Franco Serblin Accordo Goldberg loudspeaker Page 2

The sound
Experience with the Accordo Goldberg has reacquainted me with Franco's pursuit of truly natural timbres. From the first few notes, I heard an unstressed, communicative delivery that quickly drew me in. While rock and electric jazz played as well as most designs of this size, power handling, and compact category, such material could not reveal the full measure of the quality on offer here.

It was with simple recordings of natural sounds that these speakers' true excellence was revealed. Here, the Accordo Goldberg proved capable of effortlessly differentiating recording and production methods and the resulting sound quality. Fine recordings with dense orchestration exploded into life, belying the compact size of the reproducers. At times, it was much like experiencing a top-class laser projector in the domain of sound; it felt very close to sonic holography. Even with a large orchestra, the perception of individual-instrument focus and perspective was compelling. The Tony Faulkner recording of Arvo Pärt's Fratres (CD, Telarc 80387) was sumptuous, demonstrating a huge soundstage filled in with an extraordinary quantity of microdetail. Near-pinpoint imaging was heard over the whole soundscape.

Additionally, a convincing sense of scale and power belied these loudspeakers' compact dimensions. The musical performance was highly expressive—at times near heartstopping. Here was a seductive recreation of a shimmering acoustic space with image depth in spades, extending way beyond the confines of my room. Not one of my listeners dared speak until the conclusion. Microdynamics were state of the art and beautifully nuanced. I could not stop listening to these loudspeakers and expended many more days than I anticipated. There was a dynamic expression and naturalness to the midrange akin to a full-range electrostatic.

The Goldbergs are ruthlessly transparent and read the quality of all that was used with them. Sources, amplification, supports, cables, and formats were easily differentiated. We heard less an analytic dissection of the shortcomings of our equipment and more a clear exposition as to how it all could be better. While not wholly neutral in the manner of a top-class studio monitor, the Goldbergs are more than sufficiently revealing to be used in acoustic recording sessions with smaller forces. They tell you much about hall acoustic, microphone placement, floor and wall reflections, and the rest.

I learned still more about my favorite recordings with these modestly sized speakers, even excerpts that had been played hundreds of times in multiple sessions involving many products.

My practiced listening partner requested that old Decca (Argo) warhorse, the vinyl Vivaldi Four Seasons conducted by Neville Marriner. And we thought that we knew this recording to the last semiquaver—Ouch! How wrong we were! We were reminded of that Goldmund Reference turntable review when we first experienced this work in its full glory decades ago—or so we thought at the time. Now, from that same recording (and at CD resolution), it was evident there was still more music to experience. There is the first onset of a note, a steep transient as the bow excites a string. There is then that rich, nasal resonance when it sings into life. Then there's the power and timbral authority as "Summer" builds and as the Goldbergs transport the band into your room with vibrant musicality.

Simply put, these speakers do not sound like audio machinery working. That subtly nuanced harpsichord continuo and its body casework was perfectly imaged, almost as a solo piece. You could almost feel Summer's shimmering warmth. The violins were not just voiced; they sang with a rich sonority and natural dynamic expression, seducing listeners and demanding their attention. Was this thanks to the complex curved musical-instrument-related casework?

While sounding lovely on rock, including "Gravity" by Rickie Lee Jones (on CD), with no added hardness or cone "shout," the Goldberg does not quite deliver the punch and bassline drive required for a full rock experience. It fights back with extraordinary introspection and vocal clarity. So, while rock may be compromised in terms of the sheer power of the live stage experience, the Goldberg rewards handsomely by transporting the listener to the musical event. Vocals are notably more intimate and less electronic, less mechanical sounding. The female singing voice in particular is something of a revelation, in purity, dynamics, and expression. The Goldberg brilliantly showed off Suzanne Vega's stunning performance on Solitude Standing, played here on the original LP issue (A&M SP-5136).

The Franco Serblin Accordo Goldberg effortlessly reveals recorded technique details including mike placement, plus the hall acoustic in considerable scale, illuminating far boundaries. Sampling the Dorian issue of the Mozart Organ Fantasy in F Minor, K.608, with the wonderful Jean Guillou recorded at the fantastic Cathedral of St. Eustache Paris, the Accordo Goldberg sounded unusually dynamic and excellently expressed the truly cavernous acoustic. Here was transparency in spades (with room lights off for the best effect). I was amazed by the magnificent dimensionality matched by the almost hyper-real voicing of the tin-alloy pipes, even if the full weight of the tallest flutes was a little muted.

I tried a heavy dance track that had succeeded with the Magico A5. At more than moderate volume, the Goldberg said no thanks. Few individual recordings could show all that is possible from the Accordo Goldberg, but on "A Nightingale Sang in Berkley Square" from We Are In Love (CD, 466736 2), Harry Connick Jr. shows off amazingly communicative vocal skills, and that string bass solo is near heart-stopping in expression and presence. You can enjoy the sound quality and the musical performance in equal measure. Rhythm and timing are as good as they get.

"Lightning," sung by Janice Pendarvis on Philip Glass's Songs from Liquid Days (CD, CBS MK 39564), was notably unstrained, well timed, and rewardingly expressive. Many loudspeakers trip up on this recording. We also played Pyramid, by the Modern Jazz Quartet (Atlantic 1325-2), on CD. This minimalist 1960 stereo recording was stripped bare by the Goldberg and was all the better for finding the musicians starkly illuminated, with superb focus and timing. This famously dry 1959–60 Rudy van Gelder analog-recorded acoustic was faithfully portrayed, sounding entirely authentic in reproducing these fabulously upbeat performances captured more than half a century ago. This band sounded as if it was starkly present in my room, immediate, superbly focused, and captivating; the sense of excess dryness on this recording was quickly dispelled. Also on CD, "Cross the Heartland" by Pat Metheny, from American Garage, sounded lyrical, sympathetic, and utterly engaging.

Choral music was exceptionally well rendered, including "There is a flower" from Songs of the Nativity by the Cambridge Singers and the City of London Sinfonia, John Rutter conducting (CD, Hyperion CSCD510). Here, the hall acoustic and choir were beautifully placed and balanced.

I listened to the Accordo Goldberg over many days and almost every evening for weeks.

Conclusion: Quality not quantity
A summary of this loudspeaker's qualities cannot do justice to the actual listening experience. While it is not the loudest in its class, nor does it have the deepest bass, it might just be the most beautifully made and finished speaker I've encountered. But the Accordo Goldberg manages to transcend the build technology and the machinery within to build a closer relationship with your ear. It plays with a superbly natural timbre, especially violin, piano, and voice, while defining wide, deep, and well-focused sound images that almost breathe with life. With the Goldbergs, you can readily distinguish wholly analog sources from digital.

But that is as nothing compared with their supremely tactile microdynamic and seductive quality, which draws the listener into the musical performance. On its own terms and at a modest scale, there is more satisfaction to be derived here than with many a larger, far more costly technical powerhouse. Highly Recommended.

COMPANY INFO
Franco Serblin/Laboratorium
Via Riviera Berica 628 p/1
Vicenza
Italy 36100
sales@axissaudio.com
(866) 295-4133
ARTICLE CONTENTS

COMMENTS
georgehifi's picture

Would be nice if when it was designed not to have that the two octave canyon dip centered at 300hz to see what it would sound like with a flatter FR instead of having to EQ it up +5db, and while at it a little also at 2khz, they "look" like they should measure better than that.

Cheers George

laxr5rs's picture

These are beautiful. Too bad they measure horribly.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture

"Additionally, a convincing sense of scale and power belied these loudspeakers' compact dimensions. The musical performance was highly expressive—at times near heartstopping. Here was a seductive recreation of a shimmering acoustic space with image depth in spades, extending way beyond the confines of my room. Not one of my listeners dared speak until the conclusion. Microdynamics were state of the art and beautifully nuanced. I could not stop listening to these loudspeakers and expended many more days than I anticipated. There was a dynamic expression and naturalness to the midrange akin to a full-range electrostatic."

laxr5rs's picture

But, but... such prose! heh Those are not results. Those are words. I'd be glad to explain the inherent problems with human hearing system.

sinad_loverboy's picture

This cult of listening has to end. It's the tail wagging the dog. Every thinking man knows that measured performance, and measured performance alone, tells us what's worth buying and what's overpriced jewelry.

And who, other than effete snobs, give a hoot about what their speakers look like! My speakers that I built myself and cost $447.50 all in are made from MDF and vintage drivers salvaged from dumpster dives but they are better than anything reviewed here.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture

your opinions should not be mandated throughout the audio world. In fact your opening statement is so inane as to be dismissed without a comment. But it was actually too jaw droopingly moronic to not get a response. I'm glad you have no style or cares for aesthetics. Enjoy your $447 speakers. Do you wear clothing that was purchased this century ? Do you drive your father's 1976 Pontiac? Sheesh a new level of moron descends to the comments section.

laxr5rs's picture

Aren't your spirited! Do you have anything of actual value to say regarding the topic that these speakers are super pretty, but measure horribly. Do you buy speakers just to look at them? I'll take good sound over looks any day, in exactly the same way that I'd rather date someone who is a fantastic person, but may not be a super model, rather than dating a vapid super model. Am I right? AM I RIGHT PEOPLE!?!?!?

prerich45's picture

I hate to say it, but you're only right in the sense of what another person views as "fantastic". Some may view a bigoted person as fantastic as they hold the same view points. To another person - they represent what's wrong in the world. The human paradigm is impossible to escape.

laxr5rs's picture

Luckily with something as unimportant as speakers, we have massive amounts of technology that has grown up over a century that allow us to actually measure quality, over and above the protest of the humans with hearing systems that did not evolve to test the objective quality of speakers. This is why when people emphasize the human element in speakers, you get opinions all over the place like religion. Ignoring modern speaker measurements by highly sophisticated modern measuring equipment - is like saying, "Evolution is false," or, "the Moon landing was faked." I want to add that I understand that the subjective is highly important in people's relationship to speakers and audio equipment. I like my speakers regardless of how they look and only care about performance because I'm a home recording tech head. Give me performance! Performance is - why I like them. That's my subjective reason liking speakers. But if someone has another reason and they emphasize what they hear, and what the speakers look like, or something else, then, that's their criteria, and they are welcome to it.

laxr5rs's picture

To satisfy the mocking dude who commented... about, I'm not sure what. You could spend several thousand dollars on perfect wood for them, and not change a thing about their sound quality. Maybe then the believers would be satiated? heh

beave's picture

The intentional irony of sinad's post flew way over your head, didn't it Johnny?

teched58's picture

When all the angry old guys who have more money than electronics knowledge are gone -- and I am sad to report that Johnny Thunders died in New Orleans 20 years ago -- who will post love notes to the makers of expensive but poorly measuring equipment?

sinad_loverboy's picture

We'd say it looks like a cat crawled up your pants and laid an egg.

Glotz's picture

Stupid gets the horns!

Yah, thanks for the troll, haters!

@sinad... You're out of your element. These speakers are leagues beyond that $450 pair you compared them to. Lol.

And the answer is you..! Your comments crawled up Thunders' sense of decency.

He's right.

laxr5rs's picture

That is a great statement. I'm going to borrow it if you don't mind. Let me give you the opposing response from the peanut gallery: "My 60 year old years are better than your super sensitive measuring equipment that measures down to within a billionths of an inch of the noise floor!" heheh

prerich45's picture

I've chased Sinad before and I've actually found it wanting due to my own deficiencies (hearing issues), mental sonic paradigms, and just plain taste. Measured performance for me - tells me if something is fundamentally broken. However when listening - I'm listening for pleasure, my personal pleasure. If I had "ruler flat" speakers (and I do have a pair that are not hooked up anymore), and a song sounds like garbage...that I've heard before...do I blame the sound engineer? Or can I blame the engineer - as he has determined what the recording will sound like? Although you say the cult of listening must stop...I'm saying it can't, because ultimately - people will like what pleases them. If someone served me a steak, cooked to what they deemed to "perfection" (medium rare), I'd send it back - because i like MY steak cooked medium, and my wife ...she likes the most difficult of all, medium well. A speaker can be "perfect" by the numbers, but if it doesn't give me personal pleasure - I'm sending it back.

Anton's picture

Sinadloverboy! That is the best ‘casting your line’ post of the year.

Quite the haul!

supamark's picture

it's the commenter formerly known as ChrisS (or something like that). content and style match. and yea, I'd give 'em an 8/10 on the troll.

ChrisS's picture

I'm still around.

But no dogs in this race. Or chickens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDrdZM1iGrc

justmeagain's picture

Reviewers fall in love with components, especially speakers, and then they measure....not so good. The human mind has tremendous influence over what we hear (and see, for that matter), so any quality ratings must be taken with a large grain of salt. We try to balance these factors, but often we fail. It's one of the things that make music reproduction interesting.

cognoscente's picture

this is (mainly) about "the look-and-feel". And you love it or you hate it. This is (mainly) about craftsmanship. A functional (art) object. Applied art.

you have a "highly recommended" products (which means worth considering, scores proportionally to its price, comparable to others in this price range), an "outstanding" product (which means above average) and an :editor's choice" product (with an excellent price-quality ratio, a bargain). So this here is average. You choose this mainly for the "look-and- feel" and not for the price-quality ratio. The ear wants something, the eye certainly does too.

hb72's picture

hmmm, developers say measurements are of course indispensable means in development. but the relationship between perceived quality and measurement erring from ideal is not at all a simple easy to overlook field.
on a different "note", the somewhat shaky f-response may or may not disturb; if it does, get an amp or streamer or dac with Dirac or similar and you are set. works for most people most of the time. having said that, that somewhat shaky f-response might be exactly that sort of deviation from the original, we (our ear/brain combo) might adapt to the quickest, long before you get used to the beauty (visual and audible).

prerich45's picture

Here,here...bravo!

sinad_loverboy's picture

Ears and brains are a mess. That's why we have test equipment that no human can match. So and so says so and so about a speaker. So What!

The fellas here in the comments know more about how to build good hi-fi than any reviewer and most of the clowns making overpriced garbage. Sometimes I wonder why these fellas in the comments don't just make hi-fi!

I come here to read the measurements and the comments. All the rest is just words.

georgehifi's picture

"You choose this mainly for the "look-and- feel" and not for the price-quality ratio. The ear wants something, the eye certainly does too."

You don't buy a Porche or Ferrari just for their looks, if they handle and go like a bag of ****
Same for expensive, great looking hiend audio, it's must sound/measure good too.
Cheers George

cognoscente's picture

Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I'm more positive than negative about these speakers, they look great (and this is not sarcastic). I'm not going to buy them, my limit is 5k for speakers, and then the "editor's choice" type.

Oh yeah, I personally don't care about measurements in audio. That is mathematically "objective" . Listening, like experiencing music itself, is subjective. Everyone is looking for something different in music and sound. I trust my hearing (my "sound-taste") and my own judgment. I know what I'm looking for in sound. Measurements in audio says nothing about my taste, so I don't use them, for me they are pointless, but is my personal opinion, but hey, I'm just a layman and amateur.

You buy a Ferrari or Porsche or Bugatti certainly for the look-and-feel, but mainly for status / self-image and fear of death: "buy while you still can". But again this is just my personal opinion, nothing more. My truth is not your truth. Anyway I don't know where you live, but here you mainly standing or driving slowly in traffic jams. In the middle of nowhere you hardly have this problem I guess.

sinad_loverboy's picture

It's must measure good too!

Jau's picture

I am 72 years old, and all these comments make me remember a phrase from Advent loudspeakers in one of their brochures and catalogs in which when comparing the technical measurements and the sound of two identical speakers, I think I remember they said something like:
“If a microphone is installed to record our voice and we take two measurements, one speaking without any obstacle in front of us and the other placing a simple handkerchief a few cm in front of our mouth, the latter will have seen its frequency response altered but our ears will perceive the same sound in both". Would Henry Kloss have any knowledge when commenting on this?
Sorry if there is something inaccurate regarding what I think Advent said, perhaps my memory is failing me.
Apart from that, can the sound of a amplifier or loudspeaker with a distortion of 0.1% be worse than another with 0.01?

eriks's picture

Measurements reminds me of some Dynaudio speakers which were excellent at low level listening and detail. I find the impedance plot more curious though. The low impedance in the treble, given the tweeter, makes me wonder if a 2nd order low pass coil is missing a resistor. Not terrible results, but with some amps increasing impedance in the treble it may make these speakers quite tunable with the right amp.

georgehifi's picture

"I personally don't care about measurements in audio. That is mathematically "objective"."

All "good" equipment is designed, measured and tested with all the laws of electronics Ohms Law Kirchoffs Law and using test gear etc.

Any that haven't been built using these are just "voodoo products" stay well away from them, like those SR $400 "directional AC mains fuses" that Bussman 50c ones are just as good for an AC mains fuse etc etc.

Cheers George

Anton's picture

From the side, they kinda remind me of that guy listening to Maxell tape.

They look "windswept."

Very pretty.

PeterG's picture

Thanks for the great review, I appreciate you noting the speakers' obvious shortcomings as well as its strengths. As a current TuneTots owner and a B&W 805 alumnus, I'm big on stand-mount speakers. I often wonder if it is right to evaluate stand-mounts without using a subwoofer. Sure, it would introduce a huge new variable. But we know before we even plug any of these excellent speakers in that they will not deliver bass commensurate with their price level. Any serious listener without downstairs neighbors needs a sub, these should be reviewed with one.

EmmaHund's picture

"While sounding lovely on rock, including "Gravity" by Rickie Lee Jones (on CD), with no added hardness or cone "shout," the Goldberg does not quite deliver the punch and bassline drive required for a full rock experience."

'cone shout'??
Never heard of it. Can anyone explain what cone 'shout' means?

John Atkinson's picture
EmmaHund wrote:
'cone shout'??
Never heard of it. Can anyone explain what cone 'shout' means?

Also called "cone cry." Cone breakup modes or surround termination problems in the upper midrange can add a nasal coloration. The Franco Serblin speaker didn't suffer from this.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

EmmaHund's picture

Thanks for the explanation!

The excellent mid-bass from scanspeak (18W/8531G00 ?) is, among other things, designed to minimize break-up modes.

X