Does size matter? [Archive] - The Art of Sound Forum

Marco

09-02-2008, 13:58

Has anyone else read the review of the Spendor SP-100R in this month's Hi-fi+ ?

It makes very interesting reading, and the reviewer, Chris Binns, touches on a point that I've always maintained...namely that it's impossible to get a realistic sound from small boxes. Scale and impact is very important to the convincing portrayal of music, especially anything that requires convincing bass to convey the musical message. I also believe that multiple-driver speakers (anything more than 2-way) done well, particularly when the size of the bass unit is much bigger than the norm, portray music much more convincingly than speakers that employ smaller bass units, or multiple arrays of such. The SP-100s use single 12" drivers and a 3-way design to phenomenal effect.

The Spendors were described as 'Impressively ugly', which is of course a kind of back-handed compliment, but most importantly, extremely satisfying in terms of their handling of all sorts of music. I've always known this, though, as I've used SP100s since 2001, then in an all-Naim system, and for the last year and a half with the system shown in my signature below.

I shall comment in more detail on the review itself, but in the meantime I would ask the question:

Does size matter with speakers, in terms of portraying music convincingly, or can just as much musical satisfaction be derived from a decent pair of small stand-mount speakers or slim floorstanders?

Over to you...

Marco.

Steve Toy

09-02-2008, 14:48

sastusbulbas

09-02-2008, 16:59

Bigger is definitely better, but I do agree with Steve's comment regarding room size, and frequency load and amplifier.

Small bass drivers and cabinets just don't do low end, though my smaller Rogers Studio 1 do quite well with Bass Outlaws and such. Though they are a little too close to the rear wall at the moment.

I currently run my Kef R107 with the LF cut off at either 50hz or 35hz, due to the amplifier I am currently using not having the control with the cut off at 25hz or 18hz. With the amp I currently use (Technics SU-MA10) mid bass punch and definition is also improved with a higher LF cut off.

I quite like the look of the newest Harbeth Monitor 40. And also like speakers such as the PMC BB5 and B&W 801D, one of my preferred Demo's was of the PMC/Bryston BB5/XBB active system, I would quite happily have this installed if I had the room and money. It was far better than the Demo of the Tannoy Westminster Royal HE biggies, though they were OK they didn't seem to happy in the huge room I heard them in, with too much prominent mid band which seemed out of kilter with the low bass which I felt fell short in terms of depth compared to the R107.

Big speakers rule.

SolidState

09-02-2008, 17:03

Excellent question, having spoken to many ladies over the years, some have given an objective reply, others have given an objective reply and some have just given a very philosophical reply. So it really boils down to who you ask, everyone has a different take and taste in how they like their bass to be presented. My own experience has shown me that 15" woofers will give superior bass to a pencil thin speaker, like the piega's, all of course in the right environment. At the moment i'm experimenting with 10" drivers to see if I can strike a balance in my own room avoiding any boom.

Mike Reed

09-02-2008, 17:39

The main difference between large, medium and small speakers is surely one of scale.

In the 60s, 15 inch drivers (Goodmans in my case) were not rare. 12 inch were common in both production and D.I.Y. kits. They probably (my memory fails!) had the scale, but not the speed. Mind you, amplification wasn't that hot either until Naim and others came on the scene.

I had, until last year, both ProAc Response 3.5 and my current 4s. Both very similar in musical presentation (despite ATC bass and mid in the 4s), but the scale of the 4s offer a much 'bigger' picture, being limited only by the room boundaries

Give me big speakers any day, although I have had LS35As, Celestions, Rogers and Heybrooks among others.

A$$A-Pub

09-02-2008, 20:56

The room is the most forgotten component in audio. A small space allows small drivers to perform and pressurize the room allowing for a tremendous listening experience. My wife's home office is 2.5 meters by 3 meters. My little Totem Dreamcatchers fill it with ease. At the same time, a friend's Polk RTi12 towers with multitple drivers sound congested in a room virtually the same size when I stopped by not long ago.

It's important to note that since the late 1990's, the ability of small monitors to deliver a near full listening experience has improved greatly. I owned the fine Celestion SL6si's and in reality they just don't reproduce with the same fullness as my Totem Mites, and would sound wimpy next to the Mark & Daniel Maximus -Mini I just reviewed.

I will admit to being slanted on this issue as I'm a fan monitors, plus I don't have a large space to deal in my main listening room (4mx4.5m).

Marco

10-02-2008, 00:39

I think it is impossible to defy the laws of physics but this also includes the size of the room as well as the speaker cabinet. The bass drivers on your SP100 are certainly big, as are the cabinets, but they don't do much below 45Hz which is probably a very good thing for two reasons:

1) It probably contributes to their overall efficiency and easy load presented to amplifiers (90dB/W/m and 8 ohm nominal impedance) that in turn enables the use of 30wpc valve power amps without any loss of control or drive in the bass whatsoever.

2) Your room is quite small, as is mine. Low bass notes form wavelengths that require a large space. Your speakers work well in your room; I'm not sure anything plunging deeper in the bass would work so well.

I agree with most of that and it's certainly borne out by my listening experience. One thing you certainly get with a small room when using big speakers with suitably 'grunty' amps (and they don't need to be all that powerful with the SP100s) is massive scale and dynamic impact because the room is being pressurised.

This makes for fun listening sessions as you get to 'feel' the music, especially bass frequencies, as well as hear it - and that kind of stuff makes me grin from ear to ear, but ONLY if the system is properly set-up. I shudder to think what the SP100s would do in my room sans Mana and driven by amps fed from a non-optimised mains set-up...

Also, I think the SP100s do a bit more below 45Hz (even though that's what is specified in the literature). Here's a snippet of what Chris Binns observed in Hi-fi+ :

To begin with the Spendors possessed a snappy, tight and extremely rhythmic bottom end, with an attack and punch that could be quite un-gentlemanly when required. Sluggish? Definitely not, and with the ability to go loud and deliver decent in-room extension to about 30Hz, orchestral music had the great sense of authority and scale that makes it so believable, while well-recorded rock with real drums was just awesome.

Oh yeah baby, bring it home to daddy! :fingers:

More thoughts on the review tomorrow... Together with my views on big 'uns vs. little 'uns.

Marco.

Lowrider

11-02-2008, 17:20

There are small speakers that sound better than most large speakers, including bass, for instance my Sonus Faber EAII...

Still, I want subwoofers with them, as with most floorstanders, real bass is not easily reproduced...

Floorstanders for me only quite expensive ones, otherwise you get a big resonant box with a shity crossover, and bad bass, of course...

My Riga speakers are open baffle fullrange drivers with add-on supertweeters and subwoofer, the best home sound I have heard...

Leporello

13-02-2008, 01:06

In the 70's and 80's sealed enclosure and large ( 12 or even 15 inch) drivers were the norm, with a few exceptions, of course.

In the 90's, things started to change, and the demand for more aesthetically friendly boxes, saw the introduction of narrow baffles, often ported and with an array of drivers to take care of the bass ( for example Mission 753).

Other manufacturers ( like KEF), used different techniques to great effect, such as the " interport coupled cavity " or transmission lines ( like Castle ).

http://www.kef.com/history/1990_2/reference/refthree2.asp
http://www.castle.uk.com/classic_howard.htm

So, to answer the question, yes, small(ish) drivers, can be used to generate low end, it all depends in the way they're used

Filterlab

13-02-2008, 12:08

Personally I prefer small speakers with small bass drivers. Over the years I've had many pairs of floorstanders and stand-mounts and smaller speakers always seem more cohesive and snappy. Sure, it's great to have thundering lows (if you don't live in a flat) but it always seems at the expense of speed. That's not to say that small speakers can't do low bass of course, mine still impress me with their ability of depth and they go deeper than a few floorstanders I've owned.

Ok so this could be due to their level (i.e. £2k stand-mounts are going to trounce £600 floorstanders) in the hi-fi chain and it proves that small can go low, but it's costly. I however would always choose speed, presence and detail over depth as there's not really much musical information below 50hz, where large speakers do excel is in AV applications - an application where bass really matters.

sastusbulbas

13-02-2008, 16:02

I think cohesive and snappy can be regardless of size.

Small speakers with sealed boxes, large paper coned bass drivers in sealed enclosures, amplifier choice etc, all help, as does room construction and speaker placement, plus speaker design and implementation. Many speakers are a variety of compromises for specific gains though.

My big Cerwin Vega's with 15" bass drivers have a very god turn of speed, and I also think my old Kef are reasonable, noticable with some of my "unual" electronic stuff by the likes of Ryoji Ikeda, or Bass Outlaws, I also think some three way designs can have an advantage here?

I also used to use some very snappy 18" Celestion Bass drivers when I was in my Yooth, deep and fast, and very annoying to some. Big scoops with 18" drivers such as the Cerwin Vega AB-36 can also produce some very past percussive low end at impressive levels.

MartinT

13-02-2008, 16:08

I think big speakers are more about scale than bass, although big usually does bass better than small. The only caveat to this is that you must be careful not to load up your room with low-mid resonances. This can be minimised by careful positioning and room treatment.

Additional to big speakers for me are a powerful amplifier (I subscribe to the Musical Fidelity philosophy of power requirements for proper dynamic range) and - perhaps surprisingly - a subwoofer. No big speaker, however large, can do proper infra-bass like a properly designed subwoofer.

All of this might sound like I have an overbearing system but in fact it is very fast and swings huge dynamics without sounding loud until the volume is really pushing high decibels. The proof is in voice remaining natural sounding even when bass guitar and kick drum are moving serious air.

Room treatment needs attention with big speakers!

Mr. C

13-02-2008, 17:12

For me personally realistic music reproduction should involve all of the frequencies you can muster!
So full range floor-standers are a must to truly recreate as much as you can humanly can given room/speaker interactions/ limitations.
I would agree with Martin T, careful room measurement and placement of treatments reap rewards, as much as mains, cables and isolation do.
That said, quality stand-mounts can generate some beautifully sweet and involving sounds that are wonderfully captivating.
The small cabinets do not have to move as much air, have far less 'issues to get right!'( X/over points, driver technology, cabinet construction both in materials and design etc.), and thus the compromises that go with decent bass extension and control.
There not a major intrinisic part of the initial conceptual process.
There is an innate musicality, and intimacy that a quality 2 way stand-mount brings to the fore, in a way that even the very best floor-standers do not reproduce (their strengths lie in other areas which can be equally compelling)
I am fortunate enough to regularly sample the best of both worlds, and can provide equally valid reasons for both.
Most of my personally listening is split between some custom Micro be's and their bigger brothers the Nova Utopia.
Recently we had a pair of the Sonus Faber Amati's traded in, a truly beautiful work of art that would grace many a quality home.
It brought its own take to the musical fore when we had them playing for a week or so. A rare breed indeed.
So for this I vote for both :p, never simple is me!

Marco

13-02-2008, 17:28

MartinT

13-02-2008, 17:57

Most of my personally listening is split between some custom Micro be's and their bigger brothers the Nova Utopia

This is fascinating. One possible upgrade for me is from my current Mezzos to the Altos (I think the Novas are beyond my reach). The thing I love about the Mezzos is the all-round coherence and getting the midrange voicing right. What does the Be tweeter bring to the party and are there other benefits over the older non-Be Utopia range?

Ashley James

13-02-2008, 20:07

I've heard the S100's a few times and love them, they represent the best of what made the Brit speakers good all those years ago and, given a good front end and decent listening room, I can't see why most people wouldn't like them.

There's no question that big speakers, properly designed, with hundreds of watts driving them are miles better than the best 6.5" two way or smaller. They can be staggeringly loud, clear and they can give a better front to back image than smaller ones too, although the left to right is about the same.

I don't like them with small amps, but then I don't like small amps and small amps are worse as speaker size increases.

And before Steve beats me up, I'd point out that making and calibrating big passive speakers properly, takes days and that the demand for them is miniscule. The potential for ADM9s might be more than 100 times as great because everybody (except you lot on this Forum) wants smaller hi fi.

Having said all that I agree that good small speakers punch way above their weight because of their size approximating to the human head and the radiation patterns being similar and that most big speakers are pretty crap because the bottom crossover is so difficult to get right. For example even in Active form the ATC's don't have the mid range performance of ADM9s.

Ash

sastusbulbas

13-02-2008, 20:32

I agree with most of the comments by Mr C and Martin,

Carefull room positioning and such are a must, though can take ages, I went through quite a fuffle yesterday when fitting Mana Soundbases under My Kef R107.
The wife had to put up with the sitting room being out of bounds all day, while I played around with spirit levels, measuring tapes and laser pointers, all so I could get my speakers back in their original exact position after removing them for the Mana instal.
Then it was tune after tune, vocal, heavy, complex simple, subteranean bass etc etc.

I am not into sub bass systems as such, did go to buy a discounted Rel Studio once, after a lot of deliberation, just to find out it had sold the morning I decided to buy it. The wife usually comments as that sort of thing as a sign it was not meant to be.

I am a big fan of speakers with a decent frequency range, and think they can be reasonably close to the ideal of small monitor strengths with big speaker performance, Kef speakers with the head arangement, Nightingale speakers with mid and treble on open bafles etc, I feel can get close. But again the simplicity and solid construction of some small speakers can be quite captivating as MR C says.

Isolation too, hence my use of Mana, I did look into getting Townsend cradles made up, but a lack of replies to Emails, and no questions answered regarding how they may work with a design such as the Kef, left me too unsure with no knowlege, so I spent the money on a trip to Germany.
Now I have five pairs of sounbases which will fit under My Kef R107, Rogers Studio 1 and Linn Kans. Still interested in those cradles though.

Steve

sastusbulbas

13-02-2008, 20:48

I'd point out that making and calibrating big passive speakers properly, takes days and that the demand for them is miniscule. The potential for ADM9s might be more than 100 times as great because everybody (except you lot on this Forum) wants smaller hi fi.

Ash

I do not dissagree with you there Ashley, I have had many small speakers too, and they have always been easier to intregrate into rooms and set up. Though my preference is either sealed or front ported small ones.

I did try smaller for a while in a couple of my systems, I have Linn Kans too. But I didn't get on well with small speakers in general, but will probably one day have a small speaker in the bedroom again?

Every so often I do catch myself looking at small PMC's, the smaller floorstanding PMC's, ATC SCM 20sl's (and old 10's), even the ADM9 did cross my mind, I have enjoyed AVI Pro 9's too. And some small Proac's.

Are you ever going to release an ADM9 with a couple of digital inputs, and a USB in the same speaker even? What about something with an 8" driver?

Marco

13-02-2008, 21:44

Ash,

I've heard the S100's a few times and love them, they represent the best of what made the Brit speakers good all those years ago and, given a good front end and decent listening room, I can't see why most people wouldn't like them.

The SP100s are the improved design and are even better. The new 'R' upgrade apparently raises their game even further.

I totally agree with you - I refer to the Spendors (and others like them) as 'proper' loudspeakers because they represent an era when (in general) performance mattered more than 'WAF' (Wife Acceptability Factor) or fitting in with whatever hi-fi sensibilities or fashions are in vogue.

Large BBC-style monitors were always considered the 'enthusiasts' choice, and many discerning listeners I know would use nothing else. Modern designs, such as the SP100, embrace all that was good in classic British loudspeakers from respected manufacturers, and also eradicate previous areas of weakness to form a rather potent cocktail of all-round ability.

There's no question that big speakers, properly designed, with hundreds of watts driving them are miles better than the best 6.5" two way or smaller. They can be staggeringly loud, clear and they can give a better front to back image than smaller ones too, although the left to right is about the same.

Experience also tells me this, so why settle for anything else if you can get away with it without upsetting domestic harmony, or care not a jot about the whims of current fashion? :)

The potential for ADM9s might be more than 100 times as great because everybody (except you lot on this Forum) wants smaller hi fi.

That's because we're the 'real deal'. The rest are just playing at it! ;)

Marco.

sastusbulbas

13-02-2008, 22:21

I think some of us also had the "benefit" or "curse" of large rooms in the past, I certainly did. Most houses were far bigger in the "old" days, I don't think many enthusiasts got rid of large kit because of modern developments making equipment smaller, it was more to do with each consecutive house getting smaller.

One of my old bedrooms had two windows in it (both on the same wall) and a superb view of Edinburgh Castle, it was bigger than my current sitting room. Next to it was a box/Storage room which was larger than one of my current bedrooms.
Kitchens that you could have a dinning table and settee in. Large bathrooms. Sitting rooms with enough space for three 3 seater setee's and a dining suite at the back along with wall units and sideboard. New houses are pathetic by comparison.

Both my previous sitting rooms were of a size that I felt necitated large speakers, (my last sitting room had space for thousands of records on the floor behind the settee). They were huge hard to heat rooms of brick and concrete constructing with real fireplaces. I used to look at speakers such as the Spendor BC1, Kef R105.4, and TL speakers such as my Nightingale's as compact. The 107's were compact and elegant back then too I thought (if tallish).

Most of my larger speakers looked as compact in their old enviroments as many of todays small stand mounts do in thiers, and in many of those old large rooms small speakers could just not do room filling sound. Big rooms required big systems.

Steve

Lowrider

14-02-2008, 06:36

sastusbulbas

14-02-2008, 07:25

Until AV and WAF spawned good reasonably priced subwoofers, I always had 3 way floorstanders, the last where a pair of KEF 104.2 bought around 1986

Since year 2000, all my speaker solutions include one or two subwoofers, first with standmounts, now with open baffle, much easier to integrate, and they do real bass, unlike most floorstanders up to budgets I cannot afford...

I myself though not into "Subs" do think they have a place. To be honest I should probably get one or two just because of movies.

I watch a lot of movies, and to be honest I think many of them do not have certain LF effects passed effectively to stereo mains either through processors or PCM conversion.
Too many of them seem to lack a certain oomph when via stereo. (unlike some LD's)

Lowrider

14-02-2008, 07:58

Properly setup subwoofers sound better than most speakers, but they rarely are properly setup...

Manufacturers suggest wrong setup, like REL, of course they will suggest high-level, to be able to sell to those that have conventional stereo systems...

Than you have to integrate speakers and subs with not adequate frequency rollout, a bad compromise, even worst, on AV systems if you dial different time delay for the speakers and subwoofer, the processor first applies delay, than mixes all channels with LFE, a mess... :doh:

If you use an active filter, AV processor (like me), or the ADM9s, or a Beringher, no time delay difference between channels, even if they are not at the same distance, two subwoofers near the front speakers, or one between them, closed box subwoofers, you cannot go wrong... :clap:

MartinT

14-02-2008, 08:26

I would contend that REL's recommendation to use high level is *not* poor advice within the context of a stereo audio system. I have the option of a second preamp output to drive the REL from signal level but the high level connection helps to integrate the REL's sound seamlessly with the main speakers. This is important as I have the REL set to the lowest octave only (23Hz) with the main speakers giving good output to below 30Hz. I have plotted graphs to ensure that the overall frequency response is as flat as possible.

Because I don't use AV (I wouldn't entertain an LFE channel in my purist system) the overall setup can be properly optimised for a flat response rather than the bass hump typical of an AV system.

Lowrider

14-02-2008, 08:41

I would contend that REL's recommendation to use high level is *not* poor advice within the context of a stereo audio system.

On the contrary, it is rich, for them, to sell a lot more subwoofers... ;)

the high level connection helps to integrate the REL's sound seamlessly with the main speakers.

I dont call help sending the distortion of the bass made by the amplifier to the subwoofer, I call help relieving the amplifier and the speakers of playing those more difficult frequencies, with the extra advantage of making placing the speakers easier too, best possible imaging and timbre, without worrying with bass...

the overall setup can be properly optimised for a flat response rather than the bass hump typical of an AV system

There are bass humps and boom in the average stereo system too, the way most people place their speakers, more so with floorstanders...

Having said that, I believe you have good bass, but could have better with less difficult setup... :confused:

MartinT

14-02-2008, 09:29

I call help relieving the amplifier and the speakers of playing those more difficult frequencies

Ah - there is our confusion. You're talking about filtering the main feed to the L/R speakers to relieve them of reproducing deep bass, usually when the speakers are small. I don't use any filtering, my main speakers play the full range and the REL is there only to 'fill in' the lowest octave. Providing a high level feed ensures that the character of the bass through the power amp is retained, making the whole speaker system sound as one. By the way, my power amp doesn't distort even at the highest levels of playback I can sustain since there is huge headroom available.

Lowrider

14-02-2008, 09:37

All I said still applies, but, of course, non "ideal" setups can still work well with good gear and carefull tunning...

All power amps distort... :steam:

MartinT

14-02-2008, 12:28

All power amps distort...

I know that, I was originally an electronics engineer :)
I was really referring to clipping.

Ashley James

14-02-2008, 13:57

Steve, there will be slightly more expensive ADM9's available shortly with two optical digital inputs and using the "Best DAC in the World" as Linn are claiming for the WM8741 in something they've just announced.

The USB version uses an Audio Codec and there isn't room for that as well. Demand for it has been small.

We shan't use an 8" drive unit in a two way because the mid range always suffers and neither would it be possible to achieve the seamless integration of ADM9s as they are.

British amps are mostly underpowered, they don't have sufficient headroom for the dynamic range of many modern recordings, which is why people are always asking for advice on getting rid of boomy bass or harsh treble. Their amp is clipping.

Neither do many Loudspeakers designers realise that all the box and port do is produce a narrow band resonance that adds to what's coming from the front of the speaker to produce a "balanced" sound at the expense of accuracy. The drive unit size dictates how much actual bass it can produce just as the width of a canoe paddle dictates how fast you can make it go.

Therefore if you have a boomy two-way already trying to produce too much bass, a clipping amp putting bursts of DC into it, then a Subwoofer is going to make things worse! Especially as most of this type of Bass is time rather than amplitude related.

Interestingly some pop music's bass is made by lengthening the duration of the note to give the impression of greater volume.

However, a well designed two way with properly controlled bass will give good results with a Subwoofer if it too, has sufficient power to avoid clipping. Cabinet loading is crucial.

Bass radiates through 360 degrees so whether a port is in the front or rear of a cabinet makes no difference. Passive crossovers do because they reduce the control the amplifier has on the speaker cone. Overshoot and overhang cause boominess and also reduce mid range clarity.

Designing loudspeakers is a delicate balance act and more involved than many realise.

WikiBoy

14-02-2008, 14:28

British amps are mostly underpowered, they don't have sufficient headroom for the dynamic range of many modern recordings, which is why people are always asking for advice on getting rid of boomy bass or harsh treble. Their amp is clipping.

This is complete nonsense. It is the load that drives an amplifier into clipping. AND what clipping are you talking about voltage or current they a different and sound different and are caused by different load characteristics. It is the stupidity of some loudspeaker manufacturers over complicating design in order to achieve some aspect of "neutrality" or perceived "accuracy" creating extreme conditions for the amplifer, like trying to make it drive voltage and current 180deg out of phase with each other due to ridiculously over complex crossovers, and undersized low resistance voice coils, or creating cabinet designs that absorb so much of the work undertaken that it is miracle sometimes anything gets out. To blame British amplifier manufacturers for producing under powered amplifiers is like blaming Madonna for not having as big a breasts as Munroe, pointless and self defeating nonsense.

There are people who design horn loaded high efficiency creations that can be driven quite acceptably by half a watt!!!!!

An amplifier and a loudspeaker is a partnership, and like all partnerships unless it is empathic and not dominated by the biggest ego, you get music. It is that simple.

Marco

14-02-2008, 14:35

LOL. I'm lovin' this.

:popcorn:

Marco.

WikiBoy

14-02-2008, 14:42

LOL. I'm lovin' this.

:popcorn:

Marco.

Then why not contribute instead of sitting on your arse eating popcorn!

Marco

14-02-2008, 14:49

All in good time, old chap :)

I thought that I'd let the 'heavyweights' have their say first ;)

Marco.

Filterlab

14-02-2008, 14:50

Then why not contribute instead of sitting on your arse eating popcorn!

Because watching and chomping is just as much fun!

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

Lowrider

14-02-2008, 14:56

All in good time, old chap :)

I thought that I'd let the 'heavyweights' have their say first ;)

Marco.

I am no heavyweight, and need help... :doh:

Mr. C

14-02-2008, 15:01

Hi Tony,

Good post, and I agree with much of what you say. Maybe the best answer then is a (very) large stand-mount speaker, which gives you the scale and 'physicality' of a decent sized floor-stander, and also the 'intimacy' and 'communication skills' of a quality small stand-mount?

Hi Marco,

Again there is a good case for this standpoint as well.
Room size could be the deciding in the selection of this type of speaker for sure.
I have also explored this option too with quite surprisingly good results, sometimes I use the Focal Utopia L & R surround speaker, don't let the surround speaker tag fool you.
This a genuine stereo 'Full range' stand-mount speaker, basically a Micro Utopia with another midrange 6.5" driver coupled with a 10" bass driver to cater for the lower frequencies, which is also reversible for room positions.
It has exceptional dispersion characteristics, coupled with the Be tweeter.
Again I found with these, that beautifully fluidic and insightfully musical presentation that good stand mounts make. This time coupled with realistic bass extension and serious texture and layering in the sound.

Martin,
The differences are fairly marked between the 2 tweeters, as they are with the rest of the unit, cabinet construction, driver materials and x/over configuration. They are very different animal!
Were you the gent that asked us about the Altos' at the Heathrow show last September btw?
Tony.

http://www.coherent-systems.co.uk/images/L_Rbasic1.jpg

Ashley James

14-02-2008, 17:10

Richard. 12 years ago we appeared at the then Heathrow Penta with a device that showed the continuous average power into, in this case B&W 803's, the peak power and a red light every time a power amp clipped. This was with a variety of over the counter CD's, nothing out of the ordinary.

The continuous requirement for an average to slightly above average, domestic listening level was (depending on program material; Classical or Pop) between 1/4 and 1/2 a Watt and the peaks, and there were hundreds of them, ran to hundreds of Watts.

What we showed to nearly all the Press, who appeared to understand, was that to listen at normal levels with average loudspeakers you needed amplifier capable of at least 300 watt peaks if clipping was to be avoided. Amplifiers are clipping before most people realise and it profoundly affects clarity as well as what I've described above in my previous posting.

If you visit www.avihifi.com you'll see that we design both speakers and amplifiers and that we've had many awards for much of it over the years.

Horn loudspeakers were ousted thirty years ago by direct radiating types from Kef, B&W and the BBC spin offs, and this was because they produce some of the most fatiguing distortions of all. About 15 times as much as a direct radiator.

The reason so many people loved our now discontinued Lab Series Integrated was that it had extremely low distortion and delivered 200wpc into 8 Ohms.

So Richard not only am I not talking nonsense but I will happily prove everything I've said if you'd care to visit my factory.

The Bass Amps in the ADM9's are 250 watts and produce 500 watt peaks and this is one of many reasons why they have such an edge over separates systems costing much more.

Ashley James

14-02-2008, 17:55

I've a reputation for being blunt and to the point and for preferring science to alternative bullshit and this puts me at odds with lots of people in hi fi. However I do hope that you'll listen to and think about the message and try to ignore the method of delivery. I intend no malice and I do have experts on hand to help me get my facts right.

And it might be fun to get some interesting discussions going on this Forum.

Filterlab

14-02-2008, 18:02

sastusbulbas

14-02-2008, 19:22

Bass radiates through 360 degrees so whether a port is in the front or rear of a cabinet makes no difference. Passive crossovers do because they reduce the control the amplifier has on the speaker cone. Overshoot and overhang cause boominess and also reduce mid range clarity.

My own opinion was that some front ported speakers can be easier to integrate into smaller rooms and such? And could be positioned close to walls without as much detrimental effect as a rear port would cause?

Of course this would I guess also be variable depending on what frequency the port is tuned to and room size would it not?

Is bass radiation/direction not also dependent on frequency and cabinet and distance and such, is there not differences between upper mid bass and lower bass?

Steve

Ashley James

14-02-2008, 19:34

It's not so much the frequency as the duration, the longer the revolting boom lasts the more likely it is to set the room off.

As the frequency of the sound being reproduced rises so the speaker becomes more directional. Most Booms that cause aggro are around 60Hz.

If you place a speaker against a wall you restrict it's radiation to 180 instead of 360 degrees and you hear more bass.

If you position a speaker away from a wall you hear not only the sound coming from the speaker but also what hits the back wall and arrives slightly later. Because it's out of phase with the forward radiation, it has a cancelling effect over a narrow band of frequencies and a peaking up an Octave above. Moving the speaker backwards and forwards enables you to tune this to taste.

sastusbulbas

14-02-2008, 19:35

It is the load that drives an amplifier into clipping. AND what clipping are you talking about voltage or current they a different and sound different and are caused by different load characteristics. It is the stupidity of some loudspeaker manufacturers over complicating design in order to achieve some aspect of "neutrality" or perceived "accuracy" creating extreme conditions for the amplifer, like trying to make it drive voltage and current 180deg out of phase with each other due to ridiculously over complex crossovers, and undersized low resistance voice coils, or creating cabinet designs that absorb so much of the work undertaken that it is miracle sometimes anything gets out. To blame British amplifier manufacturers for producing under powered amplifiers is like blaming Madonna for not having as big a breasts as Munroe, pointless and self defeating nonsense.

There are people who design horn loaded high efficiency creations that can be driven quite acceptably by half a watt!!!!!

An amplifier and a loudspeaker is a partnership, and like all partnerships unless it is empathic and not dominated by the biggest ego, you get music. It is that simple.

Some good points,

My Technics clips badly at low volume with music with extended LF and during some movies, I have to adjust the Kef LF cut off for reasonable levels to be achieved at the expense of LF extension. (maybe due to the kef creating extreme conditions?)

When I hook up my 103db sensitivity speakers with their 15" bass drivers to the Technics amp, I have no such problems with clipping at high volume with music containing extended LF content.

I also seem to get an extra notch of volume before clipping if I change from VDH speaker cable to Naim Nac 5 with the Technics and Kef R107?

Steve

MartinT

14-02-2008, 20:22

Were you the gent that asked us about the Altos' at the Heathrow show last September btw?

Yes Tony, that was me. I hadn't made the connection! Where are you based, by the way? I'm quite serious about a potential upgrade but I'll take some convincing that the Altos are as big a step up from the Mezzos as you make out (take it as a challenge). Perhaps I should come and have a listen?

BTW, my system is posted in The Gallery as Finchampstead System if you care to comment.

greenhomeelectronics

14-02-2008, 21:03

Well, I love transmission lines. Mine were designed around scientific principles and were then changed significantly until I was happy with the sound. Each uses 4 5 inch mid / bass units, the effective length of the enclosure is 1/4 of a wavelength of 32 Hz, about 8 feet from memory. The bass port is at the front, the cabinets have some stuffing in them as the bass was overpowering with the first iteration. The efficiency is quite startling, don't know how many db but they take a tiny amount of driving when compared to any other speaker I have tried. I want to design a transmission line enclosure that uses a single 12 inch bass driver with a well matched mid and tweeter but can't see me getting the time in the immediate future. The previous comments about speakers and the rooms that they are in are spot on in my experience. The biggest change to acoustics I have ever experienced was when we went from carpet to laminate flooring, it totally changed everything. I reckon that speakers and the room they are in make the biggest difference to any system. There that should stir up some debate :-)

Lowrider

15-02-2008, 06:27

I don't think it's very easy to tell whether someone is aggressive unless you know him and you can see him.

I've a reputation for being blunt and to the point and for preferring science to alternative bullshit and this puts me at odds with lots of people in hi fi. However I do hope that you'll listen to and think about the message and try to ignore the method of delivery. I intend no malice and I do have experts on hand to help me get my facts right.

And it might be fun to get some interesting discussions going on this Forum.

I agree with your first statement, and I think that this thread has had several interesting points raised...

But it is not easy to swallow that you, and others, call bullshit, delusion, idiocy, etc, to all different opinions, there is no perfect solution, all have compromises, yours is quite pratical, but far from state of the art, others have their own problems, we all should be open minded, including you, blasting the others doesnt make you better, on the contrary, people wont be willing to give your products a chance...

Mr. C

15-02-2008, 09:16

Yes Tony, that was me. I hadn't made the connection! Where are you based, by the way? I'm quite serious about a potential upgrade but I'll take some convincing that the Altos are as big a step up from the Mezzos as you make out (take it as a challenge). Perhaps I should come and have a listen?

Martin,

As we discussed at the show we are based in Worcestershire near the beautiful Malvern Hills.
We would be delighted to demonstrate the Alto's to their fullest potential for you without hesitation thus giving you all the information you need to make a choice.
Nice looking system Martin, I took have personally been an owner of Chord amplifiers ( 1200c & 1200e's) both fine pieces of equipment.
I noticed you run a sub Martin, I have seen this with Mezzo Utopia before.
So far the only time we have used subwoofers with Alto's is purely for home cinema systems (we also carry the sub Utopia too).
Clients find their bass extension most satisfactory!
Regards Tony

Marco

15-02-2008, 10:45

Hi Marco,

Again there is a good case for this standpoint as well.
Room size could be the deciding factor in the selection of this type of speaker for sure.
I have also explored this option too with quite surprisingly good results, sometimes I use the Focal Utopia L & R surround speaker, don't let the surround speaker tag fool you.
This a genuine stereo 'Full range' stand-mount speaker, basically a Micro Utopia with another midrange 6.5" driver coupled with a 10" bass driver to cater for the lower frequencies, which is also reversible for room positions.
It has exceptional dispersion characteristics, coupled with the Be tweeter.
Again I found with these, that beautifully fluidic and insightfully musical presentation that good stand mounts make. This time coupled with realistic bass extension and serious texture and layering in the sound.

http://www.coherent-systems.co.uk/images/L_Rbasic1.jpg

Hi Tony,

They look great, and very similar to the Micro Utopias I've heard a few times and liked very much. In the bass I'm not quite sure they deliver the scale and sheer weight of the Spendors, but they certainly get the rhythm and timing aspect spot on, as well as the 'texture' and 'layering' you refer to.

I really do feel, and extensive listening experience suggests this, that a large (or very large) properly designed stand-mount design employing large drive units gives the best of both worlds in terms of what is desirable in the musical presentation of a loudspeaker. Every time I've heard a good 'big'-un' in that respect I've never failed to be impressed. Modern designs of that ilk from the likes of Spendor and Harbeth (and sometimes PMC and ATC) just get it so right to my ears. For realistic bass, outside of using some monstrous-sized floor-stander, you can't beat a nice 12 or 15-inch drive unit executed in a stand-mount design the way those companies know how.

I'd love a return to the days when people weren't afraid of using large stand-mount speakers or indeed large, quality, speakers of any description, providing the room and/or set-up allows. Personally, I'm fed up with seeing yet another boring unoriginal variation of the ubiquitous 'slim floor-stander' using arrays of 6.5" bass drivers (or variations thereof) with physical dimensions designed simply to appease the aesthetic sensibilities of 'the other half' - it's been done to death. I think it's high time some enthusiasts were less influenced by WAF and more influenced by ultimate performance and the realistic rendition of their favourite music! Just who is it that wears the pants, I wonder? ;)

There's no doubt that 12 or 15" inch bass units (in a well implemented design) do it best, and with that you just can't have slim cabinets. Bring back the 70s, I say! :lol:

Marco.

WikiBoy

15-02-2008, 10:54

Mr. C

15-02-2008, 10:56

Hi Marco,

Quite possibly they won't 'Fill the room' in the same way as the Splendors I would agree. However they do produce some pretty deep, taut and real sounding textured bass with lovely presence and depth.
They are a bit of a tricky load, dipping to low 3's around 90hz region, so a stiff amp helps here! With the right equipment and room though, it is possible to achieve a measured 28.8hz in UK living room. Which in a lot of cases is more than enough for a lot of folk!
Again it is all horses for courses, some people refuse to listen to anything less than a full range floor-stander, others are more than happy with the stand-mount.
From our point of view the only one which is right, is the one the customer relates too and is happy with. (However there a huge choice out there!)
Regards Tony

Filterlab

15-02-2008, 11:11

I still think that room size consideration is undervalued by folks choosing speakers. I've had a wide variety of speakers all of varying sizes, but I've found that if a pair of speakers is chosen with a priority to room size the results are usually stronger than choosing for outright price / review / cabinet size etc etc. No doubt if my next house has a larger listening room then a change of speakers may be necessary, but having said that I may try a sub first as I couldn't bear to part with my Revels. However, they may sound nowhere near as cohesive in a larger room and I won't know that until I try.

As far as subs go, I had an MJ Acoustics Pro100 a while back which performed really well with music - better in fact than I had anticipated. I bought it for movies really (boy oh boy did it rumble!) as my MartinLogans had crummy bass output, but I had it running for music as well. Hardly needed any gain at all, in fact almost all of the controls were set near 0, something that a lot of folk don't seem to realise with a sub - less is more.

It had to go when my nice neighbours (whom were music lovers and life lovers) were replaced by a fat, grumpy moaner who works for the post office and has never said a good word about anything or anyone.

MartinT

15-02-2008, 11:14

There's no doubt that 12 or 15" inch bass units (in a well implemented design) do it best

I always thought that JBL do bass very well. Lightweight 12" paper cone drivers that can move air but are still fast. I had a pair of L100-T (from the Ti range) a good few years ago and they showed many a British design how to do fast and deep bass properly.

Ashley James

15-02-2008, 17:01

Has anyone ever look at a www.voltloudspeakers.co.uk drive unit because I think they may be the best you can buy.

The secret to good quality bass is sensible cabinet alignment and a huge amplifier, preferably via an Active crossover because a passive one softens the sound too much.

jimdgoulding

15-02-2008, 23:04

My, I should feel right at home here- a) I listen in a modest size room b) I listen with modest size speakers with small drivers c) they are one of the grand daddies of active speakers, the last incarnation of the Meridian M20 d) I am in agreement with most of the comments here about how all this adds up. I did, however, replace the short factory supplied stands with taller ones and use the tweeter surrounds that I make. Altogether to include how they marry to my room, I'm as happy as a duck on a bug.

What intrigues me the most about the ADM9's is all that amplifier power. That has to be good. My speakers are also are too soft in the lowest bass. Dressed all the way out, that's 2/3 of a system in a single package at more than reasonable cost. To my way of thinking, add a quick little tube pre and I can imagine a lively and fulfilling listening experience. Oh yeah.

Ashley James

16-02-2008, 10:54

There is a remote controlled, two input preamplifier built in as well as a 24 bit DAC by Wolfson that I see Linn are advertising as the "best in the world".

All you need is a Laptop and an Airport Express to supply the noughts and ones to the speakers and you're done!

The scariest thing to traditionalists is how good they sound with an iPod Touch from its analogue output.

Marco

16-02-2008, 11:23

Ash,

I'm looking forward to the AVI demo at Bristol. I'll review it on the forum, along with stuff from the rest of the show. I'd really like to get a handle on where you guys are coming from with audio. There is much to learn for a traditionalist like me :)

Marco.

Ashley James

16-02-2008, 20:29

Marco, there will be no shocks for you because you already have natural and accurate speakers, you should expect an extremely clean and more dynamic sound with a better stereo image from a relatively small speaker.

That's assuming you can hear anything above the high ambient noise level.
We always think we've done well if we can equal the sound quality of the ceiling speakers in the Gent's toilet on the first floor!

Marco

16-02-2008, 20:46

LOL. It will be good to have a chat and a listen anyway :)

Marco.

WikiBoy

16-02-2008, 20:53

Some good points,

My Technics clips badly at low volume with music with extended LF and during some movies, I have to adjust the Kef LF cut off for reasonable levels to be achieved at the expense of LF extension. (maybe due to the kef creating extreme conditions?)

When I hook up my 103db sensitivity speakers with their 15" bass drivers to the Technics amp, I have no such problems with clipping at high volume with music containing extended LF content.

I also seem to get an extra notch of volume before clipping if I change from VDH speaker cable to Naim Nac 5 with the Technics and Kef R107?

Steve

The power supply is not big enough or low impedance enough in the technics. They use an under size frame transformer for the voltage swing. This is a classic example of watts meaning virtually bugger all, which is why I was calling Ashley. Think of the power supply as the waterpipe, the gain stages (amplifier) as the tap and the speaker as the glass. If the water pipe ain't big enough it makes no difference how far the tap will turn! AND there is precisely no point in measuring the speed of the water into a thimble (load resisitor) if you wish it to equate to a pint glass (loudspeaker).

sastusbulbas

17-02-2008, 16:53

The power supply is not big enough or low impedance enough in the technics. They use an under size frame transformer for the voltage swing. This is a classic example of watts meaning virtually bugger all, which is why I was calling Ashley. Think of the power supply as the waterpipe, the gain stages (amplifier) as the tap and the speaker as the glass. If the water pipe ain't big enough it makes no difference how far the tap will turn! AND there is precisely no point in measuring the speed of the water into a thimble (load resisitor) if you wish it to equate to a pint glass (loudspeaker).

Here are some pics and specs of the offending (but still enjoyable) item. :)

I do like it's quiet performance when used with sensitive speakers, with 103db sensitivity speakers this amp is silent when you put your ear to the tweeter (with digital direct). I have heard AVI amps are also good in this respect.

The amp prefers 8ohm easy to drive speakers of reasonable to high sensitivity, and can offer enjoyable results with such. I did see pictures of this amp in a Japanese TAD thread? not sure if it has been paired successfully with such esteemed products?

In earlier days it was beneficial to have it's multiple digital inputs and outputs too, but as with any integrated solution not much can be done with upgrading.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/sastusbulbas/Picture1087.jpg
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/sastusbulbas/Picture.jpg

WikiBoy

17-02-2008, 18:11

Here are some pics and specs of the offending (but still enjoyable) item. :)

I do like it's quiet performance when used with sensitive speakers, with 103db sensitivity speakers this amp is silent when you put your ear to the tweeter (with digital direct). I have heard AVI amps are also good in this respect.

The amp prefers 8ohm easy to drive speakers of reasonable to high sensitivity, and can offer enjoyable results with such. I did see pictures of this amp in a Japanese TAD thread? not sure if it has been paired successfully with such esteemed products?

In earlier days it was beneficial to have it's multiple digital inputs and outputs too, but as with any integrated solution not much can be done with upgrading.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/sastusbulbas/Picture1087.jpg
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/sastusbulbas/Picture.jpg

All you need to do is replace those undersize frame transformers with a couple of 160va but preferably 220va or better still 300va torroids and that amp would sing and drive anything. Trouble is there is no room in the case but you could do it as external PSU box or two. Typical Japanese they always scrimp on the power supply.

sastusbulbas

17-02-2008, 18:59

All you need to do is replace those undersize frame transformers with a couple of 160va but preferably 220va or better still 300va torroids and that amp would sing and drive anything. Trouble is there is no room in the case but you could do it as external PSU box or two. Typical Japanese they always scrimp on the power supply.

A separate case/cases would not bother me, I guess it would be connected with a couple of those Neutrik Speakon type power connectors for left and right channels?
How would one go about doing that though? and at what cost? Would other components not need changed also if using more powerful torroids such as the 300va?

I used a Nu-Vista 300 power amp with a separate power supply, I guess it would be similar to this or the Border Patrol supplies?

Steve.

WikiBoy

17-02-2008, 19:23

A separate case/cases would not bother me, I guess it would be connected with a couple of those Neutrik Speakon type power connectors for left and right channels?
How would one go about doing that though? and at what cost? Would other components not need changed also if using more powerful torroids such as the 300va?

I used a Nu-Vista 300 power amp with a separate power supply, I guess it would be similar to this or the Border Patrol supplies?

Steve.

Just stick to the same secondary voltage and you can use any size of va up to 1000 phew :eyebrows: . Look and see if it is just one secondary and they are not taking other sub tappings to supply something else. Dead simple if you can solder and you are logical in changing the wires. Personally I wouldn't use plugs I would just hard wire. I can supply cases with the transformers fitted to a + - and earth wire out. For 300va it would work at £80 per box. If you get a Farnell or RS box and wire it your self you will save £30 per box.

Marco

20-02-2008, 08:41

Typical Japanese they always scrimp on the power supply.

Perhaps that would explain why I've never heard a solid-state Japanese amplifier that I've liked?

They always sound somewhat 'limp' and lack drive in the bass, even the esoteric stuff.

Marco.

Mike Reed

18-03-2008, 19:46

[Moved from "Big - Old - Legacy - Separates" thread]

I think that an important issue here with a small-ish 2-way speaker is the amount of air that can be moved.

My feeling is that there is no substitute to loudspeaker diaphragm area if you want to re-create the sound (dynamics, and sheer scale) of a large orchestra (100+ musicians belting it out) or a rock band in full blast.

I really don't think that a little 2-way can do that. By choosing such a loudspeaker you are severely limiting the breadth of music that can be reproduced with a reasonable and believable facsimile of reality.

I've just found this posting buried among essays on pro or anti computer/cdp performance (I think, as my attention span only copes with shortish, pithy postings).

Endorsed by Mr Ed, I also second this motion of big against small speakers if you want to achieve sheer scale. I have had many of both types over four plus decades, but have rarely been without large speakers in my main systems.

I think there ARE trade-offs, with the larger speakers being slower than an equivalent smaller one (depending on amplification), and the smaller speakers are probably more domestically acceptable

Apart from their (to me) obvious ability to portray far, far more of the 'big picture' of larger ensembles, and probably smaller ones too, there must be design and manufacturing as well as other considerations to take into account.

Of course, quality is everything.

I had Leak 2075s in the late seventies/eighties (large bass boxes with swivel mid/top boxes). Sounded ok with valves, but dull as ditchwater, and slow, with entry-level Naim. They were not expensive at the time (£350?).

Three large ProAc Response speakers I've more recently had were quite superb in every parameter of performance and presentation through (admittedly higher level) Naim.

Back to the original premise; you really cannot match a well-designed large speaker, whether ported, transmission line, electrostatic or horn.

Ashley James

19-03-2008, 22:01

The thing to remember is that a big three-way speaker has a crossover somewhere between 250 and 400 Hz and another between 2.5kHz and 5kHz and that these are extremely difficult to design and invariably have a detrimental effect on the sound. At best they will make it harsh and at worst phase errors can cause some discomfort and lots of information can be lost in the "fuzziness" they cause. In large rooms and when the listening distance is greater than average, they can be very impressive, but a better compromise for most people is an average sized two-way with an optional Sub. Some prefer the sound of stand mounters and are happy without it, but those that demand the scale of large and powerful three way speakers can pay the extra and be happy too.

Marco

07-04-2008, 08:32

The thing to remember is that a big three-way speaker has a crossover somewhere between 250 and 400 Hz and another between 2.5kHz and 5kHz and that these are extremely difficult to design and invariably have a detrimental effect on the sound. At best they will make it harsh and at worst phase errors can cause some discomfort and lots of information can be lost in the "fuzziness" they cause.

There is no harshness or "fuzziness" in my system with the SP100s - just beautiful 'live' sounding music delivered with huge scale and dynamic impact, when the music demands, and finesse and subtlety too when that's required :)

Those tiny little ADM9s are probably ok for background music in a dining room and that's about it ;)

Marco.

jcbrum

13-04-2008, 08:30

There is no harshness or "fuzziness" in my system with the SP100s - just beautiful 'live' sounding music delivered with huge scale and dynamic impact, when the music demands, and finesse and subtlety too when that's required :)

Those tiny little ADM9s are probably ok for background music in a dining room and that's about it ;)

Marco.

This post will bear analysis. SP100's are good speakers but they are an old design and new designs from experts, with newly designed drive units, will be better.

My LS's (actives) with a 2 wire sub, will do it. I know it, that's why I bought them. I use them to replay a lot of my own recordings, and I know what they are supposed to sound like.

I have read the posts on the mods and "upgrades" done to your tube amp Marco, and that process would drive me nuts. I would think "oh bugger this thing is defective and inaccurate, I'll have to get it repaired."

I don't think you can have heard adm9's working properly. Go and see Ash and check 'em out. Then re-assess.

Marco

13-04-2008, 09:29

JC,

SP100s are not old designs - they are a current design based on traditional principles which use current up-to-date drive units, and I have no intention whatsoever to downgrade to tiny little stand-mounts, no matter how much you wax lyrical about them or how good they are in their intended application.

You really must come and hear my system sometime to understand why the statement you've posted is quite comical - enough said. You can bring your ADM9s, too, and Ashley.

Regarding my valve amp, I'm delighted with it, thanks. 'Tube rolling' is all part of the fun of owing a valve amp, and the sonic rewards of getting it right are substantial. The results I've achieved now are quite spectacular.

I'd much rather be doing that than fiddling around with iPods and suchlike! ;)

<Boooorrrinnngg> :ner:

Marco.

Ashley James

13-04-2008, 11:24

Marco SP100's are even tinier little stand mounts sharing a box with a Woofer and, to muddy the waters, the biggest advances in transducer design have been in 6.5" drive units because they sell in the largest quantities. Therefore it's not as clear cut as you think because big speakers have two crossovers, not one, and the lower one is right where it can do the most damage, especially to phase. And there's more because the two crossovers interact and sum so that it's practically impossible to make this inaudible through the all important mid range.

The question you have to ask is not about the size of box but whether two of the best 6'5" drive units with only one electronic (and inaudible) crossover together with a very special 40 kilo sub with an enormous high power drive unit in a sealed box, might actually be far louder and better sounding.

You also need to remember that we've got a history of designing bloody good big loudspeakers as well so are able to make comparisons.

Here is a review for consideration. Hugh was Head of the BBC Engineers training school in the days when they cared about sound.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/oct99/articles/av1.htm

Ash

Marco

13-04-2008, 11:52

Interesting. The Gravitions sound like my kind of speakers. Pity there are no pictures?

Ashley, I'm just trying to reign in JC's abounding enthusiasm for his ADM9s ;)

I think it is pointless trying to make silly comparisons between what he uses and my SP100s because they're both completely different animals.

Both of you would do well to trot up here at some point, or to Spendor HQ and ask Terry Miles to let you hear a pair of SP100R, and 'update your records', so to speak.

Yes I know you've got a history of designing bloody good big speakers (and other things, too) I just wish you would get bloody back to doing it! I might even buy a pair ;)

Ultimately it's that sort of stuff which is of more interest to me than your ADM9s.

Marco.

Mr. C

13-04-2008, 13:56

I like the way this is shaping up..........:punch:

Marco

13-04-2008, 14:01

Hehe...no chance. We're too much like gentlemen here :lol:

Marco.

sastusbulbas

13-04-2008, 14:42

Big Speakers Rule :wave:

Grrr
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd115/sastusbulbas/pm-124.gif

Ashley James

13-04-2008, 15:42

And as long as everyone knows that JC is a happy AVI customer and expressing his own opinions and ignores his unbounded enthusiasm, it'll be interesting because he knows his stuff.

I'd also point out that most of these Forum rows around ADM9s have occurred without my involvement, all that's happened is people who've bought them and are understandably very excited have reviewed them and been viciously attacked and accused of being AVI plants by rude, intolerant and foolish people, who won't accept that are hi fi or whatever.

Some have not used a message board since because it so upset them.

I suggest it's not worth picking a fight with JC because you won't win and people enjoy his very amusing comments, far better to pick his brains on recording, archiving, digitising, using pro audio gear because it tends to be cheaper and better than hi fi and generally getting the most from computers.

Computers are if anything, a better way to play CDs, virtually all music is made on them (most movies too) and the are more versatile and have a better user interface.

Just my thoughts and not intended to provoke a war.

Ash

jcbrum

13-04-2008, 16:39

I don't mind wars, but we've had all that so let's talk instead. You all know what "Good old Winnie" said ( and supported by "our dear Margaret", {heh, heh}), war,war, is better than jaw,jaw. !

Marco, dear boy, do you seriously think I have never heard SP100's ? and in spite of them being a current product (in their present incarnation) they were designed well before even the drivers for the adm9's were conceived.

I laughed at Blzebub because he kept trying to suggest his ATC100a's were out performing adm9's and he got so offended and outspoken they banned him for life !

The fact is I have heard these "big-old", "legacy", speakers and they are flawed, particulary in the lower register and especially on "voice".

I'm not saying they are crap, and I can understand why you like them, but really, adm9's are better, with a 2 wire sub if you must. I spent two years sorting this out, and I bought two complete systems to evaluate side by side for a year, after intensively auditioning about twenty, and I've had a lot of years of listening too.

Anyone who wants to talk about this subject HAS to audition them properly with a proper computer driving them. THEN WE CAN HAVE A REAL DING-DONG, KNOCK-DOWN-DRAG-OUT, WAR - if you like !

Mr. C

13-04-2008, 17:07

Excellent Idea JC, I would like to volunteer for judicial juties please, with my SPL meter and full measurement suite :-)

Marco

13-04-2008, 17:13

The fact is I have heard these "big-old", "legacy", speakers and they are flawed, particulary in the lower register and especially on "voice".

Bollocks. Voice is what they're best at! And there's bugger all wrong with their lower registers either :lol:

Honestly, one listen to my system (through the SP100s) and your jaw would hit the floor, sweety, certainly based on the reports I've received from trusted ears (five pairs of them to date) of the ADM9s. Not that there's anything wrong with them in their intended application, but to compare them to what I'm using is just silly.

I might put some in the houses I rent out locally to students to use with their little iPod doo-dahs. I'm sure they would appreciate them far more than me :eyebrows:

Marco.

Mike

13-04-2008, 17:20

Not playing!!!

:sofa:

Ashley James

13-04-2008, 17:27

ADM9s + Sub are as loud as pair of a ATC SCM100A SL and have a better midrange (as do the Spendors) and they'll measure better than virtually anything else on the planet, which gets us into trouble with enthusiasts.

Here's a testimonial from an owner of SCM50ASL's

We've had a few Quad ESL owners buy them too and prefer them.

Dear Ashley - New Years resolution to let you know how I am getting on with the adm9s
*
At the moment they are in a temporary set-up, simply perched on the edge of a chest of drawers in our small sitting room, waiting for the new build cupboards and shelves to go in before a final decision as to whether they will go on stands or on the shelves. Even ignoring this less than ideal placement the results are excellent! Both my sons suggest the top end is a bit extended, but I suspect this is simply that they are used to speakers with a more rolled off top - certainly I notice it being quite open, but not a problem at all - could simply be age-related high-frequency loss! The mid range is hugely transparent, so much so that I notice recording balance issues which my ATC SCM 50s largely gloss over. Notwithstanding their size, the ATCs could not be said to be bass heavy, but even allowing for that, I am amazed at the mid-bass output of the adm9s, and certainly do not miss it much in this relatively small room and with most orchestral output. Small scale jazz with percussion and string bass obviously suffers, but this tends to be fairly closed miked anyway, and the sense of realism and bite in the rest of the spectrum pretty well makes up for the bass-light nature. I have tried playing around a little with the equaliser in ITunes, but however I try the trade off is muddying of the midrange so I think if a fuller sound is the question, then probably the sub is the answer. Imaging is superb, and can only improve when better sited.
*
All in all a great investment, and using the MAC to store music has invigorated my listening - apart from the number of CDs which my AVI player swallows without a glitch, but which the MAC groans and eventually gives up any attempt to read. I am about to download the new OS, which Roger tells me is a great improvement in many ways, so it will be interesting to see if that helps
*
I am delighted, and will try to get along to the Bristol hi-fi show to have a chat - I might even contemplate selling my ATCs for another set of adm9s and a sub-woofer for the bigger sitting room!
*
Many thanks from a very pleased customer

You mustn't forget they are all we claim.

Ash

jcbrum

13-04-2008, 17:30

Ash, Cooee, any dem slots going ? I wanna sell tickets :smoking:

oops, sorry, he beat me to it !

jcbrum

13-04-2008, 17:40

Go on Mr C, you're a dealer, (is Marco a dealer ?) get a pair in, I'll bring a laptop if you need one.

Looking at your website, they'd fit in anyway I reckon. A good alternative to that silly valve stuff and not expensive.

Marco

13-04-2008, 17:46

What's the big thing with ATC? I don't particularly like ATC speakers - certainly not their active designs! I'd like to hear that new huge floorstander they've got out, though, with the 15" drive units. That looks quite promising. I can't remember the model number.

ATCs don't sound like my SP100s, Ashley.

ADM9s + Sub are as loud as pair of a ATC SCM100A SL and have a better midrange (as do the Spendors) and they'll measure better than virtually anything else on the planet, which gets us into trouble with enthusiasts.

I'm not particularly interested in 'loudness'. What I value with big speakers is scale and realism, and bass that is delivered with massive visceral impact (the kind that with appropriate material hits you in the chest and makes you feel queasy) which I get in spades with the SP100s, and which I wouldn't get with tiny little drive units in a tiny little cabinet, no matter how good ADM9s are.

You need big cones shifting lots of air to get that effect. And I don't like subwoofers. The bass always seems 'detached' from the rest of the sound no matter how well integrated they are.

Measurements? They're only relevant up to a point. I don't judge speakers (or any other piece of hi-fi equipment) on measurements alone. Experience has taught me it's folly to do so. There are extraneous factors which ultimately influence the sound much more - that is unless you want a bland and sterile sounding hi-fi system ;)

Oh and Marco is most certainly not a dealer (although he knows a few) :)

Marco.

Ashley James

13-04-2008, 19:06

Marco you misunderstood me, you know I like your speakers and I said the mid range on them was better than the ATC's, I mentioned them only to illustrate the fact that ADM9s go as loud as the ATC's without distorting as much as they do, which is much louder than S100's. The Sub merges perfectly too, which is why it's so expensive. For reasons that I shan't disclose, I'll ask you to accept that we have considerable experience of Subwoofer design because we have access to most UK made ones.

Ash

Marco

13-04-2008, 20:00

No worries, Ashley. I see where you're coming from :)

With regard to subwoofers I wouldn't dispute what you're saying about your own designs - I'm not in a position to do so as I haven't heard an AVI subwoofer in conjunction with ADM9s or other 'satellite'-type speakers of your company's own design.

However I've heard plenty of others and that's what my comment was based on. I prefer to get scale and deep bass from large all-in-one speakers than via the subwoofer route as up until now that's the best way I've heard of doing it. Tannoy Westminsters, any big PMCs, my SP100s, KEF Maidstones, Naim DBLs, JBL K2 S9800s, Focal Grande Utopia Bes, when set-up properly they all do the 'scale' thing to a dramatic degree, which is what makes me smile.

I like to 'feel' the music as well as hear it, just like you do at a live concert, and that's why size will always matter to me ;)

Marco.

Ashley James

13-04-2008, 20:18

I understand Marco but I'm worried that if we go on about ADM9's all the fights will start.

I'll pipe down till something else crops up that I may be able to comment on.

Ash

jcbrum

13-04-2008, 20:42

Hooray, Hooray, Hooray,

Marco has admitted that he's never heard adm9's and an AVI sub !!!!!!

oh bliss, there is a god after all !!!!!

I'l just nip out and perform a jig from sheer delight !!!!!

If only some of the others would actually admit they've never heard them either !!!!!

Ha Ha Ha, Ho Ho Ho, Hum Hum Hum, Bliss, such Bliss, I'm speechless !!!!

:lolsign::lolsign::lolsign::lolsign: :lolsign::lolsign::lolsign::lolsign::lolsign:

:gig: :ner::ner::ner::cool::cool::cool: :gig:

Marco

13-04-2008, 20:42

Your consideration is appreciated, Ashley. I'm sure though that if ADM9s are discussed in the appropriate context there will be no problems. They're an innovative and interesting product and as such deserve to be mentioned accordingly :)

As long as JC can keep his 'pecker' in, so to speak, we'll be fine :lolsign:

Marco.

P.S I've always said I've never heard the ADM9s - that's nothing new! I NEVER comment definitively on equipment I've had no experience with. It's a sure way of gaining zero credibility ;)

jcbrum

13-04-2008, 20:55

Hey Marco, they're waiting for you on the s/pdif cable thread. :);)

Ashley James

14-04-2008, 18:46

I must say that I've never been comfortable with the "bigger is better" argument with loudspeakers because small speakers punch way above their weight. I'll name some favourites:

The Original Goodmans Maxim as designed by Laurie Fincham, they had a tiny 4.5" Bass driver and a miniature cone driver as a tweeter and it was possible to place them on top of big speakers have have listeners not know which were playing.

LS3/5A's were amazing in their day, although, thanks to misplaced enthusiasm in certain quarters, they've achieved a cult status, which they no longer deserve. They're phasey in the mid and a bit squeaky at the top.

Our own Neutrons which are nearly over now, but thousands and thousands of pairs have sold, if anyone finds a second hand pair, buy them, you'll be amazed. I'll never forget putting them in front of ELS63's at a Musical Weekend in the Lake District and playing music. Everyone thought it was the ELS's and when we switched over to prove it, they sounded worse!

The opposite is true of big three way speakers, in so many, the crossovers really do so much damage that many people prefer two-way speakers instead. The odd ones have stood out and S100's are amongst the very best, but Wilson Watt's?

Properly designed and Active and Big three way speakers could be amazing, but they'll need a cone mid range in my opinion.

Marco

27-04-2008, 17:24

Our own Neutrons which are nearly over now, but thousands and thousands of pairs have sold, if anyone finds a second hand pair, buy them, you'll be amazed.

I think it's a crying shame that AVI have abandoned their traditional roots shunning 'classic' hi-fi for computer audio. I think it's a decision that could backfire on the company in future.

Marco.

Marco

29-12-2009, 00:55

Does anyone have any views on this?

Personally, I can't see why AVI couldn't have catered for both markets, even if it meant only selling a small amount of their 'legacy hi-fi' and them concentrating predominantly on computer audio...

Marco.

Steve Toy

29-12-2009, 14:17

If they catered for both markets the very existence of the alternative would completely undermine the marketing logic behind ADM Bloody Nine Point whatevers.

DSJR

29-12-2009, 17:34

Damn. I composed a polite and hopefully informative reply, went to check the spelling and lost the whole thing installing the iespell addon :steam:

I suspect the component market was shrinking for AVI as with everyone else and they'd already had issues with unreliable CD transports. The Pro 9 speaker was due a face-lift and I suspect the idea for active operation had been on the cards since Ash's ATC days, where he showed me what he was on about far better face-to-face than he does online.. he had backup from the ATC designers too and currently has Martin Grindrod behind him, who designs all of AVI's stuff..

AVI were considering a preamp with both analogue and digital ins and outs a short while ago. To be honest, I suspect that most ADM buyers use computers or streaming (from remote drive) systems as sources and people like me with vintage sources are very few and far between. Anyway, Meridian were doing this years ago and they made suitable preamps which could be affordable now. I wish AVI had gone ahead with this aforementioned preamp, although I suspect the market has moved on now, as Naim may have found with some of their recent releases - too little, too expensive, too late.......... :hmm:

I've no doubt that the ADM drivers are excellent in their size and price class. Driver technology has moved on no end and never more at the lower end, where top quality, computer optimised units can be sourced in the far east for reasonable amounts. I remember Robin Marshall saying in an interview how lengthy his design for the ES14 Epos bass unit took, as he had his maths, but no CAD to assist him. Harbeth have benefitted extensively from CAD in the preparation stage, saving many design-hours in the process.

I still think it's very unfair to totally dismiss the ADM9.1's as crappy little computer speakers, as there's far more to them I believe. Many of the cheaper little active monitors out there have nasty little amp packs inside (and sound cold and scrappy because of it) and I'm told that even the Tannoy actives under a grand don't come up to much.

The funny thing is, the ADM9 balance sould suit many Linnies of the old-school out there - lean-n-clean bass with no boom or overhang to upset the "timing," a lively and clear midrange and a proper crossover into the (I suspect) perfectly behaved tweeter, the crossover being usefully high in frequency yet still well within the linear parts of the respective drivers (something ALL old speakers had difficulty with IMO***).

*** Many speakers from pre 1980 had severe problems at the crossover point, the tweeters not going down low enough and the bass units not going high enough either, with all sorts of phasey dips in between. hey, even the LS3/5A needed a resonance circuit to bolster the bass unit so it crossed over properly, something Kans and 'Briks and KEF's own Concerto's using this mid unit never had

hifinutt

30-12-2009, 18:26

reading this fascinating thread , theres an extraordinary amount of members banned on it , must be very controversial !!!

DSJR

30-12-2009, 18:35

Only because of the problems caused by two particular people, one posting without expressing things as "his opinion" and the other, who comes across as a patronising wind-up merchant, yet has so much he could share if only he came down off his high horse, put the "attitude" away and accepted there's more than one way to reach musical bliss and some people are further back down the road than he thinks he is.......

Alex_UK

30-12-2009, 18:37

I was intrigued by that too, Phil, but I don't think they got banned just 'cos of the size of their speakers! :lol:

DSJR

30-12-2009, 18:41

Something Ash said nearly two years ago, but still quite telling (I've seen the big active ATC's being calibrated.....)

".....There's no question that big speakers, properly designed, with hundreds of watts driving them are miles better than the best 6.5" two way or smaller. They can be staggeringly loud, clear and they can give a better front to back image than smaller ones too, although the left to right is about the same.

I don't like them with small amps, but then I don't like small amps and small amps are worse as speaker size increases.

And before Steve beats me up, I'd point out that making and calibrating big passive speakers properly, takes days and that the demand for them is miniscule...."

Rare Bird

30-12-2009, 18:42

reading this fascinating thread , theres an extraordinary amount of members banned on it , must be very controversial !!!

Terrible aint it..Cor i've never been banned on a fora ever :)

Only because of the problems caused by two particular people, one posting without expressing things as "his opinion" and the other, who comes across as a patronising wind-up merchant, yet has so much he could share if only he came down off his high horse, put the "attitude" away and accepted there's more than one way to reach musical bliss and some people are further back down the road than he thinks he is.......

Some people eh

John

30-12-2009, 18:47

hifi_dave

30-12-2009, 19:19

In an attempt to answer Marco's question, I would say that A*I no longer have an interest in 'legacy' equipment. In fact, I don't believe they even service their own old kit. In Mr James' opinion, computer audio is the now and the future and they sell countless thousands of their computer speakers which are infinitely superior to anything else at any price, so why bother making anything else ?

This is what I have gleaned through the nastiness and arguments on another forum.:eek:

DSJR

30-12-2009, 19:45

Yes Big ATC's require a lot of power to row them along, but other speakers have a lot more sensitivity and are lot more eaiser to drive

I quite agree, but I still think 30 Watts of ANY quality wouldn't be enough to get Spendor SP100's to very high levels. At low levels, definitely though..

Anyway, judging by current market conditions, AVI sell all their stuff online and ATC don't seem to promote their domestic market overmuch, although their new pre/power appears interesting for £2500 and sounds better than previous efforts too I'm informed.

I've just answered Marco's question too - If Croft amps look too "hair shirt" no matter how good they are (they are :)) and Naim bores you rigid before you see the prices they ask, then this new ATC pairing might just do the bizz. Servicing shouldn't be an issue either with a six year warranty..

Marco

30-12-2009, 20:44

Hi Dave,

I was going to answer your post elsewhere, but decided to go straight to this one instead:

I quite agree, but I still think 30 Watts of ANY quality wouldn't be enough to get Spendor SP100's to very high levels. At low levels, definitely though..

LOL! If only you had been there during some of the sessions I've had in the past with the Spendors and the Copper amp, you'd not be saying that - I can assure you!! :lol:

Remember that it's 30W Pure Class A, which makes a significant difference.

Let me put it this way to you....................

The Copper amp drove the SP100s MUCH louder and with considerably more headroom than the 200W solid-state ECS monoblocks it replaced ever did, which pissed all over the Naim NAP135 monoblocks I had before the ECSs (as did the 30W lightly-modified Yaqin Chinese valve amp drive the SP100s harder and louder, which I had before the Copper amp) - remember that this experience is primarily what made me move from ss amps to valves in the first place, so bang goes your theory about power output! ;)

Quite simply, IME, valve watts are a very different thing from solid-state watts, subjectively, in real world applications in terms of how dynamic range in music is handled. Much of the effect of the higher power output of ss amps is diluted in overly complicated circuits to the detriment of the music signal, which often ends up sounding flat and 'sat-on' in comparison, so although on paper there is more power available, it often doesn't translate that way in terms of how the music signal is reproduced and heard by the human ear.

This is yet another example of measurements/specs only telling half of the story!

I'm sure that our resident SET fans like Ali would agree with me after experiencing on many occasions the deafening sound one can produce with 2 watts and quality high-efficiency (100db+) speakers - indeed I've heard it myself and the results are WAY louder (and superior sounding) to anything I've heard from any ss amp in conjunction with speakers of standard efficiency.

Yes, the Tannoys are more efficient than the SP100s (95db, as opposed to 90db) which is a huge difference, but that doesn't mean that the Copper amp didn't drive the SP100s to quite insane levels, and without any audible clipping. However, what I'm getting now from the Lockwoods is a massive league beyond that... The loudness level the system is capable of now in my relatively small room honestly has to be heard to be believed, and definitely isn't for the fainthearted.... :gig:

Let's hope that Barry (who's visiting me on Saturday, and which I'm very much looking forward to) can handle it and doesn't get the fright of his life!! I'll put some waterproof sheets on the sofa just in case :eyebrows:

Marco.

DSJR

30-12-2009, 21:27

Marco, I've heard this myself, but volts is volts and amps is amps and there's NO MAGIC about it. It's just the clipping behaviour of good valve amps is so much better than than many SS amps, including the Naims, which had loads of odd order and crossover distortion long before clipping arose (they're better now though, but at a huge price premium).

I'm sure you can drive your copper amp flat out with no listening fatigue at all - I'm not attacking them for Chrissakes, just trying to point out that it's HOW an amp clips and behaves on transients that is so important. Anthony may be able to supply more meaningful specs, but a specified 30 watts is 30 watts, even if it is "Valve" Watts :D

MartinT

30-12-2009, 21:41

I don't know, I find 350W per channel perfectly adequate :)

Marco

30-12-2009, 21:50

LOL, Martin! ;)

Dave, I know that you're not "attacking" the Copper amp, but whatever way you cut it the statement below of yours is WRONG with a capital 'W', (based on my extensive listening experience of the equipment in question):

I still think 30 Watts of ANY quality wouldn't be enough to get Spendor SP100's to very high levels.

30 Class A valve watts are in my experience (subjectively) considerably louder than 200W of solid-state, through 90db Spendor SP100s, using either my Copper amp or ECS monos as partnering amplifiers. The Copper amp drove the SP100s to insanely loud levels, and without audible clipping, much louder than the ECS monos ever did.

That's the truth of the matter, muchacho! :)

It's not specs that count in the final analysis, but how equipment actually reproduces recorded music in 'real-world' applications.

Marco.

Spectral Morn

30-12-2009, 22:48

I really liked the AVI speakers we sold, Neutrons, Pro 9 etc, but we came into it late on and were selling what was left before the switch over. However Ashley did keep the Pro 9 and Neutron going for a bit longer but the larger speakers were discontinued. Crazy thing is after taking on AVI it took 9 months to sell any then it went daft and it became very hard to get anymore. I looked to AVI to replace Ruark when they dropped their Prologue range (stupid Ruark put all their eggs in the Sevenoaks basket and when they dumped Ruark in favour of Monitor Audio ERRRRRRRRRRRRR :doh::eek::(:steam: Ruark nearly went tits up after that...but survived thankfully and then discontinued some of my fave English speakers. All because of bloody What Hi-Fi).

Anyway I agree with Ashley if you see S/H Passive AVI speakers have a punt they are very good imho/e.

Regards D S D L

Marco

30-12-2009, 23:09

hifi_dave

30-12-2009, 23:20

Marco

30-12-2009, 23:44

Obviously there wasn't a market for A*I 'legacy' equipment or else they would still be making it. Also, the computer speakers must be very profitable.

Dave, I think that your second sentence is nearer the truth than your first one, but only tells part of the story.

AVI as a company (or perhaps Ashley himself?) decided that traditional separates hi-fi had no future and so they were going to abandon their roots and wholeheartedly embrace computer audio to cash in on the general public's insatiable appetite for technology-led gadgetry, which is I guess fair enough.

However, I doubt Ashley would ever admit it, but I suspect that AVI haven't cashed in quite as spectacularly as they had originally envisaged (that's not to say they're not doing well enough though), and also to their chagrin, the traditional separates market has remained rather more buoyant too than probably they had first thought, stubbornly refusing to just lay down and die... ;)

Quite simply, there have never been a better selection of brand new turntables, cartridges and other analogue-related paraphernalia, not to mention valve amps on the market - ever, so I think that old Ashley may have misjudged things slightly. Bloody hell, even reel-to-reel tape decks are making a comeback and being featured at international h-fi shows!! And long may it continue...... :eyebrows:

Marco.

tfarney

31-12-2009, 00:06

I don't know, I find 350W per channel perfectly adequate :)

I manage to soldier through on just 325.

Tim

Marco

31-12-2009, 00:22

I guess you've always been a martyr to the cause, eh Tim? ;)

Seriously though, I'm glad that the ADM9s are hitting the spot for you - it's a satisfying feeling when your head's in the right zone, where enjoying music features rather more heavily as an activity than fretting about hi-fi.

Marco.

tfarney

31-12-2009, 01:00

Obviously there wasn't a market for A*I 'legacy' equipment or else they would still be making it. Also, the computer speakers must be very profitable.

Agree about the 'giant killing'. They are competent, nothing more.

Actually, they are a good bit more than competent. Are they "giant killers?" That is completely dependent on what you think a giant sounds like. What the 9.1 system is, once you get past Ashley's zealous passion, fueled by his deep disappointment in the "high end" (a disappointment I share, personally), is an extremely clean, transparent DAC/pre combination not unlike the Benchmark, mated to a "good" active monitor/sub system designed to image as well in a room as in the near field.

What pushes them way above competent, in my view, beyond the very demonstrable advantages of active design, is how "good" they are, and they are very, very good. They got there the old fashioned way: Through uncompromising engineering and design. Martin Grinrod, AVi's designer, chose not to buy mass produced (typically class D at this price point) amps, as so many pro monitor manufacturers do. He chose not to purchase mass-produced drivers, even really good ones. Instead, he chose to design the amps and the drivers himself, as a system, and have them manufactured specifically for the 9.1s. Just as he did with the DAC and the preamp. The synergy that results is pretty stunning. Remarkable clarity. Completely unlikely spl levels. Seemingly endless headroom. And a precision of imaging that I haven't encountered in systems at many, many times the price (and in no passive systems, period).

Reading about the design approach is what attracted me to them. What keeps me with them is the sound. With that said, I don't imagine they're for everybody. They have a lean, undramatic presentation that many would call clinical or dry. In a well-treated room, it's like taking the sound of reference headphones and hanging it in the air in front of you, with a remarkably firm, precise instrument placement. If that's not your preference, find something else, and enjoy. But if it is, well, a pair of Adam A7s and a Benchmark Dac1/Pre are not as competent at twice the price. Valves and passive speakers with big drivers? There's no point in trying to compare them. Apples and oranges. I like apples. And as an apple guy, if I had the room for BIG speakers, I'd pass on the vintage horns and modern towers and put a pair of these in my listening room:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images345x345/612196.jpg

Very low on the wife approval factor, but to my ears, at least, they embarrass the biggest Wilsons and Sonus Fabers. YMMV, of course.

Tim

MartinT

31-12-2009, 01:02

I manage to soldier through on just 325

:) what you got then?

Oh - reading further - do you mean the AVIs?

tfarney

31-12-2009, 02:45

:) what you got then?

Oh - reading further - do you mean the AVIs?

Yes. AVi ADM 9.1s. 250 watts for each midbass driver, 75 for each tweeter. I don't have the subs. That adds another 200 watts.

Tim

Marco

31-12-2009, 09:51

Hi Tim,

What speakers are those you've posted above? I don't recognise them.

Marco.

Rare Bird

31-12-2009, 10:18

Hi Tim,

What speakers are those you've posted above? I don't recognise them.

Marco.

Adam S6A MkII or III

DSJR

31-12-2009, 10:19

Agreed. Their 'legacy hi-fi' was always superb in my experience, and offered high SPPV, which is why it puzzles me slightly why they abandoned it completely when clearly there still exists a sizeable market for such equipment, as evidenced by the sales of 100s of other high-end manufacturers currently selling such equipment to enthusiasts all over the world...

I'm sure that their ADM9s are well-designed and do a particular job very well, but they are not the 'giant-killers' purported ad nauseam by Mr James on every Internet site that will host his blinkered agenda.

Marco.

I genuinely believe that Ash feels that the ADM9.1's are better than ANYTHING they did before. I've still not yet heard them, so I must reserve judgement. I do have some N5's though and they're VERY good, continuing the lovely Neutron vibe and p**ing over kans and LS3/5A's for example, if not the Harbeth P3ESR, which is a different kettle of delightful fish altogether :)

Marco, there may be some wonderful valve amps, turntables and vintage large speakers out there, but they don't count in the real world, as it's only Aspergics like me and like minded vintage audio hobbyists who are going to take any interest in them - and we as a group are still ageing a year every year with a very few climbing on at the bottom of the age range.

LP's will continue as the vintage source of choice, but I daresay that CD will all but die as people either download their digital music or transfer their CD's to a server somewhere in the house and stream from it. NOS valves are becoming very rare indeed now and it's still claimed that modern equivalents aren't as well made. It looks as if techTube have gone as I can't find their website - a real shame IMO..

ADM9.1's would find favour here in, say, Marco's studio (Tannoy Devons were coloured then and certainly now, if huge fun) or in a reasonable sized kitchen/conservatory. They have a clean bass with no boom apparently (yes, even Hamish would adore them, but I suspect he'll never have the pleasure) and I'm sure Neil and I would find that they continue and build upon the legacy left from their previous ranges.

P.S. Marco, I think the 200W mono amp packs are still available at a reasonable price.. Just a thought...........

Marco

31-12-2009, 10:38

Andre, I presume that they're pro-monitors of some description?

Dave,

I genuinely believe that Ash feels that the ADM9.1's are better than ANYTHING they did before.

Well if he does, he's kidding himself on and in denial!! :lol:

You're probably right about vintage gear, but (new) traditional separates hi-fi Ashy-baby brands as "legacy hi-fi" will outlive him and well beyond, that's for sure! ;)

Marco.

Rare Bird

31-12-2009, 10:42

Andre, I presume that they're pro-monitors of some description?

I know what they are :lolsign:

Aye PA Speakers

Marco

31-12-2009, 10:54

For some dad-dancing at discos? :lol:

http://www.smileys4me.com/getsmiley.php?show=2809 http://www.smileys4me.com/getsmiley.php?show=2809 http://www.smileys4me.com/getsmiley.php?show=2809

Marco.

Joe

31-12-2009, 11:04

At a tad under £25,000 per pair, you'd need to be a rich dad.

Rare Bird

31-12-2009, 11:08

I wouldnt give those a second look for 20 quid Joe

Joe

31-12-2009, 11:10

I was thinking maybe £50 tops myself till I checked the price.

Rare Bird

31-12-2009, 11:12

I'm not being funny but they look like a Sonic disaster to me.

Marco

31-12-2009, 11:14

I wouldnt give those a second look for 20 quid Joe

Well that's 19 quid more than I'd give for them! ;)

Marco.

tfarney

31-12-2009, 11:22

The speakers pictured above are active midfield monitors from Adam.

Objectively, Ash is absolutely correct that the 9.1s are "better" than all previous AVi products. They are, as I've said, very well-designed and well-implemented active systems, and offer clear gains in speed, dynamic range, distortion, noise floor, channel separation, etc. over not only previous AVi kit, but any system that is attempting to push amplification through the unknown load of any given speaker systems' passive crossovers and any given set of drivers' impedance and efficiency characteristics. The science is not hard to find and I'm sure AVi found it for themselves, through measuring and testing, and benchmarking against other products, including their own legacy speakers, as they developed the 9s and 9.1s.

Subjectively? Well, that's subjective, isn't it? As I've said, they may not be your cup of tea.

Tim

PS - Yes, you can make active systems from existing components, with the amps outside of the speaker enclosures. Doing so misses a couple of advantages - reduction of cabling, engineered matching of individual amps to individual drivers - but we are picking nits at that point, many of the very best studio monitoring systems are custom designed and installed, and use outboard power and crossovers and, all told, can cost nearly half as much as a pair of Wilsons :). TF

Marco

31-12-2009, 11:52

tfarney

31-12-2009, 12:34

Hi Tim,

Those are all good points. You know how my mind works by now, so objective observations mean bugger all when it comes to a highly subjective experience like listening to and enjoying recorded music in the home. It's only how a system sounds in the final analysis, to my ears, that matters to me - anything else can get filed in the bin.

It would be interesting to set-up two AVI systems at a show: a computer-based one using ADM9s, and a 'legacy' one consisting of their top 'Laboratory Series' gear (CDP and amps), with the big 3-way floorstanders they made (sorry, the model number escapes me), all set-up on proper equipment supports, etc, using the same music to demonstrate, and let the people attending decide which system they preferred, judging purely on the sound quality/musical presentation of both systems only.

Hey, you could even do it blind, with both systems covered up or behind something to prevent any bias! ;)

I suspect that the results would be fascinating (people could vote on a piece of paper which system they preferred, 'A' or 'B' and the votes then counted up at the end of the day). This would give a good indication of how far AVI gear has genuinely progressed (or not) in terms of subjective audio performance.......

Marco.

That would be interesting, but you, understanding how my mind works, know I would only find it interesting if it were blind :)! Actually, I'd love to see two sets of tests - sighted and blind, and compare the results. Now that would be interesting!

But as interesting as we might find it, I know AVi did extensive testing during development, including listening tests, and I doubt they would care to invest valuable trade show space on further testing of a product they no longer sell.

I've never heard any of the big AVis, though I'm sure they were good. Even better, I suspect, matched with AVi components. But consider the source -- I'm convinced that the best synergy, by far, is engineered synergy, as long as you have a good engineer, of course. While others are seeking balance and searching for the proper matches, I'll be listening to music, through components balanced and matched by design. :)

Tim

MartinT

31-12-2009, 12:44

can cost nearly half as much as a pair of Wilsons :)

Ah, but have you heard what Wilsons can do? Their new Sophia 2 are extraordinary. Mind you, so is the price and when I think that my Ushers were considerably cheaper then I got an awful lot of speaker for the money.

DSJR

31-12-2009, 12:46

You'd need the active sub though, to make it fair..

Please remember Marco, the amps in the ADM9.1's wouldn't work properly driving any other speakers via a length of speaker cable and to get the 6.5" driver to work "full range" probably means high-pass filtering below 40hz or so for all I know (my ATC100A's were bandwidth limited below 20Hz as it was with a 12" driver).

Also, DAC's don't need to cost the earth, as Ash has stated and Stan (amongst others) has proved.

Three way speakers can have problems, the art is in the tuning of a properly sorted design. As I said before, the lower crossover point is fraught with phasing and distortion problems as there is usually a wide overlap between the drivers. Tannoys had problems with the mid to treble transition and iffy switches which got in the way which Marco's revamped crossovers (and Tannoy's own from mid eighties onwards) would have sorted.

This is where a visit to AVI would be useful, as Martin could show the copious notes he's made during the design of all their products.

Tim, why is it that I becaome devil's advocate on here and the HDD forum? I'm slated for being a vintage zealot on one, yet am taken to task for not fully "understanding" valvey/vinyly thinking on here :scratch: I try to understand both ways of thinking and tailoring my little stereo to get the best from both...

tfarney

31-12-2009, 12:55

Ah, but have you heard what Wilsons can do? Their new Sophia 2 are extraordinary. Mind you, so is the price and when I think that my Ushers were considerably cheaper then I got an awful lot of speaker for the money.

I have heard several Wilsons, though last year's models, and Sonus Fabers and the big, high-end Vienna Acoustics...all the way up to The Music.

The Music is, IMO, the best of the breed, probably because this...

http://www.viennaacoustics.at/products/the_music/details/Die-Musik_56.jpg

...is essentially a single full-range driver sitting on a huge passive sub, augmented by a super tweeter. It gives me what I'm accustomed to from reference headphones -- a critical midrange uninterrupted by the distortions of a passive crossover.

YMMV, of course, and there are things that the Wilsons and speakers like them do very well. But to my ear, purity in the mids, where most of the music lies, is not on the list.

Tim

MartinT

31-12-2009, 13:02

But to my ear, purity in the mids, where most of the music lies, is not on the list.

You really need to hear my speakers. Purity of midrange is high on my list, too :)

Joe

31-12-2009, 13:19

Tim, why is it that I becaome devil's advocate on here and the HDD forum? I'm slated for being a vintage zealot on one, yet am taken to task for not fully "understanding" valvey/vinyly thinking on here :scratch: I try to understand both ways of thinking and tailoring my little stereo to get the best from both...

You're more like the little boy pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes. The truth can hurt:)

tfarney

31-12-2009, 13:27

You really need to hear my speakers. Purity of midrange is high on my list, too :)

What speakers are they?

Tim

DSJR

31-12-2009, 13:29

Less of the "little" please :eyebrows: :ner:

tfarney

31-12-2009, 13:35

Tim, why is it that I becaome devil's advocate on here and the HDD forum? I'm slated for being a vintage zealot on one, yet am taken to task for not fully "understanding" valvey/vinyly thinking on here I try to understand both ways of thinking and tailoring my little stereo to get the best from both...

Dave, perhaps you're an undiscovered Buddhist? The watercourse way flows naturally. It finds the most efficient path. That path winds, never reaching for the extremes on either side, always finding balance without effort.

Or maybe not...
;)
Tim

MartinT

31-12-2009, 13:37

What speakers are they?

As in my footer - Usher Dancer Be-20.

tfarney

31-12-2009, 14:06

As in my footer - Usher Dancer Be-20.

I haven't heard those, but I just surfed over to have a look at them. Gorgeous. I have heard some of the small Ushers, I don't recall the model, that I would put up there with the best of the passive monitor-type speakers I've heard. Very nice.

Don't get me wrong; what I (don't) hear in active designs is not a night and day thing; it's pretty subtle, a matter of degrees. And there are plenty of passive speakers out there that do midrange well, given properly-designed crossovers and generous headroom. So often, though, they're not, and then the differences get much more dramatic. There is no doubt that you can drive a small monitor, even a lot of big floor-standers in the mid-80s db range, with 50 watts, to great spl levels. I just don't care for the sound of them when you do.

Tim

DSJR

31-12-2009, 14:21

Dave, perhaps you're an undiscovered Buddhist? The watercourse way flows naturally. It finds the most efficient path. That path winds, never reaching for the extremes on either side, always finding balance without effort.

Or maybe not...
;)
Tim

I try to be..

".... I carry life with me, wherever I go, and there's no end or beginning, though I am not a circle......." Tama Starr, early seventies

Marco

31-12-2009, 16:51

Hi Tim,

The Music is, IMO, the best of the breed, probably because this...

http://www.viennaacoustics.at/products/the_music/details/Die-Musik_56.jpg

...is essentially a single full-range driver sitting on a huge passive sub, augmented by a super tweeter. It gives me what I'm accustomed to from reference headphones -- a critical midrange uninterrupted by the distortions of a passive crossover.

...and passive crossover aside, the design above has distinct elements of a classic Tannoy dual-concentric drive unit, with of course 15" ones having no need for a subwoofer ;)

Honestly, I've heard plenty of open-baffle designs and speakers using full range drivers with super-tweeters, and can confidently say that Tannoy Monitor Golds (and other similarly capable Tannoy DCs) give 95% of the midrange clarity of OBs and full-rangers, but with massively more (controlled) weight and scale with which to underpin music and allow it to be reproduced convincingly and realistically, instead of as an anaemic sounding poor relation.

YMMV, of course, and there are things that the Wilsons and speakers like them do very well. But to my ear, purity in the mids, where most of the music lies, is not on the list.

I completely agree with the bit in bold, but in my opinion "purity in the mids" is simply not enough if the sound of a loudspeaker (and partnering system) overall isn't properly balanced, otherwise all you're doing is putting your eggs into the one basket to prioritise accuracy at certain frequencies - and that isn't how real music sounds....

For me, "purity in the mids" is very important, but not at the expense of other important elements of music reproduction. It must also be accompanied by realistic weight and scale (not forgetting detailed high frequency extension), in order that instruments which require convincing authority in the lower registers to be heard properly, are reproduced believably and accurately. Otherwise, all you end up with is a thin, mid-forward sound, lacking in the natural richness and tone real musical instruments (and voices) possess.

This is why I could never live with small loudspeakers, as they're simply too much of compromise - and shoving a subwoofer into the equation isn't the answer either; certainly not in terms of how I consider music as being believably and accurately reproduced.

It goes back to the "no free lunch" thing again, of course, but in my experience so far, the best overall balance of compromises is achieved with large high quality dual-concentrics, fitted with the best quality modern crossovers, inside huge inert cabinets, and driven by high quality valve amplification (which measures superbly as well as sounds fantastic). Others and I here own such designs. If I should hear anything better then I'll honestly only too gladly hold my hands up and acknowledge it! :)

I've never heard any of the big AVis, though I'm sure they were good. Even better, I suspect, matched with AVi components.

Well I've heard some AVI CDPs, amps and standmount speakers (although admittedly not their large floorstanders) and would feel very confident that putting a system together using those components would outperform their ADM9s, sonically, in most areas - note that I say 'most' and not 'every' area, which takes us back again to the 'balanced' sound thing again I referred to earlier. In effect, I'd be very confident that the bigger system would be less of a compromise and have a better balance of sonic virtues, overall, for most people.

But consider the source -- I'm convinced that the best synergy, by far, is engineered synergy, as long as you have a good engineer, of course. While others are seeking balance and searching for the proper matches, I'll be listening to music, through components balanced and matched by design.

I agree with that in principle, and I've heard many examples of both approaches, good and bad, but I guess it ultimately boils down to what you're satisfied with. The limiting factor with your approach is intrinsically how good the designer/engineer is at their job and how many genuinely top-quality components have been used in the design due to budget constraints. You also automatically inherit the chosen compromises of the designer/engineer whether you want them or not, and I personally hate other people (effectively) voicing the system I use.

When you move outside of that rather restrictive 'safety net', as it were, of having a system designed by one manufacturer, and spread your wings a little, using your ears and (considerable) experience to build a system that's free from such budget constraints, like I have, then the potential sonic rewards are far greater should you pull it off successfully. I believe that I've managed to do precisely that, as I'm sure others here like Martin have with their systems.

It's about going the extra mile, striving for excellence, speculating to accumulate in the process, leaving comfort zones and having the confidence to trust your ears and instinct implicitly when building a system, and not allowing others to dictate the terms on which your chosen system is built - *that* for me is what it's all about, and what usually separates a merely good/competent system from a truly great one.....

Marco.