ADM9's
Max has a very enthusiastic and joyfull way of describing new aquisitions. I mean this in a positive way. I think he (sometimes) also gets taken in a little bit by a certain person over on AVI forum and perhaps over-enthusiastically joins the bandwagon but then, most people do. AVI's owners can be very persuasive. - Unfortunately, some of what has been said over there and about the ADM's, is not publicly backed up by measurements available which does fly right in the face of what the company is preaching.
Equally however its (AVI) products are often slandered for no other reason than a reaction to AVI's promotional content and outspoken nature of its co-founder/owner. I find that wrong too but it is to a certain extend self-inflicted.
What I think is clear is that the ADM's, now in their 3rd generation (I think) are good value. Not perfect probably, the continuous development and upgrades pay testament to that but probably un-attainable with separates of equal value. That is if you like the sound and (imo) dont mind adding the subwoofer. I can only comment on the MKI version but would assume that in the development process, the speakers haven't gotten suddenly worse. - It is however not the only active choice and something like Dynaudio's 110A (or BM5A in a less fancy cabinet) will give you a different flavour although with some other trade-offs. - As an 'end or exit product', to quote MF's Michaelson, the ADM's seem a good, integrated option though.
regards
Hi Max, hope you are well
As you know, Darren brought his ADM's over a couple of times as well as me hearing them both at Ashley's and Darren's. They are (as Igg and others will confirm), simply phenomenal with the (personal) proviso that you use an equally fast sub with them.
You sounded pretty enthused then, were you persuaded by someone? Or could it be that they are simply phenomenal, as Igg and the others say?
Hoopsontoast said,
"What have I learned from this thread, nothing. Its still the same, some people like them, and will blindly defend a particular brand".
The thing is though that ADM lovers are not 'blindly' defending anything. I suspect that the vast majority of ADM owners and lovers came to them from years of other gear and a multitude of variations, friends systems, dealer demos, etc. etc.
The 9s have only been around for 5 years, so their owners have been exposed to and owned other gear. They are not blind virgins led to the slaughter by hype from a mad scientist.
I could be unkind at this point, but in the round this conversation has been very civilised and so I won't. I'm sure we all know that you can't please all of the people all of the time but AVI have produced a product that sighted, experienced listeners, in their thousands, do love all of the time.
I, for one, am glad of that product and their disciples because I have re-engaged with my love of music that other systems had almost extinguished.
Its more the hype that people seem to spout, and people defending the brand when someone disagrees with them. I will defend my opinion, but i would be the first to agree that the kind of stuff I like and buy is not for everyone.
no. i mean overblown bass. the room mode i have only effects a particular frequency, the dyns were overly bassy at the dealers too. it's just i was impressed by that in those days.
I had a chance to compare Focus 110 to Golden Ear's Tritton 2 speakers. those have active dual bass drivers and passive radiator, +1kW class D power. the only difference I could notice was that Trittons went easily lower (no surprise here) and were faster. not by a big margin but noticeably nevertheless. anyway, bass colour was more or less the same. it's a shame I didn't make a comparison with test tones, only known music. so either both speakers are overblown in bass or the right bass in no bass at all. at least, it seems, to some.
No, the right bass is bass that is actually there.
well put. but which one would be more like "bass that's there"?
this?
source: http://www.stereophile.com/content/goldenear-technology-triton-two-louds...
or this?
source: http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=1042&p=3
*note to graphs
graph 1 red trace. evident bump +3 dB in 50-70 Hz region. this is NOT overblown bass. as you know most of the anechoic/ quasi anechoic measurements are taken at 1m. unless the speakers are designed to work as desktop speakers this measurement is irrelevant. almost every speaker will measure with bass bump in nearfield. this is due to the fact that woofers dissipate differently at nearfield and mid/farfield distances. most people who buy hi-fi speakers want them to listen at mid-to-farfield distance, so this bump is not a fault or overhyped bass response to allure headbangers. anyway, you get solid performance down to 30 Hz. not bad at all. these speakers can easily be called full range.
on the other hand; graph 2. flat down to 90 Hz and then steep slope down. -3dB point at 60Hz, -6dB point at 40 Hz. not only is it evident that those speakers have severly crippled low end performance but also indicates overdamped bass performance in mid-to-farfield distances. is this more "bass that's there"? it's really puzzling that so many users of AVI speakers claim they have accurate bass.
I can understand people claiming that AVIs have enough bass output though. if you follow graph 2 source link you'll get two graphs. the other is in-room response where it's evident that there's plenty of bass energy down to about 60 Hz. 60 Hz is low enough to make many people not asking for less (more? 
). however, its low-end output is mainly created by room reinforcement and resonances. and this is not bass that's there. if you had properly acoustically treated room this bass would disappear.
Hoops,
It is not 'hype' though. It is owners [or people wishing they were owners] describing what that ownership is like in comparison to their previous experience. The fact that these owners describe ADMs very similarly could perhaps tell others something. There is a very strong common thread of description, despite all the multitude of variants, there is a common voice. Sometimes 1+1 really does make 2, but I'm no mathmatition.
I hope I haven't made things worse.
Of course I have. I have auditioned stats and maggies. I liked some of the stats I heard and truly despised the Maggie MG12's I heard.
I wouldn't say I would recommend MG12 unreservedly. at least not in their stock version. but despised? how come?
They sounded unlike any other speakers I've heard and not in a good way. Frankly I had to wonder if they were out of phase or something, but the dealer has been selling Maggies for decades and lots of other persons seem to have been impressed enough with their maggie demo room to buy. The MG12s were on the end of a McIntosh Integrated and CDP. The music just sounded off. I didn't carry a selection of audiophile approved recordings, just some of my favourite albums including Michael Jackson, The Eagles & George Michael. I went along with a friend who was also shocked at how bad it all sounded. The dealer said that I had the wrong type of music for maggies and steered me to a Revel/Musical Fidelity setup instead. The MG12 audition is the only time I've ever had an audition of HiFi that I can say was truly terrible. Normally I just find the sound boring or too bright, etc...
don't know where to start. I've had mine MG 12s for about 3,5 months. never thought they sounded off. contrary. I think they are quite special. definitely not perfect. but the trade-offs they present are overshadowed by assets, at least for me. I particularly enjoy huge sound stage they produce, the best resolution I've heard (bass resolution is something completely from another planet compared to box speakers I've heard), very tight focusing, high frequency performance. I bought them blind based on what I read about them from users and what I heard from Stax electrostatic headphones (I don't think electrostats and magnetostats are far off). I've had a few hi-fi and non hi-fi enthusiasts at my place to have a listen and they all agreed that they are very good. one said they were the best speakers she heard, most lifelike. one was not so much impressed but I think he was missing impact my previous Dyns made. it wasn't about SQ.
I'm too not listening a lot to "audiophile approved" recordings but I don't think they sound off on those speakers. no sooner than yesterday I listened to Likke-Ly and Florence and the Machine. both albums terribly compressed. the worst aftermath of studio compression is unpleasant sound (doh!). it's due to creating a lot of square waves in the programme material. square waves introduce more high frequency output than it normally would. those ribbons are very fast and they don't ring so this excessive high freq output is not so much an annoyance as it's the case with domes. however, when you put on some really well recorded material they will show it easily. anyway, as I said I don't think they are perfect. but from what I heard so far I think there lies a big potential in planar ribbon speakers. I hope the issues that I have now with my MG12 would disappear after I put custom made xover network. right now they are a little bit subdued in mid and high bass (but that may be just as well the influence of my room) and highest freqs are tad too much prominent. and I hope I'll get even more delicacy in the midrange as soon I replace those cheap caps for something more-like-it (not there is not enough delicacy ATM.
unfortunately there is no choice of other planar speakers at this price point so you are either forced to buy MG12 or go DIY route (which may not be such a bad idea after all).
oldric, those frequency response plots tell you nothing about the quality of the bass. it could be horribly smeared and it wouldn't show. also, different methods of measurement would give very different results. maybe a graph showing distortion would be better indication of bass quality.
oldric, those frequency response plots tell you nothing about the quality of the bass. it could be horribly smeared and it wouldn't show. also, different methods of measurement would give very different results. maybe a graph showing distortion would be better indication of bass quality.
you're right. it would be great to have impulse response test at different Hz for bass and possibly square wave?. surprisingly it's horribly difficult to find and such test for speakers, something that's quite standard for any amp to measure... are speakers' manufacturers afraid we might see something we shouldn't see?
as for distortion measure. the smaller the woofer the worse distortion measures you'd expect for lower bass Hz. 6.5 cone is simply not meant to go below 100Hz. I know it often is pushed well below that threshold but what can I help about it? so I'd expect AVIs measure well to about 100Hz with then distortion levels rising rapidly.
Oldric,
Go back and read what you have written because it appears to me that you are not all that happy with your speakers. You have already changed things on something you were 'forced to buy' and you're hoping that other changes will make you happier.
This isn't criticism just me reading your piece. When I got my ADMs they were brilliant out of the box, there was nothing and is nothing I want to change.
I do concur with that feeling as there a lot of positive reviews and good feedback from owners. I don't have them and can't see myself splashing the cash to get them as I don't have the money or inclination to do that. With the sub in place from reviews that I have read they give a good HiFi transparent sound. Not everybody likes that, I know someone who likes the sound of Bose Acoustimass 15. Apparently the sound of other speakers go through them! Whatever that means. My wife likes B&O...
Some people probably don't like the assertion that £2k equipments sounds better than £5k stuff. If 'sound better' is defined as what I like the sound of it is a moot point anyway...
blabla I know people who like sony home cinema set, there is a person very close to avi who tells you that most budget yamaha av amps sound much better then 2k integrated amps. Lots of [EDITED BY MODS - please do not swear].
blabla I know people who like sony home cinema set, there is a person very close to avi who tells you that most budget yamaha av amps sound much better then 2k integrated amps. Lots of [EDITED BY MODS - please do not swear].
There isn't a great deal of difference between my Yamaha RXV667 driving Dali Ikon 6 , than the amp I used for 3 years, a Lyngdorf SDAI 2175.
The Lyngdorf was better , but not by much, and not 3x as much which is roughly the difference in price. I would also put the advantage it gave down to sheer power (200 WPC vs 90).
I would never go in that direction again. (I believe) you kid yourself into believing what "must" be true, it's big, it's heavy, it's expensive, it MUST be better!!
In fact, in many ways I get a better sound with the Yamaha, as I use it in "straight" mode and have the speakers set to "small" and have a subwoofer providing the low frequencies. Thus they stay cleaner at higher volumes.
There is a reason why Hi-fi in itself is on its last legs, because people are cottoning on to a lot of hot air blown by "high-end".
Maybe you should try some other speakers, I have owned the Yamaha 667 and the Naim XS did a much better job with all speakers I have tried also the Dali Mentor 5's.
Right now I have the Audiovector Si3 Super speakers on trial and the Naim is way better then the Yamaha. almost day and night.
Maybe you should try some other speakers, I have owned the Yamaha 667 and the Naim XS did a much better job with all speakers I have tried also the Dali Mentor 5's.
Right now I have the Audiovector Si3 Super speakers on trial and the Naim is way better then the Yamaha. almost day and night.
m'kay.
Maybe you should try some other speakers, I have owned the Yamaha 667 and the Naim XS did a much better job with all speakers I have tried also the Dali Mentor 5's.
Right now I have the Audiovector Si3 Super speakers on trial and the Naim is way better then the Yamaha. almost day and night.
m'kay.
wat do you mean by power, you really think the Yamaha has more power? Look at the power supply of a good amp and of the Yamaha. And 3 times better is never the case, if you think so, you don't understand how it works.
A car which is 3 times more expensive does not drive 3 times better too.
- Login to post comments
Though my guess is not based on what anybody has told me, but what my own logic tells me, which is that no matter how impressive the blades are (i'd love to hear them, i'm sure they sound fantastic), they're passive, and thus will have higher levels of distortion than the ADM's plus sub
But this logic assumes that all active crossovers are better than all passive crossovers, which whilst plausible, can't really be proved. It also assumes that any superiority of that active crossover over (one presumes) a state-of-the-art passive crossover in a Blade, should it exist, is audible.
So bearing in mind it's quite difficult - though I'd guess not impossible - to prove an assertion like that technically (unless you fancy setting up a test bench), the only option is to listen to the two. ABX of course
EDIT - it also suggests that an active crossover is the only thing that matters, and therefore any active speaker must be better than the Blades. This is patently not true, as you should know, being on pair number four(?).
Whether that's always going to be audible i don't know, what i do know is no passive speaker i've heard has had the clarity of any active speaker i've heard, even the e300 Alesis, which alludes to the advantages of an active crossover.
I don't think i suggested that an active crossover is the only thing that matters, as my long post shows, that's not what i found. And i'm pretty sure i didn't say or insinuate that any active speaker is better than the Blades, that'd be silly
Formerly known as Ooh, Boots, etc etc...
Laptop... HTC One X....ATV3....ADM9Ts...Two German Shorthaired Pointers...