[nathanm]

The Pyramid concept appealed to me due to it's intentionally omnidirectional radiation pattern (or quad-directional if you'd like) and the fact that it used the Tang Band drivers which I liked in the 3.0s.  I figured it would be a novel concept for home theater because not everyone can sit in the sweet spot.  I thought it would make sense to pump the sound in more than one direction.

In practice however, The Pyramid leaves much to be desired.  I am trying to figure out what the problem is, but I think it is probably a combination of factors.  For one the 51 degree angle of the sides aims the speaker at the ceiling, not your ears.  As a result a lot of treble energy is lost.  It helps to lower them to about 18" off the floor, or even on the floor itself isn't too bad.  On my 25" high stands it sounds like it looks; like the sound is above you, as if you were a midget at a show and were standing where the security guards are behind the barricade.  Not good!  

With four drivers going at once imaging and soundstage is pretty weird sounding.  This in itself isn't a bad thing, obviously such a design is unconventional and one would expect it to sound different.  But it's different in a bad way; weird phasey things going on.  Tonality is very muddy and veiled.  No not even veiled, blanketed!  It sounds  as if the drivers are mounted backwards and firing into the box, not into the room.  Very strange.  A definite "boxy" sound as they say.

Compared to my 3.0 drums the Pyramids sound quite bad.  I thought they sounded bad out of the box, but I gave them the benefit of the doubt.  I ran pink noise and Stereophile test disc cacophony into them for about 5 days straight hoping to loosen up those new drivers, but to no avail.  The midrange and treble is still very poor.

Besides 2-channel I also tried the Pyramids in my friend's HT setup, swapping with the mains and also using one as a center channel.  Same mediocre result there as well unfortunately.  Perhaps a ceiling mounting would be interesting to try as then the drivers would be aimed down at the listeners.  Needless to say we didn't feel like putting giant hooks in the apartment ceiling.

Perhaps the cabinet is too large?  The large baffle area causing too much diffraction?  I dunno.  I plan to do some more tests such as swapping the drivers between the Pyramids and the 3.0s to see if it is the driver or the cabinet causing the shift in quality.

I can forgive the imaging performance merely due to the nature of the design, but what I find confusing is how shut-in and murky the frequency balance sounds.  This one's an odd duck for sure.

EDIT:  I swapped out the Pyramid drivers and put two of them in my 3.0 drums and they sounded fine.  So it must be the implementation that sounds funny.  It's a shame really.

[Johng316]

Nathanm,

Thanks for the review.  I have also been thinking about the Pyramid for a 5.1 setup in my upstairs familyroom (I have a dedicated HT downstairs).  I was considering wall-mounting them because I anticipated the same issue you noted (tweeters pointed to the ceiling).  Do you think wall-mounting would help (with the bottoms fastened to the wall and the top of the pyramid pointed into the room)?

Thanks,

John G

[nathanm]

Hi John.  Wall mounting would indeed point the drivers right at you, but in my opinion this sounds even more 'wrong' as you've then got four relatively close together albeit 'misaligned' speakers pointing in the same general direction.  This to me sounded worse than if they are standing up straight.  In that case having four drivers doesn't make any sense, you'd be better off with just one!  To me it sounds like there's a lot of phase cancellations and other weird stuff.  I think ceiling mounting might be good, I just have to figure out a way to do it without putting big holes in the drywall.

I will say that the Pyramids do have more bass response than the 3.0s do thanks to the larger cabinet.  The radiation pattern is very odd though, as I said.  I think using drums for HT would be a better idea.  When we swapped out my friend's Polks with the Pyramids we both looked at each other funny and said, "Man, that sounds pretty bad!"

I bet they might work better if your room is dead.  I mean REALLY dead. Like almost anechoic.  That way if the listeners were lined up so that they faced only one side of the speaker and didn't get the off-axis stuff from the other three it might sound more correct.

Perhaps there is a better positioning idea I haven't tried yet.  Hmmm...

[Ravi]

Nathan, thanks for your honest review.  Again, refreshing to see such candor.

Its very unfortunate this speaker didn't turn out for you.  It almost seems to me like a disturbing trend is developing at Norh.  Find the weirdest (or coolest) shape, and then stick a driver or two in it.   I think the cabinet should be selected for the best possible sound, and 'cool factor' should come a distant second.  

Maybe they have yet to 'break-in'.  Or maybe you will literally break them if they don't start sounding better  

[nathanm]

I would love to hear some other 'omnidirectional' designs such as those MBL speakers (not that I could afford them) and the Duevel stuff (not that I could afford those either! )which uses vertically aimed drivers firing at what looks like a giant wooden top.

It would be interesting to be able to control each driver individually as far as polarity and frequency balance.  Perhaps if the 3 side\rear firing speakers were rolled off in the treble they would add some spaciousness without confusing the spatial cues of the high frequencies?  I am not sure how the polarity works in the parallel\series combo which I think these are wired in.  

A vertical Norh drum\Duevel reflector horn combo, now THAT would be cool to try.

Even if it doesn't work for me I can imagine someone else liking the presentation of the Pyramids.  Perhaps just running one of them in the center of a room in mono would give you a 'music everywhere' effect.  So instead of serving as a 'concentrated, sit in a chair and listen' speaker it would be a 'walk around the house' or 'play tunes while working in the garage' kind of speaker. Just a thought.

[Xi-Trum]

Find the weirdest (or coolest) shape, and then stick a driver or two in it.

I had no idea what nOrh was trying to do with the pyramid design.  

[Bwanagreg]

If I recall some of the early discussions around this design, I think one goal was to build a higher efficiency design suitable for use with the SE-9. Some of the early feedback (on HD) was that the existing nohr speakers were not ideal matches to this amp.

Personally, I don't like the sound of the 3.0 driver, so using 4 of them isn't going to make a better sounding design, just a louder, more efficient one. I think it was a case of using what was available to meet a design goal, but what do I know.

[Zoe]

I have a pair.  I can't tolerate listening to them.  Extremely boxy sounding and quite thin.  Fortunately, it was just money wasted, not something of actual value.

[Captain Humble]

Nathanm & Zoe,
Thanks so much for the reviews.
Mr. Barnes made them sound so good prior to his first shipments that I thought they might be perfect for rears.  Lack of reviews after shipping so many of them scared me off.  I'm a business major not an audio engineer but it seemed strange that pointing the drivers in four different directions could produce a cohesive image.  Seems like sound waves would be bouncing in all different directions.  And like you mentioned, none of the 4 drivers are in a plane with the listeners ears.

Thanks guys you've put my curiosity fo rest.
Jeff

[nathanm]

Last night I hooked them up in tandem with my 3.0s and placed them in the back corners of my room.  Now, they are louder than the 3.0s which is a problem, however this created a more enjoyable sound field overall.  With this setup I was able to meander around the room and still get a full sound.  Nice if you like to dance or perform air guitar.  Sitting in my chair position and hearing the rears was a bit odd, but I think if the volume was tweaked right it would work.  Perhaps with 4 Pyramids in each corner you'd be set.  With a lone stereo pair they just sound confused. But the 3.0s are a much better bargain in my opinion.

Cosmetics: I think the all-black colored Tang Band driver would be a better choice as then then drivers wouldn't show through the grill cloth like the silver ones do.  Also, it would be nice if the "ports" were painted black on the inside.  Minor issues I know, but they would be a nice touch.

I'm almost curious to see what it would sound like to cut a big hole in one side and mount my lonely pair of Fostex FE206Es in there and board up the other three holes.  Hmmm.  This shape isn't a bad idea in general, it just could use some more work IMO.  It would be cool if each driver had a volume pot or on\off switch for example.

[ABEX]

What does Norh suggest for a setup and how do they sound the way they say the ideal positioning?

Just wondering as I am not in the market for speakers.Quite glad with what I have .