26 replies to this topic

[bhobba]

Hi Guys

I am in Canberra for a while and Decky was kind enough to invite me over to check out some of my stuff on his system.

On Thursday evening I popped on over with my level 2 PDX, Off-Ramp, and Metrum.

First I want to emphasize the SGR speakers Decky has have an entirely different presentation to my speakers so it is hardly surprising different stuff was heard than in my system - and that is what happened.

First to the PDX using its internal USB. It definitely had the same character I hear in my system - strong bass, beautiful midrange, but it did not evoke the impression - this is real - I hear on my system. We tried direct connecting to the amps in the SGR's rather than going through the pre-amp Decky had and as I noticed in my system things improved - even better bass, midrange, and detail. Now for something really interesting - we switched over to using my Off-Ramp. Wow - much better here. Bass a bit tighter and the midrange seemed smoother and better with more air around it. It was the difference I heard in my system but instead of rating the internal USB and Off-Ramp about equal the Off-Ramp had pulled ahead. We tried the Metrum again direct connecting via the Off-Ramp and tholught - yea - in this system the Metrum - when fed with the Off-Ramp - was better than the PDX - its simply very transparent - bass a bit tighter as well.

In the past I had a NFB 2 in my system. To be blunt I was unimpressed - excellent value for money but slow and uninvolving. On Decky's system it sounded pretty good. In fact he had a a feature with his pre-amp to direct compare it to the Metrum, not via the Off-Ramp - but normal SPDIF - and it was hard to tell the difference. It was conjectured the reason for this was the character of the Pre-amp tended to mask differences, but I also think it was partly due to it was not going via the Off-Ramp. Decky seemed very impressed with the Off-Ramp.

Now I do not want to get into the differences between my speakers and the SGR's except to say I know a few people who know both and some have opted for SGR's and others for what I have. Its like the difference between the PDX and Metrum when fed with the Off-Ramp - its about 50-50 which people prefer. You really have to hear both and make up your own mind.

Thanks
Bill

Edited by bhobba, 31 March 2012 - 08:36 AM.

[Nada]

Interesting experience. Thanks for sharing.

While system synergy is essential I wonder if what is even more imprtant is for the source to work with most systems?

If a source has to be eccentric to make a system work its going to be highly coloured. Then any changes we make to preamp/cables/ speakers means we will need a new source.

Maybe we should interogate a potential DAC, not only in our own system but visit many systems to make sure it has a neutral balance and wide applicability to prove its transparency?


On another topic was there any valve hiss/noise doing this: "We tried direct connecting to the amps in the SGR's rather than going through the pre-amp Decky had and as I noticed in my system things improved - even better bass, midrange, and detail."

Edited by Nada, 31 March 2012 - 08:51 AM.

[Decky]

Very well conveyed Bill - thanks for that. I have noting to add and I will not go into personal preferences of sound - but I fully agree with the Bill's conclusions. The question remains how much the Audio GD C-39Mk3 influenced the sound. There was definitely a bit of difference with the PDX going directly into the SGR CX4Fs, as opposed going through the preamp. I never measured that preamp properly so I cannot comment on what it is doing to the sound but I am planning to change its output gain stages and to try something a bit brighter (Marantz M-7 is the default AudioGD circuit). I also have to stress a very obvious improvement that Off-ramp brought to the PDX. That little box definitely does some interesting things (in a good way) to the signal.

After all it was a very pleasant experience talking to Bill about all different topics that we covered, and I hope we both know a bit more than what we new before.

All the best Bill.

[bhobba]

On another topic was there any valve hiss/noise doing this: "We tried direct connecting to the amps in the SGR's rather than going through the pre-amp Decky had and as I noticed in my system things improved - even better bass, midrange, and detail."

The newer PDX we were using has a lot less noise than the older versions and you really can't hear any difference direct connecting as far as noise goes - the difference is increased transparency etc. I know the builder and designer Clay has done tests with the new DAC that shows it sounds better that way and because of that suggests forgoing the volume control. He also adjusts the I/V resistor to match the amp you use so you only use as little as possible decimation on the software player - although I have found with the volume control in Audirvana it makes no difference.

Thanks
Bill

[b.d]

How bout a bit of a mention of the objective differences between Lenehan and SGR speakers Bill, for those of us out west that dont get to hear either, doesnt have to be worded as a value judgement or anything worthy of debate does it? They're only loudspeakers after all.

[Young Skywalker]

How bout a bit of a mention of the objective differences between Lenehan and SGR speakers Bill, for those of us out west that dont get to hear either

Perhaps you mean a subjective evaluation? It would be impossible to do this in any meaningful fashion unless both speakers were optimised in the same listening room and assuming that the rest of the system was sufficiently transparent to allow both to show their full potential. Otherwise the best you will get is a personal preference for the voicing of one complete system (including the room) versus another, and with a specific range of music at that. That tells you nothing at all about the speakers or any other one component in either system.

Are you seriously in the market for either speaker, simply curious, or interested to see what direction the thread will take if the bait is swallowed?

[b.d]

I'm not in the market no, or baiting, 'simply curious' of some obvious differences between the two speakers. I'm aware different rooms makes meaningful comparisons quite difficult, but still there should be some recognizable attributes of the speakers in question that everyone would agree with. By objective I meant things like frequency response that are not so subtle as to be in the realm of the imaginary. No need to get the microphones out. I understand lot of vested interests in some brands that casual conversation gets difficult, but I dont have any agenda, though neither do I feel I need walk on eggshells either. BIll you can ignore my question, it probably was a bit naive to expect a casual answer.

I dont agree that Bill could tell me "nothing at all" about the speakers. If I called you up as a potential customer and asked you what your SGR speakers sound like would you really tell me that not knowing my room and dac you couldnt say a word about the sound of SGR speakers?

Cheers
B

[bhobba]

How bout a bit of a mention of the objective differences between Lenehan and SGR speakers Bill, for those of us out west that dont get to hear either, doesnt have to be worded as a value judgement or anything worthy of debate does it? They're only loudspeakers after all.

Objective differences - both web-sites publish specs - check it out for yourself. Without doubt both are genuine high end products worthy of respect.

Thanks
Bill

[bhobba]

I dont agree that Bill could tell me "nothing at all" about the speakers. If I called you up as a potential customer and asked you what your SGR speakers sound like would you really tell me that not knowing my room and dac you couldnt say a word about the sound of SGR speakers?

Of course I can tell you and heaps of others what I personally think subjectively. But as Young Skywalker said exactly why do you want to know other than both speakers are high end products worthy of respect. If you are actually interested my understanding is both speakers can be heard in WA so you can make up your own mind. If you have any trouble finding someone to audition ML speakers contact Kajak who has them and I am sure Young Skywalker or Decky can help you in hearing SGR speakers. Then you can post whatever you wish - or not - as the case may be.

Thanks
Bill

[b.d]

There are no FR graphs on SGR website that I can see.

Should have known better than to go anywhere near those words these days, what I meant was objective in a colloquial sense, as in subjectively perceived differences without unnecessary value judgements or loaded word (as in dictionary definition "Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions), not as in measurements. I'm sure it's still possible to say meaningfully about sound and still retain a semblance of impartiality?

I think everyone knows both speakers are "high end products worthy of respect". I want to know how they sound because I'm interested in building speakers myself, I dont feel I need to have $10k in my pocket to be interested in a product and able to ask questions about it on a discussion forum. If you feel it's impossible for you to say anything meaningful about speakers as they might relate to me in my room then the same would be true about the dacs that you post about that will be used in rooms other than yours, but it's not entirely true, as you say there is always a degree of "It definitely had the same character I hear in my system"

I've long wanted to hear SGR in Perth, but as far as asking a dealers what they can do to organize it, here I do feel I need to be somewhat 'in the market'. Owned and heard plenty of ML1's, its the 3's I'd be interested in hearing (Mario got 1's as far as I'm aware?)

Cheers

[Decky]

People no need for harsh words or erupting feelings. The topic was not about the speakers - we just played with several sources in various configurations and I never even asked Bill about his opinion on SGR speakers (although he probably has one). I think what Aaron was trying to stress is that comparing speakers "objectively" is an impossible task. Every judgement being positive or negative is subjective, our perception of the world around us is subjective and that is the whole beauty of us and this world.

That being said - comparing and judging a two way passive speaker set-up and a 4 way active one is like trying to say which air plane is better F-18 or B787. Yes they both fly and they both have engines and wings but also a slightly different design features that make them different. I hope you get my vibe b.d..


But we did prove one thing, Bill and I, and that I have been stressing since the beginning of the time - it is not the speakers or the DAC or the amps that make your system sing - it this the whole package that matters, and it is your liking not mine or Bill's. Someone likes big fat bass, someone likes it a bit leaner and faster ....and etc....

[bronal]

FWIW, I think Bevan's question is fair. I'm sure that if SGRs had been demoed at Bill's place he would have an awful lot to say about the comparison.

I know Decky's system reasonably well and would be interested to hear Bill's opinions on the presentation of SGRs compared with what he is used to.

Edited by bronal, 31 March 2012 - 10:43 PM.

[Young Skywalker]

I dont agree that Bill could tell me "nothing at all" about the speakers. If I called you up as a potential customer and asked you what your SGR speakers sound like would you really tell me that not knowing my room and dac you couldnt say a word about the sound of SGR speakers?

I am sure he could tell you plenty about what he heard on a given day but that wasn't the point I was trying to make.

If you wanted to know what an SGR speaker truly sounded like (what it does or does not add or subtract from the signal it is fed) then you would need to hear various models under a variety of circumstances (different rooms and supporting electronics). This situation is no different to any other loudspeaker. I could tell you about my own personal experiences with the product but that may be of little value to you or anyone else. If you were sufficiently interested after an initial audition and in the market to purchase then I would suggest listening to them in your own room and with your own associated electronics (source and preamp). Then you would know if they did or did not fit YOUR needs.

An anechoic measurement of a loudspeaker does not tell you how it will perform in a particular listening room, only what its maximum performance potential is. Suffice to say that the unsmoothed anechoic frequency response of any model in the line up is, from what I have seen, impressively smooth and flat.

[b.d]

I am sure he could tell you plenty about what he heard on a given day but that wasn't the point I was trying to make.

If you wanted to know what an SGR speaker truly sounded like (what it does or does not add or subtract from the signal it is fed) then you would need to hear various models under a variety of circumstances (different rooms and supporting electronics). This situation is no different to any other loudspeaker. I could tell you about my own personal experiences with the product but that may be of little value to you or anyone else. If you were sufficiently interested after an initial audition and in the market to purchase then I would suggest listening to them in your own room and with your own associated electronics (source and preamp). Then you would know if they did or did not fit YOUR needs.

An anechoic measurement of a loudspeaker does not tell you how it will perform in a particular listening room, only what its maximum performance potential is. Suffice to say that the unsmoothed anechoic frequency response of any model in the line up is, from what I have seen, impressively smooth and flat.

Hi Decky, I'm not wanting to be argumentative for the sake of it, but I got to disagree, perhaps. You're right about in-home demo to know what any speaker 'truly' sounds like (though a bit of repositioning or room treatments and that can be changed), but I feel if I ask these sort of questions enough and read enough forums I get a pretty good idea of what it roughly sounds like. When I was in Melbourne last year I made the effort to hear some Quads for the first time, and after years of reading opinion on them they were unsurprisingly to me pretty much like I had imagined they would be. As I said I'm not in the market at the moment, but one day I'm sure I will be, and when putting together a short-list of speakers to demo it can only be the 'subjective' descriptions of other that will decide my short-list. Thus far I've generally had to buy my speakers completely unheard, but knowing what I value sound wise and collating enough forum and magazine opinion I've seldom been really surprised or disappointed.


"An anechoic measurement of a loudspeaker does not tell you how it will perform in a particular listening room..."
But it would relative to other speakers that have passed through my living room given that I know their responses and how that worked for me in this room.

Cheers
B

[kajak12]

How bout a bit of a mention of the objective differences between Lenehan and SGR speakers Bill, for those of us out west that dont get to hear either, doesnt have to be worded as a value judgement or anything worthy of debate does it? They're only loudspeakers after all.

Ask grimmie for a listen to his sgr speakers......

[b.d]

Cheers Mario.

Was just reading over at Stereophile.com and interesting comparison between SLAMMs and Grand Utopias, different rooms same electronics, made me think of this thread. The review writes "The most startling and immediately obvious difference between these two truly full-range loudspeakers was their respective voicings. The SLAMM offered up a lighter, brighter sound, with greater emphasis in the mid-treble...In contrast, the Utopia offered a weighter, warmer sound with a greater midbass emphasis..." That's the kind of stuff I had in mind, fairly 'objective', nothing contentious, no preference implied, but useful none the less.

Anyways, enough of that, back to the OT.

[Tony M]

Hi b.d

I wonder if I'm the only one a bit perplexed by this. Two high end "full -range" loudspeakers with "startling and immediately obvious differences", apparently in terms of FR.

Must investigate what claims each make about their FR. I also wonder which one got it so wrong - or was it a question of compatibility with the electronics or the room.

I can't help thinking the difference between two SOTA transducers with relatively similar design approaches should be more subtle than this. Should preferences at this level be driven by a liking for a blatently bass-heavy or treble-accentuated sound?

Sorry for going OT or possibly taking a reference I haven't read out of context - but I just wanted to ask for other opinions on something that struck me as rather odd.

Edited by Tony M, 01 April 2012 - 01:05 AM.

[b.d]

You can check article here Tony http://www.stereophi...ia-loudspeaker.

Would be interesting to see anechoic measurements of the two speakers. Room maybe if not enough care taken in setup, but I wouldnt imagine electronics would account for these kinds of differences, SOTA electronics more than speakers seem to converge at a single fairly accurate point. And speakers too in many respects, but I've also often felt that frequency response differences do account for the most immediate differences between speakers (not necessarily the most important). As loudspeaker driver get better/more expensive they dont necessarily get flatter, and given two speakers claiming to be accurate ±3db 20-20k there could be a 6db difference between the two in the midrange, thats huge, 2db differences in midrange frequencies can make or break a speaker or XO, at least for me. cheers

[Young Skywalker]

I can't help thinking the difference between two SOTA transducers with relatively similar design approaches should be more subtle than this.

Tony,

Please list all of the ways in which these two loudspeakers are, on paper, similar and I will make a list of all the ways they are different. We can compare notes via PMs rather than contributing to taking this thread further off topic.

[:) al]

Hi Decky, I'm not wanting to be argumentative for the sake of it, but I got to disagree, perhaps. You're right about in-home demo to know what any speaker 'truly' sounds like (though a bit of repositioning or room treatments and that can be changed), but I feel if I ask these sort of questions enough and read enough forums I get a pretty good idea of what it roughly sounds like. When I was in Melbourne last year I made the effort to hear some Quads for the first time, and after years of reading opinion on them they were unsurprisingly to me pretty much like I had imagined they would be. As I said I'm not in the market at the moment, but one day I'm sure I will be, and when putting together a short-list of speakers to demo it can only be the 'subjective' descriptions of other that will decide my short-list. Thus far I've generally had to buy my speakers completely unheard, but knowing what I value sound wise and collating enough forum and magazine opinion I've seldom been really surprised or disappointed.


"An anechoic measurement of a loudspeaker does not tell you how it will perform in a particular listening room..."
But it would relative to other speakers that have passed through my living room given that I know their responses and how that worked for me in this room.

Cheers
B

I agree with you, most hifi I've come across has tended to have some characteristic traits. Listen to them in a few systems and these tend to shine through. I thought your original question a pretty straightforward one. dont myself understand all this prancing around mulberry bush we seem to see on this forum. I know people have all sorts of vested interests and brand preferences and all that. but should be able to put that aside and just say it as it is

bhobba, good to read your thoughts in your initial post in any case !

[SGR]

Hi b.d

I wonder if I'm the only one a bit perplexed by this. Two high end "full -range" loudspeakers with "startling and immediately obvious differences", apparently in terms of FR.

Must investigate what claims each make about their FR. I also wonder which one got it so wrong - or was it a question of compatibility with the electronics or the room.

I can't help thinking the difference between two SOTA transducers with relatively similar design approaches should be more subtle than this. Should preferences at this level be driven by a liking for a blatently bass-heavy or treble-accentuated sound?

Sorry for going OT or possibly taking a reference I haven't read out of context - but I just wanted to ask for other opinions on something that struck me as rather odd.

Hi Tony,

I am glad I was not the only one thinking the same thing

When I read "startling and immediately obvious differences", I too thought it a bit odd because I remember the time that Mike Lenehan came to one of our Brisbane GTG's and after listening to the CX3B's congratulated me on the sound which he said "is very similar to his".

Like you said, if two speakers are designed with strong engineering principles, and have apparently the same frequency response, why would they sound so obviously different? Anyway...

Guys regarding the published measurements, it is something I am working on. I will be publishing all sorts of measurements on the website, but it's a lot of work to get done in my limited spare time! Hang in there Anything specific you want to see a measurement of now, I'll post one up as a preview if you want?

Bill, glad you had a nice time at Decky's. Feel free to answer B.D's original question if you want. If the sound was or wasn't to your liking, then you're entitled to think so and you won't offend Decky and you certainly wont offend me. Bevan is a clever guy, I am sure he realises that there are many variables in the loop at play, and that also people have different preferences and opinions So it's all good...

Cheers,

Stuart

[b.d]

There was mention of a rear firing ambience tweeter on the MAXX I think, these can make quite a difference and seem not to show up much in the measurements.

[bhobba]

Bill, glad you had a nice time at Decky's. Feel free to answer B.D's original question if you want. If the sound was or wasn't to your liking, then you're entitled to think so and you won't offend Decky and you certainly wont offend me. Bevan is a clever guy, I am sure he realises that there are many variables in the loop at play, and that also people have different preferences and opinions So it's all good...

Thanks Sturart.

There are a few reasons I do not want to get into a detailed discussion on the subjective description of the sound of the speakers. First a number of people have previously posted what they think of both speakers - I am not sure I can really add a lot. Second I am acutely aware of the position you, Decky and Young Skywalker are in. As manufacturers dealers etc you are limited in what you can say about another product - I however am not. I can say what I like and you have no right of reply - I consider that unfair (I do not consider the policy unfair, wrong or anything like that - its just a statement about what it does and the position it puts some people in - this is not in any way a criticism of the policy) and I will not be involed in such. When I give my impressions of DAC's amps etc it is not done with the hands tied of those who may or may not agree/disagree with me.

Another poster asked why people can't just say what they want - well now you know why - some people are handcuffed.

However I will say this - there was nothing objectionable, to dislike, or anything like that, it was simply a difference in presentation. For example my speakers are more immediate and in your face - they jump out at you - when a drum hits for example they go whack - for better or worse. People that have heard my system often comment about that - many like it - some don't. Another thing I noticed is the SGR's ruthlessly reveal the shortcomings of older recordings and the strengths of modern recordings. We heard a definite echo quality on some old Patsy Klein recordings that is not present in my system. Its is not the age of the recording but how well its transcribed from the master because we heard some direct from the master Elvis that was divine. I don't know if that's because the SGR's are more accurate or whatever but it was there. I cant say I heard any differences in the quality of the midrange, neither speaker has a shouty treble to my ears - no sibilance issues I could hear, and the bass seemed equally extended and without boom. And of course with my speakers you get the flavor of the amp that feeds it - again for better or worse. I listen a lot with a Trafomatic SET that adds its own character of a colored but entrancing midrange - in saying about the midrange etc I was discounting that and thinking more about what I hear with my Patek and NAKSA - although the NAKSA also adds a bit of warmth.

Thanks
Bill

Edited by bhobba, 01 April 2012 - 05:15 PM.

[b.d]

However I will say this - there was nothing objectionable, to dislike, or anything like that, it was simply a difference in presentation. For example my speakers are more immediate and in your face - they jump out at you - when a drum hits for example they go whack - for better or worse. People that have heard my system often comment about that - many like it - some don't. Another thing I noticed is the SGR's ruthlessly reveal the shortcomings of older recordings and the strengths of modern recordings. We heard a definite echo quality on some old Patsy Klein recordings that is not present in my system. Its is not the age of the recording but how well its transcribed from the master because we heard some direct from the master Elvis that was divine. I don't know if that's because the SGR's are more accurate or whatever but it was there. I cant say I heard any differences in the quality of the midrange, neither speaker has a shouty treble to my ears - no sibilance issues I could hear, and the bass seemed equally extended and without boom. And of course with my speakers you get the flavor of the amp that feeds it - again for better or worse. I listen a lot with a Trafomatic SET that adds its own character of a colored but entrancing midrange - in saying about the midrange etc I was discounting that and thinking more about what I hear with my Patek and NAKSA - although the NAKSA also adds a bit of warmth.

Thanks
Bill

Thanks Bill, I wasn't wanting for any more than that.

[b.d]

Reading my reply it might read wrong, I mean to say that that sort of description suffices. I didnt mean it to read that I didnt want to hear your justifications for your reticence, if you follow.

I appreciate its hard to feel free to talk about gear that friends make their livelihood from, but I figure every piece of equipment we're ever critical of is putting food on the table of some family, so maybe we should feel equally free to give our honest but measured thoughts about whatever it is, with the understanding that it's not usually taken for more than it is, one persons impressions based their own particular taste in audio which are more likely than not quite different from ones own (but still useful I maintain)

Cheers
Bevan

[bhobba]

I appreciate its hard to feel free to talk about gear that friends make their livelihood from, but I figure every piece of equipment we're ever critical of is putting food on the table of some family, so maybe we should feel equally free to give our honest but measured thoughts about whatever it is, with the understanding that it's not usually taken for more than it is, one persons impressions based their own particular taste in audio which are more likely than not quite different from ones own (but still useful I maintain)

I do not want this thread to ramble too far off topic but there are subtleties at play here you only discover by posting a lot. For example I was highly critical of some B&W speakers I heard at a manufacturers showroom that were traded in - I am sure you can guess who. They sounded awful to my ears bass heavy and out of balance and I saw the measurements that backed it up. I posted such and was panned mercilessly by the B&W crowd and the manufacturer concerned was even caught up in it. Its not just a question of saying what you hear and think you must always think of unintended consequences - I had no intention for the manufacturer concerned to be caught up in such but that's what happened. So Beven if it seems I am being political or whatever rest assured its a hard won approach born out of the school of hard knocks.

Thanks
Bill

[b.d]

I think one can describe a speaker as bass heavy without it coming across as 'highly critical', certainly I say as much about some stuff and so far dont think I've been panned so far. Conversely one can be complementary without seeming like a proselytizer. One needs be measured more than political maybe. Anyways enough from me, thanks for your opinion on the speakers and glad it didnt have to kick up a **** fight.

B