2. speakers
  3. 1090433671

Do 1st Order XO's produce a smaller

In my mind I'm trying to come to terms with two possible conflicting desires:

1. The desire for transparency, accuracy, dynamics and a wide halographic soundstage presentation.

2. The desire for a much larger sweet spot to compensate for multiple listening positions. I want the advantage of on-axis detail, but I don't want this space to be limited by inches or a few feet.

The concept of time coherency makes perfect sense to me and seems to be a superior design philosophy in conjunction with the ability to control phase shift (smear). However, based on what I've read it appears most of the 1st order time coherent designs being created today have relatively narrow sweet spots. If you're on-axis these designs can be musical nirvana, but what if you're off-axis or move to another location in the room? Typically you tend to lose the benefit of this design.

Conversely one has the option of going the Ohm "Walsh" or Meridian route and get an incredibly wide/deep soundstage because of the 360 degree sound dispersion. I've heard you can move around within a room and the sound quality does not deteriorate significantly. In other words this type of speaker design fills up an entire room and sounds great where ever you are sitting or standing. However, are we giving up a critical level of accuracy with this design approach? With sound esstentially arriving at our ears at different times are we really getting an accurate representation of each instrument? Is the music being smeared in some way?

I guess like most audiophiles I want my cake and eat it too! I want transparency/accuracy/dynamics as well as a wide and deep soundstage that doesn't depend on a 12" on-axis listening/positioning limitation. Are there any designs that meet these qualifications?
128x128dawgbyte
sonance
30 posts
 
Someone mentioned 6moons reviewing the GMA's soon, but they already have a review of another 1st order design, the Gallo Reference III that is really quite a gushing review, even considering the normal gushy nature of speaker reviews. I guess it is time coherent too based on the driver placement but I could be wrong.
The CDT design sounds like it would somewhat address the narrow sweet spot issue. I plan to go listen to these speakers sometime this week, I'll let you know what I think.
ecclectique
509 posts
 
Dawgbyte. I do remember the original ESS Amt-1 from the mid 70's. I actually owned a pair for a brief period [3 or 4 months] and traded them in for the Dalquist DQ-10. I would hazard to guess the modern versions would surely be a substantial improvement in order to compete with many of todays high end speakers. Regarding the Tannoys: My previous reference to them was based strictly on the earlier Alnico based 15 inch speakers[pre tulip waveguide versions] and not the studio monitors per say.I too; have worked with the pro series Tannoy studio monitors, in both the studio and live gigs... both indoor and outdoors: and to be candid here... they just do not compare in any which way whatsoever. Ever heard a Tannoy Westminsters in a large room? No offence here:as the Vandy 5 is indeed a very impressive speaker,but sorry.... the Vandy 5's were not even close in my room. Perhaps my studio is a little on the large size for them at 35ft x 27ft with 16.5ft ceilings.That said, I also much preferred the Proac response 4 to the Vandy 5 in the same room as well. The Vandy certainly had the better bass foundation, however the proac was closer at recreating the illusion of a live event in the studio. It was also preferred in a smaller adjascent room as well. In a typical listening room found in the average home, I believe there are many speaker choices. The room size and the rooms acoustics would surely dictate ones choice. Small speakers for small rooms and so on. Any veteran audiofile should be well aware of ones room volume and choose the appropriate speaker for his or her room. I have heard far to many systems whereby the speakers were far to large for the room and vis-versa. In my earlier thread I mentioned the Morrison speaker,It may be worth checking it out for those intrigued by omni directional point source speakers.His web page is donmorrisonaudio.com....I should point out that I have no affiliation in any way with this company, however..... To be blunt and honest here....to my ears, they are impressive music makers indeed!
calanctus
151 posts
 
Dawgbyte, the Adam Audio speakers use the Heil principle, not only for the tweeter but also for the midrange (on some models). Check them out: http://www.adam-audio.de/

True, the MBLs need big amps, and they also have an inherent weakness: Some kind of sharpness in the upper mids, which really stands out at higher volumes. I wonder whether a big tube amp might smooth it out...e.g a VTL Wotan.

Duevels are imported by 'High End Audio' in Connecticut: http://www.highendaudio.com/index2.htm
dburna
2 posts
 
I've heard the Duevels and have found them to have a very relaxed, coherent sound. The omnipolar effect if not a traditional-sounding presentation, but it was one that I got used to very quickly. It was both detailed and relaxed/non-fatiguing, if that makes sense. In general, these are the kind of speakers to which you gravitate after you get tired of all the dog-&-pony/hi-fi sounds out there. These are still on my (very) shortlist as I look for a long-term speaker solution.

One note: I listened to largely acoustic or jazz on these speakers, I didn't try to "rock out," so I can comment on how well they would perform on louder music.

Also, I highly recommend talking to Ted Lindblad, owner of High End Audio. He's an *extremely* nice guy and has a terrific listening space in which to hear the Duevels. Disclaimer: I have no relationship to Ted, but I did buy a Stealth interconnect cable from him, if that counts.
More to discover