[audiochef]

Hey Ekovalsky,could you please make a trip  over to that critics house to recpricate a glowing /subjective review of his speakers?

And would you do us all a favor and post your thoughts for all of us to read?

Would you pleeeze?

[ekovalsky]

I'm planning on going for a listen next month.

I heard the Alphas last year.  They are good speakers, and I was impressed that azryan was able to build them himself for such a reasonable price.

I didn't think they were as good as the RM-40's, and as you know I'm much happer with the RM/X than the RM-40's.  Undoubtedly his system was being held back by the digital front end and preamp. I'm a little spoiled when it comes to electronics  

He did have the excellent Acoustic Reality power amp driving the Alphas.

Don't make the mistake of mis-interpreting his review.  Overall he thought the RM/X were "great" and his friend who accompanied him, who works at a local audio/video salon, seemed very impressed too.  

His main critique had to due with output of the FST, which I have been working on the past few weeks.  It has the hardest part of the tweaking process as I think Julian would attest to.  Adjustments to the pot and pod position can make the sound as bright or dark as you want it.

[azryan]

It's all so very subjective of course.

I think Eric and I prefer diff. type of sound. We didn't seem to agree on much of the same systems as we heard at the CES either.
Most people didn't seem to agree on CES systems from all the posts of people who went.

I tried to describe the diffs as best I can though and the X's and Alphas certainly have them.

There are certain things like dynamic impact from woofers and planars in the midrange that are just flat out different.

Up to the individual to decide what they're looking for.

Eric doesn't seem to play maybe 'any'? rock music. It seems most of what he likes is very light and the X's will have an even more clean sound in the mids than even the effortless 18 6" Alpha woofers due probably to the room effects that the planars seem to totally avoid.

To me the planars sound like headphones. I think I kept wanting to turn it up louder and louder 'cuz it didn't feel like it was loud enough, but SPL-wise technically it was VERY loud when I cranked it up.

The Alpha's x-over is more transparent IMO. It's simpler and I think or higher quality. No pot resistors, Goertz film/foil inductors, simple 2-way vs. complicated 4 way.

I had told Eric I wasn't going to post and review/comments, but he asked me to more than once so I did.

I'm sick of being called a troll here so if people get ticked at me I'm not gonna f'ing post in the forum anymore.

This is REALLY starting to sound like a pissing match to me now and I'm not going to go much farther than this.

I'm not trying to pick a fight or hurt VMPS or promote my speakers here. Note I hadn't named my speakers here in my review link to Critic's Cirlce out of respect for this being VMPS's forum, but my system is my main point of reference so it WILL come up in any review of another system I hear.

Not like I make a dime no matter what speakers anyone else buys.

As long as audiochef is asking for comments though, a finshed pair of GR Alphas fully wrapped in venner (which includes the back) is about $5K. The X's it looks like list for over $12K right? Including dealer discounts if there are any (I don't know) it's still looks like the Alphas are half price.

I built mine for $2.6K. They would have been a few hundred cheaper is I painted them instead of veneer.

Anyway...
I think Eric's bass might be over damped but DON'T know for sure. Some people might love that.

Depends on the music. It was freakin' GREAT on lots of stuff. On this Chinese Drum track it didn't sound real at all. It did sound like two GREAT tight clean subs though.
Bass guitar and snare drums etc... have a lot of midrange that I didn't 'feel' like I do here too.

IMO, here that track sounds like the actual drums and the depth is better on little drum stick taps in the distance (could just be an effect of low FST level though) and my speakers are much farther apart so the soundstage is 'grander' IMO.

He did adjust the FST's the day after I heard them so maybe that's diff. now.

I asked him a few times if he thought VMPS's room at the CES's top end was too bright 'cuz I thought it was just right and I thought it was brighter than his system.
He having come from his X system before and after the CES should have a much better point of ref. to judge that top end diff. if he felt there was one.

Both my friend and I who heard Eric's past system w/ RM-40's thought my system was better even w/ my Outlaw pre/pro driving the eARTwo.
Eric felt his was better. Fine.

At the time I found he needed room treatments in his bare drywalled room and would help if he turned his system symetrically and though the 40's bass might be better strengthened being closer to the rear wall.

He then did all those things. Plus I told him about my ICEpower digital amp and he bought one of those too (though a Rowland) so I think do I have some valid opinions on what I was hearing/suggesting.

He also agreed w/ me about the 40's top woofer being odd to the soundstage and confirmed that the cabinet is totally unbraced.

The X's cabinet is highly braced and great. The Alphas are also as highly braced built according to the plans.

Eric's current system is 100% all new incl. the room mostly too.

Currently I'm running my Alphas w/ a $300 Pannie Rec. and $180 Pio. DVD player. I don't know how much Eric's front end cost but I'm guessing litteraly around 100 times more.
It should cream my Pannie by a million miles price-wise.
I swear I didn't feel it did though but it IS certainly better and I said that already.

Wayne at Bolder Cable is going to be modding my Pannie next month and says the caps inside the stock unit take 500 hours (nuts hey?) to fully break in.

I'm working on an Alpha center chan. now too.

[Rocket]

Hi Guys,

I recently had a shootout at an acquaintances house between my amp (aksa 100) and a bel canto evo.  The amps were connected direct from a highly modified kenwood cdp to speakers which are custom made using raven tweeters and accuton mid/bass drivers.  We didnt' use a preamp for the listening sessions.

Anyway i thought the bc sounded a little better than my aksa.  I however thought the system sounded a bit bright and harsh imo.  I really wasn't that impressed with the sound i was hearing.  Anyway the next night i placed the aksa back into my system and it sounded much much better even though my speakers are not quite up to the standard of the accutons.  I have a pt p3a modwright dac and n.e.w. p3 tube preamp in my system.

My point is that the comparison between these 2 speakers on 2 different systems is pretty hard to judge.  I'm sure if Azyran improves his front end he will be mightily impressed with the improvements.

Regards

Rod

[warnerwh]

A huge point that hasn't been acknowledged is the room. Room acoustics make a huge difference in the way a speaker sounds.  The same exact speaker will sound different in two different rooms.  Good acoustics can help immensely.  The differences between the X's and Alphas would change in different rooms either in magnitude or other places not noted.

All audio opinions are based on a particular system and ROOM as the two cannot be separated.  Opinions are a opinions.  You can't say an opinion is wrong, well you can but then you're wrong.  It's really best to try to keep our objectivity.

[ekovalsky]

azryan room trounces mine -- it is much bigger and built with omni block or something like it (foam block with a concrete skeleton).

the fiberglass panels have done very good things in my room, and eventually i may add a few more on the ceiling plus some diffusors n the listening-end of the room.  but no matter what I do it is a 14.5' x 17' room with 2x6 frame walls and drywall!

since it is a dedicated listening room and i can do whatever i want in there within reason, i won't complain too much  

[pjchappy]

Yeah, I can't wait to get out of the room I'm in. . .a 14' x 14 1/2' w/ wooden floors.  Although, a bunch of 8th Nerve room treatments made a pretty big improvement.

Eric,
I like the new avatar. . .although you succumbed to the pressure of some whiners here. . .

p

[warnerwh]

Every time I've added more room treatment it made an immediate audible improvement. With the RM/X's and the nice electronics I suspect spending a little more money would have a nice return on your investment.  Brian should be able to help you.

[Q]

It's all so very subjective of course.

I think Eric and I prefer diff. type of sound. We didn't seem to agree on much of the same systems as we heard at the CES either.
Most people didn't seem to agree on CES systems from all the posts of people who went.

I tried to describe the diffs as best I can though and the X's and Alphas certainly have them.

There are certain things like dynamic impact from woofers and planars in the midrange that are just flat out different.

Up to the individual to dec ...

Azryan:
If im hearing you correctly, I'm thinking you are hearing the same major flaw that I heard during my 2 auditions of the RM40s.  And that is the dynamic impact as you say, and in particular the realism and presence in the upper bass/lower mids.  I'm on this list for one reason, and that is the majic of the microdynamics of the neo panels and their inherent smoothness due to the huge crossoverless range from 166-7kHz. Tell me that you didnt hear a greater level of resolution with the neo's...or tell me that your Alpha's will resolve to that degree and I will definitely need to hear a pair of alpha's.  I will tell you also that as another poster said on this thread about the Ravens (what I use)..that a damped upper end will sound better on harsh recordings or harsh gear...so I think the upper end is the most affected by the upstream.  So, if you could take the upper treble out of the equation, and the lack of impact..is there anything else that you would say is at fault?

[azryan]

I'm trying to be VERY careful posting here...

First I actualyl don't think my room trounces Eric's like he said. Damn, I can even agree with him on that eh?

His room treatments and large open doorway to the rest of the house sounded like it didn't effect the sound in any degrading way that I could tell in my limited time there.

That's what a great room is meant to do so that's about that. I keep meaning to by some compressed fiberglass panels (what Eric has in his room) to try some more damping in my room but I haven't gotten around to it yet. Other than my huge corner tube traps I've only got one large fiberglass panel (not thick nor comressed) to dampen out a bad front to back echo I had. I could probably improve this even more if I went nuts around the room.

I do want to keep my room looking nice (it's got a killer texture and 4 color paintjob I did myself) so in the end my goal probably is'nt the ultimate ultimate perfect room/system. I'm fine with that though.

"-And that is the dynamic impact as you say, and in particular the realism and presence in the upper bass/lower mids. I'm on this list for one reason,-"

What list?

"-and that is the majic of the microdynamics of the neo panels and their inherent smoothness due to the huge crossoverless range from 166-7kHz.-"

That's true. The planars are very clean and detailed. I do wonder if all the x-over parts on them doesn't effect ransparency to some extent. This is not some theory in my head but from what I actually heard, not that it wasn't great.

I asked Eric about the idea of replacing the L-pads on the neos and FST w/ something like Mills resistors if he knoew what he wanted to set them to.
A plus and minus IMO for VMPS being adjustable. Minor point though IMO.

You'll have to hear the Alphas yourself. I'd say try to go to Danny's place and hear his own pair.

"-So, if you could take the upper treble out of the equation, and the lack of impact..is there anything else that you would say is at fault?-"

The damping of the bass maybe but I didn't play with it. Not sure. It's a great speaker in what it is. I don't love everything about what it is though, but that ok ain't it?

[Q]

I'm trying to be VERY careful posting here...

First I actualyl don't think my room trounces Eric's like he said. Damn, I can even agree with him on that eh?

His room treatments and large open doorway to the rest of the house sounded like it didn't effect the sound in any degrading way that I could tell in my limited time there.

That's what a great room is meant to do so that's about that. I keep meaning to by some compressed fiberglass panels (what Eric has in his room) to try some more damping in  ...

What list?  The list you just replied to....the VMPS discussion list.  
List, circle, discussion group...whatever.

[ctviggen]

Has anyone done a test with both speakers in the same room and multiple people?  I'd be interested in such a test.

[tkp]

One person owned both speakers, although to the best of my knowlage they were never in the same room at the same time.  

He had at least one meeting of audiophiles to his house.

I think he sold his RM40's a few months ago as (I know) he preffered and I think he still owns the Alpha's.

He is also a proffesional in the audio community and will NOT get into this conversation because of that reason, and I will not mention his name either.

He got the 40's pretty early on and I don't think he had any cap upgrade, and I'm sure he did not have the FST upgrade.

He also said that in the end the listener taste is the ultimate decision.  Both the Alpha and the RM40 sounded great.  However, they are very different from each other in term of musical presentation so one will have to choose between them.  And yes, Marbles I talked with him when he first got them both in his shop .

[Marbles]

TKP, I deleted my post as I saw the heading was RMx vs Alpha, not RM40 vs Alpha.  My bad    

I'm very happy with my 40's and have just bought more VMPS speakers, the 626's (with the new coils) should arrive on Monday, and the RM30 should be here in about 2 weeks (with luck).


I think I would have been equally happy if I had bought the Alpha's, although I'm not sure there is as good an alternative for a center and surround speakers to match the Alpha's as there is with the VMPS line.

As far as our mutual friend, his preference was made even clearer when he sold the 40's and kept the Alpha's.  You are right, they are differenct presentations and both very nice speakers and it likely does come down to personal taste.

As far as you being in contact with him shortly after he got his RM40's, all in all, that has turned into a wonderfully great thing for me  

[ctviggen]

That there is no center or surrounds for the Alphas is a huge detriment in my opinion.  However, if you want to make the cabinets yourself, the Alphas are darn cheap.

[Sa-dono]

The unneeded posts are being removed. Let's please keep this thread clean, if you wish the topic to see the light outside of Limbo. If you wish to discuss the rest of the topics, look towards the other thread (which may, or may not, be heading to the trash).

[azryan]

My comment that I'm working on an Alpha center (It's about 95% done) got erased.
I also said that another pair of Alphas would make pretty good surrounds to match Alphas.
There's a posibility of making a normal box cabinet 6 woofer/ 6 neo smaller surround that matches the drivers number and x-over of the curved face center chan.

[warnerwh]

azryan: Have you asked Danny about making a normal box design of your center channel? This is the closest thing to what I want I've seen or heard of.  Was actually going to design my own til I learned how complicated speaker design really is.

[Sa-dono]

My comment that I'm working on an Alpha center (It's about 95% done) got erased.
I also said that another pair of Alphas would make pretty good surrounds to match Alphas.
There's a posibility of making a normal box cabinet 6 woofer/ 6 neo smaller surround that matches the drivers number and x-over of the curved face center chan.

You made some off topic comments, so the post had to be removed.

Here is the relevant material:

Q,

I think the pas. rad. on the X's works great. There's no doubt it's super tight and clean. As I said I think it MAY be overdamped stopping full transients. That's a matter of adjustment and no speaker design flaw in any way.

I do also understand that many people think 'ported' equals inferior to sealed (the pas. rad. is meant to act like a sealed sub but w/ ported extention).
There have certainly been millions of pages of ported vs. sealed subwoofer debates and this is really the same thing here.
Probably no reason to write more about it.

The Alpha's bass specifically is incredibly quick and controlled. It's hard to describe other than how I already have.... when pushing massive ammounts of bass each woofer is hardly moving. This is NOT the same as a large ported subwoofer driver.

It's terribly tight and accurate. It takes almost nothing to start and stop the 18 woofers dividing up the Watts and highly effi.

The Alphas have four 3" double flared ports on the back per cabinet. There's 100% ZERO air noise from them at any time so that's no issue.

"-While it is true that adjustment items, such as Potentiometers in line can degrade the signal to some degree, the benefits of adjustment probably far outweigh the negatives of non-adjustablity.-"

That's a guess on your part.
IMO designing a speaker to be flat and then treating the room if problems pop up (and VMPS rooms also need treating so it's not like the pots counter the need for room treatments) is the way to go.
To put pots in the mix to adjust to taste doesn't seem right to me, nor padding down multiple driver sections to match eachother vs. a 2-way that's designed to be level match without padding either section down.

If you don't like the top end from a non-adjustable speaker as transparent as the 16 neos in the Alphas then IMO you should choose a diff. front end signal that's more to your liking, not turn down/up the top octave and a half FST.

ctviggen,

"-That there is no center or surrounds for the Alphas is a huge detriment in my opinion.-"

I'm making an Alpha center. The imaging of the Alphas (and the X's to be fair) doesn't need one IMO. I'm doing it for other reasons than my 'need' for one.
There's a thread about it (guess where). It should be about $700 finshed.
6 neos and 6 woofers w/ a curved face.
It could be made flat face and be a smaller than Alpha monopole surround, but another pair of Alphas would make pretty good surrounds though. hehe

$1K cheaper if you build them than the RM-30's list price (secret dealer discounts might level this though) and would take up about the same floor space.

I find surrounds to be much less critical though w/ little content nearly as important as the front section and degraded by your ears cupped away from the back. I use Newform Research 645's for surrounds and they blend pretty well with the Alphas.

"-However, if you want to make the cabinets yourself, the Alphas are darn cheap.-"

If you don't want to make cabinets they're still half price of the X's. Could you afford RMX's and then buy matching center and surround of X's, 30's, or LRC, or new suround dipoles?

If you could afford X's themselves you could build 3 pair of Alphas and a center chan. That's 54 neos and 60 woofers. Distortion would be fairly low in that HT room.