|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.246.97.80
Still Sealed after 27 years
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB78GT9gJHw&list=FLlMZocMqNElE5XM7nc4X_OA
Follow Ups:
Why genesis Speakers given any or very little coverage at all , when was the last time you saw anything on them by TAS or SPhile .?
Regards...
Edits: 03/08/15
The EMIM drivers (mids) have magnet structure problems, even though they may have been 'new' they probably had to be repaired before use.Russel Coco (an independent dealer/repair center) was a go-to-guy back in the day to repair these. Russel is in Baton Rouge if anyone needs help with theirs (I talked with him this morning).
Edits: 02/15/15
Hi i am quite ignorant but i am amazed by the technology behind the planar drivers used
They could have sold the rights to produce them to some high end drivers manufacturer ... these drivers deserve to be immortal.
I am sure that they would have a place in a cost no object speaker also by today standards.
What a pity ...P.S. i would have preferred a D'Appolito placement of EMIx drivers ... with the tweeters in the center of the panel. Like Legacy Audio speakers, Coincident Speakers Technology, etc.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 02/13/15
Many planar drivers on the market are "single ended," with the magnet rows on one side of the diaphragm only. This design, with magnets on both sides, should result in better control and lower distortion, all other factors being equal.
Hi thanks a lot for the interesting explanation
Something similar to electrostatic drivers maybe ?
So these drivers were really something
I remember i have seen some "spectacular waterfall graphs" measured on these drivers ... almost perfect. No ringing to speak of.
These concept deserve to be used again ... at least for a very high end speakers even very expensive so that i can go to an audio fair and listen from something truly spectacular.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 02/14/15 02/14/15
www.piega.ch
They have similar technology (better actually).
I owned the IRS betas and while they were great I eventually liked my Acoustats better.
Hi and thanks for the interesting info
I understand it is a very expensive technology
I never heard them personally
Anyway they look really gorgeous
Kind regards,
bg
I sold Infinity in the 80's. They were expensive and they sounded very good. The higher you went up the line, the better they sounded. The Reference Standard has to rank with the best I have ever heard.
The technology lived on with Genesis Speakers.
Dave
Hi thank you very much indeed for the interesting information.
and sorry for my late reply
I guess main reason for their good sound are the original planar drivers.
I have seen somewhere impressive waterfall graph for them, evidence of a perfect response to impulses. Great technology indeed.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Infinity had these setup in a large room that I guess was a conference room, driven by Audio Research electronics. They were the most impressive speakers I had ever heard to that point, and still one of the best speakers I've ever heard.
I certainly enjoyed seeing the system and the info about it. But on my computer the Betas sounded just like my computer speakers. Why do people waste time demoing a system on the internet when all you get is your computer?
I have settled that issue: I watch youtube on my plasma teevee complete with a sound bar!
"Why do people waste time demoing a system on the internet when all you get is your computer?"
Headphones?
There is a guy at a site in Asia that drags the same jazz recording around in his travels and plays it at every shop he visits.
The most natural sounding speakers seem to be a set of Quad 57's and a system with WE555's (which I thought sounded more natural than the Quad 57's).
Then the sound is the sound of the head phones, still not of the speaker, no matter how good the head phones sound. So still a useless demo fo the system.
I disagree, it is easy to weed out the horrible sounding speakers this way.
In your own ways, you're both right, and, in other ways, you're both wrong.
On the one hand, attempting to hear what a speaker sounds like, after being recorded in a room of unknown characteristics, by a microphone of unknown quality and characteristics and with unknown placement, compressed onto YT, etc., is ultimately a poor way to pass judgement on the speaker.
On the other hand, if the recording sounds (through your speakers) at least "reasonably balanced" and doesn't have obviously offensive flaws such as 'honky-ness' or 'no bass', etc., AND your speakers and room aren't obviously colored or deficient to some excessive degree, then there's a chance that, if the orignial speakers/microphones/room recording chain are reasonably decent, we CAN make a preliminary judgement about the recording chain.
I played the clip through my stereo, which is reasonably decent and has flaws with which I'm familiar. This "demo" sounded mostly innocuous - other than the usual room sound influences, lack of realistic bass and not much treble, etc. Still, for TV audio, it sounded ok.
With any lack of on-site experience with this recording, it's impossible to know if the speakers are worth $500 or $50,000. This is ONE area where the marketing comes in.
:)
One of the very best loudspeakers ever built.
Yes indeed...I remember Infinity in their glory days. My favorite speaker of all time was the Servo-Static 1A, driven by Audio Research and a Decca cartridge. Wow!!
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: