[audiojerry]

It has been 12 days since the Timepiece 2.0 arrived, and for those who were interested, I promised to keep them informed of my experiences with it. I had already posted my early, highly positive impressions shortly after a brief break-in as recommended by Bob of SP, and those impressions still hold true. With over 200 hours of 24/7 playing time under its belt, I conducted a critical evaluation this weekend using my $5,000 Dynaudio 25th Anniversary Special 25 monitors as my reference for comparison.

My system:
Audio Research VT200 200wpc tubed amplifier (the 4 ohm taps worked best with the Timepiece.)
Audio Valve tubed linestage from Germany
Modwright and Tritium modified P-1A, P-3A, and Monolithic Power Supply for D.A.C.
Classe CDT 1.0 CD Transport
2 PowerVar isolation transformers, 1 PS Audio Ultimate Outlet, and ZuCable's Mother powercords for line conditioning. Mother powercords were plugged into Triphazer power cord conditioners.
ZuCable Varial interconnects plugged into Level 20 Triphazer conditioners.
ZuCable Wax speaker cable connected to Level 15 Triphazers.
For solid state amplification, I used Odyssey's Extreme Monoblocks.
Speaker stands are 24" 4 pillared steel sand filled from Studio Tech, weighing about 60 pounds each. They are rough textured sound coated with 3/8" top and bottom plates. the top plate is only 6" by 8", which is not optimal for the SP's, and I place a layer of damping material between the plate and the speaker. Stands are coupled through carpeting to concrete floor with steel spikes. The 24" stands placed the tweeter at about 41" above the floor. This may be a little too tall, but the dispersion is so wide, that I don't think height is a critical concern.

My room:
Basement entertainment room approximately 20 x 25 rectangle, divided by an 8' wall near the middle, with 7' 5" acoustic ceiling. One side of the room is used for home theater / sitting area with a sofa, lounge chair, and rocking chair. The other part of room is for my 2 channel audio room. This space is the smaller half. In this area I can place the speakers approximately 6' apart, 8' from the wall behind them, and listening position can up to 9' away from speakers. The room has heavy insulation in ceiling and walls, the walls themselves consist of very porous sound absorbant 1" thick rough sawn cedar boards, and the dense carpeting has a layer of thick padding beneath it. In addition the furniture is thickly padded and upholstered, resulting in an overly damped room with no
discernable slap echo. This room is challenging to amplifiers and speakers because it takes extra power to reach high spl, and getting effective bass is especially difficult.            

Musical Tastes:
I listen 70-75% straight ahead jazz, concentrating on trios consisting of piano, standup bass, and drum. I also like quartets that add a guitar, followed by larger groups using sax, trumpet/coronet and t-bone. Vocalists, especially female, are often featured. The remaining 30% of my listening is widely diverse including classical, movie themes, standards from the 50's and 60's, folk, and country. The primary criteria for enjoyment for me is well recorded acoustic instruments.    

Based on my musical tastes and partiality to tubed amplification, the Dynaudio Special 25's have been an ideal fit for me. Bob of SP Tech was fully aware of my bias going into this deal. It is also relevent that the Special 25 is well over 75% more expensive than the SP Timepiece. You could almost buy two pairs of the Timepiece for the price of a Special 25. In spite of all this, Bob had absolutely no reservations in risking shipping expenses because he was convinced that I would find the Timepiece a superior speaker. And you know what, he was absolutely right. Technically, the SP is superior in almost every category.

As I stated earlier, headroom and transient speed are without peer in my experience. When the music demands sudden, violent, percussive impact, the Timepiece is poised and ready to oblige. It jumps all over imposing types of musical challenges. Bass and drum whacks give the sensation of being punched in the chest. With the solid state Odyssey monoblocks, the Timepiece seems to be even more dynamic. I never felt that the music was beginning to congest because of the speakers, although there were times when it seemed like my ARC amp was reaching its limits instead of the Timepiece. This is a difficult one to call, though. When played on the Odyssey, they could get too loud for comfort, so the limits of the Timepiece's headroom will have to discovered by someone else - I value my hearing too much.                

The Timepiece excels at imaging and soundstaging. Again, they set a new standard for me. Dead-on image placement with exact positioning of performers on a virtual stage. Recordings with vocals are normally placed at the center, and with the Timepiece the vocalist is up front either on the same plane or just slightly behind the speakers. A lot of speakers seem to push most vocals too far back, or aggressively too far forward. The Timepiece's portrayal of space is convincingly holographic and images are dense. Each performer occupies an easily identifiable position and is seemingly touchable. There is no smearing or blurring of notes.

All this contributed to the Timepiece's ability to disappear, even though they are quite large for monitors. But the front baffle with the gloss piano black finish are striking and hard not to gaze at. Speaking of imaging, these speakers are probably great candidates for home theater as well because the sound changes very little when sitting off axis. I moved my chair to various positions as far as a couple of feet outside the speakers, and I was still getting a good soundstage emanating from between the speakers.

I obviously cannot measure frequency response, but these have to be the most evenly balanced and flattest speakers I've heard across the spectrum. No range of treble, midrange, or bass seems accentuated. It was necessary for me, however, to set the tweeter control on its minus setting. There are 3 settings controlled by an easy to reach switch on the back panel: minus, flat, and plus. I believe there is a 2 db variance between each setting. This is certainly a great flexible feature to have since there are so many differences between sources, preamps, amps, and wire.

What have I left out? I've covered headroom, bass, transient speed, soundstaging, imaging, neutrality. Other than the lowest bass notes, the Timepiece exceeds every speaker I've heard in these areas. But there are caveats. They require an amp with plenty of muscle. The Odyssey Mono Extremes have it, and it seems like my Audio Research VT200 is adequate but not optimal. Anything with less power might not allow the Timepiece to reach its potential. I also believe that room size, sitting position, and speaker placement need to be sufficiently large. My normal distance is 5-6' between speakers and a sitting position of about 5-6'. This is too close for the Timepiece. The widest I could go was 6' apart with a sitting distance of 9'. I would like to have increased those distances, but even within my maximum limits the sound became more natural and pleasing.                          

The Timepiece does all these things better than my Dynaudio Special 25's, and they sell for over $2000 less. So, would you be surprised to hear that I am going to stick with my Special 25's? My Danes don't play as loudly, don't go as deep in the bass, don't image as well, etc, etc, etc. So why would I favor them? Believe me it was not an easy decision, but several factors help to explain it. I have grown very accustomed to the sound of my Dyn's. Compared to the Timepiece my Dyn's are colored, but they are colored in a way that is pleasing to me. By comparison, they are mellow, sweet, airy, and creamy smooth. The leading edges are softer, and seem to be more in synch with with why I prefer tube amplification. The Timepiece is crystalline, clear, punchy, and unwaveringly truthful. I guess I like my speakers to lie to me a little. My room and my amp are better suited to the Dynaudio's, especially when you take into account my musical tastes. As I said, most of my listening is to three and four piece acoustic jazz. The Dyn's aren't slouches for symphonic and other demanding forms of music, but the Timepieces clobber them by comparison.
       
I don't dislike the SP's. In fact, I like them tremendously, and without having the 25's as my reference point, I would be ecstatic and jubilant to have acquired them. If I had a larger space for listening, the outcome may have been different. I had a endured good deal of consternation about my decision, that's for sure. And if anyone asked for a recommendation, I'd put the Timepiece 2.0 at the top of my list, provided the room and amplification were adequate. I believe Bob has accomplished his goal with these speakers by providing an affordable monitor that depicts a highly accurate representation of what is in a recording without restrictive limits on listener sweet spot or real life spl's. Perhaps in the future he will consider designing a speaker with similar qualities for smaller rooms and smaller amps.        

I wish to thank Bob of SP Technology for making this opportunity possible, and for spending so much time answering all my questions and erasing any doubts I may have had about going with a startup company. He is truely a class act and a great asset to our community of Audio Circle manufacturers.      

[Sa-dono]

Great review Jerry! I just have a couple questions. First, do you have any idea why they needed further distance (and sounded better as such)? I was under the impression with the lower phase issues, that they should be great for nearfield listening. Secondly, what were your impressions of both speakers in the highs (as the Timepiece is tapered off in the highs)?

[byteme]

Great write-up.  After hearing the 25's I'm not surprised you decided to stick with them, that system sounds fantastic!  I am, however, intrigued by the SP's now!!

[JLM]

Yes Jerry, thanks very much for your efforts to review the Timepieces.

I can understand shying away from fully accurate speakers.  I got the same impression from the smaller M&K monitors, great for professional studios or HT, but I missed having some soft, squeezable flesh around the music.  (I also prefer women of classical proportions, more like Marilyn Monroe or the Roman/Greek statues than J Lopez.)

It sounds like your room is about 3,800 cu. ft. and heavily dampened, but for imaging purposes only about 11 feet wide.  I'm planning on building a "gentleman's office" (translate: a private listening room/office) that will be 2,200 cu. ft., 13.6 ft. wide by 19.7 ft. long with 8.5 ft. ceilings and the back wall skewed and built-in bookshelves on one of the side walls.  Finishes to be determined.  With the office furnishings considered the listening position will be a maximum 13 ft. from the front wall.  So hopefully the room would be big enough.  (I share Sa-dono's curosity regarding the need for more distance.)

Along with the new room I plan on putting together an entirely new audio system.  Perhaps in the 1.5 - 2 years that it will take to complete the new house/room digital amps will reach a higher degree of perfection as I'm sure their "tube similar" qualities would help soften the overall presentation while providing sufficient power.

Your review is particularly useful to me as I've read enough of your threads to get an idea of how your tastes run and because we share many musical preferences.

Thanks again.

P.S. (What will you be doing with them?  Returning them and ruining the company's zero returned record?  Or selling them to some poor, deserving audiophile, like me, for really cheap?   )

[nathanm]

Good review Jerry! Thanks especially for describing your room\setup because as everyone knows, armed with this kind of information we are all capable of constructing an accurate mental model of your basement in our minds in which to play said speakers as we read the rest of the sonically descriptive text. So thank goodness -- your opinion counts!

Ooooh, SP takes one for the team.  Shipping industry 1, SP Tech 0!   Ha!  It will be interesting to see if they will maintain the two-way shipping deal, cause that is one helluva utopian setup for a mail order joint.  I wish everybody was like that.  

Just don't crate 'em up yet Jerry!

When played on the Odyssey, they could get too loud for comfort, so the limits of the Timepiece's headroom will have to discovered by someone else - I value my hearing too much.

It ain't that bad really - they're quite generous:

http://hearing-protection.4ursafety.com/exposure-limits.html

As I stated earlier, headroom and transient speed are without peer in my experience. When the music demands sudden, violent, percussive impact, the Timepiece is poised and ready to oblige. It jumps all over imposing types of musical challenges. Bass and drum whacks give the sensation of being punched in the chest.

Ohhhhhhhhhh, that is very good.    I tell ya, you better not be lyin' about that Jerry - hang on, let me calculate your room dimensions and equipment again...yes yes, I almost have it now.  Hold on, I am reconstructing the ARC amp's output transformer characteristic in my frontal lobe...Yep, it's coming to me...hey wait, ahh shoot I mixed the review text in with real world experience.  Dammit!  Okay, nevermind, do over.

[MaxCast]

What's SPT's web address?

Great review, Jerry.

[Double Ugly]

What's SPT's web address?

SP Technology Loudspeakers

DU

[MaxCast]

Thank you Mr. Ugly

[doug s.]

...Secondly, what were your impressions of both speakers in the highs (as the Timepiece is tapered off in the highs)?

ahhhh... this is my exact question.  everyting about these sp-techs excites my curiosity.   but, i am concerned about the hi-end - as well as wanting everyting else ya mentioned about 'em, in a speaker, i also want sparkly, airy highs.  i found it interesting, jerry, that ya actually turned the tweet pots *down* a notch...

thanks for your reviewing effort...  oh yeah, don't send 'em back 'til others in yer neck of the woods get to hear 'em!  

doug s.

[audiojerry]

Thanks for the kind words, guys!
It's late, so I'll try to answer questions tomorrow.

[infiniti driver]

Some recordings have that "hang in the air" quality with the highs and other recordings simply do not..due to mixing, mastering and talent. In my observance, if it is in the programme, you will receive, if not, you shall not.

Great review audiojerry. Wish you could find room for them in your home but like all things, it is a matter of perspective, need and opinion. I really don't think SP Tech will have any problems selling your pair...as a matter of fact, just you having them and using them and reviewing them is worth quite a lot....but careful friends, audiojerry is right, you should have the power. I can get by with 100 per channel at 10 feet quite well but they do another complete layer of performace with an extra 6dB of headroom which is a whopping 400WPCH. They ALWAYS ask to "strut their evil side" of the plus 112dB level...because they simply CAN...with abundances of dynamic purity and inaudible distortion.

I certainly hope that when audiojerry sends them back that he does not get a quest to wonder what a certain song would "sound like" with the SP's.

Congradulations audiojerry on a fine and well written (and honest) review!


(below...what am I listening to now)

[nathanm]

Some recordings have that "hang in the air" quality with the highs and other recordings simply do not..due to mixing, mastering and talent. In my observance, if it is in the programme, you will receive, if not, you shall not.

Indeed.  It's ALL about the recording!

I have a hunch it has something to do with hot mic feeds picking up the brushed snare.  It's those snare brushes I tell you,  when I heard that I knew what hifi nerds were on about.  That's what gives you the "air" sound.  Just a guess - I haven't recorded a lounge trio or nuthin'...

I may have to bring over my weakling little 3-watt SET for an extreme case scenario on these electricity suckers.  That's probably even more of an unlikely pair than the Norh SE-9 on B&W 801.  Heh!

[infiniti driver]

Nathan, I built a pair of bottlehead Paramours at 3.5 watt max/ each/monoblocks and got very satistfying output from 90 db/w speakers in most forms of music and very high definition to boot.

Now that I no longer own them or support them, I still can be confident that one watt is one watt....and may the best first watt win!

Let me know if you have anything laying around you may want to share or sell Nathan...

[lonewolfny42]

Nice review Jerry ! Great descriptions, gave a real "you are there" feel to your review !  Thanks !!

[JLM]

In the 20 years I was away from audio, the major trend changes included:

1. Return to tube amplification.

2. Speaker baffles got narrower and their orientation went from boomy bass to tighter/thinner bass (what was called European in taste).

3. Recordings became way over the top (extremely close miking, over emphasis of everything).  So I agree with the "hot" recordings comment completely.  Hopefully better studio monitors will help correct this condition.

[doug s.]

Some recordings have that "hang in the air" quality with the highs and other recordings simply do not..due to mixing, mastering and talent. In my observance, if it is in the programme, you will receive, if not, you shall not...

sure, the recordings have a lot to do w/this, but so do the speakers.  i have listened to several different speakers, lately, & some do this, some don't.  also included here is the detail that i like.  the speakers that seem to have this treble air also seem to have loads of detail.  

my swan m1.2's did this as good or better than anyting i've ever heard.  my meret re's & proac ref 8 signatures do it...  the zu druid monitors unfortunately do not do this.     i say unfortunately, cuz they do other stuff so well, i'd be seriously considering 'em for long term use, otherwise... (full "review" to follow soon.)  the gr-research criterion's also dint do it, which shocked the hell outta me, cuz they have a nice ribbon tweet.  supposedly, there was someting wrong w/that tweet; & danny has been gracious enuff to send me a pair of fresh diluceo's to audition.   we'll see.

bottom line is, some speakers won't give ya the "airy" treble, and that last iota of detail, regardless of software used...  i'm wondering about the sp-tech's, in this regard....

ymmv,

doug s.

[jackman]

Jerry,
Great review.  I love the way you paint a picture that makes people feel like they are in your basement/listening room (which really reminds me of a really nice cabin or lodge) with you listening to your system.  I may check out these speakers.  I love that airie quality you describe and those TP speakers look really cool.  

May have to wait until my subwoofer project is completed.  I have a cabinet delivering today.  Three cubic feet of beauty (once I'm done) that will be exotically veneered (by me!) and provide some bump to my sytem.   The only thing holding me back from these speakers is my long-term plan calls for full active system.  

Anyway, great job!

Jack

[audiojerry]

Sa-dono wrote:

First, do you have any idea why they needed further distance (and sounded better as such)? I was under the impression with the lower phase issues, that they should be great for nearfield listening. Secondly, what were your impressions of both speakers in the highs (as the Timepiece is tapered off in the highs)?

I don't really know why they sounded better further away. Maybe Bob can offer a theory. It might be the waveguide used for the tweeter. It is like a variation of a horn loaded tweeter and perhaps when you sit too closely to it, the energy level is too high in relation to the midbass driver.  As you move further away, the sound from the two drivers has more room and time to blend together into better coherent single point source.  The Timepiece is not tapered off in the highs that I am aware of. The new generation of the Dynaudio Esotar tweeter is unmatched in my opinion, at least in the way it was implemented in my Special 25's. As I said, if I didn't have the 25's as my reference, I'd be keeping the Timepiece.  

JLM wrote:

What will you be doing with them? Returning them and ruining the company's zero returned record? Or selling them to some poor, deserving audiophile, like me, for really cheap?  

I'm still feeling some reservations about returning them. I spoke with Bob last night, and I told him that I am continuing to burn them in 24/7, and I want to give them another opportunity this weekend. Even though Bob believes they are ready after a couple hours of break-in, I believe they sounded better with 200 hours of frequency sweep burn-in. Burn-in may be changing things like the caps, the inductors, and the voice coils. I believe there are two break-ins that a speaker goes through: mechanical and electrical. Mechanical may only require a few hours, but electrical takes much longer, and no measurement tool exists today that can confirm this, but the human ear/brain can.      

doug s. wrote:

ahhhh... this is my exact question. everyting about these sp-techs excites my curiosity. but, i am concerned about the hi-end - as well as wanting everyting else ya mentioned about 'em, in a speaker, i also want sparkly, airy highs. i found it interesting, jerry, that ya actually turned the tweet pots *down* a notch...

It's a hard concept to describe. The Timepiece provides every bit as much detail as the Dyn's, but the Dyn's just had an airier quality. At the same time, I wouldn't consider the Timepiece bright.  I just felt in my room that the Timepiece was more balanced with the tweet dialed back a notch.

infiniti driver wrote:

I certainly hope that when audiojerry sends them back that he does not get a quest to wonder what a certain song would "sound like" with the SP's.

That's exactly why I'm feeling a good amount of consternation about my decision and why I'm going to give them one more audition this weekend. If I do send them back, there is no doubt I will miss the many qualities that the SP's provide.  

nathan wrote:

I may have to bring over my weakling little 3-watt SET for an extreme case scenario on these electricity suckers. That's probably even more of an unlikely pair than the Norh SE-9 on B&W 801. Heh!

fuhged aboudid!  

Thanks again for all the kind words. I truely enjoy the company we share on AC, and being able to contribute things that might be useful to others.

[infiniti driver]

To DougS,

The post about "hanging in the air quality" was directed about the SP TP2's.

Very mastering/production dependant.

If you want to truly "be there", listen to the SP's with Lincoln Mayorga (Sheffield lab vinyl) or the Thelma Houston and pressure cooker (Sheffield vinyl).

Real as real gets in this paradigm.

You will need a subsonic filter at 18hZ ...4th order.

[Sa-dono]

I don't really know why they sounded better further away. Maybe Bob can offer a theory. It might be the waveguide used for the tweeter. It is like a variation of a horn loaded tweeter and perhaps when you sit too closely to it, the energy level is too high in relation to the midbass driver. As you move further away, the sound from the two drivers has more room and time to blend together into better coherent single point source.

Hopefully Bob can chime in here on this. If not, I guess I'll have to shoot him off an email or PM.

The Timepiece is not tapered off in the highs that I am aware of. The new generation of the Dynaudio Esotar tweeter is unmatched in my opinion, at least in the way it was implemented in my Special 25's. As I said, if I didn't have the 25's as my reference, I'd be keeping the Timepiece.

It's a hard concept to describe. The Timepiece provides every bit as much detail as the Dyn's, but the Dyn's just had an airier quality.

The Timepiece goes up to 16 kHz at +/- 2 db, so probably only at most to 18 kHz at +/- 3 db. The Sp 25 in comparison goes up to 25 kHz (+/- 3 db). Despite (most, if not all,) humans not being able to hear past 20 kHz, studies have shown that frequencies 20 kHz and up do effect the frequencies we do hear. Oftentimes these frequencies are associated with that audible airy quality. This can be important in properly reproducing the sustain, harmonics, and overtones of certain instruments.

If Bob does answer here, I would be curious to know what frequency range the treble settings effect. The Timepiece looks fairly flat in the highs, except a peak around 10 kHz, and up to where the highs taper off...based on the specs provided. Also, are these specs based on the flat setting?

Thanks again for the review and answers Jerry!