Continuums 2.5

PeteG · « **on:** 4 Jul 2005, 05:55 pm »

Here's a sneak peak of the NEW Continuums 2.5 using the SS9300
tweeter. Should have some more comments in the coming weeks.

Pete

Christof · « **Reply #1 on:** 6 Jul 2005, 03:56 am »

I had a very short listening session with this paticular pair of 2.5's in Bobs studio before they shipped. This was the first time I've heard the new tweeter (SS9300) in a pair of SP speakers and I must say that they were a pleasure to listen to. There is a little less bite to this tweeter and alot more air around the instruments yet it still manages to provide the realistic punch of energy even at low volume levels that originally made me fall in love with Continuum design. Enjoy your new speakers Pete.

reefrus · « **Reply #2 on:** 10 Jul 2005, 12:12 pm »

Nice picture Pete!
I just got back from vacation and I should receive my new tweeters upgrade for my Revelation next week. Enjoy your new speakers. They are worth the wait, aren't they?

PeteG · « **Reply #3 on:** 10 Jul 2005, 02:06 pm »

Quote from: reefrus

Enjoy your new speakers. They are worth the wait, aren't they?

Absolutely!
I’m still moving the speakers around a little and playing with bi-amping, which so far
has a big edge on being driven by a single amp, better impact & attack.

The dynamics just have me in awe and this new tweeter Bob has is amazing, Reefrus you will be very pleased with the upgrade.

More latter on
Pete

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #4 on:** 10 Jul 2005, 08:04 pm »

PeteG :

Quote

I’m still moving the speakers around a little and playing with bi-amping....

[/list:u]

Chris[/list:u]

zybar · « **Reply #5 on:** 10 Jul 2005, 08:31 pm »

What changes are in the 2.5's besides the new tweeter?

George

ekovalsky · « **Reply #6 on:** 10 Jul 2005, 10:20 pm »

Quote from: zybar

What changes are in the 2.5's besides the new tweeter?

George

The stands are different. I seem to remember the older ones having a cylindrical column. The new ones look much better.

Karsten · « **Reply #7 on:** 10 Jul 2005, 11:51 pm »

Quote from: ekovalsky

Quote from: zybar
What changes are in the 2.5's besides the new tweeter?

George

The stands are different. I seem to remember the older ones having a cylindrical column. The new ones look much better.

It is actually an extention to the box to give it more volume and thereby low frq. response.

This set can be upgraded to Revelation in the future just by changing the lower module.

Brg,
Karsten

PeteG · « **Reply #8 on:** 11 Jul 2005, 12:43 am »

The Continuums that I heard at RMAF I liked a lot and that got the ball rolling, but these newer Continuums 2.5 sound like a different speaker a all-round better speaker.

The 2.5 are a true floor stander, the bottom cabinet is ported
and filled with lambs wool, also the crossover frequency is now firmly established at 600Hz.

Pete

Aether Audio · « **Reply #9 on:** 11 Jul 2005, 08:05 pm »

Zybar,

Quote

What changes are in the 2.5's besides the new tweeter?

To be specific, the bottom enclosure is, as Karsten said, an extension of the internal volume of the upper enclosure. As most of us know, with everything being equal, a given driver will deliver extended low frequency response if placed in a larger box. There is a limit to this theory though in that once a certain "optimal" volume is reached, making the box larger will actually cause a decrease in usable bass output.

The original Continuum A.D. was a compromise design with regards to low frequency extension. The design trade-offs were chosen as they were in order to be able to offer it for use as a Studio Monitor or horizontally mounted center channel speaker in a home theater set up.

With the volume of the bottom enclosure added to that of the top section, the system achieves the optimal volume mentioned above and hence, maximum usable bandwidth. The new Continuum 2.5 offers a -3dB point (anechoic) of 25Hz. It too is a hybrid bass-reflex/transmission-line design, as are the other models (other than the Revelation), and it's response is dominated by the parameters governing ported box design. We'll wait for Pete G's comments with respect to whether or not it sounds like a typical ported speaker though.

Well, all for now. I'm sure there will be more comments as Pete gets better aquainted with his new Continuums along with those from others getting their upgrades and/or speakers.

Take care George, Pete & everybody,

-Bob

zybar · « **Reply #10 on:** 11 Jul 2005, 09:41 pm »

Thanks Bob.

Will you be out at the RMAF again this year?

I would love to hear either the 2.5 Continuum's or the Revelation with the new tweeter.

Your room last year produced some of the most dynamic and impactful sound I have EVER heard from a pair of speakers. I enjoyed spending a lot of time cranking the tunes, but ultimately felt that the tweeter was a little too hot and would be an issue over the long haul.

If the tweeter did indeed smooth out and is less fatiguing over a long listening session you will have one hell of a product!!

George

Karsten · « **Reply #11 on:** 11 Jul 2005, 11:47 pm »

George,

The new tweeter is a lot better than the old one, the improvement is not subtle.

On top of this, I'm testing the new woofers Seas developed for SP, based on their Excel technology. These are great. Even less intermodulation distortion, better power handling etc.

Frankly speaking I was pretty satisfied with the old woofers, but these are awesome. Big improvement in soundstaging and an overall better coherency to the sound image.

Furthermore, I really like the aperance as well.

Brg,
Karsten

sonicboom · « **Reply #12 on:** 12 Jul 2005, 12:32 am »

I also agree that they look nicer with the black drivers. Do these new woofs also have metal cones (Al or Mg) or the new nextel coated paper material that SEAS came out with recently?

Jason1 · « **Reply #13 on:** 12 Jul 2005, 01:13 am »

I hope I'm not stepping out of line, but, as expensive as these speakers are I would expect at least a SS9700 or Seas Millennium tweeter.

ekovalsky · « **Reply #14 on:** 12 Jul 2005, 01:17 am »

PeteG,

Are those Acoustics First products you have in your room ? They look similar to the Respond panels and Geometrix bass traps I am using.

cryotweaks · « **Reply #15 on:** 12 Jul 2005, 02:48 am »

The Continuum 2.5s will be in my exhibit at the RMAF in room 7007. Appearing with the Nuforce 350 watt monoblocks, and quite possibly biamped with them. I am really looking forward to showing the 2.5's.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #16 on:** 12 Jul 2005, 03:03 am »

Quote from: cryotweaks

The Continuum 2.5s will be in my exhibit at the RMAF in room 7007. Appearing with the Nuforce 350 watt monoblocks, and quite possibly biamped with them. I am really looking forward to showing the 2.5's.

cryotweaks,

What other equipement will you be using in this system ? Thanks !![/list:u]Chris

zybar · « **Reply #17 on:** 12 Jul 2005, 03:07 am »

Quote from: cryotweaks

The Continuum 2.5s will be in my exhibit at the RMAF in room 7007. Appearing with the Nuforce 350 watt monoblocks, and quite possibly biamped with them. I am really looking forward to showing the 2.5's.

Can't wait to hear that combo.

What will you be using for source and preamp?

George

PeteG · « **Reply #18 on:** 12 Jul 2005, 10:42 am »

Quote from: ekovalsky

PeteG,

Are those Acoustics First products you have in your room ? They look similar to the Respond panels and Geometrix bass traps I am using.

Eric,
I have Eighth Nerve treatment on top of the ceiling and EchoBusters Bass
traps in the corner/side.

All the panels are DIY from here "DIY Panel Project".

Pete

Aether Audio · « **Reply #19 on:** 12 Jul 2005, 03:42 pm »

Jason1,

Quote

I hope I'm not stepping out of line, but, as expensive as these speakers are I would expect at least a SS9700 or Seas Millennium tweeter.

In response to your comment I feel I should fill everybody in on WHY the 9300 was chosen for this application.

Upon review of the available drivers for this application, "no stone was left un-turned" in our quest to find an optimal match to our waveguide technology. Every SEAS and ScanSpeak driver, along with virtually every other product from most other reputable manufacturers, was rigorously researched and their specifications compared in order to select the most optimal fit. The ones you mentioned were thoroughly investigated and found to fall short of the requirements.

To be sure, unless one has a thorough understanding of the physics involved, one is not in a position to properly evaluate such complex matters. Your very comment here harkens to the philosophy upon which this company is based. That is: Simply throwing financial resources at a project IS NOT a formula for success.

There are many manufacturers that prey on the unwary or inexperienced consumer by offering products manufactured with certain exotic materials and/or processes that may or may not provide substantial improvements in performance. One of the most effective methods of gaining a certain level of prestige and marketing leverage is to simply offer such products at a substantially higher price. If it costs a lot, it must be really good, right? Caveat emptor.

As we state on our website:

Quote

“Often, materials of lesser cost are equal to or even out-perform their exotic and costlier counterparts. Every effort is made to minimize cost without adversely compromising performance or aesthetics. Good engineering usually dictates some compromise. We control costs by always selecting the most cost effective material or process that offers the least negative impact on performance, durability and final finish. Our intent is to provide you -- the customer -- with the highest value products possible.”

So…the SS9300 was chosen in lieu of one or two EXTREMELY costlier counterparts. The other options are still under evaluation but if and when, they will be offered in a product that will be considerably more expensive than the products in our present line-up.

Your comment

Quote

“but, as expensive as these speakers are,”

seems to ignore the extensive engineering bundled into our products. Just for everybody’s info, there are as many as 25 components in the “high-pass section” of all of the crossover networks in the various models that supply the tweeters their drive signal from the amplifier. These components are needed to provide both the crossover function AND flatten the frequency response of the tweeter/waveguide system due to the large amount of low frequency gain provided by the waveguide. This is no trivial matter…especially when you consider that every crossover is tweaked to +/- 1dB before the speaker goes out the door. And no, a “better” tweeter wouldn’t make it easier. In fact, the ones you mentioned and others of their ilk would only make it more difficult as they are not a proper fit to begin with...AND they don’t offer the low frequency linearity and/or excursion capability needed for a 600Hz crossover frequency. I venture to say that we are the only company in the WORLD offering products with a crossover to the tweeter at, or even near 600Hz...without using a compression driver!!!

One final comment with regards to cost: Recently in Denmark our Revelation was compared to Wilson Audio Grand-Slams and determined to equal and possibly exceed their performance (by a private individual). When you consider that the Revelation in our Studio Finish lists for under $10K as compared to the Wilson’s at $100K, yeah, I think we offer excellent value…even though we “only” use the SS9300. The idea that any product can even begin to compete with another at 10 times it’s price should speak volumes about the inherent value of the less costly product. You know, most of you guys out there have never even heard our products, and those that have haven't heard them since their "rebirth" with the new tweeter (and the waveguide has changed too). You really have no idea just what league of performance our products are in now. But you'll see - soon.

By the way, have you seen this month’s Stereophile? Look at the “big name” speaker on the cover and its review. To think that anybody would produce a product that cost almost $45K with as lousy a set of specs as that product makes me just a little irritable.

I wouldn’t even let our new, upcoming lower cost products out the door with performance that bad. And even our little Timepiece blows it away – except maybe in sheer power handling. Even then, they’d be biting at their heels. You wait – we’re going to make W-A, S-F, E-W, A-G, Avln. et.al. embarrassed to even show their crap before it’s over with.

-Bob