|
 |
|
|
The Two Towers
|
|
In mid November 2003, I read a post on Home Theatre Central enquiring about Equinox's flagship, the imposing Jupiter floorstander. The poster, Simon, explained that he currently owned a set of VAF I-93s, also a towering floorstander and VAF's flagship. At the time, his enquiry centered on the apparent value of the Jupiters, given their size and weight and the quality and number of the drivers. No one could help him as no one had heard both in decent listening environments (unlike trade shows), especially not directly.
About a month later, Simon posted again, this time asking about subwoofers. While this subject is quite standard for HT, in this case the intended usage was for stereo music. Even more surprising was the intended speakers requiring bass reinforcement was not a pair of small standmounts but his VAF I-93s. Simon explained that he found the bass output of the I-93s to be deep but rather lean. He also reposted his earlier enquiry about I-93's and Jupiters on the aus.hi-fi newsgroup with an explanation about his very slight dissatisfaction. On Home Theatre Central, he received various pieces of advice on subwoofers while on aus.hi-fi, he was met with disbelief and a questioning about the capabilities of his system, particularly his amplifier. Simon then contacted Equinox and Rick Stadelmaier agreed to loan him a set of Jupiters for evaluation (no small thing when you consider the size and weight of the Jupiters coupled with the fact that Equinox is based in Sydney while Simon lives in Gippsland). When Simon posted this on Home Theatre Central, I expressed my interest in hearing these two flagships together and added that I owned an ME850 amplifier, which Simon agreed would settle any questions about his amplifier.
Rick duly delivered the Jupiters in early January and the following weekend, I drove to Gippsland with my ME850, my Legacy preamp, Phillips 963 SA DVD/SACD player and some CDs. Simon had informed me that he hadn't hooked up the I-93s since the Jupiters were delivered but didn't tell me anything else about his thoughts, preferring me to listen with as open a mind as possible. Given my earlier experience comparing VAF I-66s with Equinox Solstices, I expected the Jupiter to have more weight than the I-93 but for other aspects of their sound to be basically indistinguishable (since this was my impression of the I-66 and Solstice) - I was both right and wrong.
After unloading all my gear, we first listened to the Jupiters so I could get an idea of how they sounded in Simon's listening room with his system. Basically, it sounded magnificent. The level of detail was staggering, imaging was precise and soundstaging and depth were huge. Compared with my memory of listening in Rick's room, the Jupiters did seem a touch light in midbass and a just a bit shouty but it was nothing to complain about and was the sort of variation one would expect with different rooms and equipment. We mainly listened to various jazz, acoustic and orchestral Chesky pieces that I had brought along since Simon was well and truly accustomed to the sound with his CDs.
Having satisfied myself that I had a solid impression of how the Jupiters sounded, we then wrestled each of the 160kg Jupiters to the other end of the room and replaced them with the relatively lightweight, though still heavy 100kg I-93s. Simon placed the I-93s so that their rear was basically in the same position as that of the Jupiters (about 500mm from the side and rear walls) having experimented with both and finding that was the optimal position for both speakers.
The first thing that was apparent was how small the I-93s looked in comparison to the Jupiters - while they normally look huge, when compared with the Jupiters they looked positively anaemic. The next thing I noticed was that they were far less sensitive - the I-93's required a volume setting over twice as high as the Jupiters for the same listening level. I then concentrated on the bass as that was what Simon was not totally happy with and yes, the I-93s did sound lean in comparison to the Jupiters, thought the quality of the bass (tightness and speed) was just as good. The odd thing, however, was that some notes seem to disappear while higher and lower notes were present. I concluded that the room had a mid bass suckout mode and that the Jupiter had a more robust bass output which allowed it to play through this which tallied with the first of my expectations (the volume level we listened at was quite high so it wasn't a case of just needing to turn up the dial).
What I wasn't expecting was the noticeably different voicing of the speakers. Unlike my experience with the Solstice and I-66, I found I-93 sounded a lot more forward than the Jupiter due to greater emphasis in the upper midrange region. This was more in line with the voicing of the DC-X and like that speaker, the initial impression was of great detail and imaging. It was soon apparent, however, that this came at the price of proper imaging, soundstaging and depth. As with the DC-X, the upper midrange emphasis caused the musical image to collapse into the speakers themselves which was especially noticeable with classical choral pieces. It was always obvious where the sound was coming from and the presentation was flat and closed when compared to the Jupiter. It was also rather fatiguing, especially with slightly nasally and sibilant material, like Kasey Chamber's 'Not Pretty Enough'. Still, the I-93 was refined without the obvious harshness of the DC-X and all other aspects of its presentation was on par with the Jupiter.
We broke for a coffee/tea and I discussed my thoughts with Simon to find him in full agreement. He was also quite surprised by the level of difference between the two speakers and had only been hoping that the Jupiters would be like the I-93s with more bass. That they were so obviously superior in communicating the musical image was as unexpected to to him as it was to me. Simon also added that the I-93s had seemed lean in bass at other houses he had previously lived in.
At this point we decided to debunk any theory that his amplifier was at fault but hit upon a complication - I had forgotten to bring along the balanced leads that the ME850 required so we resorted to butchering a cheap pair of interconnects that I had brought along. This achieved, we replaced Simon's amplifier and played some of the same selections as before. It was immediately obvious that the bass presentation of the I-93s was not due to any inadequacies of Simon's amplifier (the ME850 also had a bit less of the upper midrange push and treble - probably due to the crappy cabling).
After switching back to Simon's amp, I took out a CD of test tones and we went searching for the bass suckout mode. It turned out to be a very sharp and deep notch centered on 61Hz. At this frequency, the I-93s basically went silent with output returning to normal levels about 4Hz on either side of this. We played tones down to 20Hz where the I-93 began to rolloff. To check if it was that particular position, the I-93s were then moved right into the room corners and bass output was certainly stronger but the very strong 61Hz suckout was still evident. This test was repeated with the Jupiters and it was quite clear that with a volume setting that gave the same output at 75Hz, the Jupiter had far more bass below this down to its noticeable rolloff of about 25Hz - at 20Hz, the Jupiter had rolled off quite markedly although output may still have been as strong as the I-93 at this point (or maybe not). The 61Hz notch did affect the Jupiter, reducing its output in this region but it still had decent presence while the I-93 had almost none (unless it was fully corner loaded). All this testing with tones was done at low volume in order to protect the speakers .
Finally, we tried changing the source from Simon's DAC to my Phillips DVD/SACD player just for fun. This showed just how important the source is in a high end system as the music became quite flat and lifeless, even playing SACDs. We ended having a debate on the relative importance of the source vs the speakers. Certainly, at the level of Simon's system, both are critical.
Overall, this may sound like a damning review of the I-93 but it is not. In isolation it is a very good speaker and communicates well. It is only in comparison to the Jupiter that it seems slightly coloured and in some rooms, its lean bass output may be an advantage. At the end of the day, however, the Jupiters were clearly superior in voicing with the I-93 only having a slight (musically irrelevant, except for pipe organ aficionados) advantage in extension. In retrospect, I feel the I-66 may be the pick of the VAF stable as it has an even voicing similar to that of Equinox products, aside from the dry bass (which now seems to be a VAF trait).
Having heard Equinox speakers many times, I knew my friend Rick had fine products but I was totally unprepared for such a decisive margin of superiority. From my previous experience with the VAF I-66 and the Solstice, I expected the flagships to be much closer in musical performance. Given that the Equinox speakers have the same voicing and similar refinement across the range, they are worth investigating for anyone looking in the pricing range of their various speakers.
Greg Kaan
Simon’s footnote.........
I have owned VAF l-93's for nearly 5 years, and in that time been satisfied with their overall performance. It’s the longest l have ever kept a pair of speakers so that speaks for itself! They are constructed to a very high standard and backed by excellent customer service. However, l had a couple of niggling doubts with them that just wouldn’t go away. l was always a little disappointed with their bass, finding it very deep but somewhat lean. The speakers had been through many house moves and l always remained disappointed, having hoped with each move that my long lost bass may appear. It was also noticeable on some recordings that the upper midrange could be a little bright at times, which when combined with their forward midrange presentation, could become fatiguing at higher volumes rather quickly. After having my Audio Note Dac 3 extensively upgraded l was more impressed than ever with the 93's as the DAC allowed them to show their best, but still l had doubts about the same aspects of their performance. It was time to see what else was out there.
Having been an avid supporter of OZ made Hi Fi for many years l thought l was well aware of all that was on offer, but until recently had never heard of Equinox. l actually stumbled across Rick Stadelmaier’s Equinox Speakers on of all places, a car forum. Rick responded to a post somebody started enquiring about what others did for a crust with a link to his website. The first thing that jumped out at me was a pic of the Jupiter, complete with its 7 drivers and massive cabinetry. Wow l thought, l had been expecting low end stuff, not these monsters. A quick look at their specs and l knew l had to hear them. On paper at least, they appeared to be unprecedented value for money, and if they were the sum of their impressive Audax Aerogel drivers and massive cabinets, possibly the solution to my bass woes. Knowing that l would never buy any piece of HiFi equipment without being able to hear it playing in my room through my system, l contacted Rick to see if there was someway l could arrange to 'loan' a pair of Jupiter’s. Rick was very forthcoming and within a week of contacting him, had with his wife Trish, personally delivered a pair of Jupiter’s to me in Gippsland from his home in Sydney. Wow, what unbeatable customer service! Getting the Jupiter’s into my listening room wasn't the mammoth task you would expect, it was obvious Rick and Trish had a very well rehearsed routine for unpacking and moving the 160kg Jupiter’s.
First impressions were pleasing but not overwhelming. l listened for maybe half an hour and took a break. Coming back to them several hours later l was immediately taken aback at how beautifully detailed the midrange was. Sure the bass was there just as l hoped, but the inner detail, coherence and 3 dimensional imaging were like nothing l had ever heard. Details appeared on CD's l had played many times that l either wasn’t aware of, or weren’t able to discern from other aspects of the performance. Suddenly each instrument had its own space. Music had so much more life and rhythm, vocals sounded more 'real' than l have ever experienced, singers had chests where as through the l-93's they didn’t seem to have the same weight to their performance. The Jupiter’s have a smoother midrange than the l-93's, not to mention a much superior bass performance. l found myself listening with a smile on my face and tingle up my spine. l couldn’t believe that l could have this level of performance in my listening room within my budget.
The midrange of the Jupiter’s isn’t forward like the l-93's and l believe that’s the reason l initially wasn't overwhelmed by their capabilities. After nearly 5 years with the l-93's l had to give my brain time to re-adjust to the Jupiter’s presentation before their considerable strengths really shone through. No speaker can be judged in short listening sessions and this experience reinforced that belief. l was hoping for more bass, but wasn’t expecting the inner detail, beautifully smooth & liquid midrange and huge imaging these speakers possess. Its almost as though the bigger bass l longed for suddenly didn’t seem to be as much of a priority, even though it was all there in its gut thumping glory.
So what aspects of the l-93's performance do l prefer over the Jupiter’s? Well the only area the l-93's better the Jupiter’s is in going low. Experimenting with Greg’s test tone CD confirmed what l was hearing, that the VAF's do indeed have useable output to 20hz, where as the Jupiter’s roll off as claimed by Equinox at around 25hz. l own only one music CD where this could be audibly heard and so is of no significance for music lovers. Bass performance of the Jupiter’s is vastly superior to the 93's in weight, timbre and tonal correctness; they can move a lot more air. There is nothing else about the l-93's that gives them an edge over the Jupiter’s IMO.
This is my first attempt at a written subjective description of a hi-fi component. As such, l feel my limited explanation of the differences between the two speakers, and lack of audiophile jargon in summing up their performance doesn’t do the Jupiter’s justice. These are sensational speakers when price isn’t taken into consideration, but l believe stunning value when you consider Equinox make this level of performance available for $7000! They cost similar money to the l-93's and are, frankly, a high end bargain.
The Equinox Jupiter’s are an astounding example of Australian produced Hi Fi and, having now sold my I-93s, will be very soon taking pride of place in my system. But don’t take my word for it, hear them for yourself!
Simon G.
January 2004.
Relevant Websites
|
|
