Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems DSP speakers? Worth it?

Cue03,
I agree with UA's advice. I would add: dont spend much on cables, I think its all hype, but there are others with differing viewpoints. I should tell you that I had some fancy cables and one day I decided to go to Radio Shack and try their cables- these were analog interconnects. You know what- the Radio Shack cables sounded no better or worse- they just cost a whole lot less.

UA,
I guess we're just going in a circle here- but: huh?

if Meridian went belly up today, the 8000s would be capable of playing back DVD-A for as long as they are functioning. what more could you want? Why would you want to upgrade the amplifiers? I can see the d-a, but at the abilities they have now, I can tell you that Id be fine waiting 10-15 years of advancement before I felt the need to change them. the speakers are certainly not lacking in resolution. as a matter of fact, if someone prefers tubes, you probably prefer a little less resolution in exchange for "warmth".

Sure you could say its expensive to stay current with the 8000s, but they are plain expensive to begin with. Youre no more obsoltete with the 8000s in your home than you are with other components- they are all obsolete the minute they are made as technology marches on.

As to the owner of the 6000s- they can upgrade the D-A section. Meridian does offer such upgrades- I dont know the pricing but I wouldnt think it is as expensive as buying a new pair of 8000s. And of course, that owner could choose to leave his or her 6000s alone or upgrade or get 8000s or go analog and get an analog output card for their 861 or use the analog outputs on their 5 series processor. An automotive example can be found in comparing a Ferrari Testorossa from the 80s and the Subaru WRX of today. The Subaru costs many times less, is more reliable, has more functionality, and has basically the same performance. Does that make the guy who bought the Ferrari in the 80s "wrong". No- he just has to understand that technology marches on. His Testarossa still drives great today. And of course, today he would have bought a 550 or 360 or something else, and on the cycle goes. Just imagine the guy in his Mercedes E55 AMG as he blows away the guy in his mid 90's Porsche Turbo. His MB costs less, does more and is probably just as reliable. The difference here is Ferrari and Porsche and MB dont offer a way to update their older vehicles to today's standards. Of course, no analogy is perfect.

I think its just a mindset differential. Its like the difference between seperates and an integrated unit. There is more flexibility- but some would say its more an illusion of flexibility. Cue03, or anyone else for that matter, if you feel trepidation about buying into a more closed system, then dont. Its your money and its your time and enjoyment, you shouldnt spend it worrying.

[This message has been edited by JerryL (edited 11-23-2003).]

Yes its true, and already stated, that if you purchase the digital speakers you are now a part of the Meridian system.

But lets get something straight- on one hand we have high end gear, which includes something like the Theta, and on the other hand we have a more performance per dollar strategy. I hardly think the Casablanca is a product that can be called a great "bang for the buck". So if you are considering spending over $10k for a surround processor, youre really now getting into an inflexible position because to sell such a processor for the next big thing will cost you tremendous depreciation. The moral of the story with any big ticket purchase is: you better be sure its what you want- because once its in your house- short of a defect- its all yours.

How important is it to you to be able to switch the D-A and amps in your system? if its of prime importance then there is no good reason to go with Meridian Digital Speakers. But what if your prime reason is to get the most pleasing performance you can get right now? Will you always be chasing the bigger and better of tomorrow? Thats where the automobile analogy comes in. Whatever you get now: its outdated. Just like with computers. We all know the people who say: "I want to get a new computer, but Im waiting for prices to fall and performance to increase". They never end up getting that computer because they are always waiting. Im from the school of thought that says: do your research, make your choice and then do it. Accept the pros and cons. Now amps and speaker drivers are less so likely to become quickly outdated- but even then, improvements in manufacturing and design will mean tomorrows products cost less, are more reliable, and perform either as well or better than today. Today's Porsche Turbo seems pretty tame with its what? 425bhp because companies like BMW and Mercedes offer sedans with 400-469bhp. In a sedan!

Same thing with DVD players. Look at the poor saps who bought the 1st generation DVD players for $2k and up. No DTS. Slow load and layer changes. Maybe they cant even read CD-Rs. Now I can get a player for as little as $75- thats 26x cheaper!- and it performs so much more and better too! HAHAHA FOOLS!

No, of course not. Thats the price for being first and they knew it. Maybe the Meridian setup isnt the way of everything in the future is- but the point is- it will become outdated. And not all at once. The part that will age the quickest is the processing element (D-A, etc) and the least quick are the amps. And as it ages, I know I can make the changes- especially to the processing part. One thing you might not know is that Meridian does a lot of their processing is done in software- so you can get incrimental improvements that are downloadable without the need for actual new chips. Its only when they need more horsepower (to borrow from the cars) that they have a hardware update. For example we are about to get Dolby Prologic IIx- it will be a download and that will be that. If M goes out of business or into another business and I cant upgrade it- there will be choices that have to be made. The most simple of those choices is to keep what is there. It works today and theres no reason it wouldnt work tomorrow. We're back to my Apple IIe example. So what if Meridian ceased to exist? I would have what? A system that can playback any source we know of today and are likely to see for quite some time. Maybe Theta gets better D-A? Maybe its Wadia? Who cares? That 80's Ferrari is still a Ferrari today, and its still special, and it still performs well for what it is. In 20 years, if I never update the setup, I think I would be happy with the performance. If my buddy that Im trying to talk into building a home theater gets bigger and better than I say: great for him! Ill now be happy for 2 of us. And Ill give him some pointers on what good DVD-As to get.

I agree with you that people buy things like Ferraris for many reasons. In all honesty, I bought the 8000s for one reason: performance. They are excellent speakers! Yes they look good too- they should for the price they ask. Do some peoeple buy them for other reasons? Im sure they do. Do those Wilson speakers that go for $120k really need to look like something out of the 60s idea of the future?

As to what they cost- and this gets back to Cue03's original question- lets look what Meridian says about their product:

Now, Id say the 8000s are in the performance category with speakers costing around $20k and up. Lets break down Meridian's claims and try to make them into an apples to apples comparison. Lets talk about the drivers- all speakers have some sort of material that moves- and lets assume that Meridians are no better or worse than the others in the high end realm. Then you have the cabinet, which is very stiff- thats a good thing since you dont want the cabinet introducing sonic coloration via unwanted resonances. Again, lets just say the competition has the same thing- certainly they have that ability. Next you have the amplifiers. According to Meridian, there are 5 amps at 100watts each= 500 watts per speaker. I believe each pair of woofers gets 1 amp, thats 300 watts to the woofers, and then there are seperate amps for the midrange and tweeter. Getting the sound there are 4 digital converters and crossovers. I dont know exactly where the 4th crossover would go- I see the need for 3 crossovers- but lets just add that to the mix. You then have some minor room correction built into the speaker and the ability to carry IR signals back to the surround processor whereever it may be.

So it seems to me the areas of differentiation are the in speaker amplification, digital crossover, d-a, room correction and IR repeating inside the speaker.

Lets try to replicate the same thing with analog speakers and see what we get.

1 pair DSP8000s= $45k. One pair of brand X high end speakers =$20k. We will assume new MSRP since discounts may be had on either and I would imagine the dealers for both dont discount too heavily.

we will need 5 amplifiers. How about something nice like Mark Levinson. the closest thing I can find is the no 434 amp that makes 125wpc @ 8ohms. Each amp is $4,400. So thats $22,000 per speaker and $44,000 per pair.

What if you said- lets just get something else to drive the woofers- how about Krell- thats another big name. Their 350Mcx amp will do 300wpc. They are $6,000 each. So lets just add that up $6,000 for the Krell and $8,800 for the 2 ML amps= $14,800 per speaker or $29,600 per pair in amplification.

Lets add that up, since the hybrid approach was less expensive, lets stay with that. We have the Meridian 8000s at $45k and the Brand X High End's at $20k (remember, they could be more expensive). Now lets add the cost of the amplification to get a total of $49,600. Not too far off the Meridians. But theres more work to be done. We havent addressed the room correction nor the digital crossovers nor the ir capabilities.

Of course you could say- I know how to build amps or I can make do with less expensive amps. But we're talking about high end speakers and their owners want to see high end amps with them.

Lets address the room correction- the only one I know of is the Tact and it retails for around $3k for 2 channels. You of course have to get the signal into it digitally, so you will need an a-d convertor- and then a d-a convertor. I believe Tact makes a 2 channel one for around $650. Lets assume they also make a d-a for around the same price (I have no idea on this one). So thats about $4,300 for room correction per pair. Now this is far above what the 8000s can do in room correction- but it is the closest I can find.

So where were we? Oh right, we're adding up our costs. We have the 8000s at $45k and the Brand X super dooper setup at $4,300 for room correction + $49,600 = $53,900. Getting a little north of those 8000s now. But theres still more.

We have to find digital crossovers- or at least active crossovers. You know what I got when I typed in "digital active crossover" into Google? "Meridian DSP5000 Digital Active Loudspeaker" lol. I cant find much on this that makes much sense at first look, so lets just suppose we have to go with an analog active crossover and that it costs $750 per crossover. Each speaker has 3 so thats $2,250 per speaker/ $4,500 per pair.

Do the math to get $4,500 + $53,900 = $58,400.

Whats left- to get the IR repeater ability. Lets say you can get that from Radio Shack for $30.

Wait a minute- no self respecting audiophile would maks such purchases without spending some money on cables. Lets leave out the really absurd stuff and just budget $1k for all the cables per pair. The 8000s come with cables and the oft discussed MSR (remote control- if you want to penalize Meridian do it for the MSR- its not the greatest remote control, but it works).

So the grand total is:

DSP8000s: $45,000

Brand X Super Dooper Speaker: $59,430.

But we're not quite done. There are 2 unquantifiable costs. Convienence in the form of setup and support. The 8000s show up in some pretty big boxes but after that its pretty easy. Our Brand X Super Dooper Speakers will be a labor of love. For some, it will be a wonderful adventure. For others it will be an ordeal. Which one would it be depends on who it is and where they are in their lives. For me, I dont have the time to mess around with all that stuff- Im too busy here!

So in the end you can get a similar (perhaps slightly better or worse) result to the 8000s- but it will be a mess of wires, it will likely cost you more- certainly in time- and you wont have a unified tech support experience- something youre likely to need.

Now, I'm just doing this for the fun of the excercise- by no means am I an expert anad perhaps I have missed something. I think when you look at the situation as presented above, it turns out that the 8000s arent absurdly priced at all and are pretty unique. And yes, the downside of that uniqueness is that they really need to be pared with a Meridian surround processor. So if you add that in and figure $20k for an 861 and $10 for another high end processor (Im being generous here- its probably more like 12-15k) you get:

Meridian 2 Channel System: $65k
Brand X 2 Channel System: $69.5k

This is partly what I thought about when I made my choice. I came to the conclusion- over many years- that the Meridian system is an extremely elegant and sophicistated setup. I hope it helps others.

It just occured to me that the price for our Brand X speaker has to go up a little because each 8000 will automatically upsample any incoming signal to 96/24- if it isnt that already. So we need to budget some more dollars- but the point has already been made so Ill leave it at that.

[This message has been edited by JerryL (edited 11-23-2003).]

Jerry,

I'm with you on most of your argument, however MRC works whether you are are using Meridian's DSP speakers, or analog speakers.

If you'd like, I can show you the measurements from a number of analog speakers' correction profiles

Cheers,

John,
Thanks- I know MRC is in the surround processor (861). I mean the digital speakers compensation for boundry or corner, left, right, center, as well as axis control. Perhaps "room correction" isnt the right term- perhaps it should be called "location compensation". It works though- there is a big difference in my room between "free standing" (wayyyy too bassy) and "boundry" (sounds perfect).

I guess in my example above, the one thing you wouldnt have to do is find a processor doing RC since you have the tacts. But what a mess of a system that would be.

[This message has been edited by JerryL (edited 11-23-2003).]

I have listened to some DSP setups. The best result was a setup with 5 DSP7000 speakers. They were not optimally configured i think, but sounded pretty good nontheless.

I choose to build a setup with analogue speakers. I do realize i might not be in the same league soundwise as the DSP7000 but also have no spend that amount..

Perhaps a breakdown of the costs is interesting in this discussion. Now i see only comparisations of DSP8000 setups with high end speakers and amps. A lot of readers here are not having those setups i think.

On the path i am on now (Kef Reference), i might end up spending a bit more than a DPS5k setup:
$3400 for center, $2600 for main and surround speakers. Add 2 M558's for $6250 a piece, $2000 on interconnects and $3000 for speaker wire. I have than spend $36500.
And last: analogue ouputs cost more than digital in a 861..

A setup with a DSP5000C and 6 times a DSP5000 would cost around $25000
However a DSP5k5 setup would already cost $54500 and a DSP6K setup around $68000
The DPS 7K is around $96000.

Since i have had no oppertunity to listen to a 5K or a 5k5 setup, it is hard to tell if i am making the right or wrong choice. I could perhaps gone and listened in a other country if i really wanted to listen to a full DSP5k setup, but that is not a easy way to make such choices.

The most important thing is, that i am happy with the sound i am having now and i can migrate in my own speed from old analogue to newer analogue speakers.

Jaco

[This message has been edited by jaco (edited 11-24-2003).]

I think the following excerpt from an essay by a noted audiophile is helpful regarding speaker selection:

"Listeners with identical hearing acuity and identical standards of judgment will usually be highly critical of different aspects of a system's performance. Thus, expert A may be terribly, terribly critical of what happens in the high treble range, expert B may be hypercritical of bass, and expert C may have a thing about middle-range smoothness or "coloration."

We can see how this might influence their judgment of, say, a loudspeaker system. If it is a bit rough at the top, smooth through the middle range, and bass-shy, expert A won't like it much; it will offend his critical ear for treble. Expert C won't be too crazy about it either, because of the low-end deficiency, but expert B, even while admitting that "the top isn't as smooth as I have heard," and "the low end leaves a little bit to be desired," will just as likely sum it up as "one of the most natural, musical-sounding speakers" he has tested.

They can all hear the speaker's shortcomings, in the sense that the treble peaks and bass thinness will register on their hearing mechanism, but each picks out that aspect of its performance that is of particular concern to him, and tends to judge it mainly on the basis of that aspect."

J. Gordon Holt, Stereophile, Vol.1 No.4, cover-dated March-April 1963.

Go forth and listen.

Frank,
Exactly! Thank you.

UA,

Yes, I definately pushed the argument- but thats what making an argument is all about. And I'm sure your hearing is no better or worse than mine is. Just like Frank illustrated- we all prize different things- hence why some people "cant" listen to CDs and "have to" listen to vinyl.

I am merely showing what the guts of the speakers have and trying to make as equal a comparison as possible. Turns out, that is very difficult to do- which is one of my points: The DSPs are pretty unique.

I agree you have to go with final results. Thats exactly my point. With the DSPs everything comes together in a package that has top level performance, ease of use, and fit and finish. The downside: price of admission.

I dont think the N801s compare very well- I find them to be too slow in the bass department. I actually prefer the 802s. But I dont think the 802s play as well as the 8000s. Its not a very fair statement since the last time I heard a pair of 802s was in 1998- same for the 801s so maybe they have been updated.

I also think you need those seperate amps because bi/ tri amping is important to many audiophiles. It does make a difference. Many audiophiles go bananas trying to do this. The 8000s are probably very close to the ideal tri amped setup, the only issue is the likely the common power supply (I dont know if its common or not). And the seperate amps are necessary because we're trying to make as close a comparison as possible. We've got to keep the power similar- in your example thats 200wpc for each speaker vs. 500 for the Meridians.

If you want to talk about long term stability- we should be careful actually of ML and Revels since Madrigal seems to be undergoing some changes- who knows how long it will be around.

I also doubt the VK6200 will be enough power for those 801s or 802s- you are probably at the bottom end of whats acceptable. My experience is you want 350wpc @8ohms with speakers like those. If you want to try that amp- there will not be enough power for really deep bass so you will want to crossover and get a good sub. What do those go for now? I shudder to think of the price of the Krell Master! lol

I also think the BAT amps are overpriced- like all high end amps are. If we look hard enough we probably can find someone who will build you an amp that will perform the same or better for half its price. Point here is you really cant argue "bang for the buck" with this stuff- its all too expensive- they all have high margins- because the volume is low.

You will also have to address cabling because anyone shelling out for 801s and a BAT amp will be given the dog and pony show on cables. In all likelihood, they will spend $1k per pair for speaker cables and then another $1k for interconnects.

It seems to me from our discussion- and I appreciate the fact that we've kept it civil- the "comparative value" of the digitals doesnt compute for you- and theres nothing wrong with that. I want to say that I've taken this stand point more for the sake of the debate than for the sake of "I'm right/ Youre wrong".

As mentioned earlier, with any big purchase, one has to make the right choice for them. We're talking about pairs of speakers for tens of thousands of dollars and there are many choices for a reason.

I think we are talking about the same thing when it comes to the investment in digital speakers but we're just saying it differenly. Put another way, Meridian in all likelihood will offer upgrades to the hardware inside the speaker (D-A, processing) and they periodically offer software upgrades (some of those are so big that it seems like you got new hardware). If you had a 5 series processor + analog setup and wanted to change the d-a section, you couldnt do it yourself- and the upgrade will have to be done by M at their HQ for a decent cost. In a more traditional stereophile setup with a 2 channel analog preamp you could. So yes, with so much technology in one box, the digital speaker risks technological obselence much more than your typical analog speaker.

At the same time, I would say that the digital speaker is so far ahead of anything in the analog world in terms of offering that sophicistated power in an easily accessable package that I wonder if its possible to catch up. Thats all technically speaking. Results wise you have to decide for yourself. When I listened to those 8000s back in January 2001, I knew how digital speakers operated, but I didnt know it in such detail and I didnt care- I was very impressed with how they sounded. Throughout the show my wife and I went to various demos and I asked her what she thought the best was- without my ever telling her my opinion, she said it was the Meridian setup. By the time youre in your mid 20s, female hearing tends to be more accurate than male hearing, and I often find that people who arent as much into this stuff can offer a good "non-biased" or non-jaded, viewpoint. Given that we are the 2 primary listeners, the decision was made.

You could have a pair of speakers from the 60s that you like better than anything out today, and if thats what you like, who cares if its outdated, so long as they work- and we're right back to the Apple IIe example.

[This message has been edited by JerryL (edited 11-24-2003).]

I wish you would get off the looks of the speakers- to tell you the truth- its the least appealing part of them in my opinion.

while you may be correct about bi and tri amping speakers- many audiophiles feel this is a necessity. I happen to not be one of them- but the point is- if you want to list feature for feature then you have to grant that. There is usually more than one way of looking at any situation. As I said before, its clear the benefit of these speakers just doesnt compute for you and theres nothing wrong with that.

Now, when we heard the 8000s in the Meridian booth at CES01 we had an 861 at home and we used it for all sources - so we were very familiar with how it sounds with the analog speakers we were using at the time. We moved between the "analog" setup and the digital one so its not a completely fair comparison. But before our dedicated room was ready we put the 8000s in a room with acoustics that are probably on par with our old room. The difference from that setup to the one with the 8000s is very significant in the positive direction. So there it is- Ive owned both and seen the pros and cons of both and I can say with a degree of confidence that the digital setup is superior (unless you are going to build your own custom speakers)- at least within the world of Meridian source components. lets leave it at that. this has become too circular.

[This message has been edited by JerryL (edited 11-24-2003).]

sorry- coming down with a cold + late night + my football team playing terribly.

we were using aerial 10ts with a custom llano hybrid tube solid state amp. 3 channels by 300 watts per channel. I didnt like the options I had with Meridian bass management so I used the xover in my sub- the aerial sw12 to filter from 40hz down and split the high pass back to the amp. the rears were small becuase we were limited with space. I know no 2 rooms are the same- but I worked with someone who has a phd in acoustics and I asked her opinion of both rooms- she said they are about the same. I think if I had to sum up the difference it would be: clarity. the aerials are great speakers, but the 8000s seem to be even more clear, from top to bottom. those 10ts are going to a friend of mine when he finishes his room and he is going to be very happy with them.

Thats very intresting. I had switched my proceed HPA3 for a the hybrid in an effort to bring in some more "warmth".

What many fail to understand is that it is very easy to make a great amplifier, as long as it only ever has to drive one type of speaker. Hence I can purchase for about �800 a pair some little active bookshelf speakers which can comprehensively destroy most speakers in all but ultimate loudness and low frequency extension terms.
To build a great amplifier that can drive any speaker, and consequently build a great speaker that can be driven by a wide variety of amplifiers, is a lot more dificult. I'm not saying that Meridian is cheating with the DSP series, but they are making sound engineering choices.
Unless you are driving something like Soundlab U1s from Krell Master Reference Amplifiers, you aren't using the full design potential of either component class. With a DSP8000 you are getting close to the limits of magnet/cone speaker technology.

Last December I traded my PBS Goldi's and Bryston 4BST in for a pair of 5.5k's and noticed significant improvement in 2 areas - deeper, faster bass and more natural highs. One area that may have dropped was midrange - the PSB's were quite good in this range. I know the Bryston was well suited for the bass end of things and its only knock, I think, was the top end (dry).