[Aether Audio]

Folks,

Here's some interesting reading:
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/sptech.htm

Not that we should be that all surprised!

You will note that there are presently some errors with regards to the specifications.  I have just sent an e-mail to the editor and hopefully they will have them corrected soon.  The biggest error is the crossover frequency - it's 600Hz instead of 950Hz.  I believe they got the info from our website which is sorely in need of upgrading.  Never fear though, a whole new site is almost completed.

The only issue I take with the review is the comment about the Continuum 2.5's dynamic range.  C'mon guys, we all know better.  Victor Chavira's little integrated surely doesn't have the juice to come near exercising these puppies.  Of all the things to question...you may not like the sound of our speakers for whatever reason, but everybody that has ever heard them has commented about their incredible dynamic capabilities.

Then there's the extension comment.  From a specs standpoint at least the Cotinuum 2.5's go both lower and higher than Victor's Martin Miles.  But...I'm picking nits.  To sum up - Yahooo!!!

-Bob

[mcrespo71]

Which integrated did he use- the Kora or the Magnum Dynalab?  I couldn't tell from the review.  Regardless, congrats!

Michael

[zybar]

Which integrated did he use- the Kora or the Magnum Dynalab?  I couldn't tell from the review.  Regardless, congrats!

Michael

Hard time believing it would be the Kora integrated as I owned their top of the line mono amps and I doubt they would really drive the Continuums very well since they are a 4 ohm load.

George

[Aether Audio]

Guys,

I checked out the Magnum Dynalab MD-208 that Victor used - he said it was his primary system amplification.  It's not as anemic as I had suspected at 160 WPC into 4-ohms, but we all know what the Continuums can take.  

From a power handling standpoint, they're essentially the same as the Revelations Steve Chang has.  Same crossover, drivers, etc.  Well, he's running a pair of the Belles Refrence 350's at how many kilowatts per channel?  Ask Steve, he'll tell you what they can do with that kind of power.  Dynamics??? Victor would be cleaning out his shorts right now if he would have heard that!

-Bob

[Russell Dawkins]

Once you factor in the limitations of the review system in question (someone, get that man an amp!) the comparisons with the Martens are flattering and in favor of the Continuums in ways that are very significant to me.
Congratulations, Bob

[lonewolfny42]

Congrats Bob on the review !!

A quote from the review....

Rather, they are for people who know the sound of real music, in real time and space.

[/list:u]

Good point....and I agree !! [/list:u]
As for the Martin comparison....that review was

Issue 17....[/list:u]

Chris[/list:u]

[audiojerry]

Congrats Bob - another deserved feather in the hat. Based on my experience now with two SP Tech speakers, it will be the amp that limits dynamic range before the speakers. And they sure do energize the air!

[Aether Audio]

Dear Friends,

Thanks everybody for your kind comments.  It's nice to hear from our friends and to be able to share our good fortune.  Again thanks much for the support.

On another note, I feel ornery today. I've decided to be a "poop" and get something started.  So...for all you first-order crossover network guys...whaddaya think about this?:

These speakers simply do not sound like typical two-ways. Instruments sound whole, not like they are reconstituted form high and low frequencies. I could detect no timing distortions whatsoever. Pitch relationships were uncorrrupted by an intrusive crossover.

and...

My $10,000 Marten Miles speakers are more extended and dynamic, but do not have the phase and timing perfection that allows the SP Techs to seamlessly and realistically recreate musical events.

  Those $10,000 Marten Miles have ALL first-order networks I know, the guy must be deaf!  How else could you explain this from a system designed around a 4th-order Linkwitz-Riley topology?



Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!
 

-Bob

[bhobba]

First Bob congratulations on the excellent review.

But before getting to the issue of first order crossovers I just want to mention something I am sure Bob will agree with.  Even though Bob's speakers will handle large amounts of power and play very loud without distress of any kind they are still look very suitable for those like myself that do not listen at such volumes.  After all they are designed not only for domestic playback but also for close field monitoring.  I sill feel that point about the speakers is not emphasized enough.  Indeed it is one of the reasons I am toying with the idea of getting a pair - one concern is the cost of shipping to Australia.    

Those $10,000 Marten Miles have ALL first-order networks  I know, the guy must be deaf! How else could you explain this from a system designed around a 4th-order Linkwitz-Riley topology?

I am not a first order fan.  In fact my favorite crossover is a DEQX with very high order crossovers phase and frequency corrected.  That way the drivers are only working in the range they are best at.  But my reading of the claims of the first order guys is that they say they are more musical and less fatiguing to listen to for extended periods than higher order crossovers.  Such claims are very hard to verify in reviews.

As an aside Bob have you looked at producing a DEQX version of your speakers?  They look like the perfect candidates to me because they are two way so you would only require 4 high quality amplifiers instead of 6 in a 3 way.  I looked long and hard at a DEQX but the cost of say 6 Nuforce amps - ouch.

Thanks
Bill

[Bill Baker]

I would also have to agree about 1st order crossovers. I have heard many designs based on these slopes with not too many that sounded "right" to my ears.

 The way I look at it is that most of the inexpensive designs use a simple 1st order crossover with the same crossover frequency for both drivers. This presents far to much overlap of the drivers creating an increase [forwardness] with an octave above and below the crossover point. Usually, the equates to an unrealistic, forward midrange that drowns out the rest of the frequencies at the two extremes. Many will say this "openness" or "liveliness" when in fact it is a false impression.

 Using higher order slopes allows the drivers to operate more efficiently. How else could we use a <1kHz crossover point on a typical 1" soft dome tweeter. Try that with a 6dB slope! Now we add into the equation a sealed enclosure which also plays additional rolls on how a crossover reacts.

 As far as going DEQX, I am not completely convinced that this is the solution but in keeping an open mind (and so nobody yells at me), I will be experimenting with this very shortly. I think it may be a nice available option with large horn systems at the very least. Time will tell.

[Aether Audio]

bhobba,

Thanks so much for the vote.  You are very correct about the power issue.  I make a big stink about high power because I'm a burnt out rocker/former sound reinforcement engineer type - for one.  The other is that I just get a HUGE kick out of hearing the full dynamic range of a live performance coming out of a pair of speakers in a living room.  That's the absolute hardest thing to do in a design while maintaining all the finesse at lower levels.  

Anybody can buld a sweet sounding speaker that never has to be cranked to live levels.  Try building a high-end speaker that will caress the ears of a wine sipping audio reviewer and that will still please a half deaf orchestra conductor.  That's a real challenge.

But you are very correct about not needing big power (unless you're like me).  I have a customer that has a 50 watt Cary integrated and he's happy as punch.  He even tried bi-amping and didn't see any value in the extra headroom. So there you go.  You don't need no stinking megawatt amp - but it sure is fun when you have one!

As far as the DEQX goes, I have one.  Have you noticed me suggesting for people to use it with our speakers or better yet, offering any packages with one included?  There's a reason for that but I'm not going to say any more about it.  If you really want to know why you can PM me, but I'm not making any public comments about it.

It has it's advantages for sure, but I don't recommend using it on our speakers with regards to its crossover function.  Let's leave it at that.

You can bi-amp passively though you know?  The binding posts are all there to do so.  I can even throw in a little first-order passive filter box that will knock down the out of band energy being fed to the input of the amps.  The corner frequencies of the H.P/L.P sections are 2 octaves away from our X-O frequency so it won't interact negatively.  I've built one for myself and it does buy back some headroom - especially on the amp driving the tweeter.

By the way, I use BAX Global.  Their rates are pretty darn reasonable and I've never had a damaged shipment since going with them.  Add that to our 30% off sale and Australia isn't nearly as far away as you might think.

-Bob

[bhobba]

As far as the DEQX goes, I have one. Have you noticed me suggesting for people to use it with our speakers or better yet, offering any packages with one included? There's a reason for that but I'm not going to say any more about it. If you really want to know why you can PM me, but I'm not making any public comments about it.

It has it's advantages for sure, but I don't recommend using it on our speakers with regards to its crossover function. Let's leave it at that.

Interestingly my reading of it is that as far as high quality speakers with well designed crossovers are concerned is that, apart from room correction, audible differences are not that apparent - certainly not enough to justify the extra cost.  When I said I was a fan of it I meant once the cost comes down.  

By the way, I use BAX Global. Their rates are pretty darn reasonable and I've never had a damaged shipment since going with them. Add that to our 30% off sale and Australia isn't nearly as far away as you might think.

Thanks for clarifying that.  I will be contacting you in the next couple of days to get some further details and perhaps to get some further thoughts on the DEQX.  I have a few money concerns and other issues right now I but I see no reason to not take advantage of your 30% off and pay for them now.  However for reasons I won't go into here I will need to take delivery of them in 6 to 12 months time.

Thanks
Bill

[Russell Dawkins]

I also wonder if active crossovers are supposed to be such an advantage, whether a cheap active based on something like a Behringer DCX 2496 would sound better than an excellently implemented passive such as that in the SP Tech products.