I was worried
I agreed to trade in the Nimbus White as partial payment for the Joule White 3 before it even existed. That’s not my typical M.O. when it comes to audio gear. Knowing the performance gulf that exists between components and speakers, it behooves me as a fanatic and a reviewer to hear them before buying. But, something has developed over the years, a “sixth sense” about who are the gifted designers, such that when I lock on to one of them, having heard their wares, I gain confidence that I will enjoy nearly anything they make. This is not an infallible guide to products, but it usually pays off. Such is the case with Vapor Audio, as I have never heard a poor speaker from them. I have always heard speakers from Vapor that challenge prestige speakers costing multiples more. Finally, had I not owned the Nimbus White I would not enter into such an agreement.
Though the communications with Ryan was sporadic, the zeal he displayed to explain all of my investigations into the design was seemingly limitless. Even when at times his personal life was quite hectic, he rehearsed for me the logic and methodology of every change to the speaker’s design. I concurred with all of them, and only had to push for a pet tweak, massive gauge on the internal wiring. Once the Perfect Storm was finished for AXPONA 2015 and I heard it, we agreed that the Verastarr wiring internally was the way to go for the Joule 3.
Speaking of the internal wiring, I was in favor of heavy copper conductors to the Audio Technology bass driver. However, I settled for relying upon Ryan’s intuition and the excellence of the Verastarr products. If the bass was as refined as that of the Perfect Storm I would be happy. It turned out upon reception of samples sent by Ryan that all of the internal wiring was of similar smaller copper OFC strands twisted together in various gauge wires. Several of these were bundled to create my heavier gauge cable for the bass (7 AWG) and fewer bundled for the midrange (approx. 12 AWG), with a single paired run of 18 AWG for the RAAL tweeter. My ears cannot fault the selection of wire, or the implementation of it. I am grateful that I yielded to Ryan’s design methods.
Not just pushing the envelope, busting out of it!
Vision to see far beyond one’s current status can be difficult, especially if we do not perceive any difficulties at the moment. Complacency counterbalances the discontent that might prod us to make changes. There is a weird condition audiophiles find themselves falling into, a sort of smug satisfaction with the system’s sound, such that we begin to think we really have some of the best sound available. Truthfully, it is nothing other than an ego trip, often generated by the desire to not spend more on the system.
When I was younger and had far less disposable income I wanted desperately to believe that I was finished, that the sound was nearly as good as it could get in an absolute sense. My conundrum over system cost influenced my attitude toward the sound, such that the system had to sound really good, for there were few alternatives. However, with exposure to better gear through attending shows and reviewing I found that paradigm unsustainable. The truth is there exists an enormous gap, a veritable Grand Canyon scale difference, in performance of gear and systems. The only way to assure you will experience the depths of those differences is to spend more on the system.
Relying upon the ubiquitous analogy of vehicles, a person can resolve to move no further up the car chain than a sub-compact, where they can find one of the “world’s best” subcompact cars. This may ensure they have a positive experience, but this in no way means they have moved significantly toward one of the best of all cars in the world. For there are entire classes of vehicles better in nearly every respect, save sticker price, fuel economy and parking space convenience.
Applying this analogy to speakers, one can get a lovely speaker at many price points. However, snagging a terrific small monitor at under $500 does not mean that one has marched into the realm of top end sound. No, to do so one has to leave the “sub-compact” speaker and move to a far more expensive full size design. Budget-minded audiophiles may not appreciate this conclusion, but it is the truth when it comes to performance; i.e., typical sub-compact speakers cannot reach below 40Hz, but sizable floor standing speakers can reach approximately 25-30Hz. Big deal, a gap of fifteen to twenty Hertz. Yes, it is a big deal, since a lot goes on in those twenty Hertz. Frequency response is one of the more obvious of the many variables pertaining cost to performance in speakers.
My point in discussing this is that there exist several price-to-performance plateaus in audio systems. A rough approximation of them might be $5K, $10K, $25K, $50K, $100K, $250K, and above. Speakers are bit trickier to nail down, as I have seen and heard offerings that in terms of performance are outliers. That is where Vapor Audio wishes to earn its keep. Can a little speaker shop make a product competitive in most respects with behemoths of the industry churning out pricey speakers?
Where Vapor scores and where it misses
Vapor is closing in on being a juggernaut, a force to be reckoned with. A couple aspects of speaker production and sales hold it back from leapfrogging the industry giants, yet be assured they are not related to the sonic performance. One aspect is the fit and finish, which is dazzling, yet on my pair of speakers having some imperfections. A Vapor speaker is a drool-worthy product; my Joule White 3’s have Sapele veneer finished with a rich deep amber hue and a complementary Aston Martin “Bridgewater Bronze” paint on the primary (front and top) sides. How much speaker envy does an audiophile garnish when he describes the Aston Marten paint on his speakers? Do a search for images of this paint and car, and you will see it is opulent. How does it look on a speaker? Every bit as racy as the Aston Martin AM 310, which was inspiration for its selection.
What does this upscale appearance do for the owner? It makes me love the appearance, and appearance is a big deal when it comes to speakers. There are enough speakers in the world that I don’t have to settle for a good sounding, ugly speaker. I bought Vandersteens when I didn’t have money. Notice how top end Vandersteen speakers are not an MDF box with speaker grill fabric wrapped around. Why is that? It is because appearance matters, and it is a big part of whether a person will love a speaker. I could like speakers that appeared as a couple of sacks and played well, but I love speakers that look delicious and play even better. I will enjoy these speakers fully as both my ears and eyes are feasting on them.
Here’s the painful part: it is the fit in “fit and finish” that is beneath world-class standards. Some aspects of the build issues were known to me, some not. Some can be addressed easily, some not. There are tape residue marks on the top of one upper module that Ryan said will be buffed out when he visits. I couldn’t rub them out, but I’m not about to try agents or a powered buffer on the mirror-like finish. I’ll trust he will visit and do the remedy. Ryan said they have moved to a different tape now that does not leave any residue.
The speakers arrived showing a gap between one outrigger on the bass cabinet and the cabinet wall, but the mistake is repeated on both cabinets. Ryan explained to me that this could be corrected by placing a tiny shim under the bottom portion of the outrigger, thus changing the angle of approach to the cabinet, allowing it to be snugged tight. This was a mistake due to rushing the build, easy to fix, but it should not have happened on a speaker with purported high pedigree. It means Vapor needs to tighten quality control. Such mistakes must be eliminated completely if Vapor wants to be included in the field of “me too” speakers.
The other defect is one I was aware of, so I will not present it as though it was a rude discovery. Vapor pushes the envelope when it comes to finishes, using rare woods and offering more natural appearing finishes if the customer wishes. Those more “natural” appearing finishes can contain blemishes that might be challenging to the eye. Customers need to be exceptionally clear with Vapor about what they want in finishes. They must be responsible consumers when they give an open-ended order for natural finishes, as they might get a naturally occurring feature that appears as a blemish in the finish. Ryan shared that some customers have been inconsistent about such things, initially willing to accept more “raw” finishes, but balking once the speaker is delivered.
Sapele veneer is not available at Home Depot. It’s tough to get large sheets of it for covering a speaker like the Joule White 3. Ryan used the best lot of Sapele he had, which was just enough to do all four cabinets of the speaker, but in doing so an approximately 1” piece broke off at the rear side of one cabinet. He repaired it, but the defect is findable if one searches. I was aware of that anomaly, but I found a couple finer blemishes in the sheet of Sapele. It is easiest for a manufacturer to avoid such issues by simply not offering exotic finishes. How many speaker manufacturers do you know which would do a Sapele cabinet? Vapor wants to tackle exotic builds, yet not charge exorbitant prices. I am not attempting to impugn the integrity of Vapor. These blemishes might subjectively fall into the category of “naturally occurring,” and thus not a concern to Vapor. However, anything that doesn’t appear perfect becomes a blemish to an owner. Perhaps more preparation for such things would assist potential buyers.
The bottom line is, would this particular build quality issue prevent me from my purchase? Are you kidding? The Vapor Joule White 3 is radically conceptual, a custom chopper as compared to a stock Harley. No, I would not reverse my decision over some well-hidden blemishes. If you would, then you should not be a Vapor customer.
Maybe Vapor should buy new stock of Sapele veneer regardless of the cost, and then jack up the price for the consumer accordingly? If it is not your money you might say, “Of course!” If it was your money you might say, “Let’s talk about it.” I think that if Vapor makes a big mistake, they have essentially screwed themselves on the profit of a speaker. In fact, I can’t see how Vapor is making it, given their pricing to production. Ryan Scott seems obsessed with giving the average guy the chance to own a sonic equivalent of a Magico or Wilson, and for that I thank him and the Vapor team! I think it will be a long time before he and the other principles get rich off these speakers. So, because the performance is extreme, in the realm of super-speakers, I am willing to accept the problems associated with a small shop building them. If you disagree, be prepared to spend many thousands of dollars to eliminate such concerns, with no assurance the sound quality will be better.
Wait, wait, rush!
Like a Slinky, there were periods where it seemed the build was stretched out, and then suddenly contracted. At the end the push was on to complete the build and deliver the speakers. Remember, however, this was the first pair, and Ryan knows I am flexible on certain issues. For instance, we discussed the blank aluminum plate, and that in the future it could be changed out for one featuring the typical name, model number and serial number. It won’t ruin my world not to have a fancy aluminum plate, but some customers would go ballistic. This is what Vapor needs to realize; they can’t give any reasons for complaint. Is that even possible given the company is working at the edges as pertains materials and design? I think Vapor is trying to do so, and I believe eventually they will succeed in that respect as much as the more prestigious speaker makers.
At this point, perhaps we have shucked off half of the audiophile community, those who would condemn any company for such foibles. Just the other day I was reminded once again of the Wilson Audio speaker company’s debacle it suffered with speaker cabinets cracking from imperfect construction techniques. Wilson has survived, and I think Vapor will, too. Would I be willing to pay $10-20K or more for a sonically comparable speaker but with no blemishes and no exotic wood veneer? Nope. I will happily take the initial model with the gap on the outriggers and blemishes in the finish to save $10-20K. Perhaps you would, too.
Inside the beast
The crossovers on the inside of the speaker are not as pretty looking as those of YG Acoustics or Magico, but the parts used in the crossover are as impressive. As I previously detailed the design considerations of Vapor speaker cabinets, I now share particulars of the Joule White 3 crossover:
-The painstaking attention to the cabinet allows for a crossover implemented with the principle Ryan espouses as, “Keep things as simple as the design allows, but no simpler.”
-Driver selection is idealized with an eye toward simplicity in the crossover. Custom drivers are developed if necessary. The crossovers are built as a result of analysis of performance, as opposed to building with predetermined slopes and drivers theoretically suitable. In this particular pair of speakers truly world-class parts were used, including Duelund RS capacitors, Jensen wax/paper copper foil inductors, and Ryan’s new favorite resistors by PathAudio.
-A Joule Linkwitz-Riley 4th order slope (24dB/octave) is used between the midrange and tweeter, and a 2nd order Linkwitz-Riley slope (12dB/octave) is between the woofer and midrange. The drivers selected perform almost ideally inside their pass-band and an octave outside of it, allowing for a relatively simple crossover that performs only level and phase matching. No extra notch filters, Zobel networks or contour filters are used.
-An impedance compensation network is applied to the woofer, which can be enabled or disabled. Ryan explains, “This additional network flattens the impedance of the woofer, presenting an easy load for any amplifier. But it also provides some bass compensation by eliminating the interaction of the impedance hump (that every ported speaker has) with the woofers crossover components.” Vapor Audio describes this as a perfectionist way to implement bass control.
Having reviewed the cabinet and crossover features it may become more evident why a Vapor Speaker has a longer wait time, as everything is done by hand, most of the time with little twists to accommodate the owner’s interests. Several of the features of a Vapor speaker could be compromised in order to hurry the build process. However, at Vapor the goal is on the ultimate execution of performance with the time-consuming construction methods seen as a necessity to achieve that result.
The hand built crossover is not pretty, but it is minimalist, which means it is as extreme as the rest of the build. In terms of parts selection the Joule White 3 has one of the highest quality crossovers I have seen in a production speaker. Seeing that picture soothed some of the disappointment regarding the blemishes. Many of the currently high profile speakers have nice, pretty crossovers that photograph well and look tidy. How many times will you be opening up your speaker to show off the crossover? The Joule White 3 crossover is raw, visceral looking, and pulsing with capacity. They look like they could rip your head off Terminator style.
- ← Previous page
- (Page 3 of 4)
- Next page →
I feel compelled to add one additional piece of information pertinent to the review, which I inadvertently omitted. Vapor speakers are not high mark up, high discount speakers. Ryan shared that the margins are much lower than many premium speakers which are sold through dealerships. Thus, the audiophile is not to expect large discounts off the MSRP of the speakers. I received less than typical accommodation pricing on my pair of Joule White 3, as I understand the costs to the company involved in the labor, materials and specialized parts involved in the build. This also is a primary difference between a Vapor Audio speaker and one produced in higher volume by a high end speaker factory.
As a Vapor Joule Black Version 2.0 owner I would comment on wait time. It took seven months for me to receive my speakers from the day I ordered them. I would have received them a month earlier but I agreed to let Ryan show them at RMAF 2014. I received them after the show in early November. For a custom build I didn’t think the wait was that long. Communication with Ryan at times was spotty but in the end everything was totally worth it. The custom veneer and high gloss finish along with cross over upgrades is stunning. Absolutely the best purchase I have evr made in this hobby.
By the time you add a few up grades to this speaker…I hardly call it a bargain.
Your are knocking @ the door of those other speakers you mentioned…
JMHO…
Tim,
God’s Peace to you,
Well, let’s look at a few examples; Perhaps the Joule White sits somewhere between the Focal Utopia Scala at $34K and Utopia Maestro at $52K. The YG Acoustics Hailey is about $43K, and the Wilson Alexia is $50K+. Imo the Joule White 3 would be plenty comfortable competing with such speakers, and to me it’s price at about $21K is not quite knocking at the door of the others. Instead, I would suggest my conclusion that to attempt commensurate sound would cost tens of thousands more to be correct.
Blessings,
Douglas Schroeder
Douglas,
You have a point but any component $20k or above isn’t chump change to me .
I do realize some speakers can go way beyond that price,
Hopefully Vapor can keep it at that price point for a while if one so desires .
Regards, Tim
Tim,
God’s Joy to you,
I concur; $20K is serious money and speaker manufacturers had better put some nice work together to deserve that kind of money. I didn’t expand upon the thought in the article, but I noted that Ryan and Pete intended to put more affordable Vapor speakers in dealers’ hands. I expect such to be of similar sound quality, but at a better price point. If anyone can make a more affordable speakers sound good, I have confidence that Ryan can. I do not know the price points of such speakers, but I believe they will be significantly less expensive. You may wish to communicate with Vapor about that development.
Blessings,
Douglas Schroeder
Doug, Read your review “Damning with faint Praise”Most of the article seemed to be poor little ol’ me and my”ugly” wait???? Ryan builds truly bespoke speakers like none I’ve ever heard or seen before, and I’ve been at this since 1971. He’s a one man show and what he manages to produce (under difficult situations) are some of the best speakers I’ve ever heard in 40+ years as an audiophile and being in the business. The key word here is bespoke. I’ve known Ryan for some 4 years now (have an order that I’m waiting on and the key word is PATIENCE) If you were trying to do him a favor by reviewing his speakers, it sure didn’t seem like it to me. Plain and simple he doesn’t charge enough!!! You omit the tremendous discount you got and just went on and on about your “ugly” wait. Try ordering a pair of Peale or Lobb bespke English shoes and see how long the wait is. His fit finish and sound quality are impeccable. I remember when I first Dave Wilson’s new speaker in 1981 in San Jose the WAMM’s (or as one audiophile wag put it Wasted all my Money!) 30K$ in 1981 and they stank. Now all the sycophant rags laud him with praise and he can charge 250K$ for them. Of course money talks and the nasty part about ALL of the big rags is they can be bribed!!! These are not off the shelf and you kept changing the specs for them. You almost cancelled 4 times (did anybody need to know that?) I don’t know you and maybe you are a sincere guy, but the damage has already been done! I had to get my two cents in on this one
Tony Petrakis
John,
I read your comment with interest. Your passion for Ryan’s Vapor Audio speakers is palpable. The fact that you are coming to his defense speaks volume of your admiration for his talents, despite the patience needed, and it affirms the value of Doug’s Review.
Thank you for your readership.
Sincerely,
Constantine Soo
Tony,
God’s Peace to you,
I will make two corrections and one observation regarding your message. As I have stated elsewhere, I spent right at 20% of the article’s words on the topic of the timeframe of the project. This is appropriate to a company which does business in such a radically different fashion in several respects than most of the industry. It seems that those who would detract from my review misjudge the actual amount of content of the article regarding the timing of the speaker build.
In regards to your suggestion that I kept changing the specs and almost cancelled four times, those are inaccurate statements. Ryan Scott kept changing the design as it went along, presenting additional options, and I concurred with all the changes, which added zero frustration in regards to the time involved. What added frustration was solely inability of Vapor to meet its own deadlines, ones which were set by Ryan, then missed. THAT was the issue with the length of the build. THAT was why I state there is such incredible patience needed. I have also made clear that such frustration melts away rather rapidly when the speaker is delivered and enjoyed.
Whether you were told by someone that I almost cancelled four times, or whether you misread the article, at NO time did I ever discuss canceling the project.I never spoke with Vapor about canceling the speakers. In fact, I have spent considerable time in the background encouraging one industry member and a customer to hang in there, as they both have seen longer than 1.5 year wait time for speakers. So, far from canceling, I have been supporting Vapor by encouraging people who have had long wait times. My rationale has been precisely as yours; the value and performance is nearly unbeatable.
Finally, an observation. You state that Vapor has “impeccable” fit and finish, yet I don’t believe you have seen my speakers, except for pictures. Nor have you taken possession of yours. That does not put you in a position to speak definitively about the build of vapor speakers. On the other hand, I have owned two of them, and know the fit and finish blemishes on each.
Blessings,
Douglas Schroeder
Greetings all,
God’s Peace,
I would like to continue to reinforce my pleasure at the outcome of the Vapor Joule White 3 project. As the weeks roll on I have opportunity to use the speaker with ever changing combinations of gear. The performance is exceptional, the quality first rate!
I would like for the community to recognize the long term rewards involved in patiently procuring a Vapor speaker. I have heard a great many speakers with systems from $100K on up, and this speaker would be comfortable in nearly any of them (excepting, perhaps very low power setups demanding extremely high efficiency speakers). The configurability of the build is also difficult to overemphasize. Customizing the speaker leads to growing pleasure over time. I am delighted with the speaker in a way that does not typically occur with a stock speaker.
I encourage audiophiles not to be put off by wait time, whatever the length. Resisting the temptation to immediate gratification will have large rewards. You will be seeing the Joule White 3 in many systems going forward because of its exceptional qualities.
I would most definitely do it all over again, and that feeling grows as each change brings even better performance.
As a discriminating audiophile for over 50 years, it amazes me how a high end speaker manufacturer that charges over $20,000.00 for a pair of stereo speaker would first and foremost want a great deal of data and intelligence on the room in which the speakers are going to permanently operate before the speakers are built.
Colored photographs of distant shots of the floor, ceiling, all wall surfaces, door and window openings, furniture arrangement, wall decor, floor covering (wood, carpet, tile, etc.) fire place (if any) book shelves, location of audio components, the room’s size, in feet and inches (height, width, and depth, angle of ceiling), window opening sizes, open entry ways, description of the room’s wall, floor and ceiling construction and materials, draperies, type furnishings (wood, glass, etc.) and sofa and chair surface materials (leather, cloth, etc.), and other sound effecting data would be fed into a high end manufacturer’s computer program. With that data along with photos, etc. a computer program could recreate the audiophiles listening room and accurately configure that rooms sound characteristics, identify nulls, suck outs and general frequency response issues, reverberation, phasing issues and other distortions of sound generated in that room from 20Hz to 20kHz based on where the audiophile wants the speakers positioned and even where he/she will sit in the room to listen to the speakers.
The speaker builder would then go about the business of selecting the right type of speaker configuration and build that speaker to perfeclty interface with the room’s computer model (the real room) to assure utmost accuracy in the reproduction of recorded sound by the speakers.
Cross over net works should be digital, outboarded form the speakers and preset to work perfectly in the computer modeled room. Ditto for the speakers selected. In fact, the type of speaker selected would also be determined by the room’s specifications. It might be an open baffle or an enclosed air suspension unit or ported, perhaps an electrostatic design or a panel or line speaker array.
The point is, when one shells out over $20,000.00 for a pair of stereo speakers, they must work well within the room they are to be installed and operate within. To prepare a room to work with the speakers charecteristics is far more difficult and expensive (plus it usually turns out to look like a padded recording studio rather than an attractive listening room). It is far easier to select the correct type of speaker that would sound best in the computer modeled room and model that speakers cross over network and internal equalization correction to produce a flat frequency response from 20Hz to 15kHz or 20kHz in the room. The computer program could even be structured to select the right type of driver(s) and its or their configuration, plus the enclosure or frame structure for the driver system or drivers selected.
With this sort of purchase possible and within a reasonable lead time to produce such a pair of speakers after an order is placed and all the data provided by the customer to the manufacturer, I would be first in line to make that purchase. And, I think it would obsolete all high end speakers currently available. Why order a $100,000.00 pair of stereo speakers and put them in a room that makes them sound like a pair of speakers you would find in a big box discount store.
Such a manufacturer that offers to build speakers custom designed to work perfectly in the audiophiles listening room (and becomes a permanent part of that home), no doubt would get a lot of business because the speakers delivered to the audiophile that are near perfect for the audiophiles personal listening room are going to sound like “real” music, like you re there at the “live” venue.
The room represents 50% or more of the sound an audiophile hears. If the speakers work with the room to compensate for room issues that distort the sound in such a manner there so no distortion heard and the speakers are, otherwise, accurate music reproducing instruments, the end result is audio bliss. Think about this.
Mr. Dean’s comment having opened the door, I’ll go through it and ask whether you considered using digital signal processing to deal with your tweeter response anomaly. This seems far preferable to buying a pair of cables at a cost comparable to the speakers themselves. It can be done with a variety of hardware or software products currently available.
Jonathan,
God’s Peace to you,
I disagree with some observations/suggestions which my colleague, Robert, made above, and I have discussed them with him. As might be expected, there are quite different perspectives on how to do audio best, even among writing colleagues. I do not wish to engage in a lengthy discussion of that here. Suffice to say that I do not consider active systems to be absolutely superior to passive ones, as so much depends upon the implementation and attending components. Please see my review of the Legacy Audio Whisper DSW for a thorough treatment of this topic.
Regarding the tweeter, I do not consider the unusual characteristics of the RAAL to be inherently an anomaly as in “problem” to be fixed. I merely find an additional benefit by using it in an alternative way. To slap a processor into the chain to attempt a fix imo would be adding more problems than solutions. The crossover of the Joule White 3 is truly extreme, and I would not dream of clogging it up with extraneous gear. In the long run I have not been impressed by add-on processors, correctors, music signal completion devices, etc. It’s relatively easy to achieve similar results with the right combination of gear and cables without the overburden of an added processor.
Finally, simply because I used the TEO Liquid Cables, which are truly extreme, and yes, extremely expensive – at least the speaker cables, but the interconnects are a bargain! – this in no way means that inexpensive speaker cables could not confer pleasing adjustments to the treble. All things being equal, this being a superb passive design , if I were strapped for cash I would rather search the world over for economical cables offering the right balance for the treble than to insert a processor.
Blessings,
Douglas Schroeder
Uhh these speakers are now $33K and up. Wish I could have gotten onboard at $21K!