Author Archives: Doug Schroeder

World News

PureAudioProject Quintet15 10” Coaxial open-baffle speaker system Review

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

 

PureAudioProject Quintet15 10 Coaxial (inventory image)

Entry factors to this text

If you might be unfamiliar with the PureAudioProject model of audio system, I encourage you to discover the opposite articles I’ve written, as a substantial amount of background and dialogue of their sound high quality is contained these evaluations. Those evaluations are right here at Dagogo.com:

Trio15 TB (that includes the Tang Band W8-1808 driver, now upon request)

https://www.dagogo.com/pureaudioproject-trio-15tb-speaker-review/

Trio15 Voxativ

https://www.dagogo.com/pureaudioproject-trio15-voxativ-open-baffle-speakers-review/

Trio15 Horn1

https://www.dagogo.com/pureaudioproject-trio15-horn1-speaker-review/

Quintet Horn1

https://www.dagogo.com/pureaudioproject-quintet15-horn1-open-baffle-speaker-system/

Trio15 10” Coaxial

https://www.dagogo.com/pureaudioproject-trio15-coax10-open-baffle-speakers-review/

As is likely to be anticipated, the hyperlink that’s most pertinent to this text is the newest, the evaluate of the Trio15 10” Coaxial. If your curiosity was piqued by the ten” main driver and also you shouldn’t have as a lot curiosity within the different fashions, then maybe a fast have a look at that article will set you up for what follows. If, nevertheless, you might be undecided which iteration of PAP speaker would possibly go well with you finest, then be at liberty to backtrack and discover the opposite variations.

 

Building on the excellence of the Trio15 10” Coaxial speaker

This evaluate doesn’t need to be intensive, because the Quintet15 mannequin utilizing the equivalent 10” Coaxial driver builds upon the smaller model speaker, simply because the Quintet15 Horn1 is a fuller expression of the Trio15 Horn1.

The body, 4 extra 15” woofers per pair, and the peak of the bigger speaker are important adjustments from the smaller speaker, and so they contribute to a bigger scale and extra palpable bass expertise. The locus of the concentric driver is bodily larger, which is a bonus of the Quintet15. Within purpose, at any time when the first wavelaunch is elevated, the listener wins as a result of the complete soundstage rises to a extra lifelike peak. I don’t favor the decrease wavelaunch of audio system emanating beneath the peak of the listener’s ears. Frankly, audio system such because the outdated Quads bug me. They generate an expertise like listening to an orchestra taking part in from an orchestra pit. I’ve no downside with audio system that float the wave launch barely above the listener’s ears, as does the Quintet15. To my ears the result’s a extra gracious and grand expertise.

The extra woofers don’t push the frequency response appreciably decrease, however as an alternative alter the macrodynamics by bringing in additional presence within the decrease frequencies proportionate to the higher finish. Another means of placing it’s that the extra woofers trigger the bass to tackle extra solidity and punch. To really feel the bass when utilizing the Trio15 speaker one should increase the listening stage fairly a bit. With the Quintet platform there may be extra oomph, extra bass output to construct a stable basis for the music. This places the low finish of the Quintet15 extra according to bigger dynamic audio system with woofers from 12’ to fifteen”.

To attain a lot decrease than 28Hz both with the Trio15 or the Quintet15 one should add a subwoofer or two. That does reformulate the expertise and strikes it within the course of SOTA (state-of-the-art) sound. Especially with the inherent scale of the soundstage created by the Quintet15, that extension of bass to properly underneath 25Hz offers extra sound shaping traits, similar to spatial cues to the recording surroundings. Adding a subwoofer can also heat up devices and voices within the mid-bass frequencies. I’ll discuss that side of system constructing in a bit once I share my listening periods.

The crossover used within the Quintet15 10” Coaxial speaker is identical one because the Trio15, however with a bigger transformer. I already had the Trio15 and Quintet15 audio system’ frames, crossovers, and horn drivers to assemble both speaker following their evaluations. Since these fashions of PAP audio system are modular, for the earlier Trio15 10” Coaxial speaker evaluate the corporate didn’t ship me a whole speaker, however a set of 10” coaxial drivers, applicable baffles, a small field with mounting {hardware}, and the crossover matched to the ten” drivers. For the present evaluate the corporate despatched me a three-pound field containing barely bigger transformers (coils), which I exchanged on the crossover boards.

In preparation for the Trio15 10” Coaxial evaluate, like stripping a automotive, I decreased the Quintet15 Horn1 model to a shell, leaving two metallic frames with 15” drivers on the highest and backside. For this evaluate, I reversed the method and raided the Trio15 for elements, lowering it actually to the 2 metallic frames. Everything else went into the chassis of the Quintet15.

Honestly, one of many causes I’ve performed 5 earlier evaluations of PAP audio system is as a result of coping with them is less complicated than it’s with typical floorstanding audio system. In a few hours, I can transition one model of PAP speaker out of my listening room and one other into it. It is rather more nice than working with a shipper to have audio system delivered after which having to unbox, arrange, and, when completed, repackage and ship 5 completely different audio system! I’m not an audio slacker, as might be decided by the record of audio system I’ve reviewed. But comfort is an ever extra enticing factor, maybe for you as properly.

The fantastic thing about a speaker with a number of voices

The modularity of the PAP designs gives nice flexibility in pursuit of various voicing because of completely different main drivers. I encourage PAP prospects who lengthy for selection to strongly contemplate proudly owning the ten” Coaxial main driver in addition to another model of the speaker, whether or not the platform chosen is the Trio15 or the Quintet15. In my most up-to-date evaluate (of the Trio15 10” Coaxial), I unabashedly beneficial that driver as my favourite of all reviewed. It captures a substantial amount of the gorgeous coherence that’s sought by followers of concentric and single driver audio system, and if I have been constrained to at least one PAP main driver, it might unquestionably be my selection. Persons who like a comparatively extra ahead, higher finish energy-infused character to a system would doubtless benefit from the Horn1 as their go-to main driver. Either of those choices will provide a refreshing break from conventional dynamic or dipole audio system.

In phrases of system setups used for this text, I spent much less time working the speaker within the easiest two-channel amplification mode versus the choice passive bi-amp mode. PAP gives the proprietor of sure fashions a major efficiency alternative by together with two jumpers on every crossover (each the Trio15 and Quintet15 10” Coaxial audio system have this function) which, in probably the most primary setup, makes use of just one set of speaker posts. However, when the jumpers are put in place to permit passive bi-amping, each units of speaker posts are used, one set related to the woofers and the opposite related to the first driver. It is almost a sure-thing improve.

Consequently, to run the speaker in passive bi-amp mode requires 4 channels of amplification. In some setups I exploit a further pair of interconnects if the preamp has two units of outputs, or a Y-cable on the preamp main to 2 interconnects per channel, or a single interconnect on the preamp with the suitable Y-cable on the amp. You might imagine it ludicrous to attempt reversing Y-cables and interconnects as a result of presumably it couldn’t make a lot of a distinction within the sound. That is an incorrect presumption, which is definitely dispelled by attempting the variants. I warning that some low-power or esoteric preamp and amp combos is likely to be unsuitable for doubling interconnects if their output is inadequate to drive the decrease impedance of the extra size of interconnects. Nearly any pre/amp combo can accomplish that inside purpose, i.e., driving two 3M interconnects and a Y-cable. As with different different setups, it is a do-at-your-own-risk concept and, in case you are not sure, verify with the maker of your preamp and amp(s).

There is normally considerably extra price related to passive bi-amping with 4 channels (until one is utilizing a a lot cheaper multi-channel amp), interconnects, and speaker cables than a two-channel setup. Some of the anticipated benefits of transitioning any speaker with passive bi-amp functionality from two-channel to multi-channel energy embody extra highly effective macrodynamics with tighter bass, cleaner transients, expanded soundstage because of extra element being revealed, and extra openness with much less stridency within the higher frequencies.

Remember, you can begin with decrease price amp channels and cables to attain bi-amp functionality, and improve every half incrementally for added enchancment. Having in contrast such issues many occasions, beware it’s attainable for a really prime quality two-channel amp and single wiring choice of a speaker to be preferable to a decrease price bi-amp configuration. But in my expertise the efficiency and value hole between the 2 setups must be huge. In most instances the good thing about transferring to a passive bi-amp configuration on a speaker similar to it is a step up in sound high quality.

The put up PureAudioProject Quintet15 10” Coaxial open-baffle speaker system Review appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

Iconoclast by Belden Series 2 speaker cables Review

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

Iconoclast by Belden Series 2 Silver-Plated Tough Pitch Copper speaker cable, with banana termination.

Iconoclast Cables already proved they have a serious design worthy of the finest systems, but Iconoclast’s designer, retired Belden Cable engineer Galen Gareis, has taken his initial work further with the development of the Series 2 SPTPC speaker cables. Most of the design parameters for Series 2 speaker cables remain the same from the extensive testing that led to the Series 1 product, the physical difference between them being the number and size of conductors. Using individually insulated conductors, Series 1 uses 24 wires of 24Ga size for a total 10AWG, while Series 2 uses 48 wires of 28Ga size for a total of 11AWG. The audiophile can further select from either the red jacketed Tough Pitch Copper, or the top-of-the-line SPTPC (Silver-Plated TPC). Note that the blue jacketed OFE (Oxygen Free Electrolytic Copper) is only available in Series 1. I have not used Iconoclast speaker cables with the OFE conductors, or I would discuss them in comparison.

From discussion with Galen, the OFE conductor brings the soundstage forward of the speakers and has less specificity of images. I have accepted his assessment that, since resolution is extremely important to me, I would likely prefer the TPC or SPTPC conductors I have been using. I hasten to add that this distinction is not to be seen as though any Iconoclast speaker cable is lacking high precision. The TPC and SPTPC cables I have reviewed and chosen as my reference for building systems are in toto better at revealing the minutia of the music than others reviewed despite being less expensive. Using the TPC and SPTPC cables, I have been able to make systems using a variety of speakers which exhibit the tonal characteristics I seek. I have a desire for both extreme resolution and rich or full tonality, and I have less system tuning challenges when using Iconoclast Cables than with previous brands despite the use of class D amplification. See the Iconoclast website for extensive technical discussion of the measurements of L, R, C that Galen uses extensively to finalize his designs.

In my experience, conductor material and AWG are the most though not solely important variables influencing the sound of a cable. Over the years, having the opportunity to review cables of similar geometry and in some cases identical construction but different AWG or conductor material, both AWG and conductor material had pervasive influence upon the sound of all cables. In most cases moving from a copper conductor to silver-plated copper brought higher resolution but also brightness, a tonal tipping up of the frequency spectrum in playback. Not so with the Series 2 Iconoclast Speaker Cables. I was surprised at how similar the two series of speaker cables are in terms of tonality. Galen shared that the silver presents with higher resolution, but the copper dictates the tonality. The two characteristics of the Series 2 cables that I noted within the first few moments of use were the leap in information being revealed and how the timbre was not skewed.

The Series 2 cables have changed little aesthetically. The shrink wrap on the terminations sport a larger printed “ICONOCLAST,” which allowed me to grab the right set for efficient swapping to conduct comparisons. The other telltale sign is beneath the transparent sheath at each end of the cable, allowing one to see the looser weave of the larger 24Ga conductors in the Series 1 cable and the tighter weave of the smaller 28Ga conductors in the Series 2 cable. All Iconoclast speaker cables are individual leads, so one channel is comprised of two individual cables; to outfit a stereo L/R requires 4 cables. That is part of the design parameters driven by specifications. Other aspects of these speaker cables are covered in my previous review of Iconoclast products which included the Generation 1 TPC speaker cables (see here).

Something that could use clarification on the Iconoclast website is that there are two colors of Iconoclast speaker cables, Blue and Red. The color pertains to the conductor used, with red indicating TPC (Tough Pitch Copper), and blue indicating either OFE (Oxygen Free Electrolytic Copper) or SPTPC (Silver Plated Tough Pitch Copper).  The Series 1 cables were the first to be developed. Even before I had begun using the Series 2 cables, the Iconoclast Cables were preferred, consistently performing exceptionally well in all systems. That impression has been reinforced through use of the Series 2 cables.

The Series 2 speaker cables were developed to be complimentary to the Series 1. Series 2 is intended for use on the midrange/treble posts of bi-wirable or tri-wirable speakers and the Series 1 is especially recommended for use on the bass posts. Galen is seeking a patent for this complementary pair of purpose-built bi-wire speaker cables. In extensive listening across many systems, almost universally I have preferred the Series 2 cables on the midrange/treble posts (above 300 Hz) and the Series 1 cables on the bass (below 300 Hz), as Iconoclast recommends. Several times I swapped them and, while it was interesting, I usually reverted to their intended placement. Perhaps once or twice regarding idiosyncratic system builds —maybe one system in 15 — I kept the reverse placement because the combination of attributes was slightly preferable. It demonstrates that the cables are designed similarly and have an extremely high degree of complementarity. I envision that in your system the standard placement will rule the day.

 

A few words about Iconoclast jumper cables

I have a fair bit of experience using shorter custom speaker cables from Iconoclast. As I use a variety of speakers and setups, for the first review I requested sets of shorter 30” speaker cables to be used as jumpers or shorter speaker cables for amp placement next to the speaker’s binding posts. The company graciously fulfilled my request with enough sets to use up to all 8 channels of the pair of Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra Amplifiers. I requested some sets with banana terminations and others with spade terminations so that, if I wished, I could double them up as I do occasionally with speaker cables. One must be exquisitely careful when doubling any speaker cabling, as a wiring mishap may damage an amplifier or speakers! Such things are “do at your own risk” activities. Having said that, the best systems I build are typically when I have doubled speaker cables or multiplied channels of amplification. The very best systems tend to be ones where I have done both.

For this review I built systems with several permutations of cables. With all the systems the essential character of the Iconoclast house sound did not change, except in one respect; systems built with the shorter 30” speaker cables exhibited even more of the advantages of the cable’s design. In any system where I could use the 30” cables versus the standard length 8’ speaker cables, I would use the 30” cables, doubling them if possible. Galen found my doubling of these short speaker cables interesting enough that he experimented with it, making a harness so that these “jumpers” can be held in proper physical orientation to each other so as to perform optimally.

Toward the end of the assessment period, before finalizing this article, I swapped out the Series 1 SPTPC (blue) 30” speaker cables for equivalent Series 2 cables. They were being used with the Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra Amplifiers powering the PAP Trio15 Coaxial10 Speakers. I was not expecting the degree of change brought by upgrading only half of the cables involved, the other half being the Series 2 TPC (red) 30” cables being used for the concentric driver. The only variable that had changed was the geometry and gauge of the cable. The enhancement was such that the entire speaker seemed reworked, improved. Resolution of the lower end now matched precisely that of the upper end. The speaker seemed tightened in terms of coherence, though I had not thought it was lacking previously. Pieces of music that involve live performances had more jump factor and palpability than when the Series 1 cables were employed. I am quite pleased that swapping this one set of 30” cables brought such a sea change to the system!

Iconoclast identifies any speaker wire larger than 4’ as a speaker cable and any shorter as a jumper. It is not meant to be a matter of debate but, rather, identification for ordering their product. Bob Howard, head of sales, shared with me the following: “The term ‘jumpers’ as we use it is associated with ‘sets’ (4) of individual polarities that have no outer jacket. Jumpers are usually 8” to 13” in length.” Indeed, the original jumpers I used were naked, without the beautiful outer jacket. Iconoclast ideally wants all customers to use their cables with the outer jacket as it is part of the design to ensure the proper physical relationship of the conductors. Thus, as soon as the company was able, the naked 20” jumpers were switched for ones with full construction as short speaker cables.

The post Iconoclast by Belden Series 2 speaker cables Review appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

Aspen Acoustics Grand Aspen speakers Review, Part 2 – conclusion

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

The range of hybrid speaker products

For many years I asked Bruce Thigpen of Eminent Technology to make a bigger, more capable version of the LFT-8B, which would have been a terrific affordable solution for persons seeking a bigger slice of hybrid sound. Prior to reviewing I had owned the Vandersteen 2C followed by the Magnepan 1.6QR. I thought it would be great to have a speaker with a mix of those transducers’ attributes. The Eminent Technology LFT-8, which I wrote about the conversion in the field from the A version to the B version, captured what I saw as the best performance characteristics of both, and I was pulled toward ownership of it. The Eminent hybrid was my first, and I have been drawn toward hybrid speakers ever since. As I listen to the Grand Aspen, it strikes me that apart from having two towers per channel, this design is not foreign to what Eminent Technology might have produced, albeit likely with magnetic planar midrange and tweeter drivers. There is magic in the dynamic/dipole hybrid design when it is well done.

I heard the largest MartinLogan hybrid, the Neolith, at a show a few years ago, but for the price my initial impression was that it wasn’t particularly nuanced. That may have been partly due to the use of MacIntosh electronics and aggressive demo music that may have occluded a more refined character. It is difficult to make a hard, final determination of a speaker’s capabilities apart from use in one’s room. A demo either weakens or reinforces the desire to have an in-home session, but it is insufficient to make a final judgment of the speaker unless preferences preclude it as desirable. Those preferences should be discussed rather than the speaker being labeled as poor.

How, then can I discuss knowledgeably the Grand Aspen’s performance in an absolute sense in comparison to the Neolith if I haven’t had the latter speaker in my home? I cannot, and neither could anyone else. One can discuss the impact of specifications and the listening impressions and can even speculate about comparison as I sometimes do. But such should not be taken as a head-to-head comparison. Readers of reviews get into trouble when they hold a writer’s listening impressions as equivalent to direct comparisons. I make generalized comments about where I think the Grand Aspen would fall in terms of comparative sound between it and larger, more costly speakers; from my extended experience in the industry, I believe my generalizations are correct. Readers will determine whether they agree. It is tempting to give the performance nod to the Grand Aspen simply because the Neolith sports a $119K price tag, however, proper assessment of a speaker’s absolute performance is not relative to the price until one becomes a buyer. When discussing performance, I attempt to ignore price until such time as the speaker is to be considered as a good or poor value. If value is the predominant criteria by which a speaker’s performance is judged, then the assessment of performance is likely skewed in favor of the speaker considered the better value.

Revelatory experience

As I sit in front of the Grand Aspen, I struggle to process the reality of the situation. Scott made the ribbon drivers from scratch. I have used the Accuton driver previously and thought I knew its limits. I have used and heard demos of many fine panel speakers, the most recognized from Sound Lab and Magnepan. I have my King Sound King III electrostatic speakers and the Legacy Audio Whisper DSW Clarity Edition dynamic/ribbon hybrid speakers sitting in the other room. What do I hear? I hear a cleaner, more robust, tonally richer midrange and treble from the Grand Aspen than these others. The performance is simply better, and not by a little bit. The ribbon driverssurpass the performance of panel and hybrid speakers in the same price range that havemass-fabricated drivers.Evidently, Scott makes a superior ribbon driver by hand in his garage that plays with more panache thansome mass-produced ones. The conclusion is striking, that mass producing drivers does not assure superior sound quality!

I would not take my last comment to read that all craft and DIY speaker drivers are superior to all mass-produced drivers. One must simply compare to know. In my quest for SOTA sound, my willingness to take a risk, to invest in an unknown designer and builder is paying dividends. I have spent a reasonable amount of time at shows and dealers in front of upper end offerings from JM Labs, Wilson, Magnepan, Vivid, Tidal (note that these are not hybrid speakers) — name a dozen other prestigious brands’ big boy speakers in quarter to half million-dollar systems—and the overwhelming impression I have regarding the Grand Aspen is that it would not be out of place beside them. It may not outperform them, but neither would it be embarrassed by them.

I have reached that assessment after only one iteration on the system, biwiring the tweeter and midrange ribbons. I worked with the PureAudioProject Quintet15, Legacy Audio Whisper DSW Clarity Edition, and King Sound King III relentlessly to improve them, and they have not reached this level of realism.I have heard them with the same amps and source, the Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra and the Small Green Computer sonicTransporter with the COS D1 DAC +Pre-Amplifier. They have also been assessed with the same cables I now use as my reference, Iconoclast Cable’s top interconnects and speaker cables.

Years ago, it spun my audiophile world around to discover that the way to a superior system is not through break in but through aggressive changes made to a system in experimentation to find the best combination of gear. It spins my head around now to experience that a speaker made by a high school physics teacher, with home-made drivers and crossovers, is outperforming these other late model ribbon and dipole designs! If you doubt it simply because I am a reviewer or you cannot conceive of such a result, feel free to buy a popular, high value speaker. Rub your wallet every time you listen, and you will be happy.

The post Aspen Acoustics Grand Aspen speakers Review, Part 2 – conclusion appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

Aspen Acoustics Grand Aspen speakers Review, Part 2 – conclusion

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

The range of hybrid speaker products

For many years I asked Bruce Thigpen of Eminent Technology to make a bigger, more capable version of the LFT-8B, which would have been a terrific affordable solution for persons seeking a bigger slice of hybrid sound. Prior to reviewing I had owned the Vandersteen 2C followed by the Magnepan 1.6QR. I thought it would be great to have a speaker with a mix of those transducers’ attributes. The Eminent Technology LFT-8, which I wrote about the conversion in the field from the A version to the B version, captured what I saw as the best performance characteristics of both, and I was pulled toward ownership of it. The Eminent hybrid was my first, and I have been drawn toward hybrid speakers ever since. As I listen to the Grand Aspen, it strikes me that apart from having two towers per channel, this design is not foreign to what Eminent Technology might have produced, albeit likely with magnetic planar midrange and tweeter drivers. There is magic in the dynamic/dipole hybrid design when it is well done.

I heard the largest MartinLogan hybrid, the Neolith, at a show a few years ago, but for the price my initial impression was that it wasn’t particularly nuanced. That may have been partly due to the use of MacIntosh electronics and aggressive demo music that may have occluded a more refined character. It is difficult to make a hard, final determination of a speaker’s capabilities apart from use in one’s room. A demo either weakens or reinforces the desire to have an in-home session, but it is insufficient to make a final judgment of the speaker unless preferences preclude it as desirable. Those preferences should be discussed rather than the speaker being labeled as poor.

How, then can I discuss knowledgeably the Grand Aspen’s performance in an absolute sense in comparison to the Neolith if I haven’t had the latter speaker in my home? I cannot, and neither could anyone else. One can discuss the impact of specifications and the listening impressions and can even speculate about comparison as I sometimes do. But such should not be taken as a head-to-head comparison. Readers of reviews get into trouble when they hold a writer’s listening impressions as equivalent to direct comparisons. I make generalized comments about where I think the Grand Aspen would fall in terms of comparative sound between it and larger, more costly speakers; from my extended experience in the industry, I believe my generalizations are correct. Readers will determine whether they agree. It is tempting to give the performance nod to the Grand Aspen simply because the Neolith sports a $119K price tag, however, proper assessment of a speaker’s absolute performance is not relative to the price until one becomes a buyer. When discussing performance, I attempt to ignore price until such time as the speaker is to be considered as a good or poor value. If value is the predominant criteria by which a speaker’s performance is judged, then the assessment of performance is likely skewed in favor of the speaker considered the better value.

Revelatory experience

As I sit in front of the Grand Aspen, I struggle to process the reality of the situation. Scott made the ribbon drivers from scratch. I have used the Accuton driver previously and thought I knew its limits. I have used and heard demos of many fine panel speakers, the most recognized from Sound Lab and Magnepan. I have my King Sound King III electrostatic speakers and the Legacy Audio Whisper DSW Clarity Edition dynamic/ribbon hybrid speakers sitting in the other room. What do I hear? I hear a cleaner, more robust, tonally richer midrange and treble from the Grand Aspen than these others. The performance is simply better, and not by a little bit. The ribbon driverssurpass the performance of panel and hybrid speakers in the same price range that havemass-fabricated drivers.Evidently, Scott makes a superior ribbon driver by hand in his garage that plays with more panache thansome mass-produced ones. The conclusion is striking, that mass producing drivers does not assure superior sound quality!

I would not take my last comment to read that all craft and DIY speaker drivers are superior to all mass-produced drivers. One must simply compare to know. In my quest for SOTA sound, my willingness to take a risk, to invest in an unknown designer and builder is paying dividends. I have spent a reasonable amount of time at shows and dealers in front of upper end offerings from JM Labs, Wilson, Magnepan, Vivid, Tidal (note that these are not hybrid speakers) — name a dozen other prestigious brands’ big boy speakers in quarter to half million-dollar systems—and the overwhelming impression I have regarding the Grand Aspen is that it would not be out of place beside them. It may not outperform them, but neither would it be embarrassed by them.

I have reached that assessment after only one iteration on the system, biwiring the tweeter and midrange ribbons. I worked with the PureAudioProject Quintet15, Legacy Audio Whisper DSW Clarity Edition, and King Sound King III relentlessly to improve them, and they have not reached this level of realism.I have heard them with the same amps and source, the Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra and the Small Green Computer sonicTransporter with the COS D1 DAC +Pre-Amplifier. They have also been assessed with the same cables I now use as my reference, Iconoclast Cable’s top interconnects and speaker cables.

Years ago, it spun my audiophile world around to discover that the way to a superior system is not through break in but through aggressive changes made to a system in experimentation to find the best combination of gear. It spins my head around now to experience that a speaker made by a high school physics teacher, with home-made drivers and crossovers, is outperforming these other late model ribbon and dipole designs! If you doubt it simply because I am a reviewer or you cannot conceive of such a result, feel free to buy a popular, high value speaker. Rub your wallet every time you listen, and you will be happy.

The post Aspen Acoustics Grand Aspen speakers Review, Part 2 – conclusion appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

Aspen Acoustics Grand Aspen speakers Review, Part 1 of 2

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

Note to reader: As I have invested time in reviewing the  Aspen Acoustics Lagrange L5 MkII published at Dagogo.com and the speaker under consideration here is a new model built using the same principles, I will not be revisiting previously discussed background of Scott Kindt, Aspen Acoustics owner and designer, or my discussion of DLT (Disproportionately Large Tweeter) design in speakers. For those curious about these aspects of Aspen Acoustics speakers, I suggest you read the Lagrange L5 MkII review.

Free from physical risk but exposed to the fiscal risk associated with our hobby, the deeper I go into exploring different genres of audio systems, like a caver pushing deeper into great cave systems, the more unnerving and potentially costly it gets. The hobbyist who is after the ultimate sound had best not obsess about the cost, because there are constant discoveries that reveal the expensive toy that one purchased can be bested by some new product.

There will be some reading this who have spent a boatload on speakers. If you don’t want discomfiting information, perhaps you should turn away because you may be a bit unsettled by what follows. The Lord knows that sometimes I’m disturbed at the discoveries I make in this hobby. Am I suggesting that the company Aspen Acoustics is disturbing to me? Not at all! It’s a delightful craft speaker company, one well worth discussing, especially now that the magnum opus, the Grand Aspen, is shaping up for production.

What can be disturbing about handling a variety of cool products and building lots of wonderful sounding rigs? My experience is mostly a kid-in-a-candy-store experience, until something shows up that sonically trounces the expensive item I recently bought. Ouch! Frankly, one of the reasons I work with several genres of speakers is because, by shifting them about, I can assuage the pain over a new product’s superior performance.

In the interim between my first Aspen Acoustics review of the Lagrange L5 MkII I upgraded to a pre-production model now called the Capella (formerly Lagrange L1 MkII). Even as a prototype, I heard things that I considered characteristic of larger statement speakers but at an uncharacteristically low price. I decided to put skin in the game by purchasing it, with the generous assurance of Scott that he would replace it with the production version. He was true to his word and brought the Grand Aspen to my home a few months ago. To my delight the Capella has not been tweaked but retooled and as the Grand Aspen stands head and shoulders above the previous design. I hereby present my owner’s review. As I have said previously when writing an owner’s review, take it with whatever sized grain of salt you wish. Though I am excited about the Grand Aspen for several reasons regarding its design and performance, I will attempt to not gloss over the realities of such a craft speaker.

Before you proceed to read this article, know that I consider the Grand Aspen to have performance beyond practically all speakers I have previously used and reviewed. Many of you read about them and purchased them. I make no apologies for that, as I cannot predict the future, nor presage products yet to be reviewed or their relative performance. If you are an explorer, or have an insatiable desire to go deeper, to experience something more extreme, but not at the cost of an arm and a leg, then you should hang with me on this exploration.

 

Unnerving experience

Perhaps disturbing is not a term used by most audiophiles to describe their experiences listening. However, as a system builder who is chasing a hypothetical ideal, it is an appropriate description. How would you feel if you had spent $10K on a particular speaker system and because of your affiliation with the industry you could bring in any number of other speaker systems. You might think it’s a gift from Heaven, until another speaker system handily outperforms the one you paid for. Now you are confronted with the reality that you settled on lesser performance, you know it absolutely, and if you wish to switch it means additional expense. I am well aware that this is a most blessed and self-inflicted condition.

Perhaps a more uncomfortable revelation from building so many rigs is discovery that there is as much variance in sound quality attributable to a manufacturer’s choice of technology employed as to the quality of design and assembly. Consider the recently introduced PS Audio FR30 statement speaker; as a dipole speaker fan and someone who enjoys magnetic planar technology, it is of some importance that I want to have a good, long listen. I wish to form an initial impression of its 10” planar magnetic midrange as it is distinctly different from the 2” x 30” magnetic ribbon midrange in the Grand Aspen. I am aware that indirect comparison yields little more than an impression and that a formal comparison is more valuable. Yet, the FR30 is presented as a statement speaker. What if, after extended listening, I leave with the impression that the larger ribbon midrange of the Grand Aspen outperforms the FR30’s 10” magnetic planar midrange? What prevents the unknown speaker with the unusual configuration and drivers from giving a strong impression that it has outperformed a statement speaker? We see another potentially disturbing aspect of this hobby!

 

Assaulting the giant of presupposition

Statement, bespoke, state-of-the-art — these are the terms found in HiFi magazines meant to assure you that you are contemplating and hopefully going to purchase the very best. A problem arises when a speaker that none of these appellations have been applied to sounds better. It can be a crisis when the much lower cost speaker you are hearing is manifestly superior to the many higher profile speakers you have owned or heard in several, if not all, respects. I do not refer here to the FR30, as I have not heard it in my room. I will be discussing comparisons of the Grand Aspen to speakers I have used personally, particularly the ones that I currently use.

Audiophiles are groomed to believe the best sound comes from designs put forth by established companies. Higher profile companies work to cultivate a reputation of unassailable sound. I have always been uneasy with the presumption that pedigree assures the best sound. There are times when, in my system building, I have an experience that calls that presumption into question, if not entirely, then partially.

Allow me to present an observation tangentially by questioning an audiophile conventional wisdom, the assertion that the music lives in the midrange, that it is the most important part of the frequency spectrum. I disagree and assert that such a viewpoint creates a false dichotomy in terms of performance, which can lead to purchase and system setup decisions yielding poorer performance. The recent, potentially disruptive experience, I have had involves the midrange performance of the Grand Aspen. In several systems with other higher profile speakers and in extended listening, the Grand Aspen’s unusual midrange combination of a handmade 2” x 30” magnetic ribbon driver in tandem with a 6” Accuton midrange driver has outperformed the midrange of all previously owned and reviewed speakers, except for the Legacy Audio Valor Speaker System, an $86K product.

How can that be? I presume 45% of the readership will dismiss my claim and another 45% will wonder. Perhaps 10% of persons reading this will believe me based on familiarity with my previous work and concluding I have credibility in such observations. The answer as to how such a result could occur might involve surface area of the midrange. There seems to be a correlation between cone driver surface area and a more mature, relaxed bass response. Perhaps for superior midrange performance the surface area is an essential attribute allowing one to sound better than another. It has been borne out in my comparisons of dynamic midrange drivers, as speakers with more total midrange driver surface area sound more appealing to me. I tend to care less for speakers with midrange drivers under 6”. Perhaps that effect also holds across technologies and a larger ribbon midrange holds great appeal to me. It is something I will explore going forward. I suspect that makers, sellers, and users of larger midrange drivers would generally agree, while those endorsing other forms would adamantly disagree. Whether they agree or not is of not much concern to me, as my impression is based mostly on direct comparisons of speakers.

A hobbyist for whom coherence is everything might retort that midrange produced bya ribbon in conjunction with a ceramic cone, as in the Grand Aspen, cannot sound good. If apoint source launch of the midrange is one’s sine qua non, I agree. Case in point, the pair of PureAudioProject Trio15 10” Coaxial Speakers I outfitted with upgraded Mundorf Evo oil-filled caps has a tightly focused center image. The Grand Aspen’s center image is not as compact. However, it has a smoother and more generously appointed center image. The Grand Aspen’s midrange shows greater development toward a realistic image of the performer than either dynamic or panel speakers I have used. When I first encountered the Lagrange L5 model, I suspected there was something special about the DLT arrangement — Disproportionally Large Tweeter (my term) — and my suspicions are being upheld as the speaker design is developed.

For coherence fans objecting in principle to the dual hybrid midrange driver arrangement of the Grand Aspen, the output of the 2” ribbon midrange can be adjusted relative to the Accuton ceramic driver, which has a fixed output tied to the preamp’s listening level. The locus of midrange can be shifted to reside at the Accuton driver, the 2” ribbon driver, or somewhere equidistant! As I have experimented with maneuvering the midrange, I have preferred the output of the ribbon driver as evidently higher than the Accuton driver such that the density and tightness of the center image, as well as the ribbon’s superb cleanness, is highlighted.

Statements as above, about preferring the Grand Aspen’s midrange, can be like nitroglycerine: highly volatile. A fraction of readers will be convinced I am playing reviewer games and am lying. No, I am not. Here would be a lie; protecting the seemingly unassailable reputation of higher profile speakers, because one never knows when the desire to review one of theirs might surface, at the expense of the Grand Aspen’s performance, downplaying the novel, unknown speaker in order to protect my interests as well as those of higher profile speaker makers.The problem would become more acute if the Grand Aspen happened to assert itself in other parameters of performance. Technological leadership in manufacturing speakers changes over time, and companies that have been regurgitating the same thing essentially unchanged over decades are evidently not that hard to beat by an enterprising upstart. Leadership in terms of sales of units is not necessarily linked to leadership in terms of performance. Evidently, an upstart such as Aspen Acoustics can outperform, but it can take a while before the community comes to believe it and the company captures increasing sales.

The post Aspen Acoustics Grand Aspen speakers Review, Part 1 of 2 appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

Perlisten Interview

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

The following is an interview of Perlisten CEO and Co-founder Dan Roemer.

I see on the website the brief bios for Dan and Lars. Are there others deserving particular mention in association with the success of Perlisten?

Erik Wiederholtz, Stephen Mascenik and Peter Yang also are partners of Perlisten

The company timeline mentions a “high end manufacturing group.” Which manufacturing group is making Perlisten speakers?

Perlisten has its own manufacturing group near Dongguan City, China. Including transducers, crossovers, amplifiers, cabinets, painting, veneers, final assembly, and quality assurance.

When and how did Perlisten begin and what is the significance of the term perceptual in the name? What does that denote? What was the event that led to the formation of the company?

Perlisten = Perceptual Listening Experience. After all of the research hours, engineering, and manufacturing, what ultimately matters is enjoying the experience. The emotional connection to the art. We always want to keep this in perspective.

Please describe the target customer for Perlisten products.

I often describe audio reproduction as peeling layers back. Each layer reveals another level of performance and realism. This is our pursuit, and I see our customers as those who are very interested in seeking the highest levels of performance and enjoyment.

In regard to designing, what is Cosmol acoustic modeling? Please explain its advantages.

The technologies that Perlisten has developed are rather complex and, in fact, simply could not be realized just a few years ago. This is where the multi-physics modeling becomes an essential part of the development chain. We are able to consider new ideas and test them first in our models, then refine them to the point we are confident we can begin development. This is how we developed the DPC array incorporating multiple radiating surfaces in a complex 3D geometry. The benefit we achieved was a very unique way to control the wavefront. So the benefits are two-fold: 1) pursuing new ideas and 2) development time.

There is no description of the crossovers used inside Perlisten products. Please discuss the nature and parts caliber of Perlisten crossovers. Please use the S7 as an example.

The crossovers are a critical part of the whole speaker ‘array.’ Perlisten’s philosophy is to start with establishing the desired family of curves to deliver the sensitivity, bandwidth, power response, on- and off-axis directivity, etc., that we want —we’ve spent many years creating and establishing these targets. This requires the crossover to be used in somewhat of a non-traditional sense —overlapping bandwidths and varying slopes among other things. The result is a rather complex crossover, but very consistent and desirable results. We dictate 1% tolerance on the inductors and 2% on the remainder. We then pair match speakers to within 0.5dB. Air core inductors are used throughout the S7t. Metallized polypropylene film capacitors are used exclusively on the mid and tweeter networks, with metallized polyester on the woofers. Aluminum encased, non-inductive resistors are used throughout.

S7t woofer PCBA

S7t Mid/Tweeter Crossover PCBA

I believe that Dan Roemer said the software for the subwoofers is proprietary. Please discuss the development of the software for the subwoofers and what makes it more advantageous than a typical sub with standard controls.

Correct, the software was written by Stephen Mascenik. Because the amplifier and software are both developed by Perlisten, this allows us to control things unlike any other company that I am aware of. It all starts by developing intelligence into the amp —many, many criteria are monitored by the onboard processor (ARM Cortex-M3) and then we have spent years developing algorithms for how to handle this and adapt in real time. Some examples of this include signal input vs output, limiters, ac line voltage, amp temperature, etc.

The Datasheet for the D212s includes “multiple aluminum shorting rings” and “lightweight aluminum voice coil wire.” I am surprised to see aluminum used as a voice coil wire. Please explain how that can be in a premium subwoofer.

Every driver design is unique and designed from the ground up, but similar to the speakers it is the end goal of in-room performance where we start. Specifically, for the D212s a rather large +/-30mm linear excursion is required along with our target of very low moving mass and low inductance. This, as well as using 3 kilowatts. Managing all of this can be quite difficult —for example, simply increasing the voice coil windings will achieve large linear excursion, but the trade-off would be a very heavy mass and large inductance and possibly not meeting our power handling requirements. So in the end, utilizing aluminum wire (~1/3 the density of copper) allowed for higher linear travel and higher power handling (larger diameter wire for same resistance). Inductance is mitigated by the use of shorting rings. Then of course we optimize the motor – Bl(x), Le(x), Le(i), etc. to ensure linearity, stability and low distortion.

In Layman’s terms please explain what Klippel measurements are and their contribution to the design.

Klippel measurements are used to refine designs — both individual components and complete woofer/enclosure systems. The laser measurement system provides insight into various distortion mechanisms. As one example, at the engineering level this allows you to dial in the position of the voice coil for best performance (low distortion). The same can be said for the suspension components. Consider the design flow:

Initial designàFEA models àprototype samples àmeasurements (including Klippel) àrefine design and samples àverification measurements

By adding tools like Klippel and other measurements we are able to refine the design more and more (peeling the layers back).

The S7t has an open bottom with two generous ports. Explain Perlisten’s philosophy in regard to determining whether the ports should be left open or plugged.

Leaving the ports open will allow the S7t to play the lowest of frequencies.This is the desirable configuration for 2-channel full range without subwoofers. However, when using a sub(s) there maybe occasions where adding the plugs will be beneficial. The plugs create sealed box response and somewhat limit extreme LF output from the S7t. This may aid in blending a subwoofer to the mains.

Which company makes the carbon fiber woofers and mid/tweeters for Perlisten?

Our development partner was Textreme (now Composite Sound) located in Sweden but manufactured near Chicago, IL. We bring the formed diaphragms to our factory where the surrounds are attached and the final transducer assembly is made.

Composite Sound – Engineered Speaker Cones and Diaphragms – Composite Sound (composite-sound.com)???

Were grills placed on the midrange/tweeter drivers in order to protect them? Is there a reason related to sound quality why they are used? Can they be removed optionally?

The 28mm mids flanking the central tweeter dome are a part of the DPC array, which uses three transducers superimposed on a waveguide. In this case the grilles and their perforations are part of the waveguide geometry. This was a research project within the research project. In short, if the grilles are removed, the waveguide geometry is compromised.

The subwoofers use an unusual configuration of being in 90-degree opposition to each other. Please explain the reason that was chosen and the benefits.

The D212s uses a push-pull configuration where one driver is ‘flipped’ relative to the other. This creates a natural cancellation of asymmetries within the drivers (even after all the work to optimize the driver). In the case of the D212s we measured up to 10dB additional reduction of even-order harmonic distortion!

Please describe the DPC-Array. Evidently it is not the carbon fiber drivers, as the R Series also utilizes DPC-Array.

The DPC array is the combination of various transducers superimposed on a waveguide. This allows for specific horizontal and vertical dispersion control, higher power handling, lower distortion and wider useable bandwidth. This technology is patent pending. Our R-series speakers use the same technology with different transducers and geometry.

Is there an atypical sharing/overlap of the frequency spectrum by the mid/bass drivers and the mid-treble drivers? Is this extended from what would be expected of traditional driver integration, that is, does the operational band of these drivers overlap more than would be expected of more traditional designs?

Correct. This offers insight into how we control vertical dispersion to lower frequencies.

Is Textreme a brand name? What is its significance to the thin ply carbon fiber drivers?

Yes. TPCD allows the model response of the diaphragm to be optimized for each design (control of breakup modes). Additionally, Textreme typically is lighter than traditional carbon fiber diaphragms.

The website discusses a “timbre matching technique.” What is that timbre matching technique? What is involved in the timbre matching technique beyond construction of the drivers with Textreme and the waveguide?

Perlisten’s philosophy on timbre matching goes beyond simply using the same drivers. We look at the whole family of curves on axis and off. Vertical vs horizontal as well. Then once the desired result was achieved and confirmed by listening tests, we rolled this ‘sonic signature’ into the various sibling models. The first model was the S7t, then came the S5m, S4b, S5t, etc. The differences then between models are more related to sensitivity and LF extension.

Are the midrange carbon fiber drivers compression drivers? Wave guides are critical for compression drivers. Is that why they are placed into the waveguide?

Horn and waveguide essentially are describing the same thing —controlling the wavefront. The S7t combines multiple transducers with a waveguide without using compression. A compression driver/transducer is a completely separate category and comes with its own set of trade-offs.

When you were here for setup, I recall being told that HDF (High Density Fiberboard) is used for the cabinet. What else is done to the cabinet to dampen vibrations?

Yes, HDF throughout. We do several braces vertically and horizontally as well as adding layers of bitumen damping material to the interior surfaces in several locations.

Please explain the advantages of the combination of the midrange’s lower frequency crossover point as well as small size. One might think that the smaller size might produce more noticeable beaming, or the use of two drivers might cause comb effect. How do the twin midranges work without conflicting?

In fact, all 3x 28mm domes play together from approximately 1.1kHz (-10dB) where the wavelengths are large enough.The advantages are higher sensitivity, power handling, reduced thermal compression, and of course this allows for directivity control and beamforming. The beamforming is created by these drivers’ relative positioning as well as the amplitude and phase handled by the crossovers.

 

Copy editor: Dan Rubin

The post Perlisten Interview appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

Perlisten S7t tower speakers and D212s subwoofers Review

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

From the author: In a bid to lessen the inordinate amount of time spent on development of reviews, I have determined to alter their format. For the past 14 years I have typically conducted technically inclined interviews and woven into the articles the information gleaned. Now, in order to save keystrokes and allow you to hear directly from the manufacturer, I will have less of that information infused into the article and attach the Interview. Thorough readers will gain a similar amount of insight as with my prior style of article. You will notice that in my Interview some questions are not answered, typically because the company feels the information is proprietary.

 

Perfect listening is what the audiophile wants. Perceptual listening is what Perlisten offers. There is a gap between them, but that gap has been closed to a great degree over the decades. Companies vary in their ability to reach listening perfection. Considering the variables and constraints placed upon manufacturing high-end two-channel audio systems, the conceptualization and execution of speakers and subwoofers by Perlisten are extraordinary.

 

Aesthetics and quality are important to high end listeners, and so is a good deal

I have always been able to find products that perform well and look good doing so. I have fond memories of the Pathos Classic One MkIII, the Vapor Audio Nimbus White, and the Kingsound King III electrostatic speakers, which I am currently enjoying. I prefer to have both killer sound and killer looks. The Perlisten products have that very high end appearance that smacks of big money and premium sound. Thankfully, they do not disappoint in either respect.

Back when I was a Chintziphile, I thought I could get extreme sound on the cheap. I couldn’t, and you can’t. It’s a fool’s game to pile up budget gear in the wish that it will yield exceptional performance. Audio performance is on a spectrum and companies gain a reputation as typically offering a certain level of value to performance. The Chintziphile dismisses anything that is deemed expensive as having diminishing returns. If that applies to you, then you may as well stop reading because you likely will not appreciate what Perlisten Audio offers. Those who understand that a certain level of money expenditure is necessary to achieve superior sound, I adjure that Perlisten is giving exceptional value while seemingly cutting no corners in terms of quality. The experience of reviewing Perlisten products has the feel of handling premium wares versus ones that are merely good values.

The cabinet construction, selection of veneer, and detail work, such as the quality of the stands, fit, and finish are all first rate. This company is not a scheme to get rich by peddling pricey items with questionable engineering or build quality. Evidently, there has been a lot of time and some big money put into development of these products and, like Apple products, manufacturer costs have been reduced by building in China. If you hate that, buy holistically North American products. Given the novelty of the DPC-Array and the unique features of the D212s subwoofer, you will find that the average speakers will not have the technology discussed in this review. I am interested in high end performance; I support companies globally that bring it, and I do not engage in political proselytizing in reviews. Seemingly ever-escalating brinksmanship is one reason I ceased participation in online forums.

Regarding the S7t, I appreciate the HDF (High Density Fiberboard) and well-braced cabinets, as well as the high gloss finish. Also notable are the robust, long binding posts, which seem easier to torque than most. As to overall appearance, the grills — I hate grills of all sorts when it comes to sound quality, but see the interview responses — combined with the diminutive midrange complement make the speaker more visually appealing. I suspect many sets of Perlisten speakers will enter homes with partners picky about décor. The D212s subwoofer is uncommonly svelte, with an understated matte black finish, contoured edges, and racing vents. Actually, they are not racing vents, as they allow for air flow for the push-pull action of the 12” drivers.

 

Personal delivery

As Perlisten’s headquarters is located close enough to my home, following a favorable listening impression at AXPONA 2022 and discussion with Dan Roemer (CEO and Co-Founder) and Erik Weiderholtz, who is also a partner, these two delivered the first pair of S7t Speakers made and a pair of D212s to my home.

Dan and Erik wrestled with the oversized containers but found some relief due to the slider-footers built into the subwoofer boxes to ease moving the beautiful monsters. The partners unable to be in attendance are Lars Johansen (CSO) who brought his subwoofer development experience from M&K, Stephen Mascenik, who wrote the software for these very active subwoofers, and Peter Yang.

With their excellent build quality, excepting long-term assessment of operation, which is not possible in a short-term review, I put these Perlisten products further along the value to performance spectrum than the bulk of competitively priced products. At about $30K for the set, this is not budget audio, but is atypically upscale in every respect. This is a premium product and at a price point I would not expect for the result. I place the sonic signature, the quality and character, closer to the Magico and YG Acoustics, and Gamut speakers of the world, not Salk, Daedalus, or Audio Note speakers, as nice as they are.

The Perlisten experience brings a very tidy high-tech package with no muss, no fuss. That “no muss” applies to the sound as well. I was able to gauge the degree to which the D212s settings enhanced the blending of the subs by conveniently controlling them from my chair through the Perlisten software app. Switching between engaging and defeating the PEQ settings, more about them in the Interview answers, I was informed as to the contouring being done in addressing integration with the S7t and the room. The joining of the S7t and the D212s became more thorough as the PEQ settings were employed.

I did find similar tightness, or superior blending, of the D212s occurring with other speaker systems. As well as the S7t, I also used the Wharfedale Opus 2-M2 monitors, the Kingsound King III electrostatic speakers, the Legacy Audio Whisper DSW Clarity Edition speakers, and the PureAudioProject Trio15 10” Coaxial Speakers. In every instance, considering the Whisper being used in passive crossover mode, not with the full Wavelet system, these passive speakers mated more tightly, seamlessly, than with the Legacy Audio XTREME XD. The configurability of the D212s allowed me to address each speaker’s idiosyncrasies via this subwoofer’s suite of controls, bringing a new best result with each speaker.

For that reason, I hold the D212s to be my favorite of these two products. That in no way shows lack of love for the S7t! It’s terrific and out competes all of these in terms of a pristine or crystalline presentation. It may be surprising to some, but among the others used in comparison, the speaker that is most like the S7t is the PureAudioProject Trio15 10” Coaxial! Before PureAudioProject fans become too excited, I have some moderating news. They won’t typically get the same effect as the S7t. That is because the design of the DPC-Array is similar to my Landscape Orientation setup but even more fantastically refined. In keeping with my propensity to explore, I have lofted the PAP Trio15 10” Coaxial speakers onto custom Sound Anchor stands to orient them horizontally, as I have with several other speakers. Even though the 10” is a coaxial driver, by orienting the bass drivers horizontally, they fill in the soundstage in that fashion. Users of the PAP Trio15 or Quintet15 Horn1 will capture a soundstage more akin to the S7t, however, these speakers do not have the information retrieval capabilities, the sheer cleanness with super-high resolution, that the S7t carries.

That is one of the secrets of the Perlisten experience that became evident to me early on. It’s essentially a Landscape Orientation speaker system. Some industry members laughed at me when I described or showed them how I was experimenting with Landscape Orientation, taking speakers like the Daedalus Ulysses, Magnepan .6, or various iterations of the PAP line, and lofting and rotating them to achieve the stretched soundstage. However, most were authentically interested or encouraging. Now look: Perlisten is using a waveguide to emphasize the horizontal dispersion — Landscape. It works extremely well and has a unique appeal. It successfully yields the properties of a Landscape Orientation system, but retains the appearance of a Portrait speaker system, and so will not offend the status quo or aesthetic sensibilities of family members.

 

Technical discussion

A Representative System:

Small Green Computer sonicTransporter and SONORE Signature Rendu SE with systemOptique (see also Update)

Clarity Cable Supernatural USB 1m

(In various configurations) COS Engineering D1 DAC + Pre-Amplifier; Exogal Comet with PLUS Power Supply; Eastern Electric Minimax Tube DAC Supreme

Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra Amplifier (in various configurations from 2 channels bi-wired through to six channels)

All cabling Iconoclast Cables and all power cords Iconoclast BAV Power Cords

Speakers vary as discussed in article

In assessment of the S7t and D212s I built in excess of one dozen systems with four other speakers in comparison. I would sprinkle technical discussion of review products throughout the article under the old format, but with my format change henceforth I will confine exploration of most of them to this section.

Perlisten is all about arrays as the S7t sports two distinctly different arrays. The technical aspects of the DPC-Array and its relationship to the crossovers are covered with more detail in the separate interview article.

Perhaps the three 28mm drivers should be referred to individually as a tweeter and a pair of tweeter/mid drivers. Perlisten has kept such things as crossover points and slopes close to the vest, but I presume the operating range of the diminutive tweeter-sized flanking drivers is severely restricted in low output. Given the S7t’s frequency response starts falling off quickly at 80Hz, I wonder if its 7″ drivers rise higher up than normal into the upper midrange to facilitate coupling with the tiny tweet/mids. Extending the crossover region, or as Dan says, “overlapping bandwidths and varying slopes,” seemingly over larger ranges does not seem to harm the resolution and does seem to address weak points in crossovers between drivers. By that I’m referring to idiosyncrasies associated with steeper slopes.

Wouldn’t classic speaker design consider such things heresy, to result in a mess? I’ve never been shackled to convention in terms of speakers, so the novelty of odd-sized midrange drivers and extended crossover ranges does not particularly bother me, especially when I hear what it does. It sounds better overall than most conventionally designed speakers I have used. Score a point for Perlisten with their extended design and measurements to make such a system work!

With the exception of what I hear from the novel DPC-Array, the older I get the less I like line arrays and arrays in general. I’m starting to get quite sensitive to the multiplicity of wave launches from grouping identical drivers. I can see why some audiophiles are coherence diehards, being willing to accept shallower bass for a tighter wave launch. Thankfully, the DPC-Array displays very low evidence of the use of multiple drivers. The DPC-Array is tight enough and uses the same sized drivers such that driver coherence is a nonissue in their range.

As for the grouped 7” bass drivers, which appear conventional in terms of placement, when using the S7t alone one hears the multiplicity of drivers, which cannot be avoided given the design. In terms of bass extension and output Perlisten seeks to obtain the best anechoic response whereas many towers with larger woofers couple with the room more to produce an additional several dB in the lowest frequencies when measured as in-room response. Perlisten’s towers are not designed to emphasize that room-coupled, reinforced bass. Often such reinforced bass is not all that pretty and can mask much of the midrange and treble performance. That is not a danger with the S7t when used in a reasonable sized room. My room is 13’x23’x7.5’ and the speakers sat respectively at a point centered at 6’ 8” from the front wall and 37” from the side walls. The distance between them was 78”, and they were 8’3” from the listening seat. The speakers were toed in to be aligned a bit wide of the ears. This is one of several configurations I use with various speakers. I do not have only one setup and positioning for speakers, but move them about liberally with varying systems, sometimes moving them as much as 2’ from their original position. In the case of the S7t I did not move them about as they were optimized with the subwoofers at this location.

Typically, a company will advertise their bass performance with specs showing the lowest frequency at a standard measurement. An example would be the Salk Audio SS 9.5 Speakers, which measure on the low end 25Hz +/-3dB. That is a very good specification, and it is a very good speaker. It differs from the Perlisten in that it is not specifically designed to be integrated with smart subs as is the case with the S7t.

In the design of the S7t Perlisten does not seek to impress chiefly with the output of the bass as much as with the accuracy of the bass. A speaker such as the Salk SS 9.5 will have more output in the 25Hz region than the S7t. The bass reflex or acoustic suspension variants of the S7t’s setup allow for this specification: Bass Reflex 22-37Hz -10dB and Acoustic Suspension 32-37Hz -10dB. The speaker achieves a very flat frequency curve, but with lessening output in the bass as the frequency falls. This is not a failing but a fact of the use of smaller bass drivers. I suspect if the measurement was represented more traditionally the bottom bass specification might be close to 35Hz +/-3dB.

The real-world application of this distinction is that one will not get the identical output in the lower frequencies from the S7t that would be expected with a speaker that measured 25Hz +/-3dB. The S7t will yield exceptionally flat, clean sound even into the bass region, but it will not give the presence, the output of a speaker that measures tighter in the lower frequencies. Dan succinctly describes the effect as tuneful with extension, but without the added blossom due to room interaction. Think of it as akin to the bass of a panel speaker, which is acclaimed for accuracy more than deep frequency response and output. The quality of the bass, as opposed to overwhelming output, is the priority.

Having used the S7t independently of the subs, the cleanness and tautness of its bass is captivating. One does not miss the additional output in the lowest frequencies unless accustomed to much larger speakers that measure more tightly at lower frequencies. In terms of the experience of hearing the S7t’s bass, I believe an accurate assessment would be that it splits the difference between a larger dynamic speaker with larger bass drivers, such as 10” or 12” woofers on the one hand, and a monitor with perhaps a 5” woofer on the other hand.

That brings us to the intent of Perlisten to couple the S7t with Perlisten subwoofers. The S7t is an immensely gratifying speaker on its own, and those with space limitations especially would find it an exceptional performer. As it will not excite the room boundaries or create the bass reinforcement associated typically with speakers having higher output in the lower frequencies, it will sound exceptionally clean in a smaller space but with more output and presence than the bulk of bookshelf speakers. It is capable of being played quite loud without a sense of strain, but the real solution to a grander experience is to mate it with Perlisten subs. If you can, you need to get the subs. The S7t is gratifying, but the truly glorious experience with Perlisten is the combination of DPC-Array and the subwoofer(s). As I describe in relation to other speakers, the D212s transformed the S7t into a truly formidable speaker system.

When I was young, I spent time flying Estes model rockets. A smallish rocket with an A engine was impressive — that is until I discovered what a rocket with a B engine could do. If I recall correctly, the sizes of engines reached the E designation, which powered the largest of the standard kit rockets. Consider adding a pair of the D212s to be like moving the speaker system from a C engine to an E engine. It will blast off and previous performance of the S7t sans subs will seem only remotely powerful both in extension and output. If you want the ultimate Perlisten performance, you do not neglect the subwoofer.

The post Perlisten S7t tower speakers and D212s subwoofers Review appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

PureAudioProject Trio15 Coax10 open-baffle speakers Review

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

The hopeless truth (or fascinating reality)

They say wisdom is recognizing how little you know, that the more you learn, the more you realize how little you know. With each high-end audio system I assembled, and there have been hundreds, the feeling grows in me that I know less and less of the absolute extent of the HiFi performance spectrum. It’s not for lack of trying or of hearing good systems. I estimate the number of systems I’ve heard at residences, dealerships and shows at perhaps more than a thousand. This uneasy feeling that I do not have a handle on the enormity of the spectrum of sound is not for lack of experience but a growing humility that is reinforced by the uniqueness of each system. Perhaps the humility is similar to that experienced by astronomers who have learned that stars appear to be forming ten times faster than previously thought, or that there are ten times more galaxies than previously known. If you wish to learn more, search for articles about the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope.

Audiophiles with scant experience like to categorize HiFi systems penultimately and speakers ultimately as if they are types of vehicles, but with little nuance as regards the particular characteristics of sound that are sought, the equivalent of inferring all roadworthy vehicles serve the same purpose. As people favor pickup trucks, sport sedans, or motorcycles, certain audio systems or speakers are said to be the best, as though they would be the best for every listener. High efficiency and horns are the best. No, says another, panels and heavy class A or A/B amps yield the best. Music Lovers (aka analog fans, who are typically mediaphiles) intone systems with the favored source, namely turntables, are the best. Wrong, wrong, wrong. These perspectives are too simplistic to accommodate the available experiences. The truth is that audio systems are nearly as myriad and unique as individuals.

The proper way to see HiFi is to consider it as personality of a system, not merely as a set of data points resulting in a ranking as the best. I used to do a lot of poring over the data in an effort to get the best result, the best system for a price point. Building hundreds of systems blows a Grand Canyon-sized hole in that philosophy. Audio systems are as distinctive as people, and their unique sonic structures are not cookie cutter but are as unique as a person’s personality. Here’s the truth: the manufacturer, dealer or reviewer cannot tell you, the readership, with any certainty what will result when you get your aggregate equipment home and hook it up to a random speaker. The best we can do is guess, just like you. Oh, there are specifications and measurements that get us into the ballpark, but the idiosyncrasies, the nuances of personality, are unquantifiable. Like a new acquaintance, you meet a system for the first time when you have not heard the precise assemblage.

If there can be four distinct personalities in speakers from one brand such as PureAudioProject, each one unique, what of the plethora of speakers available from all brands? Add in the bewildering variety of technologies and products that come to you as components, and you have a mystery only slightly less appealing to me than the question of Origins. I get to know a little about each product, from whence it comes, but whither it goes is a ripe unknown until I turn it on and hit PLAY. It’s the same with you. We know so little of the actual performance spectrum, we are like children arguing over whose Hot Wheels car is the coolest.

 

The sixth round

Given the above, it takes great care to provide a guide in terms of selection of components and speakers. One of the reasons I build several systems when I review a component is to chip away at the vast variables of how a component or speaker will perform given the pool of potential systems. It’s a miniscule sample, but at least it’s better than putting up one system, or perhaps two, and pretending to know how the product is expected to perform universally. Heaven knows I have written plenty of articles that, if not outright suggesting such, at least hint at it. I’ll try not to do that here, while still giving some general guidance for those interested in a really nice, affordable speaker system. Here goes…

This is my fourth round of working with a PureAudioProject speaker, namely the Trio15, and my second round working with the Quintet15. What can I say? PAP must conclude that I can tease out some understanding of the personality of their speakers, as they keep sending me new primary drivers. I have heard distinct differences between them and in order to not rehash the extensive discussion in regard to the general design of the speakers and the PureAudioProject (PAP) philosophy of speaker design, I direct interested parties to the following Dagogo.com reviews:

Trio15 Tang Band

Trio15 Voxativ (AC-1.6 driver)

Trio15 Horn1

PAP-C1 active analogue crossover (for active bi-amping)

Quintet15 Horn1

 

Perusing both the Trio15 and Quintet15 speakers with the 10” coaxial primary driver is the next pair of articles. I am learning not only the PAP way but the ways of each of these speakers fairly well. Sincerely, I wish to help you as an audiophile, but consider that I am seeking to avoid dozens of eager questions from enthusiasts around the world asking particular questions about their systems and one of these iterations of the speakers. Almost universally my answer is, “I don’t know. I can only reinforce what has been said in the article.” I cannot tell you if you would like your source, pre, amp, integrated, cables, etc. with any given PAP iteration more than another. Until now.

The post PureAudioProject Trio15 Coax10 open-baffle speakers Review appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

Ohm Acoustics F5 speaker Review

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

What does an audiophile do with a speaker that tosses sound everywhere? How is the perfectionist to approach a soundstage that is bulbous, what I term the mushroom cloud soundstage? It is so obviously different that it raises many questions about its characteristics and operation in a HiFi system. A distinct subset of enthusiasts claim it is the only correct genre of speaker among the several available. I have no intent on attempting to answer these questions definitively, nor to write a history of the omnidirectional speaker. I endeavor to explore the unique aspects of this omnidirectional speaker. Along the way I will revisit an earlier model from the Ohm Acoustics, the Walsh Model F, in a fit of comparative curiosity to see how it sounds alongside the current flagship, the Beta F-5015 (At the time of publishing, the company has renamed the speaker F5 officially –pub.).

A true omnidirectional speaker is noted not so much for its timbral and dynamic characteristics, which, like any other dynamic speaker, may be exemplary or anemic depending upon the brand, but for its bulbous, amorphous soundstage. Listening to Shelby Lynn’s unnaturally outsized vocals reminded me of the time my sons and I went to the Blue Man Group show at Universal Studio’s theme park and experienced a rather unusual display. At one point the Blue men went into the audience with handheld, wireless mini cameras and unexpectedly coaxed a show goer to put his head back and open his mouth. In went the camera; the close-up images of his throat and uvula on the screen were uproarious, the audience grossed out and laughed hysterically. It is best to expect larger than life-sized imaging if you are considering an omni speaker!

As an owner of an omni speaker, the Kingsound King Tower, which I picked up from the Kingsound U.S. distributor following its appearance in two shows at RMAF, I have appreciation of the enveloping character of the omnidirectional speaker, it’s greatest attribute among fans. One does truly feel immersed in the musical event, as opposed to hearing it approach. Having an appreciation for the breadth of design in the speaker industry, when listening to an omnidirectional speaker, I readily accept the inflated scale and settle in to hear from within the performance, not outside of it. The omni does give a sense of being with the band as opposed to being segregated from it. The effect is not absolute, but much more convincing than typical speaker setups except, perhaps, nearfield listening and, as might be expected, headphones.

A new generation of Ohm speakers

By “new” generation, I am distinguishing between Lincoln Walsh’s 1970s era Model A, the later Walsh Model F spoken of earlier, and the current offerings from Ohm. My pair of Model F were about to be hauled to the dump, as they had obvious damage to one cabinet and to both speakers’ surrounds and spiders (the drivers are mounted vertically, and over time the spiders may sag from the weight of the cone). The owners recalled that I like audio, so they called to see if I had interest in the damaged speakers. They thought I might be offended, as the speakers were old and damaged. As I drove over to their home, knowing that Ohm also made some more traditional designs, I hoped that they would be omnidirectional speakers. They were surprised that I knew they were iconic, considered among the most innovative designs in HiFi speakers historically, and were thrilled that I showed interest in restoring them.

Both out of excitement to embark on an open-ended adventure in speakers, and to glean advice, I opened a thread on Audiogon wherein I discussed my options available, ranging from parts replacement to full restoration, covering a cost spectrum from less than $500 to more than $7,000! As I already owned omni speakers that were used lightly due to other fine transducers rotating through my home for reviews, I opted for the inexpensive revamp rather than a full-blown restoration. I drove two 12-hour round trips to drop off and then pick up the speakers rather than trust shippers. I was not going to chance damage to those drivers!

On the Audiogon thread one can see how enthusiasts were disappointed with my decision, but my priorities in system building are quite different from those of the average audiophile. While I cannot say the refurbishing of the speakers brought me precisely to the performance level of the original, I do believe it brought me close enough to gauge what their potential would be as fully restored vintage speakers. Thus, this discussion of comparison is between a refurbished, not perfectly restored, Walsh Model F and the current Ohm F5.

John Strohbeen, the current owner of Ohm Acoustics Corp., has written the highlights of the early company history in an article, “The Early Days of Ohm.” Link to it here:

https://ohmspeaker.com/news/the-early-days-of-ohm/  I also recommend curious parties look at the company page, “The History of Ohm Speaker”: https://ohmspeaker.com/about/#history  This will be of keen interest to some, but unexciting to others who simply want to know the performance characteristics and potential success of this speaker in my system. While I have a glancing familiarity with the history and models of speakers from Ohm, I am not an authority. I will not pretend that I am the “buck stops here” person for Ohm speakers. However, I do believe I can bring value added analysis to the F5, and when this article is finished, perhaps you will agree.

The post Ohm Acoustics F5 speaker Review appeared first on Dagogo.

World News

Staccato Audio discrete hybrid opamps Review

Posted on by Doug Schroeder

Staccato OSH-DHb dual discrete opamp hybrid horizontal

I need some advice from the community.When I use my discrete opamps, they are generating heat and after an hour or two the room gets too warm. I have to put the AC on full, and my feet get cold. Does anyone know a solution?

That, of course, is a fantasy post to a fictitious forum. Discrete opamps, even those with little heat sinks —yes, some display relatively large ones — throw off negligible heat, though if one places their fingers close, it can be felt. It is a function of the bold new world of the High End that we have opamps sporting huge heat sinks! It reminds me of the Wells Audio Cipher DAC, which uses diamonds to dissipate heat in the signal processing because the switching rate is so high that a material with superior heat dissipation must be used. Don’t laugh at the idea of a beefy looking opamp with heat sinks, because they decimate the performance of cheap chip opamps that are used in most components!

When I first started rolling discrete opamps I never thought that I would still be investigating them ten years later! In the intervening time I have rolled a variety of opamps into the Eastern Electric Minimax DAC Junior, Minimax Tube DAC Supreme and, more recently, the Kinki Studio EX-M1+ Integrated Amplifier. These all take compatible pairs of single and dual discrete opamps, though the quantity varies between DAC and integrated amplifier. Positioning may be problematic for some brands/models in the EE Minimax DAC Junior due to sockets being closer to each other than in the Supreme. As well, in both units there can be diodes or other parts that thrust upward, blocking the opamp from seating properly. This is resolved through use of add-on risers to elevate the opamp a bit more.The representative opamps are from Burson (three generations), Sparkos Labs (two generations), and Sonic Imagery. Refer to my article Audio Blast: Return of the Discrete Opamp Roller for models. Here I explore a fourth company, Staccato Audio, as it also offers compatible, drop-in, single and dual discrete opamps.

Introduction to Staccato Audio

Staccato Audio is a small manufacturer of high performance discrete opamps, led by engineers Jakub Honkisz, who is the founder and project manager, and Morten Oksbierg, who designs the analog circuits. The company is implementing its plan to move beyond opamps to production of a lower power single ended class A solid state amplifier featuring dual mono design with sound quality able to compete with bespoke lower powered amps, such as the Audio Note Kondo ONGAKU. Jakub has offered me a listening test to the rev 3.3, and based on the performance of the Staccato discrete opamps, I accept the offer! If these men are able to pull off a feat as impressive with a preamp/amp combo as with the opamps, their work will be, ahem, noteworthy!

The company has been building opamps since 2017 and the current iteration is a hybrid using the BC560 transistor. Jakub describes some of the methods of the build: “In the production level we are matching input 2SK209 JFETs transistors from the batch of 1000psc, and also adjusting the output current to keep the same load for all three output pairs of 2SK2145. Class A needs to be cooled down, so we use heatsinks, which are good for thermal coupling of the crucial transistors, which are moved to under the heatsink.” The product is called OSH (Open Sound Hybrid). Such fine tuning takes much more production time but makes the opamp highly reliable and exquisite sounding.

Exquisite sound

My testing ground for these opamps was a simple setup involving the following system: Small Green Computer sonicTransporter, SONORE Signature Rendu with systemOptique, Clarity Cable Supernatural USB (1m), Eastern Electric Minimax Tube DAC Supreme, Iconoclast by Belden 4×4 “Generation 2” OCC RCA Interconnects (2m), Kinki Studio EX-M1+, Iconoclast SPTPC (Silver Plated Tough-Pitch Copper) Speaker Cables with locking banana plugs, and the refurbished Ohm Walsh Model F Speakers. All power cords used were the BAV (Belden Audio/Video) Power Cords.

The Ohm Walsh speakers have been an interesting project because they simply have not yielded the transparency that I expected from them. I just finished a review of the latest Ohm F5 speaker and was able to compare the two. The newer hybrid omni is distinctly better in terms of resolution. I have made it a project to elicit more refinement from the Model F. Placing Staccato opamps into the EE DAC and the EX-M1+ has been highly effective at gaining that resolution. Two distinct, powerful shifts upward in openness, richness, fullness, and smoothness occurred, first when I placed the Staccato opamps in the DAC and later when I placed them in the integrated.

The effect on vocals is particularly striking. Joan Baez’s “Diamonds and Rust” is one of my favorites for hearing into a recording, but it was recessed as heard through the Model F prior to the opamp changes. After the Staccato opamps were inserted, it seemed the gain had increased; the speaker could be played at the same listening level with the digital readout of the EX-M1+ several steps lower. At the same time, Joan’s voice was clearer, more evocative, and warmer. I adore products that bring both higher resolution and richer tonality, and these opamps do so. With other opamps, I’ve had to work with mixed sets to be assured of the optimal tonal balance, which is why I recommended purchase of all the brands’ products. But the Staccato opamps bring timbral correctness from the start. I am not saying there isn’t a highly favorable pairing of either the Staccato singles or duals with these other brands of opamps mixed into the DAC or integrated, but I do not feel a need, as with the others, to mix brands to get a highly satisfactory result. These are opamps you can buy and have confidence you will be gaining an exceptional result without having to work with mixing them with another brand. I did hear the dual Burson as well as the dual Sparkos Lab opamps with the single Staccato opamps in the EX-M1+, and in both cases preferred the use of the dual Staccato opamp in their place.

The influence of the Staccato products on the bass is another wonder. The Ohm Walsh Model 7 is not what one might call a prodigious bass performer, as it has a much less braced cabinet than is standard today and the full range driver fires down into the cabinet. It strains to cleanly render contemporary music, such as the single “The Runner” by Foals. Some insist that contemporary music with compression and a heavy LF signature is inappropriate for speakers like the Model F. There is some truth to that, as designs vary markedly, and in order to reproduce all music well a speaker needs to be quite capable. Single driver designs with six-inch or smaller drivers, cramped cabinets, or line source designs with smallish woofers and the like are not up to the task. Push such speakers in terms of listening level and there will be distortion. Often hobbyists blame the music, when the reality is the system is incapable of rendering the music well.

I encourage you to enjoy whatever music you wish on a speaker played at a reasonable level and, if it cannot handle the music, then it’s not all that much of a speaker. However, when the music sounds congealed, distorted, often it is not entirely the speaker at fault but the electronics.The owner cannot tell simply by guessing; one has to compare products, or improve them as with opamp rolling. When I hear the Model F before the Staccato opamps are inserted, I hear a speaker with limitations, but after they are inserted, I hear a speaker with potential. The difference in terms of the bass is a movement from looser, flabbier and more congealed notes to tighter, leaner and more distinct notes. There is less drop-off of low frequencies disappearing due to not being reproduced. Even the mushroom cloud soundstage of the speaker is improved!

The post Staccato Audio discrete hybrid opamps Review appeared first on Dagogo.