[Double Ugly]

The Timepiece goes up to 16 kHz at +/- 2 db, so probably only at most to 18 kHz at +/- 3 db.

I was concerned about that as well, and asked Bob about it when I first called about the speaker.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Bob, but as I recall the 16kHz is an old measurement taken from a pre-production model when Bob was still adjusting and tweaking.    I believe Bob's son stumbled upon the old specs while building the website and mistakenly used them on the webpage.  I'm told the current production model reaches 18kHz or beyond.

DU

[audiojerry]

Timepiece goes up to 16 kHz at +/- 2 db, so probably only at most to 18 kHz at +/- 3 db. The Sp 25 in comparison goes up to 25 kHz (+/- 3 db). Despite (most, if not all,) humans not being able to hear past 20 kHz, studies have shown that frequencies 20 kHz and up do effect the frequencies we do hear. Oftentimes these frequencies are associated with that audible airy quality. This can be important in properly reproducing the sustain, harmonics, and overtones of certain instruments.

If Bob does answer here, I would be curious to know what frequency range the treble settings effect. The Timepiece looks fairly flat in the highs, except a peak around 10 kHz, and up to where the highs taper off...based on the specs provided. Also, are these specs based on the flat setting?

Timepiece goes up to 16 kHz at +/- 2 db, so probably only at most to 18 kHz at +/- 3 db. The Sp 25 in comparison goes up to 25 kHz (+/- 3 db). Despite (most, if not all,) humans not being able to hear past 20 kHz, studies have shown that frequencies 20 kHz and up do effect the frequencies we do hear. Oftentimes these frequencies are associated with that audible airy quality. This can be important in properly reproducing the sustain, harmonics, and overtones of certain instruments.

If Bob does answer here, I would be curious to know what frequency range the treble settings effect. The Timepiece looks fairly flat in the highs, except a peak around 10 kHz, and up to where the highs taper off...based on the specs provided. Also, are these specs based on the flat setting? [/quote]
Very good points, Sa-dono. When checking my own hearing range with a test cd a couple of years ago, I can't say with certainty that I could hear anything above 16khz, unless I really cranked up the volume. Even then, it was like a very tiny ringing and more a general sense of discomfort rather than an overt sound. However, when I tested at this volume setting, my son, who was 19 at the time, came running downstairs from his bedroom ranting to turn that noise off! It was hurting his ears. But your point could explain why the Dynaudio sounded airier even though I could not detect any greater amount of detail.

[doug s.]

more data points for the treble discussion - my meret's are rated to 22khz, the proac ref-8 sigs to 30khz, the swan m1.2's to 25khz.  zu monitors (which seem to be a bit lacking in the "air" & detail dept - their only weak point, imo), are also rated to 25khz...

doug s.

[infiniti driver]

Redbook CD's have a glass ceiling at 22050hz and the wave shapes (even with noise shaping) above 14K on redbook are little to be desired.

Any loudspeaker with accurate time placement up to around 12K will display musicality galore and even though some speakers tout 50K response, no speaker made can do it outside of a 10 degree dispersion at best.

I used to feel that accurate presentation to 30K was a must. Even with the source matierial I have and use (flat beyond 30K) I still fell that nothing is lost with the SP tech speakers when it comes to reproducing musicality.

audiojerry would have certainly commented on a "lack" or a "need" if the sp's were lacking up there. I find the source makes the difference and actually, I miss nothing in music with the sp's.

Now that I voiced that...something happened today that was rather strange...

The right SP woofer quit working.

Damnit, how did I blow it? No smell, no lockup, no scraping...how?

How I say?

So I removed it, WOW, I could not believe the level of detail inside the cabinet...amazing to the max how they are construncted. Mindboggling come to thought..

So I connected a 9 volt battery (after I painted the wire to the positive termail red)  and the woofer was good!

So I then took a vom with music playing and measured signal not going to the woofer wires. I investigated and the cause is someone loostened the bass 5 way binding posts some so that the jumpers did not make proper connection. Viola, problem solved.

Speakers built this well are rare.

Just remember to keep the posts tight and no problem will happen.

[Sa-dono]

more data points for the treble discussion - my meret's are rated to 22khz, the proac ref-8 sigs to 30khz, the swan m1.2's to 25khz.  zu monitors (which seem to be a bit lacking in the "air" & detail dept - their only weak point, imo), are also rated to 25khz...

doug s.

I do think there is certainly more to it than just extension. A pair of Swans Diva's I own has plenty of air, despite only going up to 20 kHz, although it seems partly artificial. Also, I agree about the Zu's. The Druid's did not seem to be able to do so either. Oddly enough, their Rune's did appear to properly recreate the air and sustain. I know on the Druid's this was done intentonally. This tells me that part of it is still definitely in the design and implementation.

[Sa-dono]

Redbook CD's have a glass ceiling at 22050hz and the wave shapes (even with noise shaping) above 14K on redbook are little to be desired.

This is dependent on the DAC, IMO.

Any loudspeaker with accurate time placement up to around 12K will display musicality galore and even though some speakers tout 50K response, no speaker made can do it outside of a 10 degree dispertion at best.

Musicality tends to be a very subjective term. I am not stating that a speaker that does not extend very high in the upper frequencies will sound bad. There are important frequencies to reproduce for some instruments in those ranges, IMO (or at the least, they effect those frequencies that are important).

I already knew about the Timepiece tapering off in the highs, but am still interested in them. I was just curious whether others would audibly hear the difference, and it appears Jerry did. My only concern now is in what Jerry heard of the differences between nearfield, and sitting further away. In regards to dispersion, there is nothing saying you can not listen on-axis, or setup an external super tweeter as such.

I used to feel that accurate presentation to 30K was a must. Even with the source matierial I have and use (flat beyond 30K) I still fell that nothing is lost with the SP tech speakers when it comes to reproducing musicality.

audiojerry would have certainly commented on a "lack" or a "need" if the sp's were deficeint up there. I find the source makes the difference and actually, I miss nothing in music with the sp's.

I'm glad you love your speakers. At the end of the day, in the audio world, that's all that is important.

[doug s.]

I do think there is certainly more to it than just extension. A pair of Swans Diva's I own has plenty of air, despite only going up to 20 kHz, although it seems partly artificial. Also, I agree about the Zu's. The Druid's did not seem to be able to do so either. Oddly enough, their Rune's did appear to properly recreate the air and sustain. I know on the Druid's this was done intentonally. This tells me that part of it is still definitely in the design and implementation.

re: the druids, it is interesting to find that i'm not hearing things!   it's really too bad, imo - they really have fantastic dynamics & imaging.  if it weren't for this lack of air & detail, i mite be a buyer.  also, i agree there's more to this than specs, as the druids are rated to 25khz...

here's a supertweeter i've alwasy wondered about, & even more so, since i've heard the druids:



http://www.elac.com/en/index.html
http://www.elac.com/en/products/4pi/4pitech.html

doug s.

[audiojerry]

re: the druids, it is interesting to find that i'm not hearing things!  it's really too bad, imo - they really have fantastic dynamics & imaging. if it weren't for this lack of air & detail,

I auditioned one of the first pair of Druids, and I felt the same about dynamics and imaging...and their ability to play at very high spl. But I don't think lack of air was entirely the problem - they were somewhat hard on the ears and caused listening fatigue quickly.

Maybe we should be posting this stuff in the SP discussion in the 2 channel forum instead of Critic's Circle, it might draw more interest.

[ton1313]

Jerry,

I also had the original druids, & can agree with the "hard on the ears" comment. After some long break-in, they did soften up. I have since upgraded to the Druid 2 & they are definitely no longer hard on the ears. As far as lack of air & detail, IMHO I don't find that is the case at all. I think that the Druid 2 is one of the most detailed speakers I have listened to. That being said, I have not listened to the monitor version, so I can't comment on it. I do have the Druid 2 center channel (similar to the monitor), & that speaker is excellent for dynamics & detail in even the most demanding movies.

Later

[doug s.]

re: the druids, it is interesting to find that i'm not hearing things!  it's really too bad, imo - they really have fantastic dynamics & imaging. if it weren't for this lack of air & detail,

I auditioned one of the first pair of Druids, and I felt the same about dynamics and imaging...and their ability to play at very high spl. But I don't think lack of air was entirely the problem - they were somewhat hard on the ears and caused listening fatigue quickly....

running the druids full-range, i could understand this - even the proac 1sc's & the proac tablette ref-8-sigs sounded better: less fatiguing, fuller, & warmer when run full-range, driven by a manley stingray, set to 25wpc triode.  and, this was in my big listening room...  adding subs changed the equation completely...  no fatigue whatsoever, when the subs are there to fill in the bottom...  but, also less detail & treble air...  

the gr-research diluceo's yust arrived & got hooked up last nite, so i will have another data point soon!     i'd really like to hear the sp-tech's, but i dunno how the budget would be able to handle paying in adwance...  and, i gotta hear the rm40's redbone has, down the street from me.  getting closer to a final pair of speakers, mebbe?

doug s., so many speakers, so little time...  

[Ravi]

Doug, keeps us uptodate on the Diluceo's.  I hope you like them as much as I did the last I heard them.

[audiojerry]

doug s., so many speakers, so little time...

Fun Fun Fun!  
Looking forward to your views on the 40's. and the Diluceo's.  Please evaluate the off-axis and sweetspots.  I don't think your Manley's would like the Timepieces.

[doug s.]

initial diluceo impression (new thread needed?) - as i told danny:

========================
"well, i got 'em turned on about 9:30pm last nite, & they haven't been turned off yet - i left nusrat fateh ali khan/michael brooks' "night song"  playin' all last nite, breakin' 'em in...  i dint get to bed 'til ~2am, & up at 5:15 - ouchie!  ;~) i guess by this time tomorrow, i can start to listen, eh?   :>)  my toobs are certainly gettin' a workout, but the mesa baron is holding perfect bias." :>)

"double-checking the x-over setting w/pink noise & spectrum analyzer will happen tomorrow sometime, but initial impressions are favorable."
==========================

off-axis is always someting i listen for - both wertically, & horizontally.  i, too, like to be able to sit directly in front of one speaker, or even to the outside of both speakers, & still get a decent soundstage.  & i also like to stand up sometimes, when listening.  hell, sometimes, i even like to get my ol' middle-aged ass up & dance around & make a fool of myself!   this off-axis stuff is my main reservation about the vmps - which is why redbone's offer to listen to his, is really appreciated.  and, based upon pics from his back porch, it won't take me more than 5 minutes to get there!  now if sp-tech would only offer to send a pair of speakers around for audition, instead of offering a money-back guarantee - i feel kinda bad about taken them up on that offer, w/o being pretty committed.  and, right now, there's still a few wariables...

re: the manley stingray, t'ain't mine - a relative is moving in our extra upstairs room & has a bit of gear.  he runs his proac 1sc's off the manley, & when he heard the zu's in my room, he ran upstairs, to get the manley & the 1sc's, to do a li'l a-b...  i wanted to also hear my proac ref-8-sigs run full-range, so it actually was a li'l a-b-c...    i'm still waitin' for him to hook up his proac 2.5's in my main rig - i tink he's nervous about how good they mite sound, when crossed over to subs - he's kind of a purist about not wanting to subwoof his beloved 2.5's.  

doug s.

[Sa-dono]

I also had the original druids, & can agree with the "hard on the ears" comment. After some long break-in, they did soften up. I have since upgraded to the Druid 2 & they are definitely no longer hard on the ears. As far as lack of air & detail, IMHO I don't find that is the case at all. I think that the Druid 2 is one of the most detailed speakers I have listened to. That being said, I have not listened to the monitor version, so I can't comment on it. I do have the Druid 2 center channel (similar to the monitor), & that speaker is excellent for dynamics & detail in even the most demanding movies.

Well, I actually heard the Druid 2's as well (and they were what I was referring to, as according to the Zu guys, what we heard of the monitors was due to them not being in broken in (sounding extremely compressed)..which makes me wonder why they don't break their gear in advance, considering the long break-in process to sound decent and right...unless there was something wrong with the monitors..something that still hasn't been confirmed to me yet). I was not saying they lacked detail. They did lack air and sustain though. This was confirmed on the spot as a design decision, according to Sean (although I won't go into the exact reasonings), and that would likely be inherent on the monitors as well.

All that really matters though is you have some speakers you love, so continue to enjoy. They are still certainly some great speakers I wasn't able to test exactly how loud they could go though, because I guess someone called security on us (/me)

[Mad DOg]

doug s.,

you yust mite tink about about startin' another thread for your impressions of the zu monitors and gr diluceos...otherwise ur valuable insight might get lost in this totally unrelated thread...

[ton1313]

Sa-dono, did you listen to the floor standers too, or just the monitors? This is where there could be some differences between the two speakers. Also which speaker cables were you using? & which connection the spades or the 8 pole plug. The druids are very sensitive, & they easily demonstrate the differences in speaker cables & the connecton. I am curently using the Ibis & the 8 pole connection. I did do an A/B with 2 sets of WAX with the different connections. The spades sounded compressed compaired to the 8 pole connection.


Later

[Jason1]

I dont think cables are going to help the Druid.



 

[Sa-dono]

Sa-dono, did you listen to the floor standers too, or just the monitors? This is where there could be some differences between the two speakers. Also which speaker cables were you using? & which connection the spades or the 8 pole plug. The druids are very sensitive, & they easily demonstrate the differences in speaker cables & the connecton. I am curently using the Ibis & the 8 pole connection. I did do an A/B with 2 sets of WAX with the different connections. The spades sounded compressed compaired to the 8 pole connection.

Later

I have heard the floor standers and monitors, but am referring to the floor standers (given that the monitors either needed further break-in, or were broken). Zu speaker cables were used, with the B3 connection. I am not sure which model of SC's they were...but I believe Ibis.

The Zu cables were not included with the monitors....although this should not be the difference we heard with the monitors, as the Runes do not have the B3 connectors, and did not suffer from compression problems.