References:
 ------
TIDAL Piano Cera was voted as "Product of the Year
2011" in Russia (from the eight leading audio/music magazines)
Review
of the TIDAL Piano Cera from UltraAudio.com, from Jeff Fritz:
Technical Elegance: Tidal Piano Cera Loudspeakers
|
|
"The
most widely read Ultra Audio "Opinion" to date might also
be the most controversial.
Titled "Comparisons on Paper: B&W 803 Diamond vs. Tidal
Contriva Diacera SE," the piece elicited responses that
ranged from continued outrage at the prices that the high-end
industry as a whole charges for products, to outright disappointment
that more people don’t seem to get what the high end is
all about.
The point of the article was simple: On paper -- specs,
driver configuration, cabinet size, etc. -- not much separated
the B&W speaker from the Tidal. But the Tidal costs almost
six times as much. The question was simple: What gives?
|
That article generated an e-mail from Tidal’s Jörn Janczak, who
politely and graciously explained to me why his speaker is so
much more expensive than the B&W, then offered to let me hear
a pair in my home. In effect, he was game for a genuine shoot-out
with the overachieving -- at least on paper -- B&W.
We sat down together at the 2011 Consumer Electronics Show (see
"Tidal Wave") and arranged the review.
After speaking with Janczak and perusing the Tidal models, I asked
for the Piano Cera because I thought -- and he agreed -- that
it might offer the best value in the Tidal line. At $23,990 USD
per pair, it was still about two and half times as expensive as
the B&W 803 Diamond, but it also occupies a very popular price
point for high-end loudspeakers.
In fact, $20k-$40k for a pair of speakers is perhaps the most
hotly contested price range in all of the high end.
MDF boxes and off-the-shelf drivers?
On the surface, there’s not much to distinguish the Piano Cera
in the marketplace -- especially at its price. The cabinet is
made of MDF, a material often dismissed by manufacturers who use
more exotic substances. The drivers, sourced from Accuton (Thiel
& Partner in Germany, where they’re made), though well respected
in the industry, are not Tidal-engineered-and-manufactured designs.
Accutons show up in competing products all over the world.
If those two things -- drivers and cabinet -- were the only aspects
of the Piano Cera’s design that you examined, you’d likely conclude
that there’s not much special about them. But you have to dive
deeper into the Tidal philosophy to learn just what has made their
speakers increasingly popular over the past few years. First,
it’s not voodoo, or secret sauce, or voicing from the master.
It’s smart engineering, plain and simple.
The first thing you’ll notice about the Piano Cera and that MDF
cabinet is that, for its rather slight dimensions of 46"H x 9.4"W
x 14"D, it weighs a stout 117 pounds. The walls are 1.5" thick
and locked together with tongue-and-groove joins to ensure strong
seams.
The cabinet interior is heavily braced in a manner reminiscent
of, ironically, B&W’s Matrix system. In fact, it appears from
CAD drawings that there is almost more bracing than air space
inside the Piano Cera. Add to that interior walls lined with damping
material, and this is a dense, dead cabinet -- not quite as dead
as the most inert enclosures my knuckles have rapped, but more
thud-like in character than 80% of the speakers I get in for review.
The Piano Cera’s Accuton drivers are made specifically for Tidal.
Appearance-wise, you’ll notice that the two 7" ceramic drive-units
are anodized black. But the real differences between these and
Accuton’s standard fare, I’m told, is that the Tidal drivers have
been reworked to have greater excursion while remaining linear
in travel. (If you look closely, you’ll see that the metal grilles
that cover the drivers have a greater standoff distance from the
surrounds so that the drivers can move farther out.) The 1.2"
tweeter is ceramic as well, but this version is coated with graphite,
which accounts for its gray color.
Tidal's Piano Cera is a three-driver, 2.5-way bass-reflex design
(there are two rear-firing ports). The upper 7" unit handles the
midrange and extends down fully into the bass. The lower 7" driver
augments only the bass (the exact cutoff frequency isn’t specified,
but I’d guess that its low-pass is around 100Hz). This 2.5-way
has a twist, however. Tidal’s Variogain technology allows for
some flexibility in fine-tuning when taking into consideration
room size and listener taste.
The Piano Cera can be configured for: two-way operation (for small
rooms), in which the lower 7" woofer is disconnected altogether;
linear 2.5-way operation (for medium-sized rooms), in which the
speaker runs flat, which is likely how it will be run in most
of the rooms it’s purchased for; and 2.5-way operation with Gain
A, for bigger rooms, or listeners who prefer more bass output.
Gain A gives the Piano Cera more output between 25 and 35Hz --
the extreme low end.
These configurations are easily accomplished by the user by moving,
or removing altogether, a solid-copper jumper between three binding
posts on the lower portion of the Piano Cera’s terminal block.
In my 23’ x 20’ room, I found that I got the most extension, with
no audible or measurable tradeoff, with Gain A configured for
the deepest bass. I did most of my listening with this setting.
Tidal crossover The Tidal Piano Cera's crossover during assembly.
Then there’s the crossover, made with premium components from
Mundorf and Dueland (both close partners of Tidal's, I'm told).
Like most speaker companies, Tidal wants a fairly flat on-axis
frequency response. Done deal, according to Janczak. I’ve examined
the graphs he sent me and saw nothing to note -- the speaker does
appear to measure linearly (though we haven’t measured the Piano
Cera in the National Research Council’s anechoic chamber to independently
verify this).
Janczak puts even more value on a speaker’s step response. From
the step-response measurement you can derive the behavior of a
speaker’s drivers in the time domain. Essentially, the speaker
is fed a voltage pulse, and what comes out is captured by a microphone;
this is called an impulse response.
The arrival of each driver’s output at the microphone’s diaphragm
is plotted, in milliseconds, on a graph’s x axis. From these data
you can derive one of several pieces of information.
First, in a time-coincident design you’ll see on the graph a single
right-triangle shape, meaning that all three drive-units’ outputs
arrived at the microphone at the same time, then trailed off.
(More than one spike, all positive-going in nature, would indicate
that the design is not time coincident; more than one spike, with
one or more negative-going in nature, would indicate that one
or more drivers is connected in inverted acoustic polarity and
are also not time coincident.)
While Tidal is by no means the first company to promote the advantages
of time-coincident speakers -- Thiel and Vandersteen come to mind
-- it is the only one I know of to attempt this feat using higher-order
crossover slopes.
Typically, first-order slopes are used for time-coincident designs
so that minimal phase shift (time shift) is realized through the
crossover region, though this is at the expense of greater overlap
between drivers and the subsequent higher distortion that can
cause.
Higher-order slopes, conversely, are used to lessen driver overlap,
and therefore enable the drivers to be used within a narrower
passband -- but at the expense of greater phase shift in the crossover.
From what Jörn Janczak has told me, the Tidal speakers seem to
have higher-order crossover slopes and almost time-coincident
arrival of the drive-units’ outputs.
Is this unique in the loudspeaker world? I can’t say, although
I can say that the Piano Cera is the first speaker I’ve seen for
which both of these design ideals are attempted.
I’ve eaten up a lot of space explaining the general design of
the Tidal Piano Cera, but it’s important to know what sets these
speakers apart technically -- that information will, I hope, allow
you to interpret my comments about their sound within a greater
context.
A few quick notes: The Piano Black lacquer on my review samples
was as finely finished as I’ve ever seen on a speaker: no waves,
no ripples, no orange peel, no haze. Just beautiful. You can also
buy your Tidals in a number of wood finishes, some for standard
upcharges (see Tidal’s website), some bespoke for even more (I’d
say just get the black).
The attention to detail in the build, finish, and packing is just
what you’d hope for in a speaker at this price: Each Tidal is
shipped in a flight case for transport, and four feet are included
for each speaker. Each foot comprises a steel ball bearing in
the footer base, itself encased by an aluminum housing that screws
onto the threaded speaker base plate -- all to decouple the Piano
Cera from the floor. The speaker can be only single-wired; its
excellent-quality binding posts also accept banana plugs.
Sound
Reviewers are as prone to preconception as any listener. When,
before the review samples arrived, I tried to imagine what the
Tidal Piano Cera might sound like, I thought it would have a lightweight
balance -- perhaps a slightly "whitish" nature in the top end
-- but be very holographic with respect to imaging and soundstaging.
Once the Piano Ceras were in my room, the first thing that struck
me about them was the biggest surprise. I remember being worried
that a smallish 2.5-way speaker wouldn’t be able to move enough
air in the mid- and low bass to be musically satisfying with much
of the music I enjoy listening to -- which is why my reference
speakers are always rather large floorstanders. I guess I’m somewhat
addicted to great bass.
So here’s the surprise: The Piano Ceras produced satisfying weight
and slam from 100Hz down to about 30Hz in my room. There was very
little boom or bloat throughout this region, nor was the bass
so overdamped as to become constricted.
It bloomed just a touch, but remained relatively tight and even
visceral when the music called for it. This produced a nice sonic
balance. For instance, I could listen to "Bring It On," from Roger
Smith’s Both Sides (16/44.1 AIFF, Miramar), and could hear in
my room both the weight and presence of the bass guitar -- even
as I simultaneously felt the drum strokes in my chest.
As I turned the volume up to peak sound-pressure levels of about
93dB, the sound remained composed and clean, with no audible compression
or distortion. The midbass was solid and quick, and transitioned
into a lower bass range that was weighty and substantial.
Although the Tidals didn’t give me bass all the way down to 20Hz
in my room -- surely my preference -- subjectively I didn’t feel
I was missing anything important with most of music I played.
All this from a two-and-a-half-way design! Don’t you just love
it when preconceptions get blown to smithereens?
The Tidal Piano Ceras had a wonderfully natural and airy top end.
I listened to a lot of acoustic music through them, both to get
a handle on their sound and just because it was plain enjoyable.
"Stairway to Heaven," from Rodrigo y Gabriela’s self-titled album
(16/44.1 AIFF, Sony Music), was crisply rendered, with just enough
air around the notes to make them sound dimensional and nicely
carved out in space.
Transients were quick, even explosive when they needed to be,
with an appropriately sharp leading edge that made the guitar
playing edge-of-the-seat exciting.
Although the Piano Ceras might look polite and polished, they
could cut loose and get down when the music called for it.
"Peaceful Valley Boulevard," from Neil Young’s Le Noise (16/44.1
AIFF, Reprise), sounded heavy and serious, weighty and dimensional,
just as it’s supposed to. The soundstage spread from the outer
side panel of each speaker toward my room’s sidewalls.
Young’s effects-ridden voice in this track floated holographically
between the speakers, with a level of transparency that made me
wince when his voice cracked, as it does in several places during
this track. If you’re a fanatic for soundstaging and imaging,
the Piano Cera should thrill you. What it did so well in this
regard was to lay out a soundstage that was equally wide and deep.
When a speaker does one dimension better than the other, it seems
to make my brain push back against what I’m hearing, completely
obliterating the suspension of disbelief that the best speakers
can begin to support. The Tidals kept the soundstage correct in
all dimensions and proportional on all axes.
The net effect was that I wanted to listen more often, and during
long listening sessions never got fatigued.
The Piano Cera is not the perfect loudspeaker; I could imagine
improvement in a few areas. First, the tweeter didn’t extend as
far into the highest treble as the best I’ve heard.
The best diamond or beryllium domes, for instance, and even some
of the better ribbons I’ve recently heard, have greater apparent
reach in the upper frequencies. (A version of the Piano Cera with
a diamond tweeter is available: the Piano Diacera.) This was a
sin of omission rather than commission.
Although I was most impressed with the bass that the Piano Cera
could reproduce -- and with the volume levels at which it could
reproduce it -- the Tidal couldn’t pressurize my room the way
some larger speakers have with music with significant content
in the 20-35Hz range.
This should come as no surprise, but it does mean that, if you’re
used to some of the larger speakers available in this price range,
you should pay careful attention to what the Piano Cera will and
won’t do before you buy. What the Piano Cera also didn’t do was
unnaturally bump up the midbass for greater impact -- it did sound
linear, but at the same time solid from the midbass on down to
the lower reaches of its range.
One area I could not criticize was the integration of the Piano
Cera’s drivers. This speaker was super-coherent. I never
once "heard" a driver or a crossover point.
A final note: Take seriously the advice in the owner’s manual
to use the footers to decouple the Piano Cera from the floor.
After I’d installed them, the bass was even tighter and more controlled.
These footers worked as advertised!
Comparisons in the listening room: Tidal Piano Cera vs. B&W
803 Diamond
This is why you have to listen. On paper, the B&W 803 Diamond
($10,000/pair) seemed competitive with the Tidal Contriva Diacera
SE ($58,990/pair), but the B&W isn’t really all that competitive
with the Piano Cera ($23,990/pair).
First, even though it seems counterintuitive, the Tidal has better
bass: deeper by at least 5Hz, while maintaining a slightly firmer
grip on the notes. The bass was also more articulate in a head-to-head
match. The bongos in the opening of "North Dakota," from Lyle
Lovett’s Live in Texas (16/44.1 AIFF, MCA), sounded more like,
well, bongos, through the Tidals.
Through the 803s the sound was more homogenous, really more like
generic bongo strokes than the precise bongo strokes that define
the Lovett performance. In other words, the Tidal got more realism
off the recording and into my listening room.
The two speakers’ midranges were close -- both were basically
neutral and full of tonal information. In terms of midrange resolution,
however, I’d give the edge to the Tidal -- I could hear farther
into recordings of voices. The highs were a surprise. Although
I know that the B&W’s diamond tweeter extends measurably higher
in the audioband than the Tidal’s ceramic unit, this didn’t tell
the whole story.
The Piano Cera seemed to let loose with more ease and presence
in the treble, even though I couldn’t perceive the tiniest of
details in, for instance, cymbal decays that I hear from the very
best tweeters.
Although Tidal doesn’t specify their speakers’ sensitivities (I
wish they would), the Piano Cera sounded more efficient than the
B&W 803.
I heard evidence of that in the greater immediacy of transient
attacks, much like what I’ve heard with some of the best horn-loaded
speakers.
I had to push the B&W a bit higher in volume to get that same
feeling of unrestrained transient attack, which was something
characteristic of the Tidal at any volume level.
Lastly, whereas the B&W was evenhanded and balanced -- and I’m
quite sure it could play louder than the Tidal without busting
a gut -- the Piano Cera sounded more alive, more transparent to
the source, and overall more involving: I could hear deeper into
the recording across the entire audioband.
Hands down, the Tidal was the better speaker.
Conclusions
The Tidal Piano Cera is one terrific-sounding loudspeaker. It’s
transparent and quick, and plays with more weight and depth in
the bass than you would ever suspect from a glance at its driver
array.
In fact, looking at this speaker either on paper or in photos
will give you no hint of the performance lurking beneath its rather
simple but elegant appearance. There is a ton of clever engineering
inside, and that technical expertise translates into audible results.
I think the Tidal Piano Cera would be a great choice for someone
with a midsize room who doesn’t need a speaker that makes a "statement"
-- except when it’s playing music.
reviewed by Jeff Fritz
|
