[BruceSB]

When I came across this article on the SoulSonics I was going to add it onto the old thread, but instead I took up the suggestion to start a new thread.
Here is the link http://www.monoandstereo.com/2011/07/miro-kranjc-soulsonic-wave-loudspeaker.html
There is no doubt that Mono & Stereo are mightily impressed!
It would be great to hear from others who have heard them.
The glass mounting panel and variety of colours are also miles away from the same old box speakers that seem to be everywhere (& are!!!).
I think these SoulSonic speakers look great.
Another of the many beauties of planars is that they are not the same old boxes but are appealing to the eyes as well as the ears (well at least that's what these eyes & ears think!!).

[berni]

I have the pleasure to live some 20 miles away from the constructor and by now I got close friend with him. This doesn't change my  evaluation of the Impulse or Wave speakers in any way.
I must say that they do things my 20.1 can't  and also their look appeals even to your wives.
I know that Soulsonic is preparing some improvements to make them even better.

[jimdgoulding]

Very much Saena it seems to me and that's good thing.  Something bugs me tho, and that's the baffle.  Clear is it is, it is not clear to waveforms cause there is an edge to it.  Feel free to correct me if I'm missing something. 

Having looked at the pics a second time, I am less concerned cause the waveforms radiated by the larger drivers are likely longer than the baffle is wide, depending on the crossover frequency.  I DO appreciate that the voice coils of the ribbons and the dynamic drivers are nearer the same plane for cohesive time arrival.

[berni]

Scaena is a great speaker design, but it is a line array monopole speaker, while SoulSonics are line source dipoles.
The baffles are now curved on the Impulse, same will follow on the Wave model,
similar to the  smaller IMPACT.The baffle of the IMPULSE also has a trapezoidal shape to prevent "the edge".

[josh358]

It looks like a promising design. From the picture, I'd wonder about several possible performance pitfalls:

- The ribbon tweeter seems a bit wide for optimal HF dispersion
- Spatial aliasing (vertical Venetian blind effect) caused by the use of multiple circular drivers in a line array -- this has been reported frequently with other dynamic line arrays
- Poor blending between the "faster" ribbon and the cones (not just a matter of speed, but of differing distortion profiles and self-noise)

[rollo]

   They look cool. How much do they cost ?



charles

[berni]

Josh, I think we already went through this dispersion thing. As far as I know, the designer tried various ribbon widths and he deliberately chose 1" (25mm!)width, over a narrower one - on sound quality grounds, not measurements.
With the exception of Magnepan 3.6 and 20.1, all other Magnepans have 2" wide planar magnetic tweeters, which is twice that of SoulSonics - do they perform suboptimal? What is the dispersion characteristics of all those big ESLs, or conventional boxed speakers, majority of which use 1" wide tweeters?

Some people favor extremely narrow HF dispersion characteristic (example: Sanders ESL), because of the better image focus.

Spatial aliasing - the four woofers are tapered array, which enables them to avoid the typical upper bass suckout that happens in smaller rooms with all other planar speakers.

The cones are very light and fast, but the proof of course, is in the listening.

Because the crossovers are shallow, the blending is excellent and the sound very homogeneous, you can listen from 7` distance with no problem.

Their strengths: much more dynamic than typical planars, much higher sensitivity, more coherent than 3way planars, because there is no XO point in the very sensitive presence area, the dynamics in this region is much higher and more lifelike, the ribbon construction is very shallow (0.8"), which enables better dispersion than with other planar speakers that have ribbons in 3" thick enclosure, SPL are incredibly high with no apparent distortions, focus is great, natural tonal colors, etc.

For pricing ask the manufacturer Soulsonic directly .

[seadogs1]

What is their sensitivity?

[josh358]

Josh, I think we already went through this dispersion thing. As far as I know, the designer tried various ribbon widths and he deliberately chose 1" (25mm!)width, over a narrower one - on sound quality grounds, not measurements.
With the exception of Magnepan 3.6 and 20.1, all other Magnepans have 2" wide planar magnetic tweeters, which is twice that of SoulSonics - do they perform suboptimal? What is the dispersion characteristics of all those big ESLs, or conventional boxed speakers, majority of which use 1" wide tweeters?

Some people favor extremely narrow HF dispersion characteristic (example: Sanders ESL), because of the better image focus.

Spatial aliasing - the four woofers are tapered array, which enables them to avoid the typical upper bass suckout that happens in smaller rooms with all other planar speakers.

The cones are very light and fast, but the proof of course, is in the listening.

Because the crossovers are shallow, the blending is excellent and the sound very homogeneous, you can listen from 7` distance with no problem.

Their strengths: much more dynamic than typical planars, much higher sensitivity, more coherent than 3way planars, because there is no XO point in the very sensitive presence area, the dynamics in this region is much higher and more lifelike, the ribbon construction is very shallow (0.8"), which enables better dispersion than with other planar speakers that have ribbons in 3" thick enclosure, SPL are incredibly high with no apparent distortions, focus is great, natural tonal colors, etc.

For pricing ask the manufacturer Soulsonic directly .

Interesting, sounds like he's crossing it over pretty low then, lower than Magnepan's 3 kHz?

High frequency dispersion seems to be a somewhat controversial topic. The ideal speaker would have a uniform power response, which would require identical dispersion at all frequencies. However, commercial recordings are usually tipped up in the highs, and many speaker designers say that speakers sound better with limited high frequency dispersion, including, I learned a few weeks ago, Peter Walker, who found that he had intentionally to limit the HF dispersion of the ESL-63.

Magnepan, however, seems to design for textbook behavior, that is essentially perfect horizontal dispersion at all frequencies. This is possible because the ribbon is only 1/4" wide, which is less than half of the smallest reproduced wavelength. Other advantages I can think of of their approach would include lower mass for extended HF response, the possibility of using the ribbon without a transformer, and higher field strength (or smaller magnets); disadvantages might include fragility/maximum output and low frequency limitations. As you surmise, the quasi ribbon models beam in the highs and you get the characteristic cloverleaf pattern, with side lobes. This happens to with conventional tweeters, but to a lesser extent because of the narrowing of the circular profile at the top and bottom of the tweeter. The exception to that would be the newer 1.7, which adds a thin two-trace quasi ribbon supertweeter to improve dispersion and, I suppose, extend HF response by reducing mass.

The question of whether a speaker should be directional or not and how directional is also I think controversial, or at least makes different tradeoffs that may better suit a given situation or listener. I've always found very directional stats annoying, because of the "head in a vice" effect. My old Tympani 1D's beamed, but not as badly, and that was also a bit annoying. Now that my ears are older I'm less sensitive to that particular annoyance.

There are I think a couple of drawbacks to directionality as currently practiced. One is that irregular power response, e.g., power response that narrows at crossover points owing to excessive driver diameter, has a strong negative correlation with perceived speaker quality. Another is that while it's easy to narrow dispersion in the highs (actually difficult not to), it's difficult or impossible in the lows. This interferes with imaging and perceived frequency balance, since the HF energy will be beamed at you and so you'll end up with a rising on-axis frequency response.

Blind tests show that people seem to prefer hearing room reflections when they listen, even though they blur and color the tonality somewhat (as they would at a live performance). Speakers that beam in the highs tend to have a lot of headphone-like detail, but to lack pleasant image broadening and ambiance. It's a case of shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic, I think, since with two channel stereo neither is right -- room reflections don't match the original acoustic, but directional speakers are too headphone-like in presentation.

Cool that they use the tapered array, is he using Hann shading?

[berni]

What is their sensitivity?

Not sure about the Wave, but they aren`t as hard to drive as maggies. Impulse is actually quite efficient at 86dB and a lot easier to drive than any Maggie. I had the oppurtunity to try it with my old amp, which was unable to drive my 20.1 sufficient, the Impulse was no problem.
Ok, I solved my problem with my 20.1 with a big amp 

[berni]

Josh,
he is crossing it much lower then 3khz. If you  check the link in the first post, you would see that the XO is about 500Hz.
 Will come back to it.

[josh358]

Ah, OK, thanks, didn't see that at the bottom.

I saw another interesting glass baffle dipole in one of the CES reports, IIRC it got a glowing review. Not sure if it was by the same guy (or even the same speaker?).

[berni]

Ah, OK, thanks, didn't see that at the bottom.

I saw another interesting glass baffle dipole in one of the CES reports, IIRC it got a glowing review. Not sure if it was by the same guy (or even the same speaker?).

His where at CES 2011 and got some good reports, he has gathered them on his site ..
http://www.soulsonicspeakers.com/news.html

[berni]

The ribbon in WAVE is actually a mid/high transducer, XO point 500 Hz was again chosen on listening tests, not measurements. When I said that they do things my 20.1 don`t, I actually meant their sonic realism, not laboratory textbook performance.


Regarding directinality, all dipole speakers are directional, but Wave or Impulse are not extremely directional like some big ESLs. In the upper octaves they are certainly more directional than my 20.1, but I find this more natural, than the almost omni directionality of the verry narrow maggie ribbon. I tend to listen for the sonic realism and not from which corners of the room I can still hear 20kHz, but all this being said, the Wave or Impulse still have a broad listening window to easily accomodate a few listeners on a couch.

Just recently I have listened to a well known speaker that seemed incredibly well and smart constructed, with white papers fully supporting their theoretical advantages. Well, to make a long story short, when they started to play, I`ve felt I could cry...

I`m not an audio technician, but I do know how live music can sound and if the "A" speaker sounds more realistic than the "B" speaker, then I`m not interested to dissect it further in order to become even more convinced. Actually, I don`t even care if the theory doesn`t support my listening impressions.The major proof for me is always in the listening, not theory. There are tons of theories and approaches and we can spend our lives in academic discussions, but if we know the sound of real instruments and voices, the job is much easier if we simply listen to the system.

As far as I know the designer of SoulSonic speakers chose this combination of drivers and working principle based on listening to all existing speaker principles and not on theory or measurements, but of course, he does measure speakers extensively during the earlier stages of construction.

Regarding the tappered array, I cannot disclose any further details (a trade secret), but if you consider yourself a potential buyer, then contact the designer directly and ask him.

[HAL]

How does this differ from the original Carver Amazing Loudspeaker and the newer designs based on that idea?

[rajacat]

How much do they cost? They seem almost embarrassed to state the price. I couldn't find it anywhere. I guess if you have to ask, they're too much for you.

[josh358]

Regarding the tappered array, I cannot disclose any further details (a trade secret), but if you consider yourself a potential buyer, then contact the designer directly and ask him.

Understandable. I'm guessing it's only tapered at the top, though, with the floor reflection extending the array to twice its length.

I guess I should add that my interest in the technical details is essentially curiosity. I buy speakers on the basis of their sound. Still, you can sometimes anticipate problems, e.g., I see that one of the quoted reviews referred to audible discontinuity between the ribbon and the cones. This has been a chronic practical problem with designs that try to mate them. It's even been a problem with Maggies, true ribbon to quasi ribbon and quasi ribbon to wire. Hell, it's even a problem with speakers that use all cones.

Another question I'd have -- in my experience, the sound from dipoles that don't run floor to ceiling seems to come from too low an angle.

Of course, no speaker is perfect, and what counts in the end is what does most of what you want right. From an engineering perspective, I'd say that he's done a lot of things right.

[BPT]

$100k. Nice execution. Seems like I've seen something like this before  . Crossingover a 1" ribbon to 12" drivers at 500Hz. (even ones with low Le) passively will be audible (audible even if done electronically/digitally). Wonder how Danny's new 8" servos would work here.
Chris H.

[Davey]

$100k.  Oh my goodness.  I take it these are just "statement" products and he doesn't expect to sell more than a few copies?

I don't understand the logic. 

Dave.

[berni]

$100K would be the price thorugh the distributor/dealer chain for the Impulse Supreme ( Duelund caps, all pure silver wiring, pure silver terminals, Ae woofers),  but the basic version could be had for a small fraction of that price.
100K  for the top model was suggested by a US distributor but I think the designer wants to go different route, like some other companies. He has no aim to sell thousands of speakers but rather a few dozens to the right people and by selling them directly, they could be quite affordable (not in the Maggie league though, the cost to manufacture them is much higher, because of the chosen materials). Ask him for the introductory prices!
 I think the prices for smaller models otherwise start below $10.000, I`m not sure though, ask the manufacturer, forum rules are strict