Advanced search

Space: The Final Frontier ... a.k.a. Report from the Toronto Hi-Fi show

Posted by: Mike Hanson on 01 October 2000

I was at the Toronto stereo show yesterday. Unfortunately Naim was not in attendance, but there was some other interesting stuff. Many of the rooms sounded "ok", although nothing blew me away consistently. A few of them sent me screaming.

We listened to my friend's copy of Beethoven's Triple Concerto with Itzhack Pearlman, Yo-Yo Ma and Daniel Barenboim (with Barenboim conducting the Berlin Philharmoniker). This was actually an interesting test track, because it varied hugely from system to system. We also used some Bjork, Goldie and Mahler.

On many systems the Beethoven it was just pitiful and boring. In one case, though it sounded amazing! It was being played through new prototypes from Meadow Song Labs. These are massive ribbon systems, with a woofer cut-off at 250Hz. A custom active crossover comes with the speakers. I've never heard a symphonic piece sound so lifelike on any system! However, this recording (or at least the section we heard during the audition) had very little low frequency information. When we switched to a dance track from Bjork, the whole thing fell apart. It seems that that Boom-Boom-Boom that you get in dance music is near the crossover frequency, and the result was a terrible mess. Oh well.

There was also a Mark Levinson system with Martin Logan speakers worth about US$40K. This had an amazing sense of tonal accuracy and soundstage, but was a too relaxed to keep me interested on an ongoing basis. It wasn't terrible, but just not good in every way. At that price point, I would expect more.

Both of these systems were using alternative speakers. In the same vein, the new Quad ESLs (the big 6 panel behemoths) sounded interesting, although there seemed to be too much body to everything. It was as if I was watching a female body builder dance swan lake. Even if she does all the right moves, something seems wrong.

The best sounding conventional system was driven by Sim Audio electronics with Dynaudio Confidence 3 speakers. This system really boogied, with amazing control of the music.

I gave a very quick listen to the Chord room with "Living Voice" speakers (I'm not sure of the name). This had a wonderful ease of presentation. I was running late at that point, though, and didn't get a chance to put it through its paces. Even with this quick audition, though, I can see why Frank Abela likes Chord gear.

Another amazing system that I didn't spend enough time with had electronics from Antique Sound Labs and Reference 3A speakers. The musical connection created by this system was absolutely astonishing. The interesting thing here was the passive pre-amp, going through massive interconnects to the tube mono-block amps, then through extremely hefty speaker cables. It wouldn't surprise me if the cabling in this system cost as much as the boxes!

Throughout the day I realized that very few systems exhibited the emotional intensity and sense of pace of my Naim system. However, when I got home and sat down in from of my gear, I was struck by how "small" the sound was (even though all those elements of PRaT were present). Many of the systems that I heard filled the room with glorious music, while mine seemed confined and restricted.

I don't know whether this could be considered a "soundstage" issue, as I'm not talking about positioning information in the sound field, blah, blah, blah. I'm talking about a sense of "volume" ("size" not "loudness"). The sound from my system emanates from the between the speakers, rather than energizing the room. Because of this constriction, that permeating sense of realism is missing.

Is it too much to ask for my Naim system to do this? In case you aren't aware, my kit is CDX/82/2*Hi/250/RoydAlbion. What would I have to change to improve this deficiency? Would changing the speakers to something like Martin Logans do the trick? What about a Super-Cap to replace the two Hi-Caps? Would the XPS increase that sense of music filling the space?

In summary, I want a sense of being "in" the music, rather than listening "to" the music. When I'm at a live symphony, the music surrouds me, while also coming from in front of me. With my current system, it merely comes from in front of me. Maybe I should coat my room in tinfoil, just to increase reflections.

Any thoughts? Or am I merely coveting aspects of that American Hi-Fi sound? (Heretic! Burn him at the stake!) Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

[This message was edited by Mike Hanson on SUNDAY 01 October 2000 at 14:02.]

Posted on: 02 October 2000 by Martin Payne
I think it's worth re-iterating that radical source upgrades (e.g. CDX or CDS-II) should give more depth and control (and therefore scale) out of your existing speakers than you may perhaps be expecting.

If the budget will stretch to it it's certainly worth considering. I've managed to acquire a CDPS (PS from CDS-I with modified Burndy). This was intended for my CDX, but it's now doing the business with a CDS-II head unit. Extrapolate the price you'd expect to pay for a five year old XPS (if such a thing existed) - I paid around half that.

cheers, Martin

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Mike Hanson
Sorry for the delayed response. I tried to post this last night, but Infopoop wouldn't let me. I've been very busy on a contract lately, and it's stolen all of my "fun time". It's going to be crazy for a while (weeks or maybe even months), so I won't be going into too much detail for a while. BTW, thanks for all of the feedback.

David Antonelli said:

quote:
The albions present a very flat and wide soundstage I find, with great imaging and pace, but you never get the feeling the music is stretching its fingers out into the room and embracing you. I always feel I am "watching" the music rather than partaking in it.

That's definitely how I feel right now. If I really turn it up loud, this starts to improve. However, if you get it too loud they start shouting. One interesting point: I passed on the Credos and SBLs because they were worse than the Albions in the "Look at the music over there!" department. I often commented on the Credos, "It sounds like a great party is going on across the street, and I wasn't invited."

Pierre (the Surnameless one) said:

quote:
have you ever tried another ( Naim ) CD player bar the CDX?

I used to have a 3.5/Flat-Cap, then 3.5/Hi-Cap. I've also listened to the CDX/XPS and CDS2 numerous times. I like what the XPS does to the CDX, and I really like the CDS2. However, none of these seems to impact the salient issue of music filling the room.

Arthur Bye said:

quote:
My CDS2 gives a "bigger" sound than my CDX/XPS.

It does have a "rounder" sound; much more natural. However, it doesn't compare to the sense of ambience that I was hearing on Saturday.

Kevin Grainger said:

quote:
However, trying to get close to a live Mahler, Bruckner experience is not even worth bothering with.

Actually, there were a few systems at the show that sounded very lifelike with big Mahler and Beethoven selections. None of them were perfect, but I was bloody impressed at how close they seemed to come. At the same time, they all were less than my own system in the PRaT department.

Lance A. Akridge said:

quote:
I usually listen in near field position

That's interesting, as I also listen that way at my office, and I do feel a little more "inside" the music. It looks like positioning of the speakers might be part of the problem.

Vuk Vuksanovic said:

quote:
were the speakers well away from the wall? .... If you want it to sound "real" and convincing, you have to move a lot of air.

Absolutely, and that's probably a major factor. However, the SimAudio/Dynaudio setup was also setup this way, and it didn't create that same sense of envelopment. That why I'm not accepting speaker positioning as the only explanation, and am also considering the possibility of electrostatics and their ilk.

I'm certainly willing to go for bigger speakers, whether that's NBLs, DBLs, Dynaudio Confidence 5s, Quad ESLs or whatever. I'm still going to wait until I get my house and its new room, as that will change the speaker equation quite a bit. If the room is bigger, then I'll certainly need bigger speakers. However, I suspect that the new room will more likely be smaller, so maybe the Albions will be OK.

BTW, do you realize that you've poisoned my mind? I've started to believe that my Albions don't have enough dynamic slam to satisfy my desires.

James Jong said:

quote:
there is no substitute for cubic inches

In general I agree with you. Curiously, the Dynaudio Confidence 3 had TONS of slam, a wonderful sense of scale, and great bass extension. It isn't much bigger than the Albion.

Mike McDonald said:

quote:
I guess you've tried moving your Albions …. Hows the weather in Canada right now?

I've played with this a bit, although I don't have that much room to maneuver right now. Moving them further from the wall had a slight impact, but not a major one. Toeing them in closed up the sound further. BTW, the weather here is typical autumn: warm, cold, warm, cold, etc.

Kevin Hughes said:

quote:
you need low bass to fix this problem

I'm starting to lean in the direction of bigger speakers that would address this issue.

Tony Lonorgan said:

quote:
Thankfully they are a far cry from the 'floaty head' non-reality of US kit …. thought about a second hand pair of Quads?

I don't want false soundstage (i.e. floaty heads"). I want something that seems "real", which implies "realistic".

There were some of the new ESLs at the show (the huge six panel monsters) and they sounded quite interesting. Volume, slam and bass were not limited, but they sounded a little "thick" (see my Swan Lake metaphor). Of course, this could have been a problem with the associated electronics, and I may end up giving them a try. I just wish they weren't made of ugly black pastic.

Summary...

All said, it sounds like I need bigger speakers to get bigger sound. However, I want everyone to rest assured that it's a ways down the road. First comes my house, then the new room, then the new stand (maybe Mana), then the XPS, and I'll follow from there. If I'm still not satisfied by the "size" of my music by then, I may change the speakers.

I like to be enveloped by the music, versus having it fire at me from the other side of the room. This is very enticing, but I'm not willing to sacrifice PRaT to get it. I'll keep tweaking, examining, enjoying, cringing, etc., until I've reached Nirvana. If I never get there, I'll sure have fun trying. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

[This message was edited by Mike Hanson on TUESDAY 03 October 2000 at 13:26.]

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Tony L
quote:
I like to be enveloped by the music, versus having it fire at me from the other side of the room.

This statement sounds deeply suspicious to me. Music does happen at the other side of the room unless you are actually in the band. Even multitrack stuff happens the other side of the mic, and is created using monitors in front of the engineer.

The only way to my mind you should be "enveloped by the music" is if Q-Sound or other recent electronic 3D spatial trickery is employed. It is disturbing how many people feel US 'valve soup' imaging has any place in reality. I always go back to simple things like an acoustic guitar for a reference - and I've never been enveloped by one of them, nor a full orchestra for that matter - they all happen "over there". Flat earth imaging is to my mind correct.

Tony.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Greg Beatty
Hi! Yes - toeing out helps a bit. The room also plays a factor. Try *reducing* the amount of absorbing stuff at the listening end of the room and from the side walls. When I "deaden" my side walls, the sound seems to come from only between the speakers. Livening (er…de-deadening) the side walls can have the opposite effect.

And while I remember your system well , what kind of supports are you using and what is your room setup?

- GregB
Freedom is not in finding the Holy Grail but in stopping the search for it

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by David Antonelli
Mike,

My observations with the albions are spot on with yours. I found with going from CDX to CDX/XPS and then to CDS2 the shoutiness at higher volumes diminished but never dissapeared. WIthout the WB stands the music seems flabby and the bass agressive and punctuated. All these things together aren't enough, however, to fully get rid of this problem. At low volumes the sound comes from between the speakers, but when you turn it up to get a more full and detailed and involving musical experience there is always that agressive edge (gets much smaller with better electronics) but its always there. So I am not keeping the albions, although they certainly do dozens of things extremely well. Just when you want that scale, that feeling of being enveoped in music, they hammer you instead.

Maybe 135s will help?

I'll soon see.

dave

PS right now the price tag and my new found interest in LeRoy wines is the only thing that has kept me from getting ACT 2s. Even so, I think February is the time to change!c

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
Tony,
Once again, we are in complete agreement. Just the other day, I actually moved my speakers back up against the wall (where I suspect the designers meant them to be--actually bolted to the wall in a studio). The music seemed more over there and had less phnoey imagining, yet at the same time seemed, more coherent, real and purposeful.

Dave,
Aren't you going to try some other condenders before spending such a huge sum on the WBs?

Mike,
There's also the problem of that enormous thing you have in between the speakers, right? In the end though, you will never get proper dynamics from the ALbions: they simply can not do this. BTW--I keep hearing nice things about Dynaudio, why did you pass on them when you tried every speaker in the world a couple of years ago?

Vuk.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Mike Hanson
Tony Lonorgan said:
quote:
Music does happen at the other side of the room

If I am listening to speakers on the other side of the room compared to a piano on the other side of the room, there is a very distinct difference. The piano will do a better job at filling the room with music, while the two-channel system will feel like a the music is being shot at me with a bullet. The ambience is very different. I suspect this is because the piano provides a larger vibrating area compared to the very small drivers in the speakers.

However, even a live trumpet will seem more "present" than a reproduced one. When we start talking about orchestras, this sense of music coming from both across the room and from "everywhere" is heightened much further.

A microphone records the performance at a single point, so I suppose the reproduction should be a point source. However, it seems that larger speakers do a better job at creating this sense of ambience. I don't know whether it's because they provide more vibrational area, or if they simply move more air to reproduce that sense of realistic dynamics and scale. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Mike Hanson
Vuk said
quote:
There's also the problem of that enormous thing you have in between the speakers, right? In the end though, you will never get proper dynamics from the ALbions: they simply can not do this. BTW--I keep hearing nice things about Dynaudio, why did you pass on them when you tried every speaker in the world a couple of years ago?

Yes, the cabinet may be screwing up things a bit, and nothing can be done until I get into new digs.

I agree with you on the dynamics issues, although I'm curious to see how Mana and an XPS might help the world.

I was interested in trying Dynaudio last year, but I couldn't find a dealer here during my search. I had also heard that Dynaudios were a heavy load, and I had only a 140 at the time. Even with my 250, I might have troubles with some of the bigger models. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
Quote: "The piano will do a better job at filling the room with music, while the two-channel system will feel like a the music is being shot at me with a bullet."

What about Shahinian speakers, such as the Arc, the Obelisk, or the Hawk. They seem to be particularly good at reproducing large-scale orchestral works while literally filling your room with music, as they are omnidirectional. I think a few members of this forum use them with Naim gear, and your 250 should be able to drive them properly (except for the Hawk, perhaps, which might need a more powerful amp).

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by David Hobbs-Mallyon
Mike,

I reached the same conclusions as you with my SBLs. No matter what I attached it wasn't giving the scale I was after (I tried CDSII and 52). I found the WB Actors the solution for me - they give me the extra scale and are easily driven by a 250 (I don't think ACT1/ACT2/NBLs/DBLs fit the bill), and they are superbly responsive and neutral).

David

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
Florian wrote: "What about Shahinian speakers, such as the Arc, the Obelisk ..."

Another vote for Shahinians here although only Arcs or lower can be driven with a 250. The way they fill a room with music is quite magical.

Jason

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Tony L
quote:
If I am listening to speakers on the other side of the room compared to a piano on the other side of the room, there is a very distinct difference. The piano will do a better job at filling the room with music, while the two-channel system will feel like a the music is being shot at me with a bullet. The ambience is very different. I suspect this is because the piano provides a larger vibrating area compared to the very small drivers in the speakers.

This is what I call "air moving ability" - there are very few speakers that can do this to my mind satisfactorily - Isobariks, DBLs, and large panel speakers. I misunderstood your "enveloping with music" phrase (it is the kind wording that makes Stereophile so funny). I stand by my recommendation to hear Quads on the end of your system, they have a very large air moving area compared to most moving coil speakers, though are not for volume freaks. There are so few box speakers around that don't have reflex ports these days, and therefor few I could live with, judging by the recent Hammersmith show, you can always tell the ones that have from outside the room. I feel the current crop of moving coil box speakers are nearly all appalling.

Tony.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
Quote: "I feel the current crop of moving coil box speakers are nearly all appalling."

...except for active ATC speakers, perhaps? (I just can't resist).

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Mike Hanson
The suggestions for Shahinian speakers is intriguing. I've not had a chance to here them, and it looks like I'll have to check them out. Now to find out if there is a dealer somewhere near me. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
I tried some Dynaudio floorstanders about a year ago. They were impressive - if you can now find a dealer I'd recommend a listen. I can't remember the model numbers - one pair was c 1200 GBP - the other closer to 2000 GBP. The only reason I rejected them was you couldn't bi-amp.

I ended up with a pair of Celestion A3's. The design is about 3 years old now - but they have 3x 20cm base cones for "air shifting" - and the same subtle sound as they A1. In fact - they are an A1 with some better circuitry and the base cones. If you can listen to them as well I'd have a go. They are about 2500 GBP list - but in the UK you can get them for about 1500 GBP now (much to my annoyance) so they might be about to be replaced / discontinued. I heard the new SBL (?) - the funny shape one - last week, and I was not embarrassed in the 'speaker department. I will admit the NAP500 and the CDSII were a different matter!

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Mike Hanson
I'm glad that we understand each other. I'm also quite put off by false soundstage (a.k.a. "floaty heads"). I don't mind hearing positional information that's on the recording, but I don't want exaggerated special effects.

I was just listening to the Frank Loesser's musical "The Most Happy Fella", and I was really enjoying it. I didn't even realize until I read it in the booklet that it's a mono recording! Does that earn me any of my FEPs back? Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
1. Regarding Vuk's suggestion of Dynaudios:

Dynaudios (Audience, Contour) are not bad speakers but IMO are veiled in a very basic way.
There's a certain "background" to the midrange, which sounds a bit plasticky, and this won't go away ever - just listen to a snare drum, no way.
(regardless of how many times they write "Danes don't lie"). I just couldn't forget I was listening to a speaker. I must truely say it is very good in hi-fi points, and the above flaw makes them quite forgiving and pleasing, but they won't survive analytical Mike for more than an hour.


2. Florian, Jason - As for shahinians - these are truer, but they are speakers that hold back in two ways :

1. The sound comes ONLY from the room, and I missed this direct coupling and focus that a dynamic speaker gives. I would say their focus is weaker.
2. They are a tad, tiny whinny bit "soft", but that's not a serious flaw, it's mostly a matter of preference.

Omer

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Mike Hanson
I did audition the A1 and A3. I found both to sound a little slow and disorganized (although that could have been the fault of the Adcom gear driving them). I felt that the A1 sounded much better than its bigger sibling. The A3 seemed very colored, with a bloated, flappy bass. Again, some of this should be blamed on the electronics. I never bothered to try them at home on my Naim gear, which can make a HUGE difference. Even the cheap Polk Audio Monitor 5jr sounded pretty amazing slotted into my system. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by P
Omer I agree with you

Blimey I agree with someone at last

Dynaudios , especially the 1.8 Contours , can be very good with classical music "Exclusively" but they also need to be at least 1-1.5 metres away from any wall or reflective surface. Contour 1.8's also really need 135's to do them any justice.

Shahinian arcs are fine if you like spatial surround sound systems but as serious air movers? gimme a break!

Regards P. -the anonymous one for a very good reason by the way Mike

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
Mike.

I heard some floor-standing Celestions (in the $5-6K range, I can't recall exactly) a couple of years ago in a Naim system and they were slow, uninvolving and exhibited that "plasticky" colouration Omer has just attributed to Dynaudio above. The colouration and presentation is similar to JM Labs (the king of plasticky colouration is, of course, B&W), though the French speaker is somewhat more dynamic. That said, the Celestions did make very pretty and inoffensive sounds: it's not at all difficult to imagine why many would like them, but I don't think someone used to Albions could think of the step as anything but an overall downgrade.

Vuk.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
Mike

Either I am happy with crap - or it was the gear driving it. Both are possible. I am not driving them with Naim amps - but I would suggest a try at home if you fancy lugging 56 kg about. The one's I found a bit lacking in focus and speed were the A2's - but I thought the A3's were OK. They do need a good 'grip' from the amp - shoud not be a problem with a 250 I guess. I have 4 200W monoblocks 'gripping' mine.

Omer point on the Dynaudio's - I see what he means a bit - but it was not as pronounced to me as he suggests.The other things they did made me very happy.


Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
quote:
Regards P. -the anonymous one for a very good reason by the way

Pierre Lapin !!!!

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by David Antonelli
Vuk,

To answer your question, sometimes I wonder myself, but there just aren't that many other contenders for speakers out there. For me the WB ACT 1s were sublime and did everything the albions did better and then did things the albions coul never drea m of doing. There wasn't a single category that the albions matched the ACT 1s in. Now the ACT 2 is said to be much better at dynamics, smoother, easier to drive, more extended trebble (super revelator instead of revelator), deeper bass, and has the sam e bass and mid range drivers as the Bishop (except the clam shell isobarics). Slightly taller and a wooden spine to boot, they are better looking than the ACT 1, and not that much more expensive.

For a while I considered Dynaudio (too hard to drive and p lain). Then JM Lab. Mezzo Utopias. Interesting but way too big for my room. NBLs: too lean and dry for my tastes and also way too big.

As for WB, I do a lot of research on electronic properties of advanced carbon composites and because of this think the ACT 2s are cool. Once you fall in love...

dave”

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Mike Hanson
I'm pretty sure that I won't be trying Celestions again, given my personal impressions and your scathing report.

BTW, I should stress that regardless of how much I moan and complain about my system, I'm really quite happy with its performance. I'm just a perfectionist bastard.

Right at the moment I'm getting thoroughly bored listening to Beethoven's Violin Concerto, as performed by Anne-Sophie Mutter, with Karajan conduting the Berliner Philharmoniker. It's agonizingly drawn-out and S-L-O-W... Sometimes I don't mind it, but today it's really annoying. The silly thing is that I can't bring myself to change the CD. (It must be that obsessive penchant I have for completeness. ) Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Posted on: 03 October 2000 by Former member
Mike.

Before we all lose too much perspective here, let me add that, although a big speaker change would give you some of what you heard at the show and are not getting at home, an XPS or Mana will give you more of that which makes you prefer your system even right now to all of what the head-floater systems were doing.

BTW--I just remembered that Petrik was with me at the Celestion dem and you could probably wring an even more scathing review out him. Be sure to remind him of K. K.'s finger-count listing of why the speakers, although they sounded rather unimpressive, were fit to sell: 1-they play all types of music, 2-they can play loud, 3-they have high perceived value, etc. A few months later, Joe (and/or I) got the lecture in reverse to explain why Sorcerers would not be stocked in the shop.

Vuk.

[This message was edited by Vuk Vuksanovic on TUESDAY 03 October 2000 at 19:33.]