Ed Selley
Hi-Fi Editor
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2003
- Messages
- 12,046
- Reaction score
- 5,498
- Points
- 3,077
- Age
- 43
They don't have to look bad and many look quite decent. We can always ignore those that look horrible, or where the woodwork is shoddy, etc.I wouldnt buy those if they where £100 tbf, why do high end speakers have to look utterly terrible?
Each to their own.. it looks like a lifestyle speaker for those with very deep pockets. Im sure there are cheaper speakers that sound just as good or better?
I thought the B and W PV1D subwoofer was an expensive bowling ball...now this thing...a much more expensive rugby ball...
At £6500 I wouldn't expect anything less than amazing sound.You should hear single driver speakers before making your mind. You might like sound signature.
I owned Quad ESLs for years - but that's "single driver" done right . My ML Spires have an integral active woofer, allowing them to reach 29Hz at -3dB.You should hear single driver speakers before making your mind. You might like sound signature.
they were all over the place above around 8khz, but Dirac sorted that out easily and they became my favourite sounding speaker.
Don't wish to veer too far off topic but DIRAC/ARC seems to allow speakers that have some exceptional strengths (e.g. amazing dynamics, detail monsters, fast-reacting etc) yet unbalanced frequency response, to sound great, such as speakers like these Eclipse.
Come the day when most of us are using some form of room correction, we'll need to be more analytical when choosing/auditioning speakers so that we, somehow, ignore frequency response irregularities (at least up to a point) and listen out for other performance aspects that we covet. Such an approach would surely widen our speaker choices too. Personally, I'd struggle with that because I'd find it difficult to get past an unbalanced tonality - it's the first thing that tends to strike me. Interesting times ahead though.
If and when I can afford it, I’ll be using 5 or 7 of the Jordan speakers for a Home Cinema set up and a Dirac processor. Probably the Nad version.
I've just seen the prices.
And there was me thinking a line array pair would be good!
I’m told the Fostek equivalent is quite cheap, but not as ‘sophisticated’ sounding.
Tangband also make cheaper full-range drivers. No idea if they're any good though. The response above about 5 - 8kHz always looks scary:
Clearly, these type of full-range units can have some special properties, typically lighting fast reflexes, but unless some form of room correction, together with bass support, is used, they don't really cut it as full range transducers (though the use of multiple units could negate the bass problem). Surely the best solution would be to allow an AMT tweeter (which will likely move faster at >5kHz anyway) to take care of the HF's and let a bass box take bass duties (or even a sub with a well-behaved upper bass, like the BK XXLS400).
Vastly reduced Doppler distortion of midrange frequencies, improved power handling, better HF response (quicker too), lower overall distortion, higher SPL's and cheaper than a line array of full-range drivers. Use an active crossover (with linear phase?) so that power amps are still directly connected to all drive units. Is there a down side?
...only the the fact that I’m too lazy to put it all together I suspect.
Often, the fun is in the planning.