Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
219.79.235.165
Thanks!
Follow Ups:
Hey mon
I do not know which Krell amps he used, but they are early very big Krells.
What I know however is that he didn’t use his heavily modified Quads stacked.
He did use one set firing directly towards the listener and another set placed behind and at the outside of these. Oriented in such a way that they had there acoustic null facing the listener, and their direct sound directed towards the side wall at the first reflection point of the main pair.
This increases the energy reflected from the sides and also makes the frequency response of the first sidewall reflection much more like the frequency response of the direct sound.
So his setup gave him 3 main advantages over a single pair of Quads, more spacious sound coming from more early (but not very early!) reflected energy, higher sound pressure than a single pair will give, and last but not least,a more even direct versus power response.
Unfortunately, this set-up arrangement will degrade to some extent, the excellent soundstage and image presentation capabilities of this speaker.Based on the photos and descriptions I have read of his set-up and room, my own experiments with this set-up approach, this was probably not as much of an issue as it would be in the average domestic environment.
Near-field set-up with a single pair will yield a more accurate presentation of the acoustic space that is actually present on the recording in most domestic listening situations. It may not necessarily provide the most enjoyabable soundstage with the greatest number of recordings.
Hi Kentaja.I believe you, but I think you are missing the point or maybe I should phrase it like this, you are missing Robertson Aikmans point.
His listening room was/is huge in the extreme and his priority was to recreate the feeling of listening to opera’s in being performed in his room.
We both know the difference between the, we are there, and they are here, philosophy. RA undoubtedly must have advocated for the later, using his listening room as a small concert hall.
His listening habits allowed him to optimize his stereo towards the type of music (opera) which he loved the most.In the 1950’s Wharfedale and AR showed to audiences that if an orchestra or string quartet was recorded in an anechoic chamber and reproduced in a proper concert hall using their speakers (not even stereo was a necessity) then the illusion of listing to a true orchestra/string quartet was overwhelming, for most of the audience.
I see RA system as a way of making the same happen in a slightly smaller room than a true concert hall.
I think his system gave a very believable reproduction rather than a very accurate reproduction.My best weekend greetings from Denmark.
KlausDK
Ps: The latest upgrade I have heard about in RA listening room, was the installation of a 270 kg mammoth wide band sound absorber behind the 2 pairs of Quad 63’s.
He was truly a man without compromise; I would have loved to hear this system in full
Agreed. Absolutely. And would have been a huge improvement over just a single pair of ESL63 since only a handfull of people would have been anywhere close to the optimal sweet spot for a single pair.
Based on an article in HFN&RR, I believe he used the Krell KRS 200 monoblocks.
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: