[*Scotty*]

I have to agree that forward firing speakers can be in your face more so than omni's but I would not always attribute this to a forward firing mid-woofer. I have heard a constant in your face problem at a variety of frequencies from different loudspeakers and I consider this a design error if I can point to the offending driver in this fashion. My current loudspeakers can be in your face depending on how the instruments are miked and the intent of the recording engineer. I have an enveloping image but not always a laid back depth perspective. The perspective changes dependent on the recording being played. I also spend a lot a lot of time listening being retired, but it sounds like I fewer distractions to deal with than you do.
Fortunately for both of us listening fatigue seems not to be a factor.
Scotty

[WEEZ]

I remember the O-3's in Danny's room at RMAF last year.....room-filling with great tonal balance. Very nice.

WEEZ

[TheChairGuy]

The perspective changes dependent on the recording being played. I also spend a lot a lot of time listening being retired, but it sounds like I fewer distractions to deal with than you do.
Fortunately for both of us listening fatigue seems not to be a factor.
Scotty

Just general fatigue - not listening fatigue I have in here.  Listening 75% to vinyl and having tube monoblocks helps.  Once I added 15 lbs of Plast-i-Clay to the insides of the Linaeum's a couple years ago, it reduced box-induced distortions to a minimum so that I could listen longer, too.

Still, I know that there is higher fidelity sources out there.

John 

[TheChairGuy]

Does anyone have firsthand experience with Decware's RL 1.5 and 3.0 (Radial) designs? Attractive pricing, omni-directional, crossover-less....

http://decware.com/newsite/mainmenu.htm

[Occam]

There is also Dick Olsher's 'CBAE' speakers, which are quite similar in many ways to Danny's
http://www.blackdahlia.com/   bottom left of the page

Potentially, one of the advantages to both is the perpendicular orientation of the tweeter to the bass/mid which allows the acoustic centers of both drivers to be far closer than a planar approach.

[miklorsmith]

I heard a pair of RL-3's and didn't care for them.  I thought they were tipped in the upper mids with insufficient bass weight.  This was in a pretty large room.  The fellow ended up returning them, even though he was a devout Dechead.  He was using a Decware amp and preamp to drive them.

In a smaller room, with careful equipment choices, they might be pretty nice.  The idea is certainly appealing.  They are actually pretty small speakers.

[TheChairGuy]

I read, somewhere along the way, the RL 1.5's integrate easier than the 3.0's and many prefer it (overall).

I wish (and kinda' don't, as well) I was as discerning as many of you are...I can only tell 3 things about a speaker when hearing it:

1.  The bass is light or boomy
2.  The treble is appealing or not
3.  Whether I like the speaker or not (I can tell that in about 5 seconds)

I have not been able to differentiate the issues I have with one speaker or another (or format, sometimes) such as 'problem with upper mids', 'glaring upper mids', 'midrange suck-out', 'loose lower mids', etc..

I'm serious - I'm really unsophisticated that way.  I'm being a little simplistic, but not by THAT much 

Do I get my AC membership revoked for saying so 

[Bob in St. Louis]

John, you're a big man for admitting that. I'm the same way.
When they kick us out, we'll skip off together to the land of audiophile wanna-be's. 

Bob

[TheChairGuy]

John, you're a big man for admitting that. I'm the same way.
When they kick us out, we'll skip off together to the land of audiophile wanna-be's. 

Bob

I think I admitted it before, but not as succinctly, Bob.

I marvel at others ability to pick up the point in the frequency spectrum that matters to them, and I know many can and do, but it's just not me.

I can only tell Low, High or Crap 

Again, a wee simplistic, but not by THAT much 

[Bob in St. Louis]

That's OK John, I'm perfectly happy with mine, here's my theory:

A audiophiles ears are like a woman; The higher the quality of your ears, the more cash you are required to spend to keep them happy. 

Bob

[*Scotty*]

John, maybe you don't listen the same way as the majority of other people in this hobby. That's no bad thing in my opinion. I stopped focusing on the various individual parts of a performance I was listening to at home over ten years ago. I realized that I didn't listen this way at a live performance I just enjoyed the music. It made more sense to experience the performance as a gestalt  whether at home or listening to a live performance. I can make myself listen to the performance as pieces and parts when I am at home but it is work and it is unnatural to me. I think if it sounds like crap, then the finer details of the crap kind of don't matter. 
This is of course what works for me,YMMV.  Bob I have to disagree with your generalization. In my wifes' case she hears at least as well as I do and she says I spoiled her. She knows crap when she hears it and not having the hobby she won't make any rationalizations about what she hears based on the brand,it's cost,or it's looks. If it sounds like crap it is crap and she does not the time to waste on why it's crap.
Scotty   
 

[TheChairGuy]

I don't wanna' make this a diatribe against CD or solid state (really - I don't), but when I switched back to mostly vinyl, and added tube monoblocks to the equation - it all sounds rather good now 

SS amps and tube preamps didn't do it...only the combo of (at least my current combo of) tube amp(s) and SS preamp.

Getting older and losing some measure of hearing has been a boon, too 

I wonder in thinking about changing speakers to (possibly) omni-directional ones, as I'm not unhappy with my current sounds each day, am I just bored and looking for the next big thrill or is there something fundamentally wrong wit the sounds in here?

Well, I've been a little unhappy with the sounds the past few weeks...but I think it's tube replacement time again (8-10 hours a day for 200 days a year + some other hours every so often means tubes need replacing fast around here  ) Transients/dynamics losing snap is usually the 'key' for me to know when it's time to change 'em out.

[acd483]

probably the nostalgia factor TheChairGuy!

I think any music lover is crazy to not switch over to computer based audio...simply crazy, but maybe that's because I'm young and want instant musical gratification.

[acd483]

Open baffle is such a great sound. After hearing both, I'm very interested in the Linkwitz Orion (or Pluto though I haven't heard it) and the Nomad Ronin (and definitely want to hear the Sentinel). Dipole just makes sense!

I've yet to hear omni-directional, I'm dying to audition Don Morrison's speakers.

[TheChairGuy]

Open baffle is such a great sound. After hearing both, I'm very interested in the Linkwitz Orion (or Pluto though I haven't heard it) and the Nomad Ronin (and definitely want to hear the Sentinel). Dipole just makes sense!

I've yet to hear omni-directional, I'm dying to audition Don Morrison's speakers.

Are ya' up in Ontario to hear Morrisson Audio?  He does have a US dealer I think - can't remember who or where he is.  I'm up there the 15/16/17 of October (I live in Northern Cali) , but won't have time to do anything except work.

I haven't heard a computer-audio based system that sounded any better than a spinning disc (I've only heard a bare few setups to be fair). 

I hear the same small improvement from CD's that have been burned to CD-R's (which I don't do as it's a pain) as with computer-based audio.  The resultant sound is a little smoother and easier on the ears long term.  I'm listening to Marc Antoine's 'Mediterraneo' right now that's been burned to CD-R...and it's quite easy on the ears.

I'm not that nostalgic - I don't pine for the olden days - I merely appreciate them for what they were to me then 

I am on a computer for 8-10 hours daily when not traveling - so it is a consideration that I don't want to be tethered to my computer to listen to relaxing music during or afterwards.

btw, I had a uber-modded Maggie until last week (open baffle, of course).  Too big for my room (but glorious; sold to AC'er 'Rashiki') - the loading on open baffles, especially taller ones, would seem to take them from possibility list for me in my room.

[Tr3vWh0r3]

I have had the chance to sit down and listen to Don Morrison's speakers and too me they are extremely good. Very crisp and clean sounding with excellent textured bass that digs deep. You would be surprised by the amount of bass when you see the size of the speakers. Imaging was excellent along with the sound stage.

I've also had the Decware Radials in my setup for some time and find them to be different sounding speakers. The Radials tend to be a little less in your face. Which isn't a bad thing, it all depends on your preference.

[opaqueice]

Open baffle is such a great sound. After hearing both, I'm very interested in the Linkwitz Orion (or Pluto though I haven't heard it) and the Nomad Ronin (and definitely want to hear the Sentinel). Dipole just makes sense!

How did the Nomads compare to the Orions? 

[finsup]

Hi Duke,

Thanks for posting.  Do you have any one using your speakers in SoCal?  BTW, your My Offer is very generous.
--Michael

[Duke]

Hello Finsup,

Thanks for the thumbs-up! 

I'll shoot you a message rather than side-track this very interesting thread. 

Duke

[acd483]

Open baffle is such a great sound. After hearing both, I'm very interested in the Linkwitz Orion (or Pluto though I haven't heard it) and the Nomad Ronin (and definitely want to hear the Sentinel). Dipole just makes sense!

I've yet to hear omni-directional, I'm dying to audition Don Morrison's speakers.

Are ya' up in Ontario to hear Morrisson Audio?  He does have a US dealer I think - can't remember who or where he is.  I'm up there the 15/16/17 of October (I live in Northern Cali) , but won't have time to do anything except work.

I haven't heard a computer-audio based system that sounded any better than a spinning disc (I've only heard a bare few setups to be fair). 

I hear the same small improvement from CD's that have been burned to CD-R's (which I don't do as it's a pain) as with computer-based audio.  The resultant sound is a little smoother and easier on the ears long term.  I'm listening to Marc Antoine's 'Mediterraneo' right now that's been burned to CD-R...and it's quite easy on the ears.

I'm not that nostalgic - I don't pine for the olden days - I merely appreciate them for what they were to me then 

I am on a computer for 8-10 hours daily when not traveling - so it is a consideration that I don't want to be tethered to my computer to listen to relaxing music during or afterwards.

btw, I had a uber-modded Maggie until last week (open baffle, of course).  Too big for my room (but glorious; sold to AC'er 'Rashiki') - the loading on open baffles, especially taller ones, would seem to take them from possibility list for me in my room.

The notion that a burned CD-R "sounds" better than a commercially produced CD is most certainly tweakophile lore. CDs do not read like LPs...digital comes through as either 0 or 1...if it's read by the player, you hear it, if not you don't. It's like digital over-the-air television. It doesn't help to polish your antenna...either it picks up the signal and you see a perfect picture or it can't.

As for the "sound" of CD players versus computer, I doubt there is one. For me, the computer delivers raw data to the DAC. the DAC processes into analog into the amp. The sound comes from the speakers! At least I'm pretty sure we're here to talk about the speakers' sound.