• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

DeVore have another winner on their hands

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,197
Likes
11,813
Alan Shaw speaks a lot about following scientific principles. Yet, where the state-of-the-art in the Harbeth form factor has moved along to things like low-diffraction cast enclosures - think Genelec 8030 or Neumann KH120A - that yield a demonstrable improvement, the brand is content with ply boxes. Where such speakers are using analog active crossovers, or even DSP with biamplification and built-in protection circuits, the brand is using a passive XO without anything nearly as sophisticated. And we haven't even gotten to directivity. Defenders might say Harbeth's premium can be chalked down to UK production - well, Genelec manufactures in Finland and Neumann manufactures in Ireland (note: not Northern Ireland). Hardly low-cost manufacturing bases. Both can still afford to charge much much cheaper.

Of course, it could be just like what Keith @Purité Audio observed about ATC and MiniDSP: they'd dearly love to progress but they have a customer base that is, for the most part (not saying you are), stubbornly regressive and skeptical of advancement, which forces legacy brands to play to these preferences despite knowing better,

And yet...

The Harbeth speakers I owned sounded wonderful, and very neutral.

They seemed to measure pretty well too:

http://i.nextmedia.com.au/Assets/harbeth_super_hl5_plus_speakers_review_test_lores.pdf

From the review talking about the measurements:

"Harbeth’s Super HL5plus proved to have an extremely smooth and superbly extended frequency response, characterised by a very slight spectral tilt that saw the bass/midrange region very slightly elevated compared to the output at higher frequencies. You can see the evidence of this in Graph 1, which shows the averaged frequency response using pink noise as a test stimulus. It’s important to first note the extension and linearity of the Harbeth Super HL5plus’s response, as measured by Newport Test Labs, because it extends from 45Hz to 40kHz ±3dB—EXTENSION AND LINEARITY THAT ARE, IN MY MEMORY, UNPRECEDENTED.

Be-tween 80Hz and 10kHz the response is within ±1.25dB which is, yet again, a superb result."

(emphasis mine).

And...

"I’ve seen speakers with better low-frequency extension, speakers with better high-frequency extension, and speakers with greater overall linearity. But the Harbeth Super HL5plus is the first speaker I’ve seen that has been able to deliver all three of these very desirable attributes in the one package. Equally important, it’s done it with a design that’s an easy load for any amplifier to drive and using a cabinet whose dimensions are not even close to being visually intimidating. I’m not sure who to congratulate for this marvellous achievement, the BBC, Dudley Harwood or Alan Shaw... or all three. But whoever was responsible—individually or collectively—congratulations are most certainly due, and even more certainly very well-deserved."

Now, when any speaker measurements are posted, someone will pick them apart. Especially if coming from a more single-minded guiding principle - e.g. "DSP or bust."


But those Harbeths sounded superbly neutral in my room and concur very well with what the reviewer had to say about them.
This is why I find the technical arguments - often enough at odds with each other as people disagree - made about the "right way" for speaker design to be very interesting, but I remember to take them with a grain of salt. Especially claims like people don't really buy a speaker like the Harbeth for good sound quality, or that properly designed speakers would leave no place for Harbeth in the marketplace.

The Harbeth's combined superb sound quality in to a design that actually looks beautiful in the home. The Genelec 8030 and Neumann KH120A
speakers look bloody awful - like studio monitors - and given a speaker will essentially end up as a permanent piece of furniture in a room, the last thing I want is an ugly speaker. Someone else of course may like the looks of those monitors over the Harbeth, but that's my point: people have varying tastes and goals so choice-is-good. With a Harbeth speaker I got both excellent sound and beautiful looks, and they aren't irrational needs, so there is a perfectly rational market being served by such companies.
 
Last edited:

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,197
Likes
11,813
Interesting. I've heard these at a couple of hifi shows in Melbourne and really liked them.
Even more interesting (I thought, anyway) was that at the demo, they were A-B switching between the Devores with and without DEQX room correction. I felt that they sounded better without

It seems Amirm had some positive things to say about the Devores from some shows.



DeVore, Audio Note, and all the variations on this sort of design sound dreadful with music that needs neutrality, ie classical.

Disagree. At least for the other Devore speakers I've been mentioning. I found classical particularly wonderful on those designs, especially the Devore O series. One of my main frustrations with reproduced sound comes with masses strings,which almost always to me sound threadbare, wirey, and somewhat electronic. The real thing is full, rich, and has a combination of silkiness and bow texture. My first "wow" moment listening to the Devore 0/96 speakers was the sound of massed strings, which combined a greater sense of body and fullness vs other speakers, with a life-like texture and silkiness. Horns were wonderful as well, same with woodwinds. I am a fanatic also for film scores, especially those by Bernard Herrmann and I've played my favorite woodwind/brass- heavy selections on speakers for decades, and few recreated those pieces with a sense of richness and believably like the Devores to my ears.

Same for drums. As someone who grew up playing in bands, and playing some drums, I always test that instrument on speakers. I put on certain well recorded drum heavy or drum solo tracks, close my eyes, and see how convincing the sound is. I don't think I have ever heard drums sound *that much* like the real thing from a speaker of similar size with my eyes closed, as on the Devore O speakers. They may depart from neutrality in some areas, but they have struck a canny balance to my and many other people's ears, in terms of their actual sound.


Now, that's my own subjective opinion of course, but you were giving your own view of the subjective effects of those speakers. I'm trying to explain why the speakers are popular with many listeners, including experienced listeners, and it's not simply marketing. I like the looks of the O speakers, but I've been disappointed by plenty of speakers whose looks I adored and wanted so much to like.
 
Last edited:

ryanmh1

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2019
Messages
93
Likes
117
I truly enjoyed the sound of the Devore speakers, and I LOVE the sound of the Harbeth speakers, which are high among my favorite brands. I work in pro sound so I hear million dollar studios. I've carefully auditioned the Revels and many other such speakers. I own speakers that measure quite well. So I'm not unaware of what "good measuring systems" sound like. But I still adore many of the qualities I hear in the currently derided speakers.

I wouldn't doubt for a minute that these might sound very nice to some, despite their poor measurements. However, I would be surprised if why they sound nice was unrelated to their measurements. They are so far out of kilter, that is has to have significant audible side effects.

I would hazard a guess you could get about the same thing with an equalizer and speakers that cost $10,000 less. After all, they are just square box, 3 way ported speakers.

EDIT: In at least some of their speakers, they appear to use Seas Exotic drivers. Assuming they also use insanely expensive and good drivers in their other speakers, it may account for a lot of what these speakers do right, despite their obvious faults.
 
Last edited:

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,197
Likes
11,813
I wouldn't doubt for a minute that these might sound very nice to some, despite their poor measurements. However, I would be surprised if why they sound nice was unrelated to their measurements. They are so far out of kilter, that is has to have significant audible side effects.

Agreed. There's no magic here. Surely however they sound relates to their measurements....though presumably not just one measurement.
Also, I'd emphasize that I spent very little time listening to the speaker linked to in the OP, the Gibbon X. My favorable comments on the Devore relate to a different speaker design, which actually measured better than the Gibbon X, particularly in a flatter frequency response. Still even those Devores came in for some criticism, similar to that aimed at the Gibbon X. So I find them useful touchstones in discussions like this.

I would hazard a guess you could get about the same thing with an equalizer and speakers that cost $10,000 less. After all, they are just square box, 3 way ported speakers.

I don't know the answer but I'm skeptical about that claim, given eq does not alter all the important characteristics of a speaker, as Floyd Tool is always pointing out.

BTW, I am also like many here uncomfortable with much of the pricing in high end audio, speakers included. I am fairly aghast at the sky-rocketting prices - bad enough decades ago! - and feel a visceral sense of "someone is being taken in" when I think of the price-to-cost ratio of many high end speakers. There's a train of thought that goes "Look, an item is worth whatever SOMEONE will pay for it." (I notice this response tends to come from Americans btw...:)...a very free-market mind-set). What I reject there is that it seems to erase the very notion of "over-priced" "good value" or "being taken to the cleaners." Hey...as long as someone will pay for it, no one can talk about outrageous mark-up! I just can't go along with that.
I like the idea of high end manufacturers having their feet held to the fire....oh how I'd love to see many of the high end cable manufacturers get a grilling on this in an interview from someone who knows their stuff. But of course all we ever see is soft-ball puff pieces in audio journalism on such things.

On the other hand...I run right in to the "value is in th eye of the beholder" when we actually get down to specific examples. I'm quite sure that some speakers I would pay for are ones some people here would strike immediately off their list as over-priced. It'c complicated.
 
OP
Purité Audio

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,051
Likes
12,150
Location
London
Harbeth aren’t bad a little coloured by modern standards, Zi/DeVore/Audio Note are so coloured that to me every record sounds the same.
They would be the last speakerI would ever buy although a horn loaded single driver with whizzer cone would push them close.
Keith
 

Ron Texas

Master Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
6,078
Likes
8,914
DeVore, Audio Note, and all the variations on this sort of design sound dreadful with music that needs neutrality, ie classical.

My take is for an updated Snell Type E, this two way is expensive, even in the base model, and stupid expensive with enhancements like silver wire voice coils.
 

HammerSandwich

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 22, 2018
Messages
1,137
Likes
1,497
I don't know the answer but I'm skeptical about that claim, given eq does not alter all the important characteristics of a speaker, as Floyd Tool is always pointing out.
Primarily, what cannot be equalized is directivity. OTOH, that's mostly controlled by baffle size, driver size, driver location on the baffle & XO characteristics.

Based on the Stereophile review, the Gibbon X isn't too unusual in those areas. Looks to me that you could make a low-effort stab at this with many 6.5", 2-way, monitors + subs + DSP.

More IMO, the problem with subjective praise for DeVores isn't from forum users, but Stereophile. The reviewers repeatedly talk about hanging out at the factory, being friends with John D, etc. Doesn't inspire confidence in the reviews' objectivity, IMO.
 

Juhazi

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Messages
1,717
Likes
2,897
Location
Finland
GibbonX bass-mid and mid-tweeter crossovers are far from optimal and it is impossible to fix that with eq.

Stereophile tested recently another high-fi speaker https://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-physic-step-plus-loudspeaker-measurements
This two-way looks well done, but it carries same systematic fault as all other AP models - crossover is like LR2 but tweeter is not reverse polarity. This causes a dip in on-axis response and strange off-axis. This can be fixed simply because each driver is screw-mounted. J Atkinson noticed that too. It also has no baffle step compensation. Prize for a pair is "only" 2500$, but many 600$/pair two-ways have better sound.
119APStepfig6.jpg
119APStepfig3.jpg
 

HammerSandwich

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 22, 2018
Messages
1,137
Likes
1,497
GibbonX bass-mid and mid-tweeter crossovers are far from optimal and it is impossible to fix that with eq.
I thought we were trying to make cheaper, more accurate speakers sound something like the Gibbons.
 

Juhazi

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Messages
1,717
Likes
2,897
Location
Finland
GibbonX bass-mid and mid-tweeter crossovers are far from optimal and it is impossible to fix that with eq.

OK, just as well I could have said:
GibbonX bass-mid and mid-tweeter crossovers are far from optimal and it is impossible to mimic that with eq. (of a well done speaker)
 

FockerRN

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
14
Likes
2
I've been a planar guy since first discovering Maggies in 2005. There are some box speakers I like, but generally after I adjust to them, I begin to hear the enclosure too much and the transparency suffers. I don't ever experience that with Maggies (obviously), which is why I have owned 3.6Rs since 2009 as my main speaker. The ONE speaker that got me away from Maggies for a couple years was John Devore's Super 8s. I don't know what he does, but he is a master at transparency in a box. The Super 8s were just beautiful, both in appearance and sound. I have no doubt his current offerings are even better. I'm really glad to see him getting some good feedback. He's one of the good guys and deserves to be successful, IMO.
 

FockerRN

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
14
Likes
2
If by "good guy" you mean a guy who charges $16,000 for a poorly performing, boring-looking tower loudspeaker, I guess I understand your point.

Obviously speakers that are designed and manufactured by a small business in NYC are going to be more expensive than something mass produced. As for the rest of it, to each their own. I enjoyed them quite a lot, as have many others.
 
D

Deleted member 2944

Guest
If by "good guy" you mean a guy who charges $16,000 for a poorly performing, boring-looking tower loudspeaker, I guess I understand your point.
Speakers are somewhat of a different thing than electronics.
Who's to say these are "poorly performing?" Maybe they are relative to some flat-response, or controlled directivity, or low distortion, or whatever objective, but the designer here can have a more creative objective and tries to meet it. If people listen to them and like them they might buy them.

Dave.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,608
Location
Central Fl
Speakers are somewhat of a different thing than electronics.
Who's to say these are "poorly performing?" Maybe they are relative to some flat-response, or controlled directivity, or low distortion, or whatever objective, but the designer here can have a more creative objective and tries to meet it. If people listen to them and like them they might buy them.

Dave.
Not really any different then. Either the designer aims to produce a product as capable of reproducing a signal in as High Fidelity manner as possible. Or he can introduce a "voice" into product that he believes the customers will find pleasing and sell well.
You decide what your final goal is for your system.
 
D

Deleted member 2944

Guest
Electronics are designed and judged more objectively, in my opinion. Speakers not so much. In fact, it's quite a free-for-all in the speaker design world. Many "designers" are not even designers, per-se. :)

That said, the Devore speakers are quite boring in design to me. Maybe they sound okay, but the basic paradigm is much the same as hundreds of other box speakers out there. They only differ in some sort of "flair" or "fuck up" or whatever else some clown imparts into their design.
Speakers and speaker design really hasn't evolved much in fifty years.

Dave.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,608
Location
Central Fl
Electronics are designed and judged more objectively, in my opinion. Speakers not so much. In fact, it's quite a free-for-all in the speaker design world. Many "designers" are not even designers, per-se.
If you read Amir's measurements here, or even JA's at Stereophile, you'll see it's quite a "free-for-all" in electronics too. ;)
 
Top Bottom