• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

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

DougD said:
Mine's more cluttered than that. It's my WFH workstation and has my personal computers. 3 monitors and a laptop on the front, another laptop on a side extension. I'll reclaim some landscape when I retire.
Click to expand...
Well, I can’t speak to how you use your desktop… only that when I went all in on Philharmonic Audio, I hadn’t heard anything better. As good?, maybe.

At the time, I auditioned KEF R900 and the just-released R11 (non-meta). The R900 was a legit-good Speaker but still left me scratching my head a bit. If I found a pair today for 2500, I might even consider buying them as a second system. ;)

But compared to the BMR, I have zero regrets. Especially considering the cost at the time!!! (I bought 3 BMRs for the cost of 1 R900 on discount. And the R11 just sounded like sucking wind while the B&W pair I heard made the R11s sound real nice. Admittedly, the audition of the latter two were in a much less optimized setting.)
 
Anyone find their bmr to be a little too diffuse?

I've been considering doing my own diy bmr 3 way and have the drivers for awhile, but I'm kind of finding my initial tests to be kinda meh. The bmr mid has excellent tonality, but there feels like there's just no imaging. In the mix world, there's and old phrase "if everything is wide, nothing is wide".
 
BMR monitors are probably the best passive speaker for $1800 new. I had them at my desk for many months. They are big on a desktop. A large clamp stand helped get them off the surface.
 
Ktacos said:
Anyone find their bmr to be a little too diffuse?

I've been considering doing my own diy bmr 3 way and have the drivers for awhile, but I'm kind of finding my initial tests to be kinda meh. The bmr mid has excellent tonality, but there feels like there's just no imaging. In the mix world, there's and old phrase "if everything is wide, nothing is wide".
Click to expand...
Yes somewhat but im not sure if has to do with the dispersion. The image is somewhat deeper than what im used to. If you like a bit more upfront you can try dial some eq in the mid to lower mid. That helps a bit.
 
ryanosaur said:
C’mon, K… you won’t show your near field HTs?!!
And maybe a teaser of that super beautiful HiRes photo of the Monitor you took a couple days back? (That was a stunner!)

;)
Click to expand...
I thought customer pictures speaks to more authority. :)

I'd need to clean my desk to show the HT Towers. More BMR pictures will be coming as I continue to explore how to present the Piano Ebony.
 
Ktacos said:
Anyone find their bmr to be a little too diffuse?

I've been considering doing my own diy bmr 3 way and have the drivers for awhile, but I'm kind of finding my initial tests to be kinda meh. The bmr mid has excellent tonality, but there feels like there's just no imaging. In the mix world, there's and old phrase "if everything is wide, nothing is wide".
Click to expand...
This is a common critique of wide dispersion Speakers.

Funny thing, when I listen to music, I listen to the musicians and am not interested in the artificial placement of a musician on an imaginary stage.

Does that make me a bad audiophile?

I always am surprised that so many audio enthusiasts rate how a Speaker reproduces the Mix as more important than how Speakers reproduce the actual sound of real instruments.

This isn’t to say that my enjoyment is somehow more important or more valid than what you enjoy.

For me, though, the importance falls in how the design and voicing of the BMRs succeed as it applies to sound reproduction. Yet how many speakers with sh!tty FR and colored tonality are praised for their “holographic” imaging?

In a manner of speaking, it becomes a values discussion. ;)
 
Mort said:
BMR monitors are probably the best passive speaker for $1800 new. I had them at my desk for many months. They are big on a desktop. A large clamp stand helped get them off the surface.
Click to expand...
Dennis just does great work and gives great deals.....the bmr monitors are just crazy clean sounding with great bass and decent sensitivity.. I guess you can nit pick dispersion, but that's purely subjective ....of course they aren't for everyone but as an overall value prop they are objectively a good choice for most folks
 
ryanosaur said:
Funny thing, when I listen to music, I listen to the musicians and am not interested in the artificial placement of a musician on an imaginary stage.
Click to expand...

I mix though, and that "artificial" sound stage is determined by the mix for the most part. I'm not really a fan of speakers that just blend it all together and nothing can really be picked out and that was my experience with the BMR mid so far. If the sound stage has been determined and set by the musician and engineer, it's not really artificial is it?

Recorded music is really the sum of everything, the musicians, the mix, etc... You can't really listen to them independently of each other so I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying.
 
tw 2022 said:
Dennis just does great work and gives great deals.....the bmr monitors are just crazy clean sounding with great bass and decent sensitivity.. I guess you can nit pick dispersion, but that's purely subjective ....of course they aren't for everyone but as an overall value prop they are objectively a good choice for most folks
Click to expand...
Nicely said. Can't disagree. He said it's the design he's most proud of. It 'brought something new to the market.'

Only thing I would add is they are almost their own category in size. Mega-bookshelf. (megashelf?). Quite big for a bookshelf, but they still need stands on the floor.
 
Mort said:
Nicely said. Can't disagree. He said it's the design he's most proud of. It 'brought something new to the market.'

Only thing I would add is they are almost their own category in size. Mega-bookshelf. (megashelf?). Quite big for a bookshelf, but they still need stands on the floor.
Click to expand...
Yes, up close they are a bit imposing, they are very similar in many ways (including 3 way design, size, ribbon tweeter) to my 90s era infinity crescendo books that I love( especially since they were free** )... There really is something different about **BIG** 3 way books.. From what I can see on the current market the 3 way Wharfedale books are the only thing currently on the market that even compare. ... Maybe I'm forgetting something
 
I've heard speakers with similar characteristics; Sony APM, and a DIY speaker with a tectonic BMR many years ago when they were $6? On clear out.
You do get that spacious, wide sound. Other speakers can sound "cleaner" or more focused, though also a bit more closed in or boxy.
Mostly due to the room of course
There may be something related to non pistonic sound output but idk
 
amper42 said:
I can't even imagine trying to listen to them on my desk like some have discussed. It would be like listening to my Revel F328Be within 4 feet. :facepalm:
Click to expand...

What, specifically, do you envisage is the issue with the BMR Monitors in nearfield or on desktop? (It’s never been clear to me if wide horizontal dispersion is an advantage or disadvantage in this setting.)
 
Ktacos said:
I mix though, and that "artificial" sound stage is determined by the mix for the most part. I'm not really a fan of speakers that just blend it all together and nothing can really be picked out and that was my experience with the BMR mid so far. If the sound stage has been determined and set by the musician and engineer, it's not really artificial is it?

Recorded music is really the sum of everything, the musicians, the mix, etc... You can't really listen to them independently of each other so I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying.
Click to expand...
It's not my intent to argue against you. We disagree. So be it.

There are Sound Engineers that do not want to listen to the extreme Stereo separation which they use doing their work. You, it would seem, prefer to? Are the other engineers wrong in wanting to step back and let the music coalesce into a greater whole? In this way, one is listening more to the performance than the mix, yes? Certainly, you can't take the engineer out of the equation completely: soundstage and imaging are still present, but not dominating the performance.

I spent a good half of my life as a musician and have done some studio work. I do not claim to be an expert, but I've been there and participated in the mixing. Personally I prefer to listen in a way that makes me feel as if I am among the performers, not sitting in some sacred geometry attempting to discern why the mix left me feeling that the Bass track was too close to the Lead track, or whatever.

In the end, all that is being said is that you seem to prefer a more controlled or narrower dispersion pattern. I greatly enjoy the very wide dispersion these Speakers offer. My philosophy aligns much more with Dennis' design goals (which were informed by his own experience as a trained and performing musician).

Neither aspect invalidates the other. These are personal values which we don't share, and the sun will still rise in the morning. :)
 
andrew said:
What, specifically, do you envisage is the issue with the BMR Monitors in nearfield or on desktop? (It’s never been clear to me if wide horizontal dispersion is an advantage or disadvantage in this setting.)
Click to expand...
It's entirely subjective imo....but of course that thought is subjective as well....
 
andrew said:
What, specifically, do you envisage is the issue with the BMR Monitors in nearfield or on desktop? (It’s never been clear to me if wide horizontal dispersion is an advantage or disadvantage in this setting.)
Click to expand...
Unless using them as headphones, I would think being at least 3’ away should allow room for the Drivers to blend properly. Further might well be better for cohesive sound from the Speaker, say maybe 4.5’ (perhaps?), but that is still pretty well in the definition of near field, I’d say.

Mind, I’ve not used mine in such close proximity, except as Surrounds and Rears in discrete multichannel listening. They work fine for me at that distance. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
SOLD: Philharmonic Audio Affordable Accuracy Plus (w Morel) monitors speakers Perfect Condition very rare
Replies
1
Views
1K
smokey_mountain_asr
S
BoysRBackinTown
Imagining a successor to the Affordable Accuracy Monitor
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
BoysRBackinTown
BoysRBackinTown
T
Need help creating my first hifi system
Replies
3
Views
795
kemmler3D
kemmler3D
L
Alesis M1 Active Speaker Measurements
Replies
14
Views
3K
TJT
T
genesisaudiorack
  • Locked
speaker cable vs speaker model
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
BDWoody
BDWoody
Back
Top Bottom