[doug s.]

hi all,

i really enjoyed the opportunity danny richie afforded me by providing demo pairs of the criterions for review.  altho i was a bit miffed by the ups charge of ~$56 to ship my (78 lb) pair from maryland to delaware - about a 2 hour drive.  oh well...

anyway, now on to the review.  the bottom line is that these are a freaking steal, even at the $1500 fully-assembled price.  they compared wery favorably to my retail $3300 meret re's.  in one area, they actually were a mite better - lower midrange detail.  but, i preferred the better dynamics & fuller sounding midrange of my merets.  a cd i find excellent for showing midrange detail & fullness is giovanni hidalgo's "hands of rhythm", featuring michel camilo on piano.  hidalgo is a percussionist, but when i 1st heard this cd, i thought for sure the featured artist was a pianist, there is so much piano on this cd.  both giovanni & michel do a fantastic job here, imo...  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000001274/qid=1049666207/sr=1-12/ref=sr_1_12/102-4809711-6689763?v=glance&s=music     regarding the midrange detail/fullness/dynamics, realize i am talking small differences all the way around.  and, i would not be at all surprised if gr-research's diluceo mtm wersion, with its two eton mid-woofers, would surpass my merets in the fullness/dynamics dept.  the sonic signatures of the criterions & the merets are actually quite similar - the meret uses a 7" wersion of the same 5.5" eton kevlar sandwich cone used in the criterion.

what really surprised me the most was the treble of the criterion ribbon, as it compared to focal titanium inwerted-dome of the merets.  i expected the ribbons to give a far better treble persentation, w/much better smoothness & a lot more detail.  my initial reaction, after 1st hooking up the criterions, was that they were certainly more extended - it seemed the fm radio station that gets ~50% of my listening time, had much more noise than i was used to!     further listening made me realize that this was in fact, only due to added noise of the "democracy now" broadcasts that wpfw has been broadcasting now, since the stuff in the middle east has been happening.  on the jazz, latin, caribbean & african music broadcasts, it turns out that the noise level (minimal) was the same with either the criterions or the merets.  

the treble of the criterion ribbons was smoother, but only by a hair.  to be honest, i expected a lot more.  but, what really surprised me was that the focal tweets of the merets actually surpassed the criterion's ribbons in the detail dept, & by quite a bit more than a hair.  one particular cd i am familiar with, & one which i find quite revealing of detail is Hawaiian Slack Key Guitar Masters Collection, Vol. 2  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00000JJMW/ref=m_art_bow_2/102-4809711-6689763?v=glance&s=music  this cd has close-miked recordings, which offer amazing amounts of detail - the sound of the artists moving in their chairs, their breathing, & their fingering of the strings on the frets.  (this cd was also wery revealing of changes made to my art di/o, which i modded in stages.  what semed like noise on some cuts, was eventually revealed as sounds of the artist's movement & breathing.)  well, the criterion's obscured a lot of this info that was plainly evident on the merets.  i made a point to play this cd 1st, on the merets, when i had them back in the system, to be sure i wasn't mistaken about this.

the criterions had no problem going way-loud in my ~26x38x8.5 listening space.  i had them crossed over at 60hz to my subs w/a marchand xm-9 deluxe.  w/aid of a pink noise generator & spectrum analyzer, i was able to get a perfect blend.  i dint try running the criterions full-range.  having only a week to play w/them really dint give me all the time i wanted, to hear different music, as it was!     and, to be honest, i don't know why anyone would want *any* limited-range small monitor for such a big space, w/o running subs...

imaging & soundstaging was excellent - on par w/my merets.  but, to get them to perform their best, not only did i need the bottom of the cabinet to be ~31" above the floor, i needed to remove the cones from the back of my make-shift speaker-stand extenders, to lower the back edge ~1.25", so the speakers were angled upwards a bit.  about the same as my merets...  the merets have a sloped front bafle, & i still get best results w/them tilted back even a bit more.  one thing i did notice was the sweet-spot was not as wide w/the criterions as w/the merets.  i had a buddy over to hear 'em last weekend, & i let him sit front-n-center, w/me sitting pretty-much directly in front of the left speaker.  while still enjoyable, the merets have the edge in this kinda listening...

besides the two above-mentioned cd's, i listened to a plethora of putumayo-label cd's - latin, caribbean, african stuff.  and, lary coryell's chesky release, featuring his sons on the album - "the coryells"  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000047848/qid=1049667333/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-4809711-6689763?v=glance&s=music  vinyl included discs by frank zappa, the pogues, joni mitchell, dr. john, king sunny ade, kraftwerk, and the paul winter consort.  also, a steady diet of howard u's wpfw - 89.3, which broadcasts a great-sounding signal, & i get amazing sonics outta my hot-rodded h/k citation 18 tuna.  truly sound to rival my cd & turntable set-ups...

a major weakness of the criterion's, is the cabinetry - only so-so, imo.  while they certainly look nice from the listening position, up-close scrutiny reveals that the circles for the drivers aren't perfectly round, the edges aren completely smooth & square, & there is some rippling in the veneer.  while i could be content w/these in my house, others may want something better.  perhaps these are early samples, & the quality control will get better.  or, of course, save some $$$ & roll yer own!     you can see pics of the criterions in my gallery on this site (as well as my system & room, to help put this review in context.)

again, i cannot stress how good these are, especially at the price.  while i prefer my merets, they retailed for more than twice the price, & a lot of their costs go into the cabinet - the merets weigh in at ~50lbs ea...  the criterions make me think that their bigger brothers, the mtm diluceo's, may in fact be a worthwhile upgrade.  my only caveat is the apparent reduction in detail i found from the criterion's ribbons.  (perhaps the price ya pay for the added smoothness?  i know my wife preferred the treble presentation of the criterions over the merets.)  i definitely would *not* wanna give up the detail.  not that the criterions sounded veiled, it's yust that once ya know something is there, ya don't wanna go backwards...  

anyway, danny, thanks again - a great product, regardless of price.  *amazing* at the price, imo...

doug s.

[nature boy]

Doug,

You should have dropped me a note and I would have picked the crate up from you to save the UPS charges to Delaware.  DUH!

Nice review, I have these finally set up in my listening room and will post impressions after my week is up.  

NB

[Danny Richie]

I am glad you liked them Doug,

I few things puzzle me though.

what really surprised me was that the focal tweets of the merets actually surpassed the criterion's ribbons in the detail dept, & by quite a bit more than a hair.

I have used/sold many hundreds of the Focal tweeters (I was once a Focal distributor).

The G2 ribbons are much faster and have MUCH more detail than any of the Focal tweeters I have ever worked with.

The Focals tend to have a more bright sharp edged sound about them with much more overshoot and a little bit of ringing that the ribbons do not have.

The spectral decay is much cleaner on the ribbons as well.

They have a very different sound, but to me the added detail level is on a completely different level with the G2 ribbons.

but, to get them to perform their best, not only did i need the bottom of the cabinet to be ~31" above the floor, i needed to remove the cones from the back of my make-shift speaker-stand extenders, to lower the back edge ~1.25", so the speakers were angled upwards a bit.

Raising them that high in the air and tilting them back that far will create a driver alignment offset. This delay in time will cause a suck out to begin in the crossover region (3.4kHz) and/or in the area right after (just above) the crossover point.

This could explain your sense of loss in detail.

The Criterion uses a series network with a design axis point midway between the drivers with no tilt to the front baffle.

The network inserts an electrical delay to compensate for the physical driver alignment so altering the physical alignment kind of throws the time alignment of the drivers out the window.

This tilting back might also eat into the imaging.

a major weakness of the criterion's, is the cabinetry - only so-so, imo. while they certainly look nice from the listening position, up-close scrutiny reveals that the circles for the drivers aren't perfectly round, the edges aren completely smooth & square, & there is some rippling in the veneer.

The cabinets were cut by a guy in Canada that has some kind of CNC equipment. They were then sent to Rutledge Audio for veneering. The driver holes were mis-cut and were not perfectly round.

This is not how they now come, as they are now completely built at Rutledge Audio.

When they left here the veneer looked great and had no ripples. I hope some humidity along the way didn't damage them.

the criterions make me think that their bigger brothers, the mtm diluceo's, may in fact be a worthwhile upgrade.

The Diluceo's (the MTM big brother) do have several advantages.

The crossover point was pushed down a little lower giving even more detail. Midrange is a little fuller. Bass has twice the impact. Sensitivity is much higher at 91 verses 85 with the Criterions.

Also because the impedance dropped to 4 ohms the expensive heavy gauge foil inductors got much smaller and less expensive. This makes the Diluceo kit only slightly higher. It is $995. for the pair verses $849. for the pair of Criterions.

[Rocket]

hello doug,

i too am curious to know which focal tweeters your meret's (i can't keep up with all the different types of speakers that are available in the us   ) use.  i've extensively heard the focal tweeters tc90k and tdx 120 and agree with danny's assessment, although i still do like them.  my speakers use the raven 1 ribbon tweeter and i found them to be better in all areas compared to the focals.  although to be honest they should be as they cost a lot more.

anyway thanks for the review it was interesting.

regards

rod

[audiojerry]

I also have experience with the 90 and 120 focal. They were fine, but far from great. Scanspeak tweeters are much better, and the ribbon on the Criterion is very smooth and extended. Maybe Danny mentioned it, but the output of the ribbon can be adjusted by changing the resistor value. I believe a lower value resistor would result in added detail, but it may throw off the balance.

I think a lot of audiophiles are used to exaggerated treble, which gives the impression of enhanced detail, and when a non-audiophile, like your wife listens to the same speaker, they will often comment that it sounds too bright or too much (something).

[doug s.]

hi all,

well, i am glad to see all the comments about the detail.  as i said, i was also expecting big improvements in the treble.  re: my wife liking the ribbons, i would attribute this to the fact that womens' hearing response in the high frequencies don't go down the toilet as fast as mens', & she is likely sensitive to the known ringing of the focal ti-tweets at ~26khz...  danny says: "The Focals tend to have a more bright sharp edged sound about them with much more overshoot and a little bit of ringing that the ribbons do not have. "  i agree 100% w/this.  i'm sure this is corresponds w/my wifes' feelings, & it also corresponds w/my findings of the ribbons being smoother.  perhaps the reason i dint find this to be more pronounced, is due to my use of a tubed preamp & tubed amp.  and, my prior s/s amps - electrocompaniets - are not at all harsh or grainy, so the focal's harshness was never a problem in my system.

i do not remember which ti-tweet is in my speaker - i will have to pull it out & check.  i *do* know it's an earlier iteration, w/o a phase plug.  at one point, i considered swapping it out w/the latest iteration, but the guys at madisound said it wouldn't be worth the money, even tho they aren't that expensive...

re: the listening height, i listened for a few days w/them not tilted back, & everything sounded better w/the tilt.  especially imaging & soundstaging.  i couldn't get things to gel w/them pointed straight ahead.  according to my pink noise generator/spectrum analyzer, there *was* a slight dip in response at ~4khz, but it dint change w/the tilt.   i checked this, as i also get a similar dip w/my merets at this frequency - both tilted & straight ahead.  iirc, the merets' x-over is at a similar mid-3khz walue as the criterions'.  and, re: the detail - at several times, i stood up & moved closer to the criterions when playing the hawaiian slack-key cd, cuz i was trying to hear the low-level info that i knew was present on the disc.  so, there shouldn't have been any suck-out here.  and, last nite, i listened to the coryells again, on the merets - definitely more detail in the treble...

this is definitely confusing to me.  perhaps there's some (non)synergy going on w/my mesa baron tubed amp?  tho, i'd have thought that tubes & ribbons would be made for each other...  for the most part, i ran my baron at 2/3 pentode, 1/3 triode, w/zero or -2db negative feedback.  tho i did try 1/3 triode-2/3 pentode w/some smaller-scale stuff (like the hawaiian slack-key).  the effect was much the same as w/the merets - more triode gives a bit more bloom & air, w/a tad less tightness.  but no more detail either way...  and, adding negative feedback tightens things up a bit, while removing some air, regardless of the triode-pentode setting...  i am still not set on whether or not to leave the negative feedback at 0db or -2db  for most music...  i definitely prefer 2/3 pentode for complex music, 2/3 triode for simpler stuff...

well, the diluceo's are still on my short-list for potential upgrade, but i would certainly have to hear a pair before committing.  if it weren't for this treble detail anomaly that i experienced, (and that i seem to be the only one that has!?!), that may not be the case...     of course, i'm hoping that when danny gets these back, he will discover some physical or electrical anomaly w/them, so my findings of reduced detail can be attributed to *something*, so i can stop questioning my hearing or my sanity!    

regards,

doug s.