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

[M S]

Thanks for the comparison, Woods...very helpful.

How is the efficiency of the monitor 2s? My very limited experience tells me bass extension via larger enclosures may cost something in efficiency. If you drive them comfortably with 6.5wpc, they must be fairly efficient. Are they noticeably less efficient than the Philharmonic 2s?

Marv, first of all I really liked the CAOW1s, they are great speakers. There wasn't enough bass, without a sub, which would mean adding one (less WAF). Painful as it was I had to make a hard decision. Then is when Dennis told me of the Philharmonitor 1 for a client, the first designed and he said it sounded pretty good (he he, his modesty showing again). He said with a larger enclosure would produce more bass. So, I commissioned him to do it and I am glad he did.

First of the the CAOW1s has the ow1 tweet, the monitor 2s, the fountek, I consider it smoother and more air reproducing highs which was an improvement over the ow1 or ow2, mine had the improved version of the Ow2. Dennis said, in comparison with the MBOW1, he could hear the "superior highs of the Fountek tweeter".

Second, the 7" Seas verses 5" Seas would definitely produce more bass and with the .75 guaranteed it..... bigger driver, bigger cabinet. He also told me the sound is very smooth and open. SOLD!!!

Having listened for awhile, I would completely agree with him. When I first hooked them up, I had the Genalex Gold Lion KT77 Tubes in my amp 6.5wpc, and the sound was so forward I had to lower the volume. The bass was strong, I had to get use to that, but the tubes were removed as I heard a loud buzz several times and was worried that it might damage the speakers at high volumes. One of the tubes was going bad. I then plugged the stock tubes back in and the sound was more laid back. Interesting the difference tubes make. But the monitors amazed me.... sounded fantastic even with cheaper tubes.

At this point I think I was hearing the CAOW1s multiplied, these Philharmonitor 2s sounded like towers, big bold sound, tight bass and the fountek really clear and airy. They are BIG monitors and they produce a BIG sound....seems to me they could be used in theater and create a great sound stage. However, I do not think the price will be a whole lot less than the Phil2s.

And, of course, Dennis' hard work in developing a unique crossover to make them shine. They are a worthy investment!

Oh, I also will be adding a small SS amp into the mix, sort of a backup!

Hope this helps!

 

[GranteedEV]

My very limited experience tells me bass extension via larger enclosures may cost something in efficiency.

1) With the larger box, there is also more compliance. So the driver moves more freely (and can bottom out more freely). You get less of that "air spring protection" from the box.

2) With the lower tuning frequency, the driver, is covering some more of the upper bass range because the vent (with its limited bandwidth) is operating lower in frequency. So the driver will move more. Remember that near a vent's tuning driver motion is reduced. So with a 45hz tuning, a 50hz bass note would be carried by both the vent and the driver. With a 30hz tuning, that same bass note is carried moreso by the driver. So again, it itself moves more to produce the same SPL.

So given the above, larger enclosures improve low end efficiency (at least so far as tuning is not way off the mark) but reduce max power handling.

 

[woodsart]

Thanks, GranteedEV....MS, the little amp I am using is the Musical Paradise MP-301 MKII and yeah the Philharmonitor 2s must be quite efficient. Very loud at the 9:00 position that is where I want to listen to more detail of the founteks.

I was told the Phil2s would not work well with this amp. I have not tried it and probably won't. They work too nice with the XPA-5, so why change?

 

[frsimms]

I finally thought of a comparison to a speaker that people may have heard. The Philharmonic 2s most remind me of the MBL 101Es. On classical music the MBLs can get the ambiance right and give an image that startles you. It makes you think the instruments are right there! The MBLs do that by having the best image in the industry. The image is magical. The image, of the Twos, isn’t in the class of the MBLs but the tonal quality of the MBLs isn’t in the class of the Twos. The Twos can startle you too. They do it by getting the tonal quality amazingly right while having a very good image and also correct ambiance. The Twos make you think the instruments are right there too. Arguably, the Twos have the best tonal quality in the industry. Don’t think I am trying to say that the Two is as good as the MBL. I doubt anybody would want to trade in their MBLs for the Twos. It is just that they have a similar startling quality on well recorded classical music compared with other speakers that I have heard.

Bob

 

[woodsart]

I finally thought of a comparison to a speaker that people may have heard. The Philharmonic 2s most remind me of the MBL 101Es. On classical music the MBLs can get the ambiance right and give an image that startles you. It makes you think the instruments are right there! The MBLs do that by having the best image in the industry. The image is magical. The image, of the Twos, isn’t in the class of the MBLs but the tonal quality of the MBLs isn’t in the class of the Twos. The Twos can startle you too. They do it by getting the tonal quality amazingly right while having a very good image and also correct ambiance. The Twos make you think the instruments are right there too. Arguably, the Twos have the best tonal quality in the industry. Don’t think I am trying to say that the Two is as good as the MBL. I doubt anybody would want to trade in their MBLs for the Twos. It is just that they have a similar startling quality on well recorded classical music compared with other speakers that I have heard.

Bob

Bob, I passed up the MBL room at CAF, now I know why....... looking at the COST!!!!!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I finally thought of a comparison to a speaker that people may have heard. The Philharmonic 2s most remind me of the MBL 101Es. On classical music the MBLs can get the ambiance right and give an image that startles you. It makes you think the instruments are right there! The MBLs do that by having the best image in the industry. The image is magical. The image, of the Twos, isn’t in the class of the MBLs but the tonal quality of the MBLs isn’t in the class of the Twos. The Twos can startle you too. They do it by getting the tonal quality amazingly right while having a very good image and also correct ambiance. The Twos make you think the instruments are right there too. Arguably, the Twos have the best tonal quality in the industry. Don’t think I am trying to say that the Two is as good as the MBL. I doubt anybody would want to trade in their MBLs for the Twos. It is just that they have a similar startling quality on well recorded classical music compared with other speakers that I have heard.

Bob

I believe you, Bob. But still very precarious to compare the Phils to MBLs.

I'm sure we all know that speakers that cost a lot more ($67K price tag ) will always sound better, regardless of speaker measurements and everything else, especially if they look a lot more expensive.

The sound is just sweeter. Details are just more refined. Soundstage is just more grandiose.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I believe you, Bob. But still very precarious to compare the Phils to MBLs.

I'm sure we all know that speakers that cost a lot more ($67K price tag ) will always sound better, regardless of speaker measurements and everything else, especially if they look a lot more expensive.

The sound is just sweeter. Details are just more refined. Soundstage is just more grandiose.

I think they have a model now that sells for about the same as a well-equipped Jetta. It's a buy.

 

[Nuance AH]

I'd rather buy the minivan my wife's been eyeing, and then 4 pairs of Phil 2's for my Home Theater experience.

 

[GranteedEV]

Not to get off-topic, but for some reason I was reading this, and thought you guys might be intruiged. Could be a cool addition to the Phils

 

[woodsart]

Not to get off-topic, but for some reason I was reading this, and thought you guys might be intruiged. Could be a cool addition to the Phils

And, I thought I was "eat up with it"......



FYI.......My friend just got the SA-50 and is checking it out as we speak. He's the check-er-outer!

 

[Irvrobinson]

Not to get off-topic, but for some reason I was reading this, and thought you guys might be intruiged. Could be a cool addition to the Phils

SL's website is one of my favorites. I could kick myself for not buying a set of Orions when I could for $8200, complete with ATI amp. What a bargain that seems like now! Will I think the same of Phil 3s at $3K in two years?

With this Watson stuff I'm wondering what SL has been smoking. I'd rather splurge on Salon 2s than have two vent pipes sticking up in my face while I'm listening. (Done.) To heck with WAF (my wife encourages my audio habit, FWIW), Watson says "over the edge" to me. Way over.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

SL's website is one of my favorites. I could kick myself for not buying a set of Orions when I could for $8200, complete with ATI amp. What a bargain that seems like now! Will I think the same of Phil 3s at $3K in two years?

With this Watson stuff I'm wondering what SL has been smoking. I'd rather splurge on Salon 2s than have two vent pipes sticking up in my face while I'm listening. (Done.) To heck with WAF (my wife encourages my audio habit, FWIW), Watson says "over the edge" to me. Way over.

I recall my Orions were over $8K without the amp. With the AT6012 amp, it was close to $10K. But I guess the price crept up over the years.

The price of the Phil3 increased from $2800 to $3000 immediately after I sent Del my check for the cabinets.

With inflation & supply cost increasing rapidly, the overall cost of the Philharmonic speakers will have to increase.

The Linkwitz Watson stuff looks like surround speakers to me. I could do the same with my KEF 201/2 surround speakers now. But no thanks.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I recall my Orions were over $8K without the amp. With the AT6012 amp, it was close to $10K. But I guess the price crept up over the years.

The price of the Phil3 increased from $2800 to $3000 immediately after I sent Del my check for the cabinets.

With inflation & supply cost increasing rapidly, the overall cost of the Philharmonic speakers will have to increase.

The Linkwitz Watson stuff looks like surround speakers to me. I could do the same with my KEF 201/2 surround speakers now. But no thanks.

Are you sure that whopping $200 increase wasn't immediately beFORE you sent the check? Dang. Anyhow, methinks your shiny red cabinets and custom fittings are going to cost a bit more than $3000. BTW--the price increase wasn't inflation. I just hadn't realized how expensive custom shipping boxes and endcaps were going to be.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Anyhow, methinks your shiny red cabinets and custom fittings are going to cost a bit more than $3000.

Yes they are.

It pays to be the first.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

My Phil3 cabinets are now at Dennis's house.

 

[woodsart]

My Phil3 cabinets are now at Dennis's house.

And complete, obviously, can't wait for you to get them and enjoy.!!!

 

[Irvrobinson]

If you like them better than the Salon 2s I don't want to hear about it. Just keep it to yourself. I've bought too much stuff lately.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

My Phil3 cabinets are now at Dennis's house.

And complete, obviously, can't wait for you to get them and enjoy.!!!

They are soooooooooooooo not complete. I just got the cabinets yesterday. I have a couple of 2's I have to finish up and ship out before I can turn to these shiny cabinets. BTW, the flash obscures the grain--they're really more elegant (and a little less red) than the pics show.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If you like them better than the Salon 2s I don't want to hear about it. Just keep it to yourself. I've bought too much stuff lately.

You mean the ATI AT3000s amp?

What else did you buy?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

BTW, the flash obscures the grain--they're really more elegant (and a little less red) than the pics show.

I can never get an accurate picture of the Salon2 & KEF 201/2 either; must be that reddish piano high-gloss.

I often run my fingers across the cabinets of the Salon2 & 201/2. I can see myself doing the same with the Phil3.