Palmer ORBIT 11 Cardioid Coaxial 3-way studio monitor (MSRP 799€/899$)

[MrBlueSky4470]

Perhaps one should also consider that I am listening in the near field, approximately an arm's length away. But I don't know.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Isn't a coaxial supposed to have a better soundstage than a "normal" 2-way?

 

[Mnyb]

I spent a couple of days at Abbey Road in 2020 and one of the senior engineers told me their 800 series had modified crossovers to give a neutral response. They still sounded pretty bright and lacking in midrange to my ears.

View attachment 513862

OT: thanks for the info , I knew they had to do something to be able to use these non neutral speakers as monitors ( they could have used their own EQ like many other studios do , but better to attack the root cause sometimes ) They get free speakers and B&W get undeserved cred for being a "monitor speaker" they very proud of this in their adds but fails to mentions that they need mods or EQ to actually work in this capacity .

 

[dasherzx]

Just because it's within the manufacturer's error threshold doesn't necessarily mean it's within mine or yours.

Totally get it…had a first hand experience with an ebook reader company telling me the 0.5cm e-ink stain I have is within manufacturer specs. Only thing is…it’s right in the middle of the panel. I’d rather take 3 stains at the sides.

Moving on what songs are you picking anyway to test them. Or specifically any song sounding very different between the speakers..

 

[Liftro]

Well, you could make that measurement I suggested earlier, measuring one speaker at a time from the same position without moving the microphone. A distance of one meter, or even a shorter distance than that would probably work as these are single-point speakers.

If you see any deviations between the speakers in such measurement, it is a chance that the faulty tweeter alignment is the reason, and it may also explain the non-distinctive phantom center you are experiencing.

That was the first thing I advised him to do. I would have done it if I were him, even before posting anything here. But everyone knows what they do with their time. It's just a suggestion . If the company replaces them for you, all the better.

 

[Tovarich007]

I'm pleasantly surprised by how well the cardioid works. If you put your head between the speakers, behind the front, you only hear a muffled rumble from voices, etc. I've never experienced that with speakers before. You basically only hear the bass.

Well, if so, it works but perhaps too much ???

Cardoïd isn't made for cancelling room radiating sounds to such an extent ; the purpose is to decrease reflected sound in low medium and medium range, but in a "natural" way, not as much as an anechoic system could do. It souldn't radically delete reflected sound of voices or instruments that much.

And anyway it's not intended to be listened to at such a short distance.

How does it sound in your room from your listening position ? That's the only way to know if it's working properly or not (as for your perception and experience of course).
All other interpretation is pointless.

 

[3125b]

It's getting highly annoying to be frank

Sorry to hear that, Frank

All kidding aside, this thread badly needs factual input or it's just going to spiral.

Sound&Recording have tested the Orbit 11:
https://soundandrecording-magazin.de/produkt/soundrecording-magazin-1-26-synthesizer-legenden/
EDIT: Well, they didn't actually measure which is disappointing.
Apart from that, the description (written by Nick Mavridis) is fairly close to what people have been saying here.
He praises precise imaging, bass extension, handling/operation, low self-noise and the price-to-performance ratio.
He critizises soundstage width and SPL capability in his listening scenario

Spoiler

I first listened to these speakers in an equilateral triangle of just under three meters, with two meters between the walls and about one and a half meters to the ceiling in a room measuring about 30 square meters.

He contends that they're great monitors for nearfield use but might be strenuous for HiFi applications.

 

[dickiefunk]

I like the sound. They're good. I'm just not sure yet I like them more than my Genelecs (that cost way more). They sound very different. I once had Neumann's next to my Genelecs and they sounded much more alike.

Do you mean the Neumann's sounded more alike to the Genelecs or Orbit 11's?

 

[thewas]

EDIT: Well, they didn't actually measure which is disappointing.

It seems since quite some time there are no monitor measurements there from Prof. Anselm Goertz which makes their corresponding reviews rather useless for me.

 

[olieb]

Perhaps one should also consider that I am listening in the near field, approximately an arm's length away. But I don't know.

The closer you are to the speakers the more weight the direct sound has for the listening experience.
So far we only have the manufacturers frequency response, which is ruler flat but considerably smoothed.
If that holds, then the sound difference to more "conventional" speakers (flat on axis) is in the radiation pattern for the dominant part.
In mid-field the difference should be even more obvious than in near-field.

 

[unmutual]

@olieb
"In mid-field the difference should be even more obvious than in near-field."

Could you specify what the expected difference would be? I am considering these for a mid-field application.

 

[IngMishael]

I am incredibly glad that I am not a dealer for Audio Products.
Some nitpickers would really get on my nerves, and I would probably end up harming my own business with my responses to perceived problems rather than being as accommodating and friendly as the most dealers on ASR, for example.
So it's better for the customers.

lol thought I was the only one. there has been constant needless posts in here

 

[Blockader]

Isn't a coaxial supposed to have a better soundstage than a "normal" 2-way?

Any device that constrains a driver's beamwidth: waveguides, wide baffles, coaxial configurations work against soundstage. The tighter the directivity control, the smaller the acoustic image.

The ultimate soundstage machine is a tall, narrow-baffle design: a 3-way or 4-way MTM(with multiples of little drivers), or a full line array, with no waveguides.

The claim that "coaxials produce a more compact soundstage with better imaging" is largely subjective and has little to no support in the literature. That said, it is not thoroughly tested.
Coaxials usually offer better vertical directivity matching through the crossover region. But for home studio use, ceiling reflections should be absorbed anyway... so what's the actual gain?

All that said, the Orbit 11 is one of the most game changing speakers of the last five years, in my opinion. Not because it outperforms its competitors, but because it comes remarkably close while costing six to seven times less. The design compromises are carefully calculated only trade-offs that fall outside the target audience's use case have been introduced. Looks like an incredibly well engineered product.

Going back to my first point:

This is how speakers with very wide soundstage should look like more or less.

 

[Oboreal]

Coaxials usually offer better vertical directivity matching through the crossover region. But for home studio use, ceiling reflections should be absorbed anyway... so what's the actual gain?

Actually, frequency coherence at short listening distances and the management of desk or console reflections that are really common issues in mixing studios and home studios.

 

[olieb]

Could you specify what the expected difference would be? I am considering these for a mid-field application.

I guess this is for @bumblebee657 to answer much more than for me, as he has the actual experience.

But to theoretize a bit into the blue:
The cardioid pattern will - with the same on axis SPL - radiate significantly less energy into the room in the mentioned frequency range (250-800Hz) than a conventional speaker approaching omni pattern. (Omni has 3 times the sound power of cardioid.)
This can be perceived in different ways, depending on room, recording and what one is used to.
- more clarity in LF
- less body and fundament of voices/instruments
- thin and/or bright
- more natural "reverb"/ coloration
- ...

But this is just the general trend, each case might be somewhat different.
There is a thesis about the differences of monopole versus cardioid pattern with genelec speakers from Aalto University by Olli Kantamaa.

https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/server/api/core/bitstreams/53118e62-e0d0-4a6d-949b-b74049a069e4/content

 

[Blockader]

Actually, frequency coherence at short listening distances and the management of desk or console reflections that are really common issues in mixing studios and home studios.

Neumann's new KH series have good enough vertical directivity to handle those problems.

Note that the lobbing around 1000hz is going towards the ceiling not the floor.
So the question remains, what are we really solving with coaxial designs? Does it make handling vertical directivity problems easier? Sure, but that's not the only way.

 

[Audionaut]

Any idea where the difference in sound might be found in measurements? I'm not challenging you, I'm genuinely wondering.

If they sound “very different,” the difference should show up somewhere in the measurements. With modern active monitors, audible differences usually come from small but meaningful variations in on-axis frequency response, differences in directivity and overall power response, low-frequency alignment and DSP tuning, distortion and compression behavior at higher SPL, or phase and time-domain behavior around the crossover region. Even broadband deviations of 1–2 dB can be clearly audible.

Genelec and Neumann generally follow very similar target curves and controlled directivity concepts, which likely explains why they tend to sound more alike. If the Orbit 11 is perceived as clearly different, I would first look at its off-axis behavior and how it interacts with the room. Without measurements the discussion remains subjective, but with proper spinorama data from Amir the differences should be technically explainable.

 

[RoA]

I am incredibly glad that I am not a dealer for Audio Products.
Some nitpickers would really get on my nerves, and I would probably end up harming my own business with my responses to perceived problems rather than being as accommodating and friendly as the most dealers on ASR, for example.
So it's better for the customers.

You are clearly easier to please than others. I would love to sell you stuff, no complaints, no returns. Retailer's dream.

 

[JoeDiMEG]

When a product comes with greasy fingerprints and is damaged then the possibility is high that it was repacked.

The dealer is the first contact for a return.

But here after some whine and dine even the producer comes to help and offers some pampering.

At least this first world problem seems solved.

KR

 

[Ratterbass]

When a product comes with greasy fingerprints and is damaged then the possibility is high that it was repacked.

The dealer is the first contact for a return.

But here after some whine and dine even the producer comes to help and offers some pampering.

At least this first world problem seems solved.

KR

Yes, let's keep circling on these points until eternity and beyond!

JFC guys. Come on.