Marco -
How so?Quote:
.............actives (done well) can be very good, but the problem is that this approach takes valve amps out of the equation, so what may be gained on one hand is (for me) taken away rather more on the other...
Printable View
Marco -
How so?Quote:
.............actives (done well) can be very good, but the problem is that this approach takes valve amps out of the equation, so what may be gained on one hand is (for me) taken away rather more on the other...
Maybe so,but you get rid of an even bigger problem-the box! No going back for me.I would find it very difficult to live with a box speaker again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Yes agree we have to choose our priotoriesQuote:
Originally Posted by Marco
What I like about OB is how easy they are to build and how much sound per pound you get. My speakers cost £1000 including 2 sub plates great value for what u get
Indeed, my Ushers' Beryllium dome midrange drivers are fantastically detailed and neutral.Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis
Ali,
And so would I with the lack of scale (and bass grunt in comparison to what I’m used to), low sensitivity and loudness capabilities, of electrostatics ;)Quote:
Maybe so,but you get rid of an even bigger problem-the box! No going back for me.I would find it very difficult to live with a box speaker again.
Good Tannoy dual-concentrics in superbly-made cabinets offer a very entertaining slice of the benefits of both approaches, in my experience, as you hear very little of the box and get all the benefits of massive (tightly controlled when driven by a suitably capable amp), extremely time-aligned, coherent, drive units showcasing music in all its glory. If you're coming to Scalford Hall in March, I look forward to demonstrating this to you :)
Marco.
Each to their own.I'm sure the Tannoys are very good,but high spl's are not a priority for me.The statics go more than loud enough.Also,I don't think a cone speaker exists that can match a statics transparency and imaging capabilities.These things are a priority for me.Some do get close though.However,next year will hopefully see the direct-coupled amp completed.This,to mine and other's ears has raised the bar in what is possible from a valve amp.I can't wait!
Ali,
Believable scale and 'musical realism' (read as: truly extended dynamic range and the highest level of resolution possible from a system and loudspeakers within my financial and room constraints) are as important to me as imaging ability (and other recognised traits of electrostatics) is to you.
I don't often listen really loud, but when I choose to do so, I enjoy the ability to create the (near) effect of a live gig (or acoustic musical performance) in my room without things running out of steam, or worse, sparks flying from the partnering equipment or speakers! ;)
That's it in a nutshell, matey!Quote:
Each to their own...
Could you expand on this a little? That sounds very intriguing! :)Quote:
However,next year will hopefully see the direct-coupled amp completed.This,to mine and other's ears has raised the bar in what is possible from a valve amp.I can't wait!
Marco.
Beryllium dome midrange drivers are the best, full point. Unfortunately, they are a bit expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinT
Hi Chris,
I suspect that valves would be much too microphonic to perform optimally inside the cabinets of actively-driven speakers (although it seems that Ali may have heard something to disprove that theory) :eyebrows:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Grand Wazoo
I'm also not aware of any valve-based active speaker designs on the market (certainly any of repute), are you?
Marco.
Active amplification doesn't need to take place inside speaker cabinets - surely you know that as an ex-Naim guy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
Get yerself another copper amp (or three!) & get Anthony to wack together a valve crossover for your Tannoys- that would be something to hear wouldn't it?