Waiting for the RM30

django · « **on:** 9 Mar 2004, 09:51 pm »

I have never laid eyes on a VMPS speaker but am intrigued by the expertise and fervor of the discussions on this board. Quite clearly the designer is on a roll lately and I am curious to know more about the RM30. [Brian is no doubt too busy to update his website.] If anyone has info on dimensions, weight, amplification requirements, wire preferences etc I'm all ears! Also as my historic preference has always been for stats I'm interested in observations on well this design holds up in comparisons with Quads etc.

jamin · « **Reply #1 on:** 9 Mar 2004, 11:18 pm »

django,

H=48"
W=8"
D=19"

These dimensions are outlined in this thread:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=6546

John Casler · « **Reply #2 on:** 10 Mar 2004, 01:53 am »

Quote

If anyone has info on dimensions, weight, amplification requirements, wire preferences etc I'm all ears! Also as my historic preference has always been for stats I'm interested in observations on well this design holds up in comparisons with Quads etc.

Django,

I beleive the weight is approximatley 100-110#

I would suggest a good 200wpc (min) to drive it

For best results, it should be mated with the 215 Sub, which fills in nicely in the bottom octaves.

It can be ordered to be bi-wired or bi-amped.

I won't comment on how it would sound against the sonics of the Quad (since I have not done a direct comparison) but I doubt you would be dissapointed.

It has the same "precision, focused imaging" of all the VMPS ribbons, that (in the right set up) is stunning in its soundstage depth and 3-D like soundscape,

It has the narrowest baffle of any VMPS floorstanding speaker which many say contributes to significant imaging and soundstage production.

It is beautifully crafted and the cabinets are some of the best to come from VMPS todate.

And it comes in 2 versions the M (mains) and the C (center)

The M version has a 10' side firing woofer. The C version does not.

jonbee · « **Reply #3 on:** 10 Mar 2004, 05:19 am »

I have 626R w/ Auricaps, matched to a VMPS NOS sub. I have owned Quad ESL63s (and Apogee Stages, Caliper Signatures, and Divas) and the 626 has a much wider response on the top and bottom, is much more dynamic, and will play much louder than the quad, while offering the speed, transparency, and low coloration of the Quad and the Apogees. The Quad is a bit more coherent, but few speakers can best the quads in that regard. The Quad is also dipolar, which offers it's own rewards and drawbacks. I personally found the ESL 63 to be an unsatisfactory speaker for the reasons noted above; I've never been as happy with a speaker as with the 626. (I've been in this hobby seriously for 35 years, and have owned well over 100 pair of fine speakers.) The only speaker I've owned that I would take back over the VMPS is the Apogee Diva, which is an enormous dipole which I no longer have space for.
The RM30 I believe does all the 626 does on a larger scale; if my room was a bit bigger (and I wasn't still so delighted with my 626s after 18 months)I'd go with them. Taste is a huge issue, of course; YMMV.

mcrespo71 · « **Reply #4 on:** 10 Mar 2004, 06:26 am »

I have not heard the RM30, but have heard the RM40 and 626R on numerous occasions and lived with Quad ESL 63's for over 10 years.

First things first, the Quad midrange transparency, speed, coherency,and imaging is better than both of the VMPS speakers I've heard. However, I think overall the RM40 is a better speaker. First, it is way more dynamic, has better high frequencies, has a good midrange, more extended bass, and is just overall more balanced IMO.

The 626R is not in the same category as the Quad IMO, but I may be in the minority on this one, as two people here seem to like it better than Quad. Yes, it is better at the frequency extremes, but that's the only area I feel is better than Quads. It's midrange is far too recessed to my ears and it has a more metallic edge when you play guitar pieces, especially nylon stringed guitar pieces. It can play way louder, though.

For what it's worth, that's my comparitive report. Obviously, if at all possible, get a demo of them and see what you think.

Michael

ekovalsky · « **Reply #5 on:** 10 Mar 2004, 06:46 am »

Quote from: jonbee

The only speaker I've owned that I would take back over the VMPS is the Apogee Diva, which is an enormous dipole which I no longer have space for.

jonbee, I agree with you 100% on this, at least during the time I had the RM-40's. In the 15' x 35' listening room of my former residence, the Divas with DAX3 crossover, Muse 18 subs, and Sonic Frontiers electronics was just stunning.

In the smaller 14.5' x 17' room in my current home, the Divas didn't have enough room to breath. Still, my RM-40's never lived up to the big Apogees.

The RM/X has changed that, for the first time I don't miss the big full range ribbons!

audiot_savant · « **Reply #6 on:** 12 Mar 2004, 11:55 pm »

John--200W minimum, really? I was thinking about using my VAC 30/30 @32wpc into 2, 4 or 8 ohms to drive the RM30 "C".

I thought with the RM30's 92-93db sensitivity and the resistive nature of the ribbons it would be a good match, if not the ultimate in pure volume.

Or were you referring more to the "M" model with 10" woofer? I don't know that I could give up my (tube rolled) 30/30.

Regards,
Randy

RGordonpf · « **Reply #7 on:** 13 Mar 2004, 01:15 am »

Randy - I am awaiting the Big Brown Truck with my RM 30Ms and the Large Subwoofer. It is after 5PM so they should be here any moment. I am going to drive them with deHavilland 845-G monoblocks (SETs, 30 watt/channel). The deHavillands drove my VMPS FF-3s just fine. If I have any problems with the deHavillands not being able to drive the RM 30s full range I will let you know.

Regards,

Roger

audiot_savant · « **Reply #8 on:** 13 Mar 2004, 02:02 am »

Cool, Roger--I'll be waiting!

Good luck!
Randy

RGordonpf · « **Reply #9 on:** 13 Mar 2004, 07:49 am »

Randy - The RM30s and Large subwoofer finally arrived. It took a while to get everything hooked up. My 30 watt/channel SET amps see to be driving the RM 30s just fine. I have a medium size room 20' x 25' with 10' ceilings. I don't play music above concert hall levels 90-100 dB. If your room is larger or you play louder, you may need more power.

Best Regards,

Roger

John Casler · « **Reply #10 on:** 13 Mar 2004, 09:48 am »

Quote from: audiot_savant

John--200W minimum, really? I was thinking about using my VAC 30/30 @32wpc into 2, 4 or 8 ohms to drive the RM30 "C".

I thought with the RM30's 92-93db sensitivity and the resistive nature of the ribbons it would be a good match, if not the ultimate in pure volume.

Or were you referring more to the "M" model with 10" woofer? I don't know that I could give up my (tube rolled) 30/30.

Regards,
Randy

Hi Randy,

Letting a little of my personal preference for "high power" and dynamic headroom show

I have driven even the RM40s to very high levels with a 60wpc amp so I'm sure the RM30s will do the same.

I just like to feel that during the 1812 Overture I'll not run out of steam.

While I can't guarantee that 32 wpc will take them to their highest level, I can't say they will be lacking either for your room, system and listening habits.