Philharmonic Audio - 3-way open back ML-TQWTs designed by Dennis Murphy

[DenPureSound]

I'm happy with all of them. That is why I keep them all.

That is why that PhotoBucket is full to the Brim... and then some.

[DenPureSound]

He's already happy. Buying new speakers is just its own fun though. I'm in the same boat as him except i'm not graduated yet. just you guys wait about 3 years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I remember those days at Cal Poly-SLO, CA. then onto Stanford it took forever - but never give up it was worth the ride out into the future and then some. Retired at 52yrs. and never looked back. Now onto some nice .flac off the uPNP DLNA server over to the Denon AVR-4311CI, then over to the EMO XPA-5, then into what Speaker FL/FR is the REAL QUESTION that I still have to Answer here ??

So I am sure when ADTG gets his PH3's it will be a REAL Review of them, as he has the References there to compare to.

[GranteedEV]

I could get by with the Black finish that is fine -- is the cabinet, ML-TL, drivers, Xover design the same for the PH-2 as the PH-3?

Aren't the PH2's at $2K, and 3's at $3K? Then why should I go with the 3's to keep up with ADTG? Do the 2's have the same specs as the 3's, I only hope so...

Dennis can probably give you full details but basically the Phil 1s use

Sb Acoustics 8" woofer + a ML-TL optimized for it
BG Neo 8 midrange

Fountek NeoCD3 ribbon tweeterall put together with a dennis murphy crossover!

So at $1600 it's already a speaker that can run with anything in the tonal accuracy and sound quality department.

the Phil 2 goes from a world class ribbon to the RAAL 70-10d ribbon tweeter, which some people consider the most real sounding tweeter in the world (technically the RAAL 150-15d and.RAAL 70-20XR are probably 'better' as they play lower but since the Neo 8 is only around 3-4 inches wide you can play it up to the 70-10d's crossover point without much issue). Since the tweeter is different the crossover is appropriately different, but still a dennis murphy design. Basically there's no extra markup - you're just paying the difference in driver cost!!!!!!

The Phil 3 uses the same top section but the woofer is a different. 8" Scan-speak(less sensitive, but more linear throw and reaches a bit deeper) which i don't think is a big deal for anyone using subs or listening to 97% of music out there. Since the woofer is different the enclosure is differently optimized for it and so is the crossover. Again no extra markup unless you need a red finish. Just pay the difference in driver/enclosure/crossover parts. personally i think having two or three well selected, well placed 12" vented /15" sealed subs is a better idea than making a 8" woofer deal with bass below 60hz. the audiophile community probably doesn't. I personally find a 100hz crossover in my room to give smoothest frequency response.

[Dennis Murphy]

Dennis can probably give you full details but basically the Phil 1s use

Sb Acoustics 8" woofer + a ML-TL optimized for it
BG Neo 8 midrange

Fountek NeoCD3 ribbon tweeterall put together with a dennis murphy crossover!

So at $1600 it's already a speaker that can run with anything in the tonal accuracy and sound quality department.

the Phil 2 goes from a world class ribbon to the RAAL 70-10d ribbon tweeter, which some people consider the most real sounding tweeter in the world (technically the RAAL 150-15d and.RAAL 70-20XR are probably 'better' as they play lower but since the Neo 8 is only around 3-4 inches wide you can play it up to the 70-10d's crossover point without much issue). Since the tweeter is different the crossover is appropriately different, but still a dennis murphy design. Basically there's no extra markup - you're just paying the difference in driver cost!!!!!!

The Phil 3 uses the same top section but the woofer is a different. 8" Scan-speak(less sensitive, but more linear throw and reaches a bit deeper) which i don't think is a big deal for anyone using subs or listening to 97% of music out there. Since the woofer is different the enclosure is differently optimized for it and so is the crossover. Again no extra markup unless you need a red finish. Just pay the difference in driver/enclosure/crossover parts. personally i think having two or three well selected, well placed 12" vented /15" sealed subs is a better idea than making a 8" woofer deal with bass below 60hz. the audiophile community probably doesn't. I personally find a 100hz crossover in my room to give smoothest frequency response.

Thanks for passing on all of this info. You saved me a lot of time. Frankly, I've been surprised at how much more interest there's been in the 3's than in the 1's or 2's. I love the Scan woofer, but for HT applications with a sub, it would be a complete waste.

[GranteedEV]

are there any differences in the lower midrange between the SS and the SB?

[walter duque]

Thanks for passing on all of this info. You saved me a lot of time. Frankly, I've been surprised at how much more interest there's been in the 3's than in the 1's or 2's. I love the Scan woofer, but for HT applications with a sub, it would be a complete waste.

Your speakers are starting to look very interesting to me. Looks like a great bargain. Just for looks alone they should go for over 10K.

[DenPureSound]

Dennis can probably give you full details but basically the Phil 1s use

Sb Acoustics 8" woofer + a ML-TL optimized for it
BG Neo 8 midrange

Fountek NeoCD3 ribbon tweeterall put together with a dennis murphy crossover!

So at $1600 it's already a speaker that can run with anything in the tonal accuracy and sound quality department.

the Phil 2 goes from a world class ribbon to the RAAL 70-10d ribbon tweeter, which some people consider the most real sounding tweeter in the world (technically the RAAL 150-15d and.RAAL 70-20XR are probably 'better' as they play lower but since the Neo 8 is only around 3-4 inches wide you can play it up to the 70-10d's crossover point without much issue). Since the tweeter is different the crossover is appropriately different, but still a dennis murphy design. Basically there's no extra markup - you're just paying the difference in driver cost!!!!!!

The Phil 3 uses the same top section but the woofer is a different. 8" Scan-speak(less sensitive, but more linear throw and reaches a bit deeper) which i don't think is a big deal for anyone using subs or listening to 97% of music out there. Since the woofer is different the enclosure is differently optimized for it and so is the crossover. Again no extra markup unless you need a red finish. Just pay the difference in driver/enclosure/crossover parts. personally i think having two or three well selected, well placed 12" vented /15" sealed subs is a better idea than making a 8" woofer deal with bass below 60hz. the audiophile community probably doesn't. I personally find a 100hz crossover in my room to give smoothest frequency response.

Agreed, and if you look at the cost of the PH2 woof it is $100, and the Revelator in the PH3 is $375, big difference in price for a reason. I have reviewed both woofers and when I saw the SB Acoustics in the Phil 2's I said that maybe is worth $100, then I looked up the price - yeppers, one hund. If you look at the SB's Power Handling Rating it is POOR at 60 Watts, vs. the Revelator at 170 Watts!! So I think ADTG is going the right way with the Phil 3's in my opinion.

Your right I could get by with the Phil 2's and a couple of my Subs, but I like the Phil 3's woofer muchO better all the way around, and I would be scared to pump 100 Watts into the Phil 2's, and have the SB blow out on me. In fact, I might even go up higher with the XPA-5 which with two ch. driven it will reach up into the 300W per ch. into 4 Ω, not that I will drive them that hard. Per Dennis's data he can get ~105db at 40W from 30hz. and up, with the Phil 3's.

Now, Dennis Murphy wrote me back and answered some of my questions as follows:

for PHIL 3's ---

4-6 Ohms Impedance

Drive them with the EMO XPA-5?: Sure that is twice the power Dennis is using!

Weight per Speaker = 85 Pounds

Xover Cct. Bd. is as shown in Gallery on Philharmonic Audio web site, using Peg Bd, Tie Wraps, and Silicone, and is mounted to the bottom removable portion of woof enclosure.

I am crossing the LFE on the 4311 Denon at 120Hz., and all speakers set to SMALL, but the Subwoofer output at 80Hz. works best for me with a 12" and 15" sub, room is not balanced in openings here. The nice thing about the 4311 is that it uses Audyssey MultEQ XT32 and dials in nicely dual subs.

[Matt34]

Thanks for passing on all of this info. You saved me a lot of time. Frankly, I've been surprised at how much more interest there's been in the 3's than in the 1's or 2's. I love the Scan woofer, but for HT applications with a sub, it would be a complete waste.

Well, if it makes you feel any better I'm going to "settle" on the 2's.

[GranteedEV]

If you look at the SB's Power Handling Rating it is POOR at 60 Watts, vs. the Revelator at 170 Watts!!

Whoa, hold'er there a minute.

Let's consider something:

85db + 60w = 102.7db
87.5db sensitivity + 60w = 105.2db
85db + 105w = 105.2db
87.5db + 95w = 107.2db
85db sensitivitiy + 170w = 107.2db

Heat is never your friend. the less power you're using, the better IMO - i really doubt the scanspeak has double the heatsinking capability... it uses roughly a similar size voice coil for starters. I think a woofer rated for 60w being fed more than its rating, is a lot more likely to last longer than a woofer rated for 170w but being fed twice the power at its rating.

Now as a general rule you have to remember the nature of music content. Unless it's heavily compressed, 60w RMS is something like 250w peaks, and somewhere in between those two points more closely approximates the nature of non test tone content IMHO.

A raw power handling number doesn't necessarily approximate what we hear (the audible effects of compression), or if it even matters. Test tone ratings are one thing, but I think real world application is a whole nothing thing. Sometimes these are determined by free air mechanical limitations rather than thermal limitations too.

Check out this article by Paul Apollonio:

http://www.audioholics.com/education...e-test-results

given the limited passband with a subwoofer (60hz to 800hz) combined with the actual nature of music content, I can't imagine being scared to blow a woofer, unless you're listening really damn loud to undynamic content. In that case I don't really see any of the Phils as the optimal choice, as that's not what they're designed for.

[Dennis Murphy]

Whoa, hold'er there a minute.

Let's consider something:

85db + 60w = 102.7db
87.5db sensitivity + 60w = 105.2db
85db + 105w = 105.2db
87.5db + 95w = 107.2db
85db sensitivitiy + 170w = 107.2db

Heat is never your friend. the less power you're using, the better IMO - i really doubt the scanspeak has double the heatsinking capability... it uses roughly a similar size voice coil for starters. I think a woofer rated for 60w being fed more than its rating, is a lot more likely to last longer than a woofer rated for 170w but being fed twice the power at its rating.

Now as a general rule you have to remember the nature of music content. Unless it's heavily compressed, 60w RMS is something like 250w peaks, and somewhere in between those two points more closely approximates the nature of non test tone content IMHO.

A raw power handling number doesn't necessarily approximate what we hear (the audible effects of compression), or if it even matters. Test tone ratings are one thing, but I think real world application is a whole nothing thing. Sometimes these are determined by free air mechanical limitations rather than thermal limitations too.

Check out this article by Paul Apollonio:

Loudspeakers & Power Ratings Part III: The Test Results — Reviews and News from Audioholics

given the limited passband with a subwoofer (60hz to 800hz) combined with the actual nature of music content, I can't imagine being scared to blow a woofer, unless you're listening really damn loud to undynamic content. In that case I don't really see any of the Phils as the optimal choice, as that's not what they're designed for.

Man--I gotta get you on my payroll. You could do my website. Excellent post. The real advantage of the Scan woofer is bass extension. It is very rugged, and I'm sure it will take more juice before bottoming out than the SB. But for practical applications playing music, I don't think either woofer presents a problem in terms of power handling. And for all of those prehistoric creatures on a rampage in HT applications, you're going to be using a sub.