Review of Hyperion 968
ems -- Sat, 11/07/2009 - 04:10
In March of this year, Jim Hannon reviewed the Hyperion 968. His review was nothing if not laudatory. Nothing to stop one going right out and purchasing this loudspeaker.
However, I have come across a review on the IAR site (http://www.iar-80.com/page156.html) that raises issues about the speaker's design and sound quality. We have, according to this review, a potentially great, but presently imperfect design. The review is especially valuable for the extensive description and explanation of the imperfections. None it seems is major, each can be addressed and corrected, and this would put the speaker squarely back in the limelight.
I wonder if Mr Hannon or anyone else would care to comment.
Thanks in advance (and apologies in case I have posted this observation and question to the wrong forum)
EMS
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
I have Hyperion 968...the article exaggerates to say the least, however I have to admit I'm using reversed polarity on my midrange driver...not a major difference though, if any...they're fine speakers...easy to drive and easy to listen to...listening position needs to be at least around 8 feet for drivers to integrate perfectly.
I agree with Branislav. IAR reviewed an early version of the Hyperion 968, probably mis-wired, and jumped into conclusions.
My system is set up for maximum phase integrity: zero-feedback amplifiers, laser and time-aligned speakers (thanks to the 968s midt-treble tilt control, similar to Wilson's Sasha), single speaker cable plus short jumpers to woofer and tweeter, selective control/absortion of near-wall, floor and ceiling reflections with acoustic panels that have even absortion above 300Hz and no additional signal processing besides my CD player's internal tube preamp.
In-room RT60 is right on target for listening to music in a 14 x 20 ft room with close to golden-ratio proportions (including the ceiling).
My CD player/preamp has an absolute phase switch and I can easily hear inverted phase within 5 seconds. Unfortunately about 5% of my record collection's absolute phase was messed up at the recording or mastering stage.
For example, on Rosa Passos Telarc SACD, Ron Carter's bass is recorded in reverse phase as compared to Rosa Passos's vocals. I can choose between boomy bass with sweet vocals or more defined bass with excessive sibiliance on vocals!!
A speaker that can pinpoint wrong phase in the bass as compared to the midrange is very rare: think Quad 2905, Magnepan's largest panels and Soundlabs. Wilson and Sonus Faber speakers can pull this trick too.
I tried reversing the midrange, woofer and tweeter connections one at a time, they are all phase correct as factory-wired and present an outgoing pulse when presented with a positive-going transient. I have verified this with a Phonics Real time analyser, it has a phase test function.
In-room response when the speakers are positioned according to the rules of thirds is essentially flat (+ or - 2 db) from 30 Hz to 12K Hz, then there is a slow treble roll-off, as every good speaker should sound in-room (not in an anechoic chamber).
Disclaimer: I am a Hyperion dealer, but I could have easily replaced the 968s with more expensive speakers, I have never felt the urge, because they do sound very musical. I am not trying to sell more speakers because I have no stock left and my country is retaliating against USA trade barriers, it will impose 100% duties on USA-made speakers and amplifiers, so I do not expect speaker sales in the future.
BTW the 968s do the piano's and double bass lowest string pretty nicely.
I am not saying these are the the top of the hill (I sometimes dream of Magico speakers), just that the IAR review is awfully wrong and Hyperion 968 speakers are extremely musical and one hell of a bargain, as your reviewer duly noted.
Thanks to both of you for your obvervations, in particular to Carlos Souza for his detailed remarks about phase.
My predicament is that should I decide to buy the 968 (or for that matter the 938) I shall be doing so without having auditioned them (never mind having tested them at home). Here in Switzerland, the local representative does not stock them. He does say they require large rooms. Mine is approximately the size of Carlos' room though with two glass walls and a 'quasi'-wall with openings on either side to the space beyond. I fear that the Hyperions, being ported designs, could overload an area like this (?)
I alternate presently between Martin Logan Ascents and Gallo Reference 3.1 speakers (with a slight preference for the former). Solid state amplication is by NuForce and the principal source is the Bryston CD., with cables from Analysis Plus.
Should You have any comments regarding speaker comparisons - the impossible question: "will the Hyperion sound better? "- I should dearly like to read them. Minimizing the risk of buying sight unseen, sound unheard is the name of the game.
EMS
I have listened to ML speakers countless times at a close friend's house and owned Gallo 3.1 speakers, besides being a Gallo dealer at the time (not anymore).
I have upgraded from Gallo 3.1 to Hyperion 938 to Hyperion 968.
If you prefer ML to Gallo Ref, I believe you will prefer the 938 to the 968. The 938 has a lively, clean, natural midrange and outstanding treble air. Its overall sound is somewhat similar to a ML speaker, with plenty of definition and soundstaging cues.
Also, its bass tuning is higher than the 968 and the bass port is in front of the box, which allows less room interaction / back wall bass reinforcement. Hyperion uses good old-fashioned bass tuning, they shoot for lowest distortion, not lowest frequency, therefore IME the 938 does not boom nor has ever overloaded a medium sized room.
The bass quality will not be as tight and fast as the Gallo's, but it is well integrated with the speaker's voice, In fact, I find the 938 more coherent than most box speakers, except for Sonus Faber speakers.
Best of all, frequency response aside, the 938 it is an amazingly musical speaker that provides oodles of joy when listening to jazz combo, piano, vocals and chamber music. It is not a rock&roll speaker, it will not shake the room, it is a speaker for those that appreciate the beauty in tone, musical details and correct timbre.
They sound clean, nimble, musical, not fatiguing nor bright. Their magic is in its midrange. They can also sound suave and soothing, if the music and your source are up to it.
The 968 can overload the room, because it is tuned lower and the bass port is located in the back. If you want to be safe about bass overload, go with the 938. Both speakers have essentially the same midrange performance and musicality.
I hope this helps
Second disclaimer: see my previous post.
Off and on over the years, I have read Moncrief's reviews. He must be smoking some good stuff!