New Philharmonic BMR HT Towers

[Mort]

There's a story about the band AC/DC; when they were finishing their 10th or so album a reporter asked them what it was going to sound like and Brian Johnson responded enthusiastically "it's going to sound like every one of our other fuckin albums."

This may be an awkward analogy to Dennis's 'discography' of speakers given the brand name 'philharmonic audio' but it seems appropriate nonetheless.

The wide directivity, linear frequency response and honesty about the limits of bass is what you will hear with any PA device. Ive had all but the two new ones and I would buy them in a minute if either fit my needs.

 

[PhilharmonicAudio]

Cantabile / HT Towers / Super BMR bass reach.

I updated the spec to 32Hz - 20K for all of them. In comparison, BMR is 34Hz. So if you are comparing the spec, this will help you paint the picture. Cantabile / HT Towers / Super BMR are all transmission line aligned (Mass Load vs Tapered), they will have more mid-bass presentation in the 50-100 region. In real listening, the mid-bass is really what people's attention will be. If you have the right content to show case, you'll feel more punch from the above three vs BMR Monitors.

One little girl came into our room in AXPONA with her father. She asked me: Could you play Golden? (The theme song from Netflix Kpop Demon Hunter) Her father laughed. I actually streamed that song from Tidal. I know the mid-bass punch on Cantabile will shine - clean and powerful.

 

[Chanur]

I was at Axpona on Saturday and was excited that Philharmonic was at the show. I listened to the Cantabile. Nice! I had not heard, yet, about the Super BMR monitor with Purifi drivers. If I'd had more time I would have come back to hear them too. the Canabile is attractive and sounds very smooth, but according to the rep, doesn't reach as low as the BMR Tower. As you can see (if you zoom in) Purifi drivers are expensive.

View attachment 524819

I know it's just me but I have always hated the way the Purifi drivers look. The new Cantabile looks like a very nice compromise on bass and sensitivity. Very attractive pricing too!

Thankfully I'm in love with my BMR Towers or I would be chomping at the bit for those.

 

[cavedriver]

I know it's just me but I have always hated the way the Purifi drivers look. The new Cantabile looks like a very nice compromise on bass and sensitivity. Very attractive pricing too!

Thankfully I'm in love with my BMR Towers or I would be chomping at the bit for those.

The Purifi drivers are so visually disturbing I had to put the covers on mine. I've never had something stress me visually like that, it must be really unnatural or chaotic the way they look.

 

[Hogues]

The Purifi drivers are so visually disturbing I had to put the covers on mine. I've never had something stress me visually like that, it must be really unnatural or chaotic the way they look.

I think that "chaotic" is the perfect word to describe them.

 

[ry_]

I love the purifi look. It was jarring at first but now love it!

 

[anotherhobby]

I think the purifi drivers look neat, especially with the top lighting they got in my theater

 

[Mort]

With and without Gaia

 

[amper42]

I'd need to change how we provide the spec. Cantabile has more bass than BMR Monitors but our spec does not say so. Cantabile and Super BMR has similar bass profile and they both have slightly more bass output to BMR. Super BMR is 1.5-2 dB less sensitive to the BMR but the Purifi driver has almost double Xmax - this means you can push the driver with much more power. So the loss of sensitivity is a good trade off given today's amp power. Cantabile is 90 dB sensitive. She can play in high dynamic range.

Super BMR is Purifi with a different implementation. Most other Purifi implementation has a smaller box with low sensitivity (comparing to ours). We put Purifi in a tapered Transmission line box (larger box) and with higher sensitivity (comparing to other Purifi boxes). The MTM alignment provides a more composed and focused sound stage comparing to the BMR Monitors.

Purifi CEO came to the room twice. I showed him our implementation also asked him to sell the driver cheaper. He spent the next 10 mins explaining why they couldn't. Guess I tried.

Both Super BMR and Cantabile are closer to the HT Towers. They all shared similar bass profile - more bass than BMR Monitors with a more focused midrange presentation. Super BMR has lower sensitivity but in Monitor form. Cantabile has high sensitivity in a Tower form. If you can live with Towers - pick Cantabile. If you need a monitor, take Super BMR. If you limit your budget to 2.5K - take BMR Monitors. If you can spend 4.5K, choose from BMR Towers and HT Towers. It is a big year for Philharmonic Audio.

Bass with BMR monitor is no slouch. It's got as much bass as many towers.

 

[perceptionist]

I'd need to change how we provide the spec. Cantabile has more bass than BMR Monitors but our spec does not say so. Cantabile and Super BMR has similar bass profile and they both have slightly more bass output to BMR. Super BMR is 1.5-2 dB less sensitive to the BMR but the Purifi driver has almost double Xmax - this means you can push the driver with much more power. So the loss of sensitivity is a good trade off given today's amp power. Cantabile is 90 dB sensitive. She can play in high dynamic range.

Super BMR is Purifi with a different implementation. Most other Purifi implementation has a smaller box with low sensitivity (comparing to ours). We put Purifi in a tapered Transmission line box (larger box) and with higher sensitivity (comparing to other Purifi boxes). The MTM alignment provides a more composed and focused sound stage comparing to the BMR Monitors.

Purifi CEO came to the room twice. I showed him our implementation also asked him to sell the driver cheaper. He spent the next 10 mins explaining why they couldn't. Guess I tried.

Both Super BMR and Cantabile are closer to the HT Towers. They all shared similar bass profile - more bass than BMR Monitors with a more focused midrange presentation. Super BMR has lower sensitivity but in Monitor form. Cantabile has high sensitivity in a Tower form. If you can live with Towers - pick Cantabile. If you need a monitor, take Super BMR. If you limit your budget to 2.5K - take BMR Monitors. If you can spend 4.5K, choose from BMR Towers and HT Towers. It is a big year for Philharmonic Audio.

My 0.02. Why bother Cantabile or Super BMR? I will eventually go BMR Towers or HTT.

 

[amper42]

My 0.02. Why bother Cantabile or Super BMR? I will eventually go BMR Towers or HTT.

Personally, I prefer the BMR Monitor as it doesn't suffer from the MTM lobing effect like my BMR Tower. The BMR Towers sound fantastic with an enveloping orchestra score but once I use them with highly articulate, syncopated Jazz and rock tracks I can easily hear their midrange smear compared to the crisper BMR Monitor sound.

 

[perceptionist]

Personally, I prefer the BMR Monitor as it doesn't suffer from the MTM lobing effect like my BMR Tower. The BMR Towers sound fantastic with an enveloping orchestra score but once I use them with highly articulate, syncopated Jazz and rock tracks I can easily hear their midrange smear compared to the crisper BMR Monitor sound.

I am a proud BMR monitor owner too.

 

[Chanur]

Personally, I prefer the BMR Monitor as it doesn't suffer from the MTM lobing effect like my BMR Tower. The BMR Towers sound fantastic with an enveloping orchestra score but once I use them with highly articulate, syncopated Jazz and rock tracks I can easily hear their midrange smear compared to the crisper BMR Monitor sound.

Aren't they the exact same set up for the MTM?

 

[perceptionist]

Aren't they the exact same set up for the MTM?

The non super BMR monitor comes with only one midrange BMR driver.

 

[Chanur]

The non super BMR monitor comes with only one midrange BMR driver.

Guess I forgot. Regardless I don't have any issues with the MTM. The sound stage is enormous.

 

[PhilharmonicAudio]

Personally, I prefer the BMR Monitor as it doesn't suffer from the MTM lobing effect like my BMR Tower. The BMR Towers sound fantastic with an enveloping orchestra score but once I use them with highly articulate, syncopated Jazz and rock tracks I can easily hear their midrange smear compared to the crisper BMR Monitor sound.

When Dennis and I compare our own children, for single channel, we both liked the BMR in MTM alignment better. It has more low treble / high mid-range energy and feels a bit more composed / focused. When we use 2 channel, we still has a preference to MTM but in some program materials, we can also favor the BMR. The difference in low treble and high-midrange is there. There are both great at this level. Personal preference would be a final judgement.

 

[Mort]

once I use them with highly articulate, syncopated Jazz and rock tracks I can easily hear their midrange smear

yawn

 

[amper42]

When Dennis and I compare our own children, for single channel, we both liked the BMR in MTM alignment better. It has more low treble / high mid-range energy and feels a bit more composed / focused. When we use 2 channel, we still has a preference to MTM but in some program materials, we can also favor the BMR. The difference in low treble and high-midrange is there. There are both great at this level. Personal preference would be a final judgement.

I can understand not wanting to compare your own children. They might be listening?
In my room, when I AB the Revel F328Be vs BMR Tower with highly rhythmic Jazz or Electronic music the enhanced clarity of the F328Be is easily recognized. Under these listening conditions, the BMR Tower mid-range clarity is smeared in comparison.

What's fun, is I can use the ADI-2 DAC FS app with the loudness control to make the BMR Monitors sound within 95% of the F328Be at normal listening levels. However, I can't get that same clarity out of the BMR Tower. The MTM design offers audible limits with highly rhythmic Jazz or Electronic music. If you don't have a non MTM, high quality speaker to do an AB test with the BMR Tower you may not notice the difference. But, if you are use to an outstanding, crisp, midrange now and switch to the BMR Tower while playing highly rhythmic Jazz or Electronic music it's pretty easy to hear the reduced focus in the midrange.
Once you notice it - there is no going back to thinking it's not there. It's obvious.

If you play lots of classical music and like that extremely wide concert hall enveloping sound you won't hear the midrange smear. Instead, you will be amazed how the music sounds so BIG and Wide. Just like your last concert hall listening session. The smear fades into part of the reverberant hall background experience.

In my opinion, BMR Tower shines brightest with Classical fans. Not so much when up front, in your face clarity of syncopation is desired with jazz/rock/electronic recordings.

 

[Mort]

I can understand not wanting to compare your own children. They might be listening?
In my room, when I AB the Revel F328Be vs BMR Tower with highly rhythmic Jazz or Electronic music the enhanced clarity of the F328Be is easily recognized. Under these listening conditions, the BMR Tower mid-range clarity is smeared in comparison.

What's fun, is I can use the ADI-2 DAC FS app with the loudness control to make the BMR Monitors sound within 95% of the F328Be at normal listening levels. However, I can't get that same clarity out of the BMR Tower. The MTM design offers audible limits with highly rhythmic Jazz or Electronic music. If you don't have a non MTM, high quality speaker to do an AB test with the BMR Tower you may not notice the difference. But, if you are use to an outstanding, crisp, midrange now and switch to the BMR Tower while playing highly rhythmic Jazz or Electronic music it's pretty easy to hear the reduced focus in the midrange.
Once you notice it - there is no going back to thinking it's not there. It's obvious.

If you play lots of classical music and like that extremely wide concert hall enveloping sound you won't hear the midrange smear. Instead, you will be amazed how the music sounds so BIG and Wide. Just like your last concert hall listening session. The smear fades into part of the reverberant hall background experience.

In my opinion, BMR Tower shines brightest with Classical fans. Not so much when up front, in your face clarity of syncopation is desired with jazz/rock/electronic recordings.

So you are doubling down.

 

[MarkS]

The MTM design offers audible limits with highly rhythmic Jazz or Electronic music.

Did you have the Monitor tweeter at the same height and same listening distance as the Tower? If not, given the narrow vertical directivity of the ribbon, that could be the source of the audible difference. Another possibility is differing vertical directivity in the midrange (from 2 vs 1 BMR drivers) leading to differing floor/ceiling reflections. This will of course be at least somewhat room dependent.