Horn speakers, let's hear from their owners...

[Rob]

The last 'first' in my audiophile journey is owing a proper set of horns, not for the sake of it but because they do bring many sonic attributes to the table that are compelling. I heard many flavors of horns (the good bad and the ugly) I'm interested in hearing from their owners on which type they own and the whys re their decision to acquire them. Tannoy owners and those with other high efficiency/sensitivity speakers like the feastrex types may also chime in.

In reading Bill's recent visit with Myles and hearing his system, It'd be interesting if Bill could compare and contrast the two approaches (the Magico sound vs. Avantgarde). I'd also be curious to know what horn owners still miss form their non-horn systems - if indeed they even miss them.

[JCOConnell]

First of all, somebody enlighten me, can horns do full range?

[Bill Hart]

Be happy to, Rob. I'm on my way out to dinner (we old fucks -oops, folks do the blue plate special), but will give you some thoughts later tonite. Obviously, David has some grand horns that he can speak to, as well as those industrial K-2s if I'm remembering right (though I seem to remember David saying he thought the JBL needed more power than the 18 watts of my Lamm ML 2). The questions, (to me, anyway) break down as follows:
-
how to get into a good set of horns cost effectively; the custom made ones, with the uber compression drivers, and the antiquarian ones are very expensive; Avantgardes, particularly used, can be quite cost effective, but there's the woofer integration issue, and some folks just don't seem to like the Avantgarde. Cessaro, which is less common, is less likely to come up on the market; Acapella, with the plasma tweeter is cool, but cost may be an issue and I seem to remember one owner who tweaked the hell out of them, suggesting (perhaps I'm wrong) that out of the box, they were less than perfect. I have never heard them (have heard the bigger Cessaro), so can't comment on the Acapella. Fred Crowder, who may post here, has them, or did, so he can tell me I'm dead wrong and they are fine. There are others, too but those seem to be the most common "new" ones, in addition to the JBL. I was blown away by the K2 when I heard it with ViVa amplification years ago, and imagine the Everest is even better, but don't know if that will allow you to get away with a single pair of SET amps (Unless you use really powerful ones, like those I heard at Myles' place).

When I have more time, I'll continue this, give you a rough compare/contrast on my impressions of the difference between dynamic speaker system (and an extremely good one at that) and what I'm doing, having lived with both the Avantgarde and Quads for quite a long time. OK?

[jonathanhorwich]

When I was ready to buy studio monitors (I had just sold my TAD Reference Ones, an amazing loudspeaker and monitor) I did not want to spend a lot of money. Ed Meitner and AJ Conti (Basis turntables) recommended the JBL 1400 Arrays with Ed suggesting upgrading the internal wire and parts. He said the speakers were a great tool for evaluating which is what I basically do in the studio. My previous experience with the Avantgarde Trio in the 90s was mixed. Great dynamics and punch, great immediacy. But no integration of the somewhat mediocre cone bass. Never really worked for me. And yes, horns don't do full range, just as cones don't. At least I think that is a fair comparison. Correct me someone smart if I'm wrong. But both Ed and AJ told me this JBL 1400 Array was quite together. I bought them brand new factory B models (I never found any cosmetics flaws) for $6,000.00 the pair. Had them completely redone internally with new parts, new wire, new stuffing. It took some 400 hours of break in and suddenly with the right amp, wire they sound quite musical. The immediacy is amazing. The presence fabulous. The midrange tonality is good to very good. It is not magical. But there is NO horn cupped hand sound at all. None. But this is not magic in the midrange. Little is. Only my custom Quad 57s with old Naim gear sound magical to me. And a few others like the most recent Magico of a few months ago was close and same with some Tidal speakers I heard in Doug White's room. Amazing speakers. I think Magico is on the right road tonality wise. But for $6,000.00 I figured I could not go wrong and I didn't. They kill most speakers in presence, jump, nice deep bass (big woofer on them) and fun factor. But I would never call them refined. But they are one of the few speakers that can play my piano master tapes which have dynamic range which runs out of room in most speakers. Just as I believe digital will someday catch up to analog tape I believe the horn speaker can be made to be the best of any kind of speaker. But speaker manufacturers still have to keep at it just as some are keeping at digital and making progress, even though every single download I've ever heard in digital sounds poor to me. I think a properly done horn would be the ultimate speaker. Just my taste. Maybe Bruce Brown can comment on my speakers objectively as he visited me here a few months ago and heard my speakers.

[Bill Hart]

Next, I guess, to address your question of a comparison, Rob, Myles' system, using the big Kondo SETs (which is not his "normal" amplification) was set-up for what, to me, was almost near field listening, in a smaller room than mine, with the obvious variables of different associated equipment (I think Myles may have been running the newish Ortofon cartridge, rather than his Atlas) and, of course, there was that "ringer" of tape as a source. So my comments about what I heard have to take all of that into account, particularly when you are asking for a comparison of an entirely different system, just to get a sense of what "horns" are like to live with.
Myle's system was "robust" in every sense of the word, fully fleshed out instruments, dynamic, full bodied sound with no tube bloat, and no anayltical edge. It was easy to get past the dominance of the largish speakers in a relatively small room because the system delivered so much musical information in a coherent and seamless way. No sense of being "reproduced," and when you added tape as the source, an additional amount of color and dynamics that are simply lost on vinyl. This is the kind of system that takes you way beyond "hi-fi" spectacular, and lets you engage with the music on its own terms- no obvious colorations (though I think Myles said something about the bass being better than he expected given the nature of the SET amps- probably not an ideal match), but the listening didn't betray that. Partly because I found myself a little too close to the speakers, I moved to the seat in the back row and enjoyed it more- it may be more my personal sensibilities than any shortcoming of the system. Overall, maybe some bigger systems could deliver bigger scale or deeper bass, but what I heard was comparable to the best dynamic speaker based systems in my experience.
My system, centered on an unmodified set of Avantgarde Duos that I bought new in 2006-7, creates an entirely different kind of experience. The horns are very fussy about associated gear. I've had the system long enough to get everything matched up, and think they represent about the best the Duo can do, at least in my present room. You have to get some distance from them- I'd say I'm listening about 13 feet from the speaker line, and I don't usually play them as loud as Myles was playing his system on some cuts (part of that may have been the closer physical proximity to his speakers, too). I don't think the Avantgardes in my system have quite the heft or gravitas in the bass (whether deep bass or upper bass) that Myles' system does. What they do very well, though, is give you an "instruments in the room" quality on the right recordings-for example, the track on the first May Blitz album, "I Don't Know" is hard rock psychedelia by a power trio recorded very simply (it is an early Vertigo Swirl and a good one). The guitar pyrotechnics and interplay with the bass and Tony Newman's drumming is just "there"- wild, unrestrained and no sense of the recording or playback process in the middle. There is no X-over on the mid horn and the Lamm SETs connect directly to those horns- so midrange is just as satisfactory as it was on my old Quads and my Crosby Quads, but with the added bonus of real dynamics and that so called "jump" factor.
Comparing the two systems is hard because they are very different takes on musical "reality."
Some might find the horns a little thin, but on the right recordings, there is a purity -to voice and instruments- that can be uncanny. This I attribute not just to the midrange horn, but to the associated gear, including upstream components.
Where the Avantgarde falls down is bass- it is there, but as mentioned, if you get the bass to sound good, it is discontinuous with the horns, and if you back off the woofers to get continuity, you are bass shy. I recently added subwoofers to supplement the existing woofers and this has improved the overall balance, but I'd say that's the biggest weakness, in an absolute sense, and by comparison to Myle's system (who may say, come back and hear the his system with more appropriate amplification).
One thing that is a double edged sword for the horns- given their sensitivity, is that inter-component grounding issues, tube noise and the like are magnified to a level that is probably unnoticeable on some systems. The plus side of this is the ability to get an awful lot of musical information at low db levels and to approximate almost lifelike dynamics if the information is on the record.
I'm not sure how much more I can tell you, either by way of a comparison or what my experience has been living with the Duos. I've always been about unconstrained, see-through midrange--my ears really grew in the early '70s when I bought my first pair of Quads and used them with ARC equipment starting in around 1974-5. Although I stayed with electrostats for decades, adding ribbons, woofers, changing to the Crosby and updating the various ARC electronics along the way, I don't believe I'm missing a thing in the midrange department with the horns, and have gained dynamics and a sense of realism that the Quad-based system could only convincingly portray on small scale stuff. I would like a bigger horn system, a bigger room, more bass and the ability to crank it even more. (Sometimes, I find that it is the source material that just hits a limit- there's an immediacy on some records, and others- it just doesn't matter how loud you turn it up- it ain't gonna sound "real" but to me, overly loud). The cool thing is, if the record has the goods, it can come close to "alive" without playing it loud and if it is dynamic, it may startle you sometimes.
Since I didn't cover classical or jazz here, I'll tell you that jazz combos, big band and large scale orchestra can work well. But, that's a whole other chapter, and an area where the bass tuning may be just as critical as any other aspect of living with these things to get the most out of them.

[JDZA]

Every day I listen to my children playing or sometimes assaulting musical instruments. I am always astonished at the sheer amount of acoustical energy all instruments generate. For me to then listen to recorded music (re)producing an ostensibly perfect but somewhow miniaturised recreation is simply too much of a paradigm shift.

All musical instruments acts as a trigger to release resonance in a space hence the amount of energy generated by even the smallest instrument. A loudspeaker must excite the air but not trigger resonance. It can therefore never achieve the scale of the real thing. Horns can at least act as an air transformer allowing an approximation of the real thing.

Whereas a well set up system can raise goosebumps ,a well set up horn system can makes one’s skin tingle . It is as if every single molecule in the listening space is excited causing that tingle. This is not a volume thing. I am always astonished to check the SPL only to find how surprisingly low it is. I am personally very happy to sacrifice tonal perfection ,soundstage and all the other buzzwords for that tingle,that moment of energy when real and reproduction converge . That moment is unfortunately just milliseconds away from when reproduction crosses the threshold of resonance and a sound system turns into a cacophonic amusical resonator.

[jcmusic]

Ok a horn system I have now, without all the fancy words and terms I will try and describe my systems sound. Simply put it sounds awesome to my ears, my speakers started life as Klipsch Khorns. The only thing Klipsch now are the cabinets and 15" woofers, everything else has been seriously upgraded. Fostex tweeters on top 2" BMS 16ohm drivers into 2" throated Tractrix flared horns, and 15" woofers into a folded horn design. Everything has been rewired and upgraded, the xovers are custom built with the best parts I could find.
To me the sound is is very natural but at the same time very dynamic, the soundstage completely fills the room easily. I do have dual subs but they are barley used, my room is EQ'ed and acousticlly treated. So as far as the charts go it is pretty much flat 20-20k with about a 6 db variance from the bottom to the top... I am very happy and satisfied with the sound I have no need to persue anything more, other than the best sources of music I can find!!! All this is driven by my whopping 2 wpc SET 45 type amp!!!

[david k]

Not sue what you'r looking for Rob, your question is too general and a for horn owner to come out and say that they prefer horns is really a given. As a dealer and collector I own and owned many horn and horn loaded systems, mostly 50's & 60's designs but I have some from 70's onwards too. While vintage horn speakers even the rarer ones are still bargains compared to current variants and a great future proof investment sound quality is the main reason I went for them. IMO there's simply more right in some of these vintage horns than anything modern I've come across, at any price. There are two main negatives with many modern horn speakers, first is the lack of sensitivity and the relative difficult load they present to amplifier. For me the heart of the system starts with a low powered SET amp, the purest most natural sounding design, IMO of course, and sensitive horns are their natural mate. I just don't the point to a horn speaker that requires solid state or high powered tube amps to drive them, you get none of the benefits and have to deal with the flaws.

2nd problem with most modern designs I heard is in the bass. Aside from the JBL Everest and a couple of their other models (we have to see what happens in the future with the departure of Greg Timbers!) I haven't heard anything else with a properly integrated bass. The worst offenders are the semi active designs where the designer tries to typically finagle a poor design with a digital crossover and a class d amp of unknown origin. Contrary to popular belief tube amps have more natural bass than ss equivalents, with competent SET electronics like Lamm ML2 & ML3 (yes, I'm biased !) being the most natural, semi active designs rob you of that. A lot of the magic of the vintage speaker systems is in their natural coherent easy to drive bass design where an 8-10 watt SET can easily achieve realistic volumes without strain. Then the music flows….

david

[fcrowder]

I have now owned "horn" speakers for the last 12 years. First a pair of Acapella Campaniles, currently Acapella Triolons. Both are large multi driver speakers which require a large listening space so that the listener can sit at least 10-12 feet away from the speakers. Properly set up in a large room, the drivers are coherent, the sound well integrated, imaging phenomenal. I have tried to integrate subwoofers, but in the end felt that they compromised what the speaker did well. The SEAS woofers that Acapella uses require a rather lengthy break-in, often hundreds of hours. Until properly broken-in, the woofers do not integrate well and bass can seem sluggish. These speakers are very efficient and very much like low powered, single ended, direct heated triode amps; however, I have also gotten spectacular results with the EMM Labs MTRX amps. My speakers prefer bi- or tri-wiring with speaker cables on the warm side of neutral.

[david k]

What electronics are you using with your Acapellas Fred?
david

[MylesBAstor]

Be happy to, Rob. I'm on my way out to dinner (we old fucks -oops, folks do the blue plate special), but will give you some thoughts later tonite. Obviously, David has some grand horns that he can speak to, as well as those industrial K-2s if I'm remembering right (though I seem to remember David saying he thought the JBL needed more power than the 18 watts of my Lamm ML 2). The questions, (to me, anyway) break down as follows:
-
how to get into a good set of horns cost effectively; the custom made ones, with the uber compression drivers, and the antiquarian ones are very expensive; Avantgardes, particularly used, can be quite cost effective, but there's the woofer integration issue, and some folks just don't seem to like the Avantgarde. Cessaro, which is less common, is less likely to come up on the market; Acapella, with the plasma tweeter is cool, but cost may be an issue and I seem to remember one owner who tweaked the hell out of them, suggesting (perhaps I'm wrong) that out of the box, they were less than perfect. I have never heard them (have heard the bigger Cessaro), so can't comment on the Acapella. Fred Crowder, who may post here, has them, or did, so he can tell me I'm dead wrong and they are fine. There are others, too but those seem to be the most common "new" ones, in addition to the JBL. I was blown away by the K2 when I heard it with ViVa amplification years ago, and imagine the Everest is even better, but don't know if that will allow you to get away with a single pair of SET amps (Unless you use really powerful ones, like those I heard at Myles' place).

When I have more time, I'll continue this, give you a rough compare/contrast on my impressions of the difference between dynamic speaker system (and an extremely good one at that) and what I'm doing, having lived with both the Avantgarde and Quads for quite a long time. OK?

Then there are these mother of all horns too! Well maybe second to Davids and Johann's!



I did hear them set up at Magico three years ago and the Ultimate's were an experience. This is the type of speaker, I'm sure like David's or Johann's or Bill's, where listening for a couple of hours doesn't do them justice. While there were some areas that could have been better (and that could have easily just have been the ancillary gear), there was no disputing the speaker's effortless quality, ability to move large volumes of air and to sound big.

[MylesBAstor]

Not sue what you'r looking for Rob, your question is too general and a for horn owner to come out and say that they prefer horns is really a given. As a dealer and collector I own and owned many horn and horn loaded systems, mostly 50's & 60's designs but I have some from 70's onwards too. While vintage horn speakers even the rarer ones are still bargains compared to current variants and a great future proof investment sound quality is the main reason I went for them. IMO there's simply more right in some of these vintage horns than anything modern I've come across, at any price. There are two main negatives with many modern horn speakers, first is the lack of sensitivity and the relative difficult load they present to amplifier. For me the heart of the system starts with a low powered SET amp, the purest most natural sounding design, IMO of course, and sensitive horns are their natural mate. I just don't the point to a horn speaker that requires solid state or high powered tube amps to drive them, you get none of the benefits and have to deal with the flaws.

2nd problem with most modern designs I heard is in the bass. Aside from the JBL Everest and a couple of their other models (we have to see what happens in the future with the departure of Greg Timbers!) I haven't heard anything else with a properly integratedbass. The worst offenders are the semi active designs where the designer tries to typically finagle a poor design with a digital crossover and a class d amp of unknown origin. Contrary to popular belief tube amps have more natural bass than ss equivalents, with competent SET electronics like Lamm ML2 & ML3 (yes, I'm biased !) being the most natural, semi active designs rob you of that. A lot of the magic of the vintage speaker systems is in their natural coherent easy to drive bass design where an 8-10 watt SET can easily achieve realistic volumes without strain. Then the music flows….

david

Me thinks that can be the subject of another thread. That is exactly what I hear too. But I think that might also depend on the type of music we are talking about too. But that's for another thread.

[astrotoy]

I have had my Avantgarde Duos for close to 15 years (bought used, so they are are even older.) I got them because I became entranced with the sound of SET' and actually got my SET amps (Cary 2A3 Signature monoblocks) before I got the Duos. I added a sub (Velodyne DD18) for which I used the Velodyne computer program and mike to match the sub with the Duos. Over time I bought three used Avantgarde Solos (which are self powered) for the center and rear channels. I enjoy most the magical sense and emotional impact of the SET sound which needs the very high efficiency of the horns. I have changed other parts of my system, but this has remained constant. I'm not concerned about the integration of the bass and midrange of the Duos, since for me it doesn't detract from the emotional impact. I regularly hear "better" systems but I don't feel the need to upgrade the speaker/amp combination.

Larry

[bonzo75]

Be happy to, Rob. I'm on my way out to dinner (we old fucks -oops, folks do the blue plate special), but will give you some thoughts later tonite. Obviously, David has some grand horns that he can speak to, as well as those industrial K-2s if I'm remembering right (though I seem to remember David saying he thought the JBL needed more power than the 18 watts of my Lamm ML 2). The questions, (to me, anyway) break down as follows:
-
how to get into a good set of horns cost effectively; the custom made ones, with the uber compression drivers, and the antiquarian ones are very expensive; Avantgardes, particularly used, can be quite cost effective, but there's the woofer integration issue, and some folks just don't seem to like the Avantgarde. Cessaro, which is less common, is less likely to come up on the market; Acapella, with the plasma tweeter is cool, but cost may be an issue and I seem to remember one owner who tweaked the hell out of them, suggesting (perhaps I'm wrong) that out of the box, they were less than perfect. I have never heard them (have heard the bigger Cessaro), so can't comment on the Acapella. Fred Crowder, who may post here, has them, or did, so he can tell me I'm dead wrong and they are fine. There are others, too but those seem to be the most common "new" ones, in addition to the JBL. I was blown away by the K2 when I heard it with ViVa amplification years ago, and imagine the Everest is even better, but don't know if that will allow you to get away with a single pair of SET amps (Unless you use really powerful ones, like those I heard at Myles' place).

When I have more time, I'll continue this, give you a rough compare/contrast on my impressions of the difference between dynamic speaker system (and an extremely good one at that) and what I'm doing, having lived with both the Avantgarde and Quads for quite a long time. OK?

The Avantgarde trios with bass horns are just phenomenal. I would like them to have slightly better tone, but on bass and dynamics and ease of play they are flawless to my ears. Mind you, I do not like the duos and smaller models at all. Acapellas have a nice midrange, but struggle with bass integration. Cessaros, as far as the Liszts go, is the same story - if you like miked music on the TAD compression drivers, the mids are nice. I primarily listen to classical.

I don't like the JBL K2 at all, I have heard the 66000 twice now, heard the K2s, and the a 4350 or some such number. That said, I heard a DIY speaker with JBL drivers and an 18 inch allnico woofer which was better than the AG trios.

And these Western Electric 16As are a steal, a collector's dream, and have the best magic on strings and vocals http://www.audio-markt.de/_markt/ite...id=4296427638&

[Bill Hart]

Aren't those GIP re-creations, Bonzo, rather than actual WE? I would like to hear them, I know he's done stuff at major shows over the years....
(I didn't run the thing through a translator but seeing the GIP name, make that assumption).

[bonzo75]

Yes original might be better, but these GIP are fantastic. The line magnetic are nowhere as good

[fcrowder]

I perhaps should have said that I am driving the Acapella Triolons with either the EMM Labs MTRX monoblocks (1500 watts) or alternately, the Audio Note (U.K.) Balanced Kegons (23 watts, WE 300B). In either case the amps are being driven by an Einstein preamp.