I found this thread, looking for discussions about the Purifi-6R because they are absolutely fantastic. I'm not sure why it isn't being discussed more but that's probably because Troels has loads of speaker designs and this one is relatively new.
I completed mine 3 weeks ago after looking to test the DIY waters and it has been a real eye/ear opener. They weren't meant to replace my Super HL5+ but have ended up dethroning them, beating them in just about every way. As a result, I am a DIY convert and am contemplating not ever buying a production speaker again.
The clarity, transparency and resolution of these speakers are amazing, from bass, midrange to treble. Everything is sharply defined in space, it's just a matter of pointing at the instruments. The way they render depth in the soundstage is incredible too, for large venue / orchestral tracks with reverb - there are distinct foreground and background positioned instruments.
I've never really appreciated PRaT until now. Bass can stop on a dime. Transients are lightning quick. They've spoiled me and given me the full realisation that the Super HL5+ (and very many production speakers costing more) really aren't as transparent as I thought they were. I tried switching back to the Super HL5+ for a couple of days, in case there was a placebo effect, but I was all too glad to return to the Purifi-6R in the end.
FWIW, I'm familiar with Proacs and from what I've listened to, they share the same/adjacent niche as Harbeth (and Spendor) does. And I would still pick the more modern sounding Purifi-6Rs, despite loving my Harbeths before.
I completed mine 3 weeks ago after looking to test the DIY waters and it has been a real eye/ear opener. They weren't meant to replace my Super HL5+ but have ended up dethroning them, beating them in just about every way. As a result, I am a DIY convert and am contemplating not ever buying a production speaker again.
The clarity, transparency and resolution of these speakers are amazing, from bass, midrange to treble. Everything is sharply defined in space, it's just a matter of pointing at the instruments. The way they render depth in the soundstage is incredible too, for large venue / orchestral tracks with reverb - there are distinct foreground and background positioned instruments.
I've never really appreciated PRaT until now. Bass can stop on a dime. Transients are lightning quick. They've spoiled me and given me the full realisation that the Super HL5+ (and very many production speakers costing more) really aren't as transparent as I thought they were. I tried switching back to the Super HL5+ for a couple of days, in case there was a placebo effect, but I was all too glad to return to the Purifi-6R in the end.
FWIW, I'm familiar with Proacs and from what I've listened to, they share the same/adjacent niche as Harbeth (and Spendor) does. And I would still pick the more modern sounding Purifi-6Rs, despite loving my Harbeths before.
I have purchased and received all the parts for the Ekta 25. I wanted to start out trying Troels designs with a simple floorstander that was easy on the budget. If the experience turns out positive I plan on doing other Troels designs.
Perhaps one build a year to keep me entertained?
Regards,
Dan
Perhaps one build a year to keep me entertained?
Regards,
Dan
I suspect that Troels attention to cabinet bracing and dampening pays significant dividends.
Regards,
Dan
Regards,
Dan
Good luck with the build.
At least with my cabinets, they're quite solid from a knuckle rap test. I did add the bitumen pads that he suggested. I might experiment in the future with even thicker panels and/or interlacing thinner layers with something like neoprene or rubber sheets.
When I hopefully get to it, my next build will be the Revelator-851 or the Revelator-851 MKII.
At least with my cabinets, they're quite solid from a knuckle rap test. I did add the bitumen pads that he suggested. I might experiment in the future with even thicker panels and/or interlacing thinner layers with something like neoprene or rubber sheets.
When I hopefully get to it, my next build will be the Revelator-851 or the Revelator-851 MKII.
Most people are listening for teh wrong thing with a knuckle wrap. If it just gives a dead thud, that is usually not a good sign.
dave
The thing about Troels' designs is this- other than him, who provides so many designs to the DIY crowd- almost for free?
From the cheapest parts to the most boutique, from the easiest cabinets to the most challenging. Ok sure, you may have to buy the crossover from Jantzen, but eventually the least popular ones are discontinued by Jantzen and the Troels "open-sources" this crossover. And yes, he's sponsored by some driver companies but he's free to design/build as he's pleased. He's make it clear by the disclaimer at the bottom of his website- he does what he likes- that he enjoys.
Every designer has their own idiosyncrasies, some of us are driven by an evidence or engineering focus. I, for one, wished he would follow are more rigorous scientific approach, but I get that not everyone is inclined or has the time to do so. His latest "room gain study" is a example:
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Room-gain.htm
Here's a speaker with clearly too much bass for a tiny room, just by the first photo alone I can tell that. (I've lived in 6 houses in 8 years, and trying not to keep count) And he proposes a solution: a simulate the bass response using a simulator; and then proposes a DSP which allows the user to play with a few options until it sounds nicer from the listening position.
I mean that's ok. But I would have gone the whole hog- run a simulator, take in-room measurements; measuring at the listening position, then compared to 9 measurements scattered throughout cough, vs 18 measurements scattered throughout the room. Make averages of them, compare it to the simulation for accuracy. Perhaps compare different simulators (he's using a 2 decade old bassnroom.xls) . Then compare them to a standard Dirac Live room compensation. Then do listening tests. Which one is best; the simulation, the manual measurement, or the Dirac Live?
Now that's a good study, IMHO.
And even some DIYers here may recommend an even more rigorous approach.
"You should do a (double) blinded tests"
"You should do real-time parametric EQ and dial in the preferred setting, and then measure the actual response"
But have I got around to doing that?
Has anyone else?
Where is it documented on the web (or elsewhere) for free?
At least Troels doesn't let perfection become the enemy of good.
If we want to critique his work; we should at least make it better, and publish it for all to see.
Remember it's audio / entertainment- and supposed to be fun, gals and guys.
From the cheapest parts to the most boutique, from the easiest cabinets to the most challenging. Ok sure, you may have to buy the crossover from Jantzen, but eventually the least popular ones are discontinued by Jantzen and the Troels "open-sources" this crossover. And yes, he's sponsored by some driver companies but he's free to design/build as he's pleased. He's make it clear by the disclaimer at the bottom of his website- he does what he likes- that he enjoys.
Every designer has their own idiosyncrasies, some of us are driven by an evidence or engineering focus. I, for one, wished he would follow are more rigorous scientific approach, but I get that not everyone is inclined or has the time to do so. His latest "room gain study" is a example:
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Room-gain.htm
Here's a speaker with clearly too much bass for a tiny room, just by the first photo alone I can tell that. (I've lived in 6 houses in 8 years, and trying not to keep count) And he proposes a solution: a simulate the bass response using a simulator; and then proposes a DSP which allows the user to play with a few options until it sounds nicer from the listening position.
I mean that's ok. But I would have gone the whole hog- run a simulator, take in-room measurements; measuring at the listening position, then compared to 9 measurements scattered throughout cough, vs 18 measurements scattered throughout the room. Make averages of them, compare it to the simulation for accuracy. Perhaps compare different simulators (he's using a 2 decade old bassnroom.xls) . Then compare them to a standard Dirac Live room compensation. Then do listening tests. Which one is best; the simulation, the manual measurement, or the Dirac Live?
Now that's a good study, IMHO.
And even some DIYers here may recommend an even more rigorous approach.
"You should do a (double) blinded tests"
"You should do real-time parametric EQ and dial in the preferred setting, and then measure the actual response"
But have I got around to doing that?
Has anyone else?
Where is it documented on the web (or elsewhere) for free?
At least Troels doesn't let perfection become the enemy of good.
If we want to critique his work; we should at least make it better, and publish it for all to see.
Remember it's audio / entertainment- and supposed to be fun, gals and guys.
Last edited:
What attention? This is an area where an engineering interest rather than a subjective interest would bring benefits albeit modest ones given sound radiation by cabinets is generally not particularly intrusive.
I look for a quick and solid high pitched rap, and that's what I get with the Purifi-6Rs. The Rinjanis are well braced too. The Harbeths have thinner walls but that's by design
My interpretation of PRaT is that it is a direct result of the production of dynamics and clean and quick decay from bass to treble. The quicker the drivers stop producing sound from notes, the better they are at conveying and maintaining rhythm - that sense of PRaT that comes from music in real life. It is ephemeral and subjective, I admit. But it did seem like that was something I was missing from the Harbeth's low end, which lacks some definition and can seem a bit wooly, with the appropriate tracks. The Harbeths aren't really known for their dynamics either.
Define Reference.
Reference is relative. Reference to whom or to what, and on which subject.
Some audio enthusiasts referring flat frequency response to be of utmost importance, those graphs will declare reference... or not.
Some prefer righteous of tone and musicality...
As for now I've built 6 of Troels Gravesen design, and one of Seas. So seven all in all...
Some were to my liking, some less...
Who cares? The guy is a huge gift for the Diy audio world. He deserves all to praise and some more. Like, imagine scan speak comes to you to you and say, "hey pal, we just finished to design our most ambitious drivers to date, wanna be to first to design a speaker with it "?
I guess it's sums it up, don't you think?
I agree. Troels has made enormous contributions to DIY speaker building. Although there are valid critiques on his designs, I do find it a bit cheap when the people who casually snipe and rubbish his designs are people who don't publish designs of their own, don't put forward or construct better designs of their own, let alone have even one other soul on Earth build their designs to provide feedback upon.
I couldn't agree more. Not everyone has the time, space, resources and patience to properly design and build a box, baffle and crossover, with the right components and focus on measurement. I would love to be able to do all that myself but just can't do it for multiple reasons. Also, I'm not sure what people think is deficient with his design process - he states what tools and methods that he uses (also uses the same design software that some big commercial brands use, for example), with plenty of speaker and driver measurements, and helpful guides and faqs to help rookie and veteran builders alike.
I think people should only critique Troels as a speaker designer by first building one of his kits, if not having listened to them somewhere.
I think people should only critique Troels as a speaker designer by first building one of his kits, if not having listened to them somewhere.
Good point. A lot of critics have contributed nothing to our DIY community, except their criticism! đŸ˜‰
So what you are sayin' is Trolls is a Klingon?
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Diy_Loudspeaker_Projects.htm
I happen to have a picture of Trolls:
Taken in Scandinavia. Took some effort to penetrate his disguise.
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Diy_Loudspeaker_Projects.htm
I happen to have a picture of Trolls:
Taken in Scandinavia. Took some effort to penetrate his disguise.
No need at all for me to comment here, but I'm trying to avoid some work I need to get done, so here goes:
I built a pair of Troels SBA Three Way Classic (3WC) about two years ago. I have really enjoyed them. I have a little speaker design experience, but never had the time/space/tools to really perfect the designs so never came up with a satisfying speaker of my own. (it was fun, but they were all scrapped in the end)
The 3WCs have been a joy to use right from the get-go. They are even easy to drive despite modest sensitivity.
I have no apples-to-apples comparisons, but the speakers I have directly compared them to include ATC SCM11, Harbeth Compact 7, Altec Valencias, Reference3A Dacappo, Naim SBL, and even some active monitors like Event Opals, JBL 708P, APS Klasik, and Pioneer RM07. None of these are contemporary super-speakers, so take this for what it is worth. (i.e. not much, given it's only one persons subjective opinion.)
These are definitely apples to oranges comparisons (e.g. all the above are 2-way), but all are/were owned by me and used in the same room. On the whole, for my tastes, Troels 3WC strike the best balance and have been satisfying more consistently.
Some of the above do certain things better but the 3WC's compromises are very reasonable for general music listening.
Are they the best? No. Are there better for the money? Who knows? Maybe?
What is obvious to me, listening to these speakers for the last couple years, is that Mr. Gravesen does know what he is doing.
I built a pair of Troels SBA Three Way Classic (3WC) about two years ago. I have really enjoyed them. I have a little speaker design experience, but never had the time/space/tools to really perfect the designs so never came up with a satisfying speaker of my own. (it was fun, but they were all scrapped in the end)
The 3WCs have been a joy to use right from the get-go. They are even easy to drive despite modest sensitivity.
I have no apples-to-apples comparisons, but the speakers I have directly compared them to include ATC SCM11, Harbeth Compact 7, Altec Valencias, Reference3A Dacappo, Naim SBL, and even some active monitors like Event Opals, JBL 708P, APS Klasik, and Pioneer RM07. None of these are contemporary super-speakers, so take this for what it is worth. (i.e. not much, given it's only one persons subjective opinion.)
These are definitely apples to oranges comparisons (e.g. all the above are 2-way), but all are/were owned by me and used in the same room. On the whole, for my tastes, Troels 3WC strike the best balance and have been satisfying more consistently.
Some of the above do certain things better but the 3WC's compromises are very reasonable for general music listening.
Are they the best? No. Are there better for the money? Who knows? Maybe?
What is obvious to me, listening to these speakers for the last couple years, is that Mr. Gravesen does know what he is doing.
I always wanted to build the 3WC, I finally built the boxes but ended up making some changes. The build and my impressions are documented on my blog: https://emumannen.blogspot.com/search/label/3WC
I have no idea how the originals sound but I really like the SB Acoustics elements and I ended up reusing them in a new design that better suited my needs and taste. I called it the 3-Way Retro and I am still using them. That build is also documented on my blog: https://emumannen.blogspot.com/search/label/3WR
I have no idea how the originals sound but I really like the SB Acoustics elements and I ended up reusing them in a new design that better suited my needs and taste. I called it the 3-Way Retro and I am still using them. That build is also documented on my blog: https://emumannen.blogspot.com/search/label/3WR