Joseph Audio Pulsar (TAS 203)

A Small Speaker with a Big Sound

Country star Minnie Pearl always opened her performances with a big ‘ol “Howdy!” (Actually, it was more like “Howwdeeeee,” with the end of the phrase escalating in pitch when she hit the “d.”) The Joseph Audio Pulsar deserves a similarly effusive welcome. When I asked Jeff Joseph why he created the Pulsar speaker he replied, “I’ve always wanted to make a really excellent mini-monitor speaker. The midrange/woofer I developed for the Pulsar was the missing link.
Finally, I had all the parts.“ So, in essence, the new Pulsar is a mini-Pearl that fits into small spaces where the Pearl can’t. It also costs only one-third the price.

 

Pulsar Tech Tour

The Pulsar speakers look a lot like the top section of a Pearl, but with a slightly smaller enclosure. The Pulsar employs the same tweeter, which has a special design using a hexadym magnet system. Instead of a big spheroid donut magnet behind the dome that reflects energy, there are six small yet powerful neodymium magnet structures. Since they take up less space there’s more room for absorptive material to damp the tweeter’s rear wave. According to Jeff, “There’s as much energy coming off the rear of a dome tweeter as off the front. The problem with most tweeters is the large reflective surface of a magnet right behind the dome. With our tweeter we can adequately damp the tweeter’s back wave.”

All Joseph Audio speakers employ the Infinite Slope Crossover. Ex-McIntosh product designer, Richard Modafferi, patented it back in 1988. During the intervening years licensee Jeff Joseph has made substantial modifications to Modafferi’s design. The Pulsar speaker includes Joseph’s latest refinements on the Infinite Slope crossover design.

As you might infer from its name, the Infinite Slope crossover has a much steeper slope than a conventional crossover. Conventional speakers with regular crossovers are more likely to exhibit audible (off-axis) discontinuities between drivers because the much wider span where the two driver’s frequency ranges overlap. With the Infinite Slope crossover the hand-off from tweeter to midrange/woofer occurs over a much narrower span of frequency ranges.

A first-order crossover has a 6dB-per-octave roll-off between drivers. In comparison the Pulsar uses an extremely steep crossover for the low pass and an 18dB-per-octave third-order for the tweeter’s roll-off. Jeff told me, “The lowpass filter drops extremely fast until it hits about -41dB at which point the attenuation tapers off. This is the benefit of the Infinite Slope technique—it has a very steep initial drop, and reduces wave interference much more effectively than a standard 24dB-per-octave network does. It allows the two drivers to mesh in a more coherent fashion than a conventional crossover.”

The original Infinite Crossover design was completely symmetrical, meaning that both the tweeter and the midrange driver had the same crossover slope. Jeff adds, “The Infinite Slope filter system we use now isn’t like the one we started with eighteen years ago. Now we use a steeper slope on the woofer than we do on the tweeter. This gives us a more seamless crossover and improves the quickness of the entire system because the decay is cleaner.”

Proponents of first-order crossovers often point to the more extreme phase shifts that accompany steeper crossover schemes as one of the reasons they prefer simpler crossover methodologies. The Infinite Slope crossover is actually “phase-matched” since it introduces a full 360-degree phase rotation in its crossover. But since the actual frequency region of the crossover is so narrow and the 360-degree shift puts the two drivers back into phase coherence (except for the fact that the woofer is one full cycle behind the tweeter), the audible effect of this phase shift is less than you will hear on a conventional multi-driver first- or second-order crossover. According to Jeff, “When you use a ‘wrapped phase’ measurement like we do with the Infinite Slope, you overlay the phase shifts from both drivers so they can be adjusted to sum together nicely. The final result is the phase shift occurs over too narrow a frequency range to be audible.”

Another advantage of an Infinite Slope crossover design is that the on and off-axis response curves of the speaker can be far more similar to each other than with conventional crossovers. Jeff explains, “When you listen to live acoustic music you aren’t confined to a narrow and artificial window. You can move around and the sound doesn’t change much. That’s because the power response of live acoustic instruments in a room is more even without the irritating artifacts and incoherencies of speakers with conventional crossover designs.” In theory and practice the Pulsar behaves more like an acoustic instrument in a real-world space than most loudspeakers.

Comments

ctbarker32@gmail.com -- Thu, 07/08/2010 - 11:45

I recently heard these speakers at the Capital Audiofest. I thought they sounded very nice. Fast as the reviewer accurately describes.

But, I wish the reviewer would have done some research on what makes these speakers tick. You can buy each of the drivers (Seas Millenium tweeter and Excel woofer) for $200 each. So, you pay $6k for the furniture box and fairy/unicorn dust crossover?

Look, I like these speakers but don't think they justify the pricing.

I recently researched and bought a similar type speaker. My search eventually led me to purchase the Ascend Acoustics Sierra-1 speakers. The cost was $800 for the pair shipped to my door with 30 day eval. Are the Sierra-1's as good as the Pulsars? Who knows? I've now heard both and believe the Sierra-1'a are very competitive.

At $2k, the Pulsars would be pretty competitive. At $7k they are just priced ridiculously.

I wish reviewers would use more context. There are hundreds of speakers out there that are basically a nice looking furniture box with off the shelf components. Yeah, I know they all sprinkle their fairy dust. The Internet allows the consumer to uncover all sorts of details. Audio manufacturers need to earn a customers respect.

-CB

Steven Stone -- Thu, 07/08/2010 - 15:25

Hopefully Jeff Joseph will answer why the speakers are priced as they are.

I'm glad you found the Ascend Sierra speakers to your liking. I suspect they have a very different crossover and cabinet design and cabinet construction than the Pulsars.

Steven Stone
Contributor to The Absolute Sound, EnjoytheMusic.com, Vintage Guitar Magazine, and other fine publications

Steven Stone -- Sat, 07/10/2010 - 12:32

Here's a link to Jeff's reply:

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/speakers/messages/29/296964.html

Steven Stone
Contributor to The Absolute Sound, EnjoytheMusic.com, Vintage Guitar Magazine, and other fine publications

brian -- Fri, 07/09/2010 - 11:05

The Minnie Pearl reference is cute. But where's the price tag hanging off the speaker?

Brian Walsh
Essential Audio  ~  Chicago area ~ 773-809-HIFI (4434)

markthis3 -- Sun, 07/11/2010 - 14:02

For as long as I've purchased stereo i've always heard that speakers have the biggest markup.
Dealers don't have nearly as much price flexibility on electronics as they do speakers. Now when
you regularly see amplifiers in the $10k - $30k range i wonder if that still holds true, but seriously,
when you see speakers costing as much as a new car or sometimes a house, you know you're
getting royally ripped off. Audio prices have skyrocketed at the top end. I've owned speakers with
retail prices of between $5000 and $10000. After buying new, try and get anywhere close to what
you paid for them...50% depreciation is common. Sorry, i have a hard time justifying paying car
prices for a 50 - 200 lb wooden box with a few speaker drivers thrown in. If you think about a 3500 lb
car with all it's sophisticated electronics, plastics, metals & high labor costs and compare it to that
similarly priced wooden box, it's hard to swallow. Yes, i know they sell more cars than speakers
and gain economies of scale, but you have to laugh at some of the prices they're trying to gouge
the consumer. Now i haven't heard these Joseph speakers so i can't comment on their value. I'm
just speaking about high end audio overall. I wish reviewers would look more critically at the cost
to build and design these units versus their pricing. I understand you pay for more than just labor
and materials, but also intellectual capital. Even so, high end audio seems to have gotten way
out of touch with economic reality. Do you really think a 15 ft speaker cable should command a
$10,000 price tag ?

Ricardo37 -- Sat, 08/28/2010 - 13:18

Very well put. If You think that a speaker as 20 diferent parts and a car as 2000 ... Hi-end is a non-sense ground for comum people, but this is not a comum people market. I know someone that as a 6 figure system. He put it this way :- "Life as been good to me. My Children as the best education. I don't take drugs, do casinos or have other women, so ..."

PS: I find the price for my B&W 803D acceptable, but the drivers are more sofisticated.

PS2: Do You know the cost for the Mini Magico II supports? Supports ... That's what a call total non-sense.

SLCity -- Sun, 02/12/2012 - 16:27

I have owned the B&W 803D, and in my opinion the Pulsars are the superior speaker. I am keeping the Pulsars and would never consider buying the 803Ds again. So, common sense is to listen to your system and find the best reproduction of recorded music available: shut your eyes and turn off your calculator.

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.