PS Audio FR10 sneak peak

[thewas]

The written reviews final conclusion sounds as someone would expect from such a loudspeaker

"The PS Audio Aspen FR10 speakers, priced at $10,000 per pair, have some objective shortcomings but subjectively sound quite good to me"

so no real surprises as the subjectivists would like to see.

 

[Chris Brunhaver]

With the neos and purifies I expected it to be better than that...

Well, these are our own drivers. We are not using purifi or another OEM. I used to work for BG and these are based on those designs (with some changes/improvements). Our larger midrange driver (used in the models above this) does perform a good deal better but it is about 2X the cost.

The woofers are my own design but use split-gap XBL motor and dual copper shorting rings and our own cone/surround/spider tooling.

 

[SDC]

Well, these are our own drivers. We are not using purifi or another OEM. I used to work for BG and these are based on those designs (with some changes/improvements). Our larger midrange driver (used in the models above this) does perform a good deal better but it is about 2X the cost.

The woofers are my own design but use split-gap XBL motor and dual copper shorting rings and our own cone/surround/spider tooling.

Oh my, I'm so sorry for the mistake.

 

[Chris Brunhaver]

Oh my, I'm so sorry for the mistake.

I do love the purifi stuff and have huge respect for what they're doing. However, we want our own "keys to the castle" and I want to continue understanding and improving our own drive units to iterate on future models and give a consistent design through various models.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

I do love the purifi stuff and have huge respect for what they're doing. However, we want our own "keys to the castle" and I want to continue understanding and improving our own drive units to iterate on future models and give a consistent design through various models.

Ur woofers apparently are very good, i see low subbass distortion in the fr10 review
Cheers

 

[Rick Sykora]

I do love the purifi stuff and have huge respect for what they're doing. However, we want our own "keys to the castle" and I want to continue understanding and improving our own drive units to iterate on future models and give a consistent design through various models.

Custom drivers also would explain some of the higher pricing. Do like that you bring BG heritage. Their bigger drivers were on my wish list and waited too long and missed out. I got a deal on a radia z7s and still have them around.

Can you please articulate more on your design approach? Notably, flat frequency response does not appear to be as much of a priority as many ASR members would expect. Passive radiators seem to be making a recent comeback and you seem to prefer. Any other design goals you emphasize that you feel make your speakers exceptional?

 

[Chris Brunhaver]

Custom drivers also would explain some of the higher pricing. Do like that you bring BG heritage. Their bigger drivers were on my wish list and waited too long and missed out. I got a deal on a radia z7s and still have them around.

Can you please articulate more on your design approach? Notably, flat frequency response does not appear to be as much of a priority as many ASR members would expect. Passive radiators seem to be making a recent comeback and you seem to prefer. Any other design goals you emphasize that you feel make your speakers exceptional?

Yeah, my history goes back a ways on the bigger drivers. My father did a lot of work on those with David Graebener (after David's work on the Carver ALS with Jim Croft). Here is a little think that I wrote about them. https://www.psaudio.com/blogs/copper/attack-of-the-20-foot-tweeter

Planars are rather handmade and hard to keep quite as consistent as the best domes/cones. We are able to get driver/system matching under a dB in production but, in the case of the dip in the response at 6Khz on this tweeter, they don't leave the factory that way and it is something that happens under the initial high power use of the speakers (and stays that way). I'm currently exploring that more. Dupont-Teijin Films no longer making the Teonex Q83 (which has superior shrink resistance) in the thicknesses needed for a planar tweeter (<25 micron) and so we are using some Toyobo PEN Q53 film that will shrink slightly more at high temperature. The 6 kHz frequency is the effective width of the diaphragm and so this an edge resonance of some sort (though is incredibly well damped and doesn't show any stored energy). I've talked with my fried igor Levitsky who has done planar drivers for Radian, SLS, BG, Hivi, Costal Source, Christie Digital, Oppo and others about this and there are a lot of variables involved in troubleshooting it.

I am doing some ongoing materials research (attached is a tweeter sample I'm working on using a 12 micron PEEK diaphragm (which shows really good stability and higher power handling along with slightly improved distortion numbers). This is a driver with the front magnet structure removed so you can see the diaphragm.

In short, we're working to make these flatter but these types of drive units are challenging to get ruler flat. When you say, non-flat, you do have to acknowledge that these measure better in a lot of ways than many major high-end hifi brands (B&W, Wilson and many others) and a lot of the broad strokes of the design are pretty competent (good bass response for the size, low distortion and pretty balanced presentation). Of course, I'd like to do better and there is continued efforts there.

The mid on erin's units looks a little low in level and I'll be keeping an eye on our production measurements to see if I need to adjust the crossover a hair in future production. We do traditional measurement methods and techniques and aren't designing for a different target curve or something.

The benefits of planars are very low stored energy (you can see the very clean waterfall/CSD plot in hifinews review). The midranges don't have any cone breakup (just a very mild resonance around 900 Hz based on their clamped height that decays quickly). They are quite high sensitivity and rather output (the tweeter is about 93-4 dB and midrange is 96 dB) and sound pretty open and dynamic. Distortion is almost all second harmonic and IMD is very low because there is essentially no inductance and there is no steel pole inside the circuit to modulate and so they have a pretty different sonic character from most cone/dome drivers for these reasons. Our larger mid is around 0.05% distortion at 90 dB SPL at 1 kHz and is approaching the state of the art as a midrange (other than it's rather narrow vertical directivity).

The narrow aspect ratio gives rather wide/even horizontal coverage. The couple extremely well to high frequencies (better than domes) so work very well in line array or other arrayed applications (though we aren't currently doing these kinds of designs).

The woofers in our larger speakers are higher performance that what is in the FR10 but all of them use our own implementation of the XBL split-gap motor structure that gives a rather motor force versus excursion. Here is a klippel LSI measurement of the woofers from the FR10 and you can see that they have amonst the longest throw of any 6.5" midwoofers on the market and very symmetrical suspension too. Here is a PS Audio forum link to the measurement. https://forum.psaudio.com/t/fr10-speaker/32923/56

 

[Rick Sykora]

Yeah, my history goes back a ways on the bigger drivers. My father did a lot of work on those with David Graebener (after David's work on the Carver ALS with Jim Croft). Here is a little think that I wrote about them. https://www.psaudio.com/blogs/copper/attack-of-the-20-foot-tweeter

thanks for sharing! see you additionally have some family heritage in driver engineering.

Planars are rather handmade and hard to keep quite as consistent as the best domes/cones. We are able to get driver/system matching under a dB in production but, in the case of the dip in the response at 6Khz on this tweeter, they don't leave the factory that way and it is something that happens under the initial high power use of the speakers (and stays that way). I'm currently exploring that more. Dupont-Teijin Films no longer making the Teonex Q83 (which has superior shrink resistance) in the thicknesses needed for a planar tweeter (>25 micron) and so we are using some Toyobo PEN Q53 film that will shrink slightly more at high temperature. The 6 kHz frequency is the effective width of the diaphragm and so this an edge resonance of some sort (though is incredibly well damped and doesn't show any stored energy). I've talked with my fried igor Levitsky who has done planar drivers for Radian, SLS, BG, Hivi, Costal Source, Christie Digital, Oppo and others and there are a lot of variables involved.

I am doing some ongoing materials research (attached is a tweeter sample I'm working on using a 12 micron PEEK diaphragm (which shows really good stability and higher power handling along with slightly improved distortion numbers). This is a driver with the front magnet structure removed so you can see the diaphragm.

In short, we're working to make these flatter but these types of drive units are channeling to get ruler flat. When you say, non-flat, you do have to acknowledge that these measures better in a lot of ways than many major high-end hifi brands (B&W, Wilson and many others) and a lot of the broad strokes of the design (good bass response for the size, low distortion and pretty balanced presentation). Of course, I'd like to do better and there is continued efforts there.

Yes, have some idea of the fr challenges from neo-3 and can see it is even more challenging as the planar gets bigger. While I was asking about overall flatness, the 6 kHz null was notable so thanks for explaining. I and many ASR members understand design tradeoffs, but not always specific ones. For example, flat response on-axis may not get the best directivity. However, if we see an expensive speaker with choppier on-axis response AND poor directivity, start to wonder whether that speaker is worthy of consideration. As for the FR10, does not seem you skimped on the crossover, so response still seems ragged in comparison to some less expensive passive speakers. Hence, why I asked.

Nice to hear from a younger speaker designer. Seems most of the ones we tend to discuss here are old enough to be grandfathers (or US presidents).

 

[MattHooper]

Chris I know I'm not alone in really appreciating your posts in this forum!

This one was particularly interesting and full of detail.

I hope you don't mind a quick general question based on one thing you mentioned, and a little sidetrack from the PS speakers:

The benefits of planars are very low stored energy (you can see the very clean waterfall/CSD plot in hifinews review).

I think waterfall plots a little controversial around here. But putting that aside for a moment:

I've wondered if "good" waterfall plots relate to certain characteristics I hear on some speakers. For instance, I used to own Hales Transcendence 5 speakers (and still own Hales Transcendence 1 and center channels for my home theater), and one of the main attractions is how absolutely "clean" they sound. More than most speakers I'd heard, there was an utter lack of "tizz" or strain or fuzziness or grain, just a super pure clean sound. Later on I was attracted to, and purchased, Joseph Audio Perspective speakers which struck me with the same super clean grain free character in the mids/highs.

It seems a common denominator is they both use similar SEAS magnesium-cone drivers. Though of course every driver has it's liabilities, the waterfall plots measured in stereophile for both speakers looks very clean, generally, for both speakers:

Hales Transcendence 5 Speakers:

Joseph Audio Perspective 2 Graphene speakers:

Would the waterfalls reflect what I seem to hear in terms of the clean, pure sound? Or...something else?

 

[Chris Brunhaver]

Chris I know I'm not alone in really appreciating your posts in this forum!

This one was particularly interesting and full of detail.

I hope you don't mind a quick general question based on one thing you mentioned, and a little sidetrack from the PS speakers:



I think waterfall plots a little controversial around here. But putting that aside for a moment:

I've wondered if "good" waterfall plots relate to certain characteristics I hear on some speakers. For instance, I used to own Hales Transcendence 5 speakers (and still own Hales Transcendence 1 and center channels for my home theater), and one of the main attractions is how absolutely "clean" they sound. More than most speakers I'd heard, there was an utter lack of "tizz" or strain or fuzziness or grain, just a super pure clean sound. Later on I was attracted to, and purchased, Joseph Audio Perspective speakers which struck me with the same super clean grain free character in the mids/highs.

It seems a common denominator is they both use similar SEAS magnesium-cone drivers. Though of course every driver has it's liabilities, the waterfall plots measured in stereophile for both speakers looks very clean, generally, for both speakers:

Hales Transcendence 5 Speakers:

Joseph Audio Perspective 2 Graphene speakers:

Would the waterfalls reflect what I seem to hear in terms of the clean, pure sound? Or...something else?

Yes, when there is a bad CSD (like some compression drivers or certain driver designs can have) it can be a cause of grainy/hasky sound on certain program material. I think the reverse can be true and an example of that is the improvements that KEF made with their meta drivers or in the examples that you gave of a clean decay (though that Hales graph is scaled down in level because of the upper tweeter peak so may look a lot worse if the passband were normalized to the same level as the Joseph speaker.

Well, the problem I have with a driver like the Seas magnesium is that the nearly 15dB peak at 4-5 kHz in the response of one of their 6.5" raises the distortion floor for the frequencies below that that are harmonically related and can excite that cone resonance with the driver's own self-distortion, even with a nearly brick-wall filter like the Joseph Audio speaker has. Of course, the lower distortion the driver, the less it is excited but this is an argument against metal cones in the midrange (and a possible explanation for them occasionally sounding edgy, through the frequency response and decay look excellent).

Purifi made an article about how to minimize current related distortion while using notch filters on these cone modes that seems like a very good practice when using these kinds of drivers.

Low Distortion Filter for PTT6.5X04-NAA

purifi-audio.com

I generally prefer the sound of more highly damped materials. We actually took a cue from Seas and are using Curv for the midwoofer in our FR5 speaker. Curv is a monofilament self reinforced (no binder) woven plastic diaphragm material with some of the best damping properties I've seen. However, you can definitely argue the opposite side and try to use rigid/pistonic materials for midrange cones and you mentioned a couple of great examples of them.

Paul Hales is now doing Theory and Pro Audio Technology speakers and is using high end prosound drivers for home theater, in-wall and commercial pendant speakers with active/DSP stuff so has moved in a very different application and technical direction from Hales Audio. Impressive looking stuff!

 

[MattHooper]

Well, the problem I have with a driver like the Seas magnesium is that the nearly 15dB peak at 4-5 kHz in the response of one of their 6.5" raises the distortion floor for the frequencies below that that are harmonically related and can excite that cone resonance with the driver's own self-distortion, even with a nearly brick-wall filter like the Joseph Audio speaker has. Of course, the lower distortion the driver, the less it is excited but this is an argument against metal cones in the midrange (and a possible explanation for them occasionally sounding edgy, through the frequency response and decay look excellent).

Purifi made an article about how to minimize current related distortion while using notch filters on these cone modes that seems like a very good practice when using these kinds of drivers.

Low Distortion Filter for PTT6.5X04-NAA

purifi-audio.com

I generally prefer the sound of more highly damped materials. We actually took a cue from Seas and are using Curv for the midwoofer in our FR5 speaker. Curv is a monofilament self reinforced (no binder) woven plastic diaphragm material with some of the best damping properties I've seen. However, you can definitely argue the opposite side and try to use rigid/pistonic materials for midrange cones and you mentioned a couple of great examples of them.

Paul Hales is now doing Theory and Pro Audio Technology speakers and is using high end prosound drivers for home theater, in-wall and commercial pendant speakers with active/DSP stuff so has moved in a very different application and technical direction from Hales Audio.

Thanks for the diversion! And the link.

Yeah, I talked to Paul back in the day and expressed that while I loved the tonal purity of his speakers if anything they were lacking somewhat in a sense of punch and dynamics. He agreed saying that was his feeling and he was already moving on to systems that improved in such areas...in to more pro oriented higher dynamic/DSP stuff as you mention. I never heard any of those products.

Anyway, congrats on the PS Audio speakers!

 

[Rick Sykora]

Are these with the fixed or broken tweeter?

Also, are you allowed to share any ASR technical tidbits about the new bookshelf? Are these designed primarily for traditional spinorama performance or are they intended to be voiced like B&W has been doing lately?

To the greater ASR community, PS Audio has a good/bad reputation on here, but the way I look it at it, PS Audio is a family. Maybe there’s a crazy uncle or second-cousin-once-removed, etc. It’s OK to be a skeptic on the power conditioning products from PS Audio and still appreciate the engineering that goes into PS Audio speakers.

Clearly this is a puff piece, the heavy lifting is pawned off to Chris.

@Chris Brunhaver have you made the video he references?

 

[Chris Brunhaver]

Clearly this is a puff piece, the heavy lifting is pawned off to Chris.

@Chris Brunhaver have you made the video he references?

I haven't don't the video yet but was going to when I get in the next set of production samples.

A few comments on the video:

The passive radiator tuning on these is 35 Hz. Depending on the room loading, 30 Hz will be audible but, realistically decent output is at 35 Hz and above. For some, that is enough to use comfortably without a subwoofer for a compact system. While the woofer has a lot of travel at around +/- 10 mm. They are only a single 6.5" woofer (and 6X9 PR) and they have about 5 dB less overall output than the FR10's but I think it's still enough for a lot of rooms and closer listening distances.

There is fairly complex internal bracing and we are floating the braces on some viscoelastic sheets (a material similar to dynamat, and the same thing B&W uses in a some of their 800 series speakers). and pressing the faceplace and woofer motor against it.

There is actually a lot going on on the inside and here is a partial view. I'm not sure if there is interest in a white paper or deeper dive but I will at least get a quick video up.

 

[Rick Sykora]

I haven't don't the video yet but was going to when I get in the next set of production samples.

A few comments on the video:

The passive radiator tuning on these is 35 Hz. Depending on the room loading, 30 Hz will be audible but, realistically decent output is at 35 Hz and above. For some, that is enough to use comfortably without a subwoofer for a compact system. While the woofer has a lot of travel at around +/- 10 mm. They are only a single 6.5" woofer (and 6X9 PR) and they have about 5 dB less overall output than the FR10's but I think it's still enough for a lot of rooms and closer listening distances.

There is fairly complex internal bracing and we are floating the braces on some viscoelastic sheets (a material similar to dynamat, and the same thing B&W uses in a some of their 800 series speakers). and pressing the faceplace and woofer motor against it.

There is actually a lot going on on the inside and here is a partial view. I'm not sure if there is interest in a white paper or deeper dive but I will at least get a quick video up.

Looks smartly designed. Let us know when the video (and some measurements are ready).