Mirage Omnisat initial listen

[maytagman]

Wow... I gotta say, after the raving reviews I've heard on these things, I expected quite a bit more. I was about to start running lines for my Omnisats as surrounds, when I decided for fun's sake to hook them up as mains paired with my X-Sub for a little testing. Compared to my Alesis monitors that are usualy mains (bastardized I know but sound fabulous), these things are really lacking in detail. I almost cant stand to listen to them... I plan to break them in for a bit and see if conditions improve, but otherwise they're going cheap. I wasnt expecting full sound out of a tiny speaker, but something above cardboard box wouldve been nice. The whole spectrum seems like its been draped with a tarp. It's got almost no definition anywhere and it hardly expresses any detail at all. Staggering...
I'm mighty disappointed! Is there anyone here who ownes these things and likes them? Maybe its just my ear for studio monitors that painstakingly reproduce every tiny detail.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

I demo'd them a year or so ago, and absolutely hated them. That may be the reason why they're going so cheap at Ubid.com.

 

[maytagman]

Well I let them run for a good five hours on mid volume with some nice dynamic music, and theyre really beginning to open up. I wouldnt recommend them as mains, since the imaging isn't all that explained, but soundstage is impressively huge. The detail is starting to emerge after a bit more crossover tweaking and some good tough breaking in. As surrounds I think they will work for the time being. Still nowhere near as expressive as my monitors but it's less harsh and getting much more tolerable by the minute. Not too bad for a sealed cabinet, but a crossover of 80hz is about the lowest you can go without blubbering.

 

[maytagman]

oooh and as a side-note... to anyone auditioning anything that calls itself hi-fi or home theater:

Hybrid - Wider Angle is an absolute MUST!
Throw in that first disc and you can tell in about 10 seconds who are the real winners and who belongs on eBay!

Gonna try out the sats with V for Vendetta later tonight. 4.2 baby!

 

[Jacksmyname]

I have a whole Omnisat v2 system; two floorstanders, the center, four of the sats for surround and a S12 sub. Because of the lousy room I have my gear in, I'm not currently using the sats; saving them for ceiling mounts in the new house I'm building. But the floorstanders, the center and the sub are terrific.
I really don't think the sats are meant for mains.
And, you're right about breaking them in. Mirage is pretty adament about running them at moderate levels for about 50 hours.
I also still have a pair of mirage M760 floorstanders that I bought back in '89. Now those babies are sweet. Still sound as good today as when I bought them.

Jack

 

[maytagman]

Well it's interesting, mirage sells a 5.1 system with 5 identical omnisats... But yes obviously sealed 4" drivers are not going to compare to my ported 6.5" reference monitors. I was just surprised by the lack of detail on the initial setup.. I had minisystems that performed better. I do believe theyre loosening up a bit. However, I have to run them +8-10dB higher than the main channels because they seem less efficient. It's strange since the power going to each is identical, and the speakers have similar efficiency ratings. Perhaps this also is a side effect of being new. I'll give them the month before I decide, but as far as presentation in a surround role, they give nice expression with only vague positionality, which in this case is a good thing.

Thanks for backing up my thoughts.. it helps!

 

[Sheep]

Well it's interesting, mirage sells a 5.1 system with 5 identical omnisats... But yes obviously sealed 4" drivers are not going to compare to my ported 6.5" reference monitors. I was just surprised by the lack of detail on the initial setup.. I had minisystems that performed better. I do believe theyre loosening up a bit. However, I have to run them +8-10dB higher than the main channels because they seem less efficient. It's strange since the power going to each is identical, and the speakers have similar efficiency ratings. Perhaps this also is a side effect of being new. I'll give them the month before I decide, but as far as presentation in a surround role, they give nice expression with only vague positionality, which in this case is a good thing.

Thanks for backing up my thoughts.. it helps!

Dude, break-in isn't real. It's you getting used to the speakers.

If you're expecting full bodied sound from a nanosat, think again. Try some of their real bookshelf speakers with wooden cabinets.

SheepStar

 

[Haoleb]

Dude, break-in isn't real. It's you getting used to the speakers.

If you're expecting full bodied sound from a nanosat, think again. Try some of their real bookshelf speakers with wooden cabinets.

SheepStar

Thanks, Sheep. I'm sure he appreciates your insight. as do we all. However I dont think there are many people who will agree that there is no such thing as speaker break-in. They are mechanical components and therefore most definetly could break-in. Break-in on something like the "Clever Little Clock" probbaly is more hocus pocus than the clock itself. But speakers? I dont think so. Dude.

 

[Jacksmyname]

Thanks, Sheep. I'm sure he appreciates your insight. as do we all. However I dont think there are many people who will agree that there is no such thing as speaker break-in. They are mechanical components and therefore most definetly could break-in. Break-in on something like the "Clever Little Clock" probbaly is more hocus pocus than the clock itself. But speakers? I dont think so. Dude.

Agreed. Break-in allows things to loosen up a bit and work more smoothly, etc.

 

[Vynilforlife]

Sorry guys, Sheep is absolutely correct. Speaker break-in is a total myth. Measurements have proved it, as well as DBT.

 

[PENG]

Agreed. Break-in allows things to loosen up a bit and work more smoothly, etc.

I wonder how do manufacturers/designers predict the effect of "break-in" over time. If they can't than how do they know the speakers will sound better even though they will sound different. If they can predict the effect, i.e. changes vs time, then they should be able to specify how long it will take to break-in their products to the point when they will sound best for a minimum period of time.

What I would like to see from the manufacturers is something like:

Break in with typical modern jazz music CD for a total of 48 hours or more, at moderate level of say 75 dB SPL from 10 ft away in a 15X20X8 average living room. Once broken-in, for normal listening level averaging 4 hours of use a day, the speakers should stay relatively in this sweet spot for at least 10 years.

Or something like:

At average listening level, two hours a day of use playing a variety of music and movies it should take a minimum of one week to break in the speakers to point it should reach a steady state of performance. Once it reaches this steady state, the speaker should remain relatively constant in this state for a minimum of 10 years for average use (again, they can define what average use is).

Without such clarifications, this break-in thing to me is a big puzzle.

 

[Jacksmyname]

From the manual for the Mirage OM-D series:

"It is VITAL that your new OM Design speakers be allowed to break-in
properly before you perform any precise set up procedures, system
adjustments, and before you play them at higher volume levels.The best
method of performing the break-in is to play a full range musical passage at a
moderate level as long as possible. Utilizing the repeat function on your CD
or DVD player can assist greatly. Optimum sound will not be achieved until
approximately 100 hours of playing time. After break-in, the volume level can
be increased. Do not play the speakers at high levels until the break-in
process has been completed.The transducers need to “loosen up”, and until
this occurs, damage can result to the transducers."

 

[PENG]

Thank you Jack, I should have read it first myself. It sure answers part, though not all, of my questions.

 

[Jacksmyname]

You're welcome, PENG.
I figure that the manufacturer knows better than I do as to what's right for their product. I also figure that anyone interested enough in sound quality to read forums like this one will use new speakers a lot, and will quickly put 50-100 hours on them. At that point they can make a judgment as to whether they like them or not. The point some make about "getting used to the sound" I'm not sure I agree with. We may get used to it, but that doesn't mean we'll like it any better.
It's hard for me to say right now if break in helped my new Omnisat floor standers and center. I just installed a new Yamaha RX-V2700 receiver a few days ago (replaced an Onkyo TX-NR 801), and I'm still experimenting with different things. With the same speakers, the Yamaha sounds quite different from the Onkyo; mids and highs are much more distinct and clear. Bass, along with the S12 sub, absolutely thunders on movie sound tracks, and is clean, tight and musical on music cd's.

 

[Sheep]

In an electrodynamic driver featuring the usual surround-diaphragm-spider construction, driver suspension mechanical compliance plays a key roll in determining the measured value of various driver parameters. All of these parameters will shift as the mechanical compliance of the driver’s suspension shifts in value. The bulk of a driver’s compliance shift will occur at the time of initial burn in.



Subsequent shifts in compliance are largely temporary in nature. An example of one such mechanism contributing to such temporary shifts is that which arise from the elastic deformation of butadiene-styrene surrounds. Given sufficient time to recover, these changes tend to reverse themselves and the driver returns to its pre-stimulus state.



As the enclosure compliance in both totally enclosed boxes and vented cabinets dominates that of the driver for most practical implementations of either type enclosure currently in production, any potential changes in system amplitude response attributable to changes in driver suspension mechanical compliance tend to be minimized. Normal production unit-to-unit driver spec variances can affect final amplitude response of a system to a larger degree than that expected from normal pre- post-burn in driver suspension compliance changes.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/loudspeakers/SpeakerBreakIn.php

Class Dismissed.

SheepStar

 

[Nick250]

Thanks, Sheep. I'm sure he appreciates your insight. as do we all. However I dont think there are many people who will agree that there is no such thing as speaker break-in. They are mechanical components and therefore most definetly could break-in. Break-in on something like the "Clever Little Clock" probbaly is more hocus pocus than the clock itself. But speakers? I dont think so. Dude.

If audible break-in does exist, it takes place in the first 30 seconds or so of operation. I think Sheep is right on the money.

Nick

 

[maytagman]

Well, not to sound snooty or anything, but I have a decent ear, and running these side by side in the exact same spot with a 12 hour break in period.. there is a difference. I don't 'get used' to sound, it either sounds good or it doesnt, and I use the Alesis' as a benchmark. Comparitively with the monitor one's I could definetly hear the clarity of the OS's improving over time, not just me. I mean, it would be one thing if I were using the OS's alone and saying they were getting better, but I have been switching back and forth and noticing their detail improving quite a bit...
As for the volume/effficency issue, I smacked myself on the head after realizing the monitor ones were 4 ohm. I guess I Had them so long I've forgotten. DOH!
Anyway... thanks for the insight form both sides.. I'll continue to keep my ears open...

 

[Sheep]

Well, not to sound snooty or anything, but I have a decent ear, and running these side by side in the exact same spot with a 12 hour break in period.. there is a difference. I don't 'get used' to sound, it either sounds good or it doesnt, and I use the Alesis' as a benchmark. Comparitively with the monitor one's I could definetly hear the clarity of the OS's improving over time, not just me. I mean, it would be one thing if I were using the OS's alone and saying they were getting better, but I have been switching back and forth and noticing their detail improving quite a bit...
As for the volume/effficency issue, I smacked myself on the head after realizing the monitor ones were 4 ohm. I guess I Had them so long I've forgotten. DOH!
Anyway... thanks for the insight form both sides.. I'll continue to keep my ears open...

Natural Bias, also well documented.

The only way to really know is to do it blind.

SheepStar

 

[maytagman]

lol, the ability to instantly switch between two sets of speakers in identical places with the same amp on the same audio track affords the ability to compare them logically. I can tell when something's sonic qualities change. Maybe it's unique to this speaker material but a few hours have made night and day.

Not saying there is no mental game involved, but personally they are getting better. In my experience audiophile articles are a lot like medical journals, every few years they change, completely contradicting each other, there is no set industry view, and every single person writing them disagrees with the other. I tend to trust my own listening experiences more, but that's just me.

 

[anamorphic96]

I tend to agree with Sheep on this one. All the engineers I speak with tell me it's a myth. It's really the person getting used to the new sound of that paticular speaker.