or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Philharmonic Audio - Dennis Murphy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Philharmonic Audio - Dennis Murphy - Page 128

post #3811 of 4611
I think Jerry is giving you the straight scoop on this. The Dynamic power rating is kind of junky, since it's only into one channel, and no frequency bandwidth or distortion rating is quoted. I would assume it's at 1 kHz and 1% distortion, although it could be as high as 10%, if this spec is similar to the DIN standard in automobile receivers. The true performance into 4 ohms isn't known. Still, there should be plenty of power to make a lot of noisee, even if it isn't the cleanest noise going.
post #3812 of 4611
I use a Denon AVR-4311, no problems whatsoever. I previously had an amp powering them, which was rated at 3x the output of the Denon. It made no difference so the amp is now in another setup. I'd be more suspect of hookup and cabling before faulting the amps in the Onkyo. How old are speaker cables, any evidence of oxidation? Any spare strands at posts on either end touching what they shouldn't? What type of EQ or bass management is being applied? Is output the same regardless of input or source?
post #3813 of 4611
In my settings I only have two options 6 ohm and 4 ohm. I assume that it measures the ohm somehow and will not allow me to select 8? When I switch it to 4 ohm I get proper "loudness" at 28-29. When it is set to 6 ohm I only get it at 20. Not sure why...

Also dont know why I don't have an 8 ohm option. (I am sure this is better to put this in the 818 receiver area tongue.gif

Cables are brand new... Monoprice with Sewell ends.

No stray strands as they sewell take care of that cool.gif

I have the Phil's crossing at 60...which is what I think Dennis recommends and seems to be about average for the forum members. I know 80 is THX.

Output is the same no matter the source Blu Ray vs. Cable ...really only two sources I have. I play my CD's through my Blu Ray.
Edited by Newbie01 - 3/18/13 at 4:47pm
post #3814 of 4611
Dennis...on the Phil Slim. smile.gif

I know they are still in beta but are you making them shorter and lower? Are there rough rough (will not hold you to them) dimensions you have?
post #3815 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie01 View Post

Dennis...on the Phil Slim. smile.gif

I know they are still in beta but are you making them shorter and lower? Are there rough rough (will not hold you to them) dimensions you have?

Hi. Shorter and lower than what? Certainly not shorter than the Phil 3. They will be a very standard height for a tower, but will have a much smaller footprint than the Phil 2 or 3. Anyhow, I should have a finished pair in cherry up and running tomorrow if Fed Ex doesn't mess up. I'll take pics and you can see for yourself.
post #3816 of 4611
Vic,

Have you done any companions against your Phil 2's and your Lore's yet?

I might have missed it, but we would be interested in your thoughts...
post #3817 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

Hi. Shorter and lower than what? Certainly not shorter than the Phil 3. They will be a very standard height for a tower, but will have a much smaller footprint than the Phil 2 or 3. Anyhow, I should have a finished pair in cherry up and running tomorrow if Fed Ex doesn't mess up. I'll take pics and you can see for yourself.

Hi Dennis.

I'm looking forward to seeing your latest model. smile.gif
post #3818 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechx View Post

Vic,

Have you done any companions against your Phil 2's and your Lore's yet?

I might have missed it, but we would be interested in your thoughts...

I have not yet. I plan to this weekend, but I can't imagine they will really be comparable. I've listened to both independently, and of the speakers that I've auditioned in home over the last 3 months (B&W 683, & CM9, KEF Q700 & Q900, PSB Image T6 & Imagine T, Gallo CL-3 and EMP Tek E55), none has impressed me more than the Phils.

I'm not a Phil Shill, but they're that good (to my ears at least).
post #3819 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by VicTorious1 View Post

I have not yet. I plan to this weekend, but I can't imagine they will really be comparable. I've listened to both independently, and of the speakers that I've auditioned in home over the last 3 months (B&W 683, & CM9, KEF Q700 & Q900, PSB Image T6 & Imagine T, Gallo CL-3 and EMP Tek E55), none has impressed me more than the Phils.

I'm not a Phil Shill, but they're that good (to my ears at least).

WOW! Good to know...this has swayed my decision somewhat. Glad you're enjoying the Phil's! Thank you for the info!
post #3820 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

Hi. Shorter and lower than what? Certainly not shorter than the Phil 3. They will be a very standard height for a tower, but will have a much smaller footprint than the Phil 2 or 3. Anyhow, I should have a finished pair in cherry up and running tomorrow if Fed Ex doesn't mess up. I'll take pics and you can see for yourself.

I can't wait to see these. I am currently on hold for the new Enzo from Tekton, but would love to try a pair of Phils, the only thing that has held me back are the cabinets, so very intrigued by you have here. What is your target for availability and have you announced pricing yet? Will these use the same drivers/components as either the Phil 2 or 3s?
post #3821 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by LVS View Post

I can't wait to see these. I am currently on hold for the new Enzo from Tekton, but would love to try a pair of Phils, the only thing that has held me back are the cabinets, so very intrigued by you have here. What is your target for availability and have you announced pricing yet? Will these use the same drivers/components as either the Phil 2 or 3s?

Hi. The towers are basically a smaller and cheaper version of the Salk SS8's, just as the Phil 3 holds the same relationship to the SoundScape 10. That means an open-back midrange, a ribbon tweet, and an over-achieving woofer, but on a smaller scale. Although I would have liked to use the planar midrange from the Phil 2's and 3's, it's too tall. By the time I provided enough height for a decent-sized woofer chamber, the tweeter would have ended up way above the listening axis, and the whole thing would have looked more like a skyscraper than a Spousal-Friendly tower. So I opted for a very high quality titanium 3" midrange with a small neo magnet to minimize obstructions to rear air-flow. The tweeter is the same RAAL I've always used. The woofer is the 6.5" version of the 8" Scan Speak Revelator used in the Phil 3. The woofer compartment isn't long enough to provide a true transmission line tuning--it's kind of a mixture of a TL and a conventional bass reflex, and, like a TL, uses stuffing behind the woofer to damp midrange reflections. I've kept the cabinet design as simple as possible to minimize cost, but I don't have a price yet. The cabinet maker built the finished pair to determine the cabinet cost precisely, and I won't know the results for a week or so. I've only heaard this thing in mono, and that's not conclusive for any design, particularly one with an open-back midrange. It measured well and sounded promising as a single, but I won't know whether it's a wrap or an interesting failure until I set them up and press play, hopefully tomorrow.
post #3822 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

Hi. The towers are basically a smaller and cheaper version of the Salk SS8's, just as the Phil 3 holds the same relationship to the SoundScape 10. That means an open-back midrange, a ribbon tweet, and an over-achieving woofer, but on a smaller scale. Although I would have liked to use the planar midrange from the Phil 2's and 3's, it's too tall. By the time I provided enough height for a decent-sized woofer chamber, the tweeter would have ended up way above the listening axis, and the whole thing would have looked more like a skyscraper than a Spousal-Friendly tower. So I opted for a very high quality titanium 3" midrange with a small neo magnet to minimize obstructions to rear air-flow. The tweeter is the same RAAL I've always used. The woofer is the 6.5" version of the 8" Scan Speak Revelator used in the Phil 3. The woofer compartment isn't long enough to provide a true transmission line tuning--it's kind of a mixture of a TL and a conventional bass reflex, and, like a TL, uses stuffing behind the woofer to damp midrange reflections. I've kept the cabinet design as simple as possible to minimize cost, but I don't have a price yet. The cabinet maker built the finished pair to determine the cabinet cost precisely, and I won't know the results for a week or so. I've only heaard this thing in mono, and that's not conclusive for any design, particularly one with an open-back midrange. It measured well and sounded promising as a single, but I won't know whether it's a wrap or an interesting failure until I set them up and press play, hopefully tomorrow.

Thanks Dennis. Please share after you have had a listen.
post #3823 of 4611
Very interesting on the Phil Slims... Without the TL...it shouldn't get the bass extension of the current Phil's ..but most of the people that opt for the Phil 2's are crossing over to a sub at 60 or so anyway...

I was debating going with a 3rd phil for center... If I went with the current model I have to hang it pretty high up...still may be an option.

Thanks Dennis. Review on Phil two will probably be coming out this weekend.
post #3824 of 4611
I am interested in hearing about these slim towers too !!!
post #3825 of 4611
Dennis I'm intrigued by the 3" Ti midrange...would you mind sharing what model it is? Have you heard it before or just something you stumbled across that looked promising?
post #3826 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by augerpro View Post

Dennis I'm intrigued by the 3" Ti midrange...would you mind sharing what model it is? Have you heard it before or just something you stumbled across that looked promising?

Hi. No mystery--it's the same Tang Band unit that's used in one of the best and most popular DIY speakers--The Statement--which also has an open back for the mid. It's a full-range driver that I used to design a computer speaker for Jim Salk. And this TB was extremely well reviewed by Zaph Audio. I'm only using it across a small portion of its useable range. It's not all that expensive, and I may take some grief for that, but I also tried the identically sized Visaton titanium mid ($$$$$$$$), and I actually preferred the TB.
post #3827 of 4611
Intrigued.

If I may ask a few questions:

Where in the current line up is the price expended to fall?
Will there be a single woofer, or 2?
Are the cabinets going to be veneer?
Will there be a center channel made available?

Thanks.
post #3828 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by svadas View Post

Intrigued.

If I may ask a few questions:

Where in the current line up is the price expended to fall?
Will there be a single woofer, or 2?
Are the cabinets going to be veneer?
Will there be a center channel made available?

Thanks.

First off, I don't know right now whether this will ever make it into the market. I still haven't heard them in stereo, or got firm cabinet price quotes. Second, you better hope there's only one woofer per side--4 revelator woofers per pair would not only price these puppies off the chart, but the cabinet would have to be huge. The cabinets will be offered with standard veneers, with optional upgrades. As for pricing, I won't offer them unless I can bring them in under the current price for the Phil 2's. They have to be competitive with, for example, the Ascend ribbon tower.
post #3829 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

Hi. No mystery--it's the same Tang Band unit that's used in one of the best and most popular DIY speakers--The Statement--which also has an open back for the mid. It's a full-range driver that I used to design a computer speaker for Jim Salk. And this TB was extremely well reviewed by Zaph Audio. I'm only using it across a small portion of its useable range. It's not all that expensive, and I may take some grief for that, but I also tried the identically sized Visaton titanium mid ($$$$$$$$), and I actually preferred the TB.

That was the driver that popped into my head right away, but it is a 4", so when you said 3" I thought there was something new on the market. I have a pair of Statement Monitors too! Ever considered the 3" TB dome mid? I'm actually right now building a 3 way with a switchable top portion to compare midranges - BG Neo8 vs TB 3" dome mid. Your Phils gave me the push to try the Neo8 and I already had a pair of TB 3" domes, so I figured what teh heck I'll try both!
Edited by augerpro - 3/24/13 at 4:42am
post #3830 of 4611
Dennis, would it be possible to check out a pair of Philharmonitors in person since I appear to live pretty close to you? Do you keep a pair on hand for these purposes?
post #3831 of 4611
Hi You're more than welcome top stop by, but I only have one on hand. I had to break up a set to send someone who wanted it as a center channel with the tweeter rotated.
post #3832 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by augerpro View Post

That was the driver that popped into my head right away, but it is a 4", so when you said 3" I thought there was something new on the market. I have a pair of Statement Monitors too! Ever considered the 3" TB dome mid? I'm actually right now building a 3 way with a switchable top portion to compare midranges - BG Neo8 vs TB 3" dome mid. Your Phils gave me the push to try the Neo8 and I already had a pair of TB 3" domes, so I figured what teh heck I'll try both!

Well, the actual driver is a little less than 3". The entire face plate is around 5". I've never cared much for dome mids, although I'm sure there are some decent ones out there. The main problem is that they have sealed backs, so they're of no use in an open-back design.
post #3833 of 4611
Dennis, have you ever worked with the Seas midrange drivers?

Would a 3-way using one of them, a Seas woofer and either a Raal or OW tweeter make sense?

Or do you like other mids (TangBand, ScanSpeak, etc) better?
Edited by rick240 - 3/25/13 at 5:22am
post #3834 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

Well, the actual driver is a little less than 3". The entire face plate is around 5". I've never cared much for dome mids, although I'm sure there are some decent ones out there. The main problem is that they have sealed backs, so they're of no use in an open-back design.

I forgot about the open back. So wouldn't the Neo8 work well even in a slim design? They are much narrower than the 6.5" woofer you want to use? Just wanted to try something new?
post #3835 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by augerpro View Post

I forgot about the open back. So wouldn't the Neo8 work well even in a slim design? They are much narrower than the 6.5" woofer you want to use? Just wanted to try something new?


See my post above:

"Although I would have liked to use the planar midrange from the Phil 2's and 3's, it's too tall. By the time I provided enough height for a decent-sized woofer chamber, the tweeter would have ended up way above the listening axis, and the whole thing would have looked more like a skyscraper than a Spousal-Friendly tower."
post #3836 of 4611
Great choice of midrange, Dennis. The TangBand is supposed to be a very solid performer! How high did you cross it to the woofer? The tweeter-midrange HP is ~3khz?
Edited by Monkish54 - 3/25/13 at 1:05am
post #3837 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkish54 View Post

Great choice of midrange, Dennis. The TangBand is supposed to be a very solid performer! How high did you cross it to the woofer? The tweeter-midrange HP is ~3khz?

The current crosswover points are 500 Hz and 4 kHz. But I may monkey around with those.
post #3838 of 4611
Hi Dennis.

Did you get a chance to fire up those new towers? I'm sure I'm not the only one waiting to see what you think of them.biggrin.gif
post #3839 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturn94 View Post

Hi Dennis.

Did you get a chance to fire up those new towers? I'm sure I'm not the only one waiting to see what you think of them.biggrin.gif

Hi They arrived this morning and I'm just finishing up a little tweak in the tweeter level. I haven't listened yet except to confirm on one that the highs are a trifle bright for the new run of RAAL tweeters. I'll give them a good llisten in an hour or so. They certainly look good.
post #3840 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

Hi They arrived this morning and I'm just finishing up a little tweak in the tweeter level. I haven't listened yet except to confirm on one that the highs are a trifle bright for the new run of RAAL tweeters. I'll give them a good llisten in an hour or so. They certainly look good.

Looking forward to your impressions (and pics!). smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Philharmonic Audio - Dennis Murphy