two way v. three way speakers

I have written many things about sound realism. What you describe as natural, I use the word sound realism. I love Pass labs for this part. It let you hear the exact sound of an instrument.

Presence is what I describe as to point out. But silver makes voices more round. There is more space around voices and instruments. This sets the presence ( Germans call it Dahrstellung) to a much higher level.

3 weeks ago I visited a client with MIT interconnects ( copper) I compared different silver Audioquest interconnects with his interconnects. The differences are huge. We are not taking about subtile differences.

This week he phoned me and he will buy the Audioquest cables.

Presence goes to a much higher level caused by the extra air around them by using silver. All different parts of the recording are standing fully loose from eachother. They become more round as I describe. The extra decay compared to only copper is also very easy to hear

One of my best friends had a concertroom were he gave classical concerts. Here I learned how small and direct voices and instruments are. I call it intimate sound. But also the sound of a violin and Steinway wing.

In natural sound I am just as demanding as in intimate sound. Compare a Steinway wing recoding with copper against silver. You will hear the difference in timing, decay and also presence. There is a lot more information be heard with the silver interconnects.

I will ask the person who does Transparent, to take some cables with him when he visits my home.

Silver colored? This is bullshit. Copper can easiliy colour as well. Who is an amature overhere? You are talking nonsense. It is not based on facts.

I owned the XP-20 for over 2 years of time. Weakest point is sharpness in individual focus. I had discussions about this issue with Desmond of Pass Labs. As we had discussions about using wrong properties of some brands in cables.

I am very curious about the .8 series. Presence and a much smaller individual focus should be one of the biggest improvements.

I Always use cables to make individual focus more realistic and giving it the right proportion.

Sound is about what you hear. I can let all people hear much more information of voices than most other do. They become more apparent. And ther is more information in articulation of voices.

I hate any coloration or missing a realistic individual focus of instruments and voices.

I only use powercables from Purist Audio. I prefer interconnects and loudspeakercable from Audioquest. But the combination of them both give me a stunning endresult.

It is a pitty you can't hear my system. But believe me with my pro measurement and my pre amp I am a big step further than what you can achieve with the XP-20. I had many discussions about this with Pass labs by email.

The advantages are in the articulation of voices. But also in timing and drive. A much better separation of instruments and voices. What I said before; even 2nd and 3th voices are more easy to be heard. With the xp-20 they are there somewhere. With my pre amp and pro measurement they come alive. This is a much higher level of presence.

I even can let people hear the edge of a voice. I did not achieve this with the XP-20.

Audio is Always about getting closer to the real thing.

Bo, I don't mind you denigrating the Pass XP-20. I've directly compared it to the XP30 in my system for two weeks. The 30 is better and once that becomes a priority for me in my system, I will probably upgrade.

What I'm curious about is that you seem to be committed to the Pass X350.8 without having auditioned it in your system. Do you always buy equipment before trying it out in your system? How can you be sure how it will perform?

I owned the 30.5, 60.5 and 100.5. The Xp-20 is still a nice pre amp. I was happy with it for 2 years, so don't get me wrong.

I had a few discussions with Desmond from Pass Labs about roomcorrection. To be honest when Tact ( later Lyngdorf) came out with there perfect room system ( we sold it) I didn't like it. I was not a big fan of roomcorrection at all.

The same about subwoofers for stereo use. I did not believe it could integrate as I wanted it to be.

That is why hearing is believing. Testing can give other thoughts about subwoofers and also about roomcorrection.

Don't forget that the first times I used Audyssey I did not like the limitations. As you know I hate every single limitation in sound. But on the other hand I heard things I really liked.

What happens next is that I have idea's in my head and then the testing starts.

By doing things totally differently I got a much better endresult with less limitations. After many tests you get a superior level compared what normally is possible.

That is why I believe there is room for a highend pre amp with roomcorrection. I told this to Desmond as well. It can bring you further than what is possible with just a pre amp.

I created the stealth integration with a subwoofer by using Audyssey Pro my way. In the past I never thought this would be possible.

For some time I prefered the Pass Labs XA.5 series. I owned 3 of these serie. I bought the X250.5 just to see what it does and what differences are compared to the XA.5 series.

I prefer the extra drive, more crispy high and extra speed. With my Pro measurment I can adjust the sound a lot more easy than with a XP-20. It gives me more freedom to adapt.

So why a 350.8? Because now I only need 1 powercable. And I prefer the speed, extra drive and crispy high freq over the more musical and involving sound. Because I can create the mid freq. just as I want it. At the end how I use it I can get a higher endresult with the X-series.

I would be happy with the XA series as well. I could easilly live with them. I love the properties Pass Labs gives. This is what I want and need in my sound.

In the last years I send emails to Pass Labs about what I think are the limitations of there amps and pre amps.

Not cause of my emails, but they are aware of the limitations them selves I guess. I think when I read the emails from Pass Labs and from the new owners of the .8 series it is improved a lot.

In every part,it also gives a much more intimate and realistic individual focus.

The .5 series give a wide and deep stage, but within this stage the sharpness and realistic proportion of voices and instruments were not the best. At many shows people used MIT and Shunyata cables with the Pass Labs gear.

Then you were listening to voices and instruments which were much too big in proportion. I had discussions about this issue with Desmond from Pass labs.

What are my needs in sound?

More control, more authorithy, more speed, more resolution, a wider stage, a deeper stage, even better natural sound, even better blacks, sharper individual focus. And even more flavors in the mid freq.

Then you compare what the possibilites and prices are. Then you think that the 350.8 will be a good options to improve what I want and need.

For a long time I associated 2-way speakers mostly with smaller, stand-mounted incarnations with all that generally entails; lack of bandwidth/force downwards and overall sense of physique, mids that were somewhat affected at higher SPL's and the limitations of the latter this also implied (i.e.: lack of effortlessness more than max. SPL per se), lack of (a more natural) sonic size, etc.

My latest speakers though, to my ears, have bridged the typical qualities of 2-way speakers with the ones found in larger multi-way dittos in combining coherency and focus with an effortless, forceful representation - indeed adding to the qualities of these two "camps" as they are usually found here. Very generally the smaller representatives of 2-way designs cross between 2.5-3.5kHz, indeed in a similar fashion in this region compared to 3-way designs, only to have the latter add another cross-over in the 200-400Hz region. One could argue, I suppose, where the sensitive frequency spectrums are most pronounced when crossing over from one drive unit to the other, but both 2- and 3-way designs typically seem to have problematic encounters in these frequency areas, at least compared to a 2-way design that crosses around 1kHz - give or take. Dome tweeters don't go this low, unless assisted by a waveguide - a configuration that could also house a compression driver instead, and this is a combination in particular I find very successful.

Anyway, a 2-way design crossed in this fashion at or below 1.5kHz down to about 700-800Hz seems to bring out a very nice compromise with two drivers used, and moreover the waveguide adds a much needed sense of physicality (air displacement area) that makes it (potentially) couple more fluidly with the bass/mid unit. Energy coherence, anyone? Lately I've never been able to bring my ears around the limitations of direct radiating dome tweeters; they simply sound malnourished, thin and strained compared to a well-implemented waveguide design, particularly where a compression driver is used.

As "hifi" goes a midrange above or even at 8" is usually a no-go, and this seems to be an effect of these type of lower sensitivity drivers being low-fs bass units as well; they simply run out of energy steam even in the lower mids. Where more sensitive drivers are used a 12" more or less pure midrange with lighter cone movement is not uncommon, on the contrary: one that brings with it some very interesting implementations with beforementioned waveguides. The more obvious compromise here is lower bass, and this calls for the aid of preferably a pair of subs to assist below 80-100Hz, though designs could easily go without sub assistance if one isn't craving for sub-bass terrain. Indeed, that so many speaker designs slavishly go for lower bass extension to compromise the lower to central mids presentation is beyond me.

To my ears and via above mentioned design preference I'm very obviously for 2-way designs. Once getting used to this it's hard to feel convinced by the sound of multi-way designs, not only in this area; they simply sound "out of phase/focus" and don't gel favorably. And when you got the typical traits of the larger 3-way designs in addition, in more than full measure, there's really no turning back.

Bo is more full of himself than audiooracle.