Listening #119 Page 2

The product we tried next was the DeVore Fidelity O/96 Orangutan: a vintage-vibe two-way loudspeaker that impressed us all that day. (A full review is scheduled for the December 2012 issue.) The O/96 is a wide-baffle speaker, designed to be used atop similarly wide wooden stands (included in the $12,000/pair price). On one of the more clearheaded days that followed, I noticed that the DeVore stands, if rotated 90°, could fit nicely between the integral feet of the Line Magnetic enclosures. Once I'd determined how to maneuver the very heavy 755 I's onto the stands (hint: it involved child labor), I did so, thus raising the centers of the drivers from 27" to 33" off the floor.

That single, small act made a couple of audible differences, the most surprising of which was, indeed, an increase in bass extension: With the 755 I cabinet raised that extra 6" above the floor, the 63Hz warble tone from the first Stereophile Test CD (Stereophile STPH002-2) was undoubtedly stronger throughout the listening area, and low-frequency sounds in general had slightly more power and reach. Deeper fundamentals, such as the low E-string (41.2Hz) of an acoustic or electric bass, remained beyond the capabilities of the Line Magnetic, yet most recordings gained a bit more foundation and thus were now more satisfying. The battery of percussion instruments in Felix Slatkin's recording, with the Concert Arts Symphony Orchestra, of Benjamin Britten's Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra (LP, Capitol SP8373), was more impressive, while Bob Cranshaw's bass in "Yesterdays," from Sonny Rollins and Coleman Hawkins's Sonny Meets Hawk! (LP, RCA LSP-2712), took on greater richness and scale.

And it was rather surprising how good—how downright satisfying—the newly elevated Line Magnetics sounded with rock music. One might wonder whether a speaker that extends to only 60Hz could allow drum kits and bass guitars to sound engaging; numberless contemporary minimonitors have succeeded in moving enough air to play very low notes at surprising levels—but their typically high-excursion bass drivers don't portray the body and sheer impact of those instruments as well as did the Line Magnetic. In the contest between frequency extension and the ability to instantly pressurize the room, the latter still gets my vote.

But the real calling card of this or any Western Electric 755-style driver is its musical directness and tactile expressiveness—qualities that also gained ground when I raised the Line Magnetic cabinets a little closer to ear level. Treble response at the listening seat improved, of course, but so did the speakers' overall sense of touch. The version of "Mojo Pin" from Jeff Buckley's debut recording, the EP Live at Sin-é (LP, Big Cat AB61X), shows an artist with an uncanny imagination and apparently unmatched control over both his guitar and his voice; the 755 I exceeded every other speaker in the house at getting that across.

By the way, just as I remain unsure that a 6" increase in height is the precise optimum for the 755 I—the cabinets are too difficult to lift, and appropriately sturdy bases of differing height are too difficult to make—I'm still unable to recommend a "correct" current setting for the Line Magnetic's field-coil power supply, which offers an apparent range of 20–42mA. To this day, nearly two months after I installed the review samples, the 755 Is' drivers continue to sound more open and responsive with continued playing: Whereas high field-coil current worked best when the speakers first arrived, I now find myself preferring a lower setting. (More current equals more responsiveness up to a point—beyond which further increases in current add a little brightness.)

A final observation: The Line Magnetic 755 I simply can't be played too much. The driver gains ground throughout every listening session, so much so that its performance at 11pm can't be fairly compared with that at 8:30pm. It's not a temperamental product, but it dislikes being ignored. Leave it unplayed for a week, and while you won't be all the way back where you started when it was fresh out of the box, you'll have to give it at least a day to regain the ground. Leave it unplayed for a day and you'll need about an hour to make up the loss. You get the idea . . .

The Line Magnetic 755 I probably isn't for every listener (an axiom its aesthetics seem to echo). Even the decidedly unorthodox and enduringly wonderful Audio Note AN-E is more mainstream—a distinction best exemplified by the classic recording of Elgar's The Dream of Gerontius by Sir Adrian Boult and the New Philharmonia Orchestra (LP, EMI SLS 987): The Audio Note entertains and astonishes by playing the orchestral bass-drum notes with nearly full depth, power, and scale. The 755 I can't manage that feat, but it succeeds by doing a literally peerless job of making the hair on the back of my neck stand up when it plays the drum roll behind tenor Nicolai Gedda's entrance as Gerontius. Both speakers are very good in rather different ways, and each way has tremendous appeal.

There's a fine line . . .
In the August 2012 "Listening" I made this point about vintage vs modern loudspeaker engineering:

"Whereas in contemporary audio there are any number of products that result from a designer having identified a single performance bugaboo and banished it with some or another clever solution, the best vintage products strike me as more holistic creations. Vintage engineering is seldom clever; it's simply good."

To expand on that: From 1924, when Edward W. Kellogg and Chester W. Rice were issued the first patent for a moving-coil loudspeaker, that invention evolved in a manner that was slow, conservative, scientifically sound, and remarkably consistent from one manufacturer to the next. For nearly three decades, dozens of companies produced professional- and perfectionist-quality speakers, the best of which were—literally—similarly good.

That all began to change in the 1950s and '60s. That was when we began to see a new breed of loudspeaker designer, whose modus operandi was to focus on a single performance parameter, which that designer then tried to pummel into submission with some clever design innovation. For one, it was perceived nonlinearities in woofer surrounds. For another, it was cabinet resonances. For yet others, it was a preponderance of treble beaming, a lack of time coherency, insufficient portability, insufficient bigness, or the dastardly effects of early floor reflections. Each of those things attracted a designer who considered it to be Public Enemy Number One (and whose advertising made a pretty good case that it was).

This is not to dismiss all manifestations of clever. Early in his career as a designer and manufacturer, Dick Shahinian studied the manner in which real musical instruments load a room, and set about to re-create it. His loudspeakers aren't for me, but they do a good job of replicating that model of sound propagation, for those who hear things the same way: As designers go, Shahinian is probably closer than most to being an artist. Also of note is the designer of the Quad ESL, the late Peter J. Walker (who probably wouldn't have liked being called an artist, except perhaps when playing his flute): Walker decided that virtually every other loudspeaker was wrong, including his own early efforts, and he set about to make a sound propagator that weighed little more than the air by which it was loaded. The result, which I do love, was a device whose appeal has not only endured, but is as close to universal as the domestic audio industry has ever seen. And so it goes.

In recent decades, some innovations have attracted more than one designer at a time. Metal-cone woofers of small to moderate size had their day. So did tall line-source arrays, thick felt pads, drastically chamfered baffles, spring-suspended tweeters, truncated pyramids. They all came, they mostly all went, and now the large, rectangular tower with multiple woofers is again having its day. So choose what you will, but remember: Enduring musicality—I mean real musicality, not just gee-whiz sonics—and enduring value have tended to closely track one another in this hobby. If you want a glimpse of the future, in order to see what sort of product might still enrapture you in another 20 years, look to the past to see which of those products fetch high prices today. It may be that the answer was right there in front of you all along.

Jerome W's picture

Dear Art, 

I wonder if you used your Shindo CC amps when you listened to the Heresy III. I am quite sure you did. Because indeed I had the exact same experience with the Shindo Apetite : it was a very bad matching with the Heresy's, to my great surprise. While the Apetite is very happy driving my big and pretty difficult PMC EB1i ! ( 88 dB and 6 ohms nominal impedance.... ) 

The Heresy III gave me a wonderful presentation of all styles of music, with a smooth and refined treble, with my Mc Intosh system composed of C48 preamp and vintage MC2205 power amp. For the price they are by far the best speakers I have heard and I could live all the rest of my life with only them. ( I say this in perfect consciousness while I have 3 systems at home, the top one using Wilsons WP8, and Shindo preamp / power amps... ). Jeff Dorgay from Tone Audio published a review about the Heresy III titled "Perfect Balance". I could not agree more. 

mikesp1's picture

I totaly agree, If there was only one loudspeaker in the world, I would be very happy with the heresy! I paired them with Wyred4sound class d amps and they realy sing. Here are some lifestyle photos:

Jerome W's picture

It is very cool to be able to post comments on line like this. 

It would be much cooler if a respectful question to the writer could be answered. 

I really wonder which amp(s) was used in this listening of the Heresy III. 

Art Dudley's picture

Apologies for the late response. I did indeed use my Shindo Corton-Charlemagne amps, which were made with Hammond output transformers having selectable secondary windings (set for 8 Ohms during this and most other reviews). I don't know what output transformers are used in the Appetite integrated amp, but I doubt very much that they are Hammonds -- and would in fact suspect that they are, as with most current Shindos, Lundahl single-secondary transformers, optimized for 16-Ohm loads (which characterizes all of Ken Shindo's own loudspeakers).

In any event, I'm glad that you enjoy your Heresy loudspeakers in your Mac system.


-- Art

Jerome W's picture

Dear Art, 

Thank you for your answer. 

I tried them with my Corton Charlemagne Q monoblocks and the Giscours and it is much better than with the Apetite but still, these speakers like rather warm amps : they sing wonderfuly with the Mc Intosh MC2205 and with my Manley set up consisting of the 300B Neo Classic preamp and the Snappers monoblocks. 

IMHO, you just did not pair them with the correct amplifier. It would have been nice to give them an other chance ! ;)

Best wishes, 


helomech's picture

The Heresy IIIs require sufficient break-in as well as thoughtful amp pairing. The highs do mellow out after a couple hundred hours. Can we assume they were given a comparable amount of break-in as speakers that receive full feature reviews?

As for amps, despite their high efficiency, the H-IIIs don't perform as well with flea watt glass. Feed them 50 watts of KT88 power and you'll have a very different experience regarding the highs.

Lastly, these speakers are intended to be used with grills in place. Given the typical reviewer penchant for removing grills, I think it's worth noting the configuration for these demos.

Bill Call's picture

i'm pairing a Marantz 2270 Receiver with my Heresy III's and they sound great!

grx8's picture

Many years later but please tap your H-III into 4 Ohms, the difference is incredible. Mc225 and Mc275 agrees.