Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
71.67.188.239
In Reply to: RE: Wrong, Wrong, Wrong... posted by Doug Schroeder on November 25, 2014 at 11:04:50
How does it measure up vs. the Legacy digitally crossed over AMT dipole speaker?
I assume you heard both even if you did not get to review the 20.7 (yet).
Follow Ups:
wherein the 20.7 has the edge on coherency (Yes, I have heard it), as would be expected, and the Whisper DSW Clarity Edition has the edge in terms of dynamics, as would be expected. The other major difference would be the larger, more diffuse center image with the 20.7 versus the more concentrated center image with the Legacy and the AMT. It would be fun to have them both in my room in order to see which I would prefer. I certainly would not give the nod to the 20.7 offhand over the Whisper DSW Clarity Edition.
The Kingsound King III is a more appropriate challenger design-wise to the claim of the 20.7 as best under $80K. I discuss why I think the King III is superior to all current panel comers under $20K - including any Quad, Magnepan and Martin Logan - in my review at Dagogo.com.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
any of Roger West's designs?
no text
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
How do you find the King III superior to the large SL models?
but I said they are superior to Magnepan, Quad and Martin Logan. I still stand by that statement.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
Perhaps I misinterpreted this comment to extend beyond the models mentioned:
The Kingsound King III is a more appropriate challenger design-wise to the claim of the 20.7 as best under $80K.
As a coherency freak, I've never been a big fan of MLs following the original CLS because of their hybrid design.
I enjoyed your review of the King III's...I will be at the Audio Show in Chicago next spring and hope to have an opportunity to hear these...
You are the first person I have ever heard, describing Maggies as slow...I understand what you are comparing them to, but cannot comment because I have not heard them...
I personally do not care for proclamations that they are better than all speakers under $80K...that is a very big brush the TAS reviewer is painting with in a very subjective hobby...but hey, that was his opinion...I believe he is speaking to the Audiophile value of bang for your buck...which on this forum, we feel that is self-evident as flat panel speaker owners...
I have a post running on this board, (What would be your box speaker if you did not own stats or Planars?), with constraints..."Hear is the catch...the box speaker has to cost the same as what you have invested in your Stats or Planars...No pie in the sky here..."
The consensus was...IMHO, there is not a box speaker that would replace our panels for the same money...not surprised...TAS reviewer obviously feels the same way...
In your review, you state a couple of times, you were prepared for tomato throwing, knowing brand loyalty that many Audiophiles defend quite passionately...do I feel you were pulling our noses a little...yea...do I feel you painted yourself as somewhat of a "Maverick"...sure...does it lessen my opinion of you as a reviewer...no...
Maggies, Quads and Martin Logan's are much more readily available for Audiophiles to hear then, the King III's...so it is difficult for us average Joe Shmo hobbyists to dispute your findings...this makes your "brave review", nothing but "safe"...IMHO...
But I will give you credit that it has peaked my interest to investigate and listen to the King III's...so mission accomplished...
Thank you for posting...
Mark
and you can come back here to throw stones or flowers, whichever applies, following your King III demo. :)
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
As a 3.7i owner...the 20.7 is the "holy grail", in my own head...
I am a guy that does not believe in attacking the windmills on an internet HOBBY board...AND I did like the review...
You state you have "heard" the 20.7's and I do really get your views on the technical advantages as you have pointed them out of the King III...in the comments portion of the review...you mention how Magnepan would NOT volunteer a side by side and I get that too...but I "wish" there were more opportunities for those type of reviews...as I am guessing you would too...
As a Minnesoooota home boy and have been to Magnepan a few times...it is hard to turn off the bias...BUT throughout my hobby experience I REALLY do try to keep an open mind...but hey, I am only human...I am looking forward to hearing the King III's...I still have not heard the 20.7's...with all the variable's at a dealers or shows...all you really can get, IMHO...is a taste of potential verses actually living with them in your own rig...
Magnepan business practices have been discussed to death on this board and how frustrated we owners get of the shroud of secrecy they operate under...But here in the upper Midwest our mantra is...
"There is nothing that hard work and denial can't fix"...but we are extremely "nice"...most of the time...
I really do appreciate you posting on this board and hope to see you more often in this flat speaker forum...AND I do enjoy a good plate of crow, every so often...I did try to be civil and still get my point across...
Thank you again for braving our waters...
Take care
Happy Thanksgiving...
Mark
Ps. I am very curious on WHY the double shotgun runs of speaker cable makes that big of a difference...(in my own head, I am doing the cost of that verses the sonic bang for your buck)...in reading your review, you sounded like that was required for the King III's to get the most out of them...If you would be so kind and address that for me, it would be greatly appreciated...
Many on this board are frustrated that .7 series of Maggies does not allow bi-amping or by-wiring...I make no bones that I am NOT very technically savvy and am very glad that many inmates here are...and share freely...
and I think you're quite well balanced in your questions and attitude. I think Magnepan is a good company making a terrific product.
Marketing dictates a lot of what happens in this industry, and there's no getting away from it. That's not saying the marketing is dishonest; it's merely the way a company wishes to make, promote and protect its sales, which is all legit. But it can make it hard to do comparisons.
Regarding double cable runs I am always surprised at how efficacious it is, and it's not just the cat's meow with the King III, but every speaker I have ever used, regardless of type (dynamic, panel, omni, etc.) has benefitted similarly by doubling the speaker cable runs.
Yup, it can cost a lot, but the efficacy is on the order of a component of a couple thousand dollars, to find an illustration to help you peg the performance boost. It also seems to work with cables of any price point, so this is definitely not something only for the upper crust cables. I think I recall some discussion of doubling cables potentially presenting problems for very low power amps and high efficiency speakers, but I have never heard of an actual case of it. Perhaps SET amp and HE speaker aficionados could discuss that. I typically work with speakers having impedance between 2-8 Ohms and sensitivity between 83 and 96dB, and there has never been any hint of issues in doubling cables.
The one thing you MUST be absolutely careful about is matching terminations; one false move/mismatch and you blow up an amp channel. It's not for the mechanically challenged or the in attentive! I typically check the connections three times prior to firing up an amp. It's a bit like a plane's pre-flight checklist; if the engine blows in the air it's too late to reset. I remember one time going over to a friend's house who was adding components. He wanted me to do the hook up, and he was so nervous he went outside when I turned the system on! I played a good joke on him by taking advantage of his being absent to turn the balance on his preamp all the way to the one side, so that when he returned and we fired up the rig (I had already tested it) the effect was as though something had blown in one channel! He was aghast, but I didn't let him suffer too long. :) Yes, we are still friends.
If you're scared about it, have someone who knows systems backwards and forwards do the connections.
If I had no money to work with, I'd get double runs of the best sounding older, inexpensive speaker cables I could afford. There are those here who are much more knowledgeable than I am, but my understanding is that doubling the gauge lowers the impedance that the receiving component sees, while elevating the capacitance. These two things seem to bring a beautiful benefit in transmission of the signal. One can do the same essentially with a cable having higher total gauge conductors.
There are others who disagree vehemently about this, so it's open to debate. I also will be working again with some small conductor wires soon, as I like to retrace my steps after a period of time to see if new technology, etc. brings a new revelation.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
Mismatched terminations can blow up an amp channel? Doug, you should elaborate on this because it reads like nonsense.
Any decent amplifier is not going to have a problem with an open circuit on its output. A double run to a separated crossover network with one of the cables open will simply result in one section of the speaker not working. If a short circuit exists that would obviously be a different condition and might cause an amplifier a problem....but only ones that do not have proper protection built in.
There is no inherent advantage in double runs of speaker cables, other than the conductor increase in size. Gauge does not "double" in that case....conductor cross-sectional does....resistance is cut in half.....etc, etc. Gauge reduces by three in this case. ie, if you double-runned two 18awg speaker cables you'd have the effective cross-sectional area of a 15awg cable.
Cheers,
Dave.
I used the phrase loosely, "doubling the gauge," when I should probably have said lowering the gauge. Yes, I should have known better that doubling doesn't halve the gauge; I didn't do the homework to consult a chart to see the actual gauge reduction. The point, I believe was understood that I meant doubling the cables, and your correction of terminology is appreciated.
I'm not sure, though, you understand what I am intending; a double biwire setup would have 8 leads going to four posts. Some amps simply cannot accommodate so many connections. I often use a shotgun biwire cable in association with another set of spades and a set of banana cables. In a double biwire setup if I am not mistaken a mismatch at any point in the wiring, either at the speaker or amp, would cause a short circuit. Also, though I might not have mentioned it, I often bi-wire single wirable speakers, which if mis-wired would cause a short circuit. Obviously, this is riskier business than simply getting a cable with lower AWG. But here's the thing, the sound improves markedly with lowering of gauge, and improves yet more beyond the most massive cables a company can make. So, one is left with the potential of doubling the cables.
I understand that theoretically not much should improve sonically by lowering gauge, but in every instance I have ever tried it, it has benefitted the sound significantly. Even many DIY types who know their math and circuits well build massive cables out of CAT 5 for the same reason. I apologize if I don't describe it perfectly from a technical perspective; I should. However, that doesn't change the results sonically, which are quite easy to hear for most audiophiles.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
Doug,
You're turning a very simple interconnect scheme into something way too complicated and something a non-technical user could easily get screwed up. This type of double-run recommendation should be couched with numerous "perform at your own risk" warnings. :)
Regardless, a double-run of cable X versus a single run of cable X is an easily understood RLC analysis. I have no doubt you've noticed sonic differences, but let's not attribute to this some kind of multiple-conductor magic. A simple change to an equivalent single-run cable with the same RLC parameters as a double run of cable X will yield identical performance.
Cheers,
Dave.
That is why I do discuss it as "do at your own risk," and caution people who are not careful, or mechanically inclined not to do it.
Who said anything about magic? If I said anything about it being "magical," it would be an allusion to the emotional experience, not the functionality of it. I don't believe the sonic changes are due to some nebulous, or mysterious effect. I don't give credence to tweaks of all sorts which yield no sensible or audible improvement.
I don't consider doubling the cables a simple change. I consider it a significant change, both electrically in terms of the transmission of the signal, and the resultant sound quality. It seems you are dismissing it offhand. If I read you right, your comments boil down to thinking I'm imagining a difference, but you think that theory shows there cannot be a difference.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
Doug,
I didn't dismiss it offhand. And I said nothing about you imagining a difference. Please re-read my posts again.
I simply said a different cable(s) with equivalent RLC parameters will sound identical. How difficult a concept/statement is that to grasp?
You're in good company.....a number of posters on this forum like to read things into my comments that aren't really there. :)
The silly strawman replies are pretty darn irritating.
Cheers,
Dave.
I know the guys at Zu Audio fairly well...My current Speaker Cables are the Zu Event, a hidden gem in Cable Market, IMHO...
I had there Wax Bi-wire Speaker cables for years, due to their cable geometry, they are terminated at the amp end as one hook-up, but they run two full cables on the speaker end...
So, if I understand you correctly, if the speaker end was terminated for each binding post, like the amp end would that achieve what you are talking about without the risk??
So, these pair would be for one speaker??? Right???
If you know the Zu guys at all, they are pretty much game for anything...
Thanks
Mark
speaker cables. I have a similar set done up by Clarity Cable.
Yes, if the speaker end were terminated like the amp end it would be a good illustration of what I do with separate cables. If the speaker was biwirable I would use all four cables on the one speaker channel, say the Left speaker. I would get another set of four and do the other channel, say Right. Sounds crazy, eh? But you should hear it.
With the cables you show you could double wire a pair of speakers L/R with one set of posts each.
It can be tough to lodge all the spades onto the speaker posts. Often I approach the post with the two spades from opposite directions, i.e. one at 12 O'clock and the other at 6 O'clock. You also need to be exquisitely careful that you have all the positive and negative spades clear of each other so as to not cause a short. If you have a speaker binding post wrench it helps to make sure they are snugged down so that they will not budge.
If it helps diagram the connections.
Like I say, this is a play at your own risk proposition. You begin to see why I recheck connections three times. Most of the time I verbally call out the colors of the posts and wiring attached to it, i.e. "Red, red, red.." Then move to the other post, "Black, black black.." By doing so you will be able to catch a mis-wired post. Don't guess at anything; make sure the connections are perfect. I most often use at least one set of banana connectors in place of spades as it obviously makes the connections easier. But I have at times used all spades.
If you can get it to work for you, the sonic benefit should be immediately noticeable.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
This would be further down the road if I was to do this...a pair of bi-wires per side in this configuration...a red+ and black-
I would do spades on the amp end, (my Magtech has very beefy binding posts), and bananas on the speaker end...damn Maggie binding posts...
The King III's x-over's have bi-wire/amp binding posts...so 2 bananas for the highs and 2 bananas for the lows...Maggies would be 1 banana positive and 1 banana negative, with any of the .7 models...I would have them, who ever cable company, do factory terminations...safety first...
New DAC and a Music Server, is next on the hit list...
thanks again...
Mark
Just asking, and only because I don't know the answer (and am not trying to be a smart-ass), don't the 'anti-cable' enthusiasts believe differently about matters relating to cable gauge ?
There's nothing to "believe" about cable gauge. It is what it is.
I'm not sure what an "anti-cable" enthusiast is. Cables can certainly make a difference.....but they have to be evaluated from an engineering standpoint vice all the subjective audiophile hand-waving. There's absolutely nothing magic about cables. :)
Dave.
Anti-cable 'enthusiast'(?):
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue18/anticables.htm
Sorry, I thought you were referring to something else.
Yeah, I'm well aware of Paul's offerings. Of course you know that's just a rather catchy name he's called them, but they really ARE cables. :) His cables have an inherent RLC characteristic just like all other cables do. He's just trading off one for another.
Dave.
I appreciate your insights on the bi-wiring...My 1.6's were bi-wired and it was an improvement, but not as significant as what you have described...
In my own head, the more resolving your speakers are, the more noticeable small or any changes become...
I have done the cable test for people, (mostly non-Audiophiles), switch one cable in the chain and ask can you hear the difference...I have never had someone say they did not hear a difference...
Side bar: Maybe it is a Minnesooota thing, or a Maggie thing because of their size, but friends and family asking "what did those cost???" and that would apply to the Maggies and rig in general...kind-of a pet peeve of mine...my standard answer is: "it is a Harley or Boat you can use year around"...(most of them have one or the other sitting in their garage), that they can ONLY use 3-4 months out to the year...that is something they can wrap their head around...then I show them the cost of Odin's or Stealth's and say my rig is the equivalent of 1 pair of cables...in that $15k-$20k range...
About every six months, somewhere on the Asylum, is a thread about the benefits or lack there of, of bi-wiring...wow...those get heated...but with our hobby, many things do...anonymity fuels the lack of civility, which is just beyond me...I respectively agree to disagree...leave it at that...
Messing with your friends balance after shot-gunning, is evil and very funny...my sister use to teach sewing to the blind and hear boyfriend taught wood working...one of his more difficult students after staining his project, told him he grabbed the paint and not the stain...he let that simmer over-night, before he told him...now that is evil...
Thank you again...don't be a stranger...
Mark
Yes, I remember the review of the Kingsound. You were pointing out that it had substantially more dynamic might and far less high freq kazoo noise and better dispersion at high freq than we are used to from flat stats. I was hoping for an indication that it has sufficient bass extension and dynamics to do a realistic front seat perspective of a full orchestra going full tilt. I didn't get that impression from the review. Considering how you described the Whisper, your description of the Kingsound indicated it would still not do it even with a pair of subwoofers. But it was very obviously the kind of thing you were after and had sufficient dynamics and extension for your purposes.
There is an EQ trick from Linkwitz to focus the center image of planars by introducing an HRTF mimicking dip in freq response at 1-4 khz. I employ it when listening from PC and it works. It is not necessary on vinyl.
I use a Tympani IV with a neo8 midrange array.
but I do know that some of my friends in the industry have tried the King III and wanted to push it to very high levels, as can be done with the Sanders ESL. In that respect, no, it won't play that extreme.
However, I didn't mean to suggest that with subs the King III would not be robust. It's solid and deep in LF when used with my pair of Legacy Audio XTREME HD subs. As for LF, I believe its got similar specs and to my ear delves every bit as deep as the 20.7. I have the subs dialed down a fair bit because I do not wish to have distortion from overdriving the room with LF. If I wanted, with the King III and the two subs could rattle things. Depending upon the character of the subs, a pair with the King III should give you what you want.
The Whisper DSW Clarity Edition with the EXTREME HD subs is really over the top, capable of very deep LF and impact. That's simply what you can get when operating with twelve 15" drivers in a L/R setup.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
I don't think my room can handle the Xtreme XD subs. It is only 17X20(-). The Tympani bass panels when arranged for maximum wall reinforcement and set to catch the room's tangential mode delve below 20hz and have a broad 3-6db elevated hump at 25-40 hz that I EQ down when playing from PC. Organ pedal notes can overwhelm my room not to speak of rattling stuff everywhere. I am not sure the Whisper alone would fit with 8 giant woofers sandwiched in there. I would probably never be able to make use of their potential.
I ran my midrange array naked for a while, without crossover both on its own and with the tweeter and bass cut off sharply with LR4 filters. This convinced me that I want something without a crossover anywhere near the midrange so that leaves pretty much only electrostats to do the nearly 2 decades required. My midranges can do 250-6khz but have limited dispersion past that though on axis they go to nearly 12 khz. The midrange sensitivity is about 96 db. They don't distort in that range till > 110db output (when cut off steeply at 250hz), which is plenty for a midrange. Can the King III do that sort of thing? or is that just not possible still? I know the MG20.7 mids distort before that level.
My original Tympani mids distorted audibly and obviously at below 103 db. The bass panels distort past 105db and heavily past 110db but still provide useful output past that point if they are properly braced to the wall. That with a 2kw/ch commercial amp. I don't have measurements or direct experience with the MG20.7 set up for optimal wall reinforcement. Most people would not even consider placing them that way. But I think the drivers bottom out before that.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: