Now to answer some of the questions.
The 8.2 are the MTM towers.
The larger Towers are indeed active.
They have an aggregate of just under 3Kw into the three channels. Not that they need it. They are 100 db/watt efficient. We used that power level because that was what we could get in North America at the time. The power level is insane, but does allow enormous control in transients. We chose the amplifiers that we are using because they have great sound and also exceptional DSP capability. There are a few great sounding amps that are available. But not many that also have the DSP that we wanted. With the combination we use you get clean clear sound with correction capability that makes Audessy look like kindergarten.
We played different tracks, some soft and delicate, some loud and proud. Holst, The Planets, Neptune track is a good example of a combination of those musical qualities, and it was just stunning. From as quiet as can be played to full brass, percussion and organ pedal point. Fun stuff.
But I equally enjoyed small ensemble Baroque music, Jazz and light rock.
As for frequency response. The large towers were measured and tweaked in room flat to 14 hertz. We have absolute control in the response due to the powerful DSP engine we use in the amps. We were able to tweak out serious room anomalies that muddied the sound.
We did not use the subwoofers for the greater part of the show. In fact we added up 10 minutes of use in the three days we were there. The towers have that good of a low end response. The MTM's have enough low end that if you like rock and jazz you will be content with them as they are.
Comments from almost all listeners was that they thought the subs were on whether we played the small two ways or the MTM's. The MTM's have good response to 40 hertz and minus 10 db at 35 hertz. The small two ways are good to just under 50 hertz.
Low end is easy to characterize. It was tuneful. You could follow the bass lines, and there was punch were it was called for. Or as we did with the Tron soundtrack, absolutely a blow you away low end. We could pressurize the room quite well with the larger towers. Nathan ran Tron with the small two ways and the dual 18 monsters. That was so much bass that it was uncomfortable in parts of the room.
When I designed the MTM's and the two ways bass section with Nathan, I was expecting a good but not great response. What we ended up with exceeded both of our expectations.
Imaging is something that is very important to me. I like to be able to localize instruments in their position as recorded. I also appreciate depth in the sound stage. We use a large format planar for good reason. It gives us a good platform of clean upper midrange and highs that are very easy to listen to.
The planar format has good horizontal coverage, and a very controlled vertical pattern that we have used to good effect. It minimizes floor and ceiling bounce. That can be an asset in terms of the you are there effect on a stereo recording. You get more ambiance of the original recording venue then the room you are in if you get your positioning right.
So when we played good acoustic recordings the imaging could be excellent.
I have to admit that we got the small two ways placed pretty good, the MTM's were in a good position, but the large towers could have been placed in a much better position if we had thought it through. I think next years format will be one where we will post times of what will be played where and when. Also putting up a banner that says the company name might help to!
Teething pains!
But that just means that there are better things to come.
