Planar Speaker Asylum

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

Return to Planar Speaker Asylum

Planar Speaker Asylum

RE: " But they didn't alter the main direction in design "

71.251.206.57

hahax@verizon.net

In Reply to: RE: " But they didn't alter the main direction in design " posted by Story on July 18, 2024 at 07:00:18

Heck of a logical argument against what I'm arguing.

Edits: 07/18/24

Follow Ups:

GREAT HORNYTOADS - Story 08:35:12 07/20/24 (8)
"SEAS Froy 3 speakers"

What the hell are you doing here at Planar anyway? What experience IF ANY do you have with any of the planars?
- RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS - hahax@verizon.net 20:40:51 07/24/24 (7)
  Do you think as a 60 year audiophile with special interest in speakers I've never experienced electrostatic and other planar speakers. I use the Froy 3s (with custom 18 ' woofers designed by the Froy designer) because on balance they do a better job for the values I prefer in a loud speaker which often differ from others' choices. Speakers are imperfect and each has plusses and minuses and you need to pick the balance that comes closest to what you prefer the most in a speaker.
  And if you read everything I wrote here it should be evident that I value Quads and find them an important contribution to audio. I just don't think they should be number one in the TAS list.
  By the way have you heard the Froy 3 speakers?
  
  Edits: 07/24/24
  - RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS - kentaja 06:46:56 07/26/24 (4)
    'Speakers are imperfect and each has plusses and minuses and you need to pick the balance that comes closest to what you prefer the most in a speaker.'
    
    Absolutely!
    
    Can you share what you like about the Froy?
    - RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS - hahax@verizon.net 17:35:38 07/26/24 (3)
      First of all my Froys are over 20 years old with older woofer baskets. Secondly Mine are crossed over passively at 85 Hz to 18" woofers in 5.25 cubic foot boxes with a stuffed port kike Dynaco A25s. The woofers were designed by Murray Zeligman who designed the Froys. There were 3 of these system with the 18" woofers. So my system isn't pure Froy
      My main complaint with my system is it often can be bright, Interestingly this seems minimized on well done live classical recordings. According to the designer this is because the system is flat on axis which causes the power response to cause brightness due to narrowing dispersion.
      What I love is superbly linear dynamics. Tis is especially evident on dynamic piano recordings, one of if not the hardest instrument to reproduce. This is helped, of course by the 85 Hz crossover taking a huge load off the Froys. My system is extremely detailed and open. And mid bass and bass are awesomely articulate. I hate bass that is not super controlled. Most reflex bass, even the well designed ones are soft sounding to me. There are recordings when I can close my eyes and feel like I can hear a drum skin return to its mid position.
      The Quads are magic in many ways. They were a true breakthrough in so many ways in the 1950s. They belong in the TAS top 15. I just can't see them as number 1 in the list. I don't even mind their narrow dispersion. But they lack linear dynamics, linear level changes, especially when the change is large like often on a piano. And I sincerely believe after 60 years of the crazy, fun hobby that the most fundamental characteristic of live sound is linear dynamics and not, albeit also important frequency response or low distortion. I'd rather sacrifice that kind of characteristics so long as it's not way off than linear dynamics. When you hear live sound outside a room you know its live although the frequency response is fouled up. But the dynamics still come through. The sad problem, of course, in recordings is we rarely get close enough to linear dynamics. And by linear by the way I mean micro changes and mini changes and midi changes as well as macro ones. Too many people take playing loud, cleanly as dynamics. That's just one part of it.
      
      Edits: 07/26/24
      - RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS - kentaja 09:55:59 07/29/24 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS posted by hahax@verizon.net on July 26, 2024 at 17:35:38
        
        Thanks for sharing a lot of great comments!
        
        For me the number one priority, and this trumps everything else, is lack of glare, fatigue. If a speaker or anything else doesn't pass this test I'm out I don't care what else the thing might brings to the table. Glare is what I would call overly bright that rides on top of the music. It's edgy it's painful it's like something is drilling into my ear. Wow I'd rather mow the yard! Fatigue can be many things but is generally lack luster tone, tonal balance.
        
        From there I value coherence. Good, bad or otherwise I want a speaker that speaks to me with one voice.
        
        I want some semblance of a recorded soundstage and images well placed, solid, on that soundstage.
        
        My final priority would be dynamic capability both on a micro and macro level.
        
        If we can pass the glare test in the end it becomes a balancing act for the remaining priorities. Speakers, gear, recordings will all vary in this respect the reason we are lucky to have so many options. No one thing will fit everyone's taste in audio or anything else in life.
        
        One final thought about the piano. Yes a very difficult thing to record and reproduce properly. The problem I have with using solo piano for evaluation purposes is the way they are typically recorded. Dreadful I'm afraid. I can't remember the last time I listened to a piano sitting inside the thing! And this unfortunately is how the majority or recordings are done. I'm not looking for the perspective of the pianist I lookin for the perspective of the audience.
        
        RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS - George S. Roland 18:16:59 10/08/24 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS posted by kentaja on July 29, 2024 at 09:55:59
        
        I just have to weigh in here to say I agree totally with what Kent said. I have ESLs and ESL_63s. Presently I am leaning towards the ESLs as my favorites.
        Lack of listener fatigue is one of the most important things for me in a loudspeaker. This is not an issue at all for the Quads.
        Another thing is their ability to play orchestral strings, playing loudly at high-pitched frequencies, without ever losing the tonal character of strings--never turning steely or screechy as they do with almost all other speakers I have heard.
        
        RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS - hahax@verizon.net 18:39:51 07/29/24 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: GREAT HORNYTOADS posted by kentaja on July 29, 2024 at 09:55:59
        
        I agree with you about glare. It can make an otherwise great system unlistenable. And if I have any problem with my system it is occasional glare. And I may be being too kind to my speakers because I am used to my system and others have told me it is too bright for them. But I'm retired with monetary limits and I love most of what it does so I'm fearful about messing around although I have thoughts of the SEAS KingRO4Y MK3 kit with an improved box design and materials and getting the amp out of the box.
  - "By the way have you heard the Froy 3 speakers?" - Story 04:00:23 07/26/24 (1)
    I could care less, enjoy your froy's
    - RE: "By the way have you heard the Froy 3 speakers?" - hahax@verizon.net 17:14:09 07/26/24 (0)
      I can play Mahler on them.

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion