I don't think so, where do you sign up for that one? I did set up an account through Spark though. Their "regular" online account does not recognise Phantom and Dialog serial numbers... Yesterday's Firmware 1.1.1.0 update has solved the issue with playing local files though (well, at least for now...). I hope that this message will pass the spam filter, I have been trying to send it since yesterday...matt49 said:
-
Is OLED burn-in a problem? We want your input on one of TV’s hottest topics!
matt49 said:
If I am reading the serial number correctly, mine should be #376 (#100 and #128 for the Phantoms).
I've got both systems in the living room this evening. Both are being fed some loud Janacek by the trusty modded Sonos Connect. The rest is:
1. DSPeaker Anti-Mode (in pre-amp mode) > Sanders Magtech > Martin Logan Montis
2. Devialet 200 (SAM) > Vivid V1.5
I'm switching between the two using the mute buttons on the respective remotes, which allows a very direct comparison.
The Dev-Vivid system sounds pretty good. The Vivids can certainly fill the room. The mid-bass is pleasingly rich, no doubt aided by SAM. Whether they get anywhere near Devialet's claimed 19.8Hz I doubt very much. Still, it's a really impressive sound: full of life, well balanced, punchy, nicely transparent. The Vivids do the 'invisible speaker' thing pretty well. They're quite different from the Sonus fabers I owned until recently: clearer, cleaner, punchier, perhaps not as gorgeously lyrical though.
Moving to the MLs is a bit depressing. Suddenly it's as if a whole load of distortion in the mid- and upper range has been wiped away. The musicians have walked out from behind a veil (dread word!). The seats of the orchestra have been rearranged so that instead of forming a nice clubby little ensemble, they're now spread across a huge canvass. The top end in particular is a revelation: so clear and immediate. It's a sound to die for.
The Montis, being bigger speakers, have a built-in advantage in this large room. The scale is great. But the game-changer is the lack of distortion. It's not that the Vivids sound mucky; they're actually very clear. It's just that with the Montis there's a feeling that nothing is being compromised at all. The music really is in the room (sorry for the cliche pile-up!).
The only downside is that there's the occasional click or pop through the Montis. I don't get this when the DSPeaker is replaced by the M-DAC or when the DSPeaker is in analog mode fed by the M-DAC. So by elimination, I assume the optical cable between the Connect and the DSPeaker must be faulty.
For those who are interested, the cost ratio of the two systems (RRP, not what I actually paid) is: 1.0 : 1.2 (Devialet/Vivid : DSPeaker/Magtech/Montis). In other words, pretty close.
So the conclusion seems simple. Although the Vivids are exceptionally fine speakers, electrostatics are king! (OK, I know it's a bit more complicated than that ...)
1. DSPeaker Anti-Mode (in pre-amp mode) > Sanders Magtech > Martin Logan Montis
2. Devialet 200 (SAM) > Vivid V1.5
I'm switching between the two using the mute buttons on the respective remotes, which allows a very direct comparison.
The Dev-Vivid system sounds pretty good. The Vivids can certainly fill the room. The mid-bass is pleasingly rich, no doubt aided by SAM. Whether they get anywhere near Devialet's claimed 19.8Hz I doubt very much. Still, it's a really impressive sound: full of life, well balanced, punchy, nicely transparent. The Vivids do the 'invisible speaker' thing pretty well. They're quite different from the Sonus fabers I owned until recently: clearer, cleaner, punchier, perhaps not as gorgeously lyrical though.
Moving to the MLs is a bit depressing. Suddenly it's as if a whole load of distortion in the mid- and upper range has been wiped away. The musicians have walked out from behind a veil (dread word!). The seats of the orchestra have been rearranged so that instead of forming a nice clubby little ensemble, they're now spread across a huge canvass. The top end in particular is a revelation: so clear and immediate. It's a sound to die for.
The Montis, being bigger speakers, have a built-in advantage in this large room. The scale is great. But the game-changer is the lack of distortion. It's not that the Vivids sound mucky; they're actually very clear. It's just that with the Montis there's a feeling that nothing is being compromised at all. The music really is in the room (sorry for the cliche pile-up!).
The only downside is that there's the occasional click or pop through the Montis. I don't get this when the DSPeaker is replaced by the M-DAC or when the DSPeaker is in analog mode fed by the M-DAC. So by elimination, I assume the optical cable between the Connect and the DSPeaker must be faulty.
For those who are interested, the cost ratio of the two systems (RRP, not what I actually paid) is: 1.0 : 1.2 (Devialet/Vivid : DSPeaker/Magtech/Montis). In other words, pretty close.
So the conclusion seems simple. Although the Vivids are exceptionally fine speakers, electrostatics are king! (OK, I know it's a bit more complicated than that ...)
I had another listen to the Phantoms yesterday.
Mrs49 wanted to buy some bed linen at Harrods, and I duly offered to go along and give moral support. Just 20 mins or so of deliberation and appropriate beard stroking was enough to gain me a full complement of brownie points. (BTW I doubt anyone could tell the difference between 1000 thread-per-inch cotton and 400 thread/inch, but that's a debate for a different thread ... BOOM BOOM!)
I'm seriously tempted to flog the second-hand holiday cottage system and replace it with a pair of Phantoms. Is it possible to buy a (new) system that comes anywhere near the performance of the Phantoms for the price?
Mrs49 wanted to buy some bed linen at Harrods, and I duly offered to go along and give moral support. Just 20 mins or so of deliberation and appropriate beard stroking was enough to gain me a full complement of brownie points. (BTW I doubt anyone could tell the difference between 1000 thread-per-inch cotton and 400 thread/inch, but that's a debate for a different thread ... BOOM BOOM!)
I'm seriously tempted to flog the second-hand holiday cottage system and replace it with a pair of Phantoms. Is it possible to buy a (new) system that comes anywhere near the performance of the Phantoms for the price?
Well they certaily look different, what are the Vivids made from? Another nice review, and you did'nt make it down to Gloucsestershire this weekend then?
iQ Speakers said:
They are made from Alien DNA, which landed on earth due to a series of Asteroid strikes. *dirol*
iQ Speakers said:
CFRP according to Vivid Audio's website.
Still according to their website, the Giyas are made of a balsa frame covered in GFRP.
iQ Speakers said:
Actually got here yesterday evening. Sorry I didn't reply to your e-mail. I think Monday afternoon will be difficult for me, so maybe in a week or two or four?
Re. the Vivids: see EvPa's answer above. They're beautifully made speakers. A true monocoque design. The drivers get inserted in through the front 'baffle' and secured with hefty plastic screws through holes in the rear.
.
Beauty is the eye of the beholder, of course, but to my eyes the Vivids are very attractive speakers indeed, especially in that colour. The MLs I think not unattractive too. Mrs 7, however, when I showed her the photo out of interest, was entirely unimpressed - the MLs she rated on the negative side of neutral; the Vivids? 'Ugly!' 'What about these?' I asked, quickly dialling up a photo of some Sunos Faber Olympica IIIs. 'Nice!' Well, fair enough.
i was genuinely surprised Matt, though, to read your comparative review - to find you found the Dev/ Vivids fell so far short. Knowing your taste from your multifarious listening notes, I would have thought that for the money there could be no better amp out there for you, and no better (conventional) speakers. That may indeed be the case. Which just goes to show what some well-engineered electrostatics can offer. Not without their challenges, as you yourself have found, but clearly worth the effort. It shows too how important the speakers are within any system.
As always, interesting reading. I look forward to the next journey in hifi, when your love of that ML sound gets the better of you, and System 2 finds its way onto ebay to make way for some more electrostatics.
i was genuinely surprised Matt, though, to read your comparative review - to find you found the Dev/ Vivids fell so far short. Knowing your taste from your multifarious listening notes, I would have thought that for the money there could be no better amp out there for you, and no better (conventional) speakers. That may indeed be the case. Which just goes to show what some well-engineered electrostatics can offer. Not without their challenges, as you yourself have found, but clearly worth the effort. It shows too how important the speakers are within any system.
As always, interesting reading. I look forward to the next journey in hifi, when your love of that ML sound gets the better of you, and System 2 finds its way onto ebay to make way for some more electrostatics.
Cheers, James, always nice to hear your thoughtful words.
I don't blame Mrs 7 one bit for preferring the beautiful Sonus fabers. They would look amazing in a stylish room with lots of elegant polished wood in it. Our house is rather plain. It's basically an urban version of Arts and Crafts with our modern, muted decor (no bright colours!) imposed on it. I think the Vivids look pretty good. The MLs also look very striking. I'll post some photos in the My System section once the rest of the new furniture has arrived.
The thing about the Vivid vs ML comparison is that once electrostatics have got their teeth in to you, nothing else will do. Nothing else has that same feeling of sheer immediacy and nothing else, barring the biggest and terribly dominating floorstanders, can present the same 2D image. And 3D? Forget it!
I've been doing some thinking over the weekend and have decided to pursue my plan of getting my study acoustically treated. Some 'clouds' on the ceiling and some panels behind the listening chair and at first reflection points. I think this would benefit both the Vivids and the MLs. At the moment both speakers make the room sound too small.
I don't blame Mrs 7 one bit for preferring the beautiful Sonus fabers. They would look amazing in a stylish room with lots of elegant polished wood in it. Our house is rather plain. It's basically an urban version of Arts and Crafts with our modern, muted decor (no bright colours!) imposed on it. I think the Vivids look pretty good. The MLs also look very striking. I'll post some photos in the My System section once the rest of the new furniture has arrived.
The thing about the Vivid vs ML comparison is that once electrostatics have got their teeth in to you, nothing else will do. Nothing else has that same feeling of sheer immediacy and nothing else, barring the biggest and terribly dominating floorstanders, can present the same 2D image. And 3D? Forget it!
I've been doing some thinking over the weekend and have decided to pursue my plan of getting my study acoustically treated. Some 'clouds' on the ceiling and some panels behind the listening chair and at first reflection points. I think this would benefit both the Vivids and the MLs. At the moment both speakers make the room sound too small.
Yesterday I took delivery of a pair of Silver Phantoms. They’re destined for our holiday cottage to replace the Sugden/PMC system that just doesn’t have enough grunt for the room (about 5m x 10m). The existing system was all bought second hand, and is classic kit, so it should sell on OK.
Part of what attracted me to the Phantoms was their ability to fill a big room. Inside those dinky little curved enclosures there’s 3000W of grunt. (Unbelievable!) Two opposed 8” drivers deliver the bass (more on that later), and on the front of each unit are concentrically mounted mid-range and HF drivers. The former is plastic (and this is my one reservation about the product); the tweeters are beryllium.
Obviously there’s been a lot of chat on the web about these speakers. Devialet makes an all-in-one ‘kitchen’ system! Shock horror! Well, the typical story is that a hard-nosed old hi-fi guy like me turns his hard nose up at a product like this, until he hears it, and then …
I heard them twice before committing, though I don’t mind admitting I was swayed by some of the talk over on PFM (and here, thanks to EvPa). When really discerning people who own top-notch systems start going gooey over a product that costs £3.8K for the whole system (ATC, eat your heart out!), you know it’s worth listening to.
So what do they sound like? I’d rate them as follows:
* proper point-source imaging: very good
* mid-range: pretty good, but their weakest suit IMO
* dynamics: stunning
* bass depth and tunefulness: utterly remarkable
Now if I could only take one system to a desert island (a desert island with mains leccy, of course), I’d take my Martin Logans. They do classical music better than anything I’ve heard. However, the Phantoms do something I’ve never heard a speaker do before. They punch like Ali. They make rock music sound terrifyingly real. I’ve heard a few other active systems (ATCs, AVIs, Adams … that’s just the As), but they come nowhere near the Phantoms for sheer slam. The Phantoms can hit you in the solar plexus so hard you struggle to get your breath back.
And they also do all forms of music very well. Orchestras are excellent: suddenly hearing the double bass desk getting to work is quite unnerving. Pipe organs are predictably dramatic. Brass has great impact. The imaging is excellent (though without the height of ESLs). There’s a great top-to-bottom togetherness (a hallmark of the best active speakers), so piano sounds great, as does a string quartet. Despite my slight reservations about the plastic ring mid-range driver, vocals are very good, especially male vocals.
For their price, they’re really very good. If you value sheer presence and attack, especially in the lower register, they’re miles ahead of the field at this price. The bass isn't only loud, it's remarkably tuneful. I think the bass redefines what a speaker of this size and cost can do. They're also a technological marvel and a sign of things to come.
*crazy*
Part of what attracted me to the Phantoms was their ability to fill a big room. Inside those dinky little curved enclosures there’s 3000W of grunt. (Unbelievable!) Two opposed 8” drivers deliver the bass (more on that later), and on the front of each unit are concentrically mounted mid-range and HF drivers. The former is plastic (and this is my one reservation about the product); the tweeters are beryllium.
Obviously there’s been a lot of chat on the web about these speakers. Devialet makes an all-in-one ‘kitchen’ system! Shock horror! Well, the typical story is that a hard-nosed old hi-fi guy like me turns his hard nose up at a product like this, until he hears it, and then …
I heard them twice before committing, though I don’t mind admitting I was swayed by some of the talk over on PFM (and here, thanks to EvPa). When really discerning people who own top-notch systems start going gooey over a product that costs £3.8K for the whole system (ATC, eat your heart out!), you know it’s worth listening to.
So what do they sound like? I’d rate them as follows:
* proper point-source imaging: very good
* mid-range: pretty good, but their weakest suit IMO
* dynamics: stunning
* bass depth and tunefulness: utterly remarkable
Now if I could only take one system to a desert island (a desert island with mains leccy, of course), I’d take my Martin Logans. They do classical music better than anything I’ve heard. However, the Phantoms do something I’ve never heard a speaker do before. They punch like Ali. They make rock music sound terrifyingly real. I’ve heard a few other active systems (ATCs, AVIs, Adams … that’s just the As), but they come nowhere near the Phantoms for sheer slam. The Phantoms can hit you in the solar plexus so hard you struggle to get your breath back.
And they also do all forms of music very well. Orchestras are excellent: suddenly hearing the double bass desk getting to work is quite unnerving. Pipe organs are predictably dramatic. Brass has great impact. The imaging is excellent (though without the height of ESLs). There’s a great top-to-bottom togetherness (a hallmark of the best active speakers), so piano sounds great, as does a string quartet. Despite my slight reservations about the plastic ring mid-range driver, vocals are very good, especially male vocals.
For their price, they’re really very good. If you value sheer presence and attack, especially in the lower register, they’re miles ahead of the field at this price. The bass isn't only loud, it's remarkably tuneful. I think the bass redefines what a speaker of this size and cost can do. They're also a technological marvel and a sign of things to come.
*crazy*
matt49 said:
I was under the impression that the mid-range was painted aluminium and have never read anything about the material used for the tweeter...
Here is a picture where you can see what looks like an unpainted mid-range driver:
By the way, I am a "lurker" on PFM, for some reason I never made an account...
Here are my new stands, made by a friend of mine; they were actually finished on last Sunday but I had some issues uploading the photos...
They are make of solid teak and are 80cm high:
This is the handmade (in the strictest sense of the term and I guess that it shows) anchor point, securing the Phantom's chassis to the stand:
(very useful when you have a few Felis sylvestris catus specimens roaming around)
And the finished product:
They are make of solid teak and are 80cm high:
This is the handmade (in the strictest sense of the term and I guess that it shows) anchor point, securing the Phantom's chassis to the stand:
(very useful when you have a few Felis sylvestris catus specimens roaming around)
And the finished product:
EvPa said:
Very classy. I think the contrast of the traditional fluted teak column and the space-age Phantom works very nicely.
Do you mind me asking about the height? The Branch stand is 600mm (at least that's what the Devialet bloke at Harrods told me), which I assume is because the Phantoms fire slightly upwards. Did you experiment with different heights?
matt49 said:
800mm (hence the 80cm thing in my post *biggrin*), their previous stands, my ARTist 6s, were 850mm high.
Depending on where you sit, I think that anything between 600mm and 900mm should be fine.
To be honest I am WAY off-axis most of the time when working with my laptop on the dining room's table (the dining rooms is pretty much an extension of the living room, with a slight separation and a lower floor) and they still sound wonderful.
DocG said:
I was told the Branch will be ready in June. I think it looks nice, though when I take the Phantoms up to our holiday cottage next weekend, I might knock something up out of our huge stockpile of timber. *good*
SteveR750 said:
That is a plan, Steve. I hope you have some tasty hats.
I'm really interested to hear what other people think of these beasts. The figures Devialet give are mind-blowing: 16Hz to 25kHz @ ± 2dB, and 20Hz to 20kHz @ ± 0,5dB. On the basis of listening to them over the last few days, I think those figures sound right. *bomb*
matt49 said:
I think the concept of opposing firing bass drivers must have a huge benefit if executed well, doesn't really matter how rigid the stand is. I'd be interested ti see how the room sensitivity is, I'd assume that close to a wall isn't going to work, but....
SteveR750 said:
That's a very good point: the balance of opposed forces means woofer motion transmitted to the speaker is cancelled out.
SteveR750 said:
Steve, this is what Genelec recommend in terms of placement of their active monitors (OK, they're not Phantoms, but the rule will still hold good): The best position WRT the rear wall is either very close or a at least couple of meters out, and the worst position is between 1m and 2.2m.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram