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

[ryanosaur]

An interesting short and sweet review.
I think an important note to make is that Dennis, as I understand, isn't designing for high output. I've seen him mention on occasion, a Decibel Nightmare.
I know that when I turn it up, I am usually not pushing above 80dB peaks: I usually listen at -10dB on my Marantz, depending on how hot the source may be. On occasion, when I am watching a movie instead of listening to Music, I will push the system at near-reference level. I can't say that I've ever identified a point where I felt the Speakers are not handling things well at those levels.
My BMRs are the ca. 2018 version as reviewed by J Larson on AH, not the OG pair originally reviewed by Erin, nor the newer version just reviewed above. I also have the Phil3s in my system as of May 2019. For 6 months, the BMR Monitors were my mains.
FWIW, when endeavoring to make recommendations, I always find it worthwhile to ask about the users SPL preferences. As we all know, Speaker design is a matter of tradeoffs and finding the perfect pair is nigh on impossible. Extreme SPL is not the goal with the BMRs.
That said, I have never felt myself in want of anything more with any of my gear from Dennis.

 

[Chromatischism]

Erin's original reviewed BMR used the same paper woofer as in past years. Only recently did Dennis change that. He didn't see the compression back then:

It's also not evident in the tweeter by 98 dB. The BMR was one of the higher output speakers he tested. Wonder what happened?

 

[ryanosaur]

The SB woofer allows for slightly higher sensitivity and 2nd order cross to the mid, iirc.
The old scan speak classic woofer is nice and performs quite well.
The newer design is supposed to also be taking advantage of the modified 64-10X Raal as opposed to the original 64-10. Higher output and lower distortion is supposed to be the benefit of the newer Raal design.

 

[RMW_NJ]

I know what the graphs show, but I’ll just say in practical use I’ve never encountered any of these issues with the BMRs I have. Possibly I don’t listen as loud as I thought? And Dennis has stated numerous times these weren’t really design for home theater like output.

 

[alexis]

I know what the graphs show, but I’ll just say in practical use I’ve never encountered any of these issues with the BMRs I have. Possibly I don’t listen as loud as I thought? And Dennis has stated numerous times these weren’t really design for home theater like output.

I'd say 99.99% people do not listen at 85dB or above level. I tested one of the BMR harmonic distortion at 90 dB (OmniMic is accurate in dB reading) and I have to wear ear protection. In my Home theater, I usually listen at 65 dB with some scenes the volume would be higher. Before I actually use a dB measurement tool, I don't really know how loud I'm listening. When Dennis and I did the Capital Audio Show last November, he was demoing the Tower's super bass capability by turning the volume way up to shake the room. When we switch to regular track, we forgot to turn down to the normal volume, that instant, the Tower was driven by full power of the NC400 in the demo room. Every one was shocked because of the super loud volume and also the clean clarity of the sound. We immediately turn down the volume to "normal" to not shock everyone. That is to say for a very short instant (almost like a reflective thing), extremely loud volume can shock us to cause reflective action. The high output higher frequency is.....

 

[Chromatischism]

I'd say 99.99% people do not listen at 85dB or above level.

Don't want to nitpick too much, but I'd bet that 99% of users of this speaker, which is a niche market already, will have material that exceeds 85 dB when their average SPL is around 75 dB. It's not going to be every day but they would encounter those levels.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Don't want to nitpick too much, but I'd bet that 99% of users of this speaker, which is a niche market, will have material that exceeds 85 or 90 dB when their average SPL is around 80 dB. It's not going to be every day but they would encounter those levels.

That's probably true. But as I read those graphs, the issue doesn't really show up until 102 dB. Frankly, I was surprised at how well the tweeter help up at super-90 dB levels, and I haven't encountered any audible distortion in the bass at what I consider uncomfortably loud levels. But I'm perfectly OK with a conclusion that the BMR monitors aren't extremely high output devices.

 

[pjug]

The comment regarding the 2-3KHz glare surprised me, esp where he comments in the written review that this would be a showstopper for him without EQ. I think guitar and female vocals sound amazing with these speakers, without EQ.

I also have not noticed anything sounding wrong around 500Hz where he suspects some kind of resonance.

Has anyone who has heard these had similar impression to what Erin describes?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

The new raal seems to be good in distortion, that's nice

 

[Dennis Murphy]

The comment regarding the 2-3KHz glare surprised me, esp where he comments in the written review that this would be a showstopper for him without EQ. I think guitar and female vocals sound amazing with these speakers, without EQ.

I also have not noticed anything sounding wrong around 500Hz where he suspects some kind of resonance.

Has anyone who has heard these had similar impression to what Erin describes?

I would just note that Erin listens at very high playback levels. I honestly can't hear either of these issues, and they don't show up on my measurements. However, the Klippel machine has higher resolution that any other system except perhaps those using an anechoic chamber. I can only go by my measurements and by what I hear. FWIW, this is an on-axis plot of the BMR I have on hand.

 

[amper42]

I have the BMR Monitors v2 in my 12' x 13' office and typically play them below 85dB which is still really loud to my ears. They sound fantastic. I can't imagine wanting to be in the same room with any speaker playing 100db stereo music. Erin's review seems slanted toward trying to find issues rather than simply sitting back and enjoying the music at reasonable levels.

I have the Revel M105 in the same office and they don't offer anywhere near the full bodied sound of the BMR Monitor. It sounds like Erin may prefer a speaker that offers a narrower dispersion, but for everyone else I think the BMR Monitors are a top choice in a medium size room. I haven't found anything I like better for stereo in my office. Don't let Erin's litany of complaints put you off or you'll miss out.

 

[hardisj]

Erin's review seems slanted toward trying to find issues rather than simply sitting back and enjoying the music at reasonable levels.

That's your take. I went into this expecting it to sound incredible based on my previous experience with the v1. There was one specific issue: the measurable and very audible - to me - bump around 2-3kHz that bothered me. And it turns out the fellow who loaned them to me has the same complaint. I won't "out" him here in this thread. But if he so chooses to, he can reply.

Just because I don't fawn over it, though, doesn't mean I didn't listen to it or I went into it "trying to find issues". That's nonsense. The issues were audible, I located them and I spoke about them. The same issue that the owner noticed (note: he and I didn't talk about this until after I listened to them and *before* I measured them).

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Is not this what causes the 2khz 3khz bump?
There is higher directivity at 3khz~

At 10° there is a small raise, enough to be audible.

 

[hardisj]

I would just note that Erin listens at very high playback levels.

Incorrect, Dennis. You seem to think that I only listen at high volumes. I do that as part of my testing but I don't listen for any duration at high volume because I like my ears and their ability to function normally.

I listened to these speakers at reasonable volume levels. And the 2-3kHz glare wasn't even at high output. In fact, *when* did *did* discuss high output listening, it was focused on the output capability of the speaker and the woofer's ability to provide bass at higher than normal levels. I talk about that *specifically* at this time stamp (6:24). And then I quantify the reason I then listened higher: "When I pushed the speaker harder - because people want to know ... "

So, do not conflate my concerns/complaints about the 2-3kHz with only high output. They are not one-in-the-same and I never attributed that issue to any particular volume. I only discussed volume wrt woofer capability.

 

[hardisj]

It sounds like Erin may prefer a speaker that offers a narrower dispersion but for everyone else I think the BMR Monitors are a top choice in a medium size rooms.

Did you watch the video or is this based off my written review? Serious question. I discussed this specifically in my video. I talked about listening to the speaker in two entirely different rooms and that in one room the radiation was too wide and caused the imaging to not be as focused as I'd have preferred and in the other room I didn't have that issue as much. And I said this all so people will have an idea of what to expect based on their own room.

 

[hardisj]

I would just note that Erin listens at very high playback levels. I honestly can't hear either of these issues, and they don't show up on my measurements. However, the Klippel machine has higher resolution that any other system except perhaps those using an anechoic chamber. I can only go by my measurements and by what I hear. FWIW, this is an on-axis plot of the BMR I have on hand.

View attachment 209731

Dennis, I encourage you to not look at just the on-axis response. The off-axis response and the impact it has on the EIR is far more important. And, indeed, the EIR shows this bump. Looking at the horizontal and vertical, you can see this clearly.

I'll mention again that I had no idea what the data looked like before I measured the speaker. In fact, I PM'd the owner my "initial" comments after listening to them in my home theater. And, he echoed my sentiments about this 2-3kHz "glare".

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Incorrect, Dennis. You seem to think that I only listen at high volumes. I do that as part of my testing but I don't listen for any duration at high volume because I like my ears and their ability to function normally.

I listened to these speakers at reasonable volume levels. And the 2-3kHz glare wasn't even at high output. In fact, *when* did *did* discuss high output listening, it was focused on the output capability of the speaker and the woofer's ability to provide bass at higher than normal levels. I talk about that *specifically* at this time stamp (6:24). And then I quantify the reason I then listened higher: "When I pushed the speaker harder - because people want to know ... "

So, do not conflate my concerns/complaints about the 2-3kHz with only high output. They are not one-in-the-same and I never attributed that issue to any particular volume. I only discussed volume wrt woofer capability.

I certainly don't want to get into an argument with you on this. I'm sure you're reporting what you heard. My main comment was an attempt to explain why you might have heard something the poster hadn't heard. That said, I'm honestly not hearing that problem, and indeed my main concern with the current BMR is the dip centered at 3 kHz which I thought some people might hear as a softening of lower treble response. Anyhow, thanks for the review, and I think it contains a wealth of good information.

 

[amper42]

Did you watch the video or is this based off my written review? Serious question.

I watched the video where you discussed 2" of foam on the side walls not being enough and you thought 4" would be required. I couldn't stop laughing as I don't have any treatment on the side walls and the BMR Monitors sound absolutely great. To each his own conclusion.

 

[hardisj]

And, let me say this:

I heard what I heard. If you don't then OK. It doesn't change my impressions and the data jives with the things I discussed. But the purpose of these reviews is to inform. You don't have to agree with me but understand that different situations/setups can result in different experiences. That's what I find more interesting than just blanket statements like "it sounds hot, dull, etc".

I also think it's still a great speaker but may be more room dependent than I would have initially thought. This is still part of the learning process. Before, I'd have told you I loved ±90° front radiation. Now, I'm not sure. I don't know if the tradeoff of image precision is "worth" the very wide radiation (for my home theater room) but I also can't say that all speakers with such wide radiation would behave the same way. I can "assume" they would but I don't *know* they would.

This is all part of the learning process. If you like your speakers then keep on liking them. But trying to cast doubt on what I heard or what the measurements show just comes off weird. The data is supposed to enlighten. Not draw ire and discontent.

 

[hardisj]

I certainly don't want to get into an argument with you on this. I'm sure you're reporting what you heard. My main comment was an attempt to explain why you might have heard something the poster hadn't heard. That said, I'm honestly not hearing that problem, and indeed my main concern with the current BMR is the dip centered at 3 kHz which I thought some people might hear as a softening of lower treble response. Anyhow, thanks for the review, and I think it contains a wealth of good information.

That's fine.

My point was that I do not listen at high volume levels as you said. You've mentioned this a number of times over the years and I don't get where you pull that from. I listen at various levels. I think that's a reasonable thing to do because not everyone who reads/watches my reviews listens at the same output level relative to their seating distance. So, I just want to clear up that misunderstanding.

I watched the video where you discussed 2" of foam on the side walls not being enough and you thought 4" would be required. I couldn't stop laughing as I don't have any treatment on the side walls and the BMR Monitors sound absolutely great. To each his own conclusion.

Okay. So, let's go beyond that statement... what's your room like? What are the dimensions, how do you have the speakers set up and how might your experience/situation differ? Right?... this is the reason for these discussion. If we just stop at "I don't agree" then that leaves others nowhere. You or I may not have a reason to care what the other says because "I heard what I heard and you're wrong". BUT if you are posting on a forum then *hopefully* what you're doing is trying to provide some tangible information for others to better understand these things. Otherwise, what's the point... who cares... right?