Which SPEAKER for the 21ST century?

If you don't have a Seas Excel W22 or better the new W26 in your cabinet you need to get one.

Rick Craig of Selah Audio has finally finished the Selah3. You can find a intriguing review of them over at Madisound, look for the post "a visit to Ricks place" by BradV. A believable! and honest! review. Hopefully Rick will ship by weekend and i'll post a review here ASAP.

John i can't seem to follow you. Give me another break down. Solid State amp, What brand? Going to what driver? ASL tube amp, going to what driver? That's a monster cabinet, what's the dimensions? Do you think the PHL's are more musical than the Seas? QUESTION: do you feel you need a midrange with the Raven-3's because of the limited dispersion problem with the Ravens. In other words, with say midrange + Ribbon you only deal with the limited dispersion only with the ribbon tweet. The big R-3's acting as mid+tweet limit the midrange dispersion as well as treble. True?

I usualy have to biamplify with the oris and raven I had to tri amplify what a pain worked great .I use now A.S.L. dove 300b western electric tubes .I have heard many types of amps and love the sound of a low watt s.e.t.They are simple and have the best mids I have heard.so 300b on the mid small class a solid state on the raven ,rega exons on the cabaz .Also I have a pair off like new raven r-1s about 3 months old that I tried for a while ,Id like to sell for $ 250 shipped? highly sensitive speakers can produce huge dynamics on lower power .I was thinking of making my new speaker so I can run 2 amps the 300b and a class a solid state for the ravens and phl woofers

TacT might be the most ambitious all digital design.

Just got word from Rick at Selah Audio and Jeff at Sonic Audio(Accuton specialist). All Rick says is that your after sensitivity.(???) Jeff agrees with me about over-kill. Says that a 3 way with the R-3 is confusing to him. He's not sure how to work a xover for your proposal. From your statement that you feel you need a mid. That kinda tells me that a Ribbon+Midrange is possibly more interesting than the 25 lb.Raven-3 acting as midrange+tweeter. Ribbons in reference are the ESg2,3 Raven 1,2 Philips RT9, RSQ8P/11. It's the limited vertical dispersion thing with ribbons. So even though the R-3 gives a seamless mid/treble image, you still have the dispersion problem when you stand up. It's a trade-off. I get the feeling you are looking for some "body" to the mid section? Midrange + Ribbon

I'm in agreement with avdcreations on this one. How about the arrival of active speakers with a digital amp? Further, why don't we have a system where you get *one* high-bandwidth connection (firewire/fibre?) that carries *all* audio streams. Then take this one connection and daisy-chain it to each speaker. Each speaker "knows" what channel signal to pluck out of the merged datastream, and amplifies the appropriate channel. Imagine, a single wire that come out of the back of the disc player and goes to all the speakers necessary.
I guess Meridian comes closest to this sort of thing...
Anyone know of any work being done in this direction?

Yes I just asked Rick Craig about some help with design. All he said was that you are after sensitivity. I'm not sure exactly what that means. But i can see with your goal of 98db, he hit the nail on the head...hummm, so lets see there is alot going on here. Low power amps..Are these called SET amps? Single ended? What amp do you have? What's the benifit of a low power amp vs say a nice Jadis 60 watt?

needs to be 98 db or so when fin. I do love low powered tube gear

Hold up John, lets look at our options. The Raven 3 is one heck of a driver, so we want to do this right. Yes i believe i saw a design with the monster 20 3/4 inch Cabasse on E-Speakers.com. But have you seen the new Seas W26?!! For midrange i'm casting my vote to the Accutons over the Fostex. Now which Accuton? PHL are good drivers, but Seas W26+Accuton+R3! I'll give you the model # on the Accuton.

I added the ravens to my oris horn speaker when I sell it I am building a new system arround the raven .Love the sound of the r3.1 but it still needs a mid.I was thinking about using 2 fostex sigmas for mids per side and 2 PHL 15in woofers per.that way I can use a simple crossover and keep everything at 98db -1-watt.ever heard of the cabasse 20 3/4 in woofer?thxs for your advise I will look into it

Hey John, are you the guy that posted a whilie back that you had the R-3's? Or are these new for you? Dude, That's one heck of a speaker!!!! Most folks don't know what the R-3's are all about. Now about the Lowthers i'm not too hip about, all i know is that it's a very fine "full-range" The Cabasse mid, they are all right, but i think you can do better. Seems you are like me, into superior drivers. ...hummm, i think i can give you a few suggestions. But with the R-3's, you got top dog there. With that + the ultimate woofer...the new Seas W26!!!, So here goes...Seas W26+R-3!!! Bammm! $30K speaker! Ain't nothing going to touch it!

Now I am using a lowther pm4a mid a raven r3.1 ribbon tweeter and cabaz mid woofer section and a velodyne 18in sub for ulta sonics.This way I can run a S.E.T. on the mids and class a solid state on the rest,etc.sub.I am really enjoying this combination and am going to build a more integrated speaker .I would rather have a great mid range and go without the frequincy extremes ,but this combo to me has it all

Unsound, i got the web address from MikeO on Madisound's forum for the awesome looking Seas W15CH-001, a revolutionary midrange with 6 neodynamiun magnets. Try this site, i've tried it but does not work if i try to key it in, but works if i use "my favorite". http://www.intertechnik.de/cgi-local/shop3_blatt.pl?1346 If you go to Madisound click on Catalogue Click on Seas Click on Seas home page Click on Excel, you'll see the beautiful W26!. You can't get the specs for the driver yet. But you can get a drawing and specs of the W15CH. The new tweeter, is a remake of a older model i believe, so nothing there. I just posted a thread on Mad about ribbons vs dome tweets. hunmmm, seems the ribbons ,ESg3 R-2 Philips RSQ8P offer a wonderful resolution-image of music, but there is the vertical dispersion issue. There are quite a few superior dome tweets to consider, Accuton C23, Hiquaphon come to mind. I remember Duke saying he heard the wonderful R-3's and when you stand up, you notice a drop in fq's. Same for electrostats sweet spot issue. Everyone at Mad is anxiously awaiting the arrival of the W26's. Take a look at the description and the specs on the W15CH. The other superior midrange to compare is the Accuton C-79, which i have going in a 3 way.

I'm following, send pictures and thoughts ASAP.

I'm very surprised ain't nobody following up this thread ..like i'm talking to myself. oh well here goes anyway. I posted this on 3-11. Well they've arrived, they will be released in the next week. Seas W26, Seas W15CH, Seas 27TDC. Seas web site shows a photo of the W26, the midrange and tweeter photo will be up shortly.

Twl The big Berning amp + a great full range hybrid speaker , like Lowther , Manger, Fostex will make wonderful music. As well a superior tube amp + superior 3 way will have advantages. Threads like this open the way for better understanding of the speaker factor in the audioworld.

Bishop the Manger full range drivers are married to a woofer that provides the low fq's. The Fostex Lowthers and other "full range" drivers all do well with woofers in the lower hz's. But i'm not sure if the these drivers offer the musicality that i'm after. Can one of these full range do what a great tweeter can do in the upper most range? And like i say these full range drivers are not tube friendly, so count me out. And i've got a feeling i will not be able to use the ATC midrange with in my 3 way kit, for ohm demand. Twl has a Berning amp that works well with his Fostex full range. I'm not giving up my tubes for any speaker.

Ok, Bishopwill, I'll give you the deep organ part of the argument against single drivers. But, the high end is not rolled off on good single driver speakers. Many times a high end rolloff on these is actually the characteristic of the SET amps that are commonly used with them. The transformer on the amp it the usual culprit in rolling off the highs. They will "beam" however, so the sweet spot is smaller than other designs, regarding the high freq's.,But a 1 inch dome tweeter beams at approximately 10kHz, so you lose that upper octave if you are off axis on multi-way too. Lowthers will respond within a few db of average all the way to 22kHz. So, we're really talking only about a low end deficiency here. I see the vast majority of speaker designs, even very expensive ones, don't do 20 cycles within 2 or 3 db. So I agree with you that it is a matter of degree as to what level of bass rolloff you can accept. My position is that the increased coherence of the single driver is worth the tradeoff of the lowest bass response that you probably are going to get with almost any speaker anyhow. I am not against low bass response by any means. I would love to have 16Hz flat and clean. But, I just don't want it at the expense of the truthfulness of the rest of the spectrum. Pleasant listening and thanks for your point of view. :-)

Twl, your argument is a good one but at the end of the day it doesn't pass muster. First, as to the organ work with the occasional 16Hz pedal tone, yes, a system that will not reproduce that pitch is recomposing (or decomposing) that work. If the composer did not want you to hear that pitch, s/he would have spared the organist the bother of playing it. None of us would cut speaker systems any slack about accurately reproducing other aspects of music, why do the extreme ends of the spectrum get an exception?

Here's an example: Last night I was having coffee with a friend in a local coffee shop that prides itself on being a bit artsy-fartsy. To my delight, they put on the Herbert Howells oboe sonata, a work out of my own performance past. The fast, nuanced playing totally defeated the resolving power of the tiny Bose-ettes mounted around the room. Further, the wonderful, woody nasality of the instrument was almost totally lost. Now, virtually no one on this list would defend a speaker system that decomposed the music in that fashion, yet folks will cheerfully give away an octave or so on both ends and defend their decision to do so. Stay with me now: I'm not comparing Bose microspeakers to good single driver systems in any respect other than this one--that they deny the listener the opportunity to hear the music as the composer intended it to be heard. It may still be very pleasant. I was far happier sipping my java with Howells in the background than being subjected to Kenny G or Barely ManBelow. But I was not having the experience that Mr. Howells wanted me to have when he wrote the piece.

You may say, "But no speaker can reproduce everything just right!" And you're correct. Indeed, that endless quest for the sound of live performance is the driving force behind the high end. I would submit, though, that a good full-range system that is down perhaps 2-3dB at 20Hz comes closer to realizing the composer's intent than one that is down 20-30dB at 20Hz--at least to the extent that the composer wrote notes down that low. So defending single driver systems with steep low-end rolloff simply because all systems have SOME low-end rolloff doesn't make much sense to me.

For persons who listen only or primarily to music with frequencies that fall within the range of single driver speakers, I agree that they can offer superb midrange sound and a number of other very positive characteristics. For those of us who are accustomed to hearing live organ or orchestral or other musical forms that include significant low frequency content, single driver systems simply leave out too much of the music.

This is exactly the kind of disagreement that makes high end audio interesting. Thanks for the gentlemanly tone of your response to me and please accept my comments as I intend them, not any kind of attack but simply a difference in point of view.

will

Bishopwill, I humbly and completely disagree with your point of view about not hearing what the composer intended. The same could be said about any speaker, whether it be 1 way or 6 way. If I said that a multi-way speaker did not produce the 16Hz organ note that is heard once in a blue moon, would you say it cannot produce the performance the way the composer intended? Almost every speaker in the world is rolled off somewhat on the low end. Are they all to be tossed out as well? My single drivers will reproduce even 20Hz albeit at quite a lower level than the average SPL. This conception that single drivers cannot reproduce bass information is just incorrect. It is there, just rolled off some. Just like many other speakers. And when you consider the problems encountered with crossing drivers in and out, with the response lumps, phase anomalies, and loss of signal information, would you say that these irregularities would be preferred by the composer as "more acceptable" deviations from his intended presentation. Are you saying that crossover distortions and losses are part of the composition? There are very few speakers in this world that are truly flat and accurate at 16Hz. And many of them sacrifice far more in musicality throughout the other areas of the spectrum in order to achieve that low end. I respect your opinion to disagree with my point, but I think when pressed in this way, you will have to agree that no speaker really presents the performance exactly as the composer intended and that most of them are deficient in the bass frequencies to some extent. You just seem to think that a single driver with a rolloff that begins at 40Hz is not producing bass below that point and that somehow multi- driver speakers are. You may be surprised to learn that the majority of multi-way speakers are not flat below 40Hz or even higher. I guarantee that if you heard a good single driver system, you would not have the opinion that you have.

Twl, with any driver there are + and - I'm sure the Fostex are nice. Like Bishop says a single point driver will not perform in the lower hz's like a Seas or Skaaning, and will not perform in the upper 's like a great tweeter or ribbon. And for mids the ATC midrange is suppose to be tops. Bishop explain "to the contrary notwithstanding"?

The reason in a nutshell, Twl, is that you won't be hearing what the composer intended you to hear. Some folks aren't bothered by that but many of us are not content to recompose standard works, especially from the "classical" repertoire. I wrote a long diatribe on this a few weeks back so i won't repeat it here. Suffice it to say that lots of folks want to hear all the notes the composer wrote and that you cannot do with virtually any single driver design, luscious midrange to the contrary notwithstanding.

will

If 90% of music is in the midrange, then why not use a great single driver speaker? Keep studying Tweek, you will eventually find out that I have been right all along.

Since 90% of classical (and others) music is in the midrange. And since ATC makes the best midrange. Then the 21st midrange is the ATC's. In woofers the winners are the Seas and Skaaning. There are many very good dome tweets out there. The Hiqulaphon at like 160/pr stands out for value. There are many good ribbons as well , Raven ESg Philips.

hell I never thought I would be listening to tube and high efficancy speakers in 2002 .Have owned dynamics planars ribbons and electrostatics.But there is a magic to a set amp and a horn speaker that must be experanced in your home to be beleaved.try it before you diss it

Maybe i am one of only a few who has never heard of that design, but it sounds really interesting. Thanks for sharing.

I throw everyone a curveball, or nearly everyone.... I vote that the speaker for the 21st century will be the successful development of the hypersonic speaker. Prototypes exist and work, but not to the performance needed. When the science figures it out, it should theoretically be the best speakers available.... It is based on the physics that when 2 musical frequencies are played, each tone is played, as well as the sum and difference of the two tones. Therefore, if we have 1 speaker playing at say 100,000 Hz, we'll never hear it. If we have a second playing at 100,002-120,000Hz Range, the additive sound is also silent to the human ear, but the difference should give one a 2-20,000Hz range.

The difficulty w/ most drivers is that they need to play from 20-20,000Hz, or a span of 100,000% of minimum frequency. Entirely too much to handle w/ 1 driver. If we now make a driver that plays from 100,002-120,000Hz, we only need to make a driver capable of 20% over minimum frequency... The should be MUCH easier to therefore accomplish the entire audible frequency range w/ 1 pair of drivers....

Cheers all.

the folks that are following this thread are the lucky folks..i found them!! ..yep..the drivers that i consider to be 21st century drivers are SKAANING SCANSPEAK SEAS FOCAL VINASTON EXPOLINEAR(ribbons) ESg(ribbons) RAVEN (ribbons) PHILIPS (ribbons),,these are the drivers you want in your cabinets..most of these are not cheap..but then how much do you pay for speakers at your local "hifi" shop???..you see what you are actually paying for in essence are the ads of the labs and the nice markup at your friendly local shop..i want to pay for quality drivers and quality xovers..now if you log onto http://www.kochaudio.de/ you'll find some of these drivers..check out my favorites the PHILIPS RT series of ribbons..look at the RSQSP/11 (like $800each!!)as well take a look at possibly the best sounding speaker for large rooms the VINASTON 890MK11..as for their drivers i like the DR45N tweet AL130/A AL170/A MHT12 G25HETL16H TL300..here's my pick..2 way..lets go with the SKAANING 10 incher + PHILIPS RSQSP/11..and for 3 way ..hummm..tough choice..lets again go SKAAN 10 + VINASTON DR45N + ESg3..for xovers lets go with the MARCHAND XM126..now that's a 21st century speaker

Speakers were developed in the 20th century. All the technologies. Looking ahead more than a few months to the next greatest (and most expensive) speaker kind of minimizes how long a century is and how much development can happen in such a time period.

Having said all that my guess is that 'speakers' by the end of this century will be one long device that you hang around a space - the main consumer requirement being ease of use (followed, hopefully, by sound quality). The source equipment will detect the format (length and shape) of the speaker and present a full surround sound picture of the music. The presented sound can be dynamically tested by the source equipment and equalized as necessary. From this you'll detect that I believe 'stereo' is old (almost as old as mono) as is 5.1, 7.1, 10.2, 17.6 or whatever. We'll have true surround and the media will present a picture of the soundstage rather than discrete sound channels.

Main problem I can see with this is how a user-friendly flexible long panel will be able to push enough air to create low frequencies, and be mounted stiffly enough to present a static presentation of sound. But that's not my problem - over to the engineers. I've got to start saving for all this new technology. And I don't even have SACD or DVD-A yet.

i need more time to evaluate the MANGER...ran into a few opponents>>>i'll post ASAP.. tweek out

Twl i know very little on the tech side of speakers..you may however want to e-mail someone your questions about the potential of the manger..i've heard the driver only works in a woofer set up..i have a choice of 2 FOCAL woofers with the manger..

As impressive as the Manger appears I am still not convinced that a Walsh type driver wouldn't be a better starting point to developing a perfect driver. The manger appears to be able to radiate either horizontaly or verticaly, but not both. A Walsh type driver which can lend itself to more seperation from its baffle appears to be able to be a true omni-directional driver(simultaneously horizontial and verticaly). As such it would be more practical in a surround sound system where the differences from side wall and rear wall would be negated. It would free the listener from a static position. Allow more individuals a larger slice of the "sweet" spot. Have more commercial applications in amplified concerts,theatre events, dance music and even (dare I say it ) muzak.

Tweekerman, I am saving up to get a set of manger drivers. I plan to try different low end extension techniques, to see how low it can actually go, with help. If you look at the response chart, it seems to go to 60Hz at the same relative db as it has in the midrange, with a small rise at the midbass area. The fly in the ointment is the 88Hz resonant freq., but I have a trick or two up my sleeve for that. My goal would be to get 40Hz out of it, before any significant rolloff. This way, even if it is 12db down at 20Hz, you are still only 6db down at 30Hz and that's ok with me. It may take awhile to save up the cash,though.

digital xovers should offer drivers their full potential..i hope thats in the near future..the MANGER is the ideal single source driver..all you need to do is add a FOCAL 10 or 11 inch or SCANSPEAK 10 inch woofer..i can not imagine a better set up for "any" amount of money than a FOCAL 11WX + MANGER..."is the ideal" because this driver delivers 90% of the frequencies with a fidelity like no other....this driver may not offer the "thrills and chills" of the new tech ribbons but are these ribbons revealing with true fidelity or with a tad of exaggeration?

Tweekerman, I agree with every point you brought up. Lobing effects and the space required for driver integration are problematic. I still think the manger will still need supporting drivers and may not have as desirable dispersion characteristics as some of the alternate single source drivers. At the sake of being redundant I am hoping that (untill the ideal driver comes to being) digital cross overs fullfill thier promise.

take a close look at the entire manger web page...the manger does not need any help it does it all...music is 90% midrange correct...and every 2 way design falls short in the lower mids, the midwoofer and the tweet never quite picks up where the other leaves off..and the 3 way design breaks up the source signal with an even more complex xover...i'm glad someone posted a comment on single source speakers, its at that point my research led me to manger 80hz up

I wonder if more extended versions of the drivers (Walsh,DDD) used in the OHM and German Physics speakers would be more promising? If it weren't for the space needed for driver intergration perhaps digital cross overs with the inherent steep slopes but with out the time and phase anomalies that usually follows steep slopes might help these new drivers.

TWL to purchase the separate MANGER driver or kit go to [email protected], GARY BRASHEAR is the USA dealer for MANGER or e-speakers.com..this is truly a very unique driver...no its not THE ultimate speaker but damn near comes close..and in my opinion MANGER is a good match for the SL's...

They do sell the driver separately, it is around $800 each as I recall. It is an interesting concept, and excellent in the sense of having a nearly-full-range single driver, but it is still plagued by the same problem that nearly all diaphragms have-- resonant breakup modes in the diaphragm, which are impossible to eliminate and difficult to control. So it is not a panacea, but is a high-quality driver nonetheless.

I think the Manger design looks great, in theory. Haven't heard it, but would love to. From what I see on the website, the best bet would be a Manger driver about 2 inches larger in diameter, so it would get down into a reasonable bass range(40Hz). Since it extends to 35kHz on the top end, this would be just about a do-it-all single driver system. As long as we're dreaming, let's go for the 20Hz-35kHz version, and get it all. It would be nice if they made the driver available separately, so we could experiment with our own low end tunings. I know it would be ungodly expensive, but still cheaper than their cheapest monitor at $5600. I would love to T-line a pair of these things, just to see what I could get out of them, running single. The response curve looks pretty flat all the way down to 60Hz, so there may be possibilities. Can't afford them though.

MANGER seems to be a possible alternative to the SL's.. this to me is a big step on the way to the 21ST century speaker..the ONLY thing holding this speaker back as taking top place as THE 21ST century speaker is its price tag..but like i say there is another option.. FOCAL 8W5411 or FOCAL 10 + single MANGER

THE MANGER USA LABS offer 3 models single 8 scanspeak + 1 fullrange ($6K) dual 8's + 3 fullrange ($12K) dual 10's + 3 fullrange ($14K)...hummm...interesting...way out my range ...BUT there is another option...

thanks alot for the web address...to me this manger looks like a partial answer in an attempt to match at least some of the SOUND LABS highly praised qualities...of course on a much smaller scale ..which suits me fine ..cause i do not want to be overwhelmed by any speaker ...no i prefer dynamics over a big sound stage...yes i know this goes against the likes of the majority... every time i go to an audio club meeting the volume is way over the level i prefer

http://mangerusa.com/

full range MANGER driver>>can someone give me some info and even better a solid review on this interesting driver

As a good listening room does not allow for balanced distribution of sound from multi channel direct, bi or di radiating speakers. I believe that single omni-directional drivers with digital room correction will permit suround sound to actually work.

After a quick trip around the web, I found only tweeters using the plasma technology. Mfrs. include Accapella, Magnat, Corona, and a DIY page for a plasma tweeter by Ulrich Hauptmann in Holland. They all use a flame/ionization technique which results in an AM sound transmission. Commonly, a horn is coupled to increase sensitivity. Primarily used for 4kHz and above. Tube electronics are used to regulate/modulate the flame. Advantages are stated to be coherence, imaging, natural tonality. The only price I could find was the Accapella Horn Loaded Plasma Tweeter at $2600 each. Sounds like a really neat technology to me, but possibly a little dangerous. I guess we'd have to start up a new thread about whether we would then need pure-silver litz braided propane gas lines for the tweeter.

Tweekerman, I am sorry if I ignored your post on the other thread, no disrespect meant. I have read about the Ravens and others you mentioned, but have not personally heard them. The Ravens may be the future, or the German Physic wave bending transducer, or the plasma tweeter(no full range yet, that I know of), or the Morel driver(discontinued), or the Sound Labs type of E-stat panels, or even a new generation Lowther type single driver which almost does it all, except for a small upper midrange peak and a bit bass shy. I would state that my prefence is some kind of full range single driver(cone,panel,ribbon,plasma,whatever) that really handles the entire audio spectrum, and does so in a point source fashion, presents a stable load, has minimal inherent phase shift and breakup modes, is very fast and efficient,and has no intervening circuitry between amp and speaker. And, of course, it has to play music. A friend once said to me,"I can eliminate all forms of audible distortion. Just turn the system off!" So it must be musical, technology is just a means to an end. There is alot of room for improvement in speaker systems and it will be interesting to see what may come in the future. Regarding your other point about building your own speaker system and saving money, I think it is a great idea and it can be done. I have done so and am very happy with my results. Remember, it is a learning process and very unlikely that your first one will be your best. But you will eventually get to the place where you won't want to buy a manufactured speaker system because you can make an equal or better one yourself for alot less. Unless they have a very complicated proprietary design that is impractical to make yourself. Great thread.

TWL i am trying to take in all the posts on your fine thread...seems no one wants to pick a fight over their "beloved" speaker...even though this thread did not receive even half the attention that your's received...maybe mine was a prelude...you put the question in a way that demanded attention..the full range plasma i am not familiar with ? the name?...and most important how much?...i posted on your thgread about the NEW HIGH TECH DRIVERS, but was totally ignored...what i need is some opinions on the sound of the THIEL and CABASSE, both labs make models from $4K to $13K...when we go into this price range i could have a kit designed that would easily out perform...and for half the price...THIEL's web page says "Attractive,Affordable, Awesome", and alot other funny things..so statements like that put doubts in my mind even before i hear them...oh, i see that statement is taken from the "not tell it like it is" hearing aid folks