[Zep Dude]

Hi Everyone,

I just purchased a used pair of 9.0's and there's on thing I'm having trouble with.  The low end seems lighter than it should -especially given that so many reviews praise the low end extension of these speakers.

I initially had them placed steped in with the rear ports about 4 inches from the wall.  Thinking this was perhaps not allowing the ports to "breath" I moved them about another foot away from the wall without any improvement.

Since I don't have another pair to compare them to I want to just ask a subjective question.  What do other people think of the low end on these?   I mean, given that the specs put them down only -3db at 33hz I really expect more.   The other day I recorded a large brazilian drum called a zordo (a lot of energy around 60hz) and the 9.0's sounded broken -they just wouldn't put out the bottom to capture this drum.  On more conventional recordings (let's say, Chuckie's in Love) I can hear the bottom but it's still light.  Certainly not the acclaimed bottom end that Norh and many reviews brag about.

When I get back to the studio late next week I'll try to scope the frequency response and report back.   In the meantime I wanted to get some opinions from experienced users.

By the way, I'm powering these with a Musical Fidelity A3cr amp so I know the Norh's are getting nice juice.

I appreciate any opinioins.

[Tyson]

Could be a room mode.  I did an RTA on them a while back, and they are flat to 40hz, and drop off precipitously below that.  They should produce 60hz very nicely. . .

[Dozer]

I had nOrh SM 6.9 which I believe is the same size cabinet, and also a speaker which had "bragged about" bass response, although the drivers aren't near so high end as the 9.

I experienced substantial albeit lean (euphemistically "percussive/fast") bass when they were on 15" stands close to back and side walls.  They "hit" pretty good in that small room sitting low.   But on normal 24" stands in a normal room without boundary reinforcement = NOTHING LOW.   They were a big disappointment to me bass-wise especially when I A/B'd them against some old Spendors a friend had.   The nOrhs were completely embarrassed in the mid-bass especially - it just wasn't there.

I think nOrh's are destined to be high-passed for good results if used at all.  I think most owners ultimately high pass them, or pass them on.

I would take the stats nOrh publishes with a grain of salt with respect to frequency response, impedance, and where electronics are concerned - power.  Observe the discrepancies in nOrh specs for LeAmp/MB100 - nOrh claims vs. John Curl's measurements, versus the somewhat "different" specs on the IRD site which seem to support Curl's statement that it is indeed an 80 watt amp.   Also, for grins, check out the impedance specs on the SM6.9 drivers and explain how this is an 8 ohm speaker when all these parts are put together.  The proprietary Thai crossover?  

At least the 9.0 are exotic.   Be happy you didn't kick three grand for them.  You paid $1500 right so you can put those revelator drivers in a new cabinet and not come out all THAT bad.   Put the drums in your garden and call up HGTV - they'll love it!

[jqp]

Dozer - Sounds plausible, except there are too many who actually do have them and don't have bass problems! I have a cement floor with carpet and they are on 24" stands, about 12" from the wall. No problems with bass for me. I can feel plenty in my chest with the right music.

As for measurements there has been a lot written about that on HD and AC. You don't know what you are saying.

Zep Dude - I would look at who did these reviews and ask yourself what is wrong with your setup. Also what do you think "good bass" sounds like? Try something other than Chuck E's In Love and something you recorded. There are plenty of CD's to compare with. Check out TNT-audio.com A lot of bass out there is actually distorted at many frequencies but loud. The 9.0s are not super loud, but they are very accurate.

[Dozer]

Zep dude:  or maybe try the Koolaid...

jqp:  "don't know what I'm saying"?   explain please - I'm only recounting my personal experience, plus a well known thread on AudioAsylum (not owned and operated by nOrh afficionados), plus driver impedance specs from the Vifa website.    Why would you say "I don't know what I'm saying"?    Curt will only say "specs are confusing so don't worry too much about specs, the LeAmp behaves like a much more powerful amp - it will give you 21db of increased volume, blah blah blah".

I think it's funny how anyone who doesn't bow at the nOrh altar automatically "doesn't know what they're talking about".

Zep has had poor bass results with his nOrhs.   So did I.  What's your problem jqp?   Nobody allowed to criticize nOrh unless they go over your dead body first or something?    jeez...

[markC]

Get a test tone cd and an spl meter. That way you will "know" what your talking about, even if you don't know what is causing your light bass response.

[Zep Dude]

Thanks for the reponses so far.  My units are used for nearfield monitors at ear height when sitting (around 42").  They are nowhere near any corners in the room so there's nothing helping them with the low's.  Since it's a studio, there are bass traps in several of the corners as well as sound panels in various locations.  I've had other speakers in this position (also 2 way) that did not experience bass issues.  

I've been a pro in the recording industry for 15 years and have a pretty good idea of what bass is,  and although I only mentioned "Chuckie's in Love" as an example, I actually listened to many selections from a listening reference compilation I put together which includes selections from Stravinsky, Kronos Quartet, Dave Grusin, Rolling Stones, AC/DC etc.

I am encouraged by Tyson's assertion that he scoped these down to 40hz.  I'm definitely NOT hearing that now, and Dozer seems to echo my own concerns.

My Pro Tools digital audio system generates all kinds of tones, white noise, pink noise, phase reversal etc  and as soon as I return next week I'm going to figure out what's going on.  In the meantime, I was wondering if there were people like Dozer who have experienced similar problems.

Sorry Dozer, I didn't get the "Koolaid" joke?

[BradJudy]

Zep: The koolaide reference is morbid humor about cult followings.  Do a search on Jim Jones if you want the messy details.

[Zep Dude]

Oh I kind of thought that might be it but I didn't think you guys were that sick. Good, I like a forum with an edge

[Dozer]

Zep:  It's an antiquated reference to the nOrh faithful, who were once legion.   nOrh fans have developed a rep for tolerating little in the way of critiques - basically anyone who criticizes nOrh is assumed to have a sinister hidden agenda, they must be a B&W dealer, a spurned OEM partner, or some such... thus the cult reference (koolaid - Jim Jones).    It wasn't until a couple key nOrh backers went to Odyssey/VMPS and abandoned their nOrh gear that the liberation began - to the chagrin of some....    

It's just a joke though...  the 9.0 is worth more in parts than what you paid probably and should sound great highpassed at 80-100hz, which I still contend is the most common and appropriate setup for them.   I don't think the scanspeak folks designed that driver with subwoofer frequencies in mind even though it specs to play pretty low.

You got a killer deal on great speakers... with the tools and technical background you apparently have at your disposal I'm sure you'll be able to make them sing like birds.

btw:  I used a stereophile test disc and RS meter with the common adjustments found on the net.   My speakers measured well when they had lots of boundary reinforcement - and poorly without it.

[tkp]

The marble 9.0 can play low bass but not at mid to high volume.  The Relevator woofer get distorted rather easily at mid to high volume with low bass material.  I agreed with Dozer on this one that the Relevator woofer sounds best when high pass at around 60 hz or higher.

[jqp]

I did an RTA on them a while back, and they are flat to 40hz. . .

This is my point. If you are not getting flat to 40Hz then I would try to find out why.

Dozer - Its too bad that you are upset about buying the 6.9s. Try not to take it out on the nOrh forum, OK? After a while it seems like Trolling...

[KKM]

I find that the 6.9SM are astounding at some recording like Jennifer Warnes "The Hunter", that sometime I have to check if the sub is on, some recording are somewhat anemic. Play around with different positioning and recordings.

[Dozer]

Why jqp, what ever do you mean?   Does this mean we're not friends anymore?   If I thought you weren't my friend jqp, I don't know if I could bear it.

[Dozer]

You know what man, maybe it IS trolling.  I'm going to reflect on that... if it is, and if it's wrong, then I'm sorry.  It is the nOrh forum.  I usually browse by "posts since your last visit" and look for interesting conversations - not to single out the nOrh forum.   But I'll be cognizant of what you're saying...maybe you're right...

I just go to message boards to have fun - if I get carried away and step on someone I don't mean it.

Happy 4th!

[Jay S]

Hi all,

I've had the 9.0 for 2 years now, though I was not lucky enough to pay the "used" price.       Anyway, mine are set up with the rear port about 6" from the rear wall, and about 8 feet from the right corner, and 14 feet from the left corner, so they are certainly not getting corner reinforcement.  

Here's a preview of what I think is the bottom line: the 9.0 can produce very good bass, but you need to partner it with the right equipment.  No matter what, you are asking a 5.5" woofer to produce deep bass.  It will do so, but only when you give it the right tools to work with.  

I initially was expecting thundering but somehow tight low bass from them after reading all the glowing reviews.  While there was bass, it didn't sound like a sub.  Extension was not as deep as I would have liked, and it could also be boomy.  That said, at the time I was using a 25 wpc NAD receiver, an old NAD cd player, no power filtration and my top cable was a Kimber PBJ.  Oh, and I was using the shipping cartons as stands!     I don't mean to say that you guys who are disappointed with the bass have systems as basic as mine was; my intention was to let you know where I came from, and establish that the 9.0 will not always produce great bass.  

As I have made component changes (including getting some acoustic panels), I've been rewarded with deeper extension and more tightness and speed.  I've had the Hong Kong audio mafia (henceforce, HAM) over at my place a few times and they all commented that they have been shocked at how low the 9.0 with how, that it is tight and tuneful, etc.  In fact, when I start to talk about getting an active sub, I get told that I definitely should not bother unless I feel the need to recreate T Rex's stomping through my living room.  

Check out: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=2872&highlight=hong+kong.  

Jay's nOrh 9.0 sounded a little less airy than the Harbeth (which has supertweeters) but are very coherent and detailed. Bass was impressively full and tuneful. His eAR Two amp is a excellent match.

Also check out: http://www.harmonicdiscord.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7257&highlight=shocked

We then went to my place, where the eAR Two amp had had about 6 hours of break in! While the group had good observations, kennethlhc knows how to review -- the recordings he tried were all designed to push speakers and amps and other components to the max!! We spent a lot of time listening to a live recording of a German stage performance that had really huge bass, lots of singers in different parts of the stage (main characters inside a house, enemies outside, a god speaking from the 'heavens', groups of children chanting as they moved from stage left to stage right..... (I hope this makes sense). We were playing really loud (which got the eAR from cool/cold to warm), and the bass was pounding out of the nOrh 9s. It wasn't enough to knock us off the couch but it sounded like a full range speaker with good extension, rather than a 2-way monitor with a 5.5" woofer. I'll let the others describe it more if they wish. It was a very fun torture test for the eAR and the nOrh 9.

I was shocked by Jay's system - it's clean, clear, with good details and dynamic, all from equipment I never had a chance to listen to. The stage performance Jay mentioned was the 1961 Argo recording of Benjamin Britten's "Noye's Fludde" which was re-issued in CD format under Decca/London label (London 425 161-2).

 
I like to use the opening sequence from Sting's "A Thousand Years" off the Brand New Day CD to test low end extension.  There is a a very deep bass that comes in at the intro and continues to give a foundation to the singing.  My 9.0s as set up at my place reproduce it cleanly, and allows it to sound balanced with the rest of the recording.  In comparison, the VMPS 626R, powered by Ampzillas did not go as deep.  The Taylo Linbrook bass modules also did not seem to go as low.  I heard the VMPS and Taylo in different rooms with different equipment, so it isn't necessarily a fair comparison but its indicative of the potential of the 9.0, as well as the general need to properly match a speaker to equipment and room to get optimal results.  

I don't mean to blow my own horn...  I've had the 9s for a while, have heard lots of speakers, rooms and setups, and seen the "defection" to VMPS and other brands.  That's all fine with me as I am quite happy with my 9.0s and the overall sound of my system.  I've gone to many listening sessions expecting to get blown away by a wonder product, only to realize that I prefer the sound that I get at home.  I've also heard things that I like but don't have at home (e.g. the

In summary, I think the 9.0 can produce very good bass, but you need to partner it with the right equipment.  No matter what, you are asking a 5.5" woofer to produce deep bass.  It will do so, but only when you give it the right tools to work with.  

Do let me know if there is anything I can clarify.

[wunderlast]

I used a stereophile test disc and RS meter with the common adjustments found on the net. My speakers measured well when they had lots of boundary reinforcement and poorly without it.

A pair of SM6.9s worked the same. When set on fairly low stands, not too far from a wall, surprising bass down to near 40Hz.

Higher stands, farther from walls, less bass. That isn't a condemnation, as I've heard back-loaded horns that sounded spectacular with boundary reinforcement and feeble without.  It just is what it is.

[tkp]

Jay,

I agreed that with the right equipments, the marble 9.0 sounds great.  However, there is only so much the 5.5 inches relevator woofer could do.  The marble 9.0 produce deeper bass than the 626R but it cannot play as loud.  I have owned the marble 9.0 when it first came out and for the longest time I thought the marble 9.0 produced awesome bass.  Last year Xitrum gave me a test CD which has a track with real deep bass.  The when I found out that the relevator woofer does not like real deep bass.  The woofer of the 9.0 got distorted at mid volume with this track.  The woofer of the 626R also got distorted but at much higher level.  However, this is not a problem for me because most if not all of the CD I owned do not have bass any where near as deep at the track on this test CD (I took this CD to Brian place to check out the RM40 bass and Brian immediately asked me for a copy).

For the past few weeks, I swapped the marble 9.0 and the 626R in and out of my second systems which is located in a small room (11 ft L x 10 ft W x 9 ft tall).  They both sounded great with the modded CD1, the IRD LLC-P and the modded Audire Forte.  The 626R has a bit better imaging than the marble 9.0 but its sweet spot is much smaller than the marble 9.0.    One thing intersting is that the marble 9.0 imaging improved dramtically with the modded Audire Forte amp.  For awhile, I thought the 626R was the clear winner.  Now, I am not sure because I found myself enjoying them both.  I like the pinpoint imaging of the 626R and the wide sweet spot of the marble 9.0.  The marble 9.0 has better mid-bass than the 626R (there is only so much a single neo ribbon pannel could do for mid bass).  I am undecided on what to do and which speakers to get rid off (the 626R or the marble 9.0).  I think I probably end up getting a pair of subwoofer and use a two way active crossover to remove the low bass from the marble 9.0 so I can use the system for both music and HT.  I probably end up selling the 626R becasue I already have the RM40s in the main system in a large room.

Look wise, the marble 9.0 is a clear winner by a large margin.  To my eyes, the 626R cabinet look cheap comparing the the solid marble cabinet.

[Jay S]

tkp,

I totally agree that there is only so much that the little 5.5" woofer can do, no matter how good it is.  I think that there are a few reasons why the marble 9.0 works for me, which may not be the same for everyone:

1.  I have a Mensa Plus DI/O, which really produces pinpoint imaging and deep, tight bass.  It is clearly better in these areas than my Cary 303, which is a $3k cd player that has gotten excellent reviews, particularly for its bass.  Even the Mensa level DI/O produces excellent imaging and bass.  

2.  My 9.0s are on custom 20" stands (relatively low to the ground) that I designed.  More importantly, my stands have a wood face (10.5" wide at the top, 13" wide at the bottom) that extends to within 1/2" of the ground.  Brian Cheney has said that having a "beard" to form a boundary from the speaker to the floor really helps bass.  

3.  I sit relatively near to my speakers (8 feet) and with such a nearfield configuration I don't need to push the speaker as hard to get the volume I'm after.

4.  I've invested in a power filter, aftermarket cables, acoustic panels, etc.  My single inline bybee on the digital input of my dac also helped deepen and tighten the bass (I'll post more comments on this when I've had a chance to listen to my system again without it).  

I was fortunate enough to spend 30 minutes or so listening to the 626R in Brian Cheney's listening room.  I did not feel that the imaging was up to the level of my system (sorry, this is what I heard, and I went in believing that the 626R in the master's system would sound incredible).  And, the sweet spot was really quite narrow.  In my home, I enjoy listening to the 9.0 even from the side, even from the next room.  Instrument tonality of the 626R seemed a bit better particularly in the midrange (given the lack of an XO in that region), but I did not like female voices, which seemed quite metallic.  

I do hope that Brian can get a hold on nicer cabinets through Mark Shifter in China.  The standard finishes of the VMPS cabinets are not special.  I would love to see the optional finishes, though.  

tkp, as always, its nice discussing with you.  

Regards,

- Jay

[mbarnes]

Here are two things to check.  The first is to check to make sure you have the 00 instead of the 01 woofer.  The 00 is the one we use. Some people built kits and bought the 01 because it is less expenisve. the 01 will not go as deep.

Some people wanted to drive the 9.0s harder and add a subwoofer. The way they would do this is to stuff socks or something in the port. Make sure there are no old socks stuffed in the port.

We are sure that the 9.0s should be flat to about 38 hz.