Not near-field; a little more distance is needed for the drivers to integrate. I mix in the box, so there's no console in the way - it's an audiophile setup. The woofers are 6" so certainly not full-range. But they have tremendous excursion and speed, with low distortion. The designer got a balance of port tuning and baffle-step eq that is satisfying in my smallish 12x26 room. 2' from the wall, they're 7' apart and I sit around 8' away. They're perched on Sound Anchor stands that are as heavy as the speakers, a solid foundation that helps both bass and imaging. Wood floor, plaster walls. I find it satisfying, even for reggae dub and techno, up to about 95dB. I use headphones and spectral displays to check below 30 Hz. Back when I had Dunlavy SC-4s in the room the bass extension was a problem of too much. I'd need a different space to go full-range, and/or very carefully tuned subs and traps.
It was very to get the cone to match the speed of the ribbon tweeter. It works. I haven't heard his new models, which use Accuton tweeters. They may be easier to implement and cheaper than the RAALs. The cabinets are very impressive - heavy, solid, and dead. Considering the cost of parts, the prices are quite reasonable. He demos by appointment.
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tom Fine
Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 8:24 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] SACD "surprise"
Are you using those speakers near-field or on stands somewhat apart and ahead of your listening position? I'm wondering how the tweeter and woofer balance out and if they are suitable for near-field monitoring (about a 6-foot triangle)? Also, what is the woofer size? It looks tiny. Do these things really move bass air? How? Not saying it's not possible, just wondering how they do it.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Pultz" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 8:10 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] SACD "surprise"
> Sure, I'll try to be descriptive without getting too poetically subjective. First it took 'clean'
> to a new level in my experience. It holds on to high-level signals so that there is less loss of
> articulation on complex signals than I was used to hearing, and usually blamed on my speakers.
> There is also no audible fizz or low-level distortion to modulate the music, which allows more
> sonic texture to emerge and seems to preserve more timbrel (word invention?!) color. This is
> reminiscent of a tube amp in clarity and lack of grain, but a quality that is preserved at a much
> wider range of power than is typical with a 40 - 60 watt tube amp. In fact the Benchmark has a
> consistency of tonal balance and character across the range of pitches and dynamics that is better
> than anything else I've owned. The impression of openness and clarity at very low volume is
> exceptional. The two channels must track each other very closely because imaging, particularly
> center placement, is unambiguous. As good as some other visitors to my house have been, Bryston
> 4bst, Parasound 21, Odyssye Stratos, Sim Moon, my rebuilt Dynaco Mk. IIIs, or Coda and Krell and
> ARC in my past, the Benchmark is a combo of all their strengths and none of their downsides.
> I am annoyed by minor details. Apparently EU mandate requires a timeout. If there's no audio after
> 30 minutes, the thing shuts off. It's surprising how many times it happens when I'm moving between
> tasks. The remote trigger thing is weirdly useless in its interface with the DAC. The binding
> posts require narrow spade lugs and flexible wire, or else banana terminals. Often, when switched
> on, the protection kicks in for no reason, so an off/on cycle is needed to start it up. It sounded
> bright and weird at first, so I used cables similar to what Benchmark sells - Canare mic cable and
> a Belden twisted quad. After 30 hours or so, the sound smoothed out and better wire could be used.
> I've settled on the Swedish-made Supra quad speaker and balanced interconnect for now. Madisound
> sells it - good value. That wire was too bright in context with the brasher treble of the DAC1.
> With the smoother character of the DAC2, it works nicely. My speakers are small-batch two-way
> monitors, using RAAL ribbon tweeters and Accuton ceramic woofers. Quite revealing.
> http://www.clearwavespeakers.com/webapps/p/98515/300200/723936 Because the whole thing is so
> quiet, I expect it would work well with high-sensitivity Klipsch and Altecs, etc. Power is not
> limitless. For a big room, you'll want two, bridged. So do I, but it would be crazy overkill in my
> modest space. For what it does, I think $3k is reasonable, and for $5k, the dac/amp makes a
> fantastic system.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of L. Hunter Kevil
> Sent: Sunday, April 05, 2015 11:24 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] SACD "surprise"
> Hi Carl,
> Would you please share more of your thoughts about the new Benchmark power amplifier? It can boast
> of a new technology as well as its high price. TIA,
> L. H. Kevil
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Carl Pultz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> BTW, the DAC2 is a substantial improvement on the DAC1, various
>> versions of which I've owned since it came out over ten years ago.
>> Even the analog path is better. Still, I hear a difference with it
>> between Toslink and coax from the same Redbook source. Always have. I
>> know, I know.... The async USB is also audibly better than with the
>> standard driver, whatever the data rate. It was such an impressive upgrade that I splurged on
>> their new amp.
>> It replaces a Bryston, which is no toy. The combo is highly revealing,
>> yet not annoyingly so, as there often is a tradeoff between
>> transparency and musicality. I find it correct for whichever hat I'm
>> wearing, mixer or music-lover.