Emerald Physics CS-2, Opinions Please


Hello all:

I found and read a couple of older threads regarding these speakers, I've been talking with the dealer, and I have read everything I could find on the internet. I understand the DSP's role and the need to bi-amp. The last step befor I plunk down the plastic, is to ask those of you that have them what you think?

What are the pluses and minuses? If you have had them for a couple of months are you still happy? any regrets?

Best regards,

Dave
consttraveler
Rchau,

For the record, I was not insinuating that you made it up. I just found your dealer's reaction quite surprising given that, at the very least, these are simply very good speakers. I would say that the reactions I have seen/heard (dozens) have been probably 95+% positive - most very positive indeed.

As for them not being 'revolutionary' - so what? With speakers, the devil's in the details. And, frankly, they are rather innovative. The magic seems to be due to the combination of very complete frequency response, correct dispersion/power response by the ingenious coupling of open-baffle and a waveguide (the guide takes over where the bass drivers are beaming) (power response is THE critical area neglected by almost all conventional designs), and the complete time/phase alignment offered by the DSP. The result is a speaker that honestly seems to have no dynamic compression whatsoever, has accurate timber, and portrays a very realistic soundstage.
[A lot in common with Duke's designs, incidentally, which also get around the power response problem by coupling a woofer to a similarly-sized waveguide. Duke, if I'm screwing that up please correct me!]

There is no such thing as a perfect speaker, and there are probably better speakers in certain ways, but these things did drop my jaw at RMAF last year and yes, I did finally order a pair.
These are not active speakers - they are speakers that use an active crossover.

To me, active speakers - putting the crossover and amps INSIDE the speaker to ensure that it gets the worst affects of vibration possible - is and was a compromise based on convenience, not sound quality.

In my experience, *simple* passive crossovers are Ok and can be a great solution. Complex passive xovers, however, steal far too much of the signal to be tolerable.
Paul-I never for a moment thought you were insinuating. I was just offering since you asked.

My parting commennts.

I do agree with all of the CS2 advocates here that the CS2 are not dynamically compressed. It is unfortunate that a lot of speakers these days are dynamically compressed.

My main point in my original post was that there are a whole class of speakers out there (many decades old) that have the same characteristics as the CS2s and it is worth taking a listen. Unfortunately, most of these speakers are not in the mainstream audiophile consciousness at least in this country or thought to be too old to be any good. A little education goes a long way.

Paul-your comments about your friend Duke's design is interesting. In my original post, I mentioned the old Western Electric 'wide range' speakers. I did not mentioned that they weren't actually that great. They had a variety of problems. This led to the famous Shearer horn, a two way speaker with a multicelluar horn on top and a folded bass horn driven by a dynamic cone driver. BTW-a waveguide is just another form of horn.
These are not active speakers - they are speakers that use an active crossover.

Whatever - but you are really splitting hairs.

To me, active speakers - putting the crossover and amps INSIDE the speaker to ensure that it gets the worst affects of vibration possible - is and was a compromise based on convenience, not sound quality.

I understand. There is still a huge anti-active speaker attitude amongst audiophiles. It is their loss.
Post removed