Philharmonic BMR Monitor Semi-Objective Review - Road Show Stop 1

[swampbrain]

I'll check with Mark tomorrow. The difference in price is a smidge over $250, and the difference in the woofer cost is substantially below that. I don't think there's much difference in the crossover parts, and everything else is the same, so I dunno.

Never heard back on why the difference but now it appears the SB woofer version has been removed from meniscus completely. Oh well, you snooze you lose I guess.

 

[snaimpally]

Thanks for this thread. I emailed Dennis and asked to be put on the waiting list for the next batch of BMR monitors.

 

[pjug]

Hi, I'm wondering if these are still making the rounds and also whether they will be measured by someone with a Klippel system at the end.

 

[milan616]

There's a set of the floor standing BMRs out to review with a mystery reviewer. All we know is it's not Amir or Erin however, so probably no Klippel measurements. You can go check out Erin's measurements of an older BMR bookshelf here: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/philharmonic_bmr/

 

[pjug]

There's a set of the floor standing BMRs out to review with a mystery reviewer. All we know is it's not Amir or Erin however, so probably no Klippel measurements. You can go check out Erin's measurements of an older BMR bookshelf here: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/philharmonic_bmr/

Thanks. I look forward to seeing the tower reviewed but more I am interested in measurements of the standmount BMR with newer ceramic woofer, since I own these. Erin's review was before he had the Klippel and the Audioholics review also used manual measurements. I think Dennis said there was a question about whether low freq and high freq measurements were merged correctly in those reviews. And anyway it is a different speaker now so I think worth measuring if someone can do it.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

There's a set of the floor standing BMRs out to review with a mystery reviewer. All we know is it's not Amir or Erin however, so probably no Klippel measurements. You can go check out Erin's measurements of an older BMR bookshelf here: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/philharmonic_bmr/

Right--no Klippel--and no vertical directivity above about 15 degrees. But there will be full horizontal off-axis plots, and a ground plane of the bass response.

 

[Steve Dallas]

In case anyone is wondering, I am still enjoying the hell out of the BMRs I purchased after this review. I am feeding them with various music players on an HTPC running Dirac into a Schiit Modius DAC via USB into a Peachtree Nova 300 blem. No complaints and no desire to upgrade anything. Cables are all Fraudioquest, of course.

Even my wife, who is not into hifi at all, thoroughly enjoys them from the kitchen, totally barefoot and super preggers.

To punctuate how much I like these speakers a little more, I sold or gave away ALL of my bookshelf speaker collection after living with these speakers for a few months. No regerts. <-- Yes, that really happened.

 

[pjug]

In case anyone is wondering, I am still enjoying the hell out of the BMRs I purchased after this review. I am feeding them with various music players on an HTPC running Dirac into a Schiit Modius DAC via USB into a Peachtree Nova 300. No complaints and no desire to upgrade anything.

Even my wife, who is not into hifi at all, thoroughly enjoys them from the kitchen.

To punctuate how much I like these speakers a little more, I sold or gave away ALL of my bookshelf speaker collection after living with these speakers for a few months. No regerts.

I love the BMR standmounts too. I use them with ports plugged and with a couple subs.

 

[stren]

Interested in the towers though I'm not sure I'll have space. The obvious price point comparison to speakers designed with science would be the revel F206 though they won't have the bass reach. The kef R11 and focal aria 948 are also slightly cheaper and will be decent. The BMR midrange drive offers good value for money, but I wonder once the price gets this high if it still holds it's own? Plenty of comparison from the regular BMR to the f226be makes me think it should but I can't help but wonder if a more expensive midrange would work better for a modest increase in cost? I hope the reviewer in question has access to those alternatives as good comparison points (and preferably a group blind test).

 

[JEarle]

I love mine, truly excellent speakers.

 

[Jdunk54nl]

Not a lot of midranges that can compare to the dispersion of the BMR. Just because it is priced cheap doesn't make it a "cheap" speaker. It would be nice if it was more sensitive though.

 

[Steve Dallas]

Interested in the towers though I'm not sure I'll have space. The obvious price point comparison to speakers designed with science would be the revel F206 though they won't have the bass reach. The kef R11 and focal aria 948 are also slightly cheaper and will be decent. The BMR midrange drive offers good value for money, but I wonder once the price gets this high if it still holds it's own? Plenty of comparison from the regular BMR to the f226be makes me think it should but I can't help but wonder if a more expensive midrange would work better for a modest increase in cost? I hope the reviewer in question has access to those alternatives as good comparison points (and preferably a group blind test).

I provided something of a direct comparison to my F206s a few pages back, including in-room measurements, IIRC. The short version is neither needs room correction over a few multiples of the room's Schroeder frequency, however the F206s were a little flatter in my room, although they occupied the better position in the test. And, I could not readily hear much difference. I believe my takeaway was, if I had known about the BMRs before I bought the Revels, I would have saved a lot of $$ and bought 5 BMRs instead to cover both rooms.

If you are using full range room correction, BMRs have good enough directivity that they will respond to it very well.

 

[spacevector]

I am considering these as an upgrade for my home theater front LR but concerned about the vertical directivity. From erin's audio corner, this normalized plot shows quite narrow vertical dispersion in the treble (likely due to the tweeter used). Does this mean that not much leeway is there in vertical positioning of the speaker wrt the listener?

The HT is also my living room so want to be able to enjoy the sound whether in the LP or moving about the room.

 

[stren]

I provided something of a direct comparison to my F206s a few pages back, including in-room measurements, IIRC. The short version is neither needs room correction over a few multiples of the room's Schroeder frequency, however the F206s were a little flatter in my room, although they occupied the better position in the test. And, I could not readily hear much difference. I believe my takeaway was, if I had known about the BMRs before I bought the Revels, I would have saved a lot of $$ and bought 5 BMRs instead to cover both rooms.

If you are using full range room correction, BMRs have good enough directivity that they will respond to it very well.

Ah yes I was remember your earlier review as the 226be not the 206. Good to know

 

[Jdunk54nl]

I am considering these as an upgrade for my home theater front LR but concerned about the vertical directivity. From erin's audio corner, this normalized plot shows quite narrow vertical dispersion in the treble (likely due to the tweeter used). Does this mean that not much leeway is there in vertical positioning of the speaker wrt the listener?

You get +/- 10 degrees. Get a protractor and laser out and measure. Put protractor where your head is, aim it where you think you'd place the speakers, and then you can get your marks for +/- 10 degrees. If at any distance, you would be amazed at how much +/- 10 degrees is.

There is also very little known research on vertical dispersion and how it relates to what we like.

 

[spacevector]

You get +/- 10 degrees. Get a protractor and laser out and measure. Put protractor where your head is, aim it where you think you'd place the speakers, and then you can get your marks for +/- 10 degrees. If at any distance, you would be amazed at how much +/- 10 degrees is.

There is also very little known research on vertical dispersion and how it relates to what we like.

Thanks. My LP is 11ft from where speakers would be.
So at h = 11*tan(10) = 2ft, I can expect direct treble to have dropped off by 3dB.
Do I have this right?

 

[amper42]

Interested in the towers though I'm not sure I'll have space. The obvious price point comparison to speakers designed with science would be the revel F206 though they won't have the bass reach. The kef R11 and focal aria 948 are also slightly cheaper and will be decent. The BMR midrange drive offers good value for money, but I wonder once the price gets this high if it still holds it's own? Plenty of comparison from the regular BMR to the f226be makes me think it should but I can't help but wonder if a more expensive midrange would work better for a modest increase in cost? I hope the reviewer in question has access to those alternatives as good comparison points (and preferably a group blind test).

I enjoy my BMR monitors too. They have a nice open sound. I recently ran REW on both the Revel M105 and the BMR monitors in a 12' x 13' office. I found the Revel has more of the natural downward slope to the FR that I really like on my Revel F328Be. The BMR is +2dB more efficient than the Revel M105 and it's larger 3 way driver design offers a bit more clarity. The charts below are without EQ and obviously show room impact.

I though it was interesting to see how each speaker handled the room modes and being able to visualize their slightly different frequency response. Both sound excellent but they offer different responses.

 

[milan616]

Even my wife, who is not into hifi at all, thoroughly enjoys them from the kitchen, totally barefoot and super preggers.

You heard it here folks, BMRs are how you start a family!

 

[Steve Dallas]

I am considering these as an upgrade for my home theater front LR but concerned about the vertical directivity. From erin's audio corner, this normalized plot shows quite narrow vertical dispersion in the treble (likely due to the tweeter used). Does this mean that not much leeway is there in vertical positioning of the speaker wrt the listener?

The HT is also my living room so want to be able to enjoy the sound whether in the LP or moving about the room.

According that that chart (and my ears), you get +/- 10 degrees of goodness. A sum of 20 degrees is quite forgiving, assuming your stand height is anywhere near optimal. It is just the nature of the tweeter.

In my office, I started with 32" stands and noted some vertical oddity. I later switched to 24" stands and had no further complaints, as the speakers were then in the window. Fitting, considering how tall they are vs. the speakers they replaced.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I enjoy my BMR monitors too. They have a nice open sound. I recently ran REW on both the Revel M105 and the BMR monitors in a 12' x 13' office. I found the Revel has more of the natural downward slope to the FR that I really like on my Revel F328Be. The BMR is +2dB more efficient than the Revel M105 and it's larger 3 way driver design offers a bit more clarity. The charts below are without EQ and obviously show room impact.

View attachment 160766


View attachment 160767

I though it was interesting to see how each speaker handled the room modes and being able to visualize their slightly different frequency response. Both sound excellent but they offer different responses.

Not a lot of midranges that can compare to the dispersion of the BMR. Just because it is priced cheap doesn't make it a "cheap" speaker. It would be nice if it was more sensitive though.

You beat me to it. The whole raison d'etre for the BMR is wide, even dispersion. There are a bajillion excellent speakers with a narrower and more conventional radiation pattern, and I've designed quite a few myself for Salk Sound. But I was targeting a design approach that I've found particularly successful in resolving inner detail and spaciousness in complex music recorded in a natural venue (classical works, non-studio jazz recordings). I've tried some small midrange units from the major speaker driver companies, and they just didn't perform as well as the bending-wave BMR. My latest attempt was the uber-expensive Accuton Cell mid, which definitely gives the BMR some competition. It measures with a little less distortion and is even smoother, but it lists for $600 a pop and doesn't quite match the dispersion of the BMR.