Anyone ever hear Design Acoustics D-6s?

[thedelihaus]

Anyone ever hear Design Acoustics D-6s? JP, didn't you own some? Still do, perhaps?

I've heard good things about them. I've seen a few pair pop up for sale, but they've been in California. Not conducive for me to own any.

[hakka26]

I found an orphan in perfect condiiton at a yard sale for a $1. Then two weeks later picked up a pair for $30 that need foam. Haven"t had the time or space to fix and audition yet.

[Charivari]

Yep, I've a pair.



Most of you are probably familiar with the dodecahedral D-12 (D for Design) that was Design Acoustics first product and that made the name for the company. That speaker was reviewed by Stereo Review and came out as one of the highest rated speakers ever reviewed by Julian Hirsch. The problem was that the design was just too unconventional even for the Eames era, so a 'conventionalized polyhedron" was marketed that was listed as the D-6. The price was quite a bit lower than the big brother and it became a relative market success for the quite small company. High-Fidelity Magazine immediately reviewed this model in June 1973 and found it to be one of the flatter measuring designs they had encountered. Following his glowing review of the D-12, Hirsch picked up the model for review in September and essentially said that it was his favorite. It was the only speaker to rank a perfect 100% score overall up to that time and for sometime afterwards and in other reviews years later, it was still mentioned favorably. Interestingly, Hirsch liked the D-6 better than the AR LST, though today the D-6 is forgotten and the ARs go for the price of a decent used car.

Hirsch aside, I will say that these are very good speakers for their size and what was available at the time. Thanks to the Peerless drivers, which are unusually smooth for cone tweets, the highs are pretty good and the odd arrangement counters the tendency of cone tweeters to beam terribly. The rear firing woofer, crossing over at 800 Hz, doesn't do what it should do, imo, without very careful positioning near a wall. So, the sound can end up being lean with good mids and highs, but with a major lack of lower midrange and midbass. Overall, they're an interesting design that sound better than one would expect, but will tend to perform less than optimally in most rooms. At the prices they can be found for (eBay pairs have sold for ~$300 in the past, but sometimes others can sneak by for ~$50-100), they are a steal for vintage speakers despite the unconventional (omnidirectional) sound.

Kelly had my pair for a while, so maybe he'll stop by and share his impressions.

- JP

[thedelihaus]

Thank you. A fella grabbed a pair over at AK for cheap, and it has displaced his other speakers as his favorites, if I recall correctly. I imagine he's got an ideal placement for them.

Thanks for the review, JP. I do hope Kelly does drop by to fill me in on his opinion as well.

[Charivari]

Interesting, but not surprising if he had an open wall to place these close to (DA recommended a minimum rear distance of just 2", but an optimal positioning not much farther). Do you know what other speakers he compared these to? I wonder if the link to my DA Yahoo! Group is still posted over there, so this guy may have access to the reviews I've posted in it.

- JP

[Superfly]

I actually liked JP's 6's a lot. Nice "modern" sounding speaker to me. Open and airy yet well defined. By modern I mean, to me, they sound somewhat like a good sub/sat system, nice smooth highs, clear and open, really strong and powerful bass although a little one note bass IMHO. A little sucked out in the mids adding to the "modern" sound. The rear port makes it a bit interesting to place but I thought they sounded real good on my SX-1010 with my rear rock wall about 1.5-2 feet away.