PDA

View Full Version : My audio prediction #2 for 2009



Neil McCauley
31-12-2008, 14:36
I predict a rapid and dramatic growth in the range and acceptance of active loudspeakers. There are I feel numerous reasons to support this.

First, there seems an indisputable logic that to have one amplifier channel dedicated to one driver, per channel where that amplifier channel and driver are designed and voiced as an amalgam of the two devices, rather than rely on the hit and miss approach of ‘one size fits all’ - makes complete sense.

The economic drivers will be increasingly stronger in the current climate. The saving on packaging, leads and carriage is very compelling for a maker and my guess is that some makers will pass on these considerable savings to the end-user.

Visual elegance might be another driver in that BS Meridian proved many years ago (the M2 and M20 being prime examples) that an visually elegant cabinet with a small footprint where the amps and drivers along with a sophisticated electronic crossover can produce a quality of sound (predominantly articulation, speed and credibility) that belies the small size and comparatively low retail cost is readily achievable if you know what you are doing.

Naturally the mix ‘n match enthusiasts will be reluctant to shift from the buy it, then try it, then sell it regime which for them is all part of the fun of trying to get the best out of an amp or speakers. And that’s fine – for them. However my guess is that there is a growing market sector who want the sort of uncomplicated plug ‘n play facility that Bose have pioneered – albeit withg with an audiophile quality of reproduction.

I have been privileged (and I don’t use that word lightly) to have been invited to numerous listening sessions on a new UK-built active speaker system, designed in the UK and using novel principles.

In a nutshell, a control unit with 5 line inputs and 4 dedicated power amps in the preamp chassis, connected by a single connection per channel. By doing this, the power amps are not exposed to the vibration inside a speaker cabinet. This, as some of you know, has been a source of criticism of all other active speaker systems.

The sound quality I can best describe as follows. It’s as flawless as I’ve yet heard. The lows are extended but not overblown and are well defined. The midrange is untainted, the treble is grainless and beautifully balanced, the dynamics are breath-taking. The stereo imaging is correct, truthful and unwavering. This deeply clever design defines neutrality and is one of the very few designs – ever – to leave me rooted to the spot.

The makers tell me the intended retail price inc VAT and UK carriage is around £2,400 complete.

They can achieve this by selling direct to the end user. They will be offering a 90 day sale or return facility with no small print.

Interesting times indeed!

sastusbulbas
31-12-2008, 14:44
Along with integrated dacs with volume control? Digital processor based control units or such?

John
31-12-2008, 15:53
Really interetsted the actives sounds like some really good out of the box thinking (pun intended) Keep us informed this just might be what I am looking for

Spectral Morn
31-12-2008, 16:10
I for one can't see most audiophiles going for this, but there is, as Howard says, a huge market of Bose, B&O type customers who deserve much better for their large amounts of money. Audiophile all in one systems, or based around active speakers would be one way of appealing to them. But the problem will be that to convert this potentially huge customer base means having huge quantities of money to advertise and promote the sexy lifestyle potential. However the single biggest factor in the minds of this type of customer after cost, is does it have wires (size too). Having had this type of conversation multiple times in the past, it is very hard to get past it. With new builds ( opportunity to bury cabling )dead in the water and most not willing to have any type of cables run across their nice wood floors, I can see this type of thing stalling. Not sexy enough and invisible enough for lifestyle brigade and not what audiophiles want IMO. The other big issue is this type of customers rooms do not lend themselves well to proper audio set up, they also have mostly IMHE terrible acoustics (bright and hard ) , this is what minimal,high ceilings and little or no furniture does to the sound.

Bose and B&O have had decades to brain wash peole into thinking they are the best money can buy (in terms of audio quality), we know thats not the case but, this type of customer knows what they want and it is almost impossible to change their minds. I know I have tried, more than once, in fact hundreds of times.

From a practical point of view now is probably going to be one of the toughest times ever ( ?) to launch any new product.

However in saying all this and I do respect Howard's ears, I wish this company the best and hope that I am not being to hard and they are given the opportunity to make a success of their products.

Regards D S D L ----- Neil :)

Clive
31-12-2008, 17:32
I expect a good active system could succeed if it's marketed well. It won't win by being the best sounding, even if it is the best. It needs something like....."Active Digital Technology" or some such tagline to get people to think it's the latest and most advanced technology. This wouldn't simply be printed on the box, it would need a marketing campaign to drive it into peoples' minds and aspirations.

If the intent of the manufacturer is to sell direct and only support a small family business then world domination and mega marketing won't be the way to go, something more like Stan's approach with lots of internet chat could also be a great approach.

Marco
31-12-2008, 17:46
I for one can't see most audiophiles going for this, but there is, as Howard says, a huge market of Bose, B&O type customers who deserve much better for their large amounts of money...


Indeed, and good luck to Howard. I wish him the best of success and I'm sure there's a big market for this type of product. However, I very much come into the category highlighted above.

Marco.

Neil McCauley
31-12-2008, 18:13
Hi. And thank you for all the responses so far.

I need to make it clear that I am not a retailer for these speakers. They won't have retailers. They will be selling direct.

I mentioned the Bose aspect merely for illustrative purposes – specifically to identify the type of market, but by no means the size of market.

Their year #1 projections, for global sales are just 100 pairs. Assuming the RRP of say £2k ex VAT, then a modest year #1 turnover of £200k. However, the profit to be made as a %age of that £200k is very worthwhile for the makers – and startling for a product to be built in the UK rather than the Far East. How can this be?

Well, by avoiding advertising wastage, applying a very innovative construction technique that saves a fortune compared to solid or fabricated wood construction (they use a very lightweight carcass material never previously seen in the audio world) and the exploitation of viral marketing.

And perhaps most important of all, the absence of ego, which translates into (so it seems to me as an outsider) no need to make rash or unsubstantiated claims nor extract unreasonable and unrealistic amounts of cash from what will always be, quite deliberately so I'm told, a cottage industry.

All in all, a refreshing approach and one that I was proud to have been associated with as an entirely unpaid pair of ears. If I'm lucky, I may get an invitation to be in at the early stage of their next product.

As a retailer, with little if any understanding of what makes the equipment I sell work – it was a pleasure to associated with gifted design engineers who always (and I hope it remains thus) had their eye on the musical credibility of what they were doing, with the profit motive some way down the list of success criteria and the greed aspect seemingly non existent.

MartinT
01-01-2009, 07:18
Power distribution could be an issue. Just when centralised power conditioning is beginning to receive widespread attention (e.g. PS Audio products), having speakers requiring their own power feed decentralises that effort.

I am also not entirely convinced that the inside of a speaker is the best environment in which to house a power amplifier.

John
01-01-2009, 07:57
The ATC active speakers are some of the best speakers I heard regadless of price in terms of transiant attack and dynamics have not heard anything better They also do low level detail so you have dynamics at low volume but can go concert levels without distorting
I like open baffles as well, they can seduce you in a way the ATC cannot but see this as more horses for courses than one being better than the other.
For me I like the thinking of the system and if they perform at the level Howard is suggesting then I think in real terms they will be a real bargin, but understand why people are so skeptical

Togil
01-01-2009, 10:22
I'd love to hear the Meridian DSP 7200 under domestic conditions.

If Howard's prediction #2 is correct they should become very popular

sastusbulbas
01-01-2009, 16:12
My own preference is active PMC BB5's but of course such designs add more boxes than a passive.

Another thing is that large actives are not favourable due to Uk homes getting smaller cheaper made yet more expensive, so this in itself may very well make smaller ancillaries and compact actives (wireless!) more a requirement than interest.

tfarney
03-01-2009, 11:11
I think as a market that dwarfs the Bose/B&O crowd -- the iPod/convenience listening one -- matures, discovers quality IEMs, begins searching for higher resolution and a sound stage outside of their heads, actives may be an ideal solution. Their headphone-trained ears, like my own, will emerge hearing the distortions of passive crossovers (sometimes it's all I can hear); their computer-as-source orientation will leapfrog psychological hurdles toward integrated, active systems, as will their familiarity with compact convenience; and they simply don't have the pre-conceived notions or the love of tweaking that traditional audiophiles do. The traditional audiophile will not embrace actives in significant numbers. If they would, they would already have bought up lots of pro equipment that performs brilliantly. This is, after all, not new. It is a technology that has been maturing, and that audiophiles have been ignorning, for a couple of decades. Besides, I'm not convinced that the traditional audiophile even exists in significant numbers. I fear they are an endangered species.

Tim

Marco
03-01-2009, 11:50
Good post, Tim - I agree, particularly with your last two sentences ;)

Happy New Year, incidentally! I hope you had a nice time over the festive period :)

Regarding the points you've raised, personally, I would like to educate, via this forum and by other means, some of the "Bose/B&O crowd -- iPod/convenience listening" type you mention into appreciating the finer points of audio to give them greater insight into recordings and (hopefully), as a result, increase their enjoyment of music; that's what I'm in it for!

Although we may not have many of the breed you describe as members, I'm hopeful that what is written on the likes of AOS is read and digested by the 100s of onlookers/'guests' we get every day who've perhaps found our site through Googling for computer audio related products, iPods, etc, which are discussed extensively here, and might be influenced by what they read and act on it by improving the equipment they use and their systems as a whole.

We may be an endangered species, Tim, but while we're around we're spreading our 'seed' as widely as possible! :eyebrows:

Marco.

tfarney
03-01-2009, 12:54
Good post, Tim - I agree, particularly with your last two sentences ;)

Happy New Year, incidentally! I hope you had a nice time over the festive period :)

Regarding the points you've raised, personally, I would like to educate, via this forum and by other means, some of the "Bose/B&O crowd -- iPod/convenience listening" type you mention into appreciating the finer points of audio to give them greater insight into recordings and (hopefully), as a result, increase their enjoyment of music; that's what I'm in it for!

Although we may not have many of the breed you describe as members, I'm hopeful that what is written on the likes of AOS is read and digested by the 100s of onlookers/'guests' we get every day who've perhaps found our site through Googling for computer audio related products, iPods, etc, which are discussed extensively here, and might be influenced by what they read and act on it by improving the equipment they use and their systems as a whole.

We may be an endangered species, Tim, but while we're around we're spreading our 'seed' as widely as possible! :eyebrows:

Marco.

OK, OK...the seed-spreading analogy wasn't necessary. :)

I'm not sure the iPod/convenience crowd is listening to audiophiles, but they are listening to audio. They walk into the store daily, looking to build simple systems, asking about computer/iPod connectivity. Often they're in the market for A/V surround stuff, but whenever I can, I lure them into the studio and play some music for them. They're not nearly as clueless as the audiophile world thinks they are. Perhaps they don't understand separates and tweaking and the finer points of audio OCD, but many of them have graduated from iPods to high-end IEMs and are getting at detail and coherency in their little pocket systems that eludes many audiophiles in their untreated rooms with they passive crossovers. Some of them have remarkably good ears.

Will they cross over to the world of gold-brick cd transports, tube monoblocks and passive floorstanders? Probably not. But they may plug their Apple laptops into something that will, in some key areas, outperform all of the above. Good audio reproduction is always a choice of compromises. The conventional high-end crowd has chosen theirs, just like everyone else, whether they are fully aware of it or not. Spend a few months listening to nothing but high end cans backed by ungodly amounts of headroom, then...no, on second thought, don't. No point in spoiling your fun.

Tim

Marco
03-01-2009, 13:16
Tim, it may have escaped your attention but I own a pair of "hi-end cans" (AKG 701s) and a high quality headphone amp, which I play through a rather nice Croft valve preamp, so I know exactly the effect you're referring to - and yes it's fun :)

Which set-up do I choose to listen to most, though - that or my T/T or classic hi-end CDP through my valve amp and passive Spendors?

Take a guess!! ;)

Yes, hi-fi is all about choosing your compromises, but for me a headphone set-up, 'hi-end' or otherwise, will always offer more compromises than listening to a high quality 'external' system through big, equally high quality, speakers. And as for iPods and such like, there are far more sonic compromises in that arena than the one I inhabit, simply because computer audio, as good as it is in many ways, is in general much more about convenience than ultimate sound quality.

Your point about the 'iPod breed', etc, still having good ears and the discernment to judge a good sound is indeed valid. I have young relatives who often visit, and who own the type of systems you describe; when they hear their music on my system they never cease to be gob-smacked at how different and (hugely) better it sounds to what they're used to, consequently they sit for hours listening to their tunes and revelling in the musical details and scale their iPods, MP3 players, and such like completely miss or are incapable of replicating. The look on their faces is priceless! And as for turntables and records, they think they are really cool. Some of them have since gone on to buy their own (traditional) budget separates systems.

Sewing the seed in this way is exactly what excites me about audio and contributing to hi-fi forums like this. If I can help improve someone's enjoyment of music through exposing them to better sound quality, or offering advice which achieves that result, then I'm a happy man...

Marco.

tfarney
03-01-2009, 13:42
Tim, it may have escaped your attention but I own a pair of "hi-end cans" (AKG 701s) and a high quality headphone amp, which I play through a top-notch Croft valve preamp, so I know exactly the effect you're referring to - and yes it's fun :)

Which set-up do I choose to listen to most, though - that or my T/T or classic hi-end CDP through my valve amp and passive Spendors?

Take a guess!! ;)

Yes, hi-fi is all about choosing your compromises, but for me a headphone set-up, 'hi-end' or otherwise, will always offer more compromises than listening to a high quality 'external' system through big, equally high quality, speakers. And as for iPods and such like, there are far more sonic compromises in that arena than the one I inhabit, simply because computer audio, as good as it is in many ways, is in general much more about convenience than ultimate sound quality.

Marco.

It had not escaped my attention, and your AKGs are fine cans. But I'm not talking about the headphone effect, but rather, the lack of another effect, the one that occurs when even the finest passive crossovers have two drivers, of very different character, size, dispersion and speed, playing the same critical midrange material at the same time. You really wouldn't hear it unless you committed to listening to your AKGs exclusively for a long time, perhaps not years, but at least until your ears and your psyche forgot the sound of that system you prefer listening to. Don't go there. I know for certain that after years of such listening, the incoherence is inescapable.

We all choose our compromises. I know the compromises of headphones well.

iPods and such? We've been down this road before. Yes, mp3 players with their tiny little class D analog amps and the transducers they dictate represent some serious compromises. The computer as source, through a good DAC vs. a cdp with a similar DAC? While I can't tell you what you hear, I can tell you that all the compromises that logic can embrace and science can measure are vapor. There is simply no reason why a spinning optical disc feeding zeros and ones into a buffer, into a DAC would sound at all different than a spinning hard drive feeding zeros and ones into a buffer, into a DAC.

Tim

sastusbulbas
03-01-2009, 13:58
There is simply no reason why a spinning optical disc feeding zeros and ones into a buffer, into a DAC would sound at all different than a spinning hard drive feeding zeros and ones into a buffer, into a DAC.

Tim

Yawn..... :sofa:

Marco
03-01-2009, 21:04
Tim,


I'm not talking about the headphone effect, but rather, the lack of another effect, the one that occurs when even the finest passive crossovers have two drivers, of very different character, size, dispersion and speed, playing the same critical midrange material at the same time. You really wouldn't hear it unless you committed to listening to your AKGs exclusively for a long time, perhaps not years, but at least until your ears and your psyche forgot the sound of that system you prefer listening to. Don't go there. I know for certain that after years of such listening, the incoherence is inescapable.


LOL - how very dramatic! It's quite unnecessary though. I understand what you mean, and you have a point, but I can assure you that in my system whatever "effect" there is of using speakers with passive crossovers is not overridden by the 'magic' of headphone listening. In my system, the headphone set-up plays second fiddle to external listening through my Spendor loudspeakers, and by a significant margin!

As good as the AKGs and headphone amp are, and I enjoy very much the listening experience they provide, they are merely tools to facilitate late night listening. In terms of absolute fidelity, listening externally through the Spendors is superior by a country mile. The headphone set-up is therefore a convenient add-on to my main system and nothing more. Your Sennheisers would be no different.

Don't get me wrong, with headphone listening there is a vividness and emotional intimacy due to the complete lack of colorations associated with loudspeaker cabinets, crossovers, and most significantly, the listening room itself, that is utterly beguiling, *BUT*, equally, there is also a complete lack of scale, 'physicality', and dynamic impact that listening externally through the Spendors delivers in spades, and which is ultimately more important in order that the listening experience more accurately resembles a live musical performance and not simply an addictively entertaining but ultimately unrealistic facsimile of such as delivered by my headphone set-up.

You love your cans, and I'm happy for you, but don't be fooled into thinking that what you're listening to is overall any more accurate than the experience provided by listening externally to a high quality system using a similar high quality pair of loudspeakers, fitted with passive crossovers or not, because quite frankly as far as compromises go, the balance is tipped far more heavily in favour of the latter than the former :)


The computer as source, through a good DAC vs. a cdp with a similar DAC? While I can't tell you what you hear, I can tell you that all the compromises that logic can embrace and science can measure are vapor. There is simply no reason why a spinning optical disc feeding zeros and ones into a buffer, into a DAC would sound at all different than a spinning hard drive feeding zeros and ones into a buffer, into a DAC.


Actually, experience tells me that the best way of reproducing digitally stored musical information is via a computer, streaming lossless high resolution files through a high quality (and I mean high quality!) DAC. CD transports as musical data retrieving devices, no matter how high quality, are ultimately flawed because of the sonic signature the various moving parts and reading processes impart on the musical signal.

The only reason I continue to use my classic and heavily modified Sony transport and DAC is because it's long since bought and paid for, looks stunning, and reproduces CD at its best the way it was designed to be heard when the format was invented. Therefore I am in no particular hurry to invest in a computer audio set-up, which on one hand will likely give superior performance using the same DAC, but on the other, through dispensing with my 'physical' CD collection, removes the tactile and 'human' aspect I enjoy of handling the jewel cases and admiring the associated artwork and packaging, which is important to me (as it is with vinyl). This is where I suspect we differ most: in the way we view accessing our music collection. I find your preferred way rather soulless, lacking in tactility, and completely unrewarding despite its undoubted merits in terms of organisation and convenience.

Anyway, let's not turn this discussion into another tedious subjectivist/objectivist/measurements/science debate as we've been there before and our respective mindsets are so diametrically opposed as to make debate on the matter as pointless as pointless can be.

However I will say this (so that there's no misunderstanding of my view on the matter): I would gladly use science automatically as the benchmark to judge all things hi-fi if I felt that it provided all the answers necessary. It would certainly be a damn sight easier having an 'undisputable reference' as one's basis for judgement. But it's the grey areas that bother me. Quite clearly, science currently can't provide all the answers, certainly as far as measuring how equipment and its associated ancillaries treats music signals and ascertaining how humans process recorded musical information via our ears and brain. Therefore grey areas exist because we are not robots; when listening to music our brains aren't programmed to respond in a specific way to known audio measurement parameters. The fact is, we do not listen to music in the way scientific apparatus measures sound.

If such apparatus could measure how we as humans listen to and appreciate music then measurements would be truly meaningful and embraced wholeheartedly by music enthusiasts and audiophiles alike. That is why audio/music enthusiasts like me will always trust their ears more than any scientific measurements, because what we can currently measure just doesn't tell the whole story. Until the day comes when measurements unequivocally provide all the answers, I will happily continue using my discerning ears which for me are infinitely more accurate and reliable in ascertaining what really matters in hi-fi (and subsequently in my enjoyment of music), especially in those grey areas...

Marco.

StanleyB
03-01-2009, 22:59
streaming lossless high resolution files through a high quality (and I mean high quality!) DAC.
Care to suggest a few?

pjdowns
03-01-2009, 23:04
I've heard that one from Beresford is pretty damn good LOL ;)

Marco
03-01-2009, 23:06
At its price point (and significantly beyond), Stan, yours is one of them! :)

Marco.

purite audio
03-01-2009, 23:21
My Weiss dac II sounds absolutely superb playing 24bit 176.4 'reference recordings' hi-res files, firewire conectin from my macbook. It is a very elegant solution, even has volume control if you don't want to use a preamp.
http://www.weiss.ch/dac2/dac2.htm

tfarney
04-01-2009, 00:38
LOL - how very dramatic! It's quite unnecessary though. I understand what you mean, and you have a point, but I can assure you that in my system whatever "effect" there is of using speakers with passive crossovers is not overridden by the 'magic' of headphone listening. In my system, the headphone set-up plays second fiddle to external listening through my Spendor loudspeakers, and by a significant margin!

You misunderstand me. I'm not being dramatic at all, and I'm not saying that listening to cans is superior to a good speaker set-up. I'm merely saying that after a couple of years of listening to cans almost exclusively, the one weakness a good speaker rig has, by comparison, has just pushed itself to the front of my consciousness. I can't get around hearing it. We all have these things we hear and others that we're very skilled at ignoring. It's what makes some of us go for digital into active monitors and others go for tubes into horns. Viva la difference.

And FWIW, your cdp feeds data into a buffer which feeds it to your DAC. Just as that data would be coming from a buffer (RAM), if you were using a computer as your source. Theoretically, given the same DAC, they should sound identical. No need for you to give up your tactile experience just yet.

Tim

Marco
04-01-2009, 00:56
Tim,


You misunderstand me. I'm not being dramatic at all, and I'm not saying that listening to cans is superior to a good speaker set-up. I'm merely saying that after a couple of years of listening to cans almost exclusively, the one weakness a good speaker rig has, by comparison, has just pushed itself to the front of my consciousness. I can't get around hearing it. We all have these things we hear and others that we're very skilled at ignoring. It's what makes some of us go for digital into active monitors and others go for tubes into horns. Viva la difference.


Fair enough. That's definitely not the case as far as I'm concerned. Yes, I can hear some advantages with good quality headphones, but for me the vastly superior advantages of listening externally through high quality speakers completely outweighs any slight advantages headphones have, not to mention headphones are uncomfortable and annoying after a while.

You must remember that my daily listening sessions on average can last for 4 or 5 hours, and sometimes longer. I wouldn't fancy wearing headphones for that long! ;)


And FWIW, your cdp feeds data into a buffer which feeds it to your DAC. Just as that data would be coming from a buffer (RAM), if you were using a computer as your source. Theoretically, given the same DAC, they should sound identical. No need for you to give up your tactile experience just yet.


Theoretically maybe, but I've heard a £300 Helios media player streaming FLAC files outperform my (exceptionally well built and specified) high-end CD transport playing the same music on CD using the same DAC in the same system. To my ears, ALL CD transports impose their sonic signature detrimentally on the music signal. Removing the various mechanical processes responsible for this and replacing them with a computer solves the problem, providing a high quality DAC is used to process the signal afterwards.

Marco.

Beechwoods
04-01-2009, 07:54
Does anyone have any active speaker recommendations at the < £1000 price point?

Primalsea
04-01-2009, 09:46
Why are you in th emarket for some Beechy:eyebrows::eyebrows:

I think that that an all in one system will appeal to people who want quality but are not interested in hifi as such. Others will go for a materpiece of Drastic Plastic from Dixons or the like.

The audiophile will eventually want to change the amps, preamp, xo, speakers etc etc. Part of the fun with my active speakers was changing the amps around, all 3 of them!! It was almost impossible to stop fiddling with the crossover dials as well.

By time the active system gets as good as some of the best current hifi items it price will be much larger than a comparitive system with passive speakers. Saying that though once you do go active with a good setup its very hard to go back to passive. However there are other compromises with speakers. A good large passive with most likely out preform a small active one as the compromise of small cabinet size has a far larger influence.

tfarney
04-01-2009, 10:03
Does anyone have any active speaker recommendations at the < £1000 price point?

Some good quality nearfield monitors can be found in that price range from the likes of M-Audio, Dynaudio, Genelec, etc. if the compromises of small cabs (and the later addition of subs) and nearfield listening bother you less than those of passive designs.

Tim

John
04-01-2009, 10:12
Nick
AVI ADM9 but have not heard them

Yet again fits in the small speaker but might be worth a listen

The really good ones go for silly money but you rarely see them being sold second hand

Lily Munster
04-01-2009, 10:49
However I will say this (so that there's no misunderstanding of my view on the matter): I would gladly use science automatically as the benchmark to judge all things hi-fi if I felt that it provided all the answers necessary. It would certainly be a damn sight easier having an 'undisputable reference' as one's basis for judgement. But it's the grey areas that bother me. Quite clearly, science currently can't provide all the answers, certainly as far as measuring how equipment and its associated ancillaries treats music signals and ascertaining how humans process recorded musical information via our ears and brain. Therefore grey areas exist because we are not robots; when listening to music our brains aren't programmed to respond in a specific way to known audio measurement parameters. The fact is, we do not listen to music in the way scientific apparatus measures sound.

If such apparatus could measure how we as humans listen to and appreciate music then measurements would be truly meaningful and embraced wholeheartedly by music enthusiasts and audiophiles alike. That is why audio/music enthusiasts like me will always trust their ears more than any scientific measurements, because what we can currently measure just doesn't tell the whole story. Until the day comes when measurements unequivocally provide all the answers, I will happily continue using my discerning ears which for me are infinitely more accurate and reliable in ascertaining what really matters in hi-fi (and subsequently in my enjoyment of music), especially in those grey areas...


I like that and totally agree :)

Lily.

Marco
04-01-2009, 10:56
Nick
AVI ADM9 but have not heard them

Yet again fits in the small speaker but might be worth a listen


Wow, John, hush thy mouth! ;)

Nah, for £1000, providing you're not looking for huge scale or deep bass, they do the job nicely. They're not the 'world beaters' as purported by Mr James and his marketing monkey, though.

Marco.

Spectral Morn
04-01-2009, 11:16
Hi Guys

The AVI Pro 9 speakers on which the ADM's are based are/were very good and a fave of mine when in the trade, suitable for small to mid sized rooms (if you don't need lots of bass). Then Ashely killed them, then brought them back. Very open, detailed and fast without being spot lit or bright. Bass was also very good for the size. However at a retail price of £800, the extra £200 on the active version will not give the same results as the Pro 9's used in a conventional way.

I know Ashely a bit and while he does come across as being very opinionated (you can agree or disagree with him), I do feel that while the ADM's ( IMO can't be as good as he states), they are still a very clever adaptation of an excellent speaker, and for the market he has aimed them at they deserve to be and have been a success. AVI would have been mad not to try and create a niche for themselves and they have done so and very well too, compared to the usual suspects. I do wonder If they could be hooked up to better electronics (as active) if they could get closer to what Ashely has said (assuming you like the presentation.), or even better.

I for one don't see me ever going down an active route but to be fair and honest I have heard very few such speakers, to never rule it out. However my collection of amps would kind of rule it out, and my love for valves. T+A have partly active speakers with valves driving the treble, how would that work in such a vibration rich location ?

Regards D S D L----- Neil:)

Beechwoods
04-01-2009, 19:45
Why are you in the market for some Beechy:eyebrows::eyebrows:

:ner: Well I was thinking of something without a whole load of boxes that would work well in the living room. The living room is very much a family room / kids playroom, but it's where we have the big telly and I'd like to have a reasonable 2 channel setup in there for films and the occasional bit of music. I was thinking actives could go straight into the back of the DVD player... I've got two big floorstanding transmission line speakers in the loft which will come out one day when the kids are old enough to respect them :) but for now small is beautiful.

I've tried horrible multi-channel satellite units in the past, with subwoofers that completely muddy the sound regardless of what you do or where you put them. I've heard good studio monitor actives. I know some folks find them too fatiguing, I was hoping maybe there were some alternatives in the more 'easy listening' market :lol:

tfarney
04-01-2009, 20:52
I should have mentiioned AVI 9.1's alongside the other actives I listed. Had I heard them, I might have even started with them, but I haven't. On paper, FWIW, they do an awful lot of things right, and I'd guess there's a really good chance they are as clean, revealing and coherent, if not more so, than any of the studio actives I listed. Not to mention that actives, paired with an active sub designed for them, stand a really good chance of seamless integration...in theory :).

I'd love to hear a pair some day.

Tim

Steve Toy
05-01-2009, 03:15
I heard the original ADM 9s and was unimpressed. They sounded rather dull and flat to my ears and lacked resolution compared to, say, a decent 2k separates passive system. They would make an excellent upgrade to computer speakers though and are keenly priced for what they are.

When Ashley stated that they were better than passive set-ups costing up to 14 times the price, he was either grossly exaggerating or such costly systems were badly set up.

Filterlab
05-01-2009, 12:27
Nick, I'd be tempted to get a used pair of ATC actives if you want to go down that route. They'll be far superior to anything new at that price.

John
05-01-2009, 16:28
The ATC active are great but pricy you might find a second hand ATC SCM20SL AT @ the price you looking for and should be well worth the effort if you can find one

Beechwoods
05-01-2009, 17:22
Thanks for the recommendations Rob and John. I will try and get to hear some before making any decisions. It's useful to know there are options :)

John
05-01-2009, 17:46
Yes Nick please listen first they are not for everyone