I have a friend that owns a pair of B&W loudspeakers costing $15,000. Currently he is living in a house and having a house built. I've suggested that he should take advantage of making adjustments during construction that will have positive effects on his final listening experience. I'm not sure it is resonating with him. Of course he doesn't have 15+ years in recording, mastering and acoustics. I told spending a large sum of money on some impressive speakers doesn't guarantee any sound quality in a poorly designed. He might be better off with a pair of Radio Shack Minimus 7's and a subwoofer. In my opinion, people totally misunderstand how important the room acoustics play in the overall objective. I found your video very compelling. Thanks!
One of my best experiences in HiFi was purchasing speakers from Clayton. He's a gentleman and absolute pleasure to do business with. It was evident that he believes in the unparalleled value of his products and is not out to make the quick buck.
Agreed. I called him last week to discuss the M3 and X5, to see which would be a better fit and he took the time to answer all my questions and chat about my room, electronics and listening preferences. Can't wait to take delivery of my X5s
@@blessonjacob3809 Sure, but he does touch on most of it in this video. First a little background; my room is about twice as long as it is wide, and it opens up on the side in the back to another room then on to the kitchen/family room area. It also has a wide opening to a hallway on the same side. The regular listening position is a sofa that's about 8ft from the speakers and right behind the sofa is a large freestanding bookshelf that acts as a room divider. Behind this is my desk and office space, which is where I am most of time while listening. That or I'm wandering around the other rooms and the kitchen. Here are some of the deciding factors that made the X5 the choice over the M3 for me: The powered woofers and better efficiency: I have a couple low power tube amps I like to use, specifically a < 2wpc 45 SET. With the X series, my amps are only driving the mid range and tweeter. The powered woofer on the X5 also plays down lower than the M3, Clayton mentioned he's seen it go down to 20hz depending on the room, which will allow me to get rid of my subs and simplify my setup. The powered subs in the X series also make it a true 3 way design, vs the M which is more of a 2 way speaker. The tweeter: The AMT is more focused and will perform better at longer distances. I'm almost never sitting in the listening position, I'm either at my desk in the back of the room or in an adjacent room. Dynamics: The X series was designed to be more dynamic which will lend itself better to my preferred genres. I got three words for you. Punk. Rock. Metal. Finally aesthetics, and this is just my opinion, but I like the way the ultralam material on the X5 looks, I prefer it to the M series veneers. Note that the photos on his site don't do it any justice, it looks completely different, especially close up. I also prefer the metal supports on the X. All that being said, if I spent most of my time closer, in the listening position, and I was running a higher power amp most of the time, I'd give more consideration to the M3 paired with subs. Hope that helps.
@@blessonjacob3809 Sure man, glad to help. Clayton did another interview posted on the LTA channel where he discusses the differences a bit. ruclips.net/video/vYHjNc3kWAQ/видео.html
I called Spatial Ausio on some random day and Clayton spent over an hour with me on the phone. We talked about all parts of a system. Infact more about approach and philosophy and my equipment than he even did his speakers. And he was very complimentary towards my speakers and never tried to sell me. I wish the rest of the industry would approach their customers this way. If I ever decide to part with my speakers (which I still truly love) I would definitely consider SA before anything else. I really didn't want to move off my speakers but this design really interests me. And whats really apparent is how these speakers reflect Clayton Shaws musical reproduction philosophy so your not just buying another speaker similar to everything else on the market, your buying into something someone us trying to break thru with something different and revolutionary. Anyways that's how I felt after our conversation.
Man, I only intended to check out the first two or three minutes of this video, but I ended up watching the whole damn thing. Fascinating stuff!! All my OB questions and confusions answered. I have never listened to OB speakers, but I now know why I would absolutely love them. Thank you very much for this amazingly informative Q & A session.
My search for speaker contentment ended when I picked up my Spatial M4s. Have had them for two years and I haven't desired anything else. Clayton is great as well, always very kind and helpful.
Long ago I had me build an open baffle sub using 2 opposing 12" Audax chassis on the proposal of Sigfried Linkwitz to support my electrostatic LS. The sub was driven by an old Technics amp and separated by an active x-over at 12 dB, 120 Hz. They used to play fine. Only after a while the electrostatics wore out and I had to repair them. Becoming part of the DIY community was overwhelming. I got very friendly help cutting out the round holes.
Clayton is a class act individual who lets his research and products speak for them selves. When there is less BS, there is less to have to dance around. I watched the whole video and he was seated the whole time. :-) Can't wait to hear a set of Spatial speakers. Thanks for another good one Ron.
Open baffle speakers don't cure room issues but do offer some additional options to room treatments and positioning. The main advantage with open baffles I think is that they are better with transient sounds than sealed or even more so ported speakers as there is less stored energy involved to start and stop because there is no trapped air that has resonances with reactances that can smear the transients. This is also why horns and planar speakers have advantages over the common box speaker because they can react quicker to music transients. The best transient performing speakers today are planar magnetic open baffle designs.
U are definitely correct I have box speakers and my magnepan 2.7 have stole the show nothing better in my opinion and I have them in a large room I just pull them out 3 feet from the back wall when I want to use them the only issue with magnepan is u need huge power to drive them better happy listening!
Great that Spatial audio is doing a great job promoting and making open baffle speakers right now; we also need to recognize the recently descease Jorma Salmi of Gradient speakers in Finland who introduced open baffle in the early 90,s.His sub system for the Quads and his Gradient Revolution are classic models that were highly recognized 30 years ago.
Wish you guys success. I was so lucky to attend a Linkwitz open house demo a couple years before he passed away. Since I was already a woodworker, a pair of LX-531's was easy for me to make, but I never would have dropped that money on the raw materials and electronics had I not heard them first. So happy now...I had spent 2+ decades in frustration in never having enough money to afford a pair of B&W's I wanted (especially with them doubling the prices every 5-10 years). Now I don't care what B&W or the other big boys make, the dipoles truly have satisfied me for life.
Cool! Most Audiophiles snub their nose at Pro Audio! I used to be a soundman for a few bands,learned much about room reflections! The main reason that the Audiophile sound took off,was the introduction of AR 3a's,KLH's,and similar Sealed Box designs! The Early Large Horn Designs we're much closer to open baffle designs! I Hate to say this Ladies,but the Wife Factor has set back Audio for 40 yrs! Women don't like giant speakers in their homes,it degenerated with the popularity of the little Bose cubes,and now,guys are lucky to have a sound bar, and sub! I have Many Pro Drivers( JBL,EV,Atlas,etc...) That I use for new designs.I agree With your Concepts.
I don't know if 99 percent of us could actually place a speaker in its most optimum location. I think most of us would HAVE to place it along a wall with some clearance. it'd be really lavish to be able to have a dedicated room where the speakers are actually like somewhere in the middle of the room.
First, I just want to say thank you for reading my question, I was stoked, then sadden, then stoked again. Clayton needs to be in home-theater, as well as the two channel space, although I think I may have a temporary solution that you can run by him...Three M3 Sapphires and an acoustically transparent screen, plus whatever subs he produces. Until then. push him on the open baffle center channel, or even open baffle bookshelves. That said I can not wait for the review, and thank you to you and your family for hosting this brilliant individual.
Great discussion & I have much respect for Clayton. The room is the biggest & most unfun issue to deal with that most of us never get completely worked out, open baffle deffinatly makes the journey easier. You also make it easy to see why many choose to go the headphone route & completely eliminate the problem all together.
You provided so much information that this is like a seminar. I am learning so much amazing information that I had watched the video at least 4 times. And counting :))))
I have modified Dahlquist DQ10s, which are a combination of open baffles and closed boxes for the bass and the subwoofers. These speakers have the foundation of greatness . . . they just need to be updated with careful consideration and care.
Clayton is right that OB is old technology--60+ years--and it seems to cycle in popularity out on the fringe and in the DIY community, but never comes to much because it always loses when serious and practical engineering has to dominate (i.e., in pro). Otherwise, OB would have been the designs that most pros, semi-pros (bands/venues/home studios), and maybe even consumers wanted and were most manufactured, let alone being a "legitimate alternative," but they have significant time-alignment problems even short of self-cancellation issues at lower frequencies in the room, not just along the sides to create the dipole, and that is where the genius of the Dahlquist concept comes in--you're exactly right. OB needs users with an unchanging room of sufficient size and with acoustic expertise and pro measuring tools to set them as correctly as possible. Controlled directivity has never been enough to deal with that at lower frequencies. It was possible with Dahlquist to secure nearly all of the advantages of OB while boxing in the worst of the problems at a fraction of this price. Their "bass trap" was consistent and moved whenever and wherever the speakers did and without the free-air resonance behavior that wasn't mentioned, either.
Interesting, I am very familiar with side dispersion issues from my PA experience. This is particularly a problem with stage wedges that use horn mounted tweeters. We had a corner stage (yeah bad) but the issue was that the horns gave a narrow projection from the tweeters but the bass drivers were very wide. The performers were basically on axis so if their spectrum was balanced for them, the off axis spectrum was mostly just bass. The off axis bass bounced off the floor, ceiling and walls, around the corner and then out into the audience area where it polluted the house with excessive muddy out of phase bass. The venue (church) had zero acoustic treatment of course. The house speakers themselves had very clear, precise, balanced spectrum true sound reinforcement(exceptional for a church after installing half decent cables and applying EQ). This meant that anytime the stage monitors were run to sufficient level to be useful to the performers, they polluted the house sound badly. So my options were to either run the monitors too low to be useful, or EQ them to meld nicely with the house sound. The 2nd option meant they could be run at useful levels without polluting the house sound but for the performers, they sounded tinny and metalic. At the end of the day, the house is the customer for both the performers and the sound team. I wanted to deploy acoustic treatment around the stage &/or move it out of the corner but that got no traction. From this perspective I get the great significance of sound cancellation around the edges of open baffle speakers and the fact they produce dipole lobes. My question though is what do you do about the adverse effects of the inverted lobe reflecting off the front wall? That would be just as much energy as the in phase direct lobe that is the only one you want to hear. Surely this question is the real elephant in the room with open baffle speakers!
There's something about this business, call it audiophilia that's elusive, and very few times are there products that are overwhelmingly better than their peers at a specific price point. For example, when I look back at some of those things that made the market, I think it's because the audio market was just coming into its own. The AR 3's took the audio market and shook it up. Before that time, if you wanted deep bass, relatively speaking, you might have Bozaks or Klipsch corner horns. Early designers insisted that in order to build a decent sounding speaker you must start with nothing less than a 15 inch woofer. Forget about 8 or 10 inch. Henry Kloss went on to another bread and butter winner, the Advent speaker. Once again flying in the face of conventional wisdom. All that to build up to this point of admitting my own lack of experience (even though I've been involved since the 60's). I have yet to hear an open baffle cone or dome speaker which gave me a sensational sounding reproduction. I've been hugely impressed with large electrostatics from Martin Logan, or the Magnepan flat panel. Nonetheless, they needed augmented bass typically from a subwoofer in cabinet. Now the two of you come along and say, you can get fast deep bass, and tremendous clarity from an open baffle design? It sounds like heresy, but I just have to accept the fact I haven't heard the speakers you have. Maybe someday... Anyway, I find this video very interesting. Thanks for posting.
The dipole question could be deeper. Is it okay to add 50% “reverb” sound in the room when the correct amount of reverb is already present in the recording? 🤔 Then how does such a system behave towards "fire", that is, the system's ability to correctly position the virtual sources in the environment? 🤔
Snowpuppy approved! I enjoyed every minute of that. I am very proud to own one of Clayton's designs. By the way I have one of the early pairs of M3S and I have played them very loud a lot and sometimes louder than I can stand and have had no issues. If someone had issues then either their tweeters were defective, amp was clipping, or they will be deaf soon. That said nice to know the newer model has some more insurance for protection. The Sapphire series is furniture grade. They are beautiful. You will want to pull them out at least 3 ft from the front wall for great sound and because the back side of the speaker is also beautiful.
I've got the M3 Turbo S speakers. Tremendous wall of sound. I have them backed up by a pair of REL S3 sub-woofers. My cousin came over to listen. I walked away and when I came back he was searching around my HiFi rack which is centered between the Spatials. He said he was looking for a center channel speaker. The sound stage is incredible. Wondering if the Sapphires are a worthy upgrade.
I know Clayton has been around a long time as I actually had both the Magneplaner Tympani IVa & the Dayton Wright XG8 at one time. I can tell you I was driving them with a pair of Mark Levinson No 20s, 100watt class A monos & they were stunning. .
@@infn I did sell them willingly but even considering all the things I've owned that is one that would still be in my collection if I had it to do over again.
I love my open baffles but while interaction with the room may be less in some ways, placement of open baffles are still more difficult IMO and also it needs quite a bit more distance behind it because you want the rear reflection to be delayed quite a bit. So I'd say open baffle are ideal for large rooms
i still think audio files can think to much .i used to think i was one but a old set of sansui is all i ever liked sp1500 units and sp2500 i am happy as a lark but that stuff and bad but i priced some usa made stuff its like race engine building so uh nope i am not that guy ill wast to much on turbos lol
What are Clayton's thoughts on Keele's CBT technology for constant directivity? I've been building open baffle since the mid 1990's and in 2009 I combined CBT with open baffle for the center speaker in my home theater. The combination of open baffle and CBT worked great and I will be using it again in my new theater. The new center will be a horizontal open baffle full CBT similar to the 2009 version and the left/right mains will be open baffle ground plain CBT's.
I have built semi open driver speakers. Half way in the box and half way out of the box. With a bass tube treated speaker hole, these speakers have the warm box sound combined with the cold open cone sound (tweakable). More spacial sound and more control and extended highs on single driver speakers. I also do it with coaxials.
Great interview... would be super interested in his speakers if they were more affordable... I say this cause as recently as 2016/17 maybe 18, Clayton had the M4 at $1600-2000+ and I think there was an M3 Turbo version that I think may have been as low as $2000...Today the upgraded version starts at $4950. Hey your good and successful, you should get paid... I hope this virus goes away sooner than later.... but, in the meantime, maybe with discretional spending plunging, hopefully Clayton will bring the highly reviewed M4 back, and open his product to a much bigger audience... not only to people who can spend $3500 - $27,000... Regardless, obviously his success is deserving!!! Footnote... emailed Clayton to see in fact if M4's had been discontinued... He was nice enough to email back(Props)... and said they had been discontinued last year...Lowest entry level now $3450(M5's)... going in the wrong direction for sure!!! by 100%+ in a short time... discretionary spending is in a free fall at the moment, and there's no sight of the bottom... maybe that will encourage Clayton to bring back his highly regarded, and affordable M4's... Hope so... onto another Utah speaker maker for my next pair... Tekton Electron...$2250... pushing the limit, but will order this week... Cant wait!!!
This is why I switched to good bookshelf speakers, much easier to control in a room. With the right amp, small speakers can have great dynamics and scale.
open baffle speeds the placement process - great point - and makes your room the speaker cabinet, makes sense you could find a sweet spot inside an AR5 or a large Advent - mind you, you'd be tiny & be breathing fibreglass
I’ve had open baffle twelve inch monitor gold tannoys on open baffles that I made in the seventies driven by a Macintosh 275 in the seventies, people thought I was odd then, and had a garrard 401 and Decca international arm and Decca blue cartridge but since then I have been looking for that sound ever since then! I had the speakers in the corners!
As a fella that has spent best part of 40 years putting large format sound systems in venues of all sizes. I share the same truth as this man. Direct to reflected ratios and system directivity is 90% of the pie chart of what matters! The largest flaw with the a speaker system large or small is directivity. Any loudspeaker you hear while in a lawn chair will have a good chance of being on a list of the best you will ever hear! Are you are sitting in your sheet rock den with your hifi, thinking you need some thousand dollar oxygen free RCA patch? Yes well its time for a new hobby because you don't get it and cant hear! All that said get some nice headphones perhaps 3 pairs problem solved!
Super good interview! I like the technical discussion that gives some insight into how OB works. And my next type of speakers will be OB for sure. (I have no problems with 3 feets from the front wall, actually yesterday I moved my speakers 1½ feet closer to the front wall so I am now little bit further away than 3 feets currently.. .. dedicated listening room.)
Curiously watched/listened to this one. Called to speak to Clayton and got Cloud instead. Still great info and ended by putting deposit onX5! Now in the, not too happy, waiting mode. Can't wait!
Truth be told, i'm one of those that just likes doing things different but i soon realized OB is not just a gimmick and actually sounds amazing. Still i couldn't help myself and strayed of the path once more so now when people enter my room i go like ; _Oh that? are just my one of a kind open baffle panels with decoupled drivers in a clamshell push pull configuration. Its no big deal lets move on_ But forreal, in the end it was not the need to be different but experimenting that has lead me to this setup and honestly, i tried alot of weird shenanigans but this config was to good not to keep using. They hang in the middle of my room and sound amazing from both sides, well if you forget the tweeters at least that is.
Very informative video! I'm considering pulling the trigger on a pair of Sapphire M5's next week, but I'm concerned about running them with my Cambridge CXA80 in a smallish room (11'x15'). Do you think this combo would overpower my room? I'll eventually upgrade to a lower wattage tube amp, but that won't be for another year or so.
All this makes total sense and love the concept. The issue is can and does anyone make a kit for this? I'd love to build a bookshelf sized Treble Mid Range and add a seald box sub. I don't have the room size at all for say a free standing 3 way Open Baffle. Or... is that even possible let alone practical. As l'm in a near field life and likely thats not going to change.
I know this isnt hifi, but i can recommend using decent quality free air car speakers such as a 6x9 size since they go below 50hz or 6.5 inch for midbass/fullrange 60hz and a subwoofer to build a simple super cheap open baffle system, ive been doing it now and i really enjoy the sound quality Since most car full range speakers are made to be used free air, they are perfect for open baffle. Ive even replaced the satelites on cheap logitech 2.1 systems with small 3/4/6 inch pioneer/jbl/kenwood fullrange freeair speakers in selfmade open baffle planks with very short wings. The sound quality difference is amazing, even for such cheap low class speakers it's a big change, so big even that i dont want to go back to normal ported or closed speaker boxes. As said in the video, the bass becomes less boomy, so if you like to watch movies with the open baffle car speakers i suggested i only recommend using the open baffle speakers for midbass midrange highs, and a boxed subwoofer for the lows to keep it cheap and simple
I enjoyed your video and rationale. Like you I replaced my coaxial tweeter ( Emerald Physics) with Radion Engineering 5212 with an Air Motion Tweeter Mundorf AMT 25D6.1-R which is a dipole like your tweeters
In a small space I like to hear both pressures it sounds better cause a sealed projects down the way. Ive done a pioneer dualcone like for your auto doors and just made a square open back, 4 sides and a baffle it was loud and full. Later I sealed the backs and even my buddy shook his head and said the open back sounded way better and that was 41 years ago
This was a very interesting session Ron. Looking forward to see even more industry designers on the channel, when you can get them. And my questions got picked, thanks for that! I enjoyed watching Clayton squirm just a little bit :p. He's a cool guy.
I have fallen in love with the Dahlquist DQ-10s from the 70s. But below the waste they are closed baffle woofers and I use closed baffle subwoofers with them .
Great video... Yes thats that , The elephant is the Room :) the biggest thing when choosing speakers.If baffels don't fit on your room, You can also try speakers that have DSP and room calibration , and of course you can do acoustic treatment to get even better.
I can never understand why some people go open baffle for the mid and treble and then marry it with a closed box bass unit. Great examples are most of the range from Martin Logan. They use this great electrostatic unit for the mid and treble and possibly the upper bass and then use a fairly small box for the bass. It is already hard enough to marry a very light panel with a relatively heavy cone without adding a box into the equation. I often wondered if the original esl from Quad would work well with an open baffle sub. My Dali Skyline 2000's are fully dipole and they also try somewhat to control vertical dispersion by using a very tall baffle, two mids and a very long ribbon tweeter. When driven and set up correctly, they sound awesome and I find it a shame that Dali stopped the range. I have two pairs of B&W DM70's and I am thinking of converting the second pair to open baffle bass, as the electrostatic unit is already a dipole down to 400 Hz.
I'm planning on building my own speakers as my next pair, and i was planning on the usual floorspeakers ported box. But all the information i've seen lately points towards open baffle designs are better, but how much are they affected by room?, and what type of specs on the elements are important . I *was* going to buy the GR X-static speakers but... the shippingcost would be more than the speakers.
Great looking speaker the M3 Sapphire :) hope the fabric comes off easily. The spatialaudio site really should get a better 3d modeler for the cgi, i use blender as a hobbyist modeling hifi gear and it really should realistic than that. excited for the upcoming review and this was a nice video and great topic.
I like single driver and coaxials and I build speakers with the driver mounted above the speaker hole (like one inch above). And the hole is bass vent treated (with a short wide tube). The driver is spaced from the hole by extension screws and thin plastic hose as the spacers. Easy and it beats any "normal" speaker hands down. They absolutely smoke my B&W 706s and they cost AU $2,400. And (as you said) there's no going back.
In my firs car i mounted some subwoofers behind the backseat no box ! Just a plywood sheet with holes for the woofers. Trunk itself was the box. It sounded good.
to me, having a port is like adding another woofer thats crossed over where your actual woofer cant really play to, and i think its application specific
That was great !... Thanks guy's... Theory spot on... I'm definitely a subscriber to open baffle as to considerably overcome room dynamic situations... 👍
Thanks for an interesting presentation. As a fan and amateur designer of dipoles, I share your enthusiasm. Owners of box speakers, can greatly improve their in-room performance in relation to the issues you brought up by listening in the near field. I have only listened up to the discussion of the bass range, and wanted to mention that one still gets destructive and constructive interference from the back and side walls with dipoles, although it is diminished. The reflections from a dipole or a box with typical placement in the low end is also somewhat mitigated by the fact that the notional point source of a typical moving coil speaker is at multiple distances to the walls, ceiling, etc. This is even more significant with large planar drivers. Thanks!
I am a big fan of nearfield listening but the main advantages are in the mid and high frequencies because they are directional and the ratio of direct to reflected sound that you hear is much reduced. The bass frequencies are omnidirectional and dont change much from proximity but rather are affected more by the standing waves peaks and null positions in the room.
I would love to know what the difference is between a woofer designed for open baffle and an ordinary woofer is. Is the coil different are the magnets stronger is the cage stronger or designed differently for someone that wants to mess about building a set where would they get woofers designed for open baffle. .
13:50 even though they were presented differently (one as a negative and the other a positive) it seems like you are saying that for both open baffle and box speakers, moving the speaker in the room is necessary to achieve the best sound. Is that not the case, or are open baffle forgiving and can be closer to a back wall? I'm not sure if there are similar aspects to something like a Magnepan quasi-ribbon style speaker, but it is my understanding that need *a lot* of room and are temperamental that way.
An open baffle needs more room behind the speaker, a box speaker needs more room to the sides of the speaker. So, when closer to the side wall, a box speaker needs more toe-in. When closer to the front wall the open baffle needs more toe-in.
@@JerryRutten thank you. Having my speaker wall in line with my entry door path presents a real challenge for good performances from speakers while not putting the speakers in the walk path. I'll be fairly close to the back wall. I would say no more than 1 ft or so.
The bass waveform discussion, my room creates a hole at what should be the main listening position from the main speakers and what would be a standard sub placement in line with the mains. To the extenat that leaning forward three feet, boom, lean back, nope. I remedied things by placing my sub in the MLP and finding the area in the back of the room that allowed for constant spl in the living room. Thought about bass traps, but moving the speaker forward, backward, left and right had minimal effect. There are some odd shapes in the room due to two hallways out and a stairwell. I am curious if the open baffle design would defeat the room.
icant believe the sound from the open baffle speakers. im just curious if they have thought about making speakers for theater. i would love to see this happen if its possible
I have dipole electrostatic speakers. I wouldnt say that dipole speakers are suited for small rooms. You need space behind the speaker to allow for deep bass. Best bass was when I had 2,5 to 3 meter behind. When putting closer to the wall I will loose bass. I can solve that with a subwoofer. So the performance highly depends on placement.
Hi guys , 73 years old now, not a big music room, Casta B Horn Speakers, Audio Space 3i integrated tube amp, no boom or muddy sound, bass is there if in music, dynamics are all I have, very smooth balance neutral natural sound, learned all about resistance, capacitance, room has very little standing wave, diy cables , interconnects speaker cables, power cords, multiple purpose room, have huge space, 17’ room in dinning room where speaker faces, many say I have great sound, no perfect, but very involving music, no baffle speakers no room behind them, Casta‘S 2.5’ from wall, toed in 45 degrees, get floor to ceiling sound.
I am super interested in Spatial Audio's open baffle speakers-obsessed even, but just as I was about to pull the trigger and purchase a pair last year, the models changed and the prices went up considerably. Then I decided to sell some assets so I could afford the M3 Sapphire (did I mentioned that I was obsessed?) and two weeks into that, the pandemic occurred and that fell through. Now with the economy wrecked, there's no way I'd ever be able to justify such a large purchase to my wife. I will own a pair of Spatial Audio speakers one day, but probably not anytime soon, sadly. Worst of all, I've got a killer stereo system, but crappy big box speakers that I am now likely to be stuck with for years. It's like driving a Ferrari with toy wheels. I got everything save for speakers "under the wire" before the checkbook, controlled by "she who must be obeyed," slammed shut.
This video popped up this morning. I have owned Accoustat 2+ 2s, Maggie 3.4s, Emerald Physics KCIIs and now EP 3.4s. I have also owned a fair amount of monkey coffins. For me, open baffle is much purer and faster. I think not having the XOs inside a box is a big help
Quality content guys probly the best open baffle explanation I've heard. I kept thinking headphones also solve all room issues 😉 Looking forward to the next video.
I wish I could hear a properly setup OB system. I've heard a few at audio shows and they sounded like crap. I realized that this design couldn't possibly sound so bad, but at the same time the 'showroom' demo in a hotel room is not an excuse. One characteristic that showed was a 'squawking' tonality coming from the bass unit with very little bass and no body. Hopefully I will one day get to hear a properly setup OB system.
I watched this whole video to see if you understood what causes the sound of open baffle speakers and didn't hear it. You didn't say a word about the direct and reflected sound in the room. It is the reflected that gives the depth and spaciousness and speaker disappearing that is so prized in audio circles. You need to address the positioning of the early reflected sound as you move speakers around. You can visualize this by making a drawing of the image model of the speakers in the room - draw the early reflections as additional virtual images on the other side of the walls, like mirror images of the speakers. Simultaneous benefit of reflected sound is power response. Image Model Theory enables you to draw a picture of the sound in the room.
Hey record day I'm watching d video why open baffle rules so which of all d bookies u reviewed which is best and also what's better than elacs would Dali oberons compare as well
Hey Ron The First Video of yours I wached was the Yamaha A-S2100 Review. That got. meine into HiFi. Do you still think of That amp so Highly in todays market? There pretty good used deals for about 1k for theses. Really interested in your take on that. Cheers from Germany :)
@@Newrecordday2013 hey Ron, a few episodes ago you did a few teardown videos showing the insides of some speakers. I was wondering if you might do some measurements with the internal foam removed and then comparing it to the original measurements?
Very interesting. What about in wall speakers or even think of box bookshelf speaker that would be flush mounted into the wall. The whole wall becomes the baffle.
I have a friend that owns a pair of B&W loudspeakers costing $15,000. Currently he is living in a house and having a house built. I've suggested that he should take advantage of making adjustments during construction that will have positive effects on his final listening experience. I'm not sure it is resonating with him. Of course he doesn't have 15+ years in recording, mastering and acoustics. I told spending a large sum of money on some impressive speakers doesn't guarantee any sound quality in a poorly designed. He might be better off with a pair of Radio Shack Minimus 7's and a subwoofer. In my opinion, people totally misunderstand how important the room acoustics play in the overall objective. I found your video very compelling. Thanks!
One of my best experiences in HiFi was purchasing speakers from Clayton. He's a gentleman and absolute pleasure to do business with. It was evident that he believes in the unparalleled value of his products and is not out to make the quick buck.
Agreed. I called him last week to discuss the M3 and X5, to see which would be a better fit and he took the time to answer all my questions and chat about my room, electronics and listening preferences. Can't wait to take delivery of my X5s
Jon Evans would you be able to share a summary of the pros and cons of both models? I’m debating between these two models as well.
@@blessonjacob3809 Sure, but he does touch on most of it in this video.
First a little background; my room is about twice as long as it is wide, and it opens up on the side in the back to another room then on to the kitchen/family room area. It also has a wide opening to a hallway on the same side. The regular listening position is a sofa that's about 8ft from the speakers and right behind the sofa is a large freestanding bookshelf that acts as a room divider. Behind this is my desk and office space, which is where I am most of time while listening. That or I'm wandering around the other rooms and the kitchen.
Here are some of the deciding factors that made the X5 the choice over the M3 for me:
The powered woofers and better efficiency: I have a couple low power tube amps I like to use, specifically a < 2wpc 45 SET. With the X series, my amps are only driving the mid range and tweeter. The powered woofer on the X5 also plays down lower than the M3, Clayton mentioned he's seen it go down to 20hz depending on the room, which will allow me to get rid of my subs and simplify my setup. The powered subs in the X series also make it a true 3 way design, vs the M which is more of a 2 way speaker.
The tweeter: The AMT is more focused and will perform better at longer distances. I'm almost never sitting in the listening position, I'm either at my desk in the back of the room or in an adjacent room.
Dynamics: The X series was designed to be more dynamic which will lend itself better to my preferred genres. I got three words for you. Punk. Rock. Metal.
Finally aesthetics, and this is just my opinion, but I like the way the ultralam material on the X5 looks, I prefer it to the M series veneers. Note that the photos on his site don't do it any justice, it looks completely different, especially close up. I also prefer the metal supports on the X.
All that being said, if I spent most of my time closer, in the listening position, and I was running a higher power amp most of the time, I'd give more consideration to the M3 paired with subs.
Hope that helps.
Jon Evans really appreciate you taking out time to share!
@@blessonjacob3809 Sure man, glad to help. Clayton did another interview posted on the LTA channel where he discusses the differences a bit. ruclips.net/video/vYHjNc3kWAQ/видео.html
I called Spatial Ausio on some random day and Clayton spent over an hour with me on the phone. We talked about all parts of a system. Infact more about approach and philosophy and my equipment than he even did his speakers. And he was very complimentary towards my speakers and never tried to sell me. I wish the rest of the industry would approach their customers this way. If I ever decide to part with my speakers (which I still truly love) I would definitely consider SA before anything else. I really didn't want to move off my speakers but this design really interests me. And whats really apparent is how these speakers reflect Clayton Shaws musical reproduction philosophy so your not just buying another speaker similar to everything else on the market, your buying into something someone us trying to break thru with something different and revolutionary. Anyways that's how I felt after our conversation.
Man, I only intended to check out the first two or three minutes of this video, but I ended up watching the whole damn thing. Fascinating stuff!! All my OB questions and confusions answered. I have never listened to OB speakers, but I now know why I would absolutely love them. Thank you very much for this amazingly informative Q & A session.
My search for speaker contentment ended when I picked up my Spatial M4s. Have had them for two years and I haven't desired anything else. Clayton is great as well, always very kind and helpful.
Great interview with Clayton. I found this interview to be very interesting and informative, thanks so much, Ron!
My Linkwitz (Rest in peace you GOD you !!) Orions were the best speakers i have ever heard!!!!! we will miss you Sir!
Any idea how they sounded vs today’s open baffles? Perhaps one can still get linkwitz’s made (though not by him obviously)
Long ago I had me build an open baffle sub using 2 opposing 12" Audax chassis on the proposal of Sigfried Linkwitz to support my electrostatic LS. The sub was driven by an old Technics amp and separated by an active x-over at 12 dB, 120 Hz. They used to play fine. Only after a while the electrostatics wore out and I had to repair them. Becoming part of the DIY community was overwhelming. I got very friendly help cutting out the round holes.
Clayton is a class act individual who lets his research and products speak for them selves. When there is less BS, there is less to have to dance around. I watched the whole video and he was seated the whole time. :-) Can't wait to hear a set of Spatial speakers. Thanks for another good one Ron.
I agree with every word you just said.
Open baffle speakers don't cure room issues but do offer some additional options to room treatments and positioning. The main advantage with open baffles I think is that they are better with transient sounds than sealed or even more so ported speakers as there is less stored energy involved to start and stop because there is no trapped air that has resonances with reactances that can smear the transients. This is also why horns and planar speakers have advantages over the common box speaker because they can react quicker to music transients. The best transient performing speakers today are planar magnetic open baffle designs.
U are definitely correct I have box speakers and my magnepan 2.7 have stole the show nothing better in my opinion and I have them in a large room I just pull them out 3 feet from the back wall when I want to use them the only issue with magnepan is u need huge power to drive them better happy listening!
Great that Spatial audio is doing a great job promoting and making open baffle speakers right now; we also need to recognize the recently descease Jorma Salmi of Gradient speakers in Finland who introduced open baffle in the early 90,s.His sub system for the Quads and his Gradient Revolution are classic models that were highly recognized 30 years ago.
Wish you guys success. I was so lucky to attend a Linkwitz open house demo a couple years before he passed away. Since I was already a woodworker, a pair of LX-531's was easy for me to make, but I never would have dropped that money on the raw materials and electronics had I not heard them first. So happy now...I had spent 2+ decades in frustration in never having enough money to afford a pair of B&W's I wanted (especially with them doubling the prices every 5-10 years). Now I don't care what B&W or the other big boys make, the dipoles truly have satisfied me for life.
i also built the LX521. there’s no way i’m going back to boxed speakers.
Cool! Most Audiophiles snub their nose at Pro Audio! I used to be a soundman for a few bands,learned much about room reflections! The main reason that the Audiophile sound took off,was the introduction of AR 3a's,KLH's,and similar Sealed Box designs! The Early Large Horn Designs we're much closer to open baffle designs! I Hate to say this Ladies,but the Wife Factor has set back Audio for 40 yrs! Women don't like giant speakers in their homes,it degenerated with the popularity of the little Bose cubes,and now,guys are lucky to have a sound bar, and sub! I have Many Pro Drivers( JBL,EV,Atlas,etc...) That I use for new designs.I agree With your Concepts.
I don't know if 99 percent of us could actually place a speaker in its most optimum location. I think most of us would HAVE to place it along a wall with some clearance. it'd be really lavish to be able to have a dedicated room where the speakers are actually like somewhere in the middle of the room.
First, I just want to say thank you for reading my question, I was stoked, then sadden, then stoked again. Clayton needs to be in home-theater, as well as the two channel space, although I think I may have a temporary solution that you can run by him...Three M3 Sapphires and an acoustically transparent screen, plus whatever subs he produces. Until then. push him on the open baffle center channel, or even open baffle bookshelves. That said I can not wait for the review, and thank you to you and your family for hosting this brilliant individual.
A really good 2-channel system should have excellent center imaging. There's no real need for a center channel.
Never heard his speakers or even heard of the brand so it was fun to learn about a new company and its products
Great discussion & I have much respect for Clayton. The room is the biggest & most unfun issue to deal with that most of us never get completely worked out, open baffle deffinatly makes the journey easier. You also make it easy to see why many choose to go the headphone route & completely eliminate the problem all together.
Problem one is room. Problem two is room. Clayton knows his stuff. Thank you for the interview.
You provided so much information that this is like a seminar. I am learning so much amazing information that I had watched the video at least 4 times. And counting :))))
I've owned a pair of Spatial Audio X-2's for two years now for use in my NYC apartment. I can't say enough about their capabilities. Thanks Clayton.
I have modified Dahlquist DQ10s, which are a combination of open baffles and closed boxes for the bass and the subwoofers. These speakers have the foundation of greatness . . . they just need to be updated with careful consideration and care.
Carl Marchisotto (NOLA Speakers) did go on to improve on his old DQ10 type design.
Clayton is right that OB is old technology--60+ years--and it seems to cycle in popularity out on the fringe and in the DIY community, but never comes to much because it always loses when serious and practical engineering has to dominate (i.e., in pro). Otherwise, OB would have been the designs that most pros, semi-pros (bands/venues/home studios), and maybe even consumers wanted and were most manufactured, let alone being a "legitimate alternative," but they have significant time-alignment problems even short of self-cancellation issues at lower frequencies in the room, not just along the sides to create the dipole, and that is where the genius of the Dahlquist concept comes in--you're exactly right. OB needs users with an unchanging room of sufficient size and with acoustic expertise and pro measuring tools to set them as correctly as possible. Controlled directivity has never been enough to deal with that at lower frequencies. It was possible with Dahlquist to secure nearly all of the advantages of OB while boxing in the worst of the problems at a fraction of this price. Their "bass trap" was consistent and moved whenever and wherever the speakers did and without the free-air resonance behavior that wasn't mentioned, either.
Interesting, I am very familiar with side dispersion issues from my PA experience. This is particularly a problem with stage wedges that use horn mounted tweeters. We had a corner stage (yeah bad) but the issue was that the horns gave a narrow projection from the tweeters but the bass drivers were very wide. The performers were basically on axis so if their spectrum was balanced for them, the off axis spectrum was mostly just bass. The off axis bass bounced off the floor, ceiling and walls, around the corner and then out into the audience area where it polluted the house with excessive muddy out of phase bass. The venue (church) had zero acoustic treatment of course. The house speakers themselves had very clear, precise, balanced spectrum true sound reinforcement(exceptional for a church after installing half decent cables and applying EQ). This meant that anytime the stage monitors were run to sufficient level to be useful to the performers, they polluted the house sound badly. So my options were to either run the monitors too low to be useful, or EQ them to meld nicely with the house sound. The 2nd option meant they could be run at useful levels without polluting the house sound but for the performers, they sounded tinny and metalic.
At the end of the day, the house is the customer for both the performers and the sound team. I wanted to deploy acoustic treatment around the stage &/or move it out of the corner but that got no traction.
From this perspective I get the great significance of sound cancellation around the edges of open baffle speakers and the fact they produce dipole lobes. My question though is what do you do about the adverse effects of the inverted lobe reflecting off the front wall? That would be just as much energy as the in phase direct lobe that is the only one you want to hear. Surely this question is the real elephant in the room with open baffle speakers!
D
There's something about this business, call it audiophilia that's elusive, and very few times are there products that are overwhelmingly better than their peers at a specific price point.
For example, when I look back at some of those things that made the market, I think it's because the audio market was just coming into its own. The AR 3's took the audio market and shook it up. Before that time, if you wanted deep bass, relatively speaking, you might have Bozaks or Klipsch corner horns. Early designers insisted that in order to build a decent sounding speaker you must start with nothing less than a 15 inch woofer. Forget about 8 or 10 inch. Henry Kloss went on to another bread and butter winner, the Advent speaker. Once again flying in the face of conventional wisdom.
All that to build up to this point of admitting my own lack of experience (even though I've been involved since the 60's). I have yet to hear an open baffle cone or dome speaker which gave me a sensational sounding reproduction. I've been hugely impressed with large electrostatics from Martin Logan, or the Magnepan flat panel. Nonetheless, they needed augmented bass typically from a subwoofer in cabinet.
Now the two of you come along and say, you can get fast deep bass, and tremendous clarity from an open baffle design? It sounds like heresy, but I just have to accept the fact I haven't heard the speakers you have.
Maybe someday... Anyway, I find this video very interesting. Thanks for posting.
Thanks Ron!
You gave "the man" himself my question.
I don't blame you for skipping over my handle...
The dipole question could be deeper. Is it okay to add 50% “reverb” sound in the room when the correct amount of reverb is already present in the recording? 🤔 Then how does such a system behave towards "fire", that is, the system's ability to correctly position the virtual sources in the environment? 🤔
Eyes opened! Next pair of serious speakers will likely be open baffle, if not Spatial!
I can't believe I watched tha whole thing!
GREAT interview and dive into the Spatial speakers.
Thanks Ron and Clayton!
Snowpuppy approved! I enjoyed every minute of that. I am very proud to own one of Clayton's designs. By the way I have one of the early pairs of M3S and I have played them very loud a lot and sometimes louder than I can stand and have had no issues. If someone had issues then either their tweeters were defective, amp was clipping, or they will be deaf soon. That said nice to know the newer model has some more insurance for protection. The Sapphire series is furniture grade. They are beautiful. You will want to pull them out at least 3 ft from the front wall for great sound and because the back side of the speaker is also beautiful.
Ask Clayton when he’s going to put more pictures of the wood finishes available for the Sapphire on the website. Would be good to see the options
I've got the M3 Turbo S speakers. Tremendous wall of sound. I have them backed up by a pair of REL S3 sub-woofers. My cousin came over to listen. I walked away and when I came back he was searching around my HiFi rack which is centered between the Spatials. He said he was looking for a center channel speaker. The sound stage is incredible. Wondering if the Sapphires are a worthy upgrade.
Well I’m super familiar with the original M3 and these are on another level comparatively.
@@Newrecordday2013 Thanks Ron.
I know Clayton has been around a long time as I actually had both the Magneplaner Tympani IVa & the Dayton Wright XG8 at one time. I can tell you I was driving them with a pair of Mark Levinson No 20s, 100watt class A monos & they were stunning. .
Just out of curiousity, did you let go of them willingly? Or did they just live a long life until one day they didn't sound as good anymore?
@@infn I did sell them willingly but even considering all the things I've owned that is one that would still be in my collection if I had it to do over again.
I love my open baffles but while interaction with the room may be less in some ways, placement of open baffles are still more difficult IMO and also it needs quite a bit more distance behind it because you want the rear reflection to be delayed quite a bit. So I'd say open baffle are ideal for large rooms
i still think audio files can think to much .i used to think i was one but a old set of sansui is all i ever liked sp1500 units and sp2500 i am happy as a lark but that stuff and bad but i priced some usa made stuff its like race engine building so uh nope i am not that guy ill wast to much on turbos lol
What are Clayton's thoughts on Keele's CBT technology for constant directivity? I've been building open baffle since the mid 1990's and in 2009 I combined CBT with open baffle for the center speaker in my home theater. The combination of open baffle and CBT worked great and I will be using it again in my new theater. The new center will be a horizontal open baffle full CBT similar to the 2009 version and the left/right mains will be open baffle ground plain CBT's.
I have built semi open driver speakers. Half way in the box and half way out of the box. With a bass tube treated speaker hole, these speakers have the warm box sound combined with the cold open cone sound (tweakable). More spacial sound and more control and extended highs on single driver speakers. I also do it with coaxials.
I think this video is still very very helpful for people who are not into ob speakers
Great interview... would be super interested in his speakers if they were more affordable... I say this cause as recently as 2016/17 maybe 18, Clayton had the M4 at $1600-2000+ and I think there was an M3 Turbo version that I think may have been as low as $2000...Today the upgraded version starts at $4950. Hey your good and successful, you should get paid... I hope this virus goes away sooner than later.... but, in the meantime, maybe with discretional spending plunging, hopefully Clayton will bring the highly reviewed M4 back, and open his product to a much bigger audience... not only to people who can spend $3500 - $27,000... Regardless, obviously his success is deserving!!!
Footnote... emailed Clayton to see in fact if M4's had been discontinued... He was nice enough to email back(Props)... and said they had been discontinued last year...Lowest entry level now $3450(M5's)... going in the wrong direction for sure!!! by 100%+ in a short time... discretionary spending is in a free fall at the moment, and there's no sight of the bottom... maybe that will encourage Clayton to bring back his highly regarded, and affordable M4's... Hope so... onto another Utah speaker maker for my next pair... Tekton Electron...$2250... pushing the limit, but will order this week... Cant wait!!!
have you considered a DIY option?
Thats one beautiful and informative interview..I'll be keeping an eye out on those M5
Clayton Shaw IN THE HOUSE! Literally! 😄
This is why I switched to good bookshelf speakers, much easier to control in a room. With the right amp, small speakers can have great dynamics and scale.
impossible to get great bass with a small speaker IMO. its physics
@@Canadian_Eh_I 2 bookies + 1 sub in a small room is a great solution. Rel and Rythmik make some great products.
@@aceofspades6667 Yeah thats the direction Im going too. I have bookshelves plus dual subs
open baffle speeds the placement process - great point - and makes your room the speaker cabinet, makes sense you could find a sweet spot inside an AR5 or a large Advent - mind you, you'd be tiny & be breathing fibreglass
I’ve had open baffle twelve inch monitor gold tannoys on open baffles that I made in the seventies driven by a Macintosh 275 in the seventies, people thought I was odd then, and had a garrard 401 and Decca international arm and Decca blue cartridge but since then I have been looking for that sound ever since then! I had the speakers in the corners!
Ron, you are really upping your game with this one, WELL DONE!!! Looking forward to the review video. Bravo sir, bravo.
As a fella that has spent best part of 40 years putting large format sound systems in venues of all sizes. I share the same truth as this man. Direct to reflected ratios and system directivity is 90% of the pie chart of what matters! The largest flaw with the a speaker system large or small is directivity. Any loudspeaker you hear while in a lawn chair will have a good chance of being on a list of the best you will ever hear! Are you are sitting in your sheet rock den with your hifi, thinking you need some thousand dollar oxygen free RCA patch? Yes well its time for a new hobby because you don't get it and cant hear! All that said get some nice headphones perhaps 3 pairs problem solved!
Super good interview!
I like the technical discussion that gives some insight into how OB works.
And my next type of speakers will be OB for sure.
(I have no problems with 3 feets from the front wall, actually yesterday I moved my speakers 1½ feet closer to the front wall so I am now little bit further away than 3 feets currently.. .. dedicated listening room.)
Nice job guys, appreciate the info...look forward to the review.
Curiously watched/listened to this one. Called to speak to Clayton and got Cloud instead. Still great info and ended by putting deposit onX5! Now in the, not too happy, waiting mode. Can't wait!
Truth be told, i'm one of those that just likes doing things different but i soon realized OB is not just a gimmick and actually sounds amazing. Still i couldn't help myself and strayed of the path once more so now when people enter my room i go like ; _Oh that? are just my one of a kind open baffle panels with decoupled drivers in a clamshell push pull configuration. Its no big deal lets move on_
But forreal, in the end it was not the need to be different but experimenting that has lead me to this setup and honestly, i tried alot of weird shenanigans but this config was to good not to keep using. They hang in the middle of my room and sound amazing from both sides, well if you forget the tweeters at least that is.
Awesome Interview...So Insightful!!! Love the Sappele look!!! Thank You Ron!!! and Clayton!!!
Very informative video! I'm considering pulling the trigger on a pair of Sapphire M5's next week, but I'm concerned about running them with my Cambridge CXA80 in a smallish room (11'x15'). Do you think this combo would overpower my room? I'll eventually upgrade to a lower wattage tube amp, but that won't be for another year or so.
I think you would be just fine honestly!
@@Newrecordday2013 Thanks!
Clayton has come out with M4 and M6 that should also help with smaller rooms. I know this is a year old post but thought I'd put that out there.
All this makes total sense and love the concept. The issue is can and does anyone make a kit for this? I'd love to build a bookshelf sized Treble Mid Range and add a seald box sub. I don't have the room size at all for say a free standing 3 way Open Baffle. Or... is that even possible let alone practical. As l'm in a near field life and likely thats not going to change.
I know this isnt hifi, but i can recommend using decent quality free air car speakers such as a 6x9 size since they go below 50hz or 6.5 inch for midbass/fullrange 60hz and a subwoofer
to build a simple super cheap open baffle system, ive been doing it now and i really enjoy the sound quality
Since most car full range speakers are made to be used free air, they are perfect for open baffle.
Ive even replaced the satelites on cheap logitech 2.1 systems with small 3/4/6 inch pioneer/jbl/kenwood fullrange freeair speakers in selfmade open baffle planks with very short wings.
The sound quality difference is amazing, even for such cheap low class speakers it's a big change, so big even that i dont want to go back to normal ported or closed speaker boxes.
As said in the video, the bass becomes less boomy, so if you like to watch movies with the open baffle car speakers i suggested i only recommend using the open baffle speakers for midbass midrange highs, and a boxed subwoofer for the lows to keep it cheap and simple
I enjoyed your video and rationale. Like you I replaced my coaxial tweeter ( Emerald Physics) with Radion Engineering 5212 with an Air Motion Tweeter Mundorf AMT 25D6.1-R which is a dipole like your tweeters
What a cool dude, thank you both for teaching sir(s)
In a small space I like to hear both pressures it sounds better cause a sealed projects down the way. Ive done a pioneer dualcone like for your auto doors and just made a square open back, 4 sides and a baffle it was loud and full. Later I sealed the backs and even my buddy shook his head and said the open back sounded way better and that was 41 years ago
This was a very interesting session Ron. Looking forward to see even more industry designers on the channel, when you can get them. And my questions got picked, thanks for that! I enjoyed watching Clayton squirm just a little bit :p. He's a cool guy.
I agree, he really is a cool guy!
He certainly is a cool guy, he even called me to discuss a question I sent you that he talked about on your video.
Clayton Shaw-Legend!
Wow, so much valuable info! Love it. Thanks Ron and Clayton!
This was incredible! Thank you so much for not dumbing it down. Very informative and inspiring
I have fallen in love with the Dahlquist DQ-10s from the 70s. But below the waste they are closed baffle woofers and I use closed baffle subwoofers with them .
Great video... Yes thats that , The elephant is the Room :) the biggest thing when choosing speakers.If baffels don't fit on your room, You can also try speakers that have DSP and room calibration , and of course you can do acoustic treatment to get even better.
Clayton's voice sounds awesome.
I can never understand why some people go open baffle for the mid and treble and then marry it with a closed box bass unit.
Great examples are most of the range from Martin Logan.
They use this great electrostatic unit for the mid and treble and possibly the upper bass and then use a fairly small box for the bass. It is already hard enough to marry a very light panel with a relatively heavy cone without adding a box into the equation.
I often wondered if the original esl from Quad would work well with an open baffle sub.
My Dali Skyline 2000's are fully dipole and they also try somewhat to control vertical dispersion by using a very tall baffle, two mids and a very long ribbon tweeter.
When driven and set up correctly, they sound awesome and I find it a shame that Dali stopped the range.
I have two pairs of B&W DM70's and I am thinking of converting the second pair to open baffle bass, as the electrostatic unit is already a dipole down to 400 Hz.
I'm planning on building my own speakers as my next pair, and i was planning on the usual floorspeakers ported box.
But all the information i've seen lately points towards open baffle designs are better, but how much are they affected by room?,
and what type of specs on the elements are important .
I *was* going to buy the GR X-static speakers but... the shippingcost would be more than the speakers.
Please ckeck out SL designs. LX521 and LX mini. I've got both and they're amazing
Hi - why have the sensitivities of the speakers been reduced so much over time? The high sensitivity was part of what I totally made these interesting
When you do the review, please compare it to Magnepans. Thanks for all the great work!
Great looking speaker the M3 Sapphire :) hope the fabric comes off easily.
The spatialaudio site really should get a better 3d modeler for the cgi, i use blender as a hobbyist modeling hifi gear and it really should realistic than that.
excited for the upcoming review and this was a nice video and great topic.
Is your review of the M3 Sapphires using all the mentioned electronics and rock/pop music posted yet? I can't find it. Thanks in advance.
Once I heard an open baffle, most box speakers sounded like music coming out of a box.
I like single driver and coaxials and I build speakers with the driver mounted above the speaker hole (like one inch above). And the hole is bass vent treated (with a short wide tube). The driver is spaced from the hole by extension screws and thin plastic hose as the spacers. Easy and it beats any "normal" speaker hands down. They absolutely smoke my B&W 706s and they cost AU $2,400. And (as you said) there's no going back.
@@Justwantahover you mean the driver is mounted out from the hole right?
Interesting approach.@@Justwantahover
Also, it's one of the reasons I have always liked Planar Speakers(Apogee's Sound Labs,Acoustat's)
In my firs car i mounted some subwoofers behind the backseat no box ! Just a plywood sheet with holes for the woofers. Trunk itself was the box. It sounded good.
This is an instant classic, thx, y'all!!
Thank you guys so much for this explanation: massive coin-drop on my end! I'm building myself some open baffle speakers soon 🙂
to me, having a port is like adding another woofer thats crossed over where your actual woofer cant really play to, and i think its application specific
That was great !... Thanks guy's... Theory spot on... I'm definitely a subscriber to open baffle as to considerably overcome room dynamic situations... 👍
Thanks for an interesting presentation. As a fan and amateur designer of dipoles, I share your enthusiasm. Owners of box speakers, can greatly improve their in-room performance in relation to the issues you brought up by listening in the near field. I have only listened up to the discussion of the bass range, and wanted to mention that one still gets destructive and constructive interference from the back and side walls with dipoles, although it is diminished. The reflections from a dipole or a box with typical placement in the low end is also somewhat mitigated by the fact that the notional point source of a typical moving coil speaker is at multiple distances to the walls, ceiling, etc. This is even more significant with large planar drivers. Thanks!
I am a big fan of nearfield listening but the main advantages are in the mid and high frequencies because they are directional and the ratio of direct to reflected sound that you hear is much reduced. The bass frequencies are omnidirectional and dont change much from proximity but rather are affected more by the standing waves peaks and null positions in the room.
I would love to know what the difference is between a woofer designed for open baffle and an ordinary woofer is. Is the coil different are the magnets stronger is the cage stronger or designed differently for someone that wants to mess about building a set where would they get woofers designed for open baffle.
.
Excellent coversation.ive learnt heaps.thankyou.
Great to hear!
13:50 even though they were presented differently (one as a negative and the other a positive) it seems like you are saying that for both open baffle and box speakers, moving the speaker in the room is necessary to achieve the best sound. Is that not the case, or are open baffle forgiving and can be closer to a back wall? I'm not sure if there are similar aspects to something like a Magnepan quasi-ribbon style speaker, but it is my understanding that need *a lot* of room and are temperamental that way.
An open baffle needs more room behind the speaker, a box speaker needs more room to the sides of the speaker.
So, when closer to the side wall, a box speaker needs more toe-in.
When closer to the front wall the open baffle needs more toe-in.
@@JerryRutten thank you. Having my speaker wall in line with my entry door path presents a real challenge for good performances from speakers while not putting the speakers in the walk path. I'll be fairly close to the back wall. I would say no more than 1 ft or so.
Great seminar! Very informative! Thank you!
How these types of speakers get enough bass has me completely baffled.
Haha I see what you did there
The bass waveform discussion, my room creates a hole at what should be the main listening position from the main speakers and what would be a standard sub placement in line with the mains. To the extenat that leaning forward three feet, boom, lean back, nope. I remedied things by placing my sub in the MLP and finding the area in the back of the room that allowed for constant spl in the living room. Thought about bass traps, but moving the speaker forward, backward, left and right had minimal effect. There are some odd shapes in the room due to two hallways out and a stairwell. I am curious if the open baffle design would defeat the room.
icant believe the sound from the open baffle speakers. im just curious if they have thought about making speakers for theater. i would love to see this happen if its possible
I lovedvthe SD Acoustics OBS3 in 19787. A ribbon tweeter and an open dipiloar midrange, with a ported bass box withe fhe the same 6" bass driver
I have dipole electrostatic speakers. I wouldnt say that dipole speakers are suited for small rooms. You need space behind the speaker to allow for deep bass. Best bass was when I had 2,5 to 3 meter behind. When putting closer to the wall I will loose bass. I can solve that with a subwoofer. So the performance highly depends on placement.
I want a pair I tell you that. Once I move to the new house and have an idea what I'm working with, the m5 or m3 are top on the list...
Hi guys , 73 years old now, not a big music room, Casta B Horn Speakers, Audio Space 3i integrated tube amp, no boom or muddy sound, bass is there if in music, dynamics are all I have, very smooth balance neutral natural sound, learned all about resistance, capacitance, room has very little standing wave, diy cables , interconnects speaker cables, power cords, multiple purpose room, have huge space, 17’ room in dinning room where speaker faces, many say I have great sound, no perfect, but very involving music, no baffle speakers no room behind them, Casta‘S 2.5’ from wall, toed in 45 degrees, get floor to ceiling sound.
I am super interested in Spatial Audio's open baffle speakers-obsessed even, but just as I was about to pull the trigger and purchase a pair last year, the models changed and the prices went up considerably. Then I decided to sell some assets so I could afford the M3 Sapphire (did I mentioned that I was obsessed?) and two weeks into that, the pandemic occurred and that fell through. Now with the economy wrecked, there's no way I'd ever be able to justify such a large purchase to my wife. I will own a pair of Spatial Audio speakers one day, but probably not anytime soon, sadly. Worst of all, I've got a killer stereo system, but crappy big box speakers that I am now likely to be stuck with for years. It's like driving a Ferrari with toy wheels. I got everything save for speakers "under the wire" before the checkbook, controlled by "she who must be obeyed," slammed shut.
get rid of the dashes - or put a space between them -unless you want everything struck out-
@@slidetek Thank you, that was really vexing me!
@@RichardMetzger interesting.. last person I heard use the word vex or vexing was commodus in gladiator.
This video popped up this morning. I have owned Accoustat 2+ 2s, Maggie 3.4s, Emerald Physics KCIIs and now EP 3.4s. I have also owned a fair amount of monkey coffins. For me, open baffle is much purer and faster. I think not having the XOs inside a box is a big help
Quality content guys probly the best open baffle explanation I've heard. I kept thinking headphones also solve all room issues 😉
Looking forward to the next video.
Great cons and pros in acoustic design! Thanks a lot!
Nice video guys! ...Or inwall mounted bassspeakers...
I wish I could hear a properly setup OB system. I've heard a few at audio shows and they sounded like crap. I realized that this design couldn't possibly sound so bad, but at the same time the 'showroom' demo in a hotel room is not an excuse. One characteristic that showed was a 'squawking' tonality coming from the bass unit with very little bass and no body. Hopefully I will one day get to hear a properly setup OB system.
Are those GR Research bookshelves behind you still for sale?
No
I had a Dayton Write pre amp and heard those speakers in a double stack with huge Mac tube amps🎉
I watched this whole video to see if you understood what causes the sound of open baffle speakers and didn't hear it. You didn't say a word about the direct and reflected sound in the room. It is the reflected that gives the depth and spaciousness and speaker disappearing that is so prized in audio circles. You need to address the positioning of the early reflected sound as you move speakers around. You can visualize this by making a drawing of the image model of the speakers in the room - draw the early reflections as additional virtual images on the other side of the walls, like mirror images of the speakers. Simultaneous benefit of reflected sound is power response. Image Model Theory enables you to draw a picture of the sound in the room.
Hey record day I'm watching d video why open baffle rules so which of all d bookies u reviewed which is best and also what's better than elacs would Dali oberons compare as well
Again there are the Mark & Daniel mini monitors on the shelving behind! Have they been reviewed ye, if so when and if not when? thanks.
They are SVS ultras
Good video! I delayed because its long, but watching was time well spent. Thanks for answering all those questions.
Can this style of speakers play heavy metal and hip hop as well as it can Jazz? I'm assuming it would be best to add a sealed sub for different genre?
Hey Ron
The First Video of yours I wached was the Yamaha A-S2100 Review. That got. meine into HiFi.
Do you still think of That amp so Highly in todays market?
There pretty good used deals for about 1k for theses. Really interested in your take on that.
Cheers from Germany :)
Yes I do! The 2100 is a no joke amp and I love it to this day!
New Record Day thanks; planning to pair it with the xstatik
@@Newrecordday2013 hey Ron, a few episodes ago you did a few teardown videos showing the insides of some speakers. I was wondering if you might do some measurements with the internal foam removed and then comparing it to the original measurements?
Very interesting. What about in wall speakers or even think of box bookshelf speaker that would be flush mounted into the wall. The whole wall becomes the baffle.