TAD Evolution 2 Speaker Review

[Spocko]

Sensitivity of 87 and max 150W? thought most owners of 20K speakers also own heavy duty amplifiers.

Or heavy duty tube amps that only put out 75W

 

[fineMen]

Thanks for the response.
Really? I'd say the percentage of audiophiles who listen to classical music ....

Sorry, my response seems to address me myself more. No, I'm a DIYer who questioned a lot of his evil deeds already.

Topic: why 2.5-way? (a) baffle step compensation and (b) having two basses for more power, while only one of them does the mids as to ease the x/o design, avoiding a midrange driver, doubling parts in the x/o, and foremost squared complexity.

Problem, as I see it: since both drivers are designed for and will undergo higher excursion, a certain sort of non-linear distortion is generated. The intermodulation of mids with bass tones. That's a typical annoying gargling to shrilling sound, once known, will be easily detectable in tiny portions. My score with the Klippel self-test lies around -53dB ~ 0,3%.

Even with the best motor designs such IM cannot be avoided. They are also generated independently by other mechanical parts. Most prominent is the resonance of the surround/suspension of the cone. Around that frequency the IM may reach like 10..30% even with, by today's standards, moderate excursion. In short, I would say that a driver which is used for mids also, must not move by more than say +/-3mm. I personally find 1% of IM is a natural limit for high q/ audio. My personal most sensitive freq/ range for detecting IM is from about 300Hz up to 2kHz or so. ( range of human voice ... again ).

But You might have seen the alternatives here: would You use one bass and drive it hard, whilst the mids are taken by a dedicated driver, not loaded with bass, hence no IM to speak of? Or would You trust a double team of basses, that will consequently not be stressed that much, so that IM is kept in check, even if one of them works on the mids also? <edit>: A shallow filter doesn't suffice; IM is, regularly, that high that it easily contaminates higher registers one .. two octaves above the x/o. That stands in conflict with objective (a), baffle step compensation ... .

I came to design true three-way even for mini boxes. Bass is contaminated with IM once in a while to a certain degree. But not as much, since the region of the surround resonance ( 600..1k depending on size and more ) is avoided by design. The mids ( x/o @ 250..400) are clear again by design. I like it, subjectively.

DIY gives me the opportunity to explore things like that.

One anecdote to close the case: when the BBC introduced the plastic cone, which made the larger two-way feasible. It wasn't perfect. The surround of the referring drivers had to be damped heavily with high-loss material as to support the no-resonance approach. The worst originator of IM was by this avoided unknowingly. Only later the surround had be 'loss less' for some mythical reasons, which became possible with improved plastic material for the cone. And down it went ... . Old SEAS drivers are infamous for their 'lame' sound, yep, IM is missing, the speaker has no 'voice'. Audiophiles love to listen to speakers, not to 'classical' music

 

[MattHooper]

Sorry, my response seems to be targeted at myself more. No, I'm a DIYer who questioned a lot of his evil deeds already.

Topic: why 2.5-way? (a) baffle step compensation and (b) having two basses for more power, while only one of them does the mids as to ease the x/o design, avoiding a midrange driver, doubling parts in the x/o, and foremost quadrupled complexity.

Problem, as I see it: since both drivers are designed for and will undergo higher excursions of the cone, a certain sort of non-linear distortion is generated. The intermodulation of mids with bass tones. That's a typical annoying gargling to shrill sound, once known, will be easily detectable in tiny portions.

Even with the best motor designs such IM cannot be avoided. They are also generated independently by other mechanical properties. Most prominent is the resonance of the surrouns/suspension of the cone. Around that frequency the IM may reach like 10..30% even with, by todays standards, morderate excursion. In short I would say that a driver which is used for mids also must not move by more than, say +/-3mm. I personally find 1% of IM is a natural limit for high q/ audio. My personally most sensitive freq/ range for detecting IM is from about 300Hz up to 2kHz or so. ( The range of human voice ... ).

But You might have seen the compromise here: would You use one bass and drive it hard, whilst the mids are taken by a dedicated driver, not loaded with bass, hence no IM to speak of. Or would You trust a double team of basses, that will consequently not be stressed that much, so that IM is kept in check, even if one of them gives the mids also?

I came to design real three-way even for mini-boxes. Bass is contaminated with IM once in a while. But not as much, since the region of the surround resonance is avoided by design. The mids are utterly clear again by design. I like it, subjectively.

DIY gives me the opportunity to explore things like that, mind You.

One anecdote to close the case: when the BBC introduced the plastic cone, which made the larger two-way feasible, it wasn't perfect. The surround of the referring drivers had do be dampend heavily as to support the no-resoance approach. The worst originator of IM was by this avoided unknowingly. Only later the surround had be be 'loss less' for some mythical reasons, which became possible with improved plastic material for the cone. And down it went ... . Old SEAS drivers are infamous for their 'lame' sound, yep, IM is missing, the speaker has no 'voice'. I want to listen to my 'signature' speaker

Thanks for the elaboration!

I'm not sure exactly what Joseph Audio did, but one of the salient characteristics of their 2.5 way, at least subjectively, is an amazing clarity from top to bottom, and which maintains that clarity even at high volumes. I auditioned tons of speakers and kept coming back to the Joseph speakers because of how smooth and clean they sounded compared to most other speakers I listened to. I'd guess a lot has to do with the use of the highest quality SEAS drivers, which I understand were designed with high bass excursion (for their size) in mind:

SEAS Announces New W19 Excel Graphene Woofer Series

Following the announcement in early March 2019 of a completely new Excel Graphene Woofer Series and the commercial introduction of the new W16NX003 E0073-08 driver, the first in the new Excel Graphene series, SEAS Fabrikker now announced a completely new product-size series as part of the new...

audioxpress.com

 

[ah-ra]

Hmm... somehow a bit disappointing. It might still sound good, but for 20k....?

 

[Sokel]

At this price range (close to the entry level- low limit of what old audiophiles call hi-end) looks is really important,specially the premium feeling one gets.
Unless the pics don't do justice these are not meeting that goal,quite the opposite.

 

[Deleted member 19122]

If i were a tin foil hat kinda guy....I'd say these speakers were sent in by somebody or a market rival as an elaborate practical joke.Strange that after Amir measured them he said he had no more contact from the company.Note sarcasm does not equate on the internet much

 

[fredoamigo]

I regret that 80% of the comments here are about the price because there is a moment when you have to say if it's a bad design or a good one, ignoring the price and I don't think it's really the case because with a bit of EQ correction they become almost SOTA speakers, especially since in Europe these speakers are sold at 14K usd which is already a nice sum but more "digestible" than 20K
although in this range of "standing" and of concept of small domestic columns compatible waf I will direct myself towards the Magico A3....

I take my hat off to the TAD team for having lent a copy for measurements on a forum of ayatollahs of SINAD and Spinorama!

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

I regret that 80% of the comments here are about the price because there is a moment when you have to say if it's a bad design or a good one, ignoring the price and I don't think it's really the case because with a bit of EQ correction they become almost SOTA speakers, especially since in Europe these speakers are sold at 14K usd which is already a nice sum but more "digestible" than 20K
although in this range of "standing" and of concept of small domestic columns compatible waf I will direct myself towards the Magico A3....

I take my hat off to the TAD team for having lent a copy for measurements on a forum of ayatollahs of SINAD and Spinorama!

The best definition of an Engineer I’ve heard is:
He will look at something that cost a dollar to make, then go and make a better one for 50 cents.

 

[DHT 845]

I'm curious how many of you in the US heard original Thiels CS7 (1st version)?
As far as TAD, $20.000 for what?

 

[OldManMatt]

It's way out of my price range for a pair of speakers. I'm just going to assume for that amount of money they weren't trying to build the most linear speaker but felt their end result sounded like something they are proud of. Not everyone likes a perfectly balanced speaker..I do, but this speaker looks workable, and again I'll assume for that kinda bread the drivers and crossovers are top notch and the speakers sound great. I'm making a lot of assumptions based on price though. I appreciate TAD for sending it in and allowing amir to do his thing and share his work. Good stuff

 

[DMill]

My Seiko watch keeps perfect time, why do people pay thousands on a Rolex? It’s all about image.

Seiko makes some of the nicest watches in the world. This one is $11,600. I think it’s the same mentality with high end watches and audio. Maybe ego or just an appreciation for something that is meticulously crafted and a big wallet of course. I can’t say that I find the price of these TADs to be that shocking. It’s those little thing like the binding posts that Amir mentions that make them just a bit better and if you have the coin go for it. Here’s the rub though. This Seiko measures better than many Rolex models. This speaker measures very good, but looks to me like it should be a bit better. And if I was seeking perfection I’d be a little bummed by it.

 

[oscar_dziki]

I don't understand why would anyone vote anything different then "poor". How is a sonically imperfect product for $20k (btw is it for a pair?) 'Not terrible', 'fine', or 'great'? If that is what the audience think, then the audience get what it deserves. I wonder what is the thinking behind that votes? We should expect good engineering at $100K?

 

[Adi777]

We should expect good engineering at $100K?

Yyy, yes, of course? If not good engineering, what kind? Bad?

 

[muslhead]

The best definition of an Engineer I’ve heard is:
He will look at something that cost a dollar to make, then go and make a better one for 50 cents.

I like it, but unfortunately a finished product is not just about engineering
Need to complete it with something like "and the marketing/sales department will sell it for more"

Something virtually every ASR member ignores (or is unaware of) and complains about in every product review post that includes price is that in some products (things that are not commodity items especially) there is no relationship between price and cost. Let the whining begin

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

Seiko makes some of the nicest watches in the world. This one is $11,600. I think it’s the same mentality with high end watches and audio. Maybe ego or just an appreciation for something that is meticulously crafted and a big wallet of course. I can’t say that I find the price of these TADs to be that shocking. It’s those little thing like the binding posts that Amir mentions that make them just a bit better and if you have the coin go for it. Here’s the rub though. This Seiko measures better than many Rolex models. This speaker measures very good, but looks to me like it should be a bit better. And if I was seeking perfection I’d be a little bummed by it.

Could have bought about 120 of mine for the price of the one in your post. Getting back to the TAD speaker review for $20k would have expected something better visually. Paid £650 for my Kudos X2s Ex Demo, fit and finish is immaculate plus they sound terrific in my 16’ 6” x 14’6” living room.

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

I like it, but unfortunately a finished product is not just about engineering
Need to complete it with something like "and the marketing/sales department will sell it for more"

Something virtually every ASR member ignores (or is unaware of) and complains about in every product review post that includes price is that in some products (things that are not commodity items especially) there is no relationship between price and cost. Let the whining begin

Agreed but all design and it’s implementation are governed by cost and you’re right cosmetics sell a product for a limited time span. Years ago went for an interview as a designer of electrical accessories. They had an array of their products on a bench one of them was a connection clamp to fit on an earth rod. It was well made and complicated, if you were into this sort of thing certainly beautiful. He asked for my comments and told him it wouldn’t sell. The existing widely used design was a simple U clamp, cheap cheerful and did the job. He wasn’t too happy and the interview went downhill, still if he couldn’t see cost mattered his business was doomed. The parent company closed it down a couple of years later.
Maybe he went into designing HiFi cables?

 

[Deleted member 19122]

I regret that 80% of the comments here are about the price because there is a moment when you have to say if it's a bad design or a good one, ignoring the price and I don't think it's really the case because with a bit of EQ correction they become almost SOTA speakers, especially since in Europe these speakers are sold at 14K usd which is already a nice sum but more "digestible" than 20K
although in this range of "standing" and of concept of small domestic columns compatible waf I will direct myself towards the Magico A3....

I take my hat off to the TAD team for having lent a copy for measurements on a forum of ayatollahs of SINAD and Spin

I like it, but unfortunately a finished product is not just about engineering
Need to complete it with something like "and the marketing/sales department will sell it for more"

Something virtually every ASR member ignores (or is unaware of) and complains about in every product review post that includes price is that in some products (things that are not commodity items especially) there is no relationship between price and cost. Let the whining begin

It's not about "whining" it's actually laughing at you because you seem to think because it's expensive it's "better".Spare us any more of the faux "financial envy" syndrome yer spouting.Im sure you have some knobs to polish

 

[oscar_dziki]

Yyy, yes, of course? If not good engineering, what kind? Bad?

What i meant is: is 20k not enough to expect good engineering?

 

[anphex]

I have yet to see an expensive Beryllium Speaker or even just stand alone tweeter with good data that matches their insane price.
But props to TAD for sending in the most expensiv speaker so far and having the courage to still post the results online. Though if I was CEO I'd kept those measurements unpublic.

There is just no excuse for a 20k speaker to have this performance. Though they look kind of pretty, almost every larger Genelec speaker far outperforms.

 

[MattHooper]

Could have bought about 120 of mine for the price of the one in your post. Getting back to the TAD speaker review for $20k would have expected something better visually. Paid £650 for my Kudos X2s Ex Demo, fit and finish is immaculate plus they sound terrific in my 16’ 6” x 14’6” living room.
View attachment 242794

Ironically the Kudos speakers tend to measure “poorly” as well. They take a design by ear approach and it shows up in some wonky measurements, especially peaks in the highs.

At the same time I kind of envy you: I have really enjoyed Kudos speakers. I even went out of my way to audition the Titan series when I visited Britain several years ago.
Previously I’d really liked the X3 and Super20!