I did some preliminary listening to the PC80 Mk.IIs before I measured them. This is a pretty good speaker for the price: relatively neutral with a surprising amount of bass. My estimate of its B-weighted sensitivity was a little below specification at 88.2dB/2.83V/m, but this is still on the high side for a small speaker. The PC80's impedance magnitude and phase are shown in fig.1: although it drops to 5 ohms in the lower midrange and to 6 ohms or so in the high treble, it generally approximates the specified 8 ohm load. The port tuning is revealed by the "…
search
Sidebar 6: Specifications
Description: Two-way, reflex-loaded, stand-mounted loudspeaker. Driver complement: one 6½" solid flat-piston driver, one 1" soft-dome tweeter. Crossover frequency: 2.1kHz (Mk.1), 2kHz (Mk.2). Crossover slopes: 24dB/octave acoustic. Frequency response: 55–20kHz ±3dB. Sensitivity: 88dB 2.83V/1m (Mk.1), 90dB/2.83V/1m (Mk.2). Recommended amplifier power: 25–100W. Nominal impedance: 6 ohms (Mk.1), 8 ohms (Mk.2).
Dimensions: 8 5/8" W by 13¼" H by 8¼" D (Mk.1), 9.5" W by 11" D by 15.5" H. (Mk.2). Shipping weight: 32 lbs (Mk.1), 36 lbs (Mk.2).
Finish: light oak,…
"You want to review the MDA 1000 along with the MC 275 amplifier in the same column?" Ron Cornelius, product manager and field training manager of McIntosh Laboratory, was incredulous.
Why not? Best of the past meets best of the present. 1961, meet 2004. I love incongruities. Besides, Ron set this up by delivering the two units together.
I love this—in part because the two units work so splendidly together. Not that I'd shell out $8000 for an MDA 1000 as easily as I wrote out a check for the MC 275.
Eight grand is a lot to pay for a D/A converter. Other DACs…
Sidebar: Specifications
Description: Two-channel D/A converter with seven digital inputs, balanced and unbalanced analog outputs,volume control, and automatic selection of sampling frequency from 32 to 96kHz. Frequency response: 4Hz–45kHz, ±0.5dB (sampling frequency 96kHz and 88.2kHz), 4Hz–22kHz ±0.3dB from (sampling frequency 48kHz), 4Hz–20kHz ±0.3dB (sampling frequency 44.1kHz), 4Hz–15kHz ±0.3dB (sampling frequency 32kHz). Total Harmonic Distortion: 0.002% at 1kHz. S/N Ratio: >110dB, A-weighted. Dynamic range: >100dB (1kHz). Rated output voltage: 2V (unbalanced and balanced…
One of the things endured by engineers and journalists involved in the design and discussion of high-end components is the seemingly endless attacks from those who, for whatever reason, feel that there is something unhealthy, even vaguely immoral, in the whole idea of wanting to listen to music with as high a quality as possible. The Listening Studio's Clark Johnsen reminded me recently of a letter from Daniel Shanefield that I published in the January 1984 issue of Hi-Fi News & Record Review that illustrates the whole genre: "It is utterly useless to write an amplifier review based on…
There is a wider point to be made concerning Mr. Self's conclusions. The danger lies not in his beliefs but in his insistence that those of us who rejoice in all the different shadings of sound quality possible from amplifiers—those of us who not only recognize "brown" but appreciate all the different browns bequeathed us by the Almighty—should cease to do so. Mr. Self's beliefs are a subset of my own since, if differences exist, it is quite possible for those differences to be small enough to be unnoticeable, whereas Mr. Self's world view, like Dr. Shanefield's, allows for no other. But…
Let's see—should I start with a discussion of conflict? Or maybe indecision? No, let's be more psychological and talk about approach/avoidance dilemmas...No, I'm supposed to be entertaining. How about a joke? Nah, that won't do. Well how about the framework for a joke? Yeah, that's the ticket!
Did you hear the one about the audiophile looking for speakers? Well, it seems he had a dilemma. On the one hand, he (it's a he, isn't it?) was obsessed with audio quality. He searched out (and was very impressed with) the Wilson WATT/Puppy/WHOW setup (about $23,000). He really liked the…
By tilting the driver alignment, the cabinets have to be made wider than would otherwise be the case. ProAcs have historically had stunning soundstaging and imaging capabilities, and I've been one of many reviewers who assumed this was achieved partly by Tyler's obsession with narrow cabinets (often just barely wider than the driver surrounds). A tilted arrangement means a bigger box for better bass—but it also means a wider cabinet. The question, to be answered later, concerns the tradeoffs inherent in this decision between bass response and soundstaging precision.
So the Response…
Jack English wrote about the Response 3 Signature in April 1994 (Vol.17 No.4):
Although the Response 3 Signature has not replaced ProAc's well-respected Response 3 (still available for $6500/pair, and reviewed in Vol.14 No.9, p.126), it is an evolved refinement of the basic design, and is intended to stand on its own. But is the 3 Signature worth $3500/pair more than the 3?
The Response 3 has a rich, full mid/upper bass; a lush, musical midrange with wonderful harmonic structures; a clean, quick presentation; a smooth, extended treble that lacks any textural coloration; and…
Sidebar: Specifications
Description: Two-way dynamic loudspeaker with 1" dome tweeter and two 6.5" polypropylene-cone midrange/woofers. Frequency range: 20Hz–25kHz (no limits given). Nominal impedance: 8 ohms. Sensitivity: 88dB/W/m.
Dimensions: 47" H (on plinth) by 11" W by 12" D.
Finishes available: teak, walnut, black ash, others to order.
Price: $6500/pair (1991); $10,000 pair, Signature (1994); no longer available (2006). Approximate number of dealers: 35.
Manufacturer: ProAc, Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, England (1991); Highpoint House, Riding Road, Buckingham Road…