Cadence ARCA : opinions please

[bhagwan]

Heard this once before in this forum - that, speaker technology has moved on. Would really like to know - in what way? And, what are the the sonic benefits?

Regards.

Sir,
I do not understand this either;
However, although Laws of Physics remain unchanged, the science of measurement & materials knowledge has progressed.
What I mean by this is, that materials that could not be used 1 decade back have come on to the forefront & they may replace older materials.
These newer materials are either alloys / compounds etc.
Example - Magico with Metal & Wilson Audio with Material X etc.
Drivery Technology has progressed a lot. Newer materials in Magnet Topology like what JM Labs has done with the EM Woofers etc. Also Nano Tech Drivers what Maico now has.
Cabinet Materials - Siltech XXV [Material used]
Software to design & make loudspeakers etc. Comsol [name of Software] etc. have come into play.

All this does not mean that newer speakers are 'better'
But surely the designer has far more options that are available for him to design.

In the case of Cadence Arca - There was an Anacohic Chamber that was built
just to measure the speaker - that needed space & costed 40 lacs [so I was told]
Now all that is done with a Clio Software or Mellissa Software & that too - more accurate & at a fraction of the cost.

I am not sure if I have explained things well, but I tried.

 

[Dr.Bass]

Hi Bhagwan, use of new material is not "new technology" IMO.
Dynamic drivers, Electrostat, Compression horns, these are technologies and we all know how old are these technologies. I dont know of any new driver technology that has been invented in the last 15 years. Going by this Cadence Arca is still among the best because there are not many speakers out there which implement a combination of Electrostat + dynamic drivers much better than the Arca. There could be a few but they are handful. Whether one likes the sound of Electrostats is a different question. But isnt it true that there has been no progress in technology to replace Electrostats ?

 

[bhagwan]

But isnt it true that there has been no progress in technology to replace Electrostats ?

Hi DB !
We do not want to replace the Electrostatics;;
My point here is that although the ARca has been there for 13 + years & is in current version VI - that is great.
However, 10 years back, I would have considered it to be amongst some of the
best that there was - say top 10 or 15 in the world.
Currently the new breed of speakers will surely out perform the Arca.
Therefore I say that the Arca is dated & needs a huge change - not a tweek - unfortunately that cannot happen - so it is sad.....:sad:

Speakers like this - do take a close look @ the details @ the back !!



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

things like this :-



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

and like this :-



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Another option - speakers like this :-



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This is the GAD - Possiden - With Active Bass & 'Q' Control !



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Products that have pushed the boundaries in materials & technology.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

[Asit]

The major advancement in technology in general (that is, technology at large) has taken place in the recent years (say, for the last 20 years) in electronics and materials. Now coming to audio equipments, say amplifiers and speakers, I do not see any major developments in design in this time. My knowledge may be limited, but anybody with better knowhow should put in his words here. Of course new materials for tweeters etc are being used and explored, as some of you have pointed out. I am not too sure these make speakers like Arca outdated. Of course one may not like the Arcas, that's a different point altogether. I want to add also that in many/most cases my experience with newer versions or updates of many amps and speakers have left me disappointed. But then I am talking of speakers at most up to the budget of Arca or slightly more, not much more than that.

Regards.

 

[bhagwan]

Arca is not outdated;
The Sound of Arca is outdated;
Listen tot he new breed of speakers & they will sound very different - at least to my ears.

Therefore I infer that if the sound has changed - things have moved - front or back it is a personal call & opinion.

To me, the Arca was a ref - no longer is.
Others have moved up & moved forward.

p.s. A dear friend of mine - hard core ESL lover & Arca person - had it for 5 + years - just placed an order for a German Speaker - Ribbon based [Per Scanning Woofer - Audio Technology] to replace his Arca - will arrive in 2 months - we hope !

p.s.s. At the end of the day it is all so very personal.
Lots of people may thing / like / love the Arca.
I used to like it - never loved it - but to me it is passe'
Lots of products have been introduced & they sound better to my ears vis a vis the Arca. Just an opinion @ end of the day;;

 

[arj]

In amps , there have been the newer "Digital" amps which have come in, especially products like Diavalet which is a cascaded amp with Class A and Class D in a very small size with built in DAC. while today it is priced at stratospheric levels am pretty sure there will be a trickle down in the future.

In speakers, as mentioned by Bhagwan the improvement has been in Materials and not in any design as such..although perhaps one design is the Plasma tweeter sometime in the 1960s (?) if you can consider it New

There seem to have been some pretty new Drivers Like the Phy, or the newer one used By Rethm which may bring back the "Single Driver" back to prominance..but these are again Evolutionary rather than Revolutionary.

I guess as a revolutionary products, the Ipod and the Iphones Genre is what seem to be poised for great things to come.

 

[Radni14]

Bhagwan,
For the benefit of all here , can you pl give approx or retail price in usd or euro for each of various speakers that you have shown as examples of new technology ? That ought to give a chance to compare their price with arca.

 

[prem]

IMO most manufacturers keep doing something to keep their brands alive. Unless they add a new feature or bring in something new nobody writes about them. Also new modern technology does not necessarily mean better sound for everyone. Different, yes. For example many prefer the older B & W 800 series designs to the modern ones. Also IMO a lot depends on the ancillary equipment. People hear differently. Which is why there are so many different speakers. There are people who swear by the Altec VOTT, and there are people who swear by the Tidal. Two very different products, one 50 years old, the other modern.

 

[Dr.Bass]

Hi Bhagwan, I get your drift. Those speakers look special and might also sound special, whether better than Arca or not could be a matter of personal taste.

Arca is not outdated;
The Sound of Arca is outdated;
Listen tot he new breed of speakers & they will sound very different - at least to my ears.

Therefore I infer that if the sound has changed - things have moved - front or back it is a personal call & opinion.

Has the sound of Guitar changed over the last 10 years ?

Just because today's speakers (I have heard some of them) sound different doesnt make them advanced IMHO. Only if it is closer to the real thing (real instruments) can it be termed as an advancement in music reproduction. I mean it is not fashion where the latest is the best. CDs sounded different than Vinyls, does it make it a better sound ? I am not questioning what one likes but the criteria to term something "better" in music reproduction.

Just like you, my reference speakers 6 years back was a Dynaudio but today it is not, does that make Dynaudio outdated in my books or anyone for that matter ? As humans we will always crave for the "forbidden fruit". I am sure the day we have a speaker which sounds exactly like real instruments our instruments will progress

 

[Asit]

For example many prefer the older B & W 800 series designs to the modern ones.

Exactly.

IMO, an even better example is the discontinued 700 series (something like the 703, for example). Many consider the current CM series inferior.

Agree with Dr. Bass's above post too. Where is the Contour 1.3 and the VFM that came with it?

Of course, I am talking completely at a different price point than the one shared by the speakers in the recent pictures.

At the very top end, things have to be happening to provide the necessary juice for attention and continued consumption. Sound also will be different. But, given that one knows his music well, it should take only minutes to decide which sound is preferable. For example, each one of our Sitar stalwarts (Ravi Shankar, Vilayat Khan and Nikhil Banerjee) has a very different sounding sitar (in addition to their different playing styles) - and some very decent recordings (mastered and pressed abroad, even in Japan) are available. I have heard all of them with and without amplification a number of times. It should not be difficult to find out what is this new sound that is being talked about here. I am really curious.

I do not think, a general conclusion can be drawn that the newer is the better. At least my very limited experience points me to the other direction. When something is good, one knows it immediately without having to know how old or new it is.

Regards.

 

[Dr.Bass]

Bhagwan, I would also like to understand something more from you.

An Arca, the last time I enquired, retailed at somewhere near INR 500k ($10k). You may not be following this price category any more, but if at all you do, do you know many speakers around <$15k bracket which can render Arca incompetent ? I dont know of such speakers, so I am asking ?

When you talk about your reference speakers, you seem talk about price no object references (going by your examples in the previous post), correct me if I am wrong. But that is not realistic because we are not discussing speakers in that price bracket here. Why compare a $150k speaker to a $10k speaker and suggest one of them outdated, okay-ish kind of speaker ? If you know of few $10-15k speakers which can make the Arca sound average, please mention.

 

[bhagwan]

Bhagwan,
For the benefit of all here , can you pl give approx or retail price in usd or euro for each of various speakers that you have shown as examples of new technology ? That ought to give a chance to compare their price with arca.

Yes Sir,
I shall try;
Sonus Faber = 80/-K Euro
JM Labs - Utopia Grand BE - EM = 150/-K Euro
GAD - Poseidon = 150/-K Euro

These are approximate suggested retail price;

I know you are going to compare the MSRP of the Arca @ 9/-K Euro
vis a vis the products I have enlisted.

My point pertains to performance & not price to performance:::

If you wish to compare price to performance - sure the Arca may move up the ladder a lot;;

Bhagwan, I would also like to understand something more from you.

Why compare a $150k speaker to a $10k speaker and suggest one of them outdated, okay-ish kind of speaker ? If you know of few $10-15k speakers which can make the Arca sound average, please mention.

I am not so sure;
However, the Arca is priced @ 30/- K US in a foreign country.

So, I shall try and suggest speakers @ US $'s 30/- K
That I feel may give the Arca a Run !

a]
Aerial Acoustics 20T

b]
Wilson Sasha [System 8]

c]
Audiaz Saria

d]
Manger 103/3

e]
Strauss Acoustics [Swiss]

f]
JM Labs Stella Utopia BE

g]
PMC MB2 XBDi

h]
Sonus Faber Stradivari [May be a bit more exp - sorry]

I may have to ponder more - but I am sure there will be a few more names I can come up with...
What ever I write about have been personally auditioned - none are read about or heard about from any one. All the personal auditions...:yahoo:

 

[Asit]

However, the Arca is priced @ 30/- K US in a foreign country.

Do not think that's quite correct. They are available just under USD 20k according to this link: Audion Catalog. It says it's intro price, but we all know what it means. For all I know they may actually be available for a bit less or actually a lot less.

Regards

 

[Dr.Bass]

Bhagwan, the problem is someone who is deep into Electrostats (that is the reason he will have something like an Arca) may not and most probably will not like most of the speakers you have mentioned, all of them dynamic driver designs. You may not be an Electrostat guy (me too) so you may find some of these speakers more attractive. After a certain stage in hifi we do become more specific on what kind of design suits our taste, it is just an observation and it works. Tube vs SS, Digital vs Analogue, Belt vs Direct are all the results of these kind of bias. Comparing a Kondo to a Krell is meaningless, right ? Kondo to a Lars may make sense. Similarly Arca to a Wilson is also meaningless IMO. Arca to a Martin Logan may make sense.

 

[Asit]

Dr. Bass,
I am not in full agreement here. Many of these tube vs SS etc debates are meaningless to me, although I know these debates exist in the world, but I have never really understood them. I currently own a tube amp as you know, but I did not get it because it had tubes in it, I bought it because I found it very transparent and very tonally balanced at its price point. It also has a tighter bass than many of its SS counterparts, IMO. For me these debates do not hold a lot of meaning. When someone buys an Arca, I'd think he would buy them for the sound alone (irrespective of the ES panels). It's only fair to compare them with speakers of all variety at the same or similar price point. Having said that, I wonder what purpose is served to compare the Arca to speakers costing 150k USD or even costing 30k USD because the Arca costs much much less. I am not even getting into the discussion of how much one really needs for a reasonably faithful reproduction of music that one can really enjoy.

Regards.

 

[Dr.Bass]

I am not in full agreement here. Many of these tube vs SS etc debates are meaningless to me, although I know these debates exist in the world, but I have never really understood them. I currently own a tube amp as you know, but I did not get it because it had tubes in it, I bought it because I found it very transparent and very tonally balanced at its price point. It also has a tighter bass than many of its SS counterparts, IMO. For me these debates do not hold a lot of meaning. When someone buys an Arca, I'd think he would buy them for the sound alone (irrespective of the ES panels). It's only fair to compare them with speakers of all variety at the same or similar price point.

Hi Asit, your views are idealistic and it is a "pure" approach to hifi. I too follow this approach to some extent. And in most cases, the best examples of two different schools actually sound more alike than different. The best tube and best SS amps have many things in common for example. Same goes for belt vs direct.

But then there is always a general set of strengths and weaknesses behind every school of design. Otherwise these schools would not have been established in the first place. All the roads are trying to converge towards a single destination. At one price point, one has to choose which road would take him closest to that destination. Basically one is choosing which set of compromise can he live with the most. This choosing happens purely on the basis of listening to various examples of various designs. One does not have to belong to a particular school but it so happens that the belief in a particular school is more than others.

Some times you come across a product which is exceptional and sounds better than the money it costs, can satisfy people belonging to multiple camps etc, these are rare and demonstrate the greatness of a designer. But even these have detractors. Having heard some of the products mentioned by Bhagwan, I could see a clear "camp" of sound in these speakers so is the Arca. Because the best pair of ears is always our own, to evaluate a speaker without being in a camp cannot be done through humans, can it ?

 

[bhagwan]

Arca to a Martin Logan may make sense.

Yes;

MartinLogan | CLX ART - The World's Finest Full-Range Electrostatic Line Source Loudspeaker

This is a good suggestion & I like the CLX 'more' than the Arca !

I think their price points are 'close'

p.s. At the end of the day - it is what floats your boat - I a person likes Arca - so be it - go right ahead & buy it - the service & back up are good.
I like Cadence's Power Amps - so I use them.
If I find a power amp that outperforms the CC - I will change the CC;
I think I have - Viola - but the change is far away;;
The CC was better than the GAD - so the GAD was moved out - btw - the Pre & Power are for sale @ 10/-K US [delivered] 'super price' [I think ] !

 

[Dr.Bass]

The CC was better than the GAD - so the GAD was moved out - btw - the Pre & Power are for sale @ 10/-K US [delivered] 'super price' [I think ] !

I know someone who might be interested. I will ask him to get in touch with you.

 

[hifiashok]

i have a few points that come up when reading posts in the last couple of pages, on the OT.

1. does the replacement of the ES panel membrane from an earlier, older technology one with the current, efficient (as lighter), resilient, hygrophobic, with longer life, etc., amount to an advancement of technology?

2. does the change in the internal cabinet surface geometry to cater to issues with the earlier parallel surfaces after advanced software detected these not amount to an advancement of technology?

3. does the change in the internal wiring from the original VDH to the current, better engineered siltech not amount to an advancement of technology?

there are many more.....

 

[Radni14]

Hifiashok,
IMO , these all surely amount to advancement in technology, and to the benefit of audiophiles as long as they bring sound or music reproduction closer to as recorded or as heard live .
Selection of better quality parts with tighter tolerances such as capacitors , resistors , filter coils , internal wirings all help to improve reproduction of sound and should be considered as upgrades or improved version . In other words , it is use or application of better technology , even though already existing in market.
Original ARCA s were 47 kg each , which got increased gradually to present Version VI which weighs good 91 kg each ! This has been ( in part ) achieved by putting " proprietary concrete " in the cavities ( the enclosure size has been substantially increased also ) . According to Amba of cadence , this increase in weight has helped to achieve better bass by being able to extend lower frequencies . ( I heard those lower freq that were not heard by me before , so I was telling Amba about it ) . Now IMO , this is also use or application of technology to produce better or correct sound . Is it not ?