The Orions continue to get raves wherever they go. They must be fantastic. I often wonder if the reason they are so good is because they are dipoles, or could it be that active cross sounds much better with no components between the amps and the drivers and better caps and resistors doing the work. (I already know this to be true and even more so for digital sources with a DCX2496 where the work load of the electronics is shared all the way back to the digital domaign.) Or is it the gobs of clean power from triamping. (I know that biamping a passive cross speaker sounds better) Or is it the great tweeter crossed really low. Or is it the great mid. Or is the great bass from using 4 top of the line 12s. I am sure that SL is very happy with the performance of the Orions and rightly so. They are on the short list of the worlds greatest speakers at any cost. And, that he would feel no need to prove the sonic merits of dipoles further to anyone. But it would be fascinating to build the same drivers into a conventional, sealed cabinet with active cross for a direct comparison.
Scott,
There are variants out there using the same or very similar driver set; Joseph Audio, Selah and many others.
Being a former orion owner (twice) I would venture out to say that the answer to your question of what makes them so good would be the combination of all variables. As we all know, design is a myriad of decisions trying to limit downsides and utilize upsides. The main thing that I would say makes designs such as the orion so successful is the fact that room interaction is considered. This seems to be a key factor which many companies and listeners overlook.
I have now sold my set because of a recent move as well as the fact that I have found what I have been looking for, finally. Listening to many different systems and returning to the orion's has always left me with the same easy feeling. Other systems may often do one thing or another well but never seemed to do everything good.
There are variants out there using the same or very similar driver set; Joseph Audio, Selah and many others.
Being a former orion owner (twice) I would venture out to say that the answer to your question of what makes them so good would be the combination of all variables. As we all know, design is a myriad of decisions trying to limit downsides and utilize upsides. The main thing that I would say makes designs such as the orion so successful is the fact that room interaction is considered. This seems to be a key factor which many companies and listeners overlook.
I have now sold my set because of a recent move as well as the fact that I have found what I have been looking for, finally. Listening to many different systems and returning to the orion's has always left me with the same easy feeling. Other systems may often do one thing or another well but never seemed to do everything good.
It seems the majority of listeners adore the sound of cheap opamps. Could this be another reason for the Orion's success?
On a philosophical/psychological level i see the advantages of this approach - it completely obliterates any neurosis regarding amplifiers, preamplifiers, sources or cables, tubes or solid state.
Maybe the Orions are more than just speakers. The audiophile's good mental health companion?
On a philosophical/psychological level i see the advantages of this approach - it completely obliterates any neurosis regarding amplifiers, preamplifiers, sources or cables, tubes or solid state.
Maybe the Orions are more than just speakers. The audiophile's good mental health companion?
sendler said:
Having built both Orions and Plutos, owned conventional bipoles, and listened to dipole planars I'd speculate that it's mostly more uniform polar/power response that looks a lot like on-axis response combined with decreased cabinet effects like internal reflections and panel resonances.
If you sit centered between a pair of Plutos that are close, ignore the frequency extremes, and limit the output levels to less than realistic they're surprisingly close.
The Orion's more controlled dispersion makes them much less sensitive to object/wall placement at the sides and lets you create a wide sweet spot by countering a shorter arrival time from the nearer speaker with a level reduction from its directivity. Obviously, the extra displacement lets you enjoy music that's not a scale model of the real thing. The exceptional drivers are just icing on the cake.
I'll probably try a wave guide after I finish my sub-woofer project.
Some people like Orions (and other dipoles) because they put everything in what my wife calls "soft focus" and that "bouncing aroung the room sound."
Not everyone gives them rave reviews though, after listening to a few hundred speakers @ RMAF I wouldn't rate them anywhere near the top...
The out of phase sound bouncing off rear wall, combining with the sound from the front of the driver, after a time delay, makes a very noticablely fuzzy smeared sound, like extra reverb was added on top of what was in the original recording.
Hence, the "soft focus," that loses detail.
That some people like, and "rave" about,
and some people read, and repeat...
Personally I was very dissapointed, and like my wife said, you can't hear things anymore on recordings you know well--
This makes for a zero WAF in my house.
Not everyone gives them rave reviews though, after listening to a few hundred speakers @ RMAF I wouldn't rate them anywhere near the top...
The out of phase sound bouncing off rear wall, combining with the sound from the front of the driver, after a time delay, makes a very noticablely fuzzy smeared sound, like extra reverb was added on top of what was in the original recording.
Hence, the "soft focus," that loses detail.
That some people like, and "rave" about,
and some people read, and repeat...
Personally I was very dissapointed, and like my wife said, you can't hear things anymore on recordings you know well--
This makes for a zero WAF in my house.
Some things that I'm sure contribute to the Orions: excellent quality, expensive drivers, and, they are designed by a veteran expert in the audio field.
Ok, for those of you that have found other speakers that you like better than Orions, could you please mention WHICH speakers those are? And describe the things that you like about them/contrast them to other models of speakers?
Ok, for those of you that have found other speakers that you like better than Orions, could you please mention WHICH speakers those are? And describe the things that you like about them/contrast them to other models of speakers?
Russell Dawkins said:
No point asking actually. I seen several instances where absolute accuracy in reproduction is viewed boring. Some rather go with ancient Saba or Altec 604 in OB baffle as they provide more musical coloration that soothes the ears. The Orions uses OPAMPS (big no no in audio land) and also Solid State Amp (also another debatable topic).
I'd sure like to see someone's effort to convert all the opamps in the preamp to use jfets (supposedly sounding very musical) and also using SET for the mids and highs
cheers.
Some people adore electrostats, some people don't like them...
Whether you like or dislike the presentation of a dynamic dipole like the Orion++, NaO 2T, Steinway Lyngdorf Model D, Jamo R909 is hard to argue with. For me the natural and open spaciousness of the presentation is definite plus enhancing the illusion of being there.
All this talk of pinpoint imaging, ultra detail and microdynamics, airy highs, depth of soundstage la da da. I wonder, does it actually exist in real live music. etc.
I recently heard Angela Hewitt in our state capital city's Concert Hall and the sound is nothing like conventional hifi. Closing my eyes, the sound is mono, near omnidirectional, with what sounds like nothing above 10Khz or below 50Hz, yet still glorious.
Whether you like or dislike the presentation of a dynamic dipole like the Orion++, NaO 2T, Steinway Lyngdorf Model D, Jamo R909 is hard to argue with. For me the natural and open spaciousness of the presentation is definite plus enhancing the illusion of being there.
All this talk of pinpoint imaging, ultra detail and microdynamics, airy highs, depth of soundstage la da da. I wonder, does it actually exist in real live music. etc.
I recently heard Angela Hewitt in our state capital city's Concert Hall and the sound is nothing like conventional hifi. Closing my eyes, the sound is mono, near omnidirectional, with what sounds like nothing above 10Khz or below 50Hz, yet still glorious.
tktran303 said:
I think it all comes down to personal preference and listening material, or at least what you expect out of your source material, be it accurate or not.
However, I do think that "ultra detail and microdynamics, airy highs, depth of soundstage la da da" do have a belonging, because although the performance might not have contained such qualities, it's still important for the loudspeakers to be able to replicate the source as accurately as possible across the gamut of audible soundscape.
On the other hand, if you look at it from a perspective of logic; you aren't going to be looking at building or purchasing a set of speakers that will ring up a bill into the possible thousands if you avidly listen to music you *know* sounds crappy. That would make just about as much sense as snagging some tickets to a first-rate orchestration, then wearing earplugs for the whole show.
For the gentleman that asked what I found that got me off of the orion's need not look a whole lot further than a Dr. that has been very popular on this forum as of late. Geddes and Linkwitz are both well respected in the field. I personally found Geddes' system much more to my liking once I heard it.
I am still waiting to see someone prove that opamps are the weak link in their audio system.
I am still waiting to see someone prove that opamps are the weak link in their audio system.
The "reverb effect" mentioned earlier is only a factor if the Orions are placed fairly close to the front wall.
Problem is, in 99% of houses, that's where speakers will be placed to fit in with the decor.
Its one thing to have the perfect speaker in theory, another to have one that fits into real world environments, and that has always been the reason I haven't gone dipole.
I think that's why they have never, and will never, be a popular choice, just like big horns won't. I'm curious about them, but just don't have the space to consider them an option.
Also, I have hunch that those who love dipoles are classical music buffs, whereas pop/rock fans prefer monopoles.
Problem is, in 99% of houses, that's where speakers will be placed to fit in with the decor.
Its one thing to have the perfect speaker in theory, another to have one that fits into real world environments, and that has always been the reason I haven't gone dipole.
I think that's why they have never, and will never, be a popular choice, just like big horns won't. I'm curious about them, but just don't have the space to consider them an option.
Also, I have hunch that those who love dipoles are classical music buffs, whereas pop/rock fans prefer monopoles.
analog_sa said:
Like the ones 99.9% of recorded media passed through? Modern ones have no negative effect on soundwaves, but seem to have a rather adverse effect on brainwaves. Given prior knowledge of course.
analog_sa [/i][B] The audiophile's good mental health companion? [/B][/QUOTE] "Audiophiles" and "good mental health" in the same sentence?? ;) [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by critofur said:
I think serenechaos has already stated which speakers driven by what amplification meet his standards of clear and realistic reproduction of recorded musical events.
cheers,
AJ
I have colleague how build their own Esl's.
A esl midrange is the best airy sounding their is IMO.
Also I have listened to final esl 1.2 and the 1.4 standing next to each other.
The mann of Final Maarten Smeets I spoke once about audio and said about speaker boxes. "They sound like it comes out of a box".
That is the nature of a rectangle shape and standing waves inside. whitch colour the sound.
Personal I think also the reflected sound on the back side ads to a more open effect.
And what Linkwitz shows the sound on the sides is reduced due their out of phase. So the dipole doesn't have the negative room reflections on their side.
Every snare instrument is a dipole so a dipole is the best way to reproduce that character IMO.
Like a horn the best way to reproduce voices and horn instrument like a trumpet IMO.
A esl midrange is the best airy sounding their is IMO.
Also I have listened to final esl 1.2 and the 1.4 standing next to each other.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
The mann of Final Maarten Smeets I spoke once about audio and said about speaker boxes. "They sound like it comes out of a box".
That is the nature of a rectangle shape and standing waves inside. whitch colour the sound.
Personal I think also the reflected sound on the back side ads to a more open effect.
And what Linkwitz shows the sound on the sides is reduced due their out of phase. So the dipole doesn't have the negative room reflections on their side.
Every snare instrument is a dipole so a dipole is the best way to reproduce that character IMO.
Like a horn the best way to reproduce voices and horn instrument like a trumpet IMO.
That's dated, and WAY out of context...AJinFLA said:
Read the rest of the thread, or at least four post up...
The amp remarks were an answer to how much power was needed for a specific speaker, the Austin A166, which that thread was about, and the FE166ES-R driver.
MP9 ask if a 2A3 or 45 would be enough to power it...
The year and a half old post was again specific to comparing drivers in OB to the same driver in boxes.
After break-in, and figuring out room placement, the Super Swan configuration has gotten a lot better.
These are just two of my personal speakers, and I'd deem them fair; but with a lot of problems, not my opinion of what "meet my standards of clear and realistic reproduction of recorded musical events."
The best I've heard is Jeffery Jackson's five-way horn system and 75TL amp I heard @ VSAC.
Hi David,
At the end of the day I don't think everyone enjoys the same thing. I don't think ESLs or dynamic dipoles are for everybody.
Certainly you need a good distance between the baffle and the wall behind the speakers. I have about 5' behind my baffle, any more and I get into trouble. But this is not different to box speakers too, because IMHO the midrange of box speakers sound the best when well clear of the front wall. My last box speaker was 4' from the front wall and it sounded much better there.
An unexpected upside of dipoles is that they may be placed closer to side walls. I suspect this has something to do with what Drew said in another thread about the nulls at 90 degrees.
Have you ever had a chance to move your Delta speakers at least 1.2-1.5 meters into the room? Then move your seat back and had a good listen, know when no-one else is home, no birds/dog/kids/neighbours etc to bother you.
Regarding the music selection, I don't think dynamic dipoles suffer the same issues that affect ESLs. I certainly don't limit what I play. I listen to full symphony orchestras, light jazz trios, acapellas, rock, pop, Fabric/Twilo style club music, music from around the world, and everything in between.
I'll try and get Squeezecenter to churn out a HTML list of the tracks that get played by everyone at home. Although I'm classical trained, when people ask
"What do you play?",
I say
"The CD player"
Most of what I play is actually NOT classical...
Last month we were rockin' to Guitar Hero III on the Wii.
Now that was fun...
At the end of the day I don't think everyone enjoys the same thing. I don't think ESLs or dynamic dipoles are for everybody.
Certainly you need a good distance between the baffle and the wall behind the speakers. I have about 5' behind my baffle, any more and I get into trouble. But this is not different to box speakers too, because IMHO the midrange of box speakers sound the best when well clear of the front wall. My last box speaker was 4' from the front wall and it sounded much better there.
An unexpected upside of dipoles is that they may be placed closer to side walls. I suspect this has something to do with what Drew said in another thread about the nulls at 90 degrees.
Have you ever had a chance to move your Delta speakers at least 1.2-1.5 meters into the room? Then move your seat back and had a good listen, know when no-one else is home, no birds/dog/kids/neighbours etc to bother you.
Regarding the music selection, I don't think dynamic dipoles suffer the same issues that affect ESLs. I certainly don't limit what I play. I listen to full symphony orchestras, light jazz trios, acapellas, rock, pop, Fabric/Twilo style club music, music from around the world, and everything in between.
I'll try and get Squeezecenter to churn out a HTML list of the tracks that get played by everyone at home. Although I'm classical trained, when people ask
"What do you play?",
I say
"The CD player"
Most of what I play is actually NOT classical...
Last month we were rockin' to Guitar Hero III on the Wii.
Now that was fun...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.