[Sa-dono]

It baffles me how room, equipment, or personal tastes can vary that much. I can tell you that the Diluceo is flat out, a great little speaker, using the same components as the Criterion, just one more woofer. I can't believe they would sound that different.

If I'm not mistaken, Danny has mentioned how the highs are improved in the Diluceo's, hence why he has pondered changing the crossover in the Criterion.

[Jon L]

hi mad dog,

i was just wondering what components were used to play the criterions with.

i don't have a pair of speaker which use the esg tweeter but have a pair which utilise the raven 1 ribbon tweeter.

i have found that the tweeter is very unforgiving if not matched with high quality components.  i have listened to many dome tweeters and they just don't have the same level of details as the raven 1.

best wishes

rocket

I didn't think the GR used "Esg" ribbons.  Anyone can confirm?  GR website calls it "CSS ARG2 ribbon," which does kind of look like the Esg2 ribbon tweeter I used to use.  E-speakers now changed their name to "Aurum Catus G2" ribbons.  I had the rectangular Esg2, so can't be sure the round version is the same as "CSS ARG2."  

As far as the debate above, I really don't think either party is right or wrong.  I did hear Mad Dog's out-of-spec Criterions, and while they sounded very different from Ref1, I still wouldn't call either right or wrong.  They're different, and I can imagine someone preferring one or the other.  Do you like Angelina Jolie or Charlize Theron?

I'm sure my impressions of Criterion were a bit more favorable than others b/c I've been living with Esg3 ribbons for awhile, Esg2 before that.  When I switched from Focal titanium tweeter, I also thought the ribbons were a bit too soft, and not as obviously detailed.  Having lived with'em a while and having tweaked things to cater to them, I would say the ribbons don't skimp on detail; they just sometimes don't sound as striking.  All the nuances, details ARE there, but they're blended in with the rest and don't call attention to themselves.  I've grown to respect it a lot, but I still get flashbacks to titanium domes and can see a lot of people preferring other conventional tweeters for their ringing clarity.  The real truth is probably somewhere in between, but I have yet to hear tweeters that do that, with possible exception of AKG K1000 "earspeakers" that I love...  
 
Just my 2 cents.

[Sa-dono]

As far as the debate above, I really don't think either party is right or wrong. I did hear Mad Dog's out-of-spec Criterions, and while they sounded very different from Ref1, I still wouldn't call either right or wrong. They're different, and I can imagine someone preferring one or the other.

Yes..everyone will have different preferences. That's what makes this hobby fun...as everyone can reach their perfect sound through different routes and techniques.

 Do you like Angelina Jolie or Charlize Theron?

I wouldn't kick either out of my bed I still have a preference of course

Having lived with'em a while and having tweaked things to cater to them, I would say the ribbons don't skimp on detail; they just sometimes don't sound as striking. All the nuances, details ARE there, but they're blended in with the rest and don't call attention to themselves.

I would have to spend a little more time with them. I guess technically you could say some detail is missing compared to the speakers that extend above 20 kHz though. Of course then arguments about whether it is audible or not (although there is scientific research on this subject) would come up...so we won't go there.

[Rick Craig]

I didn't think the GR used "Esg" ribbons.  Anyone can confirm?  GR website calls it "CSS ARG2 ribbon," which does kind of look like the Esg2 ribbon tweeter I used to use.  E-speakers now changed their name to "Aurum Catus G2" ribbons.  I had the rectangular Esg2, so can't be sure the round version is the same as "CSS ARG2."  

As far as the debate above, I really don't think either party is right or wrong.  I did hear Mad Dog's out-of-spec Criterions, and while they sounded very different from Ref1, I sti ...

It's the same ribbon. I've used both the ribbon and the Vifa XT tweeter. The ribbon is far superior when implemented with the right crossover.

[Jon L]

It's the same ribbon. I've used both the ribbon and the Vifa XT tweeter. The ribbon is far superior when implemented with the right crossover.

Thanks for the info.  Yes, then I am very familiar with Esg2 ribbons.  It's quite nice, of course, but the crossover point has to be fairly high with steep slopes, otherwise the lower end response can sound distorted.

I eventually swapped them for the Bigger Esg3 ribbons and happier with them.  They can take more power in the lower X-over region as well as moving more treble energy more effortlessly.  

Jee Whiz, Danny is using some expensive tweeters in his Criterion!

[John Casler]

It baffles me how room, equipment, or personal tastes can vary that much. I can tell you that the Diluceo is flat out, a great little speaker, using the same components as the Criterion, just one more woofer. I can't believe they would sound that different.

No comment about the differences between the Diluceo and the Crit, but I do know that "all" the speakers in a design have a "contributing" effect on each other.

Although we have a tendency to assign the sounds we hear to a certain speaker as in bass guitar = woofer, and cymbals = tweeter.   Various harmonics, leading edges, and decay of sounds are produced by the whole compliment of drivers, so a tweeter "can" affect the perception of bass and vice versa.

I am still blown away by the bass in my 626Rs FST, compared to the 626R spirals, and Brian says it is the FST.  That is the tweeter!!   Go figure.

And I might add that "room, equipment, and personal tastes ",  might be the biggest variables of all

Do you like Angelina Jolie or Charlize Theron?

YES!!!!    

I'm sure my impressions of Criterion were a bit more favorable than others b/c I've been living with Esg3 ribbons for awhile, Esg2 before that. When I switched from Focal titanium tweeter, I also thought the ribbons were a bit too soft, and not as obviously detailed.  Having lived with'em a while and having tweaked things to cater to them,

This is a good point and all should know that "vertical" placement of ribbons can sometimes make a night and day difference.  Now I can't speak for Danny's design, (maybe he can offer suggestions if it applies) but verical placement of many ribbons will determine if the best result is attained.

While I was at the first Crit. listening session, and my comments on the speaker were based on (correct me if I am wrong MD) 24" stands.

I have a feeling they may have benefited from 26"-30".  My only reason for saying this is that my 626Rs have a similar (no it is not the same since Brian always works his magic on all his drivers) tweeter and it works best if it is "above" ear level slightly.  And even though many of us were trying to slouch down and listen, that is not really effective.

And then again, I could be all wet in my assumption/comparison and would welcome the opp to do'em again with a little more care taken to vertical adjustement/placement.

I believe one problem here is that some of Mad Dog's reasons for his preferences don't seem to fit his arguments in that they don't seem to correspond to objective and generally agreed upon charactersitics found in the speakers he uses as examples.

Well this is a subjective observation of "subjective" opinion.  I (and please don't think me contentious) always find it interesting that with so many variables in rooms, electronics, and even hearing and assesment ability that we can really question anyones assesment of a subjective experience.

I love to hear peoples opinions of gear and how "warm" or "in your face" or "steely" it was, but the description was of the room, the system, the synergy and the listeners abiity to describe it.

Many times I read opinions of others and wonder what in the world they were listening to or if they even know how to listen or what to listen for.

Is it expereince, or preference or ego, dollar signs, or what?

I think the cool thing is that we can all read and share these expereinces and hopefully use them to add to our awarness, but to use them to form an opinion?  Count me out.   (And that includes you reading my opinions)

Don't be surprised if others don't hear what you hear.  I know they sometimes don't hear what I hear.

Sadono and I can be sitting in the same spot, listening to the same track, and conciously listening for the same trait, and hear something differently???  

(of course he is partially deaf      just kidding)

But that is why he has a certain speaker, and I have another.  No body is right or wrong in this hobby.  Of course we would like to have everyone agree with us that the speaker we own, make or sell is the best, but that is unlikely to happen.

In fact, I wouldn't want it any other way.  If everybody had the same speaker, or systems this would get boring very quickly.

If we all said the same thing about each component, I'd switch to stamp collecting.

If we all had the same preferences, we'd have no wide or narrow dispersion sweet spot/imaging/soundstage characteristics to argue about.

Hell wouldn't that be a fine kettle of fish

Give me opinions, give me preferences, let me hear diversity in ideas, and gentlemanly arguments are one of my favorite things.

Oh and of course we can agree sometimes too

Sounds like the Audio Circle.... Yeah

[Sa-dono]

This is a good point and all should know that "vertical" placement of ribbons can sometimes make a night and day difference. Now I can't speak for Danny's design, (maybe he can offer suggestions if it applies) but verical placement of many ribbons will determine if the best result is attained.

While I was at the first Crit. listening session, and my comments on the speaker were based on (correct me if I am wrong MD) 24" stands.

I have a feeling they may have benefited from 26"-30". My only reason for saying this is that my 626Rs have a similar (no it is not the same since Brian always works his magic on all his drivers) tweeter and it works best if it is "above" ear level slightly. And even though many of us were trying to slouch down and listen, that is not really effective.

And then again, I could be all wet in my assumption/comparison and would welcome the opp to do'em again with a little more care taken to vertical adjustement/placement.

Actually I did more than just slouch...I even sat on the floor and made sure I was right on-axis with the tweeter.

Don't be surprised if others don't hear what you hear. I know they sometimes don't hear what I hear.

Sadono and I can be sitting in the same spot, listening to the same track, and conciously listening for the same trait, and hear something differently???    

(of course he is partially deaf      just kidding)

Didn't I already tell you I don't want to be in your sweat spot? And I'm not going to take this from some old fart that has to cup his hands to his ears to hear right J/k of course John

[Mad DOg]

When we had the speakers on the 24" stands, it was the pair that had the pushed in dust caps and damaged tweeter so that was NOT an accurate gauge of what the speakers were truly capable of. I listened to them at Cryotweaks home with the Crits sitting on the 3-way's bass module. I was sitting on the carpet to bring the tweeters to ear level.

What I heard had nothing to do w/ positioning...it has everything to do w/ MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE as Cryotweaks has mentioned. Otherwise how is it that I like one speaker and find the other not to my liking and they both come from the same designer? As others have stated, it may have been the gear as well. If so, I certainly can't afford to own a hi-end tube setup as expensive as Audiojerry's. I ain't made of money which is why I own $1.5K Ref monitors. And that was even a stretch...my wife reminds me of it from time to time...

[acfan]

Cannot comment directly on the speakers, but I heard some saying "Hi-Vi (Swan) produces a name, and Aurum Cantus produces the sound" at hifi168.com. Is it true that the Ref 1 is an OEM product by Hi-Vi, and the GR criterions uses G2 ribbon from Aurum Cantus ?

[audiojerry]

John Casler wrote:

Well this is a subjective observation of "subjective" opinion. I (and please don't think me contentious) always find it interesting that with so many variables in rooms, electronics, and even hearing and assesment ability that we can really question anyones assesment of a subjective experience.

I love to hear peoples opinions of gear and how "warm" or "in your face" or "steely" it was, but the description was of the room, the system, the synergy and the listeners abiity to describe it.

Many times I read opinions of others and wonder what in the world they were listening to or if they even know how to listen or what to listen for.

I don't think you are contentious at all, John, and I believe you've had a lot to offer to this forum.

But, I believe we must place greater significance on the opinions and advice we all provide to others here. If what each of us says here is based totally on personal tastes and offer nothing of substance to the reader, then we are all just wasting our time (ok, I admit to wasting a lot of time here   )

I believe there is a good deal of common ground that we can all share and relate to when we discuss components or characteristics of sound. General agreement can be reached on terms such as brightness, forwardness, recessed, grainy, etc. I also believe some general consensus can be found when we describe the characteristics of familiar components or manufacturers. As an example, the vast majority of folks on this forum do not have a high regard for Bose or those who regard Bose highly. Based on your gracious open minded acceptance of others' personal views, we have no business looking down on Bose owners, but we do.

Participants of this forum, including myself, often ask for advice or opinions from others, and I believe that good advice can be found. I encourage those that offer advice to be thoughtful, informed, and try to make sure that the advice they give is based on credible information. If someone cites products or models as examples, he should have a reasonable knowledge of that item.

I'm not condemning Mad Dog; much of what he says has credence, but certain statements need to be made with greater supporting context. Mad Dog didn't say this, but an example of irresponsible advice is something like, "I listened the ProAxe Model T at a dealer once, and it stinks; don't waste your time auditioning it."          

PS: I think Cryotweaks review on page 2 of this topic is an example of  very informative and useful information. Outstanding!

[Sa-dono]

Is it true that the Ref 1 is an OEM product by Hi-Vi, and the GR criterions uses G2 ribbon from Aurum Cantus ?

To the former, there is no truth. The only relationship, at all, is that AV123 did at one point in time distribute Swans speakers (which use Hi-Vi drivers). The Ref 1 uses the Vifa tweeter and an Atohm woofer. As to the latter, that is what Rick Craig just said above.

[John Casler]

I believe there is a good deal of common ground that we can all share and relate to when we discuss components or characteristics of sound. General agreement can be reached on terms such as brightness, forwardness, recessed, grainy, etc. I also believe some general consensus can be found when we describe the characteristics of familiar components or manufacturers. As an example, the vast majority of folks on this forum do not have a high regard for Bose or those who regard Bose highly. Based on your gracious open minded acceptance of others' personal views, we have no business looking down on Bose owners, but we do

Well I have not communicated well,  for my missive was to say, "don't" expect others to hear what you hear.

While I don't look down on Bose owners (used to own some 901s in the 70's) I do respect that they may not have reached a certain stage of enjoyment and appreciation.

Participants of this forum, including myself, often ask for advice or opinions from others, and I believe that good advice can be found. I encourage those that offer advice to be thoughtful, informed, and try to make sure that the advice they give is based on credible information. If someone cites products or models as examples, he should have a reasonable knowledge of that item.

I certainly agree with you that we should all make our best efforts to provide an experience summation, that might provide benefit, but we all have extremely varied frames of reference and circumstance.

Not long ago I questioned a statement that you made about an 8" Yamaha sub that supposedly played "lower" than the Bag End and Earthquake subs.

You said:

I currently have in house 2 Earthquake and 2 Bag-End subs. The Yamaha goes lower with much better articulation and speed.

Well I too have owned Earthquake subs and while I didn't question the articulation part of your statement, I had doubts about the "lower" claim.

Actually to the point of thinking it must be a joke post.

So my point is, while your experience might not be the same as Mad Dog's with the Crits, there may be many reasons for the discrepancy (as I pointed out it could be something as simple as vertical firing), just as I have serious doubts that a 150 watt, single 8" Yamaha, rated at 23Hz could play lower than a 580 watt, 15" sub that "claims" 100db at 10Hz.

I'm not condemning Mad Dog; much of what he says has credence, but certain statements need to be made with greater supporting context. Mad Dog didn't say this, but an example of irresponsible advice is something like, "I listened the ProAxe Model T at a dealer once, and it stinks; don't waste your time auditioning it."

I agree that supporting information can be valuable, but again my point is, question "everything" people say (not always to the list, but certainly to yourself) and if it doesn't add up, either ask questions for more info, or don't place a lot of weight on their analysis.

I know MD evaluates rather seriously and usually doesn't make statements just to make them.

Just like the example I gave of your own post, I'm sure I too have posted things that run very contrary to others experiences.  

And so it goes...

[audiojerry]

Well I too have owned Earthquake subs and while I didn't question the articulation part of your statement, I had doubts about the "lower" claim.

Actually to the point of thinking it must be a joke post.

As I look back, I can understand your point. It does seem ridiculous, and I don't know if my experiences would apply to others'.

As a brief elaboration of my experience with the Yamaha and the Earthquake: I now own two Yamaha's, situated in different positions of the basement listening room than the Earthquakes. It's possible, and even likely that the response characteristics are greatly affected by room placement. You mentioned the low-end response of 23hz vs 10hz for the Earthquake. I don't know if my room would even allow a 10hz signal to develop, let alone a 23hz signal, so it's quite possible that my room prevents the Earthquake from reaching its full potential.  Too, my electronics and recordings may likely not produce any signals that low.
I have already conceded that the Earthquake can produce much higher spl's than the Yamaha, and for movies, or Blue Man Group recordings, the Yamaha's are challenged when pushed, while the Earthquakes don't even work up a sweat. However, the Earthquakes seem to require the volume to be cranked up before they come to life. At lower volumes they seem more anemic.  

While all this is true, I am still most pleased with the way the Yamaha's integrate with my 2 channel audio system using ProAc Response 1SC monitors as my main speakers. They play low down, they effectively cut off frequencies above 100hz, and they are quick enough to create a coherent link with the mains.

I also made a somewhat implausible statement about the way a single Yamaha sub was able render room shaking bass two floors above. It's true, but I have discovered the reason for this. Our second floor landing is open two stories to the foyer below, which has a hardwood floor and staircase. Directly above is an opening to the roof for a large skylight. This opening is a large cavity in the ceiling with about 30 cubic feet of volume. I believe this cavity must act as a resonator for low frequencies, thus amplifying any signals coming from the first floor or the basement, if the basement door is open. The other day, our family was hearing a rather loud hum when we were upstairs, but when we went downstairs we could barely hear anything. We noticed that the hum was loudest right beneath the skylight cavity. It turned out that a kitchen ceiling fan with a dimmer switch was operating at low speed, creating 60hz feedback hum. It was barely audible in the kitchen, but upstairs this hum was greatly magnified. When I turned the fan off, the hum disappeared. This cavity was probably creating the same situation for the Yamaha sub. It's really crazy how low frequencies can get magnified this way.