Lon wrote:
Quote:


This so resonates with me. Interestingly, even though I am able to access my NAS library through the Oppo or the PW DAC/Bridge, I am preferring the latter. I think there are two reasons for this:

1. Quality on the PW DAC is stunning, and it is audibly better than the Oppo's very good audio section.

2. Interacting with the PW DAC is more intimate than the Oppo. The Oppo puts this big display up on the screen (which I don't have to watch obviously, while listening, but I do have to use while selecting music, and it even tells me what kind of signal I have, etc.), and that big display changes something. A first, with the PW DAC, I felt confined by the tiny on-unit screen, but I have settled into interaction with either my iPhone or iPad (under iOS 5, I still have some glitchiness on the iPad), and that has restored the sense of intimacy.

Ah yes, the paying for it part. Something my wife just now commented on. Lovingly. Really. No, I mean it.

I compared the HR-1's to the Zen Open Baffle's with a Mini Torii and a ZCD200i through a ZDAC-1 on Saturday morning. With my music and to my ears there wasn't any comparison at all. The HR-1's were playing when I started, a couple of songs into the CD we decided to swap the speakers out to the ZOB's. I didn't even finish the song that was playing, we swapped back to the HR-1's and I was happy again.
I was on the fence before I got to hear both speakers back to back.
I really want to stress that to MY ears on MY music there was no contest, but then I play my music way too loud and it isn't what anyone would call subtle music.
So to sum up what I heard, pennys are being saved, the new motorcycle fund might be getting raided. A Koa covered HR-1 should be my next big purchase.
There might be a new contest next year with me giving away my MG944's. Only time will tell......

One other observation regarding the HR-1s made while playing this week. With the grille off the Radial driver especially, they can project like electrostatic speakers I've heard. Very quick and trowing a tall image. Quite impressive.

Hey Lon...I have enjoyed your comparisons of the HR-1 and ERRs. The preference for ambience and diffusion the ERRs provide makes sense in your setting and in the context of your desire to make bad recordings of good music sound as good as possible.

For me, the HR-Ones are off the charts good, but I have been tweaking them of course:-).

I think I have mentioned this before, but I think for those not aware of it, I would like to address the (sortof?) in this thread title. I am guessing that "HR-1 (sortof?)" has something to do with the HR-1s having continued to develop since yours were built. Same speaker in the main, but with modifications and refinements Bob really likes in his amazing implementation of integrating radial with a front driver transparently.

If I recall correctly, he gradually came up with several refinements, most on purpose, and some by chance. Like the newer crossover scheme separating the radials and the front woofer was apparently pretty dramatic....expanding the atmospheric ambient information, sound stage depth, width and height, and the stage saturation...overall giving a more spacious though natural and rich presentation. Perhaps closer to what you enjoy from the ERR presentation in the atmospheric information area.

There is new damping material and method for separating the top and bottom chamber; construction method improvements making for a cleaner corner and base fit; for the tweeters, there are more refined caps and I think resistors smoothing them out in a sweet way; and the passive openings have been changed a bit. This was as of my speakers, and only Bob knows if more has happened for the newly offered speaker.

It may well be that your personal preferences would still arrive at the ERR for your overall enjoyment, but for me, I am so happy with my HR-Ones that I don't even think about exploring speakers anymore. And though none of the recordings I listen to are super bad I think these would play bad recordings well. And I do like the smooth and refined clarity and focus of the speakers, presumably, in part due to the amazng implementation of the front drivers.

Actually, while listening though, I can't tell these are front firing/radial hybrids. I can't even hear the speakers, only the players. But then, I have explored refining them to my tastes/room a bit, so my thoughts may not be fully representational of the newest speaker either!

The sound though...players in the room is more the sense than ever; accurate timber; beautifully smooth detail, micro and macro; crazy good presentation of string bass and big drums...all the string strike, skin and wood present with all the space around the instruments intact in an eerily real way; piano like it is right here...an amazing triumph; strident horns like some Miles Davis stuff just sound like playing...and well recorded but still demanding horns, like Archie Shepp True ballads...reed and pads to brass and air...all crazy real and smooth. There is no doubt for me that these are an awesome example of the audio art.

will, I'm not sure where mine stands in the development process, I don't think that they are as far away from yours as earliest models may be. Regardless, what fuels the differences between the two models most is the amount of exposure the Radial driver has, and the conventional front firing driver. I think the model that would most endear itself to me would be one that incorporated the front-firing driver with a more fully exposed radial driver. I imagine that would be very hard to accomplish, but would be killer in my system. If the depth from the ERR could be woven into the presentation, that would be amazing. (It's extremely clever the integration that Bob made for this model, with a smaller radial driver mostly enclosed, and with the grilles on top directing the radiation to be closer to the front-firing radiation; the presentation is very different with the grilles removed--at least in my rooms--presenting a tall image and almost like a big electrostatic screen image, but less integrated with the front-firing driver than when the grilles are in place. I imagine integrating more radial dispersion with the front-firing would be difficult mainly because of the height and "ear level" of such a configuration, my guess is that it may be best accomplished with the front-firing driver just below a fully exposed radial driver, and the tweeter suspended above the radial driver as in the ERR. If I had skill to do so I'd experiment with that, I think I'd just go nuts for a speaker like that).

I would say that I would be perfectly happy with the HR-1s f I were not using the system as both audio AND video. For video sources the ERR simply wins out. And beowolf, I find the dialog tied to the screen with ERRs in place, and so did Pale Rider I believe; I think I'd be in heaven with 4 ERRs for surround sound if I were into surround sound and could house a system.

will, I simply never find "players in the room" to be a way that I hear music, as I have HAD players in my room and play music in my room and there's clearly a distinction, reality is reality, playback is playback. Really to my ears both sets of speakers come as close to this, with the ERR actually seeming a bit more "real" as in less "hifi" in the way that stereo reproduction highlights things that aren't really "real" like super image size and specificity, dynamics concentrated in a spot and not radiating out, etc. I still think vinyl accomplishes this realism a bit more easily than even the best digital, and I find that the ERR present playback in a more "real" way. That's ultimately important to me, as all my life I've struggled with these "hifi" attributes.*  The HR-1s have a bit of a leg up on tonal clarity and extension, which can be very good (and quite ugly with mediocre and worse recordings) and most important for Redbook cd playback, which is more challenged imo than vinyl or hires in this regard. The slight compression/concentration of the sound caused by the front-firing driver is also beneficial for Redbook. Redbook is what it is, but it isn't perfect.

* From my life experience and listening experience I think the problem is in the way that recordings are made. I actually listen to a fair amount of music from the 'teens, 'twenties and 'thirties and I believe these "hifi" attributes initially show up as limitations of the recording media and methods of the time, and that "sound" and presentation became so ingrained into records and playback that it's become the way music playback is expected to be. And these attributes became manufactured later into recordings when the media and equipment became much better, that sound was simply what was brought about on recordings as it was accepted as the sound of recorded music (and there were other, more realistic options possible, as I've proven to myself with my own rather simple recordings made on very basic equipment, and recordings that were made to be more realistic to the way music is experienced live in the air.) I grew up hearing my grandmother play the piano and organ, my grandfather and my uncle dueting on banjo and guitar, music in the church, etc. and when I came to fall in love with recorded music I just learned to live with the departure from reality that "hifi" brings, but I always wanted a more real presentation. The Radial speakers from Decware were the first move away from "hifi" to a more realistic sound that I've found, and they stole my heart. When paired with recordings made with an ear towards a more realistic sound they're amazing, and they breathe depth and a closer sound to that of the live experience into more conventional recordings. Big praise from me to Steve and Bob for exploring and offering these type of speakers.

Lon,

My HR-1s sound very, very close to the same with the grill and top piece that surrounds the radial driver off as on. In other words, after removing the two top parts leaving the radial rising out of the top chamber. From this, I am guessing the combination of modifications in mine might have done something similar to what you would like from the HR-1...integrating the radial more into the presentation. But I can only go from my experience compared to your description, and from my (hopefully well remembered) dialog with Bob as my speakers were being built and tested.

I too have played a lot of music (mostly acoustic) and off and on delving into recording. And I think I get what you are talking about...the difference between straight up players in a room and recorded player. But I definitely get a sense of players in the room from my system, though often from within the context of all the stuff that you can do with recording...different mic sounds and techniques, compression, reverbs, amps, etc. The difference may be a semantic thing, as it appears close to impossible to have a loudspeaker/amp arrangement sound exactly like acoustic player in the same room, but this is part of why I like my system...for the most part it sounds better with the oomph of the stereo system behind the music to me. Only in amazing rooms have I experienced live music as engaging as my system. Most rooms just don't make players sound that good. So, I like well recorded music and how we can bring out the best of the instrument by mic techniques and studio rooms and treatments, that is as long as it respects the inherent qualities of the voices or instruments.

With my speakers, there is no sense of the sound being different from the movie screen. And I don't quite know what high-fi means, but imagine it has something to do with hyped presentation??? Or maybe what I am describing above is "hifi." But to me, with good recordings mine just sound like beautifully recorded instruments in my room giving a very visceral sense of all the nuance of the voice or instrument in this room space...very real sounding close and extended ambience defining the later spacial placement, and the engulfing sweetness, bathed in the sound thanks to great room, source, amplification and loudspeakers. There are of course almost always little bits that don't make it to the recording well, but for the most part, within this, my system/room nails it for me.

With recordings with decent sound stage, it never feels too big or hyped, but just about right. Maybe it is source and system tuning, maybe it is room (which I am sure has loads to do with what a system can pull from recordings) and I suspect from all our posts, that I may have more detail integrated into my sound...a critical aspect of soundstage and visceral response to the music's sense of "real" to me. I go for just enough to define sound stage, air and presence, while not leaving hard edges on things...balanced sound with layered depth of inner detail. With my source arrangement, the super fine harmonic details and textures are present without harsh edges, bringing out what I refer to as detail layers,  and love this.  

So who knows, but as far as written explanations can convey...I would guess our HR-1's probably sound a lot alike, but also perhaps different in subtle qualities of presentation. Just playing with caps and resistors on mine made a big difference in refinement of sound to tastes, and damping made a big difference again for serious listening, so the mods Bob has made could be notable in our critical listening mode. But not having both to listen too.......



Have fun!

Will