Philharmonic BMR HT Tower Review

[gene]

Here is our Youtube Livestream discussion on the BMR HT Tower:

Philharmonic BMR HT Tower Review Discussion

The BMR HT Tower is Philharmonic Audio’s attempt to bring their extreme high-fidelity sound to a wider dynamic range that is more appropriate for heavy-duty ...

www.youtube.com

 

[laurelkurt]

View attachment 62284​

For those in the know, Philharmonic Audio is one of the stand-out values in high-fidelity loudspeakers, but since Philharmonic doesn’t spend a penny on promotion and advertising, only those enthusiasts who are really tuned into the world of home audio loudspeakers would be familiar with the name. Their reputation stems purely from word of mouth and a few lucky reviewers who managed to spend some time with their products. Happily, Audioholics has spent some time with their speakers: see our reviews of the BMT Tower (Philharmonic BMR Tower Review) and the BMR Philharmonitor (Philharmonic BMR Philharmonitor Review). In both instances, we were astonished at just how superb the engineering was, even irrespective of the affordable pricing.

Today, we have the opportunity to go over Philharmonic’s latest release, the BMR HT Tower. This speaker is Philharmonic’s foray into wider dynamic range applications such as home theater, as denoted by the ‘HT.’ As such, the design does take some significant departures from what we are used to from Philharmonic, although it does retain some key elements from previous designs. The questions we will be asking in this review are can the BMR HT Towers bring the same sound quality that we have become accustomed to from Philharmonic, and how well does their formula serve home theater applications? Read our full review to find out…

READ: Philharmonic BMR HT Tower Review

 

[laurelkurt]

Can you put that MONOLITH 5X200 on the test bench while you have it? It would be nice to have an updated review since they added the balanced inputs. THANKS.

 

[Nondemo01]

Great review James and Gene! Can you guys please retire and stop showing me more speakers? I was set on the Arendal 1723s. Then, the Martin Logan F100s. Then, deciding on Perlisten R7ts. Now you add ANOTHER one for consideration... SMH. First World Problems... Also, looks like they have pics of the outrigger feet on their site:

Accessories

philharmonicaudio.com

 

[Swerd]

Great review James and Gene! Can you guys please retire and stop showing me more speakers? I was set on the Arendal 1723s. Then, the Martin Logan F100s. Then, deciding on Perlisten R7ts. Now you add ANOTHER one for consideration... SMH. First World Problems...

Sounds like another case of Audio Nirvana Nervosa .

There is a simple and effective cure to the seemingly never ending worry over what speakers to buy. Order two of any of these Philharmonic Audio speakers, the BMR Monitor, BMR Tower, or HT Tower. These speakers sound so similar to each other that you can let your budget & available floor space guide you to your choice. Your First World Problems will be permanently cured.

 

[ski2xblack]

Wow, Dennis, another fantastic design with impeccable measured performance. I love the slightly smaller form factor of these, and I would expect many to feel the same way. A matte black version for those with dedicated home theaters in the works?

Also, and please correct me if I'm wrong with this, but the bass alignment seems extra clever for sub blending. Normally with 4th order reflex cabs it's sensible to high pass an octave above their roll off, to sidestep the problematic phase shifts associated with that steeper roll-off. The shallower initial roll off of the BMR HT should pay dividends here, more akin to blending a sub with sealed mains than the typical reflex design, allowing the mains to run full range. (Maybe a rumble filter for the headbanger crowd would be advisable, as the drivers will decouple at very low frequencies.)

Kudos. It's taking serious effort to resist cracking out the visa card for these.

 

[Eppie]

Nice to see that Dennis will be offering a matching centre channel speaker to go with the HT Towers. As mentioned on his web page for the HT Centre, a BMR with the tweeter rotated 90° will work fine, but the new centre will have broader coverage and more power handling. Measurements and pricing are on the linked page. I wish him further success on his excellent products.

 

[Epsonfan]

That's a massive center.

 

[Swerd]

Not so massive, for a 3-way

20½" wide × 10⅞" high × 10⅞" deep​

 

[ryanosaur]

That's a massive center.

Should seen it when he was testing the wmtmw prototype! The mtm part was vertical!!!

 

[kini]

Nice to see that Dennis will be offering a matching centre channel speaker to go with the HT Towers. As mentioned on his web page for the HT Centre, a BMR with the tweeter rotated 90° will work fine, but the new centre will have broader coverage and more power handling. Measurements and pricing are on the linked page. I wish him further success on his excellent products.
View attachment 63890

Interesting that it does not have a BMR and therefore doesn't really match. Especially with no grill on.

 

[D Murphy]

Should seen it when he was testing the wmtmw prototype! The mtm part was vertical!!!

An excellent example of function over form.

 

[D Murphy]

Interesting that it does not have a BMR and therefore doesn't really match. Especially with no grill on.

See my post above. Sensitivity demands would require two BMR's in parallel stacked above and below the tweeter. Not a good look according to 101% of commenters. The Scan midrange chosen is a rare combination of small size, high sensitivity, and very extended, wide, and smooth response.

 

[ryanosaur]

An excellent example of function over form.

Function is way more important! "FFF:" Form Follows Function.

But then, that's why I favor matching towers across the front, and failing that, using the vertical BMR Monitor in my situation.

 

[TLS Guy]

That's a massive center.

A center needs to be massive. It needs to have comparable power handling to the right and left mains. The vast majority of center speakers are nowhere near up to the task.

 

[D Murphy]

A center needs to be massive. It needs to have comparable power handling to the right and left mains. The vast majority of center speakers are nowhere near up to the task.

I don't think that's true for most applications. I certainly haven't had any issues running a medium-sized one-off center with my humongous Phil 3's. But I think it is true that you might want to cross the center pretty high in case you're watching the Napoleonic Wars with cannon shots ringing out the center.

 

[TLS Guy]

I don't think that's true for most applications. I certainly haven't had any issues running a medium-sized one-off center with my humongous Phil 3's. But I think it is true that you might want to cross the center pretty high in case you're watching the Napoleonic Wars with cannon shots ringing out the center.

If you use the Dolby up mixer then the center has as much to do as the left and right.

On music BDs and opera I find that the mix engineers tend to reduce the center feed. Last season on the BPO Dolby Atmos streams the center was at a pretty low level and the surrounds etc. so the ambience was at a low level. I have had a lot of correspondence with the BPO and this year the mix is excellent. The center is carrying the center of the orchestra and choirs and there is now pretty much an even split between the front three. In addition you can now hear the ambience of the hall correctly. In the applause you now feel in the center of the audience. As far as centers, they got the message not to 'baby' inadequate centers. Mix for the good systems and not the weak ones. So yes, I did design for a center that would give no quarter to the left and right speakers. It is a fairly large speaker and bigger than it looks, since it is through wall.

The end result is fantastic, I am "over the moon" with this seasons BPO Dolby Atmos streams. There have also been a couple of upgrades to the app.
Honestly I don't think there is much difference from being in the Philharmonie. The 3D imaging is fantastic, with the correct layering of the orchestra. In the Dvorak Stabat Mater the choir is placed behind the choir and the soloists in front and not too loud.

One thing I have noticed is that conventional recording is to blame for some ills I have blamed loudspeakers for. In particular the balance between string and body of strings. This is particularly true of cellos and double basses. In the Atmos streams they sound as they should. Part of this, is I think because they localize much better. Since this is an object based mixing system, this should not be a surprise. The violins also sound highly realistic. The bass drums and cymbals also sound incredibly realistic.

I was really skeptical of this technology for this genre of music, but I am now an enthusiast for it.

I think it will require mix engineers to reexamine their craft. I bought the DGG Dolby Atmos BD of the Bach St. John passion last winter. It was recorded in Oxford, with Sir John, Eliot Gardiner. The recording is fine, except in the solo passages. The spot mics on the soloists are turned up too high in the mix. In the solo passages the illusion is lost. So engineers will have to be very careful in their use of spot mics with these productions. I note the BPO were very sparing with them, if they were turned up at all in the Dvorak Atmos mix.