advertisement


A familiar Snell?

FireMoon

FireMoon

pfm Member
The Devore Orangutan speakers, 12,000 bucks a pair. The apparently make a very musical combination with valve amps as well. Maybe worth investigating for those who pine for modern big Snell type speaker?

 
Massive cone break up just before 2kHz. :eek:

1212DO96fig9.jpg
 
Can't see on my phone but I think they use the Seas A26 woofer or a modified version of it.

With a soft paper cone the breakup looks worse on paper than it sounds
Seas do a kit speaker with that driver. The woofer is run direct, without any crossover components.
 
fatmarley said:
Can't see on my phone but I think they use the Seas A26 woofer or a modified version of it.

With a soft paper cone the breakup looks worse on paper than it sounds
Seas do a kit speaker with that driver. The woofer is run direct, without any crossover components.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, even John Atkinson who downplays all but the most glaring shortcomings, dismissing them as "character", had this to say:

Even though I knew about the low-treble resonance and the lively enclosure, these problems were considerably less audible than I was expecting. Only with recordings of solo acoustic piano did they get in the way of the music by producing noticeable coloration, the piano's midrange sounding uneven, with some notes obscured.

Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/devore-fidelity-orangutan-o96-loudspeaker-measurements

If you read between the lines (as you should with audio reviews) you'll realise that the although he is toning it down resonance is indeed a bit obvious.
Whether it matters is down to the listener and his expectations.
 
A Snell E new in 1981 cost $850, $2377 adjusted for inflation. What some of these later (and in some cases not as good) decedents of it cost is getting a bit silly...
 
You can't seriously compare the Snell E (I had some E III's), which were very much built to a price, and the Devore's, which are a no-compromise expression of a very talented designer's art. ( And the Snell used an 8 inch woofer.)

The Orangutangs are very much music first speakers, which would I think appeal to those who like Tannoy Dual Concentrics. JD achieves superb driver integration, big woofer notwithstanding.

I do have reservations about the claimed sensitivity, given the drivers used, and they are expensive, but they are very, very good at what they do.
 
I don't see why not. Here is a direct comparison with the chart Tuga provided above for the E iii you owned.
1091Snefig6.jpg

I stand by my previous comment!
 
djftw said:
I don't see why not. Here is a direct comparison with the chart Tuga provided above for the E iii you owned.
1091Snefig6.jpg

I stand by my previous comment!
Click to expand...

If you think for a moment that a similar FR means that the O/96 will sound the same as an E/III you're seriously deluded.

An analogy would be comparing a Golf with an S-class, because, hey, they've both got four wheels, and made in Germany.
 
True that, apart from looking remarkably like a blinged up Snell, having the same cabinet proportions, the frequency plot having a remarkable similarity, there's no comparison? I reckon if you asked most speaker nerds about them they'd say. Built in Wiston under Dangerfield in a converted mill shared with a microbrewery by Gerald Caprotti, who was the Snell tea boy in the 80s, not made in New York.
 
Me think the lady doth protest too much. I said it was a descendant of, not identical. And if you are being honest about the levels of similarity the comparison is clearly a Golf and an A3; we are not talking one front wheel drive supermini one rear wheel drive large saloon here.
 
tuga said:
Hmmm, even John Atkinson who downplays all but the most glaring shortcomings, dismissing them as "character", had this to say:

Even though I knew about the low-treble resonance and the lively enclosure, these problems were considerably less audible than I was expecting. Only with recordings of solo acoustic piano did they get in the way of the music by producing noticeable coloration, the piano's midrange sounding uneven, with some notes obscured.

Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/devore-fidelity-orangutan-o96-loudspeaker-measurements

If you read between the lines (as you should with audio reviews) you'll realise that the although he is toning it down resonance is indeed a bit obvious.
Whether it matters is down to the listener and his expectations.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what you'd expect. The point I was trying to make was the breakup doesn't sound nasty or harsh like a harder cone would. Softer cones are more forgiving.
 
fatmarley said:
That's pretty much what you'd expect. The point I was trying to make was the breakup doesn't sound nasty or harsh like a harder cone would. Softer cones are more forgiving.
Click to expand...

I agree with that (hard cones and domes are no longer allowed in my home) but such a strong resonance will always be objectionable.
 
I listen to Snell J's daily. I was excited to spend an hour at a dealer listening to the O/96's. I expected to gobsmacked, but I wasn't. I wonder how much of that has to do with being used to Snells (and not something like Focals)? I don't get enough listening time to justify Orangutans at the moment, but I'd still like to hear them in my room some day, in place of my Snells.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top