Joseph Audio Pulsar – Original vs. Graphene opinions?


I'm curious about the Pulsars, but have no easy way to audition, and would be grateful if those who heard the original and current models could offer opinions.

Thanks in advance!
whipsaw
I have the original Pulsars, and have heard the graphenes. The original, to my ears, is smoothe all-around ... there is no one particular area that’s emphasized over another. OTOH, the graphenes to me have a slight over-emphasis in the bass region which muddies the sound somewhat, particularly in a small room. I prefer the originals and have passed on the upgrade. Newer is not necessarily better.
Interesting rlb61

where you the one a while back who switched to the graphene Pulsars and found the bass too big in your room?

I auditioned the Perspective graphene and the bass was a bit too much, but they weren’t set up well - too close together and near the back wall so I couldn’t get an idea of how they perform in the bass.  Midrange and highs were fantastic 
@prof No, that wasn’t me. As I recall, that person put up his graphenes for sale shortly after purchasing them. As to the originals and the graphenes, the mids and highs are identical ... the sole difference, to me, is the bass bloat on the graphenes.
Have any Pulsar owners compared them to Harbeths? I ask because I'm currently using a pair of 30.1

rlb61
666 posts
11-01-2021 5:10pm
@prof No, that wasn’t me. As I recall, that person put up his graphenes for sale shortly after purchasing them. As to the originals and the graphenes, the mids and highs are identical ... the sole difference, to me, is the bass bloat on the graphenes

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I asked Josh at madisound about the Graphenes, said they were slow sellers, wonder why?
$$$$$
IMHO the Excel Magnesius's have low ~~87db ~~ sens, so its doubtful a  special nano coating is going to make any ~~wow~~ factor.

Note in the descript
**nano coating higher dampening factor**
Thing is the E and EX magnesium are already  **damp** with zero resonances in the lower ,,in fact throughout the entire fq range of the driver.
IMHO magnesium is the ideal and best choice in cones for a  midwoofer.
The one characterist that defines how magnesium performs is ~~Neutrality~~
= No coloration, no muddyiness. 
Unlike paper type cones, which suffer  from both  flaws.
Seas does have a  new paper mix cone the Nextel which Troels loves in his designs, but then its not really paper as its heavy coated so as to completely dampen the paper flaws.
Some labs employ carbon fiber, which to me is like the plastic type cones from the 1980's. Sonus faber uses the Carbon Fiber in  its 2 way @ 16G's.
The CF will offer a tighter low end, but how does the upper bass past 100hz sound through the entire midrange?
This ism what i would like to know.
Stick with Magnesium, as its the best compromise of any midwoofer cone material.

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-8-woofers/seas-excel-w19nx-001-e0076-08-7.5-graphene-co...