Switching from Genelec 8361A to Palmer Orbit 11?

[illusonic]

reduce hiss level for sure; better amp for tweeter, maybe woofer as well; higher power amp for sub; more DSP features, like room correction.

Hiss is not relevant at 1.5m. Otherwise, maybe asking too much? See what you get from Neumann/Genelec/Ascilab/Kef etc. for that price. But one can dream...

 

[phoenixdogfan]

The one thing I would like to see revised and corrected would be the directivity to make it more uniform. Maybe a revised tweeter that can play down to 1k hz like Asci has. Otherwise, seems like they would mate well with a sub, play plenty loud enough, and be acceptable on THD down to 100 hz when paired with a pair of subs. As for DSP, I can roll my own, so I don't need it. Would of course be nice if it could play louder and with less distortion into the bottom two octaves but probably unrealistic given it's built to a price point. But the big thing for me would be better directivity and a more uniform FR particularly above 5 khz. To me that looks like a better tweeter and a lower crossover. Even so, listening in the near field, I don't know how big a deal the directivity issue would be. I also do not think hiss would be bad, particularly at distances g.t. 1 meter.

 

[illusonic]

What I care about is the sound quality when I hook it up in my smaller listening space, cross over at 100 hz to my dual SVS SB 2000 (each on placed within 2 ft of the main speaker), use Dirac ART to set up the crossover and room correction, and maybe on the 5.1 system bring my LS 50 Meta Surrounds and center in to help out.

Why buy a speaker with expensive Purifi passive radiators and high-pass it? You will pay for nothing when it comes to the PRs. Even the Orbits's are in my view too big for this kind of use. These are fullrange speakers. Once you try them in your small room you may find that subs are not required. Maybe build a double bass array with the Orbits in front and the woofers in the back? Or use ART bass management with 4 speakers to get better results. My room is 5x7m and I don't need more bass then the Orbits provide.

The one thing I would like to see revised and corrected would be the directivity to make it more uniform. Maybe a revised tweeter that can play down to 1k hz like Asci has. Otherwise, seems like they would made well with a sub, play plenty loud enough, be acceptable on THD down to 100 hz when paired with a pair of subs. As for DSP, I can roll my own, so I don't need it. Would of course be nice if it could play with less distortion into the bottom two octaves but probably unrealistic given it's built to a price point. But the big thing for me would be better directivity and a more uniform FR particularly about 5 khz. To me that looks like a better tweeter and a lower crossover. Even so, listening in the near field, I don't know how big a deal the directivity issue would be.

Yes, I also thought about the narrowing directivity around 1.5kHz probably caused by mid-woofer beaming. We all love nice looking plots. Not sure if fixing this would give any audible benefits. Have you seen the dispersion plots of various cardioid speakers linked below? There is quite some variation in many of them.

Do you have distortion measurements for the subs? Would be interesting to see the difference compared to the Orbit.

Any speakers with cardioid response in vertical as well?

Cardioid radiation pattern at low frequency is a something a lot of speakers designersare pursuing, but it seems only in the horizontal pattern. Are there any designs that are also cardioid in vertical pattern? While that would no doubt have costs in SPL capability, wouldn't it be desirable...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Pearljam5000]

They won't sound like the Genelecs that's for sure
It's definitely a downgrade

 

[illusonic]

Seems like the SVS SB-2000 Pro is the minimum size of SVS subs that should be combined with the Orbits, e.g. below 60-80Hz. SVS SB-1000 Pro and SVS 3000 Micro not so much because of rising distortion and SPL limit. SVS SB-3000 doesn't bring much improvement, either. Neumann KH750 would also increase maximum SPL by 10dB at 20Hz. Note that all of these subs as well as the Orbits are limiting at 20Hz in the 96dB measurement (<10dB step from 85dB measurement).
If the SVS SB-2000 (non Pro version) is worse than the SVS SB-3000, it may not improve the bass output of the Orbits much or at all.
Plots taken from the thread linked below. To my understanding 2m distance was used to compensate for +6dB GND-plane gain (half space).

I measured 10 subwoofers.

Hi, it's been a while! I would like to thank the people who made this project possible on a scale never before imagined in South Korea. I measured a total of 10 subwoofers, including my own DIY subwoofer(L26RO4Y), and measured them to the CEA-2010 standard using a Klippel TBM module. Below are...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[illusonic]

Another source for SPL/THD of SVS SB-3000 Micro. For 800€ the Orbits provide the same SPL in bass as this 950€ sub while being even smaller.

SVSound 3000 Micro im Test

Der Wunsch nach mehr Bass ist da, doch die Integration eines Subwoofers wird zur Herausforderung? Der 3000 Micro von SVS kann viele Probleme ganz leicht lösen. Wir haben ihn getestet.

www.connect.de

 

[Sokel]

Another source for SPL/THD of SVS SB-3000 Micro. For 800€ the Orbits provide the same SPL in bass as this 950€ sub while being even smaller.

View attachment 528339

SVSound 3000 Micro im Test

Der Wunsch nach mehr Bass ist da, doch die Integration eines Subwoofers wird zur Herausforderung? Der 3000 Micro von SVS kann viele Probleme ganz leicht lösen. Wir haben ihn getestet.

www.connect.de

You can't compare a speaker with a sub in terms of distortion, subs are distortion machines usually, they don't care about it.

If we want to see how an overall clean 3-way is like, it looks like this:

(even a small 3-way like KH420)

That's what clean looks like.

 

[illusonic]

You can't compare a speaker with a sub in terms of distortion, subs are distortion machines usually, they don't care about it.

Seems like I can. Distortion machines? Right, that's why we add subs to small speakers. We need some distortion. Love that dirty square-wave bass.

a small 3-way like KH420

Same low-frequency extension and same SPL limit at 20Hz?
And only 6 x the price of the Orbits! Impressive! Especially for the size.

BTW, You have an issue with small things? Or is it cheap things? Or mayby just Aniseikonia? Do these look similar size to you?
Maybe take a step back and question your motivation for above post and all your other posts that share the same intention?

 

[Sokel]

Seems like I can. Distortion machines? Right, that's why we add subs to small speakers. We need some distortion. Love that dirty square-wave bass.



Same low-frequency extension and same SPL limit at 20Hz?
And only 6 x the price of the Orbits! Impressive! Especially for the size.

View attachment 528563

BTW, You have an issue with small things? Or is it cheap things? Or mayby just Aniseikonia? Do these look similar size to you?
Maybe take a step back and question your motivation for above post and all your other posts that share the same intention?

I will disregard completely the tone, that's a technical forum, emotion has nothing to do with it.

Regarding subs, have a look for yourself.
Subs were always about extension and output, not low distortion.

I measured 10 subwoofers.

Hi, it's been a while! I would like to thank the people who made this project possible on a scale never before imagined in South Korea. I measured a total of 10 subwoofers, including my own DIY subwoofer(L26RO4Y), and measured them to the CEA-2010 standard using a Klippel TBM module. Below are...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Now, about the rest.
I have no issue with small gear. I do have an issue with distortion and trade-offs though.
And anyone who tries to fool physics, engineering or use extension for marketing purposes or un-intended uses.

We can't talk our way out of physics, no matter what, and when we do the shortcomings are more than evident (measurably and audibly)
That's all.

 

[illusonic]

I will disregard completely the tone, that's a technical forum, emotion has nothing to do with it.

Every speaker is a set of compromises. That's a technical fact. For some, large dimensions and high cost are a deal-breaker. Others might want to reduce reflections off the back wall using a cardioid speaker to avoid the dip in the upper bass/lower midrange that omnidirectional speakers exhibit. Yet other people may want to listen from relatively close distance and value the coax design with woofer on the same height resulting in one of the best approximations of a point source on the market. Some just want a fullrange speaker that easily supports unlimited 96dB SPL listening in actual rooms. Or they want to add subs and play up to 106dB without limitations above 70Hz from the Orbits. And then there may be people that love the orange ring . Plenty of good (technical) reasons to choose the Orbits over the KH420.

It seems to me, that emotions are the only plausible reason behind your continuing efforts to discredit the highly sensible set of compromises made in the design of the Orbits. Your technical reasoning doesn't convince me at all. And while I can understand people who point out even the smallest design flaws in expensive speakers (looking forward to comparing the 10k€ D&D 6C with the Orbits), I don't quite understand the mindset behind the same behavior when it comes to a very affordable product. That's why I questioned your motivation.

Regarding subs, have a look for yourself.
Subs were always about extension and output, not low distortion.

The kind of performance you are demanding requires specific technical solutions. Simple solution is big size. Obviously the subs tested in your link are more about small size. There may be good reasons for that.

I have no issue with small gear. I do have an issue with distortion and trade-offs though.
And anyone who tries to fool physics, engineering or use extension for marketing purposes or un-intended uses.

We can't talk our way out of physics, no matter what, and when we do the shortcomings are more than evident (measurably and audibly)

Laws of physics is a typical excuse for poor engineering. It's possible to include a feedback loop or forward correction in small woofers to reduce distortion drastically. Still, there are not many product designers or companies interested in such technical solutions. Part of the reasons for that is the low return in audible improvements on the invest of engineering effort. People that have the opportunity to listen to a woofer with distortion reduction switched on/off instantly, may realize that low-frequency distortion is not such a big deal as THD measurements suggest and can even be preferred over more sterile sound without harmonics.

If you don't accept trade-offs - fine. Don't know if you’re are a cost-no-object guy or don't care about size or simply ask for a feature set you will never get. Maybe you even built your own speakers/subs integrated as furniture or the like. In any case, others can have different views on things. Maybe you could focus on products that suit you better and allow for constructive contribution from your side?

 

[Sokel]

Every speaker is a set of compromises. That's a technical fact. For some, large dimensions and high cost are a deal-breaker. Others might want to reduce reflections off the back wall using a cardioid speaker to avoid the dip in the upper bass/lower midrange that omnidirectional speakers exhibit. Yet other people may want to listen from relatively close distance and value the coax design with woofer on the same height resulting in one of the best approximations of a point source on the market. Some just want a fullrange speaker that easily supports unlimited 96dB SPL listening in actual rooms. Or they want to add subs and play up to 106dB without limitations above 70Hz from the Orbits. And then there may be people that love the orange ring . Plenty of good (technical) reasons to choose the Orbits over the KH420.

It seems to me, that emotions are the only plausible reason behind your continuing efforts to discredit the highly sensible set of compromises made in the design of the Orbits. Your technical reasoning doesn't convince me at all. And while I can understand people who point out even the smallest design flaws in expensive speakers (looking forward to comparing the 10k€ D&D 6C with the Orbits), I don't quite understand the mindset behind the same behavior when it comes to a very affordable product. That's why I questioned your motivation.


The kind of performance you are demanding requires specific technical solutions. Simple solution is big size. Obviously the subs tested in your link are more about small size. There may be good reasons for that.


Laws of physics is a typical excuse for poor engineering. It's possible to include a feedback loop or forward correction in small woofers to reduce distortion drastically. Still, there are not many product designers or companies interested in such technical solutions. Part of the reasons for that is the low return in audible improvements on the invest of engineering effort. People that have the opportunity to listen to a woofer with distortion reduction switched on/off instantly, may realize that low-frequency distortion is not such a big deal as THD measurements suggest and can even be preferred over more sterile sound without harmonics.

If you don't accept trade-offs - fine. Don't know if you’re are a cost-no-object guy or don't care about size or simply ask for a feature set you will never get. Maybe you even built your own speakers/subs integrated as furniture or the like. In any case, others can have different views on things. Maybe you could focus on products that suit you better and allow for constructive contribution from your side?

If you had a look at my posts about all gear I have commented you would see that I never consider cost, cheap or not.
What concerns me are fatal flaws first, safety, etc.

About flaws now:

The long ASR tradition about ALL gear, is noise.
That's what makes champions, either DAC, amps, etc, abysmally low noise, far from human detection.
Why? Cause it's the one flaw anyone hears when it's skyrocketed. What good are any gear when they make themselves evident with no signal?

Then, is ability. Either extension, SPL, etc.
When looking at a speaker's THD and H3 competes with H2 early, that's its limit. H3 down low is about excursion and its limits.
Packing all the DSP you can pack and stack and push a speaker lower than it should and you'll have Amir hear it complaining, you'll have others talking about one-note bass, etc.

There's packed design, where one tries to include properties that will show nice to a potential buyer on paper but will be unusable in practice (or unintened use) and there's honest and smart design (like Sigberg for example, who makes speakers specially for used with subs without compromising their extension vs SPL) or, or...
Sure, people want it all if possible.It doesn't mean that is also doable within constrains.

Anything goes out there, and at a technical forum, we, the members prefer to talk about this kind of performance instead of anecdotes and personal use cases.

(as far as I know, commenting and posting is still free for non-buyers of any gear at ASR, let me know if that has changed)

 

[illusonic]

If you had a look at my posts about all gear I have commented you would see that I never consider cost, cheap or not.
What concerns me are fatal flaws first, safety, etc.

About flaws now:

The long ASR tradition about ALL gear, is noise.
That's what makes champions, either DAC, amps, etc, abysmally low noise, far from human detection.
Why? Cause it's the one flaw anyone hears when it's skyrocketed. What good are any gear when they make themselves evident with no signal?

Then, is ability. Either extension, SPL, etc.
When looking at a speaker's THD and H3 competes with H2 early, that's its limit. H3 down low is about excursion and its limits.
Packing all the DSP you can pack and stack and push a speaker lower than it should and you'll have Amir hear it complaining, you'll have others talking about one-note bass, etc.

There's packed design, where one tries to include properties that will show nice to a potential buyer on paper but will be unusable in practice (or unintened use) and there's honest and smart design (like Sigberg for example, who makes speakers specially for used with subs without compromising their extension vs SPL) or, or...
Sure, people want it all if possible.It doesn't mean that is also doable within constrains.

Anything goes out there, and at a technical forum, we, the members prefer to talk about this kind of performance instead of anecdotes and personal use cases.

(as far as I know, commenting and posting is still free for non-buyers of any gear at ASR, let me know if that has changed)

You have strong opinions and nothing to back them up. Personally, I find it simply ridiculous that you keep telling actual Orbit owners that these would not work well due to imaginary fatal flaws, while we simply know that it sounds fantastic. There have been reports preferring it over Genelec, Kef etc.

Skyrocketing noise? Noise audibility stops at about 1m distance. Confirmed by many people.

Audible distortion? Single speaker pushed into the limiter creates distortion. Two speakers in a typical living room generate rattling noise from the room first. I never (!) noted limiter activation while playing music. Only for sine waves.

One note bass? This person started to talk bad about the speakers after seeing the measurements. Before that he only said good things about them. I call that measurement bias. Note that I'm an audio engineer.

 

[Purité Audio]

The bass was an issue from the very first listen, if you read my posts again I dialled it right back but it just wasn’t right.
A commendable effort but just too compromised as is imho.
Keith

 

[Sokel]

You have strong opinions and nothing to back them up. Personally, I find it simply ridiculous that you keep telling actual Orbit owners that these would not work well due to imaginary fatal flaws, while we simply know that it sounds fantastic. There have been reports preferring it over Genelec, Kef etc.

Skyrocketing noise? Noise audibility stops at about 1m distance. Confirmed by many people.

Audible distortion? Single speaker pushed into the limiter creates distortion. Two speakers in a typical living room generate rattling noise from the room first. I never (!) noted limiter activation while playing music. Only for sine waves.

One note bass? This person started to talk bad about the speakers after seeing the measurements. Before that he only said good things about them. I call that measurement bias. Note that I'm an audio engineer.

I have the actual measurements to back up whatever I say, and the experience of someone testing hundreds of speakers (Amir) to rely on instead of anecdotes without a shred of actual measurements (even in room, amateur ones, as I and many do, even for fun) .

Noise at 1m you say. Don't you think that this is significant for near field speakers (as the company describes them) ?

And what an audio engineer has to do with speaker designing? That's different fields, we have lots of them here.
Is it some kind of credential for golden hearing that I'm not aware of?

It's unfortunate when someone like me, who even bashes his own gear first has to explain stuff to someone who is convicted he discovered a "giant killer" (that's a joke of its own at audio forums) . It's obvious that we won't come to an agreement or a way to propose how a better version would be.

And with that, you're the second I'll ignore at my five years in ASR, so to spare the other members from this kind of emotional stuff.

 

[Mort]

with that, you're the second I'll ignore

Beat ya by a month. What took you so long?

Fanbois being fanbois.

 

[90sNintendoKid]

I admit it’s taken me way too long to setup my Orbits and I realise I keep saying this, I am going to be calibrating my Orbits with Dirac ART and A1 Evo Acoustix with a target curve calculated by Magic Beans.

With A1 Evo Acoustix especially, I am going to do post EQ measurements to see what the distortion is like.

I’m hoping this will answer my question about whether the Orbits are feasible for my setup.

 

[sidechain]

Fanbois being fanbois.

Says the guy who according to his signature invested 30k in the Genelec ecosystem.

Projection is a hell of a drug.

 

[G|force]

It's a terrible investment, but a worthwhile expenditure.

 

[Salt]

I would support @illusonic , as in my personal impression, the Palmer offers 'Full Range' at decent volume at distance up to 2 meters. Hiss does not matter here ( with PAD -22 dB it's 30 cm).
Certainly there are some points of optimization, but at this price point they're not feasible (in my view).
But you may go on ...

 

[sidechain]

I would support @illusonic , as in my personal impression, the Palmer offers 'Full Range' at decent volume at distance up to 2 meters. Hiss does not matter here ( with PAD -22 dB it's 30 cm).
Certainly there are some points of optimization, but at this price point they're not feasible (in my view).
But you may go on ...

But price is not a valid criteria to some living room hi-fi blues lawyers hanging here. I'll ask again (I don't have the speakers yet, I'll report when I get them); find me a near field three way cardioid system at this price point.