Royd - Let's Dance.

2»

Comments

  • Royd Merlins for sale on pfm, very special speakers IMO. Better than Minstrels, for sure!

    image
    image
  • Ooh! Very nice :-)
  • I really want em.. but getting the car through its MOT has just crippled my wallet :(
  • Duke - given the constant gushing about Royds on this site I had assumed that they are objects capable of most functions, including physical transportation. Why bother with a car at all if  you have a pair of Royds...?


    ;)
  • Has anyone spotted the Sorcerers on offer over at finkpish?

  • i think that only the RR2's were capable of flight.. have heard they came with Royd embossed magic carpet..

  • You haven't heard RR3s then! ;) Somehow, Royds seem particularly special as standmounts, on open stands. This can be heard if you compare Sorcerors with Doublets, for instance.

    I rather hope to try a pair of RR2s in my system one day to see if that still holds true with the last models.

    Sorcerors can be quite spectacular by the way, but need serious amplification to shine. Most integrateds don't really hack it, IME, which is how they were often used. Less efficient Royds get faster and faster, and cleaner and more dynamic with bigger, better amps. They really show what's upstream of them.
  • Has anyone spotted the Sorcerers on offer over at finkpish?
    http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=133292
    Sorcerers...?
    Crikey, they're pulling rabbits out of hats now.
  • Interesting..

    I was told by a colleague who used to sell Royds that the RR2 was just a Doublet in a posh suit. Are they significantly better in your opinion? 

    Have heard the RR2's, and still regret not snapping up a pair when I had access to trade prices on them, but there seem to be few pairs of Doublets about at the moment for reasonable money - although i watched a pair go on bay of e for over £400!!
  • edited February 2013
    That was possibly a sweeping statement on the part of your colleague. The RR2 may look like a Doublet, it's certainly the same configuration (2.5 way) but other than that (and possibly cabinet volume), they were different.

    Different crossovers, different (custom) drivers, different cabinet construction (much more substantial)... Also, if you read Joe's article 'what is a HiFi Loudspeaker', and what he wrote when he released the RRs, you'll find the Revelation range were uniquely developed to correct phase shift, which he not only saw as destructive, but felt he had made a meaningful breakthrough with. 


    The components used and construction of the Revelations are different to earlier Royds, and they sound  more refined (which might be why brutish amps are needed to 'make the dance' in the same way as earlier models). The later speakers may have been dismissed by some saying 'RR1s are dressed up Minstrels', 'RR2s = posh doublets' and 'RR3s = pricey Sorcerors' - but that misses the point. Revelations were the result of an idea, lots of work, money spent on R&D and better parts/cabinet construction. (BTW, Sorcerors were also pricey in their day, their construction is also heavier than the minstrel era).


    For instance, look at those Merlins I linked to above; excellent speakers,
    and about the same size and configuration as RR3s. Yet Merlins were about £300 in 1995, and the RR3s were £1100 -1300 in '02 - what's the difference? It's a big price jump (even with inflation), but they're not the same speaker, as Merlins are far closer to Minstrels than RR3s. They might have the same form factor, and share a house sound, but that's about it.

    Reading what Joe Ackroyd wrote about the Revelations, it makes sense that the configurations he chose to develop as his last speakers matches the three most popular configurations Royd ever produced, the Minstrel, Doublet, and a standmount monitor.

    Whether the Revelations were ever worth the extra money is another discussion, as Royd got it so right with the early models for a smaller RRP, but the Revelations did seem to be a genuine, if evolutionary, development of earlier Roydiness. Personally, I wouldn't dismiss anything Joe Ackroyd designed.
  • Indeed.. my esteemed colleague was prone to a great many generalizations. To be fair tho, I think the gist of what he was getting at was that the Doublets do 80-90% of what the RR2's can. hifi is often a law of diminishing gains, and that 10-20% can carry a serious financial premium.

    They were a firm favorite of everyone in the shop, especially with a vinyl front end.  Personally, I felt there was nothing to touch the RR2's until you went as far as the ATC SCM35 which cost considerably more, and required even more grunty amplification to get singing. That said, they didn't have the 'soul' displayed by all of Joe's speakers.

    The whole revelation range was a clear step up from previous models, such a shame the proposed buy-out of the Royd company never reached fruition. His talent, experience, and expertise deserved better.
  • edited February 2013
    Indeed.. my esteemed colleague was prone to a great many generalizations. To be fair tho, I think the gist of what he was getting at was that the Doublets do 80-90% of what the RR2's can. hifi is often a law of diminishing gains, and that 10-20% can carry a serious financial premium.
    They were a firm favorite of everyone in the shop, especially with a vinyl front end.  Personally, I felt there was nothing to touch the RR2's until you went as far as the ATC SCM35 which cost considerably more, and required even more grunty amplification to get singing. That said, they didn't have the 'soul' displayed by all of Joe's speakers.
    The whole revelation range was a clear step up from previous models, such a shame the proposed buy-out of the Royd company never reached fruition. His talent, experience, and expertise deserved better.
    Trudat! All of that.

    Funny thing, personal preference, but I always enjoy Minstrels more than Doublets when I hear them. However, I would choose either over the technically superior ATCs any day! I do agree about the last 10% being expensive though...

    Shame the company wasn't saved, a real loss.


  • It is a shame that Royd just shut up shop. But would Joe have been there for the long run? And would Royd have been Royd without Joe?

    Well, I'm off to listen to a pair of RR3s! ;-)
  • Some nice RR2s on the wam and PF ;)
  • edited February 2014
    Not sure if these really are 'Royd-y', but there's a chance they may be.

    image

    Goodmans 'mambo', quite rare (I knew of them but have never seen a set available before) and very cute. I believe J Ackroyd did work at Goodmans during this period, and these little things look recognizably 'Royd-y' to me.

    Ebay here.
  • I wonder...
  • Have enjoyed switching back to the PA2M (SE) with the Sorcerers after spending some also enjoyable time with the RR3s including experimenting with bi-amping.  For sure the RR3s are more balanced, the best bass I've heard in a standmount, and refined, but are they as involving?

    Sometimes it takes being away from something a long time, and to really listen to the replacement, before a different perspective occurs.  I guess it's like the Honeymoon period.  The Sorcerers really throw the music out, a very being in it perspective whilst the RR3s are more 'hear into'.

    All in all the Sorcerers have a unique way of presenting the music, which is many ways even the RR3 can't compare to.  For me they are Joe Ackroyd's ultimate 7L, a tad less projected and forceful than the Sapphire MK1s (another favourite), but with great bass depth, more refined and balanced sound.  All are much less coloured than the raw & fun Minstrels.
  • I forgot to mention that my Sorcerers use the Revelation driver (late Sorcerers not the "SEs". Need to hear the original. :)
  • Hi Neil

    That's a really interesting comparison right there, I bet not many have done that. Thanks for sharing!
  • We gotta get some Sorcerers Alan ;-)
  • edited March 2015
    Calling RR3 users, I've put them back in & loving them.  Whilst they aren't as "upfront" as the Sorcerers, they are more balanced for sure.  Still a Royd, more grown up?

    When I mount my RR3s on their stands & moderately bolt the stands in, I notice that there is clearance between the speakers and the base of the stand.

    Is this normal?  Both speakers are identically cleared from the bases, bolted into the rear mounting plate.
  • Yeah, Neil. Mine are like that.

    I don't know why the stands were designed like that.
  • The only thing I can think of is to stop the most important thing - backwards and forwards movement - and add some sort of damping action up and down i.e. up and down the stands.
  • Cheers by the way for the reassurance. :)
  • The RR3 bass is astonishing almost reminds me of headphone listening with its timing and coherence compared to typical speaker and room interfaces.
  • The RR3s are very special all round. They just sound right.

    I'm plotting lots of Class A watts for later in the year to really give them a work out ;-)
  • Royd Sorcerors in cherry, going up on pfm today for £350.

    www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=202
  • Inside knowledge there, Alan?
Sign In or Register to comment.