Your "World's Best Audio System" - Page 40

Quasi anechoic measurements necessarily have coarse frequency resolution. This is because the speaker response is time-windowed to exclude room reflections. So you can't measure the lowest frequencies very well with this technique. And unless the speaker is suspended in the air (pretty difficult with the X-2 ), there will always be some floor reflection sneaking in from a driver near the floor.

- Terry

NHFRED

I am no Wilson Audio fanboy... I try to have an open mind however and have heard the X-2 extensively; not the quickies that one usually get from a dealer visit but from extended listening (several hours in the span of 5 days total) with material I am familiar with and it has no low bass deficiency far from that, heck even the MAXX-2, has low bass in spades...low grumbling in your stomach bass... I don't know what to make of the measurements we saw.. The scale is not known (to me) nor the measurements techniques.. maybe you know more than I about how to interpret these..

I believe those measurements were taken with the Dual Gotham subwoofers turned off. The room positioning for the X2's was optimized with subwoofer blending in mind, so it would make sense that the mains alone would roll off smoothly by intent.

Lee

Perhaps if there was an HT processor crossing the speaker over to the sub, I would understand your point. However, the measurement taken was "quasi"
anechoic and not an in-room response, so the speakers location in the room didn't apply. That being said... Terry's knowledge greatly outweighs mine. Maybe the low end isn't properly measured for with this type of measurement, but still all three graphs show a big bump at 55 Hz and a steady decline afterward.

If you read the titles of both jpg's, #2 is IN ROOM RESPONSE. If you don't believe that a speaker's position in a room affects its bass behavior, then I'm quite surprised.

Ultimately, if you don't like (or want to like) the X2s, that's fine. But to criticize them over a graph with admittedly unknown measurement technique seems a bit overzealous.

Lee

here's my audio system

54 x JBL VerTec 4889
24 x JBL VerTec 4888
84 x Adamson T21 21" subs
70 Crown MA-9000i amplifiers
Dolby Lake drive rack
Klark Teknik DN370
Digico D5T
one minijack to xlr
one ipod shuffle

now you're talking. (expect for the ipod, i'll take my PC over cr-apple stuff)

Below are five "World's First" for Behold that I have found:

1. The first to use "cascading" DACs. I stand corrected, but I don't think *anyone* else out there is doing this. The only co. that has such a radical layout in comparison is the GTE "Trinity" DAC of Germany.

2. The first digital-in (all digital) preamp. Some thought the TacT Millennium was...but this unit was actually a "powered-DAC" that attenuated the voltage of the power supply to control volume. The Z-systems preamp (reviewed in Stereophile in the late 90's) was a "digitizing" preamp as it took analog-ins from a CD player / DAC.

3. The first to put a digital processor in the output stage of a power amp. Another breakthrough - fewer active parts in the signal path leads to better sound. But no-one ever thought of elimination this way ! Thanks to Behold's preamp section and "output DAC", we can forget about those interconnects (and power cords !)

4. The first to use transimpedance amps in the output stage of a power amplifier. Another radical idea - echewing the typical bipolar or MOSFET transistors, designer Ballman broke new ground in using (active) current to voltage converters in this most critical stage of the power amplifier.

5. The first to mate a Class A output stage with a switch-mode power supply. Neither of these are firsts on their own - but they are when put together. Solid-state gain with Class A output, in particular, would make for a very unusual high-end power amp. A fitting approach for this heroic new design.

There might be one more: one of the first *high-powered* solid-state Class A amps. Most of the Class A amps before Behold were low-powered tubes...or the Pass Aleph which was low-powered solid-state. I think Krell had high-powered A's...but...with "variable biasing", which apparently degraded the signal. I don't think Behold employs this technique - it looks like non-stop, unrelenting A......

What about Bose ? You know in Maybach' s car...

Hmm. Not how I remember it (and I did write the review). The RDP-1 is digital in/out only. http://www.stereophile.com/solidpreamps/278/index.html
Perhaps you were thinking of a NAD preamp of that vintage? http://stereophile.com/solidpreamps/279/

Hi, Jeff

I've read through this entire thread and have a few questions for you, none of which I've seen addressed.

1. Left out of the discussion is one of the most important variables in the sound reproduction chain: the listener, you.

-Can you post the results of your most recent hearing tests? As you know the ability to hear high frequency sounds decreases rapidly with age. It would be helpful to see your frequency response, as it were.

-What is your music background? As a kid I did sound reinforcement work with lots of musicians, from Aerosmith to Stan Getz to ZZ Top and found few, if any, were audiophiles. I've seen various articles that tend to reinforce this impression. I believe that musicians brains actually differ from non-musicians based on recent work and thus their expectations of sound reproduction systems may differ as well. How many musicians listened to your TWBAS vs. non-musicians and did you notice any differences in perception?

2. Have you looked into the issue of listener fatigue? In several posts you mention spending hours listening. I can't point to any studies but I wouldn't be surprised is listening acuity drops off significantly after hours of continuous listening. Any thoughts about that?

Thanks.

jeff, could you share your thoughts on the differences between the typical hi-end system and live music? Based on your extensive experience with the twbas what's lacking from most systems? thx.

so says the guy who owns a 1000 dollar power cord... should be right up your alley...

Jeff, any luck obtaining the new levinson amps for a review, either the No. 532 or the new No. 53?

Both of these amps won quite a few of awards throghout Asia this past year, yet not a word on them on this side of the hemisphere.

McIntosh has a two channel room correction. http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/newproducts/

WOW, that is all I can say

I'm no fan of MBL. Have listen to the 101 a couple of times and it don't do it for me.

I suggest to try this


Measure the distance between the middle of the tweeters (X) and take that x 1,18 and you have the distance your ears should be (Y). Then have the speakers toe-in so much that you can see the outside of each speaker in the middle position. Then try even more toe-in and see where it sounds best.

Speakers: Procella P815 for all 7 satellite channels ....... 4 x Procella P18 subwoofers

Amplifiers: 9 x Procella DA1400 dsp amps (each amp is 4 x 350 watts)

Digital front end: Best ADA processor at the time, Oppo 95 Blu Ray player Nuforce edition, modded Sonos digital music player

Cables: Supra cables

Misc: Full Crestron control system

I own it. Even after all of these years, I still dig my own room. But to me, it's less about the gear and more about the room.

both links 404 error

Yup. Just go to http://www.soundstageglobal.com and follow the links on that page.

Reading all these comments about the best audio systems is fascinating.
All the experienced audiophiles that gave their opinions and
choices for the best loudspeakers is very interesting as well.
But with all the examples given, there is none that can compare to this
system, and to this day there has not been an improvement or a
loudspeaker that can equal the performance of the following. The performance of the Hill Plasmatronics was unequaled by any other plasma transducer ever made available to the public. It has the best bandwidth, linearity, phase and impulse response. It was this design that separated the men from the boys! This was in 1978 and this still is a transducer
that outperforms them all. Listening to this extraordinary transducer is an
education, and once heard, one can hear the distortions that are still in
todays best transducers. This transducer was restored and combined
with Apogee Scintillas and stages for the lower end of the frequency range.
The Hill Plasma goes down to 700 hz, which has never been done before,
and because of safety concerns and todays laws can no longer be
manufactured and sold. Below 25 hz, two Rotary subs are added for
a system that is just plain awesome!!