anyone here run the VR-2's or any other rear firing tweeter system? Just curious what you thought of them, seems like an interesting concept.
do they need a lot of room to breathe back there?
the VR4JRs have them. I have mixed feelings.
At first I didn't like them so I kept turning them down until they were completely off. A big issue is that I have glass behind my speakers.
But then I cranked them again so that they would burnin with the rest of the drivers. Now when I turn them all the way off, I miss them. They do make a difference in the imaging.
I don't know how this story is going to end.
I know that wasn't helpful.
no it was.
I'm interested in what people's experiences are, I don't need a review that was great.
all VR speakers emply this.
the cool part about it is that its not simply a rear fireing tweater.
its also out of phase, giving you a very wide/deep sence of space. Its not ugly at all.
As im sure you've read, the deal w/this is to act like a microhone in reverse. that rear ambiece, which is OOP, is exactly like a mic works. There isn't much that is picked up from behind a card or hyper, but there is some...and that is vastly responcible for certain soundstage information. So, it *had* to be included on playback, and that is why Albert went with this design.
IMO, it makes blumlein recordings sound absolutely real. A couple that I have made display rear info so well, i'd swear there were crowds of rude people chatting away behind my couch...but there is only a wall there.
:)
I keep it cranked on my VR4, and have noticed that there is not nearly the amount of output on these as there were on my VR2s, which I also kept cranked.
I would turn them off...run for a month, then turn them back on and see where i liked it. I think 75% was where I settled w/the vr2
Quote from: Tim on March 12, 2005, 09:31:20 PM
no it was.
I'm interested in what people's experiences are, I don't need a review that was great.
What others have said. The effect of throwing hf energy rearwards and up is quite interesting. I read about it long ago and experimented on a pair of clones of the Spica TC-50.
The rearfiring tweeters were attached permanently ;D
Anyone using Dipoles ? Which model ?
I never appreciated them until I heard a well placed pair of high-end Polks.
Mid-room, mid-wall playing Starvinski at a Dr.'s office. Giant soundstage, excellent imaging.
I had the sense of being in the 10th row at a good hall.
I think he was using Adcom or Rotel power.
Now that's an above-average Dr's office. Most of the ones I go to have dog-eared magazines I've already read. ;D
Quote from: Nick's Picks on March 13, 2005, 07:33:34 AM
all VR speakers emply this.
The VR1s don't. VR-2s or 4jrs are in my future when I get a house and a room to play with (at least 3 years away, *sigh*. :)
Quote from: MattD on March 14, 2005, 10:04:50 AM
Quote from: Nick's Picks on March 13, 2005, 07:33:34 AM
all VR speakers emply this.
The VR1s don't. VR-2s or 4jrs are in my future when I get a house and a room to play with (at least 3 years away, *sigh*. :)
that was supposed to read "employ" not "emply"
any way, after I posted that I wondered about the vr1 and if they had the ambient driver.
oh well...too bad they didn't.
Too bad is right--I'd be all over the VR1s if they had that driver... I'd love to try that in my home office. I could use a little more "space" as it's pretty small.
i like the rear tweeter on my vr2s. seems like everything is a bit richer with it on
Quote from: scott brown on March 14, 2005, 10:52:22 PM
i like the rear tweeter on my vr2s. seems like everything is a bit richer with it on
Did they blend better after breakin?
Quote from: scott brown on March 14, 2005, 10:52:22 PM
i like the rear tweeter on my vr2s. seems like everything is a bit richer with it on
I couldn't remember who had the VR-2's on this board... these are the next speakers on my radar, probably going to have to wait until summer but they really have piqued my interest.
Quote from: Tim on March 14, 2005, 11:16:58 PM
Quote from: scott brown on March 14, 2005, 10:52:22 PM
i like the rear tweeter on my vr2s. seems like everything is a bit richer with it on
I couldn't remember who had the VR-2's on this board... these are the next speakers on my radar, probably going to have to wait until summer but they really have piqued my interest.
slut.
yes, yes I am :flipa:
to be honest i'm not sure what break-in they needed. i moved somewhere during the break-in period so the room sound changed
what about the low end extension scott? they're rated pretty far down, what do you think?
the idea of ditching the sub and still being able to run a speaker of that size is very tempting.
I do like the balance that the B&W (bright) sound matched with the tubes gives me... I'm a bit worried that the VSA's are too laid back sounding for my amp.
People usually characterize ProAc as laid back... But my ProAc's sound MUCH better with tubes than SS. No way is it too much of a good thing, IMO. I came from B&W N805's, FWIW...
Quote from: Tim on March 14, 2005, 11:44:34 PM
what about the low end extension scott? they're rated pretty far down, what do you think?
the idea of ditching the sub and still being able to run a speaker of that size is very tempting.
I do like the balance that the B&W (bright) sound matched with the tubes gives me... I'm a bit worried that the VSA's are too laid back sounding for my amp.
oh i have absolutely no need for a sub with these things
yea, they are rated down to 22hz if I remember correctly.
and after you listen to them, you will know that it ain't bullshit.
same w/the VR4 rated down to 16hz.
those things go places I can't tollerate.
My Snell Type Ds have a rear firing tweeter...adds quite a bit to the depth of the soundstage in my opinion.