Home » R/E/P » Brad Blackwood » Lipinski 707s -- what to think?
| Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #312655] |
Tue, 05 February 2008 22:55  |
 |
 Barry Hufker
Messages: 6394
Registered: October 2004
Location: between heaven and hell |
Platinum Member |
|
|
I've just had a new pair of Lipinski 707 speakers arrive. I've let them break in and am now listening to them to get some sort of handle on their sound.
I would appreciate hearing of your experience with them. Here's what I have.
I think they're clean (low distortion), great sound-stage, detailed (very well or to the extreme depending upon your view), almost "surgical" or "laser-like" in quality. But I don't think they're musical.
When I listen to them I just don't hear music. I hear "analytical" and am not receiving either a sense of "coherence" or getting any emotional enjoyment from them.
I have a very fine amplifier, a Naim, with a fair amount of power. And I don't like to listen loudly at all. And the 707s seem to want to be played a little loudly to come into their own. I know the 707s can be a difficult load for some amps but I simply don't know if that's the case here. The Naim sounds great with the Avalon Acoustics Mixing Monitors I'm used to.
The tweeter is very directional, almost "beamy" (IMO). They certainly need a subwoofer, which is no problem as I have a very good one, but it was unnecessarily hard to integrate the subwoofer with the 707s. With my regular pair of speakers, the subwoofer got dialed in right away.
I know the 707s have gotten great reviews so maybe it's something I'm not doing or am missing.
A little insight from Lipinski users present and past?
http://www.hufkerrecording.com
Torture “is basically subject to perception,” CIA counterterrorism lawyer Jonathan Fredman told a group of military and intelligence officials gathered at the U.S.-run detention camp in Cuba on Oct. 2, 2002, according to minutes of the meeting. “If the detainee dies, you’re doing it wrong.”
|
|
|
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #312665 is a reply to message #312655 ] |
Tue, 05 February 2008 23:25  |
 |
tom eaton
Messages: 2592
Registered: May 2004
Location: Newburyport, MA |
Platinum Member |
|
|
Sounds like you're listening to the Lipinskis.
The Vifa ring radiator in that MTM config IS beamy. MTMs in general are beamy, there were some great posts here regarding that compromise. Toe in, tilt, and placement are crucial. MTMs present some very difficult problems to overcome, and it's pretty much up to the end user to overcome them! Distance from each driver to the ear should be as similar as possible, all four mid/bass drivers kind of need to get to your ears at the same time, so if the tweeters are at ear level, the speakers MUST be tipped down slightly.
I have heard the 707s in a VERY good room, and I own Dunlavys, and I think I know what you're talking about. The Duns are extremely unforgiving about where the listener sits. Dead center is the ONLY place they reveal how amazing they are, otherwise they're just speakers... unimpressive to most people until they sit in the right place.
Here's my suggestion: listen to Lyle Lovett's North Dakota from Joshua Judges Ruth.
If that leaves you cold, either you've got them set up wrong, or they simply aren't for you.
-tom
thomas eaton recording
acoustic music guy
http://www.thomaseaton.com
|
|
| |
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #312688 is a reply to message #312666 ] |
Wed, 06 February 2008 00:56 |
|
Barry Hufker
Messages: 6394
Registered: October 2004
Location: between heaven and hell |
Platinum Member |
|
|
Tom,
Great advice as always. I own Joshua Judges Ruth but had totally forgotten about it. It is certainly a fine disc with excellent sounds from Mr. Massenburg. When I first played with the Lipinskis I found the sweet spot and know exactly what you mean. You *have* to be there and nowhere else if you want to hear the speakers at their best.
I listened to the track you suggested, plus a few additional ones I've liked and have heard many time on other speakers.
I found the experience completely intellectual. I heard everything you love about the track and its sonics. I thought, the drums are punchy, the kick is firm with good punch, the bass has a nice low end and growl, the piano is natural, not harsh and clean/firm. The vocal sounds natural and smooth.
There is nothing wrong with these speakers (except what Bruno mentioned in that excellent thread you directed me to) except that I sit and stare at them rather than say, "wow, that's some great tune/performance, or wow, that is some great recording".
Tom, you've helped me understand so much just by sharing your experience. I have a month to return them for a full refund (minus shipping) so I'll give them a while longer, but they may well be headed back to Mr. Lipinski.
Here's a picture of the Avalon Acoustics Mixing Monitor I'm used to. It is well-balanced tonally. The distortion is low and the sound-stage is wide and deep. They aren't as picky about room placement as the Lipinskis but I think when I hear them again, they'll probably come off second best to the Lipinskis in all areas except emotion. As I can only set up one pair of speakers at a time (and am not eager to take the effort to switch monitors) it may be some time before I hear the Avalons again. In which case my opinion may well change again.
It's a two-way passive speaker with a port on the bottom. The shape, felt and leather surround all aid in diffraction control. The speaker also has excellent time alignment. The drivers are made with ceramic material.
http://www.hufkerrecording.com
Torture “is basically subject to perception,” CIA counterterrorism lawyer Jonathan Fredman told a group of military and intelligence officials gathered at the U.S.-run detention camp in Cuba on Oct. 2, 2002, according to minutes of the meeting. “If the detainee dies, you’re doing it wrong.”
|
|
|
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #312737 is a reply to message #312655 ] |
Wed, 06 February 2008 07:29 |
|
tom eaton
Messages: 2592
Registered: May 2004
Location: Newburyport, MA |
Platinum Member |
|
|
Hey Barry-
I go round and round trying to find something "better"...
I've tried and or owned:
Audix Nile X
Earthworks Sigma 6.3
Dunlavy SCIVa
JBL LSR32, LSR28, LSR4326
NS10
Griffin 1.5
PMC Ib1s
Dynaudio M1.5
ProAc Studio 100
Tannoy DMT10, PBM8
Apple Powereds, Rad Shack Minimuses of all sorts, EPI TE100...
etc...
and I've finally decided that the speakers I love to listen to are not the speakers that get me the best translation to the outside world. And THAT is the job...
The speakers that are fun to listen to do not MAKE me pay attention to the things I should... they make things sound great, maybe even less detailed... like a sonic airbrush.
But I hear you, emotionally connecting with the material is the reason we do the job at all, so it has to be a consideration... and we need that connection in order to respond appropriately, to make choices that suit the intention of the work rather than working towards a sonic benchmark.
Honestly, I do 90% of my work on the JBL LSR32 monitors with a HotHouse amp. The Dunlavys are in the room, as are NS10s... but the JBLs work for me. I've swapped out four other monitors for them in the last couple of years and the JBLs keep coming back. The midrange is just exactly right, and they strike the balance between accuracy and emotion that works for me.
It will be different for every set of ears and every room, as you know.
I used the Earthworks Sigma 6.3 for a long time, and loved the top end and (spacial and transient ) detail, but they came down for good when the big JBLs arrived.
After 10 years, I'm done looking for new primary monitors.
t
thomas eaton recording
acoustic music guy
http://www.thomaseaton.com
|
|
| |
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #312832 is a reply to message #312823 ] |
Wed, 06 February 2008 11:08 |
astroshack
Messages: 120
Registered: May 2004 |
Active Member |
|
|
| Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 07 February 2008 01:37 |
Without trying to endlessly flatter you... you make another good point about speakers for accuracy and ones for enjoyment.
|
For this reason, I have 707s powered by Bryston in my work room.
They allow me to work confidently, every time. I can _always_ clearly detect any problem areas in the audio....and translation is excellent.
I have Duntechs in my "enjoyment room", with a sweet tube preamp and a nice Musical Fidelity power amp.
Sean
Sean Diggins
The Tone Room
|
|
| | |
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #312892 is a reply to message #312655 ] |
Wed, 06 February 2008 13:05 |
Dave Davis
Messages: 375
Registered: December 2005
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio |
Active Member |
|
|
I can only second what others have said... I came to L707s by way of Dunlavy SC-IVAs, which are similar in presentation. I called your experience "The Dunlavy Effect", and while separating the subs in the L707s have made listening more pleasant, the Lipinski's have the same unforgiving accuracy as the Duns.
I nearly passed on buying my Duns because during the demo I felt like you do: it made listening unpleasant, and they were brutal on most of my favorite recordings. I was ready to pack them up when suddenly in the middle of my favorite Elvis Costello record, I heard a door creak and close behind me where there was no door! I whirled around and then heard a cough as well! I recued the track, and sure enough these flaws were there, in a record I've listened to literally hundreds of times (many on cans!). After confirming the things I was hearing were really part and parcel of the recordings, I handed over a check and never looked back.
The Lipinskis are as unflattering and brutal as the Duns. But what you hear is what's there. For this reason I'm very careful about playing back stuff I like on either speaker... once you hear flaws in a recording, you always hear them. MP3s are as flat and chalky on these speakers... no one could prefer low-rate MP3s to PCM after listening on revealing monitors like this.
For mastering, this is a godsend. For mixing, it can be a nightmare. And for entertainment, it's a waste of time: every flaw in your CD collection will become familiar (and painful) once heard. So, it depends on your application... if your goal is euphonics, pass on the Lipinskis. If you want to quickly identify problems, and correct them to whatever extent is possible, there is no better tool.
-d-
Dave Davis
MUSIC|MEDIA|DESIGN
|
|
|
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #312980 is a reply to message #312655 ] |
Wed, 06 February 2008 17:57 |
 |
Cass Anawaty
Messages: 191
Registered: September 2004 |
Active Member |
|
|
Helpful thread, guys. I made some notes for when I'm ready to upgrade.....
Cass Anawaty, Chief Engineer
Sunbreak Music, LLC
High Resolution Stereo and Surround Mastering
www.sunbreakmusic.com
|
|
|
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #313066 is a reply to message #312892 ] |
Wed, 06 February 2008 23:17 |
astroshack
Messages: 120
Registered: May 2004 |
Active Member |
|
|
| Dave Davis wrote on Thu, 07 February 2008 04:05 |
For mastering, this is a godsend. For mixing, it can be a nightmare. And for entertainment, it's a waste of time: every flaw in your CD collection will become familiar (and painful) once heard. So, it depends on your application... if your goal is euphonics, pass on the Lipinskis. If you want to quickly identify problems, and correct them to whatever extent is possible, there is no better tool.
-d-
|
Yeah, Dave's right - the 707s are a great tool.
Mixing with them is certainly harder than mastering, because I sometimes end up focusing too much on flaws in the recorded tracks rather than intuitively mixing by instinct. But you can mix on 'em. In fact, one of my friends records and mixes exclusively with his 707s and masters on his Sovereigns. He's a bit crazy though to use them when tracking I reckon, because the 707s have ZERO protection - the tweeters fry easily from loud bursts of digital noise or high freq feedback. (I use Genelecs when tracking)
Another friend makes high end audiophile tube preamps and power amps (www.supratek.biz) Mick uses 707s in his reference system for testing and fine tuning his products, but uses stats for general listening. Mick has good ears.
As tools, they are wonderful for mastering....and the price is just right for today's typical mastering business model.
I have actually learnt to really enjoy the 707s for listening sessions also, but the recording has to be very good. Joshua Judges Ruth is a great example (I love North Dakota - used to play it in one of my bands...the piano intro is way cool). But my fave lately for a bit of relaxation between sessions is Willie Nelson's Songs Of Cindy Walker - great LCR panning and lovely understated sound.
When listening in my work room just for enjoyment, if the recording is less than stellar I can suspend critical analysis and fudge the euphonic factor with a few quick puffs on a thin dooby.....maybe once a month I'll do this after a session and I'm always amazed at the way it makes me feel 17 again, lost in the music (before I became obsessed with how recordings are put together).
It's the ONLY reason I still occasionally have a puff or eat a cookie...
Sean
Sean Diggins
The Tone Room
|
|
|
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #313098 is a reply to message #313066 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 07:33 |
Andy Simpson
Messages: 643
Registered: July 2004
Location: Poland |
Gold Member |
|
|
I suggest an interesting test.
Setup the speakers as they sound best.
Put a pair of microphones in front of the speakers - ribbons, condensers, whatever.
Take a favourite reference recording and play it back over the speakers while re-recording back at whatever resolution is easiest.
Listening back to the re-recording there will be errors from the acoustic of the room, speaker, mic, mic-amp, etc, but one thing will be clear: did the music survive?
Even more interesting, you can then listen to the re-recording on more musically-engaging speakers and find out if the result is still musically engaging compared to the original recording or if the information was permanently lost.
Then repeat the test using the musically engaging speakers and compare the results.
Multiple iterations may or may not provide further clues.
As for 'hearing something in a recording that I never heard before' while listening to speakers, there are many possibilities here. We all know that compression, eq, reverb, SPL, etc can all let us hear things we've never heard before.
In fact, if this is the case AND the speakers are not musically engaging, I would tend to suspect some form of distortion before I suspected accuracy.
However, that doesn't necessarily stop them from being great tools for the job.
Andy
www.SimpsonMicrophones.com - Next Generation Microphones
Orchestra mp3 (DAV BG1 + Mytek) - Jazz (Sax) mp3 (DAV BG1 + Mytek) - Choir & Organ mp3 (Gordon IV + Mytek)
Chamber Ensemble mp3 (DAV BG1 + Mytek) - Chamber Ensemble + vocal mp3 (DAV BG1 + Mytek)
|
|
| |
| Re: Lipinski 707s -- what to think? [message #313138 is a reply to message #313116 ] |
Thu, 07 February 2008 10:58 |
|
Barry Hufker
Messages: 6394
Registered: October 2004
Location: between heaven and hell |
Platinum Member |
|
|
Andy,
Your idea is exactly the one I had yesterday. I thought about running the same material through both sets of speakers, one set at a time of course. I would record that. Then using that recording I'd listen on heaphones to the recording.
Will I have compounded coloration upon coloration? Maybe but I'd have a recorded "reference" for others to hear and then possibly offer some insight.
Last night I listened to Sgt. Pepper over the Lipinskis. Sure enough I clearly heard instruments, people, sounds I'd never heard or never heard clearly before. It was quite revealing. Then I did the same thing with Thriller. Same deal.
In each case, the sense of space was palpable, everything was exactly in its place in the soundstage. I could hear tracks come and go as channels turned on and off. It was "ear opening".
I have to say however, as Bob mentions, I could NEVER play back a tape or a mix for a client with these speakers. None of us could survive it. Besides the laser-beam accuracy the lack of emotion would kill the session in its tracks (sorry about the pun).
http://www.hufkerrecording.com
Torture “is basically subject to perception,” CIA counterterrorism lawyer Jonathan Fredman told a group of military and intelligence officials gathered at the U.S.-run detention camp in Cuba on Oct. 2, 2002, according to minutes of the meeting. “If the detainee dies, you’re doing it wrong.”
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Dec 5 10:40:36 CST 2008
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.59970 seconds |
Members
Search
FAQ
Register
Login
Home
