Denver GTG Speaker Comparison: EMP, SVS, Gallo & Philharmonic

[NewHTbuyer]

They're more than right... they're just spectacular.

I realize the bass extension matters to some, but for me, that's what subs are for, so it wouldn't even be a factor in my purchase decision.

In some ways you guys are right, as I wrote in my posts, the Phils are probably a technically "better" speaker than the Ultras. But, it is not as simple as just adding a sub. We did that, and there was still quite a bit of difference in the sound between the 2 sets. It was not just the ultra low bass that was the difference. The Ultras had a richer, better sound with a lot of the material we demoed, even though they could never equal the disappearing act of the Phils or the capability of the Raal. If it as simple as just adding a sub, why ever get any speaker that plays below 80Hz?

 

[Ricardojoa]

Well is clear to me that raal and open back design are not for everyone. There are speakers for some type of genre of music. That said, i too prefer a speaker that doesnt call too much attention yet still provide the details and nuances. I would also think the the bass fromm a TL is different then a reflex type? My Ascend sierra is BAss reflex rated down 44 hz, it sounds like im using a small sub with it though my Songtower dig deeper, it doesnt have that authrity in the impact aspect. Different speaker for different folks.

 

[Tomorrow]

Thanks for your time and posting, bitterwaste. Having run a couple of these, I know how much work it is to do and report on.

Would you mind explaining the switching technique and how you measured or equalized the spl for each speaker? Positioning and loudness make a big difference in perceived loudspeaker performance. And auditory memory is pretty darn short when comparing speakers. Lastly, do you have any FR measurements of the four pairs?

(By the way, vic, the Philharmonics don't need to be 2' out into the room.)

 

[NewHTbuyer]

I had already used my spl meter to estimate how big a difference there was between the Ultras and Phil 2s. It was about 2 or 3 clicks on my volume knob (the Phils being a bit less sensitive). I had the ability to switch between speaker A and B on my remote and then quickly increase or decrease the volume. When the other guys brought their sets over, I hooked up the Monoprice selector to speaker A, then we had the Phils, Empteks, and Gallos on that. But, we did not level match the EmpTeks or Gallos. So, we could set the selector on which of the three (Phil, Gallo, Emp) we wanted then use the remote to A/B with the SVS. If we wanted to A/B between 2 of the sets on the selector, one of us kneeled down and did the switching manually while the other guys listened.

 

[TLS Guy]

Well is clear to me that raal and open back design are not for everyone. There are speakers for some type of genre of music. That said, i too prefer a speaker that doesnt call too much attention yet still provide the details and nuances. I would also think the the bass fromm a TL is different then a reflex type? My Ascend sierra is BAss reflex rated down 44 hz, it sounds like im using a small sub with it though my Songtower dig deeper, it doesnt have that authrity in the impact aspect. Different speaker for different folks.

I think it comes down to total system Q. A reflex ported enclosure will have resonant reproduction to varying degrees.

Now an aperiodically damped line properly built can and does give broad system support without the reproduction being resonant as long as driver selection is optimal.

I have never built a mass loaded TL, but I have to say I'm suspicious of them. The impedance curves of the two approaches are quite different. The mass loaded TL has an impedance curve that looks like a ported reflex enclosure, so I suspect that they are resonant to a degree, but likely more damped than a standard reflex alignment.

I have to say that a traditional reverse tapered aperiodically damped TL, correctly aligned does not lack bass authority, far from it. The quality of the bass however is very different from ported designs. It is very different. It sounds sounds just like live.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Well, I don't want to get off on another Is Too Is Not argument on the MLTL. I think all transmission lines harness the quarter wave for reinforcment, and to that degree are resonant systems. But I'm not sure what people heard at Denver was due to the difference between a TL (of any kind) and bass reflex. The SVS has its woofers mounted at the very bottom of the cabinet next to the floor. That placement avoids the ubiquitous floor bounce dip that you get with any woofer(s) mounted further up near the other drivers. When the woofer is in its standard position, its output around 150 Hz will bounce off of the floor and return out of phase, causing a dip in the output. Although it's controversial how audible this is, and its audibility depends on listening distance, the absence of any dip (because the distance to the floor is too short to cause a problematic out-of-phase cancellation) could account for the "richness" of the SVS. I don't usually like a bottom-mounted woofer because the crossover point to the mid is usually high enough to complicate integration if the drivers are that far apart, and the bass might also be too heavy. But the SVS is (somehow) crossed very low, and that mitigates the problem. I've attached a plot of a tower speaker with the typical floor bounce dip.

 

[TLS Guy]

Well, I don't want to get off on another Is Too Is Not argument on the MLTL. I think all transmission lines harness the quarter wave for reinforcment, and to that degree are resonant systems. But I'm not sure what people heard at Denver was due to the difference between a TL (of any kind) and bass reflex. The SVS has its woofers mounted at the very bottom of the cabinet next to the floor. That placement avoids the ubiquitous floor bounce dip that you get with any woofer(s) mounted further up near the other drivers. When the woofer is in its standard position, its output around 150 Hz will bounce off of the floor and return out of phase, causing a dip in the output. Although it's controversial how audible this is, and its audibility depends on listening distance, the absence of any dip (because the distance to the floor is too short to cause a problematic out-of-phase cancellation) could account for the "richness" of the SVS. I don't usually like a bottom-mounted woofer because the crossover point to the mid is usually high enough to complicate integration if the drivers are that far apart, and the bass might also be too heavy. But the SVS is (somehow) crossed very low, and that mitigates the problem. I've attached a plot of a tower speaker with the typical floor bounce dip. View attachment 11516

Yes, the dreaded floor bounce. There are just a far too many ways to color a speaker.

I suspect the SVS is colored though. Too many listeners are just used to and possibly addicted to that type of bass coloration. I find visitors here have to adjust to its absence. To convince I play a piece where the cellos and double basses are bowed in unison repeatedly. It's really telling. The typms also help convince.

I place my woofers as low as I could and did not cross the mids at the lower end, I used acoustic roll of with the lines tuned a half octave apart, a trick of the late John Wright.

The upper woofer also has fed to its amp the signal for BSC and everything required for optimal integration. The two woofers have different amps. It works very well, probably not a commercial winner though.

The only mass loaded TL I got involved with was the JW Jupiter, which had the line loaded with a cavity tuned with an ABR. Not a great success I thought, as the range of reinforcement was narrow, so you had the kick in effect.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I suspect the SVS is colored though. Too many listeners are just used to and possibly addicted to that type of bass coloration.

...Not that there's anything wrong with it...

The word "coloration" evokes such audiophile ennui.

I prefer to use the word "warm" & "preference".

 

[VicTorious1]

(By the way, vic, the Philharmonics don't need to be 2' out into the room.)

I'm aware. At the time of my review, though it may not have been clear, I was under the impression that the ideal placement of the Phils is about 2 feet from the wall to the open baffle area, which is not the same as 2 feet measured from the bottom of the speaker's lower bass cabinet. Dennis corrected that in the thread on avsforum, but I wasn't able to edit my review on avsforum before it was ported over here. Nonetheless, after discussing that with Dennis, I pulled the trigger on a pair of Phil 2s and I'm currently awaiting their construction and delivery. Needless to say, I'm impatiently awaiting their arrival.

 

[TLS Guy]

...Not that there's anything wrong with it...

The word "coloration" evokes such audiophile ennui.

I prefer to use the word "warm" & "preference".

The question is does it sound like the real instrument or a speaker reproducing an instrument. That's the issue.

 

[VicTorious1]

...Not that there's anything wrong with it...

The word "coloration" evokes such audiophile ennui.

I prefer to use the word "warm" & "preference".

The SVS were definitely "warmer" or less "neutral" than the Phils, but I don't think it was a bad thing. I think that warmth is great with most music and HT. I think I prefer the more "neutral" sound as I listen to more jazz/blues/instrumental music, and I think detail and accuracy are great for that type of music. Admittedly, jazz/blues sounded great on the Ultras as well, simply different.

 

[VicTorious1]

The question is does it sound like the real instrument or a speaker reproducing an instrument. That's the issue.

I think the differences were more pronounced when frequently switching between the speakers. However, I think they all still sound somewhat like a reproduction. The Phils in my opinion slightly less so. But at this price point (or even at any price point) is our tech advanced enough that any speaker can actually trick our ears and brain into thinking that it is the actual instrument and not a reproduction? I know I've read of instances where such comparison tests have been tried.

 

[PENG]

I think the differences were more pronounced when frequently switching between the speakers. However, I think they all still sound somewhat like a reproduction. The Phils in my opinion slightly less so. But at this price point (or even at any price point) is our tech advanced enough that any speaker can actually trick our ears and brain into thinking that it is the actual instrument and not a reproduction? I know I've read of instances where such comparison tests have been tried.

I used to get depressed everytime after I came back from a live unamplified concert and turned on my hifi system. Not any more, my systems now can come pretty close, enough for me to close my eyes and imagine things..​

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The question is does it sound like the real instrument or a speaker reproducing an instrument. That's the issue.

It sounds like the real instrument to the listener.

 

[TLS Guy]

It sounds like the real instrument to the listener.

Not if they are experienced and regular concert attenders.

Typms really give the game away. Good bass alignments have that real tut tut, not so good bonk bonk and poor boom boom.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Not if they are experienced and regular concert attenders.

Typms really give the game away. Good bass alignments have that real tut tut, not so good bonk bonk and poor boom boom.

It does not matter. Are you going to tell people how the "real red" or "real blue" looks like just because you see a lot of art?

What sounds real" to anyone IS real as life, not what certain people say is real. What sounds good to people IS good, not what certain people say is good.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I used to get depressed everytime after I came back from a live unamplified concert and turned on my hifi system. Not any more, my systems now can come pretty close, enough for me to close my eyes and imagine things..​

I believe you.

Even your Energy Reference speakers? Since I'm sure some "experts" who attend daily concerts may otherwise disagree.

 

[Nuance AH]

It does not matter. Are you going to tell people how the "real red" or "real blue" looks like just because you see a lot of art?

What sounds real" to anyone IS real as life, not what certain people say is real. What sounds good to people IS good, not what certain people say is good.

TLS Guy is simply saying that someone who actually has a reference (obviously not you) will notice if it doesn't sound real.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...definitely "warmer"...but I don't think it was a bad thing. I think that warmth is great with most music...

I agree that it's a matter of personal preference. Does it sound real? Does a piano sound like a piano? Does a violin sound like a violin ? Does a horn sound like a horn? Does a trumpet sound like a trumpet? Have you accrued enough live concert credits to know better?

In the end, the real question is do the speakers sound great to you? Does the music from your speakers satisfy your senses?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

TLS Guy is simply saying that it someone who actually has a reference (obviously not you) will notice if it doesn't sound real. It sounds like you're trying to justify your own inabilities to hear the difference, which seems to be your standard procedure of operation as of late. As the saying goes, ignorance is bliss.

There you go again insulting me by calling me "ignorance" and my "inabilities". Let's not make this personal. It's okay to debate without calling people "inabilities" and "ignorance". Let's pretend we are in a debate class. It's not nice telling people "inabilities" and "ignorance". Is it as simple as right and wrong? Black & white?

I have been to live symphonies, concertos, chamber music, and rock/pop concerts like many people who are in this hobby. Many of us own instruments like piano, guitars, violins, etc. But this debate is not about "I've been to more concerts than you". It's about psychoacoustics.

Who is to say one person's brain perception of instruments is better than another?

Debate class. Debate. I could very well lose this debate. But let's not make it personal.