A sort of Zen-like simplicity emanates from a two way design that does this well!

Not as forgiving as paper cones.

The brief introduction to Daves magnificent Cherry speaker (same DIY event as mentioned below) which has the Dennis Murphy crossover works, were enough to perk up my ears and cause me to really listen INTO the sound (we had a well recorded small ensemble) Too bad there was not enough time... What I heard first of all was an incredible amount of space surrounding the treble (well, it was cymbals) so that the instrument was just suspended in air, with no extraneous character to its sound. This clearly was the product of a very revealing and coherent tweeter. Plenty more, however was plainly the province of the midrange, and the level of detail retrieval was a whole step above the pretty good speakers I''m used to. This had a sound so crisp that I worried about fatigue--But I realized this is the curse of the audiophile: If the correct sound is not on your Cd''s you''ll hear the imperfections! Now, When these virtues are wrapped up in a system which intergates as cleanly as this one does (on Male vocals there was just no sense of tweeterness & midrangeness- Just one voice projecting) You''ve got a system worth reckoning with. I''ve found that even with mathematically correct crossovers the blending issue is anything but a slam dunk-There is a delightfully mystical way that two drivers just LIKE each other, and if it dosen''t happen on your high end design, you get to throw the whole thing away. Here the cleanly etched sound of each, and a decently optimized set of dispersion characteristics (I''d guess) gets the job done! Lucky! Oh, and Bass--very good. No overhang or tubbiness I could ascertain. The seas driver, although Pretty little, has guts, and the magnesium cone, if anything, tightens thing up a bit! Oh yeah, did I mention, I want a pair of THESE? I would say the price pretty well annihilates the competition!

Similar Products Used:

Creek electronics. Castle& Triangle commercial designs. Diy using Raven Tweeters.

Midrange clarity, very natural sound

?

I had the opportunity to listen to these speakers at a recent DIY speaker gathering and have the following observations I would like to share. First let me start by saying that I only got to listen to them for about 15 - 20 minutes, which is just not enough time to give them a fair amount of material to show their true character. Plus there were many other speakers at the gathering to listen to. However, with the amount of time and material I did get to hear through them I can honestly say that they were one of the most musical sounding speakers I had the chance to listen to. I found myself just wanting to ignore any conversations going on and just focus on the music. There was just a naturalness to them that I found very emotionally involving. I kept thinking to myself that this is the kind of sound I want to hear in my home. This is what I equate with "high end". There was a definite feeling of air around the instruments that I did not hear as much from the other speakers that day. Female voices especially sounded good to me, with a "they are right there in front of me" quality. Imaging is pinpoint accurate. Dave''''s cabinet work is also top notch. You can get them in a variety of wood veneers and solid woods. The ones I got to see were made with a Cherry veneer and solid Cherry baffle. The fit and finish is great! These speakers are not expensive in the world of high end. On the contrary, I find them to be very reasonable for the quality, and I would not hesitate to recommend them to anyone interested in a superior speaker at any price. Yes, they are that good!

Midrange clarity, extended highs, dry detailed low end. Craftsmanship. Overall design.

Low end extention

I became aware of the 1801s while building Dennis Murphy''s MB1s. As good as the MB1s are for their price range, I wanted to experience what Dennis was capable of with better drivers. Dennis told me to contact Dave Ellis to be placed on the audition list. Once I received them, my auditioning period lasted approximately 2 weeks which included a trip to the local high end audio store, Audio Encounters, for a comparison. I agree with the previous reviewers comments about the cabinets, so I will not comment further. Due to problems with the shipping company, one set of the crossovers had to be repaired. Once the parts list was compiled, Dave quickly sent the replacement parts. For speaker auditions, I tend to use female vocalists (Jane Monheit and Diana Krall), jazz, and blues. While initially listening to Jane Monheit, I was blown away by the liquidity and naturalness of the midrange. While being detailed, the midrange did not become harsh unless it was in the music. The highs had a crystalline, extended quality that stayed connected to the music. The bass was tight, dry, and detailed - very satisfying and rich. The bass extends nicely to the low to mid 40hz. Pianos are detailed and delicate with nice texture, just like other instruments. Tenor sax ranged from smooth and mellow to edgy and sharp all depending on the musician''s playing style and the music. With other brass instruments, you could "see" the bells resonate. With guitars, the pluck of the strings became evident along with the tick of the pick against the strings. I also became aware of the differences between the two cabinets when a driver developed problems. While both cabinets are heavily braced, one has standard foam insulation and the other uses Black Hole 5. During the auditon, I did not notice any differences between the two cabinets. I was able to directly compare the 1801s against the ProAc Response 2.5s ($4000+), with Spectral components. The 2.5s had a slightly recessed midrange and extended, disconnected highs. The bass was more extended but not necessarily better. This is due to the ScanSpeak 8535 driver. The 1801s midrange and highs were more natural and more detailed. The differences between the two crossovers only became apparent at this point. The premium crossover was slightly more revealing and detailed. The regular crossover compared very favorably against the ProAcs.

Similar Products Used:

ProAc Response 2.5s, Dennis Murphy''s MB1

Great Clarity and imaging. Awesome response. Great Price

none

I auditioned these speakers at Dave's house. I was absolutely amazed at their performance. I have listened to earlier versions of his speakers, which were excellent, but he keeps making them better and better.
I listened to mainly jazz and blues selections during my review. While listening to John Lee Hooker and Bonnie Raitts's I'm in the Mood I was blown away by this speakers abilty to produce an acurate soundstage. The midrange is incredibly detailed without sounding harsh. I also listened to a recording of Hamp's Boogie Woogie and was impressed with the speakers ability to respond to complex rythyms. Piano reproduction is good from attack to fade, as if the piano was in your living room. I also listen to a selection by Celine Dion and was delighted to hear the clarity of the female voice that was produced.
The Martin logans need a lot of room to get good sound of them, this doesn't seem to be the case with the 1801's. And the base is tighter on the 1801's than the odysseys.
Dave is a great Woodworker also. He puts a great deal of time and energy into his cabinets and the effort really shows.
These speakers easy beat ones that cost tens of thousands of dollars more, making these speakers one of the best bargins I have ever seen.

System:
Bryston 3B-ST
Anthem CD-1-TW
Goertz Cable/Beldon Wire

Similar Products Used:

B&M 805, Martin Logan Odyssey, Vienna Accoustics Beethoven

There are two words which sum up the 1801's -
honest musicality.
The 1801's have:
- Extremely smooth transition from bass through mid-bass
to highest treble
- Simply the most accurate reproduction of the timbre of
instruments and voices I have ever heard from any
speaker system
- Excellent bass response
- Absolutely glorious reproduction of the sound of piano - one of the most difficult instruments to capture
- Exceptional detail in the sound enabling picking out
individual instruments in an ensemble while
maintaining the feeling of the totality of the music.
- Excellent authority in reproducing Orchestral music

None. They sound and look beautiful.

I know little about the technology of speaker design, but
I know a lot about how music should sound. Both my parents
were professional violinists, and while growing up I was
surrounded by classical music. I studied violin and singing,
and sang professionally in New York City for several years.

I head the 1801 prototype on a visit to Dennis Murphy's to hear new speaker designs he was working on. He had designed the crossover for Dave Ellis for the 1801 prototype. I loved the 1801's sound and I purchased a pair about two months.

I have been extremely pleased since. I have listened to solo violin, American and German Lieder, Opera, Orchestral music, and jazz.

I have been awed by the naturalness of 1801's sound. While no speaker can really put you in the concert hall, if you are listening to the 1801's to a string quartet, an art song, or jazz, and close your eyes, you can imagine that you are sitting in the middle of the hall during the performance. There isn't a hint of exaggeration in any register, and as mentioned before the accuracy of reproduction of timbre of sound is unparalleled.

With the older Scanspeak design (my previous primary speakers) I missed detail in the reproduction of orchestral passages. I felt you should be able to discern specific
instruments more clearly. The 1801's met that challenge. While maintaining the overall ensemble, they are able to delineate individual instruments with precision.

One of the features that was most impressive was the sound of piano music reproduced with these speakers. There is more to piano sound than the frequency of the note when struck, with complex harmonics which in live performance produce a rainbow variation of timbres. The 1801's
reproduces this 'bloom' of sound with extraordinary clarity.

How do they compare to the Scanspeak design? The Scanspeak has more bass response without doubt, but the 1801's improved accuracy, and increased detail in the sound, combined with smooth transition between registers enable the 1801 design make most music sound better.

And how do the 1801's do in bass response? While not quite up to the STS, the bass of the 1801's is excellent for the music I like to listen to.

The 1801 design by Dave Ellis with crossover design by Dennis Murphy is a new speaker design and a new benchmark for excellence and accuracy in reproducing music.

Oh, did I mention Dave Ellis is a master cabinet maker? While visiting Dennis Murphy, I had a chance to see a pair of cabinets Dave Ellis designed and built. They had an inner cabinet of MDF with significant internal bracing. As an admirer of fine cabinet work, I appreciated the exterior of the cabinet of solid cherry front and top, with precise dovetailed joinery, and beautifully finished.

The comibined excellence of the 1801 speaker design and the beautiful cabinet work is an unbeatable combination.

Similar Products Used:

As reference points, I have a pair of PROAC mini-monitors and before the 1801's had a two-way design with Scanspeak Kevlar 8546 woofer and a soft dome 9300 tweeter built by
Dennis Murphy.

Clarity, resolution, craftsmanship, overall design and parts used

Extremely finicky on setup and upstream, power handling

Over a span of approximately 2 weeks, I was the first on the list of home auditioners to get to audition Dave Ellis/Dennis Murphy's 1801's, which had several hundred hours break-in already courtesy of Dave and Dennis, as well as further tweaking by Dennis. Since then, I have received many inquiries as to a review, and so finally here it is, hopefully in its entirety although I'm still probably leaving something out.. for further questions about my experiences contact me or for technical details visit Dave's new web site at: http://home.attbi.com/~ellisaudio/index.htm

First I am a college student, moving at least once a year, and I've been through several speaker sets, auditioned plenty of others ranging anywhere from 3-figures to 5-figure status types, and my roommate has as well. My system had been in flux for the past several weeks, as I'm slowly upgrading to separates and tweaking each component. Source is a pro-level sound card, the M-Audio Audiophile 24/96 in a computer I need to further quiet, and which I was using first as a passive pre- and the onboard mixer as attenuator.. not recommended due to driver bugs and crashes, but passable until you get an active pre-. Amps were at first stock Norh Le Amps, and for IC's I used a trashy AV cable, roommate's Nordost Red Dawns, and DH Labs BL-1 (rotated in test). For speaker wire I mainly used Kimber 4PR for the 1801's due to their 5/16" binding posts not accepting the better-sounding DIY CVH 27-pair cables which have 1/4" Kimber Postmasters, but later on I lightly clamped these in the posts anyway, since they did a better job on detail, smoothness, and especially bass. My own speakers are black marble Norh 9.0's, 70 lb./per 2-way MT bookshelves using Scanspeak 9900/8530 and which easily rival speakers costing 3x+ as much in A/B comparisons on various equipment.. that's a different review though. In short, very good. My roommate had ceramic Norh 4.0's and AV-Reality 3D's broken in and on-hand to also compare against, although I didn't spend as much time with the 3D's. Upgrades to system throughout review include Transcendent Grounded Grid preamp (tube rolled 4 times but ended up with stock Jan 6189W sounding best in the end.. someday will get RCA Cleartops or Amperex Bugle Boys), Le Amp cap removal mod, various Grounded Grid mods (Auricap output caps, hexfred diode replacement, various output resistor changes ending in reverting back to 100k output resistor, which sounded best with the Auricaps). One upgrade after I sent the 1801's out, but which would have been a big factor judging by what it did to the 9.0 sound is replacement with Dennis Boyle's Chimera Labs Advantage II IC's, which have the most detail of any IC I've tried after 24 hours burn-in in mids and highs but less bass (Mr. Boyle tells me that will change as they further break in.. I only got them at the end of fall term days before I had to pack up and move out). Jena Labs cryo-treated hookup wire on the way, as well as DacT CT-2 (another big improvement expected, as the stock Grid pot tracks poorly with right channel slightly more gain than the left, and it took me awhile to get noisy "grit" out via turning knob back and forth with unit off).

Dave's packaging is excellent, and first impressions of his woodworking skills and craftsmanship on cabinets were up to par or superior to commercial designs out there.. very dense cabinets, hefty (40 lbs per?), no gaps in driver flushmounting or baffle edges, easily pass the knuckle-rap test for resonance. Crossover boxes were a little scrapped together, and there were some scratches and dings on the cabinets since they were audition speakers after all passed around via UPS, but Dave assures me the final products will be even better. Review sample came with 2 sets of crossover boxes (2 glossy, 2 dull), 2 speakers, a bunch of Goertz hookup wire (sounds good but major pain in the butt to deal with, as they flat wires liked to come out of the white jackets and fold up), some Dayton bananas, all in a 130 lb. wooden crate fit to hold a tactical nuke. Experience with Norh 9.0's and dolleys helped bring the crate from the mailroom. :)

After ~10 hours system break-in (I was out of room, busy in college), first impressions of 1801's sound on the "passive pre" and stock Le Amps? Lot of detail, but ouch bright. I use a lot of songs for auditioning, and my roommate and I created a couple audition CD's as well (email for song choices etc., another long story) with selections from all types and all clean recordings. Furthermore, I am a former violinist and I have several musician friends at school, so I am well acquainted with "live instruments", although I don't have a special studio with musicians standing between speakers ala Dunlavy. Anyways, sound was bright and a little harsh, not as much as many metal tweeter speakers out there but still a little painful. Switched crossover boxes and sound got a little smoother and nicer. Over the next few days I sometimes dropped in the 9.0's on the same stands, and after experimenting and conversing with Dennis (Murphy) and Dave, found that the 1801's indeed sound best when toed in slightly and listening with ears horizontally in-line at base of tweeter plate. On the other hand, the 9.0's sound best pointing right at you with ears in line with the baffle angle and ears also at bottom of tweeter faceplate.

In that initial setup, I enjoyed slightly more detail of the 1801's on the 2nd crossover box pair, as the first box made it sound bright and brassy. But the 9.0's still reigned king of mids, with more naturalness to voices and body and sharper imaging when required. And of course more bass punch and extension. As I progressed through a series of tweaks, the first significant one was drop-in of the Grid after about 48 hours break-in, which solidified mids more, further improved bass, but more importantly smoothed out the sound while retaining the high end detail of the "passive pre". Hexfreds were a big leap up in bass tightness control over stock diodes, and maybe slightly more extension too. Auricaps took about a day and a half to settle, and after breakin they smoothed mids and added more body. Now spent a couple days playing with the AVR 3D's, which aren't bad, but I had some real problems with their cabinet resonances and a squawky fatiguing nasality and what seemed like a dropout somewhere in the vocal region that bothered me.. also they distorted much more off-axis (nasality much more present when standing to the side), with a very horizontally narrow and vertically short sweet spot. Highs very similar to the 9.0's but no matter what upstream and room placement configuration I tried, the same symptoms persisted. Imaging was pretty good and solid, but with less depth than the 9.0's. Overall not bad at all, and these few sentences make them sound far worse than they really were, but I just felt they were a bit too colored for my tastes and I didn't have the time or equipment on hand to get them to sound the way I wanted.

By now it was somewhat of a tossup between the 9.0's and 1801's, which were still a bit prone to brightness in some songs and lacking in vocal naturalness, although very clean. "Harvardian" came up and auditioned on his own AKSA equipment before I had finished building the Grid, and the 1801's sounded a bit more powerful on bass but otherwise very similar to the stock Le Amps.. I think his impressions were similar to mine. He and my roommate preferred the 9.0's, and I was undecided. The 9.0's did have sharper imaging still but not as much resolution in the highs. I think brightness could be tamed more by more room treatment and space, which will come next term I head back.

Next big chain of upgrades came, and the biggest included the Le Amp cap removal. Decent improvement on the 9.0's, particularly in the mids and openness/width, and some in the bass department and highs. But all of a sudden synergy with the 1801's! Now the imaging and soundstage width/depth matched or even bettered the 9.0's, and furthermore with a clean neutral sound even less colored than the 9.0's. Dynamics about equivalent. Bass response was almost equivalent, and although extension was less, in the music it was almost non-noticeable, with the difference so slight even in deep bass instruments, that I, a person who really appreciates sub-tones, did not really care about the difference. Both very tight in bass after the mods, but the 9.0's are more finicky on placement and my room's 35 hz mode is excited by them, whereas the 1801's cut off right above that region. Not an issue for either speaker with proper placement. The 1801's highs were no longer bright but just about "perfect" to my ears, offering more resolution and clarity on cymbals and stringed guitars and violins. At this stage I preferred the other crossover boxes, which after opening to confirm some values for Dave, I discovered was the one with premium parts. The more expensive crossover with this set up upstream sounded more accurate and "live" on some songs, as opposed to the other one which sounded a little muffled in comparison. On the other hand, remember that I preferred the cheaper crossover with the unmodified, stock Le Amps and passive pre. The 1801's sound after the synergistic setup is quite phenomenal.. if anything a sideways move from the 9.0's, which are already an exceptional deal, but in my opinion even better than the 9.0's in terms of resolution and neutrality. But at a cost -- namely, power handling (the 9.0's drivers can output a lot more and take more power especially when high passed with a sub, while the OW1 comes out more when the 1801's are turned up loud) and of course I'm sure some will prefer the marble cabinet over the wooden one, although I personally appreciate both in different ways. Does this mean I'll sell the 9.0's? Doubtful. They are still really darn good, and I have yet to spend more bucks biamping/active crossing them. But I don't think the Scanspeak 9900 is capable of as much resolution as the Hiquphon OW1, and the 1801's do cost less than 1/3 the price of the 9.0's. In other words, I think the 1801's are probably the best value in bookshelves I've ever witnessed, and that's perhaps the best compliment I could offer.. well done to both Dennis and Dave!

Some further notes: Throughout the audition, there was indeed a slight channel imbalance in part due to the cruddy stock pot of the Grid (right channel tracks louder than left slightly) and the left speaker was overdamped.. while the differences between speaker stuffings weren't big, it did get annoying to me at first. One of the reasons is that one part of the audition was to compare the Blackhole 5 versus military foam insulation. I won't say here which was which for benefit of future auditioners to blind test, but I did prefer the right speaker over left. Also we tried the 1801's in my roommate's setup, with Marantz PM17 reference line integrated amp and Nordost cables and Titan II LE sub. Very nice, but we didn't have enough space to the sides of the speakers and the Nordost Red Dawns are inherently a tad bright.. but dynamics improved a little with the sub integrated although overall synergy not as much as my final setup. I did enjoy it though, although my roommate wasn't all that impressed.

Dennis also sent a pair of 1.5 ohm resistors and 3.0 ohm resistors to put in series with the tweeter should I decide to tame them in the various setups, and I found that the 1.5 ohm ones in series with the stock Le Amp setup made them sound sweeter (more like Sonus Fabers's Home line), while 3.0 definitely overdamped. But I am not a fan of sweet, colored sound, and throughout the audition I preferred the stock values without additional series resistors.

I am leaving out a few things, including some cables experiences (less important, and in general my impressions on the cables I've tried are consistent speaker-to-speaker on their effect on overall voicing) but I think I have most of them down now. Whew! 5 stars for the 1801's in all respects.. I only wish I didn't have to send them on to the next listener :)

Similar Products Used:

Marble Norh 9.0's, AV-Reality 3D, B&W Nautilus 805, Jean-Marie Reynaud Twin MKII and Trente, Sonus Faber Concerto/Concertino, Dynaudio Audience line and Contour 1.1 and 1.3, various models from Mirage, M&K, MBL, MB Quartz, Definitive Technology, Energy, Boston Acoustics, NHT, Martin Logan, Acoustic Energy, Klipsch, the dreaded Bose 901's and Acoustimass line, and various others I'm forgetting

Spot on imaging, smooth response, highly detailed.

Sacrifices presence for smoothness.

After comparing the Ellis Audio 1801 to various "high end" bookshelf speakers I've found myself preferring the 1801's smooth natural sound and holographic imaging. The first thing that struck me was that it is hard to tell where the sound is coming from when listening to them. The sound stage was so clear that you listen to the music and not the speakers. Second, the response is very neutral and clean. I can listen to these speakers for hours without fatigue. Compared to the B&W 805's, the B&W's had an edge that brought the musicians into the room and the 1801's sounded a little distant in comparison. But, after listening to both for several hours I kept going back to the 1801. I prefer the smooth sound to the edgy sound. I've even had the 1801 side by side with the Almighty God's own speakers the B&W Nautilus 800. I can't say that the 1801 matched the 800 in scale, but the 800's have the same edginess that the 805 had. The 1801 had enough resolution, killer imaging, and bass response that I did not miss not having the 800's. And, I saved about $15,100. I don't have a 1000 watt per channel amplifier anyway to take advantage of the big B&W. I recommend buying a pair quick. The price won't stay this low forever.

Similar Products Used:

B&W 805, B&W 800

Details of high end, midrange clarity, tight bass

Low end extension

As an avid DIY'er, I am always looking for products that offer great value because they are sold without marketing overhead. While perusing the madisound discussion forum, I came across the Dave Ellis 1801's. As I have heard the sonic attributes of the Seas Excel mid/bass units, I became quite interested in these speakers. I have heard the Scan-Speak 9500 tweeter and like them very much. Many people have expressed the sonic marvel of the Hiq OW1 over the SS tweeters. I was very intrigued. At another discussion forum (Harmonic Discord), a fellow New Englander, anounced that he was going to get an audition with the traveling pair of the 1801s. I asked if he would mind if I got a listen. I went to his dorm room (I could never afford equipment while in college?) and heard the 1801s in a pretty bad listening environment. I brought my AKSA 55W amp, my Rega 2K, and a custom DACT CT2/CT101 preamp to use as the upstream electronics.

First off, the speakers are visually stunning. Dave is an excellent craftsman. These speakers had been around, but one could still tell how nice the fit and finish of the cabinets was implemented. The cabinet is very solid and looks like a fine piece of furniture. The seas drivers are always sexy. These units were using an external crossover, so that listeners could compare the upgraded crossover to a standard one. All of my listening involved the upgraded crossover. Also, Dennis Murphy, has modified the tweeter padding to make it sound a less bright. These units did not have this modification.

Now for the sound. First thing that I noticed was the detail and smoothness of the OW1 tweeter. Very nice. Cymbals sounded crisp and had all of the ringing and reverb that they should. Next, the seas drivers offer a great midrange for female vocals. These speakers made good use of the seas drivers. There was no crossover sound. The low midbass was very tight. Transients were fast. Unfortunately, the poor room arrangement did not give me a chance to hear the soundstaging and imaging qualities. I was way to close to the units with respect to their separation. The toe-in was extreme. Given the dispersion of the OW1, I would expect the imaging and soundstage to be first-rate.
I had the opportunity to directly compare these speakers to the Norh 9's that retail for more than 3X the price. With the exception of better bass extension, the 1801's held their own very well. The 1801's bass is a tad tighter, but does not seem to extend as far. The 1801's are a little more detailed. Again, I prefer the OW1 tweeter. The Norh's seem a bit warmer, but room, electronics, and other factors may negate or mitigate.
In conclusion, you would be very hard pressed to find another commercial speaker that offers the combination of look, sound and value of the 1801's. Even if you can find some good speakers used, the 1801's may offer a better value.

Similar Products Used:

Tyler Acoustics Reference Monitor, Aerial 5, Platinum Audio Reference I, Norh 9