Any thoughts on Verity Audio Lohengrin II

Guys, it's a troll. Best left alone...

Curious about that Verity too, the few times I've heard them, they were great (one of them was with the LAMMs at the this year's CES).


alexandre

Hmmmm-- Interestingly Frank Schroeder used the Veritys in his demo at a recent CES. The Poster must know more than Frank--ah NOT!

BruceD

Bjorn said:

It's well know from researches that speakers that are correct and with a well behaved power response are preferrred. But of course that's when testet blindly. Sighted tests don't always speak the truth and bias come into place.
A polar response is seldom published and never by these so called "high-end" brands. And no wonder why; they would reveal an ugly truth. However, the combination of on-axis and off-axis measurements do show a great deal and is also what a polar response is made up of.
http://seanolive.blogspot.no/2009/04/dishonesty-of-sighted-audio-product.html

Here's Verity Audio Sarastro II measured:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/verity-audio-sarastro-ii-loudspeaker-measurements

Despite not being a speaker designer, I don't think I would have much trouble producing a better speaker then the Sarastro II for a fraction of the price. Whether a reviewer would prefer it in sighted test, is however doubtful looking at their listening performance.
View attachment 15243

Click to expand...

Yeah we all listen to a mono speaker draped with a curtain sitting on a revolving turntable located somewhere in space. I like wearing welder's goggles better.

Isn't it fascinating--that the best speaker of all--was the one Madrigal sells? Wow. Can you spell marketing hype?

And you have no idea what you're talking about when you say NO high-end speaker company does polar measurements. I just visited one that does carries out that and many more measurements in the course of speaker design.

@MylesBAstor
Why are you twisting my words?
Did I say high-end companies never conducted measurement for a polar? No. I said so called "high-end" brands never published one. That excludes of course true high-end and it's related to what's published. Of course they can do a polar if they have measured the speaker off-axis. A program will do that easily for you. Perhaps there are some exception to the rule but personally I've never seen companies like for instance Magico, Avalon, Rockport, Verity etc. publish one or give one if you ask for it. Quite a contrary to for example Genelec who has polars for most speakers on their website. Most importantly though; these so called "high-end" speakers will have a poor polar response despite of their price.

And have I said I've never listened to a Verity speaker? You're using straw man arguments
You might want consider to changing the way you debate and not being deliberately libelous and twisting what' being said to make a point. Especially when you represent a magazine.

A blindtest is far more trustworthy no matter who conducts it. After all, they only confirmed what we know from what other have studied.

Bjorn said:

@MylesBAstor
Why are you twisting my words?
Did I say high-end companies never conducted measurement for a polar? No. I said so called "high-end" brands never published one. That excludes of course true high-end and it's related to what's published. Of course they can do a polar if they have measured the speaker off-axis. A program will do that easily for you. Perhaps there are some exception to the rule but personally I've never seen companies like for instance Magico, Avalon, Rockport, Verity etc. publish one or give one if you ask for it. Quite a contrary to for example Genelec who has polars for most speakers on their website. Most importantly though; these so called "high-end" speakers will have a poor polar response despite of their price.

And have I said I've never listened to a Verity speaker? You're using straw man arguments
You might want consider to changing the way you debate and not being deliberately libelous and twisting what' being said to make a point. Especially when you represent a magazine.

A blindtest is far more trustworthy no matter who conducts it. After all, they only confirmed what we know from what other have studied.

Click to expand...

Libelous? You gotta be kidding me. Since when are facts libelous? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Libelous is what you are guilty of. You've been asked numerous times to provide details about where and when and under what conditions you've heard Verity speakers. Yet despite these requests, you have yet to provide details and continue to trash a product you've never heard.

The best you've come up with,

I've heard enough, had similar speakers and experienced enough with EQ to know this. But whatever floats your boat. I prefer something that sounds real and gives me an illusion of listening to the real thing.

Click to expand...

So if anything has questionable intentions, it's you. Sorry it's no debate if you haven't heard the product your trashing.

So once again where did you hear the Verity speakers?

And now it's true high end vs. high end? What is all this gobblygook? I stand by my statement that your are absolutely wrong by your blanket statement about high-end companies and testing. Perhaps you should do more research and then get back to us.

As far as blind tests go, perhaps you should go back to school and learn something about physiology, how the brain processes information and testing processes instead of reciting things like a Moonie.Oh yes, blind testing with one speaker tells you what sounds real?

Tell me MylesBAstor, where does these so called high-end companies publish a polar response? I haven't seen one on their websites. Read: Published
So where are they? Please show me so you can refute what I'm actually saying and not a misinterpreation of what I said.

Why does it matter whether if I've heard a Verity speaker or not? Are you so ignorant that you believe that hearing a speaker once randomly at a show, in a store or at someone house a gives you the ability to be an objective "God" judge of the speaker's performance? There can be many reasons why the speaker sounds good or not in a specific room. Set up a speaker like this in one room and the same in another and you will in most cases see a radical difference at a frequency response. Especially because of their poor power response but also because rooms below the schroeder frequency differs a lot.
And not mention bias, psychology and how the mood of the day can affect you at buisy shows running from a room to another.

What we do know however is that those Veriy speakers that have been measured have showed very low perfomance. And those measurements tells a lot when you know something about psycoacoustics and how we perceive sound and sound quality. Based on that and even though I haven't seen independent measurements of Verity Audio Lohengrin II I would not recommend those speakers to anyone. And the price of the speakers are ridicolous and is obviously a part of the marketing process to fool audophiles who take price as a proof of quality. I do know by the way how Verity Audio Lohengrin II measured at someones home.

Gobbledygook is a better description when audophile magazines are reviewing cables, rhodium plugs and power conditioners. You seem to represent another world view then me and what serious researches tell, so I doubt we will ever agree on much. Have a nice day.

Bjorn said:

Tell me MylesBAstor, where does these so called high-end companies publish a polar response? I haven't seen one on their websites. Read: Published
So where are they? Please show me so you can refute what I'm actually saying and not a misinterpreation of what I said.

Why does it matter whether if I've heard a Verity speaker or not? Are you so ignorant that you believe that hearing a speaker once randomly at a show, in a store or at someone house a gives you the ability to be an objective "God" judge of the speaker's performance? There can be many reasons why the speaker sounds good or not in a specific room. Set up a speaker like this in one room and the same in another and you will in most cases see a radical difference at a frequency response. Especially because of their poor power response but also because rooms below the schroeder frequency differs a lot.
And not mention bias, psychology and how the mood of the day can affect you at buisy shows running from a room to another.

What we do know however is that those Veriy speakers that have been measured have showed very low perfomance. And those measurements tells a lot when you know something about psycoacoustics and how we perceive sound and sound quality. Based on that and even though I haven't seen independent measurements of Verity Audio Lohengrin II I would not recommend those speakers to anyone. And the price of the speakers are ridicolous and is obviously a part of the marketing process to fool audophiles who take price as a proof of quality. I do know by the way how Verity Audio Lohengrin II measured at someones home.

Gobbledygook is a better description when audophile magazines are reviewing cables, rhodium plugs and power conditioners. You seem to represent another world view then me and what serious researches tell, so I doubt we will ever agree on much. Have a nice day.

Click to expand...

It certainly gives me more credibility than someone who hasn't. Oh and I've haven't only heard them at shows, stores but in fellow reviewers systems whom I was quite familiar with. Where was it that you heard them again that allows you to comment? You do know what they say about opinions?

Science? What do you know about science grasshopper? I've forgotten more about research than you've ever done. So pray tell us what science courses or research that you have ever done that allows to comment about testing methodology, physiological processes and perception.

Bjorn said:

Tell me MylesBAstor, where does these so called high-end companies publish a polar response? I haven't seen one on their websites. Read: Published
So where are they? Please show me so you can refute what I'm actually saying and not a misinterpreation of what I said.

Why does it matter whether if I've heard a Verity speaker or not? Are you so ignorant that you believe that hearing a speaker once randomly at a show, in a store or at someone house a gives you the ability to be an objective "God" judge of the speaker's performance? There can be many reasons why the speaker sounds good or not in a specific room. Set up a speaker like this in one room and the same in another and you will in most cases see a radical difference at a frequency response. Especially because of their poor power response but also because rooms below the schroeder frequency differs a lot.
And not mention bias, psychology and how the mood of the day can affect you at buisy shows running from a room to another.

What we do know however is that those Veriy speakers that have been measured have showed very low perfomance. And those measurements tells a lot when you know something about psycoacoustics and how we perceive sound and sound quality. Based on that and even though I haven't seen independent measurements of Verity Audio Lohengrin II I would not recommend those speakers to anyone. And the price of the speakers are ridicolous and is obviously a part of the marketing process to fool audophiles who take price as a proof of quality. I do know by the way how Verity Audio Lohengrin II measured at someones home.

Gobbledygook is a better description when audophile magazines are reviewing cables, rhodium plugs and power conditioners. You seem to represent another world view then me and what serious researches tell, so I doubt we will ever agree on much. Have a nice day.

Click to expand...

Every now and then someone comes out of the woodworks declaring the audiophile community a bunch of gullible idiots, infected with the placebo effect virus. Usually in the context of "tweaks" and cabling.

We are now learning that the collective delusion of audiophiles extends far beyond fuses, AC cords and vibration control devices, and includes nothing less than high end speakers.

We owe Bjorn a big thank you for edifying us with this insight, all based on solid logic and irrefutable deductive reasoning (indeed, why the need to actually listen to speakers?).

Of course, this newly gained insight is just diagnosis and no cure. Some of us will undoubtedly continue to waste money on expensive speakers. However, as we all know the first step in recovery is admitting you have a problem, and I for one now clearly recognize my problem. Not quite willing to sell my speakers and embark on a DIY project yet, but with time I will surely get there.

From an engineering point of view, designing a loudspeaker system that measures flat is something not so difficult to achieve, even when it comes to power response. My colleague and I did indeed, in the past, followed in this thinking model which obviously appeared to be rational and reasonable. We were unfortunately and repeatedly getting unsatisfying results in terms of musicality, long term listening without fatigue, coherence, palpable realism and engagement. All values that are practically impossible to quantify but that were real and essential to our objectives. We observed that, despite a flat frequency response and a well-balanced power response, many loudspeaker systems were indeed creating listening fatigue and exhibiting overall poor performance. We knew that live acoustical instruments were not producing such fatigue. To address this problem, Verity did researches that brought the company to identify causes and solutions. I won’t reveal all of them but here’s where it all started:
1- The human hear is mostly a time sensitive device and one should not only consider the amplitude response when it significantly affect the time and phase behaviour;
2- The human hear is mostly sensitive within the range of 800 Hz to 3,500 Hz.
In order to get a good power response, you must have a crossover point located between 2,000 and 3,500 Hz and use high order filters, but this, specifically interfere with our criterion 1 and 2. Part of what we did to reach our objectives, was to select a crossover point outside the sensitive range of the human ear and to use first order filters. It is not the easiest approach but this is the one that gave us most satisfaction. Acoustics is a complex science and it is even more complex when you integrate a “time” variable. Nowadays, the art of designing loudspeakers lies in selecting the right criteria for best performance which inevitably mean dealing with compromises. Sound perception is so subjectively human that it wouldn’t be wise to let only the measurements decide.
Now, regarding the large do-it-yourself horns, I personally owned some of those (in fact several brands) including active crossover and all. They are good in some aspects (efficiency, small cone displacements, etc.) but not so good in many other ways (phase linearity, dispersion, bandwidth, etc.). Because of their horn-shaped characteristics, they cannot be phase coherent at all frequencies. On a multiple horn system it gets even worst because of the impossibility to integrate the various horns properly. It significantly affects the midrange coherence principally the human voice. Its inherent high directivity and phase incoherence greatly compromise its stereophony, i.e. its tridimensional soundstage. This integration issue would be too long to explain here, but easy to demonstrate.
Julien Pelchat vp
Verity Audio

Julien Pelchat said:

From an engineering point of view, designing a loudspeaker system that measures flat is something not so difficult to achieve, even when it comes to power response. My colleague and I did indeed, in the past, followed in this thinking model which obviously appeared to be rational and reasonable. We were unfortunately and repeatedly getting unsatisfying results in terms of musicality, long term listening without fatigue, coherence, palpable realism and engagement. All values that are practically impossible to quantify but that were real and essential to our objectives. We observed that, despite a flat frequency response and a well-balanced power response, many loudspeaker systems were indeed creating listening fatigue and exhibiting overall poor performance. We knew that live acoustical instruments were not producing such fatigue. To address this problem, Verity did researches that brought the company to identify causes and solutions. I won’t reveal all of them but here’s where it all started:
1- The human hear is mostly a time sensitive device and one should not only consider the amplitude response when it significantly affect the time and phase behaviour;
2- The human hear is mostly sensitive within the range of 800 Hz to 3,500 Hz.
In order to get a good power response, you must have a crossover point located between 2,000 and 3,500 Hz and use high order filters, but this, specifically interfere with our criterion 1 and 2. Part of what we did to reach our objectives, was to select a crossover point outside the sensitive range of the human ear and to use first order filters. It is not the easiest approach but this is the one that gave us most satisfaction. Acoustics is a complex science and it is even more complex when you integrate a “time” variable. Nowadays, the art of designing loudspeakers lies in selecting the right criteria for best performance which inevitably mean dealing with compromises. Sound perception is so subjectively human that it wouldn’t be wise to let only the measurements decide.
Now, regarding the large do-it-yourself horns, I personally owned some of those (in fact several brands) including active crossover and all. They are good in some aspects (efficiency, small cone displacements, etc.) but not so good in many other ways (phase linearity, dispersion, bandwidth, etc.). Because of their horn-shaped characteristics, they cannot be phase coherent at all frequencies. On a multiple horn system it gets even worst because of the impossibility to integrate the various horns properly. It significantly affects the midrange coherence principally the human voice. Its inherent high directivity and phase incoherence greatly compromise its stereophony, i.e. its tridimensional soundstage. This integration issue would be too long to explain here, but easy to demonstrate.
Julien Pelchat vp
Verity Audio

Click to expand...

Welcome and thanks for your interesting comments Julien!

Bjorn said:

It's well know from researches that speakers that are correct and with a well behaved power response are preferrred. But of course that's when testet blindly. Sighted tests don't always speak the truth and bias come into place.
A polar response is seldom published and never by these so called "high-end" brands. And no wonder why; they would reveal an ugly truth. However, the combination of on-axis and off-axis measurements do show a great deal and is also what a polar response is made up of.
http://seanolive.blogspot.no/2009/04/dishonesty-of-sighted-audio-product.html

Here's Verity Audio Sarastro II measured:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/verity-audio-sarastro-ii-loudspeaker-measurements

Despite not being a speaker designer, I don't think I would have much trouble producing a better speaker then the Sarastro II for a fraction of the price. Whether a reviewer would prefer it in sighted test, is however doubtful looking at their listening performance.
View attachment 15243

Click to expand...

As a complement to the Sarastro II review published in Stereophile, we invite you the read Verity's manufacturer's comments that were published in the same magazine. As they are not available on the web, please read them here:

"Manufacturer’s Comment : Verity Audio Sarastro II
Stereophile Magazine, April 2009

Editor:

We thank Fred Kaplan and John Atkinson for their time and effort in evaluating our Sarastro II loudspeaker system. It was with great pleasure we shared in Fred’s enthusiasm as he extolled the many virtues that make the Sarastro II something truly special: its natural rendering of instruments and harmonic overtones; its strength in conveying dynamic contrasts and ambient space; its ability to properly address the size and scale of individual sounds/performers and the space in which they reside; and overall, the Sarastro II’s ability to deliver “music as a whole” with “sheer, unfatiguing pleasure”. We take Fred’s overall assessment as a very affirmative confirmation our company’s primary, and most important, goals have been achieved.
We thank John for his thorough measurements, however we think we may never quite see eye-to-eye in these matters. John suspected a number of our design decisions caused idiosyncratic measured behavior, and this lead him to believe measurement is not an aspect actively pursued in the design process at Verity Audio.
We are a company of musicians, music aficionados, and engineers. We’ve worked on loudspeaker design professionally since the late-1980’s, and as the principals of Verity Audio for the past 15 years; we each have experience with acoustics going back even further. We have familiarized ourselves with quite a few pieces of measurement and simulation software, and like John, the MLSSA system has been our preferred loudspeaker measurement tool.
We would like to emphasize, contrary to John’s conclusion, that all Verity Audio loudspeakers are first computer modeled/simulated, then built and measured, re-optimized, and finally fine-tuned through a sequence of listening sessions and measurements until the final performance goal is reached. Throughout our years of research, we have developed and tested methodologies that are unique, but repeatable. All said, all design choices at Verity Audio have specific justifications and are not pure coincidence.
Establishing a linear correlation between measurements and the perceived performance is a very critical matter; however while we believe measurements are essential, they shouldn’t exclusively, or ultimately, be used as irrefutable judgment of sonic performance. Our brain processes music as a unique whole, and in the case of music reproduced in the home, what is perceived is the summation of the loudspeaker’s acoustical attributes in a given acoustical environment. This makes designing loudspeakers a complex science where finding the right balance between what is generally accepted and established, and what can be applied from years of experience and experimentation, extremely critical. As an example, we have made a conscious decision to use our midrange units over a much wider bandwidth than would normally be allowed by convention, because this design decision has proved to offer many more virtues (better liveliness, continuity, and harmonic integrity) than simply trying to keep its dispersion even off-axis.
In designing a loudspeaker, an amplifier, etc. there are no perfect solutions, only different sets of compromises. Without explicit knowledge of what a designer’s goal is, or what research and justification lead to a design decision that consciously breaks with convention, we believe it is difficult to properly apply a standard set of measurements to ultimately judge a product’s success. We’ve made a choice to place the overall sonic performance of our loudspeakers at the very pinnacle of our design goal. While our end result is unique in some ways, what is largely recognized as standard practice in loudspeaker design has been extensively tested and is still used in the early stages of our design process. We do believe a properly trained engineer is normally able to achieve good results using the standard loudspeaker design methodologies, however we believe our customers deserve something more. For more information and explanation of our design philosophy, please visit our website.
In closing, we very much appreciate the fact John noted we’ve paid close attention to the overall sound of the Sarastro II- shouldn’t this be what matters most? In addition to challenging the conventions of generally accepted loudspeaker design, we do not hesitate to challenge our own designs continually, and this is what the Sarastro II is all about. Our primary design goal is to allow our customers to enjoy music, reproduced faithfully, and for many years without fatigue. Fred’s experience with the Sarastro II leads us to think we’ve succeeded, in spades. Thanks again for a wonderful review.

Bruno Bouchard, Julien Pelchat, and John Quick
Verity Audio"

I'm sure I remember reading that (at least) a couple of other high-end speaker manufacturers intentionally deviate from flat in their measured on-axis frequency response. And I also remember hearing a Morel speaker (Fat Lady) with almost ruler flat frequency response that only sounded good (or at least by far its best) near-field, on-axis, in a very heavily treated, absorbent room.

Julien Pelchat said:

From an engineering point of view, designing a loudspeaker system (...)

Click to expand...

Great to have one more speaker manufacturer at WBF - welcome Julien!

Looking to go on reading your posts.

In designing a loudspeaker, an amplifier, etc. there are no perfect solutions, only different sets of compromises.

Click to expand...

What wise words! We can not achieve true perfection in sound reproduction. So every designer picks the most acceptable compromises for him,just as every listener picks the most acceptable set of compromises for him. One man's Verity is another's Magico or another's Wilson. There is no What's Best in audio reproduction... or in life for that matter.

Having owned several pairs of PSB speakers years ago, which are great value, i can tell you that they were not even close to the performance i am enjoying from my verity amadis. I have heard the finn, parsifal and sarastros as well and every one of them was superb in their class. I'm not at the point where the lohengrin 2s are an option due to $$ not to mention space, but if i had both of those, they would be on my shortlist for sure.

Verity Fan here also--I recall Frank Schroeder using them at a CES --plus I've heard them in Hkg --impressive -I also always take note when I see them displayed.

Fine sounding products that deliver.

BruceD

ddk said:

They're wonderful musical speakers, among the very best that you can buy today. Spent the last two CES with them in the Lamm room and many hours in a friend's room in NYC who owns a pair. They're big speakers but depending on your choice of music will sound quite intimate, something that some others in its class can't accomplish.

They are an easy load and as Myles pointed out they were driven with the 18 watt Lamm ML2 SETs but for best results they had to be bi- wired with two pairs of them. The higher powered ML3 can easily drive them so can other amplifiers with slightly more power than 18 watts. Set up is straightforward and no more demanding than any other speaker, your room is the deciding factor on that. You won't go wrong with them!
david

Click to expand...

+1 here. I've only heard them once in Montreal. My recollection is very positive and I think they were with Nagra (but could be wrong). If the price fits your means, then I'm confident you won't be disappointed. My 2 cents...

Julien Pelchat said:

As an example, we have made a conscious decision to use our midrange units over a much wider bandwidth than would normally be allowed by convention, because this design decision has proved to offer many more virtues (better liveliness, continuity, and harmonic integrity) than simply trying to keep its dispersion even off-axis.

Click to expand...

Jumping in late on this thread because I just had a long phone discussion about these speakers. I'm not going to claim that my DIY efforts are anywhere near what Verity is doing, but the statement above strongly resonates with me. Extending the midrange driver's coverage often has resulted in a sound I liked more even if the dispersion suffered somewhat as a result. I've never heard their speakers, but I just got off the phone with a guy who recently acquired some Lohengrin II and he just couldn't say enough good things about them. I've never heard anyone more enthusiastic about any speaker or audio component. He's losing his mind over these speakers. His words, not mine.

I've heard various Verity Audio speakers driven with CAT, Lamm and others at several shows and have always loved how they sounded, even in the challenged hotel room show conditions... that's saying a lot right there. I can only imagine how well they would sound in a dedicated listening room.

Best wishes,
Don