Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [regsaudioforum] Emerald Physics CS3

Expand Messages
  • Rob Gold
    Will H:   Yes, I got to spend about 20 minutes at this weekend s AK Fest in suburban Detroit listening to the new Emerald Physics CS3 speaker.  
    Message 1 of 33 , May 3, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Will H:
       
      Yes, I got to spend about 20 minutes at this weekend's AK Fest in suburban Detroit listening to the new Emerald Physics CS3 speaker.
       
       
      This is a dynamic dipole speaker with a 12" paper cone woofer that includes a concentric tweeter at its center (not visible fron the front, covered by what looks like a normal central paper/frabric dust cap).  It is rated at 95dB sensitivity.  It weighs 40lbs net and stands 41" high and 16" wide.  The display units were wood-fronted (apparently mahogany), the same as the brochure and website units.  Cherry, maple and black front panels are also available.  There were removable black cloth grills for both the front and back of the driver.  The crossover is handled by an external digital active ceossiver/EQ unit.  Standard is the Behringer DCX2496, bringing the retail price to a seemingly reasonable $2,995.  For an extra $400, they switch this to a DBX DSP processor which includes automatic DSP room correction (mic included).
       
      The AK Fest show was hosted by Emerald Physics distributor Walter Liederman of Atlanta (who is also the only US retail dealer for the Wyred4Sound Class D, ICE-based amps (but I can't recall what solid state amp was used in this demo).
       
      The room was too small for this presentation (which used CD sound).  So while the speakers were out from the back wall, it certainly seemed that they could be further out for best soundstage presentation, depth in particular.  The speakers were placed about 708' apart and very far from the side walls.  I heard no side wall reflections in this session.
       
      The CS3s seemed well built, though not at the "furniture" level of quite a few box speakers.  The binding posts appeared well placed and easily accessible.  There were only two binding posts, and the speaker is designed to use only once amp per channel.
       
      The bottom end is rated at 32hz at -3dB, and it seemed to reah that in this room, but there was a slight bit of apparent effort to reah down that low at higher volumes (not major, just "slight").  The DBX unit's display showd a rather significant boost at the bottom end in order to achieve a balance that low.
       
      The balance between the bass and treble drivers (rated crossover is a 3rd order Butterworth at 900hz) seemed very well integrated.  High frequencied seemed well extended, certainly capable of playing orchestral recordings in balance (if not quite as "airy" as some ribbon tweeters heard at the show).  Personally, I found the top end extension musically sufficient and satifactory.
       
      Of course, the coincident driver technology offered finely focused presentation, with both solid center images and very good spread to the left and right (extended L-R beyond the speakers when the recording allowed it).
      Dynamic contrasts at the ffff end of the scale were capable of handling the Telarc CDs without apparent compression.  I suspect that there might be some limitations on "20th Century Power Music" in a room larger than this small space, but cannot confirm that.  There was very good detail at the pppp end of the dynamic end of the scale.  Musical detail was very pleasant portrayed.  While not the best I have heard, this was certainly musically fulfilling, especially for the price.
       
      The bass clarity of a dynamic dipole was certainly in evidence, as was the overall dipolar presentation.  As expected, there were none of the did-bass and lower resonance found in so many box speakers.
       
        Standing behind the speaker one could clearly hear the rear radiation, though not at the same output level found with big planars like Magneplanars, Quads and Martin-Logans.  Strangely, at the side of the speakers, there was not the severe cut off found in many dipoles.  I would suspect that these might not tolerate the close placement to the sidewalls found in many dipoles.  The "controlled dispersion design" from the front seemed fairly wide, and imaging from left and right of center listening remained fairly coherent.  There were none of the apparent tweeter dispersion issues from the larger driver found in many earlier coincident drivers.
       
      All told, a competent and appealing system for a reasonable price.  Definitely worth a listen!
       
      They also showed brochures of a coming update to their existing top-of-the-line CS2 dynamic dipole speaker, named CS 2.3.  This combines the CS3's coincident 12" + tweeter driver with two 15" paper cone woofers per side playing dipolar, mounted forward facing, one above the other, and also using either the standard Behringer DCX 2496 or optional (+$400) DBX digital active crossover/EQ units.  This is rated down to 20hz at
      -3dB.  These stand 48" high and 18.56" wide, and weigh 67lbs each.  They will be priced at $3,995 with the Behringer.  The CS 2.3 is rated at 100dB sensitivity, and is designed to be biamplified.  The brochure's front-only photo shows two openings for the 15" drivers that are farr smaller, only about 4-5" wide.  This is apparently part of their "Aperture Bass Propogation Technology."  Walter Liederman said that this speaker will be clearer, in part, because the 12" concentric driver will not be forced to play as low as in the CS 3.
       
      I hope this answers you questions.
       
      Rob Gold
       
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      --- On Thu, 4/30/09, Will_H <will_hum@...> wrote:
      From: Will_H <will_hum@...>
      Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] Emerald Physics CS3
      To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Thursday, April 30, 2009, 3:06 AM

      Rob, Roland and anyone else attending AKFest... if you can make it to the Emerald Physics room, I'd love to read about your impressions.
       
      Unfortunately, AKFest is too out-of-the-way for me. 
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Rob Gold
      Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 10:26 PM
      Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] Emerald Physics CS3

      I will be going to the AK Fest for the second year.  Friends who were there two years ago said the current location -- the Embassy Suites in Livonia (suburban Detroit) -- was a real improvement over the Southfield hotel used previously.
       
      Rob Gold
       
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

      --- On Thu, 4/30/09, Will_H <will_hum@rogers. com> wrote:
      From: Will_H <will_hum@rogers. com>
      Subject: [regsaudioforum] Emerald Physics CS3
      To: regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com
      Date: Thursday, April 30, 2009, 1:53 AM

      This looks interesting:

      http://tinyurl. com/ddghue

      World premiere next week at AKFest 2009. Anyone here going?

      Does not require bi-amping... . removes one of the barriers many people had
      wrt the CS1/CS2.



      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      Version: 8.5.287 / Virus Database: 270.12.8/2086 - Release Date: 04/29/09 06:37:00
    • Will_H
      Thanks for this Ted. Very informative. I agree that this 50+ year old article is still relevant. I ve saved a copy to re-read more carefully this weekend. ...
      Message 33 of 33 , May 6, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks for this Ted.

        Very informative. I agree that this 50+ year old article is still relevant.
        I've saved a copy to re-read more carefully this weekend.




        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Ted Rook" <rooknrol@...>
        To: <regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 1:38 PM
        Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] Re: Emerald Physics CS3


        > Will, one place I got to from your original question is a paper by BBC
        > engineer Shorter dated
        > 1957 showing a large floor standing vented loudspeaker with a rectangular
        > opening for the
        > the 15 inch woofer, Shorter credits the idea to a UK patent dated 1947.
        > The Shorter paper is
        > a text-book for the practical engineering of high quality speakers and is
        > still relevant, I have
        > saved a pdf copy in the files section.
        >
        > Ted
        >
        >
        > On 6 May 2009 at 9:24, Tom Mallin wrote:
        >
        >> I agree that the M40 is NOT a very high sensitivity speaker. The old
        >> rating of about 85 dB/watt/meter seems honest compared to other speakers'
        >> ratings and is a bit lower than average. It seems roughly equivalent in
        >> sensitivity to the Gradient 1.5. The M40.1 is also quite noticeably more
        >> sensitive than the M40. I'd estimate the practical difference to be at
        >> least 5 dB.
        >>
        >> >>> "Ted Rook" <rooknrol@...> 5/5/2009 10:00 PM >>>
        >> I agree with Tom, the M40 is no slouch in the loud department, I can't
        >> comment on the 40.1
        >> not having heard them. A quick and dirty brief uncalibrated test using
        >> 1/3rd octave pink noise
        >> centered on 100Hz produced about 105dB (C weighted RS meter) at about a
        >> meter in my
        >> living room, from a single M40 cabinet.
        >>
        >> Regarding efficiency the M40 is quoted to be 85dB 1W @ 1m. The following
        >> may be only
        >> useful as a guide because I am not too sure about power ratings with
        >> 1/3rd octave
        >> bandwidth, but if we simplify things by making some assumptions and take
        >> the LS5/8 figure
        >> of 100Watts producing 114dB then 1W is one hundredth or 20dB less power.
        >> Subtract 20
        >> from 114 leaves 94dB sensitivity for 1W at 1meter for the LS5/8
        >> sensitivity, much more
        >> sensitive, also more efficient, than the M40. In the late 1970s the BBC
        >> opted to use an off the
        >> shelf Quad amplifier for the LS5/8, it was customized to suit the
        >> particular needs of the BBC
        >> and the LS5/8. In these days now with solid state Watts being so cheap I
        >> think the reduction
        >> of efficiency is a fair trade when it permits the designer other
        >> freedoms.
        >>
        >> Ted
        >>
        >>
        >> On 5 May 2009 at 20:03, laurie483000 wrote:
        >>
        >> > Of course the LS5/8 has been superceeded at the BBC by the Harbeth M40.
        >> > Can this speaker play as loud in the upper bass/midrange and is it as
        >> > efficient?
        >> >
        >> >
        >> > Laurie
        >> >
        >> >
        >> > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Ted Rook" <rooknrol@...> wrote:
        >> > >
        >> > > Thanks Laurie I was hoping someone with knowledge of horns would add
        >> > > to my comment.
        >> > >
        >> > > Re-reading the BBC report I am struck by the high SPL the prototype
        >> > > LS5/8 produced, given
        >> > > as 114dB(A) peak in third octave bands between 100Hz and 1kHz, this
        >> > > was a LOUD
        >> > > speaker, and highly efficient, the standard amplifier, which included
        >> > > some EQ, was only
        >> > > 100W.
        >> > >
        >> > > My limited knowledge of the manufacturing situation is that the 12
        >> > > inch unit was developed by
        >> > > Rogers, wouldn't this have made it exclusive to them?
        >> > >
        >> > > On 5 May 2009 at 6:59, Will_H wrote:
        >> > >
        >> > > > Thanks for the further clarification guys.
        >> > > >
        >> > > > ----- Original Message -----
        >> > > > From: "robert jorgensen" <robert.jorgensen@...>
        >> > > > To: <regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com>
        >> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 6:11 AM
        >> > > > Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] Re: Emerald Physics CS3
        >> > > >
        >> > > >
        >> > > > Laurie's explanation concurs with what I was told by the late
        >> > > > Richard
        >> > > > Ross at Rogers/Swisstone when he demonstrated the LS5/8 to me some
        >> > > > 30
        >> > > > years ago in the Mitcham factory. Swisstone were building the
        >> > > > LS5/8
        >> > > > for the BBC as far as I know. I don't know if any other suppliers
        >> > > > were licensed.
        >> > > >
        >> > > > I am sure that they were looking for a closer match in dispersion
        >> > > > between the rather large bass/mid driver and the treble driver and
        >> > > > for
        >> > > > this reason a vertical slot was constructed on front of the bass
        >> > > > unit
        >> > > > in order to move upwards the frequency at which the unit would
        >> > > > start
        >> > > > beaming too much.
        >> > > >
        >> > > > Greetings from Brussels
        >> > > >
        >> > > > Robert
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >
        >> > ------------------------------------
        >> >
        >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> ------------------------------------
        >>
        >> Yahoo! Groups Links
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> ------------------------------------
        >>
        >> Yahoo! Groups Links
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >


        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        Version: 8.5.325 / Virus Database: 270.12.21/2101 - Release Date: 05/06/09
        17:58:00
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.