I have not heard the new ones, I have listened to the old ones (when they were new) years ago...very good!...one of the best I had ever heard at that time, except no deep bass.
I'd love to hear the new models
Dave |
I remember seeing them in the window of an audio dealer around 1980 or so and thinking WoW! what ARE those things? they must be the best. |
I worked for an audio salon in Oklahoma City from 1977-1980 while I was attending college and we had the Beveridge line. They were an amazing speaker that I hold dear to my heart to this day. Every day after classes, I'd go to the high end room just to have a nice listen to these wonderful speakers. Unfortunately, I graduated from college, got married and moved away getting involved in building a family and persuing an unrelated audio career. I never had an opportunity to hear any more Beveridges after that but I still think fondly of them. I can't remember the flagship model( I believe it was the model 2, which had the built in tube amps and separate subs) Yes, I recall the subs not integrating as seamlessly as I would have liked. It was still undoubtedly the best speaker I had ever listened to and enjoyed. The only other model at the time was the Model 3, which I believe had a built in woofer but had to be powered by a separate amp. I never did care for the Model 3( maybe because we had no separate tube amps to properly drive them) but to this day I recall being mesmerized when hearing a Paul Simon LP on a Linn Sondek LP-12 through the Model 2. Totally lifelike and captivating. The ultimate sound for either serious or low-level(background) listening. |
Lucky me! I have a pair of Model 3s and with Ultrabit Platinum CD treatment,even without the woofers,I am captivated. I will be forever grateful for the people that hooked me up with them. No tube equipment either,just one Sony TA-3200F solid state amp for almost master tape responce from normal everyday CDs.
All I can do is be calm and reserved HOOOO HOOOO! |
I came very close to buying them in the 70s, when I was experimenting with the Infinity Servostatics, the Dayton Wrights, KLH 9s, and double Quads. The Beveridges imaged better than all of these but they were even less dynamic. This all came to an end when I went back to horns.
I also remember some concerns about quality control with the Beveridges. Perhaps a new version could be more dynamic and reliable. |
Please visit the website at http://beveridge-audio.com.
The new product uses all new materials ,transducers , and electronics. The lenses are computer modeled . The cabinets use a resin to produce rigidity, and the transducers are all new construction techniques. They are a total update and should last 30-50 years according to Beveridge. The new speaker is fashioned after the 2 which the transducers have worked for 30 years flawlessly. The sound is amazing. Room 437 at the RAMF. |
I delivered a pair of classic-style Model 3's (6' 6" x 21.5" 180 lbs. each) to a friends house about six years ago, listened to them dozens of times.
He drove them with either a pair of Audio Research D-76's (bi-amped) or Melos Triode 400 monoblocks, the sound is sublime.
Judging from the remarks of the G3's I can only imagine their sound.
Way to go Beveridge ! |
I've heard the old model 2 SW2's and they ranked up with modified Dayton Wright XG-8's, magnepan typani 1d's,sound labs and hill plasmatronics as producing some of the best sound I've ever heard. I believe Rick Beveridge is working with former innersound founder Roger Sanders in designing new eliptical speakers. They should be world class given the talent of these two men. |
Actually the Sander's project has been cancelled and Rick is building everything in house. The new speaker is a new cabinet design with space age materials and computer modeling. The product will only be available through one dealer and only 25 pairs, G1, G2, G3, G3 SW , will be produced. Delivery of the initial pairs are scheduled middle of November. It is actually the identical technology using todays materials and improved design devices to produce a far superior speaker to the original. The cabinets are less intrusive being the reason for the change in looks. Much better WAF. |
Very interesting info. Has the price of the different models been released yet? |
Yes and let me make a small correction to the previous post. When I say 25 pairs will be built I mean per year. The G3 with Sub will sell for $50,000 including crossover. The G2 around $75,000-$80,000 and the Model 1at $150,000-$200,000. This is a totally hand built, from the electrodes to the finished product by Rick Beveridge. Each pair is very personal and can be finished in your choice of wood or special materials. |
Whoa..well, I'm out. Thank you. |
Sanibelsteve, at those prices the speakers would have to be quite convincing. |
Inflation is a strange thing. As I recall, the top-of-the-line 2SW speakers retailed for about $8,000.00 back in 1979. Only the very wealthy( usually doctors and lawyers) bought these from us. We did, however, sell quite a few more pairs of the model 3's. I would love to hear the new versions that Beveridge is coming out with. I recall the front end now of our main showroom system. It was an Audible Illusion 3A preamp, Linn Sondek Lp-12 Vallhalla, Linn Ittok tonearm and Koetsu Rosewood. We also alternated with Klyne preamps. I can still remember so vividly how immersed I became in the sound of these speakers, particularly a recording of a good acoustic guitar. The Beveridges struggled with loud and dynamic music( i.e orchestral) but for moderate volume music, the sound was sublime. |
http://www.coherentrecordings.com/page/page/1189173.htm
check out this article
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=290143810675&ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT&ih=019
check out this auction |
One of the drawbacks of producing in a factory environment is consistancy. One of the advantages is lower pricing. Now everything is done by Rick Beveridge. The quality of the components is paramount better than the original speakers. I've looked at, and understand, all the improvements first hand. The transducers are built on a totally modernised system and the cabinets and lenses are different materials , computer modeled, and filled with a resin to enhanse rigidity.
The new speaker will play potentially to over 110-115 db without distortion so it also has been greatly improved. With electrostatics it seems less volume is need due to lower noise . Even more so with the Beveridge. |
I remember hearing the 2's in high end shop in Jacksonville, FL - "Audio Etc..." It was 1984 or so. The 2's were driven by Audio Research amps and sounded absolutely fantastic. I couldn't afford them and ended up buying some Acoustat 1+1's. Someone in Jax. actually has a pair currently for sale.
Tony D. in St. Augustine |
Tony D, it couldn't have been the 2s you heard driven by ARC amps, as the 2s had built in amplifiers.
Sanibelsteve, when do the commercials stop? Have you read the posting rules here? |
Very interesting Oldsoundz.
Sherod, your description of the 3's mirrors mine "Sublime"
I talked to Steve Davis (really nice guy) a couple days ago for nearly an hour and was
re-educated on speaker design concepts and philosophy.
He mentioned that listening is an entirely different way to hear your music, literally from "invisible point sources" the speakers dissapear or vaporize, I'd love to experience these. |
Just a quick note about the speakers. I am with Beveridge this week and the speakers and subwoofers will be tuned in the next few days for the show in October. If you would like more info or pictures please let me know. |
Hi Sanibelsteve, I emailed you for some pictures last week but no response. |
I heard them at RMAF. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt due to "show conditions" but I swear they were missing the top octave or more. Quite frankly, I've never heard a favorite CD of mine sound so closed in and congested. Maybe someone can comment on this. |
Unfortunately, Cathode, I fully agree. I also thought they were like the originals in being devoid of dynamics. |
Hi, I've heard the old Beveridge SW2 system (with the dedicated OTL amps and subwoofers). The system has a tonal beauty that is unsurpassed. But is this tonal beauty also as in real life? I think not. I'll explain. The Beveridge sound beautiful with every music and with every recording, good or bad. The soundstage is a bit peculiar: it's as if there is one soundstage and one recorded space which is quite similar with different recordings. But eventually: what is the goal of an audiophile: to get the most refined, elegant and beautiful sound imaginable, a sort of audio hedonism or to get as close as possible to the live experience? I think part of the characteristics of the Beveridge has to do with the acoustic lens which also has a "hornlike" action. It is not unlikely that the acoustic lens is also producing phase anomalies that make the soundstage very wide with added "air" and "space". Don't get me wrong: I like the Beveridge very much, but I think it is not the true representation of how music sounds in real life.
Chris |
Dazzdax, I came very close to buying Beveridges 20 somewhat years ago for the reasons you mention as their strong points, but again their lack of dynamics put me off. |
Dazzdax zaid "The Beveridge sound beautiful with every music and with every recording, good or bad. The soundstage is a bit peculiar: it's as if there is one soundstage and one recorded space which is quite similar with different recordings".
"But eventually: what is the goal of an audiophile: to get the most refined, elegant and beautiful sound imaginable, a sort of audio hedonism or to get as close as possible to the live experience?"
Or door number three, to get as close to the record/recording as possible? To be able to hear it as it is recorded, pressed, physical condition and musical content. Not to sugar coat (in any way) every or any recording but to hear it for what it actually is.
Bob |
Go to Stereophile report and on page 3 read John Adkinsons comments and you can also see pictures. |
Hey - sorry if this is a dumb question, but if the voltage was 108 volts (that is what it says on page 3 for why the sound might have been off a bit) would the Monster Pro Power AVS 2000 have rectified that?
|
I heard the G3 at RMAF and, like most who heard the speakers, was very unimpressed by the sound. Constricted, closed-in, lacking dynamics, and very little low bass even with those huge subwoofers. Build quality was excellent though. I was kinda disappointed with the subs because the cabinate vibrated with each note - surprising because it's suppose to be TL design weighing over 200 lbs each. But I still have to give them benefit of the doubt because they were in a tiny room. Hope someone knows how to set these up to show off their full potential. |
