AudioCircle
Industry Circles => Spatial Audio => Topic started by: dealaddict on 2 May 2020, 10:27 pm
-
Hi all,
I am thinking to upgrade from Zu Omen Def I to Spatial Audio X5, and would like to hear your advice.
I don't have a lot of experience hearing different speakers. I only have 3 references. My first higher end speaker is B&W CDM7NT. I remember the sound is small and not musical. I tried upgrade the amp to 200wpc Rotel and later McCormick DNA, and switch to tube preamp and tube amp ... but can't get the sound I am looking for.
One day, I visit a hi-fi shop and listen a pair of Magnepan with Macintosh mono block. I remember I have goose bumps. The singer sounds standing right in front of me. The sound stage is huge and very musical. However, I won't see myself getting a pair of Magnepan because it is so huge. I don't have a separate living room, and my wife won't allow me to put to big black panels in the living room. Also, I heard they need quite a lot of power or current to drive them, which is a different route I am currently on.
Now, speaking on my current system, I am using a Almarro 318B with Zu Omen Def. it sounds much lively than the B&W, very musical, with a pretty big soundstage. Although it is not as "live" as the Magnepan, it is pretty good. I also recently bought a Triode Lab 2a3 SET amp with 4 watt into 8 ohms. I am still waiting for the tube so haven't have time to try it yet. I think speakers is the next component I would like to upgrade, and come across this Spatial Audio X5.
Would the X5 match well with a 4w 2A3 SET amp?
I heard horns match well with low power SET amps. And someone comment the X5 with a "horn-loaded AMT". I don't know if this is accurate, but do I get similar horn sound from this AMT?
What I hope to get out from upgrading the speakers are:
1) bigger soundstage and holographic like the Magnepan.
Would a open baffle design achieve this? I think Magnepan is also dipole design. I also have a open back headphone which sounds much "open" than a close back headphone.
2) better bass
Since X5 has a active subwoofer, I think it will have better bass than the Zu. Also with the open baffle design, I heard people say the bass will be more natural.
Before knowing this X5, I am thinking to get Avantgarde horn as my next speakers. But they are more expensive and seems too big for my area. It would be good if anyone can comment or compare the X5 to the Avantgarde horn, say the Uno Nano.
My listening area is 15.5 ft wide x 12 ft deep. The speakers are placed on the long side, so, I may not have enough space behind the speakers. I mostly listen to Jazz vocals, ballads instrumentals, tenor saxophone, guitar, cello. So, my focus is mid and low range.
Thank you in advance.
-
I've owned both and they are vastly different speakers. The X-5 is superior in every way from dynamics to soundstage to frequency response except for maybe the "tone density" of vocals and instruments that the Zu possesses.
I'd recommend trying to hear them before buying them and asking Clayton if they are a good fit for your room or not.
-
Morganc, Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately, I don’t think there is any distributor in Canada to audition. Can you elaborate what is tone density? Can you also elaborate on the soundstage? Is the improvement big or just subtle? Would you recommend the X5 as an upgrade or they just sound “different”.
Thanks.
-
I have only heard one Zu speaker, the Soul Superfly, and it did nothing for me. That said, I think your room would be fine. However, I wouldn't expect great things with a 4 watt SET amp.
Shakey
-
Morganc, Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately, I don’t think there is any distributor in Canada to audition. Can you elaborate what is tone density? Can you also elaborate on the soundstage? Is the improvement big or just subtle? Would you recommend the X5 as an upgrade or they just sound “different”.
Thanks.
No doubt the X-5's are a huge upgrade! I owned the Zu Defs like 10 years ago and have owned many since then and haven't looked back once. The X-5's are without a doubt in a different league altogether.
-
Would a 4 watt 2a3 SET amp good enough to drive the X5 with 97 DB efficiency? Because of the active subwoofer, the power is mainly used to drive the AMT and midrange woofer, I think it should be ok, am I correct? My listening area is not big and I often listen in low-medium volume since I don’t have my own listening room. Or I should look for a 100+ db sensitivity horn speaker? I want a 3D, immersive experience like in Magnepan which I believe partially due to the dipole design. I am not sure if a horn speaker will give me that.
-
IMO no one can tell you what you will like and since this speaker just came out, very few people can share their experiences. IMHO, The key is to find the speakers that you like and then you find the amp that brings out the best in them to match your preferences. I've used an amp that small with speakers that were lower efficiency though now I prefer a much higher wattage amp with my X-5's. Having said that, if I had a fantastic low wattage amp for late night listening, I'd likely love it!
-
Yes, maybe it is too new, there are not too many reviews. Especially it is not something can be auditioned. I understand it is hard to say how it will sound with my gear or in my room, I guess we can all “guess” based on experience from different people. In theory, I like the concept, seems hitting many check marks. Open baffle, dipole woofer, horn loaded AMT, high efficiency for low power tube amp, active subwoofer, contemporary look without high panels. What’s holding me is the price. The pair I am looking at is 6k used. I am comfortable spending up to 3K to try things out. But hard to convinced myself to spend 6k without auditioning it. :cry:
-
It is my opinion that 4 watts is not enough for dynamic transients.
YMMV
Shakey
-
It is my opinion that 4 watts is not enough for dynamic transients.
YMMV
Shakey
Thanks for your reply. In your opinion, do you feel it is not enough for the X5, or not enough for any speakers in general?
-
I've owned both Zu and Spatial, so I think I can give some 'just my opinion' perspective.
I owned a pair of Omens for a few years, and going further down the rabbit hole, I was seriously looking at upgrading to the Omen Defs. This was about 4/5 years ago. I was also running a Klipsch sub to bump to low end. While digging into other options, I happened across a pic of the Spatial M3's, and was immediately interested. I was also happy to learn that Spatial was also a local company for me--as both Zu and Spatial are based in northern Utah. After getting my Omens, I was set on listening before buying. Clayton, being the good fella that he is, let me stop by the lab for a listen.
I knew within 10 seconds of Clayton turning them on that knew I was going to buy the M3's. That said he let me play all kinds of random test music for about an hour. Also, best part of the demo was that he also had a sub version of the M3 (forget what it was called, but it was a M3 baffle and two woofers with no tweeter that acted as a sub) set up in the room at the time. After a few songs, I asked Clayton "ok, can we hear some without the sub on?" At which point he informed me that the sub wasn't hooked up--it was just the M3's driving clean, fast bass.
So, in a nutshell, yes to both Q's 1 and 2.
Soundstage on the OB's is an entirely different thing than enclosed speakers. Its immediately impressive. As you've mentioned, its like Maggies, but with great, fast bass. Which gets to your bass Q--the bass on the Spatials is the best i've heard. The best way I can compare it is that the OB's create soundstage like a good open-back headphone. It just immediately opens soundstage and positioning in a way that no closed-back (or enclosed speaker) can, IME.
I loved my Zu's while I had them, but I can't see going back to and enclosed speaker for my main 2.0 rig ever again.
If you're anywhere near SLC, you should definitely hit up Clayton for a demo.
-
No, it would certainly work on something like a khorn. But we are comparing 104 dB to 97 dB sensitivity. That’s a pretty big difference. And maybe it would work with the x5, but it wouldn’t be ideal. I think you are better off with at least 20-30 watts.
Shakey
-
Thanks for the reply. I have an Almarro 318B which outputs 18 watts. That may work better with the X5. However, that’s not my original intention. I bought the 2A3 amp because of very good reviews on the internet. Then I think the next item to upgrade is speaker and trying to find a speakers that match with the amp. Maybe I should do this the other way round, get the speakers and find the amp to match with it. Anyway, 6k is too much to just give a try. It seems I will wait for reviews and see what people use then decide.
Actually, I haven’t tried the 2A3 amps on my Zu yet because I am waiting for the tubes. LoL. I need to try that first. If that doesn’t work, maybe I will sell the 2A3 amp and start again with the speakers.
-
You might like that amp. But I think you are doing yourself a great diservice by passing on the X5. Pair them with the right amp and your journey is over.
Shakey
-
I've owned both Zu and Spatial, so I think I can give some 'just my opinion' perspective.
I owned a pair of Omens for a few years, and going further down the rabbit hole, I was seriously looking at upgrading to the Omen Defs. This was about 4/5 years ago. I was also running a Klipsch sub to bump to low end. While digging into other options, I happened across a pic of the Spatial M3's, and was immediately interested. I was also happy to learn that Spatial was also a local company for me--as both Zu and Spatial are based in northern Utah. After getting my Omens, I was set on listening before buying. Clayton, being the good fella that he is, let me stop by the lab for a listen.
I knew within 10 seconds of Clayton turning them on that knew I was going to buy the M3's. That said he let me play all kinds of random test music for about an hour. Also, best part of the demo was that he also had a sub version of the M3 (forget what it was called, but it was a M3 baffle and two woofers with no tweeter that acted as a sub) set up in the room at the time. After a few songs, I asked Clayton "ok, can we hear some without the sub on?" At which point he informed me that the sub wasn't hooked up--it was just the M3's driving clean, fast bass.
So, in a nutshell, yes to both Q's 1 and 2.
Soundstage on the OB's is an entirely different thing than enclosed speakers. Its immediately impressive. As you've mentioned, its like Maggies, but with great, fast bass. Which gets to your bass Q--the bass on the Spatials is the best i've heard. The best way I can compare it is that the OB's create soundstage like a good open-back headphone. It just immediately opens soundstage and positioning in a way that any closed-back (or enclosed speaker) can, IME.
I loved my Zu's while I had them, but I can't see going back to and enclosed speaker for my main 2.0 rig ever again.
If you're anywhere near SLC, you should definitely hit up Clayton for a demo.
Thank you for the reply, that sounds promising. For the X5 with active subwoofer, I can only imagine the bass will further be improve.
Since the X5 is quite expensive, another option is to try the M series first. It is about half the price of the X5. How do you feel about the midrange compared to Zu Omen since the M series doesn’t have a tweeter?
-
Thank you for the reply, that sounds promising. For the X5 with active subwoofer, I can only imagine the bass will further be improve.
Since the X5 is quite expensive, another option is to try the M series first. It is about half the price of the X5. How do you feel about the midrange compared to Zu Omen since the M series doesn’t have a tweeter?
Starting with M makes sense to me. Also, the M-series definitely has a tweeter. The Sapphire series has the tweeter above the 15's, but the Turbo S and Triode Master have the coaxial tweeter mounted on the top 15. I have the M3 Triode Master with the dipole coaxial tweeter. The mids on the M3's vs the Omens are on an entirely different level. My Omens would get shouty and harsh at ~90db, but the M3's stay clear and easy well past healthy listening levels.
I've actually been considering selling my M3TM's to upgrade to the X-series, but the lights went out on my trusty Marantz 4300 and I need to get a new amp(s) before I go further down the rabbit hole.
-
Dealaddict,
Keep in mind that Clayton shows both the Sapphires and the X's with an LTA amp that puts out 12 watts. I bought the LTA mono and paired it with a Don Sach pre and it simply stunned me. This, after using a 65 watt Crimson 275 tube amp and a pair of high current Odyssey monos with 185k ohms of high quality capacitance. Never felt I was short of headroom or volume. At 97 sensitivity you can drive with just about anything of good quality. It's not watts, its quality of watts.
-
Starting with M makes sense to me. Also, the M-series definitely has a tweeter. The Sapphire series has the tweeter above the 15's, but the Turbo S and Triode Master have the coaxial tweeter mounted on the top 15. I have the M3 Triode Master with the dipole coaxial tweeter. The mids on the M3's vs the Omens are on an entirely different level. My Omens would get shouty and harsh at ~90db, but the M3's stay clear and easy well past healthy listening levels.
I've actually been considering selling my M3TM's to upgrade to the X-series, but the lights went out on my trusty Marantz 4300 and I need to get a new amp(s) before I go further down the rabbit hole.
Thanks for pointing out that M3TM has a coaxial tweeter. Unlike the Sapphire, it is coaxial and most pictures have the driver covered so I only see two big black circles.
But this leads me to wonder the difference between the M3TM vs the Sapphire, and which one is better.
-
Dealaddict,
Keep in mind that Clayton shows both the Sapphires and the X's with an LTA amp that puts out 12 watts. I bought the LTA mono and paired it with a Don Sach pre and it simply stunned me. This, after using a 65 watt Crimson 275 tube amp and a pair of high current Odyssey monos with 185k ohms of high quality capacitance. Never felt I was short of headroom or volume. At 97 sensitivity you can drive with just about anything of good quality. It's not watts, its quality of watts.
Yes, i know. That’s why I think it should be ok for me based on the type of music and the volume I listen. When listening to CD, the volume knob of my 18 watt Almarro is between 7 and 8 o’clock. When streaming from my computer, I can lower the volume in the player, and the volume know will be at 10 or 11, never pass 12 o’clock.
My main question now is ... would the M3TM is good enough for me, or I should bite the bullet and get the X5. Very often I hear people use separate subwoofer to compensate for full range drivers or for Magnepans. But it is not cheap to buy two subwoofers. In this case, the extra money for X5 seems not bad. The problem is, I don’t know if I need the subwoofer given the type of music I listen to, or how much I actually missed without a subwoofer. I guess I will only know after I try it at home.
-
Dealaddict,
You got 60 days of listening. I know it's no picnic to ship back, but it is a trial period that gives you a chance to give them a good workout.
-
If I recall correctly, the tweeter in the M3 is a pretty standard pro-grade compression tweeter. The Sapphire line uses some new fancy ring radiator tweeter or something, and the X series uses a state of the art AMT type tweeter. I've read reports of others who know the M series speakers who say the new Sapphire and X series are in completely other league of sound refinement in the upper registers. I could believe it.
I had the M1 for about a year, which was basically the M3 in a heavier-duty cabinet at a higher price point. But some Daedalus DA-RMa V2's came my way and were altogether better across the board in detail, refinement, and natural sound. And now I have sold the Daedalus and settled with Zu Omen Dirty Weekends that I think do a number of things better than the Daedalus did. Very much more immediate sounding, and more detail too. I've upgraded the internal cap to Miflex copper foil and soldered all internal connections rather than the cheap metal fasteners used, and the sound is all the more refined and detailed and removing any harshness. It's quite a different sound than the OB sound I recall from the M1, but I remember being surprised how much detail and mids/high frequency refinement the M1 left on the table compared with the Daedalus. And the Zu operating with no crossover exceeds even the detail of the Daedalus. It doesn't have perfect timbre, given the 10" driver is run very high, well into beaming frequencies. The Daedalus is definitely the more balanced and in many ways more mature speaker. So with the Zu you have to be in the sweet spot to get realistic sounding real-to-life tones/timbres, but there's an engagement factor that I get with the no-crossover approach of the Zu that I wasn't getting with the M1 for sure, and also more immediacy/engagement than with the Daedalus even though there are tradeoffs with the Daedalus for sure. Absolutely the soundstage and natural bass of the M1 were both killer. But the midrange and high frequency details/hash left significant room for improvement. Not bad, just not as revealing of inner details as I have found since then.
I'm very curious to hear the new designs, though. The new Sapphire and X-series could very largely address the deficits of the M series in my eyes.
Also, if you were to try the M3, I would absolutely recommend more than a few watts. I and many others have witnessed them only truly open up with higher powered solid state and class d amplification. In fact, despite Clayton's assurances about its low-power tube compatibility, I had problems with tubes blowing/dying in my Line Magnetic 845 amp with 22 very robust wpc for a tube amp. Turns out the impedance swings on the M3 can be quite wild. Clayton always class d amps at shows with them. The fact that he's now using lower powered LTA amps with the new series is telling, at least to me, that they're likely much more benign designs for tube amps, and also thrive on good tube sound. But it's also telling that the LTA amps in particular have so much synergy. The LTA amps are very very detailed and on the lighter/faster end of the tube spectrum. I suspect lusher tubes would not be as great of a fit in terms of synergy. Just a suspicion, though, since I haven't heard the speakers to get a sense of their overall character yet.
Good luck with your quest!
-
@genjamon, thank you very much for sharing your experience. Actually, I think my Zu has very good mid range, too. But I always thought maybe I haven’t heard something better yet. So, in your opinion, the mid range and high frequency is not as good/detail as Zu, right? My Zu is the Mk I, likely your Dirty Weekend has a newer driver than mine, that may make a difference.
My Zu is 98 dB and 8 ohm, while the M3TM is 93 dB and 16 ohm. There is a big difference in impediance. Actually, I don’t fully understand. I only know higher impedance means easier to drive. Base on this, i theoretically will get better result / performance on the M3MT than my Zu using the 2A3 amp, right?
That also lead me to think if the M3TM is a good design, because I don’t see 16 ohm speaker very often. If it is better, why don’t we see it more often?
-
Anyone who has never heard an X series speaker has no idea how it compares to the M series. It’s only speculation. I own the X3, and I have never heard the M3TM myself so I can only guess how much better my speakers sound.
Since you already have the Almarro amp as well as your SET, why not bring in the X5 for a trial? The Almarro would come closer to being a good match, IMHO. But you (and I) might be surprised at the other amp. I know that I tried a Decware Torii and with my speakers in my room it didn’t work. Then again, I have a pretty big room and like to listen at a realistic volume much of the time.
Most who have heard both agree that the x series is a big improvement and the x5 is quite a bargain at its price when you factor in the two powered subs.
Shakey
-
Yes, I think I will bite the bullet and get the X5. I think I will always be itching to upgrade.
BTW, a slightly different question. It seems I can only get the bass when I play the music loudly. Or I should say, when playing the music softly, it is harder to notice the bass, am I correct?
-
The bass level is controlled by a potentiometer on the sub amp. It will integrate completely with the main drivers and you will have a balanced sound at any volume level.
Shakey
-
Anyone who has never heard an X series speaker has no idea how it compares to the M series. It’s only speculation. I own the X3, and I have never heard the M3TM myself so I can only guess how much better my speakers sound.
Since you already have the Almarro amp as well as your SET, why not bring in the X5 for a trial? The Almarro would come closer to being a good match, IMHO. But you (and I) might be surprised at the other amp. I know that I tried a Decware Torii and with my speakers in my room it didn’t work. Then again, I have a pretty big room and like to listen at a realistic volume much of the time.
Most who have heard both agree that the x series is a big improvement and the x5 is quite a bargain at its price when you factor in the two powered subs.
Shakey
I'm hoping to hear the X-series soon. I've owned the M3TS and the M3TM, so i'll post up some impressions once I get the chance.
-
@genjamon, thank you very much for sharing your experience. Actually, I think my Zu has very good mid range, too. But I always thought maybe I haven’t heard something better yet. So, in your opinion, the mid range and high frequency is not as good/detail as Zu, right? My Zu is the Mk I, likely your Dirty Weekend has a newer driver than mine, that may make a difference.
My Zu is 98 dB and 8 ohm, while the M3TM is 93 dB and 16 ohm. There is a big difference in impediance. Actually, I don’t fully understand. I only know higher impedance means easier to drive. Base on this, i theoretically will get better result / performance on the M3MT than my Zu using the 2A3 amp, right?
That also lead me to think if the M3TM is a good design, because I don’t see 16 ohm speaker very often. If it is better, why don’t we see it more often?
Yes, my Zu DW's have the latest drivers, and also the resistor mods to smooth the impedance, and also upgraded internal cap and soldered connections. So might not be fully the same sound you know. But probably same overall character, I bet.
What I'm talking about in terms of impedance isn't the "nominal" impedance for the speaker that the manufacturers state in their specs. I'm talking about the impedance curve throughout the entire frequency range. All speakers have different impedances at different frequencies. And they can often swing wildly - especially around crossover points, or in low frequencies, or elsewhere based on particular characteristics of the drivers involved. The stated specs by manufactures are a rough average of this, but what matters to amps often times is not so much the average, but the swings at particular frequency ranges. An impedance swing can put different strains on amps. A pronounced or deep dip can put a huge current demand on the amp, while an impedance spike does the opposite in terms of current. In dynamic loads such as playing music, these big swings are not ideal for tubes.
The Zu drivers actually have some interesting swings of their own, but not to the point of causing concerns for tubes. On the other hand, while the M1's (and I assume M3's) were marketed as benign to tube amps due to their "nominal" 8 ohm load and high efficiency, Clayton eventually revealed that they had an impedance dip down below 4 ohms. This would explain why class d and generally solid state amps might do better with them than low powered tubes. I also suspect it put some strain on my amps. I can't say for sure that was the cause of the tube failures I experienced (could have just been the tubes themselves), but the amp has been very reliable with other speakers.
The M3TM seems to be an attempt to improve the compatibility with tube amps, but from what I remember seeing, while it does shift the "nominal" (average) impedance higher, the impedance curve still swings pretty wildly. This means a solid state amp still might be a better fit for it. I feel like I've read user reports that the M3TM still prefers SS/class d over tubes, but can't remember where or when I read that. But I'm sure there are plenty of users who have tubes with these speakers and love them.
I'm not trying to shit on the M series or M3 at all. It's a very nice speaker - sounded great. Had that wonderful open baffle sound. Was very balanced and high quality speaker. I'm just saying I find the Zu has significant strengths of its own, and outperforms the M series to my estimation in some significant categories. Though certainly not all. And others would certainly prefer the M series to the Omen or Omen Def. YMMV and all that.
-
X series is going to have self-powered bass sections, so you really really really cannot extrapolate the M series performance to the X series. Particularly with tube amps. The X series is going to be a much better match for tube amps because the bass load is removed.
-
I completely agree. I was only talking about M series because he was thinking about going that direction.
-
I'm not trying to shit on the M series or M3 at all. It's a very nice speaker - sounded great. Had that wonderful open baffle sound. Was very balanced and high quality speaker. I'm just saying I find the Zu has significant strengths of its own, and outperforms the M series to my estimation in some significant categories. Though certainly not all. And others would certainly prefer the M series to the Omen or Omen Def. YMMV and all that.
Really interesting to hear(read) your experience as I went from the Omens to the M3TS, then the M3TM and can't say i'd ever go back to Zu or any enclosed speaker.
Its all so subjective and simultaneously interesting.
Are you in UT, or just have a penchant for UT-based speaker brands?
I'm currently running the M3TM's via a Marantz 4300 and a Schiit dac.
-
I bought the X5, it is a used unit. If I am lucky, will get it on Fri. Then I will be busy over the weekend. Will update this thread with my impression.
-
Looking forward to hearing your impressions.
Where'd you find a used X5 for sale?
-
It is from a Canada buy and sale website called CanucksAudioMart. That’s how I learn about this brand started by that ad.
-
It is from a Canada buy and sale website called CanucksAudioMart.
I saw those, you got a pretty sweet deal. Were you able to negotiate a better deal than his asking price?
-
Congratulation. Please try the Almarro with the X5 also and let us know how you like the sound.
-
I saw those, you got a pretty sweet deal. Were you able to negotiate a better deal than his asking price?
Yes and no, depends on how you see it. The seller is very nice to absorb part of the shipping.
-
Well you saved yourself a few Loonies and they are well on the way to being broken in. :thumb: :thumb:
-
Ok, ladies and gentlemen, I received the speakers, hooked it up, listen for 2 hours or so, and here are my thoughts.
First of all, these speakers are VERY heavy, much heavier than I expect given it doesn't have a box. I think it is even heavier than my Zu Omen Def I. For the sound, I can say, YES, it is a different level. If I want to summarize in one sentence, that is, I can hear things I didn't hear from the Zu before.
1. The bass of course is better with the subwoofer. It provides a good floor of low frequencies, and I can hear the drums that I haven't heard before. I think it sounds like those big Timpani drum in orchestra.
2. It is more detailed and transparent. The female vocal is crystal clear. Again, I can hear things in this high mid frequency range that I didn't hear before. In one song, there is a wind blowing sound that I never notice it. At the beginning, I feel it is slightly "brighter" than the Zu. Now, I feel it is revealing the frequencies that not able to reveal by the Zu. The Zu sounds like I put a layer of "thing" in front of the X5. Combine with better bass, it has a wider dynamic range, on both ends.
3. It has more depth. The Zu sound more compressed, meaning the vocal and instruments are relatively closed, even though the sound coming at a depth behind the walls. For the X5, the vocal all of sudden is more forward, feels like sound just came out in the middle of the air, then some instruments are further back behind the wall. I think I misunderstood what "depth" means before. I thought depth means the sound comes further back away from the speakers. But I think I am wrong. X5 gives me a sense of depth by having separate layers, something sound closer, something sound further away, that relativity gives me a sense of depth. With the vocal coming out from the air, it also gives me a very 3D, holographic sense.
4. Saxophone sounds more airy. I played saxophone myself, so, definitely, I can tell it sounds more like real saxophone in the X5. The sound is more open, which is as expected with the open baffle, no surprise here.
I never know what I missed until now. You don't know what you don't know. But to be fair, the Zu Omen Def I is 1/3 of the price of the X5. While the above improvements are audible, but not by a lot. I think the Zu Omen Def are still good speakers for the price. Actually, in the first 10 mins, I feel ... oh no, not much better than my Zu, and it is 3x the price, what am i going to do with them. It took me about 2 hours of listening with different songs, then I realize all those improvements. I actually feel the Zu Omen Def I is a pretty good deal for people with a lower budget.
In conclusion, I am happy with the purchase. I get what I hope to get - the openness, the holographic, the bass. The detail and transparency exceed my expectation. It is not as holographic as the Magnepan (I think it is a 2.5 because they are huge, driving by expensive, huge Macintosh mono blocks) based on my memory, but that Magnepan is so big and ugly. Those Macintosh mono blocks alone are more expensive than the X5s. This X5 provides a good balance of everything! :thumb:
So, now, I have a question. Does anyone know what are those bass program selections supposed to mean? There is 1, 2, and 3. Then there is a Prot which is not selectable. I tried different programs and can't detect the difference.
-
Going by my experience with X3 the sound can be improved *a lot* by (a) break-in for 30-40 hrs, and then improvement past 200 hrs (b) tweaking positioning.
Start with speakers as far out in the room as your space (or spouse) will allow and then move them back incrementally. Also various toe-in angles.
Enjoy!
-
Going by my experience with X3 the sound can be improved *a lot* by (a) break-in for 30-40 hrs, and then improvement past 200 hrs (b) tweaking positioning.
Start with speakers as far out in the room as your space (or spouse) will allow and then move them back incrementally. Also various toe-in angles.
Enjoy!
I bought them used. The previous owner is the 2nd owner and he seems to be a pro audiophile. I think it is already broken in. For the placement, I am somewhat limited with the Zu’s right behind the X5’s. haven’t figure out what to do with them yet. They are great speakers, don’t want to sell, but I don’t have space to store them as well.
I listen to the X5’s again this morning. Oh man, that AMT driver is awesome. Before, I don’t really understand what people mean when they say the sound is transparent. But now, I can “feel” using this term to describe the AMT. It is truly a different league. The previous owner had the M3 (not Sapphire) And various Zu speakers before. He said the tweeter of M3 sound similar to Zu, and both use Eminent driver. The AMT is in the league as the B&W diamond tweeter. He has a 802D.
-
Oh man, that AMT driver is awesome.
I have been researching the Beyma TPL150H AMT driver in hopes of crossing them over at 1 kHz/18dB in a DIY project. Beyma recommends crossover point of >=1kHz (12dB slope).
However, I found multiple actual measurements on-line that are vastly different from the measurement Beyma posts. Mainly, the driver needs to be crossed over at 1.8-2kHz to avoid the resonance frequency, and it also rolls off rapidly above 10kHz.
I am very curious what the crossover point/slope is used in Spatial Audio X3, X5 and what crossover/baffle strategies were used to create the reported great sound? I would normally just buy them and try, but at $830/pair, risk is higher. :|
Top graph is the Beyma-published FR. The rest are user measurements.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49875653767_ba2c67a454_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iZkLdX)BeymaTPL150Hfr1 (https://flic.kr/p/2iZkLdX) by drjlo2 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/60017347@N03/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49875634667_f6081d73ff_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iZkExD)BeymaTPL150Hfr (https://flic.kr/p/2iZkExD) by drjlo2 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/60017347@N03/), on Flickr
-
If the old speakers are right behind the X5 they are probably interfering with imaging.
-
The programs 1, 2 and 3 do nothing on the woofer amps. Clayton had told me he was thinking of programming them differently but then decided it was not worthwhile so just programmed them the same DSP. So just turn on the amps each time you listen and it will default to program 1 and no need to change the programs.
-
Morganc, Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately, I don’t think there is any distributor in Canada to audition. Can you elaborate what is tone density? Can you also elaborate on the soundstage? Is the improvement big or just subtle? Would you recommend the X5 as an upgrade or they just sound “different”.
Thanks.
Dealaddict
Are you aware the X5's have gone up a thousand dollars?
-
I'm certainly happy that I got mine for a screaming deal used as well. Loving them mOre and more each day. Currently running them with a 2-Cherry Amp and the sound is quite sublime.
-
No. When I learn about the X5 a week or two ago, it is already $5950 per pair. Do you mean it was $4950 before?
Dealaddict
Are you aware the X5's have gone up a thousand dollars?
-
The programs 1, 2 and 3 do nothing on the woofer amps. Clayton had told me he was thinking of programming them differently but then decided it was not worthwhile so just programmed them the same DSP. So just turn on the amps each time you listen and it will default to program 1 and no need to change the programs.
Note however that the adjustment dial does affect bass level and should be adjusted to your room and taste.
-
The programs 1, 2 and 3 do nothing on the woofer amps. Clayton had told me he was thinking of programming them differently but then decided it was not worthwhile so just programmed them the same DSP. So just turn on the amps each time you listen and it will default to program 1 and no need to change the programs.
Thanks for the info.
However, I observe something. I listened to it last night at pretty low volume in P2, the subwoofer turn off probably thinking there is no music coming in. When I turn the volume up a bit, they turn back on. Then I switch it to P1 and do more tests, it seems the subwoofer stays on without the on and off. I will leave it to P1 and do more tests. Maybe I need to program one with no auto power off.
-
Yeah I'm not sure regarding if there should be any differences regarding the amp shutting off between P1 and P2. I just leave it on the default P1 and do not notice the amps ever turning on/off during a listening session but I do not typically listen at softer levels. I do always shut off the amps between listening sessions, I don't like to leave them on although I'm sure you can with no issues.
I believe they operate like a rel sub in that the amp will go in standby mode if it doesn't detect a signal for some time. I had rel subs which did that but I still preferred to switch them off when not listening, just my preference.
-
No. When I learn about the X5 a week or two ago, it is already $5950 per pair. Do you mean it was $4950 before?
They are now $6950.
-
They are now $6950.
Oh, it is still USD $5950 in the description page
https://www.spatialaudio.us/pagex5
But listed $6950 in the products page.
https://www.spatialaudio.us/store
Compared to other brand having power subwoofer, it is still quite (or very) reasonable. IMO, we are the lucky early adopters who got a deal. :thumb:
-
Regarding the sub settings on the X5, Clayton asked that I not fool with them and leave it at P1. As supplied P1 is set to the profile that he has designed for the speaker. As I understand it, the other options are not set up at all.
-
Just to give an update on using 2A3 on the X5. I have been waiting for a pair of RCA 2A3 and they finally arrived today. it took me 2 weeks of painful waiting due to the COVID-19. It is a Triode Lab 2A3 integrated amplifier with transformer upgrades. It is said to be ~$8000 at retailed, of course I bought used and didn't pay that amount.
A funny side story. The seller, which is a store, send me 6SL7 tubes while it should use 6SN7. I plugged the 6SL7 in them and it sounds like crap. Vocal sounds thin. I initially thought: "Oh ... the 2A3 are not enough to power the speakers maybe the reason." I happened to have a pair of 6SN7GT because my Almarro uses it. Viola! That's it, it sounds good now. I started to think if the original owner sell it because he put the wrong tubes in it making it sounds like crap. Good I get a good deal. :thumb:
First of all, I don't feel the 2A3 lack of power driving the speakers. Using my 18W Almarro, using a CD player, it is set at about slightly pass the 7:00 position. On my 2A3, for similar sound level, it is at ~9:00 position. This is actually good for my listening taste and environment. My area is 18"x12", and I listen Jazz at a low-medium volume. I don't know if the upgraded transformer make any difference. We are comparing a top of the line 2A3 (CAD$8000 retail) to a best-bang-for-the-buck amp (CAD$3000 retail). I don't feel I need to increase the volume of the powered subwoofer either. So, it seems the amp is only driving the mid range and the AMT, and the sweet 4 W is not lacking anything in driving them.
I haven't done any A/B test. By impression, the 2A3 sounds smoother. The instruments also have better separation. I feel it overall sounds better, not yet able to analyze specifically what is better.
-
I further listen for another 2 hours ...
This 2A3 is smooth. When I listen to the Almarro, for some kinds of music, I get a bit of a fatigue feeling, i don't know why. But I didn't get that for this 2A3. It also sound more 3D and more real life. And somehow, the soundstage sounds higher too, not sure why.
It is also more revealing. It reveals some noise in one of the song that again I didn’t notice before. Also, the slight “squeak” before a note in violins, the singer’s saliva noise ... everything are revealed.
The Almarro is good, it got rave reviews. This Triode Lab 2A3 yet brings my system to the next level!!
-
I further listen for another 2 hours ...
This 2A3 is smooth. When I listen to the Almarro, for some kinds of music, I get a bit of a fatigue feeling, i don't know why. But I didn't get that for this 2A3. It also sound more 3D and more real life. And somehow, the soundstage sounds higher too, not sure why.
It is also more revealing. It reveals some noise in one of the song that again I didn’t notice before. Also, the slight “squeak” before a note in violins, the singer’s saliva noise ... everything are revealed.
The Almarro is good, it got rave reviews. This Triode Lab 2A3 yet brings my system to the next level!!
Nice find on the 2A3. Killer amp. A buddy of mine has one and, when he heard the 6sn7 tubes in my Don Sachs pre, he decided to try the ones that came with it. Normally I wouldn't give you a nickle for chinese tubes but the new Dawning Series high end stuff from Shuguang are an exceptional tube. I have all kinds of NOS tubes but tried these and they are a lush, beautiful sounding tube. Just a suggestion if you want to do a little tube rolling. Just be sure to get the WE6SN7 PLUS. In his 2A3 they are great.
-
Nice find on the 2A3. Killer amp. A buddy of mine has one and, when he heard the 6sn7 tubes in my Don Sachs pre, he decided to try the ones that came with it. Normally I wouldn't give you a nickle for chinese tubes but the new Dawning Series high end stuff from Shuguang are an exceptional tube. I have all kinds of NOS tubes but tried these and they are a lush, beautiful sounding tube. Just a suggestion if you want to do a little tube rolling. Just be sure to get the WE6SN7 PLUS. In his 2A3 they are great.
Thanks for the info. I will put it on my list. I am tempted to try the Psvane WR2A3 as well, but they are $400, very expensive. I heard these are good too. Which one, 6SN7 or 2A3, will have biggest impact to the sound?
-
The Almarro is good, it got rave reviews. This Triode Lab 2A3 yet brings my system to the next level!!
Almarro uses great design and nice transformers, but for some reason, the designer uses these grey polyester coupling caps in all his amps, including 318B and A205a II.
Change those out with some nice copper foil caps, e.g Jupiter copper foil, and do a rematch :popcorn:
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=209036)
-
Almarro uses great design and nice transformers, but for some reason, the designer uses these grey polyester coupling caps in all his amps, including 318B and A205a II.
Change those out with some nice copper foil caps, e.g Jupiter copper foil, and do a rematch :popcorn:
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=209036)
In fact, I am going to do that. My Almarro need a service. The sound is leaning on the left, and I believe it is caused by the volume pot. So, I will take it to a technician and do the following:
1) replace the volume pot
2) by pass the source selector as it also have some problem
3) check all the caps make sure there are no leaks
4) replace the coupling caps.
I also read multiple post on upgrading to Jupiter caps, but they are expensive and more than what I want to spend on it. The Audio Note 0.44uF happened to be on sale, and for the 0.22uF, I bought the Arizona Blue Catcus. They will arrive on 22. Will update back after the rematch :icon_twisted:
-
Almarro uses great design and nice transformers, but for some reason, the designer uses these grey polyester coupling caps in all his amps, including 318B and A205a II.
Change those out with some nice copper foil caps, e.g Jupiter copper foil, and do a rematch :popcorn:
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=209036)
Ok, I finally got back the amp, it has more problems than I anticipated. Besides upgrading the 0.44uF cap to Audio Note, and the 0.22uF to Arizona Blue Catus, two of the blue caps leaks and got replaced. Then after that, one side has no high frequencies and the technician replaced 6 of the capacitors as well. I end up spend $600 all together for parts and labor! So, here is the rematch.
After the fix and upgrade if the caps, the Almarro is much more musical, no longer dominate by the mid range. Compared to the Triode Lab 2A3, the music has more weight, more mid and low frequency, even more bass. I don’t expect that because the X5 has a power subwoofer. I believe it is due to the extra 10w of power to the 12” mid range driver.
However, my impression to the Triode Lab still holds. It has more detail, more clarity and more transparent. I can hear more “stuff“ going on. So, for certain records, I enjoy it more on the TL. However, there are some songs that sounds a bit harsh or fatigue-ing to be play on the TL.
So, it is hard to say which one is better. They are both good. The Almarro is more relax, while the Triode Lab reveals every single bits of detail. My taste is more leaning towards the Triode Lab. The Almarro is overall good. But the Triode Lab gives me a smile when listening to the right records.