Thomas J. Norton commented on the Stage in July 1991 (Vol.14 No.7): At the beginning of the second and last day's listening sessions for this massive group test of inexpensive speakers, JA requested that, when it was all over, we set up the Apogee Stages to get a feel for the program material over a solid Class B recommended loudspeaker. At the end of the sessions, though fatigue was rapidly setting in, we conducted this audition, and decided to score it. Of course, even though the Stages were also behind the screen, everyone now knew what they were listening to.
The reactions…
Thomas J. Norton reviewed the Apogee Mini-Grand, based on the Stage, in March 1994 (Vol.17 No.3): á-po-gee: the farthest or highest point.
When Jason Bloom and Leo Spiegel founded Apogee Acoustics in 1979, they picked an ambitious name. I've never heard the original Apogee loudspeakers (Steven Stone still has a pair), but a friend of mine could scarcely contain his enthusiasm after hearing them at the 1981 Summer CES. My first real exposure to Apogee was at a Frankfurt (Germany) High-End Hi-Fi Show in 1983. The model I heard there, which left me with an indelible favorable…
The Mini-Grand Stage's cosmetics have been considerably changed from those of the standard Stage—a combination of a textured black-matte finish with black grillecloth. Combined with the matching Mini-Grand Stereo Subwoofer, it's a striking package—more than slightly reminiscent of the Grand itself. 1994 System
The Mini-Grands were set up facing down the long axis of my new 18' by 26' by 11' main listening room. The associated system consisted of Krell electronics: the Reference 64 processor, DT-10 transport, KRC preamplifier, and two KSA-300S power amplifiers—one driving the Stages…
I did encounter one unexpected problem with the Stages. Apparently, Apogee, in a production change, used washers that tended to loosen and rattle on some samples. This happened with both of ours. First the left began buzzing on bass-heavy program material, seeming to resonate only at a particular frequency. The unit was replaced, the new sample broken-in, and the auditioning continued. Then, late in the second test cycle, the right loudspeaker (the Stages are mirror-imaged) began to buzz slightly. This was also replaced, but because there wasn't sufficient time to properly break-in the new…
I wanted it all. To try and get it, I pulled out the stops and tried the "Rule of Thirds"—something for which I've never before had the space. Simply put, the Rule of Thirds requires you to place the loudspeakers one-third of the room length out from the front wall, with the listener one-third of the room length from the rear wall. You don't need a calculator to figure out that this requires either a very long room or a very intimate relationship with your loudspeakers. Since my new room is just under 26' long, it was a practical alterative. "This can't work," I thought, as I was sitting…
On these and similar recordings there was a restriction of available playback levels. What was happening seemed to be the result of a combination of the extreme low-frequency boost produced by the DAX (see "Measurements" sidebar), infrasonic signals which were not attenuated but were reproduced in full and at high power by the KSA-300S, combined with the Mini-Grand subwoofer's reflex loading (footnote 4) and a large listening room. Because the Stage used alone was not subject to the DAX and its attendant LF boost, it actually played louder with some of the selections mentioned, though…
And the infrasonic boost in the Mini-Grand makes such a filter somewhere in the system virtually mandatory if you plan on playing LPs (most high-end preamps, and especially solid-state designs, do not provide this). Though the woofers didn't bottom with any of the LPs I played through the system—probably because there's little program material below 20Hz on most LPs anyway—I was not reassured by the sight of the woofers pumping from common LP warps and other low-frequency groove garbage. (And they did come very close to bottoming with the occasional higher-than-average edge warp.) I used…
Sidebar 2: 1994 Measurements On the test bench, the dedicated active crossover (DAX) had a gain of 3.4dB ±0.05dB in the unbalanced mode for either channel on both the high- and low-pass legs (taken at 1kHz and 40Hz, respectively). Its gain in the balanced mode was virtually the same (about 0.1dB higher). The balanced and unbalanced output impedance also measured the same: 50-51 ohms. The input impedance measured just under 7.4k ohms, unbalanced, and between 8k ohms and 8.2k ohms, balanced, for either channel, high- or low-pass. The latter is moderately low, but should only be a problem…
Sidebar 3: Specifications Apogee Stage: Two-way dipole speaker system with a 12" by 26", electromagnetic film-diaphragm woofer and a 0.7" by 26" ribbon midrange/tweeter. Crossover frequency: 600Hz. Crossover slope: 6dB/octave gradually increasing to 12dB/octave. Frequency range: 30Hz-20kHz (no tolerance specified). Sensitivity: not specified. Nominal impedance: 3 ohms. Recommended minimum amplifier power: 100W.
Dimensions: 37" H by 26" W by 2" D (without stands) Weight: 60 lbs each..
Finish: optional parchment, anthracite, or black sand, with or without mahogany or basswood trim.…
The debates may be old, but they're not tired. They rage on with a virulence that suggests there's plenty of life in these old dogs yet. Online forums and Letters to the Editor are filled with them: objectivist vs subjectivist, engineer vs audiophile, double-bind vs doubly blind. The divisions may be artificial or downright specious—false dichotomies perfectly set up for cheap shots—but that doesn't dissuade people from drawing sides, driving stakes into the ground, and firing off volley after volley of accusation and retaliation.
Anyone who has observed or engaged in these debates while…
