search
Prior to the visitations, LA and I had done some preliminary listening to the Betas with the FET-10 preamp, the SA-1s on the upper-range panels, and a Mark Levinson No.23 and a dbx BX1 (in turn) on the bass towers. The sound was excellent but not exactly what I would call superb. When Nudell arrived, he insisted that we try using tube electronics. He even brought along one of his own Audio Research SP11 preamps (the man owns five of them!), just in case we didn't have one gathering dust in the corner. We didn't, Arnie Balgalvis currently giving house-room to our Mk.II SP11. However, we did…
J. Gordon Holt returned to the IRS Beta in January 1989 (Vol.12 No.1):
Rave or not, my report in Vol.11 No.9 (September 1988) on this Infinity flagship system ended on a note of uncertainty, concerning an audible difference between the sound of the two mid/high-frequency–range panels which was messing up the imaging and exacerbating program grundge in one channel.
When I phoned Infinity president Arnie Nudell and reported that my upper-range panels weren't matched, he didn't believe me. "Why," he asked, "didn't any of us notice it during our visit?" I explained it was probably…
Larry Archibald wrote about the IRS Beta in December 1989 (Vol.12 No.12):
There I was in audiophile hog heaven, faced with the greatest collection of amplifier pulchritude I could imagine—plus four pieces of masking tape. Amplification was by Vacuum Tube Logic (VTL 500s), Krell (KSA-200), and Mark Levinson Audio Systems (No.20.5s); tape was by 3M. The amplifiers retail for over $25,000, the tape for less than 5 cents—but each side of the equation was equally important.
Now, I already knew from JGH's experience with the Betas (Vol.11 No.9) that choice of amplification was crucial…
Sidebar 1: Righting Wrongs
Before I listened at all, I decided to right the Infinity manufacturing wrongs uncovered by JGH. One of the knobs of his equalizer had come off, and it's not simply replaced. I had to remove the equalizer cover, with difficulty remove three screws holding on the milled-from-solid-aluminum front cover, and carefully reposition the knob so that, when tightened, it lined up with the appropriate numbers on the front panel (which was removed). For good measure, I filed a flat onto the switch shaft so the knob would not subsequently come loose, and I tightened all…
Manufacturer's Comment
Editor: Larry Archibald's review indicates that, when equipped with the right components and properly set up, the Betas are the best speakers he has heard in his home. This points to the potential of the system's musical and analytical ability.
There are a few areas that we would like to clarify:
The individual drivers have a mass approximately 1/20 that of conventional dynamic drivers, and are driven over the entire radiating area. In their operating band, they are extremely detailed and well-controlled. The overall sonic transparency and neutrality…
Sidebar 3: Measurements (from June 1989, Vol.12 No.6)
As I had dragged my motley collection of test equipment (footnote 1) over to Larry's listening room to carry out a set of measurements on the Mirage M1 loudspeaker he reviewed elsewhere in this issue, I thought it might be a good idea to quickly take a look at the measured performances of another of the high-end models that happened to be in Santa Fe, Infinity's $12,000/pair IRS Beta, which J. Gordon Holt had discussed in the September 1988 and January 1989 issues of Stereophile (Vol.11 No.9 and Vol.12 No.1, respectively).
You…
Sidebar 2: Specifications
Description: Five-way, four-piece satellite/subwoofer dynamic loudspeaker system. Rated frequency response: 25Hz–44kHz ±2dB. Minimum recommended amplifier power: 75Wpc. Sensitivity: 87dB/W/m. Drivers (per side): 4 12" cone woofers, 1 large EMIM, 1 EMIM, 1 EMIT, 1 Super EMIT. Level controls for uppermost 3 drivers & woofers. Crossover frequencies: 70Hz, 700Hz, 4kHz, 8kHz. Nominal impedance: 4 ohms. Subwoofer crossover network: electronic (line-level), with hard-wired feed to fullrange amplifier.
Dimensions: woofer columns 65" H by 15" D by 16" W; upper-…
At last January's Consumer Electronics Show, one of the more musically satisfying rooms I visited in Las Vegas' Alexis Park Hotel was hosted by Canadian magazine Inner Ear Report. I had visited the room ostensibly to take a look at the Audiophile APS AC regeneration system, but I also wanted to give a listen to the Gershman Acoustics Opera Sauvage speakers that I had agreed to review for Stereophile—not just the speakers in the abstract, but the very samples that, after CES, were going to make the trek to my Brooklyn listening room.
Driven by Tenor Audio tube amplification, the sound in…
I have always liked the Esotec tweeter for its clean, grain-free presentation. (The last speaker I reviewed that used a version of this tweeter was the Dynaudio Contour 1.3 Mk.II, in August 2000.) The Esotec's subdued top octave in the Opera Sauvage is not due to equalization, but to the 1" dome's dispersion being modified both by the wide baffle and by the fact that the baffle's edges are not chamfered. It seems topsy-turvy thinking on the part of the Opera Sauvage's designer to arrange for this speaker to have a gracefully tapered frontal profile but to not then position the tweeter at the…
Sidebar 1: Specifications
Description: Three-way, reflex-loaded, floorstanding loudspeaker. Drive-units: 1" (25mm) soft-dome tweeter; 6" (152mm) plastic-cone midrange unit; two 10" (254mm) doped paper-cone woofers. Crossover frequencies: 150Hz, 1.8kHz. Crossover filters: third-order, woofers-midrange; first-order, midrange-tweeter. Frequency range: 20Hz-20kHz. Sensitivity: 89dB/2.83V/m. Nominal impedance: 4 ohms. Power handling: 20-600W.
Dimensions: 52" (1333mm) H by 17" (432mm) W by 18.1" (465mm) D. Weight: 210 lbs (95.5kg) each.
Finish: Dark mahogany veneer.
Serial number of…