Review Hans Wetzel

[velociti]

I don't want to speculate too much on the in-room measurements. Unfortunately, that gives you a very narrow sliver of information that isn't really representative of what you'll ultimately hear. The elevated on-axis treble response is especially deceptive. What I think is pretty clear, however, is that the Silver Phantom's sub-100Hz bass is robust, to say the least.

Best,
Hans

[kameraguy]

We were not able to measure the Silver Phantom in the anechoic chamber at the NRC prior to the review going live, but our goal is to measure one in the near future. Keep an eye out on the review going forward. I'm as interested in the results as you are!

Thanks for reading.

Best,
Hans Wetzel

Greetings Hans,

Glad to see you are here participating in the forums I believe you have the most professional review going of the Phantom so far. Thank you for considering measuring the Phantoms so we can all see a properly done chart to compare to other speakers. This will be VERY interesting to see.

[deviousalet]

Hans, Thanks for joining here, and since you're here may I ask a few questions?

First I want to thank you again for writing a real review of the Phantom as audiophile speakers not lifestyle devices. Your comparisons to other speakers were great as far as you went. I would enjoy your comparison of the Phantom to the Revel F208 in the same way you compared the KEF R900. You wrote about the Definitive Technology’s Mythos ST-L but just glanced over the similarly semi-active GoldenEar. If you have more to say in the way of such comparisons I'm sure there's interest here. Also since you wrote about the Phatom vs. a passive speaker and associated costs for amplification what about comparing the Phantom to fully active speakers such as the ATC? I'm also always interested when reviewers compare not just within a price bracket but overall, especially with a speaker you yourself compared to the KEF Blade (a bit more expensive than the Phantom). So without asking for a whole other review I'd love to hear anything more you have to say about such comparisons.

You wrote that the Phantom imaging "remained relatively stable even when I sat off axis" but I'm unclear if you thought they did that well or only decently. How would you compare the Phantom in that regard to other high-end speakers you've heard in your room?

Devialet told you that the Phantom will support surround sound. Did they say anything about what they mean by "surround sound"? The biggest thing that keeps me from buying into the Phantom system is the lack of integration with home theatre so I'm very interested if Devialet told you anything about whether they mean true multi-channel surround sound or some extension to the "mix" that they currently provide if using a third Phantom as a center channel speaker.

Have you ever heard someone from Devialet explain why they made the power cord bright yellow? I wondered if they're making fun of cable-tweakers, or if they're just being French (loved your comments about the packaging in that regard). I assume the cord is easy to replace, and that the cord out of the Branch isn't bright yellow, but I'm just curious why they would choose the only color highlight on a minimalist wireless speaker to be a bright yellow cord.

You wrote that Devialet assured you that the DAC chip in the Phantom and Expert have identical performance except for thermal performance, but when I read the TI site those chips have difference specs.
TI PCM1798 (Phantom): 123dB SNR, 123dB dynamic range, & 0.001 THD+N
TI PCM1792 (Expert): 127dB SNR, 132/129dB mono/stereo dynamic range, & 0.0005 THD+N
I'm not saying that the specs of the chip mean anything about the sound of the device, but since you went to the effort to list the chips and Devialet says that they perform the same I wonder about the difference in the chip specs. I also wonder why they chose the TI chips over the ESS Sabre (ES9018: 130dB SNR, 135/133dB DNR), but I've read that the TI are easier to code for than the ESS so that may explain that one. Anyway, if you know more about their chip choices I'm interested.

I was glad to read in your review the specs. of the Phantom power supply. Did Devialet tell you any power-consumption figures or did you measure that? Devialet specifies <5W for the D200 yet we in this forum measure at least five times that in real life so I'm interested in what Devialet tells journalists about the Phantom's power consumption.

Again, thanks for an extremely useful review. I hope you don't mind me being full of questions still. I just enjoy reading your reviews and want more.

[jonstatt]

TI PCM1798 (Phantom): 123dB SNR, 123dB dynamic range, & 0.001 THD+N
TI PCM1792 (Expert): 127dB SNR, 132/129dB mono/stereo dynamic range, & 0.0005 THD+N

Indeed. I meant to look that up originally and forgot. The PCM1792 is a much more expensive DAC chip but it is a constant current output chip. This means it will generate more heat as mentioned in the review. I am assuming that the PCM1798 by virtue of the fact that it is not a constant current design means that it's specifications cannot be as good. However, although TI give those very high figures, it is near impossible to achieve them in practical designs. So possibly what Devialet meant, is that after they optimised the usage of the PCM1798 though clever design, that it measured about the same in "real terms" than the PCM1792. Or they just got it wrong! Either way, you could never hear the difference between 123dB and 127dB SNR, or 127 and 129dB DNR. It also wasn't clear to me if there is just a single DAC chip in there, or multiple ones which of course affects the numbers too. Also remember the Expert is a stereo device whereas the Phantom is a mono one.

[deviousalet]

Thanks for that explanation. I didn't know that one was constant current and one not. I do know not to ascribe sound quality to chips even though the chip choice can make a difference to sound quality. I brought it up here because the chips were called out in the review and I was interested to learn more. I think you've probably nailed it.

[velociti]

Hans, Thanks for joining here, and since you're here may I ask a few questions?

First I want to thank you again for writing a real review of the Phantom as audiophile speakers not lifestyle devices. Your comparisons to other speakers were great as far as you went. I would enjoy your comparison of the Phantom to the Revel F208 in the same way you compared the KEF R900. You wrote about the Definitive Technology’s Mythos ST-L but just glanced over the similarly semi-active GoldenEar. If you have more to say in the way of such comparisons I'm sure there's interest here. Also since you wrote about the Phatom vs. a passive speaker and associated costs for amplification what about comparing the Phantom to fully active speakers such as the ATC? I'm also always interested when reviewers compare not just within a price bracket but overall, especially with a speaker you yourself compared to the KEF Blade (a bit more expensive than the Phantom). So without asking for a whole other review I'd love to hear anything more you have to say about such comparisons.

You wrote that the Phantom imaging "remained relatively stable even when I sat off axis" but I'm unclear if you thought they did that well or only decently. How would you compare the Phantom in that regard to other high-end speakers you've heard in your room?

Devialet told you that the Phantom will support surround sound. Did they say anything about what they mean by "surround sound"? The biggest thing that keeps me from buying into the Phantom system is the lack of integration with home theatre so I'm very interested if Devialet told you anything about whether they mean true multi-channel surround sound or some extension to the "mix" that they currently provide if using a third Phantom as a center channel speaker.

Have you ever heard someone from Devialet explain why they made the power cord bright yellow? I wondered if they're making fun of cable-tweakers, or if they're just being French (loved your comments about the packaging in that regard). I assume the cord is easy to replace, and that the cord out of the Branch isn't bright yellow, but I'm just curious why they would choose the only color highlight on a minimalist wireless speaker to be a bright yellow cord.

You wrote that Devialet assured you that the DAC chip in the Phantom and Expert have identical performance except for thermal performance, but when I read the TI site those chips have difference specs.
TI PCM1798 (Phantom): 123dB SNR, 123dB dynamic range, & 0.001 THD+N
TI PCM1792 (Expert): 127dB SNR, 132/129dB mono/stereo dynamic range, & 0.0005 THD+N
I'm not saying that the specs of the chip mean anything about the sound of the device, but since you went to the effort to list the chips and Devialet says that they perform the same I wonder about the difference in the chip specs. I also wonder why they chose the TI chips over the ESS Sabre (ES9018: 130dB SNR, 135/133dB DNR), but I've read that the TI are easier to code for than the ESS so that may explain that one. Anyway, if you know more about their chip choices I'm interested.

I was glad to read in your review the specs. of the Phantom power supply. Did Devialet tell you any power-consumption figures or did you measure that? Devialet specifies <5W for the D200 yet we in this forum measure at least five times that in real life so I'm interested in what Devialet tells journalists about the Phantom's power consumption.

Again, thanks for an extremely useful review. I hope you don't mind me being full of questions still. I just enjoy reading your reviews and want more.

As you can imagine, I'm a bit wary of saying too much outside of my official review, which I (and I'm sure Devialet) would like to stand on its own. Generally, though, my comparisons were to speakers I've had on hand or had a great deal of experience with, as the DefTech and KEF R900 have each served as my long-time reference loudspeaker. And as I mention in my review, I think that for all of the Silver Phantom's talents, it is eclipsed by offerings from Magico and Vivid Audio, at least in terms of outright transparency and resolving ability. From what I've heard of KEF's Blade at numerous shows, I think it's fair to put it in the same echelon as the American and South African brands. I'm sure I could say the same thing about other top brands, such as Rockport, TAD, Focal, to name just a few.

Best,
Hans

[kameraguy]

....I think that for all of the Silver Phantom's talents, it is eclipsed by offerings from Magico and Vivid Audio, at least in terms of outright transparency and resolving ability.....

Best,
Hans

Hi Hans,

Which Magico model(s) do you refer in terms of sonic ability? For example, do you think the Q1 would be a better speaker than the Silver Phantoms, or are you talking about their large floor standers?

[deviousalet]

As you can imagine, I'm a bit wary of saying too much outside of my official review...

Sorry if I asked too many questions. I don't understand the politics of this industry. I've been having fun reading a B&W rep. answering a lot of questions on another forum and was hoping you had as much leeway. I look forward to you writing more where ads appear next to your words. Wherever you write them I'm very interested in further technical details and especially high-end comparisons.

[jonstatt]

[quote pid='33781' dateline='1454477159']
As you can imagine, I'm a bit wary of saying too much outside of my official review, which I (and I'm sure Devialet) would like to stand on its own. Generally, though, my comparisons were to speakers I've had on hand or had a great deal of experience with, as the DefTech and KEF R900 have each served as my long-time reference loudspeaker. And as I mention in my review, I think that for all of the Silver Phantom's talents, it is eclipsed by offerings from Magico and Vivid Audio, at least in terms of outright transparency and resolving ability. From what I've heard of KEF's Blade at numerous shows, I think it's fair to put it in the same echelon as the American and South African brands. I'm sure I could say the same thing about other top brands, such as Rockport, TAD, Focal, to name just a few.

Best,
Hans

I have been doing some side-by-side comparisons with my Kef Reference 4.2 speakers and Byrston power amplifiers. The Kef's were about 6000 USD (4500 GBP) when they were new so of course in today's money would be even more. It is quite interesting observing the differences with the Silver Phantoms, and I will write my thoughts on this separately in due course. But one thing I will say is that I think Devialet's focus on demonstrating the Phantoms almost entirely for their bass response is meaning a lot of audiophiles have already stuck their nose up at this product and as per other threads on other forums, regarding them as a throwback "ghetto blaster" from the 80s. This is a terrible injustice to these spherical wonders but moreso is almost entirely of Devialet's own doing.

[deviousalet]

Devialet certainly is making an interesting choice trying to market the Phantom primarily as a wireless lifestyle speaker for rich kids. It can be so much more than that but Devialet chooses to send single speakers to stereo system reviewers and plays many Phantom poorly set up at even high-end shows. They seem almost antagonistic to audiophile use of the Phantom. That's one reason I've been so happy to see them letting quality reviews like Hans' examine two Phantom as audiophile speakers.