the final placement we found for them, but they sounded completely different. Okay... now it just hit me... there was one more thing, and it could have made a difference I suppose, I placed very large and soft plush blankets, folded several times, over the tops of the three leather reclining seats on the front row to try to help knock down the minor reflections we were getting off of the seat backs. I did not get those until right before the event. It is hard to imagine them making that much difference in one set of speakers though. Anyway... I am puzzled, short of accepting it was due to speaker break-in.


----------



## phreak

I hate to take this thread even further away from its original intent, but this is a great discussion of 2ch speaker positioning. It was mentioned earlier in the thread that ideal 2ch is difficult to incorporate in most HTs, but how about the reverse? If I set the speakers in the best location for 2ch listening, set the Center between them on arc to maintain distance to MLP, and drop an AT screen in front. This could leave space to walk around the sides of the screen and have a mostly hidden area for media storage, sound treatments that would not need visual appeal, and in my case wide open access to the home electrical panel which would otherwise be awkward in the front right corner. Any thoughts?


----------



## Sonnie

I think there are those that do exactly what you are suggestion... and there is really no reason it could not work.

I think Wayne plans to start a thread as soon as we get done with the eval write-ups. Or perhaps if it is not too terribly long, he might get to it between write-ups. Hopefully we can get a lot more discussion on speaker placement, as it seems to almost be a _semi_-mystery from what I can tell.


----------



## rab-byte

I'm a diehard Martin Logan fan boy and I have no regrets about it. The nature if ESL and ribbon drivers lends itself to a sharper sound. The incorporation of a woofer gives respectable low end though not as dynamic as some other design or a subwoofer. Since there is only an ESL and a woofer the Logan's are actually a two-way speaker. This reduces the influence of a crossover on the sound quality of the speakers and since the woofer is only handling lower frequencies we don't hear a crossovers affects on the audible frequencies that language resides in... unless you're listening to Barry White. 

The trick with any di-pole speaker, really any speaker at all, is placement. You'll get the best sound if the speakers are properly toed in and are at least 2' away from walls. There's a "flashlight" trick to get the speakers set up in the ideal location. Listener is about 1.5x back from the speakers as they are apart from each other. IE. speakers are 10' apart and listener is 15' back. A flashlight is used to toe in the speakers. When you shine a light at the ESL panel it will reflect as a stripe running top to bottom in the grill. You simply toe in the speaker till the reflection is about 1/3 of the way out from the inside edge of the grill.

Another nice aspect of ribbons and ESL designs is that they are nearly impossible to blow, sure the sound can clip and the stator can slap against the housing, but it won't blow.


----------



## phreak

AudiocRaver said:


> In compiling the placement data from our listening events, it appears that the distance ratio is the thing to shoot for rather than the absolute distance from the wall. Meaning the ratio of LP-from-the-wall over speaker-from-the-wall, the average ideal from our experience being about 1.8:1. S


That is a great tip. Is there a similar rule of thumb for width?


----------



## phreak

rab-byte said:


> Listener is about 1.5x back from the speakers as they are apart from each other. IE. speakers are 10' apart and listener is 15' back. A flashlight is used to toe in the speakers. When you shine a light at the ESL panel it will reflect as a stripe running top to bottom in the grill.


Does this geometry work well for box speakers? Is it dependant on where listeners and speakers are relative to walls? Is this toe in guide specific to ESL with a specific panel curvature?


----------



## rab-byte

phreak said:


> Does this geometry work well for box speakers? Is it dependant on where listeners and speakers are relative to walls? Is this toe in guide specific to ESL with a specific panel curvature?


Yes the flashlight trick works because the speakers have a 30 degree curve. 

That golden ratio for speaker placement is fairly universal but some are better with an equilateral triangle, and your room will ultimately determine proper placement.


----------



## ALMFamily

rab-byte said:


> Yes the flashlight trick works because the speakers have a 30 degree curve.
> 
> That golden ratio for speaker placement is fairly universal but some are better with an equilateral triangle, and your room will ultimately determine proper placement.


It must, because when we were setting up the Cat 8s for two channel, Mark was using his pocket pen light to determine how he wanted them toe'd in...


----------



## Sonnie

rab-byte said:


> The trick with any di-pole speaker, really any speaker at all, is placement. You'll get the best sound if the speakers are properly toed in and are at least 2' away from walls. There's a "flashlight" trick to get the speakers set up in the ideal location. Listener is about 1.5x back from the speakers as they are apart from each other. IE. speakers are 10' apart and listener is 15' back. A flashlight is used to toe in the speakers. When you shine a light at the ESL panel it will reflect as a stripe running top to bottom in the grill. You simply toe in the speaker till the reflection is about 1/3 of the way out from the inside edge of the grill.


I was using the flashlight trick until I got a laser, now I am spoiled, as I can get it dead on... and even a few degrees different toe can make a slight difference between each speakers response. I start with the flashlight trick to get them fairly close, but then I place the laser on the side of the speaker and aim it back at the listening position and at the back wall just above the listening position, with all things being symmetrical, I can get them deal equal on toe-in. 

As for the 2' from the wall... 1.5x back from the speakers as they are apart from the listener... say 7' between speakers and 10.5' to listener... TERRIBLE! Ascent i's, Ascents, Spires, Prodigy's... and I am sure soon to be Montis... DO NOT like this ratio. The imaging is less defined... soundstage too narrow and no depth acuity at all (okay... maybe a smidgen). I can get them to do fairly well (although not what I like) with an equilateral triangle, but they have to be out from the wall at least 4-5'. In all cases I am getting much better imaging, a nice wide soundstage and excellent depth when the speakers are a little wider apart than they are to the listener... the depth improves tremendously. I can move them back to the wall and keep that same ratio and the image and soundstage sounds pretty good, but I start to lose depth. And we have found this to be the case with every speaker we have evaluated. Maybe it is my room... or my primary listening position being fixed, although it is 13.5' from the front wall to my ears and 10' from the wall behind me. :huh:


----------



## shinksma

phreak said:


> I hate to take this thread even further away from its original intent, but this is a great discussion of 2ch speaker positioning. It was mentioned earlier in the thread that ideal 2ch is difficult to incorporate in most HTs, but how about the reverse? If I set the speakers in the best location for 2ch listening, set the Center between them on arc to maintain distance to MLP, and drop an AT screen in front. This could leave space to walk around the sides of the screen and have a mostly hidden area for media storage, sound treatments that would not need visual appeal, and in my case wide open access to the home electrical panel which would otherwise be awkward in the front right corner. Any thoughts?


The only issue I see with what you've suggested is if the "hidden area" behind the screen gets so filled up with media storage, etc, that you have negated the benefit of the original spacing from the front wall. It would really depend on how far apart the main speakers were situated, and how much of the space between/beyond them that you filled with the other stuff. I think as long as it was not too dense it would maintain the original benefits of spacing.

Just a couple thoughts...I dunno, and I can't try it - my HT room is too crowded with stuff to have speakers any useful distance into the room. Fortunately (?) my ancient mains are not ported, so they perform OK in the corners.

shinksma


----------



## AudiocRaver

SteveCallas said:


> Did you guys notice these differences regarding top end detail and clarity in your listening - not the small dips or peaks, but something like the SVS being flat whereas the Dyns and Emeralds just completely roll off? Seems strange because the reviews I've read of the SVS tend to describe them as more laid back, warm even. The Dyns and Emeralds would be well beyond laid back....more like vegetative.





Sonnie said:


> I can confirm that the SVS speakers in my room were anything but laid back. As a matter of fact, when I got them in (they were the first ones here the first week of October... couple of weeks early) and set them up for break-in, I was nervous because I could not get the brightness out of them, regardless of position or toe. I was using the Rogue Cronus Magnum, then switched to the Denon 4520 to see if it made a difference, and it did not. I did not hear this with these when I was at CAF. Then when I got to RMAF, again I did not notice them being bright, although not laid back either. I did not say anything to anyone at SVS at that time, as I wanted to get back and do some more listening after they were broke-in.
> 
> When I got back, I had more speakers here, the Anthem amp was here... and before I knew it, I had it hooked up, the Rogue packed up and several more speakers in the room playing. I just never thought much more about the SVS being bright... until we brought them into the room. Then I got worried again. Low and behold... they were not bright... at least nothing like they were when I first connected them. I can only assume the break-in toned them down a bit... and/or the Anthem helped soften them up a bit (?)... I am not really sure. Strangely enough, they were farther away from the listener and had more toe-in than any other speaker, minus the Maggies. I seriously cannot contribute the change in what I was hearing to any one thing. To me, they were NOT bright, but NOT laid back by any means. I can not answer for the other guys, they might have thought they were bright or laid back... we did not compare notes and I do not remember anyone saying anything about them being either or.
> 
> As far as the Dynaudio's... they sounded great to me... just right, but perhaps maybe a little more laid back than the SVS. Definitely not vegetative. The drop off with them doesn't really take any major hit until you get above 10kHz, and I am not sure how much information we are really missing up there.
> 
> I also do not remember it effecting the EP's or causing them to sound too soft, although you would think it would because it really starts falling off above 6kHz with those.


Depending on which RT60 curve you select with which speaker's data, there are indications that the room might be a little more live above 5 or 6 kHz than at mid frequencies. This would help explain why the high end for the Dynaudio's - down a couple of dB from average at 10 kHz - sounded just right to all the evaluators (if I remember correctly, not putting words in anyone's mouth). Nothing vegetative about them. The rolloff above 10k is enough to be noticeable if you look for it, but we did not look for it because we did not see any such tendency in our initial plots with them close to the wall. We look there primarily for matching and proper functionality and I try not to analyze the early curves closely so I do not build up pre-conceived notions about the sound. The rolloff above 10 kHz is gentle enough not to stand out. Not saying it would never be missed - none of us have abused our ears horribly - I still have plenty of active sensors up to 14 kHz on both sides - just that it does not jump at you.

I just did an experiment with a couple of tracks and a low-pass filter at 15 kHz with different Q values, a good approximation of what we saw with the Dynaudios. You can definitely hear the difference, but if you activate the rolloff and leave it on for awhile so you are not hearing the contrast it is subtle and would not jump out at you in a situation where you are not looking for it. (Now that I am thinking about it, it is bugging me like crazy - the power of expectation - exactly why we listen before analyzing curves in detail.)

The SVS Towers at RMAF - for all their great qualities - had kind of an iron fist thing going on in the highs. Not at all in Sonnie's room, but _bordering on_ bright, as were the Paradigm's, with the Dyns hitting us just right, me anyway. Room liveness above 5 Khz is the only factor that seems to explain it.



chashint said:


> If I recall correctly there was some chat about trying different amp/AVRs ???
> Did y'all have time to try this?
> Just seems like it's improbable for a solid state amplifier to tone down a speaker when every electrical parameter of any commercial amplifier is orders of magnitude better than any speakers electrical parameters.
> It certainly would be interesting to see what your group has to say about an amp/AVR listening session.


One of these days. It will take some serious experimentation to be sure we are not absolutely fooling ourselves before we will be ready to do so and post results. The ears are SO impressionable with subtleties. [[[[[not a word, Sonnie!]]]]]



> AudiocRaver said:
> 
> 
> 
> In compiling the placement data from our listening events, it appears that the distance ratio is the thing to shoot for rather than the absolute distance from the wall. Meaning the ratio of LP-from-the-wall over speaker-from-the-wall, the average ideal from our experience being about 1.8:1. S
> 
> 
> 
> That is a great tip. Is there a similar rule of thumb for width?
Click to expand...

Yes, I will post my first pass at this in the 2-channel area shortly. It is rough and will develop over time, but is almost ready for viewing.



Sonnie said:


> I was using the flashlight trick until I got a laser, now I am spoiled, as I can get it dead on... and even a few degrees different toe can make a slight difference between each speakers response. I start with the flashlight trick to get them fairly close, but then I place the laser on the side of the speaker and aim it back at the listening position and at the back wall just above the listening position, with all things being symmetrical, I can get them deal equal on toe-in.
> 
> As for the 2' from the wall... 1.5x back from the speakers as they are apart from the listener... say 7' between speakers and 10.5' to listener... TERRIBLE! Ascent i's, Ascents, Spires, Prodigy's... and I am sure soon to be Montis... DO NOT like this ratio. The imaging is less defined... soundstage too narrow and no depth acuity at all (okay... maybe a smidgen). I can get them to do fairly well (although not what I like) with an equilateral triangle, but they have to be out from the wall at least 4-5'. In all cases I am getting much better imaging, a nice wide soundstage and excellent depth when the speakers are a little wider apart than they are to the listener... the depth improves tremendously. I can move them back to the wall and keep that same ratio and the image and soundstage sounds pretty good, but I start to lose depth. And we have found this to be the case with every speaker we have evaluated. Maybe it is my room... or my primary listening position being fixed, although it is 13.5' from the front wall to my ears and 10' from the wall behind me. :huh:


_Gotta get -- Gotta gotta get -- Gotta get get get you a LASER BEAM -- get get get you a LASER BEAM, baby!_

Working on the lyrics for a song about it, a jingle that will stick in people's brains and drive them to convert to lasers for their alignment needs. There is NO SUBSTITUTE. If you have panels or dipoles, you have probably not heard them at their best without laser-precise measurements and alignment.

_Gotta get -- Gotta gotta get -- Gotta get get get you a LASER BEAM.....

Gotta get -- Gotta gotta get....._:yes:


----------



## Sonnie

I have told you that you are crazy, right? 

And I know I am a RAT!


----------



## NBPk402

Sonnie said:


> I have told you that you are crazy, right?
> 
> And I know I am a RAT!


Sonnie, do you drive a rat rod too?


----------



## jmschnur

Sonnie said:


> I was using the flashlight trick until I got a laser, now I am spoiled, as I can get it dead on... and even a few degrees different toe can make a slight difference between each speakers response. I start with the flashlight trick to get them fairly close, but then I place the laser on the side of the speaker and aim it back at the listening position and at the back wall just above the listening position, with all things being symmetrical, I can get them deal equal on toe-in. As for the 2' from the wall... 1.5x back from the speakers as they are apart from the listener... say 7' between speakers and 10.5' to listener... TERRIBLE! Ascent i's, Ascents, Spires, Prodigy's... and I am sure soon to be Montis... DO NOT like this ratio. The imaging is less defined... soundstage too narrow and no depth acuity at all (okay... maybe a smidgen). I can get them to do fairly well (although not what I like) with an equilateral triangle, but they have to be out from the wall at least 4-5'. In all cases I am getting much better imaging, a nice wide soundstage and excellent depth when the speakers are a little wider apart than they are to the listener... the depth improves tremendously. I can move them back to the wall and keep that same ratio and the image and soundstage sounds pretty good, but I start to lose depth. And we have found this to be the case with every speaker we have evaluated. Maybe it is my room... or my primary listening position being fixed, although it is 13.5' from the front wall to my ears and 10' from the wall behind me. :huh:


Could you tell us more about how you used the laser? Which side of the speaker etc? A diagram would be useful.

Thanks!


----------



## Savjac

AudiocRaver said:


> The Martin Logan ESL's have a _bottom_ port. Intriguing, should allow for plenty of placement flexibility.
> 
> 
> Your input is well appreciated. And U571 is on order - sounds like a fun evaluation disk to have around and compare with your experience.


Thank You, I cannot give it all away and we have different systems and rooms, so it will be fun to see your findings. I had initial issues in my mind with the port, especially since I have carpet and a thick pad underneath but using the incorporated spikes seems to keep the port up a bit and it works. I did place some flat wood under the speakers to see if that would help and i do not think it did, spike them to the floor works,. 

I did accidentally (Yeah Right) make a teeny tiny mistake last nigh in the HT. Man of Steel came in and my wife and I just had to watch it and not quietly either. I set the volume on the processor to be able to replicate the whispers and low level dialogue heard early on and waited for the rest to happen. Happen it did as the SPL Meter kept popping into triple digits I was having a good old time basking in the movies intense soundtrack. The lights in the room were off and I did not even think about the Martin Logans until the movie was done. Then I shrieked before I realized I did not kill them, they took it all and laughed in my face, I may have to take back my thoughts and words that they are not home theater material. I have had them for over year have babied them to some extent thinking they were more delicate than they were. I guess one should put on their favorite disc, movie or music and let er fly.


----------



## Sonnie

jmschnur said:


> Could you tell us more about how you used the laser? Which side of the speaker etc? A diagram would be useful.
> 
> Thanks!


I place it on whichever side makes it easier to point at something that I can get it lined up with as a point source for both speakers. In some cases, like the Magnepan speakers, it is necessary to place it flat on top of the speaker with the edge of the laser parallel with the edge of the speaker, since it does not have a flat enough side to rest the laser. On my Prodigy's I use the bass cabinet and lie it flat on the side.


----------



## jmschnur

Sonnie said:


> I place it on whichever side makes it easier to point at something that I can get it lined up with as a point source for both speakers. In some cases, like the Magnepan speakers, it is necessary to place it flat on top of the speaker with the edge of the laser parallel with the edge of the speaker, since it does not have a flat enough side to rest the laser. On my Prodigy's I use the bass cabinet and lie it flat on the side. http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=13727



Thanks!


----------



## K1LL3M

Sonnie said:


> I place it on whichever side makes it easier to point at something that I can get it lined up with as a point source for both speakers. In some cases, like the Magnepan speakers, it is necessary to place it flat on top of the speaker with the edge of the laser parallel with the edge of the speaker, since it does not have a flat enough side to rest the laser. On my Prodigy's I use the bass cabinet and lie it flat on the side.
> 
> http://www.hometheatershack.com/gallery/file.php?n=13727


I have read comment where in this example the laser would actually be placed on the outside side of the speaker and then focused upon the opposite side of the LP (eg the other cup holder in this pic) so that both speakers toe in front of the LP. The theory being that with speakers that have any sory of decent dispersion pattern it will increase the enveloped area for listening so that head movement has less (zero) impact and maintains imaging. 

Care to offer comments on any experience with that theory?


----------



## Sonnie

Oh yeah... we have tried it with several speakers. I have definitely tried it with my ML's. I think I have tried about every conceivable angle, except turning them around 180°. onder:

It hasn't really worked thus far, not for any speakers I have tried it with. I know we tried it at least once this last time around with Wayne in the chair, but again, it was quick... didn't work and we continued right on.

As always, YMMV... but at every position try various toe angles. Obviously it is easier and quicker and MUCH easier to hear the differences if there are three of you... the one with good ears listening and two others quickly moving speakers with a laser each... _boom boom boom... gotta get it... gotta gotta get it_... (Hey Wayne, I am getting the rhythm now... very good indeed. :T )


----------



## K1LL3M

Thanks Sonnie. 

Did any of those speakers you tried it with have some form of a waveguide? 

Just wondering if maybe that could have been the magic ingredient in the other positive comments read for it


----------



## AudiocRaver

K1LL3M said:


> I have read comment where in this example the laser would actually be placed on the outside side of the speaker and then focused upon the opposite side of the LP (eg the other cup holder in this pic) so that both speakers toe in front of the LP. The theory being that with speakers that have any sory of decent dispersion pattern it will increase the enveloped area for listening so that head movement has less (zero) impact and maintains imaging.
> 
> Care to offer comments on any experience with that theory?


Agree with Sonnie, we have tried it and not cared for the results, a narrow sounstage. Our results lean more toward the _inner_ surface of the speaker lining up with the _near_ cup holder.


----------



## Airgas1998

interesting comments on the svs initially being "bright" Sonnie. I myself can't stand bright speakers either, and in no way thought the ultras were of such. not even from day one. for 2ch listening I don't add any rc or processing just strictly direct mode. I can't recall them changing tonally either after some hours were on them. strange indeed how you experienced this.


----------



## Sonnie

K1LL3M said:


> Thanks Sonnie.
> 
> Did any of those speakers you tried it with have some form of a waveguide?
> 
> Just wondering if maybe that could have been the magic ingredient in the other positive comments read for it


Not that I can recall.




Airgas1998 said:


> interesting comments on the svs initially being "bright" Sonnie. I myself can't stand bright speakers either, and in no way thought the ultras were of such. not even from day one. for 2ch listening I don't add any rc or processing just strictly direct mode. I can't recall them changing tonally either after some hours were on them. strange indeed how you experienced this.


Pure Direct with everything we used... OPPO to Integrated Amp to speakers, other than the brief listen with the Denon 4520. Same speaker cables we have been using the entire time too. 

I wonder sometimes if my ears change how they hear things. There was nothing abnormal about the weather during that time... fairly moderate temps. :huh:


----------



## gakaudio

Hi, great thread, although admittedly have only read through it sporadically. I have a couple of questions regarding speaker placement. I noticed for optimal placement, in general, the distance between speakers is greater than the distance between listener and speaker. However, with speakers closer to the back wall, the two distances became more equivalent. Is this phenomena a general "rule of thumb"? Also, was the listening position always fixed and as such contributed to the disparity of the above mentioned ratios? Last, how were these speakers selected amongst the great many options available? Thanks, Garth


----------



## SteveCallas

Sonnie said:


> In all cases I am getting much better imaging, a nice wide soundstage and excellent depth when the speakers are a little wider apart than they are to the listener... the depth improves tremendously


In what playback format do you listen to music Sonnie? Do you only do 2.x stereo? I used to only do stereo, but PLIIx Music DSX with Wides, with the center at it's lowest PLIIx Music amplitude setting and surrounds pushed a little forward is definitely my preferred option. It takes a wide soundstage and makes it that much wider, with my mains at 30 degrees in a golden triangle and my wides at the front corners of the room at around 55 degrees. Pics attached. Have you ever tried wides? 




AudicRaver said:


> You can definitely hear the difference, but if you activate the rolloff and leave it on for awhile so you are not hearing the contrast it is subtle and would not jump out at you in a situation where you are not looking for it.


I guess it just depends what you are sensitive to. I tend to be very sensitive about the top end - it's one of the first things I notice when I hear new speakers, and it tends to be the biggest contributor to whether I like or dislike a speaker. Also, if you guys did quick switching (which I understand wasn't the purpose of this test), I bet it would have stuck out like a sore thumb on both of the first two speakers. 

That active filter in your test would drain some of the "real-ness" to the sound - less airy and clear. Even if they aren't sustained fundamental sounds above 10-15khz in the music, there are ques or fragments in the recording in that range that help trick our brain into accepting it as "real".


----------



## zamboniman

Sorry for the off topic but is that an Atari in that rack? WOW. Its like a gamers museum there. OK back to the discussion


SteveCallas said:


> In what playback format do you listen to music Sonnie? Do you only do 2.x stereo? I used to only do stereo, but PLIIx Music DSX with Wides, with the center at it's lowest PLIIx Music amplitude setting and surrounds pushed a little forward is definitely my preferred option. It takes a wide soundstage and makes it that much wider, with my mains at 30 degrees in a golden triangle and my wides at the front corners of the room at around 55 degrees. Pics attached. Have you ever tried wides?
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it just depends what you are sensitive to. I tend to be very sensitive about the top end - it's one of the first things I notice when I hear new speakers, and it tends to be the biggest contributor to whether I like or dislike a speaker. Also, if you guys did quick switching (which I understand wasn't the purpose of this test), I bet it would have stuck out like a sore thumb on both of the first two speakers.
> 
> That active filter in your test would drain some of the "real-ness" to the sound - less airy and clear. Even if they aren't sustained fundamental sounds above 10-15khz in the music, there are ques or fragments in the recording in that range that help trick our brain into accepting it as "real".


----------



## Sonnie

gakaudio said:


> Hi, great thread, although admittedly have only read through it sporadically. I have a couple of questions regarding speaker placement. I noticed for optimal placement, in general, the distance between speakers is greater than the distance between listener and speaker. However, with speakers closer to the back wall, the two distances became more equivalent. Is this phenomena a general "rule of thumb"? Also, was the listening position always fixed and as such contributed to the disparity of the above mentioned ratios? Last, how were these speakers selected amongst the great many options available? Thanks, Garth


I don't know that you would necessarily call it the general rule of thumb, but more so what ended up sounding the best for us. Wayne is putting together a speaker placement thread that should help explain a lot of this.

The listening position is fixed in my room. Check out www.cedarcreekcinema.ws for pics. I will get those updated soon to show all the additional treatment I have added.

Speakers were selected mostly by our members. We had a nomination process, then a voting poll. We will start working on the next nomination process and poll as soon as we get the results here finished.




SteveCallas said:


> In what playback format do you listen to music Sonnie? Do you only do 2.x stereo? I used to only do stereo, but PLIIx Music DSX with Wides, with the center at it's lowest PLIIx Music amplitude setting and surrounds pushed a little forward is definitely my preferred option. It takes a wide soundstage and makes it that much wider, with my mains at 30 degrees in a golden triangle and my wides at the front corners of the room at around 55 degrees. Pics attached. Have you ever tried wides?


I listen in Pure Direct mode myself. The event was with the OPPO into the Anthem 2-channel amp, which I have been temporarily using. I now have the Onkyo 5509 and the Emotiva XPR-5 amp (being delivered tomorrow). I have NOT tried wides yet, but it is something I have threatened experimenting with. I have the room, no doubt. The ML ESL's that Wayne has coming to him would probably be good speakers to try as wides. 

Nice setup, which I believe I have previously seen, but still nice. I would just have to listen to it and test it out, but my major concern would be depth acuity. With the ML's... the soundstage is already incredibly wide.




SteveCallas said:


> I guess it just depends what you are sensitive to. I tend to be very sensitive about the top end - it's one of the first things I notice when I hear new speakers, and it tends to be the biggest contributor to whether I like or dislike a speaker. Also, if you guys did quick switching (which I understand wasn't the purpose of this test), I bet it would have stuck out like a sore thumb on both of the first two speakers.
> 
> That active filter in your test would drain some of the "real-ness" to the sound - less airy and clear. Even if they aren't sustained fundamental sounds above 10-15khz in the music, there are ques or fragments in the recording in that range that help trick our brain into accepting it as "real".


You got me wondering... especially since we all really liked the Dynaudio speakers as they were. I actually still have those... as do I have the EP's. I don't know if it is feasible or not, but if time permits, I might keep those a little longer and see if toeing them in a little more will create a flatter response, although I have feeling it may either make them too bright or possibly mess up the imaging or soundstage, but it is worth further investigation. Wayne is hopefully flying back over here the second week (or thereabouts) of December for a couple of days. Maybe (no guarantees) we can experiment with those, ALTHOUGH those EP's are a headache to unpack and put together. I would be more interested in experimenting with those than the Dyn's, since the Dyn's were fairly spot on for sound.


----------



## SteveCallas

Could just be a Dynaudio design thing. Attached is the FR of their Sapphire speaker.




Sonnie said:


> but my major concern would be depth acuity


With a more dedicated listening space like yours, you can bring the wides further out into the room, keeping the depth. The entire L or R channel doesn't get duplicated in the wides, only certain sounds.


----------



## Sonnie

You know... getting graphs of the speaker's response from the manufacturers would be nice, if they will all oblige us.

Wide speakers are on the investigate/potential test list.


----------



## Picture_Shooter

Great write up guys!! I enjoy the input of each of the towers write ups so far. I may soon jump over the log and buy a new set!!  

Thanks for all your hard work as I know this takes a lot of your time n effort. Great thing I love about reading about these speakers from you guys is the fact is its like ya hear it, no favoritism :nono:!!


----------



## english210

english210 said:


> Ah, ok, I'll play with that formula too. My room is 19' deep, LP is about 16' from the wall. I'll do the math after another cup of coffee



That's working out to 8'+ from the back wall. No way that'll work regularly, but I'll try it anyway next time I have alone time at home. And for distance apart, the recommendation is wider apart than the LP->speaker distance?


----------



## Sonnie

Check out the Cardas Room Setup recommendations.

This is what I actually started with and found that the closer I got to the speakers the more depth of soundstage there was. Of course to make the equilateral triangle I had to kneel down behind my PLP, but there wasn't near as much depth as when I moved forward, which just happened to be right in the PLP that is fixed. Granted, the frequency response is better with the equilateral triangle, but I like the sound better at the PLP. I believe the goal of Cardas is to get the best frequency response, which _for me_ is not always the best sound.


----------



## Sonnie

Ultimately the Arx A5 speakers were adjusted out of the Cardas recommendations, but not by what I consider a significant amount. For example... if you look back at the best location for the Arx A5, Cardas recommends 5'4½" from the side wall, where we had them at 6'. Cardas recommends 8'6" to the wall behind the speakers and we had them at 8'4".

The biggest difference was speaker to listener. Cardas recommended 8'6" and we had them at 6'2".

We were not terribly far from the equilateral triangle either... 7'6" speaker to speaker and 6'2" to listener.


----------



## rab-byte

Sonnie,
How long before the under $1000 bookshelf speaker review?


----------



## Sonnie

Don't know yet. We have tentatively scheduled another $2,500 (maybe $3,000) event for late February.


----------



## rab-byte

Sonnie said:


> Don't know yet. We have tentatively scheduled another $2,500 (maybe $3,000) event for late February.


It would be great to see a bookshelf or even 5.1 satellite shoot out as many members don't have room for floor standing speakers.


----------



## skeeter99

rab-byte said:


> It would be great to see a bookshelf or even 5.1 satellite shoot out as many members don't have room for floor standing speakers.


I was just talking about the same thing in this thread: http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...coverage/70864-hsu-research-2.html#post653916



Scott


----------



## GusGus748s

I was thinking of upgrading to the Arx towers, but I don't really like that laminated finish. So, now I supposed I'll be looking at HTD and Emptek.


----------



## lcaillo

skeeter99 said:


> I was just talking about the same thing in this thread: http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...coverage/70864-hsu-research-2.html#post653916
> 
> 
> 
> Scott


I have a lot of interest in this category as well, but we need to seriously consider the priorities. I think there are really two types of evaluations needed, one on actual bookshelf placement and one on stands optimally placed. The latter requires similar dedication of space in the room and may not be useful to everyone. The nice thing about smaller speakers is that they lend themselves to switching between the two applications, for casual and for serious listening. But let's take this into another thread of its own.


----------



## rab-byte

Posted new thread.


----------



## AudiocRaver

SteveCallas said:


> In what playback format do you listen to music Sonnie? Do you only do 2.x stereo? I used to only do stereo, but PLIIx Music DSX with Wides, with the center at it's lowest PLIIx Music amplitude setting and surrounds pushed a little forward is definitely my preferred option. It takes a wide soundstage and makes it that much wider, with my mains at 30 degrees in a golden triangle and my wides at the front corners of the room at around 55 degrees. Pics attached. Have you ever tried wides?
> 
> =============
> 
> I guess it just depends what you are sensitive to. I tend to be very sensitive about the top end - it's one of the first things I notice when I hear new speakers, and it tends to be the biggest contributor to whether I like or dislike a speaker. Also, if you guys did quick switching (which I understand wasn't the purpose of this test), I bet it would have stuck out like a sore thumb on both of the first two speakers.
> 
> That active filter in your test would drain some of the "real-ness" to the sound - less airy and clear. Even if they aren't sustained fundamental sounds above 10-15khz in the music, there are ques or fragments in the recording in that range that help trick our brain into accepting it as "real".


Not questioning that you might be highly sensitive to that rolling off of the highs. We all have our individual sensitivity areas. Quick switching definitely would have revealed that slight loss. Just listening to the presence of the highs for a minute without the rolloff shows what you are missing, then you notice it if you think about it. But to our preferences it was not big enough to stand out under the circumstances, except maybe a little with the EPs. We were listening for a lot of things under time pressure, drinking-from-a-fire-hose style. It just did not jump out at us, and I dare say would not have to most, although it might have to a few.

Remember that any natural phenomenon that causes a rolloff or any kind of change also causes phase shift and potentially other artifacts - speaker design, acoustics, air absorption, electronic filter, whatever. How is one more "real" than another? The same applies to synthesized surround enhancement, I would have a hard time thinking of it as more "real" than a simple 1-pole electronic filter.

Again, it is true that we have different sensitivities, some genetically-based and some from experience and training. Just some observations.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> Check out the Cardas Room Setup recommendations.
> 
> This is what I actually started with and found that the closer I got to the speakers the more depth of soundstage there was. Of course to make the equilateral triangle I had to kneel down behind my PLP, but there wasn't near as much depth as when I moved forward, which just happened to be right in the PLP that is fixed. Granted, the frequency response is better with the equilateral triangle, but I like the sound better at the PLP. I believe the goal of Cardas is to get the best frequency response, which _for me_ is not always the best sound.


The Cardas recommendations primarily address room modes and the placement of speakers to minimize interaction with room modes. Our priorities pretty much ignored room modes so we could get the soundstage we wanted at the fixed/immovable LP. You can see the result in the LF end of our measured curves - the modes seriously affected the low end. We need to consider options for raising the priority of room modes while preserving the soundstage results we want.




GusGus748s said:


> I was thinking of upgrading to the Arx towers, but I don't really like that laminated finish. So, now I supposed I'll be looking at HTD and Emptek.


Just a thought - you could buy a pair of A5's and have someone refinish them for you. A bit of a hassle, to be sure, but passing up on the A5's sound in favor of a different finish would not be my choice. But then I am not super big on visual aesthetics anyway. We each have our priorities. Good luck! (Really consider those A5's!)


----------



## AudiocRaver

Post #9 back at the beginning of this thread now contains the beginnings of some general observations about the weekend and our findings. More will be added over the coming days.


----------



## GusGus748s

AudiocRaver said:


> The Cardas recommendations primarily address room modes and the placement of speakers to minimize interaction with room modes. Our priorities pretty much ignored room modes so we could get the soundstage we wanted at the fixed/immovable LP. You can see the result in the LF end of our measured curves - the modes seriously affected the low end. We need to consider options for raising the priority of room modes while preserving the soundstage results we want.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a thought - you could buy a pair of A5's and have someone refinish them for you. A bit of a hassle, to be sure, but passing up on the A5's sound in favor of a different finish would not be my choice. But then I am not super big on visual aesthetics anyway. We each have our priorities. Good luck! (Really consider those A5's!)


I don't really care for the look either, but my wife does. I guess I'm more afraid of the speakers being damaged during shipping.


----------



## AudiocRaver

GusGus748s said:


> I don't really care for the look either, but my wife does. I guess I'm more afraid of the speakers being damaged during shipping.


The HTD finishes ARE pretty yummy, real WAF winners. And their ship packaging is top-notch, double cardboard with 4-inch air gap all around, suspended by heavy foam at both ends, will really take a beating.


----------



## GusGus748s

My wife likes the looks of the empteks. I'm trying to find a comparison between the HTD and EmpTek. We listen more to music now than we watch movies. So, I want to get something that sounds good with music and movies.


----------



## NewHTbuyer

GusGus748s said:


> My wife likes the looks of the empteks. I'm trying to find a comparison between the HTD and EmpTek. We listen more to music now than we watch movies. So, I want to get something that sounds good with music and movies.


This thread did not have much detail, but maybe it might help

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1458372/arx-a5-vs-htd-level-three-vs-emp-e55ti-tower-shootout


----------



## Sonnie

It looks like Jon might not have been too happy with how that dude conducted his speaker comparison/evaluation, which is does look a bit suspect, not that any of us are perfect. That might actually explain his hesitance in sending us the A5's and why it was like pulling hind teeth to get him to send them.

Gus... any speaker you order has the potential of being damaged. The Klipsch and the Arx were both packed pretty well, but both damaged. The Arx are also double boxed.

I had a bass module on another set of speakers that were shipped to me that was damaged too... and that box had thick metal triangular protectors on all the corners... yet it still had the corner crushed. You can count on them being dropped a few times in transit. However... Jon got a new replacement Arx A5 right out to me... which any company is going to do. So it ain't like you are going to have to live with a damaged speaker.


----------



## GusGus748s

Sonnie said:


> It looks like Jon might not have been too happy with how that dude conducted his speaker comparison/evaluation, which is does look a bit suspect, not that any of us are perfect. That might actually explain his hesitance in sending us the A5's and why it was like pulling hind teeth to get him to send them.
> 
> Gus... any speaker you order has the potential of being damaged. The Klipsch and the Arx were both packed pretty well, but both damaged. The Arx are also double boxed.
> 
> I had a bass module on another set of speakers that were shipped to me that was damaged too... and that box had thick metal triangular protectors on all the corners... yet it still had the corner crushed. You can count on them being dropped a few times in transit. However... Jon got a new replacement Arx A5 right out to me... which any company is going to do. So it ain't like you are going to have to live with a damaged speaker.


I agree. Anything shipped has the potential of being damaged. I still can't decide on, which brand to go with when I'm ready to upgrade.


----------



## Sonnie

The Magnepan 1.7 review is now posted here.


----------



## AudiocRaver

SteveCallas said:


> That active filter in your test would drain some of the "real-ness" to the sound - less airy and clear. Even if they aren't sustained fundamental sounds above 10-15khz in the music, there are ques or fragments in the recording in that range that help trick our brain into accepting it as "real".


I might have misinterpreted this comment when I first read it. Upon re-reading it, it sounds like you were simply explaining how important the highest octave of frequencies is in our listening to recorded music. If so, apologies for my response, which was off the mark.

Assuming that is what you meant, I can only agree, and the little filtering experiment, along with other experience, only confirms that what you say is true. It may not be so readily apparent in everyday life because so much of what we hear has little occurring in the frequency range above 10 kHz. But some sounds can contain frequencies way beyond 20 kHz, and with those our brain is noticing the detail you are referring to. With music it is more constant by its nature and a bigger factor, so when it is attenuated due to a rolloff it can be more noticeable.


----------



## Mike0206

I'm getting the sense that the dynaudios and I'm thinking paradigms are going to be the top dogs of this eval although not a shootout. It seems the comments earlier about brightness in the svs ultras may just tilt favor towards the paradigms. Hmmmm........ I thought the Maggie's would be received better as I did the emerald physics.


----------



## AudiocRaver

There have been a lot of questions about our speaker setup approach for these evaluation events. I made several unposted attempts to briefly summarize the approach, but they seemed lacking in detail. Hoping to answer your questions, a Setup Guide for Deep Soundstage has been posted in the Two Channel forum. Hope it is helpful.


----------



## theJman

Going in, I thought the order of preference would end up like this...


SVS Ultra Towers
Dynaudio DM 3/7
Paradigm Studio 60
MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL
Arx A5
The edge I gave to the Ultra's was because of the bass; I've heard those in person, and they do have a lot of bottom end.


----------



## rab-byte

I can honestly say I'm surprised to hear your impression of the Maggie's was that dull. 

Ribbon and ESL panels often do need more power then you might expect. Some time before you return/sell/giveaway (?) the speakers you should give another listen with more power. Use tubes or NAD or something with some teethe. 

Still that's the great thing about these reviews, sometimes products shine and other times we find they don't live up to the hype.


----------



## lcaillo

rab-byte said:


> I can honestly say I'm surprised to hear your impression of the Maggie's was that dull.
> 
> Ribbon and ESL panels often do need more power then you might expect. Some time before you return/sell/giveaway (?) the speakers you should give another listen with more power. Use tubes or NAD or something with some teethe.
> 
> Still that's the great thing about these reviews, sometimes products shine and other times we find they don't live up to the hype.


There are four of us who commented over many pages on each speaker. It would be useful if you included the comments that surprise you and the reviewer. We might then be able to give more context to what was written. As your post stands it implies that our overall impression of the speaker is that it is dull. We had much more to say about it than that.

As for the power, if they take more than we had, I think they are simply an impractical load. I think we were able to push them quite hard without clipping using the Anthem Integrated 225 amp (i225) at 225 WPC (8Ω) and 310 WPC (4Ω).

There was much to like about them, but there are also enough aspects that I did not like that make them one of my least favorites. That is just my opinion and my observations. Nothing at all wrong with someone thinking differently and having a different experience, but there is much more to our assessment than "dull". Oversimplifying makes it hard to make the entire experience real to others.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Mike0206 said:


> I'm getting the sense that the dynaudios and I'm thinking paradigms are going to be the top dogs of this eval although not a shootout. It seems the comments earlier about brightness in the svs ultras may just tilt favor towards the paradigms. Hmmmm........ I thought the Maggie's would be received better as I did the emerald physics.


It bears repeating that our "deep soundstage" goal pushed us to do things placement-wise that were a little out-of-the-box. Dipoles especially are affected more dramatically by off-axis aiming, which we relied upon to get that effect.

Both the EP's and the Maggies had a LOT of great qualities. The panel speaker sound has a lot of appeal to me. But those models just did not stack up for the way I like to listen.

The high end from the Maggies was too laid back for me. The response plot from up by the wall confirms that it was not just flaky placement. And the distortion thing - having heard it I would be either listening for it or riding the volume to avoid it _constantly._ That is no fun. Lots of great detail and clarity, no doubt about it, but a couple of deal breakers. And the soundstage, gotta be able to get that or I will not even bother with a speaker.

Our personal preferences have been stated. It is totally understood why those speakers have lots of fans, they just did not do what we were looking for. Too picky? Maybe. And maybe not. We just called them as we saw them.


----------



## lcaillo

It would be great to have a fan of each speaker who knows it well in each session to report from that perspective as well as from our own, but that is simply not practical.

The fact is that dipoles and planar speakers do not make up a large market share in this price range, relative to other designs. That is for a number of reasons. The niche that really loves them can overlook most of the limitations that we observed and enjoy them and that is great. Like Wayne says, we have all tried to be very open about our experience, preferences, and biases, and we continue to discuss them to give context to our reviews. I think we all tend more to speakers with better dynamics and large, deep, precise sound stage reproduction. Others are welcome to post their experiences.

We all have liked speakers with less obvious dynamics and dipoles. The Dynaudio and Martin Logans are examples. These seem to be better compromises as a whole than the Magnepans, IMO. And of course, as has been said many times, speaker design is always a series of compromises.


----------



## AudiocRaver

theJman said:


> Going in, I thought the order of preference would end up like this...
> 
> 
> SVS Ultra Towers
> Dynaudio DM 3/7
> Paradigm Studio 60
> MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL
> Arx A5
> The edge I gave to the Ultra's was because of the bass; I've heard those in person, and they do have a lot of bottom end.


Funny thing on that bass, Sonnie's room will give us very little below 45 Hz. Don't know if you saw these curves yet (post #9). I, too, expected more deep bass from the SVS Ultra's, not sure where it disappeared to, but I did not hold that in particular against them. Oops, that has not be posted yet, has it? Coming shortly.

Their low end (SVS) was very impressive at RMAF.

And the Martin Logan ESL's will still get their chance.

FWIW, from what I have heard of them on several occasions now - some of which I cannot reveal because of the conditions we placed upon ourselves for this evaluation - top secret and all - fear of death and suffering - fear of the death stare worst of all - any time you put the Arx A5's at the bottom of a list, you will probably be wrong.:bigsmile: My personal opinion.


----------



## kevin360

Sonnie said:


> The Magnepan 1.7 review is now posted here.


Yep, and there needs to be one correction. The 1.7s aren't really 3-way speakers; they are 2.5-way. I think you also discovered why I'm something of a heretic among Magnepan owners, because my setup includes this.









Full range, they positively _drink_ power. Once relieved of the heavy lifting, they do loud, rock music just fine - without any of that fuzziness you guys noted. The preamp on top of the crossover is between the XO and subs - for setting the sub level remotely. Unfortunately, there is a dramatic variation of bass level from one recording to the next. Also, there is quite a dramatic difference between the quasi-ribbon and the proper ribbon tweeter.


----------



## Jon Lane

Sonnie said:


> It looks like Jon might not have been too happy with how that dude conducted his speaker comparison/evaluation, which is does look a bit suspect, not that any of us are perfect. That might actually explain his hesitance in sending us the A5's and why it was like pulling hind teeth to get him to send them.


This is true. That comparison broke the fundamental rules (and offers to assist before the fact went unanswered. The user eventually emailed after the event and expressed some doubts, but that too dead-ended.)

What's gratifying about the HTS events is that the basics are included.

-One speaker at a time. _Please_.

-Optimize each speaker in the room. This is so important as to go almost without saying. (I love that you're using the Cardas method when you can, Sonnie.)

-Only good quality amplification and sources. Cheap low current receivers sound like cheap low current receivers, which is a shame because inexpensive high current receivers can be had. Owing to the affordability of some of our products I hate to admit it in public, but the truth is if you're really going for sound your speaker budget shouldn't be two-thirds your total expenditure. It should be about a quarter. Ten thousand dollars of front end into even $200 in very well executed DIY stand monitors can sound spectacular...they just won't play loud or deep.

-No weak links in the system

This may be a time to mention that in some circles, this not being one, myths endure. One is that frequency amplitude as a measurement is all you need to know. (Probably no worse harm to good sound above the HTIB level than this exists). 

Another: electronics sound identical unless they're tubed at which point they're whimsically colored so unscientific listeners can artificially sweeten the sound. And another is that the room is nearly all important and first arrival from the speaker is not at all important. (The best sound I ever heard was in the single worst acoustical environment I've ever seen. It all worked because the system was out of this world, especially in the front end and amplification.)

While speakers have much more measurable distortion than amplifiers, for instance, _great_, dialed-in systems have the ability to somehow push the speakers nearly entirely out of perception. When a system _really_ starts to work, the upstream components start to predominate and the speakers become just their tools. Sounds odd, doesn't it? 

It's really enjoyable to be part of this forum. I can't count the number of times I've nodded reading comments in these threads. There's a fundamental difference between really getting into immersive sound on the one hand, and speculating about how things should sound or what they should do on the other. Effort yields rewards.

Bravo!


----------



## AudiocRaver

kevin360 said:


> Yep, and there needs to be one correction. The 1.7s aren't really 3-way speakers; they are 2.5-way. I think you also discovered why I'm something of a heretic among Magnepan owners, because my setup includes this.
> 
> View attachment 45068
> 
> 
> Full range, they positively _drink_ power. Once relieved of the heavy lifting, they do loud, rock music just fine - without any of that fuzziness you guys noted. The preamp on top of the crossover is between the XO and subs - for setting the sub level remotely. Unfortunately, there is a dramatic variation of bass level from one recording to the next. Also, there is quite a dramatic difference between the quasi-ribbon and the proper ribbon tweeter.


It is great to hear from a Magnepan owner/lover. I see you run 3.7's and MMGC's. I'll bet that is one fine sounding system.

First of all, the specs came directly from the Magnepan web site. I have no doubt you know the products but, all due respect, we should leave it the way they state it, "3-Way, Full-Range, Quasi-Ribbon." Your extra info is much appreciated, though.

Heretic or no, I could probably be an absolutely delighted Maggie owner running them the way you do, assuming the 1.7's could be brightened up a bit. The manual talks about replacing a jumper with a resistor to attenuate the high end, the 2 upper drivers together I believe. But our panels started out with jumpers - I saw them as we were packing up - so there seems to be no way to brighten them easily. Maybe a different model would take care of it. THEN - do like you have and cross them to a sub - or a sub per panel to keep it a music-only 2.0 system for purity's sake - could be the makings of sonic nirvana.

The Maggies seem to image a little differently, but I think I could get over that. I like a sharp image and panels seem to image a little softer, but as long as it is stable, I could make a teeny bit of an imaging sacrifice for all that clarity and definition. Of course the soundstage depth is a must, and they can do that. It would not take too much of an arm twist to get me there.

I will be working with some Martin Logan ESL's in a week or two, am excited about that. Do you have any ML experience, any comparisons to make?


----------



## callas01

theJman said:


> Going in, I thought the order of preference would end up like this...
> 
> 
> SVS Ultra Towers
> Dynaudio DM 3/7
> Paradigm Studio 60
> MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL
> Arx A5
> The edge I gave to the Ultra's was because of the bass; I've heard those in person, and they do have a lot of bottom end.


and the funny thing is that i thought it would be more like 

Emerald Physics
Maggie
ML
SVS
Paradigm
Dynaudio

even as a dynaudio owner, i didnt expect the 3/7s to impress the panel as much as they have. they happen to be one of my least favorite dynaudio speakers, i actually like my DM2/6s that i use as surrounds moreso then the 3/7s. however i did think that the bass of the 3/7s was gonna impress the panel, however i cant understand the bottoming out issue, especially when i can play that track without issue on monitors.


----------



## lcaillo

As usual, context is everything, and the correct answer is nearly always, "it depends." Given Rad-byte's application of the Magnepans, as Wayne says, it is likely a completely different experience. We have to keep in mind, however, that we were comparing products in a particular price range with a single amp. In the same way that Mark makes the point that his speakers are not so expensive when you consider not having to have discrete amps in the system, we have to compare apples to apples in these evaluations. 

We can never match the conditions in the evaluations to even a few user's room/equipment/preference conditions, so we do what we can to keep the playing field even. That means that the context that is consistent might not be useful to any individual but it is a starting point.

Jon, I appreciate your comments and the confidence you have expressed in us. As we have discovered and discussed before, you and I have similar priorities in speaker performance (I still can't wait to play with those Swans but it will have to be next year) but I do tend to be a little more conservative on the notion of differences between electronics and their impact on the sound in the end. I do believe there are differences, but somewhere between the degree that you describe and the very pervasive "all amps sound the same" view. The differences between competent amps and pre-amps is small and one does not need to spend lots IMO to get nearly transparent sound. That said, "competent" is harder to define than many believe, IMO.


----------



## lcaillo

And Jon,
please weigh in on the conditions for any shelf speaker events. We have a thread for that, unofficially, now where I hope to get a starting point. This is one of my projects for next year and I would like to see the Arx and the Swan included. There are even more questions for this than the free standing speakers IMO because of the wide variety of ways that they are used. We will have to make compromises and settle on some standard practice, and I would love your opinion on how to do so fairly and be the most informative to the respective user cohorts.


----------



## Sonnie

rab-byte said:


> Ribbon and ESL panels often do need more power then you might expect. Some time before you return/sell/giveaway (?) the speakers you should give another listen with more power. Use tubes or NAD or something with some teethe.


They are gone.

The Anthem 225 is certainly no slouch of an amp... check out their design... it is every bit as good or maybe better than NAD. Also... we used a Rogue Cronus Magnum Integrated Tube Amp with the MG12's, but they fluttered with it as well.

I think crossing them over is the only solution... just as the writers at TAS suggest... the Maggies will not do bottom end at higher SPLs. 

What would be interesting is to see some hybrid Maggies... crossed over at 150Hz or so.




kevin360 said:


> Full range, they positively _drink_ power. Once relieved of the heavy lifting, they do loud, rock music just fine - without any of that fuzziness you guys noted. The preamp on top of the crossover is between the XO and subs - for setting the sub level remotely. Unfortunately, there is a dramatic variation of bass level from one recording to the next. Also, there is quite a dramatic difference between the quasi-ribbon and the proper ribbon tweeter.


That is the key... relieve them. :T




theJman said:


> Going in, I thought the order of preference would end up like this...
> 
> 
> SVS Ultra Towers
> Dynaudio DM 3/7
> Paradigm Studio 60
> MartinLogan ElectroMotion ESL
> Arx A5
> The edge I gave to the Ultra's was because of the bass; I've heard those in person, and they do have a lot of bottom end.


You might turn that upside down and be closer to right than not... with the exception of the ESL's, which we have not reviewed yet. However, I am not ranking them... but it is kind of fun to see others try to rank them for us. Of course you are not actually ranking them either... just stating what you thought going in.


----------



## theJman

AudiocRaver said:


> FWIW, from what I have heard of them on several occasions now - some of which I cannot reveal because of the conditions we placed upon ourselves for this evaluation - top secret and all - fear of death and suffering - fear of the death stare worst of all - any time you put the Arx A5's at the bottom of a list, you will probably be wrong.:bigsmile: My personal opinion.


Ah, but you see, it's all a matter of perspective; the A5's are _not_ at the bottom of my list, they're simply number 5. :T I was only listing my top 5 picks, which by association means I thinks it's one of the better choices in the group (even though it was actually in the previous group). I had a feeling the A5's would compare admirably to the speakers in this field, but didn't feel they would float to the top. Just the top 5...


----------



## pharoah

AudiocRaver said:


> Funny thing on that bass, Sonnie's room will give us very little below 45 Hz. Don't know if you saw these curves yet (post #9). I, too, expected more deep bass from the SVS Ultra's, not sure where it disappeared to, but I did not hold that in particular against them. Oops, that has not be posted yet, has it? Coming shortly.
> 
> Their low end (SVS) was very impressive at RMAF.
> 
> And the Martin Logan ESL's will still get their chance.
> 
> FWIW, from what I have heard of them on several occasions now - some of which I cannot reveal because of the conditions we placed upon ourselves for this evaluation - top secret and all - fear of death and suffering - fear of the death stare worst of all - any time you put the Arx A5's at the bottom of a list, you will probably be wrong.:bigsmile: My personal opinion.


just goes to show what has been discussed many times.the individual room has a massive impact on how any speaker will sound.im really glad to have some room treatments.they have definitely improved my sound.


----------



## lcaillo

theJman said:


> Ah, but you see, it's all a matter of perspective; the A5's are _not_ at the bottom of my list, they're simply number 5. :T I was only listing my top 5 picks, which by association means I thinks it's one of the better choices in the group (even though it was actually in the previous group). I had a feeling the A5's would compare admirably to the speakers in this field, but didn't feel they would float to the top. Just the top 5...


I would have a hard choice if I were going to pick between my favorites in the $2500 sessions and the Arx 5. I can't spend $2k + on speakers, however, so it is easy, I'll end up with the Arx. They certainly were worth considering among the higher priced speakers in terms of sound. Finish is not great, but really, for the price, that was not a priority. A little less deep on the bottom is not a problem for me (I lived with Thiel 04 for 30+ years). In terms of detail and image, one could easily pick the Arx over any of the speakers currently under discussion.


----------



## lcaillo

pharoah said:


> just goes to show what has been discussed many times.the individual room has a massive impact on how any speaker will sound.im really glad to have some room treatments.they have definitely improved my sound.


Yep. And assuming you are not applying treatments to the room, which is the case in the vast majority of installations, careful placement is the single greatest variable to get the most out of a pair of speakers. Unfortunately, it is hard to live with optimal placement in many rooms.

Also, even in a room designed for HT like Sonnie's note that we were not getting really deep bass out of any of the speakers. Room is a hard variable...


----------



## Mike0206

It's beginning to sound like the Arx are even more of a bang for your buck speaker then originally thought when in the $1000 evaluation. You guys all seem to be so impressed with them even considering $2500+ speakers in the mix that it would seem almost foolish to consider any other speaker under $3000 over the Arx. Of course personal taste does goes a long way in evaluating speakers but I find it pretty interesting that all of you guys are equally impressed with the Arx A5's.


----------



## pharoah

lcaillo said:


> Yep. And assuming you are not applying treatments to the room, which is the case in the vast majority of installations, careful placement is the single greatest variable to get the most out of a pair of speakers. Unfortunately, it is hard to live with optimal placement in many rooms.
> 
> Also, even in a room designed for HT like Sonnie's note that we were not getting really deep bass out of any of the speakers. Room is a hard variable...


In my room the speakers went where they had to.my room is small so no other choice.i used some gik panels amd some diy over the windows to help out.


----------



## Greenster

Mike0206 said:


> It's beginning to sound like the Arx are even more of a bang for your buck speaker then originally thought when in the $1000 evaluation. You guys all seem to be so impressed with them even considering $2500+ speakers in the mix that it would seem almost foolish to consider any other speaker under $3000 over the Arx. Of course personal taste does goes a long way in evaluating speakers but I find it pretty interesting that all of you guys are equally impressed with the Arx A5's.


I totally agree with you on this. They just seem like an amazing buy to me. I still cant wait to read about the SVS's. I love love love my SVS subwoofer. You really dont hear too much about thier Ultras like you do about their Sub's. The Ultras look so good all blacked out and polished.


----------



## AudiocRaver

callas01 said:


> and the funny thing is that i thought it would be more like
> 
> Emerald Physics
> Maggie
> ML
> SVS
> Paradigm
> Dynaudio
> 
> even as a dynaudio owner, i didnt expect the 3/7s to impress the panel as much as they have. they happen to be one of my least favorite dynaudio speakers, i actually like my DM2/6s that i use as surrounds moreso then the 3/7s. however i did think that the bass of the 3/7s was gonna impress the panel, however i cant understand the bottoming out issue, especially when i can play that track without issue on monitors.


On the bottoming out issue, to quote one of my favorite movies, "It's a mystery." Like Sonnie said, it could have been a bad or abused driver.

It was the subtleties and sense of refinement that were hard to overlook. As i posted elsewhere, the room might be a little more live (RT60) at 7 or 8 kHz than at 1 kHz. Their high end sounded _just right_ for me where some that measured flatter sounded a little hot.


----------



## AudiocRaver

theJman said:


> Ah, but you see, it's all a matter of perspective; the A5's are _not_ at the bottom of my list, they're simply number 5. :T I was only listing my top 5 picks, which by association means I thinks it's one of the better choices in the group (even though it was actually in the previous group). I had a feeling the A5's would compare admirably to the speakers in this field, but didn't feel they would float to the top. Just the top 5...


Point taken. They made it onto a prestigious list.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Mike0206 said:


> It's beginning to sound like the Arx are even more of a bang for your buck speaker then originally thought when in the $1000 evaluation. You guys all seem to be so impressed with them even considering $2500+ speakers in the mix that it would seem almost foolish to consider any other speaker under $3000 over the Arx. Of course personal taste does goes a long way in evaluating speakers but I find it pretty interesting that all of you guys are equally impressed with the Arx A5's.


We need to take a little care with all our praise. Next thing we know, Jon will change the connectors or something insignificant but visible, call it a redesign, and start charging $2k for them.


----------



## rab-byte

I'm waiting with bated breath for you ML review. As I said I'm a fan boy, being from Lawrence KS, and hope the home team blows you away. 

It's funny that Klipsch didn't want to take part in your evaluation. Their sweet highs and dynamic mid bass have always drawn in customers in my store's studio room. Personally the tractrix horns fatigue my ears quickly, that may be why I appreciate esl and ribbon speakers so much. 

Klipsch like ML focus sound better then many speakers in less optimized rooms. This helps them image better as the highs have better chance to reach your rears before room reflections. Not that treatments don't still help (they do). 

This may also be the reason that the Maggies didn't sound as crisp. The di-pole ribbons may have needed different treatment locations due to they're non-dispersal nature.


----------



## Sonnie

The Paradigm Studio 60 review has been posted here.




AudiocRaver said:


> We need to take a little care with all our praise. Next thing we know, Jon will change the connectors or something insignificant but visible, call it a redesign, and start charging $2k for them.


Put a nicer finish on them to somewhat make up for them missing the lowest octave in bass and I think he could ask $1,500-2,000 for them and get it.


----------



## NewHTbuyer

4 posted, 1 to go! Great job on the reviews.


----------



## SteveCallas

AudiocRaver said:


> I might have misinterpreted this comment when I first read it. Upon re-reading it, it sounds like you were simply explaining how important the highest octave of frequencies is in our listening to recorded music. If so, apologies for my response, which was off the mark.
> 
> Assuming that is what you meant, I can only agree, and the little filtering experiment, along with other experience, only confirms that what you say is true. It may not be so readily apparent in everyday life because so much of what we hear has little occurring in the frequency range above 10 kHz. But some sounds can contain frequencies way beyond 20 kHz, and with those our brain is noticing the detail you are referring to. With music it is more constant by its nature and a bigger factor, so when it is attenuated due to a rolloff it can be more noticeable.


No apology necessary, I didn't catch anything in your posts that was off the mark. But yes, I was referring to your 15khz filter experiment, not the speaker testing at Sonnie's. Music can still sound good with a high frequency rolloff, it just doesn't sound as real.



Jon Lane said:


> Owing to the affordability of some of our products I hate to admit it in public, but the truth is if you're really going for sound your speaker budget shouldn't be two-thirds your total expenditure. It should be about a quarter. Ten thousand dollars of front end into even $200 in very well executed DIY stand monitors can sound spectacular...they just won't play loud or deep.


:scratch: I would respectfully disagree. I've participated in multiple blind listening tests (threads probably still alive on AVS) with electronics, using everything from $150 receivers to expensive preamp, boutique stereo amps, and cheap pro amps with fans removed, and electronics just don't impart any character at all on the sound unless they are faulty, purposefully designed to impart a certain sound (not too many do this anymore), or clipping. Speakers on the other hand, whether $50 or $50,000, sound *completely* different from each other. Very rarely will any two speakers sound similar. Quick switching (level matched between switches) only highlights the differences further.


----------



## english210

I've been playing with speaker placement today. I can't get then more than 6' from the front wall because of a couch on one side. The first disc I used wasn't much good, but then I used Brothers in Arms. The thing I've noticed the most is depth. Strangely, the plane of sound is at about the front wall audibly, but there is more information heard between the plane of the speakers and the wall now. The sound with the speakers 2-2 1/2' from the wall still seemed to come from the front wall, but moving the speakers out has increased the range of depth, if that makes sense. Track 4 is especially good for this. The width isn't too great, though, it often sounds like I'm 'looking' into a funnel, so to speak. There are some instruments that break that trend, though. The drums on track 6, Ride Across the River, seem to be the width of the room, and the bass guitar makes everything in the room vibrate, including me! Bass on the whole is more defined. There are crickets in the recording that are erie!


----------



## english210

Interesting about the Paradigms. I heard a pair of those a year or so ago, and wasn't impressed. They weren't bad, don't get me wrong, just didn't do anything for me. Could have been the setup, though. My 25 year old Infinitys keep showing me new life every time I put more effort into placement, like following your advise today. Highs are still not my favorite. They get a bit harsh at high volumes. My amp upgrade tamed a lot of that, but it's still there somewhat. L/R imaging could be better. The bass will be hard to improve on though. 

I'm really enjoying the comments/advice/ideas this thread is generating!!


----------



## AudiocRaver

Jon Lane said:


> This is true. That comparison broke the fundamental rules (and offers to assist before the fact went unanswered. The user eventually emailed after the event and expressed some doubts, but that too dead-ended.)
> 
> What's gratifying about the HTS events is that the basics are included.
> 
> -One speaker at a time. _Please_.
> 
> -Optimize each speaker in the room. This is so important as to go almost without saying. (I love that you're using the Cardas method when you can, Sonnie.)
> 
> -Only good quality amplification and sources. Cheap low current receivers sound like cheap low current receivers, which is a shame because inexpensive high current receivers can be had. Owing to the affordability of some of our products I hate to admit it in public, but the truth is if you're really going for sound your speaker budget shouldn't be two-thirds your total expenditure. It should be about a quarter. Ten thousand dollars of front end into even $200 in very well executed DIY stand monitors can sound spectacular...they just won't play loud or deep.
> 
> -No weak links in the system
> 
> This may be a time to mention that in some circles, this not being one, myths endure. One is that frequency amplitude as a measurement is all you need to know. (Probably no worse harm to good sound above the HTIB level than this exists).
> 
> Another: electronics sound identical unless they're tubed at which point they're whimsically colored so unscientific listeners can artificially sweeten the sound. And another is that the room is nearly all important and first arrival from the speaker is not at all important. (The best sound I ever heard was in the single worst acoustical environment I've ever seen. It all worked because the system was out of this world, especially in the front end and amplification.)
> 
> While speakers have much more measurable distortion than amplifiers, for instance, _great_, dialed-in systems have the ability to somehow push the speakers nearly entirely out of perception. When a system _really_ starts to work, the upstream components start to predominate and the speakers become just their tools. Sounds odd, doesn't it?
> 
> It's really enjoyable to be part of this forum. I can't count the number of times I've nodded reading comments in these threads. There's a fundamental difference between really getting into immersive sound on the one hand, and speculating about how things should sound or what they should do on the other. Effort yields rewards.
> 
> Bravo!


Jon,

Thanks for posting. Sure glad we got those A5's back in August.:T

It seems like a healthy dash of obsessive attention to detail is a necessary ingredient in doing speaker evaluation effectively. One nice thing about our team is the way we bring different hot-buttons and experiences that complement each other, and also the sensibilities to help each other keep those drives in perspective. I dare say no one of us could accomplish 1/10th of what we have together. It has been an amazing journey.

From your list, I would say that _optimizing each speaker in the room_ has been the biggest key to our success, with all other speakers removed and variables minimized being an important part of that. Then _quality amplification and sources_ would be next. The well-treated room is certainly a factor, not disagreeing with your point about relative importance of first arrival and "quality of ambient arrivals" - I believe you were implying that a balance is desired, no?

Thanks again for posting, always great to hear from you.


----------



## Savjac

As someone that moved from the Maggies to the Logans, I can say that I moved for a bit more oomph on the bottom end. Nothing against the Maggies, what they did in their range was to my ears quite good, however, there is only so much you can do with a planar that has X square inches to move X-Y millimeters. It is not until you get into the 3.7's and above that you can start to feel the bass and also feel comfortable you wont hear the Mylar buzz.

The Logan's dont go much deeper but they have a more solid and tactile bottom end, and for me a sweeter more extended midrange to top end. Good blend between the woofer and planar panel, but the woofer just cannot keep up all the time. The good news is, the pass from woof to panel is well hid.

Having said all that, my journey is not done. I truly want...no need to feel the power and the glory of a moving coil speaker. I have experimented with planar and am now kind of wanting to move on. I heard an older Klipsh KLF speaker and the feeling of those 10' woofers moving a giant amount of air brought me back to my roots so to speak. This is the direction I need to go, being able to produce sound pressure and ginormous dynamic swings while not only bringing the sound and power of live music to me, but bringing me to the power and glory of live music. Ahhh I remember it well.


----------



## bkeeler10

Jon Lane said:


> -Only good quality amplification and sources. Cheap low current receivers sound like cheap low current receivers, which is a shame because inexpensive high current receivers can be had.


Jon (and anyone else who might have experience with this), can you comment on brands that, in your experience, could be trusted to deliver this elusive high-current receiver (in a multichannel AVR)? Most brands don't say much about their receivers' output into 4 ohms (and what they say about their performance in general is often suspect!) so it's hard to judge.

Is it fair to say that an amp that delivers 75% - 100% more power into 4 ohms than it does into 8 ohms is likely a high current design?


----------



## zamboniman

bkeeler10 said:


> Jon (and anyone else who might have experience with this), can you comment on brands that, in your experience, could be trusted to deliver this elusive high-current receiver (in a multichannel AVR)? Most brands don't say much about their receivers' output into 4 ohms (and what they say about their performance in general is often suspect!) so it's hard to judge.
> 
> Is it fair to say that an amp that delivers 75% - 100% more power into 4 ohms than it does into 8 ohms is likely a high current design?


"High Current" amplifiers are a perpetuated audiophile myth. 

The reality is these are voltage amplifiers.. it's simple as that. Current flows as a result of the load.. It's more of a matter of can the amp maintain its composure under the given load and voltage being produced.

End of the day it's a voltage amplifier.. current amplifiers exist but not in this context.

Sure some amps perform better than others given complex or low impedance loads... but making claims that a given amp is a "high current" design doesn't do an industry full of snake oil any favors.


----------



## Sonnie

I believe "amps of current" is a very legitimate spec... and current clipping is a reality. However... all of that is a discussion for another thread. Let's keep this one on track with reference to the speaker reviews. :T

EDIT: Here is a very good read on voltage and current as it relates to an amp.


----------



## lcaillo

zamboniman said:


> "High Current" amplifiers are a perpetuated audiophile myth.
> 
> The reality is these are voltage amplifiers.. it's simple as that. Current flows as a result of the load.. It's more of a matter of can the amp maintain its composure under the given load and voltage being produced.
> 
> End of the day it's a voltage amplifier.. current amplifiers exist but not in this context.
> 
> Sure some amps perform better than others given complex or low impedance loads... but making claims that a given amp is a "high current" design doesn't do an industry full of snake oil any favors.


Not a myth at all. As you said yourself, current flows in proportion to the load. What is also true is that it flows in proportion to the voltage across the load. The load impedance can vary with frequency. An amplifier can reach the limit of its voltage swing or it can have adequate voltage but run out of power supply capacity and not deliver adequate current. In either case we have clipping. There have been many amplifiers designed to be able to deliver the voltage and current needed into a static test load yet not be able to deal with impedance dropping in a real loudspeaker. This can be due to either voltage limitations or current limitations or both.


----------



## Sonnie

Back to our regular scheduled thread now? :bigsmile:


----------



## Mike0206

Sonnie said:


> Back to our regular scheduled thread now? :bigsmile:


how bout them paradigms? Lol


----------



## Sonnie

Yeah... I did favor those quite a bit, although there were several very good speakers in the group.


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> Yeah... I did favor those quite a bit, although there were several very good speakers in the group.


I've loved Paradigm for probably close to 15 years now. Last time I heard them were the S8's at Kris Deering's GTG a few months ago after they had recently been booted from his theater by the Legacy Focus HD's (I believe). They are SUCH great speakers! I would love to hear the 60's as those are really in a sweet spot price wise. Thanks for the great write up!

Scott


----------



## ALMFamily

Sonnie said:


> Yeah... I did favor those quite a bit, although there were several very good speakers in the group.


Of the 5 speakers we had slated for review (not including the ML's as those will be done by Wayne at a later date), I can honestly say there was only one that I did not care for - and it did have it good points as well. 

At the end of the day, I am a firm believer that 95% of speakers will have at least some redeeming qualities - it is deciding which of those qualities you are personally looking for that spark all the discussion.


----------



## rab-byte

ALMFamily said:


> Of the 5 speakers we had slated for review (not including the ML's as those will be done by Wayne at a later date), I can honestly say there was only one that I did not care for - and it did have it good points as well. At the end of the day, I am a firm believer that 95% of speakers will have at least some redeeming qualities - it is deciding which of those qualities you are personally looking for that spark all the discussion.


That should be on a giant banner across all the forums!


----------



## kevin360

AudiocRaver said:


> It is great to hear from a Magnepan owner/lover. I see you run 3.7's and MMGC's. I'll bet that is one fine sounding system.
> 
> First of all, the specs came directly from the Magnepan web site. I have no doubt you know the products but, all due respect, we should leave it the way they state it, "3-Way, Full-Range, Quasi-Ribbon." Your extra info is much appreciated, though.
> 
> Heretic or no, I could probably be an absolutely delighted Maggie owner running them the way you do, assuming the 1.7's could be brightened up a bit. The manual talks about replacing a jumper with a resistor to attenuate the high end, the 2 upper drivers together I believe. But our panels started out with jumpers - I saw them as we were packing up - so there seems to be no way to brighten them easily. Maybe a different model would take care of it. THEN - do like you have and cross them to a sub - or a sub per panel to keep it a music-only 2.0 system for purity's sake - could be the makings of sonic nirvana.
> 
> The Maggies seem to image a little differently, but I think I could get over that. I like a sharp image and panels seem to image a little softer, but as long as it is stable, I could make a teeny bit of an imaging sacrifice for all that clarity and definition. Of course the soundstage depth is a must, and they can do that. It would not take too much of an arm twist to get me there.
> 
> I will be working with some Martin Logan ESL's in a week or two, am excited about that. Do you have any ML experience, any comparisons to make?


Yep, I suppose it's somewhat heretical (I sense a trend) to run centers as surrounds, but I already had one MMGC when I transitioned to a dedicated space. IMO, they are far better surrounds than centers.:duck: At some point, I may add a CCR with the CC stand/woofer. Other changes keep cutting in line. 

You're right; Magnepan's website does refer to the 1.7 as a 3-way. I suppose that's easier than explaining what a 2.5-way is, but they simply culled one 'loop' from the QR tweeter and fed it a filtered signal from the high section of the series XO. The remainder of the QR tweeter behaves normally. The result is the addition of a 'super'tweeter that parallels the top of the tweeter's response range. Being narrower, it does so with better dispersion characteristics – remember the inverse proportion rule of driver element size to reproduced frequency. The effect is a reduction in the head-in-a-vise imaging that plagues its non true ribbon brethren. 

Neither my somewhat modified 3.7s, nor my highly modified MMGs have jumpers, resistors or fuses. Fully braced stands benefit Maggies in a number of ways – my 3.7s are on Mye Stands and the panels from my MMGs are in DIY braced hardwood frames. Again, I'll stress the counter-indicated demands of HT and planars – Maggies, at least. The room treatments that benefit multichannel reproduction over damp the Maggies. This forces a compromise – a common theme in life. It's impossible to optimize both simultaneously. It's highly unusual to encounter reports of stock Maggies, except for some older models like SMGs, as being too laid back. It's far more common for them to be faulted as being overly bright, hence the resistors. The fact that it was a unanimous complaint makes the fact of the matter rather apparent.

In my experience, once 'the spots' are discovered, the sound stage is deep, wide and reasonably well defined, with a solid center image (that largely happens _between_ the ears, in any case). The interaction of the speaker with the room in this regard also forces us back into that HT vs Maggie compromise. Maggie is a demanding mistress, but she does bring some delights to the tryst. 

I should think it best to enter the evaluation of the MLs with a minimum of expectation. By that, I mean that any comparative analysis I could tender might serve to influence your experience – such is an inescapable fact of being human. I shall only reply that I think they are excellent speakers with a different set of compromises and solutions - a different mix of strengths and weaknesses. I think the engineering concepts ML applies are both sound and effective. They have some products that I'd be extremely delighted to own.

There are lots of speakers that please me. My daughter's Def Tech Mythos STS speakers aren't even dipoles and I dig 'em. I still have a pair of AR91s that I bought 33 years ago that I enjoy (yeah, I've had to do some work to keep them going). 

Sorry for the ramble.


----------



## bkeeler10

lcaillo said:


> Not a myth at all.


Thanks for your reply, and for risking the Sonnie stare for it. :bigsmile: That is all.


----------



## K1LL3M

It is very interesting to follow this thread and one thing that continues to gain mention is comparison to the A5 from the $1000 round.

What I wonder is, is audio memory playing a factor in just how good the A5s were here? 

The general impression being recieved is that the A5s are all one needs and more expense does not equate to better sound, just a better finish.

While not directly in reference to this, the comment about tapering praise (I think "comments" was the actual wording) on the A5s less the price increase was what highlighted this impression. Just a perspective from reading along I thought I'd share


----------



## phreak

I've been a Paradigm fan for 7-8 years now, and the Studio 60 review was exactly what I was expecting from them


----------



## SteveCallas

I have no doubt that $600 Ascend 340s would best the Studios by unanimous decision, but it just comes down to what other speakers were being tested at the time. Clearly the Emeralds and Maggies had some issues, and Dyns have always been "almost good enough" in my experience. I have not heard the SVS though, and am curious to read it's evaluation. 

If this group does do a round 2, the Ascend towers with the ribbon tweeter and the Philharmonics would be more robust competition. Noesis 208s would be awesome too :T


----------



## K1LL3M

SteveCallas said:


> Noesis 208s would be awesome too :T


Seconded on the JTR Noesis 228HTs


----------



## Rolf

Nice work on this thread, i really like comparisons like this. I am espescially curious about the SVS ultra speakers since i`m currently running on their old S-series (7.1) combined with the PB13 Ultra sub.

I Was thinking about replacing my front speakers to match the quality of my sub lol. 
I find the towers and center from the S-series severely lacking for music.
I`m a bit torn atm between bookshelves and towers since i already have massive bass with my pb13 ultra.

Anyways looking forward to the review of the ultra`s


----------



## Jon Lane

AudiocRaver said:


> From your list, I would say that _optimizing each speaker in the room_ has been the biggest key to our success, with all other speakers removed and variables minimized being an important part of that. Then _quality amplification and sources_ would be next. The well-treated room is certainly a factor, not disagreeing with your point about relative importance of first arrival and "quality of ambient arrivals" - I believe you were implying that a balance is desired, no?


The principle of optimizing each speaker in the space ties to the importance _of_ the space. While I've hear some amazing sound in some amazingly bad spaces, which I mentioned, naturally that combination isn't sought. It just happens.

But if optimizing each system in its space is as key as it's assumed, we could intuit that we should treat the dickens out of that space. 

Which is to say, to _nullify_ it. Thinking a little further we see that this sets up another principle: Reflected sound is bad.

That then evolves into or revolves around another whole set of principles - especially in uncritical consumer and some home theater circles - which is that list I mentioned upthread. The common end result may be a fairly uninvolving, amusical sound.

This is where balance comes into play: We know spaces are important (and this event just proved it). But spaces absolutely do not need to be nullified. In fact, they must not be. Experience has taught that it's actually easier to over-treat a room than it is to get a stereo system to sound good in a typical space. 

Previously an A5 pair fared less well in a heavily treated theater room with narrow side walls. Read: Little or no flexibility to orient the system for good sound. What fared well, naturally, were very high energy, directional, 80Hz monitors that, presumably, didn't "see" the space, didn't in themselves have to be balanced one octave deeper in response, and that had substantially higher levels on tap to re-compensate and re-drive this densely damped environment.

***

Someone once posited that just as some of us hear _dynamically _into electronics and sources, some of us hear primarily differences in the scale and _static _responses in the system that lend themselves to those differences: The speakers. 

If you hear dynamically you'll hear electronic texture (grain, grit, distortions), image focus, transient behaviors, "jump factor", "slam", dynamics, and all the words sometimes disallowed by audio objectivists that describe the _flavors_ every system has - that "connectedness" and "immediacy" you hear from what are considered fringe audiophiles also refer here - while static listeners hear the differences in frequency response, speaker size, loudness, dispersion, the effects of the room on the system, and so forth. 

Naturally, this latter camp also relies more on classical theory and measurement. They cite amplitude more than just about anything and seem to feel that any deviation from amplitude linearity may just be an incompetent design, sometimes knowingly or even intentionally. 

The former group tend to just listen, which accounts for how they describe what they're hearing: Subjectively and with lexicons borrowed from sight, flavor, and even touch. Transparent. Rich. Palpable.

It also accounts why they tend to find arcane factors in the engineering only after hearing them. Consider Marsh and Jung testing capacitors all the way back in 1980(?) and finding substantial differences. Work like this peppers the audio arts but since it does not lend itself to amplitude research, gets dismissed.

Getting back to your question: Notice that the Cardas method, which pulls the speakers well out into the space and sets them at calculated intervals in the space, does not call for treating the space. This does not mean spaces should be un-treated, but it also does not allow for spaces to be _over_-treated.

Balance is essential. It's just been my experience that "dynamical" hearers get much more from the first arrival than from the entire _static _response of the entire venue, system included. They hear the original system and do not let either plain theory or the space advise either their preconceptions or their sensory input.

Why do listeners favor the models they do in the HTS tests? I'd guess it may be that those designs are rooted in classic static and acoustical power theory but have a strong element of dynamic empiricism to advise their final tuning. They probably break no classical rules but are not mainly contingent on them either.

And reading the HTS analysis of various series of speakers, it's becoming clear that as far as balance goes, dynamic hearing is not an uncommon base of perception. I think that's fun.

(Static and dynamic listening theory attributes to Ingvar Ohman.)


----------



## kevin360

Jon Lane said:


> But if optimizing each system in its space is as key as it's assumed, we could intuit that we should treat the dickens out of that space.
> 
> Which is to say, to _nullify_ it. Thinking a little further we see that this sets up another principle: Reflected sound is bad.


To a very large degree, this comment points up the conflict between HT and stereo in general, and HT and stereo dipoles in particular. With HT (multi-channel), there are enough speakers to supply the directional cues for one's brain to map an acoustic space. As the speaker complement has continued to increase (from 5.1), even more realism is possible from a multi-channel setup. As such, it is best to clarify the direct sound by silencing the room's reflections. Stripping the playback from that system down to the pair of mains/fronts eliminates the additional sources of directional cues. Part of what makes a good dipole perform its disappearing act within a you-are-there sound stage is the way in which sufficiently delayed reflections are interpreted by our brains. A well engineered device is 'tuned' to its anticipated environment - a well engineered speaker should behave best in the acoustic space for which it is designed. As I stated earlier, this creates a situation in which conflicting demands are in play. There are no one-size-fits-all solutions in this pursuit.

The only area that isn't in conflict is the management of low frequency room behavior. To my thinking, that is an imperative, but passive treatments are but one avenue to success. It's a complicated game, this.


----------



## Mike0206

Great post Jon!


----------



## Picture_Shooter

Sonnie said:


> The Magnepan 1.7 review is now posted here.



Thanks for the review and awesome write up! 

I never owned the bigger Maggies models, but was hoping they would offer more mid bass / lower as it does not seem like the case from what I read. The maggies I got to demo a long ways back at a local home-audio store was 3.7s and they were in a small room if I remember correctly 12'x16' and they were wonderful, but these are more expensive and bigger in size.  


Looks like these were a disappointment though. Sorry to hear you guys were not a fan of them but glad I now can check-mark these off my wish list.


----------



## Picture_Shooter

SteveCallas said:


> I have no doubt that $600 Ascend 340s would best the Studios by unanimous decision, but it just comes down to what other speakers were being tested at the time. Clearly the Emeralds and Maggies had some issues, and Dyns have always been "almost good enough" in my experience. I have not heard the SVS though, and am curious to read it's evaluation.
> 
> If this group does do a round 2, the Ascend towers with the ribbon tweeter and the Philharmonics would be more robust competition. Noesis 208s would be awesome too :T



Philharmonics as of right now are the only ones I am keeping an eye on. I know there are speakers that sound great in your basic speaker cabinet boxes, but I am getting bored to my eyes looking at a basic tower cabinet. This is why I been wanting my next set of speakers to look more different and my eyes were set with hope the maggies & Emerals to be a hit, so far that is not the case. I mean we all have our ears to make the last call, but I feel these guys are telling it how it is. I do still want to try the Emerals cause I am stubborn like that, so these will probably be at my casa very soon; However I would love, love to see these guys take on the Philharmonics for a test drive and share with us:sn:. Oh maybe bring on the Tritons by GE! I am sure these could fullfill the 2-channel highs, mids and lows do to their powered subwoofer and they also share a different cabinet / box look with a little def-tech splash and then some  .


----------



## Savjac

kevin360 said:


> Yep, I suppose it's somewhat heretical (I sense a trend) to run centers as surrounds, but I already had one MMGC when I transitioned to a dedicated space. IMO, they are far better surrounds than centers.:duck: At some point, I may add a CCR with the CC stand/woofer. Other changes keep cutting in line. You're right; Magnepan's website does refer to the 1.7 as a 3-way. I suppose that's easier than explaining what a 2.5-way is, but they simply culled one 'loop' from the QR tweeter and fed it a filtered signal from the high section of the series XO. The remainder of the QR tweeter behaves normally. The result is the addition of a 'super'tweeter that parallels the top of the tweeter's response range. Being narrower, it does so with better dispersion characteristics – remember the inverse proportion rule of driver element size to reproduced frequency. The effect is a reduction in the head-in-a-vise imaging that plagues its non true ribbon brethren. Neither my somewhat modified 3.7s, nor my highly modified MMGs have jumpers, resistors or fuses. Fully braced stands benefit Maggies in a number of ways – my 3.7s are on Mye Stands and the panels from my MMGs are in DIY braced hardwood frames. Again, I'll stress the counter-indicated demands of HT and planars – Maggies, at least. The room treatments that benefit multichannel reproduction over damp the Maggies. This forces a compromise – a common theme in life. It's impossible to optimize both simultaneously. It's highly unusual to encounter reports of stock Maggies, except for some older models like SMGs, as being too laid back. It's far more common for them to be faulted as being overly bright, hence the resistors. The fact that it was a unanimous complaint makes the fact of the matter rather apparent. In my experience, once 'the spots' are discovered, the sound stage is deep, wide and reasonably well defined, with a solid center image (that largely happens between the ears, in any case). The interaction of the speaker with the room in this regard also forces us back into that HT vs Maggie compromise. Maggie is a demanding mistress, but she does bring some delights to the tryst. I should think it best to enter the evaluation of the MLs with a minimum of expectation. By that, I mean that any comparative analysis I could tender might serve to influence your experience – such is an inescapable fact of being human. I shall only reply that I think they are excellent speakers with a different set of compromises and solutions - a different mix of strengths and weaknesses. I think the engineering concepts ML applies are both sound and effective. They have some products that I'd be extremely delighted to own. There are lots of speakers that please me. My daughter's Def Tech Mythos STS speakers aren't even dipoles and I dig 'em. I still have a pair of AR91s that I bought 33 years ago that I enjoy (yeah, I've had to do some work to keep them going). Sorry for the ramble.


Excellent post this, quite a good read. I tend to agree in that the Maggie's in my room were never dull but then again they were never bright really. I believe there were one of the first speakers to let me into the snap of a stick on the snare and the proper sound of a picked steel string flat top acoustic guitar. I can remember how stunning it was to first hear the Tri panel Maggie's as they had it going full range no punches pulled, however, the smaller speakers have had to compromise to fit a price point. My room was quite liv though, so it would appear these speakers work well with less damping rather than more.


----------



## Tonto

Sonnie wrote (SVS Ultra's):



> There is no doubt they were indeed bright and I even privately made a statement about it to Tonto (he can confirm).


I thought that was supposed to be a secret!! Just kidding, but that observation in confirmed. Boy, I've been away from this thread for a few days & wow, it has taken off now that result are coming in!

You guys have done an even better job this time. Feeling like we are right there with you guys & feeling the love. And I'm really enjoying the feedback.

Sonnie again posted:



> Back to our regular scheduled thread now?


Personally I like the discussion as long as it stays polite & on track. Jons' remarks about high current amps/AVR's & snake oil were, while a bit off track, still relavent & of interest I suspect, to a lot of readers. I don't expect anyones opinions to get a "get by free card." I think we can all apprecitate Jon's take on engineering given the preformance of the A5's. That said, it merrits a certian amount of discussion. I certianly value it.


----------



## AudiocRaver

english210 said:


> Interesting about the Paradigms. I heard a pair of those a year or so ago, and wasn't impressed. They weren't bad, don't get me wrong, just didn't do anything for me. Could have been the setup, though. My 25 year old Infinitys keep showing me new life every time I put more effort into placement, like following your advise today. Highs are still not my favorite. They get a bit harsh at high volumes. My amp upgrade tamed a lot of that, but it's still there somewhat. L/R imaging could be better. The bass will be hard to improve on though.
> 
> I'm really enjoying the comments/advice/ideas this thread is generating!!


Here is a bold generalization: There are two kinds of speaker lovers. Some like 'em flat. Some like 'em with some specific character, a mild amount of coloring that appeals to their personal listening tastes. No right or wrong, just two ways of looking at it.


----------



## AudiocRaver

K1LL3M said:


> It is very interesting to follow this thread and one thing that continues to gain mention is comparison to the A5 from the $1000 round.
> 
> What I wonder is, is audio memory playing a factor in just how good the A5s were here?
> 
> The general impression being recieved is that the A5s are all one needs and more expense does not equate to better sound, just a better finish.
> 
> While not directly in reference to this, the comment about tapering praise (I think "comments" was the actual wording) on the A5s less the price increase was what highlighted this impression. Just a perspective from reading along I thought I'd share


Sonnie still has his A5's. We listened to them before starting the other evaluations.

===============================

This bears repeating, and I thought about it a lot while completing my SVS comments (the others have been waiting on me, sorry:foottap:

_We are not treating these speakers the way most users would._ Getting the soundstage we like requires some amount of off-axis aiming, even with the dipoles _a little,_ some speakers do that gracefully, for some it is a strain. That does not make them bad speakers, just speakers that do not fit our listening requirements.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Jon Lane said:


> The principle of optimizing each speaker in the space ties to the importance _of_ the space. While I've hear some amazing sound in some amazingly bad spaces, which I mentioned, naturally that combination isn't sought. It just happens.
> 
> But if optimizing each system in its space is as key as it's assumed, we could intuit that we should treat the dickens out of that space.
> 
> Which is to say, to _nullify_ it. Thinking a little further we see that this sets up another principle: Reflected sound is bad.
> 
> That then evolves into or revolves around another whole set of principles - especially in uncritical consumer and some home theater circles - which is that list I mentioned upthread. The common end result may be a fairly uninvolving, amusical sound.
> 
> This is where balance comes into play: We know spaces are important (and this event just proved it). But spaces absolutely do not need to be nullified. In fact, they must not be. Experience has taught that it's actually easier to over-treat a room than it is to get a stereo system to sound good in a typical space.
> 
> Previously an A5 pair fared less well in a heavily treated theater room with narrow side walls. Read: Little or no flexibility to orient the system for good sound. What fared well, naturally, were very high energy, directional, 80Hz monitors that, presumably, didn't "see" the space, didn't in themselves have to be balanced one octave deeper in response, and that had substantially higher levels on tap to re-compensate and re-drive this densely damped environment.
> 
> ***
> 
> Someone once posited that just as some of us hear _dynamically _into electronics and sources, some of us hear primarily differences in the scale and _static _responses in the system that lend themselves to those differences: The speakers.
> 
> If you hear dynamically you'll hear electronic texture (grain, grit, distortions), image focus, transient behaviors, "jump factor", "slam", dynamics, and all the words sometimes disallowed by audio objectivists that describe the _flavors_ every system has - that "connectedness" and "immediacy" you hear from what are considered fringe audiophiles also refer here - while static listeners hear the differences in frequency response, speaker size, loudness, dispersion, the effects of the room on the system, and so forth.
> 
> Naturally, this latter camp also relies more on classical theory and measurement. They cite amplitude more than just about anything and seem to feel that any deviation from amplitude linearity may just be an incompetent design, sometimes knowingly or even intentionally.
> 
> The former group tend to just listen, which accounts for how they describe what they're hearing: Subjectively and with lexicons borrowed from sight, flavor, and even touch. Transparent. Rich. Palpable.
> 
> It also accounts why they tend to find arcane factors in the engineering only after hearing them. Consider Marsh and Jung testing capacitors all the way back in 1980(?) and finding substantial differences. Work like this peppers the audio arts but since it does not lend itself to amplitude research, gets dismissed.
> 
> Getting back to your question: Notice that the Cardas method, which pulls the speakers well out into the space and sets them at calculated intervals in the space, does not call for treating the space. This does not mean spaces should be un-treated, but it also does not allow for spaces to be _over_-treated.
> 
> Balance is essential. It's just been my experience that "dynamical" hearers get much more from the first arrival than from the entire _static _response of the entire venue, system included. They hear the original system and do not let either plain theory or the space advise either their preconceptions or their sensory input.
> 
> Why do listeners favor the models they do in the HTS tests? I'd guess it may be that those designs are rooted in classic static and acoustical power theory but have a strong element of dynamic empiricism to advise their final tuning. They probably break no classical rules but are not mainly contingent on them either.
> 
> And reading the HTS analysis of various series of speakers, it's becoming clear that as far as balance goes, dynamic hearing is not an uncommon base of perception. I think that's fun.
> 
> (Static and dynamic listening theory attributes to Ingvar Ohman.)


Thanks, Jon. Your posts never fail to get me thinking about something in a new way.

Cheers!


----------



## shinksma

Reading the review of the Paradigms, I am quite intrigued by their placement flexibility - I will undoubtedly be the listening type who doesn't bother pulling the speakers out, because I will be too lazy or it will be too awkward (as mentioned elsewhere, my HT/music room is quite stuffed with related things).

A speaker that gives some depth of soundstage even up near the front wall will be something to consider.

Looking forward to the final set of review postings and summary findings!

shinksma


----------



## callas01

when i was really looking to upgrade from my old energy speakers *paradigm* was high up on the list because of their reputation, i first heard the monitor audio rx speakers, then dali, dynaudio, totem, amphion, the dali, dyns and totems were at the top of my list, but i had this notion that i had to listen to paradigm cause of all i knew of their reputation. I ended up listening to the studio 20s and 60s. One of the reviewers wrote that the paradigms had a veiled sound at times. I auditioned with mcintosh, rotel and anthem gear, i could not shake the veiled, hands cupped around your mouth sound that i was getting from them. the dealer was awesome, he let me move them anywhere i wanted, i got good soundstage/imaging/bass/depth but i just couldnt shake that cupped hands sound. Its interesting that no one else made the same veiled comment that the one reviewer made. I hope Im not over playing his comment. just an experience i had. 

im gonna have to take a little bit of time and go back to that dealer or another dealer and give them a good long listen again. not that it will mean ill change speakers cause i just cant afford to, but at least it will/might change my perception of them and what i felt i heard back then.


----------



## DougReim

I think your taste in speakers is such a subjective thing it's hard to know what you'll like or not like by reading reviews. I had Monitor 11's for 10 years and really liked them but recently changed to Aperions. I just wanted a change. While I like the Verus Grands I'm setting up a 2.1 channel room and I'm just about ready to pull the trigger on a pair of 60's for that room. I guess I'm just partial to the Paradigm sound. Music to some, noise to others, yes?


----------



## Sonnie

kevin360 said:


> There are lots of speakers that please me.


Yep... same here. I like a lot of these speakers we have evaluated and for the most part, just about (not all) any of them I could live with and be perfectly happy. 




K1LL3M said:


> What I wonder is, is audio memory playing a factor in just how good the A5s were here?


They were the first speakers we listened to so that we could get an idea of what it was that we liked so much about them. Even so, it is still sometimes difficult to even get the memory right between nothing more than swapping out speakers, which is one reason we take a lot of notes while listening. Things we can pinpoint and things that notes can help us remember. I can make a note about something I heard and during the next speaker listening session, it will stick out to me because I noted it on the previous session. Yet there are times where I say to myself... I wish I could pull those back out and listen to them one more time.




K1LL3M said:


> The general impression being recieved is that the A5s are all one needs and more expense does not equate to better sound, just a better finish.
> 
> While not directly in reference to this, the comment about tapering praise (I think "comments" was the actual wording) on the A5s less the price increase was what highlighted this impression. Just a perspective from reading along I thought I'd share


We have tried to be careful in how we word things, simply because it seems so many people have different ways of interpreting things, granted in most cases they hear it the way they want to interpret it rather than how it should be or was intended to be interpreted. I think some things we say get exaggerated a bit too much. However, we slip up and help cause that in some cases... as we are human.

What you have to remember is this is what we think about the speakers in the setup we are faced with ... and some folks like some characteristics more than others. You may very well not like what we like... and especially if the speakers are setup under completely different circumstances.

I really like the A5's, but I also really like the MartinLogan Motion 12's (although no longer available)... remember they were VERY close. I like the Paradigm 60's too, but they were not leaps and bounds ahead of any other speaker, I still liked several others too. What I would really like is the A5's with a little more low end and a nicer finish. Do the 60's do that for me? It is a hard call... they do add that little more bass that I am looking for, but do they have that top end clarity of the A5's... they are close. The question might then be do I want to spend another $1,250 to get that little extra bass, and maybe a little nicer finish, though not by much, cause I still don't like a black woodgrain finish. I can get past the finish, so now the question is do I want to spend the extra for a little better bass... or can I simply be happy with the A5's? I could think about that a hundred times and possibly answer it either way 50% of the time. The answer could be different for a LOT of people. 




Tonto said:


> Personally I like the discussion as long as it stays polite & on track. Jons' remarks about high current amps/AVR's & snake oil were, while a bit off track, still relavent & of interest to a lot of readers. I don't expect anyones opinions to get a "get by free card." I think we can all apprecitate Jon's take on engineering given the preformance of the A5's. That said, it merrits a certian amount of discussion. I certianly value it.


I like it too, but it is more about amps and their design than about speakers and this evaluation. That discussion can get very deep and could send the thread WAY off. I am not saying anyone gets a free pass on anything they want to say, but it can be quoted to a different thread where it can be better discussed at great length and not get this one so far off of its purpose. :T


----------



## sdurani

AudiocRaver said:


> Here is a bold generalization: There are two kinds of speaker lovers. Some like 'em flat. Some like 'em with some specific character, a mild amount of coloring that appeals to their personal listening tastes. No right or wrong, just two ways of looking at it.


Worth checking out some of the research from Harman. When Floyd Toole and Sean Olive did large scale blind testing, they found that listeners almost universally preferred speakers with flat on-axis response and wide dispersion with consistent off-axis response. Speakers that were coloured or had been voiced to deviate from flat (on-axis) scored poorly during those blind preference tests.


----------



## Tonto

Sorry Sonnie, I didn't mean to imply that your would give anybody a free pass, I was referring to the other poster that questioned Jons' amp assertion (he could have said nothing/free pass). I am of the mind that amps don't make a significant difference in speaker output quality (barring poor design/low power units). That is why it picked my interest & was hoping Jon would expand on his comments for all of us. I do love a good discussion. You are correct that it can be discussed more fully in another thread.


----------



## Sonnie

The SVS Ultra Tower review is now posted here.

Wayne's General Observations and Summary is posted here.

Thanks and Appreciation posted here.


----------



## chashint

Good job guys.
Some very interesting observations on some of the speakers.


----------



## AudiocRaver

sdurani said:


> Worth checking out some of the research from Harman. When Floyd Toole and Sean Olive did large scale blind testing, they found that listeners almost universally preferred speakers with flat on-axis response and wide dispersion with consistent off-axis response. Speakers that were coloured or had been voiced to deviate from flat (on-axis) scored poorly during those blind preference tests.


Ah, but "scored poorly" does not mean no one liked them. My point exactly.

You just pointed out a personal hot button for me, how easily we turn trends into absolutes in our minds. Someone did a study, performed a statistical analysis, published the result with a statement like "tends to" or "on average" or "the majority of listeners" or "scored poorly" and next we are assuming an absolute - "people prefer flat" (I realize that is not what you said, but it sounded like you were hinting in that direction, forgive me if I totally misread).

Just funning with you, of course. My original comment came from a couple of hours scanning a thread in _another forum_ where mixing engineers talked about their favorite speakers for mixing. After awhile it became clear that there were two philosophies of thought at work, although no one came right out and said it. One liked the truthfulness of "flat speakers", the other was looking for some character or emphasis about the monitors that was able to reveal to them or show them the quality of a mix somehow - and flat speakers were always "too dry" or "told them nothing." It was funny to see the trends, and none of them ever pointed it our, either.

Preferring the flat sound myself, I hear people talk about a speaker as dry or boring or sterile or clinical and think, "sounds perfect!"

I called the Studio 60's "boring" and meant it as a compliment.

Just a silly observation.


----------



## AudiocRaver

callas01 said:


> when i was really looking to upgrade from my old energy speakers *paradigm* was high up on the list because of their reputation, i first heard the monitor audio rx speakers, then dali, dynaudio, totem, amphion, the dali, dyns and totems were at the top of my list, but i had this notion that i had to listen to paradigm cause of all i knew of their reputation. I ended up listening to the studio 20s and 60s. One of the reviewers wrote that the paradigms had a veiled sound at times. I auditioned with mcintosh, rotel and anthem gear, i could not shake the veiled, hands cupped around your mouth sound that i was getting from them. the dealer was awesome, he let me move them anywhere i wanted, i got good soundstage/imaging/bass/depth but i just couldnt shake that cupped hands sound. Its interesting that no one else made the same veiled comment that the one reviewer made. I hope Im not over playing his comment. just an experience i had.
> 
> im gonna have to take a little bit of time and go back to that dealer or another dealer and give them a good long listen again. not that it will mean ill change speakers cause i just cant afford to, but at least it will/might change my perception of them and what i felt i heard back then.


This may not be what you meant at all...

Sometimes we are thinking a really good speaker should "grab us" somehow with its sound. There are exciting and fun and engaging speakers out there that sound good with a certain kind of music. A really flat speaker might seem flat or boring because it contains no character of its own, and may seem boring on first listen, but over time can become beloved for its faithful delivery of all kinds of music.

Just one way to look at it.:bigsmile:


----------



## Savjac

Wonderful job of reviewing gentlemen, although I hope it was not all job in that some fun was had. 

Thank You.


----------



## lcaillo

No way we could do it if we did not enjoy it. Really, both events have been more than fun. In spite of the long hours and travel an experience like this does more for me than a vacation.


----------



## mdanderson

Thanks for all the impressions of these fine speakers. I was really interested in the SVS and Paradigms in particular. I own a Paradigm Ref.20s which are 14 years old and the Paradigm 60's look like my next speakers if not a new version of the Ref.20s.


----------



## NewHTbuyer

Thanks for all the hard work and well written write-ups. Of course, it would have been nice if you all had enjoyed the Ultras more (my speakers) than it seem like you did, but that is why we all have to listen on our own. I can somewhat understand some of the comments re being bright, as they do get a bit sharp with certain tracks and at high volumes. But I was surprised that the other things I feel they do so well did not shine through. I was also surprised how the CS2 speakers sounded to you, but I have only heard them at RMAF with the DSP and subs, so maybe that is why.


----------



## shinksma

Great work guys!

This thread, especially the first page, continues to be very enjoyable reading for me. I know that I've spent a lot more time listening to music these past few weeks simply because, after reading this thread, I said to myself "Hey, I should go toss on some multi-channel or two-channel music and have a good listening session".

I will probably not purchase new speakers any time soon (too many other recent large expenditures), but I now have a healthy regard for some brands that I was simply not picking up on my radar, or that had fallen off my radar. For example: Paradigm - I bought a passive sub eons ago, used to help fill out some bass with a couple bookshelf speakers for a basic system I had, and it is still chugging along in my Mom's TV room. But recently I had kinda overlooked the brand, what with shiny gold Klipsches and weird looking B&Ws to catch my eye (although I'd never be able to practically afford those B&Ws, frankly).

The Arxs continue to pique my interest, though...

shinksma


----------



## callas01

good job to the panel and everyone involved including Mark Seaton and the wifes and families that had to endure and sacrifice. the write ups are top notch, informative, fun and unbiased. i think i was surprised by some of your findings in your evaluations.

have you guys considered contacting the manufactures so they could make their own comments or observations to your assesments?


----------



## Sonnie

Jim Salk? I was not aware of his presence, although it might be nice to have him stop in with a pair of his speakers.

The manufacturers are aware of the event... not sure if they will comment, although one representative for a manufacturer made a comment somewhere in this thread... simply to compliment what we were doing.


----------



## callas01

oops, edited..


----------



## sdurani

AudiocRaver said:


> It was funny to see the trends, and none of them ever pointed it our, either.


That's what the Toole/Olive research was looking for: trends. They wanted to find out which qualities were consistently preferred (and not preferred) when listeners didn't know which speakers they were listening to, which is what I described in my previous post. 

BTW, those tests represent some of the most comprehensive large-scale studies done on speaker design. At the end of 3 years, 50 speakers and almost 300 listeners, the results weren't a random distribution but instead pointed to very specific qualities. Even people who claimed to prefer speakers that were voiced a certain way ended up not choosing those designs under blind conditions.


AudiocRaver said:


> Preferring the flat sound myself, I hear people talk about a speaker as dry or boring or sterile or clinical and think, "sounds perfect!"


By "flat on-axis response" I meant when measured anechoically. Those same speakers will have a downward tilted response in-room.


AudiocRaver said:


> Just funning with you, of course.


Same here.


----------



## Sonnie

callas01 said:


> oops, edited..


Mark will appreciate that. :T


----------



## Sonnie

sdurani said:


> That's what the Toole/Olive research was looking for: trends. They wanted to find out which qualities were consistently preferred (and not preferred) when listeners didn't know which speakers they were listening to, which is what I described in my previous post.
> 
> BTW, those tests represent some of the most comprehensive large-scale studies done on speaker design. At the end of 3 years, 50 speakers and almost 300 listeners, the results weren't a random distribution but instead pointed to very specific qualities. Even people who claimed to prefer speakers that were voiced a certain way ended up not choosing those designs under blind conditions. By "flat on-axis response" I meant when measured anechoically. Those same speakers will have a downward tilted response in-room.


The problem I would have with this telling me anything useful would be the listening position in relation to the speaker placement.

If the listeners were simply asked to tell what they liked best in six different positions and the majority picked the speakers with particular characteristics... I might do the same for those positions. However, that does not mean it is the sound I want... it was merely the best sound I heard in that given test. I might not be able to tell the difference between several of them, but that does not mean I like the sound I am hearing. 

I would want to be blind-folded and have the speaker moved around, preferably starting with the Cardas recommendations and going from there. Let me pick which I like best. Bring in the next set and do the same. The speakers are going to sound their best in different locations. Testing them all in the same location does me absolutely no good... tells me absolutely nothing of use because they are not in their best location. 

Just because they were able to determine trends based on what people preferred, does not mean that is the sound they would prefer over a properly placed speaker and a proper listening position in a given room.

Am I making any sense? I am not sure if I am explaining what I am thinking in the proper words.


----------



## seanpatrick

Sonnie said:


> *Closing Thanks and Appreciation!*
> 
> This completes our first round of $2,500 speaker evaluations... although we will probably bump the second round to $3,000 (2,500 - 3,500). More on this later.
> Last but certainly not least... we appreciate our readers and members, along with your comments. We truly hope you have enjoyed it and that it has been and will be a great reference tool for you in your search for the perfect speakers in _your_ room. Please always keep in mind that NOTHING can replace the need for you to hear these speakers for yourself to make a final decision. Your ears are ultimately the most important ones to help you select the right speakers for you.


Thanks again guys! .. Was totally psyched to hear your impressions of the speakers. Especially of the Paradigms and the SVS Towers. I personally thought the Ultra's were fantastic for home theater at the demo I saw - perhaps they are better suited to that purpose? .. I've always been a fan of Paradigms as well, and will start keeping my eyes open for the Studio 60's over the next year or so just in case a pair pops up. Sonnie's glowing recommendation as well as my previous experience with Paradigm as certainly piqued my curiosity. Thanks again fella's! ... I'll look forward to your next shoot out!.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Wow, we finally got it all posted. Whew!

Final observations have been added to Post number 9 at the beginning of this thread.

*Check it out here*

Topics covered:

*General Observations & Summing Up*

*Room Modes and Common Themes*

*Why The Speakers with the Flat High End Sounded Too Bright*

*Three Critical Tools*

*Abolish Home Theater Stages*

*Speaker Setup Methods*

*Too Many Test Tracks?*

*In Praise of Five Loudspeaker Designers*

*Should We Be Reported As Loudspeaker Abusers?*

*P.S. THANK YOU!*


----------



## |Tch0rT|

Sonnie said:


> I was using the flashlight trick until I got a laser, now I am spoiled, as I can get it dead on... and even a few degrees different toe can make a slight difference between each speakers response. I start with the flashlight trick to get them fairly close, but then I place the laser on the side of the speaker and aim it back at the listening position and at the back wall just above the listening position, with all things being symmetrical, I can get them deal equal on toe-in.


Thanks for this info. I'm going to have to try the laser pointer with my ML's. Thanks for the diagram too.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> The problem I would have with this telling me anything useful would be the listening position in relation to the speaker placement.
> 
> If the listeners were simply asked to tell what they liked best in six different positions and the majority picked the speakers with particular characteristics... I might do the same for those positions. However, that does not mean it is the sound I want... it was merely the best sound I heard in that given test. I might not be able to tell the difference between several of them, but that does not mean I like the sound I am hearing.
> 
> I would want to be blind-folded and have the speaker moved around, preferably starting with the Cardas recommendations and going from there. Let me pick which I like best. Bring in the next set and do the same. The speakers are going to sound their best in different locations. Testing them all in the same location does me absolutely no good... tells me absolutely nothing of use because they are not in their best location.
> 
> Just because they were able to determine trends based on what people preferred, does not mean that is the sound they would prefer over a properly placed speaker and a proper listening position in a given room.
> 
> Am I making any sense? I am not sure if I am explaining what I am thinking in the proper words.


You nailed it as far as I am concerned, and pointed out exactly the problem I have with the way studies like this are usually referred to. A study is set up with a set of assumptions and goals - has to be or it would be infinitely unmanageable - and when it is done, a set of conclusions is presented, usually (if done with integrity) relative to those assumptions (but not always - funny how scientists with salaries & sponsors & mortgages can end up with agendas, too). From that point forward, people (that's us) tend to forget the original limiting assumptions and state the conclusions as universal truths. No doubt those often-referred-to studies have some great insights in the original context, but they are so often quoted with no regard for context and assumptions that they have become next to meaningless in general use (my opinion), and that is really a disservice to the original work.

No disrespect meant to the OP on the topic, just pointing out that we need to consider context when we refer to studies, quotes, laws, theories, myth-busting pronouncements - almost anything that sounds like a sweeping generalization is probably leaving out a whole lot of important background info.


----------



## AudiocRaver

callas01 said:


> good job to the panel and everyone involved including Mark Seaton and the *wifes and families that had to endure and sacrifice*


No kidding, they do put up with a lot.



> have you guys considered contacting the manufactures so they could make their own comments or observations to your assesments?


Not sure what they would say. Some might say "You idiots" if they could address us in person. I made a few remarks about this in post # 9 observations under _should we be reported as loudspeaker abusers?_

I think we would welcome construct feedback pointing out how/why their speakers would work better under this or that condition, even constructive criticism of our methods.

Edit: Sonnie has received private communication from an individual pointing out that our pursuit of the perfect deep soundstage is a folly we can never achieve. Gotta say we have done it pretty well so far, apparently in defiance of the laws of physics.


----------



## orion

AudiocRaver said:


> No kidding, they do put up with a lot.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what they would say. Some might say "You idiots" if they could address us in person. I made a few remarks about this in post # 9 observations under _should we be reported as loudspeaker abusers?_
> 
> I think we would welcome construct feedback pointing out how/why their speakers would work better under this or that condition, even constructive criticism of our methods.
> 
> Edit: Sonnie has received private communication from an individual pointing out that our pursuit of the perfect deep soundstage is a folly we can never achieve. Gotta say we have done it pretty well so far, apparently in defiance of the laws of physics.




People who deal with theory's are constantly amazed by reality


----------



## smurphy522

So........which speaker won?

Really enjoyed reading the evaluation. Thanks to all involved.


----------



## Mike0206

smurphy522 said:


> So........which speaker won? Really enjoyed reading the evaluation. Thanks to all involved.


 It wasn't a shootout so no winner. It was just an evaluation. It's clear there were a couple standouts in the group. Dynaudio and Paradigms seemed to garner the most praise. Take that for what it's worth.


----------



## ajinfla

Sonnie said:


> I would want to be blind-folded


Well, just to clarify for the readers, you don't actually have to be in a "blind" test. You just can't be aware/have prior knowledge of what you are hearing. Harman used a visually opaque/acoustically transparent screen for their tests.



Sonnie said:


> have the speaker moved around, preferably starting with the Cardas recommendations and going from there. Let me pick which I like best. Bring in the next set and do the same. The speakers are going to sound their best in different locations. Testing them all in the same location does me absolutely no good... tells me absolutely nothing of use because they are not in their best location.
> 
> Just because they were able to determine trends based on what people preferred, does not mean that is the sound they would prefer over a properly placed speaker and a proper listening position in a given room.


Agreed to an extent. That was my beef with the Harman research when it was first published. Stereo speaker/listener positioning. There are definite limitations of conclusions, based on what you are saying. However, you should not view the Harman tests in isolation, as they are the tip of the iceberg (certainly the most comprehensive, best known...and most often cited). Eureka project (KEF), the Gradient Bypass test, etc, etc., etc. all found essentially the same thing, under very different conditions.
Speaker with the least amount of amplitude distortion on *and off axis*, are consistently preferred by the majority of listeners...*BLIND*.
Too small a sample size to be relevant, but lo and behold, the speakers that closest meet that criteria seemed to be preferred in your listening sessions as well. Obviously, a great many other factor was involved also.



Sonnie said:


> Am I making any sense?


Remarkably so for an self described "Alabama *******" .
Now, here's the twister. You repeat your listening (with optimal positioning etc) under blind (ears only) conditions, find you most prefer a completely different speaker than the sighted test.
You repeat the sighted test and the original wins again.
Which do you buy for your final decision/"listening" pleasure, the one your ears preferred, or your eyes/ears/etc, etc?

cheers,


----------



## DougReim

What a great report, I really appreciate all the time and effort that you guys put into this. I had just about made up my mind to get the 60's for a 2 channel room I'm setting up and because of this report I just ordered the 60's in Piano Black and should have them by Friday.


----------



## Sonnie

smurphy522 said:


> So........which speaker won?


I think we all had our favorites and maybe not the same speaker this time like in the $1,000... which was more of a shootout, since I was looking for a pair of speakers.

However, we (actually I) did promise the manufacturers we would not rank the speakers, although some of us might mention our favorite.




ajinfla said:


> Remarkably so for an self described "Alabama *******" .


That would be Alabama ******* Hillbilly, please!




ajinfla said:


> Now, here's the twister. You repeat your listening (with optimal positioning etc) under blind (ears only) conditions, find you most prefer a completely different speaker than the sighted test.
> You repeat the sighted test and the original wins again.
> Which do you buy for your final decision/"listening" pleasure, the one your ears preferred, or your eyes/ears/etc, etc?


Good question... it would be a good test.




DougReim said:


> What a great report, I really appreciate all the time and effort that you guys put into this. I had just about made up my mind to get the 60's for a 2 channel room I'm setting up and because of this report I just ordered the 60's in Piano Black and should have them by Friday.


We will be looking forward to your impressions.


----------



## DougReim

We will be looking forward to your impressions.


And you will get them.
After having Paradigm Monitor 11's in my main TV room for 10 years I recently upgraded to the Aperion Verus Grands. It came down to the Aperions, Paradigm 60's or 100's and I also liked the Monitor Audio RX8's. I thought they were all very nice speakers and I really liked the Studio line but in the end I just wanted to try something different. I plan on using the 60's in a different room but before I do I'll put them in the TV room and A/B them with the Aperions. I'm curious myself as to how they compare but when I was auditioning them before I thought they were more similar than different but I never could audition the Paradigm's in my home so it will be interesting to see how they stack up to one another in a direct comparison.


----------



## colofan

I see the results and two items jump out at me. The models that you preferred were easier to setup and looking at the graph off-axis measurements bore this out (all about the power response). 
Dynamics was another on how linear were they operating in when you were using them, power compression testing would bear this out....Thanks for the testing and comments.


----------



## janick

Sonnie said:


> After Hours Fun... with a Few Surprises!
> 
> As a bonus to our members and readers, we will also be reviewing a $20,000 two-channel system. This review will be published later in our Reviews forum, but we will introduce you to the company and the products during the event. This system is truly to die for... just plain awesome and worth every penny of its price.
> 
> But that's not all... we plan to enjoy a little late night fun at Cedar Creek Cinema, and this event is sure to spark some excitement with a special guest, who will also be providing a truly unique 5.0 home theater speaker system (costing well over $10,000) for us to review. This will be the first review of this product. Our plans will be to watch a movie each night of the evaluation, hopefully Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. Then on Sunday evening and Monday, we plan to do more testing and evaluation for a complete review of this speaker system, which will also be posted later in our Reviews forum. I don't think you will want to miss this review. We will announce the manufacturer, the owner and the product a little closer to the event.


Did I miss this part?

Also, I would like to thank everyone for the hours of fun reading. Very enjoyable


----------



## Sonnie

Unfortunately the $20K system did not work out... nor did we have time to review it anyway. We did get to the Seaton Catalyst 8c review and that will be published separately. There are several comments about that throughout the thread. Being a long thread, it could easily be missed.


----------



## bkeeler10

Was the $20k system from the manufacturer that was to become another HTS sponsor? Or was that Seaton?


----------



## shinksma

Doing some further thinking about what I think I "need" vs what I think I "want", and what my current system does for me:

colofan's remarks about a perceived preference for speakers that were easier to set-up and had good off-axis response has me thinking I need to lean more towards that type of speaker. Whatever I use for 2-ch listening would also be applied towards multi-channel music and HT use (I cannot fathom a situation where separate speaker systems would work for me).

So something that can adequately provide a good listening experience to the other listening positions while watching a movie is going to be important. Finicky MLP sweet-spots simply aren't going to cut it if it means significantly sacrificing clarity everywhere else.

Sigh...what to do, what to do? (And of course, the point is very much moot while my current mains keep chugging along and my budget is constrained by reality.)

I guess I'll sit back and wait for the hypothesized bookshelf evaluations to add even more data points to my already confused mind.

But once again, thanks everyone who participated in the evaluations - I know I don't know very much about speakers, but now I don't even know if I realize how little I know!

:huh:

shinksma


----------



## Sonnie

bkeeler10 said:


> Was the $20k system from the manufacturer that was to become another HTS sponsor? Or was that Seaton?


Neither have any intentions of becoming a sponsor that I know of. The Sanders System was the $20K system... and I don't think he does much advertising, but I don't think we would be that great of a market for him anyway. I am not sure about Mark... I have not really discussed sponsorship with him. I generally prefer potential sponsors come to us, as I am not a very good solicitor... or salesman, if you will.


----------



## WRYKER

Speakers are (IMO) the backbone of the entertainment system and buying quality ones will last through HDMI specification changes, 2D, 3D, 4D, UHD etc! Unlike other HT components speakers will last a long time. As in my prior post: I'm not in a position to afford these speakers though if I did I appreciate the lengths your team went through testing these out.


----------



## bkeeler10

Sonnie said:


> Neither have any intentions of becoming a sponsor that I know of. The Sanders System was the $20K system... and I don't think he does much advertising, but I don't think we would be that great of a market for him anyway. I am not sure about Mark... I have not really discussed sponsorship with him. I generally prefer potential sponsors come to us, as I am not a very good solicitor... or salesman, if you will.


Wow I must be losing it :coocoo: I remembered that there was going to be a review of a product by a company that was going to be a new sponsor, and that it would be revealed sometime during this event. :huh: I need a vacation.


----------



## AudiocRaver

shinksma said:


> colofan's remarks about a perceived preference for speakers that were easier to set-up and had good off-axis response has me thinking I need to lean more towards that type of speaker. Whatever I use for 2-ch listening would also be applied towards multi-channel music and HT use


That is the kind of speaker which, generally speaking, tends to meet our listening requirements the best, FWIW.


----------



## Sonnie

bkeeler10 said:


> Wow I must be losing it :coocoo: I remembered that there was going to be a review of a product by a company that was going to be a new sponsor, and that it would be revealed sometime during this event. :huh: I need a vacation.


lol... You are right, and you are not losing it, but I give you permission for a vacation anyway... for remembering so well 

In the very beginning we were going to review a new speaker from Jon Lane and announce Chane Music & Cinema as a new sponsor, but he could not get the prototype to me in time. He is actually still working on it and I hope we eventually get to review it. In the meantime, we went ahead and announced the merger and basically a continued sponsorship with the new company.


----------



## bkeeler10

:sweat: Phew, glad to know I'm not making things up. OTOH, this offers absolutely zero proof that I am not :coocoo: And I just got back from vacation. With the kids. Which is why I need a vacation! And why I'm :coocoo: I'd better terminate this endless loop . . .


----------



## chashint

shinksma said:


> ...
> a perceived preference for speakers that were easier to set-up and had good off-axis response has me thinking I need to lean more towards that type of speaker...


I think a lot of people would do well to give a lot of consideration to this when choosing speakers.
When the speaker placement is predetermined as it is in many situations this becomes even more important.


----------



## phreak

shinksma said:


> I know I don't know very much about speakers, but now I don't even know if I realize how little I know! :huh: shinksma


 Agreed. Most of my friends think of me as being knowledgeable, and I owe most of that to this review panel. It's incredible how much I have learned from this crew, and to other members here at HTS, over the past few years. 
Consider 2 people asking for speaker selection advice:
1) OC audio nut who has flexible placement options available and the interest / time to put into attaining perfection. 
2) Non OC who likes quality but wants to throw speakers where his wife gives him permission, hook them up and enjoy. WAF limits tweaking to a few inches. 
Friend #1 may be walked through this thread, and joined on excursions to 20 different purveyors of fine audio products.
Friend #2 could appreciate saving some time and being assisted on a trip to the 3 closest Paradigm dealers to assist with haggling over the 'Digm in his dime range.


----------



## balor1eye

What happened to the ESLs?


----------



## shinksma

balor1eye said:


> What happened to the ESLs?


See this post by Sonnie:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...uation-home-audition-event-59.html#post651271

In brief:

Something Went Wrong, possibly in shipping.

To be reviewed later, separately.

shinksma


----------



## AudiocRaver

Another thing to keep an eye on if planning to have speakers close to the wall is the location of the bass reflex port. A rear port will sound REALLY boomy close to the wall. A front port gives a lot more flexibility (remember that any speaker will have increased bass by being close to the wall, it just gets a lot worse if there is a rear port).

Rear port designs seem to be most common. The Studio 60's have dual ports, so it is medium sensitive to wall placement.


----------



## Fazorcat

Well it looks like the Paradigms were the favorite from what I gathered. That's the company I was pulling for simply because I own a pair of them....not the ones tested though, I just have the Monitor 7's. They are so clear and crisp to my ears. Anyway, thanks again for the great detailed review and I'll be sure to check in on the next speaker evaluation you guys do!


----------



## SteveCallas

Regarding SVS imaging and soundstage, keep in mind it was the only d'appolito arrangement of all the speakers being tested. In my experience, it's difficult for such an alignment to achieve as good of imaging - all else equal - as a high frequency driver with no drivers above it. The driver above it can cause comb filtering, narrowing the dispersion pattern of the high frequency driver.


----------



## D Wulf

This a a great idea, I wish that there was one done before I bought my speakers AV 123. My setup is okay except the subs they have been a problem since new replaced amps once, no longer in business so I am stuck with these. Shootouts for setups front center and rears as well as subs would be much appreciated.

Thanks


----------



## NewHTbuyer

SteveCallas said:


> Regarding SVS imaging and soundstage, keep in mind it was the only d'appolito arrangement of all the speakers being tested. In my experience, it's difficult for such an alignment to achieve as good of imaging - all else equal - as a high frequency driver with no drivers above it. The driver above it can cause comb filtering, narrowing the dispersion pattern of the high frequency driver.


Actually, I believe that it is not a d'appolito array. The crossovers are different for the two 6.5 inch drivers. The upper crosses to the tweeter at 2 kHz and the lower woofer comes in at 700 Hz.


----------



## JRace

I commend you guys on what must have been a herculian task. Great to see each speaker optimized for its listining position.


----------



## lcaillo

Fazorcat said:


> Well it looks like the Paradigms were the favorite from what I gathered. That's the company I was pulling for simply because I own a pair of them....not the ones tested though, I just have the Monitor 7's. They are so clear and crisp to my ears. Anyway, thanks again for the great detailed review and I'll be sure to check in on the next speaker evaluation you guys do!


Actually, my preference was for the Dynaudio. The Paradigm would be my second choice, though close.


----------



## ALMFamily

lcaillo said:


> Actually, my preference was for the Dynaudio. The Paradigm would be my second choice, though close.


This is where I was as well - these two were almost interchangeable albeit with a slight lean to the Dynaudio.


----------



## labman1

When I was auditioning Paradigms the 2nd choice was Dynaudio. Very similar to me. I ended up with Studio 100's but could have lived with either one. The Paradigm dealer gave me a better deal.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ALMFamily said:


> lcaillo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fazorcat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well it looks like the Paradigms were the favorite from what I gathered. That's the company I was pulling for simply because I own a pair of them....not the ones tested though, I just have the Monitor 7's. They are so clear and crisp to my ears. Anyway, thanks again for the great detailed review and I'll be sure to check in on the next speaker evaluation you guys do!
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, my preference was for the Dynaudio. The Paradigm would be my second choice, though close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is where I was as well - these two were almost interchangeable albeit with a slight lean to the Dynaudio.
Click to expand...

Did not come right out and say it in the main evaluation posts, but the DM 3/7's were the winners for me, too, in spite of the bottoming out on the _Star Trek_ track. The tightness of image, image clarity, and image depth acuity were all the best of the group, with the Studio 60's a _very_ close second. The high end, in spite of the _slight_ rolloff, was the best there for that room.

A very close match, and the Studio 60's might very well have come out ahead in a different room.


----------



## NYPete

What a great event. The amount of work sounds incredible as it always is for these type of things, but it sounds like you guys had a lot of fun. When you have a hobby, or love doing something (like listening to and talking about audio), the whole thing is fun even with all the work. Congratulations and thank you for the evaluation.

I know generalizations are just that but it seems the Dynaudios and Paradigms were the most liked by the most people. Not surprising these two did very well. I have always loved Dynaudio speakers. I think they always have a really smooth sound - very easygoing and non-fatiguing. Even in their relatively inexpensive speakers, there is always a sense of the hi-end - a feeling that you are listening to a hi-end, quality speaker. I don't think I've ever heard a Dynaudio model that I would say was a bad or even mediocre speaker.

Personally, I have not been as attracted to some Paradigm models, but that is clearly personal preference as they are immensely popular and well loved by a lot people, both professional audio reviewers and everyone else. I am not surprised these were perhaps the favorite of many at the evaluation.

What is interesting, maybe not surprising, is that the Dynaudio and Paradigm are usually considered to be very different and liked by different listeners. Dynaudio uses soft-dome tweeters which gives that smooth non-fatiguing sound, while Paradigm uses metal tweeters that are usually considered very accurate and lively but can cause some fatigue. Interesting that many individuals seemed to really like both of these. Goes to show that a good speaker design is probably more important than materials in the drivers, etc.

BTW, I've looked repeatedly but I can't find any mention of the MartinLogan Electromotion ESL. It was listed before the event as being included but then didn't seem to be there, and I can't find something saying why they were dropped. I was looking forward to seeing people's impressions of these in relation to the other speakers, in particular the Magnepans, as I have played around with these at Best Buy/ Magnolia and find them very interesting. Pretty amazing on vocals and upper midrange, but a little lacking in lower mid range and bass.


----------



## AudiocRaver

NewHTbuyer said:


> SteveCallas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Regarding SVS imaging and soundstage, keep in mind it was the only d'appolito arrangement of all the speakers being tested. In my experience, it's difficult for such an alignment to achieve as good of imaging - all else equal - as a high frequency driver with no drivers above it. The driver above it can cause comb filtering, narrowing the dispersion pattern of the high frequency driver.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I believe that it is not a d'appolito array. The crossovers are different for the two 6.5 inch drivers. The upper crosses to the tweeter at 2 kHz and the lower woofer comes in at 700 Hz.
Click to expand...

Correct, although I did not verify the exact frequencies, implemented that way to overcome the very difficulties pointed out by SteveCallas.

Although such an array can have its difficulties, I like that the center of the mid driver image (in between the two) and the tweeter fall right on top of each other. With proper integration, image is killer. Granted, it may be a challenge to achieve. Two examples which I have been recently introduced to where they got it _just right:_ Vapor Stiff Breeze and PTE Phoenix SG.


----------



## AudiocRaver

NYPete said:


> I have always loved Dynaudio speakers. I think they always have a really smooth sound - very easygoing and non-fatiguing.


Exactly what I loved about them, so easy to listen to.



> BTW, I've looked repeatedly but I can't find any mention of the MartinLogan Electromotion ESL. It was listed before the event as being included but then didn't seem to be there, and I can't find something saying why they were dropped. I was looking forward to seeing people's impressions of these in relation to the other speakers, in particular the Magnepans, as I have played around with these at Best Buy/ Magnolia and find them very interesting. Pretty amazing on vocals and upper midrange, but a little lacking in lower mid range and bass.


The ESL'S we received had a problem and we decided not to try to evaluate them with that disadvantage. There is a fresh pair on the way to my house as we speak, and a full review will be posted. Although they will not be evaluated in the same room, I have two rooms to test them in with pretty good characteristics, and will complete the evaluation in a way that covers all the same points, and with the same assumptions and limitations, as we did the others. Being a full review, there will be additional areas covered, too. Like you, I will be interested in hearing how they compare to the Magnepans, and will do my best to do so, given the limits of audio memory. I did take lots of notes on the Magnepans to refer to while completing that review. Of course we did not do _direct_ comparisons or ranking this round, but the general contrasts can not help but be inferred. I love the panel sound in general, so this will be a particularly fun review to complete.


----------



## AudiocRaver

NYPete said:


> What is interesting, maybe not surprising, is that the Dynaudio and Paradigm are usually considered to be very different and liked by different listeners.


We located each speaker set for best sound in the room. The Paragidms and Dynaudios ended up placed in almost the same spots, but aimed quite differently. That might have had somewhat of an "equalizing" effect on the sound. Only a guess.


----------



## ericzim

Any idea when the Martin Logan ElectroMotion ESL review will be compiled? My wife and I are very interested in these speakers characteristics for home theater and 2 channel music and just how much space do these need to get optimal performance from them. She says if they are up to her standards (she has very high standards by the way) than she will see if we can work them into the budget along with a new AVR. I love my wife!


----------



## NYPete

ericzim said:


> Any idea when the Martin Logan ElectroMotion ESL review will be compiled? My wife and I are very interested in these speakers characteristics for home theater and 2 channel music and just how much space do these need to get optimal performance from them. She says if they are up to her standards (she has very high standards by the way) than she will see if we can work them into the budget along with a new AVR. I love my wife!


So do I.


----------



## NYPete

AudiocRaver said:


> Like you, I will be interested in hearing how they compare to the Magnepans, and will do my best to do so, given the limits of audio memory. I did take lots of notes on the Magnepans to refer to while completing that review. Of course we did not do _direct_ comparisons or ranking this round, but the general contrasts can not help but be inferred. I love the panel sound in general, so this will be a particularly fun review to complete.


Definitely looking forward to this. Listening to some jazz on the ESLs compared to a nice pair of B&Ws at Magnolia, the horns and vocals sounded like they were in the room in a way the B&Ws couldn't match, but the B&Ws really swung and got you feeling that swing music more than the MartinLogans. I'll be especially interested to hear your impressions of their reproduction of vocals/piano/horns.


----------



## bkeeler10

As Joe was the only person at this event that was not at the prior event, and as such we don't have his detailed impressions of the Arx A5, I wonder if we could ask him to post his thoughts about his experience with them. Care to share, Joe? Thanks.


----------



## ALMFamily

bkeeler10 said:


> As Joe was the only person at this event that was not at the prior event, and as such we don't have his detailed impressions of the Arx A5, I wonder if we could ask him to post his thoughts about his experience with them. Care to share, Joe? Thanks.


Sure Bryan - I can give just a short description as we just did about 5-10 minutes each on them. I was quite pleased by their imaging capability - honestly, the depth of the soundstage and the separation of instruments into different areas of the soundstage was on par with the Dynaudios and Paradigms. As far as low end, they had what I will call "just enough" - not noteworthy, but not so loose that they distracted.

Vocally, they handled dynamic shifts really well with no signs of compression, but they did not have the open, airy sound I personally crave. Overall, I thought it did a lot of things well - and for the price, I would definitely recommend it as it outperformed a couple speakers in a higher price range IMO.


----------



## sdurani

Sonnie said:


> The problem I would have with this telling me anything useful would be the listening position in relation to the speaker placement.


If you mean asymmetrical placement, then they didn't try that. They did try commonly used symmetrical placements: one speaker directly in front of the listener, two speakers spread out in front of the listener, 5 speakers around the listener using ITU specs. Preference scores remainded consistent across all three configurations. 

However, listeners arrived at their preference quickest (least number of trials) with a single speaker, took them longer to arrive at the same conclusion with 2 speakers, took them much longer with 5 speakers. Speaker rankings remained so consistent that they have since stopped using 2-speaker and 5-speaker layouts.


Sonnie said:


> Just because they were able to determine trends based on what people preferred, does not mean that is the sound they would prefer over a properly placed speaker and a proper listening position in a given room.


Prior tests pointed to those results and subsequent tests validated those results. I'm not telling you that you have to believe Floyd Toole and Sean Olive, just pointing out that they are two data points in a large amount of research into listener preference that supports the notion that speakers voiced away from flat on-axis response tend not to be preferred. But that doesn't mean you don't have to believe all that research.


----------



## sdurani

AudiocRaver said:


> A study is set up with a set of assumptions and goals - has to be or it would be infinitely unmanageable - and when it is done, a set of conclusions is presented, usually (if done with integrity) relative to those assumptions (but not always - funny how scientists with salaries & sponsors & mortgages can end up with agendas, too).


I don't see why it would be "infinitely unmanageable". Suppose you expanded the listening test you just participated in so that it encompassed 50 loudspeakers and 300 listeners over the period of a couple years. At the end of it, you found that certain speakers consistently scored high with most listeners while other speakers repeatedly scored low with most listeners. Without naming brands and model numbers, you publish which qualities were consistently preferred and which were not. What was the "set of assumptions"?


----------



## Sonnie

sdurani said:


> If you mean asymmetrical placement, then they didn't try that. They did try commonly used symmetrical placements: one speaker directly in front of the listener, two speakers spread out in front of the listener, 5 speakers around the listener using ITU specs. Preference scores remainded consistent across all three configurations.
> 
> However, listeners arrived at their preference quickest (least number of trials) with a single speaker, took them longer to arrive at the same conclusion with 2 speakers, took them much longer with 5 speakers. Speaker rankings remained so consistent that they have since stopped using 2-speaker and 5-speaker layouts. Prior tests pointed to those results and subsequent tests validated those results. I'm not telling you that you have to believe Floyd Toole and Sean Olive, just pointing out that they are two data points in a large amount of research into listener preference that supports the notion that speakers voiced away from flat on-axis response tend not to be preferred. But that doesn't mean you don't have to believe all that research.


With those responses, I think you totally missed what I was saying. I do not doubt their test or the results, but that kind of testing is not going to tell me the best speaker for me. It might tell me which speaker I prefer for that test, but then when I get them in my room, with my setup and with my equipment, and in their best placement, which may be completely different than what they used for testing, my choice could be completely different. I need to test speakers in my own environment under my own conditions. Plus, I cannot even begin to tell how well a speaker will image or what kind of soundstage width or depth it will have based on listening to one speaker... there are too many other variables that go into two speakers being right for those characteristics of a speaker to be determined.

Bottom line... the test serves no purpose for me... whether it be accurate, true or neither.


----------



## lcaillo

The purpose of those tests was not to determine which is the best speaker for any one person in any particular placement. It was to determine what most people perceive to be preferable in terms of speaker response. That research provided a very useful baseline for the design of many different products, yet they do not all sound the same. They may share some characteristics, but there are many more variables than were studied in their research.


----------



## lcaillo

sdurani said:


> I don't see why it would be "infinitely unmanageable". Suppose you expanded the listening test you just participated in so that it encompassed 50 loudspeakers and 300 listeners over the period of a couple years. At the end of it, you found that certain speakers consistently scored high with most listeners while other speakers repeatedly scored low with most listeners. Without naming brands and model numbers, you publish which qualities were consistently preferred and which were not. What was the "set of assumptions"?


All research has underlying assumptions. No study can isolate every variable. Our assumptions were many. First and foremost is that positioning for soundstage and imaging is more important than positioning for frequency response. This colors any results and may make them less meaningful to any particular individual. Learning about trends from research has nothing to do with what is preferable to any one individual. That does not make research invalid. On the contrary. Enough research on many variables under many different assumptions is how we expand knowledge and understanding.


----------



## sdurani

Sonnie said:


> I do not doubt their test or the results, but that kind of testing is not going to tell me the best speaker for me.


It's not intended to. Think of it like Top 40 radio. They can tell you what the most popular songs are, but they can't tell you whether you will like any of those songs. However, finding out what's trending in music can tell you some things, like the fact that Broadway show tunes aren't popular enough to show up on a preference-based list. Which was my point about speakers voiced to deviate from flat not scoring high on preference tests.


Sonnie said:


> It might tell me which speaker I prefer for that test, but then when I get them in my room, with my setup and with my equipment, and in their best placement, which may be completely different than what they used for testing, my choice could be completely different.
> 
> Bottom line... the test serves no purpose for me... whether it be accurate, true or neither.


Sure, but the point of those tests was not to choose a speaker for you but to find out what qualities were generally preferred (e.g., flat vs voiced). Otherwise, why would anyone do speaker comparisons at all? I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about the value of tests done in rooms other than our own. You just finished conducting a speaker evaluation in a room that I will never use, but that doesn't mean that your test "serves no purpose" for me. Quite the contrary.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ericzim said:


> Any idea when the Martin Logan ElectroMotion ESL review will be compiled? My wife and I are very interested in these speakers characteristics for home theater and 2 channel music and just how much space do these need to get optimal performance from them. She says if they are up to her standards (she has very high standards by the way) than she will see if we can work them into the budget along with a new AVR. I love my wife!


The ESL's get here Thursday, I probably won't even get them opened up for a week or so...

Who am I kidding, I am already starting to peak out the front window every time a delivery truck goes by. Assuming no problems or damage, will get right on it. Want to try different things in different rooms. By mid December is my goal, but no promises, maybe sooner. Then there is the long-term follow-up listening to make sure nothing important was missed. That could go on for years. Gotta be thorough.:huh:


----------



## Sonnie

sdurani said:


> It's not intended to. Think of it like Top 40 radio. They can tell you what the most popular songs are, but they can't tell you whether you will like any of those songs. However, finding out what's trending in music can tell you some things, like the fact that Broadway show tunes aren't popular enough to show up on a preference-based list. Which was my point about speakers voiced to deviate from flat not scoring high on preference tests. Sure, but the point of those tests was not to choose a speaker for you but to find out what qualities were generally preferred (e.g., flat vs voiced). Otherwise, why would anyone do speaker comparisons at all? I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about the value of tests done in rooms other than our own. You just finished conducting a speaker evaluation in a room that I will never use, but that doesn't mean that your test "serves no purpose" for me. Quite the contrary.


I suppose it depends on what you are looking to help you choose a speaker... not sure why else you would look at speaker testing... other than maybe entertainment. Knowing that 90% of people preferred flat over voiced doesn't help me learn anything... other that 90% of people preferred flat over voiced. I want real world variables for what would be typical. It is not typical for a person to sit in front of one speaker. If it were an evaluation like we did... it might be useful for me. As it is and as it was done, it serves no purpose for me. I can't get any closer to determining what speaker I would buy based on that testing. :huh:

If the test is to determine preferred qualities, they missed quite a few that would be what I would prefer. The reason I do speaker comparisons is to determine what speakers sound the best to me. We share that info with our readers, but it won't tell them what is best for them, although it might tell them that certain qualities are easier to obtain with speaker x over speaker y. That is why it is more useful.


----------



## AudiocRaver

sdurani said:


> I don't see why it would be "infinitely unmanageable". Suppose you expanded the listening test you just participated in so that it encompassed 50 loudspeakers and 300 listeners over the period of a couple years. At the end of it, you found that certain speakers consistently scored high with most listeners while other speakers repeatedly scored low with most listeners. Without naming brands and model numbers, you publish which qualities were consistently preferred and which were not. What was the "set of assumptions"?


All I was saying was: a study has to have assumptions and goals - be it a 1-weekend evaluation of a 10-year study. That is how you end up with meaningful results. The results then refer to the assumptions, have to, you cannot infer universal absolutes from finite data.

Edit: Also, I did not claim the studies to be of no value, they clearly were of value. But the results can be taken out of context, and can then be misleading.


----------



## sdurani

Sonnie said:


> It is not typical for a person to sit in front of one speaker.


As I mentioned previously, they only started testing that way after finding out that there were no differences in ranking when using single speaker vs 2 speakers vs 5 speakers.


----------



## sdurani

AudiocRaver said:


> All I was saying was: a study has to have assumptions and goals - be it a 1-weekend evaluation of a 10-year study.


Since they didn't know which qualities would be preferred (hence the reason for the testing), what were their assumptions?


----------



## skeeter99

AudiocRaver said:


> The ESL's get here Thursday, I probably won't even get them opened up for a week or so... Who am I kidding, I am already starting to peak out the front window every time a delivery truck goes by. Assuming no problems or damage, will get right on it. Want to try different things in different rooms. By mid December is my goal, but no promises, maybe sooner. Then there is the long-term follow-up listening to make sure nothing important was missed. That could go on for years. Gotta be thorough.:huh:


I'm not gonna lie, this (along with the EP's) were the ones I was most looking forward to reading. I've loved panels every time I've heard them. A reasonably priced panel, sign me up! I should go and audition these myself too


----------



## AudiocRaver

sdurani said:


> Since they didn't know which qualities would be preferred (hence the reason for the testing), what were their assumptions?


"Assumption 1: We will perform a variety of tests with different speaker types in different configurations in different rooms to determine trends in what kinds of speakers people tend to prefer."

They did not go for a random stroll through the woods looking for pretty frogs and end up reporting, "Hey, guess what we figured out about loudspeakers!"

Those assumptions can be, and often are, refined along the way. That is fine.

Back to my post about mixing speakers, my conclusion was simply: _Based on a couple hours of reading (assumption) in a forum thread (assumption) of comments mostly by mixing engineers (assumption), it appears (assumption), according to my interpretation of those comments (assumption), that some (assumption) mix engineers prefer speakers with coloration of a certain kind to mix with because it points out to them certain sonic characteristics that are helpful to them that they have a harder time hearing with flat speakers._

Bottom line: I read something and made an interpretation of if. Take my conclusion out of context and it would be easy to make a misleading statement, like: Mix engineers prefer speakers with coloration. Not untrue within the context given, but very misleading outside of that context.


----------



## admranger

AudiocRaver said:


> Another thing to keep an eye on if planning to have speakers close to the wall is the location of the bass reflex port. A rear port will sound REALLY boomy close to the wall. A front port gives a lot more flexibility (remember that any speaker will have increased bass by being close to the wall, it just gets a lot worse if there is a rear port).
> 
> Rear port designs seem to be most common. The Studio 60's have dual ports, so it is medium sensitive to wall placement.


My 'wall sensitivity' issue is a bit different.

I have the joy of the modern home 'media niche' so while I can place my speakers two feet in front of the back wall, the left and right speakers are only 5 inches from the side walls of the niche (though the front of the speakers are in front of the niche sidewalls a bit). Then there's the matter of the 16" 'stage' that everything sits on… 

The B&W LCR6 front soundstage handles this less than perfect situation pretty well. Finding an upgrade for these speakers (outside of the B&W 805s) may prove challenging.


----------



## sdurani

AudiocRaver said:


> "Assumption 1: We will perform a variety of tests with different speaker types in different configurations in different rooms to determine trends in what kinds of speakers people tend to prefer."


An assumption is when you assume something (i.e., start from a premise). What would that assumption/premise have been going into the tests? Not like they knew ahead of time what qualities would be preferred (otherwise they wouldn't have wasted all those resources and time doing the tests).


AudiocRaver said:


> Bottom line: I read something and made an interpretation of if.


I likewise read research and described the findings here. They happen to be different from what you were saying, but I didn't think that posting an alternate viewpoint would be problematic.


----------



## AudiocRaver

admranger said:


> My 'wall sensitivity' issue is a bit different.
> 
> I have the joy of the modern home 'media niche' so while I can place my speakers two feet in front of the back wall, the left and right speakers are only 5 inches from the side walls of the niche (though the front of the speakers are in front of the niche sidewalls a bit). Then there's the matter of the 16" 'stage' that everything sits on…
> 
> The B&W LCR6 front soundstage handles this less than perfect situation pretty well. Finding an upgrade for these speakers (outside of the B&W 805s) may prove challenging.


Yes, our "real-world" rooms can be challenging. The 16 inch high stage sounds like a BIG challenge.


----------



## AudiocRaver

sdurani said:


> I likewise read research and described the findings here. They happen to be different from what you were saying, but I didn't think that posting an alternate viewpoint would be problematic.


It is not.

I respectfully suggest that we have somehow kept missing each other's points - no big deal - and we should let the thread get back to its business. I DO appreciate your thoughtful posts, truly.

Cheers.


----------



## ajinfla

Sonnie said:


> If the test is to determine preferred qualities, they missed quite a few that would be what I would prefer.


Hi Sonnie,

Possible, but impossible to determine, since their tests and your comparisons...are incomparable!! It is entirely possible that you too would prefer speakers with the least amount of polar distortion, in your room, with your ears...but that is NOT under test in your comparisons. There are a great many more variables involved in yours.
Btw, polar response and spatial perception _are_ related. I keep seeing thing stated here as if they aren't.



Sonnie said:


> The reason I do speaker comparisons is to determine what speakers sound the best to me.


Best thing to do. That of course, was not what Harman's tests were about...and I agree with you on the positioning issue, which I argued against myself way back when. Clearly, you cannot plop a Maggie and a cone 'n dome ported box in the same corner positions and expect a reasonable stereophonic comparison, blind or otherwise.



Sonnie said:


> We share that info with our readers, but it won't tell them what is best for them, although it might tell them that certain qualities are easier to obtain with speaker x over speaker y. That is why it is more useful.


Each has its own use, but unfortunately, I would guess 99.85% of readers will misinterpret both equally.
The Harman tests confirmed that the majority of listeners prefer less, not more, native (speaker itself) amplitude distortion...and found that the majority of listeners will prefer less polar response distortion from monopoles in a wider variety of rooms....blind. That's it.
It does NOT mean that the listener will prefer this type of speaker, in their room, sighted.
Your comparison may well reflect this reality, though far more measurements would be required.
Folks really, really should audition speakers themselves, preferably in their own rooms, but that, is also unfortunately, not realistic.

I'll finish with this, my opinion: speakers with smoother polars, tend to sound *more consistent*, in a wider variety of rooms. The opposite being true, speakers with more erratic polars sounding great in one room, terrible in another, i.e. more variability.
So it's not that one sounds "better" than the other (they don't), it's that one more _consistent_ sound qualities, room to room.
Well, except when the room has been turned into an iso ward...which is another matter entirely..:rofl2:

cheers


----------



## AudiocRaver

ajinfla said:


> ...Btw, polar response and spatial perception _are_ related. I keep seeing thing stated here as if they aren't...


While that has not been made a huge point of in these discussions, it is understood on our part and has been mentioned, or at least implied, in various posts. Thank you for the clarification.


----------



## ajinfla

Thanks AudiocRaver and also to clarify myself, in my first paragraph response to Sonnie, Harman wasn't testing for "dynamics",etc. so we are in further agreement there.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ajinfla said:


> Each has its own use, but unfortunately, I would guess 99.85% of readers will misinterpret both equally.


Yes, all you can do is state your conditions and assumptions... over and over, as we do... the rest is up to the reader.



> The Harman tests confirmed that the majority of listeners prefer less, not more, native (speaker itself) amplitude distortion...and found that the majority of listeners will prefer less polar response distortion from monopoles in a wider variety of rooms....blind. That's it.


A good summary of a worthwhile study. While our tests do not compare to the Harmon tests directly, there is nothing in our findings that I personally can see being incompatible with, or in conflict with, the Harmon study findings as stated.

Thanks again.


----------



## Sonnie

ajinfla said:


> Btw, polar response and spatial perception _are_ related. I keep seeing things stated here as if they aren't.


Are you saying the north pole has something to do with the old guy in the red suit and raindeer flying through space?




ajinfla said:


> Folks really, really should audition speakers themselves, preferably in their own rooms, but that, is also unfortunately, not realistic.


We really try to emphasize this ... and do so more than we ever have. It is unfortunate for those that do not have the ability. If you could somehow narrow it down to two or three and get those in your home for a trial, it would be worth the return shipping on the other two for you to have the ability to listen to each one.

-------------------------

What if Harman took each speaker and placed it for optimal imaging, soundstage width and depth acuity, then each listener given a chance to listen to those characteristics. Would they have chosen the same speakers?


----------



## ajinfla

Sonnie said:


> Are you saying the north pole has something to do with the old guy in the red suit and raindeer flying through space?


The existence of Santa has never been demonstrated under double blind conditions (unrelated to alcohol consumption).



Sonnie said:


> What if Harman took each speaker and placed it for optimal imaging, soundstage width and depth acuity, then each listener given a chance to listen to those characteristics.


If if and buts were candy and nuts...
Actually, I asked the same thing. , I didn't even get a response about specific data on the "acoustically transparent screen" (and not just the on axis attenuation characteristics).
And what happens when they played "Tricycle" at AJ levels, or that Roger Waters(?) track at Sonnie levels, etc, etc? But I do agree with what they did find, with caveats.



Sonnie said:


> Would they have chosen the same speakers?


Don't be silly. They would have chosen mine, unanimously.

cheers


----------



## Sonnie

I would be 'amused to death' at you riding a 'tricycle'!!!


----------



## ajinfla

Sonnie said:


> I would be 'amused to death' at you riding a 'tricycle'!!!


Yeah, like the Dynaudio woofers, you'd probably crack up


----------



## AudiocRaver

Alright, break it up you two.

What we are running into is a redefinition of what a speaker's sound is.

Classic definition is on-axis.

We are defining it, for our purposes, as a pair set up with soundstage and imaging optimized. Would have liked to see the reactions of test subjects with the soundstage of the Dynaudio or Paradigm or Arx as we had them set up.


----------



## Sonnie

:surrender:


----------



## prerich

Once again, I love what you guys have done here. I have a theory that personal taste, culture, and age can dictate our choices in speaker preference. I love that it was called an evaluation rather than a shoot-out. A shootout implies a winner or "I'm better than you". An eval just looks at the speaker as it is, points out personal preferences and allows the product to be exactly what it is. I'm learning to enjoy different aspects of speaker design. I'm a horn man myself - but I like what other speakers can bring to the table!!!!  

It's just all good :bigsmile:


----------



## ajinfla

AudiocRaver said:


> We are defining it, for our purposes, as a pair set up with soundstage and imaging optimized. Would have liked to see the reactions of test subjects with the soundstage of the Dynaudio or Paradigm or Arx as we had them set up.


There may be a very good reason why Harman avoided this conundrum. What is "optimized imaging" for a recorded stereo construct? Ever been to a studio to witness this construction?
How would one measure to confirm, that it was indeed "optimized" (like FR)? Against what reference?
We are looking at some form of preference here, rather than optimization IMHO.

cheers


----------



## ajinfla

Oh, btw, spatial reproduction _can_ be measured utilizing tools such as interferometry, but "optimization" of a stereo construct in another matter entirely.


----------



## AudiocRaver

No doubt about it, what we are talking about is pretty much in the subjective realm right now. I would like to find ways to change that.

I am aware of many of the techniques used to create the phenomena in a recordings, and have given thought to ways to create standardized recordings that might help make objective evaluation possible, but there is no work that I am aware of in the industry that can do this. That makes it difficult to apply in a rigorous study.

For our evaluations, we are defining it the best we can. We are able to repeat the phenomenon consistently and many ears have witnessed it, so we are confident that it is repeatable and stable, not a fleeting thing. We are doing what we can to document our setup techniques so others may reproduce it for comparison. Not scientifically rigorous, but attempting to point in that general direction.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Plus, it is a bit of a shame, although understandable at the same time, that such a wonderful phenomenon be essentially denied to exist because it is difficult to define and measure.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ajinfla said:


> How would one measure to confirm, that it was indeed "optimized" (like FR)? Against what reference? We are looking at some form of preference here, rather than optimization IMHO.


Very good point, can't stop thinking about it. The reference is what is missing, a standard against which one can say they are 50% or 90% or 99% "there." That and tools to help listeners to achieve it consistently and without special training.


----------



## Mike0206

This thread has officially gone over my head......lol


----------



## AudiocRaver

Mike0206 said:


> This thread has officially gone over my head......lol


Thanks for the nudge, Mike. I concur. We will carry on any further discussions about imaging and soundstage in the _How do you define good Imaging? and good Soundstage?_ thread in the Two-Channel area.


----------



## skeeter99

Mike0206 said:


> This thread has officially gone over my head......lol


Me too! My eyes glossed over a few pages back :rofl: Glad I wasn't the only one!


----------



## moparz10

i guess this means my bbq sauce could be perceived as tasting better than one made in tha south :rofl:


----------



## rab-byte

moparz10 said:


> i guess this means my bbq sauce could be perceived as tasting better than one made in tha south :rofl:


True but the best BBQ sauce comes from KC in a little joint called Gates


----------



## Macattack

Wow - this thread has taken a few twists and turns sometimes driven by those who want to see the science, the explanation or fact behind the observations. I am thankful for people like you because in total you have made this hobby possible for those of us who simply enjoy and feel or sense what - it is. 

I have stood in my room and 'seen' an instrument that was right in front of my face and heard a voice that was behind me. It was just simply cool and I have no interest in trying to figure out how it is done or the 'why' of it. I don't question it but accept that others do and am glad for that. 

I really enjoy this type of review and take it for what it is. A point in time comparison by well meaning folks I might want to have a beeer with sometime.

Great community here. It takes a village to make it so.


----------



## moparz10

rab-byte said:


> True but the best BBQ sauce comes from KC in a little joint called Gates


that might depend on your where sitting placement is in the back yard,temp,chicken beef or pork :bigsmile:


----------



## AudiocRaver

rab-byte said:


> True but the best BBQ sauce comes from KC in a little joint called Gates


Have had Gates BBQ many times, it is fine BBQ.

My first intro to really good BBQ was John Hardy's BBQ in Rochester, MN. John set the bar pretty high. Very smokey, falling off the bone, great tangy sauces.



Macattack said:


> Wow - this thread has taken a few twists and turns sometimes driven by those who want to see the science, the explanation or fact behind the observations. I am thankful for people like you because in total you have made this hobby possible for those of us who simply enjoy and feel or sense what - it is.
> 
> I have stood in my room and 'seen' an instrument that was right in front of my face and heard a voice that was behind me. It was just simply cool and I have no interest in trying to figure out how it is done or the 'why' of it. I don't question it but accept that others do and am glad for that.
> 
> I really enjoy this type of review and take it for what it is. A point in time comparison by well meaning folks I might want to have a beeer with sometime.
> 
> Great community here. It takes a village to make it so.


Thanks for your support and your patience. We get sidetracked _a little_ once in awhile, but our intentions are good. It is all about the movies and the music!


----------



## vann_d

Hey great write-ups to all the reviewers! 

I must say that I was really excited to read about the Emerald Physics speakers and then pretty disappointed when they turned out to be nothing like I thought they'd be.

I'd love to hear some Paradigms in person someday. I've always read that they were great speakers but I guess the traditional look to them made me think they were nothing that special. After reading the reviews I feel a renewed interest.


----------



## lcaillo

Macattack said:


> Wow - this thread has taken a few twists and turns sometimes driven by those who want to see the science, the explanation or fact behind the observations. I am thankful for people like you because in total you have made this hobby possible for those of us who simply enjoy and feel or sense what - it is.
> 
> I have stood in my room and 'seen' an instrument that was right in front of my face and heard a voice that was behind me. It was just simply cool and I have no interest in trying to figure out how it is done or the 'why' of it. I don't question it but accept that others do and am glad for that.
> 
> I really enjoy this type of review and take it for what it is. A point in time comparison by well meaning folks I might want to have a beeer with sometime.
> 
> Great community here. It takes a village to make it so.


Few are more interested in being able to quantify performance than Wayne. And he and I have very similar views in that way. It might seem unusual that we give such subjective impressions of the speakers. What we try to do is quantify anything we can that might be useful or meaningful, try to optimize the speaker position by relying on several different listener's observations, then try to relay our experience as best we can. Now that experience might not be useful or meaningful to some, nor is it in any way objective, but it is not meant to be. It is just that, our experience and opinion, and we don't pretend to be objective about it. In fact, we have been very open about our biases, priorities, and preferences.

What is amazing about humanity is that we can find value in both the objective and the subjective. Human perception and experience is some representation of reality, probably not particularly accurate in many ways, but we can express that experience in a manner that others can find value, information, or even joy. If we are successful, it is not because we mapped out every finite element of performance and quantified it, it is because we can give meaning and context to the experience of others.

The false dichotomy between objectivism and subjectivism may be fun to debate, and we may chase the dragon or grail of a truly objective reference to good purpose, but meaning and value require something more. It seems we hit the mark in these evaluations for many, and for that I am proud.

That said, knowing my partners in crime, we are never satisfied that we cannot do better. Or learn more. We share that journey here, and that is ultimately why we do it.


----------



## lcaillo

vann_d said:


> Hey great write-ups to all the reviewers!
> 
> I must say that I was really excited to read about the Emerald Physics speakers and then pretty disappointed when they turned out to be nothing like I thought they'd be.
> 
> I'd love to hear some Paradigms in person someday. I've always read that they were great speakers but I guess the traditional look to them made me think they were nothing that special. After reading the reviews I feel a renewed interest.


Thank you sincerely for the compliment.

I was hoping the EP would be more appealing to me as well. I just did not get a sense that the speaker works as a whole for me. It seems to have different character at different frequency ranges and levels. Not unpleasant, and certainly an intriguing listen, but it did not call for more listening for me.

Paradigm has certainly been a consistent performer for decades. They were no disappointment this time for sure. I slightly preferred the Dynaudio, but I could see how many would flip that preference around.


----------



## lcaillo

Sounds like the community here is begging for a BBQ shootout!


----------



## AudiocRaver

lcaillo said:


> The false dichotomy between objectivism and subjectivism may be fun to debate, and we may chase the dragon or grail of a truly objective reference to good purpose, but meaning and value require something more. It seems we hit the mark in these evaluations for many, and for that I am proud.


Well said, Leonard. "Feet on the ground and head in the clouds."


----------



## Greenster

Just got a chance to read all of the reviews. Can I say thank you for doing this. I really enjoy reading this kind of stuff. Being in the middle of my HT build, this thread really helps me out as I still need front and center speakers. 

This thread has changed my thinking about adding a front stage to my room. I really like the look but am now thinking about eliminating it because it limites what you can do with the room too much. Thanks again for this event.


----------



## needspeed52

I just want to extend my sincere thanks for all the work you guys have done. It is so refreshing to hear folks actual impressions of what they are hearing without a thousand different numbers to explain why they are hearing what they are. I realize numbers are important to make a decision to even audition a speaker, but hands on listening is what compels me to to persue a particular brand or model of speaker. I love your no nonsense approach and again commend you guys for bringing all of this to us folks who don't have the opportunity to go out and listen to as many speakers as possible. You guys are doing all the leg (EAR) work, this is priceless. Just because the ARX5 was so well received didn't change my opion or impressions of them, I really liked them the moment I brought them home and to have them mentioned in the company of some well known and very popular brands is just another feather in their cap. Thank you again my friends, well done. I am very proud to be a part of this family of folks who seek the truth without the perks to sway your impressions with so many others that do. Happy Happy Holidays to all.
Best Regards, Jeffrey :T


----------



## JeffB

One thing I am always interested in is how the design of a speaker effects its sound. For example, Vandersteen likes to talk up their first order cross-overs like it is the only way to go. After listening to one Vandersteen model that I didn't care for I am not sure if first order cross-overs are good or not. I also tend to notice a certain boominess with bass-reflex designs. Perhaps with the right box design this is not an issue, but I think in general it is a negative trade-off of the bass-reflex model. So I am curious about other designs like transmission line, aperiodic, open-baffle, horn, etc. Of course, one often trades for different qualities rather than getting an across the board improvement. The new Wharfdale Jade5 is an aperiodic design and thus really interests me. I often wonder why cross-overs are placed in 2k-3k region where human hearing is so sensitive. Why are there not more 3 way designs using say a 3" midrange. A good 3" midrange could cover from 150Hz to 4k or so. This would move the cross-over to the tweeter higher which seems like a good thing to me. It would also allow for a 10" driver on the bottom to hit hard. Perhaps 3 way integration is just too hard. But in a way most speakers need a subwoofer creating a 3-way design anyway, but with time alignment issues. I have an experimental open-baffle at home with a 15" pro-audio woofer on an 18" baffle. It is the most natural bass that I have heard. It would not be for everybody though as it does not provide that pound you in the chest kick drum. But my sub-amp is only 10 watts, lol. I see a lot of designs lately with tweeter wave guides. Of all of these that I have heard it seems to make the sound brighter to my ears and not better. There is also baffle step correction where the right amount depends upon the distance to the front wall and maybe the room size. Its too bad this isn't left out of speakers all together and adjusted digitally via some form of room correction. I can't help but feel that someday digital cross-overs will be the way to go. It is also a little surprising to me that more speakers don't try harder to reduce baffle diffraction, like say the Anthony Gallo Orbs or more conservatively like the Diapason Karis. So many variables, but it would be nice to see some of these areas explored.


----------



## theJman

Greenster said:


> Can I say thank you for doing this.


You certainly can, but they would prefer you show appreciation in a more tangible way (read: monetarily).


----------



## rab-byte

lcaillo said:


> Sounds like the community here is begging for a BBQ shootout!


Some one has to invite Bobby Flay


----------



## ALMFamily

theJman said:


> You certainly can, but they would prefer you show appreciation in a more tangible way (read: monetarily).


Or, invite us all out to Jim's place as I hear he puts on a great party...


----------



## moparz10

lcaillo said:


> Sounds like the community here is begging for a BBQ shootout!


I'd be more than happy to ship some of my secret stuff to the evaluation staff with my deepest appreciation for this has been a fun and informative ride.


----------



## JBrax

Thank you to all who put in the time and effort for the $2,500 speaker evaluation. This has been a very in depth and lengthy read but enjoyable. Having personally listened to a few Different lines of the Paradigm speakers I was confident they would do well. At some point when money allows I'll be putting together a two channel system and Paradigm is on my short list. I'd really like to find some ARX A5's and give them a listen before pulling the trigger but I have some time. Thanks again HTS!


----------



## AudiocRaver

Greenster & needspeed52 & all else who have said thanks: your appreciation is appreciated, and you are welcome.



needspeed52 said:


> It is so refreshing to hear folks actual impressions of what they are hearing without a thousand different numbers to explain why they are hearing what they are. I realize numbers are important to make a decision to even audition a speaker, but hands on listening is what compels me to to persue a particular brand or model of speaker.


I am particularly fascinated by the relationships between what we measure and what we hear. the objective and subjective, but of course it has to be kept interesting and tell a story that informs, too. I like a healthy balance of the two, and try to remember that most of us have a _boring detail_ threshold that has to be watched our for.



Greenster said:


> This thread has changed my thinking about adding a front stage to my room. I really like the look but am now thinking about eliminating it because it limites what you can do with the room too much. Thanks again for this event.


They can look nice and add to the theater vibe, that is for sure. Even with a room dedicated to cinema viewing, they put tower mains at a boosted height, which can make a little or a big difference in their sound. But for music listening, that difference is likely to stand out more. The stage has constantly been in the way for us. Can't think of a single time one of us has said, "Sure is a good thing we have this stage here."



JeffB said:


> One thing I am always interested in is how the design of a speaker effects its sound. For example, Vandersteen likes to talk up their first order cross-overs like it is the only way to go. After listening to one Vandersteen model that I didn't care for I am not sure if first order cross-overs are good or not. I also tend to notice a certain boominess with bass-reflex designs. Perhaps with the right box design this is not an issue, but I think in general it is a negative trade-off of the bass-reflex model. So I am curious about other designs like transmission line, aperiodic, open-baffle, horn, etc. Of course, one often trades for different qualities rather than getting an across the board improvement. The new Wharfdale Jade5 is an aperiodic design and thus really interests me. I often wonder why cross-overs are placed in 2k-3k region where human hearing is so sensitive. Why are there not more 3 way designs using say a 3" midrange. A good 3" midrange could cover from 150Hz to 4k or so. This would move the cross-over to the tweeter higher which seems like a good thing to me. It would also allow for a 10" driver on the bottom to hit hard. Perhaps 3 way integration is just too hard. But in a way most speakers need a subwoofer creating a 3-way design anyway, but with time alignment issues. I have an experimental open-baffle at home with a 15" pro-audio woofer on an 18" baffle. It is the most natural bass that I have heard. It would not be for everybody though as it does not provide that pound you in the chest kick drum. But my sub-amp is only 10 watts, lol. I see a lot of designs lately with tweeter wave guides. Of all of these that I have heard it seems to make the sound brighter to my ears and not better. There is also baffle step correction where the right amount depends upon the distance to the front wall and maybe the room size. Its too bad this isn't left out of speakers all together and adjusted digitally via some form of room correction. I can't help but feel that someday digital cross-overs will be the way to go. It is also a little surprising to me that more speakers don't try harder to reduce baffle diffraction, like say the Anthony Gallo Orbs or more conservatively like the Diapason Karis. So many variables, but it would be nice to see some of these areas explored.


Quite a summary of design tradeoffs and issues. Makes you wonder how a design ever gets done with so many decisions to be made. We have gotten into some of the parameters that directly affect speaker placement, like monopole vs. dipole, and front vs. rear ports. A number of these variables affect now difficult or easy it can be to find a speaker's ideal placement for best sound, or placement flexibility and sensitivity, and related LP position flexibility. A lot of these variables are _inner details_ that will be difficult to evaluate directly, but can be pointed out and discussed in how they seem to be affecting the speaker's sound and flexibility. We are interested in these details, too, and will delve into them as we find ways to accurately report more about them.

==============

As for suggestions how to best express appreciation:

treats never hurt
keep us laughing
hug your pet
how about: Click through an HTS ad or banner to a sponsor, one who participated in the event, or any of them, pick one


----------



## chashint

moparz10 said:


> i guess this means my bbq sauce could be perceived as tasting better than one made in tha south :rofl:


Probably not.?


----------



## Infrasonic

Looking at the group photo of you guys my first thought was “Hey, that’s Mark Seaton!”. So not only do you guys get to listen to great music with an array of very good speakers but you’ve got the godfather of bass there to setup his Catalyst system – you lucky dogs you! I can’t wait to read your impressions of *that* setup.

I have not heard any of these speakers in person but I was surprised by the impressive performance by the Dynaudio’s just based on the name recognition of its competitors. I haven’t been following every post (my apologies if this has been answered) but has Dynaudio tested those speakers when you sent them back to make sure the woofers were not damaged before your audition? Or were those speakers purchased outright? I am especially interested in them due to their lack of brightness; that is one area that I seem to be especially sensitive to, similar to Wayne it seems.

I’ve kept an eye on Paradigm over the years due to their rabid following and I’m glad they were entered into the event. Whenever I finally get a new home for my HT they will be on my short list along with the Dyna’s (although the more of these audition threads I read the longer that list is getting!). 

Thanks again for all you have invested (both time and money) and I look forward to reading more of these in-depth reviews.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Infrasonic said:


> Looking at the group photo of you guys my first thought was “Hey, that’s Mark Seaton!”. So not only do you guys get to listen to great music with an array of very good speakers but you’ve got the godfather of bass there to setup his Catalyst system – you lucky dogs you! I can’t wait to read your impressions of *that* setup.


Working on them as we speak. He really was a wizard working with the subs.



> ...has Dynaudio tested those speakers when you sent them back to make sure the woofers were not damaged before your audition?


They were a review pair that had been used at least once before. Not sure what testing has been done on them.



> I am especially interested in them due to their lack of brightness; that is one area that I seem to be especially sensitive to, similar to Wayne it seems.


Their highs were exactly right for me, in that room anyway, almost dreamy smooth. Leonard and Joe said similar things, as I recall.

The HTD Level Three Towers I am reviewing right now in my home are more like the Paradigms in brightness the way I have them set up, plenty hot but are not bothersome. The room is deader and the speakers are closer. Many factors.

I definitely have a fairly hard threshold where my ears say "too bright" and for anyone who has a similar threshold, I agree that the Dynaudios would be worth looking at - having many other attractive qualities too.



> Thanks again for all you have invested (both time and money) and I look forward to reading more of these in-depth reviews.


:T


----------



## natescriven

I think these evaluations are interesting because they help me know what to listen for. I will definitely experiment with speaker placement cause of this. Thanks for your hard work!


----------



## Aquarian

hey guys,

i didnt do a quality post 
I was in learning stage but am sure that I will try to do something next time whenever theres any reviews or contests happen. 

good to see all the posts from all good members of HTS


----------



## AudiocRaver

natescriven said:


> I think these evaluations are interesting because they help me know what to listen for. I will definitely experiment with speaker placement cause of this. Thanks for your hard work!


If you are thinking of playing with placement, you might take a look at the beginnings of our setup guide.


----------



## Infrasonic

Thanks for the reply Wayne!

Yes some of us are more sensitive to it than others; then of course there is what room acoustics and placement does to shape what we hear as you mentioned in the review.


----------



## janick

*Issues downloading REW files*

I'm having permission issues trying to download the .mdat file for the Paradigm. Does everybody have restrictions? The error I get "janick, you do not have permission to access this page." thx


----------



## Sonnie

AudiocRaver said:


> My first intro to really good BBQ was John Hardy's BBQ in Rochester, MN.


And I thought I was going to read something different. :sad2:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> And I thought I was going to read something different. :sad2:


I did not say it was last or best. I have had what was supposed to be the best in a city or region that was not near as good.

Then there was the BBQ I had recently at a guy's place in southern Alabama that pretty much stole the show in all classes, including the coveted _cooked with lots of TLC_ award. The only problem is the conditioning that has taken place and the expectation put in place for future visits - denial can lead to severe PTSD.


----------



## Sonnie

janick said:


> I'm having permission issues trying to download the .mdat file for the Paradigm. Does everybody have restrictions? The error I get "janick, you do not have permission to access this page." thx


I think we will have to upload a few of those again. Will fix shortly.




AudiocRaver said:


> I did not say it was last or best. I have had what was supposed to be the best in a city or region that was not near as good.
> 
> Then there was the BBQ I had recently at a guy's place in southern Alabama that pretty much stole the show in all classes, including the coveted _cooked with lots of TLC_ award. The only problem is the conditioning that has taken place and the expectation put in place for future visits - denial can lead to severe PTSD.


Feeling better already! :T


----------



## AudiocRaver

Infrasonic said:


> Thanks for the reply Wayne!
> 
> Yes some of us are more sensitive to it than others; then of course there is what room acoustics and placement does to shape what we hear as you mentioned in the review.


FWIW, being aware that ear fatigue can be a problem with an event like this, including possibly shifting one's comfort and preference thresholds, we took lots of breaks. I also had a set of sealed headphones which I wore most of the time I was not actively listening for some extra attenuation and protection against hearing fatigue.


----------



## Sonnie

*Re: Issues downloading REW files*



janick said:


> I'm having permission issues trying to download the .mdat file for the Paradigm. Does everybody have restrictions? The error I get "janick, you do not have permission to access this page." thx


It should work now.


----------



## jpmst3

Whoa, I step away from the Shack for a while and I miss everything! 
That is quite the collection of hardware there! I wish I could have been part that testing session!:T


----------



## Sonnie

I wish there was someway we could have a member as a guest. If we just stick with 6 speakers and don't do any other reviews, we might be able to make that happen. Of course the member would have to cover their own travel expenses. I think we could feed you well though.

Leonard, Wayne, Joe... what say ye?


----------



## skeeter99

There are so many awesome people on this forum, it'd really be cool if a "regular" member could put their words to the evals also. I know there would be QUITE the list of people cal morning to be a part of an event


----------



## lcaillo

Actually, I think Sonnie, Wayne, Joe, Quentin, and me are all not that different from other members. We are just hobbyists that enjoy good music and movies.


----------



## Sonnie

Good point Leonard... being staff does not make us any better than any other member. Of course being on staff does afford us some nice benefits that we are able to take advantage of... but it certainly does not make us any more or less important than anyone else... just fortunate.


----------



## phreak

I think you had a great idea and don't see how anyone could have been offended. Why not have a draw for a seat of privilege on the panel with the only qualification of being responsible for your own expenses. If anyone is unable to attend but would like to sponsor me, I would be honoured to accept.


----------



## Savjac

:wave::wave: I volunteer, and can even bring some things of my own should it be needed, such as a nice old pair of DQ10's or super efficient Tang Bands, or just me. I am even potty trained. :heehee:


----------



## ALMFamily

Sonnie said:


> I wish there was someway we could have a member as a guest. If we just stick with 6 speakers and don't do any other reviews, we might be able to make that happen. Of course the member would have to cover their own travel expenses. I think we could feed you well though.
> 
> Leonard, Wayne, Joe... what say ye?





lcaillo said:


> Actually, I think Sonnie, Wayne, Joe, Quentin, and me are all not that different from other members. We are just hobbyists that enjoy good music and movies.





Sonnie said:


> Good point Leonard... being staff does not make us any better than any other member. Of course being on staff does afford us some nice benefits that we are able to take advantage of... but it certainly does not make us any more or less important than anyone else... just fortunate.


Excellent point Leonard - I know I for one by no means think of myself as an expert. That said, I think it is a really cool idea. Can Angie and Gracie handle an extra?


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> I wish there was someway we could have a member as a guest. If we just stick with 6 speakers and don't do any other reviews, we might be able to make that happen. Of course the member would have to cover their own travel expenses. I think we could feed you well though.
> 
> Leonard, Wayne, Joe... what say ye?


There is 1 extra seat in the back row, on a rotating basis, or we could squeeze in a folding chair. Last time Mark Seaton was our guest (BTW, I am finishing my review of his speakers and work now). It might be fun to include a selected member-guest in the festivities, with abbreviated listening privileges. Of course that means putting him to work!


----------



## lcaillo

I am all for it.

But we need to have full disclosure here. Anyone who might join us will have to put up with a fair amount of eccentricity. We are a rather odd bunch in some ways. Late nights listening (actually early mornings), getting a bit punchy at times, generous volumes of sarcasm, and of course the venue is the middle of South Alabama hillbilly land.


----------



## AudiocRaver

lcaillo said:


> I am all for it.
> 
> But we need to have full disclosure here. Anyone who might join us will have to put up with a fair amount of eccentricity. We are a rather odd bunch in some ways. Late nights listening (actually early mornings), getting a bit punchy at times, generous volumes of sarcasm, and of course the venue is the middle of South Alabama hillbilly land.


I was reluctant to reveal so much. You will scare them away for sure.


----------



## bkeeler10

Sounds to me like just an added dimension of entertainment.


----------



## Andre

Thank you very much for all the work (and fun) for the eval staff. For me one of the most important was the "close to the front wall" eval as this is something I take seriously considering my small HT. I wish it was also done with the 1k eval. Will we ever see a center channel or LCR shootout?


----------



## Sonnie

Yep... we call it entertainment in hillbilly land!!!

Hey... it's a LOT more fun that going to Disneyland. 

Это английский говоря форум, но, возможно, кто-то еще знает русский.


----------



## Sonnie

Andre said:


> Will we ever see a center channel or LCR shootout?


I kind of doubt we will get that far with it. That would be too much like work than enjoyment.


----------



## lcaillo

I don't know what one would be looking for in a center channel alone. And LCR is so sensitive to placement and install differences like screens and displays. The material that matters for this kind of application also varies greatly. It would be tough to decide what matters. To me, once one finds the character of a speaker that is preferred, matching the center is what is most important.


----------



## shinksma

Andre said:


> Will we ever see a center channel or LCR shootout?





Sonnie said:


> I kind of doubt we will get that far with it. That would be too much like work than enjoyment.


While I agree that either situation would be more work and less play, that is the one element that helps tie a 2-ch set-up into a 5.1 / 7.1 envelope for HT or multi-channel music set-up. If I could get a better feel for how well a particular brand or model of center channel can integrate with the L+R, I would feel assured the overall system would be meeting my needs, and hopefully it would be info that other folks would find useful for the same reasons.

I suppose the best way to solve my concerns is get identical LCRs (and maybe surrounds too), but it seems a good center for my situation would be a MTM (horizontally), while I'm not sure whether I'd want MTMs (vertically) for L+R. That's where a "shootout" or evaluation thread would help me.

Still, enough whinging, and thanks again for this event and thread.

shinksma


----------



## admranger

I speak sarcasm! Fluently…


----------



## Sonnie

At least you would meet that qualification.


----------



## PEB

What gives you hesitation about MTM for L/R? What other design formats would you consider?


----------



## lcaillo

PEB said:


> What gives you hesitation about MTM for L/R? What other design formats would you consider?


I don't really understand your question nor who it is directed to. Can you elaborate?


----------



## lcaillo

shinksma said:


> While I agree that either situation would be more work and less play, that is the one element that helps tie a 2-ch set-up into a 5.1 / 7.1 envelope for HT or multi-channel music set-up. If I could get a better feel for how well a particular brand or model of center channel can integrate with the L+R, I would feel assured the overall system would be meeting my needs, and hopefully it would be info that other folks would find useful for the same reasons.
> 
> I suppose the best way to solve my concerns is get identical LCRs (and maybe surrounds too), but it seems a good center for my situation would be a MTM (horizontally), while I'm not sure whether I'd want MTMs (vertically) for L+R. That's where a "shootout" or evaluation thread would help me.
> 
> Still, enough whinging, and thanks again for this event and thread.
> 
> shinksma


Consider what we have done with the 2 channel evals. We focused on the parameter of sound stage. If we did a similar evaluation that used LCR, what would the placement and listening priorities be? LCR integration is far more dependent on placement and environment and source mix than any other variables. What would we meaningfully be able to tell you about an LCR combo other than finding severe issues with poor design that does not translate LR performance to LCR? A reasonably designed center using the same basic technology and voicing as LR speakers should perform quite well as LCR. At least in my experience. LCR systems simply will not have the same degree of image definition due to the nature of the mix and material. 

The questions are completely different with LCR vs 2 channel. Different priorities and different considerations for variables for evaluation. We would need to come up with a model that focuses on those priorities. It was somewhat easier to do this with the 2 ch. evals because Sonnie's priorities provided us a good starting point.


----------



## AudiocRaver

shinksma said:


> ...that is the one element that helps tie a 2-ch set-up into a 5.1 / 7.1 envelope for HT or multi-channel music set-up. If I could get a better feel for how well a particular brand or model of center channel can integrate with the L+R...


Here is one overly-simplistic way of looking at it:

C handles dialogue well
C has same (or close) tonality to L/R (except might not go as deep)
Which means L/R also handle dialogue well. So this becomes the main question. We could _consider_ including a well-selected track or medley of music+dialogue from movies and briefly evaluate how well the dialogue stands out.



> I suppose the best way to solve my concerns is get identical LCRs (and maybe surrounds too)...


Yes.



> ...I'm not sure whether I'd want MTMs (vertically) for L+R...


I can not think why not. A design with good M-T integration, _always_ a priority to minimize lobing, means you can have just-as-good M-T-M integration. The tweeter is in the center of the midrange image center, which can support terrific imaging.

*However,* the main emphasis has been music, and - like the others - I hesitate to mess with that basic set of assumptions. It would mean more variables, and potentially - probably - more complexity and time burden.


----------



## AudiocRaver

I suggest that for future evaluations, the "closer to the wall" setup involve a set "standard" location to minimize time burden - allowing only toe-in variation for quick optimization of soundstage/imaging.


----------



## ALMFamily

AudiocRaver said:


> I can not think why not. A design with good M-T integration, _always_ a priority to minimize lobing, means you can have just-as-good M-T-M integration. The tweeter is in the center of the midrange image center, which can support terrific imaging.
> 
> *However,* the main emphasis has been music, and - like the others - I hesitate to mess with that basic set of assumptions. It would mean more variables, and potentially - probably - more complexity and time burden.


I agree with Wayne - it really felt like we had a full weekend with our current set of criteria. If we add more, Wayne might not get the one hour of sleep he gets now... :bigsmile:



AudiocRaver said:


> I suggest that for future evaluations, the "closer to the wall" setup involve a set "standard" location to minimize time burden - allowing only toe-in variation for quick optimization of soundstage/imaging.


Agreed - for testing a close-to-the-wall configuration, most people who have to do that have limitations foe toe- in as well...


----------



## shinksma

PEB said:


> What gives you hesitation about MTM for L/R? What other design formats would you consider?





lcaillo said:


> I don't really understand your question nor who it is directed to. Can you elaborate?


Sorry guys, this question was aimed at one of my prior posts, where I indicated a minor reluctance (?) to using MTM for L+R as a possible solution to getting identical LCRs. PEBs question back to me looks out of context due to some other posts in between and a new page (assuming everyone sees the thread the same as me...)

AudiocRaver addressed some of my concern head-on:



AudiocRaver said:


> Here is one overly-simplistic way of looking at it:
> 
> C handles dialogue well
> C has same (or close) tonality to L/R (except might not go as deep)
> Which means L/R also handle dialogue well. So this becomes the main question. We could _consider_ including a well-selected track or medley of music+dialogue from movies and briefly evaluate how well the dialogue stands out.
> 
> 
> I can not think why not. A design with good M-T integration, _always_ a priority to minimize lobing, means you can have just-as-good M-T-M integration. The tweeter is in the center of the midrange image center, which can support terrific imaging.
> 
> *However,* the main emphasis has been music, and - like the others - I hesitate to mess with that basic set of assumptions. It would mean more variables, and potentially - probably - more complexity and time burden.


My main concern with MTMs for L+R is minimization of lobing between the two Mids, which while being an important part of center channel design can be completely eliminated by using just MT for the L+R. I realize I'm being overly paranoid to this issue in all likelihood.

Anyway, I do not wish to take this thread any further offtopic, but thanks for the push to consider MTMs for mains. Perhaps I will browse around the forum for analyses of MTM configurations for L+R purposes, and factors to consider in that application.

shinksma


----------



## JerryLove

I really have found that a good speaker is a good speaker. There's not some dichotomy between music and movies (though I suppose one could make a good dialog-only speaker that was poor otherwise). 

Besides: Who wants to be watching "Rock of Ages" apologizing for the horrible sound because "well, it was chosen for dialog"?

The *only* reason that the center should, IMO, be different from the L/R is because of limitations of the space in which it is placed. If you have your screen level with your ear, and it's not acoustically transparent, then you are going to need to sub-optimally place a center-channel in a spot that may not accommodate a speaker like you are using for L/R. 

Personally, under that circumstance, I tend to become a fan of a phantom center. Bluntly: if you are setting up a large enough media space that the need for a center is strong; then you are in a position to start using AT screens and the like; and if not, a phantom tends to work very well. 

So I'm just fine with the choice to evaluate 2-channel.


----------



## bkeeler10

JerryLove said:


> I really have found that a good speaker is a good speaker. There's not some dichotomy between music and movies (though I suppose one could make a good dialog-only speaker that was poor otherwise).
> 
> Besides: Who wants to be watching "Rock of Ages" apologizing for the horrible sound because "well, it was chosen for dialog"?
> 
> The *only* reason that the center should, IMO, be different from the L/R is because of limitations of the space in which it is placed. If you have your screen level with your ear, and it's not acoustically transparent, then you are going to need to sub-optimally place a center-channel in a spot that may not accommodate a speaker like you are using for L/R.
> 
> Personally, under that circumstance, I tend to become a fan of a phantom center. Bluntly: if you are setting up a large enough media space that the need for a center is strong; then you are in a position to start using AT screens and the like; and if not, a phantom tends to work very well.
> 
> So I'm just fine with the choice to evaluate 2-channel.


Mostly agreed on the idea that a good speaker for music should make a good speaker for movies too. The only exception would be those that are unable to handle lots of power and play loud enough. Now, sometimes the reverse is not true - sometimes a speaker will be voiced to be initially very impressive for theater but end up disappointing for music. Ultimately it will probably prove to be not as great for movies as initially thought for the discerning listener though.

Also agreed on the acoustically transparent screen. I haven't done that yet but I am sold on the idea and plan to do it.

Sorry getting off-topic a bit . . .


----------



## rab-byte

I'll delve only slightly more off topic. 

IMO we're more forgiving of movie fidelity bedside we don't necessarily have a reference point to compare whatever are hearing to. I've never heard a car explode or a trex attach. But I have heard a symphony perform and a kick drum up close.


----------



## bkeeler10

To add to that, we also have another sense that's being heavily stimulated, because we are watching what's going on on the screen. Maybe I should try "watching" a movie with the screen off some time.


----------



## JerryLove

bkeeler10 said:


> Mostly agreed on the idea that a good speaker for music should make a good speaker for movies too. The only exception would be those that are unable to handle lots of power and play loud enough. Now, sometimes the reverse is not true - sometimes a speaker will be voiced to be initially very impressive for theater but end up disappointing for music. Ultimately it will probably prove to be not as great for movies as initially thought for the discerning listener though.


 I listen to music pretty loud sometimes. I play movies with significant amounts of music in them sometimes.

The true bottom-end of sound, where the subharmonics of, say, Master and Commander run, are perhaps not heavily represented in music (they do exist though). I would also say that the possibility exists in stereo LF recordings of having sounds that will not sum well electrically to go into a subwoofer; but I think these are relative outliers rather than common-case.


----------



## Sonnie

Hmmm... not a silent movie, but maybe a blind movie... or invisible movie. onder:


----------



## gdstupak

Sonnie,
earlier you mentioned that the low grade finish on the Arx speaker cabinets are a negative point. Anything can be re-finished. New real-wood laminate or paint of any color with any degree of gloss finish is possible.
Would this make the Arx speakers cost more than they are worth?


----------



## Sonnie

I don't think I stated "low grade", but rather that I just did not prefer it. It might be more like mid grade if I had to grade it.

I think each person would ultimately have to decide what they would be worth to them with whatever finish they prefer. In my opinion they are already worth more than they cost. If they had a high quality painted Satin Black finish, to me they would be worth even more.

You are probably asking that backwards... you should ask would it make them worth more than they cost, not would it make them cost more than they are worth.


----------



## AudiocRaver

The finish on the Arx speakers seems best described as basic, simple, entry-level. It is a nice enough finish, and there are some fairly expensive speakers that are available with that as their basic finish with options for more refined finishes involving more expensive veneers and more time-consuming staining or painting processes. Its low-reflection surface is really a pretty good home theater choice. But some will prefer a different look and might even choose a speaker that is known to not perform as well sonically but will look better in their room.

For me, the sonics are everything, and as long as a speaker is finished and not banged up - and even that can not be said of my beloved 20+ year old Polk Monitor 5jr's, which had a piece of collapsing ceiling fall on one of them - I am pretty happy. Sonnie has said it is not his favorite finish, but you will note he still has that pair of A5's.

Refinishing a pair of purchased speakers is not trivial. Doing it right means complete dis-assembly, and not everyone is that brave (probably resulting in a voided warranty) with a new $800 purchase.


----------



## JerryLove

gdstupak said:


> Sonnie,
> earlier you mentioned that the low grade finish on the Arx speaker cabinets are a negative point. Anything can be re-finished. New real-wood laminate or paint of any color with any degree of gloss finish is possible.
> Would this make the Arx speakers cost more than they are worth?


 True. Anything can be rebraced, re-cabineted, re-crossovered, or re-drivered as well though, yes?


----------



## Jon Lane

The Arx finish is a good quality version of the ubiquitous simulated black ash that's been adorning all the hipper, sexier, trendier, and finer loudspeaker brands for decades. Who knew?

Given that it seriously impacts price, what threw us, actually, was the growing demand for a high impact semi-gloss black catalyzed paint. Actually what threw us was the call for _paint_, and we put in place the means to make that particular finish and others.

In December we'll start to prototype the first 2014 A5 in paint along with an A7 tower, which is a new concept, also in paint. I think it's safe to say that Q2 2014 should see as much as the entire line available in paint for an upcharge.

I ask that you remember that the reason Arx costs what it does is that ultra-cool PVC wrap people have forsaken so many cozy Black Friday _soirees_ nationwide to admire. In a black paint they will rise.


----------



## NBPk402

Jon Lane said:


> The Arx finish is a good quality version of the ubiquitous simulated black ash that's been adorning all the hipper, sexier, trendier, and finer loudspeaker brands for decades. Who knew?
> 
> Given that it seriously impacts price, what threw us, actually, was the growing demand for a high impact semi-gloss black catalyzed paint. Actually what threw us was the call for _paint_, and we put in place the means to make that particular finish and others.
> 
> In December we'll start to prototype the first 2014 A5 in paint along with an A7 tower, which is a new concept, also in paint. I think it's safe to say that Q2 2014 should see as much as the entire line available in paint for an upcharge.
> 
> I ask that you remember that the reason Arx costs what it does is that ultra-cool PVC wrap people have forsaken so many cozy Black Friday _soirees_ nationwide to admire. In a black paint they will rise.


Something to think about. If you offer paint... Will you only offer black or will you do custom colors too?


----------



## Sonnie

I have no plans to sell my A5's... at least not until the A7 painted version comes to Cedar Creek Cinema and Listening Room. :bigsmile:


----------



## lcaillo

I have first option on them when you do.


----------



## craigsub

Jon Lane said:


> I ask that you remember that the reason Arx costs what it does is that ultra-cool PVC wrap people have forsaken so many cozy Black Friday _soirees_ nationwide to admire. In a black paint they will rise.


If anyone can translate this into American, please PM me.


----------



## craigsub

Sonnie said:


> I have no plans to sell my A5's... at least not until the A7 painted version comes to Cedar Creek Cinema and Listening Room. :bigsmile:


I get the first A-9's then. :hsd:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> I have no plans to sell my A5's... at least not until the A7 painted version comes to Cedar Creek Cinema and Listening Room. :bigsmile:


Bet he never lets 'em go.

Actually they have become a reference point for us. It might be good to keep them around for that purpose alone.


----------



## Jon Lane

ellisr63 said:


> Something to think about. If you offer paint... Will you only offer black or will you do custom colors too?


For the larger models once paint starts we can provide nearly any color.


----------



## gdstupak

Jon,
Hopefully you will continue to offer great sound with the cheap"er" finishes. I would much rather pay for the sound than the look. And because of this speaker evaluation I may end up being a paying customer soon.


----------



## craigsub

gdstupak said:


> Jon,
> Hopefully you will continue to offer great sound with the cheap"er" finishes. I would much rather pay for the sound than the look. And because of this speaker evaluation I may end up being a paying customer soon.


Jon and I have been discussing this - how to keep the less expensive vinyl wrap finish for the budget conscious customer while bringing some paint finishes into the line up of ARX speakers.

Feedback like yours is helping to confirm that we need to keep the most cost effective approach available along with the higher priced catalyzed paint finishes. Thank you. :T


----------



## JerryLove

craigsub said:


> Jon and I have been discussing this - how to keep the less expensive vinyl wrap finish for the budget conscious customer while bringing some paint finishes into the line up of ARX speakers.


 There's a speaker builder near me. He actually contracts out cabinet building in general, but even if he didn't this story would go the same.

Like you, he's using relatively basic wrap and finishes, but as his speakers are moving into higher price categories, I think there's a market for "better looking" finishes for him as well.

My recommendation to him is going to be to contract out those finishes (to a local artist actually). This lets him continue to do exactly what he's doing while saying "and if you want the fancy finish, I hand the unfinished cabinet over to a subcontractor and you pay the costs". We'll see if he likes the idea.


----------



## bkeeler10

craigsub said:


> Jon and I have been discussing this - how to keep the less expensive vinyl wrap finish for the budget conscious customer while bringing some paint finishes into the line up of ARX speakers.
> 
> Feedback like yours is helping to confirm that we need to keep the most cost effective approach available along with the higher priced catalyzed paint finishes. Thank you. :T


I second that feedback. It's nice to have a gorgeous speaker, but my budget demands that I spend every available penny on the best acoustical performance possible. Perhaps that would be different if I had five-figure money to spend and I could have the best of both worlds. That's not where I am at right now though.


----------



## craigsub

JerryLove said:


> There's a speaker builder near me. He actually contracts out cabinet building in general, but even if he didn't this story would go the same.
> 
> Like you, he's using relatively basic wrap and finishes, but as his speakers are moving into higher price categories, I think there's a market for "better looking" finishes for him as well.
> 
> My recommendation to him is going to be to contract out those finishes (to a local artist actually). This lets him continue to do exactly what he's doing while saying "and if you want the fancy finish, I hand the unfinished cabinet over to a subcontractor and you pay the costs". We'll see if he likes the idea.


Jon has something in the works that is fairly close to what you are suggesting. Our new subwoofer line up (100 units are in production now) will be all "USA Built" as will some of the higher end ARX designs on which he is working. 

When he gets more of this sorted out, look for some details on this. I think everyone will like where he is headed with the A-7's that Sonnie has been pushing Jon to build.


----------



## Sonnie

*The $3,000 Speaker Evaluation Nomination Thread* is now open... be sure to nominate the speakers you would like to see in the voting poll.


----------



## Tonto

Strong contention as well on the quality aspect/preformance. Finish is not as important untill you get into higher price ranges. But then, that's part of what you are paying for. For me, preformace is priority one & the A 5's have it. Can't wait to hear the A 7's. Thanks for the leak.


----------



## Nuwisha

Man that's a lot of reading 

What I got out of it was to move my speakers forward and out a bit and aimed the l/r at the opposite listening position, much better. 
(My JVC's have rear firing/rear ported woofers, when the wife says, hey that sounds way better, you stop fiddling and be happy)


----------



## K1LL3M

Has the Seaton 5.0 review been posted yet?


----------



## AudiocRaver

No. Working on it now. I should know better, but had an editing error wherein I lost a day's worth of writing. Bummer.


----------



## K1LL3M

All good. I'd read you were working on it and then I just wasn't sure if I'd maybe missed it in another thread.

Edit. 

Ohh. Losing work, eek. Feel for you.


----------



## lcaillo

AudiocRaver said:


> No. Working on it now. I should know better, but had an editing error wherein I lost a day's worth of writing. Bummer.


CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, CTRL+S, 
etc.

:duh:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Oh, yeah, Ctrl-S.:doh:

It was actually a LITTLE more complicated than that, involved syncing between 2 devices, and an old version over-wrote a new one.:hissyfit: Still, should have known better. Like - KEEP IT SIMPLE. And Ctrl-S, Ctrl-S, Ctrl-S, Ctrl-S, Ctrl-S, Ctrl-S.....

Thanks, Leonard.


----------



## lcaillo

Sorry, bad Leonard came out and I couldn't resist.


----------



## Sonnie

Hey... have either of you used crtl+s ... it works great!


----------



## AudiocRaver

me and my big mouth


----------



## phreak

I come here for the audio expertise and pick up word processing skills free of charge


----------



## Sonnie

Yes... and we can process a LOT of words with BIG mouths! :yes:


----------



## K1LL3M

I figured it was a little more than just Ctrl-S which was why I left out the Gamers motto

Save Early, Save often. 

I didn't want to rub salt into the wounds, but you seem to have been salted, baste and well roasted anyway. Lol


----------



## AudiocRaver

Thanks for all the help.:rolleyesno: _Sigh....._


----------



## bpape

Nice to have friends in times of need


----------



## needspeed52

AudiocRaver said:


> Thanks for all the help.:rolleyesno: _Sigh....._


REALLY :scratch:


----------



## needspeed52

AudiocRaver said:


> Thanks for all the help.:rolleyesno: _Sigh....._


REALLY :scratch: You'll be fine my man


----------



## K1LL3M

AudiocRaver said:


> Thanks for all the help.:rolleyesno: Sigh.....


Would this be a bad time to ask if its ready yet


----------



## Sonnie

Well... it was no easy task and took quite a while to sort it all out, but we have a winner of the Private Message $500 Cash Giveaway that will be announced in the newsletter. The winner will be announced in our Newsletter to be sent out on Monday. Are you subscribed? :whistling:


----------



## hyghwayman

:jump:That's awesome Sonny, can't wait to read who the newest winner of the greats HT forums will be.


----------



## Mark Seaton

AudiocRaver said:


> No. Working on it now. I should know better, but had an editing error wherein I lost a day's worth of writing. Bummer.


Seeing all the work that went into the review and witnessing the extensive listening and note-taking involved, I'm impressed you didn't tell Sonnie the Catalyst 8C review could wait till next year! :dizzy:

Only those who have made related attempts at such extensive reviewing have any idea as to the work involved in such efforts. Hats off to the 4 of you. I'll try and make my presence more known where appropriate in the coming weeks & months.


----------



## ALMFamily

Mark Seaton said:


> Seeing all the work that went into the review and witnessing the extensive listening and note-taking involved, I'm impressed you didn't tell Sonnie the Catalyst 8C review could wait till next year! :dizzy:
> 
> Only those who have made related attempts at such extensive reviewing have any idea as to the work involved in such efforts. Hats off to the 4 of you. I'll try and make my presence more known where appropriate in the coming weeks & months.


Well, Mark, I would love to have your presence somewhere in the state of Wisconsin after I take delivery of some amazing new speakers!


----------



## bkeeler10

Oooh, watcha gettin'?!


----------



## ALMFamily

bkeeler10 said:


> Oooh, watcha gettin'?!


Now, now, no letting the cat out of the bag too early! You will just have to check out my lobby build thread!


----------



## tonyvdb

Hmmm, I think I may have had my expectations set too high on these. Being bright in Sonnies room would mean that in someones untreated livingroom they may be a problem. The mushy bass mentioned may be something that can be dealt with if an external EQ is added even the brightness but if your going to hook them up directly to a receiver (most people will) not sure what would work. 
I love the looks of the SVS towers and was considering them for a two channel system but given the above reviews Im not sure now.


----------



## Sonnie

Ultimately I did not think they were bright... and they certainly were not bright at CAF (large room) nor RMAF (small room) in completely untreated rooms.


----------



## theJman

ALMFamily said:


> Well, Mark, I would love to have your presence somewhere in the state of Wisconsin after I take delivery of some amazing new speakers!


Well now, there's a surprise (not) ; seems like every GTG I've been to where Mark has also been in attendance at least one person buys something from him. It's almost predictable at this point.

For those interested... Mark will be on a podcast this afternoon.


----------



## ALMFamily

theJman said:


> Well now, there's a surprise (not) ; seems like every GTG I've been to where Mark has also been in attendance at least one person buys something from him. It's almost predictable at this point.
> 
> For those interested... Mark will be on a podcast this afternoon.


Nice guess Jim... 

Mark made an offer that I just could not refuse!


----------



## phillihp23

Sonnie said:


> I suppose it depends on what you are looking to help you choose a speaker... not sure why else you would look at speaker testing... other than maybe entertainment. Knowing that 90% of people preferred flat over voiced doesn't help me learn anything... other that 90% of people preferred flat over voiced. I want real world variables for what would be typical. It is not typical for a person to sit in front of one speaker. If it were an evaluation like we did... it might be useful for me. As it is and as it was done, it serves no purpose for me. I can't get any closer to determining what speaker I would buy based on that testing. :huh:
> 
> If the test is to determine preferred qualities, they missed quite a few that would be what I would prefer. The reason I do speaker comparisons is to determine what speakers sound the best to me. We share that info with our readers, but it won't tell them what is best for them, although it might tell them that certain qualities are easier to obtain with speaker x over speaker y. That is why it is more useful.


Very well stated Sonnie. :clap: While a speaker may tend to have a certain quantitative quality all be it flat or voiced the so called "best speaker" is determined by a infinite variable which is an individuals specific preference and personal hearing ability.


----------



## mdanderson

tonyvdb said:


> Hmmm, I think I may have had my expectations set too high on these. Being bright in Sonnies room would mean that in someones untreated livingroom they may be a problem. The mushy bass mentioned may be something that can be dealt with if an external EQ is added even the brightness but if your going to hook them up directly to a receiver (most people will) not sure what would work.
> I love the looks of the SVS towers and was considering them for a two channel system but given the above reviews Im not sure now.


I feel the same way as you do about the SVS towers. I am leaning towards going with Paradigm for my next speaker upgrade but the Paradigm 60s may be a little to expensive for me. The new Paradigm Ref. 20s look really nice and that is what I currently have even though they are about 13 years old. They still sound great after all these years.


----------



## NewHTbuyer

mdanderson said:


> I feel the same way as you do about the SVS towers. I am leaning towards going with Paradigm for my next speaker upgrade but the Paradigm 60s may be a little to expensive for me. The new Paradigm Ref. 20s look really nice and that is what I currently have even though they are about 13 years old. They still sound great after all these years.




I love my Ultra Towers. Other owners I have spoken to haven't complained about the brightness. I would still urge you to give them a demo, especially since they are risk free. I don't think I would ever consider trading mine for a pair of Studio 60s. Especially if you need a true full range tower for music without a sub, as the bass is much better on the towers that the Studio 60s. Just my opinion.


----------



## claudej1

I keep getting eMails asking me to reply here. As a 2PH3 Klipsch array (Stereo Klipshorns and LaScala in the middle, mono, about -6 db on wide wall), life was good. Then came Home Theater on DVD.....5.1. and the quest began................using only old dollars, on the cheap.

I have all pro Klipsch gear, all used, from a Regal theater that got all new stuff for 7.1 Onkyo receiver fed by used OPPO 83 SE with the Sabre DACs. The Ausyssey XT saves the day for the room (amazing). 4 KPT-200 for sides and rears (100 db sensitivity), Heresy for Center voice channel. R and L are a tri-amped horn "stack" Peavey FH-1 bass bins (stronger, cheaper than LaScala) with EVM 15L PEQ'd with a Behringer DCX active 50-320 Hz. (no inductor on woofer) Mid horn Klipsch K-402 with K-1133 320-4,000 Hz. to B&C DE-250 tweeter on QSC horn that looks like a "mini-me" of the big midrange horn. Power is B&K multichannel with gain tweaks for each section at 60 W per section, all gain tweaked before applying Audyssey. Since I use 0.025 watts to get to 85 db at my sweet spot, and about 0.010 W on the mid & tweet I have a minimum of 33 db headroom for whatever "crest factor" hapens. Front and Rear center wall Super Spud subs from Danley the incredible DTS-10's (100 db/W) driven by used Adcom 555 gen 1 stereo amp with RCA Y0connected mono from receiver Sub output.

For CD's, I use the SE output to the receiver Analog input which still give me 2.1 with the Danley subs and Audyssey XT EQ and Dynamic volume. Bottomless bass with micro resolution and scary dynamics on all program materials from good recordings. The ridiculously low distortion and transient response makes some recordings (mostly pop and rock) unlistenable at high volumes.

Blue Rays with modern LFE vibrate stuff at the other end of the house, along with the couch frame right where I sit 9 feet from JVC LED TV. It's ok, I don't want anymore kids anyhow.


----------



## KLH007

mdanderson said:


> I feel the same way as you do about the SVS towers. I am leaning towards going with Paradigm for my next speaker upgrade but the Paradigm 60s may be a little to expensive for me. The new Paradigm Ref. 20s look really nice and that is what I currently have even though they are about 13 years old. They still sound great after all these years.


Let the reviews be a guide, but I recommend you audition the SVS Towers for yourself. I've never heard them have sloppy bass, and I'd call them extended on top but not bright. IMHO they are one of the best bargains around. When I've heard them I thought they gave a little away in ultimate detail to the best, but were quite competitive in midrange naturalness, soundstaging, bass dynamics and extension, and ability to play loud without glare, and they look like they cost $10K.


----------



## phreak

mdanderson said:


> I feel the same way as you do about the SVS towers. I am leaning towards going with Paradigm for my next speaker upgrade but the Paradigm 60s may be a little to expensive for me. The new Paradigm Ref. 20s look really nice and that is what I currently have even though they are about 13 years old. They still sound great after all these years.


If the 60's are out of your reach check out the Paradigm Monitor 11. You get 70% of the aesthetics and 95% of the sound for 50% of the price.


----------



## mdanderson

NewHTbuyer said:


> I love my Ultra Towers. Other owners I have spoken to haven't complained about the brightness. I would still urge you to give them a demo, especially since they are risk free. I don't think I would ever consider trading mine for a pair of Studio 60s. Especially if you need a true full range tower for music without a sub, as the bass is much better on the towers that the Studio 60s. Just my opinion.


Thanks for the input. Yes, I would actually like to hear the SVS Towers for myself before I make a definite judgement.


----------



## mdanderson

KLH007 said:


> Let the reviews be a guide, but I recommend you audition the SVS Towers for yourself. I've never heard them have sloppy bass, and I'd call them extended on top but not bright. IMHO they are one of the best bargains around. When I've heard them I thought they gave a little away in ultimate detail to the best, but were quite competitive in midrange naturalness, soundstaging, bass dynamics and extension, and ability to play loud without glare, and they look like they cost $10K.


Yes, auditioning them for myself is the best way to make a good decision.



phreak said:


> If the 60's are out of your reach check out the Paradigm Monitor 11. You get 70% of the aesthetics and 95% of the sound for 50% of the price.


I have heard good things about the Monitor line for Paradigm. I just want speakers that sound as good or better then what I currently have.


----------



## FJR

Unless they have changed a lot, the only Paradigms I heard were two generations of Monitors and I thought they were extremely veiled. I had to assume that the Studios and Signatures were quite different to get the acclaim they did. That was about three years ago, I believe.


----------



## AudiocRaver

NewHTbuyer said:


> I love my Ultra Towers. Other owners I have spoken to haven't complained about the brightness. I would still urge you to give them a demo, especially since they are risk free. I don't think I would ever consider trading mine for a pair of Studio 60s. Especially if you need a true full range tower for music without a sub, as the bass is much better on the towers that the Studio 60s. Just my opinion.


FWIW, the room & setup seem to make quite a difference. I agree there is a lot of value there and they are worth a try in one's own environment the way they will be used. Be sure you have a measurement mic to see how well they match.


----------



## tusker

Maybe off topic?? Did I miss the review of the Seaton Sound speakers?


----------



## Sonnie

Wayne is putting the finishing touches on it now... should be up in a day or two.


----------



## rab-byte

Those Logan's ever show up?
Still waiting for the review.


----------



## Sonnie

Wayne has those too and that review should be forthcoming not too long from now.


----------



## K1LL3M

Sonnie said:


> Wayne has those too and that review should be forthcoming not too long from now.


I almost feel sorry for Wayne having to get through those reviews. Then I note that the review comes after spending time listening to and enjoying some very nice gear and my sympathy wanes a bit over such arduous and unrewarding work.


----------



## Sonnie

And he goes all out on his reviews... takes a lot of time and gets very detailed. 

He has no doubt been hustling with the HTD, Seaton and MartinLogan reviews. He's flying over to our home in January to review the Montis and Stage X. And no telling what else.


----------



## K1LL3M

Sonnie said:


> And he goes all out on his reviews... takes a lot of time and gets very detailed.
> 
> He has no doubt been hustling with the HTD, Seaton and MartinLogan reviews. He's flying over to our home in January to review the Montis and Stage X. And no telling what else.


Yes, Wayne' s work and effort put into his, what is as you say, "very detailed", reviews are certainly appreciated. They make for a great read, as attested to by the desire on the forum.

Edit..while I envy his listening sessions, I deffinately do not envy his work load that follows


----------



## Savjac

Sonnie said:


> Wayne has those too and that review should be forthcoming not too long from now.


I am truly looking forward to his review on the Logan's. They do so much well and only a very few things less well.


----------



## dolsey01

Savjac said:


> I am truly looking forward to his review on the Logan's. They do so much well and only a very few things less well.


I couldn't wait, I just snagged a pair of them today. I've owned Aerius I and Claritys so I kinda knew what I as getting into.


----------



## 1Michael

When I first got into building speakers I heard about the company Focal. After reading information from there website it looked like their drivers were something I would be interested in using in a project. Unfortunately their products seem to be a bit pricey so I abandoned the idea and eventually found this site and started making some of these builds but I would be very interested in the focal evaluation. I hope others agree.addle:


----------



## lcaillo

1Michael said:


> When I first got into building speakers I heard about the company Focal. After reading information from there website it looked like their drivers were something I would be interested in using in a project. Unfortunately their products seem to be a bit pricey so I abandoned the idea and eventually found this site and started making some of these builds but I would be very interested in the focal evaluation. I hope others agree.addle:


In this round of evals, unfortunately, we did not evaluate any Focal speakers. We did, however, evaluate the 716V in the $1000 event. You can find our review here:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...n-home-audition-event-results.html#post634758


----------



## AudiocRaver

The Seaton Sound review has been posted. You can READ IT HERE.


----------



## dolsey01

Sonnie said:


> Wayne has those too and that review should be forthcoming not too long from now.


Did I miss the EM-ESL review somewhere? I've been looking but can't seem to find it.


----------



## bkeeler10

I don't think you've missed it. I've been checking every few days myself, waiting with baited breath. I guess you can't rush Wayne, and really there's no reason to because, if history is any guide, when it comes out it will be really in-depth and worth the wait.

I suppose it will be with other reviews when it is published. That would be in the General Shack Area > Home Theater, Audio and Video Equipment Reviews > Speaker and Subwoofer Reviews.


----------



## kiss999

Who won?:spend:


----------



## Tonto

It wasn't about winning or losing...it was more about extoling the virtures of each speakers design based on a given format. All speakers have their strengths & weaknesses, depending on what you like in a speaker & given your room responce, might give you some insight into a speaker(s) to listen to.

That being said, sometimes it's not too hard to tell if somebody liked a particular speaker.


----------



## lcaillo

Exactly. Every one of the speakers that we reviewed would be a winner for someone. And a loser for some other. The first of our group reviews was intended ton find one winner, but it was in the context of what Sonnie wanted for his priorities, in his room, with his equipment choices. Even that one ended up being very hard to decide. 

Speakers vary in so many ways that it is impossible to say one is better than the other in any objective sense. We all have different ideas of what sounds good, where speakers can or should be placed, expectations for dynamics and bass extension, aesthetics, and design preferences.

As a reviewer it is very difficult to impart an understanding of the product without filtering through one's own perception and preferences. What we tried to do was focus on getting the best out of each speaker with optimum placement and exploring what each did well, and not so well, under the same conditions to the degree practical. You have to read the reviews of each to get a window on that experience and to get some idea of how each speaker might work for you or might not.

All of the speakers we reviewed have an appeal to someone and do lots of things right. There are also dozens more that we did not review that are just as good in some way, or maybe better. We did not intend to end up with a one step buying guide, just to make a dent in the problem of our readers better understanding a wide array of speakers. And have some fun. As Tonto will confirm, it certainly was that.


----------



## htaddikt

Very nice selection. I wish there were more local places to audition these on my own. But living vicariously through the reviewers has to be the next best thing. And each pair is a gem in it's own right.


----------



## Tonto

It was a blast, and a pure joy to meet you guys in person. If I walked away with anything, it was realizing how a room can really effect a speakers sound. There are several compaines that allow for in home demo, some even offer return shipping. While it is a bit of expence, comparing "in house" is the best way to evaluate a speaker. Coodos to Sonnie & HTS for putting this on.


Hopefuly there will be more!!! A bookshelf eval would sure be nice!!! Hint, hint, hint.


----------



## bkeeler10

+1. I get the feeling though that Sonnie was spearheading this and that current management is not similarly motivated. Hoping I am wrong on that. I was actually reading some of the $3000 event last night and was reminded of just how interesting and insightful these events were.


----------



## Wooderson

Just a guess, but I don't think any speaker manufacturer wants to be involved in a "shoot-out" for fear of not being #1, or shudder, coming in last. And all based on an arbitrary group of dudes (and ladies?). Now this group was obviously incredibly professional and the results of a shoot-out would likely be applicable to a wide ranging audience. But the manufacturers have no way of knowing how good any particular "group of dudes" will conduct what needs to be a very scientific study.

*Now*, that said, I disagree with those who say "there can be no winner". I think if you take ~ > 5 experienced listeners and give them excellent review conditions, preferably with the ability to blindly A/B switch. Then give them let's say 100 points to allocate among the transducers as they see fit. Then add up the points and publish. I think it would be a reasonably good buying guide for those not able to do a study like this themselves.

So I think it's possible to conduct a good shootout, in theory. But who among us has enough money to buy 6 $2500 speakers for testing purposes and then set up an excellent experiment as described above? Don't go looking for submissions from manufacturers. Like I said above, no matter their confidence level, they're all scared to death sales will plummet when they wind up in the middle or bottom of the list -- in a situation that's out of their control. In fact, I wouldn't even put it past a deep-pocketed manufacturer to sue a shoot-out publisher for misrepresenting their product and harming their ability to earn.

Possible in theory? *Yes*. Practical? Nope.


----------



## vidiot33

Your concerns regarding manufacturer participation depend mainly on how well know. The study is.


----------



## lcaillo

Wooderson said:


> Just a guess, but I don't think any speaker manufacturer wants to be involved in a "shoot-out" for fear of not being #1, or shudder, coming in last. And all based on an arbitrary group of dudes (and ladies?). Now this group was obviously incredibly professional and the results of a shoot-out would likely be applicable to a wide ranging audience. But the manufacturers have no way of knowing how good any particular "group of dudes" will conduct what needs to be a very scientific study.
> 
> *Now*, that said, I disagree with those who say "there can be no winner". I think if you take ~ > 5 experienced listeners and give them excellent review conditions, preferably with the ability to blindly A/B switch. Then give them let's say 100 points to allocate among the transducers as they see fit. Then add up the points and publish. I think it would be a reasonably good buying guide for those not able to do a study like this themselves.
> 
> So I think it's possible to conduct a good shootout, in theory. But who among us has enough money to buy 6 $2500 speakers for testing purposes and then set up an excellent experiment as described above? Don't go looking for submissions from manufacturers. Like I said above, no matter their confidence level, they're all scared to death sales will plummet when they wind up in the middle or bottom of the list -- in a situation that's out of their control. In fact, I wouldn't even put it past a deep-pocketed manufacturer to sue a shoot-out publisher for misrepresenting their product and harming their ability to earn.
> 
> Possible in theory? *Yes*. Practical? Nope.


Please start a new thread to discuss this. I will be happy to debate it but not here. The evaluation event that this thread was for is done and the way it was done cannot be changed. This is a good discussion, but it does not belong here. Keep this thread focused on the speakers in this evaluation and what was done.


----------



## yosh7

Great review! These speakers look awesome.


----------



## lcaillo

Thanks, yosh7. Please post your experiences as well.


----------



## Talley

Blast from the past... I skimmed over this again just as a refresher and there is some good info in here. 

1. Why was Mark Seaton never announced early on as being in attendence. "Seaton" doesn't come up till page 107.
2. There should be another test performed but utilizing Dirac


----------



## Talley

KLH007 said:


> Let the reviews be a guide, but I recommend you audition the SVS Towers for yourself. I've never heard them have sloppy bass, and I'd call them extended on top but not bright. IMHO they are one of the best bargains around. When I've heard them I thought they gave a little away in ultimate detail to the best, but were quite competitive in midrange naturalness, soundstaging, bass dynamics and extension, and ability to play loud without glare, and they look like they cost $10K.


This is spot on. I purchased the SVS tower system that were in this evaluation. For the record their FR response is so much different in my room than in Sonnies. In Stereo Reference mode with them sealed I get response down to 26hz. Ported I get down to 22hz. In this 22-28hz range ported yields 7db more output... it's very significant.

I've done critical listening and they may be a smidge quicker sealed but lately I've been running them ported and they show no signs of slop. 

They were IMHO bright in my room before treatments. Now they are perfect. Not bright at all but like you said... EXTENDED. The sibilance range of frequencies are present more than other speakers I've heard but that doesn't mean necessarily they are bright. I find them to be very smooth in response, accurate and a great deal. 

I'd say room treatments bring out the best in these towers.


----------



## NBPk402

Talley said:


> This is spot on. I purchased the SVS tower system that were in this evaluation. For the record their FR response is so much different in my room than in Sonnies. In Stereo Reference mode with them sealed I get response down to 26hz. Ported I get down to 22hz. In this 22-28hz range ported yields 7db more output... it's very significant.
> 
> I've done critical listening and they may be a smidge quicker sealed but lately I've been running them ported and they show no signs of slop.
> 
> They were IMHO bright in my room before treatments. Now they are perfect. Not bright at all but like you said... EXTENDED. The sibilance range of frequencies are present more than other speakers I've heard but that doesn't mean necessarily they are bright. I find them to be very smooth in response, accurate and a great deal.
> 
> I'd say room treatments bring out the best in these towers.


Room treatments will bring out the best in all speakers.:T


----------



## Savjac

ellisr63 said:


> Room treatments will bring out the best in all speakers.:T


That is great because I have to give a speech next week and could use all the help I can get


----------



## needspeed52

Savjac said:


> That is great because I have to give a speech next week and could use all the help I can get


Very well put my friend, put a nice smile on my face...........:T


----------

