I really enjoy these interviews with James. He is so nerdy, but still has the ability to explain things in an understandable way. He also seems really honest and doesn't look down on brands or those that enjoy those brands, it seems all about the sound. He will even push back on Gene when appropriate! Great work! 👍🏻
i have rarely seen a marketing ground game launch as well done as this svs campaign. they are EVERYWHERE promoting these new products. this will be a model for companies to follow for years. i love their subs and assume these are a great value as well
Yep, and that's why their price to performance rsruon is pretty terrible. For their subs anyway. I haven't heard these yet. You're paying for that name, free shipping both ways and their excellent customer service.
I'm glad James brought up the fact that these are more of a (4) ohm speaker. With this many drivers you really do need a robust amp. Alot of receivers wouldn't do well driving these at higher volumes. A prime example is : a pair of the JBL HDI 3800's. With the (3) demanding 8" woofers, a Rotel RB1590 was blowing out left or right channels on (3) brand new amps at reference levels. Had absolutely no problems with a (Arcam PA240, Peachtree SE220 or My NAD M 23.
What is meant by "beefy"? Is a monolith 2 channel amp at 200w per just fine, or even just an A/V like the Denon X4800h? Why would I pay $2500-3500 for the Arcam or NAD at the same power level. I am generally perplexed and not poking fun or arguing.
I’ve had mine for 3 weeks and love them! BASX A3 would drive them hard with rock and metal but clipped when playing modern electronic music. I had to bi-amp them with my denon 4400. Just bought an Emotiva XPA 3 and am going home to hook it up. Have not turned on my 2 subs. These just sound too good!🎉
They are definitely power hungry. Glad you’re enjoying them. Just in case you didn’t know you’re only supposed to bi amp with the same amp. I wouldn’t care if it sounded good, but just throwing it out there
These speakers say 20w-300w range to drive. Not sure what that even means considering I can't find a RMS or "peak" number on the website. If you are clipping with that BasX a3 is it due to playing way above reference level? Running SPL on these in my room would have them at 104db easy on 200w per channel. let me know what you have going on there so I may avoid or learn from this. thanks
@@dylanpage7436 these are 4 ohm speakers or less when you crank them. The XPA 3 is 300x2 at 8ohms AND 490x2 at 4 ohms! You can definitely hear the 1000watts at high volume! Unbelievable with the new amp! They hit VERY hard with all that power. 3 people sat with their mouths open and couldn’t believe it
@@WardoUSA Actually, that is not true. The speaker does not care since you are bypassing the crossover. Guys have been using different amps since the beginning. An example is a tube amp running the tweeters and a solid-state amp running the drivers.
I auditioned the Ultra Evolution Pinnacles last weekend. They were in about a 16' X 24' room. They were about 10' to 12' apart, facing straight ahead 12' from my listening position. It sounded a little boomy to me, but I felt they were too close to the wall and corners of the room. I then listened to the Titans, which were in a bigger room with a sub, and they sounded much tighter and faster bass response. Both systems were powered by Marantz Cinema 40 integrated. I do believe the Pinnacles needed more power to control the woofers. It would be interesting if James would review the Titans and compare the two.
I'm confused. Right after saying you kind of need to listen on axis or it "might sound a little rocky and show some dips in the crossover points", you say that they are wide dispersion and sound close to the same across the room. Not trying to nitpick, just trying to understand. Aren't those two statements in conflict with each other? Thanks for the review.
You are right to point out the ambiguity there, and I should have been more clear. Per my comment about the dispersion creating a similar sound over a wide area, I meant that there aren't any major peaks or nulls at off-axis angles, so you will be more or less getting hit with the full spectrum of sound. However, for the most linear and balanced sound, have them aimed at the listening position, because the on-axis angle has the smoothest and most linear response. In other words, the off-axis response is generally OK but the on-axis response is specifically very good.
Would my 2 SVS PB 1000 pro's still benefit for impact for movies? Would there be a way to set my Anthem AVM70 ARC to run the speakers full range and set the subs? Would also like to run just 2 channel music with no subs.
James has already spoken, but I think two separate points were being made that kind of accidentally got melded into one. The first point is that the overall Frequency Response is smoothest with the speakers aimed On-Axis to your listening position, mainly because the dip in the crossover region and a few other areas become more pronounced further Off-Axis. The second point is that above the tweeter's X/O frequency, these speakers have an unusually Wide & Consistent Dispersion pattern in the mid-to-upper treble for a dome tweeter. Due to physics and the diameter & shape of the dome tweeter piston, the dispersion pattern of nearly all speakers that use a dome tweeter (without a waveguide) will begin to progressively narrow more & more above ~7kHz. Perhaps in part due to the "Acoustic Lens" grill in front of the tweeter dome, these tweeters maintain a much wider dispersion pattern with rising frequency. Loudspeakers that have a more consistently wide upper treble dispersion pattern will have more consistent response and tonality/timbre (in that region) over a wider listening area (i.e. multiple front row seats in a HT), and this wide dispersion also results in a perceived wider soundstage overall with more room ambience. But care must also be taken in shaping the upper FR in the X/O of the tweeter because in a speaker with an otherwise Flat On-Axis upper treble response, the direct On-Axis SPL will sum with the increased Off-Axis Reflected Sound due to this wider dispersion and will result in and be perceived as "hot" or "bright/exaggerated" treble. Given James' and other's listening impressions of these as being more on the "warm" side, it seems that SVS has properly addressed this.
two points i think is important: opposing drivers also needs to be linked to each other directly, not only with the box like in this svs. my other point is: the woofer crossover at 140hz is too low, maybe a limitation and compromise they worked around but still you will miss the impact from 150hz and above from only two midrange units. 200hz is better from this perspective. and speculations from my part is that the ports may have some issues with larger bandwidth woofers, same with internal damping wish is lacking in ported designs.
Great review guys. The Arendals seem like good competition at a slightly lower price point. Certainly a lot of options at this level. I'd be curious if the time aligned cabinet design and diamond coated tweeter offer measurable advantages.
I think you would find measurable advantages for both. The time-alignment advantage should show up in impulse or step response measurements, and the diamond-coated tweeter advantage should show up in a frequency response graph by pushing break-up modes to higher frequencies. The question for me is are these really audible advantages.
@jameslarson2277 Hmmmm. If, in fact, the advantages are not really heard, can I infer that I might was well save some money by choosing the Arendal 1723 THX over the Pinnacles? I was actually trying to decide between the Arendals and the SVS Ultra Evo's. I can't wait for you to review the 1723 THX.
@adamjj85 Quite a few tweeter manufacturers use some type of coating or secondary material (doped fabric domes or layered/deposited secondary material on metal domes) in order to either push the breakup modes above the audible spectrum and/or to dampen/distribute a larger single breakup mode to multiple smaller ones that are less audible. This has been done for many years now with easily measurable improvements. In regards to physically "time aligning" multiple drivers by placing them on angled or stepped-back or -forward baffles, this might look effective, but in reality this is rarely the case and James is justified to be skeptical. Whether it be a tweeter, midrange, or midwoofer/midbass driver with a deep cone, the common notion or idea is to vertically "line up" or vertically align the transducer's pistons (dome or cone) at the point where they all interface or connect to the voice coil former or bobbin. For example the base perimeter of the dome on a tweeter where the voice coil is attached should be vertically aligned to the base perimeter of the central "dust cap" where the voice coil attaches to a cone on a midrange or midwoofer/midbass driver. What most "speaker designers" who are not also actual transducer engineers fail to take into account is that every driver is made using many different materials, and different combinations of materials in their construction. Different materials are used for the voice coil formers or bobbins (paper, kapton, aluminum, titanium), various cone materials and composite cones, the different adhesives that bond the parts together, and the type/mass/# of windings/density of the voice coil wire itself (aluminum vs copper, etc.). Note that the Speed Of Sound is relatively constant for sound waves as they propagate through the air. HOWEVER, the Speed Of Sound can vary greatly as it propagates through a variety of MUCH denser materials...before reaching the driver's piston that actually moves the air. IOW, once the voice coil of the driver is set in motion by the input signal, the TIME that it takes for that signal and movement to propagate through and reach the actual cone or dome "piston" of the driver that moves the air may vary widely. We are talking just milliseconds, but just a matter of a few milliseconds is what we use in DSPs in order to digitally "time align" multi-driver active loudspeakers, loudspeaker arrays, or the multiple driver placements in a car audio system. So in reality, "physically aligning" all of the voice coils of the drivers in a multi-driver loudspeaker by angling or off-setting the baffle forward or back does not necessarily equate to real-world Time Alignment of the drivers via impulse response. As James suggests, ultimately, this "alignment" should be verified with the alignment in time of the impulse responses of each driver via measurements. And more study needs to be done regarding our audible threshold, i.e. how much offset in time or impulse response between drivers at any given frequency is actually audible and/or results in a difference in measurable response.
I heard the SVS "ULTRA EVOLUTION PINNACLE" at AXPONA and thought they had great potential. Since then I have been looking forward to a review with measurements and greatly appreciate this one! I wish you would have published a full spectrum plot but I was able to piece one together and found that these are warm speakers- really warm! The response rises by 7db from 1Khz to 70 Hz- anechoic! That is way too much bass. In-room would be even worse. Given the additional rear firing woofers in-room measurements would have been very helpful in addition to a full spectrum plot. If the SVS would have measured flatter in that region (like the Perlisten R7t or BMR Monitors) I would have pulled the trigger on them already. Thank you.
Honest question. People in the audio space seem to want speakers that measure flat in some areas like some other speakers. If they measure the same as another speaker what's the point in buying them? Wouldn't they just sound the same?
I'm awaiting on the arrival of a Yamaha R-N2000A receiver. I hope it will be powerful enough to drive the Pinnacles or the 1723 towers. Not sure which speakers I would prefer.
How would you run these full range using Dirac Live Bass Control ? Are would Audyssey be a better option ? I’m assuming in Audyssey to run these as Large instead of small correct ?
Listening to these in person, in the room that I listened to them in, there seemed to be a lot of upper bass/lower midrange energy coming from these speakers. I also agree that the treble was a little subdued. I'm still interested in hearing their two smaller towers though. I appreciate that they are time-aligned.
I had the same thoughts but then realized that the bass and treble can be attenuated down or boosted up to match and tune the sound to your liking. Just a thought.
I own these and yea I agree, running full range with subs and having them toed in really sounds good. Only problem is my emotiva xpa gen 3 is going into protect so now I need to go look for a better amp.
The high pass filter is just the bass management that your avr does. When you normally pair speakers with subs you want to let the subs do the heavy lifting with the bass frequencies with their own amplifiers and save the AVR's amps or your separates power amps use their power for the mids and the highs on the tower speakers. So the AVR will set a filter at say 80 hz on your towers where output below 80 hz is significantly reduced on the towers and is routed to the subs. This filter wherever it's set will allow the speaker to play anything higher then its setpoint at say 80hz but anything lower then 80 hz will start to be cut off or reduced actually. This is why it's called a high pass filter. This SVS speaker however shouldn't be crossed over at all you should run it full range since the woofers crossover is so low because their will be problems with the subs and the speakers acting up at that crossover. You should run these full range when paired with your subs. But that means you will need a lot of power since the amplifier you drive these with will be powering the entire full frequency range and not handing some of that range off to the subs
Good. That is what I also thought. If one has good towers why cut off at 80hz (can be cut off just above their lowest rated frequency), with separate amplifier for LCR! Also that 5 in 5.1 is full range or is cut off as per dolby recommendation while mastering? Because x.1 is LFE so if we crossover at 80 or any frequency then sub is doing double duty, isn't it? Please share the opinion as I don't know technicalities. I have Emotiva xpa3 for LCR and LCR rated 44 hz lowest so can be xovered at 60hz, isn't it.
@@sanonmars "Good Towers" is a relative statement. Most loudspeakers, whether they are bookshelf or towers, will struggle to produce CLEAN Undistorted response as SPL increases (i.e. Loud Home Theater levels). When you apply a 60Hz-80Hz High Pass Crossover Filter to your main LCR speakers and add a Subwoofer to cover the frequencies below that, it can usually take some strain off of the main speakers and reduce their overall distortion and allow them to play higher SPLs cleanly. If you really do have "Good Tower" speakers that already have very low distortion even at high SPLs, then there will probably be much less of an advantage or reason to use a 60Hz-80Hz High Pass Crossover and/or combine them with a subwoofer. But your LCR speakers that reach down to 44Hz at the lowest would most likely benefit from adding at least one subwoofer and applying a 60Hz-80Hz High Pass Crossover Filter to the LCRs. Again, the advantage should be that your LCR speakers will be able to play louder with less distortion. Frequencies lower than about ~100Hz are very omni-directional and our auditory system has a hard time localizing those low frequencies to any specific point in space, so there is really no need to have the distance or separation between your LCRs when reproducing those low frequencies. But a decent subwoofer can easily reproduce those low frequencies at Higher SPLs compared to having your LCRs strain or struggle to CLEANLY reproduce those low frequencies. Because of this, if needed, a subwoofer can easily manage doing "double duties" as you say. For the Specific Speakers in THIS Review, James does not recommend using a typical 80Hz High Pass Crossover Filter on the towers if you are going to add a subwoofer with a ~80Hz Low Pass Crossover Filter. This is because of the extra or multiple drivers/speakers that are being used in these towers and how they are combined in a very complex manner to each other, and also how they are integrated with multiple ports on the speakers in order to achieve their overall uniform response . James is saying that it will be very difficult to add a subwoofer to these and be able to integrate it well in order to maintain good phase and frequency response overall if you try to use a subwoofer crossed over at ~80Hz to the main towers. It generally isn't a problem with other tower or bookshelf speakers that use a simpler and more traditional combination of drivers and ports through the midbass and bass region.
How would the Pinnacle and Titan compare in a dedicated home theater environment with 2 subs ? I'm seriously considering Pinnacle, but it might be overkill.
only 100lbs👌 I may consider these as id like to downsize in my old age🤙 I like the build quality of most svs products, but never was satisfied with the sound. Hopefully these may be the answer👍
Based on what you're saying, these might be helpful in addressing room nodes. When I sit and listen to my system it's fine, but when I stand up bass drops off. Am I wrong?
@@stephenphillips1660 I am really happy I waited for the Black Oak to come out. They are beautiful and completely disappear in my Theater Room when I am watching movies. I would have had a reflection from my screen with the Gloss Black. These sit much higher than the Ultra Bookshelf speakers I had on the stands. I moved them up to the level the Titan's would sit and there was reflections off of my screen. I love the look of the Gloss Black but the Black Oak is finger print and dust proof!
@@swllz I hear ya. I had the chance to hear them a week ago they blew me away. I compared the Focal Aria and Elac Uni-fi reference and it wiped the floor with them in my opinion
I’m leaning towards bookshelves myself since i have dual subs already and Dirac with bass man. Already. Kinda feeling that the bookshelves would be good enough. But i would love to see a detailed review to be sure
Im surprised Definitive Technology DM80 wasn't on James list. I know Im looking at both. I would love to know which Gene and James think is better? Which has the better tweeter?
I did have it originally but pared it out since the list was too long. I feel like it's a bit too idiosyncratic to be a direct competitor. It has a powered bass section and a bipole passive section. I did review the DM70. Is it better? I would say its a matter of personal preference since the soundstages are very different.
@jameslarson2277 oh, okay, thanks for the quick reply. But I was wondering how there tweeters compared? Do I need to step up to like Perlisten s7t to get a good tweeter and mid for music? I did hear a pair, but wow, 4x the cost of these.
@@battousai412 The drivers for both speakers are good. The real difference is the dispersion pattern and its effects on soundstage. The Deftech speakers may give you a more spacious soundstage but less precise imaging than the SVS speakers. I do like both speakers.
Gene I was looking forward to the review video and then I saw the Yankees shirt. As a Red Sox fan I had to read the transcript instead. James thanks for keeping your gear as neutral as a good pair of speakers. 😀
Since Gene mentioned "price class" ... These are priced very close to the MartinLogan Motion XT F200 Would i be correct to say there is no way these SVS speakers can truly compete with the XT F200's and should be priced accordingly?
I'm no expert but if you had the ability to cross significantly lower than normal, say 40 hz, I would still probably run a sub or two and high pass the towers. Many bass management tools don't allow for that low. My integrated is 60, 80, or 100. I wish I could do 50 or so with my R3s but 60 is still nice.
Yes, the older Ultra Towers have the same issue in that the low crossover to its bass drivers means lots of filtering happening around traditional subwoofer crossover frequencies.
@@jameslarson2277How would you run these full range using Dirac Live Bass Control ? Are would Audyssey be a better option ? I’m assuming in Audyssey to run these as Large instead of small correct ?
Andrew Robinson did an extensive comparison of the R11 to the SVS Titan. He then did another video explaining why he liked the SVS better but kept the R11 as his reference.
I have the Focal Kanta 2, and the Klipsch RF7III, honestly this new SVS speaker feels like it might be a combination of the both of them. Might consider this one seriously. Except for the dang price here in Australia. Bought the focals for $6.5k and the Klipsch for $3.8k. But the SVS is $10.4k and svs products are hard to negotiated down with unfortunately 😕
@rasta.j I was wondering where do you find the Klipsch RF-7 IIIs for $3800 AUD which av specialist dealer was that, was that with a trade-in of other speakers? They retail for $10,000 in Australia which is insanity but the street price is probably around under $6999 which is still crazy for what they are but SVS is off the chain in Australia with the latest Evolution series, the Pinnacle "flagship" floorstanders retail for $11,499 but hey they're on special at the moment for a paltry sum of only $10,349, bargain territory I reckon ;)
@@oniiz8685 digital cinema Sydney had a pair in cherry that was hard to move. I suspect it was stock that was lying around. I went to buy the heresy iv, but left with the rf7 at that price. Fast forward, I ran out of space in my townhouse because I picked up the kanta on discount. So I let my dad borrow the rf7's, turns out he loved them and wanted to do his own rf7 set up. Regrettably digital cinema couldn't match the price they previously gave me. Best I could find was $6.5k at Hollywood Cinema Store in Melbourne.....So I just have the one pair of RF7s. Underrated, unique, fantastic speakers.
@@rasta.j That was extremely lucky basically got them at USA pricing, it's funny you say that the pair was the Cherry veneer finish as that is notably absent across Australian dealers, they now only ever advertise Black Ash & Walnut, I think it's because it was discovered that the Cherry veneer had visible seams on the the RF-7 III units so maybe Australia feels they do not want to deal with the headache of customer disappointment, the USA still sells the Cherry finish, I picked up my pair of Black Ash RF-7 IIIs for $4200 plus $1000 trade-in of my Klipsch RF-82s back in early 2022 just before the price hike which the price rose from $7899 to $9999, ouch, the speaker pricing in Australia is getting really insane, the USA is laughing at us as while their flagship pricing is not "cheap" at $5000-$5500, the US pricing is much more palatable ;)
Really curious about the idea of not needing subs. These are listed up to 300 watts per speaker. How can 300 watts split across 6 drivers (4 eight inchers) be enough to even remotely compete with the amps driving single woofer subs? Again not being critical but it seems like an impossible task.
There are 200” of surface area per speaker. Where a single 12” is 176”. I would argue subs are always better for tune ability and modal distribution… But these look good for the money. I would like to hear them.
@@veroman007 4 8 inch drivers. Not 8 per speaker. That's 300 watts max split between them not even including the mid and tweeter. I realize there is more surface area but that's like 65 watts per 8 inch driver.
@@JamesWilliams-gf8gm I realize there is more surface area but that's like 65 watts per 8 inch driver. Can that really compete with 500 to 2000 watts driving one sub?
For music listening you could get away with not using subs. For movies though, I'd still run a sub to fill in the area between 30 and 20hz as the output on these drops off rapidly below 30hz and that band is crucial for creating low freq effects in movies. Also, good luck ever giving 300 watts to each speaker. You'll beg for mercy long before then.
Sorry guys, but the 8" woofers looks like very cheap $10 units with zinc coated forged T-Yoke and washer (premium stuff is CNC), bad glue job on the magnetic system, and 2 cents spade terminals on a cardboard support... Really low level manufacturing (but can offer good performance, it's a different topic) PS: I'm acoustic engineer who designs drivers
Looks can be deceiving. Cast Aluminum baskets alone on this size driver equates to a bit more than $10/unit. But what's more important is the actual motor system and what's on the "inside". Do they use shorting rings, titanium VC formers, etc? On quick glance they look to have high xmax/xmech capability as well as excellent venting/thermal dissipation. And using FOUR drivers allows for less overall required excursion which will keep any HD/IMD products at exponentially lower levels. We'd really need to see independent driver measurements to know for sure, but also consider the LIMITED PASSBAND that these particular drivers are playing! IMO, SoTA drivers in this application and design are not really *that* important. SVS is a growing company with growing expenditures (facilities, work force, equipment, insurance, marketing, utility bills, etc.) and they have every right to maximize their profits and ROI by using "affordable" drivers as long as they "get the job done". IF they were just using a single 8" driver to reach these response goals, then Yes, I would want to see a SoTA driver being used. But again, you and I don't know the actual measured response or quality of these drive units, so there's that. ;)
I'd still HP this speaker :P Usually below 50Hz distortion increases heavily. Not to mention 30 or 20Hz... Though... I get that crossover points in this one may make it hard...
That just doesn't make sense in this case. If you did that, you will essentially not even be utilizing all FOUR of the large 8" drivers in these large towers and would be throwing away your money on 4 bass drivers and also therefore have unnecessarily large towers that are being completely wasted. It'd be like buying a muscle car with a big V8 engine to have lots of HP + Low-End TORQUE and then taking out 4 of the spark plugs so only 4 cylinders are producing the power while you waste extra gasoline! Spend less money, take up less space, and get the smaller versions and integrate them properly with a good subwoofer(s).
Even in the case of a simple stereo pair, I tend to agree. There's no harm in trying, especially if one's set up allows easy-to-do crossover changes. I'd try 40 Hz with a 12 dB/octave slope. A caveat or two... I'd be looking for a sub that has a -3 dB point well below 20 Hz. (All of my SVS subs are ported and tuned to 16 Hz.) And if your listening tastes don't include content with ultra-low frequencies, it's not going to make a difference whether you use a HPF or not. Heck, if your content doesn't, I wouldn't even bother adding a sub, HPF or not - unless the sub (or subs) would be useful in smoothing out the room response.
@@bbfoto7248 well... I'm just speaking from my experience. That is - in most cases you are right. But there is always this one damn song that digs deep below 40Hz and my experience is that THD of speakers, no matter the size, goes quickly up. The end result is that it sounds ok until i play that with sub. Then the bass sounds deeper because there is less thd. Example? Currently I am playing with 2xSVS SB3000 in small 20sq meter room. And I'm planning on moving to SB16 because thd in SB3000 is killing me (well, plus limiter). So ultimately - that depends on use case. In my use case for music 2x SB3000 is too little ;-) Then why to buy towers speakers? Well, i like the looks and... additional sources of LF are always welcome :-)
If you can listen closer because of the angled drivers, wouldn't that mean problems at greater distances or does the fact that one set of woofers is angled down and one up solve this problem?
The angling of the drivers isn't what makes the Ultra Evolution Pinnacle listenable at closer distances, rather, it's the way the drivers are arranged as well as the low frequencies used in the crossover circuit. This main acoustic lobe of this speaker is heavily centered on the tweeter, and the only integration distance that you need to worry about comes from the spacing between the midrange to tweeter on this design. So the distance that the sound from all drivers integrate is about the same as a two-way bookshelf speaker. However, the integration distance doesn't somehow diminish if you were listening further away, so these will sound just as good at a 1 meter distance as a 5 meter distance, provided they don't run out of headroom to make up for the higher loudness levels needed to overcome the greater distance.
Interesting thoughts about the fullrange talk. I run my O.G Ultra Towers with a 80hz crossover even tho they also provide alot of bass by themselves. But i also have SVS 2x PC-4000. Anyone think i should run the towers fullrange?
@@MrOggaaaa LFE+Main will not impose any crossover restrictions on your towers. I would suggest sticking with LFE and 40hz crossover, but you can experiment to see how it sounds.
I have a dual sub system with Dirac bass management. Any thoughts on if it is worth it to get the full towers vs just the bookshelves? Thanks in advance folks
Dirac is able to calibrate the speakers to run full range with the sub, so you could get either the bookshelf or the towers with no problem. I would say if you like to listen at loud levels, get the towers since the two midranges will give you more headroom than a single midrange.
Companies should stop with the one upmanship naming of products. What happens if they make a better speaker? They’re already at Pinnacle so what could be higher? Should they name the better one the Zenith or really go for it and call it the Zenith Pinnacle Ultra tower speaker. They’ve locked themselves into a corner. I think they should start over and call their speaker lines Good, Better and Best. At least this still leaves room for Silver, Gold and Platinum editions.
I like the 'good, better, and best' naming convention. And if the company makes one better than 'best,' they can just call it 'bestesser.' Or, if they make one lower end then the 'good,' they can just call it 'worst.' 😄
@@davidt8438 There's always the Mark II, III, IV, etcetera naming convention to fall back on. :) For instance, with the dSLR cameras I've owned, there was the original Canon EOS 5D, then the 5D MK II, then 5D MK III, and finally the 5D MK IV, until they switched over to mirrorless digital bodies such as the EOS R5. And there will be an EOS R5 Mark II announced and released this August. 😛 Each one was a vast improvement on the former model. So, there's that. ;)
These speakers are incredibly cheesy looking. I’m surprised so many people think they look good. Looks like a cheap speaker trying to look high end and failing miserably. Very awkward visual design.
The finishes are whats lacking. If the shape has a functional purpose which SVS is claiming and if you’re facing them, what are you seeing? A monolithic tower just like almost every speaker.
@@Nurdaholic Just don't ever look at them when you aren't in the listening position. I'm with Dorko. They look bad and I'm not buying that the angled drivers helps anything unless you are in the perfect vertical and horizontal position. I mean, that's gotta make the sweet spot smaller right? That said. If they sound good I'd buy them regardless of looks.
@@justbrowsing5279 "I mean, that's gotta make the sweet spot smaller right?" That's not how speaker directivity works, mate. ;) But TBF, ANY gloss Piano Black speaker looks "cheesy" to me. I'd much rather have a matte/satin finish real wood veneer or painted finish that doesn't reflect the picture from my HDTV and every light and object in the room. YMMV.
@kennethmccullough1342 TBH, I don't own and haven't heard any of the speakers in question. 😛 But the most important aspects required for producing a Wide and Immersive Soundstage are Smooth & Even Frequency Response (that also matches as closely as possible between the Left & Right speakers At Your Listening Position), and Smooth & Even DIRECTIVITY with relatively Wide Dispersion overall. Smooth and Even "DIRECTIVITY" means that the Dispersion Angles or "polar radiation patterns" of all of the multiple drivers that are being used match very closely overall, and match especially well through each Crossover region from driver to driver (between the woofer, midbass/midwoofer, midrange, and tweeter). The Horizontal Directivity is more important in general for a wide & immersive soundstage, but you'll also want good Vertical Directivity if you have a Home Theater with Tiered multi-row seating where each consecutive row is elevated slightly behind the other, or if you want even frequency response while sitting or standing/walking around. The size, shape, nearby boundaries, and acoustic properties of your listening room also play a significant role in regards to imaging & soundstage characteristics. But in general, loudspeakers with a consistently Wide Dispersion Pattern and with a Frequency Response that remains very Similar both On-Axis (direct sound) and Off-Axis (reflected sound) will provide a Wider and more "immersive" soundstage with more "room ambience". Look for speakers with Off-Axis Dispersion angles or Response that is smooth out to 60°-70° to each side of the speaker, so 120° to 140° total forward radiation off of the front baffle. Speakers with dispersion angles of 50° or less to each side might provide for more focused and distinct individual image placements, but a Soundstage that is not as Wide and "Immersive". It's always a balance of compromises and tradeoffs with every speaker design. ;) While the Directivity Matching isn't perfect with these SVS towers, overall it is very GOOD throughout the majority of its response, and it's unusually good in regards to the wide radiation pattern of the dome tweeter above 7kHz, which is very rare. Most dome tweeters that are placed on a flat front baffle will start to "beam" significantly (narrowing dispersion as the frequency rises) above ~7kHz. This Wide & Even Dispersion pattern that is maintained above ~7kHz by the tweeter in the SVS will generally result in a Wide & "Immersive" Soundstage that has more "room ambience". My only guess is that the "Acoustic Lens" used in this tweeter's unique built-in grill is responsible for the wider/smoother dispersion of the upper treble.
I really enjoy these interviews with James. He is so nerdy, but still has the ability to explain things in an understandable way. He also seems really honest and doesn't look down on brands or those that enjoy those brands, it seems all about the sound. He will even push back on Gene when appropriate! Great work! 👍🏻
Gene and James make a great team on these videos. Always an instant click for me.
i have rarely seen a marketing ground game launch as well done as this svs campaign. they are EVERYWHERE promoting these new products. this will be a model for companies to follow for years. i love their subs and assume these are a great value as well
Yep, and that's why their price to performance rsruon is pretty terrible. For their subs anyway. I haven't heard these yet. You're paying for that name, free shipping both ways and their excellent customer service.
I'm glad James brought up the fact that these are more of a (4) ohm speaker. With this many drivers you really do need a robust amp. Alot of receivers wouldn't do well driving these at higher volumes. A prime example is : a pair of the JBL HDI 3800's. With the (3) demanding 8" woofers, a Rotel RB1590 was blowing out left or right channels on (3) brand new amps at reference levels. Had absolutely no problems with a (Arcam PA240, Peachtree SE220 or My NAD M 23.
What is meant by "beefy"? Is a monolith 2 channel amp at 200w per just fine, or even just an A/V like the Denon X4800h? Why would I pay $2500-3500 for the Arcam or NAD at the same power level. I am generally perplexed and not poking fun or arguing.
I’ve had mine for 3 weeks and love them! BASX A3 would drive them hard with rock and metal but clipped when playing modern electronic music. I had to bi-amp them with my denon 4400. Just bought an Emotiva XPA 3 and am going home to hook it up. Have not turned on my 2 subs. These just sound too good!🎉
They are definitely power hungry. Glad you’re enjoying them. Just in case you didn’t know you’re only supposed to bi amp with the same amp. I wouldn’t care if it sounded good, but just throwing it out there
These speakers say 20w-300w range to drive. Not sure what that even means considering I can't find a RMS or "peak" number on the website. If you are clipping with that BasX a3 is it due to playing way above reference level? Running SPL on these in my room would have them at 104db easy on 200w per channel. let me know what you have going on there so I may avoid or learn from this. thanks
@@dylanpage7436 these are 4 ohm speakers or less when you crank them. The XPA 3 is 300x2 at 8ohms AND 490x2 at 4 ohms! You can definitely hear the 1000watts at high volume! Unbelievable with the new amp! They hit VERY hard with all that power. 3 people sat with their mouths open and couldn’t believe it
@@WardoUSA Actually, that is not true. The speaker does not care since you are bypassing the crossover. Guys have been using different amps since the beginning. An example is a tube amp running the tweeters and a solid-state amp running the drivers.
I auditioned the Ultra Evolution Pinnacles last weekend. They were in about a 16' X 24' room. They were about 10' to 12' apart, facing straight ahead 12' from my listening position. It sounded a little boomy to me, but I felt they were too close to the wall and corners of the room.
I then listened to the Titans, which were in a bigger room with a sub, and they sounded much tighter and faster bass response. Both systems were powered by Marantz Cinema 40 integrated. I do believe the Pinnacles needed more power to control the woofers. It would be interesting if James would review the Titans and compare the two.
”You are alot stronger then you look” 💪🏼 That was funny! 😅 You guys are awesome! 👌🏼
I'm confused. Right after saying you kind of need to listen on axis or it "might sound a little rocky and show some dips in the crossover points", you say that they are wide dispersion and sound close to the same across the room. Not trying to nitpick, just trying to understand. Aren't those two statements in conflict with each other? Thanks for the review.
I am wondering the same thing.
I think what he means is it sounds different on vertical axis but sound even on horizontal axis
Pretty common problem of mtm designs.
You are right to point out the ambiguity there, and I should have been more clear. Per my comment about the dispersion creating a similar sound over a wide area, I meant that there aren't any major peaks or nulls at off-axis angles, so you will be more or less getting hit with the full spectrum of sound. However, for the most linear and balanced sound, have them aimed at the listening position, because the on-axis angle has the smoothest and most linear response. In other words, the off-axis response is generally OK but the on-axis response is specifically very good.
Would my 2 SVS PB 1000 pro's still benefit for impact for movies? Would there be a way to set my Anthem AVM70 ARC to run the speakers full range and set the subs? Would also like to run just 2 channel music with no subs.
James has already spoken, but I think two separate points were being made that kind of accidentally got melded into one.
The first point is that the overall Frequency Response is smoothest with the speakers aimed On-Axis to your listening position, mainly because the dip in the crossover region and a few other areas become more pronounced further Off-Axis.
The second point is that above the tweeter's X/O frequency, these speakers have an unusually Wide & Consistent Dispersion pattern in the mid-to-upper treble for a dome tweeter. Due to physics and the diameter & shape of the dome tweeter piston, the dispersion pattern of nearly all speakers that use a dome tweeter (without a waveguide) will begin to progressively narrow more & more above ~7kHz. Perhaps in part due to the "Acoustic Lens" grill in front of the tweeter dome, these tweeters maintain a much wider dispersion pattern with rising frequency.
Loudspeakers that have a more consistently wide upper treble dispersion pattern will have more consistent response and tonality/timbre (in that region) over a wider listening area (i.e. multiple front row seats in a HT), and this wide dispersion also results in a perceived wider soundstage overall with more room ambience.
But care must also be taken in shaping the upper FR in the X/O of the tweeter because in a speaker with an otherwise Flat On-Axis upper treble response, the direct On-Axis SPL will sum with the increased Off-Axis Reflected Sound due to this wider dispersion and will result in and be perceived as "hot" or "bright/exaggerated" treble.
Given James' and other's listening impressions of these as being more on the "warm" side, it seems that SVS has properly addressed this.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the Center Evolution and Nano
SVS just seems to make really good/excellent quality no drama, no caveats equipment. Like Arendal, or Polk.
Nice. I'm about to update my home cinema and was waiting for a review. Thanks.
Don't forget the watts
two points i think is important: opposing drivers also needs to be linked to each other directly, not only with the box like in this svs.
my other point is: the woofer crossover at 140hz is too low, maybe a limitation and compromise they worked around but still you will miss the impact from 150hz and above from only two midrange units. 200hz is better from this perspective.
and speculations from my part is that the ports may have some issues with larger bandwidth woofers, same with internal damping wish is lacking in ported designs.
Great review guys. The Arendals seem like good competition at a slightly lower price point. Certainly a lot of options at this level. I'd be curious if the time aligned cabinet design and diamond coated tweeter offer measurable advantages.
I think you would find measurable advantages for both. The time-alignment advantage should show up in impulse or step response measurements, and the diamond-coated tweeter advantage should show up in a frequency response graph by pushing break-up modes to higher frequencies. The question for me is are these really audible advantages.
@jameslarson2277 Hmmmm. If, in fact, the advantages are not really heard, can I infer that I might was well save some money by choosing the Arendal 1723 THX over the Pinnacles? I was actually trying to decide between the Arendals and the SVS Ultra Evo's. I can't wait for you to review the 1723 THX.
@adamjj85
Quite a few tweeter manufacturers use some type of coating or secondary material (doped fabric domes or layered/deposited secondary material on metal domes) in order to either push the breakup modes above the audible spectrum and/or to dampen/distribute a larger single breakup mode to multiple smaller ones that are less audible.
This has been done for many years now with easily measurable improvements.
In regards to physically "time aligning" multiple drivers by placing them on angled or stepped-back or -forward baffles, this might look effective, but in reality this is rarely the case and James is justified to be skeptical.
Whether it be a tweeter, midrange, or midwoofer/midbass driver with a deep cone, the common notion or idea is to vertically "line up" or vertically align the transducer's pistons (dome or cone) at the point where they all interface or connect to the voice coil former or bobbin. For example the base perimeter of the dome on a tweeter where the voice coil is attached should be vertically aligned to the base perimeter of the central "dust cap" where the voice coil attaches to a cone on a midrange or midwoofer/midbass driver.
What most "speaker designers" who are not also actual transducer engineers fail to take into account is that every driver is made using many different materials, and different combinations of materials in their construction. Different materials are used for the voice coil formers or bobbins (paper, kapton, aluminum, titanium), various cone materials and composite cones, the different adhesives that bond the parts together, and the type/mass/# of windings/density of the voice coil wire itself (aluminum vs copper, etc.).
Note that the Speed Of Sound is relatively constant for sound waves as they propagate through the air. HOWEVER, the Speed Of Sound can vary greatly as it propagates through a variety of MUCH denser materials...before reaching the driver's piston that actually moves the air.
IOW, once the voice coil of the driver is set in motion by the input signal, the TIME that it takes for that signal and movement to propagate through and reach the actual cone or dome "piston" of the driver that moves the air may vary widely.
We are talking just milliseconds, but just a matter of a few milliseconds is what we use in DSPs in order to digitally "time align" multi-driver active loudspeakers, loudspeaker arrays, or the multiple driver placements in a car audio system.
So in reality, "physically aligning" all of the voice coils of the drivers in a multi-driver loudspeaker by angling or off-setting the baffle forward or back does not necessarily equate to real-world Time Alignment of the drivers via impulse response.
As James suggests, ultimately, this "alignment" should be verified with the alignment in time of the impulse responses of each driver via measurements. And more study needs to be done regarding our audible threshold, i.e. how much offset in time or impulse response between drivers at any given frequency is actually audible and/or results in a difference in measurable response.
I heard the SVS "ULTRA EVOLUTION PINNACLE" at AXPONA and thought they had great potential. Since then I have been looking forward to a review with measurements and greatly appreciate this one!
I wish you would have published a full spectrum plot but I was able to piece one together and found that these are warm speakers- really warm! The response rises by 7db from 1Khz to 70 Hz- anechoic! That is way too much bass. In-room would be even worse.
Given the additional rear firing woofers in-room measurements would have been very helpful in addition to a full spectrum plot.
If the SVS would have measured flatter in that region (like the Perlisten R7t or BMR Monitors) I would have pulled the trigger on them already. Thank you.
Honest question. People in the audio space seem to want speakers that measure flat in some areas like some other speakers. If they measure the same as another speaker what's the point in buying them? Wouldn't they just sound the same?
I'm awaiting on the arrival of a Yamaha R-N2000A receiver. I hope it will be powerful enough to drive the Pinnacles or the 1723 towers. Not sure which speakers I would prefer.
It can easily drive these to satisfying levels that will delight you! That would be a hell of a combination
How would you run these full range using Dirac Live Bass Control ? Are would Audyssey be a better option ? I’m assuming in Audyssey to run these as Large instead of small correct ?
Listening to these in person, in the room that I listened to them in, there seemed to be a lot of upper bass/lower midrange energy coming from these speakers. I also agree that the treble was a little subdued. I'm still interested in hearing their two smaller towers though. I appreciate that they are time-aligned.
How would these compare to the perlisten r5t ? Or the titans vs r5t ?
Great info gents, thanx. Seems like a lot of value for the $. "Warmth over accuracy" is not a speaker I personally will be attracted to however.
I had the same thoughts but then realized that the bass and treble can be attenuated down or boosted up to match and tune the sound to your liking. Just a thought.
I own these and yea I agree, running full range with subs and having them toed in really sounds good. Only problem is my emotiva xpa gen 3 is going into protect so now I need to go look for a better amp.
Not surprising regarding the Emotiva amp. Check out some alternatives from Anthem, Outlaw, Monoprice, Parasound, and NAD.
@@Audioholics hi Gene, will the Anthem MCA 325 drive these ok?
The comparison should be The Ultra Evolution Tower 3000.00 vs the Polk L600. That would be a fairer comparison per price
Thanks for the review. I have been waiting eagerly. I am considering upgrading from Klipsch rf7iiis in my home theater…But what is a high pass?
The high pass filter is just the bass management that your avr does. When you normally pair speakers with subs you want to let the subs do the heavy lifting with the bass frequencies with their own amplifiers and save the AVR's amps or your separates power amps use their power for the mids and the highs on the tower speakers. So the AVR will set a filter at say 80 hz on your towers where output below 80 hz is significantly reduced on the towers and is routed to the subs. This filter wherever it's set will allow the speaker to play anything higher then its setpoint at say 80hz but anything lower then 80 hz will start to be cut off or reduced actually. This is why it's called a high pass filter. This SVS speaker however shouldn't be crossed over at all you should run it full range since the woofers crossover is so low because their will be problems with the subs and the speakers acting up at that crossover. You should run these full range when paired with your subs. But that means you will need a lot of power since the amplifier you drive these with will be powering the entire full frequency range and not handing some of that range off to the subs
Good. That is what I also thought. If one has good towers why cut off at 80hz (can be cut off just above their lowest rated frequency), with separate amplifier for LCR!
Also that 5 in 5.1 is full range or is cut off as per dolby recommendation while mastering? Because x.1 is LFE so if we crossover at 80 or any frequency then sub is doing double duty, isn't it? Please share the opinion as I don't know technicalities. I have Emotiva xpa3 for LCR and LCR rated 44 hz lowest so can be xovered at 60hz, isn't it.
@@danzilla31stompinontokyo36 awesome explanation. That helps a lot, thanks
@@sanonmars
"Good Towers" is a relative statement. Most loudspeakers, whether they are bookshelf or towers, will struggle to produce CLEAN Undistorted response as SPL increases (i.e. Loud Home Theater levels).
When you apply a 60Hz-80Hz High Pass Crossover Filter to your main LCR speakers and add a Subwoofer to cover the frequencies below that, it can usually take some strain off of the main speakers and reduce their overall distortion and allow them to play higher SPLs cleanly.
If you really do have "Good Tower" speakers that already have very low distortion even at high SPLs, then there will probably be much less of an advantage or reason to use a 60Hz-80Hz High Pass Crossover and/or combine them with a subwoofer.
But your LCR speakers that reach down to 44Hz at the lowest would most likely benefit from adding at least one subwoofer and applying a 60Hz-80Hz High Pass Crossover Filter to the LCRs. Again, the advantage should be that your LCR speakers will be able to play louder with less distortion.
Frequencies lower than about ~100Hz are very omni-directional and our auditory system has a hard time localizing those low frequencies to any specific point in space, so there is really no need to have the distance or separation between your LCRs when reproducing those low frequencies.
But a decent subwoofer can easily reproduce those low frequencies at Higher SPLs compared to having your LCRs strain or struggle to CLEANLY reproduce those low frequencies. Because of this, if needed, a subwoofer can easily manage doing "double duties" as you say.
For the Specific Speakers in THIS Review, James does not recommend using a typical 80Hz High Pass Crossover Filter on the towers if you are going to add a subwoofer with a ~80Hz Low Pass Crossover Filter. This is because of the extra or multiple drivers/speakers that are being used in these towers and how they are combined in a very complex manner to each other, and also how they are integrated with multiple ports on the speakers in order to achieve their overall uniform response .
James is saying that it will be very difficult to add a subwoofer to these and be able to integrate it well in order to maintain good phase and frequency response overall if you try to use a subwoofer crossed over at ~80Hz to the main towers.
It generally isn't a problem with other tower or bookshelf speakers that use a simpler and more traditional combination of drivers and ports through the midbass and bass region.
Wonder how they compare to the KEF R11 Meta
R11 has a flatter frequency response (not rolled off) and less bass. Accuracy=R11, fun=SVS U.E.
These versus the Arendal 1723 towers? I'd still opt for an additional dedicated sub, either way. What would be the recommendation?
Good question
The frequency response is miles better on the 1723 that's for sure.
We have a review of the 1723 Towers incoming. Stay tuned for that!
The Arendal's have a brighter sound and less bass. They focused on output above 80hz because of THX cert.
@@bearclaw5115 how well do the pinnacles handle treble? Are they resolving? Do they need to be lifted?
How would the Pinnacle and Titan compare in a dedicated home theater environment with 2 subs ? I'm seriously considering Pinnacle, but it might be overkill.
only 100lbs👌
I may consider these as id like to downsize in my old age🤙
I like the build quality of most svs products, but never was satisfied with the sound.
Hopefully these may be the answer👍
If I would add one sub to the Ultra Evo Pinnacle for sound quality, which one would you suggest?
Now I wonder how close the Titans would spec compared with the Pinnacles. I really preferred the Titans with a sub in comparison.
Based on what you're saying, these might be helpful in addressing room nodes. When I sit and listen to my system it's fine, but when I stand up bass drops off. Am I wrong?
Thanks for the review! I am running the smaller Titan towers in Black Oak. They do sound fantastic!
Why are you using to power them? An amp or a regular AVR?
@@acehigh13 I am using an Outlaw 7000X to power them. I have the Tonewinner AT300 processor and I use two Outlaw 7000X to run my 7.1.6 system.
How do you like the black oak finish? That's what I'm considering ordering.
@@stephenphillips1660 I am really happy I waited for the Black Oak to come out. They are beautiful and completely disappear in my Theater Room when I am watching movies. I would have had a reflection from my screen with the Gloss Black. These sit much higher than the Ultra Bookshelf speakers I had on the stands. I moved them up to the level the Titan's would sit and there was reflections off of my screen. I love the look of the Gloss Black but the Black Oak is finger print and dust proof!
I have the Titans as well.
Focal Aria Evo is my choice! Curious how JBL HDI 3800 sound like though..
I'm happy with my Philharmonic BMR Towers
The bookshelfs kick ass
waiting to be measured.
@@swllz I hear ya. I had the chance to hear them a week ago they blew me away. I compared the Focal Aria and Elac Uni-fi reference and it wiped the floor with them in my opinion
@@budsmoker4201120 how about the center?
@@budsmoker4201120I'm thinking of doing the Nano Bookshelfes for all rear channels and side surround channles and the Titans for the front.
I’m leaning towards bookshelves myself since i have dual subs already and Dirac with bass man. Already. Kinda feeling that the bookshelves would be good enough.
But i would love to see a detailed review to be sure
I heard from a reliable source that the midrange polarity is reversed. Is this true or not? Thanks for the review.
Im surprised Definitive Technology DM80 wasn't on James list. I know Im looking at both. I would love to know which Gene and James think is better? Which has the better tweeter?
I did have it originally but pared it out since the list was too long. I feel like it's a bit too idiosyncratic to be a direct competitor. It has a powered bass section and a bipole passive section. I did review the DM70. Is it better? I would say its a matter of personal preference since the soundstages are very different.
@jameslarson2277 oh, okay, thanks for the quick reply. But I was wondering how there tweeters compared? Do I need to step up to like Perlisten s7t to get a good tweeter and mid for music? I did hear a pair, but wow, 4x the cost of these.
@@battousai412 The drivers for both speakers are good. The real difference is the dispersion pattern and its effects on soundstage. The Deftech speakers may give you a more spacious soundstage but less precise imaging than the SVS speakers. I do like both speakers.
I own a pair of Tekton Pendragon's, do you guys think these would be a worthwhile upgrade or more of a side-grade?
The idea that these speakers are Ultra makes me want them.
Gene I was looking forward to the review video and then I saw the Yankees shirt. As a Red Sox fan I had to read the transcript instead. James thanks for keeping your gear as neutral as a good pair of speakers. 😀
Since Gene mentioned "price class" ... These are priced very close to the MartinLogan Motion XT F200 Would i be correct to say there is no way these SVS speakers can truly compete with the XT F200's and should be priced accordingly?
The SVS speakers absolutely compete with the ML XT F200s. I would prefer the SVS speakers, myself.
@@jameslarson2277 Is this the real James Larson?
@@stephenphillips1660 YES
Come on Gene! Get the kid a speaker 🏗️ crane!!!😊😊
Would you recommend running their original Ultra Towers full range as well?
I'm no expert but if you had the ability to cross significantly lower than normal, say 40 hz, I would still probably run a sub or two and high pass the towers. Many bass management tools don't allow for that low. My integrated is 60, 80, or 100. I wish I could do 50 or so with my R3s but 60 is still nice.
Yes, the older Ultra Towers have the same issue in that the low crossover to its bass drivers means lots of filtering happening around traditional subwoofer crossover frequencies.
@@jameslarson2277How would you run these full range using Dirac Live Bass Control ? Are would Audyssey be a better option ? I’m assuming in Audyssey to run these as Large instead of small correct ?
How do these compare to the Kef R11 meta?
Andrew Robinson did an extensive comparison of the R11 to the SVS Titan. He then did another video explaining why he liked the SVS better but kept the R11 as his reference.
Love the work guy!!!!
Been really curious about these
I have the Focal Kanta 2, and the Klipsch RF7III, honestly this new SVS speaker feels like it might be a combination of the both of them.
Might consider this one seriously. Except for the dang price here in Australia. Bought the focals for $6.5k and the Klipsch for $3.8k. But the SVS is $10.4k and svs products are hard to negotiated down with unfortunately 😕
@rasta.j I was wondering where do you find the Klipsch RF-7 IIIs for $3800 AUD which av specialist dealer was that, was that with a trade-in of other speakers?
They retail for $10,000 in Australia which is insanity but the street price is probably around under $6999 which is still crazy for what they are but SVS is off the chain in Australia with the latest Evolution series, the Pinnacle "flagship" floorstanders retail for $11,499 but hey they're on special at the moment for a paltry sum of only $10,349, bargain territory I reckon ;)
@@oniiz8685 digital cinema Sydney had a pair in cherry that was hard to move. I suspect it was stock that was lying around. I went to buy the heresy iv, but left with the rf7 at that price.
Fast forward, I ran out of space in my townhouse because I picked up the kanta on discount. So I let my dad borrow the rf7's, turns out he loved them and wanted to do his own rf7 set up.
Regrettably digital cinema couldn't match the price they previously gave me. Best I could find was $6.5k at Hollywood Cinema Store in Melbourne.....So I just have the one pair of RF7s. Underrated, unique, fantastic speakers.
@@rasta.j That was extremely lucky basically got them at USA pricing, it's funny you say that the pair was the Cherry veneer finish as that is notably absent across Australian dealers, they now only ever advertise Black Ash & Walnut, I think it's because it was discovered that the Cherry veneer had visible seams on the the RF-7 III units so maybe Australia feels they do not want to deal with the headache of customer disappointment, the USA still sells the Cherry finish, I picked up my pair of Black Ash RF-7 IIIs for $4200 plus $1000 trade-in of my Klipsch RF-82s back in early 2022 just before the price hike which the price rose from $7899 to $9999, ouch, the speaker pricing in Australia is getting really insane, the USA is laughing at us as while their flagship pricing is not "cheap" at $5000-$5500, the US pricing is much more palatable ;)
@rasta.j
Personally, I would look at some of the speaker options from *March Audio* in Oz! Amazing price/performance IMO.
Really curious about the idea of not needing subs. These are listed up to 300 watts per speaker. How can 300 watts split across 6 drivers (4 eight inchers) be enough to even remotely compete with the amps driving single woofer subs? Again not being critical but it seems like an impossible task.
8 8in. drivers move a LOT of air. makes more sense than one 12 inch.
There are 200” of surface area per speaker. Where a single 12” is 176”.
I would argue subs are always better for tune ability and modal distribution…
But these look good for the money. I would like to hear them.
@@veroman007 4 8 inch drivers. Not 8 per speaker. That's 300 watts max split between them not even including the mid and tweeter. I realize there is more surface area but that's like 65 watts per 8 inch driver.
@@JamesWilliams-gf8gm I realize there is more surface area but that's like 65 watts per 8 inch driver. Can that really compete with 500 to 2000 watts driving one sub?
For music listening you could get away with not using subs. For movies though, I'd still run a sub to fill in the area between 30 and 20hz as the output on these drops off rapidly below 30hz and that band is crucial for creating low freq effects in movies.
Also, good luck ever giving 300 watts to each speaker. You'll beg for mercy long before then.
Sorry guys, but the 8" woofers looks like very cheap $10 units with zinc coated forged T-Yoke and washer (premium stuff is CNC), bad glue job on the magnetic system, and 2 cents spade terminals on a cardboard support... Really low level manufacturing (but can offer good performance, it's a different topic)
PS: I'm acoustic engineer who designs drivers
the crossover components in the old ultra were supposedly extremely low quality.
Looks can be deceiving.
Cast Aluminum baskets alone on this size driver equates to a bit more than $10/unit. But what's more important is the actual motor system and what's on the "inside". Do they use shorting rings, titanium VC formers, etc? On quick glance they look to have high xmax/xmech capability as well as excellent venting/thermal dissipation.
And using FOUR drivers allows for less overall required excursion which will keep any HD/IMD products at exponentially lower levels.
We'd really need to see independent driver measurements to know for sure, but also consider the LIMITED PASSBAND that these particular drivers are playing! IMO, SoTA drivers in this application and design are not really *that* important. SVS is a growing company with growing expenditures (facilities, work force, equipment, insurance, marketing, utility bills, etc.) and they have every right to maximize their profits and ROI by using "affordable" drivers as long as they "get the job done".
IF they were just using a single 8" driver to reach these response goals, then Yes, I would want to see a SoTA driver being used. But again, you and I don't know the actual measured response or quality of these drive units, so there's that. ;)
I'd still HP this speaker :P
Usually below 50Hz distortion increases heavily. Not to mention 30 or 20Hz...
Though... I get that crossover points in this one may make it hard...
That just doesn't make sense in this case. If you did that, you will essentially not even be utilizing all FOUR of the large 8" drivers in these large towers and would be throwing away your money on 4 bass drivers and also therefore have unnecessarily large towers that are being completely wasted.
It'd be like buying a muscle car with a big V8 engine to have lots of HP + Low-End TORQUE and then taking out 4 of the spark plugs so only 4 cylinders are producing the power while you waste extra gasoline!
Spend less money, take up less space, and get the smaller versions and integrate them properly with a good subwoofer(s).
Even in the case of a simple stereo pair, I tend to agree. There's no harm in trying, especially if one's set up allows easy-to-do crossover changes. I'd try 40 Hz with a 12 dB/octave slope. A caveat or two... I'd be looking for a sub that has a -3 dB point well below 20 Hz. (All of my SVS subs are ported and tuned to 16 Hz.) And if your listening tastes don't include content with ultra-low frequencies, it's not going to make a difference whether you use a HPF or not. Heck, if your content doesn't, I wouldn't even bother adding a sub, HPF or not - unless the sub (or subs) would be useful in smoothing out the room response.
@@bbfoto7248 well... I'm just speaking from my experience. That is - in most cases you are right. But there is always this one damn song that digs deep below 40Hz and my experience is that THD of speakers, no matter the size, goes quickly up. The end result is that it sounds ok until i play that with sub. Then the bass sounds deeper because there is less thd. Example? Currently I am playing with 2xSVS SB3000 in small 20sq meter room. And I'm planning on moving to SB16 because thd in SB3000 is killing me (well, plus limiter).
So ultimately - that depends on use case. In my use case for music 2x SB3000 is too little ;-)
Then why to buy towers speakers? Well, i like the looks and... additional sources of LF are always welcome :-)
If you can listen closer because of the angled drivers, wouldn't that mean problems at greater distances or does the fact that one set of woofers is angled down and one up solve this problem?
The angling of the drivers isn't what makes the Ultra Evolution Pinnacle listenable at closer distances, rather, it's the way the drivers are arranged as well as the low frequencies used in the crossover circuit. This main acoustic lobe of this speaker is heavily centered on the tweeter, and the only integration distance that you need to worry about comes from the spacing between the midrange to tweeter on this design. So the distance that the sound from all drivers integrate is about the same as a two-way bookshelf speaker. However, the integration distance doesn't somehow diminish if you were listening further away, so these will sound just as good at a 1 meter distance as a 5 meter distance, provided they don't run out of headroom to make up for the higher loudness levels needed to overcome the greater distance.
Interesting thoughts about the fullrange talk. I run my O.G Ultra Towers with a 80hz crossover even tho they also provide alot of bass by themselves. But i also have SVS 2x PC-4000. Anyone think i should run the towers fullrange?
try lowering the xover point.
The OG Ultra Towers would mostly have the same issues thanks to its very low 160Hz crossover to the bass drivers. I would run them full-range.
@@jameslarson2277 I will try that. Should I set them to "fullrange" or run LFE+main?
@@MrOggaaaa LFE+Main will not impose any crossover restrictions on your towers. I would suggest sticking with LFE and 40hz crossover, but you can experiment to see how it sounds.
I wonder what quality components they used in the X over....
A speaker with multiple woofers does not have to be 4 Ohms. It could be made with any impeadance like 8 Ohms, 16 Oms or even 32 Ohms.
How do these compare to Polk R700s?
The SVS outclass the Polk R700 and compete more w Arendal 1723 tower and others we put on the list at the end of the video.
The SVS has more dynamic range. The Polks would be more forgiving to set up for a neutral response at listening position. Both are excellent speakers.
JAMES IS A ROCK STAR🤘🤘🤘
I have a dual sub system with Dirac bass management. Any thoughts on if it is worth it to get the full towers vs just the bookshelves?
Thanks in advance folks
Dirac is able to calibrate the speakers to run full range with the sub, so you could get either the bookshelf or the towers with no problem. I would say if you like to listen at loud levels, get the towers since the two midranges will give you more headroom than a single midrange.
waiting for evolution bookshelf and center to be measured.
I wonder how them compare to the tekton MOAB at the same 5k price..........
If you want to go with an Aussie manufacturer, better to look into March Audio loudspeakers. ;)
Companies should stop with the one upmanship naming of products. What happens if they make a better speaker? They’re already at Pinnacle so what could be higher? Should they name the better one the Zenith or really go for it and call it the Zenith Pinnacle Ultra tower speaker. They’ve locked themselves into a corner. I think they should start over and call their speaker lines Good, Better and Best. At least this still leaves room for Silver, Gold and Platinum editions.
I like the 'good, better, and best' naming convention. And if the company makes one better than 'best,' they can just call it 'bestesser.' Or, if they make one lower end then the 'good,' they can just call it 'worst.' 😄
@@jameslarson2277 Bestesser! Ha ha, boy did I have to fight with auto correct on that one.
@@davidt8438
There's always the Mark II, III, IV, etcetera naming convention to fall back on. :)
For instance, with the dSLR cameras I've owned, there was the original Canon EOS 5D, then the 5D MK II, then 5D MK III, and finally the 5D MK IV, until they switched over to mirrorless digital bodies such as the EOS R5. And there will be an EOS R5 Mark II announced and released this August. 😛 Each one was a vast improvement on the former model.
So, there's that. ;)
Everyone is gonna add subs no matter if they need or not. That's a given.
James looks like hugo
Please buy James a forklift.
For the money, I'd rather get the The BMR Tower.
There are definitely LOTS of options in this price bracket, especially if you are going to implement a subwoofer or two anyway. Choice is good.
These speakers are incredibly cheesy looking. I’m surprised so many people think they look good. Looks like a cheap speaker trying to look high end and failing miserably. Very awkward visual design.
The finishes are whats lacking. If the shape has a functional purpose which SVS is claiming and if you’re facing them, what are you seeing? A monolithic tower just like almost every speaker.
@@Nurdaholic Just don't ever look at them when you aren't in the listening position. I'm with Dorko. They look bad and I'm not buying that the angled drivers helps anything unless you are in the perfect vertical and horizontal position. I mean, that's gotta make the sweet spot smaller right? That said. If they sound good I'd buy them regardless of looks.
Just say you can't afford them...😂
@@saulm5632 If you had any idea, you’d realize how hilarious your comment is. 🤭
@@justbrowsing5279
"I mean, that's gotta make the sweet spot smaller right?"
That's not how speaker directivity works, mate. ;)
But TBF, ANY gloss Piano Black speaker looks "cheesy" to me. I'd much rather have a matte/satin finish real wood veneer or painted finish that doesn't reflect the picture from my HDTV and every light and object in the room. YMMV.
They look weird
Some may say the same about you and me. 😛 Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and YMMV.
Which of the listed speakers you put up including the SVS has the widest and immersive soundstage?
@kennethmccullough1342
TBH, I don't own and haven't heard any of the speakers in question. 😛 But the most important aspects required for producing a Wide and Immersive Soundstage are Smooth & Even Frequency Response (that also matches as closely as possible between the Left & Right speakers At Your Listening Position), and Smooth & Even DIRECTIVITY with relatively Wide Dispersion overall.
Smooth and Even "DIRECTIVITY" means that the Dispersion Angles or "polar radiation patterns" of all of the multiple drivers that are being used match very closely overall, and match especially well through each Crossover region from driver to driver (between the woofer, midbass/midwoofer, midrange, and tweeter).
The Horizontal Directivity is more important in general for a wide & immersive soundstage, but you'll also want good Vertical Directivity if you have a Home Theater with Tiered multi-row seating where each consecutive row is elevated slightly behind the other, or if you want even frequency response while sitting or standing/walking around.
The size, shape, nearby boundaries, and acoustic properties of your listening room also play a significant role in regards to imaging & soundstage characteristics.
But in general, loudspeakers with a consistently Wide Dispersion Pattern and with a Frequency Response that remains very Similar both On-Axis (direct sound) and Off-Axis (reflected sound) will provide a Wider and more "immersive" soundstage with more "room ambience".
Look for speakers with Off-Axis Dispersion angles or Response that is smooth out to 60°-70° to each side of the speaker, so 120° to 140° total forward radiation off of the front baffle.
Speakers with dispersion angles of 50° or less to each side might provide for more focused and distinct individual image placements, but a Soundstage that is not as Wide and "Immersive". It's always a balance of compromises and tradeoffs with every speaker design. ;)
While the Directivity Matching isn't perfect with these SVS towers, overall it is very GOOD throughout the majority of its response, and it's unusually good in regards to the wide radiation pattern of the dome tweeter above 7kHz, which is very rare. Most dome tweeters that are placed on a flat front baffle will start to "beam" significantly (narrowing dispersion as the frequency rises) above ~7kHz.
This Wide & Even Dispersion pattern that is maintained above ~7kHz by the tweeter in the SVS will generally result in a Wide & "Immersive" Soundstage that has more "room ambience". My only guess is that the "Acoustic Lens" used in this tweeter's unique built-in grill is responsible for the wider/smoother dispersion of the upper treble.
These aren’t it…too expensive