KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
I think he's talking about passive bi-amping, but I still think the answer is start with one.
It sounds like the mid-upper end of this speaker is a comfortable load for any reasonable amp.
If you want to play with bi-amping - just to see for yourself, you might try using your current receiver for the upper end.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
The Focus has gone through several versions since it was introduced (1992?). The version in this thread, and the ones I owned, were the original version. The next version, and the first ones Stereophile reviewed, were a major update; the 20/20 version. I had a chance to audition a pair of 20/20s near my home at the time (Legacy was still direct sales only), and they had some really different characteristics than my originals. One big difference seemed to be that the originals use a very gentle (1st order maybe?) high-pass filter on those Eton midranges, and they put out a lot of what was really bass. In the 20/20s it was clear Legacy used one of the 12" woofers in the front to reach into the lower midrange and rolled off the Etons much sooner. To my ears that changed everything for solo piano. The leaf tweeter was a different driver, and the low range tweeter was a new design, but by the same company. I was told the Eminence woofers had been "updated".

After the 20/20 came the HD, and Legacy got rid of the third woofer in the back, and swapped out the Eton midrange drivers for a custom design. The tweeters went custom too. IMHO, the HDs may look similar to the original Focus, but they on a different planet as far as performance. (A better planet.) I haven't heard the SE version yet.

The story with the measurements on my pair was that a friend of mine at the time was into speaker design, and he was trying to become a manufacturer. (He never made it.) He was so curious about the Focus he asked to measure my pair. He came over with equipment and mics, including a scope, and measured for a few hours. He thought the Focus was "an electrical disaster", and joked it must have been designed just to show off the Class A Krell monoblocks I was using at the time. Yes, he measured impedance and electrical phase. I didn't keep the curves he printed out for me all those years ago. He wanted to take one of them outside to better measure the frequency response, but I wouldn't let him. My pair had custom rosewood veneer that was simply gorgeous, they were big and weighed 165lbs each, and I didn't want them scratched. He used some sort of software I don't remember the name of to measure simulated anechoic frequency response above 200Hz, or something like that. At my listening seat he used an RTA to estimate frequency response.

One bright spot was that the scope revealed very low distortion everywhere he measured. The frequency response, however, always looked like a classic saddle curve. These speakers were clearly "voiced" to sound a certain way.

We are in complete agreement, it was not a very practical speaker. But if you had the amps to properly power them, I never found another speaker at that time for anything like the price that sounded as good, especially in the mids and highs. I later liked the Carver Amazing, but I didn't have an appropriate room for them, so they were out. My previous speakers were from ADS, but by the latter half of the 1990s ADS had lost their way, and the ADS tweeters weren't very good. I didn't like the B&Ws I could afford. I liked the Martin Logan Monolith, but being a solo piano nut revealed their driver transition weakness too much for the price. And my room was a problem. In fact, I found anything that would fit in my room or that I could afford weren't substantially better, they just had different weaknesses I found more annoying.
Thanks for that write up.

Eminence woofers are very utilitarian to say the least. I have used them previously in non critical applications.

This thread actually points to the wisdom for the use of powered subs for most applications.

One has to wonder if the OP would not be better off financially and sonically with a change of speakers.

I have not heard a Legacy speaker for a long time now, but I never was impressed by them back in the eighties.

I can attest that the design and building of a really high performance full range integrated speaker is a formidable undertaking. In my design there are features that have never been used before to my knowledge.
 
ahblaza

ahblaza

Audioholic Field Marshall
I would not use it in bridge mode driving an ~ two ohm speaker. But that would be my recommendation in stereo mode, unless OP had the budget for the upcoming amplifier from Mola-Mola.nl
Thanks Grant for the clarification, hadn't considered the 2 Ohm load in bridged mode. Good call.
Jeff ;)
 
H

HifiSystems1

Enthusiast
I realize this thread started about the 20 year old Legacy speakers, but I have to chime in on the latest Focus SE. These are incredible speakers.
After seeing the latest reviews claiming them to be the speaker to beat under $10K, I had to check them out for myself. It's true, they are incredibly hard to beat for less than $10K.

The Focus SE get a lot of use in mastering and recording studios, and I see why. Great dynamics, incredible low end extension, excellent detail, and smooth highs. Imaging is fantastic and these speakers really "get out of the way" and let you listen into the music.

Someone was looking for a place in Chicago to listen to them- their site says they have a showroom there- Tweak Studio.

Auditions by appointment
151 E Wacker Dr. (Hyatt Riverwalk East Tower)
Chicago, IL 60601
(312) 235-6561

Hope that helps,
Richard
 
S

speakerking

Enthusiast
Well that 5308 is way better than the 4311 it doesn't matter that if the 4311 will do 4 ohms cause it won't do it as well as the 5308 even though it isn't rated for 4 ohms it has a way bigger power supply. I currently have the 4311 and was going to replace my 4308 but after compairing them im bringing this
4311 back it's not even in the same league as my 4308 as far as power and in my opinion doesn't sound as good either.
 
M

MosesMalone

Enthusiast
Well that 5308 is way better than the 4311 it doesn't matter that if the 4311 will do 4 ohms cause it won't do it as well as the 5308 even though it isn't rated for 4 ohms it has a way bigger power supply. I currently have the 4311 and was going to replace my 4308 but after compairing them im bringing this
4311 back it's not even in the same league as my 4308 as far as power and in my opinion doesn't sound as good either.
Highly skeptical about this...

I'm willing to wager that all other factors equal (room, speakers, Audyssey correction turned off, etc.,) and if both receivers are driving a set of speakers within their capability, that they would sound exactly the same. I do agree however that Denon and other receiver manufacturers are continually cutting down on costs by offering wimpier amplifier sections, which is sad. But if I had to choose between a 4308 and 4311 for multi-channel purposes, i'd no doubt go for the 4311. XT 32 vs. XT is a much more apparent and observable jump in audio quality compared to different amp sections with the same power rating.
 
S

speakerking

Enthusiast
Well yeah i agree xt32 is a improvement over xt that's for sure. And to be honest i don't use auddyssey as i feel it flatens the sound to much for my taste. But to me i only care about sound quality and not options and i stand by my previous statement that the denon 4308 sounds way better than the 4311 and it should it's a higher end denon series with better parts. And once i tried both recievers level matched without auddyssey on i added my power amp in the mix and to me the 4308 also again has a better pre-amp due to better pre-amp section even though the 4311 was put in pre-amp only mode still couldn't compare again this is my opinion. I really wanted to like the 4311 i can't justify the move to it over the 4308.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top