thoughts and views on PMC OB1's

According to them [MMS Inc.], they are very good, but today is the first occasion I've heard of them.

If you wish to swallow their hype, and repeat it here, well, good luck to you. As pointed out earlier, ATC have absolutely no axe to grind wrt to active versus passive because their monitors are available in either flavour.

Yes I suffer depression every time I read your BS.

 

Using some text might help, as I have no idea what you are trying to convey.

 

Pot, Black, Kettle, hypocrisy? Some of these words may refer to both of my last posts.

 

Be more specific, please. What exactly do you mean by that?

 

I'm sure you're clever enough to work it out James or shall I spell it out, I'm sure others don't need an explanation.

 

Yes, spell it out. Don't be so coy.

 

Wales, Arrows, Scotland, Salisbury, are you gettin' warmer?

 

I apologise for causing you stress with my comments James - I did not realise you were ill. Still, I guess you might grasp how many of us feel when you spout the usual BS about stands and CDS2's

 

I think that this place is one of the few places where Naim equipment is perceived as not being very good. You are living in a fools' paradise. The rest of the world rates Naim very highly.

AK, spit it out and stop the riddles - unless you have nothing to say - which I suspect is the case.

On second thoughts, don't bother. I've completely lost interest.

Bye.

 

All crossovers cause phase shifts. We can conclude nothing about whether the units are 'in phase with each other' or not from the graphs.

The reason that the tweeter is usually connected 'back to front' with a 12dB/Octave crossover is so that the woofer and tweeter are electrically in phase at crossover.

Paul

 

Thanks Paul.

So are you saying that regardless of driver placement and crossover design, it is impossible to have the two units in phase at the crossover point of a passive design? Could you just clarify that for us?

 

I would spit it out James but it's like talking to a brickwall, and just as satisfying.

 

I wrote,

"The reason that the tweeter is usually connected 'back to front' with a 12dB/Octave crossover is so that the woofer and tweeter are electrically in phase at crossover."

Seems pretty clear. Your Merlin blurb doesn't exactly explain how their crossover works, but does obfuscate the usual. Looking at it closely it is quite possible that their 2nd order crossover does actually wire the tweeter out of phase in the conventional manner, and the phase/frequency diagram shows a convenient 180degrees at the crossover frequency. I smell bullshit.

Paul

 

Thanks Paul.

BTW, regardless of the BS, the Merlins have one of the finest dynamic speaker midranges I have heard, with stunning imaging and tonal virtues. Big Sellers in the States. It was the only speaker that could wean me off Stats.

 

james,
zerogain as a forum has one of the broadest remits of all the audio fora out there. there are no make, or philosophy restricitions and the cost of members systems covers the entire range (except perhaps for silly money but then there's always titian and even yourself to some pockets).
i think a lot of people here who don't specifically like the 'naim sound' think that it is overpriced when new rather than flat out thinking it crap (a few exceptions of course for the smart arses out there). personally i've heard few things that i prefer wholesale to my naim kit however whether this is a true preference or just that the kit i heard didn;t differ too far from the sound i get at home and am used to i'm not sure. either way i've not been tempted to change makes.
cheers


julian

 

And there's nothing wrong with that. I've never heard them and I wouldn't assume anything from the port or the blurb. Anything can happen in the real world.

Paul

 

Perhaps, but almost certainly better if active, for the reasons discussed above.

 

More accurate perhaps but who can say if it is 'better'?

I am a supporter of active speakers, but in my experience (and I know others) a general complaint of active studio monitors is their lack of imaging! Quite the opposite of what ATC claim. There are of course exceptions, but in my experience passive designs generally have better imaging.

I don't know what this is down too, perhaps microphones? It would be nice I think, if manufactures made active monitors where the electronics can be attached or detached from the speaker cabinet so if they reside in one room you can detach them and if they are used on the move like a lot are in studios and broadcasting you can attach them.

James, I don't know much about MANA but it's all to do with reducing vibrations right? As you believe so strongly in MANA making a profound difference, surely you also have to accept that passive systems have an advantage in that the electronics are not in a big 'ol vibrating cabinet?

Have you ever considered removing the power amps from your ATC's and placing them separately on MANA? I know this could be asily done with my active PMC's by just extending the speaker cable.

 

I've 'A/B' tested active Isobariks against passive. Active images better.

Paul