Seattle report: Mike's System, Bruce B, Jazdoc, EA MM7, NVS, Darts, etc

I too have read with great interest the near field listening that others have commented on but if is sounds better sitting there, then that's the way it is. Just as Mike says

In my room which is much smaller than Mikes my speakers are 10 feet from tweeter to tweeter and I sit 12 feet back. Like Micro though I personally have reservations sitting that close especially when you guys were playing that Rolling Stones tape at high spl

Mike Lavigne said:

seems to work pretty good.

my ears are 15 feet off the forward wall, and 14 feet off the rear wall.....along the exact front to back center line. and my room is exactly symmetric side to side.

really......there are so many variables, almost infinite variables when you start talking about density of walls and ceilings and such that......you cannot with certainty say what will work ahead of time.......guides are just that.....guides. rules of thirds, or fifths, or golden ratio.....or any of that......these are starting points. and small room acoustics really don't scale well. they are just concepts to try.

if you found the best spot and then had some physicist come in and study it and tell you why this one spot was best i'll bet they could not do it. they would simply compile more and more data and would just burn out on trying to prove cause and effect.

if it sounds best then it's best.

Click to expand...

Exactly. We both break rules that would not be broken by dealers or speaker designers in the set-up of speakers. Having set up a speaker by a dealer (gasp) or designer can be only a first iteration at best. To treat this as 'how it should be' would be folly and can rob you from so much potential enjoyment. Especially since they do not know our respective rooms and how they react to different set-ups as intimately as we do, things we have had the chance to get acquainted with for years.

Experts are experts, and their advice can be useful, but the ears of the system owner will trump expertise any time when it comes to fine-tuning the system.

Mike Lavigne said:

remember, the bass towers (which are massive) are between the main towers and the walls. so that 71.5" between the tweeter and wall is filled with a 7 foot tall 750 pound bass tower. and having those bass towers on the same listening radius is important for perfect phase and time alignment for the ideal wave launch and ultimate involvement. perceived perfect speaker coherence in a true full range system is not an accident.

and sure, when I have friends over I always sit in the 2nd row sofa, as do others. it's 11'-12' feet back. it's a great seat. but there is a better seat.

the reason we sit back is our comfort zone visually, but really we are use to a room pushing us back by how it interacts with the speaker. all the agressive reflections make the music confused and hard when the SPL's increase when we are closer. so it's the combination of the visual and our learned hearing comfort zone.

but what if you completely eliminated the room reflection issue? I mean completely. when I did that, even with monster towers so close, the sighted comfort zone part was easy to adapt to. like Bonzo said, the second day those visuals were no longer an issue. I normally see it take about 90 minutes for a person to relax, take a deep breath, and just allow the speakers to caress them. like getting in the shower every morning, that first half second is startling, then it's ahhhhhhhh.

resistance is futile......just allow yourself to be absorbed by the entity.....

sitting in the far field you are then hearing the room as much as the speaker......this is a learned thing.....and can be un-learned if/when sufficiently motivated. we go to such degrees of effort.....then we stop short of what it takes to go all the way. and these type things cost nothing....zero....nada. it's just our minds holding us back. and I'm 65 years old.....so don't be telling me you are too old to learn......

if one's set-up/system/signal path is not sorted out enough to get up close then there is work to do......but that is another topic.

one more thing; I do feel strongly that the ribbon tweeter-ceramic mid-range combo on all the Evolution Acoustics speakers is particularly smooth and listenable and allows for comfortable and natural near field listening. if you are having trouble getting comfortable close up there could be reasons for that you cannot change.

Click to expand...

I have some experience with near-field listening, as I use a pair of B&W silver signature monitors in a second system. You have a point in this aspect - they give me somethings that my Soundlab system or other speakers I have owned will never be able to do. I was particularly sensitive to Ked description of the Beethoven listening - I could exactly understand what he meant, as this type of listening is particularly suitable for this type of recordings. Sometimes you only discover the quality of a recording when listening at 7 feet - for example the Chesky Beethoven 9th sounds exceptional in this mode of listening. Soloists, chorus and orchestra parts have separate entities and blend really well in this recording. Many Decca recordings also sound particularly great at this distance.

But all in all I do not want to learn in this aspect, perhaps too old for that . IMHO the optimum listening distance for a speaker is also due to the pattern radiation of the speaker and room, not only listener preference. We have many designs, reflecting the beliefs of their creator - after all we are debating subjective preferences.

Unfortunately I am not as brave as Ked considering long distance traveling, otherwise I will queue to get an invitation to listen to your great system and learn from you in place.

spiritofmusic said:

Mike, from Ked's measurements you seem to be sitting in the midline of the room
At a recent GIK seminar, apparently a major no no is to choose to sit midway btwn front and back walls
You appear to be breaking a cardinal rule
You're such a rebel LOL!

Click to expand...

IMHO once we have separate bass towers with plenty of controls and our main speakers also have excellent bass response we can afford to break cardinal rules and create our own rules ...

Bonzo, Thank You for the great report! It's probably safe to say that almost no one has done as much traveling as you to find the very best systems in the world.

If you were to step back and synthesize your learnings, what are the top 3-5 systems that you have experienced? And what are the common threads between the great ones that one can incorporate into their system/ room?

Mike Lavigne said:

it seems to me that the Evolution Acoustics MM7's are never given their due.

maybe it's because I'm the only MM7 owner who posts. maybe it's because the other 'uber' speakers are from sexier companies that have wider groups of customers. maybe it's because they have not been at audio shows, never been at Munich, or Hong Kong. who knows?

even with this write-up, they get mentioned but then marginalized that somehow I've overcome something. can't be the MM7's.

I'm here to say that is baloney. the MM7's are a tool that makes all things audio possible, and have multiple significant advantages over 'most' uber speakers, and at least one advantage over almost all 'uber' speakers. maybe their equal exists......but the MM7's are as capable as any other speaker out there. A N Y.

what's an 'uber' speaker?.....let's say over $175k that aspires to full range large room music reproduction.

to me the big thing that sets them apart is the combination of an easy amp load, naturalness and tonal density, ultra detail and texture, absolute seamless coherence through the deep and mid bass, complete extension and headroom both top and bottom octaves and their twin tower room adaptability. remove any of those clear attributes and the speaker is significantly diminished. yet most of the competition lacks at least one of those areas.

and......and with all their multiple advantages......they can be made to sound like a planar or 2 way with total coherence. close your eyes and you would have no idea there are 3000 pounds and 7 foot tall of 4 tower excellence less than 10 feet from you. there is no discontinuity from one driver type to another. seamless, coherent, musical, full bodied, capable of making solid state sound like tubes. they go from 10hz to 50khz without even breathing hard and can work in any room easily.

ok.....I feel much better now that I've got that off my chest. you can go back to ignoring the MM7's now. (maybe if the price was doubled to $400k they would get more pub......)

now I suppose I have to write up one of these posts about my dart 458 mono blocks that never get any love either. I am sympathetic that it is difficult to actually recommend a $160k set of amplifiers to anyone. but hey....these are 'that' good I got to tell you.

it is true the 458's do show up at shows from time to time and are not always matched favorably.....but in the right situations they have no limits.

it seems these 2 products just kick major ass but are like giant trees in the forest that just rule the world in obscurity.

I know, I know.....sympathy is between sh*t and syphilis in the dictionary......if....I want any that is the only place i'll get it.

Click to expand...

Mike, congrats!

A couple of questions, and I apologize if I missed these:

- what is the purpose of the towers MM7 use? how is this kind of design different than using multiple subwoofers? also, don't multiple subwoofers give spread around the room give you more flexibility to even out the bass humps?

- you mention that you have made 50% improvements in recent months, but your system and room have been in tact for several years. What specifically have you done to get such large improvements, considering the fixed variables?

- did I understand your post correctly, when you say that PCM on Trinity dac is the best digital you have heard, even better than "up-calculated" DSD?

Thanks!

asiufy said:

Perfect post, Mike!
It's the nature of the hobby and the business, I guess... Some brands will be marginalized, while others "hog" the attention.
Just today I had a person come into the store, and audiophile of many years, and he could not believe how the Evolutions are not more widely known, given the performance AND their price. He did a cursory search and found next to no reviews, and very few forum posts. Most of the stuff is actually show reports (usually top 3 on those too).
Personal taste always comes into play, but I've always found the Evolutions to be speakers that are very easy to like, as they can cater to a wide variety of tastes, as they do so many things well...
Oh, and you gotta tell us more about those 458s


cheers,
alex

Click to expand...

Yes, the brands that are successful have a brand story to tell, and unfortunately EA is left out in the cold. . I talk about it here:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...ess-successful&p=421841&viewfull=1#post421841


If it weren't for Mike, most people wouldn't even know about it.

Furthermore, to have that top of mind of awareness of a brand, a well-read or respected reviewer needs to have it as part of their reference system. Fremer has Wilson listed in every stereophile review, while Valin pumps up Magico every time he talks about any speaker, turntable, interconnect, or a cable elevator tweak.

Marketing high end audio is very tough...

I think one of the unintended but important takeaways from this thread is that high performance audio is a journey. Simply purchasing and plugging in well-selected, high quality and synergistic components is not the end; rather it is the beginning. In order to approach maximizing the sound quality, you have to be willing to experiment with many interdependent variables including, analog setup, cable layout, room, tube selection, speaker and equipment positioning, etc. These variables are relatively inexpensive (and oft times 'free') but require the willingness to commit the time and effort. IMO, the 'Seattle Audio Mafia' has been an invaluable asset for the local high performance audio community. I can't begin to catalog what I've learned about audio from folks like Joel, Mike, Gary, etc. We are critical but supportive and willing to help each other in the audio journey. Most importantly, it's much more fun to enjoy and discover music with your friends. (OK, good scotch helps!) The process is assuredly non-linear and time consuming. As documented in this thread, the performance of Mike's system today is not just the result of a large financial commitment, but time, sweat equity and yes, some tears.

jazdoc said:

I think one of the unintended but important takeaways from this thread is that high performance audio is a journey. Simply purchasing and plugging in well-selected, high quality and synergistic components is not the end; rather it is the beginning. In order to approach maximizing the sound quality, you have to be willing to experiment with many interdependent variables including, analog setup, cable layout, room, tube selection, speaker and equipment positioning, etc. These variables are relatively inexpensive (and oft times 'free') but require the willingness to commit the time and effort. IMO, the 'Seattle Audio Mafia' has been an invaluable asset for the local high performance audio community. I can't begin to catalog what I've learned about audio from folks like Joel, Mike, Gary, etc. We are critical but supportive and willing to help each other in the audio journey. Most importantly, it's much more fun to enjoy and discover music with your friends. (OK, good scotch helps!) The process is assuredly non-linear and time consuming. As documented in this thread, the performance of Mike's system today is not just the result of a large financial commitment, but time, sweat equity and yes, some tears.

Click to expand...

+1

Mike Lavigne said:

remember, the bass towers (which are massive) are between the main towers and the walls. so that 71.5" between the tweeter and wall is filled with a 7 foot tall 750 pound bass tower. and having those bass towers on the same listening radius is important for perfect phase and time alignment for the ideal wave launch and ultimate involvement. perceived perfect speaker coherence in a true full range system is not an accident.

Click to expand...

Mike, you have obviously gone to great lengths to find a satisfying speaker/room/listener relationship. I am very interested in this notion of listening radius, and fully appreciate exact, measured, speaker and listener positioning. I think I read that it was Jazzdoc who suggested that your main speakers be moved 6" closer together. And then Mr. Durand who suggested that you move your listening seat slightly closer toward the main speakers. That, in itself, is interesting, that two different listeners suggested these specific changes in speaker and listening positions, and it seems as though you are very happy with the results of their suggestions.

I have four questions about your specific speaker position relating to this listening radius:
1. When Jazzdoc suggested moving the main speakers closer together, were they moved along an arc, at a fixed radius relative to the listener, thus maintaining the exact same radius as the bass towers?
2. When Mr. Durand suggested moving the listening seat forward slightly, did you then adjust the bass towers to the new focal point of the arc, thus matching the new, shorter radius created by the new seat location?
3. Did you adjust toe in for either the main speakers or the bass towers with these changes in spacing and listing position?
4. Are all drivers aimed directly at the listener, ie. the center of the circle, or are they toed out somewhat?

I have found in my modest, and small speaker based system, that precise speaker and listener positioning can make a significant difference and elevate the overall listening experience beyond what one might expect and more than one might get form a component change. The result is almost always worth the effort, and, as you wrote, it does not cost anything.

Steve Williams said:

In my room which is much smaller than Mikes my speakers are 10 feet from tweeter to tweeter and I sit 12 feet back.

Click to expand...

As do I.

caesar said:

Yes, the brands that are successful have a brand story to tell, and unfortunately EA is left out in the cold. . I talk about it here:If it weren't for Mike, most people wouldn't even know about it.
Marketing high end audio is very tough...

Click to expand...

I had the EA MM3 speakers for a couple years. It's a great speaker.

jazdoc said:

I think one of the unintended but important takeaways from this thread is that high performance audio is a journey. Simply purchasing and plugging in well-selected, high quality and synergistic components is not the end; rather it is the beginning. In order to approach maximizing the sound quality, you have to be willing to experiment with many interdependent variables including, analog setup, cable layout, room, tube selection, speaker and equipment positioning, etc. These variables are relatively inexpensive (and oft times 'free') but require the willingness to commit the time and effort. IMO, the 'Seattle Audio Mafia' has been an invaluable asset for the local high performance audio community. I can't begin to catalog what I've learned about audio from folks like Joel, Mike, Gary, etc. We are critical but supportive and willing to help each other in the audio journey. Most importantly, it's much more fun to enjoy and discover music with your friends. (OK, good scotch helps!) The process is assuredly non-linear and time consuming. As documented in this thread, the performance of Mike's system today is not just the result of a large financial commitment, but time, sweat equity and yes, some tears.

Click to expand...

Hi Jazzdoc,

Great points. But one can really drive themselves crazy...

I'm wondering if it's easier to just get a setup expert like Jim Smith in the US or Peter Swain in Europe, and get all that taken care of for a price of an expensive tweak...

http://www.theaudiobeat.com/blog/aso.htm

PeterA said:

Mike, you have obviously gone to great lengths to find a satisfying speaker/room/listener relationship. I am very interested in this notion of listening radius, and fully appreciate exact, measured, speaker and listener positioning. I think I read that it was Jazzdoc who suggested that your main speakers be moved 6" closer together. And then Mr. Durand who suggested that you move your listening seat slightly closer toward the main speakers. That, in itself, is interesting, that two different listeners suggested these specific changes in speaker and listening positions, and it seems as though you are very happy with the results of their suggestions.

I have four questions about your specific speaker position relating to this listening radius:
1. When Jazzdoc suggested moving the main speakers closer together, were they moved along an arc, at a fixed radius relative to the listener, thus maintaining the exact same radius as the bass towers?

Click to expand...

****added note---after thinking further I recall that a few weeks prior to moving the speakers, Jazdoc and I did play around with seating position only. we ended up moving it waay forward and back and forth. some things were better and some worse. but we knew we were on to something......and we discovered we had some latitude in toe-in where we could move over a range and not lose things (soundstage width and depth) to find the best bass lock in....which allowed Joel's later listening position change without needing to re-toe-in.****

I'm trying to recall this exact sequence. I had listened to Jazdoc's Found Music amps and got my socks knocked off. thought about tube amps for a month. then started considering moving the speakers closer together to achieve the same thing. when I spoke to Jazdoc about it, he mentioned he had had those same thoughts over a period of time when listening in my room. when we moved them closer together we decided to simply move them horizontally the 3" each and not have too many variables. we moved them the 3 inches, kept the same toe in, and liked it. then we toed them in for the closer listening position (still not the newest position) and were very happy...and stopped. we did use a laser alignment to do that.

it was sounding so good we did decided not to touch the bass towers. it seemed to lock in in the bass with what we did with the main towers so felt why mess with success.

2. When Mr. Durand suggested moving the listening seat forward slightly, did you then adjust the bass towers to the new focal point of the arc, thus matching the new, shorter radius created by the new seat location?

Click to expand...

a few days later (I had just got the CA Goldfinger Statement) Joel came over to hear that and the changes. when he listened he heard some non-coherence on some music he knew and asked to move the seating position forward even more. which we did. we never moved the speakers any more, just the listening position. this is where it is now.

3. Did you adjust toe in for either the main speakers or the bass towers with these changes in spacing and listing position?

Click to expand...

good catch on this. above I mentioned we did adjust toe in for the previous position, but not for the new one Joel suggested. no further adjustments occurred.

and bottom line, right now the bass towers are not exactly on the listening radius with the main towers. but the bass is to die for. remember, the main towers do the bass down to 37hz or so......so almost all of bass perceived location is the main towers. and at frequencies under 37hz, the small distance from the bass towers to that exact radius is a very small factor....but possibly technically significant.

4. Are all drivers aimed directly at the listener, ie. the center of the circle, or are they toed out somewhat?

Click to expand...

they are toed in to hit the top of the shoulder blade (EA recommended orientation as a starting point) on the position in point 1. not for where the seat was moved for position in point 2.

I have found in my modest, and small speaker based system, that precise speaker and listener positioning can make a significant difference and elevate the overall listening experience beyond what one might expect and more than one might get form a component change. The result is almost always worth the effort, and, as you wrote, it does not cost anything.

Click to expand...

Magico Mini II's are modest in size but still significant speakers. and very high resolution. could not agree more on the significance of exact alignment.

microstrip said:

istening so close - call it speaker claustrophobia - but I suffer from it . I have an old house and got used to large spaces, I do not feel comfortable listening at distances closer than 11-13 feet. Did you ever try your speakers in more "typical" distances, closer to the walls?

Click to expand...

I was a little surprised by the distance too, but the moment that needle touches down you realize Mike has it just right, and it all fades away!

I would like to add my 2 cents to this thread. I heard Mike's system 10 days ago, and my jaw dropped at the quality of the vinyl playback sonics. I have never heard vinyl playback where the level of coloration is so low as to be undetectable by my ears.

A big thumbs up to Mikes careful tuning of his system over months and years. My suspicion is that the two active anti-vibration tables which the support turntable, and the preamp, are major factors in delivering a bass that is so strong clear and uncolored.

We have in Holland, an early vintage Lampi Golden Gate which has been upgraded with USB receiver Superclocks and the DSD 512 module, so we know Mike is in for a treat and a significant narrowing of the gap between his vinyl and digital playback when he gets his Lampi back after the upgrades.

Mike's SGM has about 2 weeks running time on it, it will continue to improve as it approaches the 30 day mark. At 30 days, the Mundorf AG caps will have reached maturity and be singing at their full potential. Crazy for a digital device, but everything matters. On Mike's system, there is no hiding place for any sonic nasties !

Every serious audiophile should try to get an invite to Mike's barn !

Well there certainly looks to be enough drivers/driver surface area in Mike's system to pulverise anyone with the guts to turn it up with bass heavy material!

Nice review, Ked. Better than Henk's Apogee Grands? I should hope so given the price of the gear and speakers. If that is what it takes to beat the Grands...

Mike Lavigne said:

Folsom,

thank you for all the kind words.

but regarding your comments on my dart 458's I have to mention that you came to my room with an (understandable and fully disclosed) agenda. you've spent years working on your own amplifier which I allowed you to insert into my system and listen to. i'll refrain from commenting on my perception of your amplifier, but you had your own prism of viewpoints on my darts verses your amps which honestly I did not agree with (to be fair I would need more time to fully grasp), so I need to mention that for full disclosure on this specific issue. I fully get that that amplifier is your baby and it's so personal. but for the reader this is important to point out.

I very much enjoyed your visit and spending time with you and look forward to our future relationship. so please understand my only intent is to deal with this one issue. I certainly wish you the best with your amplifier project.

Click to expand...

Mike I would like to say that would have come with or without my amp. That was just icing on an already fantastic, layered, huge cake, that I'm very grateful for and is very helpful to me. And I didn't mention my amplifier since there's no real point (it's a thread about Mike L's place), but just to be clear for everyone reading using it was nice to give an AB type scenario so that I have something to establish some thoughts on.

I did sense that you were surprised at my comment on the amplifiers. But I can't retract them because I had the thought the first night after I came back to reality of the shock and awe of what a soundstage really means. Keep in mind my first thoughts were holy crap this sounds good, and they do other things way beyond the capabilities of most things I've heard. And I believe there's great possibility that even more could be milked from them. They're impressive amps, without a doubt. I specifically said that I now believe DartZeel is a company to be respected and meant it. But there are things I seek in amps that may or may not be what someone else is looking for at all. Please accept that I'm ever critical, because I need to be when I'm trying to design equipment. It's challenging to not come off as discounting something that I like, when I also say that it has features that may or may not jive with me. Perhaps saying this will give a good point to the subject, I'd be very happy to listen to them again (and hope I do! next meet, or maybe with some other forum guests?), and if I had to choose the last stereo I could ever have without changing anything, it would be yours.

Listening to other people's stereo's is a lot of fun, and I actually like that we as people do enjoy hearing different things. I'm happy that people have differences in things they're attracted to. I'd be a little disappointed if every stereo I heard sounded the same And so yes, I do have my partialalities too, which I full accept and won't deny.

caesar said:

Hi Jazzdoc,

Great points. But one can really drive themselves crazy...

I'm wondering if it's easier to just get a setup expert like Jim Smith in the US or Peter Swain in Europe, and get all that taken care of for a price of an expensive tweak...

http://www.theaudiobeat.com/blog/aso.htm

Click to expand...

Casear,

Point well taken. If you are unwilling to invest the time and effort, by all means, hire an expert to help you. The one potential caveat with this approach is that you may end up with the expert's take on sound and not yours. Personally, I have enjoyed the journey but admit that the process has been frustrating at times.

One interesting side note, even though our listening environments, musical preferences and equipment are quite different, I believe that Mike L's, Joel's and my systems have all moved to a more similar sonic signature over time.