Spoke with rockport dealer who felt the Arrakis would work well in smaller environments if well installed. He felt you might play it a bit softer but would be crystal clear at super low volume and effortless.
Arrakis 2
- Thread starter wizard
- Start date
Spoke with rockport dealer who felt the Arrakis would work well in smaller environments if well installed. He felt you might play it a bit softer but would be crystal clear at super low volume and effortless.
Cello Audio Palette? Looks like Levinsons/Colangelo's favorite F-Dyne caps
THANK YOU, Myles and treitz.
I haven't been back to this thread in a while. I thought it was a Cello Audio Palette but wasn't sure if anyone would be using it with those speakers, so many people being purists.
Hello Arnie....would you extend the same invitation to a former native Austinite who wants to hear the Arrakis as well??? Maybe later this year???
MANY thanks!!!
You're welcome.
Here is a link to my system description on Audiogon. It is listed under userid: babybear
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vaslt&1250107418
Arnie
Texas or California, your choice. We have the Arrakis here along with several other models for you to listen to. Would love to have you over!
Ken Boyce
Cake Audio
Rockport Authorized Dealer
California USA
After 10 hours upgrade this is the result.
Two pairs of Gryphon Colosseum Solo.
So, I wonder....regarding the area behind these lovely ladies and all the beautiful gear....are the back walls real rock and the sides next to the speakers cement?? Aside from the wooden acoustical panels behind the speakers and what looks to be some sort of bass trapping in the corners,how do the hard surfaces affect the sound of this gorgeous room???
Cheers,
So I FINALLY managed to hear these...in Hong Kong. Ernest Lau was an absolute gentleman and accommodated me when I was rushing to the airport. Got a good solid chunk of time with him...4 VTL Siegried 2 monos. They reminded me in many ways of the enormous scale one gets from the big Genesis 1.1s which I have also heard. It is very different from what I have heard from the innumerable setups of big Wilsons I have also been fortunate to hear in my life including at home.
I would say, like for like, the scale of Nirvana Unplugged, Norah Jones, Dark Side of the Moon...all are about 50% bigger, fuller, realer than what I have ever heard from any of the big Wilsons. And when I mean bigger, I don't mean Norah Jones was 7 feet tall, but rather that the sense of the auditorium size for Kurt Cobain, the spacing of the players...everything felt very much like they were spread out across a stage...you can get that sense from big Wilsons, Tidals...but for some reason when I heard the big Genesis and now the Arrakis...I got a bit of an 'ear opener' about what lifelike scale is for even those kinds of small to medium scale ensembles.
While listening to DSOTM, I remembered something a distributor once said about the Arrakis (not the Rockport distributor): amazing scale, effortlessness...but he was not sure about detail. I initially thought the same thing on music I was not familiar with...'is it detailed with every nuance?'...then, when I got to DSOTM...I heard everything I have ever heard on this album before...its just it is not obvious at all. I think i know why. Because the scale of it all is so large, you are 'just hearing'...you don't have to actively 'listen' for music...its just in front of you in a very large-lifelike scale...so the side of your brain which seems to switch on is more the one that switches on when you are walking around in real life or going to a concert...than the one that switches on in an audio den where you are scrutinizing a system. When the 'listening to a live acoustic' side of the brain switches on, thoughts of detail go away (for me, anyway, I never pass by a couple guys playing instruments in the street and say, 'did you hear that air?, that 'ping' of that drum', 'they way the guy seems waaay in the back'.) (at least not until I consciously try to compare it with how my system sounds at home like a typical crazy audiophile!) ...and so it is with the Arrakis and the Genesis. Of course, the nice thing with Arrakis is that when you consciously activate that audiophile side of your brain to evaluate...you realize (with great surprise)...the detail is all there...at least as much as any other speaker I have ever heard. (And by the way, I just remembered my audiophile side of the brain was on when I was auditioning the Altair, as well as the big Wilsons, Grand Utopias, Aidas, etc).
BTW, on build quality...we had bass so powerful that when I stood next to it, my trouser legs were flapping along with my shirt...but my hand on the side of the cabinet less than 2cm away from the edge of the 15" woofer...had no vibration whatsoever...the speaker felt like it was actually OFF.
In sum, I will say this about Arrakis...it is not a difficult speaker to make sound great imho. Having heard Altair now in a totally different system, my gut tells me (as confirmed by many) its voice is the same as Arrakis and much of the Rockport family...and so it does have a voice. And its an easy to get along with because its tonal quality is organic...extremely powerful...but again, remarkably detailed without showing it (at all until you really start to evaluate tracks you know well.) But it also is not an SF speaker which has a definite signature.
Now to make it sound AMAZING...you do have to work at it as with all things. I felt intuitively the Wilsons are easier to finetune...the Arrakis is a beast...and even in that room in Hong Kong, I stepped back 3 feet behind the couch and felt more 'breathing' in the music. Not a criticism, just an observation.
The one thing I would say is that having heard these tracks above in several systems...I am still a sub guy and would still go with one with Arrakis. A kick drum has a certain gut punch that even the Arrakis did not deliver fully on its own...much more powerful than the 2 times I auditioned the XLF...but still not like my X1s plus sub, nor I am told like XLF + Thor.
Final note, I am utterly convinced that the big Genesis and Arrakis (for me) rank in another league above the Tidals, Aida, Grande Utopia, XLF...the Arrakis is 'relatively' smaller than the big Genesis. I could not possibly compare the 2 at this level and pick a winner, and surprisingly, despite their very different technologies, and very different 'stereotyhpical' sounds from which their technologies hail...the sound I heard from both was far more similar than different. Organic, fast, slam, etc. Could easily be happy with either...its about having the room. One man's opinion.
I would say, like for like, the scale of Nirvana Unplugged, Norah Jones, Dark Side of the Moon...all are about 50% bigger, fuller, realer than what I have ever heard from any of the big Wilsons. And when I mean bigger, I don't mean Norah Jones was 7 feet tall, but rather that the sense of the auditorium size for Kurt Cobain, the spacing of the players...everything felt very much like they were spread out across a stage...you can get that sense from big Wilsons, Tidals...but for some reason when I heard the big Genesis and now the Arrakis...I got a bit of an 'ear opener' about what lifelike scale is for even those kinds of small to medium scale ensembles.
While listening to DSOTM, I remembered something a distributor once said about the Arrakis (not the Rockport distributor): amazing scale, effortlessness...but he was not sure about detail. I initially thought the same thing on music I was not familiar with...'is it detailed with every nuance?'...then, when I got to DSOTM...I heard everything I have ever heard on this album before...its just it is not obvious at all. I think i know why. Because the scale of it all is so large, you are 'just hearing'...you don't have to actively 'listen' for music...its just in front of you in a very large-lifelike scale...so the side of your brain which seems to switch on is more the one that switches on when you are walking around in real life or going to a concert...than the one that switches on in an audio den where you are scrutinizing a system. When the 'listening to a live acoustic' side of the brain switches on, thoughts of detail go away (for me, anyway, I never pass by a couple guys playing instruments in the street and say, 'did you hear that air?, that 'ping' of that drum', 'they way the guy seems waaay in the back'.) (at least not until I consciously try to compare it with how my system sounds at home like a typical crazy audiophile!) ...and so it is with the Arrakis and the Genesis. Of course, the nice thing with Arrakis is that when you consciously activate that audiophile side of your brain to evaluate...you realize (with great surprise)...the detail is all there...at least as much as any other speaker I have ever heard. (And by the way, I just remembered my audiophile side of the brain was on when I was auditioning the Altair, as well as the big Wilsons, Grand Utopias, Aidas, etc).
BTW, on build quality...we had bass so powerful that when I stood next to it, my trouser legs were flapping along with my shirt...but my hand on the side of the cabinet less than 2cm away from the edge of the 15" woofer...had no vibration whatsoever...the speaker felt like it was actually OFF.
In sum, I will say this about Arrakis...it is not a difficult speaker to make sound great imho. Having heard Altair now in a totally different system, my gut tells me (as confirmed by many) its voice is the same as Arrakis and much of the Rockport family...and so it does have a voice. And its an easy to get along with because its tonal quality is organic...extremely powerful...but again, remarkably detailed without showing it (at all until you really start to evaluate tracks you know well.) But it also is not an SF speaker which has a definite signature.
Now to make it sound AMAZING...you do have to work at it as with all things. I felt intuitively the Wilsons are easier to finetune...the Arrakis is a beast...and even in that room in Hong Kong, I stepped back 3 feet behind the couch and felt more 'breathing' in the music. Not a criticism, just an observation.
The one thing I would say is that having heard these tracks above in several systems...I am still a sub guy and would still go with one with Arrakis. A kick drum has a certain gut punch that even the Arrakis did not deliver fully on its own...much more powerful than the 2 times I auditioned the XLF...but still not like my X1s plus sub, nor I am told like XLF + Thor.
Final note, I am utterly convinced that the big Genesis and Arrakis (for me) rank in another league above the Tidals, Aida, Grande Utopia, XLF...the Arrakis is 'relatively' smaller than the big Genesis. I could not possibly compare the 2 at this level and pick a winner, and surprisingly, despite their very different technologies, and very different 'stereotyhpical' sounds from which their technologies hail...the sound I heard from both was far more similar than different. Organic, fast, slam, etc. Could easily be happy with either...its about having the room. One man's opinion.
Last edited:
If you are still a sub guy, why don't you buy a Magico Qsub18? two 18" drivers per sub, 550lbs, 6000W, 136dB at 20Hz with 1% distortion. Nothing beats that apparently. They are showing it now at Cedia (room with two Qsub18), a friend has heard it and he is still under shock.
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/magico-introduces-the-qsub-at-cedia-2013/
PS: I love the Arrakis (imho sounds much better than the XLF)... but would take a Magico Q7 over the Arrakis any day: better transient, better transparency. Not talking about the Ultimate 3 I have on order of course...
Hi Stereo...I am seeing someone here about the Magico QSubs in about a week's time. I cannot say I am likely to get it per se...but I can say I wanted to know more about it. Although I know for the same money, one could buy several extremely great subs, place them across the room, play each at lower levels within their 1% distortion range...and get comparable volume to 120db or whatever one wanted...
...but I do not have that luxury of space. Still, for that kind of money...there is much my system could benefit from before I went there...nevertheless, having dramatically improved my subs performance purely thru isolation...top and bottom...I have to admit I am intrigued.
Hi Lloyd,
Thank you for that report. Would you mind writing a few words of what you think about Arrakis vs Altair both in general terms and in medium sized rooms?
Do you know the VTL Siegrieds from other systems? I wonder how a SS amp would compare on the Arrakis.
Thank you for that report. Would you mind writing a few words of what you think about Arrakis vs Altair both in general terms and in medium sized rooms?
Do you know the VTL Siegrieds from other systems? I wonder how a SS amp would compare on the Arrakis.
Hi Roysen,
I have learned from a lot of study/auditioning to trust my instincts...but also to be humble about how much I know. I do not always get it right. My instincts are:
1. SS vs Tube on Arrakis.
- From reading, speaking and hearing Altair & Arrakis personally, I feel confident in saying the 2 have very similar sounds. Thus, the differences of tone, detail and sharp snap of sounds (when there should be sharp snaps) are more about electronics than speaker differences.
- I preferred the Vivaldi + Constellation to the digital (cannot remember) + VTL. I felt the Arrakis had huge wide sweeping spaces that while exceptionally detailed, felt 'crowded' at times...this was either due to space or to the fact that somehow I preferred the Constellation approach to the VTL. I am going to suggest it was a mixture of BOTH...and thus, would say I would go for SS.
- I do not know VTLs...I just know I preferred the Constellations on the Altairs more...and I have heard Constellations a few times on different systems I know well.
(Just to be a little more clear...I found this same 'crowding' existed in my own system (which I did not really know about...until I got Ultra 5s under a lot of my equipment, particularly CJ GAT preamp)...suddenly what I thought were delineated instruments, started to REALLY step apart into their own space, and interestingly, the soundstage felt less crowded (at first glance smaller)...but it was simply that once each instrument takes up truly its own space (no 'reverb imaging' where there is a diffuse space that the instrument takes up)...you don't feel this mass of instruments in your room anymore. Of course the second thing I noticed was that those instruments front to back were much much further apart in reality. So the soundstage enlargening came from isolating tubed equipment, and I wonder whether maybe SS has less trouble with this. Hence, why I think it may be related in the VTL-Arrakis system to tubes? Since I did not hear this crowding on the Constellation-Altair, I am purely conjecturing it may be the SS equipment vs Tubes/vibrational issues...maybe the Distributor could put Ultra 5s under the VTLs to see...)
2. Arrakis vs Altair.
- Many people say Arrakis in a room smaller than 17x30 is a problem...I have spoken with 1 dealer who insists otherwise. personally, I could definitely agree you wont get the BEST out of the Arrakis is a smaller room...but will it still be better than Altair. I believe if you have it well setup in a medium sized room that is well proportioned, you might just get away with it...and it is such a controlled speaker, no vibrations, leakage of excess bass air...you might be able to get it at lower levels not to overwhelm the room...it really can be that delicate which impressed me.
- In terms of one vs the other, the scale of Arrakis is something to behold. It is not close to Altair...it is much greater in my limited experience...basically equivalent to what I got when I heard the big Genesis 1.1s. And I got it in a much smaller room than the one in which I heard the Genesis 1.1s. Its totally different than XLF....I came away feeling at a much greater scale and effortlessness than Altair.
- With the Altair, I got scale that felt intuitively close to X2 and XLF...likely a little bit smaller. many have said Altair is smaller...too close for me to call without having them in same room...but instinctively I felt it was smaller in terms of each instrument's lifelike portrayal...but generally the soundstage of Altair is much deeper so you might not truly notice the difference overall since the deeper soundstage was quite quite cool...drums waaay in the back, felt like 30 feet back
- The difference between Arrakis and Altair is smaller than the difference between XLF and Alexia, but it is still quite a big difference imho.
- But I have to caveat that by saying I particularly value scale and effortlessness...not everyone does. Many are exceedingly happy with perfection within a smaller scale...Quad 2805s, Guarneris...both of which I love and one of which I loved owning...are great examples of this. You truly have exquisite music and sound from speakers such as these.
- But scale is an enjoyment unto itself that is distinct...and if you don't miss it or value it...then you don't need an Arrakis vs Altair necessarily. I am told Arrakis is more transparent than Altair...given the difference in electronics fo the 2 systems, I would not be able to make the call...they seemed that close to me. But I definitely can feel the difference in scale.
- And the scale is not about bass slam...Altair 2 + subs would be awesome indeed!...but the Arrakis scale shows itself very plainly even on Norah Jones with an upright bass, piano, guitar and voice...when her voice, the piano (even at soft levels) feels everybit the full size of a piano...its breadth, depth, weight really give you scale at every volume level. Very cool.
Hope that helps.
Last edited:
I must just say that your never ending positive attitude and contribution to this forum is very much appreciated LL21!
wow...I am flattered. Thank you...just enjoying the hobby and the opportunity to have heard some truly, truly amazing systems!
Hi Lloyd, first I have to echo what others are saying...quality guy and love your writing style. You make your points on differences, but in a very classy way....Thanks for all you do here!
As a Altair owner, and having a friend nearby with Arrakis, I really have to agree here. The sense of scale is different, it's not a tonality or detail or ease of expression...they sound very similar actually with exception to scale and sheer bass power/control.
I might add, and maybe this is owner bias, the simplicity of the Altair, one amp, single wire etc has some advantages...maybe it's just easier set up. The Arrakis is double everyone..more interconects, speaker cables, amps...etc....it takes some time to get right (as my friends are certainly right I might add)
Thanks for stopping by on the way to the airport! Seems like you maybe getting a Rockport bug one day...
Similar threads
