I was sitting right next to Lynn for the EnABL demo in the Lowther/Pass suite Friday night.
It was a blind A/B test of treated and untreated drivers running from 75Hz up, active. (BTW, Lynn guessed the x-over at "about 80Hz"- he has some smart ears, that Mr. Olson).
3 cuts were palyed, all vinyl. First was small jazz ensemble, 2nd female vocal, 3rd orchestral.
The system sounded very nice overall. Then the cuts were played in reverse order. The difference was noticable, for sure. In some passages I thought it was a toss-up, but others not. Especialy the jazz piece. Hot peaks were much less distorted on the 1st set of drivers, and there was certainly much more width and depth to the image on 1st set. If given a choice, I would have said - "I'll buy the first ones!". Just much more musical, much clearer.
OK.... I hope the 1st set was the EnABL'd drivers. I think it was, now, but at the time I didn't know. Lynn? Was the 1st set the treated set?
More later, I'm at the airport on my way home to Maui now.
PS, the Audiokenisis speakers were among my favs, too. Duke does a great job.
It was a blind A/B test of treated and untreated drivers running from 75Hz up, active. (BTW, Lynn guessed the x-over at "about 80Hz"- he has some smart ears, that Mr. Olson).
3 cuts were palyed, all vinyl. First was small jazz ensemble, 2nd female vocal, 3rd orchestral.
The system sounded very nice overall. Then the cuts were played in reverse order. The difference was noticable, for sure. In some passages I thought it was a toss-up, but others not. Especialy the jazz piece. Hot peaks were much less distorted on the 1st set of drivers, and there was certainly much more width and depth to the image on 1st set. If given a choice, I would have said - "I'll buy the first ones!". Just much more musical, much clearer.
OK.... I hope the 1st set was the EnABL'd drivers. I think it was, now, but at the time I didn't know. Lynn? Was the 1st set the treated set?
More later, I'm at the airport on my way home to Maui now.
PS, the Audiokenisis speakers were among my favs, too. Duke does a great job.
The Bastanis Apollos were gratifying as before, superb lower mids and mids, bass too heavy and slow, horn tweeter OK but not astonishing. These, like the things I was grumbling about in the Lowther room, came down to what I felt are inappropriate choice of crossover points. I'd like the see the Bastanis cross a little lower, and the First Watt/Lowther quite a bit higher.
The Bastanis runs the widerange driver without any lowpassing or highpassing - no crossover at all. With the minimal baffle they use, it starts to go away around 220 Hz, and the fairly large closed-box woofer meets it at 200 Hz or so. My instincts for a big prosound woofer in a really large box is to cross it just a bit lower, maybe 120 or 150 Hz, and arrange the widerange baffle to be just a bit larger/longer, higher, or something, so it can meet the woofer at the lower frequency.
I didn't like the First Watt crossover at 75 Hz at all. As MJK's paper makes clear, an 8" driver in a fairly narrow baffle needs a fairly high crossover, maybe around 200~250 Hz, and it is asking very little of open-baffle woofers to be flat up to 250 Hz, epecially a pair of little bitty 10" audiophile woofers with fancy phase plugs.
What makes the higher crossover a matter of necessity rather than choice is the extremely small Xmax of the Lowther, no greater than the Xmax of a good 1" dome tweeter. By crossing the Lowther at 75 Hz a lot of distortion is assured at almost any playing level, and that's what I heard - the onset of harshness was pretty rapid with increased level, and was to some extent noticeable with all program material.
Moving two octaves higher would have cleaned up things a lot - and if woofer coloration is noticeable at 300 Hz, well, that says something about the choice of woofers, doesn't it? Any decent woofer short of an 18" subwoofer should handle 300 Hz with grace and ease.
The Emerald Physics had yet another weird crossover choice. The EP used a pair of open-baffle 15" woofers - the minimum requirement for OB in my view - but they were crossed at 1 kHz to the 1" compression driver in a waveguide. This resulted in a noticeably stressed sound from the 1" CD - all the drivers sounded like they were working at the extreme limits of their range, and very much required the aggressive 24 dB/oct digital crossover to join together. I'm no fan of digital crossovers and the extremely cheap D/A converters they use - and the digital crossover is an integral part of the EP loudspeaker, like it or not. If the DAC of an iPod sounds OK to you, well, you'd be OK with the sound of the EP digital crossover. It didn't do it for me, though.
The bass, midbass, and lower mids were pretty good, though. The pint-sized hotel room had obviously been EQ'ed for the show, and it sounded great in that part of the frequency range. But - the EQ tricks don't work at higher frequencies, where the direct sound dominates, and driver-quality sonics are pretty much the whole story.
It's interesting the 5" and 8" Feastrex, with its over-the-top magnetic design, and the AudioKinesis, with its top-quality 10" TAD Alnico and Beyma CP380 compression driver, were my favorites at the show. Both in pretty conventional boxes, but using drivers with first-class magnetic and diaphragm design.
The Bastanis runs the widerange driver without any lowpassing or highpassing - no crossover at all. With the minimal baffle they use, it starts to go away around 220 Hz, and the fairly large closed-box woofer meets it at 200 Hz or so. My instincts for a big prosound woofer in a really large box is to cross it just a bit lower, maybe 120 or 150 Hz, and arrange the widerange baffle to be just a bit larger/longer, higher, or something, so it can meet the woofer at the lower frequency.
I didn't like the First Watt crossover at 75 Hz at all. As MJK's paper makes clear, an 8" driver in a fairly narrow baffle needs a fairly high crossover, maybe around 200~250 Hz, and it is asking very little of open-baffle woofers to be flat up to 250 Hz, epecially a pair of little bitty 10" audiophile woofers with fancy phase plugs.
What makes the higher crossover a matter of necessity rather than choice is the extremely small Xmax of the Lowther, no greater than the Xmax of a good 1" dome tweeter. By crossing the Lowther at 75 Hz a lot of distortion is assured at almost any playing level, and that's what I heard - the onset of harshness was pretty rapid with increased level, and was to some extent noticeable with all program material.
Moving two octaves higher would have cleaned up things a lot - and if woofer coloration is noticeable at 300 Hz, well, that says something about the choice of woofers, doesn't it? Any decent woofer short of an 18" subwoofer should handle 300 Hz with grace and ease.
The Emerald Physics had yet another weird crossover choice. The EP used a pair of open-baffle 15" woofers - the minimum requirement for OB in my view - but they were crossed at 1 kHz to the 1" compression driver in a waveguide. This resulted in a noticeably stressed sound from the 1" CD - all the drivers sounded like they were working at the extreme limits of their range, and very much required the aggressive 24 dB/oct digital crossover to join together. I'm no fan of digital crossovers and the extremely cheap D/A converters they use - and the digital crossover is an integral part of the EP loudspeaker, like it or not. If the DAC of an iPod sounds OK to you, well, you'd be OK with the sound of the EP digital crossover. It didn't do it for me, though.
The bass, midbass, and lower mids were pretty good, though. The pint-sized hotel room had obviously been EQ'ed for the show, and it sounded great in that part of the frequency range. But - the EQ tricks don't work at higher frequencies, where the direct sound dominates, and driver-quality sonics are pretty much the whole story.
It's interesting the 5" and 8" Feastrex, with its over-the-top magnetic design, and the AudioKinesis, with its top-quality 10" TAD Alnico and Beyma CP380 compression driver, were my favorites at the show. Both in pretty conventional boxes, but using drivers with first-class magnetic and diaphragm design.
Re: LTO on RMAF
Umm, both were good, like super-resolved 5 and 8-inch Lowthers. There were several times during the demos when we all held our breath at the beauty of what we were hearing - and that includes Alexander, who was in the room and had to admit these were the best full-rangers he'd ever heard.
The Feastrexes really are insanely over-the-top. Paper cones made by a Japanese ninth-generation Living National Treasure who makes paper for the Emperor, surrounds made from lambskin (really, I felt them!), and the aforementioned magnetic design that avoids all sharp corners in the flux field. As I recall, the 8-inch used a field coil, and the 5-inch used some exotic kind of Alnico with the famous gold-colored beach-ball magnet.
The sonic differences, I feel, came down more to the sonic characteristics of field-coils vs Alnico, which to my ear sound quite different. Alnico has a vivid, exciting, colorful sound, while field-coils have a subtle, suave, elegant and understated sound - by comparison, ceramic sounds coarse, rough, with washed-out tone colors and a noticeable lack of low-level resolution. I'm not that familiar with the neodymium sound, but the prosound world groups Alnico and neodymium together in the metal-magnet category, and ceramic in the insulating, non-metallic category.
For those who can afford the best, the Feastrex combined with the small RAAL would be a stunning combination - both sounded quite similar in character, with shimmering, beautiful tonality, extraordinary delicacy (yes, better than electrostats), and a dynamic ease quite unlike most full-rangers or ribbons. The RAAL actually doesn't sound much like a conventional ribbon at all - more like a really dynamic ionic speaker, actually.
I should add that even if I had the income to own a personal jet, I still wouldn't listen to a full-range speaker, not even the Feastrex. The dynamic limitations are real, even with pricey LAMM electronics, and my Mercury CD of Antal Dorati conducting Picture at an Exhibition fell well short of realistic symphonic levels. (The AudioKinesis did just fine, though, and was the only system at the show that played this extremely challenging recording. On almost all systems it sounds distorted - but it isn't, just very energetic and intense.)
I might use it as a stunning midrange, though - and from what I gleaned, they can be had without the whizzer, making the combination with the RAAL even more appealing.
I also confirmed that the Lowthers are indeed available from the factory without the whizzer, and can say from experience they combine very successfully with the RAAL. Wanna tweak your Lowther? Save yourself a lot a time and trouble and get a decent tweeter first.
ScottG said:
Umm, both were good, like super-resolved 5 and 8-inch Lowthers. There were several times during the demos when we all held our breath at the beauty of what we were hearing - and that includes Alexander, who was in the room and had to admit these were the best full-rangers he'd ever heard.
The Feastrexes really are insanely over-the-top. Paper cones made by a Japanese ninth-generation Living National Treasure who makes paper for the Emperor, surrounds made from lambskin (really, I felt them!), and the aforementioned magnetic design that avoids all sharp corners in the flux field. As I recall, the 8-inch used a field coil, and the 5-inch used some exotic kind of Alnico with the famous gold-colored beach-ball magnet.
The sonic differences, I feel, came down more to the sonic characteristics of field-coils vs Alnico, which to my ear sound quite different. Alnico has a vivid, exciting, colorful sound, while field-coils have a subtle, suave, elegant and understated sound - by comparison, ceramic sounds coarse, rough, with washed-out tone colors and a noticeable lack of low-level resolution. I'm not that familiar with the neodymium sound, but the prosound world groups Alnico and neodymium together in the metal-magnet category, and ceramic in the insulating, non-metallic category.
For those who can afford the best, the Feastrex combined with the small RAAL would be a stunning combination - both sounded quite similar in character, with shimmering, beautiful tonality, extraordinary delicacy (yes, better than electrostats), and a dynamic ease quite unlike most full-rangers or ribbons. The RAAL actually doesn't sound much like a conventional ribbon at all - more like a really dynamic ionic speaker, actually.
I should add that even if I had the income to own a personal jet, I still wouldn't listen to a full-range speaker, not even the Feastrex. The dynamic limitations are real, even with pricey LAMM electronics, and my Mercury CD of Antal Dorati conducting Picture at an Exhibition fell well short of realistic symphonic levels. (The AudioKinesis did just fine, though, and was the only system at the show that played this extremely challenging recording. On almost all systems it sounds distorted - but it isn't, just very energetic and intense.)
I might use it as a stunning midrange, though - and from what I gleaned, they can be had without the whizzer, making the combination with the RAAL even more appealing.
I also confirmed that the Lowthers are indeed available from the factory without the whizzer, and can say from experience they combine very successfully with the RAAL. Wanna tweak your Lowther? Save yourself a lot a time and trouble and get a decent tweeter first.
panomaniac said:
My memory was non-EnABL all day long (I asked and was told by Jon the EnABL version was being saved for the evening demo), the drivers got changed out for identical-looking EnABL version, and then back to the non-EnABL version demo'ed during the day. Jon never did tell us which ones we were listening to, but the difference was pretty obvious, although badly thrown off by the LF/MF level mismatch.
I think a lot of auditioners in the room preferred the warmer sound of the non-EnABL version, but I'm quite sure that was a demo artifact, not the actual change in sound of the Lowther. The residue of sizzle - a sound I detest, and a notorious feature of this years RMAF - probably was an unhappy result of the other equipment, and not something I'd necessarily ascribe to the EnABL itself.
But this all describing assorted varieties of whizzer sound, none of which I really like, even the Feastrex. I especially dislike the violent "crashing" of whizzers when they break up suddenly and violently - conveniently enough, this breakup almost never happens with the tedious studio-recorded jazz that audiophiles seem to like, but is all-too-evident with the kind of powerful and dense symphonic music I connect to emotionally.
I think the folks at AudioKinesis were a little shocked at the listening levels I chose for the Mercury recording of "Pictures" - basically, Row 10 in the symphony hall. My associate at Nutshell High Fidelity, Gary Dahl, is a percussionist trained by the lead percussion player at the Seattle Symphony - I've heard him practice at a 2-foot range. Live symphonic music has some serious peaks, and these are emotionally very important to getting the sound right.
salas said:
The man has taste, something very very rare in the high-end.
Most of the rooms at the show were demo-ing little bitty speakers - or great big ugly ones - with terrible tonal balance, all tipped-up and sizzly-sounding. Ugh - don't these people ever listen to live music? Or do they think "live" is something that comes out of a JBL PA system?
Oh yeah, a question was asked a page ago about the impact of the RMAF on "the project".
Good question. Pardon me while I look a little stupid for a moment and collect my wits.
Hmm, what did I learn?
I don't like whizzers, no matter how good the rest of the driver is.
Horns & waveguides, at least with 1" compression drivers, need pretty sophisticated crossovers to get that silky-smooth relaxed sound - or maybe just top-quality compression drivers. Probably both.
Magnets really matter - the sonic differences are very akin to the differences between good and bad transformers - anyone that's participated in a Dave Slagle tasting session will know exactly what I'm talking about.
Drivers matter. Drivers matter. Drivers matter. I can't say this enough. They are the most important aspect of the design, and all the talent in the world won't change the essential character of the driver. This is exactly the same lesson as cooking - the best gourmet chef in the world cannot overcome stale, flat, or low-quality ingredients.
A mediocre cook will make the claim they can magically transform stale, flat or low-quality ingredients, but unless they have mastered the most arcane secrets of alchemy, this claim is unlikely to be met. (The last man to successfully transform water into wine kept it quiet at the time, and did not brag about it.)
Similarly, an outright inept cook can ruin the best ingedients. I've done this myself at times, so I'm kind of sympathetic to this error.
Good question. Pardon me while I look a little stupid for a moment and collect my wits.
Hmm, what did I learn?
I don't like whizzers, no matter how good the rest of the driver is.
Horns & waveguides, at least with 1" compression drivers, need pretty sophisticated crossovers to get that silky-smooth relaxed sound - or maybe just top-quality compression drivers. Probably both.
Magnets really matter - the sonic differences are very akin to the differences between good and bad transformers - anyone that's participated in a Dave Slagle tasting session will know exactly what I'm talking about.
Drivers matter. Drivers matter. Drivers matter. I can't say this enough. They are the most important aspect of the design, and all the talent in the world won't change the essential character of the driver. This is exactly the same lesson as cooking - the best gourmet chef in the world cannot overcome stale, flat, or low-quality ingredients.
A mediocre cook will make the claim they can magically transform stale, flat or low-quality ingredients, but unless they have mastered the most arcane secrets of alchemy, this claim is unlikely to be met. (The last man to successfully transform water into wine kept it quiet at the time, and did not brag about it.)
Similarly, an outright inept cook can ruin the best ingedients. I've done this myself at times, so I'm kind of sympathetic to this error.
Isn't it amazing that the Feastrex people made such a driver without knowing even how to measure its Fs? The boxes are just guessed! They just bought a woofer tester and try to understand the manual! Traditional top quality craftsmanship and taste can sense parameters! Wow! Very slow and costly trial process though.....
Lynn, your comments on the RAAL tweeters prompted me to investigate them a little bit. Did you listen to the smaller or the larger ones? the mid-high looks appealing with it's higher efficiency but has much greater mass (comparatively).
I'm very happy to say the RAAL are less than half the price I expected they would be. on par with some of the fancier offerings from Fostex. Sadly the exact opposite of my experience with the pricing of Feastrex drivers. To push the food analogy until the wheels fall off the Feastrex really is a caviar and truffles sort of driver.
I'm very happy to say the RAAL are less than half the price I expected they would be. on par with some of the fancier offerings from Fostex. Sadly the exact opposite of my experience with the pricing of Feastrex drivers. To push the food analogy until the wheels fall off the Feastrex really is a caviar and truffles sort of driver.
Lynn Olson said:
Thanks for that Lynn. Despite the rave at AC about the CS2 I usually take those with one tiny kg (or pound
) of salt. Moreover, a CD + waveguide XOed @ 1 kHz to not one, but _two_ 15'' driven in parallel didn't look right -- even for the ignorant me. Back to the question of RMAF, "the project" and "drivers, drivers, drivers". Any esoterica worth mentioning -- e.g. Fertin, Supravox field coils, etc ? Beyond Feastrex, that is ....
Best regards, and here's for hoping we'll see sawdust soon,
Florian
I take Alexander at his word that all of his tweeters have a similar character, but with strengths in different directions (if you need a supertweeter, he'll build you one). I can tell you right now they do not sound anything like the Raven or Chinese ribbon tweeters, the pseudo-ribbon stretched films, or a Heil AMT. Not the same at all.
Not many people have heard an ionic tweeter, but that's what they sound like, with much more impact and dynamic range. In terms of vividness and impact, I'm not sure they give up anything compared to a compression driver. Heresy, I know, but people should listen for themselves.
As for the folks tuning in from the other forums, sorry my comments about the EnABL comparison were kind of vague, in comparison to the vibrant enthusiasm for some of the exotics.
My best instinct is to apply EnABL to a really good non-whizzer driver with an excellent Alnico or Neodymium magnet system. The best pro drivers come to mind here, along with the exotics mentioned above.
I do think people who have "tipped-up" their systems to compensate for the somewhat low HF resolution of whizzer drivers are in for an unpleasant surprise when they try an EnABL treatment. Don't jump on me for making that "low-resolution" comment about whizzers. Listen to a RAAL or a good compression driver and then tell me that whizzers have more resolution.
Oddly enough, I do like paper-cone tweeters - I really miss the old Peerless HFC 225, although the best tweeters today have way more resolution and just as much sweetness. But I'd take a cone over a dome tweeter any day of the week.
Not many people have heard an ionic tweeter, but that's what they sound like, with much more impact and dynamic range. In terms of vividness and impact, I'm not sure they give up anything compared to a compression driver. Heresy, I know, but people should listen for themselves.
As for the folks tuning in from the other forums, sorry my comments about the EnABL comparison were kind of vague, in comparison to the vibrant enthusiasm for some of the exotics.
My best instinct is to apply EnABL to a really good non-whizzer driver with an excellent Alnico or Neodymium magnet system. The best pro drivers come to mind here, along with the exotics mentioned above.
I do think people who have "tipped-up" their systems to compensate for the somewhat low HF resolution of whizzer drivers are in for an unpleasant surprise when they try an EnABL treatment. Don't jump on me for making that "low-resolution" comment about whizzers. Listen to a RAAL or a good compression driver and then tell me that whizzers have more resolution.
Oddly enough, I do like paper-cone tweeters - I really miss the old Peerless HFC 225, although the best tweeters today have way more resolution and just as much sweetness. But I'd take a cone over a dome tweeter any day of the week.
OzMikeH said:
Not really. Imagine the best curry dinner you've ever tasted. For me, that would be at the Palace Hotel in Udiapur, India, eating a meal that was literally fit for a king - the same kitchen cooked for the local Maharajah, who resided in the same palace on the lake. That was in 1991, and I can still remember it. Such experiences are rare but do exist.
Imagine visiting the Parthenon. Imagine visiting the Taj Mahal, or the great temples in Kyoto. You are lifted to a transcendent state of being just walking into these places - the photos do not convey the true depth of the experience in any way. You have to go there and avoid the crowds. I have done this and can still remember them as I write this.
That's the comparison for the Feastrex. Also the RAAL. And a fully restored Quad ESL57. That's what I think of them. A hifi system that can create an intense, emotionally powerful impression of beauty is a rare thing, and not an easy thing to do.
