• Welcome to ASR. 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!

Palmer Orbit 11 Monitor Review

Rate this monitor speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 7 2.7%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 47 17.9%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 141 53.6%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 68 25.9%

  • Total voters
    263
Hello,
Finally i have got the pair :) After short listening i can share some thougths:

1. Low end - really really good with great transient response and fullness - really really good and room independent as hell.
2. Mids - U need to listen to them louder and they open so its the worst part of orbits - still examining as i found some 500-700hz translation issues
3. Highs - love and hate
4. Tonality - really well done i can tell U they are one of the best ballanced speakers i have tested and owned.
5. Dimensions - narrow and small scene - better when U crank them up but still narrow and little comparing to other speakers
6. Noise - from 1.2m with low gain no problem for me
7. Buid quality - really good
8. In compare to other spekaers the bad mixes will sound really bad on them and good will sound really good - thats the key for most mixing situations and i think they do it really well.
9. They are somehow 'economica' in the matter of amount of details but not at every part so for example U can have a lot of bass details and smacks and reverbs but less in vocal, guitars, sax region etc. So i am wondering if this is intentional or just random effect - its not good or bad to be honest as in case of not perfect room more details can affect headache.
10. Transient response also very good - somehow not equal in every region but good ( lowend eally good )

My current room is rather small and they do great job here - so seems they can do really well at that case. Will try more soon.
But in general i can recommend those speakers for mixing - U got full range musical device for really nice money.

Meny of U are comparing them to gens ones. I think gens have more strong sound and more detail but the gens doesnt sounds as music sounds - they are just presenting sound in the space - orbits are more at the musical side. I would prefer orbits in my situation ( near field and mix )

Thanx
 
What do you mean by "(The Genelec The Ones) doesn't sound as music sounds" ? and" they are just presenting the sound in the space" ? (well, happily they do and i hope the Orbit do so).

These expressions are subjective and not precise. Please can you try to describe more what you intend ?
As for me, the Genelecs I have listened to just transfer the sound of the source as it is, with no artefact nor obvious coloration. Of course, absolute transparency and neutrality don't exist, it's just a dream for pro engineers, musicians and music lovers, but The Ones are among the most neutral and transparent speakers i've heard.

If the Orbits are even more accurate in a (your) small room, they should be an absolutesuper bargain. I mean, of course they are indeed a bargain, they're super speakers for size/tech and price.
But better than The Ones ???
 
IMG_8058.jpeg

I got my b stocks today. It came with a dent on the woofer. Sad, but shouldn’t affect the sound.
Bloated bass out of the box, but wow there’s still rumble at 20hz and below, I had to double check in minidsp control panel I turned off my subs.
Dirac was pretty weird too and recommended a +12db bass boost and -3db around 7khz and stopping there. But nothing that cant be fixed with a little fiddling.
Nothing else to drone on about the sound, other than it works as advertised. Great value especially considering the kh120ii costs more, but that one has Dsp built in.
 
What do you mean by "(The Genelec The Ones) doesn't sound as music sounds" ? and" they are just presenting the sound in the space" ? (well, happily they do and i hope the Orbit do so).

These expressions are subjective and not precise. Please can you try to describe more what you intend ?
As for me, the Genelecs I have listened to just transfer the sound of the source as it is, with no artefact nor obvious coloration. Of course, absolute transparency and neutrality don't exist, it's just a dream for pro engineers, musicians and music lovers, but The Ones are among the most neutral and transparent speakers i've heard.

If the Orbits are even more accurate in a (your) small room, they should be an absolutesuper bargain. I mean, of course they are indeed a bargain, they're super speakers for size/tech and price.
But better than The Ones ???
hi for me the reference speakers is atc 100 ( own ) or 110 in properly designed room. I meant about gens that they do sound artificial - there is no glue at all in the sound and no musical character - they are most artificial sounding speakers i have owned / no excitement at all - bad mixes sound on them similar to very good mixes if the volume isnt matter. Its not only my opinion but opinion of few others with who we listened a lot to different speakers - they are also known sound engineers. Orbits are much more musical than ones but they are narrow sounding / small. I prefer them of course. Of course its not that i dislike ones - they are uniqe somehow but ... orbits are better.
Cheers
 
hi for me the reference speakers is atc 100 ( own ) or 110 in properly designed room. I meant about gens that they do sound artificial - there is no glue at all in the sound and no musical character - they are most artificial sounding speakers i have owned / no excitement at all - bad mixes sound on them similar to very good mixes if the volume isnt matter. Its not only my opinion but opinion of few others with who we listened a lot to different speakers - they are also known sound engineers. Orbits are much more musical than ones but they are narrow sounding / small. I prefer them of course. Of course its not that i dislike ones - they are uniqe somehow but ... orbits are better.
Cheers
Stick around and be open to having your mind changed.
 
no even from the top to bottom - height -

they are small - toed them and sorry yes its wider but the depth has been affected. R.
galilen, thank you the sharing! The narrow and small Dimensions could be the the cardioid design of the speaker. Is the image more focused or less compared with other speakers?
 
galilen, thank you the sharing! The narrow and small Dimensions could be the the cardioid design of the speaker. Is the image more focused or less compared with other speakers?
image and tonality are great - i still have to examine 500 700 as i have some doubts but they can really surprise with the reproduction - they do sound real much more real than other dsp based ones and they will show U the space between sounds but still U hear the 'music' so not unreal as others. They are like geithain combined with the barefoot.
R.
 
5. Dimensions - narrow and small scene - better when U crank them up but still narrow and little comparing to other speakers
Interesting. Sorry if I misread it, but what are you comparing them against? I find them quite wide for nearfield speakers. Certainly wider soundstage than my other speakers (Focal Alpha and KH120ii).
 
hi for me the reference speakers is atc 100 ( own ) or 110 in properly designed room. I meant about gens that they do sound artificial - there is no glue at all in the sound and no musical character - they are most artificial sounding speakers i have owned / no excitement at all - bad mixes sound on them similar to very good mixes if the volume isnt matter. Its not only my opinion but opinion of few others with who we listened a lot to different speakers - they are also known sound engineers. Orbits are much more musical than ones but they are narrow sounding / small. I prefer them of course. Of course its not that i dislike ones - they are uniqe somehow but ... orbits are better.
Cheers
Sounds like the Genelec' are more neutral to me. They aren't meant to sound exciting or "musical," just playback material as neutrally as possible.
 
Interesting. Sorry if I misread it, but what are you comparing them against? I find them quite wide for nearfield speakers. Certainly wider soundstage than my other speakers (Focal Alpha and KH120ii).
hi now i have toed them out and its better but the depth is gone - it can be matter of hard front wall in my room i will try them at the another room. From the top to bottom they are rather small. I have compared them to the atc scm20mk2 and ex machina pulsars mk2 - anyway i prefer orbits than pulsars.
 
Sounds like the Genelec' are more neutral to me. They aren't meant to sound exciting or "musical," just playback material as neutrally as possible.
i liked them too but they are rigid or somehow hard. For mixing not so usuable. I think they do good when U listen to electronic music.
R.
 
I reported earlier that the toe-angle can be used to adjust soundstage width of the Orbits. I had a general idea that toe-out increases lateral reflections resulting in wider soundstage. To gain better insight, I did the attached sketch, which is a generalization for cardioid dispersion. My findings are included so I will not repeat them here. With the speaker playing straight into my room, I'm satisfied with the soundstage that clearly exceeds speaker positions.

1777890878549.png
 
Last edited:
Hello,
Finally i have got the pair :) After short listening i can share some thougths:

1. Low end - really really good with great transient response and fullness - really really good and room independent as hell.
2. Mids - U need to listen to them louder and they open so its the worst part of orbits - still examining as i found some 500-700hz translation issues
3. Highs - love and hate
4. Tonality - really well done i can tell U they are one of the best ballanced speakers i have tested and owned.
5. Dimensions - narrow and small scene - better when U crank them up but still narrow and little comparing to other speakers
6. Noise - from 1.2m with low gain no problem for me
7. Buid quality - really good
8. In compare to other spekaers the bad mixes will sound really bad on them and good will sound really good - thats the key for most mixing situations and i think they do it really well.
9. They are somehow 'economica' in the matter of amount of details but not at every part so for example U can have a lot of bass details and smacks and reverbs but less in vocal, guitars, sax region etc. So i am wondering if this is intentional or just random effect - its not good or bad to be honest as in case of not perfect room more details can affect headache.
10. Transient response also very good - somehow not equal in every region but good ( lowend eally good )

My current room is rather small and they do great job here - so seems they can do really well at that case. Will try more soon.
But in general i can recommend those speakers for mixing - U got full range musical device for really nice money.

Meny of U are comparing them to gens ones. I think gens have more strong sound and more detail but the gens doesnt sounds as music sounds - they are just presenting sound in the space - orbits are more at the musical side. I would prefer orbits in my situation ( near field and mix )

Thanx

Yeah, something going on on the low/mid midrange and it seems to be kinda random - different people indicate a lack of balance at different frequencies, which may be a convection of high room dependence;

My mixes without any correction had to much midrange but after a bit of personalization, either manually or using room eq (and after all, almost everyone uses something these days), everything went back to normal and, in my opinion, the translation is at a high level on them. I had a lot of speakers in the same room and Orbits are some of my favorites when it comes to work comfort, self-confidence as an engineer and translation quality on par with PSI A23-M and Amphions One15. It's easier and faster for me to work on them than on SCM25, Kali SM-8 or 6-2.
 
I reported earlier that the toe-angle can be used to adjust soundstage width of the Orbits. I had a general idea that toe-out increases lateral reflections resulting in wider soundstage. To gain better insight, I did the attached sketch, which is a generalization for cardioid dispersion. My findings are included so I will not repeat them here. With the speaker playing straight into my room, I'm satisfied with the soundstage that clearly exceeds speaker positions.

View attachment 529768
Good stuff. Also of relevance here is the coaxial mid/tweeter, which typically yields similar results tonally whether toed in or out. From experience with KEF, there is little to no imaging penalty for toeing the speakers out, but quite a significant soundstage penalty for toeing them in. It doesn’t surprise me that toeing out these speakers is of subjective preference to many.
 
In case anyone wondered how Palmer could release such an advanced product seemingly out of nowhere, look at this speaker from LD Systems (belongs to Palmer). Cardioid midrange and optionally also bass (requires second sub). Check the videos. The way the bass module automatically goes into slave mode, which only allows cardioid mode de-/activation, once the column speaker is removed, showcases their attention to detail and system integration. Also the display reminds me of the Orbits, although the implementation on the latter is more advanced.


1777998994998.png
1777999787522.png
 
Back
Top Bottom