Dancing Queen

For Grace Potter it seemed inevitable that the clock was going to strike Midnight.
Fri, 08/28/2015

RIP Bobby Palkovic of Merlin Music Systems

Photo: Stephen Mejias

We were saddened to hear of the death of loudspeaker designer Bobby Palkovic, apparently by his own hand. We had published positive reviews of Bobby's Merlin speakers, including one of his VSM Millennium design and the VSM-MX at www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/439/index.html. Following is the news posted to Facebook by Bobby's friend, Rich Brkich of audio retailer Signature Sound...

Fri, 08/28/2015

Bowers & Wilkins 683 S2 loudspeaker Measurements

Thu, 08/27/2015

COMMENTS
chrisdemarse's picture

I found a deal on a pair of the 685 S2's and couldn't pass it up. I've experience the same uncanny experience of centralized vocals and very competent overall sound, but I can't seem to find any reviews anywhere that unpack them in detail with a more competent amplifier (i'm driving the modestly efficient speaker at 87db with a NAD D3020). Anyone else have a pair that cares to share their thoughts?

fetuso's picture

Chris, see my comment below

low2midhifi's picture

Besides the excellent "product of year" designation and accompanying video review of the B&W 685 S2 by What Hi-Fi, here are some other recent reviews:

CNET:

http://www.cnet.com/products/b-w-600-series-685-speaker-wired-series/

Connect.de (seems to be the successor site to Audio.de, which gave a "Sehr Gut" rating to the 685 s2):

http://www.connect.de/testbericht/bowers-wilkins-685-s2-test-lautspecher...

Numeriques (France):

http://www.lesnumeriques.com/enceintes-home-cinema/bowers-wilkins-685-s2...

Nextmedia (Australia):

http://i.nextmedia.com.au/Assets/bw_685_s2_loudspeakers_review_test_lore...

I hope, still, that we can add Stereophile's review of the B&W 685 S2 to these soon.

This speaker, while perhaps not the best stand-mounter overall, is an outstanding product. I have heard the 685 on Marantz, Rotel, and Arcam amplification. Its easy impedance load and good sensitivity make it a versatile speaker with a variety of gear.

The 685 s2 projects a massive presence for its modest size. It has the characteristic, kind of laid-back "B&W sound." This sound can be laid-back for some, but there is little listening fatigue for this product. Many stand-mounters crossover to the tweeter around 2,800 Hz. Other, more expensive stand-mounters, cross over a lower frequencies of around 1,600 - 1,800. B&W with the 685 S2, as with their other stand-mount speakers get a good result, to my ears, by crossing over to the tweeter at 4,000 Hz.

Weight-wise, the B&W 685 s2 is not heavy at around 15 lbs per unit. There appears to be no inner-bracing of the cabinet. However, another leading manufacturer of speakers is asking almost $3,000 per pair for a pair of speakers that weigh almost the same as the B&W 685 S2 (makes you wonder where the additional $2,300 is going).

An interesting thing I have noticed is that the B&W 685 S2 is such a great deal at $700/pair, that the product at times seems to get limited exposure, by retailers and publications alike. I am sure that many would gravitate toward this product, over much more expensive alternatives, if they knew the sound at which this product was capable, compared to more margin-rich, but not much better products. A major retailer in my major city conspicuously has the B&W 685 S2 on display, but not connected to any amplification or source equipment; they are on display to be seen but not heard.

This is my amateur-hour appraisal of the B&W 685 s2. Read the professional reviews relayed by me for more polished insights.

AllanMarcus's picture

I really appreciate these "Connecticut home" reviews. I too am in the market for the $2000-ish speakers. Any chance you can try some of the internet direct brands like Ascend, XTZ, SVS, Philharmonic, Tekton, Gallo, LSA, or Salk?

Kal Rubinson's picture

The difficulty I have with ID brands is that it is difficult to get any prior exposure or audition that would encourage me to commit to a review.

AllanMarcus's picture

Every brand I listed has rave reviews, some even from TEN magazines.

fetuso's picture

If the brands you listed have rave reviews, why do you need another?

I investigated an ID brand, Chane, before I purchased my current speakers. I decided to not try it because of shipping charges.

AllanMarcus's picture

Chane is another really highly regarded (albeit budget) ID brand.

I guess you are right. All we need are a few Amazon or AVSForum reviews of audio equipment. We don't need professional reviews that can provide consistent comparisons between brands and models.<\satire> Also, just because the brand had one or two speakers doesn't mean they can't have other speakers reviewed.

Kal commented that [essentially] he is not familiar with these ID brands. I was just pointing out that in many cases all these brands have had good reviews, some even by his own magazine. Just because they don't buy ad space should not disqualify them from reviews. All of these brands have speakers that, when reviewed by the pros, garner comments like: "Without fanfare it exists as a completely balanced musical package, with no single element vying for dominance and no unharmonious weaknesses (TAS)", "system is a lovely and effective problem solver (TAS)", "There are few other speakers in this range that can cover the frequency extremes with such versatile ease (HiFI Review", "an audiophile-grade speaker that will appeal to anyone who craves big, highly transparent sound (CNET)". "Based on my reviewing experience, these practically free speakers will get you a satisfyingly big portion of those $50,000 models' performance (Stereophile)". I'm just saying, some of the speakers from these ID companies have been reviewed, but it's always great when a trusted reviewer can compare and contrast to known equipment.

fetuso's picture

You're asking the impossible. there's no way every speaker out there can get reviewed. My point was that it seemed that you were asking to have certain speakers or brands reviewed, then later said that those brands already have numerous reviews. At some point you're just gonna have to buy something and see if you like it at home. If not, return it.

Kal Rubinson's picture

The "brands" may have rave reviews but why would that motivate me to select a particular model when there are so many in every size and price category and the number I can review are so few? I need something direct and personal as I am not interested doing a general survey.

johnnyangel's picture

An interesting review of speakers I might be in the market for. Nice to read it on the web at least but I'm a paying subscriber whose Zinio copy of the edition from which this review was taken still hasn't shown up. Is there any end in sight to this ongoing problem?

John Atkinson's picture
johnnyangel wrote:
I'm a paying subscriber whose Zinio copy of the edition from which this review was taken still hasn't shown up. Is there any end in sight to this ongoing problem?

The Zinio edition of the September Stereophile was made available a week ago. (As a check on their schedule, I pay for a subscription and downloaded my issue last Saturday.)

You need to contact Zinio customer service. (As Zinio is an independent company, I am afraid there is nothing I can do.)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

johnnyangel's picture

Thank you, I will contact them. And meantime I will investigate the alternate subscription mechanism through the iTunes store (now, roll on, rumored large-screen iPad Pro).

In any case Stereophile is to be complimented for only offering limited servings of what has appeared in print on its website. Many titles now (particularly automotive) now provide almost every bit of their content on the Internet before readers can possibly have received their copies. Nice for the freeloader, but really an insult to paying subscribers!

fetuso's picture

Chris, the review of the 685s2 on whathifi.com recommends pairing them with the Arcam FMJ A19. For what it's worth, I recently upgraded from the D3020 to Peachtree Nova65se, and it's made a huge difference. I'm currently using Wharfedale Diamond 220's, which are 86db, and 8 ohm nominal. The 685's are on my list of possible upgrades.

spacehound's picture

Unlike that dopey Gamut thing. Its grille looks awful and serves no practical function, not being cat, dog, and child proof.

The B&W is made for the real world.

Dr.Kamiya's picture

...and its largely decorative grill: A system with a $39,000 speaker is likely to be in a room where cats, dogs and children aren't normally allowed in.

spacehound's picture

On whether you consider $39,000 a lot of money of course :)

I don't. But I would not buy the Gamuts as they CERTAINLY won't sound 20 times better than the B&Ws. Once you get beyond a 'bound to be rubbish' price point, way below the B%W price, HiFi price and performance are not often connected, particularly with speakers.

russm535il's picture

I have RevelF12 floor standing speakers since I have no way to audition speakers here in Pittsburgh This review is so good should I consider selling my Revels and moving to the 683 S2 ?
Thank you for your input !
Russ DeJulio
Pittsburgh PA

Kal Rubinson's picture

Whew! I cannot help you there. I loved the F12s but I last heard them back in 2006. I would have bought them then but they were a bit too tall to fit under my display.

russm535il's picture

Thanks Kal yes I have had. Mine awhile also they are definitely tall and heavy !
Regards
Russ

lifeliver's picture

Hi'
I really stuck between 3 speakers,
Sonus faber venere 3
B&W CM10 S2
And Dali Rubicon 6
Can someone give me advise please ?

Regards
Leonardo

Pages

Bowers & Wilkins 683 S2 loudspeaker Associated Equipment

Thu, 08/27/2015

COMMENTS
chrisdemarse's picture

I found a deal on a pair of the 685 S2's and couldn't pass it up. I've experience the same uncanny experience of centralized vocals and very competent overall sound, but I can't seem to find any reviews anywhere that unpack them in detail with a more competent amplifier (i'm driving the modestly efficient speaker at 87db with a NAD D3020). Anyone else have a pair that cares to share their thoughts?

fetuso's picture

Chris, see my comment below

low2midhifi's picture

Besides the excellent "product of year" designation and accompanying video review of the B&W 685 S2 by What Hi-Fi, here are some other recent reviews:

CNET:

http://www.cnet.com/products/b-w-600-series-685-speaker-wired-series/

Connect.de (seems to be the successor site to Audio.de, which gave a "Sehr Gut" rating to the 685 s2):

http://www.connect.de/testbericht/bowers-wilkins-685-s2-test-lautspecher...

Numeriques (France):

http://www.lesnumeriques.com/enceintes-home-cinema/bowers-wilkins-685-s2...

Nextmedia (Australia):

http://i.nextmedia.com.au/Assets/bw_685_s2_loudspeakers_review_test_lore...

I hope, still, that we can add Stereophile's review of the B&W 685 S2 to these soon.

This speaker, while perhaps not the best stand-mounter overall, is an outstanding product. I have heard the 685 on Marantz, Rotel, and Arcam amplification. Its easy impedance load and good sensitivity make it a versatile speaker with a variety of gear.

The 685 s2 projects a massive presence for its modest size. It has the characteristic, kind of laid-back "B&W sound." This sound can be laid-back for some, but there is little listening fatigue for this product. Many stand-mounters crossover to the tweeter around 2,800 Hz. Other, more expensive stand-mounters, cross over a lower frequencies of around 1,600 - 1,800. B&W with the 685 S2, as with their other stand-mount speakers get a good result, to my ears, by crossing over to the tweeter at 4,000 Hz.

Weight-wise, the B&W 685 s2 is not heavy at around 15 lbs per unit. There appears to be no inner-bracing of the cabinet. However, another leading manufacturer of speakers is asking almost $3,000 per pair for a pair of speakers that weigh almost the same as the B&W 685 S2 (makes you wonder where the additional $2,300 is going).

An interesting thing I have noticed is that the B&W 685 S2 is such a great deal at $700/pair, that the product at times seems to get limited exposure, by retailers and publications alike. I am sure that many would gravitate toward this product, over much more expensive alternatives, if they knew the sound at which this product was capable, compared to more margin-rich, but not much better products. A major retailer in my major city conspicuously has the B&W 685 S2 on display, but not connected to any amplification or source equipment; they are on display to be seen but not heard.

This is my amateur-hour appraisal of the B&W 685 s2. Read the professional reviews relayed by me for more polished insights.

AllanMarcus's picture

I really appreciate these "Connecticut home" reviews. I too am in the market for the $2000-ish speakers. Any chance you can try some of the internet direct brands like Ascend, XTZ, SVS, Philharmonic, Tekton, Gallo, LSA, or Salk?

Kal Rubinson's picture

The difficulty I have with ID brands is that it is difficult to get any prior exposure or audition that would encourage me to commit to a review.

AllanMarcus's picture

Every brand I listed has rave reviews, some even from TEN magazines.

fetuso's picture

If the brands you listed have rave reviews, why do you need another?

I investigated an ID brand, Chane, before I purchased my current speakers. I decided to not try it because of shipping charges.

AllanMarcus's picture

Chane is another really highly regarded (albeit budget) ID brand.

I guess you are right. All we need are a few Amazon or AVSForum reviews of audio equipment. We don't need professional reviews that can provide consistent comparisons between brands and models.<\satire> Also, just because the brand had one or two speakers doesn't mean they can't have other speakers reviewed.

Kal commented that [essentially] he is not familiar with these ID brands. I was just pointing out that in many cases all these brands have had good reviews, some even by his own magazine. Just because they don't buy ad space should not disqualify them from reviews. All of these brands have speakers that, when reviewed by the pros, garner comments like: "Without fanfare it exists as a completely balanced musical package, with no single element vying for dominance and no unharmonious weaknesses (TAS)", "system is a lovely and effective problem solver (TAS)", "There are few other speakers in this range that can cover the frequency extremes with such versatile ease (HiFI Review", "an audiophile-grade speaker that will appeal to anyone who craves big, highly transparent sound (CNET)". "Based on my reviewing experience, these practically free speakers will get you a satisfyingly big portion of those $50,000 models' performance (Stereophile)". I'm just saying, some of the speakers from these ID companies have been reviewed, but it's always great when a trusted reviewer can compare and contrast to known equipment.

fetuso's picture

You're asking the impossible. there's no way every speaker out there can get reviewed. My point was that it seemed that you were asking to have certain speakers or brands reviewed, then later said that those brands already have numerous reviews. At some point you're just gonna have to buy something and see if you like it at home. If not, return it.

Kal Rubinson's picture

The "brands" may have rave reviews but why would that motivate me to select a particular model when there are so many in every size and price category and the number I can review are so few? I need something direct and personal as I am not interested doing a general survey.

johnnyangel's picture

An interesting review of speakers I might be in the market for. Nice to read it on the web at least but I'm a paying subscriber whose Zinio copy of the edition from which this review was taken still hasn't shown up. Is there any end in sight to this ongoing problem?

John Atkinson's picture
johnnyangel wrote:
I'm a paying subscriber whose Zinio copy of the edition from which this review was taken still hasn't shown up. Is there any end in sight to this ongoing problem?

The Zinio edition of the September Stereophile was made available a week ago. (As a check on their schedule, I pay for a subscription and downloaded my issue last Saturday.)

You need to contact Zinio customer service. (As Zinio is an independent company, I am afraid there is nothing I can do.)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

johnnyangel's picture

Thank you, I will contact them. And meantime I will investigate the alternate subscription mechanism through the iTunes store (now, roll on, rumored large-screen iPad Pro).

In any case Stereophile is to be complimented for only offering limited servings of what has appeared in print on its website. Many titles now (particularly automotive) now provide almost every bit of their content on the Internet before readers can possibly have received their copies. Nice for the freeloader, but really an insult to paying subscribers!

fetuso's picture

Chris, the review of the 685s2 on whathifi.com recommends pairing them with the Arcam FMJ A19. For what it's worth, I recently upgraded from the D3020 to Peachtree Nova65se, and it's made a huge difference. I'm currently using Wharfedale Diamond 220's, which are 86db, and 8 ohm nominal. The 685's are on my list of possible upgrades.

spacehound's picture

Unlike that dopey Gamut thing. Its grille looks awful and serves no practical function, not being cat, dog, and child proof.

The B&W is made for the real world.

Dr.Kamiya's picture

...and its largely decorative grill: A system with a $39,000 speaker is likely to be in a room where cats, dogs and children aren't normally allowed in.

spacehound's picture

On whether you consider $39,000 a lot of money of course :)

I don't. But I would not buy the Gamuts as they CERTAINLY won't sound 20 times better than the B&Ws. Once you get beyond a 'bound to be rubbish' price point, way below the B%W price, HiFi price and performance are not often connected, particularly with speakers.

russm535il's picture

I have RevelF12 floor standing speakers since I have no way to audition speakers here in Pittsburgh This review is so good should I consider selling my Revels and moving to the 683 S2 ?
Thank you for your input !
Russ DeJulio
Pittsburgh PA

Kal Rubinson's picture

Whew! I cannot help you there. I loved the F12s but I last heard them back in 2006. I would have bought them then but they were a bit too tall to fit under my display.

russm535il's picture

Thanks Kal yes I have had. Mine awhile also they are definitely tall and heavy !
Regards
Russ

lifeliver's picture

Hi'
I really stuck between 3 speakers,
Sonus faber venere 3
B&W CM10 S2
And Dali Rubicon 6
Can someone give me advise please ?

Regards
Leonardo

Pages

Bowers & Wilkins 683 S2 loudspeaker Specifications

Thu, 08/27/2015

COMMENTS
chrisdemarse's picture

I found a deal on a pair of the 685 S2's and couldn't pass it up. I've experience the same uncanny experience of centralized vocals and very competent overall sound, but I can't seem to find any reviews anywhere that unpack them in detail with a more competent amplifier (i'm driving the modestly efficient speaker at 87db with a NAD D3020). Anyone else have a pair that cares to share their thoughts?

fetuso's picture

Chris, see my comment below

low2midhifi's picture

Besides the excellent "product of year" designation and accompanying video review of the B&W 685 S2 by What Hi-Fi, here are some other recent reviews:

CNET:

http://www.cnet.com/products/b-w-600-series-685-speaker-wired-series/

Connect.de (seems to be the successor site to Audio.de, which gave a "Sehr Gut" rating to the 685 s2):

http://www.connect.de/testbericht/bowers-wilkins-685-s2-test-lautspecher...

Numeriques (France):

http://www.lesnumeriques.com/enceintes-home-cinema/bowers-wilkins-685-s2...

Nextmedia (Australia):

http://i.nextmedia.com.au/Assets/bw_685_s2_loudspeakers_review_test_lore...

I hope, still, that we can add Stereophile's review of the B&W 685 S2 to these soon.

This speaker, while perhaps not the best stand-mounter overall, is an outstanding product. I have heard the 685 on Marantz, Rotel, and Arcam amplification. Its easy impedance load and good sensitivity make it a versatile speaker with a variety of gear.

The 685 s2 projects a massive presence for its modest size. It has the characteristic, kind of laid-back "B&W sound." This sound can be laid-back for some, but there is little listening fatigue for this product. Many stand-mounters crossover to the tweeter around 2,800 Hz. Other, more expensive stand-mounters, cross over a lower frequencies of around 1,600 - 1,800. B&W with the 685 S2, as with their other stand-mount speakers get a good result, to my ears, by crossing over to the tweeter at 4,000 Hz.

Weight-wise, the B&W 685 s2 is not heavy at around 15 lbs per unit. There appears to be no inner-bracing of the cabinet. However, another leading manufacturer of speakers is asking almost $3,000 per pair for a pair of speakers that weigh almost the same as the B&W 685 S2 (makes you wonder where the additional $2,300 is going).

An interesting thing I have noticed is that the B&W 685 S2 is such a great deal at $700/pair, that the product at times seems to get limited exposure, by retailers and publications alike. I am sure that many would gravitate toward this product, over much more expensive alternatives, if they knew the sound at which this product was capable, compared to more margin-rich, but not much better products. A major retailer in my major city conspicuously has the B&W 685 S2 on display, but not connected to any amplification or source equipment; they are on display to be seen but not heard.

This is my amateur-hour appraisal of the B&W 685 s2. Read the professional reviews relayed by me for more polished insights.

AllanMarcus's picture

I really appreciate these "Connecticut home" reviews. I too am in the market for the $2000-ish speakers. Any chance you can try some of the internet direct brands like Ascend, XTZ, SVS, Philharmonic, Tekton, Gallo, LSA, or Salk?

Kal Rubinson's picture

The difficulty I have with ID brands is that it is difficult to get any prior exposure or audition that would encourage me to commit to a review.

AllanMarcus's picture

Every brand I listed has rave reviews, some even from TEN magazines.

fetuso's picture

If the brands you listed have rave reviews, why do you need another?

I investigated an ID brand, Chane, before I purchased my current speakers. I decided to not try it because of shipping charges.

AllanMarcus's picture

Chane is another really highly regarded (albeit budget) ID brand.

I guess you are right. All we need are a few Amazon or AVSForum reviews of audio equipment. We don't need professional reviews that can provide consistent comparisons between brands and models.<\satire> Also, just because the brand had one or two speakers doesn't mean they can't have other speakers reviewed.

Kal commented that [essentially] he is not familiar with these ID brands. I was just pointing out that in many cases all these brands have had good reviews, some even by his own magazine. Just because they don't buy ad space should not disqualify them from reviews. All of these brands have speakers that, when reviewed by the pros, garner comments like: "Without fanfare it exists as a completely balanced musical package, with no single element vying for dominance and no unharmonious weaknesses (TAS)", "system is a lovely and effective problem solver (TAS)", "There are few other speakers in this range that can cover the frequency extremes with such versatile ease (HiFI Review", "an audiophile-grade speaker that will appeal to anyone who craves big, highly transparent sound (CNET)". "Based on my reviewing experience, these practically free speakers will get you a satisfyingly big portion of those $50,000 models' performance (Stereophile)". I'm just saying, some of the speakers from these ID companies have been reviewed, but it's always great when a trusted reviewer can compare and contrast to known equipment.

fetuso's picture

You're asking the impossible. there's no way every speaker out there can get reviewed. My point was that it seemed that you were asking to have certain speakers or brands reviewed, then later said that those brands already have numerous reviews. At some point you're just gonna have to buy something and see if you like it at home. If not, return it.

Kal Rubinson's picture

The "brands" may have rave reviews but why would that motivate me to select a particular model when there are so many in every size and price category and the number I can review are so few? I need something direct and personal as I am not interested doing a general survey.

johnnyangel's picture

An interesting review of speakers I might be in the market for. Nice to read it on the web at least but I'm a paying subscriber whose Zinio copy of the edition from which this review was taken still hasn't shown up. Is there any end in sight to this ongoing problem?

John Atkinson's picture
johnnyangel wrote:
I'm a paying subscriber whose Zinio copy of the edition from which this review was taken still hasn't shown up. Is there any end in sight to this ongoing problem?

The Zinio edition of the September Stereophile was made available a week ago. (As a check on their schedule, I pay for a subscription and downloaded my issue last Saturday.)

You need to contact Zinio customer service. (As Zinio is an independent company, I am afraid there is nothing I can do.)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

johnnyangel's picture

Thank you, I will contact them. And meantime I will investigate the alternate subscription mechanism through the iTunes store (now, roll on, rumored large-screen iPad Pro).

In any case Stereophile is to be complimented for only offering limited servings of what has appeared in print on its website. Many titles now (particularly automotive) now provide almost every bit of their content on the Internet before readers can possibly have received their copies. Nice for the freeloader, but really an insult to paying subscribers!

fetuso's picture

Chris, the review of the 685s2 on whathifi.com recommends pairing them with the Arcam FMJ A19. For what it's worth, I recently upgraded from the D3020 to Peachtree Nova65se, and it's made a huge difference. I'm currently using Wharfedale Diamond 220's, which are 86db, and 8 ohm nominal. The 685's are on my list of possible upgrades.

spacehound's picture

Unlike that dopey Gamut thing. Its grille looks awful and serves no practical function, not being cat, dog, and child proof.

The B&W is made for the real world.

Dr.Kamiya's picture

...and its largely decorative grill: A system with a $39,000 speaker is likely to be in a room where cats, dogs and children aren't normally allowed in.

spacehound's picture

On whether you consider $39,000 a lot of money of course :)

I don't. But I would not buy the Gamuts as they CERTAINLY won't sound 20 times better than the B&Ws. Once you get beyond a 'bound to be rubbish' price point, way below the B%W price, HiFi price and performance are not often connected, particularly with speakers.

russm535il's picture

I have RevelF12 floor standing speakers since I have no way to audition speakers here in Pittsburgh This review is so good should I consider selling my Revels and moving to the 683 S2 ?
Thank you for your input !
Russ DeJulio
Pittsburgh PA

Kal Rubinson's picture

Whew! I cannot help you there. I loved the F12s but I last heard them back in 2006. I would have bought them then but they were a bit too tall to fit under my display.

russm535il's picture

Thanks Kal yes I have had. Mine awhile also they are definitely tall and heavy !
Regards
Russ

lifeliver's picture

Hi'
I really stuck between 3 speakers,
Sonus faber venere 3
B&W CM10 S2
And Dali Rubicon 6
Can someone give me advise please ?

Regards
Leonardo

Pages

Bowers & Wilkins 683 S2 loudspeaker

For some time now I've wanted to upgrade my weekend system in Connecticut, and have been surveying three-way floorstanding speakers priced below about $2500/pair. I've focused on the stereo performance of each pair with music because, despite my interest in surround sound, the great majority of recordings are available only in two-channel stereo. Not wanting to look like a Bowers & Wilkins fanboy—my main system has long included their 800-series speakers—I put off auditioning B&W's 683 S2. But my goal was to get the best bang for my buck and with the 683 S2 costing $1650/pair, it would foolish to be influenced by such extraneous considerations. Besides, the 683 S2's three-way design and physical proportions were precisely what I was looking for.
Thu, 08/27/2015

GamuT RS7 loudspeaker Measurements

Thu, 08/27/2015

COMMENTS
jmsent's picture

Quote:
"The soft diaphragm is terminated with rubber roll surrounds not only at its circumference, as usual, but also at a central, stationary, sharp-pointed phase plug."

I don't understand this. Tweeters are generally not terminated with rubber rolls and this one is no exception. The picture shows a one piece coated textile dome assembly, just like every other ScanSpeak and Vifa ring radiator tweeter I've ever seen. Since the large rolls are designed to be the actual radiating surfaces , I think rubber would be the last material you'd want to use for this purpose.
As for the performance...I guess you're being "diplomatic" here..but I see a system with serious flaws in its design. The specs describe this as a 3 way speaker, but the individual driver curves reveal it to actually be a 2-1/2 way system. The so called "midrange driver"isn't really a midrange at all. It's a woofer/midrange, since it is being fed all the spectral energy right up to the tweeter crossover point, including all the bass. At least, the impedance curve gives no indication of an electrical crossover at 250Hz And what exactly is the deal with the huge response dip at the tweeter crossover? Did they run into the well known problem of using a ring radiator tweeter at too low a frequency? It's no secret that 2nd order distortion in this type of tweeter rises quickly under 2.5 kHz, which is why this tweeter performs best when crossed over at or above 3kHz. But then, there's the problem of trying to push a 7" bass/midrange beyond 3kHz. It seems to me this all could have been avoided by using a real midrange driver; e.g., 5" with a true bandpass filter, or choosing a different tweeter that could be crossed in at a lower frequency. To me, this speaker has major flaws, inexcusable at $39,000.

dcolak's picture

That can't be normal, specially for that kind of money?

Pages

GamuT RS7 loudspeaker Associated Equipment

Thu, 08/27/2015

COMMENTS
jmsent's picture

Quote:
"The soft diaphragm is terminated with rubber roll surrounds not only at its circumference, as usual, but also at a central, stationary, sharp-pointed phase plug."

I don't understand this. Tweeters are generally not terminated with rubber rolls and this one is no exception. The picture shows a one piece coated textile dome assembly, just like every other ScanSpeak and Vifa ring radiator tweeter I've ever seen. Since the large rolls are designed to be the actual radiating surfaces , I think rubber would be the last material you'd want to use for this purpose.
As for the performance...I guess you're being "diplomatic" here..but I see a system with serious flaws in its design. The specs describe this as a 3 way speaker, but the individual driver curves reveal it to actually be a 2-1/2 way system. The so called "midrange driver"isn't really a midrange at all. It's a woofer/midrange, since it is being fed all the spectral energy right up to the tweeter crossover point, including all the bass. At least, the impedance curve gives no indication of an electrical crossover at 250Hz And what exactly is the deal with the huge response dip at the tweeter crossover? Did they run into the well known problem of using a ring radiator tweeter at too low a frequency? It's no secret that 2nd order distortion in this type of tweeter rises quickly under 2.5 kHz, which is why this tweeter performs best when crossed over at or above 3kHz. But then, there's the problem of trying to push a 7" bass/midrange beyond 3kHz. It seems to me this all could have been avoided by using a real midrange driver; e.g., 5" with a true bandpass filter, or choosing a different tweeter that could be crossed in at a lower frequency. To me, this speaker has major flaws, inexcusable at $39,000.

dcolak's picture

That can't be normal, specially for that kind of money?

Pages

GamuT RS7 loudspeaker Specifications

Thu, 08/27/2015

COMMENTS
jmsent's picture

Quote:
"The soft diaphragm is terminated with rubber roll surrounds not only at its circumference, as usual, but also at a central, stationary, sharp-pointed phase plug."

I don't understand this. Tweeters are generally not terminated with rubber rolls and this one is no exception. The picture shows a one piece coated textile dome assembly, just like every other ScanSpeak and Vifa ring radiator tweeter I've ever seen. Since the large rolls are designed to be the actual radiating surfaces , I think rubber would be the last material you'd want to use for this purpose.
As for the performance...I guess you're being "diplomatic" here..but I see a system with serious flaws in its design. The specs describe this as a 3 way speaker, but the individual driver curves reveal it to actually be a 2-1/2 way system. The so called "midrange driver"isn't really a midrange at all. It's a woofer/midrange, since it is being fed all the spectral energy right up to the tweeter crossover point, including all the bass. At least, the impedance curve gives no indication of an electrical crossover at 250Hz And what exactly is the deal with the huge response dip at the tweeter crossover? Did they run into the well known problem of using a ring radiator tweeter at too low a frequency? It's no secret that 2nd order distortion in this type of tweeter rises quickly under 2.5 kHz, which is why this tweeter performs best when crossed over at or above 3kHz. But then, there's the problem of trying to push a 7" bass/midrange beyond 3kHz. It seems to me this all could have been avoided by using a real midrange driver; e.g., 5" with a true bandpass filter, or choosing a different tweeter that could be crossed in at a lower frequency. To me, this speaker has major flaws, inexcusable at $39,000.

dcolak's picture

That can't be normal, specially for that kind of money?

Pages

GamuT RS7 loudspeaker Page 2

Thu, 08/27/2015

COMMENTS
jmsent's picture

Quote:
"The soft diaphragm is terminated with rubber roll surrounds not only at its circumference, as usual, but also at a central, stationary, sharp-pointed phase plug."

I don't understand this. Tweeters are generally not terminated with rubber rolls and this one is no exception. The picture shows a one piece coated textile dome assembly, just like every other ScanSpeak and Vifa ring radiator tweeter I've ever seen. Since the large rolls are designed to be the actual radiating surfaces , I think rubber would be the last material you'd want to use for this purpose.
As for the performance...I guess you're being "diplomatic" here..but I see a system with serious flaws in its design. The specs describe this as a 3 way speaker, but the individual driver curves reveal it to actually be a 2-1/2 way system. The so called "midrange driver"isn't really a midrange at all. It's a woofer/midrange, since it is being fed all the spectral energy right up to the tweeter crossover point, including all the bass. At least, the impedance curve gives no indication of an electrical crossover at 250Hz And what exactly is the deal with the huge response dip at the tweeter crossover? Did they run into the well known problem of using a ring radiator tweeter at too low a frequency? It's no secret that 2nd order distortion in this type of tweeter rises quickly under 2.5 kHz, which is why this tweeter performs best when crossed over at or above 3kHz. But then, there's the problem of trying to push a 7" bass/midrange beyond 3kHz. It seems to me this all could have been avoided by using a real midrange driver; e.g., 5" with a true bandpass filter, or choosing a different tweeter that could be crossed in at a lower frequency. To me, this speaker has major flaws, inexcusable at $39,000.

dcolak's picture

That can't be normal, specially for that kind of money?

Pages

Pages

X
Enter your Stereophile.com username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
Loading