[Mad DOg]

Cryotweaks happened to have the repaired pair of Criterions at his place yesterday when I stopped by to see him yesterday and was kind enough to hook them up for me to hear so I wanted to share my impressions of them since they were damage the last time i heard them at my place...

due to Cryotweaks current situation, i had to listen to them playing Norah Jones nearfield...well, they definitely sounded better than the first time...but not by much...i wrote that the bass was weak last time and it was still weak yesterday. the highs were a little better but still much more laid back compared to the speakers below. the details in the highs were still not at the level i would expect from a speaker in the $1.5K price range. both the Van Alstine Biro L/1s and Onix Ref1s hold an advantage over the Crits in this regard.  the Crits presentation was still flat and 2-D like in comparison to the PHL Revelator Focal speakers. i am definitely more accustomed to the PHL's type of presentation. much more dynamic and life-like similar to the Biros and Ref 1s.



connecting a bybee filter inline to the positive speaker binding post helped a great deal to open up the Crits but the Biros responded equally well when i later tried it on them, too.

in conclusion, after having heard a good pair of Criterions, i still stand by and hold the opinion that i previously arrived at...for around $1.5K, i would expect a lot more.

i am very impressed with Danny's PHL Revelator Focal speakers though...while i didn't have the time to put these through the paces, i can tell that these babies can really rock! Great job on these, Danny!

[satfrat]

MD, on the subject of the PHL Revelator Focal setup, iyo, was the imaging ALL that Mike says they are? He really seems to like these beauties, that or he likes to write about them. Regards, Robin

[Danny Richie]

Maddog, Your opinion is your own and I have no disputes with your own likes and dislikes, but statements like this really make me wonder...

the details in the highs were still not at the level i would expect from a speaker in the $1.5K price range. both the Van Alstine Biro L/1s and Onix Ref1s hold an advantage over the Crits in this regard.
dy>

Having worked with the Vifa XT tweeters plenty, Scan Speaks and many other dome type tweeters I can tell you without question that the ribbon used the Criterion's is a big step ahead of those in the detail department. A big step ahead!

As noted, I designed and built the speakers you pictured below that use the Scan Speak 9900 and the smaller speakers Mike has that use the Vifa XT tweeters.

You may be confusing detail with just plain brightness or output level compared to lower frequencies.

These are also not designed to play low and produce lots of base. They are designed be fast, remain linear, have low distortion, and to be used with a sub. They are only 5" woofers in .25 cubic feet of air space. If I would have wanted them to play low they would have been in a different alignment.

i am definitely more accustomed to the PHL's type of presentation. much more dynamic and life-like

Those are a full range floor standing speaker with 92db sensitivity. The Criterion's are a small stand mounted speaker with 85db sensitivity. I think a larger dynamic range and more life like size is a given wouldn't you think?

[Mad DOg]

MD, on the subject of the PHL Revelator Focal setup, iyo, was the imaging ALL that Mike says they are? He really seems to like these beauties, that or he likes to write about them. Regards, Robin

Robin,

the PHL Revelator Focal setup is really very good IMHO. in his setup they are detailed, revealing and exhibit excellent overall balance. bass is very solid and deep but a bit loose. i think a better amp will be able to drive and control the bass better...while the finish is very good but not great, i found them to be visually appealing. nice angles...regarding the imaging, yes, the imaging is very good...certainly on par with some of the better imaging speakers i've had an opportunity to listen audition.

[satfrat]

Robin,

the PHL Revelator Focal setup is really very good IMHO. in his setup they are detailed, revealing and exhibit excellent overall balance. bass is very solid and deep but a bit loose. i think a better amp will be able to drive and control the bass better...while the finish is very good but not great, i found them to be visually appealing. nice angles...regarding the imaging, yes, the imaging is very good...certainly on par with some of the better imaging speakers i've had an opportunity to listen audition.

                  MD, please tell Mike to try a couple of his Bybee`s on his sub cable, I have a couple of Bolder inlines on mine and and it tightens things up better than a 18 year old virgin! (if there IS such a thing anymore) Regards, Robin

[Mad DOg]

...but statements like this really make me wonder...

danny,

i think it is natural for most folks to compare speakers with something that they are very familiar with and products that sell in the same price range. both the speakers which i mentioned both hit the ~$1.5K price range...

[Mad DOg]

Having worked with the Vifa XT tweeters plenty, Scan Speaks and many other dome type tweeters I can tell you without question that the ribbon used the Criterion's is a big step ahead of those in the detail department. A big step ahead!...

Danny, that may be the case so maybe it's something in the crossover...I've heard the VMPS RM40s and 626R FST ribbons (in my room w/ my equipment) and they have plenty of detail...if the 626R FSTs that John Casler brought over to my place sounded anything like the Criterions, I would've written the same thing about the 626s as I did about your Crits. Nothing personal, just my sharing my opinions.

As noted, I designed and built the speakers you pictured below that use the Scan Speak 9900 and the smaller speakers Mike has that use the Vifa XT tweeters.

Cryotweaks mentioned that the smaller speakers which he is using for rear surrounds that you designed using the Vifa XT tweeters are nothing like the the Ref 1s which also use the Vifa XT tweeter...Guess it must be differences in the crossover...

You may be confusing detail with just plain brightness or output level compared to lower frequencies.

No sir, that is not the case...Most folks who have followed my threads know that I do not like bright speakers. I have mentioned before that I have found the Ref 1s to be too bright and can be fatiguing when paired w/ my Carver CD player due to the glare. however the addition of the Perpetual Tech gear has tamed the "brightness" by removing the glare and leaving just the detail...this was invaluable in teaching me about brightness.

Those are a full range floor standing speaker with 92db sensitivity. The Criterion's are a small stand mounted speaker with 85db sensitivity. I think a larger dynamic range and more life like size is a given wouldn't you think?

while we didn't volume match using an SPL meter, we did turn up the volume considerably to account for the lower sensitivity of the Crits...no, the larger dynamic range and realism is not due specifically to one being a full range floorstander vs a small stand mounted speaker...

the small stand mounted Ref 1s play bigger than many floorstanders i've compared them to and every single monitor i've compared them to. while the Biros don't play quite a big as the Ref 1s, the Biros still do play very big compared to most monitors i've auditioned...

i still maintain that the Criterions remind me a great deal of the Aurum Cantus Leisure 2Ds in sound and in overall presentation. this is not a negative thing as it just shows that speakers are voiced differently so folks who might not like the Refs may find the Crits to be their cup of tea...

[Danny Richie]

Maddog, I don't care what you compare the Criterion's to. You can compare them to Mikes three way PHL/Scan Speak/Focal floor standing speakers that would be about $12,000. a pair if sold through retail stores.

You can like, dislike, love, hate, not think they are worth the money or anything you want.

But to say that the highs in the Criterion's lack the detail you get from the Vifa XT tweeter is absurd.

Here let me pull a couple from inventory for a quick snap shot.



I know how these tweeters compare in detail. They don't. It's not even close.

And no it is not the cross over making the difference.

The Criterion's you heard had Sonicaps and Mills resistors in it. It doesn't get any better. And it has a simple third order network that allows the ribbon to play down to a crossing point that is in the 2.4kHz range.

Oh yea, they are also wired point to point with Teflon jacketed Silver coated Copper wire.

What's in your speakers?

If you think that combo lacks detail you don't know what detail is. You are looking for or used to elevated highs.

[Mad DOg]

Danny,

The detail of both tweeters based on the attached jpg looks the same...both very grainy...based on the photo i can't tell what each tweeter sounds like...

If tweeters used in the Crits are as detailed as you say they are, then I don't know why the VMPS ribbons sound more detailed to my ears in my setup in my room...

Also your quote on the speaker city site from the link below regarding the PHL/Revelator/Focal speaker...

"These speakers are among the best sounding speakers I have heard" - Danny Richie

http://www.speakercity.com/GRProject/PhlRevProject.shtml

Does this mean that the Crits are better and more detailed than Mike's 3-way even though you're quoted above claiming Mike's speakers are among the best sounding speakers you've heard?

I know your Crits are hand contructed using the best components available...All I'm saying is that I PREFER your 3 way PHL/Revelator/Focal speaker more. MY PREFERENCE (and very possibly Mike's as well). These sound much more similar to the Ref1s than the Criterions IMHO which is why I PREFER them more.

The point of my post is NOT to BASH your speakers since I do like your 3-way design very much. I try to be as objective as possible based on my listening PREFERENCES. You must realize and accept that in sending your Criterions out for auditioning purposes, some folks will and some folks won't like them. If I audition a speaker, I will share my honest opinions on them. Likes and dislikes.

Prefer: Danny Ritchie's 3-way speakers
Don't prefer: GR Research Criterion

Other folks may and will disagree and that's fine by me. If everyone agreed then we'd all own BOSE speakers since they do the best job in marketing and advertising!

[Danny Richie]

If tweeters used in the Crits are as detailed as you say they are, then I don't know why the VMPS ribbons sound more detailed to my ears in my setup in my room...

And this detail is from the ribbon that is playing from 8 or 10kHz and up or the planar? And again you could be hearing elevated levels in the highs and associating it with detail.

And yes, Mike's speakers are among some of the best sounding speakers that I have ever heard, but they do not have the detail level of the Criterion's.

Who likes which one better and for what reason's is nothing but preference. They are completely different speakers.

[Sa-dono]

If you think that combo lacks detail you don't know what detail is. You are looking for or used to elevated highs.

I can tell you this is not a problem.

Who likes which one better and for what reason's is nothing but preference. They are completely different speakers.

I'm unsure of the point of this discussion then... You guys can just agree to disagree..and those interested can give the Criterions a listen for themselves.

[Mad DOg]

If you think that combo lacks detail you don't know what detail is. You are looking for or used to elevated highs.

Wow...I listen to 2 speakers both of which YOU designed...I really like one and don't find the other to be my cup of tea and you go on the offensive...I guess you believe that your speakers are so good that there's no more room for improvement either and hence they are beyond reproach...I guess anyone who hears your speakers had best like them otherwise they don't know what they're listening to...

as far as me being used to or looking for elevated highs? i've stated on various forums that I find Axiom, B&W, Klipsch speakers as being too bright for my tastes...I find Vienna Acoustics and Dynaudios to offer speakers that are much more to my liking...as such, that would mean the VAs and Dyns have elevated highs

This would also mean that Mike's 3-way was intentionally designed to have elevated highs...which kind of surprises me as the freq response chart below shows them rolling off from 17kHz on up...

[Rocket]

hi mad dog,

i was just wondering what components were used to play the criterions with.

i don't have a pair of speaker which use the esg tweeter but have a pair which utilise the raven 1 ribbon tweeter.

i have found that the tweeter is very unforgiving if not matched with high quality components.  i have listened to many dome tweeters and they just don't have the same level of details as the raven 1.

best wishes

rocket

[Mad DOg]

hi mad dog,

i was just wondering what components were used to play the criterions with.

i don't have a pair of speaker which use the esg tweeter but have a pair which utilise the raven 1 ribbon tweeter.

i have found that the tweeter is very unforgiving if not matched with high quality components.  i have listened to many dome tweeters and they just don't have the same level of details as the raven 1.

best wishes

rocket

hello Rocket,

i listened to the repaired pair of Crits at Cryotweak's home...

he runs B&K separates...not sure of the model #s...the amp is a 100W/channel multi ch amp...not sure of the preamp #...the source was a tube output stage modwright pioneer elite DV-36 tube output stage.

while not the best gear ever but certainly not crap either...

I believe Danny is knows what kind of gear Cryotweaks runs so if gear was  an issue, rather than attack me and my opinion, he could have mentioned that the gear was not ideally matched for his speakers...however, he did not...

[brad b]

Interesting discussion.  I have had the Thiel 3.5, Dynaudio SE 1.3's, Meadowlark Kestral Hotrods, GR Diluceo's, and have had the good fortune to live in Denver, where I have listened to the the VMPS 626 upgraded and spiral ribbons, and finally the big RM 40's I believe.  The ribbon Danny has used is equal to the upgraded ribbon in the 626, RM 40 VMPS line, and much more detailed and smooth than my previous speakers.  It baffles me how room, equipment, or personal tastes can vary that much.  I can tell you that the Diluceo is flat out, a great little speaker, using the same components as the Criterion, just one more woofer.  I can't believe they would sound that different.

[Danny Richie]

Wow...I listen to 2 speakers both of which YOU designed...I really like one and don't find the other to be my cup of tea and you go on the offensive...

Look, I am not taking offense to your preferences. It does not bother me one way or an other what your opinions are.

What bothers me is that you state something that is factually not true.

Stating the G-2 ribbon lacks detail compared to a dome is like taking a test drive of two cars. One is a Cadillac and the other a Corvette. You decide your preferences are for the Cadillac. That's fine, but to then say you didn't like the corvette because it was not as fast would be a false statement.

And you keep saying you think speakers XYZ are bright and yours are not bright, blah, blah, blah. These are nothing more than your opinions. Where are the measured responses?

Elevated highs in the 17kHz range is not what makes a speaker sound bright or have super detail.

An elevation in the 3kHz to 8kHz area will give the illusion of added detail.

This would also mean that Mike's 3-way was intentionally designed to have elevated highs...

Mike's speakers were designed to be accurate. As you can see by the measured response they are little more than +/-1db from end to end.

[audiojerry]

Some observations about Mad Dog's observations:

When I auditioned the Criterions, I had on hand a 45 wpc integrated amp and a 165 wpc amp. Accepting that other factors also play a role, the Criterions sounded a bit anemic and too laid back with the 45 wpc. With the higher powered amp the speakers really came to life. There was a big difference in performance due to amplification. Perhaps a large part of Mad Dog's views were due to the amplfication.

But even with the higher powered amp, I still consdered the Criterion to be somewhat laid back in character. This is not a negative comment, in my opinion. I'd much rather listen to a speaker that was not forward sounding. This does not mean the Criterion lacked detail. I found it to be highly resolving of inner detail; it just didn't highlight it like some other speakers.

Mad Dog stated:  

as far as me being used to or looking for elevated highs? i've stated on various forums that I find Axiom, B&W, Klipsch speakers as being too bright for my tastes...I find Vienna Acoustics and Dynaudios to offer speakers that are much more to my liking.

I would not put B&W in the same grouping as Axiom and Klipsh. I have had the N805, 801, 802, and N803. I did not find them to be bright at all. They do not have any similarity to the much inferior newer Klipsch models. The only Dynaudio that I have found to be comparable to the Criterions in terms of detail are the $4k 1.3SE, which uses Dynaudio's best Esotar Tweeter at over $500 per matched pair.  In terms of smoothness, the Criterions are very similar to the Vienna Acoustics Mahler.  

I believe one problem here is that some of Mad Dog's reasons for his preferences don't seem to fit his arguments in that they don't seem to correspond to objective and generally agreed upon charactersitics found in the speakers he uses as examples.

[jackman]

Posts like the last one are what separates Audiojerry from the casual listener.   Jerry, you have a great deal of experience and knowlege of some of the best audio gear available.  Unlike many people, myself included, you have actually OWNED this stuff and understand the difference between an impressive 5 minute audition and actually sitting down and critically listening for extended periods, to well recorded material.  I have learned (the hard way) through the years that the speakers that impress me most (almost bought a pair of JM Labs for this reason years ago and bought some Paradigm Reference as a result...mistake) in the store are not the ones I can live with long-term, because of elevated highs that I mistook for "great detail".  

Not to say that this is the case here.  Just commenting on Jerry's experience.  Hopefully, I can join you guys at the next Audiojerry evaluation!  I will post exactly what I hear, and if there is controvercy, so be it.  Hopefully, I will have my upgraded AVA gear by then!  I'm having my Fetvalve amp and preamp upgraded to Transcendance level (pre) and EC on the amp.  Also getting the upgraded tranny modification and new tubes in everything.  Frank says it takes things to a new level.  It should be fun to find out.

Lastly, I listened to Jerry's B&W's (the big ones) and was absolutely floored by the sound.  They were detailed but NEVER bright.  If my only experience with B&W's was the lower end stuff played  through midfi gear, I would not be saying this.  Their lower end speakers are not my cup O' tea, but their high-end is very good.  The speakers I listened to at Jerry's house were refined and totally enjoyable.  Could have something to do with Jerry's system.

Cheers,

Jack

[cryotweaks]

Room size:
Approximately 650 sq. feet, although I was forced to listen in a nearfield setting.  The reason is I am having some repair work done in this room and all of the furniture, including my system, are pushed to one side of the room.  Nonetheless, the volume of the room has not changed.

Equipment:
B&K Separates consisting of an AVP 3090 and AV 5000 amp.  105 watts per channel into 5 channels.  This was driving both the top MTM units and my subwoofers at the time of listening.  Not the best setup, but my subwoofer amplifier had developed an annoying buzz, perhaps from old capacitors, who knows.  Anyhow the subs work best on at least 200 watts from an amp with a high damping factor.

I also have a Pioneer Elite DV 37 with Modwright Truth mods.  

All of this runs through a 5kv Topaz isolation transformer wired for common mode noise rejection(balanced power).

You have seen pictures of my speakers in the first post of this thread.  They are made by GR Research, and consist of two PHL 16 ohm 6.5" drivers mated to a Revelator tweeter in an MTM configuration.  The MTM sits atop the subwoofer cabinet that houses an 11" passive Focal bass driver.  Bybees are soldered to each individual driver throughout the system.

Power cords:
The preamp is powered by my Power Conditioner cord

The DVD is powered via  a cord of my design with ERS, since I already have Bybees soldered inside on the AC mains.

The amplifier is powered via another custom power cord in development, and I am not at liberty to divulge its design right now.

Interconnects:
The Interconnects were my Bybee inline Focus between the preamp and amp, and the Surface Max between the DVD and preamp.

Speaker Cables:
Modern Audio Designs custom multi conductor, flat silver plated copper for both the MTM and the Subwoofer.

Music:
George Duke "After Hours"
Dave Mattews "Live At Luther College"
U2 "All that You Can't Leave Behind"
Jack Johnson "Brushfire Fairytales"
Incubus "Morning View"
Anuna "Celtic Heartbeat"
Nora Jones "Come away with me"

Hooking them up.

I set the Criterions on top of my Subwoofer cabinets, which placed them at ear level when sitting on my sofa.  I initially had them facing straight forward like my MTMs, but being a ribbon driver, they needed to be towed in a bit for my listening position.  The good thing about ribbons is the narrow dispersion prevents for the most part those early reflections that can smear the sound.  This is true to form for these, especially in a nearfield listening situation.  This becomes less of an issue at greater distances from the speaker.

I also left my subwoofers on, as this speaker is meant to be used with a subwoofer.  However I did have to adjust for the lower sensitivity of the Criterions.


My initial impression of these was that they possessed a quick midbass with a very laid back midrange and treble. It reminded me of the Silverline SR-17s I had in my system at one time.  This voicing was a bit of an adjustment for me to make, as it was the exact opposite of what I am used to.  My MTMs are what I would call forward in the mids and highs, very similar to the Ref 1s. They really project out into the room.  

I let the Criterions  play for about an hour while I walked in and out of the listening room, and my ears adjusted to the more laid back presentation of the Criterions just fine.  Now I was ready to sit down and do some serious listening.

It was evening and all was quiet in the house.  My first selection was from George Duke's "After Hours".  A bit of a smooth jazz sound but excellent for testing every aspect of a system with the exception of vocals.  The acoustic bass was fast and articulate as it should be, the highs were very smooth, and had that ribbon extended sparkle that you just can't get from domes.  The mids were there too, but instead of being projected way out into the room, they were slightly in front of the speakers, off to the sides, and behind the speakers.  Another thing I noticed, and this was most obviously due to the ribbon's narrower dispersion characteristics, was when an event or instrument was meant to be heard out of one channel, it didn't sonically "bleed over" like it can with a dome tweeter.  I guess you can call it greater stereo separation.  Its something you probably wouldn't even notice until you heard it produced by a ribbon driver.

This was all done at a quiet listening level.  It was nice, but the mids were a bit too laid back at this level for me.  So I turned it up to a more moderate listening level.  The criterions really opened up nicely at this point.  It was simply a very smooth sounding speaker.  More detailed than at lower levels.  I really liked the smoothness of the ribbon.  Some drivers equate smooth to rolled off highs. These retained their high frequency extension yet sounded sooo smooth.  It was a very seductive sound.  Yet the mid -highs (2-4khz) were just a wee bit too recessed for me.  That led to my next experiment, The Bybee Purifier on the postive terminal of each speaker.

WOW!  The Bybees REALLY opened these puppies up.  It brought the midrange and high frequency detail a quantum leap (I couldn't resist the pun) forward!  When I told Danny this, he was shocked, he had done the same thing to the Crits in his studio (Waay better gear than mine) and it had little to no effect on the Crits.  It just goes to show you that systems and environments (LA vs. rural Texas) can really effect the performance of the Bybees.  Anyhow I much preferred the Crits with Bybees in, as did Mad Dog (more on that later).

I kept the Bybee'd Crits in my system for a few more days, and really liked the sound.  I then switched back to my MTMs, and gave a listen.  The MTMs are a bigger, more efficient speaker.  They filled the room a bit better.  But I had to re-adjust my ears to the forward presentation, it was almost too much at first.  I also had to listen a little harder for the highs that came so easy to the Crits.  They were there,  but not as obvious.  Just as the mid-highs were there on the Crits, just not as obvious.  

The bottom line:
As you can see, my system is far from state of the art.  I would highly encourage you to audition the Criterions in your own system.  In fact, Danny does too, hence the demo program.  I liked the way the Crits made every recording no matter how awful sound decent. I found myself pulling out CDs that would normally drive me out of the room after ten minutes, and listening to them all the way through.  Picking out little details and subtleties that I hadn't noticed before.  After listening to the Crits, I would really like to know how the Diliceos would sound in my system.  I think the extra midbass driver would more than likely provide that more forward sound I am looking for.

Soundstage, imaging and detail were all there. The detail in spades.   The mid-highs needed a bit of volume to really open up.  Not much volume, probably just above conversation level.  Bybees went a long way towards improving this characteristic, especially when in my system.  Mad Dog will vouch for that.  The high frequency extension  was very smooth, while retaining a realistic sparkle.  The Crits  are definitely to be used with a high quality sub, and definitely for someone who sits and listens.  They are also for someone prefers a laid back sonic presentation, or perhaps has  a very reflective listening room (hardwood floors, etc.).  


Mad Dogs session:
To be fair, the listening situation was far from optimal for Mad Dog as I had a fan going in the listening room, and my wife making some noise over in the kitchen (we have a somewhat open floor plan in our house).  That and the brief duration of the listening session may have understandibly contributed to his opinion.  He immediately commented on the "lack of highs" the Crits seemed to be offering.  He was very impressed with what the Bybees did for the Crits, although it still did not make him love, or even like the Crits.  His opinion was (I am paraphrasing here) "for the price, I think one could do better".


This is not a speaker that bowls you over immediately.  It is more of a seduction. In my opinion, it takes time to really discern the characteristics of this speaker.  I strongly encourage anyone looking at speakers in this price range to audition the Criterions in their own home on their own system.  Heck if you can do that with any speaker you are considering, by all means do it!


 I really respect both Mad Dog and Danny.  Both are honest, of good reputation, and have excellent "ears". In defense of Danny, I feel Mad Dog  needs to spend more time with the Crits in a better listening environment.  I am certain he will not love the Criterions over his speakers, but I think he would appreciate their characteristics a little better.  In defense of Mad Dog, not everyone is going to like everything GR Reseach offers. Mad Dog's opinion is not a statement about the competence of the designer, that is not even in question.  It is a statement about his preference for a certain type of "sound", and how closely the Criterions came to fitting his preference for that "sound".

[Mad DOg]

...I would not put B&W in the same grouping as Axiom and Klipsh...

more specifically i find the Axioms and Klipschs to be much brighter than the B&Ws. the B&W (auditioned the N805 and Sig 805) sound is much more refined compared to the other 2, but still too bright for my liking(although i've never heard the B&Ws N80X speakers driven by tube gear before, just solid state)...i simply mentioned a few brands of speakers that came to my mind as being brighter than what i generally prefer.