Anyone heard Amphion?

[radio3]

Usually I am an active only speaker guy, but I've heard a lot of good things about Amphion. Just curious if anyone here has heard any of their speakers. It sure would be cool to see a review of their Argon5C (as LCR monitors) or Krypton models.

 

[dfuller]

I've used them as studio monitors - I don't own a pair, but have used them in studios I've worked in. They're nice speakers, the sealed cabinets make them very punchy. They're extremely unflattering and very much don't make music sound good unless it actually does.

 

[pozz]

S&R measurement of the Amphion One18: https://www.soundandrecording.de/eq...2-wege-monitor-mit-externer-endstufe-im-test/

 

[ernestcarl]

S&R measurement of the Amphion One18: https://www.soundandrecording.de/eq...2-wege-monitor-mit-externer-endstufe-im-test/

Not very flattering... at least with this model.

 

[pozz]

Not very flattering... at least with this model.

They are ok. The polars look good.

Impedance starts falling heavily as you get to upper end of the range. Beyond 15kHz or so things look ugly. Not sure how audible the resonance around 500Hz is.

 

[TimVG]

They're a bit rough around the edges in general. The passive radiator (while technically 'sealed' does not imply a sealed system) causes issues in the midrange where it's interacting with the mid/woofer (same issue as seen in the Buchardt S400)
Directivity is okay, but nothing special. No special care seems to have been taken in terms of cabinet to offset diffraction effects although it can be argued that the waveguide will help. The 1600Hz crossover point chosen because our ears are less sensitive in that area is far fetched and not based on actual evidence.
So, while by no means bad speakers, I wouldn't call them extraordinary. Why they are so popular in studios is beyond me when there are brands such as Genelec and Neumann which offer better objective performance for the same or less money.

 

[dfuller]

Why they are so popular in studios is beyond me when there are brands such as Genelec and Neumann which offer better objective performance for the same or less money.

Because oddly enough often times we don't necessarily want the widest range flattest speakers. What we're after is good translation between playback systems, and super wide range flat response speakers aren't always the best tool for determining that. That's part of why NS10s (which are decidedly not good speakers objectively) are so popular.

 

[ernestcarl]

They are ok. The polars look good.

Impedance starts falling heavily as you get to upper end of the range. Beyond 15kHz or so things look ugly. Not sure how audible the resonance around 500Hz is.

Definitely not that bad. But I've seen pages and pages extolling the same brand in other places as if they were the perfect studio monitors. For the asking price (considering also that you still need to buy the amp), I think they should measure better.

 

[TimVG]

Because oddly enough often times we don't necessarily want the widest range flattest speakers. What we're after is good translation between playback systems, and super wide range flat response speakers aren't always the best tool for determining that. That's part of why NS10s (which are decidedly not good speakers objectively) are so popular.

You should want the flattest loudspeakers, with good directivity behaviour, for the simple reason that there are an infinite number of variations of 'non-flat', as opposed to flat. Good loudspeakers from the studio through the living room will go a long way in correcting this problem of 'translation'.

 

[pozz]

Definitely not that bad. But I've seen pages and pages extolling the same brand in other places as if they were the perfect studio monitors. For the asking price (considering also that you still need to buy the amp), I think they should measure better.

Yeah I've seen the same hype. Definitely an expensive offering (their Amphion-brand speaker cables are not cheap!).

 

[dfuller]

You should want the flattest loudspeakers, with good directivity behaviour, for the simple reason that there are an infinite number of variations of 'non-flat', as opposed to flat. Good loudspeakers from the studio through the living room will go a long way in correcting this problem of 'translation'.

Yeah, and those are often used, but I'm telling you from experience that that's what we do and it's why grotboxes like Auratone 5C's and NS10s are relatively commonplace. It's a sanity checking thing.

 

[TimVG]

Yeah, and those are often used, but I'm telling you from experience that that's what we do and it's why grotboxes like Auratone 5C's and NS10s are relatively commonplace. It's a sanity checking thing.

Also, the more toys the merrier.. (we're all guilty of it).

 

[Juhazi]

Two series is new for Amphion, first attempt on pro market. https://amphion.fi/

Op was asking about older "home" models from late ´90s, which were forerunners with waveguide tweeters and smooth power response. Krypton also had cardioid midbass. I still have a pair of the smallest Helium II.

 

[Soniclife]

Review of the little one here, with spin, and Neil is a member here.
https://thenextweb.com/plugged/2020...nnish-speakers-with-an-impressive-soundstage/

 

[FeddyLost]

I've heard Amphions briefly in studio. Nothing special, flat, boring, non-involving sound. But punchy, fast and somehow "in your face".
Must be OK for studio.
Need good power amp, at least as good as Amphion offers, or there will be troubles with dynamics and low end as users say. They tried something else (cheaper) and was disappointed. Ncore or Purifi must pump them well, I think.

 

[Chromatischism]

Review of the little one here, with spin, and Neil is a member here.
https://thenextweb.com/plugged/2020...nnish-speakers-with-an-impressive-soundstage/

Well, inevitable comparison to the Buchardt S400 here. You can see a similar overall design approach however one difference I'll point out:

• The directivity heatmap shows a narrowing directivity in the high frequencies, which is why Buchardt deliberately chose their smaller tweeter to avoid that. However, by using a larger tweeter, Amphion prioritized directivity at the crossover, including even the vertical directivity. The S400 probably sounds more airy up top while the Argon may sound a little more forward. Can't really say which one is better - comes down to preference here.
• Much discussion was had about the tweeter size in the S400 thread. Looks like the Argon gives some people what they were asking for, but it's not without its tradeoffs

Overall very nice review.

 

[napilopez]

Well, inevitable comparison to the Buchardt S400 here. You can see a similar overall design approach however one difference I'll point out:

• The directivity heatmap shows a narrowing directivity in the high frequencies, which is why Buchardt deliberately chose their smaller tweeter to avoid that. However, by using a larger tweeter, Amphion prioritized directivity at the crossover, including even the vertical directivity. The S400 probably sounds more airy up top while the Argon may sound a little more forward. Can't really say which one is better - comes down to preference here.
• Much discussion was had about the tweeter size in the S400 thread. Looks like the Argon gives some people what they were asking for, but it's not without its tradeoffs

Overall very nice review.

I'm the reviewer of the Amphion -- I actually posted those measurements here on ASR first too =]

Your comparison of the A500 and S400 regarding tonality is spot on. To me the bigger benefit of the small tweeter, however, is the wider sweetspot - the S400 changes very little within +/- 30 degrees. The amphions are good, but the S400 have maybe the widest sweetspot I've heard from big-waveguide speakers.

They're a bit rough around the edges in general. The passive radiator (while technically 'sealed' does not imply a sealed system) causes issues in the midrange where it's interacting with the mid/woofer (same issue as seen in the Buchardt S400)
Directivity is okay, but nothing special. No special care seems to have been taken in terms of cabinet to offset diffraction effects although it can be argued that the waveguide will help. The 1600Hz crossover point chosen because our ears are less sensitive in that area is far fetched and not based on actual evidence.
So, while by no means bad speakers, I wouldn't call them extraordinary. Why they are so popular in studios is beyond me when there are brands such as Genelec and Neumann which offer better objective performance for the same or less money.

I also largely agree with this analysis, however, I do wonder if the relatively well-controlled vertical directivity of the amphions is underrated -- there are few speakers that have vertical directivity so well controlled that aren't coaxials.

Imo that does in part make up for not having quite as pristine horizontal directivity as some competitors. I like the S400, for instance, which has better controlled horizontal directivity, but it has an extremely narrow vertical sweetspot. Despite the midrange mess on-axis caused by humongous port output, I felt that the Argon1's more timbrally neutral than other speakers that appeared cleaner at first glance. My guess (and it is just a guess) is that it's because of the verticals, which we know pretty much only affects timbre.

 

[samysound]

I'm the reviewer of the Amphion -- I actually posted those measurements here on ASR first too =]

Your comparison of the A500 and S400 regarding tonality is spot on. To me the bigger benefit of the small tweeter, however, is the wider sweetspot - the S400 changes very little within +/- 30 degrees. The amphions are good, but the S400 have maybe the widest sweetspot I've heard from big-waveguide speakers.



I also largely agree with this analysis, however, I do wonder if the relatively well-controlled vertical directivity of the amphions is underrated -- there are few speakers that have vertical directivity so well controlled that aren't coaxials.

Imo that does in part make up for not having quite as pristine horizontal directivity as some competitors. I like the S400, for instance, which has better controlled horizontal directivity, but it has an extremely narrow vertical sweetspot. Despite the midrange mess on-axis caused by humongous port output, I felt that the Argon1's more timbrally neutral than other speakers that appeared cleaner at first glance. My guess (and it is just a guess) is that it's because of the verticals, which we know pretty much only affects timbre.

The larger amphion argon designs look like they use passive radiators in place of ports. I wonder if this helps with port output issues

 

[Juhazi]

Yes the Two series use passive reflex units, but all others have ports and lots of port noise. Buchardt meeasurements have showed that passive units have resonance/leakage problems as well.

Some of my measurements of Helium2. I also switched woofer polarity on some measurements

 

[radio3]

It’s funny, I hadn’t heard of Amphion until after I’d been exposed to all the Buchardt hype. But, in fact, it looks to me like the S400s are in many ways possibly copies of Amphions. There was so much hype around the “revolutionare” big waveguide same diameter as woofer, passive radiators on back etc. In fact, nearly identical monitor was already being offered by someone else all along.

Anyway, I’d like to see a review of some of their symmetrical woofer models rather than only 2-way designs before writing them off completely as not as good value as Genelec, Revel, KEF R3.