Lenbrook International – the owner of Bluesound, NAD, PSB Speakers and high-resolution multi-room streaming platform BluOS – has announced a new hi-fi internet radio station exclusively for BluOS products.
The new service, launched in association with MQA, will see Radio Paradise, a listener-supported internet radio station, providing MQA-encoded audio on all four of its mix channels, utilizing high-resolution 24-bit masters where available. The collaboration marks the first time an internet radio station will carry MQA content. MQA technology notably powers hi-res Tidal Masters on Tidal, while hi-res MQA hard files are also available to download.
All BluOS devices will receive an update in April 2021 to enable Radio Paradise MQA as a native music streaming option. It will also be included as standard on all future BluOS-based devices from hi-fi brands like Bluesound, NAD Electronics, DALI Loudspeakers, Monitor Audio, Roksan, Peachtree and PSB Speakers.
Radio Paradise first began streaming its main internet channel in 2000 and offers eclectic DJ-mixed music focusing on high-quality audio. Three additional mixes – mellow, world and rock – have recently been added to its service, too.
Speaking about the collaboration, Bill Goldsmith, founder of Radio Paradise, said: ”As music lovers and audiophiles ourselves, it was a revelation to hear the performance difference in music when encoded into MQA, even when only 16 bit/44 kHz masters are available.
“The team at BluOS has been 100% committed to delivering high-res audio direct to the listening room and has long supported our work at Radio Paradise. Our shared values for best-in-class audio make this collaboration a totally natural evolution.”
MORE
Our pick of the best music streaming services
Need Inspiration? 50 of the best albums for audiophiles
It feels like just about every big tech company is working on a Clubhouse-like social audio feature — Twitter’s Spaces feature is rolling out now, Facebook is reportedly building one, Spotify is making one, Mark Cuban has one, even Slack is getting in the game. But now, the idea of the shared audio space, which started on Clubhouse largely as an exclusive club for tech venture capitalists and elites, has come full circle. Professional social network LinkedIn is working on an audio networking feature of its own, the company confirmed to TechCrunch.
“We’re doing some early tests to create a unique audio experience connected to your professional identity,” LinkedIn said in a statement to TechCrunch. “And, we’re looking at how we can bring audio to other parts of LinkedIn such as events and groups, to give our members even more ways to connect to their community.”
LinkedIn said the feature will begin beta testing soon. Below is a mockup of what the feature might look like, which LinkedIn shared with TechCrunch. Like Clubhouse and Twitter Spaces, it features a stage of speakers front and center and a list of people in the audience lower down the screen.
Image: LinkedIn via TechCrunch
LinkedIn has already been working to make itself a destination for creators with tools like a new Creator mode that denote you as a LinkedIn content creator on your profile. A Clubhouse-like feature actually seems like a natural fit.
Pretty much the only wireless headset you should consider if you’re a PS5 gamer
For
Punchy and exciting sound
Convincing 3D audio
Comfortable over long sessions
Against
Mic picks up background noise
Extravagant design
One of the best features of the Sony PlayStation 5 is its support for 3D audio. Sony’s so-called Tempest Engine does all of the hard work so that any standard pair of wired headphones can deliver immersive 3D sound when plugged into the DualSense controller.
But what if you want to go fully wireless? Currently, the only wireless headset compatible with the PS5’s 3D audio feature is this, the official PlayStation Pulse 3D Wireless Headset.
Having just one option is rarely a good thing, but the Pulse 3D headset comes from good stock – its predecessor on the PS4 combined excellent core sound quality, excellent comfort and (limited) 3D audio to the tune of a five-star rating.
Comfort
(Image credit: Sony)
Sony has decided to visually tie the Pulse 3D headset to the controversial design of the PS5, opting for the same white finish for the headband as on the faceplates of the console. It is instantly clear that the two products are related, but the headset’s design may be too attention-grabbing to consider using it as a standard pair of headphones when out of the house.
The plastic band also feels a bit cheaper than the brushed metal of the Platinum Wireless Headset, but that can be forgiven because the Pulse 3D headset genuinely is cheaper by some margin. Besides, having now used the headset for several months, there’s no sign of the slightly cheap feel translating into flimsiness. We have no reason to believe that the headset won’t last for many years.
It feels comfortable, too. The earcups are firmer than some headphones, but they create a good seal around the ears and the headband provides just the right amount of pressure. There’s no obvious heat generated around the ears in use, either.
Build
(Image credit: Sony)
The Pulse 3D headset’s controls are located around the edge of the left cup. They include a rocker to adjust the balance between game audio and chat, a switch for turning monitor mode on or off (useful for ensuring you don’t speak too loudly), volume, mute and power on/off. Most button presses are accompanied by an on-screen notification, something you won’t get from third-party headsets.
Sony PS5 Pulse 3D Wireless Headset tech specs
(Image credit: Sony)
Compatibility PS5, PS4 and PC (wireless), Xbox One, Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S (wired)
Wired Yes
Wireless Yes
Surround sound Yes
Battery life 12 hours
Weight 295g
There’s no button to enable or disable the 3D audio feature as there was with the Platinum Wireless Headset, but that’s because the tech is built in more at a system level.
Using the headset wirelessly involves plugging a dongle-like USB transmitter into your PS5 (you can use the socket on the front or rear) and from that point, the console will automatically output sound to the headset whenever you switch it on. Battery life is 12 hours, which isn’t huge by Bluetooth headphone standards but should cover even the longest of gaming sessions. Charging is via USB-C.
As well as the PS5, you can also use the Pulse 3D headset wirelessly with a PC or PS4, and there’s also an included 3.5mm cable for when you run out of batteries or want to use the headset with an Xbox, phone or tablet. The microphone works in wired mode, too, but you only get 3D audio when wirelessly connected to a PS5 or PS4.
The microphone picks up and projects your voice clearly, but it’s also prone to picking up background noise more than most, which will be of concern to anyone who plays online while there are others in the room. We understand why Sony would opt for a slick and minimalist appearance, but an optional stalk mic would be a nice touch.
Sound
(Image credit: Sony)
While you probably won’t be using the Pulse 3D headset primarily as a standard pair of wired stereo headphones, there’s value in benchmarking against models in this class to get a sense of the core sound quality of the headset.
Surprisingly, despite all of the additional tech on board, the Pulse 3D headset more than stands its ground against sub-£100 wired headphones in most areas. There’s energy, enthusiasm and a crispness to the delivery that’s foot-tappingly enjoyable. While some go deeper, there’s still more than enough bass here and it’s punchy and tuneful.
The treble, meanwhile, has a sparkle and zing that never veers into brightness, and the midrange is textured and clear, with vocals delivered directly. Dynamics are decent, too, with the headset able to convey subtle shifts as well as epic crescendos, and there’s more than enough detail for a pair of headphones costing this much.
But they fall down slightly on timing. When music tracks become particularly busy, the Pulse 3D headset struggles to maintain a complete grip on each strand, and that can make these sections a little hard to follow. Luckily, though, this timing issue isn’t apparent when gaming and the generally strong core sound quality translates well when you use the Pulse 3D headset for its intended purpose.
(Image credit: Sony)
Of course, the quality of the 3D effect depends on the way it has been implemented into the game, but opt for Spider-Man: Miles Morales or even PS4 game Ghost Of Tsushima and you get not only a sense of the direction that each sound is coming from, but also how far away it is. The sonic presentation becomes all-enveloping and it’s easy to audibly pinpoint effects.
Switch to Call Of Duty: Black Ops Cold War and the 3D audio gives a real sense of the cavernous nature of the CIA safehouse, the distance of each character as they speak and the echo as their voices hit the interior walls of the warehouse. You get none of this when listening in standard stereo.
Though you can get 3D audio by plugging a pair of standard wired headphones into the DualSense controller, the crispness and precision of the Pulse 3D headset makes for a more engaging and exciting experience than is offered by most similarly-priced wired headphones. It feels as though the 3D audio delivery has been tailored for the official headset – there’s every chance that in some cases it has been – which is a benefit of having just one product on the market.
That’s not to say that the Pulse 3D headset is an adequate replacement for your surround sound speaker package. The Pulse headset is surprisingly accomplished at creating a 3D soundfield, but the placement of effects is even better with a properly calibrated home cinema system. Effects placed directly in front of or behind the listening position are a particular struggle for 3D audio via headphones, which is no issue with physical speakers in those positions.
Verdict
The Pulse 3D Wireless Headset is really the only option here, but it’s also particularly good at what it does. Those slight timing issues aside, it boasts an accomplished core audio performance that can take your gaming to new levels when combined with the PS5’s 3D audio processing.
If you don’t have the money, space or circumstances for a home cinema system, this is pretty much the next best thing as far as PS5 gaming is concerned, and that makes it a great buy.
SCORES
Sound 5
Comfort 5
Build 4
MORE:
Read our guide to the best gaming headsets
Read our Sony PlayStation Platinum Wireless Headset review
(Pocket-lint) – Chinese manufacturer Xiaomi has five phones within its Mi 11 range. Not all are available in all markets, but with so many options, it’s good to know how they all compare.
Here is how the Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra stacks up against the Mi 11 Pro, Mi 11, Mi 11i and Mi 11 Lite 5G. Which is the right Xiaomi Mi 11 device for you? Let us help you figure it out.
Design
Mi 11 Lite: 160.5 x 75.7 x 6.8mm, 159g
Mi 11i: 163.7 x 76.4 x 7.8 mm, 196g, IP53
Mi 11: 164.3 x 74.6 x 8.1mm, 196g
Mi 11 Pro: 164.3 x 74.6 x 8.5mm, 208g, IP68
Mi 11 Ultra: 164.3 x 74.6 x 8.38mm, 234g, IP68
The Xiaomi Mi 11 devices all share similarities when it comes to design, though the Mi 11 Ultra has a much more prominent camera housing on the rear with a second display, setting it apart from the other four devices. None of them look identical, but you can tell they are from the same family.
All the five Mi 11 devices feature a punch hole camera on the front, all positioned in the top left corner, except the Mi 11i that has the front camera in the centre at the top of its flat display. The Mi 11 Lite also has a flat display, while the Mi 11, Mi 11 Pro and Mi 11 Ultra all have curved displays.
The material finishes and colours differ between all five models. The Mi 11 Ultra has a ceramic back, while the Mi 11 comes in glass and leather options. The Mi 11 Pro, Mi 11i and Mi 11 Lite all have a glass back with aluminium frames. Only the Mi 11 Ultra and Mi 11 Pro are IP68 water and dust resistant, while the Mi 11i is IP53 rated. The other two have no official IP rating.
The Mi 11, Mi 11 Pro and Mi 11 Ultra are all a similar size, sharing the same display with an optical under-display fingerprint reader, while the Mi 11i and Mi 11 Lite are smaller, with the Mi 11 Lite being the smallest and lightest. Both the Mi 11i and Mi 11 Lite have physical fingerprint readers on their side.
Display
Mi 11 Lite: 6.55-inch, flat AMOLED, 2400 x 1080 (401ppi), 90Hz, HDR10+, 800nits
Mi 11i: 6.67-inch, flat AMOLED, 2400 x 1080 (395ppi), 120Hz, HDR10+, 1300nits
Mi 11: 6.81-inches, curved AMOLED, 3200 x 1440 (515ppi), 120Hz, HDR10+, 1500nits
Mi 11 Pro: 6.81-inches, curved AMOLED, 3200 x 1440 (515ppi), 120Hz, HDR10+, 1500nits
Mi 11 Ultra: 6.81-inch, curved AMOLED, 3200 x 1440 (515ppi), 120Hz, HDR10+, 1700nits / 1.1-inch rear AMOLED display, 124 x 294
The Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra, Mi 11 Pro and Mi 11 all have a 6.81-inch curved AMOLED display with a 3200 x 1440 pixel resolution for a pixel density of 515ppi. They all offer a 120Hz refresh rate and one billion colours. The Mi 11 and Mi 11 Pro have a maximum brightness of 1500nits, while the Mi 11 Ultra ups this to 1700nits.
The Mi 11 Ultra also has a secondary 1.1-inch display on its rear within the camera housing. This secondary AMOLED display will show notifications, as well as rear camera selfie previews. It has a 294 x 124 pixel resolution and it’s an always on display.
The Mi 11i has a 6.67-inch flat display, so slightly smaller than the Mi 11, Mi 11 Pro and Mi 11 Ultra. It drops the resolution to Full HD+, resulting in a pixel density of 395ppi, but it retains the 120Hz refresh rate. It has a maximum brightness of 1300nits.
The Mi 11 Lite has the smallest display of the five devices being compared here, with a 6.55-inch screen, like the OnePlus 9. It has a Full HD+ display like the Mi 11i, though a sharper pixel density at 401ppi thanks to the smaller size. It drops the refresh rate to 90Hz though and the maximum brightness to 800nits.
All five Mi 11 devices support HDR10+.
Hardware and specs
Mi 11 Lite: Qualcomm SD780G, 6/8GB RAM, 128/256GB storage
Mi 11i: Qualcomm SD888, 8GB RAM, 128/256GB storage
Mi 11: Qualcomm SD888, 8GB RAM, 128/256GB storage
Mi 11 Pro: Qualcomm SD888, 8/12GB RAM, 128/256GB storage
Mi 11 Ultra: Qualcomm SD888, 8/12GB RAM, 256/512GB storage
The Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra, Mi 11 Pro, Mi 11 and Mi 11i all run on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 chipset. They all come with 8GB of RAM as a base model, but the Mi 11 Pro and Mi 11 Ultra are both available in 12GB of RAM models too.
The Mi 11i, Mi 11 and Mi 11 Pro all have 128GB as the base storage too, with a 256GB option, while the Mi 11 Ultra has 256GB as a base and 512GB as the second option. All are 5G devices.
The Mi 11 Lite runs on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 780G chipset with 6GB or 8GB of RAM and 128GB or 256GB of storage. The model we are comparing in this feature is the 5G handset, though there is also an LTE model of the Mi 11 Lite.
None of the Mi 11 devices have microSD support for storage expansion, except the China model of the Mi 11 Lite.
The Mi 11 Ultra, Mi 11 Pro, Mi 11 and Mi 11i all have dual stereo speakers, while the Mi 11 Lite has dual speakers. None of the models feature a 3.5mm headphone jack and all support 24-bit audio. The Mi 11 Ultra and Mi 11 Pro’s speakers are tuned by Harmon Kardon.
Battery and charging
Mi 11 Lite: 4250mAh, 33W fast charging
Mi 11i: 4520mAh, 33W fast charging
Mi 11: 4600mAh, 55W fast charging, 50W wireless, 10W reverse
Mi 11 Pro: 5000mAh, 67W fast charging, 67W wireless, 10W reverse
Mi 11 Ultra: 5000mAh, 67W fast charging, 67W wireless, 10W reverse
In terms of battery capacity, the Mi 11 Pro and Mi 11 Ultra both have a 5000mAh call under their hoods. They also both support 67W fast wired and wireless charging, along with 10W reverse wireless charging.
The Mi 11 has a slightly smaller 4600mAh battery with 55W fast wired charging, 50W wireless charging and 10W reverse wireless charging.
The Mi 11i has a 4520mAh battery and the Mi 11 Lite has a 4250mAh battery. Both have 33W wired charging, but no support for wireless charging or reverse wireless charging.
Camera
Mi 11 Lite: Triple (64MP main + 8MP ultra wide + 5MP macro), 20MP front
Mi 11i: Triple (108MP main + 8MP ultra wide + 5MP macro), 20MP front
Mi 11: Triple (108MP main + 13MP ultra wide + 5MP macro), 20MP front
Mi 11 Pro: Triple (50MP main + 8MP telephoto + 13MP ultra wide), 20MP front
Mi 11 Ultra: Triple (50MP main + 48MP ultra wide + 48MP telephoto), 20MP front
All five of the Xiaomi Mi 11 devices being compared in this feature have a triple rear camera, but they are all made up of different sensors. They all have a 20-megapixel front camera though.
The Mi 11 Ultra has a 50-megapixel main camera sensor with an aperture f/2.0 and optical image stabilisation (OIS), a 48-megapixel ultra wide sensor with a f/2.2 aperture and 128-degree field of view and a 48-megapixel telephoto sensor with an aperture of f/4.1, OIS and 5x optical zoom.
The Mi 11 Pro has a 50-megapixel main camera sensor with an aperture of f/2.0 and OIS, an 8-megapixel telephoto lens with OIS and 5x optical zoom and a 13-megapixel ultra wide sensor with f/2.4 aperture and a 123-degree field of view.
The Mi 11 has a 108-megapixel main camera sensor with an f/1.9 aperture and OIS, a 13-megapixel ultra wide sensor with an f/2.4 aperture and a 123-degree field of view, and a 5-megapixel macro sensor with an aperture of f/2.4.
The Mi 11i has a 108-megapixel main camera sensor with an aperture of f/1.8, an 8-megapixel ultra wide sensor with an aperture of f/2.2 and a 119-degree field of view and a 5-megapixel macro sensor with a f/2.4 aperture.
Finally, the Mi 11 Lite has a 64-megapixel main camera with an aperture of f/1.8, an 8-megapixel ultra wide sensor with an aperture of f/2.2 and a 5-megapixel macro sensor with an aperture of f/2.4.
Conclusion
The Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra and Mi 11 Pro are similar in terms of specifications, though the Mi 11 Ultra has that second display on the rear, a more capable camera on paper, brighter main display, ceramic design and more storage as an option.
The Xiaomi Mi 11 sits just under the 11 Pro, offering the same display, but a smaller battery capacity, slightly slower charging capabilities and different rear camera makeup. It also doesn’t have the 12GB of RAM model option like the Mi 11 Pro and it isn’t waterproof.
The Xiaomi Mi 11i has a flat and smaller display over the Mi 11, a different camera make up again, a smaller battery and slower charging capablities again, as well as a lack of wireless charging support. It has the same core hardware as the Mi 11 though, as well as an IP53 rating.
The Xiaomi Mi Lite meanwhile is the most affordable in the Mi 11 pack, but it drops its camera capabilities compared to the Mi 11i, offers a smaller battery capacity, but the same charging capabilities as the Mi 11, a lower refresh rate display and a lower RAM model option.
Wilson Audio has overhauled the Alexx speaker it released in 2016 to produce an all-new Alexx V model that incorporates many of the top-tier technologies the Utah-based company has created and honed over the past five years.
The 161cm-tall Alexx V sits just below the flagship Chronosonic models and features its open gantry design, which started with the WAMM Master Chronosonic before following into the Chronosonic XVX, enhancing the structural rigidity of the upper modules and minimising pressure trapped between them.
The driver modules – all differently sized to allow for more careful tuning of the frequency band – comprise the 5.75in mid-woofer used in the original Alexx, TuneTot and SabrinaX, coupled to a 7in Alnico (an aluminium, nickel and cobalt alloy) QuadraMag mid unit borrowed from the Chronosonic XVX. Sitting up top is an all-new tweeter system called the Convergent Synergy Carbon (CSC) tweeter, a carbon fibre design, 3D-printed in-house, that builds upon a modified version of the previous Convergent Synergy motor with a new rear-wave chamber.
Down below, meanwhile, are the 10.5in and 12.5in bass drivers originally developed for the Chronsosonic project. The internal volume of the Alexx V’s woofer enclosure has increased by 16 per cent over the original Alexx’s, making it almost the same as the Chronosonic XVX’s volume and helping it achieve deeper low-frequency response.
Every baffle angle of each driver has been refined to increase time alignment accuracy – a key attribute of Wilson Audio’s modular designs – with the individually adjustable high- and mid-frequency modules, as well as the presence of a XLF reversible bass port, also helping this case.
(Image credit: Wilson Audio)
A revised crossover with fewer components now utilises Wilson Audio’s brand-new AudioCapX-WA capacitors, and measures better than the Alexx predecessor in terms of sensitivity and impedance (Alexx V is 1dB more sensitive than Alexx Series 1).
Also down south is Wilson Audio’s latest cable management system (as featured on the flagship WAMM Master Chronosonic), as well as an all-new spike system – a combination of austenitic stainless steel and the company’s newly designed, resonant-reducing ‘V-Material’ – which the Alexx V debuts.
Typically for a Wilson Audio speaker, the Alexx V comes in a range of finishes – 21 ‘standard’, ‘upgrade’ and ‘pearl’ colour options, alongside a choice of grille colours, to be precise. And custom-match colours are available upon request. Pricing starts at a cool £139,000 per pair, including full installation.
MORE:
12 of the world’s most expensive loudspeakers
Wilson Audio launches £330,000 Chronosonic speakers
Best speakers 2021: budget to premium stereo speakers
“I suppose you can’t have true respect for something unless you’re willing to challenge it,” we posit to Nils Frahm. “Exactly,” he replies. “Exactly.”
It feels good to have Frahm agree with you. Not only because his music is as much part of our homes – and the What Hi-Fi? test rooms – as the light fixtures and soft furnishings. It feels good to have Frahm agree with you because he comes across as an expert on whichever topic he is speaking about in that moment.
He even makes his own soap. Because that devilish streak of tinkering with his instrument, which we celebrate today on Piano Day, is just symptom of a wider curiosity this exquisite composer applies to every part of his life. Whether or not he is an expert is almost moot, as that infectious interest in everything travels down the phone line to us.
Even Piano Day cannot be taken at face value when Frahm, the very man who appointed it as the 88th day of the year, discusses the instrument’s more menacing symbolism.
Nonetheless, it is clear that there is a lot of love in this relationship. To celebrate this year Frahm has today released Graz, the first album he ever recorded for Erased Tapes.
This grand piano recording has taken 12 years to surface – though certain pieces you might recognise from his live performances – and captures a more youthful musician nearer the start of a career, and nearer the beginning of this mischievously respectful relationship with his instrument that we hope is nowhere near its end.
Over half an hour, we managed to talk with Frahm about Graz, recording the piano and a heavily customised hi-fi set-up. Not that we’d have put him through it, but we could have spoken for hours upon hours longer.
Lisen to Graz by Nils Frahm, released to celebrate Piano Day 2021, on Tidal or Spotify.
An emotional reaction
(Image credit: Sebastian Rieck)
What Hi-Fi?: We should probably start by congratulating you on getting Erased Tapes to release your debut album, at last. We’ve listened to it a few times and it’s got that real sort of transformational quality that your music has; it goes through that metamorphosis depending on what time of day or when in the year you hear it. Is the album as recorded in 2009?
Nils Frahm: It was recorded in a place where there was a special setup. It was basically a big studio that has variable acoustics, realised through microphones in the room and speakers where there’s a custom-made reverb algorithm, which basically takes the sound from various points – I think it has about 16 microphones and 64 speakers – and you can change the the parameters of the ambience through this.
So the shortest reverb is maybe 1.8 seconds, then you can turn on the engine and it will generate a reverb which you would like to hear in that room. It can be quite impressive; when you close your eyes and you play, and somebody tweaks with the parameters of the settings, you basically travel through space. Basically, while I was improvising, my colleague was turning some knobs and dials from this reverb engine, and that was inspiring me to play in a different way maybe.
WHF?: Reverb, and natural reverb especially, has been a huge part of your playing; it was in All Melody you used a dry well that you had found on holiday. How important for a piano recording is it to hear the space that it’s been recorded in?
NF: I think the room for acoustic instruments plays a big role, because essentially the room makes stuff louder and sound more immersive. With reflections and some sort of ambience an acoustic instrument sounds like it’s floating around you. Coming from various points, it becomes more three-dimensional and big sounding.
This is why a piano or a symphony orchestra sounds much better in a room over being played outside; I still don’t understand why some festivals curate classical concerts outside, because strings or the whole classical ensemble without the natural reverb for me doesn’t blend. You can’t blend the elements together without ambience. So I think the same for the piano: you have a lot of different sounds and notes and things on a piano. With the acoustics you put all of this together in one concept, almost as if you would dress a person from tip to toe.
WHF?: The performance is obviously key, and a recording lives or dies by it, but what other things are important to get right when recording the piano?
NF: The performance. Because when the performance is well put and the balance between the notes and the balance in the voicing, the loudness of each finger, is put right then basically the recording is quite stable. And if you have an unstable performance you have to really work much more with the mixing, or focusing on the microphone position, or choice of reverbs and processing to get the performance organised. Basically that’s the case for every musical performance. When the performance has some integrity and is put well, then as a recording engineer or as a person listening back at home, it’s an easy task to transport that wonderful moment.
Because sound in the end is decoded in our brains into an emotional reaction somehow – I don’t know how that works – but I would say that if you hear something that doesn’t really get you emotionally, you will analyse more technically. And if something just haunts you or something strikes you, and you don’t know why, you will not really ask so many questions.
It’s like a phenomenon. When I listen to Chet Baker records and I hear the voice then hear the piano, the piano sounds kind of bad, honestly. But together with the voice, the quality of the piano and the quality of the voice becomes something that’s hard to explain why it works. I think it’s because Chet really just sings so beautifully, and the piano just really plays wonderfully, and that gives you so much freedom as a producer to put these elements wherever you want. When you play really good you can make that element 6dB louder or 6dB quieter: it will still be amazing. If you have a bad arrangement or a bad take, you will fiddle with the volume to fit it in, because it will never be right.
A rebellious angle
(Image credit: Leiter Verlag)
WHF?: You have what we would describe as an almost two-way relationship with the piano, in that it feels like it’s rewarding you for the care you put into its tone and its timbre. What makes it such a special instrument?
NF: I think all instruments are pretty special. The piano is so special because I think it has had such a big success in the history of music. Ever since it was invented it played a huge role in the creation of music, especially in the Western world. Not so much in other places in the world. The piano is also testimonial to an industrialised society, a Western capitalist industrialised society, because it’s very difficult to make unique heavy machinery; you need vast skill sets and machines to make a piano. And you need a lot of money!
And so the piano is a symbol for power as well. These are all components I am also aware of. I try to have the awareness to treat the piano with a certain respect, but also show a sense of humour. Because when you take the piano too seriously, you also take the society we live in too seriously. You might get more interesting results from the piano if you treat it with respect but also with a rebellious angle, because there are many things I don’t agree with. I don’t think the West created a fair world, or a better place for everybody. So if the piano is a statue or symbol for all of this, then whatever the critique is towards a society or towards our philosophy, or our culture, the critique also addresses the piano.
So that’s why I respect it but I also disrespect it, in terms of changing its sounds or putting things inside, or doing wrong things maybe with it. Because I think the piano shouldn’t rule us, we should rule the piano; in as much as the values of a capitalist society or a white supremacist society shouldn’t rule us, we should rule the society. So it’s very philosophically put, but the piano is a symbol also for all the things I don’t agree with, and it creates an interesting angle for me to approach this special instrument.
WHF?: You can’t have true respect for something unless you’re willing to challenge it.
NF: Exactly, exactly.
WHF?: As well as experimenting with your instrument, on Spaces in particular you have a lot of different ways of recording; it’s almost a collection of field recordings. Is using things such as reel-to-reel an experiment, or is there a particular sound to each medium that you really like and want to capture?
NF: For me it’s a little bit like with photography: the best camera is always the one you have with you. You can say the best recorder is always the one you can just work with in the moment, and is reliable and records the music. And true, they sound all a little bit different, but when I choose to record something on a cassette tape it probably reflects the approach of that session. I probably just don’t have real good equipment available and I take maybe just a really cheap USB junk sound card rather than my really high quality converter that I only have in one place.
I like to record on really interesting broadcasting master recorders. I like quality from all eras, and when I buy a cassette deck on eBay for 200 bucks, it’s maybe the Marantz PMD master recorder that was built for broadcasting documentaries. It has a certain quality: it will always turn on, it’s made out of metal, you can listen to the record head and you can definitely check what you’re recording. I really go with whatever sound comes out of it, if the machine is so well designed.
I’m a big fan of the Nagra tape recorder as well, or I record a lot on portable to track field recorders, made for film sounds. For me – tape, digital, analogue – whatever gets the job done and I feel happy with is my colour of choice. Because I know that whatever I do there is so much flexibility to treat material further in the mixing processes, and have more decisions. Of course, when I put something on tape I will never make it sound like a really good modern recording, but there’s still so many places that I could go with it that I just trust what will come out.
WHF?: It comes back to the performance being key; but if you set a certain recorder up do you think that affects the way you play?
NF: I don’t try to make the recorder a big inspiration or compositional element. I would rather record in a way that I can play loud notes without distortion, and if I play very quiet I will record in a way that I don’t just hear noise. But obviously the piano is a very dynamic instrument: if you want to get a good recording done, before you start playing you should think ‘is this a loud piece or a quiet piece?’.
I always turn the gain on the mic preamps to an according position, because the piano has over 90dB of usable dynamics. If I play super quiet and I have to crank the preamps up otherwise I will record almost nothing, and if I know I’ll play a loud piece or dynamic piece I have to turn the amps down knowing the quietest elements will not otherwise sound as good. So obviously I take this into account [but it doesn’t change the way I play].
WHF?: Do you have a list of favourite piano recordings that you go back to again and again?
NF: I think my favourite piano record, that I have gone back to for years, is one that doesn’t really sound like my style of recording. It’s actually the opposite: it’s a very far, distant sound. It’s a recording called Bagatellen und Serenaden by Valentin Silvestrov. He is a Ukrainian composer living in Kiev; I think it’s like nobody recorded the grand piano in such a loving way as ECM has done. Another mind-blowing recording from ECM is Der Bote by Alexei Lubimov. And there’s one piece [on that record], In the Landscape by John Cage, and that piece is just sounding unreal.
But again most of that is how the piano was treated and prepared by the piano technicians prior to the session. They really make the sound of the piano, these people, the piano tuners. They don’t tune the piano, they touch it in every possible spot; they put oil here, they sand down the hammers, they put needles inside the hammers to see whether the density should be different. So each note gets basically custom tuned, and so the whole piano becomes one thing that sounds like an instrument, which inspires the player. Because a piano that doesn’t inspire the player will not lead to a good take.
So all becomes like one beautiful thing: the room, the acoustics, how the piano is set up, who is the piano builder and the player, the performance. All that composition. And out of a thousand piano recordings, there are some that are just reaching far beyond what I thought was possible. That always sets imagined horizons, for me to remember: ‘wait, maybe we’ll get something else out of that wooden box, something more engaging than what we’ve heard.’
Principles and physics
(Image credit: Leiter Verlag)
WHF?: We want to talk to you about not just what you listen to, but how you listen at home. Do you have a mix of sources, amplifiers and things?
NF: At home I listen strictly to vinyl at the moment, just because I don’t need flexibility. I have the studio where I can listen to digital files. At home I just play records. I have a good pick up on a customised [Technics SL-1200] MK2. I just love that record player; I actually like how it looks also, people hate the Technics now but I still have mine and I’m very happy with it.
And that goes through a phono stage. I forgot the name: it’s a custom box from Sweden by a guy who put all the equaliser curves of all the different pressing plants – the Philips and Columbia and whatever – because I have a lot of original Columbia records for my US tours. I collect some original jazz records. And so I can just set the equaliser settings, because I realise that some of the records sound really much different when I change the EQ – and that makes sense when you know the history of that.
Then out of the phone stage I go into a… Jesus Christ, I’m so bad at names; I just bought this thing.. it’s an Air Tight, used 34-watt tube amp. I go straight into that and I need the boost to drive my 15 Ohm Klangfilm speakers. I made some custom wood panels for it so it’s not a closed chassis, it’s an open-baffle speaker. They have a coaxial driver with a tweeter in the centre, which is similar to the system I use in the studio, but it’s from the 1940s or something. And I made my own frequency divider for this with just an old British condenser, which sounds fantastic and takes the low out of the tweeter.
It’s very rough but it gives me such a good overall sound and tone. It isn’t very good with very low bass, and it’s not a fast speaker, but when you play resonant, atmospheric music like piano or jazz or old records especially, it sounds almost like people are in your room playing. It’s absolutely mind-blowing. Obviously it’s not a reference system, but it’s a very good sound system.
WHF?: It sounds a lot like the way you approach the piano, tinkering and tailoring to make it fit your own taste. Is that something you’ve always been interested in, on the listening side?
NF: Yes, every aspect in life for me is similar. I don’t want to buy brands, I think it’s boring when you just go ‘I like this brand and I like that brand’. I want to go beyond and when I like something I want to know why; I want to understand the principle, and often it’s not the magic of some brand. I mean, people think they should buy Bose speakers – I don’t want to bash Bose, they just don’t do the equipment I like – but if people trust the name, they think whatever they do will work.
Even if you listen to people with the everyday stuff, they say ‘oh, I have to buy the soap from this brand’ and ‘you have to buy the soap from that brand’. And I am always like, well let’s take that soap let’s look at the back: so it’s this, it’s this, it’s this… and then I go back and try to find the basic components. Usually it gets much easier without the additives and the weird colouring stuff, and it’s for the same for me with instruments or speakers.
I want to know, why do I like this? For example, why do I like coaxial speakers? The principal for me is much more important than the brand. All the forums that try to figure out how to make stuff sound good, they discuss brands and models; but people don’t really discuss physics, and they don’t really discuss principles, and types of signal flow. So there’s little knowledge about Class A, B, C, D – and so people try to remember what they should buy, and they think, ‘so I heard Class A sounds the best, so I need class A’. But often you don’t need class A. For me it’s always about looking under the bonnet.
WHF?: It’s testament to your creative mind that everything is an interaction rather than a consumable for you. Is it a similar tweaked set-up when you’re touring and on the move?
NF: No, my life is simple: when I don’t have a sound system that I like, I don’t really listen to music. I also need time away from sounds and away from music, nobody wants to listen to music 24/7. So if I’m not in the studio or not at home, I just stop listening to music. And if I’m in the car, I go with whatever sound system is in there. I would never spend money on that: it’s just a car. Maybe I listen to NPR or something like that, and it helps me also to listen to music on just a very average sound system, just for double-checking mixes.
So yeah, I’m not a picky type. Like I said, I value good-sounding records over a good-sounding sound system. Because I learnt a lot of people who are crazy about good speakers, they start buying CDs that are only made for good speakers, where the music was recorded through golden cables or whatever. And the musicians are not so good, but their sound recording is really good, and so they listen to reference where the music is not so interesting. For me, that is the point where I’m just getting lost, because the sound system is just there to play music from talented people with a message. Sometimes these moments are recorded great, and then if they’re recorded great I can also listen to that on a shitty sound system where it will cut through.
My first Radiohead experience was like that. I listened to a €100 or whatever, portable, shit CD player back in the day in the late 90s, designed for a children’s room. And I sat and I played Amnesiac, and it sounded huge. It sounded absolutely insane, it sounded completely different to all the other records I had, and I could never really get sound out of that box. I was at that point more interested in bypassing the quality of what people have as a hi-fi, and try to make music which transforms the speaker, whatever quality it is, into to what the composer or the artist wants from it.
I know examples of records that will sound good on every sound system I know, and that’s not 100 per cent what is important but it’s very interesting to learn about this. Especially when people don’t make music and they just buy equipment to play back, and they’re not so familiar with how music is made. They need to know that when something doesn’t really sound right in that room ,or something doesn’t really sound right in that moment, it’s mostly a problem with the producer. It should not be the problem of the consumer to help whatever didn’t work in the recording or production stage. So whenever we want to listen to good music, we just have to find the good music. It’s very easy and you don’t need to spend too much money on on anything
WHF?: Those recordings you know will sound good on any system, what are they for you?
NF: Basically anything Miles Davis recorded In the 50s and 60s, especially Kind of Blue and the soundtrack he did for the French film, Ascenseur pour l’échafaud. That will transform your iPhone into to a huge soundstage. And obviously the Chet Baker example is is the most convincing for me, because when you put Chet Baker on your iPhone and you put your iPhone into a Pringles box, it will also almost sound as good as if you listened on thousand euro speakers. Maybe just 90 as opposed to 100 per cent. It’s a rough statement to make, but people probably get the point.
MORE:
10 of the best movie scores to test your system
40 of the best 1990s albums to test your speakers
Music for sleep: the best ambient albums to help you relax
Images of Samsung’s unannounced Tab A7 Lite tablet have leaked, courtesy of Evan Blass on Voice. The images show a decidedly budget-looking device, with a single rear camera and no flash. Internally the tablet is said to be running a modest MediaTek Helio P22T processor paired with 3GB of RAM and a 5,100 mAh battery.
The Tab A7 Lite is one of two “Lite” tablets Samsung is expected to launch in June, if a February leak from WalkingCat is to be believed. The other is the Galaxy Tab S7 Lite, which features a bigger 12.4-inch display compared to 8.7-inches on the A7 Lite, according to WalkingCat. GalaxyClub.nl previously reported the S7 Lite may be available with 5G or Wi-Fi-only connectivity, and that it could be powered by a Snapdragon 750G processor with 4GB of RAM. Available colors are said to include pink, green, black, and silver.
The two Lite tablets follow their full-fat counterparts from last year. Both the Tab S7 and the Tab A7 benefited from great displays and speakers, making them excellent for general media consumption. While neither were as well-suited to productivity tasks, that might not matter for the upcoming tablets if they’re priced affordably enough.
The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is a ThinkPad through and through. It’s got the keyboard nub, the discrete mouse buttons, and the all-black chassis with scattered dots of red. (If you’ve seen its predecessor, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 2, you’ll know what you’re getting — the models are identical, with different chips.)
But this ThinkPad has a unique feature you don’t see every day: an OLED screen. That, combined with its discrete GPU, puts the X1 Extreme Gen 3 out of the business laptop space that ThinkPads traditionally dominate and into the crowded market for ultraportable content-creation machines. Among those competitors, the X1 Extreme has some significant drawbacks that keep it from reaching the top of the pack. But it still includes the features that have made ThinkPads so dominant across the board, and that means there’s certainly an audience for it.
Like other ThinkPads, the X1 Extreme is customizable for a variety of price points. All configurations have an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q. The base model is $2,734 (currently discounted to a much more reasonable $1,640) and includes a Core i5-10400H, 8GB of RAM, 256GB of storage, a 1920 x 1080 non-touch display, and a standard 720p HD webcam. Among prebuilt models, you can go all the way up to a system with a Core i9-10885H, 64GB of RAM, 1TB of storage, a 3840 x 2160 OLED touchscreen, and an IR camera, all for — wait for it — $4,959 (currently listed at $2,974.40). My test configuration is in the middle; it includes a Core i7-10850H, 1TB of storage, 32GB of RAM, and the OLED touchscreen. It has an MSRP of $4,111 but is currently listed at $2,466. You can tweak most of the specs to your liking, though some are dependent on others; for example, all models that don’t have the base display come with the IR camera.
This model has two absolutely standout features. The first is the keyboard. ThinkPads usually have great keyboards, and this one is no exception. It’s one of my favorite keyboards that I’ve tried on a workstation laptop this year, with the possible exception of the Dell XPS 15. The keys have a comfortable texture and a heck of a lot of travel, without being too loud. The typing experience feels closer to that of a mechanical keyboard than to that of flatter laptop keys. I actually found myself eschewing my personal laptop during my testing period in favor of the ThinkPad because of how much I love typing on it.
There’s a row of useful hotkeys on the top of the deck. New to the X1 Extreme are three buttons tailored to remote work: F9 brings up the notification center, F10 answers calls, and F11 ends calls. There are also keys to cut the volume and microphone, toggle airplane mode, and adjust volume and brightness.
Ports include two USB 3.2 Gen 1, two Thunderbolt 3, one HDMI 2.0, one SD slot, one combo audio jack, and an optional Nano-SIM card slot.
One quick thing about the keyboard: the Fn and Ctrl keys are swapped from the locations where you’ll find them on most keyboards. This is how ThinkPad keyboards have been laid out since forever, and you can remap the keys through the BIOS or with Lenovo’s utility app if you prefer. But if you’re not a regular ThinkPad user, or you’ll be swapping between this machine and a personal laptop, it’s worth noting that it’ll take time to adjust (or you’ll be using mislabeled keys). I’ve been using the X1 Extreme for almost a week, and I’m still accidentally hitting Fn all the time.
The second standout feature is the 15.6-inch 4K OLED panel. It covers 100 percent of the sRGB spectrum, 100 percent of Adobe RGB, and 100 percent of P3. (Basically, it maxed out our colorimeter.) The panel is sharp and vibrant with great contrast. You can watch streaming content that supports HDR and swap between various color profiles with Lenovo’s Display Optimizer.
Build quality is another strength. Like most of its ThinkPad siblings, the X1 Extreme feels quite durable. There’s no flex in the keyboard or lid, and Lenovo says it’s been tested against “12 military-grade certification methods and over 20 procedures” for resistance to vibrations, shocks, extreme temperatures, humidity, and the like. The laptop achieves this without sacrificing much portability. It’s on the thick side at 0.74 inches — but at four pounds, it’s lighter than many competitors including the Dell XPS 15 and the MacBook Pro 16.
Lenovo says the multi-layered carbon fiber top cover “provides durability and weight advantages.”
The chassis has a black finish with a nice texture. The ThinkPad logo on the right palm rest and the X1 logo on the top cover add splashes of red. The lid has a unique carbon-fiber weave pattern, which looks and feels similar to the carbon-fiber palm rests on the Dell XPS 15. (This is only available on UHD models). Lenovo says this material is lighter and more durable than aluminum and other common chassis materials. It’s also likely part of the reason for the X1 Extreme’s lofty price tag.
There are dual far-field microphones that work alongside Cortana.
One note on the build: the lid and chassis aren’t the worst fingerprint magnets I’ve ever seen, but they do pick them up. After a few days of use, the keyboard deck was pretty smudgy.
Finally, the X1 Extreme comes with some helpful features for remote meetings. You can optimize the dual microphones for various settings (including voice recognition, solo calls, and conference calls) in Lenovo’s Vantage software. They didn’t have any trouble picking up my voice. And the stereo speakers are fine, delivering distortion-free audio with percussion and bass that are audible but not exceptional. You can create custom equalizer profiles in the preloaded Dolby Access software, and you can also toggle presets for scenarios like voice, music, movies, and games.
The infrared webcam was also a pleasant surprise — while a bit grainy, it was fairly color-accurate and delivered a decent picture in low-light environments. There’s a physical privacy shutter that’s easy to click back and forth. You can sign into the X1 Extreme with Windows Hello facial recognition, as well as a match-on-sensor fingerprint reader on the side of the keyboard deck, which was quick to set up and didn’t usually have trouble recognizing me.
All of this stuff is similar to the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 2 — there’s not much noticeable change. The Gen 3’s upgrades are on the inside. It has a six-core 10th Gen Intel processor and an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, where its predecessor had a 9th Gen Intel processor and a GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q.
The Core i7-10850H isn’t the most monstrous processor around, especially compared to AMD’s recent H-series chips. But it does bring the business-specific benefits of Intel’s vPro platform, and it did a fine job with my piles of spreadsheets, emails, Slacking, and other general office work.
Similarly, the GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is a midrange graphics card — it’s not what you’d want to use for serious gaming or high-throughput professional video editing. But for amateur creators and other artists, it can certainly lend a hand.
My test model scored a 386 on PugetBench for Premiere Pro, which tests its proficiency in real-world Premiere Pro tasks. That’s not a shameful score among top competitors, but it’s not great either. The system comes in under scores we’ve seen from the Dell XPS 15 with the same GPU, and the six-core MacBook Pro, which has AMD Radeon Pro 5300M. And, of course, it loses out to creator machines with more powerful Nvidia chips, such as the lower-priced Gigabyte Aero 15 with an RTX 3060.
If you’re going to be doing intense content work, prepare to hear the fans. Even when I was just bouncing around in Chrome, they were audible quite often. On the plus side, they did their job: the laptop’s bottom, keyboard, touchpad, palm rests, and hinge all remained cold.
Lenovo says the ThinkPad can charge up to 80 percent in 60 minutes with its “Rapid Charge” feature.
Another compromise you’re making here is battery life. I only averaged four hours and 59 minutes on our battery test, which involved using the ThinkPad for continuous office multitasking on the Battery Saver profile, with the screen around 200 nits of brightness. I ran a trial without using Chrome to see if that would make a difference; it didn’t. And this result actually seems to be a bit on the high side — Tom’s Hardware got an even pithier two hours and 19 minutes on a synthetic streaming benchmark.
It’s not unexpected that a machine with a 4K screen and a discrete GPU wouldn’t last all day. But I got more juice out of the Gigabyte Aero 15, which has both an OLED display and a heftier graphics card. And if you don’t need the high-resolution screen (which many people won’t), the Dell XPS 15 (which still has an exceptional display) lasted an hour longer with my workflow, while my colleague Dieter Bohn got up to eight hours out of the MacBook Pro. Folks who are interested in the X1 Extreme who would prefer not to have it plugged in all the time should consider an FHD (1080p) model.
It’s a ThinkPad through and through.
Ultimately, the decision between the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 and other 15-inch thin-and-light workstations really boils down to: do you want a ThinkPad?
This is to say that the X1 Extreme shares many of the strengths and weaknesses of Windows machines like the XPS 15. Both have dazzling displays, decent chips, sturdy build, boisterous fans, and mediocre battery life. Both have best-in-class keyboards and touchpads, with average webcams and speakers.
But a ThinkPad and an XPS are still very different machines — and if you’ve used any member of either lineup before, you probably know which one you prefer. They have different looks and different feels. The ThinkPad is slightly lighter and slightly thicker, with more ports and larger bezels. The XPS is a bit more powerful, but the ThinkPad has extra business features.
The XPS, due to its lower price, is a more accessible model for most consumers. And the X1 Extreme’s weaker chips and poor battery life, in particular, are tough pills to swallow at such a high price. But there’s still a market for the X1 Extreme — and if you’re willing to sacrifice a bit of power, a bit of money, and a bit of battery life for the unique advantages of a ThinkPad, you probably fall into it.
To call Rega a little bit dominant in the world of turntables would be rather an understatement. After all, of the 30+ turntable What Hi-Fi? Awards we’ve dished out over the last five years, Rega has scooped up around half of them, leaving its rivals to scrap over what’s left.
The current Award-winning turntables didn’t come out of nowhere: they’re the culmination of over four decades of tireless development and refinement and built upon the legacy of the turntables that have gone before.
But while record players and cartridges are what Rega are most renowned for, and quite rightly so, the British company has also excelled in a range of electronics – mostly amplifiers and phono stages – over the years that have many an accolade and an impressive heritage of their own. It’s got a few pairs of speakers under its belt, too, having recently launched the Kyte.
That makes this a perfect time to revisit Rega’s greatest hits, from its very first turntable to its most recent What Hi-Fi? Award-winners across a number of categories.
Rega Planet (1973)
Pre-Rega, founder Roy Gandy spent his free time installing, upgrading and repairing turntables. Dismayed by the poor reliability of the decks he was seeing, Gandy set out to make an alternative with real solidity and longevity.
He also wanted his first turntable to look different to everything else that was available at the time. “Why can a turntable not have three outrigger points spinning round, that people might buy as a piece of sculpture?” he asked.
The result of his experience, goals and theorising was the Rega Planet, with its three-spoke, steel and aluminium platter and Acos Lustre tonearm. This was also the beginning of Rega as a company.
Rega Planar 3 (with RB300 arm) (1983)
As you’d assume from the name, the Planar 3 was not the first Planar by Rega. What’s more, the model we’re highlighting here wasn’t even the first Planar 3. What makes this the Planar 3 to focus on is the RB-300 tonearm that came pre-installed on it.
Having used Japanese and Danish manufactured arms for the first decade of its life, Rega’s own RB-300 and RB-250 took performance to new levels and received plaudits that you might not expect, with Modern Metals magazine proclaiming that it was ‘still trying to figure out how you produce such a long cored hole so accurately’.
More importantly (we hope), we proclaimed at the time that the RB-300 edition of the Planar 3 ‘seemed to get so much more off the discs’. This is arguably the point at which Rega came of age.
Rega Brios (1991 and 2018)
(Image credit: Rega)
The original Brio amplifier first launched in 1991 – it was the company’s third model after the higher-end Elex and Elicit – ever since has pedalled a reputation for being a musically engaging affordable amplifier.
The generations we’ve seen over the years have all stayed true to the original’s musical foundations, managing to be sonically engrossing to entertaining and mostly class-leading degrees. And while they haven’t strayed far from the original design in terms of aesthetics and connectivity – half-width casing and analogue-only connectivity is infused into their design DNA – the performance benchmark they set has continued northwards. The current, sixth-generation Brio – the standout iteration alongside the first-gen model – is the best in the line yet: a stickler for detail and dynamics, rhythm and timing and, perhaps the simplest, truest summation, outright fun.
Read the Rega Brio review
Rega P5 (2002)
Rega spent much of the ’80s and ’90s focused on electronics and speakers, ensuring that someone looking to build an entire two-channel system could do so using Rega components alone. New decks were occasionally launched along the way but it’s the P5 and its 15mm glass platter of 2002 that we’re picking out.
The idea here was to bring some of the features of the company’s more premium turntables – particularly the P25 of 1998 – within the reach of more hi-fi fans, hence the aluminium surround, complex CNC machined skeletal low mass micro-fibre plinth, and the RB700 tonearm of the P7.
Rega P3-24/Elys 2 (2007)
It would take Rega 24 years to launch the second-generation Planar 3, called the P3 2000, but then just seven years to launch the third model – the P3-24.
This model kept much of what made the original Planar 3 great but added some serious upgrades, including a new plinth, arm and motor.
You could buy just the turntable and arm for £400, but our sample was also fitted with Rega’s own Elys 2 cartridge, a model that would become part of the Rega furniture for years to come.
It was a terrific-sounding package, with class-leading and rival-obliterating drive and rhythmic ability. It’s fair to say this turntable left a lasting impression, so much so that it won the Product of the Year Award twice in a row.
Read the Rega P3-24/Elys 2 review
Rega RP8 (2012)
Rega’s goal of combining lightness and rigidity bore striking fruit in 2012 with the launch of the RP8.
The skeletal plinth was constructed using little more than foam – closed cell, polyolefin foam to be precise. Phenolic resin skins were added to both top and bottom surfaces to deliver higher rigidity and an element of damping, but the RP8’s plinth still wound up being seven times lighter than that of the original Planar 3.
To say we were impressed by the RP8 – which is still available, by the way – would be an understatement. ‘When the company really goes for it, shooting for the stars rather than trying to meet a price point’, we said, ‘the results are spectacular’.
Read the Rega RP8 review
Rega Naiad (2013)
It should be clear by now that Rega is renowned for building brilliant turntables at the relatively affordable end of the spectrum, which is why the Naiad might come as a bit of a surprise – it costs £30,000. Not that you can buy one even if you had the money: only 50 were ever made.
Built to celebrate Rega’s 40th birthday, the company considers the Naiad to be the ultimate representation of its engineering ideas when executed with little regard for cost or ease of manufacture. In other words, it’s the best deck Rega knows how to make.
Unfortunately, we’ve never tested the Naiad – there’d be little point reviewing a product almost no-one could buy – but it’s fair to assume it should sound pretty special, given Rega’s track record. And it sure is pretty.
The making of: Rega Naiad
Rega Elex-R (2014)
(Image credit: Future)
Rega’s Elex-R arrived in 2014, 13 years after the original Elex, which was the company’s second-ever amplifier following its debut Elicit the year prior. It’s still going strong today – something we’re very thankful. Because while the Elex-R’s five-time What Hi-Fi? Award-winning streak came to an end in 2019 when Cambridge Audio’s better-connected CX models showed up, it still remains a go-to for analogue purists who aren’t worried about digital connectivity.
As with the Elicit and Brio siblings, its biggest strength lies in its effortless, uncompromising musicality; it’s the kind of product that gets straight to the heart of the music and conveys all the emotion in the recording with ease. We anticipate the next-generation Elex (which we’d imagine is due in the not-too-distant future) with avid eagerness.
Read the Rega Elex-R review
Rega RP1 Performance pack (2014)
We’ve always been fans of Rega’s entry-level turntable, the RP1, but this enhanced version took things to a new level.
Mostly, this is the same turntable we know and love, but with a few key tweaks. For starters, there’s a new, thicker drive belt. You also get a new mat: it’s thicker, and made of natural wool as opposed to the synthetic material of the original. The moving-magnet cartridge is new, too, with the standard Ortofon OMB5 having been replaced by Rega’s own Bias 2.
We proclaimed the RP1 Performance pack a ‘blindingly good turntable for the money, and a great entry point into the world of vinyl’.
Read the Rega RP1 Performance Pack review
Rega Planar 2 (2016)
In 1976, three years after Rega’s creation, the Planar 2 launched as one of the brand’s very first turntables. Its S-shaped tonearm was then replaced in 1984 with Rega’s RB250, and at the turn of the century a brand new version of the deck – fittingly named the P2 2000 – took its place in Rega’s catalogue until 2005.
Over a decade later, the Planar 2, having been developed over the past two years, was brought back from the dead – this time with the unabbreviated ‘Planar’ name.
The only things existing from the original being the drive belt and the plastic mouldings for the dust cover lid hinges, despite the two decks looking remarkably similar. But changes included a new plinth, power switch, 24v low-noise motor, central bearing, platter and feet. Quite a lot, then.
Most importantly, the Planer 2 received Rega’s new RB220 tonearm, which features new ultra-low friction ball bearings, a stiffer bearing housing and an automatic bias setting, making it virtually plug ’n’ play.
We proclaimed it a ‘proper step-up in performance from the RP1’, which is saying quite a lot.
Read the Rega Planar 2 review
Rega Planar 3 (2016)
Despite there being a 40-year gap between the original and current Planar 3, we surmised that if we put the two side-by-side, ‘most people would be hard pushed to find any differences beyond the smarter plinth and the updated tonearm’.
In actual fact, almost every part had been revised since the last iteration – the P3-24 of 2007. The company had, fairly unusually, put some real effort into the styling, too. The core of the turntable was the same, though: simple, well-engineered and designed to put performance first.
“Want the best value turntable on the market?”, we asked. “This is it”.
And it is still.
Read the Rega Planar 3 review
Rega Planar 6 (2017)
£1400 is no small price to pay for a turntable, particularly when a perfectly capable version of the same turntable is available for £200 less. But, such is the quality of the combination of Planar 6 and Ania cartridge, it’s a price well worth paying.
‘It’s a frankly astonishingly refined and mature sound’, we said in our review of the Planar 6, ‘with refinement adding to the deck’s customarily musical and insightful performance’.
It won an Award that year and repeated the feat in 2018. Will it be third time’s the charm? You certainly wouldn’t bet against it.
Read the Rega Planar 6 review
Rega Aura MC (2018)
(Image credit: Rega Research)
While Rega is a leading light at the more affordable end of the turntable and electronics fields it is a part of, ever mindful of value, it certainly knows how to make high-end products too. The Aura MC phono stage, which launched at £3999 ($5995), demonstrates that entirely.
Largely thanks to a three-stage symmetrical FET (Field Effect Transistor)-based main circuit board that’s packed with good quality components and driven by a generously specified power supply, the Aura MC is a virtuoso with moving coil cartridge-fitted record players, able to squeeze every last drop of energy from music signals it’s handed – not surprising considering that’s what Rega components do best. “If you have a system that can make the most of a phono stage of this level, dive right in,” is how we ended our review, and two years on from penning that statement we stand by it.
Read the Rega Aura review
Rega Planar 8 (2018)
If you’re not one of the lucky 50 who managed to get hold of the Naiad, above, you should probably take a good look at this Planar 8, which is designed to encapsulate the essence of the Naiad at a far more affordable price.
To these eyes it’s a gorgeously designed turntable that looks like nothing else out there. It’s vastly more capable than Rega’s more affordable models, too, including the Planar 6.
‘Rega has pushed the boundaries of performance at this level and has given premium rivals positioned above it plenty to worry about’, we said at the time, and little has changed since.
Read the Rega Planar 8 review
Rega Planar 1 Plus (2018)
When we heard Rega had finally developed a turntable with a built-in phono stage, the reaction of the What Hi-Fi? reviews team was a mixture of relief, anticipation and a fair bit of “about time, too”.
The Planar 1 Plus is essentially a Rega Planar 1 turntable with the Rega Fono Mini A2D built in. Both are Award-winning products, of course, and Rega says it only felt natural to combine them together. We absolutely agree.
‘Rega has struck gold in combining two superb products into one’, we said, commenting that in some ways it’s actually a better performer than when the turntable and phono stage are bought and combined as separates. This is a future classic and no mistake.
Read the Rega Planar 1 Plus review
Rega Planar 10 (2019)
(Image credit: Rega)
While the sparkliest jewels of Rega’s crown are arguably its lower-ranging Planar decks, its mainstream range-topper is the pinnacle of the Planar series and demonstrates the level of impressive engineering available at this price point.
The closest the company has got to building a production version of the Naiad – closer still than after the Planar 8 that came just before it – it’s an exceptional performer that packs clever engineering and fine build into a visually striking design. In fact, it’s the most sonically capable turntable we’ve heard at this price. If you really want to find out what’s hidden in that record groove, start here.
Read the Rega Planar 10 review
MORE:
10 of the best British record players of all time
12 of the best Cambridge Audio products of all time
There must be something in the water in Cambridge, England.
Not only did Cambridge Audio emerge from the university city, but so too did another bastion of British hi-fi. Amplification Recording and Cambridge (as it was known originally) was founded back in 1976, the brainchild of John Dawson and Chris Evans, who met while studying at Cambridge University. Over the years, the name was shortened to A&R Cambridge before Arcam was adopted in the 1980s.
Arcam has cast its product net far and wide over the years, always willing to experiment and entertain new product categories as they have emerged. From iPod speaker docks to standalone DACs, DVD players to music streamers, Arcam hasn’t been afraid to push itself, and the sonic envelope, in terms of both design and performance.
And the results speak for themselves. We’ve seen some absolutely classic products emerge over the years, and in celebration of British Hi-Fi Week, we highlight a number of them below. We kick things off where it all started, with a classic stereo amplifier…
Read our British Hi-Fi Week reviews and features
A&R Cambridge A60 (1979)
(Image credit: Future)
Arcam got off to a flier with its first-ever product, the A60. Launched in 1976, it was a well-equipped integrated amplifier, with a solid selection of line-level inputs and a quality moving-magnet phono stage. We were impressed by the A60’s solid build and sound quality from the start. It cost £190 in the early Eighties and was very much the go-to middle-market amplifier of the time.
The A60’s smooth presentation and expressive midrange made it a fun and entertaining listen. It was surefooted rhythmically and provided decent punch too. The power output of 40W per channel wasn’t special, by any means, but it was still enough to work with a wide range of speakers.
That Was Then… A&R Cambridge A60 (1976) vs. Arcam A19 (2013)
A&R Cambridge P77 (1977)
(Image credit: Future)
If you were looking to upgrade your record player in the late 70s, Arcam’s budget P77 cartridge would probably have been somewhere on your shopping list. It was designed using Japanese parts and boasted excellent tracking ability, although you needed to get the right capacitive loading to get the best sound from the moving-magnet design. We were big fans of its wonderfully open and intimate soundstage at the time, as well as its dynamics, and its rhythmic ability.
The cartridge wasn’t completely immune from criticism, however. We questioned its “slightly fat bass quality and a brightness when not correctly loaded”, proof that there’s always room for improvement, even in some top-performing products.
A&R Arcam Two (1985)
(Image credit: Future)
Arcam might be better known for its electronics, but in 1985 it managed to serve up a cracking pair of stereo speakers in the shape of the Arcam Two. For petite budget standmounters, these really stood out from their rivals. This was partly down to the fantastic build quality on offer. The real-wood finish was superb, while each cabinet was heavily braced and damped to keep vibrations to a minimum. A&R even offered optional wooden pedestal stands for you to perch them on.
We highlighted their “marvellous” stereo imaging and the fact they weren’t lacking in top end detail. They also displayed a “midrange resolution which is of benefit with any kind of music”. At the same time, though, this was a pair of speakers that also benefited from careful system matching. We noted the Arcam’s weighty bass had the potential to sound a little thick and unwieldy if the speakers were partnered with unsuitable electronics.
17 of the best British speakers of all time
Arcam Alpha 7 (1996)
(Image credit: Future)
Based on Arcam’s landmark Alpha One CD player, the Alpha 7 left the competition in its wake when it launched back in 1996. The ‘7’ featured a modular design, which offered the possibility of an upgrade path. This meant that with a new DAC board and a badge change you could transform the Alpha 7 into an Alpha 8. Neat.
It had a smooth, mature and relaxing sound, which made for treble that was softer than that from other players. But the sound had a good weight to it, which helped tracks sound big and substantial where necessary. The Alpha 7 took the game to similarly priced Japanese efforts and held its own – and not many affordable British-made players achieved such a feat.
Arcam Alpha 7SE – The What Hi-Fi? Hall of Fame: 1990s
Arcam DiVA A85 (2001)
(Image credit: Future)
The A85 was different from its forebears. Where previous Arcam efforts veered towards warm and safe, the A85 had the ferocity of a sledgehammer smashing through glass. It worked well with all genres of music, with no trace of boom or bloom, and a clarity that extended throughout the frequency range.
We noted its “immaculately clean” midrange that had a resolution its rivals couldn’t match. The A85 was a sonic leader in its class, a fully featured amp that blew away the competition.
11 of the best British stereo amplifiers of all time
Arcam FMJ AV8 / FMJ P7 (2002)
(Image credit: Future)
If we were to make a list of home cinema highlights from the noughties, then Arcam’s potent processor/power amp combo would be a shoo-in. Granted, at £5500 for the pair, it wasn’t cheap, but the AV8/P7 justified every penny thanks to its breathtaking sonic ability.
The P7 power amp boasted an impressive 170W of power into seven channels, and it deployed it all with a sofa-shaking amount of force. The beauty of this Arcam pairing, though, was also its musicality. It was capable of elevating any movie soundtrack to a level where the listener couldn’t help but be blown away.
For the time, there was also a fair chunk of technology on show too. The AV8 showcased THX Ultra2 certification, and included format support for THX Surround EX and DTS-ES, among others. Remember, this was before the days of HDMI sockets and Dolby Atmos.
Our pick of the best AV receivers you can buy
Arcam Solo (2005)
(Image credit: Arcam)
For hi-fi fans who couldn’t accommodate a stack of separates, the Arcam Solo was the perfect solution – it provided the convenience of a one-box micro system with sensational sound quality. All you needed to do was add speakers. It was the benchmark product of its kind back in 2005, a premium hi-fi set-up that delivered brilliance across the board.
Playing a wide variety of genres, the Solo just refused to put a foot wrong and produced “consistently listenable results, packed with detail and expressive dynamics”.
The Arcam looked understated, but extremely elegant at the same time – the unit felt solid and was beautifully finished too. It combined CD player, DAB/FM tuner and amplifier to fantastic effect and you even had the option of connecting an iPod and controlling it through the Solo’s remote control. As an all-in-one proposition it was very tough to beat.
Read our Arcam Solo review
Arcam rDAC (DAC) 2010
(Image credit: Arcam)
Thanks to the increasing amount of music being stored on computer hard drives, DACs (digital to analogue convertors) had exploded into the mainstream by the time the Arcam rDAC arrived on the scene in 2010. It was a talented device and Arcam got the design, the feature set and the sonic performance absolutely spot on. Emphasis was put on the performance from the asynchronous USB input for computer-based music and the company focused heavily on reducing jitter (digital timing errors).
But to be fair, the rDAC performed well across all inputs delivering a “spacious, controlled and big-boned sound”. Low frequencies were controlled yet authoritative, and detail levels and the DAC’s ability to translate textures accurately was second to none at the money. A superb example of its kind.
Read our Arcam rDAC review
Arcam rCube (2011)
(Image credit: Arcam)
With the rCube, Arcam proved it could be flexible enough to shift from traditional separates and embrace new sources of audio – in this case, the Apple iPod. This portable music player’s emergence spawned the arrival of numerous iPod speaker docks which brought added convenience and a new angle to home audio.
There was no lack of rivals on the market at the time, but, to its credit, Arcam rose to the challenge. The rCube not only delivered excellent cohesive sound quality, it also offered portability (via the rechargeable battery) video playback and a wireless option; it even had multi-room potential – you could buy two and stream from one to the other. Its design meant the speaker dock sounded better tucked in the corner of a room, but it also featured an all-important ‘bass’ boost function which gave it a helping hand in open space. A very clever speaker that stood out from the crowd.
MORE:
Read our Arcam rCube review
6 of the best British hi-fi innovations and technologies
12 of the best Cambridge Audio products of all time
Linn has taken the wraps off its next-generation flagship Klimax DSM music streamer, the original of which kickstarted the British company’s successful journey into hi-fi streaming way back in 2007.
According to Linn, the all-new Klimax DSM represents “a complete reimagining” of its top of the line streamer. That’s largely down to its Organik DAC, the first ever all-Linn digital to analogue converter, manufactured entirely in-house. Organik combines FPGA processing (which uses custom algorithms to increase upsampling and ensure precise volume control) with a discrete conversion stage that benefits from a new ultra-low jitter oscillator and clock distribution network. This combination – implemented in a double-sided circuit design to reduce signal paths – has allowed Linn to have control over every stage of the conversion process.
Linn says Organik measures better than anything the company has achieved before, offering significantly lower noise and distortion and its “most natural sound ever”.
Read our British Hi-Fi Week reviews and features
(Image credit: Linn)
It feeds a plethora of digital inputs – USB-typeB (24-bit/384khz, DSD256), optical and coaxial. They are complemented by analogue RCA and XLR inputs, which should benefit from an all-new ADC design that has its own circuit board with dedicated power supply, as well as wi-fi, Bluetooth and Airplay for a range of streaming needs. Linn’s dedicated Exakt Link ports enable direct hook-up of an LP12 turntable with Urika II phono stage, too.
A home cinema variant of the streamer, the Klimax DSM (AV), expands that connectivity list with HDMI socketry (four ins, one eARC-compatible out).
Both versions are housed in a new chassis, which is machined from solid, special-grade aluminium and takes on an aesthetic that’s in line with both the latest Majik DSM and Selekt DSM as well as the Klimax DS heritage.
To that end, you’ll find diamond-cut circles on the upper surface, stainless steel buttons and a mirror-screen frontage, not forgetting the beautiful, custom designed, precision-cut glass control dial with 100 status lights. Each unit will also be signed by the Linn engineer who built it from start to finish.
(Image credit: Linn)
(Image credit: Linn)
The sheer weight of the machine, coupled with internal damping, helps isolate the Klimax DSM from vibration in the room, while a number of pockets and partitions separate the analogue, digital and power stages in an effort to reduce interference.
The Linn Klimax DSM (either the ‘Audio’ or ‘AV’ variant) costs £30,000.
Linn is also taking this opportunity to offer an Organik DAC upgrade for its Klimax 350 speakers and Klimax Exaktbox, costing £10,800 and £5400 respectively. New orders of the 350 and Exactbox, priced £57,500 and £15,000, will come with Organik as standard.
(Image credit: Linn)
Finally, there’s the Klimax System Hub (£15,000), which is for anyone “seeking the highest performance from a complete Linn system”. Designed for use in a Linn system with Exakt technology, the System Hub is housed in the same new enclosure as the Klimax DSM. It also uses the company’s latest ADC design, and features the same inputs as the Klimax DSM (AV) variant – including the option to upgrade with surround 7.1-channel capability.
The pinnacle pairing is, Linn says, between the Klimax System Hub and the Klimax 350 speakers or Klimax Exaktbox, both with the new Organik DAC onboard. An impressive system, no doubt.
MORE:
Read our British Hi-Fi Week reviews and features
See our pick of the best Linn products of all time
Interview! Cyrus XR Series: a clean break from Classic
We ask the industry: is there such thing as ‘British hi-fi sound’?
If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.
It’s still fair to call audio sunglasses a niche category, but with Bose offering several models, Amazon in the game, and counting recent announcements from Razer and JLab, it’s certainly a growing one. There are people out there who just aren’t particularly fond of earbuds — often because they dislike the feeling of silicone tips plugging up their ears. Open-style products like the standard AirPods and Galaxy Buds Live are one alternative, but then you still face the possibility of losing them. If you’re running on a trail or out for an intense bike ride, it’s not an insignificant risk.
For those people, I can absolutely see the appeal of the Bose Frames Tempo, which have speakers built right into their frame and will stay planted on their face no matter how strenuous outdoor activity gets. The Tempo glasses are the sportiest model of Bose’s Frames family, clearly geared at hikers, runners, cyclists, and anyone else who spends a good chunk of their time outside. Bose says they’ve also got the best sound performance of the bunch.
From the front, they look like your typical pair of Oakley, Nike, or Under Armour sunglasses. Bose is clearly going after that same market with the $250 Tempos. If you’re more fashion-forward or looking for a pair of audio sunglasses that don’t give the impression you’re in the middle of a triathlon, you’ll want to stick with the Tenor or Soprano styles of Frames. These come with black mirrored lenses in the box, but Bose also sells a couple of other pairs of $40 lenses that you can swap in to let different amounts of light pass through. The oversized temples are where it becomes more obvious that these are audio sunglasses.
But there’s a benefit to that chunky design: unlike the Tenor and Soprano Frames, which use a proprietary charger, the Tempo model has a regular USB-C connector on the left temple. Bose says the frame is made from “TR-90 nylon.” There’s not much give, but they feel rugged to me, and they’ve got an IPX4 water and sweat resistance rating, so if you get caught running or biking in the rain, they’ll survive.
The large temples are the obvious tell that these are audio sunglasses.
For the first couple of days wearing the Tempos, I felt a slight squeeze at the sides of my head that got uncomfortable. Now, I’ve got an extremely large dome — they used to have to bring out a special-sized helmet in Little League, friends — but thankfully, the fit loosened up a bit because this pressure went away by the end of the first week. The sunglasses didn’t get loose enough to where they started bobbing on my head or anything; they still felt nice and secure. (My friend Theresa, who has a normal-sized head, never mentioned any headache-inducing tightness.) Bose includes three sizes of nose tips in the box, and I found the large to be the right match. Even if my face was covered in sweat from a long run, the nose tips helped ensure the sunglasses didn’t slide around.
The frames have an IPX4 rating for water and sweat resistance.
The controls that Bose came up with are wonderfully foolproof, which is crucial when you’re trying to stay focused on other things. You swipe across the right temple to raise or lower the volume, and on the underside of that temple is a small circular button that you can press to play / pause, double-tap to skip tracks, or triple-tap to go back. In no time at all, these controls felt so natural and easy. Powering off the Frames Tempo just takes holding down the button for a few seconds. Or you can flip them over and lay them down with the top of the frame on a surface. After two seconds in that orientation, they shut off. (You can disable this in settings, but I found it really convenient and, again, natural.) Battery life is listed as eight hours, and that’s lined up with my experience so far. The sunglasses take roughly an hour to charge back to 100 percent. Bose’s mobile app lets you update the sunglasses’ firmware, but there aren’t any EQ controls or other options that adjust their performance.
The sunglasses stay firmly in place through all sorts of outdoor activities.
Describing the sound quality of audio sunglasses can be tricky. They’re nothing like headphones or earbuds since these are essentially down-firing speakers pointed at your ears. But Bose stepped up its game compared to the first-generation Frames, which I’ve tried on occasion. These have more life to them across the whole EQ range.
There’s a surprising amount of separation between vocals and instrumentation, and the Frames Tempo have a nice clarity and even-handed balance. There’s more bass than before, but this is where I think it’s most important to set reasonable expectations: the low end you get from any decent pair of in-ear buds will blow these out of the water. No contest. That said, Bose has at least reached a place where the bass no longer sounds anemic or flat, which is a legitimate improvement over the first-gen Frames. It’s there and perceptible.
Sound bleed is easily canceled out by everyday street noise, but if you’re inside with the volume turned up, people nearby will be able to tell that you’re listening to music. These are sunglasses, after all, so I imagine those situations will be few and far between. The Bluetooth connection has held stable throughout the vast majority of my time with the Frames Tempo so far. No complaints there.
Voice calls while wearing the Tempos have also been a joy. Callers say I sound nearly as good as when speaking directly into my phone, and something about taking calls with your ears totally open just feels very cool.
Bose sells additional $40 pairs of lenses that let in different amounts of light.
Even after a relatively short time using the Frames Tempo, I get this audio glasses thing. I really get it. It’s like Dieter recently wrote: “Not having to put in or take out headphones changes your relationship to audio — it’s just always available, always there when you want it.” Do I wish I could pop clear lenses into them and wear them everywhere? In theory, you bet. But this style wouldn’t really work for that, nor is it what the Tempos are meant to be at the end of the day. So I can’t knock Bose for the disappointment I feel when switching back to my normal glasses, which now seem so very primitive.
The Bose Frames Tempo let you hear the world around you with no obstructions — with a soundtrack playing over everything, while at the same time giving your ears a bit of a break compared to normal earbuds. At $250, they will be a tough sell for some. But I’ve come to realize that audio sunglasses are the exact sort of thing you won’t ever realize you needed. Until you put ‘em on — and all of a sudden, you do.
GameStop has sold PC gaming hardware for a while now, including entire gaming laptops, monitors, headphones, mice and speakers, but in the post-stonks era it apparently wants a piece of Best Buy and Newegg’s desktop components business as well. Most prominently, the company has started selling Nvidia RTX 3000 series graphics cards — where by “selling,” I mean engaging in the same sort of barely-there, blink-and-they’re-gone listings as every other purveyor of GPUs.
As PC Gamer reports, GameStop made its entire weekly circular ad revolve around PC gaming this week, including several GPUs, motherboards, a power supply, and a case:
GameStop’s weekly circular for March 21st-27th.
Back in reality, though, GameStop sold out of these GPUs days ago, roughly the instant they first went on sale. Judging by the replies to GameStop’s tweets, this was the typical reaction:
And as best as I can tell, the entirety of GameStop’s PC component selection consists of two motherboards right now.
The selection of GameStop PC hardware that is “available now.”
It’s hard to blame GameStop for selling out of components, though, hilarious Javascript or no — the street prices of Nvidia and AMD GPUs are utterly out of control, selling for 2x-3x their worth. I just don’t understand why GameStop would even bother to try during the shortage. Maybe it could refurbish old graphics cards at its refurbishment plant? Even older cards are in high demand right now.
To the younger hi-fi enthusiast, of whom there are undoubtedly some among our ranks, it might come as a surprise to learn the BBC once designed its own speakers. The same licence fee that’s now used to fund new series of Mrs Brown’s Boys was once invested in what Rogers Hi-Fi’s Andy Whittle calls Britain’s “world-breaking commitment to audio”.
The task of building the speakers was divided up between a thriving British hi-fi industry – Rogers was among the companies holding licenses, along with Goodmans and Spendor. Having already brought the LS3/5A and LS5/9 back to the market, Rogers has plans to re-release more of the company’s back catalogue in the future.
Though the parts are more or less the same, drivers previously built by KEF have had to be reverse-engineered. As Whittle explains, this is as much about recapturing the sound and the essence of the speakers as it is following an old recipe.
Read our British Hi-Fi Week reviews and features
A personal history
(Image credit: Rogers Hi-Fi)
What Hi-Fi: Let’s talk about your background. How did you get from where you started to where you are today?
Andy Whittle: I started in 1985 with Goodmans loudspeakers. At that time, Goodmans had a license for making the BBC LS3/5A. I worked on what was then the MkII Goodmans Maxim; there was an original Goodmans Maxim in the 60s, which was partly designed with Laurie Fincham from KEF. When I worked at Goodmans, they were making 3/5As and wanted to reinvent the Maxim name, but a cheaper version. I designed the Maxim II speaker, which got some awards and good reviews.
So that’s how I started. I did a spell with Celestion in Ipswich, which at that time had a professional market and a domestic hi-fi market. I was working on the professional side, on 10- and 12-inch guitar speakers. It’s the polar opposite to home audio because you’re not trying to introduce distortion, but guitar speakers like distortion in certain places at certain times.
You’re actually trying to colour the sound there? You want some break-up, but also a particular tone. It’s interesting – you spend most of your career trying to get rid of distortion and then someone asks you to put it back in. It’s like, let’s look through the other end of the telescope and see what happens.
After that, I did a bit down at Mordaunt-Short, which was part of the TGI group that owned Tannoy and Goodmans. TGI also had Epos and Creek Audio, and there was a period in the late 80s when we were all together under one roof. I ended up working with Robin Marshall on the Epos ES11 bass unit.
Rogers LS3/5A tech specs
(Image credit: Rogers Hi-Fi)
System type Two-way infinite baffle Frequency response 80Hz-20KHz Nominal Impedance 15ohms Bass/midrange 110mm Bextrene cone Tweeter 19mm Mylar dome Sensitivity 82.5dB Finishes Walnut, Rosewood and Olive Grille Black Tygan Dimensions (hwd) 30.5 x 19 x 16.5cm Weight 4.9kg (each)
In the early 90s, I moved to Rogers. It’s a small industry, of course – everyone moves around and knows everybody else. At that time, Rogers was making all the BBC monitors. I carried on the Rogers tradition of the BBC-balanced sound and brought out one or two new ranges. I did the AB1 subwoofer that went with the 3/5A, and then we did the DB101.
Michael O’Brien, who owned Rogers, sold the company to the Wo Kee Hong Group in Hong Kong. They ran it for four or five years before the big financial crisis in the late 90s when they pulled the plug on the UK manufacture. They weren’t making those products in Hong Kong or China, they were basically making their own products and introducing them to the domestic market; so they moved a bit more mainstream, doing more AV stuff. But that was all kept in the domestic China market.
After that, I ran Exposure for about five years, and then for the past ten years, I’ve been working with Audio Note UK. I kept in touch with the Rogers people, and a few years ago they contacted me and said they were looking to make a small batch of speakers in the UK for Rogers’ 70th anniversary.
We got those made, then I said to Richard Lee, the chairman of Wo Kee Hong, ‘Why don’t you just start making the 5/9 and 3/5A back in the UK?’ My friend Kevin from Talk Electronics has a factory, so I spoke to him and that’s what we did.
So we get the cabinet and the crossovers made here in the UK. I reverse-engineered the drive units, because KEF doesn’t make those anymore. They come in from China, we finish the drive units here and we assemble the tweeter – we put the dome into the magnet – so the final assembly is done here.
We’ve been doing that now for about 2.5 years. We have a BBC licence for that and do the same for the LS5/9. We’re also looking at making an active LS5/8; we’re doing the amplifier design and are hoping those will be ready this September.
A certain character
(Image credit: Rogers Hi-Fi)
Why did you want to start making these BBC speakers again? There still seemed to be an appetite for BBC-designed products. I was in the audio industry, travelling around to shows and, without being arrogant, most of what I heard didn’t actually sound that good. I’d start listening to the older stuff and think, that sounds better than some of the newer stuff. Why not make the old stuff again?
It has a certain character you don’t get with modern products. Maybe it’s a bit like driving a Morgan car: it’s not going to set the world alight with its 0-60mph stats or top speed, nor is it the last word in handling, but it still provides a purpose.
If you look at the quality of the R&D and the resources available to the BBC at the time, there must have been millions of pounds spent on developing the 3/5A – or certainly a considerable amount in today’s money. These days I wouldn’t know, but I don’t think so much is invested in the acoustics of the speaker.
You talk about the character of these speakers; how would you describe it, and what makes that BBC character so special? I don’t have a BBC background on the design side, but ultimately, it’s all about the vocal and the voicing. If it’s for an outside broadcast van and they are mixing, the vocals have to be 100 per cent spot on. If you get that right in the critical mid-band, the bass and top aren’t so critical. Get it right and you’re pretty much home and dry.
Rogers LS5/9 spec sheet
(Image credit: Rogers Hi-Fi)
System type Two way bass reflex Tweeter Audax 34mm with phase correction Mid/Bass Rogers 210 mm polypropylene cone vinyl surround Crossover 3KHz 27 precision element 18dB per Octave Sensitivity 87dB for 1W at 1M Nominal Impedance 8 Ohms Power handling 100 Watts unclipped Maximum SPL 106 dBA typical in room Cabinet 9mm Birch plywood hardwood battens Grille Black Tygan Finish Walnut, Rosewood and Olive Connections Stereo pair 4mm banana sockets Dimensions 460mm x 275mm x 285mm (HxWxD) Weight 12Kg (each speaker)
In terms of the driver development and crossover integration, it’s seamless and you can’t hear the join. So there’s no phase, there’s no funny off-axis performance, it’s easy to hear the layers – which, again, is quite important for recording.
It comes back to the tonality. It’s easy to design speakers to try and chase more detail and a brighter edged sound, but it’s like putting more salt on your dinner – you just upset the balance of the flavours. Ultimately, it’s about that presentation, that tonality and the ability to reproduce the human voice.
If you look back at what was around in the 1970s that has stood the test of time, there are only a few things – maybe a Mini or a London bus. But it’s trying to nail that flag that says this is what we made in the UK, this was our world-breaking commitment to audio back in the 70s, and it still seems to have some merit today.
If you take a pair of the new 3/5As and put them against the old 3/5As, there are subtle differences, but for all intents and purposes, they have the same DNA. You can follow it through.
Cranky old drive units
(Image credit: Rogers Hi-Fi)
How many comparisons have you done with the new speakers? I’ve done comparisons with earlier Rogers products, including a pair of 3/5A from 1976 that I use as my reference. The BBC licensed it out to more than one supplier in case of supply issues, but they should have been able to take one from any manufacturer and swap them out. The left speaker could have been a Spendor and the right a Rogers, and you should have still been able to mix on it.
You mentioned KEF now not making the drivers. Is that the main thing that’s changed from the 1970s to now? Yes, that’s the biggest thing. KEF used to make the woofer and tweeter, then the independent licences used to make their own crossover. And there came a bit of argy-bargy between people saying these drive units are no good, and KEF would say, ‘Well it’s your crossover’. Eventually, the BBC stamped that out, so KEF would produce the matched woofer, tweeter and crossover.
When KEF was bought out by Gold Peak – around the same time Gold Peak bought Celestion – they weren’t interested in making 3/5As, as they had bigger fish to fry. They were looking at seriously growing the company, to the point where now KEF does the consumer side and Celestion does the pro side. And you can see with their modern products that they’re going great guns. They aren’t interested in making cranky old drive units – they leave that to us.
Sorting out the drive units was the biggest challenge. But on reflection, we’re quite happy we managed to capture the essence of that. The way it’s partnered with the crossover and the cabinet, with those three ingredients we’ve got the right result.
So are these current versions geared more towards hi-fi or pro? I don’t know how the market has changed on the pro side, but I want to get these speakers back into the BBC studios. I want to say to them: ‘Whatever you’ve got in Maida Vale, throw it in the bin and put the Rogers 3/5A in’. That’s my plan anyway.
Want more of this kind of thing? Check out the best British speakers of all time
(Pocket-lint) – If you want to make a worthwhile difference to the sound of your TV, you’re spoilt for choice where soundbars at the lower end of the budget scale are concerned. Equally, if you feel your games console experience requires a sonic rocket, there are numerous LED-happy gaming soundbars ready to do a job for you.
But what if you want both – and you want something small and discreet enough to cause minimal disruption to your viewing and/or gaming environment(s) at the same time? Your shortlist has suddenly become quite a lot shorter.
You can now add the Panasonic SC-HTB01 – or Soundslayer, as it’s also rather excitably known – to your shortlist, though. It may be physically small, but it’s big on performance.
Obviously, the big news is how small the Panasonic is. It’s perfectly proportioned to sit discreetly underneath your TV or games monitor, and at this weight it’s hardly a burden to move it from one position to another. But it’s still big enough to be fitted with reasonably sized speaker drivers.
‘Design’ doesn’t really seem to be something that’s happened to the SC-HTB01 – rather, its drivers and accompanying electronics have been put into a housing which has then been mostly covered with acoustic cloth. Its plastics feel ordinary. It’s basically not much to look at – although it’s easy to imagine Panasonic thinking that’s entirely the point.
‘Bland’ isn’t the same as ‘badly made’ though – this, after all, is Panasonic we’re talking about. The Soundslayer may not be visually stimulating, but it’s properly screwed together and feels made to last.
Features
Decoding: Dolby Atmos & DTS:X supported
Modes: Game, Standard, Music, Cinema
4K HDR passthrough supported
There is a brief suite of physical connections on the rear of the soundbar. A couple of HDMI sockets – one input, one ARC-enabled output – a digital optical input, and a USB socket (for updates only).
Panasonic
Via HDMI, the Soundslayer can handle 4K HDR content as well as multi-channel audio up to a hefty 24bit/192kHz standard – so Dolby Atmos and/or DTS:X soundtracks present no problems. Wirelessly connectivity is handled by Bluetooth 2.1 – hands up who remembers when that was the cutting edge of wireless streaming technology?
The SC-HTB01’s equaliser (EQ) presets let you know where it thinks it belongs. Presets for ‘music’, ‘cinema’ and ‘standard’ attest to its flexibility – but within the ‘game’ preset there are sub-settings for ‘RPG’, ‘FPS’ and ‘enhanced voices’ (which is excellent when listening at very low volume levels).
Interface
Included remote control
It’s not a problem, in and of itself, that the Panasonic has no voice assistant or control app. It’s not a problem that everything, from subwoofer level and overall volume level to EQ preset and Bluetooth pairing, is taken care of by a full-function remote control handset.
Panasonic
No, the problem is that the remote control seems to have been selected on the basis that there were no more affordable options available. It’s small, hard, thin, unpleasant to hold, and very nearly as unpleasant to use.
Behind that mild-mannered exterior, two 40mm full-range drivers and two 14mm tweeters face forwards. On the top of the ‘bar there’s an upward-firing 80mm bass driver, alongside passive low-frequency radiators. Panasonic is striving for a ‘2.1’ channel effect with this five-driver layout, and has fitted the SC-HTB01 with 80 Watts of power with which to make it happen.
Panasonic
There’s also a bass reflex slot at the front of the cabinet, just in case that passive radiator doesn’t quite pull its weight. Naturally, this upward-firing configuration means the Panasonic shouldn’t be positioned with surfaces directly above it.
So how does all that come across? Well, if you’ve been using the audio system integrated into your TV or your monitor up until now, the SC-HTB01 will thrill you with the scale and drive of its sound.
The combination of judicious speaker driver placement and careful EQs means the Panasonic sounds bigger – and in every direction – than seems likely from a soundbar this tiny. There’s no mistaking its presentation for that of a dedicated Dolby Atmos soundbar, naturally, but the Soundslayer’s soundstage is taller, deeper and (especially) wider than it would seem to have any right to be.
Best Alexa speakers 2021: Top Amazon Echo alternatives
By Britta O’Boyle
·
At the top of the frequency range it carries plenty of detail, and gives treble sound lots of substance to go along with their considerable bite. Further down, the midrange is nicely shaped and projects forward well – even without the intervention of the EQ presets.
It’s down at the bottom of the frequency range, though, that the Panasonic both triumphs and fails. This isn’t the first soundbar to have mistaken ‘overconfident bass’ for ‘excitement’ – and, to be absolutely fair, the SC-HTB01 controls the low-end stuff pretty well. It certainly doesn’t drone and doesn’t blossom into the midrange, either. But it definitely overplays its hand where bass is concerned – ‘punchy’ is one thing, but being repeatedly punched while trying to watch TV or concentrate on a game is quite another.
Panasonic
The big, bassy emphasis doesn’t help the Panasonic’s overall detail retrieval, which is a pity. It’s possible to independently adjust the ‘subwoofer’ level using the remote control, but the effect is not so much to reduce the soundbar’s outright wallop as to rob it of its dynamism.
That’s unfortunate, because the Soundslayer ordinarily has more than enough dynamism to maximise any game soundtrack you care to mention. It can put a huge amount of distance between ‘stealth’ and ‘assault’, which adds a lot to the gaming experience.
It works well for movies, too – when the soundtrack demands a shift from ‘quiet and contemplative’ to ‘massive attack’, the Panasonic relishes the opportunity. It’s so much more accomplished than the sound of your average TV, and consequently far more involving.
The temptation, naturally, is to go all-in on the volume – but that would be a mistake. The Soundslayer’s tonal balance, which at moderate volume levels is pretty well judged, takes a definite turn for the ‘hard and unforgiving’ if you decide to press on. Treble sounds get edgy and thin, and the bass stops punching and starts slapping. Stick to reasonable levels, in other words – it’s not only your neighbours who will thank you.
Verdict
Keep its limitations in mind and there’s lots to like about the Panasonic SC-HTB01. It may not quite be the ‘soundslayer’ it purports to be, but it’s a convenient and capable way of giving your games and movies a bit more sonic oomph. As long as you don’t get carried away with volume, anyhow.
Also consider
Yamaha
Yamaha SR-C20A
squirrel_widget_4026933
Slightly bigger than the Panasonic, slightly less expensive too, but designed to do much the same job. It is similarly unruly when the volume get big, too, but overall is probably a marginally better bet.
Read our review
Writing by Simon Lucas.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
