New Philharmonic BMR HT Towers

[DVinylfan]

I like everything I hear about these loudspeakers. I am looking to replace my speakers soon and will first make an enquiry about shipping cost to Europe.
Got to respect a small independent company innovating to make great sound and offering the results at such reasonable cost.

 

[amper42]

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.

Any speaker with a RAAL Tweeter will sound best when the height of the listeners ear and the RAAL Tweeter are the same.
In all my tests with BMR Monitors and BMR Tower the tweeter is level with the listeners ear.

The Revel F328Be is much more forgiving of the listening position. The F328Be tweeter sits 10.5" higher than the BMR Tower RAAL as its cabinet is considerably taller. There is no need to raise the listener seated position with the F328Be as it sounds great at all levels. All speakers are the same distance from the listening position during each test.

 

[Chanur]

Any speaker with a RAAL Tweeter will sound best when the height of the listeners ear and the RAAL Tweeter are the same.
In all my tests with BMR Monitors and BMR Tower the tweeter is level with the listeners ear.

The Revel F328Be is much more forgiving of the listening position. The F328Be tweeter sits 10.5" higher than the BMR Tower RAAL as its cabinet is considerably taller. There is no need to raise the listener seated position with the F328Be as it sounds great at all levels. All speakers are the same distance from the listening position during each test.

It's also way more expensive.

 

[PhilharmonicAudio]

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.

What amper42 describes is what I say the BMR Monitor will be a bit "forwarding" when comparing to the BMR Towers. I wouldn't describe that as "smear". BMR Monitors feels like a "naughty" girl while Towers feel like a composed / mature lady. Different people could have different preference on different materials. If you never compare them head to head with volume matched and instant switching, it would be a bit difficult to understand. This is also something the frequency response measurement won't tell you as both are measured perfectly flat.

On the same token, if you compare our True Mini to BMR Monitors, TM will a little bit more forwarding. Part of that is because of TM is a two way implementation, which is difficult to achieve the "relaxing" feel in a well implemented 3 way.

 

[MarkS]

OK, but what is the physical cause of "naughty" vs "composed"? Differing off-axis vertical response is the obvious guess, do you agree with that or do you believe that it is something else? (For example lower distortion with 2 BMR drivers vs 1.)

 

[PhilharmonicAudio]

OK, but what is the physical cause of "naughty" vs "composed"? Differing off-axis vertical response is the obvious guess, do you agree with that or do you believe that it is something else? (For example lower distortion with 2 BMR drivers vs 1.)

MTM has a different radiation pattern vs TM. The distortion are both low.

 

[WillBrink]

Well no more bass than the Monitor but about 5 db more spl, so more dynamic - closer to the HT Tower I would expect w/o the 25-35 Hz. Sure have filled in the line pretty fast the past 2 years or so.

Super Monitor probably more interesting for me.

So far they haven't made anything I don't really like.

The line up is starting to get a bit confusing and convoluted for me as to the differences. If you have/want subs, I would go with super monitors. Differences between HT towers and Cantabile? Good choice with or without subs I expect. More dynamic for HT Tower? With subs and X over at 80-100hz does it matter?

 

[Mort]

The line up is starting to get a bit confusing and convoluted for me as to the differences. If you have/want subs, I would go with super monitors. Differences between HT towers and Cantabile? Good choice with or without subs I expect. More dynamic for HT Tower? With subs and X over at 80-100hz does it matter?

I don't disagree about the line up. For the few hundred extra the HT takes up just as much space with a mount as the super monitor. It's the much better speaker. Dennis agreed fwiw

 

[Mark609]

I don't disagree about the line up. For the few hundred extra the HT takes up just as much space with a mount as the super monitor. It's the much better speaker. Dennis agreed fwiw

Which one is the much better speaker (with a sub)? Seems to me he designed both to be paired with a sub (s) to extend the low end when it comes to home theater.

 

[PhilharmonicAudio]

The line up is starting to get a bit confusing and convoluted for me as to the differences. If you have/want subs, I would go with super monitors. Differences between HT towers and Cantabile? Good choice with or without subs I expect. More dynamic for HT Tower? With subs and X over at 80-100hz does it matter?

We want to provide more options to fit everyone's budget. For three Towers, Cantabile will be the highest C/P. The more you pay, the more speakers you will have but the diminished return will apply. You can use subwoofers with all Towers. The decision among our Towers would be: 1) your budget, 2) which finish you like, 3) which size you can accommodate. If you can live with the Towers and piano black is acceptable, I'd edge toward Cantabile over Super BMR. Some people really want the Monitor size speakers. For Super BMR, we are offering custom finish option and that is also attractive for someone who wants to make their speakers unique.

I did not list sound quality as a criteria - you cannot go wrong with either one of these.

 

[Mort]

Which one is the much better speaker (with a sub)? Seems to me he designed both to be paired with a sub (s) to extend the low end when it comes to home theater.

It's a fine point, both I'm sure are great. But the HT will ultimately beat the super in spl.

And I think that's worth a few hundred dollars.

 

[DVinylfan]

H T towers listed out of stock
on website
Cantabile in black: low stock
I'm in Europe. I prefer the wood finish.
I'm wondering if these beautiful speakers will ever be available for me.

 

[PhilharmonicAudio]

H T towers listed out of stock
on website
Cantabile in black: low stock
I'm in Europe. I prefer the wood finish.
I'm wondering if these beautiful speakers will ever be available for me.

We will have them in June. You can reserve them now.

 

[PhilharmonicAudio]

It's a fine point, both I'm sure are great. But the HT will ultimately beat the super in spl.

And I think that's worth a few hundred dollars.

HT has lower harmonic distortion under 100Hz than Cantabile / BMR. That is the Purifi advantage of super clean low end. You can see them in measurements but in the practical listening, this is where the law of diminishing return applies.

 

[MarkS]

For three Towers, Cantabile will be the highest C/P.

What is C/P?

 

[ryanosaur]

What is C/P?

Cost to performance.

 

[Beave]

But then, shouldn't it be P/C (performance to cost)?

 

[ryanosaur]

But then, shouldn't it be P/C (performance to cost)?

You'd need to work that out with Ken.

 

[PhilharmonicAudio]

You'd need to work that out with Ken.

But then, shouldn't it be P/C (performance to cost)?

I think we usually say cost-performance ratio or C/P. I never actually saw a number.

 

[Rickysa]

We will have them in June.

That's when we are heading your way for a listen