Description

Audio Hobby Thoughts, Philosophy & System Description 

Current Room Anchors - Room 1 and 2 active

Room 1 - Matrix 800's anchors -  for creating that ..........Maxell Tape Effect. 
Room 2 - (Adjacent to Room 1) - Quad 57 + two Dynaudio BM12s subs - Midrange reference
Room 3 - Acoustat Model 3 - Modded - upstairs - For imaging larger than life  (literally speaking) - see last picture. Unfortunately is next to my wifes TV room. So it gets limited use.
 
Stored - B&W Electrostatic DM70c Continental - Wife calls them the washing machines. John Bowers called them his favorite speaker.   Very interesting and very rare. Could anchor a room but they need special placement and lots of room. ESL portion needs to be 100% functional and at ear level or they will sound soft. 

Room 2 is mostly digital, guests, and used for trialing used unplayed records before they make the queue for room 1.  Room 1 has been called by my family as Dads Hole. I prefer panic room as it helped to raise my kids and stay married...so far. 

Psychology Part 

Music is critical to ones health and well being. I went through a couple stretches in life due to events without it and the results were not good. The goal for me to get lost in the music and have it transport me to that special place. Now whether you get there by a typical 2 channel home stereo with speakers, headphones, or other means is not important. Getting there is the important part.  

Audiophile not.....

Have always been the type that if I frequent a room enough, a system usually ends up in there. My wife finally put an end to this, and allows me to do what I want in the full basement of our house.....so..... In this described virtual system, I have had Room A since 1994. Adjacent Room B is in the process of being finished, but I have been using it for listening for a few years now adding in room treatments as needed.   

History 

Like many others, have been at this audio hobby since I was about 13 when I was consciously aware of the gear versus the actual music relationship. I am now 55 and currently with two adjacent music rooms setup with different gear. Both rooms can do full orchestra symphonies with large dynamic swings. Getting Room B with the Quad 57's to do this was a challenge; but I was able to get it to work with the right amps and powered subs. The Quads require a very different room acoustic setup over the Matrix 800's in Room A.  

I am a pure amateur, audiophile, music lover, past trombone player, and have never been part of the Audio Business as a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or have any special interest relationships with any of these people. I consider myself a full time music lover, and part time audiophile; although I have friends that could argue this point. I have tried to upload pics and information here, that give a flavor of some of my audio journeys, and associated bouts of Audiophilia Nervosa.  :^)

"Audio Heaven, is for Music Lovers - Audiophiles are never happy.
With that, in the real, authentic, Heaven;  there is room, even for Audiophiles"  
8^0


Living in the country

Having moved away from the city core in the 90's, I have found that audiophiles away from the cities, are in general, scare to find and or keep to themselves. Many of my audio friends are now remote, due to the distance between us; so only virtual communications are possible most of the time. 

The negative aspects of Isolation aside;  one good aspect of living in the country is the clean power and lack of noise and vibrations caused by traffic, trucks, etc...Once experienced and its effect on your listening, you become very aware of the multitude of audiophile products available as band aids, to cover, veil, but never eliminate these artifacts in densely populated areas. 

Thanks for reading and please say Hi.  

Happy Listening  


Read more...

Room Details

Dimensions: 24’ × 20’  Large
Ceiling: 8’


Components Toggle details

    • My Music Library Records, Tape, Cd's, Files.
    I was born in the 60's so I grew up with Classic Rock, Beatles, etc... But I love all music, new music and Opera hits home with me. I played trombone in Jr and High school so the Bass Clef has a bias with me.  Listen more now to the ladies crooning at me, Classical and Jazz with occasional Classical Rock; I think a well recorded full Orchestra Symphony with huge Dynamic swings has the most magic for me.
    • ***** MAIN ROOM aka Panic Room, Dad's Hole, ....*****
    I have had Room A since 1994. It has 3 dedicated lines 20, 20 , 15. This room is personal use. Room B is more for entertaining and spending time with friends. 

    Room A is much better insulated and isolated from my wife. As much as I would like to move the Matrix 800's to the larger Room B space to try them, it would probably just get me that much more trouble.  

    Room A and B are both located on a concrete poured floor. A has a an underpad and flat carpet on top. Spikes from gear stands and speakers are able to penetrate to the concrete with no problem ensuring a solid mechanical connection. The speakers are located 6 feet from the front wall with the room being 24 ft in length. Putting in the 800's over the 801's meant that some of the room treatments were able to be removed due to the 800's double woofers high and low.  This is also one of the reasons I call them very room friendly.
    • RTR - Studer Tape Deck - For Listening & Vinyl Tuning
    RTR - Studer - used to play 15 IPS Tapes. 
     
    1/4 inch 2 track machine. The three pictures attached. Top Left - known as two turntables. my machine being worked on Middle pic - 807 Top Right Pic. A picture of Roger Ginsley with a 48 track machine he is about to split into two 24 tracks. My Studer 807 is calibrated by him. He is also the one that makes the interconnects I use with it.
    • JC Verdier La Platine Vintage Granito Original Design
    2012 

    http://www.jcverdier.com/ADSL/platineVintage.html 

    Just a delight to use. With its presentation, sends the message home that it is all amount the music. Effortless, seamless, but experience is needed is setting up the thread. A real Goldilocks scenario of the thread being too loose, too tight or just right.  Different thread tensions alternate how the motor and platter work together and change the speed. The objective is to get the correct speed with as little effect from the motor. ....  
     
    Original design. Granito Model My version uses a motor only equipped for thread Granito base and solid aluminum billet armpod. The later newer motors are equipped now for belts too - but no one runs them this way that I know of. This decision was made imo to generate more sales as it is easier to setup. But imo the belt grip would play havoc with the motor / magnets marriage which was designed for thread. I would think that belt stretch and its physical changes with temp and humidity changes would also cause problems, and interfere with the natural braking action of the magnets. This is my opinion as mine is thread only. There is a greater learning curve involved with thread. 

    This is the only turntable I am aware of whose platter design includes both acceleration (inertia) and braking (natural forces from same pole magnets) to deal with the records behavior - going from soft to heavily modulated grooves. The motor design, like a marriage with the platter. Think of the childhood merry go rounds that once up to speed - even a little girl could keep them going. To understand how the motor and platter are like a marriage, one need only turn the motor off and the platter spins for 30 seconds with the thread attached. However cut the thread while the platter is turning, and the platter stops much quicker as the two magnets demonstrate their braking capability. Impressive to me is just the plain simplicity of design using physics to get the job done with a piece of string and magnets. I found it important in setup to have the thread positioned in a way that is the least intrusive on the platter; so as to allow the platter to not only do its job as designed; but to also provide the needed jolts as required from the motor to maintain speed stability. 

     In my opinion - you will know when you have set it up properly because you are able to turn the motor off and on and also deflect the thread with your finger - as the records plays - and not affect the music delivery to your ears. I base this when compared directly to 15 IPS Master Tape dubs. In testing for accuracy I run both simultaneously with one lagging 10 seconds behind the other and switch between the two - compensating for gain as tape is a high level signal. When the thread is setup in this fashion there is minimal stress put on it. The current silk thread I am using has recently passed the one year mark. Overall Big Sound from a small piece of thread. 

    Some facts Magnetic bearing design. Brass colored rings are big shielded permanent magnets; same magnet poles repelling each other. The result is "levitation" the space you see between them. No thrust bearing involved. A central spindle bathed in a special oil keeps them aligned. For me personally I did not know what TT bearing noise sounded like until I heard music on a TT without a physical bearing. The plinth is made of Granito. Granito is not real granite but a non-resonant material that looks and feels like granite. A limited edition model.

     "Granito is a material composed by little pieces of marble of very different origin agglomerated inside a mold with cement. Machined and polished. The resonance of the plinth with its suspension is about 5Hz and it is well absorbed by the air cavities." 

    Mr. JC Verdier Note: Newer Platines are provided with a setup bearing. The manual is very clear on the setup bearing. It is just that - a setup tool only. COUNTERFEIT PLATINES Unfortunately there are non-authentic tables out there worldwide from 20 different counterfeiting makers. These tables are out there with people using them. If anyone is unaware of this, see the Platine Information on the JC Verdier website for more info.

    http://www.jcverdier.com/ADSL/platineV.html]Platine 

    The only advice I can give is when buying a Verdier Platine you should be careful to ensure it is a real Platine, especially if buying privately. If you already have one and have doubts, check with an authorized dealer or J.C. Verdier company in France to ensure it is authentic.  
    • Custom Eminent Technology Model 2.5 for MC Carts
    This is a custom build ET 2.5 Tonearm from Bruce Thigpen - A 19 PSI design.I am using the new Long I Beam. Weights are reduced by half and therefore the vertical inertia is higher - a goal of the design. The Aluminum Gooseneck was sourced from NZ. It was through Richard Krebs also an ET2 owner.  I am using Single Shot WBT wiring, Aluminum mount plate. Magnesium armtube. Double Leaf Spring and damping trough. If you are an ET2 owner you know what I am talking about :^).... Advantages of the ET2 airbearing linear tracker tonearm - no VTF changes with VTA adjustment, no offset setup, antiskating and immunity to acoustic feedback, as it rides on film of air. 

    https://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1325551242&&&/Eminent-Technology-ET-2-Tonearm-Owners

    One shot wire. Run at 19 PSI. Damping trough with 1 cc of Oil. Lead weights at the very end of the I Beam.

    VTA on the fly while the record plays and it doesn't change any parameters (VTF) like all other tonearms do. This is due to a patented VTA on the fly system. Have you ever noticed how with same thickness records....some can sound brighter, some bloated and some just right? When they press the records the different plants can have different standards. Records are then cut with varying angles.. even same thickness ones.

    See ET2 Bass Management Below
    • Tonearm Wiring Loom - One shot WBT NextGen
    2011 One shot wiring loom for the ET 2.5. WBT 0102 CU connectors. The design of the ET2 (2.5) allows for this wiring to be changed out in about 10 minutes. Silver and copper can be experimented with.
    • The PUMP ET2
    Life Support for the ET2's.
    Timeter 3000 Medical Industrial Pump. The most important part of the ET2 arms setup. Industrial commercial grade medical pump. Its actually a patient respirator.

    These have an hours counter and come up for sale cheaply on ebay. If you have space in your basement somewhere they are turnkey once set up.

    I have tried large aquarium pumps, smaller medical pumps, compressors.

    This Timeter Medical 50 psi pump has been customized to allow me to regulate air pressure coming out and send 19 psi to the ET2 tonearms. Another regulator with gauge at the arm allows me to accurately adjust for the PSI coming into the arm. Located in another room -cannot be heard in sound room when running.


    The smoothness of air delivery is excellent. No resonance. The pump dumps/expels moisture like a car's AC. Have never seen a drop in the moisture collector; other than one incident when the pump outlet clogged with minerals from the moisture. I now soak the pump outlet in CLR for 2 hours every two months.

    • ET2 In Room Air Regulator & Filter
    2nd Regulator and Filter on wall near the ET arm. Confirms and controls the 19 psi and also filters out moisture in line. Have never seen any moisture in this filter. This device lets me change the pressure going to the arm by just turning the top mounted knob. This regulator is mobile. It can be placed in my lap while the music is playing and pressure adjusted to hear how it affects the music delivery.
    • Audio Research DAC8
    From a DAC only function perspective identical to the ARC REF DAC except the output stage is tubed on the REF. Interesting read.  :^)

     http://www.audioresearch.com/ContentsFiles/DAC8_white_paper.pdf

     
    • Audio Research SP11 - MKII Pre Amp Modded
    Owned many many years. Modded power supply box. Variable Gain for dealing with hot, and compressed source material - Digital and Analog. On the fly cartridge impedance loading. Used in ARC's hotrod mode. Direct output and bypass switch engaged. Amperex Bugle Boys.
    • Matrix 800
    Unique one time all assault effort from B&W at a time when 2 channel was the focus. Smooth, musical yet still detailed. Room Friendly if you can believe it. Imagine 4 subs two high and two low pointed at you for 2 channel music. Each driver 2 woofer, mids, tweeter have their own crossover easily accessible from the back. 
    They were a  2 1/2 year study from Bowers & Wilkins under John Bowers (RIP). I have looked for a long time for a pair. The only time they become available are through owners going to a smaller condo (retiring or divorce).

    All B&W 800 models that followed the Matrix series are the same only in model designation - 800. They are not a replacement or upgrade. They are a different build, design, objectives, sound. Post Matrix 800's are a smaller speaker system (require a sub for full range); they do have better WAF (more easily placed into a shared room with the wife)

    800 matrix can be played at low and high levels with the right amp.
    93db 2.83 volts/1m, Mine are Quad wired. They can be run on four separate amps if one desires as each driver has its own crossover. 

    Top and bottom woofers each excite a different set of waves. These waves cancel each other out. Thats the theory. My listening supports this. Smooth tight bass. It is quite something to experience since their size make you think they will over take the room. Also IMO each woofer works only half as much with four versus two for the desired SPL.  All of this results in a very flexible listening position. All drivers are physically isolated with separate crossovers and Van Den Hul silver wiring from the factory. I run them with both tubes and Solid State. Krell and  the modded Music Reference RM9.  

    Krell Amplifier Story
    My research found me talking with Dan D'Agostino who used matrix 800's as his reference speakers when he designed this era of Krell amps.
    Specifically the FPB series like my FPB600. On a dedicated 20 amp circuit with upgraded 20 amp power cord using Furutech Gold IEC.

    600 wpc - 8 ohms,
    1200 wpc 4 ohms,
    2400 wpc 2 ohms.

    The speakers are a 4 ohms design due to the double woofers.
    New spiders in all the four woofers.
    • KRELL FPB600 & KRELL Bass Alignment Filters
    Krell / 800 Matrix Interface. KRELL FPB600 KRELL 800 Matrix BAF Furutech IEC. 

     20 amp power cord. 
     20 amp wall service. 
     http://hansvt.home.xs4all.nl/pdf/brochures/baf.pdf
    • ROGER MODJESKI Music Reference RM9 MODDED
    I have two of his amps. RM10 used with QUAD 57's

    RM9 Push Pull Tube Amp.
    Used to power Acoustat, 801, 800 speakers.
    WBT 0700 Connectors.
    KT88 output tubes.
    Hardwired for 4 ohm tap. Total Overhaul done April 2015
    • MATRIX 800 INSTALL
    Installation
    • 800 Series Bass Alignment Filter / Equalizer.

    The graph shows the 801 matrix frequency response with and without the filter.

    All 800 series B&W matrix speakers are an active design and are intended to be used with an equalizer by the designer (John Bowers) to achieve the best frequency response.
    This attached graph was sent to me by B&W Europe years ago 

    It is the frequency plot for the 801 matrix "without" using the supplied Bass Alignment Filter. (not sure if it is 801 s2 or s3)
    B&W England are the ones that drew the two dotted lines on the graph. 

    The 801 matrix speakers were designed to be used with the BAF. The speakers with BAF devices were shipped to original owners. But these devices became lost as speakers changed hands. They pop up on their own on ebay.  

    The two interesting parts.  

    Part 1 

    Not only does adding the BAF filter as designed give you a smoother response and allow the speaker to hit 20 hz.  The BAF makes the 801 matrix speaker much more efficient. The ohm ratings can be seen on the right 8 - 6 - 4 - 2 ohms. The 801 matrix s2 and s3 are a very easy 6 ohm steady load with the active equalization provided by the BAF. This opens up amp choices.    

    Part 2 

    Audiophile opinions on the BAF device are kind of split. Not sure if its an even 50% like it, 50% don't like it, but you have the two camps. Why the difference? The room; its acoustic properties, and how the 801 (aka relationship destroyer) deals with it. There is a reason B&W no longer make the 801.  You need a dedicated room. Its makes no business sense. 

    801 matrix owners today (there are many out there and some reading here), that could NOT make the BAF work with the speaker; or who never used it, or even heard of the BAF before;  are taxing their amps way more to make bass with the 801.  
    • ************ SECOND ROOM ***********************
    A backwards seven with the main section 20 -23. This room is the "top of the Seven". It is separated from the bottom portion of the Number 7 shape (12 x 24) by a heavy curtain. It is also adjacent to my other room of which the door is left open. The back of the room has the stairs that go upstairs. One of the pictures has me standing on the stairs. All this makes for a much bigger room as far as sound volume and space is concerned. An in progress dedicated listening space that accommodates different speaker types.
    • ******************SPEAKERS ***********************************
    03/31/2011 Dynamic, ESL, Planar IMO - We listen to our rooms. The speakers in the rooms are like boats. They both represent freedom to me. A 12 foot aluminum boat is perfect for a small lake and your favourite person. But out on the ocean or a big body of water … The water/boat analogy in this case is like your room and speakers. Water waves versus sound waves. There is no perfect boat and no perfect speaker. This is because all our rooms are different and the room is the big rock in this audiophile game. Speakers represent the last piece in the audio chain. Their sound represents everything in your audio chain especially the room, before it reaches your ears. Every piece will have an effect on what is heard. This IMO is why it is so important to have a good source. The last few years my speakers have remained intact and I have concentrated on improving the source components. Each time I improved the source my main speakers improved as well. This tells me they are not a bottleneck and I have not yet reached their limits.
    • Dynaudio Acoustics BM12s - Two of these in my Quad Room B .
    Two of these in Room B -  18hz - 60 hz. 
    4th order Linkwitz- Riley crossovers have a really steep slope past 60 hz.
    On paper this made them look like a really good match for the Quad 57's; but how does such a small box make 18 hz.  They have class a/b amps are 4 ohms. 
    I brought them home and demoed them. Very Punchy, Clean and they go really low. A great match with the raised Wayne Picquet Quad 57's. They are placed under the speakers - see pic in my virtual system. 
    • Quad 57 Wayne Picquet rebuild with Music Reference RM10 AMP
    Quad ESL-57 - Wayne Picquet Panels Partnered with the amp that was designed for them - Music Reference RM10 by Roger Modjeski.

    With certain music magic for me.

    8/20/2012 These Quad 57 speakers were designed and put out before I was born. The parts inside which I have replaced like the EHT modules were stamped 1971. Fourteen years after they originally came out. The panels themselves are only a few years old. They were rebuilt by Wayne Piquet in Florida.
    The normal music presentation for stock Quad 57’s is as if listening to music from the first row of a balcony. If using stock feet a 2 or 4 x 4 piece of wood or brick under the rear leg angling the speaker downwards toward you actually raises this image. This may be a more realistic presentation in your room.

    Check out my review. http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/frr.pl?rspkr&1309018315&&&/Quad-57-
    • 801 Active Monitors - Currently Stored
    Currently Stored - "Winnie the Pooh" of speakers. Relationship Destroyer. Owned since 1994. Serious Sound Pressure Speaker can re-create an event in your room when positioned and driven properly. Mothers milk bass. During my time with them have used Solid State and Tube amps (Push Pull and OTL's).  In comparison to the DM70 Electrostatic, If the 801 and DM70 were cowboys. The 801s are wearing black hats and the DM70 white ones.  

    801 Matrix S2 and S3 - Designed by John Bowers to be Active Monitors with use of the BAF and become a sixth-order Butterworth alignment. Without the high pass filter they are a vented fourth-order design, specifically in a Bessel alignment. "Fourth-order" is an engineering term that refers to all vented and passive-radiator speakers; sealed boxes are "second order."  

    They are not full range to 20 hz without the BAF. 

    http://kenrockwell.com/audio/b-w/800-series-bass-alignment-filter.htm 

    ***************************************************************************** 

    From Stereophile (re: S2) "Higher in frequency, the response trend (averaged across a 30 degrees lateral window on the tweeter axis) is basically flat, but with a slight excess of energy in the presence region and a corresponding lack of energy in the top octave. All things being equal, this will make the speaker both a little too revealing of recorded detail and somewhat fussy when it comes to the quality of source and amplification components, just as LL noted in his auditioning comments." 

    *******************************************************************************

    801 S2 versus S3. 
    Some of the changes. S3 used a different crossover than s2 - less component count. Better isolated mid and hf boards. Bass inductors with an iron dust core . Rotating midrange – tweeter head assembly was permanently connected. (from 3 to 4 pin delivering separate ground signals to midrange and tweeter) Magnetic fluid cooling of the tweeter (like the 800 matrix) - the reason the apoc protection eliminated (circuits needed for this were also removed) 


    ******************************************************************************* 

     In nearfield very revealing of room setup, system components - SS and Tube, cabling, TT drive systems, poorly recorded music. They reveal all the flaws of the recording. 

    Depending on your audio hobby objectives this can be a good thing or a bad thing...

    See picture of the Bass Alignment Filter. 
    • B&W Electrostatic DM70 John Bowers / JansZen Hybrid
    B&W DM70 Electrostatic Continental Hybrid Speaker Clockwork Orange Movie The late John Bowers (RIP) favorite speakers. JansZen ESL - 500hz and up. B&W Woofer - 500hz and down. Require a large room - elevated to ear level and a good distance from the front wall. Very refined midrange - muscular bass. Non-directional with a large sweetspot.

    n]Designed in 1970. No cost or time constraints during the development. From what I can make out they were discontinued due to costs involved.
    Version One - Power handling 25 watts at all frequencies.
    Version Two - The later DM70 Improved, which looked identical, is suitable for amplifiers of 25-100w, but seems otherwise identical.

    500hz crossover - ESL panel can not be overdriven and is nondirectional.

    ESL Panel was provided by JansZen.
    Sensitivity is 17 watts into nominal impedance required to produce a sound level of 95 dB. at one metre at 400 Hz
    Double fuse protection C and CA versions.


    Restored and refurbished. Silver wiring inside

    http://loudspeaker-repair-service.reromanus.net/B+W-Manual_1970.pdf

    http://reromanus.net/loudspeaker-repair-service/refurbish_DM70.htm

    http://www.mats-enterprise.co.uk/DM70page/index.htm
    • Modded Acoustat Model 3 - Used In Shared Space Upstairs
    Finally hooked up the Model 3's to the OTL's in a temporary fashion.


    These are in our living area shared space
    Custom modded Model 3;s.
    They have rebuilt interfaces.
    Unique granite bases with integrated spikes that weigh 80 lbs.
    Burl Oak Veneer facing and the inside is filled with small sand bags.
    • Technics SP10 MKII with 2nd ET2 High Pressure Manifold
    March 11, 2013 Update


    Next version ? will replace the current black base plinth with a more aesthetic one.

    Pet Project - Has taught me a lot about resonances and vibrations.
    SP10MKII Version Five
    Solid Stainless Steel Legs have threads at both ends and are bolted into the sp10 top plate as well as the solid plinth/platform. The armpod is bolted into the plinth. The plinth is then isolated by the AT-616 Pneumatic footers.
    19 lb Solid Brass Pod
    1 inch Diameter Solid Stainless Steel.

    Previously I had the SP10 MKII in a heavy 7 layer plinth. Birch ply + one mdf layer. This SP10MKII came from a private studio.



    This is the second ET2 I own and it is a high pressure manifold

    Detailed tips and observations here.



    http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1325551242&&&/Eminent-Technology-ET-2-Tonearm-Owners
    • Jean Nantais 100 LB Two Tonearm Custom Lenco
    Jean Nantais Custom turntable.
    Includes:
    100 Pounds - Veneered - Two Tonearm Plinth
    Lenco L75 motor and top plate rebuilt to his standards.
    Reference model spindle, bearing thrust plate.
    Bonded Metacrylate mat
    Bearpaw footers.
    IEC outlet.
    • ************ SOME NOTABLE MEMORIES **************************
    For me some notable equipment. Currently stored or sold-indicated as such.
    • McAlister OTL 195
    OTL195 There is a review contained in my system thread. In comparisons to good Solid State Class A and Push Pull amps they were like driving a 911 but you are limited to 1st gear when pushed. Very fast and punchy. But lack the bass that push pull deliver on. Get the bass right and everything else comes into place. These amps are designed around the needs of Acoustats. My Acoustats are in the shared room upstairs. I no longer own the OTL's.
    • Fidelity Research FR64s
    Gimbal Pivot Arm. I found excellent build quality and a nicely implemented antiskate system. I also found a low frequency resonance that accentuated the bass. A warmer sounding tonearm. It was in my second room with the second ET2 not the ET 2.5. Whenever I started a session with the FR64s it was always nice. But curiosity would always prevail and I would switch over to the ET2. It would always remain there. This happened more times than I can remember. I am not a tonearm collector so it was sold to raise funds for another project. I am in agreement with what Cartridge designer Johnathan Carr had to say about it. http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1243274438&openusid&zzJcarr&4&5#Jcarr
    • Modded VPI's
    Thread driven TNT and a JMW 12 using rollerblock jrs. SOLD
    • Acoustat Spectra 33
    Acoustat Spectra 33
    • Eminent Technology LFT 8a
    Set up in midfield - soundstage at both sides of the room. So the speaker shown is the left or the right one depending on side of room you are on. Excellent Magnetic Planar Hybrid Woofer Speaker. Very natural sounding but difficult to drive.
    • ****************AUDIOPHILE FUN + ET 2 TONEARM MODS ************** ****
    From here down are some inserts from past audiophile fun. 
    Also contained here is important information on the ET2, 2.5  tonearms as well as some of the mods I have done to them. If any questions on any of them let me know. No Holds Barred tonearm. User needs to be mechanically inclined and be willing to read ET2 manual instructions for proper setup of this tonearm. If bought on the used market a friend that is familiar with the tonearm for proper inspection of condition is important. 
     Audiogon ET2 thread 

     http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1325551242&&&/Eminent-Technology-ET-2-Tonearm-
    • COMPARING TURNTABLES (Jan 2010)
    Goldilocks and the Three Turntables . See Sept 20, 2019 post comment below on my virtual system for findings / details. 

    Belt Drive (converted to thread) VPI TNT Idler - Jean Nantais Custom 100 Lb Direct Drive - SP10MKII When compared in the same room(nearfield), with same gear, tonearm and cartridge, same time, differences are revealed. Out into rooms on their own, this is not as noticeable as our ears deal with different room acoustics. ymmv
    • OTL VERSUS PUSH PULL Tube Amps
    In room comparison.
    • Thread Drive Comparisons
    2010 testing out different threads. Fabricland became a favorite place of mine.
    • ET 2 Tonearm Proper Bass Management - ATB
    According to Bruce
    My ears agree
    • ET 2.0 Manifold Before and After Cleaning
    Pictures courtesty of a friend.
    • ET2 VTA Block Destroyed
    Thigpen Genius showing VTA Block rack of teeth and worm gear. This one was abused. If you are buying a used one ensure the rack of teeth seen in the pic are uniform with no wear and baldspots. This is an indicator that the VTA block was misused and rigidly tightened stripping the teeth. The bolt was tightened to a point that shattered the CF.
    • ET 2.0 2.5 Tonearm VTA Block Torquing Procedure
    VTA Block - Ensure each of the four bolts is torqued equally or the patented VTA system will be off. This procedures takes just minutes and should be done off table or you will throw your alignment off. Once bolts are torqued the manifold housing can be mounted to the pillar post and the rest of the setup completed.
    • ET 2.0, 2.5 Tonearm Magnesium versus Aluminum Armtubes
    Mag - MC Cartridges Aluminum - MM Catridges The middle ground is the Carbon Fibre arm tube. MM and MC.
    • ET 2.0, 2.5 Custom Aluminum Joint - aka GOOSENECK
    Black one is the stock one. Sourced from Richard Krebs
    • ET Tonearm Counterweight Bolt Mod
    Get a longer counterweight bolt especially if you like to use heavier cartridges. The stock ET2 bolt is on the right. The longer bolt weighs a bit more, holds more lead weights and allows you to use less lead further out on the I Beam. This provides for the highest vertical mass which is really important with the ET2 as it has medium to high horizontal mass. a 4 - 1 horizontal to vertical ratio. In my system higher vertical mass means cleaner, less resonant, overall better bass.
    The brass rings are meant for balancing only. I prefer to use Blue Tack for this purpose.
    • Et2 Leaf Spring Mods Single, Double, Triple
    General Cartridge Guideline 
     Single Leaf Spring - High compliance 
     Double - Medium Compliance 
     Triple - Low compliance
    • ET2 Pedestal Custom 3
    Solid Brass Arm Pod
    • Koaltar Tweak
    my pal 6 months, 79 lbs.
    • Kitty Tweak Bengal
    a real sweetheart
    • RCA Victor Dog
    I introduce Lucky. He is a mixed breed Jack Russell/Chihuahua mix breed. He will be acting as the Victor RCA dog, 

    The original Victor RCA dog.  
    He was named Nipper and was born in 1884 in Bristol, England, and died in September 1895. He was a mixed-breed dog and probably part Jack Russell Terrier, although some sources suggest that he was a Smooth Fox Terrier, or "part Bull Terrier". He was named Nipper because he would bite the backs of visitors' legs.

Comments 667

Center
Owner
Hi Eric - would never have figured out your name from Bdp24 :^)

Firstly what is very important here to me and I thought about it when u said this.

I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric
I appreciate real experiences over all else. it holds a lot of value to me. This thread only a couple years old now and before Audiogon buggered it all up last spring, showed me the views. Back last spring was near 1/2 million views ....i think. So I believe your experiences are of interest to me, and others I am sure. Especially since you show a lot of passion and are not tied to the Audiophilia Biz. :^)

Eric ...Pictures are a real asset. Especially speakers in a room ! Like a thousand words ..... Every experienced audiophile can look at speakers/type in a room and has a good idea how it sounds. Now regarding stacked Quads.

For those on this thread unfamiliar with Quad 57's, and stacked quads I attach some links for reference.

Please notice the positioning of the bottom panels on the first two links compared to last three. The last three links - the bottom panels are setup like stock. On stock form - single pair - this produces music to a listener that imitates sitting in a balcony. So I would expect that the last 3 setups fill in more bottom to top.
As you tilt the ground panel forward. Like putting a piece of wood under the third back leg on a stock 57 - imaging rises. You are no longer in the balcony hearing the performance.

Stacked Pic 1

Stacked Pic 2

Stacked Pic 3

Stacked Pic 4

Stacked Pic 5

Re: Stacked Quads - Peter Walker said in the interview that I linked here that the stacked setup gives 6db more in the bass - and 3 db more everywhere else.
So...
They don't play any lower, and it is not a straight linear upgrade to the original single 57 output.
The prominent midrange where the magic is - loses some of its magic when Quads are stacked. The numbers support this too - 6db versus 3 db. This is just my opinion on it. And only hearing a setup like this once. Now it could of been the room or condition of one or more panels. Too many variables. Readers can see if you look at the links that it is quite the effort to do; Stack Quads 57's. What you are not seeing is the time it took to restore the panels. Very few panels for sale are 100%.
If they were the owner would be hanging on to them. imo

For me right now its just not worth acquiring a second pair and sending them to Wayne Picquet for restore. Effort, time and cost. This is mainly because I am able to play my pair in my space (a bigger space than most of those links from what I can tell) with one RM10 at 90 db AVERAGE measured at the chair if I want . This is 10 more db than normal for me with no issues. The sub comes in at a low 50 hz. More on this in a bit.

57's need to be set up in a live room. This is a total opposite to my Room A and experience with John Bowers era matrix 800 series. Those take work and knowledge on room tuning to get right. And fwiw - I am not impressed that B&W unleashes speakers like this to the unsuspecting audiophile. Studios know how to set them up. Audiophiles new to the brand with cash to burn do not. The John Bowers era was all about 2 channel music. Not a fan of the post - John Bowers era.

Re:DM70
Bdp24 - To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads!
Eric....To be honest :^) , if you have these two speakers staring at you, in your own space. I can't imagine any red hot blooded audiophile - NOT - trying it out and hearing for themselves. Room B has always been an audio play room of sorts for me. This experiment lasted 3-4 days. Switching polarities on the woofers helped,if I recall?, but am not sure now. The experiment let me hear it for myself.

The DM70 on their own absolutely need to be set up high. The panels at your ear level. This means a lift of one foot minimum. They have a resonating - non matrix box. Up high also makes them less boomy with more bass note articulation. They should also be setup in a larger live room. They don't play any lower than 40 hz just like the Quad 57's, but their lower end is obviously more fuller. So depending on the music you can get away without a sub.

Re: OB sub
Bdp24 - Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile.
Yeah, I got this message and it is cool. All those in the audio biz all need/have to play within their own silos. he was however helpful.

Re: RM10
Thanks for the insight into the RM10. You have a unique relationship with Roger. I found him very elusive when emailing - I gave up. He's just too far away. It's too bad you haven't heard a single pair of 57's with the RM10 to hear how much output / quality I am getting.

Bdp24 - Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!
*********************************************
Eric - Sorry for the asterisks - But wanted u to see this in this post - post getting long - what else is new !
Consider something here as I believe it is a big factor in play. The OTL's I owned were 200 wpc. They could not compete in the bass dept with the push pull RM9 in the bass dept. i believe (using OTL's) is a big factor in having to set a higher crossover on subs with 57's. I base this on my own experience and your comments on recommending the use of 80hz and 120 hz crossover points. The bass I found is just more lean with OTL's. I would never go that high a crossover in my room with the Quads and sub.

You may prove my above theory in your own room only, by borrowing 1 or 2 RM10's from your buddy Roger. :^) .....:^)......:^)
And this needs to be done in your room only for a direct comparison.

*********************************************

Bdp24 - the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally..
I can position any way I want in Room B. The 57's are 7 feet out from the front wall right now. I am getting really good results with just one nearfield / conventional sub. The brown chair you see in the pic I linked has seen every side of the space. But the overall music results are best as in the pic. I wish I could get rid of that house support pole - like move it to the left a bit.
The brown chair as pictured - for a nearfield sub, has boundaries to the the right of it, That is where the sub is. The staircase, which would be a back wall to it. To the left is open. I realize those OB subs would allow me to try positioning within range of the speakers themselves. But right now Eric, unless you have tried this with a nearfield sub/s, and can provide me with some direct comparison insight; I am staying on this nearfield track for now. Bringing anything new in at this time requires selling existing stuff. That gives one patience and incentive to research this through. If I wasn't getting excellent results with a nearfield sub it would be a different story.

Cheers Chris
.

ct0517

Center
Owner
Hi Eric - would never have figured out your name from Bdp24 :^)

Firstly what is very important here to me and I thought about it when u said this.

I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric
I appreciate real experiences over all else. it holds a lot of value to me. This thread only a couple years old now and before Audiogon buggered it all up last spring, showed me the views. Back last spring was near 1/2 million views ....i think. So I believe your experiences are of interest to me, and others I am sure. Especially since you show a lot of passion and are not tied to the Audiophilia Biz. :^)

Eric ...Pictures are a real asset. Especially speakers in a room ! Like a thousand words ..... Every experienced audiophile can look at speakers/type in a room and has a good idea how it sounds. Now regarding stacked Quads.

For those on this thread unfamiliar with Quad 57's, and stacked quads I attach some links for reference.

Please notice the positioning of the bottom panels on the first two links compared to last three. The last three links - the bottom panels are setup like stock. On stock form - single pair - this produces music to a listener that imitates sitting in a balcony. So I would expect that the last 3 setups fill in more bottom to top.
As you tilt the ground panel forward. Like putting a piece of wood under the third back leg on a stock 57 - imaging rises. You are no longer in the balcony hearing the performance.

Stacked Pic 1

Stacked Pic 2

Stacked Pic 3

Stacked Pic 4

Stacked Pic 5

Re: Stacked Quads - Peter Walker said in the interview that I linked here that the stacked setup gives 6db more in the bass - and 3 db more everywhere else.
So...
They don't play any lower, and it is not a straight linear upgrade to the original single 57 output.
The prominent midrange where the magic is - loses some of its magic when Quads are stacked. The numbers support this too - 6db versus 3 db. This is just my opinion on it. And only hearing a setup like this once. Now it could of been the room or condition of one or more panels. Too many variables. Readers can see if you look at the links that it is quite the effort to do; Stack Quads 57's. What you are not seeing is the time it took to restore the panels. Very few panels for sale are 100%.
If they were the owner would be hanging on to them. imo

For me right now its just not worth acquiring a second pair and sending them to Wayne Picquet for restore. Effort, time and cost. This is mainly because I am able to play my pair in my space (a bigger space than most of those links from what I can tell) with one RM10 at 90 db AVERAGE measured at the chair if I want . This is 10 more db than normal for me with no issues. The sub comes in at a low 50 hz. More on this in a bit.

57's need to be set up in a live room. This is a total opposite to my Room A and experience with John Bowers era matrix 800 series. Those take work and knowledge on room tuning to get right. And fwiw - I am not impressed that B&W unleashes speakers like this to the unsuspecting audiophile. Studios know how to set them up. Audiophiles new to the brand with cash to burn do not. The John Bowers era was all about 2 channel music. Not a fan of the post - John Bowers era.

Re:DM70
Bdp24 - To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads!
Eric....To be honest :^) , if you have these two speakers staring at you, in your own space. I can't imagine any red hot blooded audiophile - NOT - trying it out and hearing for themselves. Room B has always been an audio play room of sorts for me. This experiment lasted 3-4 days. Switching polarities on the woofers helped,if I recall?, but am not sure now. The experiment let me hear it for myself.

The DM70 on their own absolutely need to be set up high. The panels at your ear level. This means a lift of one foot minimum. They have a resonating - non matrix box. Up high also makes them less boomy with more bass note articulation. They should also be setup in a larger live room. They don't play any lower than 40 hz just like the Quad 57's, but their lower end is obviously more fuller. So depending on the music you can get away without a sub.

Re: OB sub
Bdp24 - Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile.
Yeah, I got this message and it is cool. All those in the audio biz all need/have to play within their own silos. he was however helpful.

Re: RM10
Thanks for the insight into the RM10. You have a unique relationship with Roger. I found him very elusive when emailing - I gave up. He's just too far away. It's too bad you haven't heard a single pair of 57's with the RM10 to hear how much output / quality I am getting.

Bdp24 - Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!
*********************************************
Eric - Sorry for the asterisks - But wanted u to see this in this post - post getting long - what else is new !
Consider something here as I believe it is a big factor in play. The OTL's I owned were 200 wpc. They could not compete in the bass dept with the push pull RM9 in the bass dept. i believe (using OTL's) is a big factor in having to set a higher crossover on subs with 57's. I base this on my own experience and your comments on recommending the use of 80hz and 120 hz crossover points. The bass I found is just more lean with OTL's. I would never go that high a crossover in my room with the Quads and sub.

You may prove my above theory in your own room only, by borrowing 1 or 2 RM10's from your buddy Roger. :^) .....:^)......:^)
And this needs to be done in your room only for a direct comparison.

*********************************************

Bdp24 - the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally..
I can position any way I want in Room B. The 57's are 7 feet out from the front wall right now. I am getting really good results with just one nearfield / conventional sub. The brown chair you see in the pic I linked has seen every side of the space. But the overall music results are best as in the pic. I wish I could get rid of that house support pole - like move it to the left a bit.
The brown chair as pictured - for a nearfield sub, has boundaries to the the right of it, That is where the sub is. The staircase, which would be a back wall to it. To the left is open. I realize those OB subs would allow me to try positioning within range of the speakers themselves. But right now Eric, unless you have tried this with a nearfield sub/s, and can provide me with some direct comparison insight; I am staying on this nearfield track for now. Bringing anything new in at this time requires selling existing stuff. That gives one patience and incentive to research this through. If I wasn't getting excellent results with a nearfield sub it would be a different story.

Cheers Chris
.

ct0517

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Let me address your concerns Chris, all well founded.

- Yes, the OB/Dipole sub needs to be away from the wall behind it, as do all Dipoles, including Quads. They can be right up against a side wall though, or on the floor if placed horizontally.

- B & W DM70! Now there's a speaker I haven't thought of in years. In '71 I heard my first ESL's, the Infinity Servo-Static 1. I also heard two speakers with ESL tweeters, the Infinity 2000A and ESS Tran-Static I. Thus began my love affair with ESL's, which continues to this day.

Having heard those speakers, I started planning the purchase of my first perfectionist system. By the time I had the dough, Audio Research and Magnepan had made it to the West Coast. I happened to make my first visit to the new ARC dealer in my area (Audio Arts in Livermore, CA, owned by Walter Davies, now the maker and seller of the excellent Last LP care products) on the day that Bill Johnson was delivering and setting up his complete ARC system, including bi-amped (with D-51 and D-75 amps) Magneplanar Tympani I-U loudspeakers. Over the next few months I went to listen to the Maggies at the shop, wherein Walt had a pair of the DM70's as well. I bought the Tympani's (and the ARC electronics), but remember the B & W's well. To be honest, I can't imagine why you would be using the woofer in that speaker as a sub for Quads! Let me tell ya, you are in for a pleasant surprise when you hear the OB/Dipole sub (or a Rythmik)!

- Danny Richie has found a pair of the OB/Dipole subs to produce about the same output as one of the sealed F12's. So yes, you are giving up 3dB by going OB/Dipole. Then why do people do it? I have both a pair of GR Research OB/Dipole subs and a pair of Rythmik F15HP subs, and though they have much in common, there are also differences. You will find all of the following on the GR Research AudioCircle Forum, but it is buried in a lot of other information. So let me condense it for you:

Danny Richie is a loudspeaker designer specializing in Open Baffle design, selling his designs as kits to the DIY crowd. Guys who make not only their own speakers, but often their own electronics as well. His designs are mostly of high-sensitivity, and his customers are into low-powered SET tube and Class A SS amps to power Danny's speakers, the Pass DIY designs being very popular. Danny is a firm believer in high-quality passive parts, offering x/o upgrades to commercial loudspeakers using them. So Danny is coming from a perfectionist, no compromise, high performance point of view.

He had been a long-time fan of not just OB speakers, but OB subs as well. OB subs are not new, and are favored by some, Danny included, for their non-room loading nature (a result of their Dipole design), and clean unboomy character (no enclosure!). He learned of a subwoofer designer, conveniently also located in Texas, who had a new idea that he had patented, which he had named Direct Servo Feedback. The designer's name was Brian Ding and his company Rythmik Audio, and Danny got in touch with him. Danny's creative mind envisioned that an Open Baffle sub combined with Brian's DSF design could produce a new standard in bass reproduction. The two put their heads together, and we can now enjoy the fruits of their skills and labors.

But here's what you have to realize: Though the OB/Dipole sub uses the Rythmik plate including the Direct Servo Feedback circuit that controls the 12" woofers in the sub, the sub is a Danny Richie design. Enrico is of course not going to recommend the sub to you (or even mention it), or be able to advise you on it's use. He is involved with Rythmik, a completely separate operation with a different target audience and customer bass (largely Home Theater, most definitely not audiophile. Most Rythmik customers power their mass-market speakers with receivers, like Denon). Brian Ding himself is not really that much enamored with the OB sub. Upon hearing it, he admitted to not quite knowing what to make of it, finding it to sound very "lean". Now, the Rythmik subs themselves have been described as sounding lean when compared to "normal" subs, even very famous, expensive, "Class A" rated ones. Compared to them, a Rythmik is superior in degree, but not in kind. The OB/Dipole sub is different in kind, as different from a Rythmik sub as a Rythmik is from all the thick/heavy/boomy subs everyone has heard and found unacceptable for use with panel speakers. The same way that an electrostatic loudspeaker or any other dipole is different from Any and all box speakers.

The GR Research OB/Dipole sub does not sound like a sub. When added to a high-transparency speaker, it does not expose it's presence, but rather blends invisibly. You do not hear it as a separate entity, but only hear the bottom octave of music evaporate when you turn it off! It makes your speaker sound like the bottom octave of missing sound has been restored, not that a sub has been tacked on the bottom of the speaker, trailing along behind the music like a caboose. Now I ask you, is that worth giving up 3dB for?!

- The Rythmik plate amp is loaded with controls that will allow you to add the sub to your Quads without giving up any of their sound quality. If you want to x/o at 80Hz using a 2nd order x/o you can. If you prefer 120Hz with a 4th order, you can do that as well. Or any combination of the two. You can locate the subs anywhere you want, as the plate amp's continuously variable 0-180 degree phase knob simulates physical distance, and can get the speaker and sub in phase at the x/o frequency no matter where each is located.

- There is actually one person making speakers that include the OB/Dipole woofer system, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems. He has been making Open Baffle speakers on 2-1/4" thick MDF panels, using the GR Research 12" woofers and Rythmik DSF plate amp for the bass section. The midrange an tweeters he was using (BG Neo) are currently unavailable, but Ric may be willing to make you a pair of subs. He does not, however, make it as a W- or H-frame, but as a flat baffle. So there may be more low-end cancellation and roll-off in his version of the sub. You can check him out on his website.

- Here's my experience with the Music Reference RM-10: Roger Modjeski gave a seminar in the early 90's at Brooks Berdan's shop in Monrovia, CA. In it, Roger discussed a new design he was still working on, which became the RM-10. He mentioned that the Quad was one speaker he had been using in fine-tuning the circuit. After the talk I approached Roger, telling him I was looking for amplification for my stacked Quads. I asked him if he advised me to wait for the RM-10's design to be finalized and put into production, when I could get a pair of them, one for each pair of Quads, or to get one of the already available RM9 amps. He told me that because he was a believer in high-overload margins, he would go with the RM9. I pressed him further, pointing out that one RM-10 would have more power than a pair of Quads would be able to accept without damage to the panels from arcing, that the combined insanely low impedance of the Quads at high frequencies was even lower in a stacked pair, and that lower-powered amps, all else being equal, usually sound better than higher-powered ones. That didn't persuade him.

A couple of years later, Roger gave another seminar at Brooks shop (Brooks loved Rogers stuff, selling it as his "reasonably" priced tube line, selling VTL to his wealthy customers). When Roger saw me, he came over and said my questions had lead him to reconsider his position on the choice, having seen the wisdom in my thoughts on the subject. Yes, he did now recommend a pair of RM-10's. Unfortunately, I had already bought an Atma-Sphere M60!

Well Chris, I hope I haven't overstayed my welcome, and that at least some of this rant will be of use (or at least interest!) to you---Eric.

bdp24

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Center
Owner
Halcro - Why don't you contact Richard Vandersteen about the suitability of the 2Wq for the Quads or John at Audio Connection who is an expert.

Hi Henry (Halcro)

There are a number of Vandersteen dealers in Ontario. I spoke with a couple of them today. There is a design issue with the 2wq for my setup that I was not aware of. The 2wq's require you to make the crossover that comes with the 2wq the ALPHA. Meaning outputs coming out of the preamp need to go through the 2wq first; then on to your main amplifier/s and main speakers. I want the Quad 57's running full with the Music Reference RM10 amp. The sub/s running parallel to fill in the lowest octave only when needed. Unfortunately this is not something one can try before you buy.

Also ...my experiences with Rel, ML and HSU have been that the sound is not as good - when your amp that powers the main speakers are receiving signals from an extra box** , unless that box was designed for them specifically - in this case a Music Reference RM10.

** External crossover's, equalizers, Bass Alignment Filters's , etc...

Whatever else happens going forward will need to work in parallel mode. Preamp has two low level outputs. One L-R for the MR RM10 amp and Quad 57's and one extra L-R for one or two subs.

Bdp24 Yeah Chris (saw your name!)
You can call me Chris, you can call me Chrissy. If we meet in person you can call me Christie - but then you better bring chocolate chip cookies. :^)
Some are comfortable with names, others feel a need for their moniker only - I am good either way.

Bdp24 - have you ever heard 57's with a Music Reference RM10 ?

I don't know how you feel about this idea Chris, but the width of a W- or H-frame is around 16". The OB/Dipole sub can actually be used horizontally (laid on it's side), and a Quad speaker set on top of it, the sub thus becoming a 16" high stand for the speaker.
Bdp - Short answer is no. And you are reminding me of an experiment I did which was really illuminating for me. So I share it here.

Dm70 Quad 57 Combo

The DM70 is left unplugged making only the woofer active. It started out right under the 57 (looked kinda funky...no ?)and gradually moved forward until the bass wave was aligned with the 57's - to my ears. The problem is the crossover for the dm70 is 500 hz and intruded into the Quad's space. The woofer is designed to work with its own ESL panel. The ESL panel which btw was made for B&W by Janszen. .

1-06-15: Bdp24
Oh, I neglected to address your desire to fill in only the bottom of the Quad, without encroaching on the it's sound above that. A well-justified concern Chris, and the inability of almost all subs to do just that is exactly why most Quad lovers choose to just live without deep bass, the loss of too much of the Quad's sound being too high a price to pay to get it.

Well I think I have it figured out. I need some time with my wife out for some fun test runs to really test it out. Maybe this weekend.

Also I found out from Rhythmik that you need at least a pair (4 drivers and two amplifiers) to get the same output as one F12.
The OB sub is not good for near field placement. They need a lot of room around them to work properly.

Just sayin....

Cheers Chris

ct0517

Displaying posts 101 - 125 of 667 in total