My wife is awesome :)

YES! Those are the ones I prescribed... They are “noise cancelling,”...right? ;)

No, they're standard headphones using planar technology, very highly regarded among mix and mastering engineers.

Back in the 80s, I had a pair of Magneplanar speakers utilizing this technology, and they were fantastically accurate and revealing -- if you were close enough to them.

However, in a room, planar technology has a drawback: the speakers are dipoles, so they radiate sound behind as well as in front of the speaker. As a result, room reflections can be a problem that interferes with accuracy. That's fine for a hi-fi system, no one's going to be upset if the reflections from your room compromise the frequency balance, but in a studio it's deadly.

In headphones, where the "environment" is controlled by the design of the earcups, this problem of planar drivers can be solved, and the advantages of planar technology, such as transient speed and accuracy, can be useful in critical listening.

Mixing and mastering require accuracy. My studio is an acoustically treated room and it's pretty large (33 x 14), but it's not designed originally as a studio, so the acoustics aren't as perfect as I'd like. I have some excellent phones, and use Sonarworks to EQ a flat response, but typical headphone drivers, even good ones, have limitations.

So I'm thinking about getting a pair of the Audeze.

Hmmm. I’m getting stuck on the “need” part of this... I’ll just say this. It’s worth the trouble to google her. She’s kinda cute.

Bah! It's not like she's going to call me and ask me out, so I don't care.

"You don't appreciate beauty for its own sake, Les?"

"No. I appreciate beauty that wines me and dines me and buys me flowers."

"Has that ever happened to you?"

"Not really."
 
Bah! It's not like she's going to call me and ask me out, so I don't care.

"You don't appreciate beauty for its own sake, Les?"

"No. I appreciate beauty that wines me and dines me and buys me flowers."

"Has that ever happened to you?"

"Not really."
That’s it... next time Heather calls me, I’m giving her your contact info.
 
No, they're standard headphones using planar technology, very highly regarded among mix and mastering engineers.

:):) Yeah, I know. The emphasis on “noise cancelling” was a joke in reference to your previous remarks about your wife. :):)

If you recall my previous posts about being into some higher end audio equipment in my younger days, I heard several different models of the Magnapan speakers on more than one occasion. They could sound incredible but boy did they require massive amounts of power. Least efficient speakers I ever heard. And, while truly special in some ways, not dynamic enough for a “rocker audiophile.”
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:):) Yeah, I know. The emphasis on “noise cancelling” was a joke in reference to your previous remarks about your wife. :):)

If you recall my previous posts about being into some higher end audio equipment in my younger days, I heard several different models of the Magnapan speakers on more than one occasion. They could sound incredible but boy did they require massive amounts of power. Least efficient speakers I ever heard. And, while truly special in some ways, not dynamic enough for a “rocker audiophile.”

I noticed that you stopped short of mentioning duct tape. :eek:
 
:):) Yeah, I know. The emphasis on “noise cancelling” was a joke in reference to your previous remarks about your wife. :):)

If you recall my previous posts about being into some higher end audio equipment in my younger days, I heard several different models of the Magnapan speakers on more than one occasion. They could sound incredible but boy did they require massive amounts of power. Least efficient speakers I ever heard. And, while truly special in some ways, not dynamic enough for a “rocker audiophile.”

If they were powered by a 250 Watt per channel Krell KSA Class A amp, which is what I used, they were pretty darn dynamic speakers.

Mine were set up in a large, two-story living room, and they still kicked out the jams. I had no issues with volume or dynamic range. In fact, they were loud and dynamic enough that I could play along to music on my grand piano, and believe me, the piano got loud enough to drown out most hi fi rigs.

Krell made a hell of an amp. When I set up my first studio, I moved the amp into my studio and powered B&W studio monitors with it.

My old hifi rig consisted of the Krell and the Magneplanars, a Harman-Kardon Citation Eleven preamp (which my brother still uses), a Thorens turntable with an SME arm, and so on. I had a Nakamichi cassette deck at the time, with Stax electrostatic headphones, and that was the entire system. Wasn't a lot of stuff, but it did the job.

I didn't buy CDs until the early 90s, they sounded terrible at first.

Forgive me for making jokes at my wife's expense. I'm like Henny Youngman. "Take my wife, please." Actually, she's pretty awesome.

As a long time audiophile, you might remember these speakers that I also had at the time: Ohm Fs. They were pyramid shaped speakers that radiated sound all around the room with a very unusual upside-down aluminum driver. They sounded unbelievable. The '70s and '80s were big hi fi times for me.
 
Last edited:
If they were powered by a 250 Watt per channel Krell KSA Class A amp, which is what I used, they were pretty darn dynamic speakers.

Mine were set up in a large, two-story living room, and they still kicked out the jams. I had no issues with volume or dynamic range. In fact, they were loud and dynamic enough that I could play along to music on my grand piano, and believe me, the piano got loud enough to drown out most hi fi rigs.

Krell made a hell of an amp. When I set up my first studio, I moved the amp into my studio and powered B&W studio monitors with it.

My old hifi rig consisted of the Krell and the Magneplanars, a Harman-Kardon Citation Eleven preamp (which my brother still uses), a Thorens turntable with an SME arm, and so on. I had a Nakamichi cassette deck at the time, with Stax electrostatic headphones, and that was the entire system. Wasn't a lot of stuff, but it did the job.

I didn't buy CDs until the early 90s, they sounded terrible at first.

Forgive me for making jokes at my wife's expense. I'm like Henny Youngman. "Take my wife, please." Actually, she's pretty awesome.

As a long time audiophile, you might remember these speakers that I also had at the time: Ohm Fs. They were pyramid shaped speakers that radiated sound all around the room with a very unusual upside-down aluminum driver. They sounded unbelievable. The '70s and '80s were big hi fi times for me.


Yeah, that’s about what it would take to make them get very loud. MASSIVE amounts of power. I heard them with huge Krell mono blocks. Those things were SPACE HEATERS! LOL. I remember the massive heat coming off those things.

And yes, I remember after hearing multiple high end systems with Sota Star Saphire turntables and all the other things, the first time I heard the “perfect sound forever” CDs and I just about ran from the room screaming. The guy at Stereo Lab trying to convince me I just wasn’t used to hearing flat high end. I said “no, that sounds horrible.” It was dull, lifeless and VERY synthetic sounding compared to the high end analog systems I was used too.

And yes, of course I was just playing along with your joking about your wife.

I remember those OHM speakers. Saw them but never did get to hear them.
 
Yeah, that’s about what it would take to make them get very loud. MASSIVE amounts of power. I heard them with huge Krell mono blocks. Those things were SPACE HEATERS! LOL. I remember the massive heat coming off those things.

And yes, I remember after hearing multiple high end systems with Sota Star Saphire turntables and all the other things, the first time I heard the “perfect sound forever” CDs and I just about ran from the room screaming. The guy at Stereo Lab trying to convince me I just wasn’t used to hearing flat high end. I said “no, that sounds horrible.” It was dull, lifeless and VERY synthetic sounding compared to the high end analog systems I was used too.

And yes, of course I was just playing along with your joking about your wife.

I remember those OHM speakers. Saw them but never did get to hear them.

I was once an interesting person with several interests, not the garrulous old studio rat/curmudgeon I am today.
 
I was once an interesting person with several interests, not the garrulous old studio rat/curmudgeon I am today.

Speaking of the Magnapan’s, some guys in the Nati were experimenting with them crossed over to subs. The Magnapans and electrostatic speakers (which the Magnaplanars are not) are extremely fast and incredibly coherent (all frequencies coming from one driver) but because of their dipole design, it was tough to get deep bottom out of them. In fact, even the 6’ tall Magnapans I heard, in a complete live end dead end room, didn’t do rock music well, even with huge solid state amps. So guys were trying to cross them over and use subs with them. To me, it rocked more but never worked. Just like some of the Infinity speakers at the time that had incredibly transparent ribbon or electrostatic tweeters and mid ranges and crossed over to cone woofers, the time alignment always seemed off and there was something about the tone that “gave away” that it was coming from various types of drivers.

I’ve often wondered if that could be remedied now, given the huge advances in the digital technologies for time and phase alignment, etc. But, there is a video circulating currently, where someone with the ability to test it properly “proves” that the popular Adam speakers are not properly aligned... so the advantage of the incredibly quick and transparent ribbon tweeters is somewhat lost by their lack of perfect phase and time alignment.

How did you get me on this stuff? LOL
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Speaking of the Magnapan’s, some guys in the Nati were experimenting with them crossed over to subs. The Magnapans and electrostatic speakers (which the Magnaplanars are not) are extremely fast and incredibly coherent (all frequencies coming from one driver) but because of their dipole design, it was tough to get deep bottom out of them. In fact, even the 6’ tall Magnapans I heard, in a complete live end dead end room, didn’t do rock music well, even with huge solid state amps. So guys were trying to cross them over and use subs with them. To me, it rocked more but never worked. Just like some of the Infinity speakers at the time that had incredibly transparent ribbon or electrostatic tweeters and mid ranges and crossed over to cone woofers, the time alignment always seemed off and there was something about the tone that “gave away” that it was coming from various types of drivers.

I’ve often wondered if that could be remedied now, given the huge advances in the digital technologies for time and phase alignment, etc. But, there is a video circulating currently, where someone with the ability to test it properly “proves” that the popular Adam speakers are not properly aligned... so the advantage of the incredibly quick and transparent ribbon tweeters is somewhat lost by their lack of perfect phase and time alignment.

How did you get me on this stuff? LOL


Hey, I get you on this stuff because you're interested in audio! ;)

The Heil ribbon tweeters ADAM uses were first used on ESS Heil AMT speakers starting around '1974 (you probably remember them). They had a wonderful high end, but a narrow sweet spot. However, they led me to the idea of trying new types of drivers, and were actually a big reason that I started to experiment with unusual drivers in speakers such as the OHM Fs and Magneplanars in my own rig back in the day. When I was in college I even had Bose 901s; though they weren't as accurate, they were great fun paired with a 50 WPC McIintosh I had at the time.

I had a good moment remembering my first audition of the Heil AMT Tweeter in the ESS speakers during that time when I first heard the ADAM monitors. I was really excited about them!

I didn't have a problem with the low end on my Magneplanars (they were the 6' tall ones). However, one factor is that my room was a good 35' long, which allowed plenty of low end extension. Since a 40Hz bass wavelength is 28' long, the longer the room, the better for low end reproduction without doubling and other bass artifacts or cancellation.

Accurate bass reproduction is largely dependent on how the wavelength operates in a room. If you have a smaller room than one with a 28' length from front to back wall, the lowest frequencies tend to start cancelling one another out because of phase cancellation and other issues. What most audiophiles don't realize is that bass extension is as much a function of acoustics as it is the gear.

This is especially the case in dipole transducers, in my opinion, since the room reflections from the back of the speakers mean a lot.

Most people don't realize that much of the bass they're hearing is what's doubled an octave up, which gives the impression of more bass. I felt that the Magneplanar speakers had more accurate bass than I was able to get from traditional drivers. That doesn't mean, however, that it was more entertaining, bass!

All that said, once I began working in the studio, I realized that I was getting a more effective presentation in the near field of the monitors, and that creating a good near-field zone that eliminated as much of the room as possible was going to give me the most accurate results. That meant using monitors that were front-radiators with adequate dispersion in the higher frequencies to create a wide sweet spot. For some time, this was the B&W 805s and 801s, and later the Genelec 8040s.

Fortunately, I've always had studios with at least 30 feet between the front and rear walls, so bass propagation hasn't been a problem, though reflections can still create null points at certain spots in the room that I treat with bass traps. I do still experiment with speaker placement and room treatment.

Still, my mix room isn't perfect, and I use headphones and software like Sonarworks and the Waves NX/Abbey Road/Ocean Way rooms to double check for low end issues (which they do quite well).
 
Hey, I get you on this stuff because you're interested in audio!
Yes, it’s been a while since I was serious about it but I enjoy talking about it with someone who knows what they’re talking about.

And yes, those Heil ribbon tweeters... boy they could have the sweetest most detailed treble you ever heard, but yes, lacked dispersion and were harder to integrate with other types of drivers into a coherent package. Still, they had a certain something... which is why many people fall for the Adam’s.

Some of the sweetest sounding systems I ever heard were Conrad Johnson pre-amps and amps with some speakers a guy was DIYing based on Strathern ribbon tweeters and mids, and various cone woofers. And he was hanging the tweeter and mid ribbons, to avoid vibrations.

That and some electrostatic and hybrid electrostatic speakers were some of the most incredible systems I ever heard.

I leaned more towards Thiele and Vandersteen towers at the time though, overall, because of the type of music I listened too. :)
 
I leaned more towards Thiele and Vandersteen towers at the time though, overall, because of the type of music I listened too. :)

My brother in law has a set of the Vandersteens to this day. Though his listening room is really too small for them, he listens at such low levels that I don't understand why he bothered to get them!

I think the Vandersteens were a decade or so later than some of the stuff we've mentioned, but they were/are very fine speakers!
 
Back
Top