[Double Ugly]

Double Ugly, I have read about the Daedalus Audio speakers.  They are quite good although I think that they were designed based on a very different philosphy. 

Right on all counts.  I'm still partial to my SP Techs, but I've had the Daedalus for several years and will likely keep them in a secondary system.

Great news Lance.  Glad we could help improve an already wonderful transducer (Double Ugly loves when I talk that way..  ).

'Tis the right word considering the context (meaning almost anything to do with SP Tech ).

FWIW, I think I'm about to cancel the Revelation order.  I think I'll instead purchase 3 pair of Timepiece Minis (2 pair for music/HT room, 1 pair for the BR), a Continuum Mini center channel (never heard of it, right?  Me either ) and a pair of the yet-to-be-seen-or-heard SP Technology Infra-Wave subs.

I think that'll suffice, Ted, don't you? 

[ted_b]

Hell no.    I won't rest until you top me....that is...FIVE Revelations!!!! 

Actauilly, DU that sounds like a great deal.  And Bob can likely build those quicker too.

[Double Ugly]

My room is decently sized (18'x23') and has a 10' ceiling, but I think 5 Revs would crack the concrete pad.  Then again, who's to say a couple of Infra-Waves which go even lower won't do the same.

Seriously. 

But I think I'm gonna do it.  That way I'll have the pleasure of hearing the best bass in the world x 2 AND have the SP Tech sound spread to the BR.  Honestly, aside from being the first to own a couple of them (subs and Continuum Mini center, which does concern me), I can't find a lot to dislike about the prospect.

The real question is, where will I put my Timepiece 3.0s (or 2.5s, or 2.75s or whatever they are)?  They're a bit large for the kitchen; bathroom, maybe? 

[ted_b]

OK...TP 2.75's as mains; Minis for sides and rears (7.1); Continuum Mini for center, a couple of infra-Waves....WOW..what a system.

[Double Ugly]

OK...TP 2.75's as mains; Minis for sides and rears (7.1); Continuum Mini for center, a couple of infra-Waves....WOW..what a system.

Not bad.  Potentially doable, though room configuration may make it difficult, maybe impossible.  Further, I wonder if I wouldn't be better off keeping the same speakers/drivers/waveguides in the "main" system.  Given the time, energy and (of course) $$$ invested, I'm hesitant to do anything with even an outside chance of making seamless integration less probable.

Regardless, I apologize for the topic detour, targa; it honestly was not my intention.  I will now humbly bow out of the conversation for what I hope will be a smooth and rapid retrace to the original superb discussion.

[targa]

DU, no need for apologies.  i and everyone like reading the exchanges and this forum is for all..  so don't even bother.  however, you are extremely couteous..

about your setup, you are talking about a significant investment here:  SP Tech home theater set up.  however, am glad to hear you are committed to SP Tech.  this says a lot about the quality of SP Tech!   

question about my room..  i know, not ideal for music or home theater in current setting..  wife's decision.  Is the floor a bigger issue or wall or both?  I couldn't help but played a bit earlier.  I put a carpet between the speakers and noticed that the sound is even more detailed..  not sure if i am hallucinating (been a long day) but if true, I am extremely encouraged... 

Jim and i will play around and see.  if you have any suggestion please let me know.  the less i have to spend the better..  honestly, i prefer to spend money on equipments instead but will follow directions if i can.

i found out about couple of brilliant (technical) things that were implemented in the SP Tech speakers that i will share next time...

[ted_b]

The three main first reflection points are crucial.  Those are the floor in front of you (where a bounced ball, or signal, would hit the tweeter of the minis) and the side wall areas, damped (you can figure out where they are by using a laser pointer and a mirror, or by this diagram)




Multiply the distance from you to the front of the soundstage TIMES the distance from you to the side wall.
Take that number and divide by the sum (not product) of (the distance to the side wall plus the speakers distance to the side wall)

Damp that area and the imaging will improve significantly.

[targa]

Ted, thank you. looking at the picture, i see now.

Jim mentioned that the soundstage of my system was pulled more over to the left..  this can be explained by the fact that the right wall has a big opening so the sound did not bounce back whereas the left wall was continuous and allow sound to bouce back to me therefore more sound comes through on the left hand side..  this means louder and the soundstage is pulled to the left..  cool!

[targa]

ok.  let me share with you 1 technical thing about the TP3 (applies to all SP Tech speakers) i learned.  i have a pair of Tyler Acoustics and most of you know that Tyler uses quite expensive drivers such as Seas Excel Magnesium woofers.  they do look nice with the solid copper core.  i like their looks so i did a bit of research why SP Tech did not use them in their speakers instead of the current Seas Prestige Aluminum woofers.  is (lowest) cost a key factor?  as I asked myself this question, i thought that cost is an unlikely factor considering the asking price and reputation the designer want to uphold..  well I was right..

magnesium cones (or even paper cones) are lighter than aluminum...  so they can move faster.  now considering that standard (2 way) speakers have a cross over above the 2K Hz, use of a lighter cones are an absolute requirement!  what this means is that in order to produce a note at 1K Hz, a woofer must move back-and-forth 1K times in one second..  correct? 

but then, i asked myself the following question:  can a (let us say) 8 inch (can be any number) woofer cone move comfortably 1K times back and forth in 1 second vs. a 1 inch tweeter making the same movements in 1 second?  law of physics says small mass can move (change direction) much faster than higher (inertia) mass..  what this means is that the tweeter can move much easier at 1K Hz than a woofer cone.  but the problem is that the tweeter surface is so small and therefore can not move enough air to make the note loud enough at 1K Hz. 

therefore, other designer sticks to common practice by making the cross over at higher frequencies and let the woofer work harder (at a rate their mass do not allow them to do..)  on the other hand, SP Tech uses the waveguide as a (natural) amplifier for the tweeter..  so the tweeter sound is now amplified and can sound louder.. what this means is that, the woofer and tweeter moves at frequencies that are well within their physical limitations and therefore less distortion as result..

so, the reason why SP Tech did not have to use Seas Excel Magnesium woofer - as an example - because (1) their woofer does not have to work hard at high frequencies since the cross over is well below 1K Hz.  (2) in addition to this, if you look into the driver frequency response curve (published by the manufacturer), the aluminum woofers used in SP Tech have a more linear freq response up to 1K Hz (!) than other woofers..  (3) last, the aluminum woofer is heavier and stronger.  the woofer move as one piece and therefore make a cleaner sound.  when woofers move at higher frequencies, the inner part of the cone can move faster than the outer part and causing the cone to flex and create distortion…  the higher the frequency, the more of this behavior that is why they will "break up" if they work too hard

not sure if SP Tech has the above explanation on their website but this is what i found out for myself because if i would have asked the designer, he will tell me what i wanted to hear anyway..  right?

sorry for the technicalities..  not sure i am making sense..     

[jimdgoulding]

The three main first reflection points are crucial.  Those are the floor in front of you (where a bounced ball, or signal, would hit the tweeter of the minis) and the side wall areas, damped (you can figure out where they are by using a laser pointer and a mirror, or by this diagram)




Multiply the distance from you to the front of the soundstage TIMES the distance from you to the side wall.
Take that number and divide by the sum (not product) of (the distance to the side wall plus the speakers distance to the side wall)

Damp that area and the imaging will improve significantly.

Thanks for that, Ted.  The imbalance of Lance's stage isn't all that obvious most of the time.  I played Miles' Live in Tokyo which has a concert hall size audience of enthusiastic patrons and the recessed and deep applause bunchs up in one part of the stage and is imbalanced to the left.  Rightly or wrongly, I attributed that to the alcove.  We shall see.  We will move Lance's rug forward to the speaks to damp the reflection off the floor and I am encouraging him to put a thick pad underneath it.  We will also play with a couple of GIK panels.  His ceiling freaks me out, tho.

[ted_b]

Jim,
you're right abou the ceiling being an issue.  I completely disregarded it at first.  What is that up there?  What is the ceiling height?

[rydenfan]

The real question is, where will I put my Timepiece 3.0s (or 2.5s, or 2.75s or whatever they are)?  They're a bit large for the kitchen; bathroom, maybe? 

Jim, you can always send them to me  I promise to give them a workout 

[jimdgoulding]

Jim,
you're right abou the ceiling being an issue.  I completely disregarded it at first.  What is that up there?  What is the ceiling height?

Maybe 8' across its highest point which is pretty narrow, then it has a broad slope down to around 4' the length of the room with alcoves on one side fore and aft of the listening position (presently).  That's recessed lighting above. 

[Double Ugly]

... because if i would have asked the designer, he will tell me what i wanted to hear anyway..  right?

It sounds as though you've never spoken with Bob.

I'm sure opinions vary, but IME I've never spoken with a more forthright designer/manufacturer.  Yes, Bob believes strongly in the choices he's made (as well he should), but he will not hesitate to acknowledge that everything - including his own design path - is a compromise.

You should probably give him a call some afternoon (best time to catch him), but only do so if you have a couple of hours to spare.  You'll understand why at about the 45-minute mark of the call. 

[targa]

DU,  I have talked to Bob after I found out the woofer..  He explained it like I thought and even more.  You are right that he is a honest and open guy.  You are also right that hanging up on him is not easy..  Do not get me wrong, I do enjoy the intellectual discussions with him.  He is passionate about his designs.  I must say that few other designers provide indepth technical details around their design principles. 

Like you said, every design has its own compromises..  However, I am impressed with how Bob solved the compromises..  A lot of his intellectual properties have gone into the designs.. 

[targa]

Feb 22
Listening session #4:

I have made minor adjustments to the set up. I started bi-amping the speakers with the Linar 10 and also raised the speakers up 4-5 inches where my ears are as high as the mid point between the woofer and tweeter, as recommended by Bob. Additionally, I put a thick 4x8 carpet between the speakers and my sitting position to damp the reflections off the wooden floor. This listening session is based on the described changes. Overall, I can say that base was less boomy. Details and imaging are better because of fewer floor reflections (ceilings and side walls not covered yet..). What this all means is that the mentioned qualities of TP3 have become even more apparent to the ears.

CD:  U218 Singles:  With or Without You (…heavy base line)
CD:  Chrsi Botti Live:  Why Not (…drum solo)

I listened to the tracks above to evaluate the low end of the TP3. With the U2 track, the baseline was well under the 600Hz cross-over point so I could test the woofer only against my DynAudio Sub300. With bi-aping using the Linar 10, I could easily shut off the tweeters or woofers as I wished. Now, the baseline of the U2 track came through much clear through the TP3. The base melody was clear, each note was articulate and distinguished. I used this track in all of my past auditioning and testing out speakers. I had not heard this baseline this good and clear before. I tested this track with all the speakers I had and even driven by much more expensive Audio Research combos and Krell digital front-end at that time. I also auditioned this track (and other CDs) with the Vandersteen Quatro (was reviewed by Stereophile - http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/706vandersteen/ - as detailed and better imaging than the $44K Wilson Maxx2 speakers) a local hi-end audio store driven by Ayre electronics. I did not recall a clearer articulation of the baseline as of now through the TP3. My Sub300 is good for hometheater but not music since the TP3s go as low as the sub…   

The “Why Not” track/ drum solo was simply impressive playing through the TP3. I could follow the drummer technical ability through every beat he played. The snare drum had a hollow sound and some after vibrations while the big “base” drum sounded solid and well damped. The cymbals sounded right either when the drummer hit them soft or loud. The baseline of the base player was also excellent. I could even hear a metallic sound of the base string vibrations when the notes were not damped by the base player finger/ hand. The louder I played, the better the drum solo sounded… right up until 80-85% of the amp capacity.. I did not go beyond that point since the amp distortion may kick in.. (I didn’t know for sure but at which point but did not want to test..)


CD:  Mahler Symphony No. 5:  track 1
This track is one of the most difficult tracks to play through any system due the micro and macro dynamics of the track. The orchestra used by Mahler is huge in size and he makes use of the all voices at once through certain pieces of music. This explains why the track can be a difficult test for any systems...

I used this track at dealer demos when I was looking for a pair of speaker a year ago (I ended up buying the Martin Logan Vantage to replace the JM Lab). I listened to some expensive speakers: JM Lab (with Krell electronics), Vandersteen Quatro (Ayre electronics) and other in the $8K and above range. I could not hear this track the way I wanted. The track started out with a single horn playing a solo. 20 seconds into the track, the full orchestra came into live, the drums, the brass, the strings, woodwinds and more horns. What jumped out at me was that now I could hear the multiple horn voices distinctively whereas before I heard “one note” horn through that particular passage. The horn also sounded right in relative to the other instruments. Their positions were in the back of the stage as expected…

This track was the track I really sold me on the TP3.  Their ability to resolve complex pieces of music is second to none to me.  Also, the imaging remained stable and “correct” throughout the complex pieces.   The reason why I mentioned that latter point is that, if the imaging was not correct, I would hear for example, the horns much more up front of the soundstage than they should be because they were played loud, relatively louder and more distinct that other voices…  However, my ears told me that they were still correctly positioned in the back of the stage.. 

Impressive!  This kind of complex pieces of music fully demonstrates - for me - why I care so much about:  1. accuracy 2. transparency and 3. coherence.  Everyone has a different set of preferences or criteria when looking for speakers.  For me, the 3 criteria mentioned are key...

[Double Ugly]

This kind of complex pieces of music fully demonstrates - for me - why I care so much about:  1. accuracy 2. transparency and 3. coherence.  Everyone has a different set of preferences or criteria when looking for speakers.  For me, the 3 criteria mentioned are key...

It sounds like you and I would get along splendidly.  Your priorities are identical to mine, and thankfully for both of us, Bob's transducers are as accurate, clean (transparent and uncolored) and (a biggie for me) coherent as any speaker I've heard, even those costing many multiples of the Timepiece's full retail price. 

I guess I'm just particularly sensitive to it (lucky me ), but even a brief critical listening session will usually reveal some evidence of the crossover.  Others may not hear it, but if I do it's a deal-breaker, period. 

My detailed orientated nature came in handy (required, actually) in my past life, but it was a solid gold pain in the arse when it came to finding a speaker.  I'm blessed to have found Bob's speakers early on (I purchased the first pair sold outside a 50-mile radius of La Porte) and I haven't looked back.  Each and every new iteration does all the previous edition did, only better.  I can't imagine what the man could design with a virtually unlimited budget.

If I may make a suggestion, targa, now that you've found *the* speakers, consider looking for a more powerful amp if/when you can afford to do so.  The economic woes have created a phenomenal buyer's market and there are a *lot* of excellent deals to be had.

I say this because I believe you've only had a taste of what your speakers are truly capable of producing.  I power my Timepieces with a Spectron Musician III SE Mk2, but I'll either get a second & run them as monoblocks or I may take a long, hard look at a new amp produced by a fellow here on Audio Circle (see here).

It's your call, but I think you'd be seriously surprised by the improvement as you fuel the sonic fire.  As long as it's good, clean power, you'll be rewarded in spades.

Regardless, congratulations again on finding and then correctly identifying what I feel is one of the best, most undervalued speakers available today. 

[targa]

DU, thanks for the recommendation!  true, i feel like the speakers can handle more because they just get better every time i tweaked something.  they immediately revealed any changes in my set-up, be it the room accoustics, power, or even power conditioning...  with past speakers, i had to listen hard and repeatedly to hear changes in my system...  given that, i am sure that the weakest links in my system are the components, amps and source..

Does Ted have the same Spectron Musician amps?  i know that your recommendation is sincere and for the better..  you are right that it is a buyer market but also a very difficult time to put down high $ for upgrade..  with stock prices are so low (as long as i stay away from the stocks of banks, i am fine..) the opportunity costs are even higher for not investing that incremental $ into the market..right?  seriously, it is a difficult time for most of us...  but i do hear you...

[ted_b]

Lance,
Yes I have Spectron Musician III Mark 2 as well, but I have a pair of them in monoblock mode (bridged phase inverted style) to produce three times the power (3200 watts into 4 ohms) and twice the headroom of the stereo amp.  The Sp Tech Revelations LOVE all that power and headroom.  Dynamics are incredible IMHO.

[targa]

Ted, DU..  you are talking about amps that cost $100+ per lbs..  and i need to get at least 70 lbs to make up 1 amp right..?  let me do math.. hmm