Philharmonic BMR Speaker Review

[Dennis Murphy]

Are the 35 pairs already accounted for? I might want to get in line if I can!

I haven't promoted the new BMR's except in response to relevant questions. Only one or two pairs have been spoken for. I'll be putting details on my site in a couple of weeks.

 

[ctrl]

This one is $20/ea and has wide directivity:
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/vifa/vifa-ne19vts-04

The radiation pattern above 5kHz is totally different. Even if it would improve vertically, the horizontal character of the speaker would change completely in the high frequency range.

The physics can't be tricked, the approximately 1'' effective diameter of the vifa dome cannot keep up with the approximately 0.4'' width of the ribbon.

The influence of edge diffraction (and the baffle as a whole) has to be imagined with the Vifa dome.

 

[napilopez]

This one is $20/ea and has wide directivity:
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/vifa/vifa-ne19vts-04

The distortion is a crapshoot though.

But nothing compares to a real ribbon!

I just wrote a whole thing about why a difference of a few dB matters, so I'm not sure we're looking at the same thing That driver is again noticeably behind the BMR and the differences would absolutely be audible. There is no way these drivers would sound alike.

Illustrated more clearly, here is the normalized comparison of the RAAL in the BMR and the Vifa. Of course this ignores the cabinet effects, but it's still apparent the BMR has a clear advantage above 6kHz.

And note that this only covers out to 60 degrees. The drop off would be steeper at further angles, and the difference would likely grow.

I've mostly been ignoring the stuff above 10k, but if you're young, that might matter too. I can still hear up to 19khz well and can tell when speakers are missing energy up here

Also @GelbeMusik, the 70-20xr is a different ribbon and I'm not sure how it's relevant to this thread at all. No one is talking about the benefits of ribbon technology specifically, we're talking about the one used on the BMR. The 70-20XR is a much fatter design without the wide directivity of the model used in the BMR.

EDIT: Just saw @ctrl beat me to it.

 

[GelbeMusik]

... Illustrated more clearly, here is ...

So it's a diagram of something you need to come up with a story about. Where does it come from? What is it? Anyway, this only convinces those who no longer need to be convinced, but are to be confirmed.

I can still hear up to 19khz well and can tell when speakers are missing energy up here

I'm missing energy since my 80th birthday. You are way younger, sure.

Also @GelbeMusik, the 70-20xr is a different ribbon ...

There are still different types made? I never new. Look, I don't care what any avid ribbon fanatics do with themselves. But I may say that this ribbon, because of its nature, is very bad in three criteria at the same position in the frequency response**. If that's not enough to think about the significance of the ribbon a little bit further, there's no help for you. The data is there, just a little time needed to turn and turn the pros and cons. I really can't take this mental effort away from you as well

** and it is that famous frequency band where the hearing is actually and truely most sensitive, even with elder folks, due to inner ear resonance ...

 

[napilopez]

So it's a diagram of something you need to come up with a story about. Where does it come from? What is it? Anyway, this only convinces those who no longer need to be convinced, but are to be confirmed.

All this does is tell me you have not even really bothered looking closely at the directivity data. These are the same graphs already shared in this thread. I simply copied the BMR graph from @hardisj's review and the Vifa graph from Hificompass shared above. Tools like VituixCAD make it easy to copy plots from any image, which I then import into REW.

There are still different types made? I never new.

The 70-20XR is twice as wide as the tweeter used in the BMR (20 vs 10mm). It's like comparing the horizontal directivity of a 0.75 inch dome with a 0.4-inch dome.

Look, I don't care what any avid ribbon fanatics do with themselves. But I may say that this ribbon, because of its nature, is very bad in three criteria at the same position in the frequency response**. If that's not enough to think about the significance of the ribbon a little bit further, there's no help for you. The data is there, just a little time needed to turn and turn the pros and cons. I really can't take this mental effort away from you as well

** and it is that famous frequency band where the hearing is actually and truely most sensitive, even with elder folks, due to inner ear resonance ...

You must be on another forum. I've not once heard people express fanaticism for ribbons here. Anyway, there's no point on belaboring this discussion. Yes, you can get lower distortion with a 0.75-inch dome, but no, you can't get as wide directivity. For some people, the added distortion might not be worth the extra directivity width. For others, the directivity width is the reason you buy this speaker in this first place.

Pick what you prefer. It's as simple as that.

 

[GelbeMusik]

All this does is tell me you have not even really bothered looking closely at the directivity data. These are the same graphs already shared in this thread. I simply copied the BMR graph from @hardisj's review and the Vifa graph from Hificompass shared above. ... Pick what you prefer. It's as simple as that.

So, the latter curve doesn't include the interference with baffle reflections, right? Don't You think that's a bit pedestrian?

Btw, which is Your leading ear? Everybody has a leading ear. Which is Your side of preference, left or right?

 

[hardisj]

 

[MattHooper]

This was a terrific review! This type of input really makes this forum so valuable.

Dennis Murphy's speakers certainly get a lot of praise over on the AVSForum so it's nice to see how well they hold up under the cold scrutinizing
eye of the machine.

Oh, and maybe we better not let hardisji in on the fact that music continued to be produced well after 1989. It might take up so much of his time discovering new music he won't have time to do his great speaker reviews.

(I kid..I kid...)

 

[hardisj]

This was a terrific review! This type of input really makes this forum so valuable.

Dennis Murphy's speakers certainly get a lot of praise over on the AVSForum so it's nice to see how well they hold up under the cold scrutinizing
eye of the machine.

Oh, and maybe we better not let hardisji in on the fact that music continued to be produced well after 1989. It might take up so much of his time discovering new music he won't have time to do his great speaker reviews.

(I kid..I kid...)

Nearly half the playlist is after 1989. So kiss it. Butthead.

 

[bigjacko]

https://medium.com/@chweng/bmr-philharmonitor-喇叭開箱-無響室實測-e1e22fd26e41
This is another measurement done in Taiwan, so it is in Chinese. They use raal 64-10X and said it has less distortion than 64-10. Here is the picture for measurement.

The yellow line is frequency response, white is 2nd harmonic, green is 3rd harmonic distortion. Red is said to be THD but I don't know how to read. They also said this measurement is only valid to 100 Hz. Do you guys know how much is the improvement of 64-10X compare to 64-10?

 

[Icboschert]

Nearly half the playlist is after 1989. So kiss it. Butthead.

Higher Love is legit audiophile music!

 

[hardisj]

Higher Love is legit audiophile music!

Yes. Yes it is. I put it on a demo disc about 12 years ago. Some dude was making fun of it. Next meet I went to... everyone had it playing.

 

[overg]

Yes. Yes it is. I put it on a demo disc about 12 years ago. Some dude was making fun of it. Next meet I went to... everyone had it playing.

 

[hardisj]

<snip>

LOL. That's great.

 

[Trouble Maker]

How good or bad of an idea is trying to turn this into a tower? Same internal volume but shrink foot print, mostly in the depth. I like the idea since it takes up less real estate, I personally like the aesthetics/ proportions better, and no need for a stand.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

How good or bad of an idea is trying to turn this into a tower? Same internal volume but shrink foot print, mostly in the depth. I like the idea since it takes up less real estate, I personally like the aesthetics/ proportions better, and no need for a stand.

How good or bad of an idea is trying to turn this into a tower? Same internal volume but shrink foot print, mostly in the depth. I like the idea since it takes up less real estate, I personally like the aesthetics/ proportions better, and no need for a stand.

You mean in addition to the monitor, or instead of? If the former, it wouldn't be practical because I would have to meet a minimum order for two different BMR's with the same performance characteristics, and then pay more for the tower cabinet and shipping. I would rather save the tower approach for a premium version with deeper bass response and greater power handling. I should be getting a test cabinet for that in a few weeks.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

https://medium.com/@chweng/bmr-philharmonitor-喇叭開箱-無響室實測-e1e22fd26e41
This is another measurement done in Taiwan, so it is in Chinese. They use raal 64-10X and said it has less distortion than 64-10. Here is the picture for measurement.
View attachment 74604
The yellow line is frequency response, white is 2nd harmonic, green is 3rd harmonic distortion. Red is said to be THD but I don't know how to read. They also said this measurement is only valid to 100 Hz. Do you guys know how much is the improvement of 64-10X compare to 64-10?

I believe that's the measurement that was done during an open house at a university-owned anechoic chamber. I've never understood the distortion graph--how can THD be lower than its components? The 64-10X RAAL is the only model available now in the 64 series. It has a different rear chamber that allows a slightly lower crossover point, or less distortion at the same Xover frequency. As I recall, my distortion readings at one meter, 90 dB were about .5 percentage points lower over the band where THD is highest (2-3 kHz). I'll have to run that again to make sure--I forgot to save the results.

 

[Beave]

How good or bad of an idea is trying to turn this into a tower? Same internal volume but shrink foot print, mostly in the depth. I like the idea since it takes up less real estate, I personally like the aesthetics/ proportions better, and no need for a stand.

Salk made a tower version, at least for one customer, but I think it was the same depth as the bookshelf.

(The bottom half is just unused space inside. In principle they could do as you said and make a shallower cabinet and use the internal volume from the lower half to compensate for the decreased cabinet depth.)

 

[bigjacko]

I believe that's the measurement that was done during an open house at a university-owned anechoic chamber. I've never understood the distortion graph--how can THD be lower than its components? The 64-10X RAAL is the only model available now in the 64 series. It has a different rear chamber that allows a slightly lower crossover point, or less distortion at the same Xover frequency. As I recall, my distortion readings at one meter, 90 dB were about .5 percentage points lower over the band where THD is highest (2-3 kHz). I'll have to run that again to make sure--I forgot to save the results.

Yes it was measured at one university. I don't know how to read the red line too because it is so low, nearly bottom of graph. Are you measuring the distortion yourself at home? Do you need special ways to measure it and how accurate would it be?

 

[Trouble Maker]

You mean in addition to the monitor, or instead of? If the former, it wouldn't be practical because I would have to meet a minimum order for two different BMR's with the same performance characteristics, and then pay more for the tower cabinet and shipping. I would rather save the tower approach for a premium version with deeper bass response and greater power handling. I should be getting a test cabinet for that in a few weeks.

I meant if I were to make them (cabinets) for myself, using the kit from Meniscus. Would the internal cabinet dimension changes have some significant negative effect, like internal resonances. I don't have a huge depth of knowledge in this area.

I'm struggling with the depth most speakers regardless of form factor not fitting well. Our living room is 12ftx20ft, so not huge. Due to layout the position of items are pretty much fixed, with the TV and speakers on the long wall. And also the main entrance is by the right speaker. My feeling is a shallow 2 or 'small' 3 way would work well for us. I would still plan to use this with a sub.