The Speaker Hunt Nears an End

[YBArcam]

Thought I'd start a thread as my system is finally nearing completion (i.e. I'm finally becoming satisfied with what I'm hearing). The next step is to decide on speakers, but I'll provide a little background first.

I recently replaced my Exposure 2010s2 amp with an Audiolab 8000S. A little bit lost in terms of sense of pace, but the 8000S gives a more full bodied sound, with a soundstage that is both deeper and closer to the listener. It's got greater peak power, has plenty of control over the speaker drivers, and is really well built (it's heavy, put together well, knobs and buttons don't feel cheap). I like the trade off, mainly because what bugged me about the Exposure amp was the thinner sound that felt like it was a little too distant.

So then it was time to decide on a new source (replacing my Exposure 2010s2 CD player). It really came down to the Rega Apollo or Arcam CD17. When I found out a local dealer had the 35th Anniversary Apollo still in stock I jumped at it. Picked it up two days ago. It's gorgeous. But also faulty. :mad2: It wouldn't stop playing the first CD I fed it. I knew this might happen, these complaints are all over the Internet. But I bought it anyway knowing I've got the warranty if it should give me problems. Well, it's not working at all now, but it's going back to the dealer tomorrow to get fixed. Let me just say, that the sound it produced while it was playing for about a half hour was awesome. I felt like I got back some pace, but didn't lose anything. It seems to be a great match with my 8000S and Quad 12L2 speakers.

But now I've got this Exposure gear sitting here and I can trade it in, along with the 12L2, for some speakers. That was the plan from the get-go. To get the amp/CD player I wanted, and the best speakers to match. To get that full bodied, detailed, bigger soundstage, and bigger scale sound. Perhaps the 12L2 is what I'll keep, but I'm considering the following:

PMC TB2i - had these for an in home trial. They've got a nice open sound, with well defined and deep bass. What impressed me most was the detail they brought out. You can really follow every instrument and the separation from other instruments is top notch. Frankly, I think this is a must. How are you going to understand the music, have conveyed what the artist intended, if sounds are blended together and you can't hear the smaller details? A fabulous speaker, but the most expensive on my list. If I can get close but spend $1,000 less, I'll be very happy.

Monitor Audio RX2 - big 8" woofer. These just overwhelmed my room. Felt like they'd be a great speaker in a bigger space, but in my room they pressurized it too much and sounded boomy. When I plugged the port the speaker felt like any other smaller speaker and was a lot less interesting. On softer songs without a lot of bass they sounded great. Monitor Audio did a nice job reigning in the brightness of the old RS line, but these are now off my list.

Dynaudio Excite X16 - big sense of scale, deep bass, and sounded really musical, like the emotion in the music really came through. Are still in the running, though I'm concerned about placement with the rear port.

ProAc Studio 110 - will get to hear them soon.

Paradigm Studio 20 - I'm really excited about hearing these. Reviews make it seem like they provide everything I'm looking for, and it's a bonus that they've got a woofer that is slightly larger than average for a 6.5" model, and also a front port.

[Mr Peabody]

Looks like you've got some good speakers on your list. I'm partial to the Danes and have not heard Proac. I like Paradigm as well. If none make you as happy as the PM's though you might as well get them or you may never be happy with a compromise. Unless the difference is so slight it wouldn't justify the extra expense.

[YBArcam]

I could end up keeping the Quad's too. They sounded really great with the Apollo this past weekend. I wasn't sure it would make that much of a difference, but apparently it did. Though I'd need to hear some other music on them to be absolutely certain. Overall though, I think scale and bass would improve with the larger Paradigms.

[TheHills44060]

Never heard the PMC's before, in fact I've never heard any PMC speaker for that matter but always wondered. Not a fan of Monitor Audio...they do absolutely nothing for me, except for the rare exception. Definitely like the Dyanudio's and I've always loved ProAc although they maybe too laid back for some but they cater to my tastes. Wouldn't touch the Paradigms with a ten-foot pole. The studio series leaves me wanting to jab my eardrums out with a wire coat hanger.

[bobsticks]

I like the Danes too, they've got character.

Never had that problem with the Paradigms (the wire coathanger dillema) but they don't lift me to great heights either...at least the twenties don't.

I think you've made a very wise decision by going with in-home testing. Many could learn from that. Good show.

[Hyfi]

Dynaudio Excite X16 - big sense of scale, deep bass, and sounded really musical, like the emotion in the music really came through. Are still in the running, though I'm concerned about placement with the rear port.



See if you can find a used pair of Audience 82s. Mine have the port on the front. You won't be dis-satisfied with Danes, until you compare them to anything Von Schwiekert designed.

[Mr Peabody]

Despite the higher sensitivity of Paradigm I've found it typically still takes some power to make them sound good. They have a lively midrange that gives a live feel to the music. I too have heard some uninspired set ups with Paradigm but I have heard some good ones as well. My theory is without an amp with juice to pump the Paradigm bass driver properly they can sound quite out of balance. One of the best Paradigm setups I heard had an Adcom 5500 driving the bass end of Studio 100's.

[bobsticks]

Despite the higher sensitivity of Paradigm I've found it typically still takes some power to make them sound good. They have a lively midrange that gives a live feel to the music. I too have heard some uninspired set ups with Paradigm but I have heard some good ones as well. My theory is without an amp with juice to pump the Paradigm bass driver properly they can sound quite out of balance. One of the best Paradigm setups I heard had an Adcom 5500 driving the bass end of Studio 100's.

I feel the same same way about KEF.

[YBArcam]

I'm not surprised the Paradigms need a good bit of current. The graphs on Soundstage and Stereophile for the 20 actually show it dipping below 4 ohms. An amp rated for 4 ohms is ideal, and from all I've read the 8000S should be up to the challenge.

The only Paradigms that I've heard were the entry level Monitor series, a floorstanding model, powered by some sort of Krell amp. I really didn't like it, the sound wasn't smooth and clean. It's hard to describe, it just sounded really unrefined. I would expect the Studio series is a pretty big step up though.

[bobsticks]

The only Paradigms that I've heard were the entry level Monitor series, a floorstanding model, powered by some sort of Krell amp. I really didn't like it, the sound wasn't smooth and clean. It's hard to describe, it just sounded really unrefined. I would expect the Studio series is a pretty big step up though.

Really? Paradigm and Krell? i do not in any way disbelieve you, That's just an odd combination...not the best way to show off that speaker. I prefer the Studio 40 over the 20...just a personal thing...but the last time I heard it was in an Ovation, hooked through some Audiospace Reference gear and fed by a an MP3 player (?!)...I was completely nonplussed by the choice of lossy, compressed audio...

Clearly, some if not many dealers have no idea what they're doing.

[YBArcam]

Really? Paradigm and Krell? i do not in any way disbelieve you, That's just an odd combination...not the best way to show off that speaker. I prefer the Studio 40 over the 20...just a personal thing...but the last time I heard it was in an Ovation, hooked through some Audiospace Reference gear and fed by a an MP3 player (?!)...I was completely nonplussed by the choice of lossy, compressed audio...

Clearly, some if not many dealers have no idea what they're doing.

Yeah, it was an odd combination. I think it may have been a multichannel Krell amp, but I'm not sure. I didn't give that audition too much attention. It wasn't one that I initiated. I think the dealer had them set up and just wanted me to give it a listen to see if I liked the sound. Once I heard them I just knew they weren't for me. I guess with a different amp they might be more ideal. But to be honest, I always thought the Monitor line was ugly. Looks aren't a huge concern of course, but there are lots of speakers that look great that also sound great. So why would I buy something that's ugly, unless it's a radically different speaker design, and therefore also sounds really unique?

At the time I think I was looking for HT speakers, but I never followed through on that. Since then I've shifted focus to creating a nice two channel set up, and I'll worry about HT down the line.

[Mr Peabody]

Why would Krell and Paradigm be an odd combo? With the power of the Krell they would seem to be a decent combo. Not every one likes Krell but they are a very good amp.

[RGA]

The bottom line is buy what you like. I would try your best to listen to different kinds of speaker designs not a bunch largely following a similar signature - and most do and IMO not the best ones. As for Krell it being good or bad will depend on what you've compared it to and your taste. Me I would not touch a Krell and a Paradigm anything with a 50 foot pole but others seem to like em just fine.

You mentioned some concern over placement issues and rear ports. Have you considered sealed enclosures? I usually recommend the Audio Note K/Spe being a standmount and a sealed acoustic suspension design but it's too expensive.

There is Omega Loudspeakers which I have not heard but they are intriguing. First they're a single driver speaker and come in several configurations. They seem to have pretty solid bass response but being single driver there is no crossover and thus they should exhibit spot on cohesiveness. What look to be good prices and very very easy to drive (2 watts) is their claim for many of them. And they give 10 year warranties which is about double most of the rest of the industry. Moreover, they're bound to sound considerably different than your list of usual suspects. Perhaps try and get a listen to them on a good SE amplifier just to see what you think. Most companies will ship you gear to try. Magnepan may advertise it but most companies will in fact do the same thing.

The Omega Alnico 8 holds interest for me due to the seeming high level of quality for the price and that they are Sealed boxes. http://www.omegaloudspeakers.com/products/super8series

I will try and get something from them for review.

[YBArcam]

Why would Krell and Paradigm be an odd combo? With the power of the Krell they would seem to be a decent combo. Not every one likes Krell but they are a very good amp.

It's just the price discrepancy really. Of course you are correct, Krell should have little problem driving just about any speaker, and the poor sound was much more likely due to the Paradigms.

Thanks for the Omega suggestion, RGA. I'll take a look at them. In all honesty I'm probably going to go the conventional route this time around, but any future change will involve looking at some much different designs, both for amps and speakers. If I can try them out without any commitment then I'm sure I'll take the chance sooner rather than later.

[bobsticks]

Why would Krell and Paradigm be an odd combo? With the power of the Krell they would seem to be a decent combo. Not every one likes Krell but they are a very good amp.

It's not a comment as to the power capabilities or quality of either. I loved the way the Krell integrated rocked your Danes, Mr. P...in fact, I think I weakly contemplated buying that unit, eh? Remember?
I just think the sonic signatures of the two would be, ahem, "awkward" if combined...just a supposition with no basis.


The bottom line is buy what you like. I would try your best to listen to different kinds of speaker designs not a bunch largely following a similar signature - and most do and IMO not the best ones...

True...and good advice...but I strongly suspect that YBA is not a newb and has a fair idea of the sound he likes.
However, I too have been intrigued by the Omega offerings. Here's a review...

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/omega6/super3.html

[RGA]

bobsticks

I am never sure of people's experiences. I went to practically every audio shop in the downtown and great Vancouver area. Vancouver isn't a massive city, but the average home price in Vancouver is now over a million dollars and 1/13 have a net worth of a million bucks. It's one of if not the most expensive cities to live in North America.

Most dealers carry very similar designed products which are more about home decor over sound quality. The issue is that one can be an audiophile and very possibly go 15 years without once auditioning a good horn speaker. And while Klipsch is around they're sold at a drug store or big box chain so they can't even be auditioned on any sort of equal footing. Worse is that most dealers seem to carry big name competitors. So one dealer may carry Paradigm another may carry B&W and the third Dynaudio. All have speakers in the same price class but all three sold in different shops with different amps/sources. I have the advantage that I live on Vancouver Island and the big dealer - Soundhounds - carries all three of them so you can do direct comparisons. But this is the only dealer like this that I have been to.

The thing ultimately is that "most" people have not heard single driver speakers, open baffle designs, Lossy cabinet designs, or for that matter good electrostats. The vast majority carry a slim floorstander with several 6-6.5 drivers in an MDF box that is deeper than it wide and has some sort of tweeter (usually metal) at the top with similar efficiency ratings and often come as part of some sort of home theater package. You can add the center and rears and sub later if you wish.

The designers out there bucking the usual trend likely do so because they feel they can make a much better sounding product where they're not constrained by market share and the "Corporation" style agenda - see movie "The Corporation."

FWIW I'd probably lean towards the Dynaudio from the list but I'd still try for a used high efficiency speaker - perhaps a Tannoy which is probably easier to locate. If for no other reason than to keep the low powered tube amp option open.

Logically, keeping all your amp options open makes more sense than being forced to buy a 100 watt+ SS amp. Tannoy appears to have several speakers in this general price class.

[Mr Peabody]

I'll keep an open mind but I have to wonder if "bucking the trend" is just another way of getting attention in a crowded market. I wouldn't think if single driver or open baffle is so good it would take 50 years to figure out how to do it. I also like how the 6Moons reviewer goes in to great detail explaining the effect of higher frequency harmonics then basically says, oh, but you don't need those any way. I am a firm believer of harmonics since taking in a training session with HK back in the day where they explained harmonics and why their receivers were designed to have a frequency bandwidth of 5-100k. I am really suspect of open baffle unless they are in-wall subs. I don't see how an open baffle speaker just sitting in a room could possibly have an accurate bass response. The Carver Amazing Loudspeaker had a bass response but it was like a cheap headphone type bass, no definition. It also seems that if single driver was the way to go that Pro sound would have adopted it years ago.

[YBArcam]

RGA, are we talking the Tannoy Prestige line to get that kind of speaker? I once owned a pair of Tannoy Mercury F2, which I felt was a great $300 speaker. Since then I have always been interested in the brand, and also what with learning some of their history and just how much the Tannoy name means in hifi circles. But the Prestige line is too expensive for me right now. The Revolution Signature line is in my price range, but I'm thinking you would consider that to be in the category of the others on my list. There's a great dealer in my area that carries Tannoy and I've listened to a couple of the Prestige speakers. They are impressive for sure, the only concern I'd have is that they perhaps sound a little too refined, maybe a little too perfect. But I'm not comfortable in passing judgment on them after only listening to each for about a half hour.

You said you wouldn't touch Paradigm with a 50 foot pole. I'm curious what it is that you dislike so much. I just came across a positive-feedback review of the 20 that pretty much echoes what the Stereophile and Soundstage! reviews said about the speaker's strengths. They seem to be exactly what I'm looking for in terms of sound.

That said, I've listened to enough of the this kind of speaker over the last year. After this purchase I'm definitely going to start listening to other kinds of designs.

bobsticks, you are right, I'm not a newb. I'm also far from the most experienced and I've still got a lot to learn. I'd say that I pretty much know what kind of sound I want, but it is like RGA said - that's within the context of having listened to primarily one kind of speaker design, all powered by relatively affordable SS amplifiers. I really don't know what else is out there.

I'm curious what you guys would suggest when it comes to these other kinds of designs, if playing primarily rock music. Like, are electrostats even worth considering for that genre of music? Can a single driver speaker do rock justice? Etc. It would seem to me, that the ideal might be a medium/large sized room with a pair of efficient speakers that are both wide and tall, and house at least a 12" woofer, powered by a smooth but powerful amp.

[Mr Peabody]

YBA, yoou just described the Klipsch Cornwall :) www.klipsch.com take a look at the Heritage line. I've got a set of Heresy III I'm keeping around for fun.

[RGA]

I'll keep an open mind but I have to wonder if "bucking the trend" is just another way of getting attention in a crowded market. I wouldn't think if single driver or open baffle is so good it would take 50 years to figure out how to do it. I also like how the 6Moons reviewer goes in to great detail explaining the effect of higher frequency harmonics then basically says, oh, but you don't need those any way. I am a firm believer of harmonics since taking in a training session with HK back in the day where they explained harmonics and why their receivers were designed to have a frequency bandwidth of 5-100k. I am really suspect of open baffle unless they are in-wall subs. I don't see how an open baffle speaker just sitting in a room could possibly have an accurate bass response. The Carver Amazing Loudspeaker had a bass response but it was like a cheap headphone type bass, no definition. It also seems that if single driver was the way to go that Pro sound would have adopted it years ago.

Problem is you are wondering about "seeing how" and talking about some other companies "written documents" which is kind of my main point. A lot of people argue the theory until they're blue in the face - most of them on internet forums with little supportive credentials to back up why I should take anything they have to say with any grain of salt. People often also take a poor example of a design and compare it to the best of the best of their favorite design.

As for why single drivers are unpopular or many speakers with wide baffles is not the science it's the aesthetic. Most audiophiles are males (and most makes are easy to market to on visuals). Although that is not entirely true - like my comments about most of the best rooms at CES using tube amplfiers (which is true) it is also true that all of the best rooms had speaker designs that don't look anything like a Paradigm Studio 100 and every other speaker in the world that "look like" a Studio 100. Indeed, event he companies who do make such carbon copy speakers - when you look at their top of the line models - they look "nothing" like those middling models. You can eve look at Dynaudio's top speaker. IMO the reason most follow the pattern is because the pattern is easy on the eyes, and they're cheap to make and are nice for the bottom line.

The single driver has weaknesses when I just look at the idea. The driver has to cover a large frequency spectrum with control and volume capability. I doubt it's going to be able to do it in the Omega price or size class. The Teresonic Ingenium IMO doesn't quite get there and they run $10k. But to be fair there are a LOT of speakers that don't get there and they have many drivers in a box and virtually none of them are as spot cohesive and sounding "right" where 95% of music resides. Most speakers will need a sub for super deep bass anyway. My thought on the Omega is that looking at the pictures he had them in a MASSIVE room and I am thinking if you put such speakers in a 12 X 16 room and place them near walls or in corners (for the sealed models) then the corners "might" be able to add a lot of low end drive.

Of course I won't know any of this unless I audition them. I sent them an e-mail - you never know. I have others on my list but I like the prices that seem to me to be affordable.

[RGA]

YBArcam

Tannoy is a funny company they have made speakers I felt were way to polite sounding and rather boring (like what I hear from most Thiel and Vandersteen speakers). Though that is probably not a bad side of the spectrum over longer listening for some listeners but they tend to bore me to death. Then there are Tannoy speakers that will blow you into next week like their pro and club speakers with 18inch dual concentrics in a club that can just pound but also sound quite cohesive and refined but they ran something like $15k Tannoy has a lot of offerings and some are better than others.

With Paradigm I am not a big fan for 2 channel. I get the good reviews and I also get that none of the reviewers actually buy them for themselves. They're a product that after you've heard a lot of speakers you would sell them. They're a line of speakers to be sold not owned as my dealer would say (and incidentally he's one of the biggest Paradigm dealers in Canada). Not a single guy working there and selling them would actually buy them and put them in their home. I get the appeal - they're pretty inexpensive and some of them are actually quite good value. The Atom is a great little speaker and the Titan is not bad and they have a nice little one with an 8 inch woofer (monitor 3 I believe) not perfect but they were punchy and fairly refined.

People like them and they get good press (so does everything) the trick is trying to read between the lines. The midrange lower treble that is a deal breaker for me on most of their speakers. The floorstanders since the very good V2 series seem to sound hollow and boxy. They sound like Home theater speakers. I suppose it will come down to taste because plenty of their competitors pretty much sound and do the same sorts of things. But then that was the point in suggesting different designs. They may be more about nuance and subtlety and micro-dynamics rather slam. Of course if you listen to rock and movies then it makes sense. It is a new era after all and nobody really listens to classical or jazz anymore. Walking through the big box music chains tell us this clearly.

[D. Paul Navigator]

RGA: I agree with description that high end speakers are rather boring by the surround standards. However the people that drop tens of thousands of dollars are looking for accuracy above all else (typical of Thiel). The European market (less emphasis on bass) tends to follow this style of sound more than the American way of in your face sound.

[RGA]

RGA: I agree with description that high end speakers are rather boring by the surround standards. However the people that drop tens of thousands of dollars are looking for accuracy above all else (typical of Thiel). The European market (less emphasis on bass) tends to follow this style of sound more than the American way of in your face sound.

There is a balance of the extremes. I believe a speaker needs to play ALL music to a very high degree - if it can't then it can;t be called an accurate loudspeaker. Audiophiles may like dynamically inept loudspeakers and they may spend $10 grand on them - but accurate they most certainly ain't. The other extreme is the speaker that can rock the house down like Cerwin Vega but have pathetic tonality, timbral accuracy, micro-dynamics, nuance, etc. IMO both speakers are not desirable "unless" your music catalog resides in one or the other camp and never ever dips into the other. Thiel is in the former camp, but ask it to do the other camp they are woefully lacking in every regard. Ultimately the user has a budget and a music collection and you need to know what music you listen to more often and forget being a part of the "hi-fi acceptance" club buying stuff that other people will view as "high-end." If you listen to 80% rock and roll and care more about how it sounds you don;t go and buy any Thiel loudspeaker just to tell people "I'm an audiophile - see I bought Thiel" and the good and the great will say you did good. No you buy a balls to the wall loudspeaker that does a credible job for other kinds of music. Indeed, I have a cheap and cheerful speaker that does just that in the Wharfedale Vanguard (is an upgraded 3 driver version of the classic E-70) For rock this thing will kill a Thiel. http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/hfw/oldeworldehtml/wharfedalee70.html for classical the Thiels will kill the Wharfedale - but since most people listen to more rock and roll they make more sense - and save a pile of cash.

The Gallo 3.5 for instance is a dream rock and roll speaker with studio pedigree and lack of colouration that it can do justice to classical and jazz. But I'd need to have it in my house for a while to see what I can get from it from tubes or single ended amps. The treble hash I heard is likely due to the SS amp that was being run.

You're certainly correct that EU tends to like speakers of the polite restrained variety - but I also think that is shifting. Their market is similar - all the speakers were largely of one type and so everyone heard the same kind of sounding BBC dipped loudspeaker or 20 varieties of the LS/3 - while in North America everyone gets a 3-5 driver slim box. I would personally avoid both kinds because neither can play all music - I listen to everything from Beethoven to Johnny Cash to Madonna, to Slayer to Coltrane and IMO a speaker and system needs to make me believe that what I am listening to is like the real thing - it needs to be able to pound in the midbass when called for and it needs to be wholly out of the way when a solo pianist is playing. The list of what I have heard that can do both ends is very very small and mostly very expensive.

[blackraven]

YBA, great pick up on that Rega Apollo SE CDP! It's a fantastic player and I would put it up players costing thousands more.

For speakers, I would consider a pair of PSB Synchrony's if they are in your budget. Awesome sounding speaker. They blow away the Paradigm Signature series in every aspect.

[YBArcam]

I'm still really excited about the Apollo. While I'm sure I'll enjoy it once it's fixed, given the problems that seem to plague these Rega players, I don't know that I'll hang onto it for more than two years. I'm thinking it's likely I'll sell it while it still has a year of warranty remaining and I may purchase an Arcam CD17 or something like that. Or perhaps something entirely different. Then again, if the Rega is flawless over the next two years then I might just keep it. But it'll have to be flawless, or with very, very minor issues. But if it acts funny then I don't think I'd want to risk keeping it past 3 years.

Thanks for the PSB recommendation. I would go for the One, and it would appear to be a great speaker for my application. Over my budget though. If I can get a deal on them (like a demo model or something) I'll be sure to give them a try. The Paradigm dealer here also carries PSB. So I will ask about them.

[frenchmon]

The Gallo 3.5 for instance is a dream rock and roll speaker with studio pedigree and lack of colouration that it can do justice to classical and jazz. But I'd need to have it in my house for a while to see what I can get from it from tubes or single ended amps. The treble hash I heard is likely due to the SS amp that was being run.


RGA...the more I read from you, the more I find myself in disagreement with you, but thats no biggie your ears are your ears and mine are mine...first your opinion on Paradigm and owners, I know sales persons who do in fact love them and own them, and keep them. I am a Paradigm owner as well...and now on the Gallo Reference 3.5's. While the speaker is transparent its not sterile and may I add, has emotion. I've listen to it for a while through a tube amp and hybrid preamp and it was a wonderful sounding speaker. I listen to Jazz classical, blues and a little rock and the speaker performed just fine....its just not a traditional looking speaker, and they are not as tall as they seem to be from looking at the image on the internet.

[frenchmon]

YBA, great pick up on that Rega Apollo SE CDP! It's a fantastic player and I would put it up players costing thousands more.

For speakers, I would consider a pair of PSB Synchrony's if they are in your budget. Awesome sounding speaker. They blow away the Paradigm Signature series in every aspect.

Raven...I have heard the Signature speakers and I thought they where a nice speaker. Not hard on the ear, but a nice lively tweeter and a great mid-section that held your attention to what it was doing. This speaker has emotion and is not a boring speaker at all. Not a laid back speaker and not a speaker to be in your face either. They require good power to get them to sound like they where made to sound.

The PSB Synchrony or any PSB speaker I have never heard. Can you kindly describe the speaker? I suspect they are two different sounding speaker from reading a few reviews....they seem to be more laid back and sterile from what I gather.

[frenchmon]

Indeed, I have a cheap and cheerful speaker that does just that in the Wharfedale Vanguard (is an upgraded 3 driver version of the classic E-70) For rock this thing will kill a Thiel. http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/hfw/olde...fedalee70.html for classical the Thiels will kill the Wharfedale - but since most people listen to more rock and roll they make more sense - and save a pile of cash.

Here's the thing that really gets me, and I know I do it, and am guilty of it as well. But when it really boils down, Some place on this planet some one is disagreeing with your dogmas and a write-ups dogmas about Thiel speakers or any speaker. Thats why a good listen to gear is always important to determine if it moves us one way or another.

Now I've listened to Thiels and I do find them boring speakers...but that's because I like a more lively speaker with more sparkle in the upper ranges of sound. And I've learned over the years, that a Nissan is not my cupatea...ima more of a Toyota kinda guy. Same with audio gear and speakers. Would I say a Nissa really is better than Toyota and will kick the Nissan's butt? I have, but in wisdom, I know that one is probably not better than the other, and it all comes down to taste and needs...In other words its all subjective in the end. So while I think my favorite speaker Canton is much more better than your Audio Note brand of Speakers, they really are not due to preferences in sound, and it would be better in wisdom if we act like its just a matter of taste rather than superiority. That way we wont come off as looking like a total snob and a jerk who knows everything about what is to be known about the subject...Unless of course, you value your ego over the feelings of people we interact with often. There is a way of saying it to smooth it out rather than mine is better than yours, and that settles it. ....Mr Kal Rubinson who also shares in your writing passion and contributes to online forums has wisdom...he understands its a matter of taste rather than mine is better.

[LeRoy]

Congrats on your Rega Apollo player. As you mentioned in your earlier post, you might decide to keep it if it really performs to your expectations. Since that might turn out to be the case have you already auditioned the Apollo with Rega speakers? Is the Rega speaker a consideration for you?

I am going to Austin,TX next weekend to meet with an audio retailer that carries Rega and Kudos speakers and I will be making direct comparisons between both. The retailer should also have an Apollo on hand for demo and I've been wanting to compare the Apollo to the M.F. XRAY so I will take that along with me. I'll be posting my interpretations on what I think I heard.

LeRoy

[Mr Peabody]

LeRoy that should be an interesting shoot out, look forward to your report.

[YBArcam]

Congrats on your Rega Apollo player. As you mentioned in your earlier post, you might decide to keep it if it really performs to your expectations. Since that might turn out to be the case have you already auditioned the Apollo with Rega speakers? Is the Rega speaker a consideration for you?

I am going to Austin,TX next weekend to meet with an audio retailer that carries Rega and Kudos speakers and I will be making direct comparisons between both. The retailer should also have an Apollo on hand for demo and I've been wanting to compare the Apollo to the M.F. XRAY so I will take that along with me. I'll be posting my interpretations on what I think I heard.

LeRoy

I might be wrong about all this, but I'm a little wary of Rega speakers. Not that they are bad or have reliability issues or anything like that, but just because Rega is known as one of those flat-earth brands. My experience with flat-earth sound is that it's just not my cup of tea. Naim for example, is often criticized for sounding thin and not doing those audiophile things (soundstaging, detail) all that well. I heard a Naim system and my impressions were exactly that. I've come to realize that I enjoy these things when listening. Part of the reason I moved on from Exposure was also due to the thinner sound.

I opted for the Apollo because I really like using Rega players, and it's got a reputation for being successfully used in many different kinds of systems. If it gives me some of the pace Rega is known for, and the rest of my system gives me the other stuff I like, I figured that might work. And it seemed to while the Apollo was working.

I've read that Rega turntables play just a little bit fast. I wonder if their CD players employ a similar kind of trick.

[RGA]

RGA...the more I read from you, the more I find myself in disagreement with you, but thats no biggie your ears are your ears and mine are mine...first your opinion on Paradigm and owners, I know sales persons who do in fact love them and own them, and keep them. I am a Paradigm owner as well...and now on the Gallo Reference 3.5's. While the speaker is transparent its not sterile and may I add, has emotion. I've listen to it for a while through a tube amp and hybrid preamp and it was a wonderful sounding speaker. I listen to Jazz classical, blues and a little rock and the speaker performed just fine....its just not a traditional looking speaker, and they are not as tall as they seem to be from looking at the image on the internet.

I think you read my post incorrectly. I chose Gallo as one of the 5 best sub $10k rooms I auditioned at CES. I think it would have been better with better (likely tube) amplifiers. It still made my top 5 with SS amps. As for Paradigm, IMO there is better for less in the Studio price range and up. The monitor line down is fine enough for the price. I have not been impressed with anything from them since the V2 series. Here is my Gallo Coverage http://www.dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=713

[RGA]

Now I've listened to Thiels and I do find them boring speakers...but that's because I like a more lively speaker with more sparkle in the upper ranges of sound. And I've learned over the years, that a Nissan is not my cupatea...ima more of a Toyota kinda guy. Same with audio gear and speakers. Would I say a Nissa really is better than Toyota and will kick the Nissan's butt? I have, but in wisdom, I know that one is probably not better than the other, and it all comes down to taste and needs...In other words its all subjective in the end. So while I think my favorite speaker Canton is much more better than your Audio Note brand of Speakers, they really are not due to preferences in sound, and it would be better in wisdom if we act like its just a matter of taste rather than superiority. That way we wont come off as looking like a total snob and a jerk who knows everything about what is to be known about the subject...Unless of course, you value your ego over the feelings of people we interact with often. There is a way of saying it to smooth it out rather than mine is better than yours, and that settles it. ....Mr Kal Rubinson who also shares in your writing passion and contributes to online forums has wisdom...he understands its a matter of taste rather than mine is better.

Unfortunately I disagree that it's a matter of taste. I believe there are clearly superior sounding amplifiers and speakers. At certain "levels" once there are speakers at that level then it's certainly a matter of taste. Using your car analogy there are clearly very superior vehicles to other vehicles and there are general classifications. For example if you like Sports cars (which we may say are analogous to people who like Rock music) you have cheap but good sports cars like Camero which might be a Gallo that the average person can afford at some point and then there is a Bughatti which will BLOW AWAY a Camaro (maybe that is a top beastly Tannoy). But there is clearly a superior speaker/car.

If however your tastes is for a more laid back sound like a Quad 2905 that is posh sounding then maybe we equate that with a luxury sedan. Maybe the Quad is a nice Toyota Camry or Honda Accord. It's no sports car but it's comfortable. Maybe a top Vandersteen is a Rolls. But again you should be able to tell that one is better than another. The subjectivity of it comes in when you are deciding between two products in the same class - you don't compare the Rolls to a Corolla but you can certainly compare Rolls to a Mayback or Corolla to a Civic. Then of course your personal tastes comes in to play.

Indeed, even if you ONLY look at one manufacturer they themselves sell several models - some companies sell $300 speakers and $60,000 speakers - the latter is going to be a far far superior loudspeaker - it's not a matter of taste. The flagship speaker is better than their cheapest speakers. Thus if that is true why isn't it also true when you cross-compare speakers from different makers? The answer is that it is in most cases.

With Cars I have never owned a car from the same maker more than once. I am not someone that is interested in what a car maker was like 20 years ago or even 3 years ago. I am interested in what they are doing now and how it directly compares against others. They are big corporations that are out for the bottom line. If building quality will gain a foothold they will do it - if resting on their name reputation and building unsafe rubbish will net them a profit then that's what they'll do.

With the American companies building their usual crap, and Toyota doing their best GM impersonation (it's too bad Americans don't seem to get the lemon Aid but they were talking about engine surging problems in 2000 not 2010), and Honda slipping dramatically in reliability I thought it was a good opportunity for the South Koreans to step up and gain a nice foothold into the market. And what do you know the horrible little Pony days are over and reading the Elantra stomp everything in it's class and Kia not far behind and both offering far better warranties to go with it - they're objectively superior to most of the stuff in their price class. But people are very tied to name brands and will only buy a Ford or only buy a Toyota(even if it will kill them).

I like a lot of different stereos and dislike a lot of them. One man's opinion.

[YBArcam]

Not to get into a car thing, but Ford is kicking butt now. Building great cars that are reliable and fuel efficient. My '97 Grand Prix keeps going strong, no major issues. I'm glad I didn't spend $5K more for a comparably equipped Accord or Camry. And the Grand Prix looks way sweeter to boot. Always been an American car guy, probably always will. I've always preferred the styling and performance (low end torque). Frankly, the talk that Americans built crap and Japanese built quality reached hyperbolic levels. If you listened to people, you'd think every single American car was a lemon, and all you had to do with a Japanese car was oil changes and nothing would ever go wrong.

[frenchmon]

I think you read my post incorrectly. I chose Gallo as one of the 5 best sub $10k rooms I auditioned at CES. I think it would have been better with better (likely tube) amplifiers. It still made my top 5 with SS amps. As for Paradigm, IMO there is better for less in the Studio price range and up. The monitor line down is fine enough for the price. I have not been impressed with anything from them since the V2 series. Here is my Gallo Coverage http://www.dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=713

Pardon me if I miss understood. As for Paradigm...im sure you may find better for less. I wont argue that point. That is most certainly the case with a lot of things. I relly have not been impressed with the monitor series above v3.

[frenchmon]

Unfortunately I disagree that it's a matter of taste. I believe there are clearly superior sounding amplifiers and speakers. At certain "levels" once there are speakers at that level then it's certainly a matter of taste. Using your car analogy there are clearly very superior vehicles to other vehicles and there are general classifications. For example if you like Sports cars (which we may say are analogous to people who like Rock music) you have cheap but good sports cars like Camero which might be a Gallo that the average person can afford at some point and then there is a Bughatti which will BLOW AWAY a Camaro (maybe that is a top beastly Tannoy). But there is clearly a superior speaker/car.

Please don't miss my point, and perhaps I should have been a bit more clear...its about apples to apples and not oranges to oranges.


If however your tastes is for a more laid back sound like a Quad 2905 that is posh sounding then maybe we equate that with a luxury sedan. Maybe the Quad is a nice Toyota Camry or Honda Accord. It's no sports car but it's comfortable. Maybe a top Vandersteen is a Rolls. But again you should be able to tell that one is better than another. The subjectivity of it comes in when you are deciding between two products in the same class - you don't compare the Rolls to a Corolla but you can certainly compare Rolls to a Mayback or Corolla to a Civic. Then of course your personal tastes comes in to play.

Yes thats the point...apples to apples.


Indeed, even if you ONLY look at one manufacturer they themselves sell several models - some companies sell $300 speakers and $60,000 speakers - the latter is going to be a far far superior loudspeaker - it's not a matter of taste. The flagship speaker is better than their cheapest speakers. Thus if that is true why isn't it also true when you cross-compare speakers from different makers? The answer is that it is in most cases.

With Cars I have never owned a car from the same maker more than once. I am not someone that is interested in what a car maker was like 20 years ago or even 3 years ago. I am interested in what they are doing now and how it directly compares against others. They are big corporations that are out for the bottom line. If building quality will gain a foothold they will do it - if resting on their name reputation and building unsafe rubbish will net them a profit then that's what they'll do.

With the American companies building their usual crap, and Toyota doing their best GM impersonation (it's too bad Americans don't seem to get the lemon Aid but they were talking about engine surging problems in 2000 not 2010), and Honda slipping dramatically in reliability I thought it was a good opportunity for the South Koreans to step up and gain a nice foothold into the market. And what do you know the horrible little Pony days are over and reading the Elantra stomp everything in it's class and Kia not far behind and both offering far better warranties to go with it - they're objectively superior to most of the stuff in their price class. But people are very tied to name brands and will only buy a Ford or only buy a Toyota(even if it will kill them).

I like a lot of different stereos and dislike a lot of them. One man's opinion.

The whole point of the conversation was not automobiles...but being dogmatic in what we believe is superior gear. I have my favorites...just as well as the next audio hobbyist. But I think it be wise not to kick his gear to the ground as junk and put mine on a pedestal as the end all solution. That was my only point.

[frenchmon]

Not to get into a car thing, but Ford is kicking butt now. Building great cars that are reliable and fuel efficient. My '97 Grand Prix keeps going strong, no major issues. I'm glad I didn't spend $5K more for a comparably equipped Accord or Camry. And the Grand Prix looks way sweeter to boot. Always been an American car guy, probably always will. I've always preferred the styling and performance (low end torque). Frankly, the talk that Americans built crap and Japanese built quality reached hyperbolic levels. If you listened to people, you'd think every single American car was a lemon, and all you had to do with a Japanese car was oil changes and nothing would ever go wrong.

YBA....I agree that Ford is doing an outstanding job with their new cars. I also think they where the only ones not taking the bail-out. I also think GM is doing a good job as well as Chrysler at the come back. If any one needs a new car its me...just ask MrP...he has road in my hoopty more than once and im sure he will tell you that thing stinks. Its a 1992 Saturn. and its raggaly to the max. But the problem is I hate car notes. Im trying to hold on to it as long as possible.

That Ford Taurus is just a fine automobile. That thing is on my list as well as that new Buick... if I can get over the car note thing. I also agree that the talk about American cars being junk is also untrue. I have personally owned one Japaneses car in my life and it was a Subaru. Now my wife is a different story...if it does not have a Toyota or Lexus symbol on it..she wont have it.

[blackraven]

Frenchmon, I'm not dissing the Paradigm S series. They are a nice sounding speaker. But the PSB Synchrony's at $3K and $5K have better bass, and a smoother midrange and treble. They present a wider sound stage and have more detail, resolution as well as an over all more balanced if not warmer sound. A good friend mine owns a pair of the $5k Synchrony's and before he bought them (he bought them online based on a Stereophile review with out hearing them first) I went with him and auditioned the Paradigm S series. The Paradigms had more of an aggressive in your face sound.

I've heard the PSB's on my friends system which consists of an AR Tube line stage preamp, Bells Hot rod amp and the Marantz SA8001 CDP. He recently upgraded his amp to a $5K pair of Nuforce REF-9se monoblocks and the speakers still sound awesome if not better.

The problem with comparing speakers is that most of the time the other equipment and setting is different, so it's almost like comparing apples to oranges. They are both types of fruit but they are very different.

[YBArcam]

The new Taurus seems to be a great performer. The exterior to me, I'm not sure if it works. But the interior styling is top notch.

The new Buick Lacrosse, it just looks flat out beautiful, both inside and out. If I were buying now I'd probably get a Ford Fusion. But that Lacrosse would be tough to turn down. The new Regal also looks great. And the new Focus, of course it's definitely a class or two below these other cars, but it looks amazing for a small car. They are bringing over the European model, which has always been well regarded and is more upscale than our Focus has been.

I don't mind if this thread veers off topic, and I'm sure that won't last long. Cars seem to be a passion for many people. I'll bring it back on topic when I listen to some more speakers (hopefully in a week's time). Of course, on-topic posts like the above are always welcome!

I'll definitely try to listen to a pair of Synchony One's, if they are on the dealer's floor. blackraven, what do you think of the Imagine line? They seem to be on par with the Studio line from Paradigm, but unfortunately there is no bookshelf model with a 6.5" driver.

[frenchmon]

Frenchmon, I'm not dissing the Paradigm S series. They are a nice sounding speaker. But the PSB Synchrony's at $3K and $5K have better bass, and a smoother midrange and treble. They present a wider sound stage and have more detail, resolution as well as an over all more balanced if not warmer sound. A good friend mine owns a pair of the $5k Synchrony's and before he bought them (he bought them online based on a Stereophile review with out hearing them first) I went with him and auditioned the Paradigm S series. The Paradigms had more of an aggressive in your face sound.

I've heard the PSB's on my friends system which consists of an AR Tube line stage preamp, Bells Hot rod amp and the Marantz SA8001 CDP. He recently upgraded his amp to a $5K pair of Nuforce REF-9se monoblocks and the speakers still sound awesome if not better.

The problem with comparing speakers is that most of the time the other equipment and setting is different, so it's almost like comparing apples to oranges. They are both types of fruit but they are very different.

Thanks Raven....I cant wait to hear a pair. Every review I read is like awesome. Problem is no place around hear has them. One day MrPeabody and I will have to take a trip up to Kansas City or Chicago to listen to some gear.

[RGA]

Not to get into a car thing, but Ford is kicking butt now. Building great cars that are reliable and fuel efficient. My '97 Grand Prix keeps going strong, no major issues. I'm glad I didn't spend $5K more for a comparably equipped Accord or Camry. And the Grand Prix looks way sweeter to boot. Always been an American car guy, probably always will. I've always preferred the styling and performance (low end torque). Frankly, the talk that Americans built crap and Japanese built quality reached hyperbolic levels. If you listened to people, you'd think every single American car was a lemon, and all you had to do with a Japanese car was oil changes and nothing would ever go wrong.

I think the hyperbole was not hyperbole but based on hard statistics. This is not to say that certain American models were not always quite decent or that there were not some Japanese models that were overrated junkers but the Lemon-Aid combined with CR (and I say combined because the Lemon-Aid catches a lot of what CR misses) that overall Toyota and Honda are FAR more reliable motor vehicles "overall" than GM, Ford, and Chrysler. In some cases a comparable GM and Ford will fail 10 times more often or more over a 10 year period. Those kinds of facts however will be ignored completely if you're the one guy in a 100 that has his Cavelier last 20 years and 400,000 miles with nary a problem. It's just that the 90 other guys will have it self destruct at 170,000 miles and 8 others won't get past 50,000 without a myriad of trouble.

But like I said if you are a Toyota guy you make fun of American car owners but as you note Ford is making some decent cars - and some very good ones - while Toyota is making death traps. So it's not a good idea to be "anti-American car" or "Pro-Japanese" because as you correctly note the tides shift. For years Ford was a laughing stock and they're working to change that. Kia and Hyundai were an absolute joke and now they're most certainly not. No they won't appeal to the style folks but they will appeal to the people who bought Toyota for their reliability. The Elantra recently got 5 stars in the Lemon-Aid which heavily focuses on reliability and price and features and ride and comfort. Honda Civic got 3 stars and costs more. Corolla got 2 stars and that's not counting their problems. But for 15 or so solid years or so the Civic was the 5 star champ in its class. And I must say it was certainly the most reliable car I have ever owned. It even went up hills better than my Pontiac Grand Am which was a V6. The civic was incomparably a better vehicle than the Grand Am. Though yes it looked better.

Just as an side - the Camero was the only GM I believe that got 5 stars in the Used car Lemon Aid - it got great scores in front and side crash ratings as well. You have to view cars model specific IMO not the company.

I suppose it depends on what you want from a vehicle. I don't really care what they look like since I can't see the outside of it while I am behind the wheel.

[poppachubby]

My assessment of Paradigm is that they are chameloen like, depends on the amplification. I have heard the same pair suck and then rock by simply switching amps.

Rich it is wrong for you and I to diss Paradigm as we must support all things Canuck. We must spread our influence globally, one pair of speakers at a time. Once they are all in place, we can activate the listening devices we have planted in them, and crush our enemies.

You Yanks don';t stand a chance, MMMMWWWHHAHAHAHhahahhahahaaaaaaaaa......

[blackraven]

YBA, I havent heard the Imagine line but the reviews on the line are good. The Image T-6 is a good speaker as well. It uses some of the same tech. as the Synchrony's.

Here's a link to some discounted Synchrony one's.

http://www.soundseller.com/index.php/cPath/25

[bobsticks]

Unfortunately I disagree that it's a matter of taste. I believe there are clearly superior sounding amplifiers and speakers. At certain "levels" once there are speakers at that level then it's certainly a matter of taste. Using your car analogy there are clearly very superior vehicles to other vehicles and there are general classifications...stuff...

I think you're on dangerous ground here in that A) your own argument disproves itself B) from a standpoint of of logical consistency that argument is unsuccessful, and C) you are, successfully managing to conjure the image of Melvin Walker.

Many if not most audiiophiles judge aspeakers value by it's capability to perform certain tasks to a level comensurate with their approval. Imaging? Check. Midrange lushness? Check...etc. A greater majority of the planet, however, wants their music to be palatable to their tastes for simple aesthetic reasons, charts be damned.

Things seem to get a bit closer when you analogize luxury cars because so many "qualitative" judgements within that realm are subjective. Let's face it, anything above a boombox or an iPod these days is a luxury...and caveat emptor don't buy stuff by reputation, graphs, charts or any other such rubbish.

My point, and my only point, is that whatever sounds best to someone in their room, with their gear is "best" for them. I think you and I, RGA, have similar tastes and similar conclusions, but we arrive to them by different routes...:D

[RGA]

When it comes to the way I listen - the first thing my ear is drawn to is this:

Do i hear the woofer separate from the rest of the speaker or a mismatch - I'm quite sensitive to it and I would say 99% of every system exhibits the problem and it's why I don't like most stereo systems (which may be odd coming from a reviewer). But there it is. It bothers me. Now I try and set that aside as best as I can and just accept the fact that I can hear the drivers operating as separate and not cohesively. So i try and find the ones that do it better than others. B&W for instance with the tweeter on top - well I ALWAYS hear the tweeter on top. They always sound like a gap and not just their look but it seems something is missing when the top of the midwoofer's passband where the tweeter picks up the rest of the notes. Quad and AN and a few others note the importance of the crossover but also of the physical materials used in the woofer and tweeter. If a note is carried through from one driver to the next it would make sense that both drivers are made from materials that compliment each other so that when it is physically outputting a frequency the resonance signature of the material somewhat matches the driver handing off the note. Quad wrote about this for their boxed speakers and of course they would consider this critical because they make electrostats which are single drivers.

Not everyone notices this failing but I suspect a lot of Electrostatic and Lowther owners tend to be bothered by some of this as well which is why they swear by those designs. While others either don't notice it or simply don't listen carefully enough, or even care so long as the soundstage is good and it has a flattish frequency response. Speakers like Paradigm to me are immediately obviously loudspeakers. I hear all the drivers and the box resonance instantly and it bugs me. I have tried Paradigm for 20 years with loads of equipment and it just doesn't sound like live, it sounds like plastic and has a presence on every disc - it just doesn't go away. I don't get the appeal. I got the 100V2 though because it had big loud powerful controlled sound (not cohesive but not much for the money is) and it had an attractive price and it was very very well built. Then the 100V3 came out cost 30% more money - worse build, less bass, sounded thin and I could hear an obvious box echo - I notice they got rid of that version faster than usual as many felt the same way I did - the V2 was better. I still say the 100V2 was one of the better floorstanding speaker values I heard over the decade. It offered a LOT of everything for $2k.

Anyway, that might explain where my ear is coming from and perhaps why multi-way speakers tend to have problems for me. Thiel for instance you have to sit way back for their drivers to sound coherent. The problem for me then is that I am so darn far away from them that I want to put up the volume. But they also are not terribly good on macrodynamics and so they don't really have any impact. It all sounds polite and as if I am in the back row of the hall. If I am going to go down the polite refined and not so great dynamic route I would buy a Quad or a King Sound - those are very coherent and have more resolution and a "window to the event" kind of presentation that Thiel and Vandersteen don't possess.

Even the Gallo which I like was not cohesive - the woofer made itself known - it's just that I think it has the speed articulation and impact that if you can get the positioning right you can probably get them in sync with more time and trials. And even if you can't it does have those other strengths and the sheer ability to blow you into next week. A speaker needs to do that IMO. If it can't play AC/DC at level then why would anyone think it could possibly play Beethoven's 9th credibly.

At the end of the day 90% or more of music playback resides in the midrange. A speaker like the Teresonic Ingenium is a speaker that makes a strong case against any multi-way speaker. Same of the Slilbatone Aporia single driver. There is a lot of bass - not the slam of a multi-way but none of them are even remotely close to capturing the midrange as cohesively. Some two ways like the AN E but the list is very small that I have heard - the E and J get away with it because they're further away from the listener and in the corner. The time deal from side walls are non existent so everything is coming from pretty much the same place resulting in a time correct presentation (though the speaker is deliberately stepped out) Other speakers like the Green Mountain Audio stuff may be as well but I have not heard any of them so I can't say. Single drivers and electrostats and pure ribbons would also be cohesive but they lack credible bass unless they're stupid large.

Sorry I am writing this at 2am so with luck some of the above is remotely coherent.

[YBArcam]

It's great that you mention that, RGA. Driver integration is something that I picked up on after hearing my Quad 12L2 for the first time, and I've written about it (albeit on other websites). Before the Quads I didn't really notice, or perhaps I did but I thought that's how speakers are, so I didn't pay it much mind. But with the Quads, the highs just mixed in so well with the lows and mids that it was really quite remarkable. I would say that it is the speaker's biggest strength. Is it enough for me to keep them? I'm not sure, but I'm quite fond of the Quads all around, so perhaps I will. Ultimately I'm looking for more scale and detail, perhaps a little deeper bass, but this is nitpicking somewhat as the 12L2 isn't horrible in these respects.

I'd say the PMC did an excellent job at driver integration as well. My old Monitor Audio RS5 did not, and I don't think it helped much that the highs were so much louder than everything else. I've also owned the Wharfedale Evo2-10, and of course my old Tannoy Mercury F2 and my first speaker, which was the Energy Connoisseur C-1. It's been too long for me to give an honest appraisal of those, but I'm quite certain that they were not on par with my 12L2.

I would have thought Paradigm and Monitor Audio use materials in both drivers that compliment each other, as the drivers they employ are both metal. But I'm sure there is more to it than that.

I am honestly surprised at how many folks seem to dislike the Studio series from Paradigm. The reviews really make the speaker seem like a leader at it's price point (I realize a lot of reviews do this), and I notice that it seems to do well in the used market. I'll just have to hear a pair for myself I guess.

[frenchmon]

It's great that you mention that, RGA. Driver integration is something that I picked up on after hearing my Quad 12L2 for the first time, and I've written about it (albeit on other websites). Before the Quads I didn't really notice, or perhaps I did but I thought that's how speakers are, so I didn't pay it much mind. But with the Quads, the highs just mixed in so well with the lows and mids that it was really quite remarkable. I would say that it is the speaker's biggest strength. Is it enough for me to keep them? I'm not sure, but I'm quite fond of the Quads all around, so perhaps I will. Ultimately I'm looking for more scale and detail, perhaps a little deeper bass, but this is nitpicking somewhat as the 12L2 isn't horrible in these respects.

I'd say the PMC did an excellent job at driver integration as well. My old Monitor Audio RS5 did not, and I don't think it helped much that the highs were so much louder than everything else. I've also owned the Wharfedale Evo2-10, and of course my old Tannoy Mercury F2 and my first speaker, which was the Energy Connoisseur C-1. It's been too long for me to give an honest appraisal of those, but I'm quite certain that they were not on par with my 12L2.

I would have thought Paradigm and Monitor Audio use materials in both drivers that compliment each other, as the drivers they employ are both metal. But I'm sure there is more to it than that.

I am honestly surprised at how many folks seem to dislike the Studio series from Paradigm. The reviews really make the speaker seem like a leader at it's price point (I realize a lot of reviews do this), and I notice that it seems to do well in the used market. I'll just have to hear a pair for myself I guess.

Well..I am for one that dont have a problem with the Studio or Signature series from Paradigm. I like them both.

[RGA]

I am honestly surprised at how many folks seem to dislike the Studio series from Paradigm. The reviews really make the speaker seem like a leader at it's price point (I realize a lot of reviews do this), and I notice that it seems to do well in the used market. I'll just have to hear a pair for myself I guess.

As my dealer said - he has speakers he carries to sell and speakers he carries to own. Paradigm is a speaker he carries to sell. There are speakers that get great reviews and speakers that the reviewers keep. Which isn't to say that if the reviewer doesn't keep it it's not good but you can read between the lines.

[YBArcam]

It begs the question then. Are these reviews full of lies about the quality of these speakers?

Like you said, the fact that most, or even all, of Studio 20 reviewers elect not to buy the speakers doesn't mean they are bad. It's not like there are hundreds of Studio 20 reviews out there. So there might be ten reviews. A reviewer could love the speakers but perhaps they elect to spend a little bit more and get something better, or they might buy something in the same price range (after all, there are lots of options at each price level - there is no shame in speaker X being passed over for a pair of ProAc's, for instance).

But either the reviewers mean what they say, or they are lying. Either the Paradigm 20 is a great speaker, and one they could easily live with even if they actually chose something else, or the reviews are bunk.

[frenchmon]

As my dealer said - he has speakers he carries to sell and speakers he carries to own. Paradigm is a speaker he carries to sell. There are speakers that get great reviews and speakers that the reviewers keep. Which isn't to say that if the reviewer doesn't keep it it's not good but you can read between the lines.

Well you need to talk to Kal Rubinson...because he is a reviewer who has a pair in his system. I also know those who sell them down in Carolina and also own them. From reading your postings between the lines... you make it sound like no one likes them....and we all know that's far from the truth. They have a large following in may places....here is one such place.http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=559431

IF what you say is the majority, them Paradigm would have stopped selling them by now, but that's not the case. IF you don't like a product then that's fine, but to make it seem like its across the board that no one likes them is just not right RGA..

[frenchmon]

It begs the question then. Are these reviews full of lies about the quality of these speakers?

IF I whee you, I would take whats being said with a grain of salt.


Like you said, the fact that most, or even all, of Studio 20 reviewers elect not to buy the speakers doesn't mean they are bad. It's not like there are hundreds of Studio 20 reviews out there. So there might be ten reviews. A reviewer could love the speakers but perhaps they elect to spend a little bit more and get something better, or they might buy something in the same price range (after all, there are lots of options at each price level - there is no shame in speaker X being passed over for a pair of ProAc's, for instance).

I agree...that does not make the studio 20's bad. I've listen to that speaker and almost got a pair my self...its a fine speaker. I was just to cheap at the time.


But either the reviewers mean what they say, or they are lying. Either the Paradigm 20 is a great speaker, and one they could easily live with even if they actually chose something else, or the reviews are bunk.

The Studio 20 is a great speaker. At lease to my ears and hundreds of other who have heard them. And Paradigm sells a lots of them. The worst version for the 20's was the v4 series. The Version 5 is just out standing from what I've heard. IF you dont believe me go ask those over at AVS.com

[YBArcam]

Thanks frenchmon. Don't worry, I'm still really excited about hearing the 20's and anticipate that they will be excellent.

[Mr Peabody]

I feel it's as Frenchmon was saying earlier each person has their own preference and reviewers aren't immune. I've heard speakers I liked well enough but would not buy. Gallo is one example. I cannot pinpoint what it is about them but I wouldn't buy a pair. I feel as RGA mentioned a bit of lack in coherency and the highs sometimes doesn't sound natural. With that being said I really enjoyed the few times I heard them. I liked Thiel well enough just not my personal desire in presentation. Then there are some speakers I dislike and I will refrain from examples. Then there are speakers I've heard and wish I could own a pair of each but since I don't have the room nor the funds have to pick my favorite and stick with that until something unseats it. I'm fortunate enough I now have my mainstay Dynaudio and an set of Klipsch Heresy to play with. I would also love to have a pair of Martin Logan. Then there are speakers you think you hate and a model or series comes along to sway your opinion or at least convinces you the company can put out listenable speakers like Klipsch. I don't take back the bashing I've given them in the past because they truly do have some bombs with their name on them but I have learned they have some good models as well. You all also must keep in mind that speaker companies have different approaches or designs and not just one is correct. As much as Dynaudio is my favorite I still enjoy good Klipsch and it's just two different presentations. I don't see why any one feels they have to be locked into any one type of presentation. It would also seem as a reviewer they should have a couple different types of speakers around for comparison and for synergy check. Most pro reviews I've read the writer usually has a couple different amps and sources around. I wouldn't hold up the fact that you can't find a reviewer with Paradigm as any type of statement. I'm sure there would be if you looked hard enough. There was a writer for I believe old Stereo Review who used Vandersteen. When I heard what Vandersteen actually sounded like I pretty much disregarded his reviews. I knew his ears and mine weren't going to like the same thing.

RGA, I like Paradigm as well but do not own them but if I did I would find you totally offensive. It's not enough for you to say Paradigm simply doesn't appeal to you, and you can even state why you think it's so but instead you have to make it sound like those who do own Paradigm buy out of ignorance, blindly or having hearing deficiencies.

[RGA]

It begs the question then. Are these reviews full of lies about the quality of these speakers?

Like you said, the fact that most, or even all, of Studio 20 reviewers elect not to buy the speakers doesn't mean they are bad. It's not like there are hundreds of Studio 20 reviews out there. So there might be ten reviews. A reviewer could love the speakers but perhaps they elect to spend a little bit more and get something better, or they might buy something in the same price range (after all, there are lots of options at each price level - there is no shame in speaker X being passed over for a pair of ProAc's, for instance).

But either the reviewers mean what they say, or they are lying. Either the Paradigm 20 is a great speaker, and one they could easily live with even if they actually chose something else, or the reviews are bunk.

Let me clear this up. I did say that it doesn't mean a reviewer doesn't like a speaker because he doesn't buy it. I like a lot of speakers that I didn't buy. You note correctly that there are reasons - if the reviewer's budget is $10k and he loves a $2k speaker he may feel it's the best speaker for the money but his budget is much higher and chooses to buy a better speaker. A Ferrari owner may like a Camero at $30k and thinks it's great but it's not a Ferrari. I did say that in my prior post so no the reviewers are not lying in this kind of instance. And there may be other issues like aesthetics, power requirements which could be legit.

That having been said and cleared up the issue I raise is that the review industry especially print media but online as well is about increasing readership - the more readership the more advertising revenue can be attained. The more positive reviews the happier the manufacturers and the more they will advertise. It's a business and the review press is not really "hard news" press no matter what they claim it to be.

Positive reviews means more happy manufacturers and more advertising space and more money generated for the owners of the magazine. My personal belief is that it would be "more" beneficial to the manufacturers of what I consider to be the "elite" gear to get praise they deserve and for the majority (and in my opinion it is the majority) of the overrated high end to be called out as such. I believe the premise that Arthur Salvatore argued years ago that looking at Stereophile under J. Gordon Holt there were 7 class A products in total when the magazine had no advertising. Even when they went to advertising in 1985 there was still a total of 9 class A components. When JA took over and the magazine has huge advertising there were 104 components with class A status.

Now I am not saying JA is doing anything shady at all - I truly believe he believes what he's doing but at the same time the fact of the matter is it waters down the integrity of such classifications. Especially, when he overrides the view of the reviewer who actually reviewed the products.

People for whatever reason put stock into ratings guides and for appliances and even cars I get that. Looking at the star safety rating of a car might be important to you (it is to me) i want to know if my car does well in front and side and rollover crash tests. It's still not guarantee it will be safer real world but it's bound to be safer than the car that only gets a 2 star rating. But for loudspeakers and other components that are subjective a reviewer IME will always give the product the benefit of the doubt. A speaker that leans bright will be called detailed or neutral or accurate or some term that bends the wording such that the speaker will not be called bright. After all the reviewer knows that what is bright to him may be a little exciting to the average consumer. So he writes the review with such wording. Besides he figures that in another room with mushier amplifiers that it may very well sound better in another person's room. So it gets the stamp of approval. This applies to amplifiers.

And the other problem is that one the one hand people like magazines like UHF because they give negative reviews (to Bryston, Castle, and Paradigm and B&W in review or in their commentary advice section) and they usually do not get products from those manufacturers. Arcam refuses to send them products because they absolutely destroyed one of their amps in a review for basically being a big pile of doggy doo. It's a small community and many companies know about UHF and won't take the risk of a bad review.

Stereophile recently gave rather negative reviews to Bryston's 7b amplifier and a Totem loudspeaker. Then people railed against Stereophile for dumping on them. Ahh - people want negative reviews but not if it is negative about what they bought.

As for Paradigm - I don't believe they're a terrible speaker maker - not at all. Nor do I think people buy them out of ignorance. I think what I would say is they're a good entry into the hi-fi speaker world on a sensible budget. My dealer likes other speakers better as do I but he is a dealer for them for this very reason. This is not an anti-Paradigm commentary - I have had several Paradigm speakers in the running for or my top choice in categories over the years. So in fact I have rated them higher than any other speaker I have auditioned for the money on several occasions so if you get that I dislike them then you should not (though certainly I dislike certain models) - I also dislike the Audio Note AX one and think it's beaten by a lot of better speakers but I don't dislike the company because of a few products I don't think are very good.

I almost bought a Paradigm surround system a time ago, I still think they're subs are some of the best for the money, and I bought an integrated amp based on auditions through Paradigm 100V2 speakers which means I felt the speaker was more than capable. I like more of them than I think I projected with previous posts.

My contention has merely been to try and look to off the beaten pack designs - those are usually the products the dealers tend to "like" and I say that because they're not being carried because they're going to sell very well. A dealer that actually loves music and is an actual audiophile opens shop in the hopes to carry his favorites gear but also has to sell the big name brand marketed stuff. You have to make a living after all. My dealer is probably one of most knowledgeable guys I've met in the industry and carried virtually every high end brand over the last 30 years. He carries stuff like Creek Audio and it doesn't sell well at all. He said he likes it for SS and to him it sounds nicer than the other Solid State amps but it is not well known, it doesn't look anything special and worst of all the name is just not something that rolls off the lips. People are creatures of marketing and if you say the name Creek when discussing audiophile amps - it reminds of a door opening with no oil and you think of that horrible sound. Sounds silly but it's not to far off from the truth. So they say Creek Audio instead. As knowledgeable as he is he notes that 90% of consumers already know what they want when they walk in - they read a review know what they want before really even auditioning - and when they do audition it's not extensive - it is more about confirming to themselves what they read.

With Paradigm one can look at all the similar competitors, PSB, Boston Acoustics, B&W, Dynaudio, Energy and dozens like them. My contention is that it doesn't really much matter which one you buy because they all tend to have a "something similar" presentation so you buy whichever one floats your boat. Dynaudio might have deeper bass prowess, the Energy may be more dynamic, the PSB might be the best balanced, the B&W may have the most extended treble, the Paradigm may have the biggest slam and soundstaging. But these differences are all not that big when one compares them to completely different designs such as single drivers, speakers with lossy cabinets, OB, line arrays, planars or electrostats. And these speaker types are often less carried because they're not mega corp products geared for home theater with matching center channels and surrounds. Paradigm is by no means a poor maker - they're as good as those others. And all those others get equally good reviews you'll notice. Largely because none of them separate themselves from each other.

Lastly part of my problem with some companies is the routine 4-5 year cycle of upgrading (if you can even call it that) of changing models to get new reviews to keep the marketing hype up. My amp has been selling for over 15 years and there is no reason to bother changing it. Look at Musical Fidelity and speakers that add Version 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 etc and ask yourself why they are changing them all the time. It's not to make a better product because often they are not. But if they say it is to FIX a problem then I question why they put something to market with very obvious problems to start with. It's always interesting that the new revolutionary much better than the old model occurs precisely when the product line has finished the review circuit and enter the plateau period. Coincidence I guess.

[poppachubby]

He carries stuff like Creek Audio and it doesn't sell well at all. He said he likes it for SS and to him it sounds nicer than the other Solid State amps but it is not well known, it doesn't look anything special and worst of all the name is just not something that rolls off the lips. People are creatures of marketing and if you say the name Creek when discussing audiophile amps - it reminds of a door opening with no oil and you think of that horrible sound. Sounds silly but it's not to far off from the truth. So they say Creek Audio instead.

Funny you mention this. My local dealer was selling Creek for sometime, but got out for this exact reason. He was down to his last OBH-18 phono stage, a demo model but in mint condition. It just wouldn't sell.

I traded him my USED, but excellent condition Bellari straight up for the Creek. The Bellari sold within a couple of weeks. I am enjoying the Creek far more than the Bellari, so good for me.

Creek is one of many brands for those in the know.

[Mr Peabody]

I agree, I used a Creek phono stage for a long while and had to spend a great deal of money to get what I considered an upgrade in sound. I also liked Creek integrated amps I've heard.

[RGA]

And Creek illustrates the point - it's nothing to look at, it's not marketed, it has a name that people may associate with the squeeky door. Audiophiles will seek it and Sugden (which you could say the same thing about) while most of everyone else will buy the bigger name sexier looking product. Meanwhile audiophile dealers like Terry at Soundhounds are frustrated that people pass it by for something he likes a lot less (MF) that costs more. But he will carry what the people want because if he doesn't someone else will.

This is the problem with the speaker world as well. Some makers have much deeper pockets and take out huge multiple full page ads in every issue of every stereo magazine on the planet. It's like a drumbeat - there is the same ad over and over and over. They can afford to give out multiple speakers to all the magazines for review and pay hundreds of thousands in advertising space. And of course the reviews are good, and then more and more dealers want to carry them. We're creatures of habit - big is better, more is better. Paradigm is sold sold at Mad-Man Macay a semi-box chain and Audio Video Unlimited (a big box chain) and several other home video outlets. You then see them sold everywhere. Big companies must be better than small ones.

I used to get into trouble for my McSpeaker analogy comparing them to McDonalds but I was comparing more the notion that they were everywhere - they were handy, and they were a known consistent product. But that you had to seek out a Gordon Ramsey Michelin Star quality restaurant and that those were not on every corner or that you had to seek out a Bentley dealer. Creek Audio or Sugden won't be found for example at any of those kinds of chains - they will have to be sought out and even at the high end shops they could be bypassed on name and looks. The big box chains will carry Bryston, NAD, Roksan, Parasound here if they carry anything other than receivers.

My whole point about Omega loudspeakers or something like them is that they will offer a very different kind of presentation and rather than just audition the usual speakers that are designed from a very similar design perspective that auditioning something completely different may add a better slant on things.

[YBArcam]

Thanks for clearing that up, RGA. I get where you are coming from and appreciate your push to have some of us try something new. I'll definitely get to doing that.

By the way, when I think of the 'Creek' name I tend to associate it with one of these:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/Forest-Creek-Eagleville-PA-USA.jpg/800px-Forest-Creek-Eagleville-PA-USA.jpg

[RGA]

Maybe they should name their next amp "A Paddle" and then they can say that you are not up the creek without a paddle.

Damn I must remember these kinds of goofy things if I ever get one of their amps for review.

[Mr Peabody]

That's interesting that Paradigm is marketed differently in the U.S. To my knowledge they aren't in any big box stores. They are also very particular over territory and dealers not selling out of theirs.

A bad economy has a way of changing things though, who would have thought you would ever by Krell over the internet.

[Enochrome]

Peabody,

I own a pair of Mini Monitor V.6's, this is not in the same league you are looking in but, i think they are an extremely versatile speaker. I did however audition the Studio 20's and they completely floored me. They turned everything I love about my Mini Monitors (check out my review on this site) up to eleven; their detail and depth are phenomenal and by the way, the Mini Monitors won Absolute Sounds "Best Budget Bookshelf" award, so what does that tell you. Strings and bass are unmatched in this price range. And the look: they were able to balance a very aggressive design with classy/regal touches and finishes.

I thought these speakers faired better than the B&W CM1 I auditioned them against.

As far as materials and construction: forget about it, all in house Canadian construction.

Hope this helps.

[Mr Peabody]

Enochrome, it certainly helps the cause for Paradigm but I wasn't the one looking to buy.

[Pat D]

Frenchmon, I'm not dissing the Paradigm S series. They are a nice sounding speaker. But the PSB Synchrony's at $3K and $5K have better bass, and a smoother midrange and treble. They present a wider sound stage and have more detail, resolution as well as an over all more balanced if not warmer sound. A good friend mine owns a pair of the $5k Synchrony's and before he bought them (he bought them online based on a Stereophile review with out hearing them first) I went with him and auditioned the Paradigm S series. The Paradigms had more of an aggressive in your face sound.

I've heard the PSB's on my friends system which consists of an AR Tube line stage preamp, Bells Hot rod amp and the Marantz SA8001 CDP. He recently upgraded his amp to a $5K pair of Nuforce REF-9se monoblocks and the speakers still sound awesome if not better.

The problem with comparing speakers is that most of the time the other equipment and setting is different, so it's almost like comparing apples to oranges. They are both types of fruit but they are very different.

I auditioned the PSB Synchrony One at some length a couple of years ago and was very impressed. I am sure I could live quite happily with them. Very neutral, great wide and deep image, and very easy to listen to.

On the other hand, I have the Paradigm Signature S2 (and a 15 inch subwoofer) and am very pleased with them. Very neutral, great wide and deep image, a little bit laid back--which I like, and very easy to listen to. The speaker does not call attention to itself.

When you find yourself just wanting to listen to the music instead of evaluating the speaker, you know you've found a good speaker.

[bobsticks]

When you find yourself just wanting to listen to the music instead of evaluating the speaker, you know you've found a good speaker.

Amen...

[YBArcam]

An unexpected turn of events:

Listening to my system lately, I'm a little disappointed. It wasn't as sweet sounding as I remembered it just last week. Drums with the 8000S are big, which can be fun, but I'm starting to think they are overblown. And it just isn't sounding as transparent and organized as my Exposure stuff...more jumbled, with added grain. I never felt that about music played back through the Exposure during the time I used it. And the Exposure could sound big too, it's not a wimpy amp, but perhaps it does this when the music calls for it and not all the time. Maybe this is what RGA talked about with his comments about damping and negative feedback (which Exposure probably uses, but not to the same degree).

Anyways, I don't know...I don't want to open that can of worms. I'm just reaching for an explanation as to why it's sounding the way it did. More listening is required...I didn't get rid of my Exposure gear yet, so I'll be comparing over the next several weeks. I'll continue to use the 8000S with my Quads. I should, in a few weeks, be able to try out the ProAc and Paradigm speakers. Both the 8000S and 2010s2 amps will get a shot with all of these speakers. I'll see what configuration I prefer. Right now it's looking like the 2010s2 might be coming back into the system. I'll be getting my Apollo back soon, it should be next weekend.

[frenchmon]

An unexpected turn of events:

Listening to my system lately, I'm a little disappointed. It wasn't as sweet sounding as I remembered it just last week. Drums with the 8000S are big, which can be fun, but I'm starting to think they are overblown. And it just isn't sounding as transparent and organized as my Exposure stuff...more jumbled, with added grain. I never felt that about music played back through the Exposure during the time I used it. And the Exposure could sound big too, it's not a wimpy amp, but perhaps it does this when the music calls for it and not all the time. Maybe this is what RGA talked about with his comments about damping and negative feedback (which Exposure probably uses, but not to the same degree).

Anyways, I don't know...I don't want to open that can of worms. I'm just reaching for an explanation as to why it's sounding the way it did. More listening is required...I didn't get rid of my Exposure gear yet, so I'll be comparing over the next several weeks. I'll continue to use the 8000S with my Quads. I should, in a few weeks, be able to try out the ProAc and Paradigm speakers. Both the 8000S and 2010s2 amps will get a shot with all of these speakers. I'll see what configuration I prefer. Right now it's looking like the 2010s2 might be coming back into the system. I'll be getting my Apollo back soon, it should be next weekend.

Oh boy! sounds great...a shoot out with not only speakers, but amps as well! Now you've got me really interested. Can you post pictures of your gear as you shoot out? I like to look at gear...and I suspect many here does as well but they wont come out the closet as of yet and say it...so I will...ima audio porn nut who loves to look at pictures of others audio gear...so please..if you can post pictures as you shoot-out.

[YBArcam]

Haha, I'm the same way. No problem frenchmon, I'll post some pics when this gets rolling. I may throw up some pics of my current system today or tomorrow, then as I add in various components I'll put those up too. The real comparisons won't begin for a few weeks though. I've got a couple of days off later this month that I'll be using to test the speakers, and that's when I'll get the Exposure gear back in place.

[YBArcam]

Okay, here are the pics! Wish I had a better camera but I think these turned out pretty good.

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0826.jpg

There is an Ultralink power conditioner in the corner under the credenza.

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0822.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0833.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0819.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0825.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0827.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0830.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0832.jpg

Atlas Jumpers, QED Screwloc banana plugs

[frenchmon]

Yes!!! Ima lovin the pictures. The Quads are just gorgeous. I like the color as well. What sound characteristics do they have? Is that the Music Hall tracker on your table? The Cambridge looks nice. Have you thought about giving a little isolation to you CDP/BDP? I put home made isolation under my X-Ray and it helped the sound greatly.

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/4346/pict0012fui.jpg (http://img17.imageshack.us/i/pict0012fui.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

I've been away from Vinyl for 20 years and wife bought me a discounted MMF 2.1 that was sitting in the back room in storage at Music Direct to see if I wnated to get back into it. It came with a Tracker/Elan cart... I've removed it in place of a Ortofon 2M Red that is more lively and detailed than the Goldring Tracker. I like the warmth of the Goldring though. I have also got home made Isolation for it as well and yes...it did wonders for the sound. I have to get some pictures of it up.

I've heard good things about the Cambridge 650p. How do you like it?

The Audiolab 8000S integrated amp is one that im not familiar with. I do know Exposure though Cant wait for the shoot out.

Heres a picture of my gear....

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/1711/pict0030dm.jpg (http://img16.imageshack.us/i/pict0030dm.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)


I have since added another turntable that I got at Goodwill for $12 buck. works perfect. I figure I can sell it for triple the price. Its a Technics SL D3.

[YBArcam]

Thanks frenchmon! Those Rotel amps you have look serious!

Yes, the Quads are gorgeous. Sometimes I just stare at them. :lol: I don't know if I can give them up to be honest. They are really nice speakers. Driver integration is the best I've heard, bass is surprisingly deep but very tuneful, the highs are smooth and easy to listen to, detail is good, pace is excellent. I think the lows and highs are slightly more emphasized than the midrange, but I don't think drastically so. Things I am looking to improve are sense of scale, a fuller midrange, resolution, and a bit more detail. This is sort of nitpicking though...the Quads are not horrible in these respects. But when I compared the 12L2 to the PMC, with the PMC the resolution was noticeably better, and bass was truly impressive with the transmission line - as good as the 12L2 bass is, it's not on the same level.

Isolation is one of the next things I will consider. The credenza these components are on is very heavy and non-resonant, so it hasn't been a priority for me. But I should really explore this area as I'll never know until I try.

Yup, I have the Music Hall Tracker. I've been eying those Ortofon carts, but the 2.2 is only six months old or so. I'm going to figure out my amp and speakers, and use the 2.2 for a bit before making a change. I do plan on buying the Pro-Ject Speed Box and Acryl-It platter later this year though. They seem like two well regarded upgrades that also don't cost much. After a few years with the 2.2 I might upgrade the table.

The Cambridge is there to play SACD and DVD-A. I'll be using it for some Blu-Ray too once I get a high def monitor for my PC (I'll run an HDMI cable to it). For CD it's not bad, but not as good as my dedicated CD player (the Exposure 2010s2). I haven't been able to compare it to my Apollo yet, but I'd expect the Apollo to win.

[vlastoc]

Frenchmon,

I finally see your very nice setup...you've got mu sympathy for beeing a Cantons lover...

[frenchmon]

Well thank you Vlastoc...how do you like the Vento in comparison to the Ergo series?

[YBArcam]

So I got my Apollo back yesterday - they replaced the PC board. Tried out a couple albums last night and it worked flawlessly. I compared it to my Cambridge 650BD and the Apollo won handily. Perhaps for some reason the Apollo has some synergy with the Audiolab 8000S, because it sounds much better with the Rega player than it does with the CA. Better separation of instruments and an overall less congested sound. Maybe the 8000S is a keeper after all, but I'm looking forward to seeing how my Exposure amp acquits itself.

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0842.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0837.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0835.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0846.jpg

[frenchmon]

Boyeee! That Apollo looks sweet. Whats different about the sound of the Apollo compared to the CA? When do you think you will get the Exposure ?

[YBArcam]

Just as I described frenchmon, the Apollo just sounds cleaner, smoother, and better able to reveal small details because it's not as congested. Frankly, I was quite shocked the first time I realized just how much of a difference the source can make. The CA is staying put though, as it is going to play BR, DVD-A, and SACD discs. I would never expect it to beat a dedicated CD player with Redbook anyway.

I already own the Exposure. Will work it in sometime in the next couple of weeks. I just want to listen to the 8000S/Apollo a bit more before I do. Then hopefully I can make a call and sell some of this stuff already!

[frenchmon]

Just as I described frenchmon, the Apollo just sounds cleaner, smoother, and better able to reveal small details because it's not as congested. Frankly, I was quite shocked the first time I realized just how much of a difference the source can make. The CA is staying put though, as it is going to play BR, DVD-A, and SACD discs. I would never expect it to beat a dedicated CD player with Redbook anyway.

I already own the Exposure. Will work it in sometime in the next couple of weeks. I just want to listen to the 8000S/Apollo a bit more before I do. Then hopefully I can make a call and sell some of this stuff already!

Sell? Put it in a second system or put it away for a rainy day when you really need the money.

[YBArcam]

Well you need to talk to Kal Rubinson...because he is a reviewer who has a pair in his system. I also know those who sell them down in Carolina and also own them. From reading your postings between the lines... you make it sound like no one likes them....and we all know that's far from the truth. They have a large following in may places....here is one such place.http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=559431


I just read a review of the Usher BE-718 on Soundstage, and Doug Schneider mentions there that he owns a pair of Signature S2s. So yes, it does happen! :shocked:

As for sell or keep, point taken! I'll think about it. There are always more responsible things to put the money towards, however.

[frenchmon]

I just read a review of the Usher BE-718 on Soundstage, and Doug Schneider mentions there that he owns a pair of Signature S2s. So yes, it does happen! :shocked:

As for sell or keep, point taken! I'll think about it. There are always more responsible things to put the money towards, however.


I'm not surprised. Paradigm is a good product. And the Signature series has a very good sound. Every body dont want a laid back speaker. Some like a more lively sound. Just like all speakers you either like them or you like something else better. But we all get what sounds best to us and what can fit our budget. As I said before...they have a large following. Thanks for the information.

I've sold or got rid of some audio gear I wish I still had now. One such piece I had years ago that got a way was a 4 tract Pioneer reel to reel. I wish I still had that thing.

[vlastoc]

Well thank you Vlastoc...how do you like the Vento in comparison to the Ergo series?

Hi frenchmon,

you know...that's hard...I owned Ergo 700, which is a little older model than Vento or your GLE. But anyway I used Ergo 700 with NAD 320BEE amplifier, which was not that good match. Too bright, present mids and highs. Of course a some music sounded very good by this combination, especially drums...and so on.... Then I sold that NAD and never heard it together with Vento 807. The NADs, which I'm using now, I used only shortly with Ergos, so I can't declare result from direct comparison.

But here are some my experiences and comparisons:

- I think Ergo models are I more present, detailed, may be more exact and more neutral than LE, but they are quite difficult to match with good amplifier to tame them (I would say some good Marantz or Denon is suitable for them).

- LE series seemed to me less precise, but somehow more musical, more consistent..I don't know...I could not say, which is better..LE or Ergo.
Anyway, Canton LE 107 sounded better with NAD 320BEE.

Of course..I don't know the GLE lines and newer Ergos, there could be a different situation.

- My Ventos seem to be a next step far from LE or Ergo. I think, they are very well balanced, the highs are smoothed, they have very musical, really good speakers. I would say, my NADs' are not that good partners to them, I 'm considering to change the amplifiers.

[YBArcam]

I compared the Apollo to the 2010s2 CD player. IMO they are both of comparable quality but the presentations were different. The 2010s2 had greater emphasis on bass and just seemed to rock more. It had a loose, swinging sound, and more drive than the Apollo. The sound was more forward (closer to the listener). The Apollo was more balanced, laid back, and refined, but to me it's biggest virtue was the detail it wrung out of each song. As an example, I could clearly hear every little strum of the guitar underneath the more prominent distorted electric guitar, drums and vocals on a few rock tracks. With the 2010s2 I had to listen closer to pick up on these details, and sometimes they were tough to make out...they simply were not brought to the fore the way they were with the Apollo. One thing to note is that there is only about 5 hours on the Apollo so far. It was originally a dealer demo but the dealer said they barely played it.

I guess it's a matter of preference then. Personally I like the added detail and separation. Everything going on is part of the song, and hearing it with ease helps the musical message come across. I wouldn't mind getting that and some of what the Exposure brought...maybe with the right amp and speakers that will happen. The next comparison will be the 8000S vs. the 2010s2 integrated amp, then hopefully the ProAc 110 and Paradigm Studio 20. I'll say this though - with the right electronics ahead of them, the Quad 12L2 sound pretty sweet.

[frenchmon]

Hi frenchmon,

you know...that's hard...I owned Ergo 700, which is a little older model than Vento or your GLE. But anyway I used Ergo 700 with NAD 320BEE amplifier, which was not that good match. Too bright, present mids and highs. Of course a some music sounded very good by this combination, especially drums...and so on.... Then I sold that NAD and never heard it together with Vento 807. The NADs, which I'm using now, I used only shortly with Ergos, so I can't declare result from direct comparison.

But here are some my experiences and comparisons:

- I think Ergo models are I more present, detailed, may be more exact and more neutral than LE, but they are quite difficult to match with good amplifier to tame them (I would say some good Marantz or Denon is suitable for them).

- LE series seemed to me less precise, but somehow more musical, more consistent..I don't know...I could not say, which is better..LE or Ergo.
Anyway, Canton LE 107 sounded better with NAD 320BEE.

Of course..I don't know the GLE lines and newer Ergos, there could be a different situation.

- My Ventos seem to be a next step far from LE or Ergo. I think, they are very well balanced, the highs are smoothed, they have very musical, really good speakers. I would say, my NADs' are not that good partners to them, I 'm considering to change the amplifiers.

IF you like NAD, I've heard the NAD Master series was out standing, though I've never heard them my self.

[frenchmon]

I compared the Apollo to the 2010s2 CD player. IMO they are both of comparable quality but the presentations were different. The 2010s2 had greater emphasis on bass and just seemed to rock more. It had a loose, swinging sound, and more drive than the Apollo. The sound was more forward (closer to the listener). The Apollo was more balanced, laid back, and refined, but to me it's biggest virtue was the detail it wrung out of each song. As an example, I could clearly hear every little strum of the guitar underneath the more prominent distorted electric guitar, drums and vocals on a few rock tracks. With the 2010s2 I had to listen closer to pick up on these details, and sometimes they were tough to make out...they simply were not brought to the fore the way they were with the Apollo. One thing to note is that there is only about 5 hours on the Apollo so far. It was originally a dealer demo but the dealer said they barely played it.

I guess it's a matter of preference then. Personally I like the added detail and separation. Everything going on is part of the song, and hearing it with ease helps the musical message come across. I wouldn't mind getting that and some of what the Exposure brought...maybe with the right amp and speakers that will happen. The next comparison will be the 8000S vs. the 2010s2 integrated amp, then hopefully the ProAc 110 and Paradigm Studio 20. I'll say this though - with the right electronics ahead of them, the Quad 12L2 sound pretty sweet.

Well its just to bad you cant combine all the characteristics of both into one.

[YBArcam]

I'm hoping the right speaker, or the Exposure amp, will preserve the detail of the Apollo but also provide a bit more drive.

[YBArcam]

I hooked my Exposure 2010s2 amp up in place of the Audiolab 8000S. Very similar to what I noted when I first moved from the Exposure to the 8000S - the Audiolab has softer highs and more body. But I noticed something else this time around...something that I didn't notice was missing when I moved to the 8000S, but now when I listen to the 2010s2 it just sort of pops out. It hit me once I started playback - the Exposure preserved the detail and clarity that I thought the 8000S had, but it also revealed lower level details, micro-dynamics and the interplay between instruments that just didn't really jump out at me when I had the 8000S hooked up.

Okay, so it really is a trade off and now I'm leaning towards sticking with the 2010s2. I think what it brings is something that you want to preserve because it's integral to the music, and adding softer highs and more body can be achieved hopefully with the right speakers.

That's where I'm struggling now though. Other than the lack of body in the mid range I probably wouldn't change anything about my speakers. They sound great. If I find a speaker with more body then I'm probably trading off somewhere else where the Quads excel. But getting that extra fullness seems important to me. I'm still considering the three speakers on my list (Studio 20, Studio 110, Excite X16).

Is there a way to pick out a speaker that I can know will bring more fullness to the mix? Do I need a floorstander (Quad 21L2 perhaps?). Do I just need a bigger bookshelf (and/or bigger driver)? Should I look for a speaker whose frequency response in the mids is high? Greater volume in the midrange (and perhaps bass too) I would think would yield a fuller sound. I'm going to probably do in home trials of all three speakers on my list (with the 'digms it'll have to be the Studio 10) and I guess I'll go from there. All three speakers seem to potentially have what I'm looking for, but I won't know for sure until I try them out. There is the very real possibility that I've become too obsessed with this and I just need to forget the gear and just enjoy listening, but why do that when I can torture myself instead?

[PeruvianSkies]

I hooked my Exposure 2010s2 amp up in place of the Audiolab 8000S. Very similar to what I noted when I first moved from the Exposure to the 8000S - the Audiolab has softer highs and more body. But I noticed something else this time around...something that I didn't notice was missing when I moved to the 8000S, but now when I listen to the 2010s2 it just sort of pops out. It hit me once I started playback - the Exposure preserved the detail and clarity that I thought the 8000S had, but it also revealed lower level details, micro-dynamics and the interplay between instruments that just didn't really jump out at me when I had the 8000S hooked up.

Okay, so it really is a trade off and now I'm leaning towards sticking with the 2010s2. I think what it brings is something that you want to preserve because it's integral to the music, and adding softer highs and more body can be achieved hopefully with the right speakers.

That's where I'm struggling now though. Other than the lack of body in the mid range I probably wouldn't change anything about my speakers. They sound great. If I find a speaker with more body then I'm probably trading off somewhere else where the Quads excel. But getting that extra fullness seems important to me. I'm still considering the three speakers on my list (Studio 20, Studio 110, Excite X16).

Is there a way to pick out a speaker that I can know will bring more fullness to the mix? Do I need a floorstander (Quad 21L2 perhaps?). Do I just need a bigger bookshelf (and/or bigger driver)? Should I look for a speaker whose frequency response in the mids is high? Greater volume in the midrange (and perhaps bass too) I would think would yield a fuller sound. I'm going to probably do in home trials of all three speakers on my list (with the 'digms it'll have to be the Studio 10) and I guess I'll go from there. All three speakers seem to potentially have what I'm looking for, but I won't know for sure until I try them out. There is the very real possibility that I've become too obsessed with this and I just need to forget the gear and just enjoy listening, but why do that when I can torture myself instead?

What kinda money you looking to invest?

[YBArcam]

$1,500ish. That's about the value of what I can trade in. Keeping what I've got now and not making any moves is possible, but if I hit on something that I really love I will make the trade.

[PeruvianSkies]

$1,500ish. That's about the value of what I can trade in. Keeping what I've got now and not making any moves is possible, but if I hit on something that I really love I will make the trade.

You could easily pick up a used set of the classic PSB Stratus Golds for about half that amount or so, or even go with a new set of the PSB M2's depending on whether you want floorstander or not.

[YBArcam]

I'm definitely considering the used market. I'm going to add the Tannoy Revolution Signature DC6 to my list as well, only because I've liked other Tannoy models before.

[Mr Peabody]

YBArcam, also take a listen to the Martin Logan, Motion 12, right at $1500.00. I haven't heard these compared to what you are looking at but I heard them recently and was impressed by what they can do. These are not electrostats.

[YBArcam]

Thanks guys, I'll check out the PSB and Martin Logan suggestions.

I'm thinking a small tower might be better able to give me the sound I want. One thing I don't like about tower speakers is that they are often at the wrong height (the tweeter is too low). That necessitates either making or buying some sort of platform. But the Neat Motive 2 is a tower that is tilted back so that the drivers are aimed at ear level, and a small tower like this one is probably ideal for my room. I also read an article that the Motive 2 was partnered with the Exposure 2010s amp back at the 2006 CES. The Motive 2 definitely seems like it's worth a listen.

[Mr Peabody]

Take a look: http://www.martinlogan.com/

What is your thoughts?

[frenchmon]

Thanks guys, I'll check out the PSB and Martin Logan suggestions.

I'm thinking a small tower might be better able to give me the sound I want. One thing I don't like about tower speakers is that they are often at the wrong height (the tweeter is too low). That necessitates either making or buying some sort of platform. But the Neat Motive 2 is a tower that is tilted back so that the drivers are aimed at ear level, and a small tower like this one is probably ideal for my room. I also read an article that the Motive 2 was partnered with the Exposure 2010s amp back at the 2006 CES. The Motive 2 definitely seems like it's worth a listen.

I've always wanted to know what sound characteristic the Neat line of speakers have. And by the way...what type of sound do you like?

[YBArcam]

Take a look: http://www.martinlogan.com/

What is your thoughts?

They look big. The 10 seems like it would work better in my room, but I see those only go down to 65Hz. Two woofers on a tower speaker and only 65Hz? Not that that means anything. I guess the 12 would be what I'd go for, and looking at the height the tweeter would be in an ideal position. Too much for a small room though?

frenchmon, what kind of sound do I like? It's getting to the point where I don't even know! It seems I can find something I don't like about any speaker, and then I begin doubting myself. Basically, I want some richness and body, but also something very resolving, transparent and detailed. Smooth highs. A big sense of scale. Funny enough, my old Tannoy Mercury F2 (an entry level speaker) was probably the most satisfying speaker I've had yet. The Monitor Audio RS5 was great other than the too hot treble, and my Quad 12L2 are great other than the lack of body and the fact that there is some compression at high volumes (which I'm sure is just a limitation of their size). But I'm not in a rush to make a change. I'll look around and listen, and when I hit on the right speaker then I will bite.

The Neat line are often paired with Naim. They excel in what people refer to as PRaT, which I'm sure you guys are all aware of, and according to one review have a smooth and clean sound. Interestingly, the Motive 2 has a port on the bottom of the speaker.

http://www.sonicflare.com/IMG_1928.jpg

[frenchmon]

I was going to offer Canton as a choice but the tweets may be a little hot for you if MA are hot in your opinion and the mid section may be just a tad lively with the dispersion of sound. But other than that Canton Floor standers will fill your bill I suppose.

I've read up on the Neat Acoustics Speaker Company while down in Carolina...I think they are a British speaker? I've read good things and very positive reviews concerning them. They use to be distributed by Blue Bird Music in the USA or Canada but they no longer carry them....Who is the USA distributer?

[bobsticks]

Take a look: http://www.martinlogan.com/

What is your thoughts?

I've heard them and was not at all impressed...sorta like a Sony HTiB compared to an ES unit through some comparable electronics.

I think we're ignoring the possibilty of used gear. Clearly space is an issue so the following link probably isn't a reasonable solution for our friend but is demonstrative of how one can step way up the line in product quality by purchasing used...

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?spkrfull&1285961652&/Martin-Logan-cls-ii-solid-wood

[frenchmon]

I've heard them and was not at all impressed...sorta like a Sony HTiB compared to an ES unit through some comparable electronics.

I think we're ignoring the possibilty of used gear. Clearly space is an issue so the following link probably isn't a reasonable solution for our friend but is demonstrative of how one can step way up the line in product quality by purchasing used...

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?spkrfull&1285961652&/Martin-Logan-cls-ii-solid-wood

I've heard them too. MrP and I listened to them over at Magnolia right after we listen to a few pairs of Vienna Acoustics. The Motions sounded light years ahead of the VA which had a very lost mid sections and a bottom end stuck in the mud. We where listening to my CD "Blues-Ette" By the "Curtis Fuller's Quintet" Featuring Benny Golson on tenor sax. IF you've not got that one in your collection you shoulda. Any how the Motions had clearer highs, and mids and a decent bottom end. But really....there was really nothing special about the Motions other than the name. So I am guessing after listening to the horrible VA, the Motions sounded like a million bucks.

[Mr Peabody]

The Motion 12 had an excellent bass detail and the rest of the range was good. Keep in mind the price range, I'd still consider the M12 a budget floorstander at $749.00 each. What gear did you hear them with? I assumed if they sounded good with a Yamaha 2065 they should sound even better with better gear. They aren't going to replace my Dyn's but if I was putting together a budget system they'd definitely be on my list. I also thought they were an improvement over the earlier non-electrostats released by ML.

[frenchmon]

The Motion 12 had an excellent bass detail and the rest of the range was good. Keep in mind the price range, I'd still consider the M12 a budget floorstander at $749.00 each. What gear did you hear them with? I assumed if they sounded good with a Yamaha 2065 they should sound even better with better gear. They aren't going to replace my Dyn's but if I was putting together a budget system they'd definitely be on my list. I also thought they were an improvement over the earlier non-electrostats released by ML.

Did you really think they where that great of a speaker? Nothing really stood out to me to say I would spend my money on them. But of course I like wood on my speakers. Those things where black plastic. For $749 each, I would rather have a pair of Monitor Audio's Rs6 or Canton GLE 407's or Paradigm Studio 20's. The Motions sound about as the same or as good as those Energy speakers. Both where heads above the VA.

[Mr Peabody]

I don't know if you really paid attention to the sound of the M12's, I did think they were good and a step up from the Energy. I'm indifferent to the looks so maybe you were put off before they were even turned on. What caught my ear first was the bass response and detail in that region. Remember I asked again to make sure they weren't amplified? That tweeter they use is pretty good as well. I mean I was surprised to learn they were only $1500.00 a pair. I commented to the girl I bet they sell a lot of the M12's. I'll have to try to get back there for another listen and start with those first. I know one thing up against the Vienna Acoustic the Motion 12 was a bargain.

[YBArcam]

I was going to offer Canton as a choice but the tweets may be a little hot for you if MA are hot in your opinion and the mid section may be just a tad lively with the dispersion of sound. But other than that Canton Floor standers will fill your bill I suppose.

I've read up on the Neat Acoustics Speaker Company while down in Carolina...I think they are a British speaker? I've read good things and very positive reviews concerning them. They use to be distributed by Blue Bird Music in the USA or Canada but they no longer carry them....Who is the USA distributer?

The store that carries Tannoy also carries Canton, so I guess we'll see what happens! I'm certainly open to listening to a pair if they have them on the floor.

You know, I didn't even realize that Blue Bird was no longer the distributor. I went to the Neat website and on the distributor page for both Canada and the U.S. it says to contact Neat directly. And sure enough I found this: http://www.bluebirdmusic.com/Neat%20Philosophy.htm

bobsticks, buying used is always at the back of my mind. I bought my Quad 12L2 for under $600 on A-gon, a pretty nice deal. I'm leaning to buying new this time around though, because of the convenience in dealing with a local store. First they let me listen at home (which is obviously important) and I may be able to work out a trade with the one I ultimately decide to buy from, which saves a lot of headache.

[YBArcam]

Hi everyone, just posting an update on my situation.

I'll be comparing a couple of speakers to my current Quad 12L2. I traded in for a pair of DC6 from Tannoy a few months ago when I had some components to get rid of, and shortly after that bought a pair of new old stock Castle Avon floorstanders. This is the pre-IAG Castle. These speakers are probably somewhere between 10-13 years old and have been sitting in the distributor's warehouse for almost their entire existance. I'll see how each speaker sounds in my system and the winner will stick around, while I will likely sell the other two. Maybe I'll sell only one of them, I'm not sure yet. I guess it'll depend how much I like each one. I've always liked Tannoy and wanted to try for myself a pair of dual concentrics. And I've always been interested in Castle, and can't shake the itch to try out another floorstander. So when the Avons came up (brand new and of course nicely discounted) I jumped at them.

First things first though - speaker stands. I've now got a pair of Kudos S50 stands under my Quads. The dealer here fills them with sand until they almost stop ringing. These stands have totally transformed my Quads, even over my old Reference 3A stands. The puny Quads sound like a floorstander now. The deepest and most powerful bass notes can actually shake the room - the Quads never did that before! And it's amazing how the mids and highs have improved too. It feels like the stand is channeling the bass away from the speaker, helping it to excel at mids and highs. They are clearer now, and the various instruments feel much more grounded within the image that the speakers are casting. However, the bass can be a bit too much sometimes. It's probably the room. Need some bass treatments. But I'd say 95% of the time this isn't an issue and the bass sounds great. So perhaps it's a node at a particular frequency. Or could it simply be boomy bass on certain recordings? Whatever it is, I can live with it for now.

Listening to the Quads it's clear they are good at lots of things. Imaging, detail, transparency, clarity and focus, attack and decay, dynamics...they seem to tick off most of the audiophile boxes. The overall presentation with my Rega source and Exposure amp is warm and smooth. There are three or four things I suspect I'm not quite digging right now, which might make all the difference, but I will confirm that once I hear the other two speakers. Suffice to say that despite the impressive sound, something just doesn't seem right. I'm not as immersed in the music as I should be. Some music probably more so than others. Again, we'll see how the other two do on this front. I want to start paying more attention to the whole of the music rather than focus on audiophile ideals. Most speakers from companies such as Quad and Tannoy should be able to do a lot of the audiophile stuff, but the joy in listening to a system is hearing the music itself not in bits but as a whole, and connecting with it. That's when you want to keep listening, rather than try to figure out what's not working.

So now, onto the Tannoys. These are gorgous speakers. They've got one of the nicest wood finishes I've seen on a speaker at this price. I'll mention the Castles here too - Castle was known for build quality above all else, and it shows here. Thicker than usual real wood was used, and apparently there is a sloping partition near the bottom of the speaker, which reduces overall internal volume, but the crossover is sealed underneath it to isolate it from the drivers above. Rap the speaker with your knuckles and you get a totally dead sound. There is a port on the bottom, and the Avons use what was then a newly developed by Castle carbon fibre woofer. Thanks to the review at gramophone.net for some of these details. Suffice to say the build quality definitely shows where Castle invested a lot of their money.

I'll have the Tannoys on the stands tonight and I'm going to start listening. I'll take this nice and slow over the winter. I want to give the Tannoys some time to break in and for me to get used to their sound before I swap in the Castles. So far I have put about 8 hours of non-critical, low-volume listening on the Tannoys just to help ease them in. Those 8 hours have me very encouraged, as I believe I'm hearing more magic than with the Quads. I've got about 8 hours on the Castles too, and I'm looking forward to them even more based on what I've heard so far. One step at a time though...

[Mr Peabody]

Have you ever heard any of Zu Audio speakers?

[YBArcam]

Hey Mr. P. Nope, never heard them. I've read about them as they are getting lots of hype on the Internet, which I'm sure you know. It looks like Zu is offering some nice deals. I'd love to hear a pair. Maybe someday. But I think this will be the end of the line for me. I'm going to be saving money for a while, so one of these three is going to be what I'll be listening to, hopefully for at least three years. After that, who knows?

I primarily listen to rock, and given their large drivers and high sensitivity, I bet Zu speakers can rock with the best of them. And they should work great with tubes, something I eventually want to get into.

[YBArcam]

Some points on the performance of the Tannoy DC6:

- awesome imaging. I've never heard imaging like this before. The sound is very focused and when something comes from the left or right, it is clearly heard from the left or right side. It doesn't bleed into the centre of the stage. When both speakers are producing the same sound, you can clearly hear each part. The only time this is distracting is when most of the sound comes out of one speaker. It feels like you can't hear properly on the side where there isn't much sound. My Quad 12L2 basically presents the image between each speaker, and doesn't have the separation that the DC6 does. From what I've read, the excellent imaging can probably be attributed to the dual concentric drivers.

- the highs were a little too strident at first. This has greatly been tamed by cables. First I connected my speaker cables to the LF terminals. Then I read the manual and Tannoy actually insists on connecting to the HF terminals. That helped a lot. Then I received my bi-wire LFD cable from my local dealer. Bi-wiring has made a very noticeable improvement in terms of cleaner highs and heftier bass, and overall greater resolution.

- the 12L2 has a smoother sounding treble than the DC6, but it also feels closed in. I've been able to tame the DC6 highs sufficiently as described above. They now sound great, and more open and extended than the highs on the Quads. More natural too. Piano for example, has a shimmering quality and actually sounds like a percussion instrument. With the smoother, closed in sound of the Quads, this quality is muted.

- the best thing is that music really bounces along now. It is more interesting and exciting to listen to, and it really feels like the rhythm section propels a song forward (as it should). I think the 12L2 is just a little too laid back sounding for my tastes. However, I will put the 12L2 back on the stands soon, because I'd like to hear them with the bi-wire cable and just to confirm my overall impressions.

And finally, I think the greater sense of pace and rhythm comes partly from the imaging. I believe the Quads are ultimately more detailed than the Tannoys, but the way the Tannoys image, they call attention to sounds that I didn't pick up on with the Quads.

[Mr Peabody]

Does Tannoy have current product and dealers? I looked at a lot of brands recently and I can't remember why Tannoy I didn't pursue further. Do they make floorstanding models?

[YBArcam]

Yes, Tannoy has many current models. They make bookshelf speakers and floorstanders, ranging from entry level up to their expensive Prestige series, which are wide baffle floorstanders, many of which use big dual contentric drivers (10 inches plus).

I don't believe they list retailers on their web site, only distributors. If you want to find a Tannoy retailer you'd have to find the distributor for your area on the site and give them a call.

I might end up wanting a floorstander. If I do and for whatever reason the Castles don't make me happy, given my experience with the DC6 I could easily end up with the floorstanding version of the same speaker. Here are some pictures of both the DC6 and the Castle Avon:

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_1003.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_1007.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0995.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0910.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0912.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk62/PGP_97/Stereo%20Pics/100_0936.jpg

[Mr Peabody]

Thanks for the info. I think it was the frequency response that got them scratched from my list. I would give them a listen if they were in my area but my Klipsch are rated at like 55Hz and although the bass it covers provides a filling sound I can still hear and miss the effect of that bottom octave.

Have you heard the Zu Audio? Forgive me if I mentioned this here already, I ordered a pair of the Omen Def to give a listen. When reading reviews and peoples comments of the Zu the things said about presentation and textures got my attention.

[YBArcam]

My Tannoy are rated to 46Hz. The floorstanding version to 34Hz. The DC6 is a small speaker, and while they don't output as much bass as my 12L2 does, it doesn't feel like bass is lacking. Ultimately I think I might prefer a larger speaker that has more slam and fullness, but that isn't a sure thing. If whatever other speaker I'm considering doesn't match up well with the DC6 in other areas, I'd happily live with the DC6. I'll be trying out the Castle Avon within the next couple of months. I'm sure fullness will not be lacking, so we'll see how that goes.

I haven't tried Zu, but they are on my radar. Whenever I venture into tubes or Class A amplification they will be a logical match. They look awesome too.

[RGA]

The Tannoy Kensington SE is superb - although way out of budget. But if lower models can get most of that then definitely look at the floorstander versions.

The issue as usual with any single driver and or dual concentric is bass and bass drive and early compression. Even the $10k Teresonics can't do it all. That's why people invented two ways and three ways etc. Getting a two way correct is very difficult - getting a three way correct is almost impossible and beyond that there is nothing I would buy regardless of price that I have heard. The trick is getting single driver sound and still getting some bass response without much cone movement.

People often complain about various speakers because they tend to sound "slow." I have not personally much cared for what i have heard in the past from Castle. I was dissapointed in the Eden that UHF magazine raved about. It was about that time where I felt I didn't need the magazines because if that was a leading price class speaker then there was something wrong. The floorstanders in the day were not as good as the Eden either.

Tannoy has been hit and miss over the years for me as well - didn't like the late 1980s models that were around. Kensington is something else but so is the price.

Bass is one of those things that we think we can do without and we can for awhile but make sure whatever you choose has enough low end. The type of bass is important as well. Some speakers do have reasonable bass depth but not when you turn it up.

[YBArcam]

I've heard the Tannoy Glenair 15 and the Stirling SE at my local dealer. They were very impressive for sure, but I think they also sounded a little too refined. I'm not sure though, I'd need to listen to them more to confirm that.

Isn't a dual concentric very different, and actually more like a standard two-way design, than a single driver? As far as I know, the dual concentric is a separate tweeter and woofer, and a crossover is used to separate frequencies. The only difference is that the tweeter is placed in the middle of the woofer. Is the output of each driver affected by the proximity to the other driver?

Regarding Castle, I've heard the same things you have...mainly from reading comments online. Of course, you'll find many positive comments online as well. Yet the brand has always interested me. When the Avon came up, they were of course from the old Castle, and were new old stock. The box had never even been opened...it was just sitting in the distributor's warehouse for it's entire life. I figured there can't be too many of these out there, and I could probably sell it for close to what I paid if I didn't like it, so I grabbed this pair. I hooked them up to ensure they worked, and maybe put a couple of hours of low level playing on them. I wasn't listening critically, so I cannot say for sure, but they sounded great. Smooth extended highs, nice deep punchy bass (they are ported on the bottom), with a very immediate midrange. We'll see what happens when I turn the volume up. And of course, being from Castle it is extremely well built. Heavy, made with thick wood, and one of the deadest sounding I've heard when I rap on the top with my knuckles. The only review of the Avon I've been able to find is on Gramophone's site from back in 1997. http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/April%201997/115/766111/Castle+Avon.

[Mr Peabody]

Just a point on Zu, the "Def" versions are 6 ohms and will work with any amp. Other versions are 12 & 16 ohm. Just FYI as I have not personally heard them yet.

Having been a Dynaudio owner for years comparable high quality bass response is hard to find. I am interested in seeing what else is out there though.

[TheHills44060]

Subscribed...interested in what kind of impressions the Castle's leave on you.

[YBArcam]

TheHills, thanks for your interest. I'll be hooking them up in mid February. I want to let the Tannoy DC6 break in properly first, before I yank them out of the system. I've brought gear in and out too quickly before, and not let things break in sufficiently. Though my impression of the DC6 is obviously very favorable, and I'm not sure how much more they can improve.

Mr. P, I heard the Dynaudio Excite x16 once. I found there to be way too much bass and fullness. It sounded boomy and slow. It was being fed by a Simaudio amp and an Audiolab CD player. Another speaker in the store (Audio Physic) had the same muddy kind of sound...so I'm not sure if they just like it that way, or what. I'm sure the Dynaudio would sound better if I had the chance to play around with it...try different amplification* and get it set up in my own room. Dynaudio gets too much respect for their speakers to sound as bad as what I heard.

* I really like my Exposure amp. Great detail and clarity, but lots of low end drive. It's a low negative feedback ss design if I'm not mistaken.

[Mr Peabody]

I'm not sure what the problem was there, typically, Dynaudio bass is not only plentiful but nicely detailed. Electronics plays a large part but I've heard the Dyn's, Audience series, sound alright with larger Marantz receivers. As you go up in series the more current you have the better.

[theaudiohobby]

The issue as usual with any single driver and or dual concentric is bass and bass drive and early compression. Even the $10k Teresonics can't do it all. That's why people invented two ways and three ways etc. Getting a two way correct is very difficult - getting a three way correct is almost impossible and beyond that there is nothing I would buy regardless of price that I have heard. The trick is getting single driver sound and still getting some bass response without much cone movement.
A speaker's quality depends on its design, A competent design will sound decent whatever its configuration, getting decent bass out of a single driver at high SPL is a hercullian task, something has to give, I think that most designs are shooting for a balanced and even sound, that goal necessitates a multi-way design.

[RGA]

A speaker's quality depends on its design, A competent design will sound decent whatever its configuration, getting decent bass out of a single driver at high SPL is a hercullian task, something has to give, I think that most designs are shooting for a balanced and even sound, that goal necessitates a multi-way design.

What were your thoughts after listening to the Teresonic Ingenium?

[theaudiohobby]

What were your thoughts after listening to the Teresonic Ingenium?I have not listened to the Teresonic, have they breached new frontiers with their Lowther based design?

[RGA]

I think you might be impressed by how much they have in the bottom end. Though in general everything is a series of compromises. Volume and bass is one but then they offer much in the way of cohesiveness in the midrange that may trump that. Apparently they provide 30hz flat in room or 30hz -3db and 22khz-3db according to a couple of review sites. While offering near 100db sensitivity (running a 3.5 watt amp)

I didn't quite get the drive out of them at CES in the bass registers but they do offer a beguiling presentation. The downside is they're quite massive and not inexpensive. I'd certainly like to hear them again. While 30hz may not be viewed as full range - I am generally happy if the speakers sounds really good and reaches 35-40hz. Large speakers with many drivers tend not to sound remotely integrated to me and generally require very big rooms. The Teresonic would likely appeal to planar/ESL supporters I should think. They too offer the 30 day money back thingy so if under 40hz is enough you might be surprised. The most bass I have heard from a single driver. And while it compressed at higher levels on some trance music - there isn't much shame in that - a lot of multi-way speakers at CES did that and cost more.

[theaudiohobby]

Of course, I might like them, they may even have some bass to speak of. However the stated specs are pure fantasy, 100dB sensitivity, 30Hz(-3dB)-22kHz(-3dB), off a single horn-loaded lowther driver, er no, something have to give. 30Hz flat is impressive for any speaker, it's herculean for a horn-loaded single driver and mated to a top-end of 22kHz -3dB, well, amazing.

I have heard multi-way speakers that sound even and coherent in relatively small rooms, I use a 3-way Tannoy in a small room and it sounds great, that said I use tone controls to trim its bass output on certain bass-heavy recordings. Generally, large multi-ways put out generous amounts of bass so they would tend boomy and uneven in certain rooms as excited room modes do no favours to their overall presentation. the current fad for hairshirt functionality in high-end stereo rigs does no favours to large-multi-ways as most rigs lack any form of LF trim functionality.

Many ESL/planar tend have limited LF output as well as being a bit midrangy, so I would not be surprised if ESL fans are more tolerant of the limitations of the single driver designs. Personally, I am sold on multi-way designs as their strengths wide listening window, even-handed presentation and lack of compression and audible distortion even at elevated SPLs are very important factors when considering speakers capable of providing long-term satisfaction.

[Mr Peabody]

Balance is very important to me, I can't listen to a speaker that stands out in one response or another.

I wonder what Teresonic does to Lowther they don't do themselves, I looked at Lowther not really sure what they were about and none of there horn speakers I saw go below
60hz.

I am hopeful but I have yet to hear a "high efficiency" speaker have the deep bass a lower efficient speaker is able to produce. I know that's a wildly general statement, some low efficient speakers aren't that great on bass either but the best bass I've experienced has been from lower efficient speakers. Bass has to have detail and tuneful, not just a boom or resonance.

[RGA]

Balance is very important to me, I can't listen to a speaker that stands out in one response or another.

I wonder what Teresonic does to Lowther they don't do themselves, I looked at Lowther not really sure what they were about and none of there horn speakers I saw go below
60hz.

I am hopeful but I have yet to hear a "high efficiency" speaker have the deep bass a lower efficient speaker is able to produce. I know that's a wildly general statement, some low efficient speakers aren't that great on bass either but the best bass I've experienced has been from lower efficient speakers. Bass has to have detail and tuneful, not just a boom or resonance.

The Ingenium uses custom Lowthers - they're made only for Teresonic apparently. John Atkinson seems to believe they reach their spec.

The Ingenium is a quarter wave transmission line. They call it ETQWTİ (Enhanced Tapered Quarter Wave Tube).

The driver itself does not need to be responsible for all the bass. There are ways around it and a transmission line is one of them - PMC gets far more bass than your average bear with a T-line in a similar sized cabinets. Corner loading is another, floor loading is another. The Silbatone Aporia full range uses one single Manger driver and it had plenty of bass depth. Generally though the size of the speakers get very large. They address their design and some of the limitations of Lowther drivers and how they feel they've overcome them. It was one of the 5 best speakers at CES in my opinion. http://www.teresonic.com/speakers-14.html One of the poster's here felt they were one of the two best rooms at CAS.

They sound really very good. But I also would have had a Tannoy in my top five at CES I bet as well - they simply were not there. But the Prestige line and some of the Pro series I have heard are very good. Jack Roberts of dagogo left Audio Note E's eventually for Teresonic Ingeniums and I understand why he felt that strongly. (partly cause he doesn't have corners) but the Ingenium is one of those end of the road speakers.

[theaudiohobby]

The Ingenium uses custom Lowthers - they're made only for Teresonic apparently. John Atkinson seems to believe they reach their spec.
I read the relevant blog (http://www.stereophile.com/content/teresonic-speakers-play-loud) differently, JA was reporting Teresonic's claims for the Ingenium as he would have been unable to verify any spec claims in a single listening session at an audio show.

Kudos for to Teresonic for building a compelling Lowther-based speaker, however it's unlikely that any customization would totally address the inherent limitations of the driver when driven full-range, those specs are astonishing.

[RGA]

I read the relevant blog (http://www.stereophile.com/content/teresonic-speakers-play-loud) differently, JA was reporting Teresonic's claims for the Ingenium as he would have been unable to verify any spec claims in a single listening session at an audio show.

Kudos for to Teresonic for building a compelling Lowther-based speaker, however it's unlikely that any customization would totally address the inherent limitations of the driver when driven full-range, those specs are astonishing.

Fair point. I read the Soundstage review and they felt it reached 30hz but for whatever didn't measure the speakers. Some have actually had issue with the treble (including soundstage) in they feel it's a bit strident (bright). I got a bit of that but felt it was more of an open clearer presentation so a longer session is what I want. I just took the quote of John Atkinson as saying they had good bass extension (whether it meets their spec or not is not really that important it's whether the speaker's bass seems deep and sounds good doing it and I think John is saying that. "The sound of the Ingeniums from LP did have superb dynamics and clarity and good bass extension"

The issue though is that they're 6 feet tall and cost over $10 grand. The selling point to me more than the bass is the ability to use lower powered single ended amplifiers. Still the Kensington SE is no slouch and it was happily driven with sub 20 watt tube amps in South Korea in a fairly large room and seemed to me to have sufficient bass, a smaller sized speaker and considerably less money. I hope Tannoy shows at CAS - I'd like to hear more of their lines. The DC10T I believe was the other Tannoy speaker in SK that impressed me from a different non prestige line (actually liked the looks better) and sounded excellent - problem was the guys there while super friendly didn't speak any English and I didn't speak enough Korean and so I had no idea of price. The DC10 is probably what they should push to the North American market and if it's not to ridiculous in price could be a stunner. Seemed to me to have bass well under 40hz.

Interestingly a drug store in Canada called London Drugs has picked up some Tannoy speakers and Klipsch's new Heresy. It's an odd little company London Drugs - they all have a little audio section and they pick up some pretty revered higher end loudspeaker lines from time to time. The down side is they have poor demo rooms and usually rubbish electronics to show them off and set it all up rather badly.

[theaudiohobby]

The DC10T is an interesting design and I am glad that Tannoy finally put out a product to fill the gap left by the previous definition series. I imagine that its north of USD5000 given the UK sticker price of circa GBP5000, there may be some ex-dems floating around at a good discount.

[Mr Peabody]

The Transmission Line could certainly account for some lower end.

[Mr Peabody]

The Teresonic speakers aren't cheap. I'd love to hear their system, the $27k amp/skr/cable set up. Their spill about the cabinet being shaped like musical instruments is almost word for word the same as Sonus Faber. Hopefully, Teresonic achieved a better result.

[RGA]

The DC10T is an interesting design and I am glad that Tannoy finally put out a product to fill the gap left by the previous definition series. I imagine that its north of USD5000 given the UK sticker price of circa GBP5000, there may be some ex-dems floating around at a good discount.

I didn't hear it long but $5,000 would be a good deal IMO. So don't tell them or they might raise the price. I would like to build a second system that would work for home theater as well as high quality audio. I like the fact that they're relatively easy going to drive. I like amplifier choice. I picked up a small Rotel RB-1050 last week which will be more than enough for medium/high efficiency speakers.

[tube fan]

Playing my set of vinyl records at the CAS, I felt that the teresonic system produced the best sound. Unfortunately, the Audio Note room was only using CDs. Teresonic was using a 2 1/2 watt integrated amp! My current speakers, either Fulton Js or Dunlavy SCIVs, are much larger than the $15,000 Teresonic.

[Kclone]

I read this whole thread with interest and it never concluded what speakers you ended up with. So how did the Castle's sound?

[Mr Peabody]

Aw, I hate that, when you read a book to the end and it really never gives you a conclusion :)

[YBArcam]

Will update this weekend. I just actually started listening to the Castles a couple of days ago. It will take a while for them to break in.

The Tannoys got better and better as they were broken in. I actually removed my Cardas Crosslink interconnect (between the Apollo CD player and Exposure amp) and replaced it with a set of van den Hul The Wave. Maybe it's my imagination, but the change was not negligible, and also for the better. Some say that Cardas can soften the highs, and that seems to be my experience here. With the vdH cable, the highs were more front and center, but there was also a level of engagement, and more focus on my part on the melody as a result.

The Tannoys also just seem to have the perfect balance for my room. No part of the frequency range sticks out, and I get more than enough bass from these small standmounts. Part of it are my stands, which really helps bring out the bass (with the Quads too much so). But the speakers sound bigger than they are. Anyways, bass is well integrated, punchy, deep, well defined and quick when it should be. I am more engaged in my music that I have been for a while, and that will make the Tannoys tough to top.

I put the Quad 12L2 back into the system just to see how they fared. They are much more laid back than the Tannoys and the sound is less clear. The Tannoys are certainly more my style.

As stated, in a few days I'll give my initial thoughts on the Castles.

[Mr Peabody]

Sounds like the Tannoy does it for you, you just want to be sure.

[YBArcam]

Sounds like the Tannoy does it for you, you just want to be sure.

But are you ever really sure? There's probably something like 1,000 different speakers out there. You never know for sure until you try them all! :biggrin5: :out:

Seriously though, I've rushed too many decisions in the past. The Castles are going to get at least a couple of months of work, just like the Tannoys did, then I'll go back to the DC6 to see if I still like them as much as I do right now. I'll listen critically to each speaker, but the final decision will be simply down to which speaker is more fun for me to listen to.

[Kclone]

How big is your room YBAcram?

[YBArcam]

It is about 13' x 10'.

[Mr Peabody]

The room isn't that big, could be why the Tannoy fit there so well.

[Kclone]

If you can swing it, the Von Schweikert Unifield 3s are designed for small rooms. There are highly regarded and reviewed. There is a couple listed on A-gon at half their retail price.

[YBArcam]

$15,000! Even half off for a used pair is way more than I can afford. $2,000 and under is my comfort zone, but I think I'll be stopping for a while at the Tannoys, or the Castles if they win this battle. I figure it can be hard to find that little bit of magic, and when you do have it it's probably best to just forget about gear and listen to your system for a few years.

Let's say for whatever reason I decide to keep neither the Castle or Tannoy - I feel this is highly unlikely. But if it were to happen I'd probably buy a pair of PMC TB2i. I've heard the speaker a couple of times and really enjoyed it.

[Mr Peabody]

YBArcam, after your current face off try a pair of Zu Omen. MusicDirect was still running a special price of $999.00 a pair. Trust me when I say these are a steal at the regular $1500.00 price. They are highly efficient but have a 12 ohm impedance.

[YBArcam]

There is a dealer here who just started carrying Zu. One day I will stop by to have a listen. I think they may only have one model in the showroom though. I'm in Canada - unfortunately getting a set of speakers over the border isn't cheap. But usually not outrageous either.

As I put more hours on the Castle Avons they are sounding better and better. For a floorstander in a small room they don't overwhelm with bass. The bass is definitely deeper than what the Tannoys can manage, but overall it's still very tight and punchy. Bass can sound big depending on what's playing, but usually doesn't - maybe this is a case of the speaker presenting it honestly and not overdoing it.

Highs sound rolled off to me. I've never heard a speaker where the highs didn't get a little hot depending on the song I was listening to, but with the Avons that doesn't really happen. It's an easy speaker to listen to, but whether it's accurate or not I'm not sure.

The mids sound a little brittle to me. Not as liquid and rich as from the Tannoys or the Quads. Soundstaging isn't as good either, but no speaker matched my Tannoys in that department so far. Soundstaging is overall very good, and better than my old Quad 12L2.

The overall sound from the Castles is very clear, detailed, and open. I was somewhat expecting a slow sounding speaker that couldn't rock (from reading what people say about Castle). Not so with the Avons. They sound quick and exciting. The review on gramophone.net said they are a very balanced speaker that can handle any kind of music well, and I think I'd agree (though I certainly haven't listened to jazz or classical). While not as quick and exciting as the Tannoys sound, they certainly whooped the Quad's butt in this department. The Quads overall are a very dense sounding speaker, and as such feel lacking in speed and excitement.

So that's it so far. I'm still leaning towards the Tannoys as they just seem an ideal size for my room, are a bit more exciting and present a richer midrange. But I still need to put some hours on the Avons to see how much they continue to improve.

[Mr Peabody]

I didn't realize Zu was still trying to set up dealers.

[YBArcam]

I think there are two Zu dealers here now. And Zu has set up a Canadian website. It seems inevitable that I will try a pair one day, but not quite yet. It is time to start saving up a little bit, and just enjoying what I've got.

I really like the Castle Avon. Superbly balanced, very clean, clear, and detailed with just enough bite, yet still very musical. Rythmic drive and the ability to track the beat are never lacking. The highs and mids have opened up with break in, and the lows have filled in nicely too, with a bit more fullness that was lacking when new. At first the highs sounded very rolled off compared to my Tannoy and Quad speakers. I don't know if I'm just used to them now, or if they have truly opened up. I suspect a little of both. Needless to say, this is a very non-fatiguing speaker to listen to, but it does not feel now like any of the highs are missing.

One thing I like about it's soundstaging ability - while the The Tannoy DC6 is adept at left-right soundstaging and are quite in your face about it, the Avons do that too (with greater subtlety), but they also do front-back and up-down more than the DC6. It's there when you listen for it but it doesn't stick out. The DC6 is almost a little too precise with the left-right placing of parts of the music. I've never really heard a speaker before that just gets out of the way - with the DC6 you can often tell the sound is coming from the left or right speaker. With the Avons, it's like they aren't there. It's like a band is playing right in front of me. I've got the separation that I like, and the big soundstage too, but it also sounds extremely cohesive. You don't just hear the various parts, but the whole performance.

I mentioned clarity and separation, and to me this is one of the Avon's big strengths. I hear each part of a song more clearly. Lyrics, for one, are easier to make out. I hear bass guitar, as a second example, more clearly underneath the lead and rhythm guitar. But the cohesiveness is maintained, which must not be the easiest feat to master.

That said, I like both speakers. I'm going to switch back to the DC6 to see if my impressions are still the same. While both speakers present a different take on music, they are each fun to listen to and I expect I will keep them both. The Quad 12L2 is definitely the loser in this comparison. Can't say it's a bad speaker, it's also got it own set of pros and cons that many would probably prefer. But for me in my room and in my system, the bass is a little too overblown, it's a little too closed in sounding, and simply too relaxed for the kind of music I usually listen to.

[Mr Peabody]

The Avon's sound like a very good speaker.

[RGA]

YBArcam

I normally never recommend a speaker I've never heard but I would try if you can to audition Audio Kinesis' "Rhythm Prism" speakers.

I was actually going to get them for review but unfortunately the shipping costs to Canada and some other issues got in the way - but I was and still am VERY intrigued by the design and the price - $2500 for high efficient heavy floorstanders. The adjustable port design and sealed approach should make them very room friendly and bass to below 30hz.

You may know the owner of this company - he goes by the name Duke on audioasylum so it's a very very small operation so there is some issues of getting an audition. Still I know a lot of the speakers he's been inspired by and when I see speakers with minimum 7 ohm impedance that with 93db sensitivity but can be run with 5 watts to 900 watts I am betting the "live" and dynamic factors will be right up there. I was hoping one of my American reviewer counterparts could pick it up for review and they may still do so.

Definitely worth a look if it is at all possible http://www.audiokinesis.com/product_ak_rhythm-prism.html

[YBArcam]

Thanks RGA. I'll keep Audio Kinesis in mind, and I definitely need to try a high efficiency design someday soon. For the time being I am quite content as far as speakers go, but once I get rid of some excess gear (more on this below) and then save a bit of money I'm sure I'll get the itch to try something different.

I think the goal is always to try to improve, to make one's system more engaging, so the hunt never actually ends. I don't think I'd spend much more than the Rhythm Prism speakers cost, but up to about $3,000 there are lots of choices out there, and a few different options as far as basic design goes. So within that dollar constraint, there is lots of potential to tailor one's sound.

In that vain, the Avon probably isn't anything special compared to other speakers, but to my ears, in my system, and in my room, it's working. Castle had an okay reputation, good build quality but a boring sound. Perhaps the Avon were one of their better models (they weren't exactly entry level, about $2,000 fifteen years ago), or perhaps it just synergizes with the rest of my gear and the whole is more than the sum of the parts.

For much of the past two years I've been disappointed in what I had been hearing. Many different components (mostly speakers) in and out of my system, and when you aren't happy about the sound it can make for rush decisions that are not well thought out as you race to hear new gear. Starting out with something that works reduces the pressure to find the component that will magically fix everything.

I have a couple of Blu Ray players I have to get rid of, which my dealer will take on trade. I'll use them (along with my MMF-2.2) to upgrade to a P3-24, or trade them plus my current amp for something like a Sugden Mystro or Creek Evolution 5350. I'm also thinking about trading in my Apollo for a Rega DAC (which should cost very little extra after the trade). Given that I do enjoy the sound I've got right now, I wouldn't be surprised if I stick with my amp and player and simply upgrade the turntable. It'll all depend on whether one of these other amps and/or the DAC impresses me. I should be able to in-home trial the amps and the DAC. For now it's all about clearing out the two blu-ray players and some extra interconnects, and doing whatever upgrades I can without spending too much new money.

[Taterworks]

YBArcam, you've probably been inundated with more speaker recommendations than you can keep straight, but take a look at these. It might just be love at first sight if you've wanted the Totem Ones but weren't ready to pay the sticker price.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue29/images/FritzMini600.jpg

Cali-based speaker builder John "Fritz" Heiler of Fritz Speakers (his company) had a pair of Totem One in his possession while voicing the Fritz Mini, which is a two-way minimonitor with a 5.25" Dynavox driver (large voice coil design similar to Dynaudio bass drivers; I've heard this used to good effect in another competent design by a friend of mine) and a Morel 1-1/8" Dynaudio-style doped silk dome tweeter, which is also very good but will have a smoother character than the Totem's aluminum dome. The cabinets look well built, if a bit plain, but the Minis can be had for $1K directly from Fritz.

[Taterworks]

(Double post? How on earth?!)

Anyway, here's a link to the Positive Feedback review of the Fritz Mini. http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue29/fritz_mini.htm

I should mention that I don't own these speakers personally, but if I weren't into designing and building my own, I'd be after a pair of these for my listening room.

(Edit: I didn't realize the search for speakers had concluded, though I know many who would argue that it never truly does. Ah well...at least the above suggestions are 'out there'.)

[YBArcam]

Thanks Tater. No, the search never really ends. I'll likely be moving soon and hope to set up a more dedicated listening room. I'm sure I'll grab another pair of speakers in due time to go up against what I've got now. There are so many speakers I'd love to try, and sticking to the used market is a good way to do that without blowing tons of cash.

[tube fan]

I heard the $15,000 Teresonic speaker at CAS. Over three days, I must have spent six hours in their room, and listened to most of the vinyl records I brought to the show. They were using a 2 1/2 watt SET pure class A, zero feedback, no caps in signal path, NOS tubes (a steal at $15,000).

It means very little to me, but these were the most beautiful looking speakers I have ever seen! The shape and finish were fantastic. As for the sound, both male and female vocals were as close to perfect as I have heard. Full out Jazz was extremely realistic. As for bass, my favorite record is the Adagio d'Albinoni with Gary Karr on double-bass and Harmon Lewis on organ. One of the times I was there someone got them to play a full symphonic version of this piece. It sounded great. Then Garth of Music Surroundings noticed that I had the two man version of the same piece, and asked me if he could play it. Even the owner of the full symphonic version admitted that the Karr/Lewis version was much better. The speakers HAD to be going flat to at least 35 hz. perhaps lower, and were moving a ton of air. And that was with a 2 1/2 watt integrated tube amp!

BTW, my multi-driver Fulton Js go lower (they shake the room) when I play the Karr record, but then they are flat to BELOW 20hz. The Fultons look like **** compared to the Teresonic, but I am not really concerned with that (of course, my wife would LOVE the looks of the Teresonic!) However, several of my records sounded better on this system than on mine. I bought the Fosgate Phono unit (another steal at $2,500) which they were using, and it certainly was an improvement over my SP8 's phono section. The only other room at the CAS that I was really impressed with was the Audio Note one, but they had no TT, so I had to settle for digital in their room. Would love it if AN brought a tt to the 2111 CAS show.