Philharmonic Audio - Dennis Murphy - Page 22 - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > Audio > Speakers > Philharmonic Audio - Dennis Murphy

Speakers

Eternal Velocity's Avatar Eternal Velocity
08:46 AM Liked: 61
post #631 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,397
Joined: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturn94 View Post

With regards to the Parasound Halo recommendation, I'm curious why you recommend a Halo series amp over the Classic Series?

Well not that it'd matter for the easy-to-drive Philharmonics but Peter Aczel did measurements on the Halo amp and it seriously impressed me. The Classic series to me look good too but still not IMO cost-effective, so why just not go for the gusto? If going for cost-effective, any choice but the crown seems silly...
Nuance's Avatar Nuance
08:57 AM Liked: 59
post #632 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 11,584
Joined: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal Velocity View Post

Well not that it'd matter for the easy-to-drive Philharmonics but Peter Aczel did measurements on the Halo amp and it seriously impressed me. The Classic series to me look good too but still not IMO cost-effective, so why just not go for the gusto? If going for cost-effective, any choice but the crown seems silly...

Not only that, but the Classic amps sounded fuzzy/hazy compared to the Halo line. TJHUB used to own the 2250 and it was just "off" a bit. It could have been a defective unit, but the Halo amp doesn't exhibit these issues to our ears.
anarkhia's Avatar anarkhia
09:03 AM Liked: 10
post #633 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 126
Joined: Feb 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkish54 View Post

Aint t@t t3 tr00th?? LOL

lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal Velocity View Post

My advice is to not worry about amps.

What differences might (and yet might not) exist between very different, well-designed amps, are infinitesimal enough that you might notice them one day, yet fly over your head another day, and probably won't be as significant as the difference between sitting at one place on the couch and sitting five inches to the right.

That said, while not what I would call a difficult load, the Philharmonic 2s are a decently hungry load. I would not suggest using low powered tube amps. If using tubes you probably want something that can deliver about 70W / 4 ohms minimum. That will get you a decent dynamic capability over 95db in the typical setup. I suggest avoiding anything with an output impedance higher than 1 ohm or so.

If using surround receivers, typical $1000 MSRP Yamaha, Marantz, Denon, and Pioneer options are perfectly fine choices. They will generally deliver a nice clean 160 to 200 watts into stereo 4 ohm loads which is nice to have if you sit a little bit further away.

If you plan to use a higher powered separates amplifier, my advice would be to stick to Solid State or Class D amplifiers designed by companies that aren't trying to sell you "magical" sound quality. I would only get a high (400w @ 4 ohm) powered separates amp personally, otherwise you're probably not getting a good return for the money. JMO

A few options:

(cant post URL, since im new poster :S)


Just because the price of the above varies doesn't necessarily mean their SQ varies. There's many different factors that lead up to the final price of an amp. Enjoy your music on your Philharmonics in your room... don't over-concern yourself with the electronics - there's a lot of stuff that comes before that, especially the room, the speaker setup and the recordings themselves. You made probably the best choice as far as speakers are concerned, though My advice is to try something affordable first rather than trying to jump into the deep end with pricy amps. You might find yourself %110 content with whatver you already have!!!

.

Thank you very much for taking time to explain this to me... really

and im french/quebec =)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twylight View Post


What made a difference? When I play with my rack I have to move a 1st reflection treatment out of the way. A partially deaf person can tell when its not there.
-I would spend NOTHING on amps until your room is treated.


There is so much voodoo in audio, the room treatments are all you need - you will simply faint with how much difference putting treatments at 1st reflections is. Its the cheapest upgrade and makes an audible, profound difference for pennies in comparison to hardware. All rooms will gain profound impact from bass traps, 1st reflections, front and back wall directional in front and behind the speaker. No room corrections software can make the same difference that an actual panel makes in the right spots. Electronics simply cant fix the physics. Do them yourself or buy them cheap, no need to get fancy.

Thank you again, but for now i have no room specially dedicated for HT, so i plan to put them in the living room, do you know a good site to learn about room correction? how do i know where is the first reflection depending on the room etc...i mean information about positionning

I was asking since my receiver is a pioneer VSX-1019


(120 watt per channel made for 8 ohm) and i wasn't sure if it had enough WOOMMPH to drive them, since im only using 5.1, would it help if I Bi-Amp them?
Also since i have a crap Sinclair audio brightton serie Center, should i just totally remove center and get the best quality in movie from the R/L.

Thanks =)
Saturn94's Avatar Saturn94
09:21 AM Liked: 393
post #634 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 4,284
Joined: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

Not only that, but the Classic amps sounded fuzzy/hazy compared to the Halo line. TJHUB used to own the 2250 and it was just "off" a bit. It could have been a defective unit, but the Halo amp doesn't exhibit these issues to our ears.

Interesting. Personally I couldn't really tell the difference so I bought a 5250 instead of the A51. I certainly don't hear anything fuzzy/hazy about the sound when using it to drive my HT2-TLs.

Perhaps y'all just have better ears than me.

Anarkhia, I would just try what you have first before throwing money at amps. You may find your Pioneer receiver will work just fine.
Eternal Velocity's Avatar Eternal Velocity
09:27 AM Liked: 61
post #635 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,397
Joined: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by anarkhia View Post

Thank you again, but for now i have no room specially dedicated for HT, so i plan to put them in the living room, do you know a good site to learn about room correction? how do i know where is the first reflection depending on the room etc...i mean information about positionning

Electronic room correction will mess with voicing, so avoid that.

If the room is very small some absorption panels at 1st reflection might help but in typical rooms it'd probably make the sound less "awesome"... for lack of a better word. Diffusion is normally a positive. Very few rooms truly need absorption IMO. I did suggest absorbing the floor bounce and some bass but i would not overdo it. Dead rooms sound more resolving to the recording but not necessarily more musical/pleasant.

The first reflection points can be found by sitting down and having another person shift a mirror until you see the speaker through it. I'd want reflectors at first reflection points except in very tiny rooms. 4-5ft distance from speaker to wall is plenty but more never hurts.

Quote:
I was asking since my receiver is a pioneer VSX-1019

I've never played with pioneer receivers but here are the measurements;

http://www.hometheater.com/content/p...-labs-measures

It's roughly 130wpc @ 4 ohms, equivalent to a 65w @ 8 ohms amp. This will give you over 95db @ 10ft - pretty loud 90% of the time.

As far as power, a doubling of watts implies about 3db of gain. Which is pretty small but could maybe make a tiny difference if your amp is clipping, at least with some movie content. Try out the Crown I recommended earlier for what it's worth.. it's pretty inexpensive and offers some headroom (around 6-7db). However you will need to confirm if your 1019 has preamplifier outputs.

Quote:
, would it help if I Bi-Amp them?

no. Advantages of bi-amping come with tricky speakers with multiple 4 ohm drivers in "parallel" with active crossovers. The PH use passive crossovers and no drivers operate in parallel thanks to the crossover and steep slopes. It's very elegant .

Beyond that, based on the 5 channels driven measurements shown above, your receiver actually really struggles driving any more than 2 channels... so passive bi amping might br counter productive. It might be a good reason to add an amp to drive your mains as it will open the amps up for your surrounds.
Twylight's Avatar Twylight
09:48 AM Liked: 10
post #636 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 557
Joined: Jan 2005
I dont want to derail this - ill just talk about speakers now.

Ask away
Twylight's Avatar Twylight
09:51 AM Liked: 10
post #637 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 557
Joined: Jan 2005
for music I would not use the center channel (and surrounds as well)

most receivers will do this in stereo or pure audio/direct modes

dont biamp or bridge or any of that
woodsart's Avatar woodsart
10:04 AM Liked: 15
post #638 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 759
Joined: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twylight View Post

for music I would not use the center channel (and surrounds as well)

most receivers will do this in stereo or pure audio/direct modes

dont biamp or bridge or any of that

You're such a derailer!!!

My Onk does a good job with the XPA-5, just getting the right toe in/fill is my challenge. These phil2s sound great regardless.
Monkish54's Avatar Monkish54
10:08 AM Liked: 29
post #639 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,306
Joined: May 2011
How much do the Phils weigh? More specifically, the 2?
Nuance's Avatar Nuance
10:13 AM Liked: 59
post #640 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 11,584
Joined: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkish54 View Post

How much do the Phils weigh? More specifically, the 2?

11,543 pounds. They're doozies!
woodsart's Avatar woodsart
10:15 AM Liked: 15
post #641 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 759
Joined: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

11,543 pounds. They're doozies!

LOL you are very close Mr. B. Nuance!!!!

Like to have killed me carrying in those bass cabinets!

I would try to get them on the scales, but I can't pick up the whole set together.
Monkish54's Avatar Monkish54
10:16 AM Liked: 29
post #642 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,306
Joined: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post


11,543 pounds. They're doozies!

That's much less than I was expecting!
anarkhia's Avatar anarkhia
10:28 AM Liked: 10
post #643 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 126
Joined: Feb 2012
they weight 75 lbs
Saturn94's Avatar Saturn94
10:33 AM Liked: 393
post #644 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 4,284
Joined: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal Velocity View Post

AJ's monitors? You're actually supposed to aim a foot or two in front of the center LP.

I came across this today and found it very interesting:

http://audioroundtable.com/PiSpeaker...ges/23369.html

I think I'll do a bit more experimenting with this and see what happens.

While perhaps not specific to Phils, it may help Phil owners with setup (how do you like that attempt to stay on topic).
Eternal Velocity's Avatar Eternal Velocity
10:36 AM Liked: 61
post #645 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,397
Joined: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturn94 View Post

I came across this today and found it very interesting:

http://audioroundtable.com/PiSpeaker...ges/23369.html

I think I'll do a bit more experimenting with this and see what happens.

While perhaps not specific to Phils, it may help Phil owners with setup (how do you like that attempt to stay on topic).

It's worth trying for fun
..though the theory only truly applies to speakers whose off-axis response rolls off of predictably and notably. The PH have such wide dispersion that being 45 deg off axis is.... like being on axis.
Nethawk's Avatar Nethawk
10:42 AM Liked: 115
post #646 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 2,513
Joined: Sep 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturn94 View Post

With regards to toe in and placement, it really varies by room. You will really have to do some of your own experimenting. I found recommendations for setting up my Salks in my room (about 7ft apart and little to no toe in) did not give me the best results in my room. I got better results from spreading them apart further than might be normal (the distance between them is now more than the distance to the prime listening position) and aiming them directly at the center listening position (I got this idea from a setup I saw at last year's Capital Audio Fest in DC).

I'm sure Philharmonic owners can give you good tips on handling the open back midrange.

Acknowledged. I expect a good bit of experimentation in placement. Forgive my lack of education, but the design of these speakers and nature of dipole driver might indicate that placement would make a big difference.

From philharmonic.com:

All of these speakers are three-way designs employing a dipole planar midrange driver that operates in an open-back cabinet to provide added depth and spaciousness to the sound stage without imposing restrictions on room placement.

Room placement restrictions (or sloppy placement) may not be significantly detrimental, but proper placement may be greatly beneficial to that sound stage. This will probably be very unique to everyone, and no guidelines are necessary.
Nethawk's Avatar Nethawk
10:47 AM Liked: 115
post #647 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 2,513
Joined: Sep 2001
Now we're talking! Nice link Saturn, this has been top of my mind.
Eternal Velocity's Avatar Eternal Velocity
10:48 AM Liked: 61
post #648 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,397
Joined: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post

Acknowledged. I expect a good bit of experimentation in placement. Forgive my lack of education, but the design of these speakers and nature of dipole driver might indicate that placement would make a big difference.

While placement will always make a difference with any spraker, I would not approach the PH2s as 'dipoles' IE Magnepan or Quad ESL. Those kind of large panel speakers are normally very beamy so there is a well defined sweet spot outside of which the sound changes quickly. These are really the opposite.
Twylight's Avatar Twylight
11:18 AM Liked: 10
post #649 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 557
Joined: Jan 2005
Check the measurements on the site. Very open and honest...so much more honest than you get out of basically every speaker mfr.
Nuance's Avatar Nuance
11:21 AM Liked: 59
post #650 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 11,584
Joined: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkish54 View Post

That's much less than I was expecting!

LOL!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal Velocity View Post

While placement will always make a difference with any spraker, I would not approach the PH2s as 'dipoles' IE Magnepan or Quad ESL. Those kind of large panel speakers are normally very beamy so there is a well defined sweet spot outside of which the sound changes quickly. These are really the opposite.

I would agree with this assessment. We had a discussion about it over in the Audioholics Philharmonic thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twylight View Post

Check the measurements on the site. Very open and honest...so much more honest than you get out of basically every speaker mfr.

Very true. There aren't many manufacturers out there that give you the full board of measurements.
klh007's Avatar klh007
11:30 AM Liked: 13
post #651 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 231
Joined: Nov 2003
Nuance, I agree with your amp picks, all great choices for the Phils!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

Who?



First off, congrats on your purchase and I look forward to your review.

So, about the amps, I agree with EV. Don't beat yourself up too much over amps, because while there are audible differences they are minimal, and said differences don't hold a candle to upgrading speakers, fixing room acoustics or simply sitting off-axis (as ET mentioned). Some suggestions I'll add to ET's list are:

Odyssey Audio
AVA
Emotiva
Bryston
Wyred4Sound


AcuDefTechGuy
12:18 PM Liked: 239
post #652 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 4,312
Joined: Dec 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by anarkhia View Post

So i ordered the Philharmonic 2 for my Home Theater today and i was wondering what amp have you used/ are you using to power them?

I would also just get an AVR like Denon 3312 or Yamaha 1010 or similar AVR from Marantz, Pioneer.

If you should happen to need an amp just for the Phil2 (center & surround channels require even less power), something like the ATI AT1202 amp will do for $600.

http://www.ati-amp.com/AT1202.php

Or the AT1802 for $1,000.

http://www.ati-amp.com/AT1800.php

But chances are, you don't even need the external amp.
Nethawk's Avatar Nethawk
12:19 PM Liked: 115
post #653 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 2,513
Joined: Sep 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal Velocity View Post

While placement will always make a difference with any spraker, I would not approach the PH2s as 'dipoles' IE Magnepan or Quad ESL. Those kind of large panel speakers are normally very beamy so there is a well defined sweet spot outside of which the sound changes quickly. These are really the opposite.

I'm not well versed in terminology or theory, forgive the elementary question. Are you indicating that there is no placement infraction that would lead to degradation of sweet spot with the Phils? My curiosity, which I will certainly explore with placement creativity, is the change to that sweet spot as a result of dipole and the open back design (reflections, I suppose) as well as all the great stuff coming from the front.

Thanks Nuance, I will read through the audioholics thread and try to learn more.
Dennis Murphy's Avatar Dennis Murphy
12:49 PM Liked: 191
post #654 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,661
Joined: Aug 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post

I'm not well versed in terminology or theory, forgive the elementary question. Are you indicating that there is no placement infraction that would lead to degradation of sweet spot with the Phils? My curiosity, which I will certainly explore with placement creativity, is the change to that sweet spot as a result of dipole and the open back design (reflections, I suppose) as well as all the great stuff coming from the front.

Thanks Nuance, I will read through the audioholics thread and try to learn more.

The impact of the rear wave will definitely be greatest in the sweet spot between the speakers. I haven't performed any miracles here. I think the only point to be made is that the basic tonality of the speakers won't change very much as you move off of the sweet spot, and you will still get added spaciousness and depth from the quasi-open back mid. Also, there is no critical distance from the rear wall where everything will suddenly snap into focus. The soundstage will just get a little better as your get the speakers out from against the rear wall.
Saturn94's Avatar Saturn94
04:37 PM Liked: 393
post #655 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 4,284
Joined: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eternal Velocity View Post

It's worth trying for fun
..though the theory only truly applies to speakers whose off-axis response rolls off of predictably and notably. The PH have such wide dispersion that being 45 deg off axis is.... like being on axis.

Quote:


....The important thing to know is that this strategy only works for speakers with uniform directivity, that have off-axis sound that is spectrally similar to the on-axis sound. With a little bit of experimentation in placement, the sweet spot can be widened or, with asymmetric placement of the speakers, the sweet spot can even be moved around in the room.....

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this quote from that link or the meaning of "uniform directivity" (Google search didn't help)? I took it to mean that the on axis and off axis response needed to be similar (ie - wide, even frequency response).
Monkish54's Avatar Monkish54
04:56 PM Liked: 29
post #656 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,306
Joined: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturn94 View Post


Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this quote from that link or the meaning of "uniform directivity" (Google search didn't help)? I took it to mean that the on axis and off axis response needed to be similar (ie - wide, even frequency response).

Unless i'm mistaken, Uniform directivity is the same as constant or continuous directivity. If you google Constant directivity, you will get a plethora of results.
Saturn94's Avatar Saturn94
06:57 PM Liked: 393
post #657 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 4,284
Joined: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkish54 View Post

Unless i'm mistaken, Uniform directivity is the same as constant or continuous directivity. If you google Constant directivity, you will get a plethora of results.

Ah...didn't know that. I googled CD and think I have a little better idea of what it means now. Thanks.

BTW, I have about 3-4ft of space behind my listening position, so I figured listening from behind the normal listening would give me an idea how my speakers would sound aimed in front of the listening position without having to actually move them (they are aimed at the normal LP currently). I noticed a few things listening behind my normal position. The soundstage width was reduced somewhat and imaging wasn't as focused. Also, the image seemed more stable when I moved from side to side (ie wider sweet spot).

So it seems my choices are;

1. Wider soundstage, more focused imaging, less stable image/small sweet spot.
2. Narrower soundstage, less focused imaging, more stable image/wider sweet spot.

Not sure which I prefer.
Monkish54's Avatar Monkish54
07:04 PM Liked: 29
post #658 of 4860
03-02-2012 | Posts: 1,306
Joined: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturn94 View Post


Ah...didn't know that. I googled CD and think I have a little better idea of what it means now. Thanks.

NP! If you go to Gedlee.com Dr. Earl Geddes has a few papers on CD and waveguides. Read his waveguide paper. It explains CD pretty well.
Nethawk's Avatar Nethawk
10:47 AM Liked: 115
post #659 of 4860
03-03-2012 | Posts: 2,513
Joined: Sep 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

I would agree with this assessment. We had a discussion about it over in the Audioholics Philharmonic thread.

Wow! And I thought you guys were smart!

Thanks for the reference Nuance, I'm learning a lot by reading these conversations. I'd pretty much given up on audioholics as a viable source for information, their reviews seem to have gone downhill (no offense to fans), and had not spent much time in the forums unless google drives me there. The community, at least, seems informed and happy to share knowledge.
Saturn94's Avatar Saturn94
11:00 AM Liked: 393
post #660 of 4860
03-03-2012 | Posts: 4,284
Joined: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkish54 View Post

NP! If you go to Gedlee.com Dr. Earl Geddes has a few papers on CD and waveguides. Read his waveguide paper. It explains CD pretty well.

Great stuff on that link, thanks. While some of it was way over my head, I think I understand the gist of it.

I found the Power Point presentation on small room acoustics interesting, especially the part about achieving both good imaging and spaciousness:

http://gedlee.com/Papers.htm

If I'm understanding it correctly, the idea is to minimize reflections close to the speakers (ie the wall behind them?) and leave the rest of the room "lively".

Reply Speakers

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3