Advice about speakers

[puiutu62]

Hello to all!
I am new here,but I think here I can find a good advice about speakers-amplifier compatibility.
I have a Acuphase E 406V integrat amplifier and a Acuphase Cd-player DP 65V.
My question is:
I will chose from:Dynaudio C2,Dynaudio Saphire,countur 5.4,or B&W Nautilius 802/803,or Focal JM lab Alto Utopia or Electra 920.
First I must say...YES,I know ,the sound is much diferent wit this type of speakers,...but is the 406Vfrom Accuphase enough stronger/good/give high curent to handle this speakers on his performance or not?Know somebody this think?
My tendency is to go for Dynaudio Saphire...????Wat you think?is a god choosing?
I hear my Accuphase with a Dynaudio C2.I was satisfied with the sound,but...if is posibil to have a better sound with the accuphase line 406v and 65v,and someone can give a adwice,please give me this.
And ...From Accuphase a Power conditioner PS 500,will be a big improuwment on the sound or not?(I read much of this Accuphase PS 500 and manny people said"he make miracle ".Is really so?
Thanks,and sorry for....many question

[Mr Peabody]

I've heard the Sapphires and believe although they aren't cheap, they are, a good value. Their sound quality is incredible. In my opinion the Sapphire would put the B&W to shame.

Not familiar with your amp but if it drove the C2's fine I don't see it having a problem with the Sapphire.

[puiutu62]

Many thanks for your answer ,Mr Peabody!!!:thumbsup:
Please if somebody know something different about my question,please answer!

[basite]

I heard the sapphires with an Accuphase E-550 driving them, and I was thoroughly impressed.
great match, great speakers, great amp. :thumbsup:

the B&W's are also extremely good, although I would definately aim for the 802D's big step forward from the 803's. Remember though you'll need lot's of space, and a good room to use them correctly. And a pretty powerful amp.

ever looked at Thiel CS3.7's (I have thiels, so I'm slightly biased :)), or Avalon's? those are exellent speakers too, I heard the Thiels a few times already now, and everytime again they suprise me (in a good way :p)...

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[RGA]

For this kind of budget I would do your best to audition the Audio Note E and J speakers. They are the least good looking of the bunch but offer you the opportunity to move to low power tube amps in the future - neither Dynaudio or B&W offer that ability. Ideally they are to be positioned in corners to give their best response in terms of frequency balance and bass depth. The E, assuming your room is 25X25 or smaller will match the B&W N801 in terms of bass depth - despite being smaller and utilizing less drivers. In terms of sound quality IMO the AN J and E are quite a sizable step up from either Dynaudio or B&W especially on acoustic and vocal material though the big Danes and big B&W's will ultimately play louder. That Tannoy Westminster would be another option if you want the high SPLs while retaining again the ability to use SET amplifiers down the road. You may think to yourself that you would never go to low powered tubes but the option is nice to have and when you hear a good one - you may never go back - virtually all SET owners started with expensive Solid State amps and were highly skeptical and when they hear them - well their SS soon goes up on Ebay or audiogon.

I own Audio Note and I am biased but at the same time a nice Audio Note E/LX HE runs around $7,500. The B&W Diamond 800 is $22,000.00 And Dynaudio Evidence speakers are up here as well. The E/LX HE IMO just sounds better - more cohesive, and like actual instruments rather than hi-fi speakers. To a degree the Westminster and the Quad 2905 share this ability in different ways.

If the speaker is unfamiliar to you, check out www.dagogo.com (editor's reference speaker) - several different reviewers have reviewed them, enjoythemusic.com (editor's reference speaker), stereophile (the reviewer ended up buying a set), Hi-Fi Choice (magazine's reference speaker), Chesky Records (mastering engineer's reference speaker).

You may hate their look though www.dagogo.com/AudioNoteAN-E-SE-2003.html
www.dagogo.com/AudioNoteAN-E-SPe-HE.html

My review of the J
www.dagogo.com/AudioNoteANJ-SPe.html

Having said that - no review equals an audition - I am not telling you what to buy but merely suggesting something at significantly lower cost because IF you do like them it will save you a significant amount of money. You may very well prefer the B&W or the Dynaudio and feel the added price is worth it.

But the HE speakers can of course be driven by the SS and digital amps as well - they ultimately give you more flexibility for future upgrades because you have far more amplifier choices.

Good Luck - I personally find speaker hunting to be the most fun in this hobby.

[puiutu62]

Many thanks for your answers/opinion.
I apreciate this,and I can make a good choosing when I buy the speakers.I have allready the Accuphase amplifier and cd-player,and I don't will to change them.
I am happy to find here so friendly people.

[theaudiohobby]

Many thanks for your answers/opinion.
I apreciate this,and I can make a good choosing when I buy the speakers.I have allready the Accuphase amplifier and cd-player,and I don't will to change them.
I am happy to find here so friendly people.

puiutu62, you have shortlisted a fine set of speakers, is it possible to audition them with your amps? Some of those speakers are more demanding on amplification than others.




I own Audio Note and I am biased but at the same time a nice Audio Note E/LX HE runs around $7,500. The B&W Diamond 800 is $22,000.00 And Dynaudio Evidence speakers are up here as well. The E/LX HE IMO just sounds better - more cohesive, and like actual instruments rather than hi-fi speakers. To a degree the Westminster and the Quad 2905 share this ability in different ways.

If the speaker is unfamiliar to you, check out www.dagogo.com (editor's reference speaker) - several different reviewers have reviewed them, enjoythemusic.com (editor's reference speaker), stereophile (the reviewer ended up buying a set), Hi-Fi Choice (magazine's reference speaker), Chesky Records (mastering engineer's reference speaker).[/url]



http://www.recordinginczech.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/ilu003.jpg

http://www.auricleaudiomagic.com/images/studio.jpg

I guess these folks do not know what actual instruments (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ASB6hFUat4g) sound like, they just record them for a living :biggrin5:

[RGA]

Judging by most people's opinions on the quality of recordings - it might just be that they're using the wrong loudspeakers. B&W gives for free speakers to recording studios in exchange for advertising. You may know that B&W is used at Skywalker studios - but did you know that George Lucas does not like B&W loudspeakers - Did you also know that some of the top engineers designing B&W speakers prefer Audio Note. You may also know that many studios use many different loudspeakers and most try to ensure that recordings will fit car stereo sound quality best with limited dynamics and seriously compressed sound - sounds like a B&W to me. :17: (That was a bit of a joke but as an ex B&W owner and someone who has heard virtually their entire line shmooze and hard sell dealers and wall to wall advertising and product placement in movies is amusing)

Like I said - most people never really hear a B&W against anything worthwhile. Most dealers in Canada and the US seem to have B&W at one price point with nothing else worthwhile against it. I am fortunate that I can put a $22k+B&W against a $5-7k Audio Note and let the chips fall where they may.

[theaudiohobby]

That was a bit of a joke but as an ex B&W owner

More specifically an ex- B&W DM302 or was it 303 owner, It's huge leap from there to a B&W 803 monitor. :wink5:


Judging by most people's opinions on the quality of recordings - it might just be that they're using the wrong loudspeakers. B&W gives for free speakers to recording studios in exchange for advertising. .

True all those recording studios get B&W 800 series speakers for free so they can monitor Mch SACD recordings for use on non-existent SACD car stereos :D. :nonod: The Audio Note E is unsuitable for monitoring orchestral recordings because of its limited loudness and dynamic capability. :yesnod: Large format Tannoys and B&Ws are popular in recording studios around the world for practical reasons. :18:

[Florian]

Did you also know that some of the top engineers designing B&W speakers prefer Audio Note.

Who would have thought? :17:

[RGA]

Who would have thought? :17:

It's not really surprising to be working for a company that does not allow you to do the things you want to do because the owner/marketing team wants you to make your speakers fit a look that is highly salable. On the record they will say one thing - off the record they'll say something else, which is completely understandable.

TAH - When did you get a set of AN E's in a room and directly compared them to a Diamond 800 - I have done this - have you? You probably have never heard either speaker anywhere ever. I have an :idea: - do that before you discuss.

1) So we have a company that sells in large large numbers with heavy marketing like Bose. They give their speakers to recording studios who are out after all to make a buck selling CDs to the masses on stereos that are not very good. A competent speaker is all that is needed - B&W is certainly that. An out for profit recoprding studio will gladly take free speakers.

2) The majority of speakers are competent so plenty of good reviews for a B&W is acceptable - look nice sound competant to good, big name makes buyers feel safe in their purchase.

3) They sell more speakers than any other high end maker (Bose is the biggest seller by a wide margin of the speaker makers - in fact Bose sells more than the next five biggest combined).

4) Virtually all reviewers for all major publications have heard B&W. The percentage of B&W sold to the public versus an Audio Note or a Quad is staggerring and yet the percentage of reviewers who buy Quad or Audio Note yields very interesting results. B&W probably sells in the order of more than 500-1 against AN or Quad or Tannoy prestige etc and yet the people who have actually done the direct listening comparisons have selected the "other one." There-in lies the difference. B&W sells - they are a first rate marketing machine with competant to good loudspeakers, and typically sell against other companies selling the same kind of megacorp speaker makers. Reviewers are fortunate enough to listen to all of those and the smaller makers - and they are buying in a very different ratio. If the B&W's were as good sounding as they are at marketing they would sell to reviewers at a 500-1 rate.

As Art Dudley said in a recent issue - he has plenty of positive reviews and some where you need to read between the lines - it's when you find out what the reviewer actually lays out the hard cash for when you get a true inkling of what they "really" like.

Having said that - like I said before - None of this is to suggest that someone won't prefer B&W. My dealer has carried B&W for decades and Audio Note for several years. Of course people will listen to both and some may have preferred the B&W. I do not see their sales receipts but they're the only dealer I know of on the planet that sells both brands - and so the sample size is one.

I can say that looking at what they have done is shift the B&W line away from Audio Note price points. In other words they carried the 700 and Nautilus line and in head to heads the B&W's didn't sell. So they carry the inexpensive and IMO very good value for the dollar 600 line where Audio Note is not priced (and more importanly for home theater matched set-ups). The same N801 was sold three times and the speaker kept coming back for AN E's - the owner of the store was amused but frustrated at having to lug such heavy speakers back into the store so many times - They stopped selling the N801 completely and now stock the D800 which is over $22k - and even then they moved it as far away as possible making a customer feel a little guilty to request for a head to head challenge - they don't after all want to be stuck with $22k+ speakers forever. The store owner moved his similarly priced E to his own home to avoide that direct competition.

DO I think the AN E is a better speaker than the B&W D800? Yes a lot better - vastly better, miles better, leagues better.

Is B&W a bigger selle? Yes a lot bigger - vastly bigger miles bigger, leagues bigger.

Is B&W used in more recording studios? Lot more, vastly more, miles more, leagues more.

Have those recording studio engineers who actually listen to speakers heard Audio Note?Lot fewer, vastly fewer, miles fewer, leagues fewer.

If they heard them would they agree with the majority of the reviewers who have heard the AN E or the people who have heard them in a store that sells both head to head?Lot more, vastly more, miles more, leagues more.

[Florian]

Your right ! I never heard this stuff, nor do i really care to be honest. I still dont read your posts fully.

Enjoy

[RGA]

Since we're being honest - I'm not terribly surprised.

enjoy to you as well (that's the point after all)

[theaudiohobby]

TAH - When did you get a set of AN E's in a room and directly compared them to a Diamond 800 - I have done this - have you? You probably have never heard either speaker anywhere ever. I have an :idea: - do that before you discuss.
So recording studio requirements are the same as your dealer's showroom? :biggrin5: And all your experience of these speakers you trash at every opportunity are based on dealer' s showroom demos and your DM303, nice. :smile5: :lol:


They give their speakers to recording studios who are out after all to make a buck selling CDs to the masses on stereos that are not very good. A competent speaker is all that is needed - B&W is certainly that. An out for profit recording studio will gladly take free speakers.
So the masses buy mch sacds for use on 'not very good' stereos :wink5: I bet Tannoy is also giving away speakers for free, aren't they?
Here's a quote (http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/display.aspx?infid=1621) from B&W site and another quote (http://www.badaweb.co.uk/b&w/about.html) showing a number of studios that purchased B&W 800 series speakers, do you have anything to back up your claims that most B&W loudspeakers used in recording studios are freebies or is it just word on the street?

[Mr Peabody]

A lot of B&W's sales can be attributed to marketing. They associate themselves with Denon and Rotel. You rarely see a store that carries one of these without the other. It's like Rockford used to be with Alpine. And, B&W has built up the name. Nothing wrong with that, after all making money is the name of the game. People begin to buy an item based on rep and status over true listening and performance. Bose, need I say more... Please don't come unhinged, I'm not comparing B&W to Bose, I just use Bose as an example of the type of mindless purchses I'm talking about, in that respect, maybe I am comparing the two. Not that everyone who buys B&W are like that, we all have our own idea of how we want, or think, our music should sound.

Speakers are a very personal thing to a true audiophile. I'm talking about a person who buys the speaker based on sound solely and cares not what it looks like, not one of those guys who will buy a speaker because it's pretty and he has to please his wife so he compromises. I'm one who buys solely based on sound. I have not heard Audio Note speakers but have heard B&W plenty. Dynaudio, in my opinion wipes the floor with B&W's costing many times more. Driven by Krell or other high quality amps I have yet to hear anything give the impact and transcient response these combos reproduce. I'm talking crescendos so hard I didn't think possible to recreate by electronics. The closest thing to reproducing the snap of real drums I've heard. I'm sure there's many brands of speakers used in recording studios, I haven't been to many to see what was used. Dynaudio makes studio speakers and I'm assuming they are in some studios as they are still making them.

I feel it's a weakness if a speaker has to be put in a corner to work. That in itself will limit use and sales. AN isn't alone in the woods with a difficult placement though.

I believe I said this in my thread where I talk about the Sapphires, I have heard the Flagship Evidence and the, at the time, $35k Temptations, dollar per performance comparing the Sapphires to the big brothers, the Sapphires are a stunning value. When I heard them they were driven by Clayton Audio Class A monoblocks, I believe they are about $15k a pair, the rest of the electronics were T+A, the demo was incredible. Dynaudio had better be careful making speakers like the Sapphire at such a price because it becomes hard to justify more than double for a Temptation.

I also heard the Flagship Diamond series. They were driven by ARC with Classe' monoblocks. This was a very expensive system but one that made me think, "give me the money so I can buy something else". I later heard those Classe' monoblocks with an all Classe system and was very under whelmed so I can't lay all the blame on the B&W's.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Your right ! I never heard this stuff, nor do i really care to be honest. I still dont read your posts fully.

Enjoy
Pardon this low-life's interruption, but truthfully Florian, you come across as a real elitist prick, did you know that? How sad for you little boy.

[RGA]

So recording studio requirements are the same as your dealer's showroom? :biggrin5: And all your experience of these speakers you trash at every opportunity are based on dealer' s showroom demos and your DM303, nice. :smile5: :lol:

No those are not the only times I've heard B&W but it is the only place I know to do a direct comparison - speakers are designed to be operated in homes that is why they are called home audio loudspeakers - not - this only works in a studio with $350,000 worth of treatments and digital Equalization. A dealer room and a room in a person's home is largely the same - maybe not in your town but in my town dealers set-up a room that would be typically found in most houses - some complete with typical furniture. Not a wall of speakers in a cramped space like in England, where sympathetic vibrations are abound that just starts the problems that dealers face of there. Here - one set of speakers properly set-up by the company who builds the speakers - When I listened to the Magnepan 20.1 or the Wilson Sophia - these are professionally designed rooms with proper positioning and room treatments that specifically fit the loudspeaker. Unfortunately that dealer went under.

I don't trash B&W. I owned the 302 and I owned it because it was a damned fine speaker for the money - it still is. Liking another speaker a lot more is not trashing the B&W - it's a subjective albeit strong subjective preference for one speaker over the other - one that virtually everyone I know of and the very people SELLING both agree with. If you got off your butt and actually bothered to listen to them you would no doubt agree - but since you'd rather have a preference for one speaker you've never heard over another speaker you've never heard that is your choice.

If you want to infer that B&W is superior because they are used in more sound studios at a higher rate or that they are better because they sell more or for any other reason that is your right.

But the comments of someone who has not tried them EVER and then tries to say my listening was invalid because I did not listen to them in a particular room is puzzling - I have not ever owned the AN E in my home either and in fact at Soundhounds you are far better able to hear the D800's true capabilities than the AN E over the past several years.



So the masses buy mch sacds for use on 'not very good' stereos :wink5: I bet Tannoy is also giving away speakers for free, aren't they?
Here's a quote (http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/display.aspx?infid=1621) from B&W site and another quote (http://www.badaweb.co.uk/b&w/about.html) showing a number of studios that purchased B&W 800 series speakers, do you have anything to back up your claims that most B&W loudspeakers used in recording studios are freebies or is it just word on the street?

Virtually all SACD discs are dual encoded with the regular CD format - most shoppers are buying DVD multi-format players from the likes of Sony with the SACD capability thrown in. $200 Sony DVD player with SACD with the customer not realizing what SACD even is - it pumps up the perceived sales of SACD but little more. The actual dedicated players sold peanuts.

Since I have been unimpressed with all of the SACD multichannel music demos I've heard it does not really impress me that B&W is involved. It does not help their cause. Studios have to use something after all - and many of the better two channel makers simply don't LIKE multichannel set-ups and do not make systems for that technology. Since B&W is very big and well positioned they can offer serious discounts, freebies, special warranty add ons, and kickbacks to studios (especially ones with satellites that will buy in larger bulk). "Free" for all studios no of course not - "free" for ones that help B&W advertise - well you buy our speaker for $14,000.00 and we'll pay you $14,000.00 for the use of your studio name on our website. Technically that isn't free.

The market is far and away shifted to home theater and the big companies real preference is for home theater pyrotechnics and not musical subtlety - which with mp3 has been killed in the music arena as well.

As I said earlier - you and anyone else is perfectly within your rights to prefer B&W over Audio Note with or without an audition, for any and all reasons you wish - Makes no difference to me. Since Audio Note is so hopelessly behind on meeting the huge demand - even if you wanted something you would likely have to wait 6 months to 2 years to get it. B&W does not have such problems - one more reason for you in fact not to buy an Audio Note. You dislike the owner, you dislike the writing, the measurements, probably the looks, me, and a host of other things - waiting for it too is another one to add to the list. And hey B&W has more employees to feed, name brand appeal, sexy looks, more owners out there to stroke your ego - definitely buy one of those. Does not even need an audition first - it has to be better because more people buy them.

[RGA]

Mr. Peabody

A few points - the AN speakers will not compete with many speakers in sheer slam or SPL of which I think you speak. Thus I am not suggesting they are the right fit for everyone. The corner is a compromise in the sense that many people don't have corners - The company specs the speaker to be used where it believes the best results will occur - corner loading in a certain sized room - arguments over whether it meets those specs have been discussed endlessly with TAH but the hearing of it is more important than whether a bass spec is off a few db or a sensitivity spec is off a few db.

Don't let the corner scare you off - When I first heard the AN E's they were not in corners - and in fact the AN E is usually the speaker that is set-up the least well - in a room too big or far too small with no treatments and not in corners. I swear the owner of Soundhounds deliberately handcuffs the AN E to make the other stuff that is more ideally set-up have a better chance. Mario of AN came to Soundhounds and when I found out went down to visit. We set the AN's up properly in a basement room the store stopped using for logistic reasons - it took about 20 minutes of positioning and set-up and let er rip at higher SPLs than i would listen at in a fairly big room with three couches behind each other - the first being about 10 feet from the speakers (I don't know the exact dimensions. The speakers were hard in corners with serious toe in such that the drivers were firing a good meter in front of the first couch. 8 watts powering the set-up - clean crisp resolute - quite far and away the best sound that store has produced - They carry some nice gear - no question about it - the 2905 is a special speaker, the Cremona from SF was quite good in their other room with Linn direct streaming technology and top of the line Sim Audio, the Magnepan 20.1 was in the main room that you could not help but notice, the B&W D800 is a sheer work of visual art. It is so nice for a dealer to carry such stuff.

When and if you ever do hear an AN set-up you will probably notice that it will give up some in the area of sheer macrodynamic impact - it will take your ear to adjust but what may win you over is a kind of inner resolution and trimbral rightness that is awfully appealing and I would say beguiling. Lightning fast transients but less in your face than some and full body decay allowing you to hear the finishing of the last note along with the new one - something that AN DAC owners notice. There is a "lighter" "bouncier" "openness" uncommon with most boxes that seem to me to be trying to get out of their box as if the box was a necessary evil to overcome.

The Tannoy Westminster is a class act because it captures a lot of what I like about the AN E, it has the cohesiveness nearly down, it's relatively easy to drive and it obviously can play louder with more slam - all day listenable and musical. For a bigger room it would probably be my choice.

But if you ever want a second stereo for a smaller room (25X25 down) I would definitely try an audition of an AN system - I have probably posted this before but this KevinF fellow had a similar set-up that you have in the respect that he owned top of the line high impact top tier professional loudspeakers and while not a Krell, Top of the line professional grade insanely high powered SS amplification.

He tried a modest level 3 AN system and wrote about what the Audio Note's give up and what they gained. He writes very well, better than me, http://www.audioasylum.com/reviews/Other/Audio-Note/Level-3-system/general/345133.html

[Mr Peabody]

I understand some of what you are saying I have the AN 1.1x DAC. It was the first piece of tube gear that I owned. I hooked it to the digital output of my Krell CD player and ended up preferring the AN DAC. I eventually got a transport for the DAC and sold the Krell CD player. The CD player I have now is better and I'm using the AN DAC in a second system. I posted it for sell a couple times but nothing seems to be selling, even used gear.

The AN 1.1x gives instruments and vocals an organic sound. I heard that adjective used in describing AN gear and didn't understand it until I heard the DAC. There were things the Krell was better at but the sound of the 1.1x just kept drawing me back. When listening to the Krell it never seemed glaring but after listening to the 1.1x for a while and going back to the Krell it did seem to glare. I believe the AN would appeal to those who like a "analog" sound.

[theaudiohobby]

RGA

I take you do not have anything to back your claim of freebie B&W speakers do you? :wink5:

[theaudiohobby]

I understand some of what you are saying I have the AN 1.1x DAC. It was the first piece of tube gear that I owned.....
The AN 1.1x gives instruments and vocals an organic sound. I heard that adjective used in describing AN gear and didn't understand it until I heard the DAC.
Last time I checked in on an Audio Note DAC (2.1x Signature), I was relieved to come home to the 'organic' sound of the rig I had the time. I think I got home that evening and put on "Miles Davis/Marcus Miller Siesta" and just chilled out To a certain extent, your comment speaks to the heart of how a DAC works, but that's a something for the digital forum. As point of reference, fully over 70% of my listening time is classical and jazz, so good instrument and vocal tone is very important to me. I am listening to Horowitz playing Mozart Sonata (K330) as I write this. :19: :17:

[RGA]

RGA

I take you do not have anything to back your claim of freebie B&W speakers do you? :wink5:

I could but Mr. Qvortrup is in your neck of the woods and was willing to have you sit down and talk with B&W engineers about their preferences in loudspeakers and while there could tell you about the "freebies" - since you were too afraid to do that why would it be any different from my end. Why would I take up my time when you have proven to be a no show.

And when I asked for the serial number on the back of your AN K you claimed to own - you could not provide the information - even though it was supposedly sitting in your home.

And even here - you obfuscate the issue of sound quality by changing it to something unrelated since you have not auditioned either product and I suspect no Audio Note product ever - and certainly not the D800 then I understand why you would shift the topic to something other than sound quality and preference.

Interestingly the obfuscation is still irrelevant because even if the RE chooses the loudspeaker and his company pays top dollar for the speaker that still does not address quality or the RE's experience, hearing, level. The RE is a technician who is well versed in mathematics but is still in the same boat as the home consumer - and advertising is still paramount in those pages. Democracies are wonderful but not always right. The fact that most people buy Nike or that most studios use HD 580 headphones does not in fact make them the best or subjectively preferable to something else.

I am a little perplexed by your reasoning TAH - more people buy it so it must be better? I find the obfuscation amusing when even the B&W designers went to Peter for help. And hell Quad hired Andy Grove. I have to hand it to both those companies - they actually bothered to listen and they liked what they heard. I understand why B&W could not take the advice - the AN look is just not saleable to the masses and studios could not possibly put up with tube amplification downtime where studio time is exorbitant.

And as you quite correctly note in your sig line - that you don't need to see it - but as you know many people buy with their eyes - The B&W engineers prefer what they heard with their ears but they know full well that people = especially males - and I have mountains of education support for this - are visual creatures. B&W could not possibly sell the AN look even with nicer wood finishes - the form is far more important to the sale - whether it is a male buying it for his house or a male buying it for his recording studio.

I am surprised that you don't believe B&W is trying to sell the aesthetic over substance to the predominantly male buyer.

[Mr Peabody]

Last time I checked in on an Audio Note DAC (2.1x Signature), I was relieved to come home to the 'organic' sound of the rig I had the time. I think I got home that evening and put on "Miles Davis/Marcus Miller Siesta" and just chilled out To a certain extent, your comment speaks to the heart of how a DAC works, but that's a something for the digital forum. As point of reference, fully over 70% of my listening time is classical and jazz, so good instrument and vocal tone is very important to me. I am listening to Horowitz playing Mozart Sonata (K330) as I write this. :19: :17:

What digital playback do you have that would sound more natural than the 2.1? There may be players that sound better or preferrable but I doubt you have one that sounds more natural (what I mean by organic). AN whether you like them or not have something with their "no filter" technology.

Miles/Marcus together I'll have to check that out.

[theaudiohobby]

... but I doubt you have one that sounds more natural (what I mean by organic). AN whether you like them or not have something with their "no filter" technology.

What's this 'something with their "no filter" technology?

[winston]

hello everyone, can i ask you all about (ENERGY SPEAKERS) their new models namely the C500

[Florian]

Pardon this low-life's interruption, but truthfully Florian, you come across as a real elitist prick, did you know that? How sad for you little boy.

I am, no kidding! But dont worry at least i dont post about toys i ever never heard or owned like some others in here ;-)

[theaudiohobby]

I will chose from:Dynaudio C2,Dynaudio Saphire,countur 5.4,or B&W Nautilius 802/803,or Focal JM lab Alto Utopia or Electra 920.

Are these only models you have at your disposal, I ask because the Electra 926/936Be were very fine speakers for reasonable dough.

[theaudiohobby]

I could but Mr. Qvortrup is in your neck of the woods and was willing to have you sit down and talk with B&W engineers about their preferences in loudspeakers and while there could tell you about the "freebies" ...

In otherwords, it's just hearsay you do not have any evidence, who would have guessed? :thumbsup: you da man! :)

[winston]

hello everyone, can i ask you all about (ENERGY SPEAKERS) their new models namely the C500
i wanted to say something more but something went wrong...ok i wanted to give a pair for xmas gift. i found a great price on PR.COM, it strikes a bell" as i did owned a set of the C6 for about 7 YRS i did not like the performance of the tweeter but that was the 90S. any input will help plz.dont let me be the bad (SANTA) THX ALL rgds winston.:nonod: :) ok

[Mr Peabody]

I thought you said you auditioned the 2.1x, and you didn't ask any questions? I hope the Sony gear you show isn't what you thought sounded better. Either you like to post just to stir things up or your ears need some educating. Audio Note does "Direct From Disc" technology where they use no oversampling and no analog filtering. You can find numerous reviews of Audio Note DAC's and they all seem to be quite consistent in the DAC's attributes and characteristics.

http://www.deaudiofabriek.nl/audio_note_cd

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/Magazine/equipment/0505/audionotedac21sig.htm

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0200/anmeetsmsb.htm

http://www.audionotekits.com/dac2_1.html

I don't know what Sharp sells across the pond but in the U.S. they would have to improve to be considered entry level.

[Florian]

In otherwords, it's just hearsay you do not have any evidence, who would have guessed? :thumbsup: you da man! :)

The guy isnt even the brain behind Audio Note..... just the ex english importer. LOL ..... i see a lot of people with serious audio note japan equipment but none ever use the audio note uk speakers.... but who is willing to pay for 2 ****ty drives in a **** box with silver cables....... Hahahah.... break the rule of physics. :yikes:

[Florian]

http://pic5.audiogon.com/i/c/f/1222529893.jpg
http://pic5.audiogon.com/i/c/f/1222529894.jpg


Only 3K..... low usage.... must sell...... beats 20k B&W

[theaudiohobby]

I am lost for words...trying to keep my cool so that the thread does not head south.

[theaudiohobby]

I thought you said you auditioned the 2.1x, and you didn't ask any questions?

:confused5: :yikes: What question should I have asked? Why should I have learn to about how a DAC works to assess it sound :confused5: ? I thought the proof of the DAC is in the listening :confused:?


I hope the Sony gear you show isn't what you thought sounded better. Either you like to post just to stir things up or your ears need some educating.

Emperor cloths, anyone? :smilewinkgrin: Ofcourse the Sony sounds better, miles better and more flexible to boot ..:D:


Audio Note does "Direct From Disc" technology where they use no oversampling and no analog filtering.You can find numerous reviews of Audio Note DAC's and they all seem to be quite consistent in the DAC's attributes and characteristics.


Should I have asked for a glass of audio note marketing before listening :D ?


http://www.deaudiofabriek.nl/audio_note_cd

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/Magazine/equipment/0505/audionotedac21sig.htm

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0200/anmeetsmsb.htm

http://www.audionotekits.com/dac2_1.html

I don't know what Sharp sells across the pond but in the U.S. they would have to improve to be considered entry level.

It is not small irony that's you and RGA accuse B&W of marketing but have resorted to posting reviews and namedropped at every opportunity. At least B&W marketing is more successful as it's marketing has translated into more sales, just maybe their product is also better :cornut: :D

Mr. Peabody you need to simmer down a bit because you and RGA seem all bent out of shape for no good reason cos whilst both of you are hyperventilating I am enjoying some very good music on my superbly organic sub-entry-level rig :cornut:

[Mr Peabody]

To each their own.

[RGA]

To each their own.

This is a difficult tag team duo in Florian and TAH - I must say it is interesting. TAH argues that if a company sells more it is better - well Bose is 10 times better than B&W because that's a low estimate of how much more Bose sells - and you'll even find Bose and JBL in recording studios. Genelec and PMC must be truly terrible because they are in less studios than B&W and TAH's QUADs that he loves or loved - he changes so many times it's hard to keep track of are in ZERO recording studios so they must be truly abysmal - More people buy Totem than Quad so they must be be better.

And the other part of the tag team is the exact opposite, Apogee, - they are the best speakers in the world so much so that nobody wanted them they could not sell them and went belly up - all their owners will tell you it's better than Magnepan though. So it's good because it sells more - or it's good because they went out of business and sell none.

So I wonder if Florian agrees that B&W is VASTLY better than Apogee because B&W is in more recording studios and sells far more. I also wonder if TAH thinks B&W is better than Apogee because of sales and lack of recording studio presence?

They sold more Ford Mustangs than Ferrari so it is clear as day that the Ford is a vastly better motor vehicle.

[audio amateur]

To each their own.
I think that sums it up nicely:smile5:

[Feanor]

I think that sums it up nicely:smile5:

Indeed, a matter of taste.

I wonder at RGA's passionate advocacy and defense of AN speakers (and AN products in general). It's almost pathetic when you think of it. RGA loves the AN sound; that's fine, but he can't accept it as a matter of preference. Instead he has to endlessly rationalize this preference and try to convince the rest of us the AN approach is certainly the best and possibly the only valid approach to speaker and component design.

But has he partially convinced me? There are couple of things I like to try.

First, as a DIY project, I think I'll design a pair of speakers along the AN lines. Really, the concepts are straight forward and easily copied:

Under-damped cabinets
Close to the wall or corner placement -- which certainly will reinforce bass
Simple, two-way designs
High-quality crossoversFor the sake of design simplicity and lower tuning sensitivity, I'll go closed-box rather than vented and provide quite low Qtc. The low Qtc ought to complement close to the wall placement as well as yiekl excellent bass transients as I understand it.

Secondly I'd like to try a non-oversampling DAC. What sounds interesting is one of the designs that parallels multiple DAC chips which as I understand delivers sufficient voltage that output op amps aren't required. There a quite a few of these, especially from China, for example the Gigalab Moon which can be order Pacific Valve & Electric (http://www.pacificvalve.us/GigaMoon.html) in the US/

[E-Stat]

Indeed, a matter of taste.
Exactly.


Close to the wall or corner placement -- which certainly will reinforce bass...
You can stop there for me. While corner placement may *improve* the bass response, my experience is that it sucks for imaging. Other speakers designed for such placement like the KHorn share the same issue. I perceive greater width when the speakers can radiate outside their placement. Only then can walls disappear.


Secondly I'd like to try a non-oversampling DAC. What sounds interesting is one of the designs that parallels multiple DAC chips which as I understand delivers sufficient voltage that output op amps aren't required.
Another op amp avoidance strategy can be found in the Manley Delta Sigma DAC. Somewhat dated, but uses an 18 bit Crystal chip set. Its *line stage* (with analog gain controls) uses a pair of 12au7 dual triodes sufficient to drive amplifiers directly.

Manley DAC (http://manleylabs.com/containerpages/labDSD.html)

rw

[theaudiohobby]

I think that sums it up nicely:smile5:

RGA evidently does not feel that way :eek6: the chap is on a crusade to save the great unwashed. :eek:

[RGA]

Indeed, a matter of taste.

I wonder at RGA's passionate advocacy and defense of AN speakers (and AN products in general). It's almost pathetic when you think of it. RGA loves the AN sound; that's fine, but he can't accept it as a matter of preference. Instead he has to endlessly rationalize this preference and try to convince the rest of us the AN approach is certainly the best and possibly the only valid approach to speaker and component design.
/

Feaner - let it be clear that I like a great many products but yes I have a preference that does exceed the second choice. I have no problem with anyone who goes out and listens to the AN E and prefers the B&W D800 - you heard you prefer the latter fine - I know a fellow who preferred the Quad 2905 and on another forum who preferred the Westminster from Tannoy and the reason why makes perfect sense - and I understand why. Indeed in both cases we hear the same things - but our order of importance was different. The 2905 is a wider imager - the AN E was more dynamic - could play louder, better in the frequency extremes - but when it comes to wide soundstage the 2905 and holographic nature is difficult to surpass (One reason it's one of my 5 favorites). The Westminster hits harder is more powerful - macrodynamically superior - great bass cohesive sound and can hit live scale volume levels a full 10db+ higher than the AN E So of course I am not saying it is the best speaker or the best product. However both agree that the AN E is a better balance between the two extremes capturing "most of what their speaker preference does while also bringing far more of the other to the table.' Nevertheless - if you can't live without the absolute slam of the westminster or the holographic imaging of the 2905 then "Balance" is irrelevant.

However that is quite different from someone who insists his ford festiva is better than a Bughatti when he's never tried either one. Or someone who makes an inference based on one speaker and then presumes to be able to apply it to all others. For instance the Magnepan 20.1 and the 2905 or both panel speakers and yet I find the latter to be vastly superior to the former - they're both panels but I would not tell people well it's a panel so it sounds like "X". I have heard the K-Horn and years ago Allison loudspeakers - they're corner loaded and have some strong points but they don't sound remotely like an AN E just because they happen to be corner loaded.

Corner loading is not just for adding bass depth - that is arguably the least important aspect of why Audio Note places the speaker there. Even free standing the bass is "good enough" to cover everything but pedal organs. Unfortunately, and I am arguably as much to blame as anyone, people are fascinated by numbers more than the listening. Bass depth is not the reason to be buying AN or any one box speaker - if bass depth and SPL were really all that critical you'd buy two big powerful subwoofers and that would be how you'd achieve the idiotic bass levels one could desire.

In my room free standing the AN J is more than enough bass - placing them in the corner was to improve tonal balance and reduce room induced colouration and some treble directionality do the listening proximity to the speakers. In the corners those issue are reduced to perceived inaudibility and yes there is a gain in bass but even there it is not really noticed unless the source material has it - as I don't listen to Organ music much the bass gain really isn't a huge selling point of why I would position them in the corner.

I've actually softened my stance on Audio Note speakers over the last year largely because I can see the appeal of other designs more clearly. Though it's not a lot to ask to listen before you bash. It was Art Dudley who made me give the 989 and 2905 a more serious audition. Having been so impressed by the AN E but still describing the qualities of the 989 I felt that I must have missed something because his ears likely could not be so right about one speaker and so completely wrong about another.

[Feanor]

...

Corner loading is not just for adding bass depth - that is arguably the least important aspect of why Audio Note places the speaker there. Even free standing the bass is "good enough" to cover everything but pedal organs. Unfortunately, and I am arguably as much to blame as anyone, people are fascinated by numbers more than the listening. Bass depth is not the reason to be buying AN or any one box speaker - if bass depth and SPL were really all that critical you'd buy two big powerful subwoofers and that would be how you'd achieve the idiotic bass levels one could desire.

...

Agreed, corner place will reinforce the bass, not necessarily add depth. Also it will, as you say, change the tonal balance making the bass more prominent. I'm sure you know that speakers designed to be place well into the room require "baffle step compensation", and more BSC is required as the front width of the front of the speaker gets narrower. Basically volume loss occurs below the frequency where the 1/2 wave length become longer than the width of the baffle; to compensate for this, the mid and high frequences must be attenuated -- this results in an efficiency loss of up to 6 dB :eek6: It's no wonder that AN speakers are relatively efficient when placed as instructed.

It seems to me that closed-box systems are well suited to near- or on-wall placements. That's because the bass can be rolled off slowly, such that roll-off begins sooner but goes deeper. Thus near-wall placement with a closed box will compensate for the roll-off and also achieve deeper bass than a vented design. (AN uses both closed and vented designs however.)

[theaudiohobby]

Feaner - let it be clear that I like a great many products but yes I have a preference that does exceed the second choice. I have no problem with anyone who goes out and listens to the AN E and prefers the B&W D800 - you heard you prefer the latter fine - I know a fellow who preferred the Quad 2905 and on another forum who preferred the Westminster from Tannoy and the reason why makes perfect sense - and I understand why. Indeed in both cases we hear the same things - but our order of importance was different. The 2905 is a wider imager - the AN E was more dynamic - could play louder, better in the frequency extremes - but when it comes to wide soundstage the 2905 and holographic nature is difficult to surpass (One reason it's one of my 5 favorites). The Westminster hits harder is more powerful - macrodynamically superior - great bass cohesive sound and can hit live scale volume levels a full 10db+ higher than the AN E

Grrr :yikes: !!! Quad 2905 and AN E are seriously limited speakers in comparison to the Tannoy Westminster and B&W 801. The B&W801 is 92dB and flat down to 20Hz (anechoic) which is some of the reasons it's a popular studio classical music monitor, it will fill a large room with solid low-distortion bass without any room support( see links above) and why it's less suitable as a domestic speaker as most domestic listening room are relatively small. The Westminster is 99dB/1m but with considerably less deep bass ~30Hz and it is aimed squarely at the domestic market. In comparison AN-E and the Quad are dynamically constipated.and no one will seriously consider either as credible classical music studio monitor.


However both agree that the AN E is a better balance between the two extremes capturing "most of what their speaker preference does while also bringing far more of the other to the table.' Nevertheless - if you can't live without the absolute slam of the westminster or the holographic imaging of the 2905 then "Balance" is irrelevant.


Another listener may come along and say the opposite, claiming it captures the worse of both speakers as a domestic user is free to select whatever 'balance' catches their fancy. Personally, comparing the Westminster to the Audio Note E is a bit of a joke :nonod: , they are in a different league entirely.

http://www.moxtone.com/images/Tannoy_setup.jpg

[RGA]

It seems to me that closed-box systems are well suited to near- or on-wall placements. That's because the bass can be rolled off slowly, such that roll-off begins sooner but goes deeper. Thus near-wall placement with a closed box will compensate for the roll-off and also achieve deeper bass than a vented design. (AN uses both closed and vented designs however.)

The bottom line comes down to the listening experience more than the numbers - I have heard the 90db AN K/Spe mated with the 5 watt Sonic Impact amp the AN K was 5 feet into the room away from all room boundries with 15 foot ceilings and a 25X 30 room. Hardly ideal the speaker sounded a little thin and lightweight but there was enough power to drive it to fairly loud levels without huffing and puffing. In a 10X13room with 8-9 foot ceilings the sound would be as loud as any normal person could take. So might I add would a B&W N805 mated to an OTO.

Most people do not listen at 110db very often and our ability to distinguish problems at those spls is seriously diminished anyway.

[RGA]

Grrr :yikes: !!! Quad 2905 and AN E are seriously limited speakers in comparison to the Tannoy Westminster and B&W 801. The B&W801 is 92dB and flat down to 20Hz (anechoic) which is some of the reasons it's a popular studio classical music monitor, it will fill a large room with solid low-distortion bass without any room support( see links above) and why it's less suitable as a domestic speaker as most domestic listening room are relatively small. The Westminster is 99dB/1m but with considerably less deep bass ~30Hz and it is aimed squarely at the domestic market. In comparison AN-E and the Quad are dynamically constipated.and no one will seriously consider either as credible classical music studio monitor.

Oh TAH you're so ridiculous - I have heard all 4 speakers and you've heard none of them. What's more my dealer carries thre of them and used to carry the Tannoys - I actually like the Tannoy more than most - but there is a reason the Tannoys are in the "used to carry" pile. For one the Westminster is a monster speaker. And umm you were waxing the Quads as the best speakers ever made - what happened - now you hate them? Quad is not good for classical music? Huh? So let me get this straight - you love the Westminster more than the Quad now? Well on that we agree I would prefer the Westminster too in a large room. And trying to make an argument over what I already said is odd. The Westminster is higher sensitive can play louder and has more impact - umm already said it. The N801 meets its spec in an enechoic chamber - the AN E requires corner gain and speced in room - the N801 can play louder to boot. And before you get on about the bass - frankly I'll be happy to say the N801 has 10hz more or do you want 50hz more at higher level? Heck let's say the N801 goes deeper by 30hz in room and is 30db more sensitive than the E and has a flatter frequency response - happy now TAH? So TAH what do you win? I've heard all four loudspeakers and to one degree or another like all four speakers. Reading the graph and looking at the pretty pictures of the speakers you post does not change my listening experience of the four loudspeakers.

My dealer carries or carried all four of those loudspeakers. What is curious is that most of the people who have listened to all four (add the 20.1 from Maggie) hears it exactly the same way that I do - and everyone who works there does. Do you have an explanation for that? I make a very big allowance for why someone would like the Westminster or the 2905 over the AN E - but it is interesting that you can see no reason how anyone could like the AN E over those speakers. Why for example does a Quad or westminster or N801owner trade their speaker in for an AN E? Of course I have actually listened to the four and I know of he sonic strengths and weaknesses of the lot of them and know where the strength of the AN E can seduce the Westminster lover and would have them make the switch. I also know why someone would still choose the Westminster. The Tannoy upscale stuff is stuff I could live with long term - I don't consider the AN E to be a "better" speaker and frankly I wish Soundhounds had found a way to keep the line because I think it's better than some of the other stuff they carry. At this point in fact the Westminster is my second choice - and if I had a bigger room might be my first choice.

[theaudiohobby]

Oh TAH you're so ridiculous - I have heard all 4 speakers and you've heard none of them. What's more my dealer carries thre of them and used to carry the Tannoys - I actually like the Tannoy more than most - but there is a reason the Tannoys are in the "used to carry" pile..... Reading the graph and looking at the pretty pictures of the speakers you post does not change my listening experience of the four loudspeakers.


With due respect you are being silly...how do you know that I have listened to none of the speakers:confused5:? Secondly, I am indifferent to your preferences, what get's my goat is your constant jarring commentary that somehow the Bowers & Wilkins 800 series are unsuitable as studio monitors and are only in studios because Bowers&Wilkins gives them away for free.

The fact of the matter is that nobody in their right mind will monitor a large orchestra recording on either an Audio Note E or a Quad 2905 because of their dynamic and bass limitations, they are domestic audio speakers. And listening to either speaker in your dealer's shop will not tell you how well they will perform in a large recording studio. Going on to claim that recording engineers that use B&Ws somehow do not know good sound and put out poor recordings is a tad tasteless and uncalled for, IMO.

I am not interested in changing your listening experience nor preferences. And those pesky numbers would immediately tell you that neither the Audio Note E nor Quad 2905 are suitable as classical music studio monitors.

[RGA]

The AN E is designed for home audio not a recording studio - and there are limitations to listening to recording studio designed speakers at home - there is a reason for their differences. The AN E is full range enough to cover everything but the pedal organ and even then only not capable at loud levels - Dynamics is not the same as sheer volume level.

Every single person I know who has made the switch from an 800 series B&W to an Audio Note E (and I know of zero on line or in person who went the other way) will talk about cohesiveness. The B&W's let you hear what the driver is doing - that may in fact be a desirable attribute for an RE but not for a music listener. And I am NOT even remotely close to being alone on hearing this "lack" of coehsiveness of B&W tweeter on top technology. The gap is audible and it completely destroys the belief that one is listening to an instrument but a speaker reproducing an instrument. It may very well be acceptable in a recording studio. It also may be that a lot of folks don't hear the separation or are less sensitive to what I hear as a major failing of the tweeter on top B&W's. Again TAH - this is subjective - If I hear it and it annoys me - and a lot of other reviewers and owners all complain about the exact same thing - then it's not just in our heads - it's actually a problem. However I admit that another 10 individuals either don't hear it at all or do hear it but the problem is less of nuisance to them.

I do not buy speakers for ultimate SPL or ultimate bass response. Full scale classical music is not done justice to except for the live event. The N801 or D800 with my classical music discs is no better produced in room than on the 2905 or Westminster or AN E. I hear an audible gap with B&W's which sounds nothing like the real thing. And I keep saying it but it may very well be a reason so many complain about so many recordings being bright, thin and generally poor.

The quality of reproduction on the 2905 is far better IMO but it is dynamically limited, the Westminster is a champ on the dynamics SPl and "scale" - The AN E captures 90% of what the Westminster does but simply requires a smaller room at lower listening levels. And it sounds "subbjectively" better on microdynamics and nuance and cohesivenes than the Westminster does - despite the dual concentric. Ultimately to say the Westminster is better - it is in some respects but the AN E is also better in other respects. I would rather listen to the 1812 at high levels on the Westminster over the AN E perhaps but Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata I would rather listen on a set of AN E's. And since much more music across genres is not like the 1812 then for me the AN E is more practical. In a studio I could see the choice being made for the speker that could handle the 1812 at 130decibals and obviously that is not the 2905.

My strong held opinions about Audio Note and B&W may irritate you but if you were in my shoes you would not see it that way. Whether the speaker is in a showroom or my home is completely 100% irrelevant because a speaker is supposed to be designed to operate in many rooms not any one single room. While it is true that at home one could "tweak" it to get the best from it - it is also true that most of the dealers I go to set up gear well, in appropriate sized rooms, putting them in the best possible light in order to sell them.

I have heard B&W for more than 15 years liked many disliked many. When I do the direct comparisons, and listen to other "customers" sitting in the room and in every single case every single time everyone comes to the exact same conclusion and with the guys selling both lines (with no inherent "stake" in either) all have the AN E in their homes and people bringing their B&W's in for Audio Note - perhaps you could understand a little why I get a bit the way I get. From my personal experience of everyone I see listening and know all confirm what I have felt in my listening sessions. It's difficult then to see how it could be heard any differently.

[RGA]

I apologize for this second reply:

This is for all the forumers here at AR who have been posting here as long as I - If you were here before this forum (I believe I was here even before Woochifer) was in this format then you may remember back in 1998-2003 or thereabouts when RGA was a staggering B&W fan. Almost as big a B&W poster boy as I am for AN - hard to believe but if you check the history here you can read up on the threads. I had at least the amount of posts on the old format as I do now.

And now I know how some of you felt because I am now reading the exact same arguments from TAH to me that I made defending B&W against those little companies I snickered at.

B&W is used in all the recording studios - They would not buy them if they were bad
B&W sells more so gee maybe they are actually better than the small time stuff.
B&W has deeper pockets so they can afford the best engineers
B&W can buy in larger quantities thus offering far more for the buck than any small makers.
And probably a whole pile more.

Yes fast forward a decade and I am being confronted with my own arguments so I suppose it's a healthy dose of my own medicine.

I shudder to think of my past opinions in most cases.

Some of my posts before 2003

First of all B&W is the biggest high end speaker maker in the world which makes them a target. I don't think it's a fair target because even though the B&Ws may not be to one's taste they don't have any truly bad habits and of all the big name speaker companies they are probably the best of the lot. For instance I always suggest a B&W speaker to go and listen to...sure they are not my first choice at every price point(sometimes they are) but they are usually always a speaker that are in the running.(What more can you ask for). And they certainly are built well and look nice to boot." December 10, 2002 AA

"The Thing I really like about most all of B&W speakers is that they start with the midrange and work out from there. 90% of music is in the midband...few budget speakers get it right. Some like Mission do as well, but they are not as dynamic for harder music or H/T. Some planars are better for certain things but take up more space and usually require a lot more money on amplifiers etc. The 600 Series does everything well, and IMO one of the very best "all rounders" available in the price point...perhaps THE Best(at least compared to what I have heard from Energy, Paradigm, Boston Acoustics, NHT, Klipsch, Jamo, Mission, Polk, Acoustic Energy, PSB, Mordaunt Short, Tannoy, Monitor Audio, Linn, Mirage, and a few others I can't think of off the top of my head. Some of these others from Mission, Monitor Audio and Linn have certain attributes I like better but as an overall all rounder...I'd probably buy the B&W 602S3 or 603S3.

Plus they are very good to build a H/T set-up around should you elect to go that route. Just get the top 600 Series Center channel as the other one is kind of lackluster."

"Well with the Nautilus 801(I like the Matrix better though). I heard the N801 with an 11 watt tube amp at low volume and they dissapeared...that is a neat trick for a speaker this gigantic.../...They are a world class speaker - I liked the highs better on the Matrix series though for some odd reason. Perhaps the Nautilus has a slight lilt to appeal to home theater...after Lucas is now using the 802 so ???"

"The N804 is a well made good sounding speaker. It isn't my personal choice but I think it's a safe one. It sounds good for the money - and it has some other nicities like good looks, easily resalability, long lasting drivers, a big corp so they'll be around in 10 years if something should fail...can you say that about MOST of the esoteric competition? Esoteric does not mean good, necessarily, either.

The N804s again are not perfect, there is some oddities about their sound, but that is hardly a knock compared to competitors who have downright nasty highs or lots of resonances or no bass etc."


However I did progress after hearing other speakers

To Layman
I have to admit that I definitely get a sense of what you're taklking about [with B&W]. The Reference 3a MM De Capo sounded seamless. I stood up walked outside the listening position...and whether I was one foot in front or 15 feet back(speakers about 7 feet apart) the sound was virtually the same all the time. The did seem to be a spearation between drivers with the CDM 1NT.

I personally didn't find it to be bright though, nor did I get the sense of an ETCHED high frequency...But, perhaps if I owned the product longer term that separation might become fatiguing. I usually associate fatiguing with the very TOP of the frequency response(well the top of my hearing) and a LOT of metal tweeter have that harsh sounding ping ping sound on cymbols etc...it literally sounds like tin cans banging away. Since the B&W CDM 1NTs don't do that it is highly possible that I have ignored the seamless issue because although not perfect it's better than the competitors' problems.

Of course i have not heard all the competitors...and as you note the Reference 3a and Audio Note don't have the problem whatsoever.

I have never been too impressed with Vandersteen...but it was mre because the speaker was kinda lifeless overly, polite...but it was a long time ago.

The Audio Note actually seems like an old school product...reading their big philosophy essay of speaker design...it's certainly interesting. Sort of based of 70s snells. My question has always been ... Why fix it if ain't broke? Perhaps why Sugden still sells their A21a since 1989. Why screw with it?"

But then I read some stuff from a poster named layman and a few others

It's interesting you mention Audio Note. After auditioning them against B&W - I have to say I understand where you come from when you're against B&W. The Audio Note AN-K level 3(their entry speaker) sounds big and full and frankly awesome compared to the N805 that quite frankly I'm shocked. Sure I like B&W against a lot of speakers...but then a lot of speakers have the same kind of design.

I think the best advice is to look for speakers that perhaps don't get the mainstream press but still seem to survive. Until about 11 months ago I had never heard of Audio Note...they went under my radar because all the magazines talk about Paradigm, B&W and big gigantic corporations like Harman etc.

But there is a reason why companies like Audio Note, Reference 3a, Sugden(and the companies you list) last for 20 and 30 or more years. Amazingly both Audio Note and Sugden make ugly componants relative to others, neither is mentioned much...both still survive and do well without the need to heavily, if at all, advertise.

What is frustrating is that B&W's N805 SHOULD be vastly superior to what Audio Note can put out. B&W has huge resources, can buy parts and build far more cheaply than a smaller company and sell in bigger numbers to further be able to lower their margin. And Yet, to be frank, there is simply no contest...the AN-K sounds like a full range stand mount. It isn't of course - but at least it gives you that impression...for the $3000.00CDN...the N805 just doesn't cut it.

And the N805 used to be my favorite standmount. B&W needs a completely new design approach to replace this series...they need a bigger sounding speaker - and a less separated sound. And the N805 should drop to a $1,000.00 a pair price point.

I want more for 3k than "well it sounds good" For that money I want to be floored. "

"Layman took a lot of flack from people including me when he brought up several problems with a midrange suckout in B&W speakers(and they have high prices too). Listening to the B&Ws again this time against deifferent brands I understood what Layman was talking about."

Referred problems that Layman was talking about to put my above quote in context

Above: Horizontal Response graph for Nautilus 801, which clearly shows the progressive loss of output at 2 kHz as you move off the speaker's reference axis. The 7-inch FST drivers clearly beam.

If the kevlar drivers behaved as B&W claimed then they would not beam at the top of their passbands, but measurement data clearly show that they DO BEAM at the top of their passbands. The kevlar drivers are not behaving as claimed. They appear to behave as a rigid, homogenous material.

The only difference that I can see between the measured behavior of kevlar vs. the measured behavior of metal (another rigid cone material) concerns the Q (amplitude) of the first break-up mode. Metal drivers exhibit high-Q (high amplitude, narrow bandwidth) break-up when driven past pistonic motion. The narrow bandwidth mode is rarely audible to the human ear. Kevlar drivers on the other hand exhibit low-Q (low amplitude, wide bandwidth) break-up. The wide bandwidth 1st break-up mode is EXTREMELY audible and this is what users are reporting when they describe the extra detail, analysis and zip of the kevlar drivers (which fatigues over time).

Based on measurement data, the kevlar drivers are not behaving as B&W claim. The beaming of the drivers past 1 kHz indicates that their operational area does not shrink (as B&W claim) with increasing frequency. The break-up data show that kevlar behaves like a very stiff material whose characteristics place it somewhere between metal and polypropylene. The measured behavior of B&W's kevlar drivers show that the cones behave like any other rigid material that breaks up and distorts (like all rigid materials) when driven past the point of pistonic motion.

I see no MEASURED advantage from operating kevlar drivers past the point of pistonic motion into break-up (which is common current B&W practice).

Notice the hump (low Q peak) at the top of the FST kevlar driver's passband in the model CDM9NT in the attached link (courtesy of Audio Ideas Guide). The reviewer's description of a papery, forward coloration of vocals and sounds that overlap the peaked up upper band of the FST kevlar driver is no coincidence.

Reference (courtesy of Stereophile):
B&W N801:
http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?207:9 "

I would like to point out that the above was posted by a different forumer and in fact I like the sound of the N801 more than he does despite the fact that I do hear a lack of cohesion with B&W's. But I understand why he and such a huge amount of listeners like him have long term problems with B&W speakers that incorporate Kevlar. I have not owned them so I do not know if long term they would rally bug me - though i suspect they would for me personally.

[theaudiohobby]

The AN E is designed for home audio not a recording studio - and there are limitations to listening to recording studio designed speakers at home - there is a reason for their differences.
Then why whine about RE not listening to it?

The AN E is full range enough to cover everything but the pedal organ and even then only not capable at loud levels
Well not in my book…it lean midbass and upper bass is not to my taste. It’s limited LF capability would certainly take a toll on dynamics.

Dynamics is not the same as sheer volume level.
Not sure your point here, but the B&W801/800 is more dynamic, moreso in the bass where the E is bass challenged.

The B&W's let you hear what the driver is doing - that may in fact be a desirable attribute for an RE but not for a music listener
That’s a copout, So the RE is possibly more interested in the sound of speaker drivers rather than the music they are recording, c'mon now? :confused:

I do not buy speakers for ultimate SPL or ultimate bass response. Full scale classical music is not done justice to except for the live event.
So we should all give up and buy dynamically challenged speakers like the Audio Note, isn’t it? No thank you. I can think of a couple of speakers without their limitations. You do not need a Westminster to understand their limitation. A Kef iQ5 handily showed up the shortcomings of the J.

I hear an audible gap with B&W's which sounds nothing like the real thing. And I keep saying it but it may very well be a reason so many complain about so many recordings being bright, thin and generally poor.
Funny that, your comments mirror my opinion of the Audio Note J, I cannot bear to listen to many otherwise decent recordings on the J because of its leanness and overly aggressive midrange, seems like you need to listen to a more balanced speaker. The Audio Note K/D? is a more balanced speaker in that respect but it’s a small sealed standmount with limited LF capability. And totally but understandably falls apart on full-scale symphonic music.

the AN-K sounds like a full range stand mount. It isn't of course - but at least it gives you that impression
Like a fullrange? :D The AN-K sounds exactly like what it is, a standmount with limited low-end

My strong held opinions about Audio Note and B&W may irritate you but if you were in my shoes you would not see it that way.
I don’t think so…the Audio Notes I have heard did not cut the mustard. I cannot think of a single area where the Audio Notes excel except their low power requirements but they give up too much to achieve that.

Whether the speaker is in a showroom or my home is completely 100% irrelevant because a speaker is supposed to be designed to operate in many rooms not any one single room.
That rather contradictory isn’t it? You just finished saying that a Tannoy Westminster may be more suitable than an Audio Note E in a larger room and conversely the E in smaller room :confused:

While it is true that at home one could "tweak" it to get the best from it - it is also true that most of the dealers I go to set up gear well, in appropriate sized rooms, putting them in the best possible light in order to sell them.
Which include setting up a B&W801 in a domestic sized listening space :crazy: , I hear you.

I am not surprised that Audio Note speakers are not big in the UK, the ones I have heard fare badly against the competition IMO. Tannoys, Kefs and B&Ws of all shapes and sizes run rings round them.

[RGA]

TAH

Soundhounds has the AN E and the D800 - anyone on this forum is welcome to audition the two on full tilt classical music at volume levels capable of damaging your hearing.

As a long time B&W fan, lover, supporter, owner, and nearly Nautilus series owner I am well aware of what B&W can do and what the AN line-up can do.

[theaudiohobby]

RGA

As a long time B&W fan, lover, supporter, owner, and nearly Nautilus series owner I am well aware of what B&W can do and what the AN line-up can do.

No worries Soundhounds keep the 800 series around because they know what the AN E can't do :D :lol:

[RGA]

Yes the B&W can indeed play louder, and they look quite sexy to boot. I wonder why every single person working there decided to have the uglier AN E in their home - oh yeah because they sound better to everyone who walks into the store and compares them!

And that is why I want people to listen for themsleves in a direct comparison - unlike you I am not afraid to let the people themselves decide on the matter.

All those ex B&W owners selling and trading for Audio Note E's and gee I know no one who went the other way. And all those reviewers who have heard all those B&W's over the years and yet so many more of them bought Audio Note - a tiny company - and so few go to B&W.

25hz flat in room at over 105db in a 25 X 25 room is more than enough for anyone who values their long term hearing and covers in full piano and bass. And um for $7k for the AN E versus $22k for the B&W D800 - I can buy two high powered subwoofers for $15,000 (the difference) that will hit 5hz at 130+decibals that will destroy the D800.

So do we trust TAH - a person who claims to own a speaker but can;t proivide a serial number for verification and his observations about listening to speakers or do we trust all the reviewers who have heard or owned B&W and bought Audio Note. Is TAH a member of the B&W team - worried about the economy while AN can't keep up with orders?

Granted I don't trust every reviewer but Art Dudley of Stereophile (who by the way owns them now). Granted the competition but still...

"the sound of the electric bass was deep, full, and strong, with believable timbre and excellent clarity of attack. The Es were also excellent in their sense of sheer impact, as in the percussion on that album's "Heart of Gold""

"Throughout their time here I was consistently impressed by how loudly the Audio Notes could play, and by how utterly big they could sound when doing so with orchestral music. There was something of a disconnect, seeing those not-terribly-large speakers with their 1" tweeters in front of me, yet hearing them make flutes sound like real instruments moving reasonable amounts of air, and not like precise little images in some audio nerd's fantasy-ass "soundstage." The crescendo at the end of János Starker and Antal Dorati's recording of Dvorák's Cello Concerto (a recent and brilliant Speakers Corner LP reissue of Mercury SR90303) showed that off especially well—as did Ruggiero Ricci and Ølvin Fjelstadt's wonderful recording of the Sibelius Violin Concerto, also on a Speakers Corner LP (Decca SXL 2077). Also on orchestral music, the overall spatial quality of the Audio Note AN-E Lexus Signatures was closer than usual to the way I hear things in the concert hall."

"I used the Audio Note AN-E Lexus Signatures to play David Grier's I've Got the House to Myself (CD, Dreadnought 0201), and skipped to the Civil War–era fiddle tune "The Girl I Left Behind Me." Eight or so bars in, my attention was completely captured by how real the performance sounded—not in the Quad sense of heightened neutrality, transparency, and spatial precision (fine though those things are!), but real in the sense that the notes started, flowed, and stopped in a manner that was eerily convincing, for hi-fi. It was also dynamic as all get-out."

The Audio Notes are on a different plane altogether: easy, adaptable, and, in the best sense, mostly invisible. That they manage all that while being compatible with the very-low-power amps that some of us love is a heck of a thing.

It's joined the Lowther horns and Quad electrostats as one of the very few speakers I know I could live with and love, indefinitely."

Hmm no B&W's - they look nicer and they play louder. Oh yeah that's right this about music reproduction not looks, marketing, and being loudest.

[theaudiohobby]

25hz flat in room at over 105db in a 25 X 25 room

In your dreams :lol: @50Hz the speaker is off >9dB off its midrange peak, corner loading can only lift the bass so much.



Granted I don't trust every reviewer but Art Dudley of Stereophile (who by the way owns them now

And other reviewers who do not own Audio Note are not to be trusted :D :cool: At least Mr. Dudley is consistent. The Audio Note E is in good company with a Lowther Horn and a Quad ESL 989. sharing common features namely a thin lower midrange/upper bass and varying degrees of upper midrange/LF treble emphasis I bet they are always revealing of what is on the recording. Funny that :lol: :lol:

[RGA]

From a real actual competing speaker designer!

"Peter, I think that Donald North has nuked my theory. As far as I can tell the theoretical maximum gain from corner placement is indeed 18 dB because the energy reflected off the floor and walls (or directed by the floor and walls) is in-phase with the rear-firing port's output.
Simply put, I was wrong.

I apologize for saying that your speakers cannot do what you claim they can even with corner loading. I gave you a hard time about it and you took it like a gentleman.

I guess that different people are convinced by different kinds of evidence, and as long as I had the mistaken conviction that 9 dB was the theoretical maximum gain from corner placement I wasn't going to believe your claimed in-room measurements bass extension. Now I have no solid basis for disputing your claim of -6 dB at 17 Hz with corner loading.

Ah, there's my dessert now. Yum."

Art Dudley is wrong (Stereophile)
Constantine Soo is wrong (Dagogo) http://dagogo.com/Events/2008RMAF/Coverage-I.html
Martin Colloms is wrong (Hi-Fi News, Stereophile, Hi-Fi Choice, Hi-Fi Critic) Stereophile technical advisor
B&W designers are wrong (they like the AN E more than the D800 and they made the D800 - LOL
SEAS designers are wrong
Richard Austen is wrong (Dagogo)
Paul Messenger is Wrong (Hi-Fi Choice)
Steven Rochlin is Wrong (enjoythemusic)
Bob Neil (Positive Feedback magazine)
Chris Redmond (dagogo)
the best sound of the show (6 moons) http://sixmoons.com/industryfeatures/vsac20083/vsac_2.html
Jack Roberts is wrong (dagogo)
Peter Van Wellinsward is wrong (speaker designer, Stereophile technical advisor)

Please - I am happy you like the B&W model _____ - enjoy it for many years.

[theaudiohobby]

Just one post earlier, you said

Granted I don't trust every reviewer but Art Dudley of Stereophile (who by the way owns them now). Granted the competition but still...
Yet you've just reference almost every single reviewer that you know that has favourably reviewed Audio Notes in the press ::yikes: It is "kitchen sink" throwing time, eh? :thumbsup: :lol: Reviewers are only to be trusted when they recommend Audio Note then :lol:.

Duke said "theoretical maximum gain from corner placement is indeed 18 dB" you cannot get that in a real room and certainly not for over such a wide bandwidth. Look at the blue curve below (measured in Art's listening room), as expected corner loading does not do much for the lower midrange and upper bass which is down about 6dB from the reference point and the exaggerated upper midrange is there in all its glory.

http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/66ANFUpfig1.jpg

There is no getting away from it loverboy, the E is one lean, bass challenged speaker. And I daresay that's probably one of its major selling points with domestic customers as its lack of mid and upper bass energy means that many room resonances in that region will be benign. downside, certain types of music will sound thin and bright through these boxes and any piece whose foundation is set in the bass will sound lifeless.

[Feanor]

Just one post earlier, you said

Yet you've just reference almost every single reviewer that you know that has favourably reviewed Audio Notes in the press ::yikes: It is "kitchen sink" throwing time, eh? :thumbsup: :lol: Reviewers are only to be trusted when they recommend Audio Note then :lol:.

...

Some say it's impolite to discuss religion. Audio Note is religion with RGA.

[RGA]

The Red Trace in your graph of Harbeth shows similar measured response in certain areas indicating room induced issues - that said it is a fair assessment in commentary by John Atkinson -

That is a perfectly acceptable criticism of the loudspeaker - it's not one I share but hearing much of what he loves in a technical sense it's fair. Let's not be inclined to think that the speakers are perfect transducers or that AN is the holy grail for all listeners.

Is the AN E a perfect measuring loudspeaker? Nope. Are they the least coloured speaker? Nope. Are they the loudest speaker? Nope. Are they most powerful bass speaker? Nope. Are they the best looking speaker? Nope. Are they best speaker for sound staging? Nope. Are they best speakers for Imaging? Nope. Is Audio Note for someone who loves the sound of B&W? Nope.

Is Audio Note a company for someone who views audio as a hobby - a resounding "definitely NOT!!!!." I am now completely sure of that.

I'm not going to try and convince you of the qualities of the AN E - for that is a dubious task since I know you're opinion of Peter Qvortrup and AN before you claimed to audition a product.

Art basically sums it up:

The latest version of the Audio Note AN-E/SPe HE offers the kind of performance that simply must be heard to be understood: more music than sound. Like its stablemates, the AN-E/SPe HE is not the sort of audio product that prompts its new owner to pull special record after special record off the shelves just to hear the bass depth on this one, the imaging specificity on that. Rather, the SPe HE is the sort of thing that will compel you to play every record you own, all the way through, without interruption—arguably because it does a better job than most of really connecting the listener with the dramatic, intellectual, and emotional intensities captured in every groove. I can't recommend it strongly enough.—Art Dudley http://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/506an/index5.html

In the end I can't argue with the measurements since they are what they are. I hear it like Art hears it and numerous others hear it - not sure what you want from me TAH. I listened and to me the AN E sounds a helluva lot better than any B&W I have heard. The E moves me emotionally, the E has the ability to bring tears to my eyes. they make my toes tap and want me to sing along and get up and dance - B&W makes me want to turn them off. And looking at some graphs just doesn't change what I hear. No they are hardly "perfect" loudspeakers but for me they play their weaknesses very well to my ears.

So if you want the "win" then you win. But I'm not sure what that is? I'm not sure what you want from me?

[theaudiohobby]

Some say it's impolite to discuss religion. Audio Note is religion with RGA.

In RGA's world speaker selection is a zero sum game ;), The only true way is the Audio Note way,

[theaudiohobby]

Art basically sums it up:


:rolleyes: Art is an audio writer, sounding excited about some of the products he reviews is his job As a counterpoint here a clip from another reviewer.

"It’s tremendously high across-the-board performance is what impresses me most; it’s surely the best all round loudspeaker I’ve yet heard, and better still it’s neither bland nor emotionally unengaging as a result of its sheer efficiency and competence – indeed you’ll struggle to hear a more emotionally engaging loudspeaker anywhere.--Dave Price"

Guess which speaker is being reviewed? Notice the similarity to Art's commentary? By the way, you've shot your credibility in this thread. Your position on audio reviews is hypocritical, reviews are only credible if the reviewer favourably reviews a product you like. :)

My point remains the same, your criticism of other speaker brands is OTT and sometimes uncalled for.

[RGA]

TAH

But what is it you want from me.

If I listen to two loudspeakers - one that I think is Much better a 10/10 and another speaker I think is poor 5/10 - what do you suggest I do? Listening to music reproduced on a stereo is 100% subjective. You can, as stereopphile does, bring out several graphs but the JOB and the ONLY job is to be satisfactory in the listening position in room to the person listening to the system. That is why JA admits the measurements don't remotely tell the whole story. That is why good reviews follow speakers that measure flat and ones that don't.

I don't purport my view to be anything but subjective - if I like Oranges better than Apples someone might be able to produce a fruit acidity index and vitamin c charts that tell me that in fact Apples are the superior fruit but it doesn't change the "tasting" of the fruit.

My contention for Audio Note is that more audio reviewers who have heard both Audio Note and B&W choose Audio Note. Every person I have met and can substantiate that they indeed listened to the AN J or E have preferred it to B&W. All of those people are merely "subjective" views - whether one is a "reviewer" or not.

Are you suggesting that I am not entitled and no one who has heard both loudspeakers entitled to prefer Audio Note or in fact have the opinion that a particular same priced B&W is quite a poor alternative? I dislike Lord of the Rings as a film triology too and I can explain why - other people think it's the greatest film series in the history of cinema.

So what do you want from me?

[theaudiohobby]

The text was from a B&W801D review in Hi-FiWorld.


TAH

So what do you want from me?
Lay off unsubstantiated and largely unjustified remarks of other speaker brands e.g. Claiming some folk using 800 series to monitor does not know how actual instruments sound and put out thin bright recordings is uncalled for.

My contention for Audio Note is that more audio reviewers who have heard both Audio Note and B&W choose Audio Note.

Absolute rubbish.......you have absolutely no evidence to back such a wild claim.

I'll ignore the various strawmen....

[RGA]

Well truth be told I like the 801 and I suppose I should not have used it as a point for AN. However the story I mentioned about the N801 coming back can be verified by Soundhounds who I could ask owners if they would mind being contacted by you. So it is verfiiable if you wish to check.

"Produces a fine open sound thats hard to better at the price. A system for the real discerning listener who loves classical music." This was for AN by the same David Price.

Nevertheless I get your point - the words are in some ways no better than astrology being espoused on numerous brands.

Before you rubbish the idea of evidence I don't think it would be a truly difficult task to determine - a number of companies ask you to fill in a survey card - what model you bought and what model you used to own. I can't recall if Audio Note or B&W does that by some of my gear had those questions on the warranty card you mail back.

You could I suppose ask both B&W and Audio Note to survey their customer base and figure out which owners traded Audio Note for B&W and B&W for Audio Note.

I suppose I am making a leap based on Soundhounds but they're the only dealer I know selling both brands so I am going by their results. If you sell $7k B&W and $7K ML and $7k Paradigm Signature and $7K AN then after awhile you stop selling the B&W, ML, and Paradigm - all of which have a far superior marketing presence in Canada and you continue to sell the AN that the store can't even get stock of then to me the results are pretty clear that people are voting with their wallets (when they actually have the opportunity to compare). AN is far smaller than those brands but that also means they are far less heard than those other brands. Should I go by a sample size of one store - perhaps not but it's the only sample I know of.

But this is neither here nor there - I'll lay off commentary of B&W that extends beyond my subjective listening of the product because in reality the my belief of "ways of marketing" really has nothing to do with the sound. I continue to recommend numerous B&W loudspeakers and continue to dislike a bunch of them as well. But that is true of virtually every company I hear - including incidentally Audio Note

[3db]

Sheesh. Been gone for almost 2 years and I come back to this? *LMOA* RGA still spouting off the virtues of Audio Note speakers and forgetting to realize that the most subjective puchase in the audio chain are speakers.

RGA..who cares man? If you love-em great...but don't be putting down other speakers because of that. No other company buillds a more inert speaker cabinet than B&W . There high end models are practically vibration free and its vibrations that kills a good loudspeaker.

[Mr Peabody]

You all have it wrong, it's Dynaudio or nothing.

[blackraven]

And I thought Magnepans were the end all in speakers:2: :2:

[audio amateur]

You all have it wrong, it's Dynaudio or nothing.
Rightly so:thumbsup:

[basite]

You all have it wrong, it's Dynaudio or nothing.


no no no.

Thiel. nothing else but Thiel.





now please, stop fighting and learn to live with the fact that tastes differ. you can both say you prefer 'that speaker', and why that is, but please, don't try stuffing the other with 'facts' that your speaker is 'better'...


Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[audio amateur]

now please, stop fighting and learn to live with the fact that tastes differ. you can both say you prefer 'that speaker', and why that is, but please, don't try stuffing the other with 'facts' that your speaker is 'better'...
I definitely mirror this feeling. You've both said your bit and I don't think there's much point in debating this any further. It's been enlightening, although a little hostile at times, I suggest you leave it at that

[puiutu62]

Now I have the sapphire,and I am very happy to choose this speakers.Together with Accuphase integrated 406V.Dc-65V player and PS-500V power suply is a dream combination,(but only after 70,80 hours of run,(now I think I have cca.100 hours),and I think the sound will be more better in the future,after running in complete.
Thanks again for the people who encourage me to make this combination.

[Mr Peabody]

Now I have the sapphire,and I am very happy to choose this speakers.Together with Accuphase integrated 406V.Dc-65V player and PS-500V power suply is a dream combination,(but only after 70,80 hours of run,(now I think I have cca.100 hours),and I think the sound will be more better in the future,after running in complete.
Thanks again for the people who encourage me to make this combination.

Are you talking about the Dynaudio Sapphires?! If so, you are my hero. The break in time sounds familiar to a Dynaudio owner. The Sapphires are my dream speaker. Some might think the Evidence would be but who has a room large enough to make those sound correct. The Sapphires are awesome and can be used realistically in some one's home. Absolutely, incredible speaker.

[puiutu62]

Mr Peabody,and all
Yes is really incredibile this speacker,I don't know in another setup,but with Accuphase is really a dream.The think who make me to be afried on the begining was to not be too soft the sound with accuphase....now I can say is not!!!,I here much sistems,(a friend of mine have Dynaudio C4 with Pass 350,and I can say in this capitol,(spead/energy),my sistem is better.I read the review on the Stereophile where say "sometimes the sound un uper end is to bright",and must use the cover,...Yes,the sound is 100% not dark,but with the right cable,(I use Audioquest Anaconda balanced and Accuphase unbalanced,ansd Audioquest Pikes Peack and Vulcano,and with this cable I can make really a dream sound).My room is 5m x 5,5m,(I must somthing made in the future with the things from the room to be better,(new arranges).
With the right Electronic,I really can recomand you this speakers!
If you will to know something near this speaker,please ask,and I try to tell from my experience with them!

[Mr Peabody]

Thanks. Trust me if those were in my budget I'd already have a pair. The C4 is a very good speaker but the Sapphire is something special.

[daveuzuk]

Hello to all!
I am new here,but I think here I can find a good advice about speakers-amplifier compatibility.
I have a Acuphase E 406V integrat amplifier and a Acuphase Cd-player DP 65V.
My question is:
I will chose from:Dynaudio C2,Dynaudio Saphire,countur 5.4,or B&W Nautilius 802/803,or Focal JM lab Alto Utopia or Electra 920.
First I must say...YES,I know ,the sound is much diferent wit this type of speakers,...but is the 406Vfrom Accuphase enough stronger/good/give high curent to handle this speakers on his performance or not?Know somebody this think?
My tendency is to go for Dynaudio Saphire...????Wat you think?is a god choosing?
I hear my Accuphase with a Dynaudio C2.I was satisfied with the sound,but...if is posibil to have a better sound with the accuphase line 406v and 65v,and someone can give a adwice,please give me this.
And ...From Accuphase a Power conditioner PS 500,will be a big improuwment on the sound or not?(I read much of this Accuphase PS 500 and manny people said"he make miracle ".Is really so?
Thanks,and sorry for....many question


Add Harbeths and Art loudspeaker to your list - The focals have that dreaded metal tweeter play something with some tough treble bits and listen to is shriek away at you.

Uzzy