[Bica]

I found the very opening of Sibelius violin concerto (Heifetz, SACD) quite handy for deciding the minimum toe-in--listen for the violin's location. If you can still hear even a trace of the violin's sound from the left speaker, more toe-in is needed.

[Bica]

A good friend brought a Phonic yesterday and took a quick FR measurement of the Timepieces in my room. Pretty flat unweighted, except for a +5 dB boom from 100Hz to 200 Hz--which I assume is the room--and the gradually rolled-off highs, which is expected in such a listening room measurement.

The Timepieces go really low--No significant roll-off even at 30 Hz.

I'll be getting a Phonic soon myself and will post a more detailed analysis here. Addressing the 100-200 Hz boom will be my first priority then.

Some updates about my set-up: I moved the Timepieces one foot further away from the side walls, and toed them in till I can just see a bit of the inside cabinet sides.

Tried the Vacuum State dpa300B (differential 300B PP, 20 watts/channel) with the Timepieces and so far so good (or too good). Far from a difficult load, the Timepiece.

[mixsit]

Just to put up another perspective, I'm playing with the Continuum's and the room is 16x19 and they're firing down the long dimension. I have them toed' in so that if I'm in the typical monitoring position (near field, front third of the room) we're in an equilateral triangle. But often I'll work or be listening from further back. So for what it's worth, the twist is I'm moving Vs changing toe-in here.
At about center of the room where they're crossing a few feet in front of me, and though a little less precise than being up front, the image is very satisfying and useful in a different way.
I still have some work to do (need to get them higher) but the idea was to have a good wide range of even coverage and sound-stage options, and this is working out great.

Man I love these speakers.
(Can't miss an opportunity to say that.)

Wayne

[Bill Baker]

Hi Wayne,
 I have also been playing with the Continuums lately. I found that when I was firing down the length of my room, 25 feet or so, the room took over. I have to set these (and most other) speakers along the long wall.

 What I am finding with these is toe-in is not as critical when compared to more "conventional" designs. Obviously the Waveguide is the reason for this.

 The soundstage is wide and deep without regard to room placement. When placing them in the general area that houses the Usher D2s, I was able to get a beautiful center image as well as soundstaging outside and behind the speakers. Of course I had to create a "fake wall" as this area opens into a large "L". Luckly, I was packing up 12 large amplifiers and used the boxes from Hurricanes, Monsoons and 2 large Ming-Da amplifiers to create this wall. Worked perfectly until UPS and Fed. Ex came and took my wall away.
 I then tried firing them down the longest run of my room which measure over 40 feet x 15 wide and aside from the bass being unatural (the room is wierd), the speakers simply dissapear.

 The best aspect is that I found the Bella SP/AV's to also exhibit the same characteristics in regard to soundstage and imaging due to the Waveguide. Yes, the SP series have more extension at both extremes. Especially down below. I was measuring into the low 20's (in room) with the Continuums.

 Now I just need to sell the D2s and replace them with a pair of Revelations

 I have to get the room fixed. There's my summer project!!!

[Bica]

I haven't been to a concert for almost six months (not since I brought back the Timepieces). Recently I saw certain interesting repertoire and went to some.

I have to admit that I suffered the "audiophile-in-a-concert" syndrom thoughout the first concert I went to--Shostakovich Fifth, BTW--but this time, gladly so and with tremendous satisfaction. The sheen of the instruments, the low frequency foundation, and the intimacy (not closeness) of the sound--all sounded so familiar!

To be fair, I must say that in my experiences, the magic of the Timepiece disappeared when matched with inferior electronics, so the credit isn't all the Timepiece's. But I also know very well that without the Timepieces, I'll probably waste another five, maybe ten years in my search for the absolute sound.  I already wrote a private letter to thank Bob, but--thank you, Bob.

[Double Ugly]

To be fair, I must say that in my experiences, the magic of the Timepiece disappeared when matched with inferior electronics, so the credit isn't all the Timepiece's.

No, of course not.  But isn't that what a speaker should be?  Shouldn't it essentially get out of the way and serve as a platform - a sonic transducer - for the recording via the rest of the equipment (assuming it is up to the task)?

I do, and that's why I'm so pleased with SP Tech speakers...and why I've ordered two more pair.  I realize you didn't intend your comment to be in any way construed as negative, but the fact that they allow you - and me - to so clearly hear the good *AND* the bad means they're doing exactly what they were designed to do IMO.

Though the process was tough on my ears - and over time, my bank account - finding components of a quality commensurate with the Timepieces was absolutely critical.  But now that it's done, I can honestly say I didn’t believe this level of sonic performance and satisfaction was achievable at anywhere near this price point.

But I also know very well that without the Timepieces, I'll probably waste another five, maybe ten years in my search for the absolute sound.

Even after finding the Timepieces, it took me over a year and a bunch of trail and error to get the ancillary equipment sorted out.  Either I'm painfully slow, or you're way ahead of the game.  

I suspect the former.  

One of the greatest strengths of SP Tech speakers is their neutrality.  They're the most neutral I've heard, and though their neutrality most positively manifests itself in a non-critical, music-loving environment, it also affords me an increased confidence in my analysis of the various components and cables that find their way into my system.  Point being, if you don't begin with speakers capable of delivering sound that's clean, clear, unfettered and uncolored, how can one accurately determine what is or isn't happening upstream?  

Furthermore, they allow you to confidently tune your system to sound the way you want.  Like a little tube flavor in your evening listening sessions?  Sure thing.  Want something that's almost clinically analytical for mixing and mastering work?  No problemo.  Want something in between?  It's yours for the taking.  Just find supporting equipment suited to your sonic desires and you're off and running.

Of course, the best part is having your cake and eating it, too.  Amazingly accurate, detailed sound delivered in a highly satisfying, musical way.  What’s not to like?  IMHO, they’re the ultimate transducer.

Anyway, I'm glad you're happy with the purchase.  My new Timepiece 2.1s should be arriving soon, and a rather unique pair of Revelations will follow a bit later.  Speaking of which, have you ordered Revelations yet?  If you think the Timepieces are good, you're in for a real treat.

Jim

[Bica]

Double Ugly, I am curious to know in what ways your Revelations are unique...

Just wanted to mention that I was sitting at the 19th row at the Shostakovich concert (National Music Hall in Taipei) and there was a striking similarity in the perceived imaging between the live performance and a good recording played through the Timepieces.

My Timepieces are actaully still sitting on a pair of pretty light stands which are only 20 inches tall. I'll be upgrading to a pair of custom stainless and brass stands (25" standard but can be changed to 20") soon, but I kind of like the current image height--I'll experiment with 25" and report back here.

[cryotweaks]

Hi Bica,

I think you will find the 20" height superior to the 25" height on the stands.

Double Ugly - Right on!  the SP Tech speakers really do give one an added degreee of confidence in judging the merits (or flaws) of other components.  That is both a blessing and a curse.  

[bhobba]

My getting my Timepieces delivered is getting closer all the time.  I still believe you are better off spending on the timepieces and less on a amp than an expensive amp and lesser speakers.  Are gains to be had in getting a better amp - prboably (but are suptle) - are they as dramtic as upgrading your speakers - I doubt it.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=602135
Well, I and a five (4M, 1F) friends of various audio/music backgrounds (one has a system anchored by B&W N805s, one has a DM from Yale, one was a player in a major symphony orchestra, and so on) did a single-blind listening test between the XR55 and my previous setup (Marantz AV600 pre-proc, Adcom GFA-535II, and Adcom GFA-2535) when the XR55 was basically new. (I had watched "The Daily Show" twice though it and that's about it.). Obviously, the test was not multichannel, because the Marantz does not do Dolby Digital or DPL2. Levels were matched at 1kHz with a scope and the matching was confirmed at 100Hz and 16kHz. Speakers were 12" Tannoy duals, which are both extremely resolving and moderately efficient (~94dB/w/m). Source material used was orchestral (Vladimir Ashkenazy conducting Shostakovich), jazz (Bela Fleck and the Flecktones), female vocalist (Natalie Merchant live). All were fed from a Powerbook to an Apple Airport Express and encoded in Apple Lossless. Though it doesn't matter, all of the panelists had seen BFF and Natalie Merchant live before; I was the only one who had heard Ashkenazy conduct live, though not this particular piece.) Cables were switched manually, or pretended to be switched using a calculated time delay, which is the flaw in the test. The listening and equipment were in different rooms (~25' of speaker wire) so that the listeners could not see what was going on. Each musical excerpt was played 7 times over 1/2 hour. After the data were crunched in SAS, it was clear that there was no statistically significant sonic difference between the Marantz/Adcom separates and the Panny. As a control, the next day the same panelists ran a second single-blind test, this time using two pairs of identical speakers (KEF Q-Compacts) rather than swapping leads on one set. As the geometry of the Q-Compact precludes vertical stacking, one pair was set next to the other horizontally on the same stand, with a horizontal center-to-center spacing of about 7", to either side of what was consider the ideal placement azis. At random intervals, the leads were swapped, so that one set of speakers was connected to the other electronics. (Or simply connected to the same ones after a delay to simulate swapping.) Two statistical analyses were run, using SAS. Controlling for change of speaker pair (which was statistically significant, as one would expect) the difference in the components was not significant. The conclusions are obvious: no difference. However, the Panny is much smaller and uses far less energy for the same result, so on balance I think it's a win for the little guy. If size or energy efficiency aren't concerns, then the Panny would've lost because I already had the other gear and the Panny was (small) additional expenditure. The conclusions are obvious: no difference. However, the Panny is much smaller and uses far less energy for the same result, so on balance I think it's a win for the little guy. If size or energy efficiency aren't concerns, then the Panny would've lost because I already had the other gear and the Panny was (small) additional expenditure. Previously, this system or components within it had been found sonically identical to several other chains, generally featuring more expensive gear (the Adcoms vs. Classe amps, the Marantz pre vs. a Meridian 501, that sort of thing) but there's no valid reason to think that what what works "up" won't work "down", too. Any receiver of competent design should sound the same as the Panny, or for that matter a multi-kilobuck Meridian/Classe separates system, on appropriate speakers.

To me it is obvious - get the timepieces if you can possibly afford them and a cheap amp like the XR55; then try amps to get the one just right for you at your lesure.

Thanks
Bill

[Bica]

I think you will find the 20" height superior to the 25" height on the stands.

Many thanks cryotweaks for your insight--and that's actually one of the only two concerns I have about the Revelation: that the tweeter is placed higher up than on the Timepiece (sitting on a stand of regular height).  What's your impression of the Revelation's imaging ability compared to the Timepiece's?

I would also be interested in knowing Bob's take on this (his explanations on dispersion in another thread have been clear and extremely useful information), if he has time to spare.

[Bill Baker]

No, of course not. But isn't that what a speaker should be? Shouldn't it essentially get out of the way and serve as a platform - a sonic transducer - for the recording via the rest of the equipment (assuming it is up to the task)?

 I agree. The speakers are a window to represent what the associated equipment is capable of. I have now played with MANY amplifiers driving my Continuums from a 50 watt Signature 3205 right on up through the EXtreme Hurricanes.
 With these speakers, I found that a minimum of 70 watts (tubes) was preferred to keep dynamics in tact. They are currently being driven by a Reference Jolida 801 (as they were in the Chicago Audio Society) and this seems to be working out nicely in their present location.
 For shits and giggles, I hooked up a pair of my prototype Bella 25 watt 300B amps. Surprisingly enough, the presentation was quite enjoyable but the dynamics were obviously no where near these speaker's capabilities.
 With what I have on hand at the moment, I find the ASL Monsoons driven by the ModWright to be a great combination.
 Throw some good vinyl through this system and I am in heaven.

 I think I will go with two pair of Monsoons in a bi-amp set-up when I finally get around to bringing in the Revelations.    We'll see.

[Double Ugly]

Double Ugly, I am curious to know in what ways your Revelations are unique...

You have a PM.

Double Ugly - Right on!  the SP Tech speakers really do give one an added degreee of confidence in judging the merits (or flaws) of other components.  That is both a blessing and a curse.  

Yep.  

And be advised, that blessing and curse thing can get expensive quick if you aren't careful.

I still believe you are better off spending on the timepieces and less on a amp than an expensive amp and lesser speakers.  Are gains to be had in getting a better amp - prboably (but are suptle) - are they as dramtic as upgrading your speakers - I doubt it.

I couldn't agree more.  

In my opinion, there are probably a *LOT* of amps that will produce satisfactory music with SP Technology speakers.  The problem I had was failing to comply with my wife's admonition to avoid exposure to new gear.  

There's a lot of wisdom in one of her favorite sayings, "You can't miss what you don't know you don't have."  Problem is, I'm always wondering what it is I don't have.  

Jim

[Karsten]

My getting my Timepieces delivered is getting closer all the time.  I still believe you are better off spending on the timepieces and less on a amp than an expensive amp and lesser speakers.  Are gains to be had in getting a better amp - prboably (but are suptle) - are they as dramtic as upgrading your speakers - I doubt it.

Hehe you will be wiser If you don't want to buy new gear, don't try new gear with these speakers

I'm pretty amazed how little coloration these speakers give and how they project the qualities (or lack of) in the front end equipment.

Here's to Bob for some quality listening time

Karsten

[bhobba]

Hehe you will be wiser If you don't want to buy new gear, don't try new gear with these speakers I'm pretty amazed how little coloration these speakers give and how they project the qualities (or lack of) in the front end equipment.

Don't get me wrong.  I believe firmly that a better amp will give better results especially with speakers as revealing as Bobs.  But blind listening test after blind listening test proves, essentially (please note this caveat), all competently designed amps sound the same.
http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf
And that article was written ages ago - lower priced amps have only gotten better since.
To pick differences you need to be really familiar with the speakers, room acoustics and have good source material.  Then over time the subtle differences will become apparent - difference blind listening tests will usually 'mask' (although not to the trained experienced listener with the correct source material).  I have mentioned elsewhere I think it is a little like high bit rate MP3.  Blind listening test after blind listening test shows that is indistinguishable from the original for most material on even the very best equipment eg quad electrostatics.  But there are guys out there who really know their stuff, for example the guy that wrote monkey audio lossless compression.  He got sick and tired of claims lossy audio was totally transparent and on well recorded material was able to pick it blind.  Not only that but such people can in fact train others to pick it.  As an aside my advice is don't learn those tricks because then MP3's may then be unlistenable - at least one guy who was trained was really upset about it.  I suspect something similar with amps and over time I will need to upgrade my amp.  I have no doubt guys like Hugh Dean of Aspen amps could easily train me to pick the differences - hell without training once I get my hands on a much better amp for an extended period it will probably become apparent.  In the mean time when I get them I plan to enjoy my panny XR55 until financial issues allow me to investigate alternatives.  And for those with financial issues do try to get the Timepieces and a lesser amp - you will be glad you did - differences in amplifier sound is subtle - differences in speakers are not.  As an aside I would really love to see guys like Hugh Dean take part in those blind listening tests.

Thanks
Bill

[lonewolfny42]

bhobba :

I have no doubt guys like Hugh Dean of Aspen amps could easily train me to pick the differences - hell without training once I get my hands on a much better amp for an extended period it will probably become apparent. In the mean time when I get them I plan to enjoy my panny XR55 until financial issues allow me to investigate alternatives.

[/list:u]

Good man that Hugh Dean...and he makes a very good amp, the AKSA. Its DIY (or get someone to do it for you)....and it works very well with my TP's. Might be worth checking out when your money flow is better. Hope your speakers arrive soon Bob !!! [/list:u]
Chris[/list:u]

[Karsten]

Bill,

Basically I think you are doing the right thing by investing in good speakers first. This way you are sure to get proper front end equipment and not just something which will compensate for flaws in the speakers.

However be sure that everything matters with these speakers.....

Karsten

[bhobba]

bhobba :

[/list:u]
Good man that Hugh Dean...and he makes a very good amp, the AKSA. Its DIY (or get someone to do it for you)....and it works very well with my TP's. Might be worth checking out when your money flow is better. Hope your speakers arrive soon Bob !!! [/list:u]
Chris[/list:u]

Its Bill  

Yep - a very good option I suspect.  So far I am thinking of an Aspen or Van Alstine.  But I will probably have quite a while to think of others.  One advantage of the aspen is I am looking at using a bolder modded SB3 which works great with its internal volume control so I would need a switch to directly input the SB3 and output from a HT receiver.  

The main problem with getting them delivered now is my finances are in a state of flux - it probably would be OK but it would be a shame if the money I spent on it was required for something else and I need to sell long held shares or something like that.

Thanks
Bill

[Double Ugly]

Hi Bill,

One advantage of the aspen is I am looking at using a bolder modded SB3 which works great with its internal volume control so I would need a switch to directly input the SB3 and output from a HT receiver.

I can vouch for the quality of the Bolder-modified Squeezebox and PS.  I owned a top-of-the-line SB2 and battery PS from another popular modder, but IMO and in my system, it was bettered by the "Basic" PS from Bolder Cables.  

The Bolder equipment provides the same unrestrained and uncolored sound you can expect from the Timepieces.  I love my Bolder SB2 and PS, and believe them to be one of the better investments I've made in audio.

FWIW...

Jim

PS - I've heard neither amp you mentioned, but given your location and their reputation, I'd have think long and hard before going with something other than Aspen/AKSA.  I believe few would dare question Hugh's technical expertise, and he has time and again proven himself a true gentleman and scholar.  I'd bet dollars to donuts his amps would sound glorious w/ the SP Techs.  If I could afford it, I'd have someone build four of the 100W N+ amps for me and have a bi-amping field day.

[bhobba]

PS - I've heard neither amp you mentioned, but given your location and their reputation, I'd have think long and hard before going with something other than Aspen/AKSA. I believe few would dare question Hugh's technical expertise, and he has time and again proven himself a true gentleman and scholar. I'd bet dollars to donuts his amps would sound glorious w/ the SP Techs. If I could afford it, I'd have someone build four of the 100W N+ amps for me and have a bi-amping field day.

There are a number of technical people I hold in very high esteem - Bob from SP Tech, Seigfried of Orion and Linkwitz-Riley fame, and Hugh Dean are among them.  An option that is particularly appealing to me is to biamp the Timepieces via a DEQX and 55N amps (I listen at low levels and you get a 3db increase from biamping) fed with a modded SB3. To me that would be simply great - perhaps my ultimate goal.  But for now when I get them delivered a panny 55 will have to do.  I can add the SB3 with you beaut power supply later then the DEQX and aspen amps.  Actually the DEQX and aspen amps will cost me less than some of the super expensive amps you see advertised and would smoke them all because of room correction and time alignment.  Strangely Bob has mentioned he thinks his internal crossovers may have the edge over using the DEQX as a Crossover - but one can always use very gentle slopes with the DEQX and keep the internal crossovers and time correct the drivers and apply room correction.  I know Bob has one and can advise on the best set up.  Without his experience I would have been inclined to rip out the crossover - but Bob has done the homework for me - just another plug for a great guy.

Thanks

[lonewolfny42]

Its Bill ....

Bill not Bob....Bill not Bob....Bill not Bob....Sorry about that Bill....  (don't know why I was thinking Bob... ...oh, maybe thinking Bob from SP Tech....or maybe it was just late... ...but I got it....its Bill    )[/list:u]
Chris[/list:u]