# Suggestions for a new hi fi set



## tfm

Hello,

I have made a very important decision in a man's life: I will upgrade from a "standard" 5.1 home theather to a brand new hi fi audio system. 

I hope you, experienced people, could help me with that urge....

My budget goes up to USD 1.500, max 2.000. 

I am a classical guitarist and love classical music and live orchestras. 

My only source of music is the desktop PC, so I'll also see movies and sound will come from this same audio system - although no doubt classical music is the main topic. Because data will come from PC, there is no need at all for cd players or any kind of reader/player.

I am looking for components to be selected on their ability to make more sense of different melodies, and give the greatest possible insight into the musical performance. 

It is also a core for me that the set is capable of recreating life-like dynamics, because there are many insights which just happen in a live concert hall, during performance. So I would like to have the closest to that within that budget...

Also, I live in a small apartment, and desktop is in the office, even smaller :heehee: I stay in front of the computer almost the whole day, and here is where I listen to music most of the time. So although a sound that fills well and fully my apartment is important, near field listening is the most common scenario.

I would not like those computer aimed "compact" solutions, like, just as an example, B&W MM-1. 

Could you suggest me what can I sound best with this budget?


----------



## GranteedEV

Given a $2000 max budget, I would get one pair of Philharmonic 1 speakers ($1600). They measure great, use exceptional drivers, and are designed by a world class crossover designer in Dennis Murphy. 

And one Marantz SR6004 receiver ($470) with HDMI in. Whether you want to use all the surrount features or not, it's really slim pickings for stereo receivers without using analogue connections, which can be noisy when a computer is the source. Into two channels, the amplifier section is measured to be robust and plentiful with current, and the preouts are limitless if you ever wish to use a separate amplifier. 

I'm rather convinced you can't do much better than that given the budget. Eventually, corner bass traps might be desirable though, to further tighten up the already excellent, uncolored bass response of the mass-loaded transmission line 

EDIT, sorry, it did not cross my mind that this was for a nearfield setup. In this case I would do something different because it is difficult to have a tower speaker on a desktop 

Try to audition active studio monitors from JBL Professional, Focal Professional, Genelec Professional, and Adam. Do pick up a cheap USB sound card though. For passive speakers, strongly consider the $1000 Vaporsound Breeze. It uses a world class RAAL tweeter and a very nice wavecor midbass, and a very neutral crossover. Power it with the same receiver above. A small sub might be worthwhile in this case... perhaps a Rythmik FV12

well placed broadband diffusion panels are a great thing to consider as well.


----------



## tfm

GranteedEV,

Thanks for the reply. I am already taking a look in your suggestions.

In this meanwhile, I could tell you that the best sound set up is my first priority. So, if space is required for the best system, I am willing to move the office to the living room :jiggy:. If towers speakers bring a superior experience than monitors within the budget, that's ok!

Everthing for the perfect sound and music! :T


----------



## jackfish

Here are my suggestions based on my experience and penchant for also listening to classical music:

Loudspeakers
Magnepan MMG, $600/pair 60-day trial with purchase price refund
http://www.soundadviceblog.com/reviews/review-magnepan-mmg-speakers/
http://www.goodsound.com/equipment/magnepan_mmg.htm

DAC/Preamp
Emotiva XDA-1, On sale right now for $300 delivered
http://emotiva.com/xda1.shtm

Amplifiers
Emotiva UPA-1 monoblock amplifiers, $700/pair delivered
http://emotiva.com/upa1.shtm

If you find this system does not produce enough bass for your liking, the addition of an Emotiva Ultra Sub 10 subwoofer for $400 will suffice with a subwoofer low pass setting of 50Hz.

Your PC should be able to output a digital signal for use with the XDA-1.

I also would recommend lossless digital music files for the best sound reproduction.

Move it into the living room.


----------



## GranteedEV

> I am already taking a look in your suggestions.
> 
> In this meanwhile, I could tell you that the best sound set up is my first priority. So, if space is required for the best system, I am willing to move the office to the living room . If towers speakers bring a superior experience than monitors within the budget, that's ok!


I definitely think the Philharmonics will be speakers you could live with forever. Dennis Murphy is the kind of individual who wouldn't sell a speaker that wasn't more accurate and emotionally moving than should be legal at the price point. If you've ever heard about the Salk Songtowers/HT2-TL/Ellis 1801/Soundscape/HT3/HT1, he's the guy who designed them all, and you'll find no shortage of praise for them online.

His Philharmonics take it a step further than the Songtowers at the same price point, by incoprorating an open back midrange and an 8" woofer in a mass loaded transmission line. The midrange uses a 3" wide driver, so its off axis dispersion mates excellently in the crossover to the ribbon tweeter, leading to reflected sound which mimics on axis sound.

As for farfield towers vs nearfield monitors, it's difficult to say. The presentation is going to be pretty different between the two, because of room interaction.

Good nearfield monitors can have a dominant direct-to-reflected ratio because they're so close to your ears, as long as you're physically far from sidewalls. However because you're close, the speakers better have consistent listening window response, because you don't want a one inch head movement to change what you're hearing.

I think larger rooms tend to have less bloated bass without heavy treatments, and farfield placement means you can enjoy your music with others once in a while, too. For a farfield speaker, not only frequency response, but sound power response dominates, so speaker voicing/far off axis response becomes that much more relevant. 

At the end of the day, better speakers are better speakers. I think a proper nearfield setup has its pros and cons, and so does a farfield setup. For farfield, I would still want to keep the seats pretty close to the speakers - IE 7ft away from the speakers instead of 10-15 ft away, and the speakers a good meter or more away from any boundaries, and a good 2m away from each other. I don't know if your living room is this accomodating. 

I'm a big believer that speakers and their interaction with the room, is 95% of what you hear. So you want good speakers, but you want them to be setup properly within the room. It's all a tradeoff. That said, I'm rather confident in the Philharmonics in a farfield setup.

An alteranative receiver would be the harman/Kardon HK3490 Stereo Receiver. To use your computer as a source, you will need to use a Toslink optical cable, as it does not accept HDMI inputs.

http://www.amazon.com/Harman-Kardon-HK-3490-Radio-ready/dp/B00198F89A

This receiver is very stable and clean.


----------



## class a

Check out the PSB Imagine Minis. I don't know how designer Paul Barton did it but somehow he managed to make 9.25" tall speakers sound like small floor standers. They run about $750 a pair. A definite demo if availabe in your area. You can also check them out on Audio Advisor.:T


----------



## tfm

Everybody,

Tks for the replies!!!

I am in a business trip and for this reason I can't reply, but as soon as I came back I will study all cases!


----------



## tfm

*Change in plans!! Lets do it right!*

Hey, everybody!!

Tks again for sharing your opinion!!

After a lot of research, I decided to upgrade the plans and expand the budget a bit (!!) for great things in life... :heehee:

I will go with Dennis's The Pilharmonic 3. That is for sure.


Now, what amps do you suggest? I think of something that can get the juice of the Phils comfortably, but not overrated, perhaps around 120W. Maybe optical/DAC included for direct PC connection? 

What else (I mean, from cables to everything else) do I need for running the rig?

Tks!!


----------



## jackfish

How do you make the jump from a $2,000 overall budget to deciding on loudspeakers you have never heard which cost $2,800/pair? At least with the Magnepan MMGs you can return them if you don't like them. If your budget has changed, then so do the options beyond one person's opinion. Have you seen the size of the Philharmonics? 24 inches deep.


----------



## tfm

jackfish said:


> How do you make the jump from a $2,000 overall budget to deciding on loudspeakers you have never heard which cost $2,800/pair? At least with the Magnepan MMGs you can return them if you don't like them. If your budget has changed, then so do the options beyond one person's opinion. Have you seen the size of the Philharmonics? 24 inches deep.


Jackfish,

I see your point.

It happens that I am in a mission abroad. I am in Brazil and will stay here for several months, probably some years. I had already made the decision to buy before going back to USA.

Because of that, I won't have the chance to return any of them... :sad:

The only way I can think of bringing the whole rig is asking a favor to a friend, who will move from CA to Brazil in Feb'11 and could bring those along with his stuff. Taxes and freight otherwise would make it totally unfeasible. 


Now, what made me jump that far is that I won't have the chance to hear most of them - maybe some in Sao Paulo, a huge city in Brazil, actually its financial heart, but certainly not the greatest for the price, like Phils). And I can't think about other chance to bring anything that size. 

After a lot of research, I found nothing but outstanding and marvelous reviews and comments about the Phils, and Dennis's history makes it all very solid! I understand that the feeling towards a speaker/rig is personal and in some way subjective, but I just don't have to chance to experience the ones I wanted. So I will keep doing my home work/research deepest I can. And for that I ask your help, experienced ones!!

I had in mind budget up to USD 2000, you are right. However, after speaking to many people, I have seen that the difference quality and experience wise changes dramatically when I go from 2k to something like 4k - it just doesn't double linearly. Although it is also quite subjective, some degree of consistency can be found in all those audiophiles reviews. 

If I am spending 2k in something which I will be using for years and won't spend anymore because I won't be in USA, why not spend 4k already in something that will be really up to the task? (that is also the kind of thought one knits in his head when he reallllyyyyyyy wants something :rofl: ..... )

Surely I can't afford more than those 4k - that is my real boundary!!

I might be wrong, but from what I've heard Phil 3 is the ultra best "quality per buck", say, under 4 or 5k. 

I'd love to hear side by side Phil 3 and MMG 1.7, although MMG costs 2k and I guess it would not be a match for Phil 3, specially concerning bass. I might be wrong on that...
MG 3.7 around 5.5k, on the other hand, is completely out of range. But again, I can't hear any of them... :huh:


----------



## GranteedEV

> I will go with Dennis's The Pilharmonic 3. That is for sure.


:yikes: You should raised your budget quickly! LOL!



> Now, what amps do you suggest? I think of something that can get the juice of the Phils comfortably, but not overrated, perhaps around 120W.


Not sure why you would limit the power going to your speakers. the Philharmonic 3s are 85 dB/2.83v/m sensitive, and essentially a 4-ohm load. I would feed them plenty of power. Remember, having power on tap, does not mean you're always using it. It's just there in reserve, if the audio content asks for it. It's pure dynamics. GIven their low sensitivity, high current draw, and exceptional sound quality, I would power them with this guy:

http://www.emotiva.com/xpa2.shtm

Does that mean you have to listen loud? Absolutely not! But you will be very pleased with the dynamic range and the fact that you amp will never clip to distortion.



> Maybe optical/DAC included for direct PC connection?


Hmm... I wouldn't spend a world on these features. The marantz SR6001:
http://www.accessories4less.com/mak...-100w-X-7ch-Hdmi-Home-Theater-Surround/1.html
May have all the features you might need. Pair it with the emotiva for a frighteningly dynamic, and clean sounding electronic chain.



tesseract said:


> Keep in mind that a dipole like the Philharmonic 3 or the Maggies require at least a 3 ft. placement off of the back wall, measuring from the front baffle. More is even better.


The Philharmonics are a mostly monopole speaker, with some attenuated rear wave information leaking through solely to increase stage depth. I'm sure they'll benefit from some distance-from-wall, but not quite to the extent of a dipole, which IMO should always be a good 6 ft from walls (I love dipoles btw). I think all monopole speakers should be at least 3 ft from boundaries for optimal results, though.



> I might be wrong, but from what I've heard Phil 3 is the ultra best "quality per buck", say, under 4 or 5k.


Personally, my gut would steer me towards Philharmonic 2s, plus 3 spaced and carefully integrated subwoofers, rather than just philharmonic 3s. I don't think they are worth the extra 800 for the bass improvement, compared to adding subs. I think 3 spaced low distortion subs, should produce better sounding results because of how flat the frequency response can get from optimal placement and integration of multiple subs. One 15", plus a pair of 12" subs, should make for a really good setup and outperform the scanspeak revelator transmission line speakers..


----------



## bogiedr

All great suggestions, but if I may add my 4 cents worth here ... Sansui AU717 vintage integrated amp, $300.00 average in Ebay, Thiel CS2's $500.00 average, again Ebay, Olive music Server from manufacturer,(same maker as Oppos), $1,000, Vintage turntable, (JVC, Technics etc., make sure it is direct drive) $150 ... total price $1,950 ... listening pleasure, priceless!!!
I currently listen to an NAD C375BEE integrated amp, an Olive server, Clearaudio Emotion turntable with a Verify Carbon tonearm and a Clearaudio Maestro cartdrige and a vintage Luxman PX 100 turntable with a Clearaudio Aurum Wood cartdrige. Honestly, Sansui was the Japanese McIntosh in its hayday, and I will say, contrary to what anyone may say, still sounds as good as any contemporary high end amplifier. Thiel's are timeless, I can say that as they are my fronts in my HTS after 20+ years in my main system. Very simple system to set up, little fuss and incredible sound. 
Just my 4 cents worth, after years of spending many thousands in Hi Fi equipment, I can say cheap vintage is truly priceless!!!
Hit them staright and good luck with your mission!!!!
BogieDr :T


----------



## tesseract

> tesseract wrote: View Post
> Keep in mind that a dipole like the Philharmonic 3 or the Maggies require at least a 3 ft. placement off of the back wall, measuring from the front baffle. More is even better.





GranteedEV said:


> The Philharmonics are a mostly monopole speaker, with some attenuated rear wave information leaking through solely to increase stage depth. I'm sure they'll benefit from some distance-from-wall, but not quite to the extent of a dipole, which IMO should always be a good 6 ft from walls (I love dipoles btw). I think all monopole speakers should be at least 3 ft from boundaries for optimal results, though.


I deleted this post last night, didn't realize you replied to it until now. The reason for the deletion is because I recalled that the Neo 8 midrange can be tuned with acoustic fill. This will help with placement. I do have doubts that a partial dipole speaker is as good as a full dipole, though. Especially when you have to kill the rear wave to accommodate sub optimal placement. I'm not a big fan of the 4 ohm impedance or the low sensitivity, either.


----------



## tesseract

tfm said:


> I might be wrong, but from what I've heard Phil 3 is the ultra best "quality per buck", say, under 4 or 5k.


You should also check out AudioKinesis speakers, specifically the Rhythm Prism. Easy to place, easy to drive, low power requirements, bass ports can be tuned to the room.

Wayne Parham Pi Speakers are worth a look, too. The Three Pi and Four Pi are bang for the buck.


----------



## Omega

For a classical fan like you, it will be foolish to skip Magnepans. I didn't understand your decision to increase your budget so drastically. Are you trying to put a plug for this new company, or really asking for advice?


----------



## tesseract

Omega said:


> For a classical fan like you, it will be foolish to skip Magnepans. I didn't understand your decision to increase your budget so drastically. Are you trying to put a plug for this new company, or really asking for advice?


It appears that the OP has just been introduced to Philharmonic in this thread. They are pretty nice speakers with a pedigree, a lot of folks are excited about them.


----------



## GranteedEV

*Re: Change in plans!! Lets do it right!*



tfm said:


> What else (I mean, from cables to everything else) do I need for running the rig?


The only thing I can recommend, is to not overspend on something as trivial as a cable. Sounds like silly advice, but you'll find a lot of science-rejectingg claims in audio related circles, about needing high end cables/amplifiers/etc. As I said earlier, I think the speakers and room are 95% of what you hear, and the other 5% is almost solely the amplifier. I've used monoprice and home depot cables in the past, and i find the biggest difference, is the aesthetics. What cables look nicest to you, and fit most snugly in your speakers? Go with those. Blue jeans cable is a popular company as well.



> I do have doubts that a partial dipole speaker is as good as a full dipole, though. Especially when you have to kill the rear wave to accommodate sub optimal placement.


Dennis has played around with the Linkwitz Orion in the past, which is what I think inspired him to try out an open back/transmission line type of monopole speaker. One comment I've heard about the Soundscapes (which is the de facto big brother of the philharmonic) compared them to some sound labs electrostat dipoles, and said that certain instruments had a more "correct" size than either on monopoles or dipoles.

Personally, while I do like planar magnetic and electrostat dipoles (and the MMGs mentioned earlier in this thread are great bang for buck) I think dynamic dipoles, like the Nao Note, are the way to go.



> I'm not a big fan of the 4 ohm impedance or the low sensitivity, either.


The low sensitivity is not great, and means I would feed these speakers a bit more power than the average speaker. I don't see the impedance as overly problematic as there are no sharp dips below 4 ohms and the phase angles are simple. I really wonder if Dennis would someday make a more sensitive (IE 90db) version of this speaker with a 10" woofer, designed for mating to multiple subs instead of hitting the depths. 



> I might be wrong, but from what I've heard Phil 3 is the ultra best "quality per buck", say, under 4 or 5k.


I dislike terms like "best" because they're generally so subjective and different for every individual, but i'm positive they are extremely accurate with an engaging, deep, wide soundstage. I suspect the imaging won't be as razor sharp as some speakers you've heard, but that's all part of the voicing. Dennis has stated in that past, that when he's at a concert, he doesn't really hear razor sharp hi fi imaging, but mostly a "diffuse depth" and prefers to recreate that aspect.


----------



## flyng_fool

Are you still going with nearfield listening? Those Philharmonics seem awfully huge for nearfield. They do look awesome though. I would love to hear them sometime. Ribbon tweeters are among the best for two channel listening.


----------



## tfm

GranteedEV said:


> Hmm... I wouldn't spend a world on these features. The marantz SR6001:
> http://www.accessories4less.com/make...urround/1.html
> May have all the features you might need. Pair it with the emotiva for a frighteningly dynamic, and clean sounding electronic chain.


I agree! I wouldn't spend an arm and a leg in pure electronics. When I mentioned embedded optical/DAC, it was just for using digital PC output without having to spend extra money with those, and inputs for those are not to be expected in all amps, as far as I've seen. Emotiva XPA2 itself does not allow direct digital connection. :rolleyesno:



> Not sure why you would limit the power going to your speakers. the Philharmonic 3s are 85 dB/2.83v/m sensitive, and essentially a 4-ohm load. I would feed them plenty of power. Remember, having power on tap, does not mean you're always using it. It's just there in reserve, if the audio content asks for it. It's pure dynamics. GIven their low sensitivity, high current draw, and exceptional sound quality, I would power them with this guy:
> 
> http://www.emotiva.com/xpa2.shtm


Actually, this number came from Dennis (thank him for all the attention he's been giving to me!! :T), when I asked him what amps he could suggest me for the Phils, and he said: "(...) I personally use a Van Alstine Insight 120 watt amp, which has no problems whatever with my speakers"

Now, I also consider the benefits of having an extra power, thus not limiting whatever are the needs of the system at all times. As am not an amp expert either, I ask you why is Emotiva so less expensive ($/per W), in real world terms, compared against Van Alstine or Marantz stuff? Are they in different tiers?



> Personally, my gut would steer me towards Philharmonic 2s, plus 3 spaced and carefully integrated subwoofers, rather than just philharmonic 3s. I don't think they are worth the extra 800 for the bass improvement, compared to adding subs. I think 3 spaced low distortion subs, should produce better sounding results because of how flat the frequency response can get from optimal placement and integration of multiple subs. One 15", plus a pair of 12" subs, should make for a really good setup and outperform the scanspeak revelator transmission line speakers..


I understand what you are saying, it should outperform Phil 3, as you say. However, those matched subs wold cost more than the extra $800 and they would increase overall budget beyond ~4k, including amps and everything. I see this option as a possible upgrade in future, but I am leaning to think that Phil 3's $800 plus are worth.


----------



## tfm

Omega said:


> For a classical fan like you, it will be foolish to skip Magnepans. I didn't understand your decision to increase your budget so drastically. Are you trying to put a plug for this new company, or really asking for advice?


Unfortunately, I won't be able to hear any of them, so I am relying on as many (real) experts and experienced people's opinions I can manage to, despite the subjective aspect of it.

Magnepans were the deal to be made before I found the Phils. Could you explain me why for a classical fan like me, it will be foolish to skip Magnepans? I could surely learn from that too. :wave:

Regarding increasing the budget, it is what I have tried to express before. This will be a one shot investment, and it will last for years. 2k was a starting point, because I could find systems from $500 to $54.000 Q5 pair. However, I realized that jumping from 2k to approx. 4k changes listening experience in a huge way!! I am willing to that and I can't afford much further.

Now, about the plug for this new company, I can assure you that I am really asking for advice, since I have never digged too deep regarding sound equipment.


----------



## jackfish

I think you might be able to listen to, and actually purchase, Vandersteen 2Ce Signature IIs in Sao Paulo. 

Contact the CD Shop
Rua Tabapua 821-3a
CJTO 44 Itaim BiBi
Sao Paulo, Brazil CEP04533-013
55-11-3078-7121

http://www.vandersteen.com/stereophile2cesigreview.pdf


----------



## tfm

tesseract said:


> You should also check out AudioKinesis speakers, specifically the Rhythm Prism. Easy to place, easy to drive, low power requirements, bass ports can be tuned to the room.
> 
> Wayne Parham Pi Speakers are worth a look, too. The Three Pi and Four Pi are bang for the buck.


Thanks!! If I find any owner of any of those around here, I will surely take a look. :T

About the bass tuning, let me ask you folks: what can you tell me about Marantz Audissey? Have you tried it, how does it sound in different environments? 

Another question: have you had experience with Bang & Olufsen? I have visited a store of them when I was in Europe, but unfortunately I could not compare their stuff side by side with others. But overall impression was interesting! One of the things that caught my attention was the feature of tuning frequencies to the room (if I am not mistaken, it was not only bass, but something like an equalization). However, it's been almost 3 yrs and I can't remember which model was that, nor the name of the feature. A hidden mic would come out of its case and the whole thing would "calibrate" the output to the room. Well, although I just heard it for some instants, the idea seemed quite interesting. Could you tell me something about B & O?


----------



## tfm

*Re: Change in plans!! Lets do it right!*



GranteedEV said:


> I dislike terms like "best" because they're generally so subjective and different for every individual, but i'm positive they are extremely accurate with an engaging, deep, wide soundstage.


Agree! I didn't expressed myself correctly. Guess I read many reviews of Phils, and all of them no exception saying so high of it, I was just considering how higher it could have been charged.



> I suspect the imaging won't be as razor sharp as some speakers you've heard, but that's all part of the voicing. Dennis has stated in that past, that when he's at a concert, he doesn't really hear razor sharp hi fi imaging, but mostly a "diffuse depth" and prefers to recreate that aspect.


This is an important information for me, GranteedEV!!! That is exactly what I intend to have in home!

My decision to buy a whole new hifi set came because I have so many unique insights during live orchestras, and around here it only happens around once a month!! So, I am moving towards recreating that experience inside home the closest I can get wihtin (new :R) budget. 
It is not for me like some audiophiles which find great satisfaction hearing exactly sharp and defined imaging, but hifi " sound environment", capable of wide transients, rich harmonic content and depth, just like live performances! 

Extra point to Phil...


----------



## GranteedEV

tfm said:


> Now, I also consider the benefits of having an extra power, thus not limiting whatever are the needs of the system at all times. As am not an amp expert either, I ask you why is Emotiva so less expensive ($/per W), in real world terms, compared against Van Alstine or Marantz stuff? Are they in different tiers?



To put it bluntly, you're paying for "hand assembled in america (AVA)/japan(Marantz)" vs "outsourced and constructed in China to spec". ...Emotiva can do much more volume with their business model. For reference, here's a review of the XPA-2 with full measurements:

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/amplifiers/emotiva-xpa-2

Most people here have had a great experience with their Emotiva amps. You really have to pay much, much more to get comparable performance out of other companies' offerings.

Now I love Marantz. One day i'd love to own a pair of Marantz reference series 9S1 monoblock amps. But that's not because it necessarily performs better... i'm just a sucker for the champagne aesthetics :R " But it's a poor value, as is typical in the hi fi industry.



> About the bass tuning, let me ask you folks: what can you tell me about Marantz Audissey? Have you tried it, how does it sound in different environments?


The main advantage i've experienced with audyssey, is that it fixes baffle step compensation. With passive speakers (that only use one amplifier) they are usually voiced for a specific distance from wall, which affects bass. Too far from the wall, some speakers might become midrange heavy. too close to the wall, other speakers might become bass heavy. Audyssey will help balance that out a bit. Overall though i don't like the idea of being stuck with EQ over the entire audible range; it can mess up the voicing of a speaker. In general i think it has its pros and its cons, and to try it out but never be stuck to it either.

It can also shelve down subwoofer problems but overall MultEQ does not have a ton of resolution. You really want MultEQ XT32 if you want real room correction, and the processors and receivers with that feature get very pricey, very quickly. 

In the case of room acoustics correction, I think good speakers are not very sensitive to it. Good off axis response means reflections arriving at your ears will mostly mimic what the direct response is, leading to tonal accuracy regardless of room, unless we're talking REALLY small, reflective rooms. Getting space from lateral boundaries does help what you hear though.



> Another question: have you had experience with Bang & Olufsen? I have visited a store of them when I was in Europe, but unfortunately I could not compare their stuff side by side with others. But overall impression was interesting! One of the things that caught my attention was the feature of tuning frequencies to the room (if I am not mistaken, it was not only bass, but something like an equalization). However, it's been almost 3 yrs and I can't remember which model was that, nor the name of the feature. A hidden mic would come out of its case and the whole thing would "calibrate" the output to the room. Well, although I just heard it for some instants, the idea seemed quite interesting. Could you tell me something about B & O?


The Beolab 5 i believe uses something like this. Nice speaker with a hidden 15" sealed woofer and lots of DSP processing.


----------



## tfm

flyng_fool said:


> Are you still going with nearfield listening? Those Philharmonics seem awfully huge for nearfield. They do look awesome though. I would love to hear them sometime. Ribbon tweeters are among the best for two channel listening.


Well, I will probably move office to living room to accommodate the rig. In this case, I believe it wouldn't be exactly nearfiled. 

But I am not willing to give up rigs like those that have been mentioned because of imperfect match to mid or far field... :wave:


----------



## tesseract

> Thanks!! If I find any owner of any of those around here, I will surely take a look.


You _might_ find Wayne's speakers around, I doubt you will find Phil or AK. Dennis Murphy, Duke LeJeune and Wayne Parham are great guys, friendly, knowledgeable and have stellar reputations. You should speak to at least two of these guys before buying. 



> It is not for me like some audiophiles which find great satisfaction hearing exactly sharp and defined imaging, but hifi " sound environment", capable of wide transients, rich harmonic content and depth, just like live performances!
> 
> Extra point to Phil...


The Philharmonic are really cool speakers, but they are partial dipoles and I find that just a little odd. I'm sure they sound great, but are they as accurate as they could be? They will certainly lack in dynamics, even with a behemoth amp behind them.

AudioKinesis speakers lean towards a slightly diffuse soundfield too, Duke has stated that is one of his design goals, and are voiced using what is arguably the finest full-range electrostatic loudspeakers around, those from SoundLAB. AK loudspeakers are also very efficient, and therefore, dynamic. Another upside is that amp power becomes less of an issue. Parham's Pi Speakers offer the same attributes, he and LeJeune are friends and have been bouncing ideas off of each other for years. You would do well to Google these guys, it would be a great learning experience if nothing else. Here is a bit of a contest that Duke's speakers just went through. That they were even considered speaks well for them.



> About the bass tuning, let me ask you folks: what can you tell me about Marantz Audissey? Have you tried it, how does it sound in different environments?


EQ'ing is a band aid, and is generally most effective for only one listening position. Being able to tune the speaker to the room addresses the root cause of the problem is the preferred way to deal with the speaker/room interface. Treat the cause, not just the symptom.


----------



## tesseract

jackfish said:


> I think you might be able to listen to, and actually purchase, Vandersteen 2Ce Signature IIs in Sao Paulo.
> 
> Contact the CD Shop
> Rua Tabapua 821-3a
> CJTO 44 Itaim BiBi
> Sao Paulo, Brazil CEP04533-013
> 55-11-3078-7121
> 
> http://www.vandersteen.com/stereophile2cesigreview.pdf


+1.

Vandersteen loudspeakers should be listened to if at all possible. 

Also, used Vandersteen speakers are pretty easy to come by, and one of the best speaker values around. I see 2Ce's (not Signatures) for around $500 all the time.


----------



## tfm

tesseract said:


> +1.
> 
> Vandersteen loudspeakers should be listened to if at all possible.
> 
> Also, used Vandersteen speakers are pretty easy to come by, and one of the best speaker values around. I see 2Ce's (not Signatures) for around $500 all the time.


Tesseract, I will surely have some trip scheduled to Sao Paulo in next few months. I won't miss the chance to listen to those. I may post my impressions here, and comparison to others I may find there. Thanks for the tip!

Doing some research, I came to Vapor's speakers. Cirrus had nothing but great reviews, and Breeze is following the same way. Despite being Breeze a mini monitor and its price level is not the same as Phils and others above, does anybody own a par of those or could tell us some experience/comparison?


----------



## tesseract

The Vandy tip came from Jackfish.

Personally, I think the Vapor Audio Breeze and the Soundfield Audio Monitor 1 are the best bargains in the $1k range. I haven't heard either one, but the designs are very sound.


----------



## tfm

ooops, sorry for that, Jackfish, those are your credits. You got me address and info as well. Thank you!

Sao Paulo is where I'll find most of things to be evaluated here. I'll head there as soon as I have all equips to be found listed!


----------



## cafyon

Hello tfm,
Although you opted out "compact" solutions, I'll insist you give a shot for Audioengine's active stereo speakers, A5.

Otherwise I'll say that, you can buy gear within your budget as 2nd-hand purchase whose brand new price tags are 5k-10k. So you need not to squeeze your choices...

Cheers.


----------



## Sstevemichael

hi all


----------



## tfm

Hello everyone!!

As I promised, here I am back again!

I some time passed, I made some decisions and ordered a Phil 3 from Dennis Murphy. 

System was suppose to be a pair of Phil's 3, Emotiva XPA-2 and a Marantz - SR6005 - Home Theater Receiver:

http://philharmonicaudio.com/philharmonic3.html
http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MASR6005
http://emotiva.com/xpa2.shtm

However, as I managed to wait until Holiday prices :sweat: I am back to ask you about some final decisions. 

What do you think of adding an extra subwoofer? My first goal is music, live orchestra like sound. Hence my choice with Dennis's Phil. But of course, nice drums and movies punch would be nice too! :sarcastic: And perhaps that would call an extra sub. 

I was wondering if I could match the Phil's ScanSpeak 22W8851T00 “Revelator” 8-inch woofer with Emotiva X-Ref 12. What do you think?

I think I would just have to rush a bit, because I could only afford it during holiday prices. 

Thanks!


----------



## tesseract

A subwoofer, placed midway or better still, in the back of the room would compliment the Phil 3s nicely.

Congrats on your new system, especially the speakers! :TT


----------



## tfm

thanks for the update and the words, man!

And what about matching? I mean, revelator is capable of filling smoothly the room. So which sub I could choose to complement the Phils? Do you think X-Ref 12 would be a smart choice or would it do just as/overlap a bit Phil's sub?


----------



## tesseract

I think that as long as the sub is quality, proper room integration is more important than brand names. The X-Ref 12, while I have not listened to it, seems to be a quality budget sub, and I feel would not take away anything from the Phil 3 sound.

The addition of a sub will not be to add bombast, but to smooth the bass response in your room by knocking down room modes.


----------



## tfm

Yes, I see. I also agree this is a major point. 

But apart phase adjustment / positioning, how could we match subs? I mean, subs are really not my expertise, but I see audiophiles like you guys picking the right sub(s) not just for positioning, but matching their curves and probably more.

Just this missing to buy everything! Knowledgeable subs people!!! Would you give me a help??

Whole saturday refreshing the page... :scratch:

Tks!


----------



## GranteedEV

tfm said:


> Yes, I see. I also agree this is a major point.
> 
> But apart phase adjustment / positioning, how could we match subs? I mean, subs are really not my expertise, but I see audiophiles like you guys picking the right sub(s) not just for positioning, but matching their curves and probably more.
> 
> Just this missing to buy everything! Knowledgeable subs people!!! Would you give me a help??
> 
> Whole saturday refreshing the page... :scratch:
> 
> Tks!


Sorry for not responding quickly. Here's the deal:

It starts with our perception of "bass". The wavelengths involved in bass are very long. Below a given frequency they get so long that a bass wave reflects multiple times and repeats itself until it's finally formed. Now i'm sure you have an idea about how standing waves work. They either combine, or cancel the wave. By the time it has fully formed, there may be a gap or a peak in the frequency response. The size of the room affects this. We call the frequency where the room affects the bass response via standing waves, the Schroeder Frequency of the room.

It's safe to say that given the mechanism of our ear, roughly and increasingly below 1khz, our ear becomes less and less sensitive to various issues that we consider offensive higher up in frequency. The by far dominant factor in our hearing in the lower midrange and upper bass, is frequency response, and indeed box speakert cabinet resonances are arguably a mere contributor of "frequency response" (though the jury's still out on that one).

Additionally, just about all (except for dipole and cardioid - gradient - radiators) speakers will eventually have a shift in their radiation pattern towards omnidirectional - that is, the sound diffuses in all directions virtually equally in amplitude. 

So it's effectively simple to say this:

Below the Schroeder frequency of a given room, our hearing mechanism is dominated by the frequency response, and omni speakers (which encompasses most speakers) are most victim to this fact.

Now the shroeder frequency is normally somewhere near 300hz, but standing waves becomes _most _problematic in the frequency range of _roughly _40hz to 120hz.

Now we get to the transducers themselves. If the room is dominating much of the behaviour, the transducer is mostly just responsible for _two_ things:

Output
Anechoic Frequency Response.

Although, yes, different drivers can have different distortion signatures, few drivers will have a truly distortion free output. It's safe to say that you should expect _plenty_ of distortion - and _not worry about it_ as it won't be offensive. Let's say the Scanspeak has less distortion than the emotiva for example. Not a big deal. It's benign distortion that you'll barely recognize as distortion at all within limits. You'll appreciate the flattened frequency response MUCH more.

So then we get to anechoic frequency response. The main thing to look at is absence of peakiness and sufficient extension for your source content.

Output is output. If you run out of headroom (and there's countless reasons why you might) then your system will compress the bass and take some "attack" away. 

Now look at the above and consider the scanspeak revelator 8". It's a very capable woofer, but I wouldn't call it a subwoofer because its output is limited for dynamic HT purposes. In the transmission line, its extension is very deep and should be pretty flat in-room in a broad sense (maybe a smidgen of a rise near the bottom end - depending on the nature of your room). Not in a broad sense though, there will be many peaks and valleys dictated solely by the room. 

Adding more sources of bass, from different locations of the room, will induce a more random exciting of room modes/nodes and spatial averaging will smooth out your frequency response. Your limiting variable will be your least output or extension capable transducer. In this case, your Emotiva will most likely limit the output below 30hz and the scanspeak tapered transmission line will most likely limit the output above 30hz. If you play them loud enough you might experience a mismatch between the drivers only because one is at its LIMITS. :T

I would suggest you towards the Outlaw LFM-1 EX sub with the CAVEAT that you WILL need to equalize its frequency response to match your room (based on the measurements in this review, response rises below 28hz, whereas you want it a shallow rolloff to match the room gain to get flat response). Adding a sub will definitely smooth out frequency response for music (run your speakers large, and have the sub roll in around 100hz as in "Both" mode with your receiver)). Ideally you want three or four subs as that will maximize the random excitation of modes and give a WIDE bass sweet spot. But still, one sub will still improve the bass response of the two mains in room. 

For movies, you don't want your mains contributing to the LFE channel (and they shouldn't, so don't worry). Again bass is dominated by the room, and you might find that the single subwoofer has an uneven frequency response without the two transmission lines filling things out. At that point it's up to you to whether to smooth things out with additional subs (which is my recommendation whenever possible).

So basically, phase/frequency response/placement are what you want to worry about. I do recommend having some sort of EQ in place in line with the sub if possible. A Behringer DCX2496 is a fantastic tool in this regard, as is a miniDSP. But to do that you'll want some method of measurement of course to find out exactly what to do. How far you want to take it will really depend on your subjective satisfaction. Start by trying to integrate it as simply as possible and listen and see what you think. If things start to sound bottom-heavy with the sub in place, don't worry about the transducer as a culprit - it's the frequency response alone.

Another sub I think will work great, is the Rythmik FV12. If you can squeeze in a pair of these, you'll be especially impressed.


----------



## tfm

Thank you very much for your care! That was thoroughly helpful!! 

Spent the whole day reading...

I feel like raising the (sub) budget again :rofl2:




GranteedEV said:


> Your limiting variable will be your least output or extension capable transducer. In this case, your Emotiva will most likely limit the output below 30hz and the scanspeak tapered transmission line will most likely limit the output above 30hz. If you play them loud enough you might experience a mismatch between the drivers only because one is at its LIMITS. :T


I understood the idea, and I imagine those 30 Hz are just a figure, right? I took a look in revelator datasheet:

http://www.europe-audio.com/document.asp?document_id=3295&link=datasheets\scanspeak\22w-8851t00.pdf

And I would like to confirm there's a +-3dB from about 14 to 1000 Hz. Is that right? Cause that seems nice SPL @ 14 Hz. Btw, I refer to black line, although I am not sure it would be that, since there is no indication for red/green/blue lines.




GranteedEV said:


> I would suggest you towards the Outlaw LFM-1 EX sub with the CAVEAT that you WILL need to equalize its frequency response to match your room (based on the measurements in this review, response rises below 28hz, whereas you want it a shallow rolloff to match the room gain to get flat response). Adding a sub will definitely smooth out frequency response for music (run your speakers large, and have the sub roll in around 100hz as in "Both" mode with your receiver)). Ideally you want three or four subs as that will maximize the random excitation of modes and give a WIDE bass sweet spot. But still, one sub will still improve the bass response of the two mains in room.
> 
> ...
> 
> Another sub I think will work great, is the Rythmik FV12. If you can squeeze in a pair of these, you'll be especially impressed.


Yes, I gave a look at them and they seemed nice! Btw, I found many guys saying FV12 is great, including around here, at Subs section, but I couldn't find any pro reviews on it. Truly weird, how come??


Now, here's the deal: if I can squeeze a pair of Rythmik FV12 ($500 each) , level of choices rises, since besides 1x LFM-1 EX , it could also be 1x Rythmik FV15 or 1x F12 - Signature Edition (beauuuutiful aesthetics, btw!! Although that's second place).

What do think about it??

One more thing: by your experience, is black friday lowering Emotiva's prices below holiday prices??

Thks a lot!! It's been very helpful!


----------



## tfm

Ok, about Rythmik tests, found this:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/home-audio-subwoofers/49504-rythmik-eating-my-words.html

But they cover FV15-HP, which is out of range...


----------



## tfm

Guys,

If you are trying to torture me by privation of knowledge, you are hitting it!!! :devil:

Kidding :rofl2:


----------



## tesseract

tfm, what is your budget, and how big is the room?


----------



## tfm

I was convinced to take it to US$ 1.000 level. 

Concise technical explanations followed by experience and advice, and I easily move it to a higher notch... Glad, anyway!

About the size, current living room is about 4000 cubic feet, but I am moving and I would like to have something ready up to 7000 or 7500 cubic feet.


----------



## tesseract

Because it is a 2 channel system, I will recommend that you allocate the $1k subwoofer budget to a single sub. The listening position will be small, and one sub along with the Phil 3's should fill the room with the bass you are looking for. You are unlikely to do serious listening with multiple persons, so let's just worry about the main chair... yours.

You will be moving, eventually, so the next room is an unknown quantity. This means that a ported sub is more likely to be a room match than a sealed, so I'll stick to that alignment.

-SVS PB12-NSD
-HSU VTF-15H
-CHT VS-18.1
-Rythmik VF-15

Any of these subs will do justice to your Phil 3's. I am not sure if these guys can ship to your locale, so give a call. :T


----------



## tfm

Tesseract,

Thanks for the advice! I have a friend coming moving from usa, so he can bring it with him, and I believe that's a one shot deal for quite some years!!

I've looked for information these days and read a bit, but i don't get why ported sub is more likely to be a room match than a sealed , for an unknown volume, considering I could move the sub (i don't have wife or space/positioning restriction actually) and EQ it. Could you teach me why is that?


----------



## tesseract

In large rooms that are open to the rest of the home, ported subs will have an advantage over sealed. In a sealed room, high powered EQ'ed subs will rule the day.

With a sealed room, you can take advantage of room gain, or pressure vessel gain. This would be an advantage for sealed subs, provided you EQ them properly and can supply enough amplifier power to back the EQ.

Ported subs do not rely on room gain as much, but the low frequency response is limited by the port's tuning and will roll off rapidly below that tuning. Not a problem with the subs I mentioned. In a 2 channel music system, all of those subs will dig deep enough.

I recommend a ported sub for your present and future applications.


----------



## tfm

I understand.

Thank you.

Still, let's consider listening room is closed, wouldn't it be interesting to look for 2 (ported) subs instead of one, randomizing excitation / taking down room modes?


----------



## tesseract

We can excite different room modes simply through sub placement. While main speakers like to "see" symmetry in placement, multiple subs work with the room best when they have dissimilar placements. This has a lot to do with the Schroeder frequency that GranteedEV spoke of.

Multiple subs are the way to go, but with a $1k budget, I would go with one good sub. The Phil 3 speakers reach down to 30 Hz or better on their own, one good sub that can dig to 20 Hz or lower would do you well.


----------



## GranteedEV

tfm said:


> I feel like raising the (sub) budget again :rofl2:



That's something I like to hear :devil:



> I understood the idea, and I imagine those 30 Hz are just a figure, right? I took a look in revelator datasheet:


It's a rough guess on displacement. Since the TL is tuned below 25hz the revelator even with an 8" woofer should outperform the emotiva below 30hz. The 12" driver is sealed so it's probably output limited below about 35hz. 

http://www.europe-audio.com/document.asp?document_id=3295&link=datasheets\scanspeak\22w-8851t00.pdf



> And I would like to confirm there's a +-3dB from about 14 to 1000 Hz. Is that right? Cause that seems nice SPL @ 14 Hz. Btw, I refer to black line, although I am not sure it would be that, since there is no indication for red/green/blue lines.


You're certainly misreading that. The revelator shows a roughly -3db point near 60hz, and -6db point near 30hz based on that; but bear in mind that is an infinite baffle measurement and not indicative of the tapered transmission line loading on the woofer which extends bass response.



> Yes, I gave a look at them and they seemed nice! Btw, I found many guys saying FV12 is great, including around here, at Subs section, but I couldn't find any pro reviews on it. Truly weird, how come??


It's a relatively good sub. Being a rythmik servo sub, we know it'll have fantastically low distortion thanks to the servo. As I said earlier that's not really a big deal but it's nice to have at a low price like that. It's a low tuned vented 12. It'll have its limitations with respect to output. A pair would hopefully give a bit more headroom and better room interaction.

If you're willing to spend more, the SVS PB-12 NSD would be my choice. Here are its measurements:



SVS said:


> Below is our CEA-2010 data set for the SVS PB12-NSD. This is 2 meters ground plane outdoors.
> 
> The data is dB Peak as reported by the software. For 1M add 6 dB. For dB RMS subtract 3 dB.
> 
> Excellent bandwidth uniformity is a primary SVS design goal. Note the max output of the subwoofer only varies 5 dB between 20 Hz and 80 Hz, indicating extemely good output uniformity.
> 
> We'll be getting a PB12-NSD over to AH and Josh for test/review soon. If you have any questions, fire away. Thx.
> 
> Freq/dB Peak/% THD/Comments
> 
> 10/NA/NA/Insufficient SNR
> 12.5/89.1/15.2/Limited by 3rd Order Harmonic
> 16/99.0/19.0/Limited by 3rd Order Harmonic
> 20/107.5/10.4/Amp Limited
> 25/110.3/12.1/Amp Limited
> 31.5/111.4/6.3/Amp Limited
> 40/111.9/6.9/Amp Limited
> 50/112.0/3.6/Amp Limited
> 63/112.3/3.5/Amp Limited
> 80/112.8/3.4/Amp Limited


which is respectable perforamnce.



> Now, here's the deal: if I can squeeze a pair of Rythmik FV12 ($500 each) , level of choices rises, since besides 1x LFM-1 EX , it could also be 1x Rythmik FV15 or 1x F12 - Signature Edition (beauuuutiful aesthetics, btw!! Although that's second place).
> 
> What do think about it??


I think if you're okay with eventually adding a second sub in the future, go for the best sub you can afford right now. If you're dead set on being "one and done" go for the dual FV12s.



> One more thing: by your experience, is black friday lowering Emotiva's prices below holiday prices??


don't have a clue!



> but i don't get why ported sub is more likely to be a room match than a sealed , for an unknown volume, considering I could move the sub (i don't have wife or space/positioning restriction actually) and EQ it.


Tesseract already addressed this any many of your other questions, but I thought I'd give you a visual represenation. 

Here is a modelled MAX SPL graph of a typical vented sub, and the same driver in a typical sealed box. Before taking a look, consider the fact that "room gain" is a lift of roughly 5-7db/octave below a given frequency, in larger rooms generally beginning close to 20hz and in smaller rooms it can start near 35hz, and in cars it'll start even higher up, often around 80hz.










The sealed sub is fed 600w and the Vented 400. As you can see the box loading protects the sealed driver enough that you can squeeze about 2db more headroom above 40hz in this case. However the box loading extends the bass response of the vented sub all the way down to a -3db point of 26hz and a -6db point of 17hz. 

Now in a small room you'd want to EQ the vented one down as the room gain will turn that -6db point into more of a +5db point. In a large room it'll probably be flat or very similar to the transfer function.

On the other hand the sealed equivalent is already around 9db down by the time room gain would come into play in a larger room. You can EQ the response but not the max SPL. Is it a huge difference? I dunno. The sealed happens to be in about 1.5cu ft vs 4.8 cu ft for the vented. The sealed also actually extends deeper below 11hz. But you can see why i'm not a fan of 12" sealed drivers. See the grey line? That's a 21" driver in 20 cu ft sealed so you can see i'm not against going sealed... i'm just against _wimpy_ sealed subs being EQ'd flat 

As you can see, EQ won't compensate for what you can't get. And sealed 12s just can't get it done in larger spaces. You've got to be able to displace the air at low frequencies:


----------



## tfm

I see. Thank you again for the complete exposure!

I am quite sure we are on the same page now.



GranteedEV said:


> If you're willing to spend more, the SVS PB-12 NSD would be my choice.


Yes, sir!! I am! :devil: I must decide and order it until the end of this black friday!! :rant:

I've been aiming for ones with a nice FQ and SLP @ 20 Hz or digging sub-20. It comes that, as Phil's revelator handles just fine down to 40 Hz and probably less for most cases, a dynamic deep sub-20 would balance it for music and HT/movies.

I understand now what you are telling me about SVS PB12-NSD, specially when comparing cost/performance against previous PB12-Plus and PB13-Ultra. It is really gang for the buck. Solid quality.

Don't really understand why SVS is keeping PB12-Plus. Almost twice the price, just a few dB over. Am I missing some premium feature over NSD?

Now what I believe is the last doubt: regarding 2 criteria, first ultra-low FR and SQ (say 16 Hz to 25Hz) / second overall performance, do a pair of PB12-NSD outperforms a single PB13-Ultra?


----------

