Never ceases to amaze me how people can make judgments over the internet. Even with reference headphones, I can’t judge any high end system fairly. These speakers desperately and deserve a larger room. However, a couple of observations…They are pointed in at 30-40 degrees. If I did that with any system I have had, it would destroy the soundstage. Evidenced by the sound baffles that are trying to stop reflections.
Great stuff to hear what the system is capable of. Heaps of decay and detail etc. I wouldn’t be popular with the neighbours if I played that kind of stuff at home though
Hi, I’d love your thoughts on this: I love electrostatics! but am looking to try something with dynamics that can rival pistonic/dynamic speakers. While I’ve heard great things about modern designs like Popori speakers, which are electrostatic, I suspect they might still not match in terms of dynamics. But what about ribbon speakers like Alsyvox? In your experience, do they truly match the dynamic capabilities of traditional dynamic drivers? I’m asking because my friends and I are planning to build panel speakers for fun, and we’re trying to decide where to focus our attention and research to achieve dynamics in a panel design. Thanks!
You can get comfortably under 100hz with e-stats like the Popori... Even into the 30s at 100db listening. However, all speakers can benefit from subs... Assuming they are properly integrated and used mainly to address room issues... Not extension. I wouldn't go the DIY route though without a ton of experience. The guys at Popori repaired other estats for decades to learn the issues and trade-offs...While developing a superior approach. It might be disappointing trying to DIY without a ton of experience.
Sounds awesome. Are they toed in away from from first reflection point? Is that as absorption panels in the center on the front wall? Did he do room measurements to find out where acoustic treatment needed to be put?do you know what type of tubes are used in the amps?
I was the first one to comment on the Acapella room reverberations in the playback space. I occasionally listen to classical music recorded in large concert hall venues. On my reference system, the custom built room, treatments and custom tuning totally eliminates playback room reflections and the speaker locations completely and totally disappear. Where ever the phone was located in the Acapella room, the reverberation time at that location was longer than what the brain can process and ignore, as I could hear excessive smearing of instruments. This does add an exaggerated sense of ambiance, which can be neat as you and I both agreed upon and both stated. Large venues themselves, can also smear instruments as well and recordings made in those spaces can pick up instrument smearing. But in this case, I'm familiar with the difference. Bottom line......as long as the owner of the system is happy with the setup that's all that matters. With that being said, my reference also gives the illusion of being in a large concert venue hall without the excessive smearing that that particular playback room adds. And Rick Brown definitely knows his stuff and gave the customer exactly what he was looking for, it seems. 😃
I hate to say this, but physics tells us that line sources can not possibly be the most accurate transducers. There is a time distortion, smearing, inaccuracy, or whatever you want to call it from the disparity in distance to our ears from the top, middle, and bottom of the speaker. This causes the image size exaggeration inherent in line source speakers. I owned many panel speakers. This is the "elephant" in the room that these manufacturers never talk about. That being said, Thank you for the content.
No one design philosophy is perfect, but you can get very pinpoint imaging with certain line sources. There are difficulties an tradeoffs with every design, so it depends on what metrics you're chasing and how neurotic you are about certain advantages and disadvantages. The same things you referenced can exist with point source speakers since almost none behave as a true point source...and when they do...it opens up new issues and tradeoffs that are often worse if you simply chase "perfect point source" physics goals. Certainly a point source that truly behaves like a point source will be attractive to many, but with DSP, many of the things you referenced can be cured and there are other advantages to line sources that are hard to get close to mimicking with other designs. Thus, when you realize that the issues with line sources can exist with ANY speaker, yet a line source can do things that are less likely with other designs, it makes it an attractive option with minimal REAL tradeoffs. Plus...physics alone won't dictate a persons preference with speakers...usually it starts with aesthetics and budget...then it comes down to room interactions and personal taste on dispersion profiles. Line source have the advantages of minimizing certain reflections that corrupt imaging far more. Plus as I'll release soon in a presentation by ASC...the interaction with the room by certain designs can be a huge advantage depending on how much the person has dedicated to room treatments.
@AudiophileJunkie I agree with your premise that there is no one perfect solution at this time. However, I am not talking about "pinpoint imaging." I am talking about a very specific distortion that can not be compensated for with DSP. DSP can not fix the distance difference between the top middle and bottom of a line source. This will distort the relative size of an image to what the microphones picked up. Furthermore, I think I missed something as I thought this rig was not using DSP. Provided they have the speed, low distortion, and resolution, your GR research NX extremes are actually a better starting point than a line source, and they will respond better to manipulation with DSP.
With a number of point-like sources in an array you still can get a good imaging plus all benefits the array gives. A trick is to place drivers at different distance from a front as a height changes, plus a different power to a driver according to a height. And you will get a good coherent beam of sound. With eletrostats this can be made by curving a membrane, plus a different distance to a stator. What this gives? Zero reflections from a ceiling and a floor (reflections from walls can be mitigated way more easily).
This rig isn't using DSP, but he prefers it to a previous point source of impeccable pedigree. I agree that most point sources that are functioning as such will respond better to DSP and less deleterious reflections to address. However, baffles create a ton of potential issues that corrupt imaging as well. I'll have a Zoom soon with ASC Tube Trap guys talking about that point and in most cases you can mitigate tradeoffs with each design with a combination of room treatments, DSP and attentive speaker design whether it's line source or point sources. Thus, it's not something that is conducive to generalizations although it's fair to point out certain tradeoffs. Even Andrew Jones who goes for mostly point source designs loves the old Quad Electrostatics which got him into the hobby in the first place. Thus, the danger in this hobby is being married to generalizations versus analyzing individual applications of which the Alsyvox does line sources at the highest of levels.
@AudiophileJunkie thank you. I understand these principles well. I met you last year at FLAX. We went to the Gershman room for the after party together. We discussed a speaker design I am considering bringing to market. Every design has its compromises. I am not dogmatic. However, I have found that those inherent in line sources are not cured by DSP. The physics just don't allow it. I am sure when you get the popuris in your compact room, you will agree.
A bass is not good in all senses. And when you start to incorporate a traditional bass driver with electrostats, you get an unwilling result. This is why.. Despite of an exceptional quality of mid/high freqs. Besides, a low sensitivity forces to use taaaaaaall panels, and so a listening sweet spot is narrow. Plus a dipole manner with all these reflections. This is why we don't see them everywhere despite they are very cheap to produce.
Sc! Try to listen Relco Audio - Da Vinci...😊 Dippol,Bass without Box,Ribbon 1.50 m long,Free in Magnetic Field.... 2.0 m High,120 kg weight..... Amazing Sound..... Greetings...
Expensive echo chamber. Not at all appealing to me. I'm sure the speakers are good, just a horrible room/setup. Let me explain.... it's physics. When you have reflections those reflections mix with the direct sound and change the resulting waveform, it changes the actual tone, it creates sharpness in highs and obliterated detail. The result is you are not listening to the actual recording, you are listening to a whole new and different sound created by the comb filtering going on. There are people who like that, and think it's great sound, it's not, it is distortion of the worst type. Both of my listening rooms are fully treated acoustically and because of being aware of and used to that now I simply can not be in a room with horrid sound, it just grates on my nerves. I'll take my cheap systems in my treated rooms over this mega dollar system as set up here any day.
I'm guessing it sounds spectacular. Worth noting; - Dipoles can excel in rooms with lively characteristics, whereas monopole propagation may be untenable. Essentially ... elevated direct sound relative to room sound. - Quasi-line sources also tend to outperform typical platforms in lively rooms. The planar energy serves the experience well. - The panels are several feet off that front wall behind them. With a sufficient ITD Gap, the energy returned off that front wall actually increases the experience via spaciousness and envelopement. - Fortunately we don't hear anything like the way mic capsule captures the sound. We possess discrimination in processing what's relevant. Plus, the added bonus ... our entire body receives the energy and adds visceral component to the experience. You're right, obnoxiously reverberant rooms can suck. However, I bet these extraordinary dipoles, several feet out into the room simply kick ass.
‘ No need to explain this envelope : [ most ] audiophiles know this - Hell, even I know ; and I’m an, audiophile, wannabe. Despite all of these wayward reverberations ; the potential of the, musical, skeleton is apparent. I appreciate the exhibitors willingness to spotlight music choices that give an idea of the devices’ range. 🍺
17:24 man ,I can see what you meant..just the right amount of room (liveliness with purpose) 👍👍
Gosh I'd love to hear a pair in person
Never ceases to amaze me how people can make judgments over the internet. Even with reference headphones, I can’t judge any high end system fairly.
These speakers desperately and deserve a larger room. However, a couple of observations…They are pointed in at 30-40 degrees. If I did that with any system I have had, it would destroy the soundstage. Evidenced by the sound baffles that are trying to stop reflections.
you don't even have to play music, it's enough when you see that room that it's pure acoustic horror
@@axelpalfy7597 Agree 100% ! Reverberation/Reflection City LOL
Couldn't agree more . . . they are hearing their OWN speakers LOL Here . . . Reverberation City LOL
Great stuff to hear what the system is capable of. Heaps of decay and detail etc.
I wouldn’t be popular with the neighbours if I played that kind of stuff at home though
Very real amazing system!! Is in the top of the top
Hi, I’d love your thoughts on this: I love electrostatics! but am looking to try something with dynamics that can rival pistonic/dynamic speakers. While I’ve heard great things about modern designs like Popori speakers, which are electrostatic, I suspect they might still not match in terms of dynamics. But what about ribbon speakers like Alsyvox? In your experience, do they truly match the dynamic capabilities of traditional dynamic drivers?
I’m asking because my friends and I are planning to build panel speakers for fun, and we’re trying to decide where to focus our attention and research to achieve dynamics in a panel design. Thanks!
I'm asking because of what you said at 0:11 "all the advantages of pistonic drivers"
You can get comfortably under 100hz with e-stats like the Popori... Even into the 30s at 100db listening.
However, all speakers can benefit from subs... Assuming they are properly integrated and used mainly to address room issues... Not extension.
I wouldn't go the DIY route though without a ton of experience. The guys at Popori repaired other estats for decades to learn the issues and trade-offs...While developing a superior approach.
It might be disappointing trying to DIY without a ton of experience.
Sounds awesome. Are they toed in away from from first reflection point? Is that as absorption panels in the center on the front wall? Did he do room measurements to find out where acoustic treatment needed to be put?do you know what type of tubes are used in the amps?
Sounds great. What kind of mic are you recording this demo with?
Just a Galaxy S24
That is an impressive sounding rig
I love the fast forward button! ↪️
Bad ass New Order Blue Monday shirt !! Went to my first New Order concert in 87 man those were good times.
New Order "Power Corruption and Lies" was my first album at 16 years old. Still one of my favorite album covers.
I was the first one to comment on the Acapella room reverberations in the playback space. I occasionally listen to classical music recorded in large concert hall venues. On my reference system, the custom built room, treatments and custom tuning totally eliminates playback room reflections and the speaker locations completely and totally disappear. Where ever the phone was located in the Acapella room, the reverberation time at that location was longer than what the brain can process and ignore, as I could hear excessive smearing of instruments. This does add an exaggerated sense of ambiance, which can be neat as you and I both agreed upon and both stated.
Large venues themselves, can also smear instruments as well and recordings made in those spaces can pick up instrument smearing. But in this case, I'm familiar with the difference.
Bottom line......as long as the owner of the system is happy with the setup that's all that matters.
With that being said, my reference also gives the illusion of being in a large concert venue hall without the excessive smearing that that particular playback room adds.
And Rick Brown definitely knows his stuff and gave the customer exactly what he was looking for, it seems.
😃
If he thinks it's the best system he's ever heard then he's right, simple as that.
Sounds great! What is the percussion ensemble (artist, album, track)?
15:58 song title?
Audio Club helped tune 20.7s 😊
Input from others is important
Auditioned Botticelli's w no subs
GM☕️🍩☃️
Listen and learn 👍
I hate to say this, but physics tells us that line sources can not possibly be the most accurate transducers. There is a time distortion, smearing, inaccuracy, or whatever you want to call it from the disparity in distance to our ears from the top, middle, and bottom of the speaker. This causes the image size exaggeration inherent in line source speakers. I owned many panel speakers. This is the "elephant" in the room that these manufacturers never talk about.
That being said, Thank you for the content.
No one design philosophy is perfect, but you can get very pinpoint imaging with certain line sources. There are difficulties an tradeoffs with every design, so it depends on what metrics you're chasing and how neurotic you are about certain advantages and disadvantages. The same things you referenced can exist with point source speakers since almost none behave as a true point source...and when they do...it opens up new issues and tradeoffs that are often worse if you simply chase "perfect point source" physics goals.
Certainly a point source that truly behaves like a point source will be attractive to many, but with DSP, many of the things you referenced can be cured and there are other advantages to line sources that are hard to get close to mimicking with other designs. Thus, when you realize that the issues with line sources can exist with ANY speaker, yet a line source can do things that are less likely with other designs, it makes it an attractive option with minimal REAL tradeoffs.
Plus...physics alone won't dictate a persons preference with speakers...usually it starts with aesthetics and budget...then it comes down to room interactions and personal taste on dispersion profiles. Line source have the advantages of minimizing certain reflections that corrupt imaging far more. Plus as I'll release soon in a presentation by ASC...the interaction with the room by certain designs can be a huge advantage depending on how much the person has dedicated to room treatments.
@AudiophileJunkie I agree with your premise that there is no one perfect solution at this time. However, I am not talking about "pinpoint imaging." I am talking about a very specific distortion that can not be compensated for with DSP. DSP can not fix the distance difference between the top middle and bottom of a line source. This will distort the relative size of an image to what the microphones picked up. Furthermore, I think I missed something as I thought this rig was not using DSP.
Provided they have the speed, low distortion, and resolution, your GR research NX extremes are actually a better starting point than a line source, and they will respond better to manipulation with DSP.
With a number of point-like sources in an array you still can get a good imaging plus all benefits the array gives. A trick is to place drivers at different distance from a front as a height changes, plus a different power to a driver according to a height. And you will get a good coherent beam of sound. With eletrostats this can be made by curving a membrane, plus a different distance to a stator. What this gives? Zero reflections from a ceiling and a floor (reflections from walls can be mitigated way more easily).
This rig isn't using DSP, but he prefers it to a previous point source of impeccable pedigree. I agree that most point sources that are functioning as such will respond better to DSP and less deleterious reflections to address. However, baffles create a ton of potential issues that corrupt imaging as well. I'll have a Zoom soon with ASC Tube Trap guys talking about that point and in most cases you can mitigate tradeoffs with each design with a combination of room treatments, DSP and attentive speaker design whether it's line source or point sources. Thus, it's not something that is conducive to generalizations although it's fair to point out certain tradeoffs.
Even Andrew Jones who goes for mostly point source designs loves the old Quad Electrostatics which got him into the hobby in the first place. Thus, the danger in this hobby is being married to generalizations versus analyzing individual applications of which the Alsyvox does line sources at the highest of levels.
@AudiophileJunkie thank you. I understand these principles well. I met you last year at FLAX. We went to the Gershman room for the after party together. We discussed a speaker design I am considering bringing to market. Every design has its compromises. I am not dogmatic. However, I have found that those inherent in line sources are not cured by DSP. The physics just don't allow it. I am sure when you get the popuris in your compact room, you will agree.
Patricia Barber
A bass is not good in all senses. And when you start to incorporate a traditional bass driver with electrostats, you get an unwilling result. This is why.. Despite of an exceptional quality of mid/high freqs. Besides, a low sensitivity forces to use taaaaaaall panels, and so a listening sweet spot is narrow. Plus a dipole manner with all these reflections. This is why we don't see them everywhere despite they are very cheap to produce.
Not narrow, wide sound stage
@@CarlVanDoren61 wide sound stage at a narrow listening sweet spot -)
Sc!
Try to listen Relco Audio - Da Vinci...😊
Dippol,Bass without Box,Ribbon 1.50 m long,Free in Magnetic Field....
2.0 m High,120 kg weight.....
Amazing Sound.....
Greetings...
Expensive echo chamber. Not at all appealing to me. I'm sure the speakers are good, just a horrible room/setup. Let me explain.... it's physics. When you have reflections those reflections mix with the direct sound and change the resulting waveform, it changes the actual tone, it creates sharpness in highs and obliterated detail. The result is you are not listening to the actual recording, you are listening to a whole new and different sound created by the comb filtering going on. There are people who like that, and think it's great sound, it's not, it is distortion of the worst type. Both of my listening rooms are fully treated acoustically and because of being aware of and used to that now I simply can not be in a room with horrid sound, it just grates on my nerves. I'll take my cheap systems in my treated rooms over this mega dollar system as set up here any day.
Agreed way too lively and the music or sort of, played had nothing below 100Hz otherwise it would have been much worse
I'm guessing it sounds spectacular.
Worth noting;
- Dipoles can excel in rooms with lively characteristics, whereas monopole propagation may be untenable.
Essentially ... elevated direct sound relative to room sound.
- Quasi-line sources also tend to outperform typical platforms in lively rooms.
The planar energy serves the experience well.
- The panels are several feet off that front wall behind them. With a sufficient ITD Gap, the energy returned off that front wall actually increases the experience via spaciousness and envelopement.
- Fortunately we don't hear anything like the way mic capsule captures the sound.
We possess discrimination in processing what's relevant. Plus, the added bonus ... our entire body receives the energy and adds visceral component to the experience.
You're right, obnoxiously reverberant rooms can suck. However, I bet these extraordinary dipoles, several feet out into the room simply kick ass.
Lol
Good for you - you just saved a lot of money - but you are judging based on presumbtions mixed with theory.
‘ No need to explain this envelope : [ most ] audiophiles know this - Hell, even I know ; and I’m an, audiophile, wannabe.
Despite all of these wayward reverberations ; the potential of the, musical, skeleton is apparent.
I appreciate the exhibitors willingness to spotlight music choices that give an idea of the devices’ range. 🍺