[MtBiker]

I wrote nearly two pages of notes detailing differences between this speaker and that on this recording and that one.  In the end, I went back and listened to some of the same songs over again and after making amendments to my notes, I feel like the same comments apply almost everywhere.  So notes aside, here is a late night review off the top of my head.

First, however, some rudimentary background information.  I had the Criterions on loan from Danny Ritchie of GR Research and  the SSV's from Rick Craig of Selah Audio for several days.  Both are 2way monitors, the former utilizing the G2 ribbon  tweeter and a special incarnation of the Eton 5-880/25 HEX.  The cabinet, very heavy and inert, is custom made for this speaker.  The claimed f3 is 55Hz.  The latter utilizes the Scanspeak 9500, electrically, a tank of a 1" soft dome, paired with the new Vifa XT18WH wood pulp cone midbass.  It uses a Parts Express cabinet with an exceptional finish for a premade cabinet.  The claimed f3 is 53Hz.  My reference speakers (hardly a reference, but I have lived with these well balanced speakers for years) have a Vifa D25AG 1" aluminum tweeter and a Vifa P17WJ.

Both the Criterions and SSV's came well packaged, the former in a battle weary crate.  Did I mention I love overkill?

My listening room is in the basement.  It has a carpeted concrete floor, is 13'x19', but the right wall opens into both a stairway and a hallway.  This room, like every other room in my house, has a bad echo.  Room treatments have dramatically  reduced the problem but there is still some work left to do.  The associated electronics include the Rega Planet 2000, the  Bryston BP25, and Odyssey Stratos.

One of my Criterions had a blown tweeter, and so unable to run them in stereo, we were not able to evaluate their imaging capabilities.  To make things fair, all comparisons were made with the preamp in mono and with single drivers.

The Scanspeak 9500 is definitely crisper and more detailed than the Vifa D25AG.  The D25's redeeming quality is that it is not very fatiguing for a metal dome (and it's cheap and rugged).

The G2 ribbon eats the Scanspeak for lunch.  It is crisper yet than the Scanspeak, and it has a faster settling time.  On occasion it make cymbals sound live, and not simply a great recording.  Fatigue?  Not a trace.  The only drawback is there is a tremendous attenuation of the highs when moving vertically off axis with the ribbon.

The Magnepan is just as fast as the ribbon, and it is faster than the XT18WH and 5-880/25, but the frequency response of the entire speaker seems extremely ragged to my ears.  In my mind, Maggies are not inappropriate for rock so much because of their lack of air moving capabilities, but because of the fact that if you play something that covers the entire audible spectrum at once, they immediately sound unnatural due to their ragged response.

The simpler the music, the more difficult it is to tell the difference between the SSV and Criterion--or any 2 speakers or components for that matter.  Unaccompanied female vocals are great for imaging tests and getting a sense of "being there" but are absolutely worthless as an reviewer's tool otherwise.  When playing any complex piece of music, whether it has many different instruments as in an orchestra, or a few guitars, drums, and keyboards, when asking a speaker to cover the entire musical spectrum at once, you get a sense of its true characteristics.

The longterm listenability of the Criterion is slightly greater in my mind than the SSV.  The SSV will simply fatigue you  after a while.  However, the Criterion will run out of steam before the SSV.  This, incidentally is right at (or above) the loudest level I would ever listen without a house full of people and some liquid listening aids.  Both speakers have very comparable bass extension.

The Criterion has its problems but does nothing wrong.  The SSV, from a design standpoint, seems to do more things right overall, but it has an upper-midrange/lower-treble affliction that I think is almost honky.  Others have described it as lispy or sizzly I think such terms denote different frequency bands, but we all agreed that something odd was going on.  It is as if there is a peak or hump somewhere near the crossover region.  This characteristic grows more prominent the more musically complex the piece.  Not only does the region need excitation, it needs a frame of reference.  A horn blaring in  that region won't highlight the problem--you won't even notice it, but on a piece of rock and roll, it will appear as an  annoying and fatiguing congestion.

In conclusion, I would hazard to guess that the Criterion lacks some midbass but makes up for it with a little boominess down  low.  I hate the fact that speakers at Best Buy employ this technique, but the degree in this case seems VERY slight and  probably commendable as Danny has created a tiny 2way with a 5" midbass that I can stand to listen to on its own.  The SSV  has that midrange congestion that everyone who heard them remarked on unprompted.  If the source can be identified and the  problem remedied, I think the speakers are otherwise well balanced and they could become a real good value in their price  class.

Now it is time for me to put my slightly bright, not quite so detailed speakers back on their stands and aaaaaah, turn on my sub.

[audiojerry]

You make some good points, Mtbiker, and I also had a very favorable audition of the Criterion. It's too bad you could not audition in stereo. It makes a huge difference. Danny really deserves credit for making his designs available for free auditions.

But I have to disagree with you about the following comments:

The simpler the music, the more difficult it is to tell the difference between the SSV and Criterion--or any 2 speakers or components for that matter. Unaccompanied female vocals are great for imaging tests and getting a sense of "being there" but are absolutely worthless as an reviewer's tool otherwise. When playing any complex piece of music, whether it has many different instruments as in an orchestra, or a few guitars, drums, and keyboards, when asking a speaker to cover the entire musical spectrum at once, you get a sense of its true characteristics.

Listening to solo voice or instrument can be a very revealing test of speaker quality, and easily separates the great speaker from the ordinary. Solo guitar, piano, and violin, for example, produce extremely complex timbral (tonal) sounds, and it tests a speaker's ability to recreate all this complexity in a natural and coherent way, especially when the musical passage covers a wide frequency spectrum.

Speakers definitely need to be tested with complex orchestra works and challenging dynamics, but for me, final judgement of a speaker cannot be done until it's been evaluated with solo instrument and voice.

[Al Garay]

Care to add comments about Jim Salk's Seas W18/G2 that you heard on Sunday's get together? How about Dennis' MBOW1?

Al

[MtBiker]

I think audiojerry and I agree.  I just meant my comment as an addition to his.  I listened to plenty of type of music, including a lot of flamenco, which was mostly acoustic guitar, sometime bongos, violin, or bass.  Both speakers are very close as far as recreating the timbre of a single voice or instrument.  The problem is that they are so very close.  To get an idea of their actual differences, a more musically complex piece or passage is required--and was required in this case.  

There have been too many times that I've gone to a DIY gathering, or speaker shopping with a friend, and after listening to different speakers for hours, I want to pummel someone when the inevitable "I dunno, they all sound the same to me" comes out.  Maybe if you listened to music you actually listen to at home, you would see a greater contrast!  Yes, Diana Krall sounds great on high quality speakers but she sounds the same on most high quality speakers, and the person who put her in is often the one bemoaning this.  I'm not bitching at you audiojerry, you guys know who you are

Now Dennis' 2nd order MBOW1 is something special in my mind.  The midbass is not the last word in definition but it is absolutely exceptional for the price and the fact that it can be played alongside a Seas Excel at all speaks volumes.  What I like so much about it is it's presentation.  There is something very natural about it.  Yet I still prefer the Salk Veracity HT1 that he brought with him.  It is a perfectly balanced speaker, more accurate than everything else I evaluated in my living room (infallible I would say), and if Dennis and Jim could design a fullrange version of it with the presentation of the MBOW1, we could conceivably have the last word in speaker design.

[Al Garay]

Dennis uses a sealed subwoofer to suplement the bass for the MBOW1.

Thanks for the update.

Al

[Rocket]

hi mtbiker,

is there any chance the ribbon could be replaced and do the review again?  i'm sure if you did this the speakers would dramatically improve for you.

i have a custom pair of speakers built by war audio here in perth.  the speaker uses raven 1 ribbon tweeters, every time i tear the ribbon i can immediately hear the difference in sound quality.

regards

rocket