B&W, Revel, & RBH

[GO-NAD!]

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Like listening to low-mid sensitivity vertically decorrelated direct radiator on a flat baffle monopolar box speakers....and expecting to hear something of substance different in room, that you haven't heard for 30+ yrs.

Have fun while doing so. When you reach the end of the dead end road, then go listen to an Orion 3.1, a GedLee Summa and an AudioKinesis Dream Maker.
Don't make me have to come up to KC .

cheers,

AJ

It would be interesting to see a direct comparison of these alternative concept speakers alongside some "low-mid sensitivity vertically decorrelated direct radiator on a flat baffle monopolar box speakers". I've been intrigued by the Orions for a while. However, as I understand it, their real estate demands will eliminate them as a viable option for most conventional rooms. Plus, they're rather pricy for the average Joe - even as a DIY build.

 

[Docks]

Just in case you guys are looking for a response graph for the RBH T-2's
LMS Full Bandwidth Frequency Response Comparison of T-2 and (1266-LSE + 1010-SEP)
Pink: T-2 System
Blue: 1266-LSE + 1010-SEP Subwoofer

Nice speaker but seems to have some huge spl swings- Starts jumping up like crazy around 70hz the hammers down at 20hz(20db difference in there ), 300hz, 2khz, not too sure about the accuracy of these, would be fun for some bass heavy songs though! (Maybe im being picky??)

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...alternative concept speakers alongside some "low-mid sensitivity vertically decorrelated direct radiator on a flat baffle monopolar box speakers"...

These alternative concept speakers refer to bipole and dipole speakers, correct?

The DefTech BP7000s (& other BPs) are bipole speakers.

The Orion, AudioKinesis, MartinLogan, and Magnepan speakers are all dipole speakers?

I've auditioned the MartinLogan Vantage also (same dealer as Dali & Krell).

I think the spaciousness and 3D soundstage of the MartinLogan & DefTech BPs are similar - more similar than they are compared to the Dali Euphonia MS5, Paradigm Studio 100, Krell Resolution, B&W 800s, Revel M22s, & Infinity P362s.

After living with my bipole speakers for several years, listening to direct-radiating speakers sounds different. I mean really different somehow. My wordings may not be accurate and I don't have the words to describe it, but it is as though the soundstage went from 3D to 2D somehow.

The difference is like night and day.

Going from listening to the BP7000SC for several years to listening to the Infinity P362 for the first time is like.....Huh?...what happened???

I mean the sound from the P362 is clear and vocals are centered between the speakers, so I know the imaging is accurate, but that "room-filling-air" is gone (in the same room and position as the BP7000).

It's the same when I audtioned the B&W 800Ds (& the other direct-radiating speakers I've auditioned). The sound is clear and vocals are centered, but something was just "missing" in the experience.

So I think it is safe to say that I will do 2 more auditions of the direct-radiating speakers: RBH T3 (hopefully next Tuesday) and the Revel Salon2 (some time, some where in Dallas).

If after listening to these 2 great speakers and I still feel that something is "missing", then I will never look back.

But are the RBH T3s considered traditional direct-radiating speakers? They are truncated line-array speakers?

 

[GO-NAD!]

These alternative concept speakers refer to bipole and dipole speakers, correct?

The DefTech BP7000s (& other BPs) are bipole speakers.

The Orion, AudioKinesis, MartinLogan, and Magnepan speakers are all dipole speakers?

I've auditioned the MartinLogan Vantage also (same dealer as Dali & Krell).

I think the spaciousness and 3D soundstage of the MartinLogan & DefTech BPs are similar - more similar than they are compared to the Dali Euphonia MS5, Paradigm Studio 100, Krell Resolution, B&W 800s, Revel M22s, & Infinity P362s.

After living with my bipole speakers for several years, listening to direct-radiating speakers sounds different. I mean really different somehow. My wordings may not be accurate and I don't have the words to describe it, but it is as though the soundstage went from 3D to 2D somehow.

The difference is like night and day.

Going from listening to the BP7000SC for several years to listening to the Infinity P362 for the first time is like.....Huh?...what happened???

I mean the sound from the P362 is clear and vocals are centered between the speakers, so I know the imaging is accurate, but that "room-filling-air" is gone (in the same room and position as the BP7000).

It's the same when I audtioned the B&W 800Ds (& the other direct-radiating speakers I've auditioned). The sound is clear and vocals are centered, but something was just "missing" in the experience.

So I think it is safe to say that I will do 2 more auditions of the direct-radiating speakers: RBH T3 (hopefully next Tuesday) and the Revel Salon2 (some time, some where in Dallas).

If after listening to these 2 great speakers and I still feel that something is "missing", then I will never look back.

But are the RBH T3s considered traditional direct-radiating speakers? They are truncated line-array speakers?

Well, what really sets the Orion apart is that it is also an open baffle design.

 

[gene]

Nice speaker but seems to have some huge spl swings- Starts jumping up like crazy around 70hz the hammers down at 20hz(20db difference in there ), 300hz, 2khz, not too sure about the accuracy of these, would be fun for some bass heavy songs though! (Maybe im being picky??)

Umm that was an in-room response at my old home where the couch was close to the back wall. Those dual 10s certainly pump out alot of SPL due to room gain which was the point of that measurement!

Try this measurement which was done at 2.5m.

 

[STRONGBADF1]

AcuDefTechGuy, Have you auditioned Magnepans? (I didn't read back through the thread to find out...) I'd be curious to read your opinions on them compared to the others.

 

[Warpdrv]

but completely different in sound If you are as crazy as self described, at trip to Michigan wouldn't be far fetched. And I'm sure you're a puddle jumper away from the land of 10k lakes to hear Warp's setup. Beer, cheese, and subs Anechoic specs are awesome and the free air mid appeals to your room sense...... Give Jim a chance

Land of 10,000 Lakes is Minnesota.....

I'm not sure that Wisconsin even has a catch slogan like that....

Wisconsin: Beer - Brat State...
CheeseHead State...?

If your looking to dump that kind of cash on new speakers... I would also second the notion of checking out the Salk Sound Scape.... goofy looking but from the reviews I have read about, worth a listen...

Your always welcome to come here and check out my system anytime....

 

[AJinFLA]

You need to audition the BP7000SC and let me know just how much better are those other speakers!

Your opinion of (all of) them, is the only one that matters.
I have heard BP speakers (though not the 7000SC). I still give the edge to and prefer the old Paradigm Eclipse or Mirage OM-6 (intimately familiar with both) within that style of loudspeaker. What I am suggesting you listen to is beyond that category. You seem ready.

It would be interesting to see a direct comparison of these alternative concept speakers alongside some "low-mid sensitivity vertically decorrelated direct radiator on a flat baffle monopolar box speakers".

I've done that over a lifetime. Others are welcome to do so.

I've been intrigued by the Orions for a while. However, as I understand it, their real estate demands will eliminate them as a viable option for most conventional rooms. Plus, they're rather pricy for the average Joe - even as a DIY build.

They seem to fit within ADTG's requirements.
But yes, the (real estate) market for that level of fidelity is low. Very low. As Paradigm, Energy, etc. all came to find out.

These alternative concept speakers refer to bipole and dipole speakers, correct?
The DefTech BP7000s (& other BPs) are bipole speakers.
The Orion, AudioKinesis, MartinLogan, and Magnepan speakers are all dipole speakers?

Yes.
The Summa is thrown in as a benchmark vs what you are currently auditioning (low sens....monopolars).

I think the spaciousness and 3D soundstage of the MartinLogan & DefTech BPs are similar - more similar than they are compared to the Dali Euphonia MS5, Paradigm Studio 100, Krell Resolution, B&W 800s, Revel M22s, & Infinity P362s.
After living with my bipole speakers for several years, listening to direct-radiating speakers sounds different. I mean really different somehow. My wordings may not be accurate and I don't have the words to describe it, but it is as though the soundstage went from 3D to 2D somehow.
The difference is like night and day.

Bingo.
Some prefer 2D. Heck, some prefer headphones. Won't affect Floyd, Steve Miller and the likes. But it's obvious on acoustic large scale works.
Not for everyone or idiot-proofed against misplacement and misuse.

Going from listening to the BP7000SC for several years to listening to the Infinity P362 for the first time is like.....Huh?...what happened???

I mean the sound from the P362 is clear and vocals are centered between the speakers, so I know the imaging is accurate, but that "room-filling-air" is gone (in the same room and position as the BP7000).

It's the same when I audtioned the B&W 800Ds (& the other direct-radiating speakers I've auditioned). The sound is clear and vocals are centered, but something was just "missing" in the experience.
So I think it is safe to say that I will do 2 more auditions of the direct-radiating speakers: RBH T3 (hopefully next Tuesday) and the Revel Salon2 (some time, some where in Dallas).
If after listening to these 2 great speakers and I still feel that something is "missing", then I will never look back.

But are the RBH T3s considered traditional direct-radiating speakers? They are truncated line-array speakers?

Something in between. There must be some frequency shading to avoid a polar disaster with all those separated point sources. No way the T3 will have anywhere near as smooth an off axis (or entire polar response) as even the 362. You would want to keep it away from walls. Proof is in the pudding, give it a listen and see (or hear) for yourself. Ditto for the others.
Like I said, when you reach the end of the road, you'll know where to search next .

cheers,

AJ

 

[AJinFLA]

Umm that was an in-room response at my old home where the couch was close to the back wall. Those dual 10s certainly pump out alot of SPL due to room gain which was the point of that measurement!

Try this measurement which was done at 2.5m.

The 1st one definitely looks like an in room for that type box speaker. The 2nd looks like...with eq at the measurement position. Different room?

cheers,

AJ

 

[jostenmeat]

Have fun while doing so. When you reach the end of the dead end road, then go listen to an Orion 3.1, a GedLee Summa and an AudioKinesis Dream Maker.
Don't make me have to come up to KC .

AJ, I'd like to pick your brain a bit. Outside of any discussion regarding placement or real estate, what, if any, compromises are made with such speakers? Would you consider these designs to be just as superior for mch setups? (I mean with bipolars in particular.) Would you consider the open baffle to be inherently superior, for any reason such as cabinet resonance (I think you may have once said that cabinet resonance might be an overhyped issue, but I cannot exactly recall). Thanks.

I have a pair of dipole electrostats for a stereo system, and out of a few regrets, one of them is my failure to research the Orions further. I was recommended to listen to them from a nice scientist/organist fellow who was helping me understand basic room acoustics, since he knew I was leaning very hard towards electrostats, but it never came about . . .

I find I have great 3D, front to back, and in-between the speakers. I don't have so much spatial information outside of the speakers. I believe the nature of electrostats means that power/SPL only decreases inversely with distance, and not exponentially like with point sources, and I suppose this will play a part in that, since the offaxis information (yes, which there is little of) will be relatively lower in SPL. Then again, my LR is rather asymmetrical.

edit: for the convenience of others, here are the links for a couple of the speakers AJ was recommending:
http://www.gedlee.com/summa_.htm
http://www.audiokinesis.com/product_ak_dream-maker.html

 

[bandphan]

Land of 10,000 Lakes is Minnesota.....

I'm not sure that Wisconsin even has a catch slogan like that....

Wisconsin: Beer - Brat State...
CheeseHead State...?

If your looking to dump that kind of cash on new speakers... I would also second the notion of checking out the Salk Sound Scape.... goofy looking but from the reviews I have read about, worth a listen...

Your always welcome to come here and check out my system anytime....

And there I was thinking I was on Mars. I guess my meds had me a tad bit confused about geography

 

[jostenmeat]

And there I was thinking I was on Mars. I guess my meds had me a tad bit confused about geography

Don't feel so bad about it man. After all, Wisconsin has a few thousand more lakes than Minnesota, believe it or not, and their baseball team in Milwaukee is called the Brewers, since that town was home to the breweries of Miller, Schlitz, Pabst, and others. Yeah, then those damn cheeseheads too (no offense meant to Nomo).

 

[AJinFLA]

AJ, I'd like to pick your brain a bit. Outside of any discussion regarding placement or real estate, what, if any, compromises are made with such speakers?

If these had no compromises I would own one . They have different compromises, like all speakers, including my own. The Orions won't have the uncompressed dynamic range of the Summa or Dream, the Summa doesn't had the 3D depth of the Orion or Dream, the Dream and Summa won't have the clarity in the bass like the Orion, etc, etc, etc.

Would you consider these designs to be just as superior for mch setups? (I mean with bipolars in particular.)

Absolutely. A loudspeaker cannot know what signal it is being fed, 2 or 2+ channels.

Would you consider the open baffle to be inherently superior, for any reason such as cabinet resonance (I think you may have once said that cabinet resonance might be an overhyped issue, but I cannot exactly recall). Thanks.

No. It is a means to an end. There is plenty of evidence to speculate on, such as the (greater) symmetry of the air mass load on the cone reducing distortion, etc., etc., but the reality is that the main evidentiary benefit is simply the obtainable dipolar radiation characteristic using piston sources, in real rooms.

I have a pair of dipole electrostats for a stereo system, and out of a few regrets, one of them is my failure to research the Orions further. I was recommended to listen to them from a nice scientist/organist fellow who was helping me understand basic room acoustics, since he knew I was leaning very hard towards electrostats, but it never came about . . .

I find I have great 3D, front to back, and in-between the speakers. I don't have so much spatial information outside of the speakers.

That is why I didn't suggest any panels to ADTG . Linkwitz has this tidbit about panels vs piston source dipoles which you may have read already.

I believe the nature of electrostats means that power/SPL only decreases inversely with distance, and not exponentially like with point sources, and I suppose this will play a part in that, since the offaxis information (yes, which there is little of) will be relatively lower in SPL. Then again, my LR is rather asymmetrical.

Be careful. That propagation loss is true for free field conditions, not an enclosed reverberant space.
The sweet narrowish spot nature of the panels is dictated by their large acoustic size. Asymmetry will not help either.
Hopefully at some point you can audition the type of speakers I have suggested to ADTG, to see if they are to you liking as well.

cheers,

AJ

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I think I'll be doing some more research on the Orion.

I have one concern, though.

The Orion has been revised serval times now (currently 3.1).

I would hate to buy the 3.1 and then S. Linkwitz comes out with a 4.1 revision.

If I were more capable of tweaking speakers and making these revisions, I would not mind.

But I am NOT capable.

The current revision seems to address the TREBLES. Are there any other possible concerns that Linkwitz might address later?

As a side note, I thought it was kind of funny how one guy wrote to Linkwitz that he was selling his B&W 800D after he listened to the Orion.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

No way! You've got to go with the 5308/3002 combo for the 2 channel and the AVP/3005 for the theater. The AVP must be in the theater.

On second thought, I think you may be right.

How can I ever doubt you?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Like some folks, I've been thinking about the Linkwitz Orion on and off for several years now.

I'll still check out the RBH T3/T2 first, but the more I read about the Orion 3.1, the more intrigued I get.

Besides the tremendous sound quality expressed by Orion owners and Audio Critic's Peter Aczel, the fact that a pair of Orions require EIGHT channels of amplifiers has always been very interesting to me.

So each speaker is truly actively QUAD-amped!

 

[jostenmeat]

Besides the tremendous sound quality expressed by Orion owners and Audio Critic's Peter Aczel, the fact that a pair of Orions require EIGHT channels of amplifiers has always been very interesting to me.

So each speaker is truly actively QUAD-amped!

That would be fun to have a reason to need 8 channels of amp for a stereo system. Wait, I better be careful what I wish for!
ADTG, if there are any threads that you find that are very revealing about the construction and/or other things about this speaker, I'd appreciate it if you shared. When I peruse the DIY section of the Orion site, I don't really see where/how it's actively xover'd, but instead I see $800 for the tested crossover/equalizer which I must assume is passive?

It can still look neat, without having to run a ton of wires. You can just run one cable to it, just like before (depending on how/what the connections already are on the back). Get something like the below combo for $15, and you have one cable for your 4 channels. For the chassis mount, this image has the "tabs", but I highly recommend you find the "screw" type if you can. I believe I remember Speakon has their names for male/female backwards, so call them either "cable plug" or "plate plug" when talking with anyone at a store, over the phone, etc. It may prove to save you time and/or headaches. Don't ask me how I know. Anyways, I wish all of our speakers/receivers/amps used speakons! Way cooler, buffer, and in fact much easier. To disconnect, pull tab, turn, it's out. To connect, push in, twist, and it's in and ain't going nowhere.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

That would be fun to have a reason to need 8 channels of amp for a stereo system. Wait, I better be careful what I wish for!
ADTG, if there are any threads that you find that are very revealing about the construction and/or other things about this speaker, I'd appreciate it if you shared. When I peruse the DIY section of the Orion site, I don't really see where/how it's actively xover'd, but instead I see $800 for the tested crossover/equalizer which I must assume is passive?

It can still look neat, without having to run a ton of wires. You can just run one cable to it, just like before (depending on how/what the connections already are on the back). Get something like the below combo for $15, and you have one cable for your 4 channels. For the chassis mount, this image has the "tabs", but I highly recommend you find the "screw" type if you can. I believe I remember Speakon has their names for male/female backwards, so call them either "cable plug" or "plate plug" when talking with anyone at a store, over the phone, etc. It may prove to save you time and/or headaches. Don't ask me how I know. Anyways, I wish all of our speakers/receivers/amps used speakons! Way cooler, buffer, and in fact much easier. To disconnect, pull tab, turn, it's out. To connect, push in, twist, and it's in and ain't going nowhere.

I thought the crossover was Active?

"The ORION could not have been built without the use of active line level crossovers and equalization"

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/orion_asp.htm

If I'm ordering, I think I would order the whole set, EXCEPT for the amplifier, Ebony Trim, 8 Interconnects, & 2 Y-cables.

I would get African Mahogany finish on everything, with Black grills and dress panels.

I don't like the $200 "documentation" fee or the $250 'Packing & Handling" fees.

 

[jostenmeat]

I thought the crossover was Active?

"The ORION could not have been built without the use of active line level crossovers and equalization"

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/orion_asp.htm

Ah thanks. See, I don't want to put in the work as far as learning about this speaker. I want to ride the coattails of your efforts.

If I'm ordering, I think I would order the whole set, EXCEPT for the amplifier, Ebony Trim, 8 Interconnects, & 2 Y-cables.

It sounds like the attitude I would have as well. Though I'd have to make an opinion on the ebony first.

I would get African Mahogany finish on everything, with Black grills and dress panels.

I would probably opt for some maple, spruce, or cedar, since I have musical instruments made of those. There are also some ebony, indian rosewood, and brazilian rosewood on those, but I fear that would get too expensive.

I don't like the $200 "documentation" fee or the $250 'Packing & Handling" fees.

Hm. The Danley subwoofer kit I bought also had a handling/packaging fee, so I suppose this is more normal, the closer you get to DIY stuff. However, even the monstrous Danley had a much lower handling fee than that.

 

[AJinFLA]

I think I'll be doing some more research on the Orion.
I have one concern, though.
The Orion has been revised serval times now (currently 3.1).
I would hate to buy the 3.1 and then S. Linkwitz comes out with a 4.1 revision.
If I were more capable of tweaking speakers and making these revisions, I would not mind.
But I am NOT capable.

To be clear, once again, I'm not suggesting you go buy an Orion (or Summa, Dream, etc.). I'm suggesting, as with the RBH, etc., you go listen. Of course, you may then end up buying one, but that is presumptuous.
I have no idea if SL will revise it again. Only 2 of the revisions were to the main speaker. The rest were to the ASP...and the addition of the Thor subwoofers...to meet your 20hz -3db requirement.
Revisions to the ASP can be done by sending it back to the manufacturer, just like one would with many upgrades/revisions to certain high end gear.

As a side note, I thought it was kind of funny how one guy wrote to Linkwitz that he was selling his B&W 800D after he listened to the Orion.

No need to stir the pot, if the looks of the B&W and audiophile street cred, meets someone's sonic requirements, so be it.

Since you already have the BP's to listen to, why not take your sweet time and audition as many as possible?

cheers,

AJ