Notes on the Timepiece 2.1

fu_man · « **Reply #40 on:** 22 Apr 2006, 01:38 pm »

Have any of you guys heard/compared the Zu Definitions. Wondering how they compare with the the Revelations?
Or, the Zu Druids compared to the Timepieces or Continuums?
Any thoughts?

Double Ugly · « **Reply #41 on:** 22 Apr 2006, 02:45 pm »

Quote from: fu_man

Have any of you guys heard/compared the Zu Definitions. Wondering how they compare with the the Revelations?
Or, the Zu Druids compared to the Timepieces or Continuums?
Any thoughts?

I'm sure there are others, but the only person *I* know who's heard all of the above is Joe Jurzec of JAM’n Audio. I'll direct him to the thread, but if he doesn't respond soon, you may want to email him @ jamnaudio1@sbcglobal.net

Alternatively, if you don't mind international rates, you may call him @ (847) 356-5161.

FWIW, I own Timepiece 2.0s, will soon receive a pair of 2.1s and will eventually take possession of a pair of Revelations. The Timepieces are killer speakers, and more than hold their own at well beyond their price point IMHO. That said, when considering the entire audible spectrum (i.e., from top to bottom, highs to lows), the Revelation is the best speaker I've ever heard...period.

And no, I don't sell them, represent them or have any investment in the company.

Hmmm...on second thought, I guess I should say I have no investment aside from the aforementioned purchases.

Jim

fu_man · « **Reply #42 on:** 24 Apr 2006, 03:21 pm »

Jim,
Thanks for you comments and the hook up with Joe. Yes he has been in contact and provided some useful discussion. He also reminded me that this isn't the most polite forum circle to ask such questions... oops wasn't thinking, please excuse me Bob!

Double Ugly · « **Reply #43 on:** 24 Apr 2006, 03:52 pm »

You're welcome, fu_man. I don't represent SP Tech, but I have quite a bit experience with their products.

Let me know if I can be of further assistance.

Aether Audio · « **Reply #44 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 02:21 am »

fu_man,

Quote

He also reminded me that this isn't the most polite forum circle to ask such questions... oops wasn't thinking, please excuse me Bob!

Huh? Excuse you for what? All you did was ask a legitimate question. One that I can't or wouldn't-if-I-could answer, but...maybe someone else can. Polite? We try to be. I get a little irritated at times when I sense someone is trying to bait me, but other than that I expect everyone in our circle to be polite - even me!

So ask what you will as long as it's not immoral or indecent. I can't make any guarantees about the answer you'll get, but it should be polite in kind, whatever it is.

Oh, and welcome to our circle!

-Bob

fu_man · « **Reply #45 on:** 25 Apr 2006, 12:57 pm »

Thanks Bob,
I did agree with Joe in thinking that it was a question better posted on say 2 channel. I appreciate yor reply and SP Tech's are definitely staying on my must audition list!

Tim

bhobba · « **Reply #46 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 03:04 am »

Quote from: Double Ugly

That said, when considering the entire audible spectrum (i.e., from top to bottom, highs to lows), the Revelation is the best speaker I've ever heard...period.

And from what guys who should know like Jim Merod say they in fact may be the best - certainly up there with the likes of those often considered the best like the Orions, WAR Reference One etc. Of course eventually I hope to own a pair as well - (timeline - when I formally retire in 4 years time and get my retirement money - that and a new car). Love that transmission line bass. And Timepieces at under $3000.00 - a steal.

As an aside you may be interested in how the discussion on interconnects and my comments about bybees finished up - check it out. I knew mentioning them would open a can of worms but didn't think it would be quite as bad as it was. I wonder if Bob has ever tried them on his speakers?

Thanks
Bill

Bill Baker · « **Reply #47 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 03:13 am »

Quote

As an aside you may be interested in how the discussion on interconnects and my comments about bybees finished up - check it out. I knew mentioning them would open a can of worms but didn't think it would be quite as bad as it was. I wonder if Bob has ever tried them on his speakers?

Hi Bill,
While I have not seen or read your thread concerning Bybees in speakers, I will tell you I am a big believer in them. I have Bybees in the tweeter network of my Musica Bella SP/AV-2s (based on the Continuum design) and would not go back to running them without for my preferences.

If I owned the SP Continuums that are currently in my showroom, I would install Bybees in them as well.

I have installed Bybees in a countless number of loudspeakers that I have build and/or modified over the years as well as in who knows how many tube amplifiers and CD players.

I am not looking to start a debate here on this thread as most people know I will not get invloved in debates. I only wanted to voice my opinion on the Bybees. To each their own.

Double Ugly · « **Reply #48 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 03:26 am »

Quote from: bhobba

And from what guys who should know like Jim Merod say they in fact may be the best - certainly up there with the likes of those often considered the best like the Orions, WAR Reference One etc.

I could add a whole slew of high-dollars entries I've heard at shows and personal auditions that don't hold a candle to the Revelations, but it would still only be my opinion. Folks *really* need to hear these things for themselves.

Quote from: bhobba

Of course eventually I hope to own a pair as well - (timeline - when I formally retire in 4 years time and get my retirement money - that and a new car). Love that transmission line bass. And Timepieces at under $3000.00 - a steal.

No bass I've ever heard - transmission line, subwoofer or integrated driver(s) – has equaled the performance of Bob's proprietary T-line. I don't know what he did, but suffice to say it works.

The rest of the speaker is simply a Continuum, which itself is a great speaker. But the bass from the Revelations is...incredible. It’s entirely possible there’s something out there as good or even better, but nothing I've heard produced the subtle nuances and idiosyncrasies of various instruments in the lower octaves that I heard from the Revelations. If it wasn't so special, I'd save myself a bunch of money and get a pair of Continuums or Continuum 2.5s.

Quote from: bhobba

As an aside you may be interested in how the discussion on interconnects and my comments about bybees finished up - check it out. I knew mentioning them would open a can of worms but didn't think it would be quite as bad as it was. I wonder if Bob has ever tried them on his speakers?

Yep, saw it, but thanks for the head's up.

I'm all-but positive Bob hasn't tried Bybees.

Jim

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #49 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 03:45 am »

DU :

Quote

I could add a whole slew of high-dollars entries I've heard at shows and personal auditions that don't hold a candle to the Revelations, but it would still only be my opinion. Folks *really* need to hear these things for themselves.

[/list:u]How true !! At the RMAF '05 I got to hear them at reefus's house ( Steve)....wow !!! if I only had the room....

Chris[/list:u]

bhobba · « **Reply #50 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 04:02 am »

Quote from: Response Audio

I am not looking to start a debate here on this thread as most people know I will not get invloved in debates. I only wanted to voice my opinion on the Bybees. To each their own.

Indeed. And I really appreciate your comment. FWIW I believe bybees do work - it is just interesting people get so worked up about the issue. But we have people that believe Daytons sound as good as Sonicaps - even Bob told me he can hear the difference with Sonicaps in his speakers which is why I forked out the extra dosh for them. Makes one wonder; it really does.

As always Bill all the best
Bill

Bill Baker · « **Reply #51 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 04:08 am »

Quote

even Bob told me he can hear the difference with Sonicaps in his speakers

Yes, even I agree that the SoniCaps are a few cuts above the basic Solen or Dayton capacitors. Very clean and the ability to dissapear from the signal path.
I have tried these as well as MANY other capacitors. I have chosen a differnt route for the Musica Bella line but use a lot of the SoniCaps in other various applications.

bhobba · « **Reply #52 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 04:32 am »

Quote from: Double Ugly

I could add a whole slew of high-dollars entries

From the days I listened to speakers a lot I can say for certain most high dollar speakers are simply not worth the money. They often had a lot of trouble beating Axis LS28's - a rather good 2 way at only $700.00. I have never found a speaker with as good midrange as quad electrostatics (ribbons are very close, my Axis LS88's are close as well but not as close as Ribbons by a smidgen) and very few with as good treble (ribbons were) - yet I have heard many speakers more expensive (notably some of the more expensive BW and Focal models). That is another thing that really makes you wonder. When someone (Karsten I think) mentioned they thought the Timepieces were as good as the Quads (obviously better in the bass) - that is really something. A Quad with awsome world beating bass would be something very special. Yet the revelations are nowhere near as expensine as say http://www.lenwallisaudio.com.au/products/details.php?pid=876
- which is only the middle of the Focal range

Poser value comes to mind. To be fair however usual dealer overheads are expensive.

Thanks
Bill

Bica · « **Reply #53 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 06:07 am »

Speaking about the Quad...

Whilst in the process of designing a pair of stand for the Timepiece (this will be constrcted with solid brass rods in tapered tall holow acrylic pyramids filled with steel sand and tipped with brass cones top and bottom), I will be listening to the Quad '57 again in my main system for some weeks. I just powered the '57s on and still have to wait some 48 hours (roughly the time it takes to properly charge the '57).

I presume the Bybee won't affect the inductance/capacitance of the drivers (since it's soldered directly to the input terminals of the drivers, if I am not mistaken), and therefore won't affect the crossover/Zobel network's intended correction/compensation? If so I might also experiment with the Bybee myself...

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #54 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 06:28 am »

I'd be curious to hear your response to the sound of the Quads, now that you're used to the Timepieces.
The '57s used to be the de-facto standard for mid range tonality in the late 60s and through the 70s.
In fact it was standard practice for a while in England, in magazine loudspeaker reviews, for the reviewer to compare the sound he was hearing to that of the Quad, partly because everyone knew what they sounded like and in part simply because the Quad was widely regarded as the benchmark.

Bica · « **Reply #55 on:** 26 Apr 2006, 08:11 am »

I'll post my initial impression on the '57--after the Timepiece, i.e.--in three weeks.

Before re-instating the '57 in my system I tried out several other dynamic speakers still in my collection. I gave each at least two days' time but--fortunately or unfortunately--the only conclusive outcome was that I now know I'll be reducing my speaker collection drastically.

The '57 is a beautiful speaker to behold, especially with its metal grill on. Talk about timeless design.

bhobba · « **Reply #56 on:** 27 Apr 2006, 03:30 am »

Quote from: Bica

I presume the Bybee won't affect the inductance/capacitance of the drivers (since it's soldered directly to the input terminals of the drivers, if I am not mistaken), and therefore won't affect the crossover/Zobel network's intended correction/compensation? If so I might also experiment with the Bybee myself.

I would really like to hear what you find out.

Electrically bybees are a.02 ohm resistor with vanishingly small inductance and capacitance. So inserting them into electrical circuits will usually not have any actual effect - electrically. The question is do they lead to audible improvements.

If you actually cut one open you find it is a very high quality .02 ohm resistor surrounded by a proprietary ceramic substance. In fact they are evidently made by a manufacturer who also makes them for the military - if it was not for that they would evidently be hellishly expensive. That is something the naysayers need to address - if they are pure snake oil why does the military use them?

So far I have not given my view. Well here it is - they do filter noise by an unknown mechanism that somehow has an effect on all noise in the circuit - for example the noise generated in the driving transistors of an amp is somehow diminished - I don't know how but if it is audible it can't be just the noise in the wire because that is vanishing small compared to that generated by the actual active components. Perhaps it is literally a filter - noise has a random character - perhaps it smoothes out random fluctuations somehow.

Thanks
Bill

cryotweaks · « **Reply #57 on:** 27 Apr 2006, 03:39 am »

Whatever they are, Jack ain't talkin'.

Actually the newer versions, the Slipstreams, achieve similar sonic ends by a different means. They run the signal through a very small length of carbon fiber nanotubes. Hellishly expensive, but they possess some really interesting properties. Lets just say that the first company to make an actual wire out of these things (at a reasonable price) will own the high end audio market.

I have a scientific American article on carbon fiber nanotubes (499k PDF file) that has some really great info put into human language. If anyone is interested in reading it, PM me.

Bica · « **Reply #58 on:** 3 May 2006, 04:36 am »

Russell, here are some of my initial observations on the Quad '57:

The biggest surprise is that the '57 sounds less transparent than the Timepiece. This was immediately apprarent when I first made the swtich, and did not improve after more than a week's continuous use. I remember when I first listened to the Timepiece in my system I felt that it was not as transparent as the Quad--so this really surprised me now. The result of this relative lack of transparency is that the magical "liveness" that made me smile in a concert is now gone. I am made quite aware that I am listening to recorded music.

Nevertheless, the '57 is a beautiful-sounding speaker. It has a full and rich sound. In my current, largish, listening space its bass reproduction is quite respectable and the overall balance leaves little to desire.

The '57 is relatively easy to position--a seamless, deep and wide soundstage was achieved in no time, and the imaging is full-bodied with adequate height. It's not as sharply focused as the best dynamic speakers, but to me it's not a problem. The lack of transparency is.

That's it for now. I will remove the '57's metal grill over this weekend.

Aether Audio · « **Reply #59 on:** 3 May 2006, 04:46 am »

Quote

The biggest surprise is that the '57 sounds less transparent than the Timepiece.

Huh?

So why am I not rich$$$!!!

-Bob