|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.232.93.134
In Reply to: Re: My two cents... posted by jbcortes on May 2, 2007 at 13:41:31:
Since becoming a dealer, I am expected to keep my preferences muted. I don't know what it means to say that speakers run along parallel paths, but if this means something to you, that's fine. If you mean both Merlins and JMR's make you happy, that's also fine...and I commend you for your remarkably catholic taste. I would guess that these parallel paths you speak of have a bit of distance between them. And finally, audiophile opinions ought to have some sort of statute of limitations: I mean I loved my Altec Lansing in 1959 but would just as soon not be held to that opinion now. Experience changes experience, as my cat says. Merlins and Reynauds, eh? Wow. Will wonders never cease.
Follow Ups:
this has nothing to do with having your hearing corrected but being more balanced and fair. it is true that your original statement didn't make any specific leading comment. but when you consider what you have said in the past and that your leading statement was made directly after audiohobbies' incorrect assumptions based on near field on axis measurements and that he had not ever heard the speakers, you cannot blame jb for bringing it up. the fact is that all merlin speakers were designed with their power response and if used the way they were designed to be used, the top end actually rolls off. again, look at figure 9 of the vsm m review in stereophile. secondly, to assume that all merlins have the same sound, is incorrect. the early versions were designed to be used with softer sounding se triodes and every model from the m to mm/mx and now the mme/mxe sound way more right and bold, even now, with ss. so, to assume a merlin is a merlin is the same thing as saying all chevs are chevs. big difference between a cavalier and a corvette. the last comment about the auditioning older versions could also be made to a few others in this string.
to get a really good indication of what the newer speakers sound like, look at the top of this string at maxwellp's comments of the tsm mme. this man clearly has listened to them and gets it!
bob, you may still not like the newer models but at least give them a chance. take your cat too, he won't run away. my speakers do not chase my cairn terrier out, he actually comes into the room when music is playing.
best regards,
b
"audiohobbies' incorrect assumptions based on near field on axis measurements and that he had not ever heard the speakers"Come on now! Measurements are there for good reason, my comments on the performance on the speaker are echoed by the Micheal Fremer he said that they are 'ultra detailed', so my basic comments based on FR are not incorrect at all.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
that is not all he said. here is all of it.
"The Dynaudio Esotar D330A, which is also used in the Rockport Antares, is one of my favorite tweeters. As implemented in the Merlin, it offered airy, ultradetailed, grain-free high frequencies and electrostatic-like resolution. Like the VSM Millennium, the VSM-MX's low-level resolution and microdynamic presentation were positively mesmerizing, resulting in "cascading reverberant trail-offs extend[ing] into seemingly impossible depths of time and space, exposing new layers of ultra-low detail from even the most familiar recordings," as I wrote in the original review."Despite its awesome resolution of detail, the VSM-MX never sounded mechanical or fatiguing."
and in the original review of the millennium he said, "But what drew me into the VSM first was the smooth, airy, graceful top end, delicate yet detailed. It sounded luxurious without being syrupy or unctuous."
"In terms of overall frequency balance, I found the VSM to be just about ideal. I'll bet John Atkinson's measurements will show the very top end to be slightly rolled off at the recommended 10 degrees off-axis firing line, and perhaps flatter directly on-axis."i have spoken to michael fremmer and he never told me they were bright or implied they were bright either. that is your interpretation of what he wrote and that is fair, i suppose. but as i have said a few times in this string, the speakers were not designed to be listened to near field on axis but 10 degress off directly on axis, far field. soft domes do not disperse energy axially as well as harder domes. so in this case, the tweeter was designed hotter on axis to provide greater axial dispersion. the last thing you want to do imho, is to listen to it on axis. if you look at the power response of the speaker which is a combination of on and off axis measurements, the top end actually rolls off. this is evident in figure 9 of the vsm m review. then we select the smoothest most continuous response to listen to. that is toed out, 10 degrees off directly on axis. i suppose if you had the opportunity to hear the speaker properly set up, you would not feel as you do. and the definition michael speaks of comes from the crossover disign and the components used in the networks and not a rising response.
sorry if i offended you, nothing intended. but i have worked very, very hard to make the speakers as continuous and complete sounding as possible and having a rising top end goes against everything i have worked so hard to do.
sorry foor all this but it needed to be said.
have a nice weekend.
bobby at merlin
did I say that was all he (Fremer) said? These are my precise words."since the VSM tweeter is balanced about 1-2db higher than the midrange, whereas the Guarneri is flat thru midrange with a slight dip between 5KHz - 10Khz to forestall any treble attack"
where did I say that the speaker was bright? That said, it is pretty clear from the measurements that the VSM-MM is sound more detailed and dare I say brighter (as you raised the issue) than the Guarneri, the dip in the treble btw 3-5kHz is balanced at least 1-2dB higher than the lower midrange and it gradually rises from that dip (probably owing Fletcher-Munson loudness compensation) to peak of 2-3dB peak @~7kHz. Contrast that to the Guarneri, where the narrow peak at @6-7kHz is btw +/-2db of the lowest dip in midrange and dip between 3-5Kz is about -2dB wrt to midrange. At any rate, both speakers use soft domes so their dispersion is broadly similar and as I mentioned in my original post, the balance above 10Khz, even 7kHz for both speakers is similar, the top end starts to roll off for both speakers. The critical difference btw them is in midrange and lower treble. And to reiterate my originals comments the Merlin would sound more detailed, but the Guarneri's mellower sound is definitely more accurate.
As per Bob tongue in cheek comments, no one will confuse a VSM-MM for a SF Guarneri, that's for sure.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
to disagree!
i still have no idea what fr plot you are using to make these statements. certainly fletcher-munsons have bearing on the design the more you make it for nearfield aps. the sfs sound great neirfield but the merlins are designed to do something very different and to be listened at 9.5 feet or more away. so, if you did a power response plot of the vsm at 2.5 meters or more away, it would show something quite different than the nearfield ones taken by mr. atkinson. figure 9 just starts to show this.
since what is accurate really depends on personal taste and its intended use, i think, imho should follow "the Merlin would sound more detailed, but the Guarneri's mellower sound is definitely more accurate." you still may not like the merlin sound or the way it is designed to work but do you not think it fairer to pass judgement after you listen to the vsm mme or mxe? will you be in nyc for the stereophile show. if so, come by and say hello and listen for yourself.
regards,
bobby
Yep, we should agree to disagree on this one. I will not be attending Stereophile show as I am not based in the US nor do I intend to visit on account of the show.Well, later
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Well do YOU think your speakers sound like Reynauds?Given the response I've gotten to my note, I can't imagine what the response would have been had I been less guarded and more judgmental!
I have no idea what Merlins sound like these days. All I said was I doubt they sound much like Reynauds. There is room in the world for those who like Merlins and those who like Reynauds, and they needn't sleep together or sand off their differences to get along. There is also room for those who like Audio Notes, which sound unlike both the Merlins I've heard and Reynauds. So I can be catholic when called upon to be.
Anyone who makes as popular a speaker as you do (I expect it gets more mention around here than just about anything else)need not be defensive when he smells an innuendo. To say that two speaker lines (probably) don't sound much alike is not an attack on either, regardless of what opinions I have expressed in the past about models no longer made. And what do you care what I think about Merlins? Hell, I sell Reynauds and Audio Notes. I can't afford to like Merlins! (=:
bob,no i do not think they sound like reynauds but something about the sound or the effect they have on jb, makes him think they do. that is ok with me.
i am not defensive at all. but you are talking in circles and it does not confuse some of us as to what your intentions were.
why not stop all this nonsense and just give them a chance when you can. no biggie if you do not give them a try or do not like them as there is plenty of room in this to like what you like or to sell what you want to sell.there have been no merlin discussions (or certainly very, very few) on this forum about merlin in months. you know that as well as i do and if you don't, do a search. and i pride myself in talking about what i know and nothing else. innuendo? it was plain as hell. now if you would have put your comment at the top of the string, it would not be as obvious as it was after audiohobbie's . and as to your last statement, yes, please continue to sell what you like. all i am asking is for you to be fair and to give them a chance. as i said, you probably still won't like them, just speak or imply from first hand knowledge.
b
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/search.mpl?searchtext=Merlin&b=OR&topic=&topics_only=N&author=&date1=2006-05-03&date2=2007--05-03&slowmessage=&sort=score&sortOrder=DESC&forum=speakersBut there are also that many for Sonus Faber and 186 for Reynaud and 200 for Audio Note, so I am essentially wrong about your getting the most references. But you're certainly getting your share, eh? Weird thing is Thiel got 200 too. Wonder if the Search Engine cuts off at 200? Spendor gets 200, Harbeth gets 200. Oh well.
Hi Bob,Yes, the search engine cuts off at 200 results. You can tighten up the date range to get a better picture. What the heck, I'm sitting at breakfast at the Lone Star Audio Fest in Dallas absorbing CDs into my laptop to demo the Audio Note Kit DAC 2.1's USB input, so I'll redo the search while I sit. . . . .
Keep your ears and your mind open.
In the period 1/1/07 - today, searches on the following terms in the Speaker Forum produced the following number of hits:Merlin 141
Bose 118
Thiel 101
JMR or Reynaud 90
Audio Note* 77* Audio Note was searched for as an exact match to avoid counting posts with audio in one place and note in another having nothing to do with the audio company.
On the other hand, Merlin results may, in some cases, have related to discussions of famous wizards. The search was as rigorous as I could make it without being silly. Silly is, of course something that can never be used to describe the goings on here at the Asylum. (I can hear the inference canon firing up in the distance . . .)
n.t.
nt
No, I meant Dave Cope provided up to date statistics to "back up" my impression that Merlin gets more than its fair share of attention around here.
corrected!
these must be more of an isolated mention in other strings because i watch this site very closely for full discussions to see how they are going. and since the new year there have been very few. i had no idea that merlin was mentioned so many times in embedded discusions. sorry and thank you.
bobby
corrected!
these must be more of an isolated mention in other strings because i watch this site very closely for full discussions to see how they are going. and since the new year there have been very few. i had no idea that merlin was mentioned so many times in embedded discusions. sorry and thank you.
bobby
bob,
maybe so but in the last number of months there have been virtually none. and that is what i meant and should have said specifically.
b
"no i do not think they sound like reynauds..."Good, that's all I said. Oh yeah, I also said they probably don't sound like Sonus Fabers either, which I assume you would also agree with. So as far as what matters to me in this conversation, we have settled it. The rest is all baloney.
All I meant in criticizing jb's remark is that it's not helpful to say that Merlins sound like Sonus Fabers sound like Reynauds. It is talking about what you like and not what things sound like. My goal, usually, is to help people make distinctions, not run stuff together because it all feels good, or whatever.
I'm not a reviewer any longer but there is still some reviewer in me. And that's what reviewers are supposed to do. Make distinctions, not blur them. The fact that Merlins, Sonus Fabers, Reynauds, Audio Notes all "arrive" at the music, all make their respective listening constituencies happy, is very nice. It is all very nice. But frankly I'm a lot more interested in the differences, both among the speaker lines and the constituencies.
bob,
no, i don't think they sound like sfs either.
as to why, that would be best said in private e-mails.
i can see what you mean in your last paragraph but this is hard to do here because of conflicts of interest for both you and me.
musical enjoyment and the emotional connection to it should always be the goal for all of us.
i wish you well.
b
I have never been very good at saying (knowing!) why various speakers lines don't sound like one other, for which Robert E Greene used to take me regularly to task. It might have been interesting at some point in my education to study a bit of audio physics to repair that hole in my knowledge. But the truth is, I have always been more interested in what the differences were as experience. In that sense, I take impressions of speakers (and other gear in conjunction with them) and report them. I think that's what most amateur 'philes do because in the end that's what's the point. What does a Merlin speaker sound like these days? How do the new Signature models of Reynauds sound compared with their immediate forebears? How are Harbeths and Spendors different to our ears? How differently do they strike us? It ain't very intellectual, I concede, but it's damn interesting, especially when you hear well and can get it right, in language. As I said earlier, that has always been my goal.As for Neill and Merlins, we have not had ideal relations over the years. I have never heard them on your preferred (?) Joule amps. I heard them on a very fine but perhaps not ideally suitable pair of Blue Circle BC 2.1's years ago. And I heard them in Montreal a few years back on a Berning. The experiences were similar, but I preferred them on the BC amp, which seemed less severe.
Perhaps I'll get to hear your lastest at RMAF, which I plan to attend next fall representing Reynaud (first appearance of JMR in years) and sharing a room with Blue Circle. If you're to be there, I will make a point of finding you.
Bob,
I didn't say Merlins sounds LIKE Reynauds, this is a shorcut. Not two speakers sound alike. I said that they weren't in opposite camps as you hinted at. In the analytical/hyper detailed vs warm and musical, the Merlins, like Jean-Marie Reynaud, are in the warm and musical category.
There is a common misconception that Merlins sound rather analytical, and your initial post fed that misconception. I don't care if people buy Merlins or JMRs or any other brand. But I will always disagree with any comment stating that the Merlins are cold or lean or analytical, because that's the opposite of what they are. They err on the warm side, they are full-bodied and detail is always presented in a natural, unforced way.
Yes, Merlins and JMRs have more in common than people credit them for. Once more, I'm a fan of JMRs AND Merlins, and there's a reason why. I hate it when my speakers don't convey the natural warmth of music or are clinical/sterile. Well I just described what the Merlins and the JMRs are NOT.
So once more, they have more in common than you hinted at, and are not in opposite categories.
That's all I'm saying.
b,
cardas audio, joule and merlin will attend and show at the rmaf in room 1007 or 1017, not sure which but same room as last year.
this is a good room and perfectly suited to the speakers and the combination. imho, we had sound that i was proud of last year so it should even be better this year with jud's (joule's) new lap 150mk2.
all the gear is wired with cardas and jud and i use each other's gear to design our own. great show and venue too.
see you there.
b
I have been reading this and it seems that Bob - you like several different speakers, Bobby is a manufacturer so you obviously have a preference in sound are trying to get at what you believe is "the best solution" and jb you like different speakers but you believe them to be in a similar sonic landscape (whatever that means - I would surmise a similar signature the way that I feel most multiple stacked slim lines sound alike to me that follow the NRC camp of design) Ala a Paradigm 100 is similar to what Energy puts out).My question is do you guys like speakers from totally different camps. I have looked over some of my favorite loudspeakers and I have liked stuff from complete opposite ends of the spectrum from Panels to horns to transmission lines to dual concentric (umm Tannoy if I got the dsign name wrong) to undamped boxes from Audio Note with their "out-there" theories. (as you all know this is my preference) but I still like these others and understand why people love them.
I'd be interested to know what speakers sound similar to a current Merlin or what camp one would put them into if possible and what would be viewed as a polar opposite.
I would like to hear Merlin and JMR -- I am in Korea -- any representation here. Harbeth seems to do well here as do some smaller brands not generally represented well in BC Canada like ProAc, Tannoy, Ruark etc.
Any speaker that is designed with tubes in mind is probably more right than wrong in my books even if they're not my first choice. If Merlin is doing that then they would probably be something I would like.
nyc, so i am here today. i just have time to say a few things about your post.from the time i have spent around live music and musicians, i have gained a particular appreciation for a continuous/complete sound and the musical center. some of my musician friends have said "i need to hear the middle of that instrument." so i have spent years trying to get rid of mechanical resonances, electrical resonances, distortions and amplitude irregularities which can all draw your attention away from the oneness, that i like to hear. the use of cryogenics and lead free construction have enabled me to get closer to this ideal than ever before (these are the e versions). and interestingly enough, later versions can also sound wonderful imho, with ss. i never thought this possible.
i personally like, quad electros, soundlab electros, rockports, avalons, kharmas and verity products (not in any particular order). i am sure there are others but that is all i have time to mention or to think of now.
i thank you for you thoughts and sorry, but i have to go.
bobby at merlin
nyc, so i am here today. i just have time to say a few things about your post.from the time i have spent around live music and musicians, i have gained a particular appreciation for a continuous/complete sound and the musical center. some of my musician friends have said "i need to hear the middle of that instrument." so i have spent years trying to get rid of mechanical resonances, electrical resonances, distortions and amplitude irregularities which can all draw your attention away from the oneness, that i like to hear. the use of cryogenics and lead free construction have enabled me to get closer to this ideal than ever before (these are the e versions). and interestingly enough, later versions can also sound wonderful imho, with ss. i never thought this possible.
i personally like, quad electros, soundlab electros, rockports, avalons, kharmas and verity products (not in any particular order). i am sure there are others but that is all i have time to mention or to think of now.
i thank you for you thoughts and sorry, but i have to go.
bobby at merlin
I'm butting in here, but I'm sure Bobby or jb will respond..To me, there is no other speaker(s) that sound quite like Merlin. It's difficult to describe because Merlin speakers are transparent but still retain image density. They can sound warm but not syrupy. They can sound full but not bloated. They have high resolution without being analytical.
They are easy to drive. They sound pretty much like whatever the recording sounds like. But just because they are neutral...they are never boring.
I like the 'sound' of many different speakers too. But so far, none that make me want to give up my Merlins. The general 'character' of the TSM is surprisingly similar to the VSM. They both play larger than their size. And with a sense of 'ease'. The VSM takes it all several notches further than the TSM...but the overall presentation is remarkably similar.
They are worth an audition for any music lover who wants music to sound natural and complete in their home.
As for other speakers I know, I also like Avalon, Verity and JMRs, going from the "colder" side of the musical spectrum to the "warmer". I feel all offer that "oneness" Bobby describes.
JB
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: