Any opinions on these Morel speakers?

birdwizard · « **Reply #20 on:** 13 Sep 2004, 03:40 am »

I love the sound of these speakers!

The midbass is coming in. They are just sounding better and more together. I thought I could hear the crossover and the seperate drivers at first. Its just one cohesive sound now; with a very large soundstage.

They have a slightly euphonic sound. It reminds me of when I had a Heart 6000 CD player; just this little sparkle and vibrance in place of the normal sharp sound edge. Almost a shimmer. Maybe not completely accurate, I'm not sure. I dont care. I've been listening all day. I just keep popping them in

I'm ordering another pair tomorrow to make it 5 identical speakers.

birdwizard · « **Reply #21 on:** 18 Sep 2004, 06:10 pm »

I recieved the walnut pair yesterday. The finish is much nicer (and slightly darker) than I expected. Having identical speakers for 5.1 sounds simply awesome for multichannel SACD and HT alike. I'm just extremely happy and impressed with this deal and felt compelled to share it.

I found another speaker that uses the same midrange, with reportedly great results:

http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/861/

" The speaker adored vocals. Whether it was the slightly nasal Midlands twang of Fairport Convention's Dave Swarbrick on "Sloth", Julee Cruise's breathy, sexy coo, or the whisky rasp of John Wetton's rich baritone on King Crimson's "Doctor Diamond", there was an almost eerie presence and a touching holism to the presentation of each. "

Ok I'm done

birdwizard · « **Reply #22 on:** 2 Oct 2004, 07:34 pm »

Update:
Dennis Murphy has offered to look at the crossovers and decide if he can make these speakers even better.
So, I decided to purchase another pair, and have them sent directly
to Dennis. I'm excited to see what he comes up with.

I'll keep you guys posted

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #23 on:** 2 Oct 2004, 07:49 pm »

Wow, after Dennis works his magic on these speakers, this is like a no brainer for me if I wanted a new speaker in this price range.

goskers · « **Reply #24 on:** 6 Oct 2004, 11:58 am »

Can someone comment on the build quality of the cabinet? If Dennis is going to touch these and the build quality is high then this becomes a much better value overall.

Thanks

birdwizard · « **Reply #25 on:** 15 Oct 2004, 11:56 pm »

Build quality is pretty good. Its no Jim Salk, thats for sure.

Dennis is redsigning the crossover right now. He said the parts

were suprisingly high quality, but the midrange is crossed over too high

and there is a suckout in the mid treble because of it. I should know more

soon.

Either way, I still love these speakers, and have listened to more

music in the last 3 weeks than the 3 months before

Unclewai · « **Reply #26 on:** 17 Oct 2004, 04:52 am »

Hi birdwizard, would it be possible for you to take some pictures of the two different color of the speakers?
I am really interested in getting a pair. I read in Audiogon that someone disliked the walnut color, I just want to know if they are that bad.
I can host the pictures if you can take them.
Thanks

Thomas

johnkramer · « **Reply #27 on:** 17 Oct 2004, 08:24 am »

Quote from: ooheadsoo

morel usa is not the traditional morel we think of with the nice tweets. The "real" original morel is based in Israel. Not to say that I know that this speaker is good or bad, just a heads up.

I believe Morel came out of England.

In fact I remember back in 87'ish I was in Israel (Navy) and I went off looking for the *new* Morel Israel plant while on shore leave. I didn't find it due to lack of time (a bit of the party spirit also got in the way). But as I remember, the new plant made certain drivers and in England, other drivers of the line were made (something like that). That how I remember it at least.

They were a great driver then and still are.

Unclewai · « **Reply #28 on:** 19 Oct 2004, 01:47 am »

birdwizard kindly took the following pictures and sent to me.
So here they are:

http://students.washington.edu/tcheng/morel1.jpg

http://students.washington.edu/tcheng/morel2.jpg

http://students.washington.edu/tcheng/morel3.jpg

mac · « **Reply #29 on:** 19 Oct 2004, 02:28 am »

Dennis Murphy's posted the results of his work on these. To quote him, "Here's my entry in the exciting "Worst Measuring Speaker of 2004" competition".

http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/discuss.cgi?read=321166

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #30 on:** 19 Oct 2004, 03:10 am »

Latest post by Dennis sounds like things are looking up.

birdwizard · « **Reply #31 on:** 19 Oct 2004, 04:52 am »

I dont doubt the measurements.

My listening doesn't support the dark conclusion though.

There my be a glaring mid treble dip, but to me the sound is

still awesome. I've heard speakers that measure flat as a board,

but also sound as dull and lifeless as a board.

I am excited to hear and compare the mod though

tonygeno · « **Reply #32 on:** 23 Oct 2004, 07:50 pm »

Quote from: birdwizard

I dont doubt the measurements.

My listening doesn't support the dark conclusion though.

There my be a glaring mid treble dip, but to me the sound is

still awesome. I've heard speakers that measure flat as a board,

but also sound as dull and lifeless as a board.

I am excited to hear and compare the mod though

This whole thread is a great reason why I view ad bombs with a bit of scepticism. This great deal was touted on another forum, and it seemed like well-placed advertising. According to Dennis Murphy over on Madisound:

Quote

Maybe I'll see if there's anything simple I can do to the existing crossover before seriously suggesting people spend any more on these things. But in terms of value, a used pair of the original Advents or even an old KLH6 will give you more accurate sound than the Morels.

These appear to be a very poor deal and birdwizard should get out more and hear what real music sounds like.

mcgsxr · « **Reply #33 on:** 23 Oct 2004, 07:53 pm »

welcome to AC, and thanks for taking shots right out of the gate...

Hey, the guy likes his speakers, you don't think they are the best deal in the world, so what?

Mark in Canada

jackman · « **Reply #34 on:** 23 Oct 2004, 08:38 pm »

Tony,
I don't think it's cool to slam people on your first post. I have been following the thread on Madisound and although Dennis has made a couple negative remarks about the original design, he did come up with a mod that is very inexpensive and seems to correct the problems. I believe he also said the original design had some positive attributes that some people might like.

Maybe Birdwizard likes the original design. Heck, maybe you would like the original design more than the modded version. Anything is possible. Regarding the poor measurements, I don't know if you have ever seen the database (forgot the address) that lists the frequency response (non-smoothed) of several popular commercial speakers, most of which cost way more than the Morel's in this thread. The response measurements of most commercial speakers are anything but flat. Not necessarily a measure of good sound or bad sound but it's pretty interesting reading.

Look at manufacturer's websites, VERY few post frequency response measurements. The ones that do, usually post smoothed measurements or bogus ones like -high dB levels. I only know of a couple that do, Ellisaudio.com and Bamberglab.com. Dave and Phil are pretty up front and proud of the way their speakers measure. I suspect the opposite is true of the vast majority who choose NOT to post measurements.

Hope you join the fun at Audiocircle, but I hope it's for more than just to be critical of people who are merely posting their impressions. If Birdwizard likes his speakers, I am very happy for him. How many good speakers are available for $600 delivered?

Cheers,

Jack

mac · « **Reply #35 on:** 23 Oct 2004, 09:19 pm »

Quote from: jackman

Dave and Phil are pretty up front and proud of the way their speakers measure.

Who do you think was responsible for designing (and measuring) the 1801?

tonygeno · « **Reply #36 on:** 23 Oct 2004, 09:33 pm »

jackman:

The original post did not pique my interest. What did was what appeared to be an orchestrated attempt on several boards to "tout" these speakers. Jim Salk linked the Madisound thread over at AVS as he too noticed the constant hammering as to how great and what a great value these Morels were. The reality, it seems, is somewhat different.

Now one may certainly have an opinion and I am not a member of the opinion police. However, when one guy starts to spam the internet with how great these speakers are, and what a great value, then my ss (sales shack) radar goes up. When the general weight of opinion says something's good, who am I to argue? When one guy plasters the net with an opinion, which objectively doesn't stand up, I don't mind stepping in, in the spirit of full disclosure. I'd hate to be the rookie, who, based on one over the top poster on multiple forums, purchases a speaker that is so obviously underachieving and a poor value. If my post helped him or her to be a bit more wary of unsusbtantiated internet claims, then I feel as if I've helped someone.

Now I'll play nice.

Regards,

TG

BTW, speakers that can be obtained for similar dough and measure and sound good:

Ascend 170 and 340
Axiom M22
Some of the lower end Polks
NHT SB3 among others.

There are tons of under $600 speakers that measure and sound well.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #37 on:** 23 Oct 2004, 09:47 pm »

Tony, do try to keep up with the madisound discussion instead of just coming here and party pooping. Dennis has found a cheap xover solution that costs $10 a side composed of reversing polarity on the tweeter and a trap, and he is pretty pleased with the results. He advised a friend of mine specifically to not return the speakers.

tonygeno · « **Reply #38 on:** 23 Oct 2004, 09:55 pm »

Quote from: ooheadsoo

Tony, do try to keep up with the madisound discussion instead of just coming here and party pooping. Dennis has found a cheap xover solution that costs $10 a side composed of reversing polarity on the tweeter and a trap, and he is pretty pleased with the results. He advised a friend of mine specifically to not return the speakers.

Does this $10 mod now make them the best speaker for the money? And I wonder why Mike Shabani didn't think of it.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #39 on:** 23 Oct 2004, 10:32 pm »

According to my friend, the president (I assume it was Mike) apologized for the bad measuring speakers and suggested it may have been a bad batch of drivers. Questionable. The drivers themselves don't sound bad by all accounts and the xover problems are now largely resolved. Why do you wonder why Mike Shibani didn't think of it? This question surprises me. These aren't the only pair of speakers in the world that measure poorly. Far from it. Why didn't any of the designers do anything about it? Here's a half assed analogy: Some people don't like microsoft products and think they perform poorly. They have a free fix called 'nix. Why didn't Bill Gates think of it? And I'll still use MS even though 'nix may be better "bang for buck."

Narrow dips in response are hard to hear. OTOH, ever look at the response graphs of some silverline speakers?

Dennis has his own designs that are around $500-600 in cost that sound damn good if I don't say so myself. I'm using one. The friend I mentioned is deliberating right now whether to return the morel speakers and build mbow1s or keep the morels. Dennis specifically advised to keep the morels, but that was without the mbow1 as frame of reference. I hope my friend will get the chance to ask Dennis.

I just hoped that you realized that the situation had evolved and that Dennis is no longer of the opinion that the speakers are a bad deal. If he did, he wouldn't have recommended that my friend keep the speakers, would he? As for alternatives, I'm sure that there are plenty of fine alternatives. You could say that for any speaker at any price range.