[-Richard-]

Deb has been a marvelous sport with my audio addiction... but we have to finally redo our living
room and that means pulling everything out for a few weeks... so she asked me to streamline
my audio holdings. OH MY!!!! I can't say no because she has been so good about it all.

So to make some space in our living room, I find I must sell my beloved Bipoles.

They are the most gorgeous things you ever saw. Blond wood from Italy and the edges meet
on all sides giving a perfect seamless look to them. I only used low watt amps to drive them
so they were never pushed.

These are fantastic speakers... amazingly modest size but the bass they produce will
knock you out!!!!! And then there is that dipole/bipole saturation to the sound that rivals
the best OB implementation. When Louis's hemp drivers are ready, you will be ready for them!!!

PM me or call if you are interested. The price is right!

805.640.0532

Warmest Regards ~ Richard

[ZLS]

   I would urge people to buy these speakers.  Everything Richard says about the Bipole experience is true in spades!  The amount of bass these 4 1/2 inch drivers put out is astounding!  There ability to handle complex music completely destroys the myth that single driver speakers are only good for small scale music.  I have these same Bipole speakers with the new HempTone drivers.  Add to all of this, knowing Louis's craftsmanship, these speakers will be as beautiful to look at as to listen to.
    One final selling point. These speakers operate in either 4 Ohms or 16 Ohms.  If you use a SS Amplifier use the 4 Ohm setting to maximize the efficiency of the Amp.  If you use a Tube Amplifier use the 16 Ohm setting to do likewise.

[sts9fan]

how far from that back wall do these need to be?

[bprice2]

how far from that back wall do these need to be?

Mine are 2' 8" from the back wall and everything is working just fine.  Of course, more would probably be better.

Here is a post from Mr. Vinnie Rossi on the Omega Circle:

Hi Dave,

It was nice to see you again and I agree with you on the Bipoles, they kick serious butt!

I found the Super 3 Bipoles to be a very impressive speaker!  They are super fast, very full-sounding (down to about 50Hz), and dish out a very wide and deep soundstage.  The Clari-T/Lotus does a fantastic job driving them (they are a 4-ohm nonimal load, so the Clari-T dishes out a clean 11 watts into 4-ohms) and since there are two drivers, the efficiency is increased to 96dB.

The Super 3s have more pinpoint imaging (probably some of the best imaging of any speaker I've heard), but the Super 3 Bipole has a more diffuse, 3D sound (similar to the B200 OB, but are much easier to place in the room than the OBs, and with much better bass reponse) with a very wide and deep soundstage.  We actually tried them as close as 1 foot from the rear wall and they still sounded good, but sounded better at about 3 to 5 feet from the wall.  This is very room dependent and one needs to experiment for the best results.  IMO, the music that the Bipoles created was very lifelike, very fleshed out, and very balanced.  And the Super 3 Bipoles seemed just as lightning fast and responsive as the A8s, and are a little warmer up top.   
 
As Louis mentioned, there is one thing about the Super 3 Bipoles that I believe no other speaker can compete with...versatility!  You have the option to configure them as a Bipole in a 4-ohm or 16-ohm fashion (parallel vs series), which is great if you have an amp that does not like a 4-ohm load.  You can also add an inductor to the rear firing driver and this will transform them into a 1.5 way speaker, where the rear driver would just be used for bass response with a gentle 1st order roll-off.  You can also just run the front driver (monopole, which essentially gives you a Super 3), or even run the front and rear drivers out of phase (dipole, which is like an OB speaker).  You can also power the front and rear drivers from different amps if you wanted!  These are seriously veratile speakers, which is another thing that makes them very appealing and I'm sure they can be configured to work well with many different rooms and amplifiers. 

Louis, you have something really special here... a very unique speaker that really needs more attention.  It is too good to be left as an "unknown Omega model."  When I move into my new house at the end of January, I'll going to have to get myself a pair! 

Thanks for having Dave and me over yesterday, and thanks for the pizza and drink 

The entire thread can be found here:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=22850.0

Hope this helps.

[Wind Chaser]

Deb has been a marvelous sport with my audio addiction...

You truly lucked out.  Women like that are very rare.  It would sure be nice if such women were sold at audio dealers.

[eric the red]

You truly lucked out.  Women like that are very rare.  It would sure be nice if such women were sold at audio dealers.

With of course a 30 day in-home trial period

[-Richard-]

My Bipoles have sold. One does form an attachment to speakers that is perhaps more
intimate than feelings one has for an amplifier. So I am truly sorry to see them go.

I am also really sorry I never had the chance to hear Louis's new 4.5 Hemp drivers in these
incredibly beautiful Bipole cabinets.

Our friend and fellow AC audio enthusiast ZLS certainly knows what he is talking about.
Lucky ZLS, has one of the best speakers in the world. Deceptively small looking, these
Bipoles generate real lower heft... the bass is prodigious!!!

I also kept mine about 3 feet from the back wall, like ZLS. Deborah actually loved the look of
these speakers, and Deb is a highly regarded professional designer.

Thanks to everyone who called. It was nice speaking to you all.

Warmest Regards ~ Richard

[Dmason]

Nice snag somebody.... I really, really look forward to the time when I get to hear this speaker with the bipole presentation of the HempTone cones in them; I have a feeling they are to become music-lover's legend. All the right buttons get pushed with this one, even impedance, allowing for more hotrod sonic fun with our beloved T amps. What a great thing. 2007, and its hemp, all over again.

[rajacat]

Yesterday I ordered 2 pairs of Hemps for my Bipoles V.1. I suspect that I will soon be wallowing around in a state of ecstasy like ZLS. The break-in period will be a little more difficult than with normal speakers because you can't place them face to face and out of phase because the  drivers are on both sides of the box. I did like the speakers with the Fostex's but I feel that the Hemps will take them to a new level and I'm lucky enough to have a room that will allow them to breath.

Raj

[jrebman]

Raj,

Which of your amps are you using with these?  I'd be really interested to hear what you think about the hemps in 16-ohm configuration driven by your Scott.  I could never use the bipoles in this house as I couldn't get them far enough from the wall, but I am looking forward to the 16-ohm high-q 8-inch driver replacement for the B-200s so I can put them in my Revolutions and drive them with my Scott 222-C.

How do you like your sub and how do they get along with the dipoles?  I have the ULW-10 but haven't been able to try it yet.

Thanks,

Jim

Yesterday I ordered 2 pairs of Hemps for my Bipoles V.1. I suspect that I will soon be wallowing around in a state of ecstasy like ZLS. The break-in period will be a little more difficult than with normal speakers because you can't place them face to face and out of phase because the  drivers are on both sides of the box. I did like the speakers with the Fostex's but I feel that the Hemps will take them to a new level and I'm lucky enough to have a room that will allow them to breath.

Raj

[rajacat]

Raj,

Which of your amps are you using with these?  I'd be really interested to hear what you think about the hemps in 16-ohm configuration driven by your Scott.  I could never use the bipoles in this house as I couldn't get them far enough from the wall, but I am looking forward to the 16-ohm high-q 8-inch driver replacement for the B-200s so I can put them in my Revolutions and drive them with my Scott 222-C.

How do you like your sub and how do they get along with the dipoles?  I have the ULW-10 but haven't been able to try it yet.

Thanks,

Jim

Yesterday I ordered 2 pairs of Hemps for my Bipoles V.1. I suspect that I will soon be wallowing around in a state of ecstasy like ZLS. The break-in period will be a little more difficult than with normal speakers because you can't place them face to face and out of phase because the  drivers are on both sides of the box. I did like the speakers with the Fostex's but I feel that the Hemps will take them to a new level and I'm lucky enough to have a room that will allow them to breath.

Raj

Jim,

I've been rotating my amps and so far I favor the Scott LK-48 over the Mapletree pre/gainclone combo. This might not be a fair comparison since the gainclone used with the Mapletree is an economy version which needs some tweaks to operate at its' full potential. The Scott seems to have greater resolution and a more holographic sound stage. I have been using the 4 ohm tap mostly which works fine. I asked the person who refurbished my Scott about using the 16 ohm tap and he said that it is used in the neg. feedback loop which makes it a questionable tap for my speaker however I might have this wrong and there are some technical issues that I don't fully understand. One of these days I should devote some time to study the tech. side of this hobby.

The sub works OK with the Bipoles but I need to optimize it also through room treatments, placement and purchase a sound level meter to make use of the single band equalizer.

Raj

[-Richard-]

I have come to regard amplifiers... resolution issues aside for the moment... as casting
a temperature on the speakers they are driving.

It has become the ethos currently to strive for neutrality. I have no interest in neutrality
when it comes to music reproduction. I like warm. Once a listener is aware of his/her
response to temperature gradations in reproduced music, the choices of amplifier takes
on a different set of criteria.

Yes of course, we all want high resolution. But that is subject to a great deal of misunderstanding.
Many serious music lovers are prone to think of upper frequency information as the area where
resolution plays. For me it is the all-over sense that each instrument has space around it so
it can shine as it folds out of and back into the music's fabric.

The voice is all-important for me. And here is where warm impacts the most. A warm voice
enters one's emotional sound-board with a greater color palette than when it is cast in
neutral.

It is often suggested that warm sound is a lower species of evolution on the audio tree of life.

Single driver speakers are the perfect portal to the emotional side of music. And warmth is
the human response reintroduced into music's inner life.

Warm Regards ~ Richard

[Wind Chaser]

Richard,

Given you have some very nice amps, both SS and tubes, two different OB speakers, which combo seems to be your preference?

[miklorsmith]

Many serious music lovers are prone to think of upper frequency information as the area where
resolution plays. For me it is the all-over sense that each instrument has space around it so
it can shine as it folds out of and back into the music's fabric.

Nice!  I totally agree.  The type of "detail" that is centered around the tweeter is usually false, IMO, the product of a hopped-up frequency balance and etched digital.  True resolution involves the entire spectrum, and can be integrated and relaxing.

[rajacat]

I like it warm but not fuzzy.

Raj

[-Richard-]

Hi Wind Chaser ~

I am now in a state of transition. About to embark in several different directions at once.

DMason has used his empirically based, highly tuned, experiential, and penitrating logic
to convince me that I need EQ if I want to be able to control various drivers in the Open
Baffle paradigm. So I have been doing a great deal of research into EQ. DMason points at
things and I look closely into them.

For anyone interested in EQ there are 2 versions of the Rane devices that are worth looking
at... they are both revolutionary in the sense that their accuracy has never been achieved
before by any manufacturer... opening a new era of control... budget breakers in one sense...
severely underpriced in another... for anyone interested:

For a Graphic Equalizer look into the Rane DEQ 60 or 60L... for a Parametric Equalizer
look into the PEQ 55: Links follow:

http://www.rane.com/peq55.html      and      http://www.rane.com/deq60l.html

Right now I am listening to my OB's with the Step Correction Filter that Vinnie Rossi
was kind to give me the values for... I believe he received them from the German AC member
who has been experimenting with circuits with his B200's on DMason's Dark Star thread.

Using my old Single Ended Pentode, with their crude but effective tone controls, my OB's
are sounding beyond belief. I describe the tone controls as crude because they do not
have that accurate steep slop that the Rane EQ's, for example, use as an extra added attraction
in both of the models I am suggesting above. The steep slop preserves the mid-range.

DMason is right again... I can achieve much more effective control over the sound as it
interacts in my room by EQ'ing the signal before it even flows into the amplifier.

In the world of OB's with their severe cancellation issues of some frequencies... the
lowest frequencies below 200Hz are perhaps the most affected... being able to augment
the frequency with EQ before it reaches the amp let alone the drivers would go along way to
helping to compensate for that kind of cancellation issue. Tone controls for the 21st century.

I am convinced that any speaker... even the Bipoles... could benefit from a highly
sophisticated EQ device.

So to answer your question, Wind Chaser, I am currently using my SEP with OB's to achieve
the sound I find most satisfying now... simply because I do not have one of the above Rane's
yet. When I get the Rane and can EQ the OB's I can go back to the Signature 30 and Roger's
RM 245.1/45 SET amp. Let me explain that I am not using a subwoofer... with the tone controls
I do not need one... the bass is fantastic... very satisfying and convincing. The treble tone control
is probably not as affective as the Rane EQ would be. But passable.

Let me also say that DMason is going through one of the most creative periods of his audio life.
His experimentation into the possibilities with OB's has accelerated to a phenomenal
degree. As usual I stand on the sidelines in awe... like a rigorous archaeologist peering into
the present... as if it was a lost civilization... and finding gems here that others are unable
to see... DMason is finding new pathways to solving OB's problems. Fascinating stuff.

Warm Regards ~ Richard

[rajacat]

Jim...This morning I hooked up my Bipoles to the Scott 16 0hm tap and they sounded fine. I'm not sure why my tech guy didn't feel that the 16 ohm connection wouldn't be right but as far as I'm concerned they sound great.

Raj

[jrebman]

Raj,

Great to hear, and thanks for trying it out.  Scott F. says his 299 also sounds great with the 16 ohm tap.

I'll be looking forward to trying it for myself.

Thanks,

Jim

Jim...This morning I hooked up my Bipoles to the Scott 16 0hm tap and they sounded fine. I'm not sure why my tech guy didn't feel that the 16 ohm connection wouldn't be right but as far as I'm concerned they sound great.

Raj

[smargo]

I am convinced that any speaker... even the Bipoles... could benefit from a highly
sophisticated EQ device.

So Richard:

I shouldn't sell my beloved bose 901's then - the equalizer that comes with them makes them sound great but with a better eq they should sound really phenomenal - yes?


regards,
smargo

[-Richard-]

Hi Smargo ~

It was a sad day when the audio design community decided to relinquish their responsibility
to work out a good application of tone controls on the receivers, preamps and integrated
amplifiers they designed.

I spoke to several designers at that time... perhaps beginning in earnest 13 years ago...
several of them said that since users wanted the furthest frequency extension at all times
why bother with tone controls? My response was that there are at least 2 variables that
could use tone controls... or EQ... which is what they really do... one is to compensate for
speaker room integration... which is what I am using the tone controls on my SEP amp for...
and anomalies in recordings... recordings that are overly bright... or that lack bass.

There are several schemes for applying tone controls. Quad for examples uses a sea-saw effect
on their tube integrated amps. As you depress either the bass, or treble, the other it reduced
somewhat. Apparently it works rather well. The idea here is to preserve that all important
mid-range. Rane has employed steep slopes on the inside of their optional tone controls on both
of their EQ devices. That also preserves the mid-range.

Audio engineers/designers can certainly solve whatever nasty problems might be associated
with the application of tone controls by using clever science and design solutions. Some older
amplifier designs for example simply by-passed the tone control circuits as long as the dial
was set to zero.

One complaint from the audio designers was that the additional tone control circuits
added complexity to what should potentially be a simple and elegant path; the shorter
the better. In theory that is a nice idea and may even contribute to a more refined sound.
In that sense tone controls may represent a compromise of sorts. The solution is to offer
tone controls as an option. My hunch is that many audio enthusiasts would jump at the chance
to have the option for tone controls if they were offered it.

There are several hi-end... read expensive... digital amplifier manufacturers that offer "room
correction" devices or build that kind of control into their amplifiers. In these schemes the user
can tailor the response curve of the speakers in the room to flatten rises or troughs and so
eliminate them. Essentially that is the potential that the Rane EQ or any good EQ's are designed
to accomplish. But there are opamps in these EQ's and not everyone wants to learn to operate
them properly which takes a bit of time and effort. There is also the added expense and
one more device to have to worry about.

The option of tone controls is an easy fix. In my Single Ended Pentode amp is makes the difference
between needing subwoofer's or not... a serious consideration.

So to answer your question smargo, which I believe you asked rhetorically, I would not part
with any amplifier that sounded good, let alone an amp that gave me the option to use
their built-in equalizer or tone controls. How much better a dedicated equalizer would allow
your amp to sound is uncertain. Probably it would not be all that noticeable. The law of
diminishing returns is always operating.

It makes sense to hang onto gear that sounds good but that appears to go out of fashion.
Fashion is, after-all, transitory.

Warmest Regards ~ Richard