[newzooreview]

I'm interested in getting a pair of the Bagby Continuum speakers that Jim makes, and I'm wondering if anyone can add to the couple of listener impressions that I was able to pull up on Google.

I have a pair of HT1-TLs for my main system, and I'm starting to put together a bedroom system. I have a Jolida 302 tube amp on the way that Jim ordered for me. I have some small speakers to use for now (Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE), but I'm very interested in the Continuums for a couple of reasons:

1. I recall hearing a pair of Rogers LS3/5a speakers a long while ago, and I was very impressed with the vibrant, musical presentation from such a small speaker.

2. Much more recently I owned some little Wharfedale Diamond bookshelf speakers (7 years ago) and very much enjoyed them with the kind of jazz, small ensemble vocal music that I'm likely to listen to in the bedroom system. I expect that they shared design affinities with the LS3/5a Rogers.

Since I need the bedroom speakers to be small, I very intrigued by the Jeff Bagby design as an update on the LS3/5a heritage.

Has anyone heard the Continuum who might be able to comment on how they liked them in general and how they might match my interests (or at least what I've hinted at here)?

Thanks!

[DMurphy]

I've worked with them on two occasions.  Bear in mind that Jeff was more or less replicating a classic design, not starting from scratch with a design that he considered optimized in an absolute sense.  They sound very different from most of the Salk speakers, and quite different from another Jeff Bagby design I recently worked with, which used SB acoustic drivers.  The Continuum has considerably less baffle step compensation (being true to the original BBC design).  I found that a problem on heavily orchestrated material, but not on simple vocals and small jazz.  BTW, I also had a Diamond in hand for a couple of weeks.  There were many renditions of this design, and I'm not sure which one I had.  But I do have to say that this particular Diamond wasn't my idea of an accurate speaker.  Perhaps you had a more recent variation, or it's also possible that we have different tastes when it comes to midrange presentation.  A lot of my listening is to symphonic classical material. 

[newzooreview]

Thanks, Dennis. That makes sense. I hadn't really heard what was possible with large symphonic pieces until I got my HT1-TLs (and heard the Soundscape prototypes at your house).

It's been a while since I heard the Rogers or the Wharfedales (they were Diamond 8.1s, little buggers). I simply recall a natural ease in the mid-range, on vocals and guitar. I fully expect that compared to the HT1-TL they would not be accurate or as detailed. But since I need a small speaker for where I can put them in the bedroom, and since I expect to be listening mostly to jazz and vocals there, I thought I would seek out something that captures what I enjoyed previously (within its limits). The thing that struck me was that Jeff Bagby apparently designed the speakers for his own use and was seemingly looking to capture the sort of LS3/5a mid-range pleasantness that I think I'm remembering.

[DMurphy]

Sounds like a perfect fit.  I think you'll be surprised at how much bass those little guys put out. 

[Jeff B.]

I've worked with them on two occasions.  Bear in mind that Jeff was more or less replicating a classic design, not starting from scratch with a design that he considered optimized in an absolute sense.  They sound very different from most of the Salk speakers, and quite different from another Jeff Bagby design I recently worked with, which used SB acoustic drivers.  The Continuum has considerably less baffle step compensation (being true to the original BBC design).  I found that a problem on heavily orchestrated material, but not on simple vocals and small jazz.  BTW, I also had a Diamond in hand for a couple of weeks.  There were many renditions of this design, and I'm not sure which one I had.  But I do have to say that this particular Diamond wasn't my idea of an accurate speaker.  Perhaps you had a more recent variation, or it's also possible that we have different tastes when it comes to midrange presentation.  A lot of my listening is to symphonic classical material.

Dennis,

I’d like to make a couple of comments.

Although it appears like the Continuum doesn’t have enough baffle step compensation implemented in its response, it actually uses a 3mH inductor in the crossover that yields 8dB of compensation (enough to handle the step and the 2dB baffle diffraction peak above the step). The dip that you see in the response that is centered around 350Hz is intentional and part of the design of the LS3/5a loudspeaker, and you will see it in all versions of that speaker. It was designed this way by the BBC engineers to remove any thickness or muddiness from vocals that could come from full baffle step compensation and boundary reinforcement when placed near a boundary like a table-top or near a wall. The benefit of this approach is not just a reduction in artificial thickness in the lower vocal range but an apparent improved extension in the bass range as well. As you noted already, the little speakers put out much more bass response than you would expect them to.

I must say, that I still love my set and in their near-wall placement measure very flat, with a very even polar response due to the lower in-phase crossover point. I would argue that their in-room response when used as designed is very flat and accurate. On the other hand, well out away from the wall it is possible that the lower mids may sometimes sound thin, but I don’t seem to notice much change. That being said, they were selected as the best small speaker at two different audio gatherings I took them to against quite few contenders. So the consensus on them was very positive. In fact, one of the people present, after hearing the Continuum, commissioned the SB Acoustics kits you made reference to.
 
The second comment is that I’m not sure if you have really heard this speaker yet or not.  I know you listened to, and measured the pair Del built. Only his were not true Continuums as the woofer was front mounted with a different offset and changes in the crossover – changes I have never actually heard. When I saw the measurements you took of his speakers I noticed that something didn’t look right. It appeared that the entire tweeter level was elevated about 2dB above my reference response for my pair. Jim sent me the response plot he took of a pair he built and it matched my plot very well with a much flatter balance. After discussing this with Del, I figured out what happened and the crossover was redone to produce a response that had a better balance. I am sure with the 2dB elevation in the tweeter level combined with the dip at 350Hz, mounted on stand away from the walls, the speaker probably did sound bright. You mentioned the SB Acoustics design I did, in my listening room that speaker and the Continuum sound much more alike than different, just as a reference.

I believe if the original poster is looking for a small speaker for a bedroom that will be near the wall or sitting on a desk or table then he will find these to be very clean and balanced with remarkable bass for such a small speaker.

Jeff

[DMurphy]

Hi  I've worked with two sets of Continuums--one was Del's, and they did measure a little hot, although that didn't really bother me.  The other set, which Kenneth Linn owns, was built with your original woofer location.  I listened to both sets on stands about 3 feet from the back wall.  If that's not how they were intended to be used, then obviously my comments may not apply to a different location.  Both sets sounded the same to me, which is to say very nice on jazz and vocal, with excellent bass extension, but too forward in the midrange on heavily orchestrated material.  And they sounded quite different in this respect than your SB design, which I could compare instantly with my switching preamp.  As I posted earlier, I think the Continuums would be an excellent choice for Newzooreview given his musical preferences and intended location.  So I don't think there's any need debate  how they might perform under different circumstances.  I would also note that I never liked the original Rogers design, and I auditioned two versions of it in my home for two weeks.  Others obviously loved the things.  So go figure. 

[Jeff B.]

Alrighty. We all have different preferences, and speakers will sound a bit different in different placement locations. I have heard nothing by very postice things about them, and I find their vocal reproduction remarkable in my set-up. One thing is for sure, this often comes down to personal taste, and these were designed to have the same flavor as the LS3/5a. I thnk they meet or exceed that speaker's strengths while bringing some modern performance benefits as well.

Jeff

Hi  I've worked with two sets of Continuums--one was Del's, and they did measure a little hot, although that didn't really bother me.  The other set, which Kenneth Linn owns, was built with your original woofer location.  I listened to both sets on stands about 3 feet from the back wall.  If that's not how they were intended to be used, then obviously my comments may not apply to a different location.  Both sets sounded the same to me, which is to say very nice on jazz and vocal, with excellent bass extension, but too forward in the midrange on heavily orchestrated material.  And they sounded quite different in this respect than your SB design, which I could compare instantly with my switching preamp.  As I posted earlier, I think the Continuums would be an excellent choice for Newzooreview given his musical preferences and intended location.  So I don't think there's any need debate  how they might perform under different circumstances.  I would also note that I never liked the original Rogers design, and I auditioned two versions of it in my home for two weeks.  Others obviously loved the things.  So go figure.

[Will2]

I can't offer much by way of comparison to other options but I needed something to use at my desk and called Jim for his advice.  The speakers are on a desk in the corners with overhead bins above and set about 5 feet apart from each other.  Jim steered me towards the Bagby Continuum's and I've been happy with them.  The important factors seemed to be that they are sealed and designed to be placed very close to boundaries.  Are there other options, even better ones?  Probably, but for the price these seemed very competitive.

Not sure if that helps much ..... hope it does.

Cheers
Will

[DMurphy]

I liked their reproduction of vocals very much.  And I think that's why a lot of people liked the Rogers so much.  In any event, discussions like this aren't a substitute for hearing the darn things.  If Newzooreview wants to come by, I think I can arrange to have the Continuums here, along with other bookshelf models I have lying around, and he can place them anywhere he likes and play whatever he likes.