Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
..and Erin's. I fully trust both, so something must have been changed in the crossover, maybe? I can't imagine that there's that much unit to unit variability.
Youngstown, Ohiobased loudspeaker manufacturer SVS made foundations its specialty, starting at the company's very beginning in 1998, when it started by designing subwoofers and only subwoofers. The company didn't start offering regular loudspeakers, with midranges and high frequencies, until 2012. Over time, SVS's high-value speakers got more ambitious until earlier this year, at AXPONA, it introduced its most ambitious loudspeaker yet, the full-range, three-way Ultra Evolution Pinnacle ($4999.98/pair).
SVS stands for Stimpson Vodhanel Sound, after the company's founders, Ron Stimpson and Tom Vodhanel; Tom, the chief designer, left the company in 2007; Ron, the CEO, sold the company in 2011.
"The joke in our industry is the road is littered with the bodies of subwoofer companies that tried to make speakers," Gary Yacoubian, SVS's current president and CEO, told me. "Smith Freeman came on board with others who are speaker designers as opposed to focused on subwoofers. It's been a journey, and the Ultra Evolution Pinnacles are the culmination of that thus far."
Currently, SVS offers 18 models of subwoofer and 20 models of loudspeaker. If the Stereophile Recommended Components list is any guide (and that is what it is meant to be), SVS is building on a strong foundation: The most recent list includes two SVS subwoofers in Class A and a third in Class B; the Prime Wireless Pro, an active loudspeaker, is also on the list. The Ultra Evolution speaker line includes seven models; the Pinnacle is the top.
Content and form
The SVS Ultra Evolution Pinnacle is substantial, deserving of the "tower" designation. With feet attached, they measure 50.2" high, 11.81" wide, and 18.14" deep. Unboxed, each speaker weighs 96.7lb. My review pair was finished in gloss black; the Pinnacle is also available in gloss white and black oak veneer. A one-piece, magnetically attached cloth grille covers the front driver area, unless you remove it. Those feet can be either aluminum spikes or floor-friendly elastomer; both are included. Hookup is via two pairs of gold-plated five-way binding posts, allowing for biwiring and biamping.
There is an elegant, studied symmetry to the Pinnacle's front panels; think of it as a generalization of the D'Apolito MTM concept but with time-alignment built in. SVS calls it "Acoustically centered architecture." A 1" vapor-deposition diamond-coated tweeter is in the center, flanked above and below by a pair of 5.25" composite glass-fiber midrange cones. This MTM configuration of tweeter and midrange drivers is flanked above and below by a pair of 8" woofers that are similar to the midrange drivers in construction, with composite glass-fiber cones. Each front-firing woofer is paired with an identical woofer on the rear. Each cabinet, then, has seven active drivers. There's a port below each woofer on the rear.
The cabinets are constructed from ¾" MDF, designed using finite-element analysis to minimize vibration. The baffles, front and back, are 1" thick, and the edges of the front baffle are chamfered to optimize diffraction. The tweeter and midrange drivers are sealed in a single acoustic-suspension chamber. The ported woofers are implemented in what SVS terms a Force-Balanced Opposed Array, a bipolar design in which the front- and rear-firing drivers fire together, achieving the dual advantages of reducing cabinet movement and mitigating some room interactions. The Pinnacle's symmetry, then, extends top to bottom and front to rear.
The three-way design has crossover points at 140Hz and 1.8kHz, creating a wide frequency band for the midrange drivers. That's challenging for a midrange driver, but the upside is wide coverage of midrange frequencies by a single (rather, a matched pair) of drivers across all but the lowest part of the vocal range. The crossover electronics utilize air-core and iron-core inductors, film and poly capacitors, various high-power resistors, and wide-trace printed circuit boards.
Working in tandem with the crossovers is a time-aligned, fixed cabinet geometry; note the dual-slope profile of the front baffle. The voice coils and center of mass for all the drivers are aligned. The symmetrical layout of the front drivers places the tweeter somewhat lower than it is on many other floorstanders. This is also the vertical center point of the time-aligned driver arrayso when listening, pay careful attention to the height of your ears relative to the tweeters.
Looking under the hood (and at the SVS product specs sheet), one notices fine attention to detail and quality materials in the construction of the drivers. The tweeter is constructed with a "cell lattice diffuser" placed on top of an "aircraft-grade aluminum dome" coated with "industrial-grade diamond carbon dust" using vapor deposition; SVS calls it a Diamond Coated Tweeter. The midrange drivers employ cast-aluminum alloy baskets and a vented Kapton voice coil former. The woofers are driven by a long-stroke motor and suspension, also with a vented voice coil former, these from aluminum. The drivers are designed by SVS. Everything is manufactured, and the loudspeakers are assembled, in China.
Basic specifications are well within norms for this type of three-way design. The frequency range is a wide 24Hz 40kHz. The nominal impedance is given as 6 ohms. I asked for an impedance graph, and the lowest point seems to be at about 2.5 ohms at around 8090Hz, climbing from there. John Atkinson's measurements will reveal precise figures. Sensitivity is pegged at 88dB/2.83V/mpretty average among recent designs. Recommended amplifier power range is 20300 watts. These figures suggest a relatively benign load for a partnering amplifier, but hearing (and measuring) is believing!
Deployment
I slid the SVS Ultra Evolution Pinnacle speakers out of their boxes; rather, I slid the boxes off the speakers. Setup decisions are simple: spikes or elastomer footers? Both are adjustable for height. Grilles or no grilles? I chose no grilles.
I don't consider 96lb light, but these speakers are not as heavy as some I have dealt with recently. I was able to slowly walk them to the default loudspeaker positions in my living room. I do not biwire or biamp, so all I had to do was connect the speaker cables and power up.
In my Downstairs System, I am currently using a hybrid (tubed pre, solid state amplifier) McIntosh MA252 integrated amplifier, which is capable of putting out 100W into 8 ohms, 160W into 4 ohms. The review pair were brand new, so I assumed that the drivers needed some loosening up. I played miscellaneous music for more than a week before I started taking notes. It's always interesting to check out the sound during the earliest stages, and I did. In early stop'n'listen moments, I heard some opaqueness over the upper-mids and highs. They opened up over time.
Positioning the Ultra Evolution Pinnacles was interesting. I have not previously had loudspeakers with rear-firing woofers in the house. When someone asked Gary Yacoubian about positioning during a Zoom session for EISA, he responded, "slight toe-in, with three or four feet from the rear and sides." That's a common, generic recommendation, but it's more important with rear-firing woofers: What you will not want to do, given the rear woofers, is jam these speakers into corners. They don't need boundary reinforcement, and in most cases won't benefit from it.
While the force-balanced opposed array approach may make it easier to address in-room low-frequency resonances, that is not a given. Like any speakerbut maybe more so for the Pinnaclesspending time experimenting, auditioning a wide range of room placements, is a good way to proceed, remembering that small increments can make a big difference: bigger than you expect, bigger than intuition suggests.
In my case, placement of the Ultra Evolution Pinnacles was not unduly challenging, given our largish Victorian double parlor, which has a high ceiling.
I Love a Piano
"I love a piano. I love to hear somebody play, Upon a piano, a grand piano, It simply carries me away."Irving Berlin
Jim Austin visited the SVS room at this year's AXPONA in April, where the Ultra Evolution Pinnacle was having its worldwide debut. He liked what he heard. The choice of music, though, was less than optimal for a thorough audition; it was (as is usual) intended to show off the Pinnacles' most obvious virtueswide bandwidth and abundant bass plus excellent imaging. Jim noted, though, that "The ultimate test of a pair of speakers like this will be whether they can reproduce something dry and natural, like a well-recorded piano. ... I'm confident that Sasha's upcoming review of the Ultra Evolution Pinnacle will test this." Talk about throwin' down!
..and Erin's. I fully trust both, so something must have been changed in the crossover, maybe? I can't imagine that there's that much unit to unit variability.
"Interesting comparison between John's FR measurements and Erin's. I fully trust both, so something must have been changed in the crossover, maybe? I can't imagine that there's that much unit to unit variability."
— remlab
2024-09-13_20:37(GMT)
John Atkinson and Erin Hardison use different measurement schemata with very different measurement processes, and very different measurement data processing, all of which produce some significant differences between the two schemata in the results, but not so much difference among results within either one schema.
John Atkinson has mentioned that he has been very careful to remain as consistent as practicable in performing his measurements and in his presentations of his results over many years of measurements, and so you may well compare results within his large set of measurements.
Erin Hardison seems careful in his consistency, so likewise you may well compare among results within his measurements.
Careful consistency improves precision within one schema which allows comparisons within one schema, but does not necessarily provide accuracy which would be needed in both schemata to compare all results in both schemata.
That said, the impedance measurements are comparable, and seem to show very similar results. And the on-axis measurements above mid triple digit frequencies likewise seem rather similar.
JA does quasi-anechoic measurements, and Erin uses a Klippel. JA's measurements match quite closely with the measurements Soundstage! (where I used to write) does in an actual anechoic chamber. The difference being on ported speakers there's a dip between where the woofer rolls off and the port picks up - it looks like the unintegrated output of the individual drivers/ports.
The Klippel, from what I've read (and I may be wrong), uses quasi-anechoic technicques with a metric crap-ton of measurement points to predict what the speaker will sound like in a room. The dispersion heat maps look cool and are actually pretty useful on their own as well.
On a related note, JA's in room measurements are the ones I find the most useful of all. I really hope he starts doing measurements in KR's new listening room (it can't be any harder than going out to MF's place in New Jersey was), and always wondered why there are no in room measurements of KR's old room. Those in-rooms really help you understand the subjective portion of the review, and over time and data points really added to the reviews' usefulness. Would also like to see in rooms of HR's and KM's rooms since they're also in NYC, even if they're wonky like AD's room was. That's real world good stuff.
...is succinctly well explained in the post at the following link. (or a deeper dive at the Klippel website)
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/understanding-how-the-klippel-nfs-works.13139/
That link does a poor job explaining the system, though this brochure from Klippel does better - https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/klippel/Files/Brochures/Brochure%20Klippel%20web.pdf The acoustic measuring stuff starts on page 14. I don't think the OP of the post you linked really understands how it works, he just regurgitated a bunch of info he found on the web. Trademark ASR imo.
Also, I wasn't far off in my understanding. It uses fewer spatial points than I thought (or expected) and relies more on math functions, and various frequency measurements, to extrapolate the sound in a room. I was expecting something more akin to a hi-rez 3-D scanner.
It's still a quasi-anechoic system, like JA uses, but relies more on math and how the measurements are performed. The mic circles the speaker instead of using a turntable so the speaker's room interactions never change, making the math to remove the sound of the room less complex. You can achieve the same thing on an elevated turntable outdoors, though your neighbors might not be happy about it. The full system also does a lot of quality control and component measurement stuff, which is where a lot of its usefulness to industry lies.
And then there's Dynaudio's Jupiter system... that's some resources towards speaker measurement.
Great point. Readers should keep this in mind when they respond to the reviewer's listening experiences.
Considering in-room response, with furniture, specific room dimensions, wall materials, etc. do affect the subjective review and their personal response to the speaker. It would also affect measurements of those speakers, as the room is individual.
loudspeaker made by John and Erin. https://www.stereophile.com/content/dutch-dutch-8c-active-loudspeaker-system-measurements
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/dutch_dutch_8c/
Of course the bass response will be different, but pay attention to the upper registers..
where the response drops off a cliff just above 20 kHz because it uses a low sample rate + steep lowpass filter for its required digital processing (ewww)? I'm sure that makes the treble sound awesome.
Also, if you take into account the 6dB bump in JA's measurements (which he tells you to do), they measure essentially the same all the way down. The only real difference between how Erin/ASR use the Klippel and how JA measures speakers is the Klippel is an integrated quasi-anechoic measuring *system* with a lot of computational power and mechanical precision. It also does a lot of other stuff too so you get things like distortion measurements and everybody's favorite... Spin-o-rama! That JA gets essentially the same results as an anechoic chamber or Klippel system is a testament to his skill and attention to detail, which may have been your original point though he's closer than you may have thought.
I really don't like DSP speakers for serious or long term listening, just sayin'. I know that wasn't the point, but... just sayin'.
the differences may be due to the robustness of the amplification generating the full bandwidth uncorrelated pink noise. As noted these speakers need amplification that is 2-ohm capable which sets a fairly high cost and quality bar.
Severely limits the amps (types) that you can use. Under 2 Ohms your damping factor goes to crap on almost all amps. In general, Class D seems to do better with output impedence than other classes of operation; likely negative feedback related. It's just math.
... in order to drive a 2 ohm, or lower, load.
According to a Hi-Fi News test, the NAD C275BEE is capable of a peak output of over 1kW into a 2 ohm load and over 1.5kW into a 1 ohm load.
The C275BEE is presently available in for $1,100.
WOW... that is a speaker looking for an amp! I can't believe the designers went with this, even despite the excellent measured and listening performance.
I think they are hoping audiophiles dig deep and find the right amp for performance here. Even with the great value on offer, this will definitely mean searching for the right match.
What about the bipolar output? No real mention of the effects of 2 rear firing drivers at play in the rear of the speaker. No big whup, there were no big issues reported and I must assume it did not cause attention to itself. I like how they operate like a piston, essentially.
A fair thing to always mention is that it takes Chinese manufacture to provide this kind of price for this performance. Not making a judgment- just a fact that builds perspective when others talk of value or the lack of it with American or other builds. I think it would be very difficult to source a diamond-coated tweeter (even if aluminum) for this kind of price from US manufacturers.
It might drive the load, but it will sound like crap doing so. The output impedence of the NAD C 298 is 0.06 Ohms at 20 Hz per Mr. Atkinson's measurements (which is actually pretty low). The C 298 is a higher tier of amp from NAD than the C375BEE. Doing the math, the damping factor at 2 Ohms is 2/0.06 = 33.334 which is not exactly optimal in the bass, not enough control... adding to its treble awfulness (the Eigentakt class D module, like the NCore before it, just sounds bad mmmmkay).
This is why I won't consider a speaker that dips below 3 Ohms anywhere below ~300 Hz, because it will have compromised bass regardless of the amp you use. The amp won't have enough control over the woofer's ringing for me. I don't buy speakers that are incompetently designed. Even Wilson Audio is starting to change their ways on impedence.
... NAD C298, the output impedance was 0.005 ohms - so, a damping factor of 400 relative to a 2 ohm load.
The subjective reviewer characterized the amp's sound quality as "magnificent".
Stereophile reviewer KR described the C298 as "a transparent, uncolored, powerful stereo power amplifier".
includes 6 feet (~2 meters) of speaker wire. It has impedence, and must be used for the speaker to function. This is a more useful measurement in/re real world usage.
... have separate power amplifiers for each channel/speaker and the length of the speaker wires can be reduced from six feet down to about six inches.
Note that some Stereophile reviewers appear to be unconcerned with the output impedance/damping factor of the power amplifier they use as a reference.
For example, JVS uses a pair of Dan D'Agostino M400MxV power amps with Wilson Audio Alexia V speakers.
According to the Stereophile test, the Alexia V has a minimum impedance of 2.45 ohms at 85Hz and a minimum EPDR of 1.15 ohms at 66Hz.
Again, according to the Stereophile test, the M400MxV has an output impedance of 0.5 ohm at both 20Hz and 1kHz.
So, JVS's reference speaker/power amp setup has a low frequency damping factor of about 5.
I’m sort of between you and Ortofan on this one. Unless you’re continually playing sustained pipe organ notes at 29Hz (which, as I’m sure you know, you feel more than hear) or heavy rap music in a large room at high levels, not sure that you need a perfect amp response with these speakers to get satisfying bass. Personally, I’d be more worried about room nodes and the speaker interaction with them.
But I’m totally with you on acoustic suspension speaker designs. Richard Hardesty (RIP) wrote some very persuasive, detailed articles on why he thought that acoustic suspension designs can have the best, tightest bass. Alas, as with all things such designs do have their practical trade offs, and I believe that’s why most manufacturers use ported designs instead (Magico being a notable exception).
He was also a huge proponent of time+phase coherent designs like Thiel, Vandersteen, Dunlavy, etc. His writings had a huge influence on me.