+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: LINN: A comprenhensive history of the Isobark

  1. #1
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: Southern England

    Posts: 2,990
    I'm Howard.

    Default LINN: A comprenhensive history of the Isobark

    Wikipedia states:

    The Linn Isobarik, nicknamed "Bariks" or "Briks", is a loudspeaker designed and manufactured by Linn Products. The Isobarik is known for both its reproduction of low bass frequencies and being very demanding on amplifiers.

    Launched in 1973, the Isobarik DMS, Linn's maiden and flagship loudspeaker was based on and named for the isobaric loading principle invented in the 1950s. The speaker exists also as the Isobarik PMS – destined for the professional market. Although discontinued in 1992, it remains popular among audiophiles.

    History

    While other loudspeaker manufacturers sought to outperform each other to produce more quantum bass output from their products, Linn was seeking clear undistorted low frequency bass. Linn theorised a design whose bass could go all the way to DC and be without fundamental resonance.[1] The quest for that extra octave of "dry and extended bass sound" and more accurate reproduction resulted in the Isobarik.[2]

    Linn launched the original Isobarik DMS loudspeaker in 1973,[3] the year following the release of its first product, the Sondek LP12. "DMS" is the contraction for "domestic monitor system", and is designed to be driven passively in the home setting – it incorporated a crossover within the loudspeaker cabinet. The Isobarik PMS ("professional monitor system") loudspeaker launched in 1977, destined for the professional market is without the internal crossover. This latter configuration opens up more wiring and driving options, in particular active operation and tri-amping.[1][4]

    The Isobarik is so named as it employs the isobaric loading principle invented by Harry Olson in the 1950s: two bass units are mounted in a sealed container and driven in parallel so as to effectively double the speaker enclosure volume and extend its bass frequency response beyond what would be possible for otherwise identical speakers. Linn used a .....
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linn_Isobarik
    Well, hello.

  2. #2
    Join Date: May 2016

    Location: Notts

    Posts: 2,741
    I'm Geoff.

    Default

    The Isobark? Got a big woofer then?

    Geoff

  3. #3
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: Southern England

    Posts: 2,990
    I'm Howard.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherwood View Post
    The Isobark? Got a big woofer then?

    Geoff
    Indeed so.
    Well, hello.

  4. #4
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Essex

    Posts: 31,846
    I'm openingabottleofwine.

    Default

    "The trade-off was a less than solid stereo image." An understatement if ever there was one!
    Barry

  5. #5
    Join Date: Apr 2011

    Location: Surrey

    Posts: 4,162
    I'm Mike.

    Default

    I found my Isobariks image excellent after many upgrades
    TAD CD / DAC / Pre, Technics 1210, MCRU PSU, Mike New Bearing & Platter, Stillpoints LP1 weight, Speedy Steve Ebony armboard, Fidelity Research FR64FX arm, Ortofon SPU. Aurorasound VIDA Phono Pre Amp, TAD Power Amp, TAD E1 speakers. Coherent RTZ 3 Grounding box, Coherent grounding cables, Creaktiv racks. Coherent Mains Cables. SR Blue Fuse. Interconnects : Coherent and Yannis 223.5 Connect Litz. Coherent speaker cable. Audio Magic Transcendence Conditioner. Coherent mains socket. Mains Filters : , PS Audio Harvesters, Russ Andrews Purifiers, Tacima, Vertex. Black Ravioli and RDC supports. Electric Beach S1NX platforms for TAD CD and Technics. Ferrite chokes everywhere except the above. Ears, brain

    Mike

  6. #6
    Join Date: Apr 2009

    Location: Near Saffron Walden, Essex

    Posts: 7,087
    I'm Dave.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    "The trade-off was a less than solid stereo image." An understatement if ever there was one!
    They spray 'music' all over the room - part of the design, so imagery is vague, to say the least.

  7. #7
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Essex

    Posts: 31,846
    I'm openingabottleofwine.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hifi_dave View Post
    They spray 'music' all over the room - part of the design, so imagery is vague, to say the least.
    Yes I know. I heard them twice: once at a London hi-fi dealer and for a second time at an audio show. On both occasions they were being demonstrated in a large room. The image floated around so much I almost felt sea sick, and could only put with listening to them for about ten minutes. When I pointed this lack of focus and image stability to the demonstrator his replay was "How do you know it's not meant to sound like that?" Clearly he hadn't attended many live performances in his life.

    Sorry, IMO the Isobariks really are/were awful speakers. In fact the Linn Isobariks join a select company of two speaker designs that are the worse I have ever heard. And the second I would forgive because I heard them being played in a hotel room that was far to small for such a (dipole) speaker.
    Barry

  8. #8
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: A Strangely Isolated Place in Suffolk with Far Away Trains Passing By...

    Posts: 14,535
    I'm David.

    Default

    Having owned three pairs of DMS's and sold and set up many an active pair as well as passive models throughout its life, I can say that driving the room in a half hearted way as they did could be utter pleasure and utter pain. best active ones for me were the early chipboard ones pre 1983, as Linn took more care with driver matching and internal construction (I believe they did a heck of a lot inside them in the early days and have some pics to prove it from a factory visit).

    MDF passive ones post March '83 were better sounding and the actives probably then became too good for the driving Naim electronics if truth be told - My jury's out on the Hiquphon tweeters. From mid 85, they all sounded crap as KEF screwed up the B110 mid driver once too often (screechy voices and shrieking guitars became the norm) and Linn totally revised the whole thing in the late 80's. Mid colouration was increased (hollow cuppy quality on vocals) and a friends six-pack active 'Briks with six NAP135's were an absolute joke when compared to the then rather cheaper ATC 100A's he replaced them with, keeping the 'briks nearby for comparison - and yes, we did try to tweak the 'briks to make them better but with no success).

    The best 'briks I ever heard were a colleagues pair of bolt-up 250 driven active samples. These worked so well in his room and totally disappeared so easily from the music coming through.
    Tear down these walls; Cut the ties that held me
    Crying out at the top of my voice; Tell me now if you can hear me

  9. #9
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: Southern England

    Posts: 2,990
    I'm Howard.

    Default A different way to drive these monsters ....

    A different way to drive these monsters ....

    (Meridian) 101/105 combination was very versatile. I used it in sixes to drive the initially hideous sounding Linn Isobarics in a remarkable combination hand built by Bob Stuart. The speakers had no crossover. None at all. As such each of the six power amplifiers had their sonic characteristics and electrical performance matched specifically to each of the six drivers (three per side) of the speakers. As far as I’m aware this has never been repeated. Six of these six pack combinations were built and sold and I’ve not seen one come up on the second-hand market ever.
    http://www.hifianswers.com/2017/08/b...howard-popeck/
    Well, hello.

  10. #10
    Join Date: Oct 2012

    Location: NE England

    Posts: 4,173
    I'm Jez.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    Yes I know. I heard them twice: once at a London hi-fi dealer and for a second time at an audio show. On both occasions they were being demonstrated in a large room. The image floated around so much I almost felt sea sick, and could only put with listening to them for about ten minutes. When I pointed this lack of focus and image stability to the demonstrator his replay was "How do you know it's not meant to sound like that?" Clearly he hadn't attended many live performances in his life.

    Sorry, IMO the Isobariks really are/were awful speakers. In fact the Linn Isobariks join a select company of two speaker designs that are the worse I have ever heard. And the second I would forgive because I heard them being played in a hotel room that was far to small for such a (dipole) speaker.
    +1. Lowthers of pretty much any description being the other... although I once heard a set of massive horn loaded things that had what looked like a wooden doorknob sticking out of the middle of each modified Lowther driver which sounded excellent...
    Arkless Electronics-Engineered to be better. Tel. 01670 530674 (after 1pm)

    Modded Thorens TD150, Audio Technica AT-1005 MkII, Technics EPC-300MC, Arkless Hybrid MC phono stage, Arkless passive pre, Arkless 50WPC Class A SS power amp, (or) Arkless modded Leak Stereo 20, Modded Kef Reference 105/3's
    ReVox PR99, Studer B62, Ferrograph Series 7, Tandberg TCD440, Hitachi FT-5500MkI, also FT-5500MkII
    Digital: Yamaha CDR-HD1500 (Digital Swiss army knife-CD recorder, player, hard drive, DAC and ADC in one), PC files via 24/96 sound card and SPDIF, modded Philips CD850, modded Philips CD104, modded DPA Little Bit DAC. Sennheiser HD580 cans with Arkless Headphone amp.
    Cables- free interconnects that come with CD players, mains leads from B&Q, dead kettles etc, extension leads from Tesco

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •