New Joseph Audio Pulsar Graphene 2

Hi @prof,

For an example, see Stereophile's measurements of the CJ 12.  In particular, the first graph showing the output into a simulated load.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/conrad-johnson-premier-twelve-monoblock-amplifier-measurements

See that bump at ~ 60 Hz?  That's what I'm talking about. :) The greater the impedance of the speaker, the more that bump will rise.

I wrote:

Both amps share quite a bumpy ride

I meant:

Both _speakers_ share quite a bumpy ride

Thanks erik. I admit I’m still somewhat in the weeds though, as I guess you can’t give a definitive answer and it will be just a play-and-try situation.

I have just been a bit worried if the new model was "harder to control" in the bass region or something for my amp. My current perspectives a nicely controlled in the bass and *just on the edge* of overwarmth in some situations, so I was trying to understand if I upgrade whether I should anticipate any bass issues.

As to the top octave balance, I did hear a slightly more relaxed sound from the Graphene version. (Occasionally I wondered "too relaxed?")Having read JA’s Perspective2 review/measurements I went in knowing the top had a slightly less extended balance but was happy that this didn’t lead to a "darker" sound, at least from my limited exposure. It still seemed vivid and open sounding where it counts.

Look at the Stereophile CJ Premiere 12 chart.  The simulated speaker load they use is pretty close to what the Pulsars have.  Shows about 0.5 dB boost.

Perfectly manageable with placement, and of course, in a good room. :)

So with respect to the original post, as an owner of original Pulsars interested if anyone can comment with respect to discernible acoustic differences between the original Pulsars and their latest revision?
Remain amazed by the pictures these small speakers are capable of painting, but if the revisions can offer even more and the difference is quantifiable (my call),  I'd very much like to know.
Todd