McIntosh Mini Flagship Line Array Speaker at 1/2 Price

[haraldo]

I Audtitioned their larger sibling, the XRT 2.1K, in the local hifi shop. The speakers are around twice the price tag of the ”smaller” XRT 1.1K. They are incredibly dynamic, there are no limits, compression is unknown and there seem to be no limits to how loud they can go.

Incredibly impressive and they will completely blow your socks off, so dynamic it is uttermost scary .... I doubt you will find anywhere any more dynamic speakers, insane !!!!!!

But at the same time they are unrealistic, they present a much larger than life soundstage, artificially large. If you go to a concert it is nothing like what you will hear from these speakers. IMHO they do not present music the way it is in real life... Read: Mark Knopfler’s mouth is five feet tall

I would not want them even if I could afford them, but good that products like these are made

 

[haraldo]

There are some very slim and room friendly line source speakers being made in Norway too under the Adyton brand, require subs though....

Price tag at $23.000 plus required subwoofers

 

[GrimSurfer]

In my experience, line arrays are the speaker type for those looking for a 'wall-of-sound' effect, that larger than life sound that you would expect from an Imax. The cost is imaging; these speakers don't tend to have very precise imaging.

I read a piece on this by Floyd Toole in the AES Journal the other day. It is Toole's assertion that what we hear as imaging is the result of reflected sound. His contention is that in a quest for greater imaging, we often accept the various negative effects of reflected sound as the price of dog business.

Floyd's thoughts were framed by well founded views on the directionality of sound at certain frequencies and the importance of flat anechoic frequency response as a necessary precondition of quality sound.

Some of this makes sense, especially Toole's belief that centre channel and other drivers are needed for more accurate sound reproduction. I also agree with Toole's views on the need for flat frequency responses (which, one must admit, increases the possibility that electronic room correction will be reasonably effective.

Some of this doesn't make sense because we all know that humans can image real sounds quite well... so how does this square with the notion that a speakers' recreation of a sound stage is somehow bad?

I think there's a compromise to be achieved and linear arrays may be the best way to get reasonable front hempispherical coverage from two loudspeakers through phase and driver orientation. The key, I believe, is not to overdo it, as Amar Bose did with the 901s (which had ~360 degrees of driver orientation, making it difficult for the loudspeaker manufacturer to anticipate how these may interact in a variety of rooms).

More accurate direct sound is something that might appeal to a "thinking audiophile", particularly if the electronic mediation is used to create a realistic sound stage. Looked at in this way, it might just be possible for the right linear array, amp, and audio software to deliver something closer to perfection. But a lot of pieces need to come together here -- and speakers are just one piece of the puzzle.

 

[haraldo]

I read a piece on this by Floyd Toole in the AES Journal the other day. It is Toole's assertion that what we hear as imaging is the result of reflected sound. His contention is that in a quest for greater imaging, we often accept the various negative effects of reflected sound as the price of dog business.

Floyd's thoughts were framed by well founded views on the directionality of sound at certain frequencies and the importance of flat anechoic frequency response as a necessary precondition of quality sound.

Some of this makes sense, especially Toole's belief that centre channel and other drivers are needed for more accurate sound reproduction. I also agree with Toole's views on the need for flat frequency responses (which, one must admit, increases the possibility that electronic room correction will be reasonably effective.

Some of this doesn't make sense because we all know that humans can image real sounds quite well... so how does this square with the notion that a speakers' recreation of a sound stage is somehow bad?

I think there's a compromise to be achieved and linear arrays may be the best way to get reasonable front hempispherical coverage from two loudspeakers through phase and driver orientation. The key, I believe, is not to overdo it, as Amar Bose did with the 901s (which had ~360 degrees of driver orientation, making it difficult for the loudspeaker manufacturer to anticipate how these may interact in a variety of rooms).

More accurate direct sound is something that might appeal to a "thinking audiophile", particularly if the electronic mediation is used to create a realistic sound stage. Looked at in this way, it might just be possible for the right linear array, amp, and audio software to deliver something closer to perfection. But a lot of pieces need to come together here -- and speakers are just one piece of the puzzle.

To me it’s all simply about the music being presented in a natural realistic way, in a simplistic way it is very simple. IMHO line arrays do not present music in a realistic way, generally larger than life it seems to me. Like watching a movie with exagerated colors.

My experience, the more I manage to kill first reflection, the better imaging. I have no idea what Floyd Toole is getting at here......

 

[shadyJ]

I read a piece on this by Floyd Toole in the AES Journal the other day. It is Toole's assertion that what we hear as imaging is the result of reflected sound. His contention is that in a quest for greater imaging, we often accept the various negative effects of reflected sound as the price of dog business.

Floyd would say that much of imaging comes from the direct sound, not reflected sound. While reflected sound can contribute to imaging, the way in which we determine imaging is largely a matter of first arrival of sound, since we determine much of localization from loudness difference and arrival time difference.

 

[mtrot]

I heard the larger size version of this at Rocky Mountain Audio Fest last October. I've always thought, eh, McIntosh is an amplifier company and sort of discounted their speakers. Boy, was I wrong. I sort of stumbled into the McIntosh room where they had the line array speakers playing a large scale orchestral piece. Maybe I don't have discriminating enough ears, but it sounded just fantastic to me.

 

[Hartley]

McIntosh has come a very long way with regard to speaker design. Back in the (very) old days they weren't a contender in this arena as they were in amplification and signal processing. Now the only question in my mind is whether they're going over the top a bit.

 

[haraldo]

I once again today auditioned the top of the line XRT 2.1 with a full McIntosh rig in front, and this time the experience was different.
- The snap and big scale dynamics is out of this world, I heard much more expensive speakers not being close to this
- The soundstage is 3 dimensional to a level I am not sure I heard before, and quite precise
- The music is BIG, VERY BIG
- There is a bass to die for, when playing music from the original blade runner movie, it was unreal
- Drums hit you in the chest with a snap that is just, wow

But still, soundstage is larger than in real life....

What I think now, these speakers are really worth the price, and there is an insane amount of engineering going in here, finish is state of the art.
And I believe there are no speakers like this on the market

 

[JerryLove]

I once again today auditioned the top of the line XRT 2.1 with a full McIntosh rig in front, and this time the experience was different.
- The snap and big scale dynamics is out of this world, I heard much more expensive speakers not being close to this
- The soundstage is 3 dimensional to a level I am not sure I heard before, and quite precise
- The music is BIG, VERY BIG
- There is a bass to die for, when playing music from the original blade runner movie, it was unreal
- Drums hit you in the chest with a snap that is just, wow

But still, soundstage is larger than in real life....

I think it's the HF/Midrange array.

I think that the sound is spread over too large an emissions surface for those frequencies and so localization is hurt.

That was my experience with extended testing on the XRT2k, at any rate.

 

[haraldo]

I think it's the HF/Midrange array.

I think that the sound is spread over too large an emissions surface for those frequencies and so localization is hurt.

That was my experience with extended testing on the XRT2k, at any rate.

I like your priorities in life

I listened to a lot of different types of lines source speakers and some things are always the same to my experience.
1. There is a complete immunity to standing waves between floor and ceiling, that means they will work exceedingly well in rooms where this is an issue.
2. The dynamics is unreal, because of all the drivers you will never get close to stressing the drivers, even at ear bleeding levels
3. Distortion is absent, this means you often end up playing way louder than what you think, because it is so super clean
4. Soundstage is tall, because it is just the nature of the linesource, imaging seems fine to me it’s just that problematic unrealistic tall soundstage
5. Because of tbe large number of drivers, you often see much smaller drivers that are very light, what I experience is a level of detail and resolution that I just normally don’t hear in anything else....
6. If you extend the line source to the woofer / subwoofer section you seem to get a combination of power and precision in the bass that is simply staggering, maybe.... the best bass I heard are also from line source subwoofers. Another reason why this may work so well is also that I guess they are less susceptible to resonances in the vertical plane.

Line source speakers are incredibly popular over here in Norway because of all those advantages, and they sell like ice cold beer on a bleeding hot humid summers day, but I am reluctant to line source due to 4. above

The room which the XRT 2.1’s were demoed in is incredibly troubled with standing waves and some speakers are very non-perfomant in here, but it’s no doubt that these speakers are completely unreal and something special.

Just my thoughts and experiences....

 

[haraldo]

There’s a lot of DIY projects on line arrays out there, it’s just to google; a common denominator is that most seem to be really succesful

 

[shadyJ]

I like your priorities in life

I listened to a lot of different types of lines source speakers and some things are always the same to my experience.
1. There is a complete immunity to standing waves between floor and ceiling, that means they will work exceedingly well in rooms where this is an issue.
2. The dynamics is unreal, because of all the drivers you will never get close to stressing the drivers, even at ear bleeding levels
3. Distortion is absent, this means you often end up playing way louder than what you think, because it is so super clean
4. Soundstage is tall, because it is just the nature of the linesource, imaging seems fine to me it’s just that problematic unrealistic tall soundstage
5. Because of tbe large number of drivers, you often see much smaller drivers that are very light, what I experience is a level of detail and resolution that I just normally don’t hear in anything else....
6. If you extend the line source to the woofer / subwoofer section you seem to get a combination of power and precision in the bass that is simply staggering, maybe.... the best bass I heard are also from line source subwoofers. Another reason why this may work so well is also that I guess they are less susceptible to resonances in the vertical plane.

Line source speakers are incredibly popular over here in Norway because of all those advantages, and they sell like ice cold beer on a bleeding hot humid summers day, but I am reluctant to line source due to 4. above

The room which the XRT 2.1’s were demoed in is incredibly troubled with standing waves and some speakers are very non-perfomant in here, but it’s no doubt that these speakers are completely unreal and something special.

You can't really make a line-array subwoofer. Well you can in theory, but no one will ever do that. The reason is that for the speaker to act as a line-array, it must be four times as tall as the largest wavelength it is producing, so only within that bandwidth will it act as a true line-array. Now consider that the length of a 40 Hz wave is something like almost 30 feet or 8.5 meters. So now you need a line-array that is 120 ft/34 m tall just to act as a line source for 40 Hz. Double that height for a subwoofer that can play down to 20 Hz.

 

[haraldo]

You can't really make a line-array subwoofer. Well you can in theory, but no one will ever do that. The reason is that for the speaker to act as a line-array, it must be four times as tall as the largest wavelength it is producing, so only within that bandwidth will it act as a true line-array. Now consider that the length of a 40 Hz wave is something like almost 30 feet or 8.5 meters. So now you need a line-array that is 120 ft/34 m tall just to act as a line source for 40 Hz. Double that height for a subwoofer that can play down to 20 Hz.

When I say line source, I understand it's not really that "line source" in the bass, but I guess the vertical distribution of the drivers makes it less triggering of some of the room resonances....

There is this one that I listened to: "Adyton Impetus"
supposedly flat from 15 Hz to 130 Hz

Anyways, it sounds great

Some diy'ers have made similar things around here and results seem to be unreal, I'm planning to visit a guy soon with a complete 4 tower system he made himself....

 

[shadyJ]

When I say line source, I understand it's not really that "line source" in the bass, but I guess the vertical distribution of the drivers makes it less triggering of some of the room resonances....

There is this one that I listened to: "Adyton Impetus"
supposedly flat from 15 Hz to 130 Hz
View attachment 28907



Anyways, it sounds great

Some diy'ers have made similar things around here and results seem to be unreal, I'm planning to visit a guy soon with a complete 4 tower system he made himself....

A much more sensible way to construct a tower sub is to take a whole bunch of sub cubes and stack them. That guy took 8 bass drivers and put them in a single cabinet which will weigh a ton and be very difficult to move around. Very impractical.

 

[haraldo]

A much more sensible way to construct a tower sub is to take a whole bunch of sub cubes and stack them. That guy took 8 bass drivers and put them in a single cabinet which will weigh a ton and be very difficult to move around. Very impractical.

Agree
I guess that's the idea of Ken Kreisel and his subwoofer "towers" that you can build in your own pace
https://www.kreiselsound.com/subDXD808.php
https://www.kreiselsound.com/subDXD12012.php