Hunt for hifi IV: Attack ov ze Germans
Having exhausted the options of speakers cheaper than Focal Diablo Utopia that has my preferred dry, tight and precise sound, I was beginning to think that I might have to either buy the damned things, buy something cheaper I wasn't fully happy with, or just keep what I have and take up knitting instead. But in a last attempt to make sure there were no options, I asked what else there was in the same price class as the Diablo's. After all, if I'm going to spend that amount on speakers I'm pretty much obliged to ensure I've scourged the market to exhaust all options.
Somewhat hesitantly the sales guy started talking about speaker technology, indicating that a regular loudspeaker with the membrane, coil and magnet is actually a fundamentally flawed principle of generating sound, but that it's prevalent mainly because it's relatively cheap and it gets you "close enough". He then explained how cones of sound projected towards your ears can never be fully like the real thing as for example the strings of a violin or whatever emits sound in all directions. And so with that introduction he pointed me towards these:
They're the smallest speakers from German manufacturer MBL, Who like Focal invent, develop and produce their own speaker elements. But where Focal have Beryllium, MBL have the Radialstrahler. It's essentially a set of lamellas that flex with the audio signal, generating a fully omnidirectional sound (at least for the treble and mids). I was cautioned that these speakers would demand a new way of listening, with a tone that almost assumed that I would not prefer them over the Focal's. But I gave them a listen anyway.
On my first go with the MBL 121's, they were in the setup pictured above, in a room as acoustically perfect as a box can be. They also had support of additional subs, something I was informed that they could not bypass for my session. So while I could not do a very fair comparison to the Focal's due to the radically different setup, I liked the very silky quality that especially voices had, but more than anything else I was extremely impressed by how the sound was just not in any way seeming to come from the speakers. Instead it was as though I could pinpoint in X, Y and not least Z axis where each sound was emitting from. I played some Björk off of Medúlla and I swear I could hear exactly where here head was as she was singing. Not only side to side, mind you, but in depth, about a meter in behind the speakers, and even the goddamn height. Yes, I could hear how tall (or rather, short) she is. Fucking amazing.
But the sound was in no way as insanely detailed as with the Focal speakers, as not only the treble but also the mids were a bit blurred in texture and resolution. I wasn't sure whether to blame the speakers, the room or the electronics but despite the absolutely mindboggling 3D imaging I would prefer the Focal's. I can't buy speakers knowing how much detail I'd still be missing. But I realised I needed to investigate these suckers further.
In my next visit to the store, I asked to compare the two. I started with the Focal's in the old spot, now with the Bel Canto e.One s300iD amplifier, passing up the on-board D/A for a Weiss Minerva DAC. Now the Diablo's too had that amazing silky quality I first heard in the MBL's - clearly the amp and/or DAC was the key here, so one less advantage for MBL. After this warming up session I moved into the acoustically trated room again to have a go with the MBL's, now playing on über expensive Spectral Audio amplification and an older GamuT CD. Again the subs were in, and again there was a muddiness to the sound. I'm sure the frequency response in the room is absurdly flat, but it felt boomy and muddy. The 3D imaging was there again, the silkiness too, but somehow, maybe, a very slight hardness of the treble compared to the beryllium-equipped Diablo's. Normally monodirectional speakers should be tougher on the ears, but the sick resolution of the Focal Utopia elements might get the edge anyway. But this is in a room with zero dampening, so perhaps it's acoustics?
Next up was to get the Diablo's into the treated room, also with the subs. The 3D depth was better here than outside, but still can't really match MBL. Detail-wise they fared better than MBL and the bass felt much more integrated with the rest of the sound. But I might still prefer how they performed without the subs and, perhaps surprisingly, without the diffusion-ripe room.
So the last test was to take the MBL's out to the open, slightly dry sounding area and play them on Bel Canto / Weiss. Here they sounded much better, even more so than I had hoped. Aside from the Diablo's they're the only speaker that has yet passed the test that is Autechre's "Surripere", including the growling bass weirdness starting at around 4:40, that most speakers just don't play at all. The 3D magic was somewhat subdued, but still clearly superior. Even here, sound wasn't coming from the speakers, it was just there, in the air.
The sub matching was clearly bad with the MBL's, as on their own they were much, much better, albeit not as deep. I could no longer sense the slightest trace of treble harshness either, but the Diablo's might still have the edge in resolution. I did not have time (after 4 hous of listening) to do an A/B test, but that will come soon and will the the final elimination round. For the longest time I was sure Focal were going to win, but the comeback that the MBL's did without the subs was astonishing, and over the last few days I've been going back and forth. I could really go either way; Do I stick with the Focal sound I love and possibly the best non-floorstanding traditional speaker ever, or with what is probably the speaker concept of the future with it's amazing immersion?
Whatever I end up buying now will probably be with me for ten years, or more. But it's not only I that will be affected long-term by this decision; These will probably be the speakers that my eventual children will grow up listening too, the speakers whose sound characteristics through which they will feel all those emotions that music can bring.
I don't know how much of a drop in quality it will be to go with the built-in DAC of the Bel Canto amp, but if it's within an acceptable range of the clearly superior Weiss Minerva, I´'m starting to think that I might actually be prepared to take the plunge now and buy a new system. I'll have downpayments for 3 years at least, but should still be able to buy a golden horn diffusor every now and then to try and tame the concrete ceiling of our apartment. And I'll have absolutely spectacular sound, so what else would I need money for? =)
Somewhat hesitantly the sales guy started talking about speaker technology, indicating that a regular loudspeaker with the membrane, coil and magnet is actually a fundamentally flawed principle of generating sound, but that it's prevalent mainly because it's relatively cheap and it gets you "close enough". He then explained how cones of sound projected towards your ears can never be fully like the real thing as for example the strings of a violin or whatever emits sound in all directions. And so with that introduction he pointed me towards these:
They're the smallest speakers from German manufacturer MBL, Who like Focal invent, develop and produce their own speaker elements. But where Focal have Beryllium, MBL have the Radialstrahler. It's essentially a set of lamellas that flex with the audio signal, generating a fully omnidirectional sound (at least for the treble and mids). I was cautioned that these speakers would demand a new way of listening, with a tone that almost assumed that I would not prefer them over the Focal's. But I gave them a listen anyway.
On my first go with the MBL 121's, they were in the setup pictured above, in a room as acoustically perfect as a box can be. They also had support of additional subs, something I was informed that they could not bypass for my session. So while I could not do a very fair comparison to the Focal's due to the radically different setup, I liked the very silky quality that especially voices had, but more than anything else I was extremely impressed by how the sound was just not in any way seeming to come from the speakers. Instead it was as though I could pinpoint in X, Y and not least Z axis where each sound was emitting from. I played some Björk off of Medúlla and I swear I could hear exactly where here head was as she was singing. Not only side to side, mind you, but in depth, about a meter in behind the speakers, and even the goddamn height. Yes, I could hear how tall (or rather, short) she is. Fucking amazing.
But the sound was in no way as insanely detailed as with the Focal speakers, as not only the treble but also the mids were a bit blurred in texture and resolution. I wasn't sure whether to blame the speakers, the room or the electronics but despite the absolutely mindboggling 3D imaging I would prefer the Focal's. I can't buy speakers knowing how much detail I'd still be missing. But I realised I needed to investigate these suckers further.
In my next visit to the store, I asked to compare the two. I started with the Focal's in the old spot, now with the Bel Canto e.One s300iD amplifier, passing up the on-board D/A for a Weiss Minerva DAC. Now the Diablo's too had that amazing silky quality I first heard in the MBL's - clearly the amp and/or DAC was the key here, so one less advantage for MBL. After this warming up session I moved into the acoustically trated room again to have a go with the MBL's, now playing on über expensive Spectral Audio amplification and an older GamuT CD. Again the subs were in, and again there was a muddiness to the sound. I'm sure the frequency response in the room is absurdly flat, but it felt boomy and muddy. The 3D imaging was there again, the silkiness too, but somehow, maybe, a very slight hardness of the treble compared to the beryllium-equipped Diablo's. Normally monodirectional speakers should be tougher on the ears, but the sick resolution of the Focal Utopia elements might get the edge anyway. But this is in a room with zero dampening, so perhaps it's acoustics?
Next up was to get the Diablo's into the treated room, also with the subs. The 3D depth was better here than outside, but still can't really match MBL. Detail-wise they fared better than MBL and the bass felt much more integrated with the rest of the sound. But I might still prefer how they performed without the subs and, perhaps surprisingly, without the diffusion-ripe room.
So the last test was to take the MBL's out to the open, slightly dry sounding area and play them on Bel Canto / Weiss. Here they sounded much better, even more so than I had hoped. Aside from the Diablo's they're the only speaker that has yet passed the test that is Autechre's "Surripere", including the growling bass weirdness starting at around 4:40, that most speakers just don't play at all. The 3D magic was somewhat subdued, but still clearly superior. Even here, sound wasn't coming from the speakers, it was just there, in the air.
The sub matching was clearly bad with the MBL's, as on their own they were much, much better, albeit not as deep. I could no longer sense the slightest trace of treble harshness either, but the Diablo's might still have the edge in resolution. I did not have time (after 4 hous of listening) to do an A/B test, but that will come soon and will the the final elimination round. For the longest time I was sure Focal were going to win, but the comeback that the MBL's did without the subs was astonishing, and over the last few days I've been going back and forth. I could really go either way; Do I stick with the Focal sound I love and possibly the best non-floorstanding traditional speaker ever, or with what is probably the speaker concept of the future with it's amazing immersion?
Whatever I end up buying now will probably be with me for ten years, or more. But it's not only I that will be affected long-term by this decision; These will probably be the speakers that my eventual children will grow up listening too, the speakers whose sound characteristics through which they will feel all those emotions that music can bring.
I don't know how much of a drop in quality it will be to go with the built-in DAC of the Bel Canto amp, but if it's within an acceptable range of the clearly superior Weiss Minerva, I´'m starting to think that I might actually be prepared to take the plunge now and buy a new system. I'll have downpayments for 3 years at least, but should still be able to buy a golden horn diffusor every now and then to try and tame the concrete ceiling of our apartment. And I'll have absolutely spectacular sound, so what else would I need money for? =)
posted by ukiro at 9.8.09
5 Comments:
Fy fasen, det låter som härlig lyssning det där. Har alltid velat höra hur en rundstrålande högtalare faktiskt beter sig med musik. Men av andras rapporter att döma så låter det fantastiskt – med en akilleshäl: De lägger till den där stor-maximerad-ljudbild-hela-tiden på samtliga inspelningar, oavsett om de skapades med mycket efterklang eller ej.
Jag skulle leta efter sådana "defekter" i högtalarna, för det är sånt jag tror man kommer störa sig på i längden. Beteenden som gör att inspelningar låter mer lika varandra än de borde göra rent tekniskt.
Ja det där är defenitivt en parameter jag ska vara vaksam över när det blir final showdown (kanske så snart som i övermorgon om jag har tid). Spex-effekten a la låtsas-surround från tvåkanalssystem kanske fanns måhända där i någon utsträckning i akustikrummet, men det kändes torrare och mer korrekt ute i butikslokalen. Det är ju lätt att bli förförd i början, för att sedan tröttna ganska fort. Lite samma grej som med högtalare som först låter ändlöst monsterdetaljerade bara för att sedan inse att öronen blir helt varma av ansträngningen (se det jag skrev om Marten-burkarna i nån post).
Jag har nog, trots det där, innerst inne lutat mer åt MBL än Focal på sistone. Men i går när jag promenerade hem från jobbet och lyssnade på nya Traject-albumet i lurarna så var det Diablo jag såg framför mig. Den där typen av ljud, som jag verkligen älskar, är exakt vad Diablon är som allra bäst på. Det SKA verkligen vara snustorrt, låta "nära öronen" och ha den där hyperprecisionen i både textur och timing. Så jag tror den plattan ska införas i referenshögen inför finalomgången... Det lär bli fler poster i den här svammelserien =)
Oavsett vad det blir kommer jag på provlyssning så fort det är dags. Mycket spännande att se vad du väljer och hur du kommer få till det hemma. Kattskit lär det inte bli.
Du hade ett fint spår från Draft 7.30-albumet som testspår såg jag. Tycker Autechre har flera sådana där härliga låtar där man med bra återgivning i princip kan gå fram och ta på ljuden. De måste ju vara perfekta testspår för att se om MBL ställer till det med spex eller inte kan jag tro.
Det är intressant det där med vad man väljer att fokusera på i återgivningen och vad man vill att högtalarna ska klara av, för att ge sin musiksmak de bästa förutsättningarna. Själv har jag blivit helt fokuserad på att kunna återge hela det hörbara (och gärna under det) frekvensspektrat utan att tappa något. Detta för att kunna tillgodo göra mig Thomas Köners skivor till stor del. Och även lite gamla Lustmord. Kul är det, även om det balanserar på gränsen till det totalt onödiga att ha bra återgivning ner till infrafrekvenserna.
Jag tror inte jag riktigt törs jaga full range! Dels så är jag enormt känslig för bas - jag kan både höra lägre frekvenser än de allra flesta (mer om det en annan gång) och jag har skenande allergi mot atonal bumlighet och ojämnheter - och dels blir det så är akustikreglering för bas både svindyrt och väldigt opraktiskt. Så jag offrar hellre lite tryck under 45-50 i utbyte mot kontroll och homogenitet.
Jag lyssnade en vända på storebror till Diablo, Focal Scala Utopia, och den basen kan jag nog leva med. Men de kostar 215000...
Autechre (iaf de senaste 8 åren eller så) är fantastiska som referensmaetrial. Vad som låter som en väldigt enkel vågform, trummaskin eller liknande visar sig nästan alltid ha en fantastisk liten textur, en krusning på ytan eller en ljudmässig "kropp" som bara kommer fram när allt sitter som det ska. I "Surripere" som jag nämnde finns en nästan 808-liknande bastrumma med från början. Dels varierar graden dist som appliceras på den genom hela låten vilket kräver en del av anläggningen för att man ska höra, och dels finns det ett fenomen som jag alltså enbart hört i dessa två högtalare (eller tre, Scala Utopia visade på samma fenomen): Jag vet inte hur det går till, men i MBL 121 och Focal Diablo Utopia så försvinner en hel del botten i basen, mer än vad som kan skyllas på att de är stativare. Det är verkligen ingen infrabas, så vad fan händer egentligen? I många andra anläggningar klingar varje anslag fortfarande kvar lite när nästa kommer, men i dessa två hinner den klinga ner nästan till tystnad. Min teori är att pitchen på ljudet skiljer någon promille mellan kanalerna, vilket gör att de glider ur fas. Detta gör att i EXTREMT tajta och timingkorrekta högtalare tar de två kanalernas ljud ut varandra allt mer medan trumman klingar ut. Jag har inte verifierat detta genom att titta på vågformer eller så, men det är intressant hur nästan alla högtalare får den här att låta som i hörlurar, där effekten mellan krockande ljudvågor inte kan uppstå.
Lustigt alltså, jag har aldrig räknat med Autechre innan år 2001. För mig började det med Confield – i princip.
Tog mig några lyssningar på Trajectskivan du nämnt. Först i hörlurar, men jag var inte så imponerad. Men i fullregister är skivan mumma! Bumlighet och kraftiga basresonanser är vidrigt, men rummet jag har nu är ytterst förlåtande. Återgivningen är verkligen slank i nästan hela rummet. Bra proportioner på det helt enkelt. Dessutom kommer jag bekämpa lite resonanser genom att utöka antalet basmoduler från två till fyra i vinter, och därmed få ett jämnare utstrålningsmönster då de ska placeras jämt utspridna längs med högtalarväggen. Mer prestanda behöver jag knappast nämligen - det finns det nog av. Visserligen behövs det även basfällor för att sänka efterklangen, men det får vänta till nästa mer permanenta boende. De blir stora som du antydde.
Nå, hur har det nu gått? Det lät som ett beslut skulle tas i dagarna efter din sista uppdatering.
Post a Comment
<< Home