I’ve heard the FR 5 in my home and the FR 10 at AXPONA. The 5 is great, but I need a larger speaker like the 10.
Problem is going from a $3500 speaker to a $10,000 speaker is not possible. There is a big hole in the lineup pricewise I think.
How about a speaker in between?
A floorstanding 3 way with a passive radiator, for around $6-6500? FR 7.5 maybe?
Paul & Chris, what do you think ?
Right now, you can get a pair of FR10s for $6K, as long as you have trade-in gear that cost $4K when new. That’s how I got my FR10s last winter, and they’re really great speakers!
Funny how the FR10s have kind of developed into the black sheep of the family. A lot more media coverage on the other members of the family. Can’t recall reading a negative review though.
I had originally considered a 3-way LCR/center channel that could be used with the line around that price point but it didn’t make sense with our current manufacturing relationships.
I had also considered a 2.5 way tower, but we felt like it was too close in price to the FR10 (only omitting the planar midrange and moving the midwoofers close to the tweeter).
The issue with a 3-way bookshelf is that our planar midranges are quite tall (8-10”) which would make it kind of an odd form factor (think old VMPS 626). I see wharfedale selling this form factor of 3-way bookshelf but I would think that it must be a small part of their business.
In the future, I hope to expand our offering and offer more price points and combinations that will offer more solutions.
How would you feel about a less expensive secondary product line (with a more traditional appearance) where the top 3-way tower model was around $5000-7000?
I’m also wondering if the planar drivers could be mounted on top with the sides, top and rear of the cabinet open to make a partial OB design? It could save on cabinet costs, and give more of the “traditional” planar sound? (I own Maggies, can you tell? )
Unfortunately, an open baffle has much more narrow directivity in the midrange (because of the baffle cancellation) with the bass drivers being essentially omnidirectional below a fewhundred hz. With this radically different directivity between the midrange bass drivers, integration and off-axis behavior much worse and this causes poor sound quality.
With an open baffle, you could cross over below 100 Hz to a monopole woofer, however, this makes for a more complex system. Because of the loss in response from the baffle, ideally this would be an active system and then you’re looking at a 4 way, if using a planar midrange. While this as a dipole or cardioid would be an interesting design, it’s hard to scale this approach into a line of products that makes sense.
I get this impression also. I remember some posts here where people encouraged others to go for an FR 20 if they could. No question that the 20 is a better speaker than the 10 (as it should be given the price difference). But for me, the 10s would be both more affordable and fit better in my room. But would I be happy with them as my ultimate speaker purchase? I’m quite sure I would be with the 20s. if I hadn’t spent a huge amount of money getting work done on my house this summer, I’d probably go for them. But the 10s with the trade-in are a real value.
For me the weight of the Fr20s are a no go. There’s no way I would be able to lug those speakers up the stairs to my listening room on the second floor.
Maybe drop the passive radiators on the bookshelf model so that they can be placed closer to a wall? With the assumption that people will use a sub if they want low bass.
We’re going to build a big library/listening room in our barn and I really would like FR10 s in that new room.
That said, currently I listen to music in our living room with open kitchen. This room is far from ideal as a listening room. Untreated, not symmetrical and not big. Besides that I’m not the only “decision maker” at home! That’s why I choose for an intermediate system (Strata mk2 with completely restored Bang & Olufsen CX100 speakers and cheap sub that I still had from my old home cinema system).
I think this is relevant in this discussion, because I can imagine that many people that could be interested in a cheaper PSaudio speaker line, have a more or less similar room “situation” as I described above. At least over here in Holland .
In our current living room I really like the CX100 + sub: placed almost against the wall, they sound more than acceptable, the sound stage certainly is there, and they sound bigger than they actually are (I think about a third of an FR5…). Even rock, metal and electronic music is not a problem at 80-90 dB . And then the most important: my wife and kids like them too!
For situations like mine, I really think there is a market for a smaller sub $1500 speaker with optional sub. Designed to be placed (almost) against the wall in smaller (living) rooms.
… before you’re going to make remarks about my setup: when I place te CX100 speakers using @Paul ’s Audiophiles Guide, it sounds a lot better. However, since it makes the wife less happy…
I would really welcome something that could be used as a center channel speaker in a 5.1 setup. Yes, as Paul says, you have to choose what you want first, so I prioritize stereo first. That said, I also would like secondarily a 5.1 setup if possible. Releasing a PSA center would provide a balanced setup, meaning something whose capabilities and performance curves matched the PSA front left and right speakers. Hoping the upcoming PSA sub could also be configured for the .1, and figure out the surrounds later?
Oh, heck, hire a neighboring teenager to do the lugging for you. He might even stick around for you to demo the sound, possibly recruiting a new audiophile!