Any opinions on any of these?

[Mr Peabody]

I am sort of looking at speakers, I'd like if possible to keep the high quality of my Dyn's while gaining in transparency and efficiency. Here's what I have in mind if you have actually heard any of these I'd appreciate your opinion and what gear you heard them with.

Sonus Faber, I suspect the Toy tower might be too small for my room and the Liuto will be too difficult to drive. But I could actually get an in home listen.

Focal, 826; the brand in a local big box store

PSB, Synchrony Two; I'm concerned here because of mention of a dark character, this may be a way of saying "lack of transparency". In addition, the Dyn's are sort of dark, I'm trying to find a less damped sound.

Monitor Audio, GX; I know not out yet but any experience with GS?

I've considered the Klipsch Reference RF7II. Although I like Klipsch and find some models I've used fun I'm not convinced they could be my main speaker. In general, they seem not to hold the sound stage together at high volume despite claiming low distortion, not sure what the issue, they also don't have the type of bass I like. The Dyn's play deep and give a full body bass where the Klipsch provide sort of a surface bass. For instance, with Klipsch a Tom Tom sounds like it's being struck on the top but you don't get the sound of the body of the drum. The new Reference is supposed to have trickle down technology from the Paladium so I haven't totally ruled them out.

As I posted on another thread I was all set to bring in a pair of Zu Audio, Soul Superfly but it looks like their high impedance will be a deal breaker. Still investigating this issue. Other suggestions of high efficient speakers that might sound good would be appreciated, well, other recs in general as well.

[Ajani]

I suspect the Monitor Audio GX would mate nicely with your tube gear... My all time favourite small to medium room system consisted of a pair of Monitor Audio GS20s with a Musical Fidelity XT100 Hybrid integrated amp (tube pre & 50 watt SS power) and matching XRayV8 CDP...

Another audition I had of the GS20s with audio refinement complete Integrated and CDP, involved listening to the sales rep's recording of his drum solo... The bass was magnificent... Deep and clean... not boomy yet never leaving you wanting more....

Sadly I haven't tried any of the other speakers on your list... If the PSB Synchrony are much like their predecessor (the Platinum) then I doubt they'd be an improvement over the Dyns...

[Mr Peabody]

I briefly heard the GS bookshelf and was impressed, they are front runners. I have no experience with Focal, they may be good. The Sonus Faber have good mids & highs but I'm not sure about the bass, it could have been the recording but even the $12k model lacked in bass definition. Interesting having a speaker wrapped in leather.

[LeRoy]

I am sort of looking at speakers, I'd like if possible to keep the high quality of my Dyn's while gaining in transparency and efficiency. Here's what I have in mind if you have actually heard any of these I'd appreciate your opinion and what gear you heard them with.

Sonus Faber, I suspect the Toy tower might be too small for my room and the Liuto will be too difficult to drive. But I could actually get an in home listen.

Focal, 826; the brand in a local big box store

PSB, Synchrony Two; I'm concerned here because of mention of a dark character, this may be a way of saying "lack of transparency". In addition, the Dyn's are sort of dark, I'm trying to find a less damped sound.

Monitor Audio, GX; I know not out yet but any experience with GS?

I've considered the Klipsch Reference RF7II. Although I like Klipsch and find some models I've used fun I'm not convinced they could be my main speaker. In general, they seem not to hold the sound stage together at high volume despite claiming low distortion, not sure what the issue, they also don't have the type of bass I like. The Dyn's play deep and give a full body bass where the Klipsch provide sort of a surface bass. For instance, with Klipsch a Tom Tom sounds like it's being struck on the top but you don't get the sound of the body of the drum. The new Reference is supposed to have trickle down technology from the Paladium so I haven't totally ruled them out.

As I posted on another thread I was all set to bring in a pair of Zu Audio, Soul Superfly but it looks like their high impedance will be a deal breaker. Still investigating this issue. Other suggestions of high efficient speakers that might sound good would be appreciated, well, other recs in general as well.

I've heard several models of ATC speakers a few years ago and all the accolades they receive are well deserved. I am assuming that bass response plus clarity and definition is what you want in a floor stander. You may want to consider ATC speakers and seek out an audition. Here is a review of a floor stander from ATC.

http://whathifi.com/Review/ATC-SCM40/

LeRoy

[rakeford]

I have the Klipsch RF-7s (old style cira 2004) powered by my Yamaha RX-797. I really enjoy the setup, but I don't have much to compare them too.

Everytime I play Fleetwood Mac Tusk, I crank it up until the windows rattle. :3:

[Ajani]

I've heard several models of ATC speakers a few years ago and all the accolades they receive are well deserved. I am assuming that bass response plus clarity and definition is what you want in a floor stander. You may want to consider ATC speakers and seek out an audition. Here is a review of a floor stander from ATC.

http://whathifi.com/Review/ATC-SCM40/

LeRoy

ATC are a brand I would love to try... They have a fantastic reputation for their Speakers and Amplifiers.... Nothing but 5 Star reviews for their products on WHF:

http://whathifi.com/ATC/

[Mr Peabody]

I haven't heard of ATC but will check them out.

Any info on Tannoy or Lowther?

[LeRoy]

For my audio tastes, I've never heard a Tannoy speaker that I like, but that's just me. Have yet to hear Lowther speakers.

Here is a dated piece of info that might help you narrow down the manufacturers to consider.

http://www.techradar.com/news/home-cinema/home-theatre-audio/top-10-hi-fi-speakers-163318

Good luck with the auditions.

LeRoy

[Mr Peabody]

Hey, Dynaudio got in there. :)

[02audionoob]

I like my little Focal 806S but I didn't like their floorstander brothers. I was interested in a pair on Craigslist, so I took my Adcom amp to the seller's house and listened for maybe 30 minutes or so with my CDs. I thought the highs sounded great and the bass was decent, but the midrange seemed a bit muffled. They didn't really seem to get loud, either, but I could live with that. I no longer use a 200-watt amp - I'm down to 50 watts. I really wanted to like them because his price was good, but it just didn't happen for me.

[harley .guy07]

Mr Peabody are you looking to replace your Dyns or are you looking to get a second set of speakers for something to give you something different from what you've had for a while. I love the dynaudio sound but I could understand having something different occasionally as well to give your music to you form another perspective. Let me know your progress and what you find. I have looked at most of the speakers you have talked about just for interest sake and would not mind hearing how they compare.

[RGA]

Frankly if you want to spend the money to go in a different direction then go in a different direction not the same/similar retread direction. Not the list is bad or anything but if you're going for higher efficiency with bass and truly special sound then I personally don't think MA, Sonus Faber Toy, or lower level JM Labs or PSB gets you there. I'm not slagging them they're all fine reputable makers of competitive speakers but IMO the lot of them are also Ho-Hum down the same path kind of stuff. Slapping a leather wrap or a ribbon tweeter may be good marketing but I don't know. I liked the Toy - bass is a little thick but pretty ample and they sound like Sonus Faber

Audio Note J or E (J has the bass of the Contour 5.4 but far easier to drive, far smaller, sounds far better and costs far less, is far uglier, requires corner or else the bass is not as deep - drops to Contour 3.4 level - my dealer carries both lines), Tannoy Kensington SE (others may fit the bill but this and the Westminsters are the ones I've heard enough to say anything about and the latter is way out there price wise - The price has risen on them - around $13k but they're beautiful and have solid bass to around 30hz), You can not use a flea amp with them though - they probably like at least 30 watts of El34 or KT 88 power and up. Sonist loudspeakers if budget is a major issue can be run with 8 watts, Teresonic has speakers in the $5k range but they have their limits in terms of bass but have strengths that outclass a lot of others in the midrange (though the Ingenium does have good bass it doesn't do all that well with rock at volume - flea watts will work great though - single driver speakers 3 watts is enough. And Lastly Harbeth - but be careful which ones - some are fine with little power some are not. But Harbeth has a rich full bodied sound and sounded good at CES with digital front ends or tubes.

I am recommending this based on the need for higher sensitivity. I liked the SF Toy for the money - but I also tend to prefer simpler loudspeakers because they usually sound more transparent and possess better cohesion. Dual concentric, single driver, and AN which just manages to do it as well as two driver speakers can do it. The Sonist don't do this as nearly as well as the others but they're also a lot less money and they are relatively easy to drive and they don't sound irritating considering they use a ribbon tweeter (although integration is a problem because they do).

Basically, if you're ear has gotten good enough to realize that good high efficiency speakers are superior (and you know where I stand here) then at some point I am betting the other realizations, low powered SET for example, will be on the horizon. Whether that happens or not getting a speaker that can handle as much amplifier choice as possible gives you far more upgrade options in the future. I can run 1000 watt mono blocks on my speakers and 4 watts and get to leave the room volume levels on both. That to me is a speaker that lets me hear the amplifiers rather than being pigeon holed on one type of amplifier choice for the rest of my life.

[Ajani]

RGA,

have you tried any Zu Audio speakers, and if so what are your thoughts on them?

In another thread I suggested that Mr. Peabody could check out the new Zu Omen Definition (high efficiency & dual full range drivers):

http://www.zuaudio.com/images/product/omen/omen_def_angle.gif

http://www.zuaudio.com/store/omen/def/

OMEN DEF Quick Specs
Efficiency: 98 dB 1W/1m (see measures)
Impedance: 6 Ohm nominal (see measures)
Third generation ZuRG driver/cabinet loading technology
Height: 47" tall + footers
Footprint: 12" square
Tube and solid-state friendly!
Manufactured in Ogden, Utah, USA

[TheHills44060]

Sonus Faber Liuto - Really like it (SF fan). Low end may sound a bit sluggish for some but thats my preference.

Sonus Faber Toy - Never heard it but from the size, specs and gut feeling i think they'd be too limited.

Focal 826 - I'd never buy a french speaker but I have to admit they seem to be good compromise for all types of listeners but for people like us that's probably not a good thing.

PSB Synchrony 2 - I like a whole helluva lot but could not tell if you'd think they were more or less dark than your Dynaudio's.

Monitor Audio - Have heard a few models and never liked any of them. I want to get up and leave after listening a while.

ATC - Never bothered to listen to anything but their active models which are fantastic. I usually like other speakers who use ATC drivers as well.

Tannoy - The D300 and D500 are some of my all time favorite speakers. Have not kept up with their current offerings.

ZU - Omen series = blah

Audio Note - Never heard any model but they have a die hard following. Have to make it a point to audition someday.

[Ajani]

So let's compare exhibit A:


Monitor Audio - Have heard a few models and never liked any of them. I want to get up and leave after listening a while.

Versus exhibit B:


ZU - Omen series = blah

So Monitor Audio you've heard and disliked... Excellent, that's a clear opinion...

The ZU Omens on the other hand: Were you one of the relatively few persons who auditioned a pair? Or are you just dismissing them without having listened?

[blackraven]

Mr P., I have heard the PSB synchrony 1's and they are very transparent with excellent bass and control. My good friend has them with a ARC tube preamp, Nuforce 9 monoblocks and Marantz SA8001 CDP and they sound fantastic. He use to run a Bell's Hot Rod amp with them which had a more tubey sound but the Nuforce amps really make these speakers shine. And they are not dark sounding by any means. They are very resloving, well controlled with no fatigue. They are easliy one of my favorite speakers in that price range.

While I can't speak for the Synchrony 2's, but if they sound anything like the One's you won't be disappointed.

[RGA]

Ajani

Certainly that seems like a good suggestion because as I noted - if Highish efficiency has been tantalizing then look into speakers that fit the mold. I have not heard the Zu line but in general these would be speakers I would gravitate to all else being equal. I still prefer a two driver two way sort of design over using more drivers so perhaps the Omen or Essence would be more interesting - though of course I would not say until I heard them. The specs certainly seem to suggest an easy drive and those I know who have heard them describe them as fun. This reminds me of my own Wharfedale Vanguards which are also dead easy to drive being mostly in the 10ohm range 95dbsensitive.

I try to list 5 or so makers because they're not all available in any given area.

I also forgot to mention Acoustic Zen which make very good speakers in their price classes and were run with modest power Tri amplification.

[Mr Peabody]

RGA, I never said I thought more efficient speakers sounded better than less efficient speakers. If I am to get new mains something more efficient would be desirable. My amps push the Dyn's well enough but if I got something that didn't make them work as hard then the better. I actually thought about Audio Note but they are no where near me and I don't want to build anything. We have a new store and I believe they offer Harbeth, that could be something to look into.

Ajani, I saw the Omen Def. Zu says they will have a Soul Def next year. The price though would be pushing my budget. One thing that bugs me about their pricing, MD and Amazon both have Zu models cheaper than Zu's own website. The Zu rep assured me the Def was a better speaker than the Omen, not just more. He said the Def cabinet was a trickle from the Definition. The brand really has my interest. I really couldn't afford the Soul Def at his proposed MSRP range but if they came out at a discounted price like the Omen, and Amazon shows the Essence at $1999.00 which is $1600.00 cheaper than Zu's site, if I caught a discount like that I could make it happen.

[RGA]

Mr. P

Can I recommend an alternate. Go to an audio Show. Keep your speakers for now and make a trip of it. You can buy and sell speakers but in general it's a big pain in the arse and you are kind of playing the "someone else likes it so I might too" game.

Shows are not perfect but the CAS one Dagogo puts on is open to the public, CES is easy to get into if you create a fake profile and pretend you're in business - they never check.

What this does is have all the big boys together - all in the same/similar rooms so no real advantages for any of them, hooked up to gear the makers think make them sound their best (or good enough). If you go in to a place like this with 15 speaker makers that you are interested in you can then really get an idea of what you like. Moreover, you can slash the list down to top contenders for home auditions.

A vacation like this may run you $1500 for travel/hotel but it's something that can last you years and years. You may end up finding a $3k speaker that beats a $6k speaker you were planning to get. Sure you paid $1500 for a trip but you still saved $1500 from overpaying on the $6k speaker over the $3k one.

And you will be surprised or I suppose unsurprised to find that plenty of $5k speakers beat plenty of $30k+ speakers.

Is ZU one - I have no idea but at a show you can hear a hundred speakers in your price class and have a pretty great idea of pretty much everything available in your budget. Very few stones will be left unturned. As a reviewer it is harder because I am listening to huge variety of price ranges so I can't zero in and focus on a given price bracket.

Lastly, if something does stand out for you can bypass the dealer and buy them from the manufacturer and maybe get a reduced rate.

[Geoffcin]

Shows are the WORST place to make any decision on speakers. Don't EVER make your decision there. Unless you live in a hotel room the acoustics will not match your living space.

[harley .guy07]

Shows are the WORST place to make any decision on speakers. Don't EVER make your decision there. Unless you live in a hotel room the acoustics will not match your living space.


Touché, I thought the same thing. Why go somewhere that the systems have been set up in a hurry and the acoustics are most likely inferior to your own room at home. Plus you have Jim and Slim talking about what they are hearing and not letting you listen for yourself. I think I will stick with the personal listening experience at a shop or better yet on my own system at home.

[Mr Peabody]

RGA, I was merely throwing out what I'm researching to see if any one had opinions that might help me narrow the field. I plan to audition before I buy. There could be something to eliminate a brand or push me in another's direction. It would really be a pain to have to bring all in for a trial/return cycle. I'm not in any big hurry either, it's not like I'm hurting for speakers :)

On the PMC suggestion, if you are familiar with the line what model is their floorstander?

[Geoffcin]

Touché, I thought the same thing. Why go somewhere that the systems have been set up in a hurry and the acoustics are most likely inferior to your own room at home. Plus you have Jim and Slim talking about what they are hearing and not letting you listen for yourself. I think I will stick with the personal listening experience at a shop or better yet on my own system at home.

You got that right! In addition you get sonic overload after about the 11'th room, so your shot for any kind of critical listening. Don't get me wrong though; GO to shows! It's fun to play with all the gear. Just don't make your final decision on what to buy there.

[RGA]

Audio Shows are dependent on the room quality - nevertheless as I said the pros are:

1) All rooms are roughly the same so all rooms have the same "disadvantage/Advantage"
2) All rooms are run by the manufacturer and dealer and set-up by them who are "more expert" than the average audiophile on set-up requirements for the given room
3) All ancillary gear that is used is selected by the manufacturer or typically top dealer/distributor

Loudspeakers are NOT designed to ONLY work in a customer's home. Since all customers have totally different rooms of varying quality and size and shape it's garbage excuse to say it will sound bad at a show or a dealer's home or an apartment or a cement basement. Plenty of "houses" even new ones have paper thin walls and relatively poor acoustics - the rooms at The Show in the Flamingo and Bellagio were quite good and better than a LOT of houses I have been to with audiophiles who have multi-thousand dollar systems.

Moreover, if the rooms were so bad then how does that explain the truly "exceptional" sounding rooms that do in fact play at shows. Putting my critical thinking hat on I say gee if these ten systems can sound great and a whole pile sound mediocre and they are all in rooms of the exact same construction then why would I blame the room? System A sounds 10/10 in the room System B sounds 3/10 in the room - then the "room" is certainly capable of delivering 10/10 sound quality therefore it's not the room.

Granted it could be set-up but again if the manufacturer can't set-it up why on earth would a customer be able to do it better?

The other way is to simply cross check which I have done. I made it a point to listen to several speakers at a dealer, in a few homes, in my home and at a show and in every case the speakers sounded very largely the same in every location used. Some differences in bass but in general - what I hear with the Maggie 20.1 at CES was the same as what I heard in Vancouver's show case room ( a dedicated professionally acoustically treated room) and the open space room at Soundhounds). Subtle differences but easily enough to get what they can do. This goes for B&W, Harbeth, AN, Sonus Faber, Quads, Dynaudios, and numerous others. Once the baseline is there and you have the ability to filter out the room (easier with nearfield speakers I grant you) then to me the rest is merely excuses for mediocre sound quality and lack of experience judging quality music replay.

Indeed, many dealers go to audio shows basing what they sell on what they hear - they are investing large on such decisions. Some people have the ears for it I guess.

I am not saying don't listen at home but you can't make direct quick comparisons at home with 100 loudspeakers. Most audiophiles who trot the listen at home because it's the only place on earth it can sound good have 1 set of speakers and they bring in one or two others. So that's great you compared 3 loudspeakers but that is "hardly" playing the field. And even dealers - most of them anyway, only select the mainstream audiophile brands - because they're easiest to sell. Big corporation speakers amps etc but bigger is almost never better.

An Audio Show puts a pile of makers on the map and IMO anyway, the best "sound" does not come from the companies advertised on every other page of every magazine. Gallo, Trenner&Freidl, AN, Harbeth, Sonist, KingSound, Studio Electric, Acoustic Zen, Silbatone, Acapella, Usher Loudspeakers, all sounded a helluva lot better than the usual Paradigm, Magnepan, B&W, SF, of the world. Most of these makers most people have never heard of because High End dealers are shifting to home theater in droves and if a company doesn't make such offerings they are not getting carried. So listening at home won't happen if you don't know about them (not heavily marketed) and you can't hear them at a dealer since few carry them.

That is why I said use a show to target speakers in a given price class and cross off the ones you know won't likely cut it and then from that list you can bring them home.

[harley .guy07]

I was not trying to say that shows are a bad thing. I think shows are a good way to see the manufacturers that you might not be able to see otherwise and get some physical since of the products. But I was just saying that I don't believe that I would make a big purchasing decision based off of something that I heard at a show without hearing it in a more controlled environment without all the people and it is true that a persons ability to due critical listening suffers after a while of hearing different setups in my opinion.

[RGA]

harley

Exactly true. You can't rely on a show to make a buying decision - I try not to judge something too much on a show especially if I have not heard it in another place. But if you are ever at a show and you are trying to seriously audition something talk to the people running it and ask them for a quiet audition. Most respond well to this. Indeed, some will give you a private audition.

It's also tough to judge if they won't let you play your own music because the people running it can have music that is tailored to what the system does well.

I was very disappointed in rooms that would not allow me to play difficult music and played at absurdly low levels with absurdly simplistic music. The Magnepan 1.7/Bryston room was extremely disappointing for me because 1) they played simple music at low volumes 2) they controlled the number of people in and told people when to leave 3) would not let you play what you wanted at reasonable drive levels.

So anyone who waxes poetic on that room IMO has an issue because the only thing they heard was soft string music which shows off only mid frequencies and spatial cues - which is fine since panels typically do well with this anyway but since 99% of music sold today isn't limited to that it is rather frustrating to be able to audition them properly. Fortunately, my dealer carries the 1.7 and also carries Bryston (and much better amps) to be able to get more of a sense of them. So a show is not great for many many rooms. They sound better at my dealer but really that's because they have more and arguably better music and the customer can listen by himself at the volume they like.

I just don't believe that CES or the FLamingo rooms are bad enough that the room itself would ruin the audiophile's ability to get at least a 85-90% sense of what the speaker is about. Bass issues are the big issue for most though. The Big Soundlabs was in a room far too small and as a result I felt they sounded pretty lousy. Boom and sizzle and no sense of pressurizing the instruments. But the people running the room apparently had the room switched on them or something last minute so it's an issue you can't be critical of the speaker. The U1 sounded quite excellent years back so that's where you know the room is a problem.

Also I heard Magico sound great but again I didn't have control of the music played or volume so I gave it a high rating but it didn't make my top 5 because it may have been playing to its strength. I've never heard them prior to that either so it's hard to get too into rave mode until a few more auditions.

[Mr Peabody]

I thought Bryston and PMC were in the same camp.

[Geoffcin]

Gee, there's just so much to disagree with it's not fair!


Audio Shows are dependent on the room quality - nevertheless as I said the pros are:
1) All rooms are roughly the same so all rooms have the same "disadvantage/Advantage"


Quite an assumption or your part, but as anyone who has stayed in a hotel can tell you; All rooms are NOT created equal. I won't even go into the advantage at a show of having a quite next door neighbor instead of the 95dB "floppy box" speaker guy showing how loud he can play his flea watt amp.



2) All rooms are run by the manufacturer and dealer and set-up by them who are "more expert" than the average audiophile on set-up requirements for the given room

Again, a total assumption on your part. Most manufactures don't have a clue on how to make a sonically challenged hotel room sound good. Some do a good job though, as Vince Bruzzese, owner of Totem Acoustic, covered his entire room in acoustic treatments!



3) All ancillary gear that is used is selected by the manufacturer or typically top dealer/distributor.

Yes, and as such your most likely NOT going to be using it. Showing off your $3k speakers with a $10k digital source and driven by a $40k amp doesn't help me when I'm looking for speakers in a $5k system.



Loudspeakers are NOT designed to ONLY work in a customer's home. Since all customers have totally different rooms of varying quality and size and shape it's garbage excuse to say it will sound bad at a show or a dealer's home or an apartment or a cement basement. Plenty of "houses" even new ones have paper thin walls and relatively poor acoustics - the rooms at The Show in the Flamingo and Bellagio were quite good and better than a LOT of houses I have been to with audiophiles who have multi-thousand dollar systems.

Well that's just sad. I can say for sure that my room sounds better than any "hotel room" for acoustics. Of course I designed it that way when I had it built, but even before that I knew all about refection points and room nodes. Most audiophiles that I know do too.



Moreover, if the rooms were so bad then how does that explain the truly "exceptional" sounding rooms that do in fact play at shows. Putting my critical thinking hat on I say gee if these ten systems can sound great and a whole pile sound mediocre and they are all in rooms of the exact same construction then why would I blame the room? System A sounds 10/10 in the room System B sounds 3/10 in the room - then the "room" is certainly capable of delivering 10/10 sound quality therefore it's not the room.
Granted it could be set-up but again if the manufacturer can't set-it up why on earth would a customer be able to do it better?.

I would ALWAYS blame the room. I'll give you a for instance: I've heard the Von Schweikert Audio VR4jr, and VR9se speakers at the same time in adjacent rooms at a show and the VR4jr sounded better by quite a large margin. The VR9's, even though they were driven by some of the most expensive gear imaginable,(and having the room setup by the speaker's designer!) sounded congested and disjointed compared the the VR4jr. That sad fact is that in a 12'x18' room the VR9'se are just not good as near-field monitors.



The other way is to simply cross check which I have done. I made it a point to listen to several speakers at a dealer, in a few homes, in my home and at a show and in every case the speakers sounded very largely the same in every location used. Some differences in bass but in general - what I hear with the Maggie 20.1 at CES was the same as what I heard in Vancouver's show case room ( a dedicated professionally acoustically treated room) and the open space room at Soundhounds). Subtle differences but easily enough to get what they can do. This goes for B&W, Harbeth, AN, Sonus Faber, Quads, Dynaudios, and numerous others. Once the baseline is there and you have the ability to filter out the room (easier with nearfield speakers I grant you) then to me the rest is merely excuses for mediocre sound quality and lack of experience judging quality music replay.

You need an ear check my friend. I've heard the same speaker driven by exactly the same equipment sound totally different in different rooms. Having a "dedicated professionally acoustically treated room" means almost nothing either if you've placed the speakers too close or too far from the walls.



Indeed, many dealers go to audio shows basing what they sell on what they hear - they are investing large on such decisions. Some people have the ears for it I guess.

Doing an awful lot of guessing aren't we? If I were you I would stick with what I know about rather than try to guess what drives dealers to make decisions on what they want to carry.



I am not saying don't listen at home but you can't make direct quick comparisons at home with 100 loudspeakers. Most audiophiles who trot the listen at home because it's the only place on earth it can sound good have 1 set of speakers and they bring in one or two others. So that's great you compared 3 loudspeakers but that is "hardly" playing the field. And even dealers - most of them anyway, only select the mainstream audiophile brands - because they're easiest to sell. Big corporation speakers amps etc but bigger is almost never better.

The way a speaker sounds in your own home is the ONLY thing that matters. It's where you should make your decision. Your idea that you have to listen to 100 speakers to make your mind up is farcical. So I say go to shows yes. But don't make up your mind there. Good or bad!

[RGA]

I have heard enough speakers in enough locations to be able to tell what they're about in less than ideal rooms. Having treatments means zilch since the treatment is speaker specific as well as room specific. You can treat a room for one speaker to tame issues that would actually hurt another speaker to varying degrees.

You don't have to listen to 100 speakers but a show give you an opportunity to hear more speakers that are not chosen based on sales volume. Chances are that most dealers don't carry a lot of what I and others commonly find to be the best sounding loudspeakers. King Sound for example is much better and much cheaper than any Magnepan and chances are YOU have never auditioned one. And that you probably would only get that chance at a show. It sounds better under Show conditions in the same rooms as magnepan and the king room in a show condition also sounded better than a showcase room where the room was treated specifically for 20.1s. So despite the conditions the King sound better in a "worse" room. I get that the folks who play the room card so much are usually the ones defending the speakers that sound so poor so often in so many rooms. But manufacturers are provided with the room dimensions and construction materials of the room before they go. Detailed measurements of the hotel rooms are provided. CES and The Show 2010 the rooms were typical of a home listening environment. Treatments should be brought by manufacturers.

I guess I don't know why there is argument here when plenty of rooms make first class sound under the same constraints that others have. The Trenner and Freidl Room, AN rooms, Teresonic room, Acapella room, was exactly the same as 50 other rooms with similar sized loudspeakers. They managed to sound outstanding. No more or less time to set-up. Indeed some of these had no treatments of any kind and they sounded far better than many rooms using them.

I guess what I would say - is with a speaker that sounds bad at a show, at a dealer, in an audiophiles home where it has been set up properly - what would be my motivation to say gee speaker X always sounds bad where I have heard - I think I will waste time and money to bring it home and spend $10,000 on room treatments in to see if it was "just the other room" fault. I just don't get why anyone would bother. If they're THAT much of a pain to get to sound remotely decent and dealers and the manufacturer can't get them to sound good why would the consumer think they know more about the manufacturer. And then to top all that off many of these supposed pain in the arse speakers need to be after market modded either replacing caps, wires or doing things to the tweeter. Huh?

Actually many dealers love such speakers that you continuously have to fiddle with to get right. There is an endless upgrade path to such loudspeakers. Selling people treatments, amplifiers, cables, modifications, sources. It's very profitable to carry speakers that never sound quite right.

[harley .guy07]

I do understand the argument that going to shows will give you a sense of what equipment will sound like but I will also side with some others on this topic and say that the room makes one heck of a difference in sound and I know through knowing several audiophiles that have spent a lot of time in their listening rooms that the same equipment and speakers will sound so much different in different rooms that you can get two different opinions on the same gear in different situations and rooms. Since I have moved and now have a dedicated room to my equipment that I have been way more satisfied with my system by having the freedom to change speaker placement and what ever it takes to get the sound that I want. I am far from done with my listening room but for now I think I have a good sound in the room I have but some room treatments would be a good addition and I know this and besides dealing with some equipment upgrades I have been planing for a while in the preamp area after that I think I will rest my wallet and concentrate on getting my room perfected for the equipment that I have. I know I don't have the highest end stuff out there but I have auditioned some very expensive systems out there in rooms where they just sit the stuff in there and to me my system smashes these systems in sound quality and overall enjoyment. Its not perfect but what system is really. That is why as audiophiles we are on a never ending quest to better our sound. If it were as easy as changing speakers or equipment then we would all buy the same electronics and be happy but also the human ear factors in here when it comes to the fact that every one of us hear differently and what RGA might love I might not like and vise a versa.

[RGA]

To give Geoff the benefit here - Magnepan and Dipoles in general are noted to be relatively fussy with rooms so I get where he's coming from to a degree. I am coming from a position where I had to take down all my room treatments (except for a couple) because they made my speakers sound too dead. My speakers tend to sound rather terrific in any room and pretty darn good even when they're in undesirable rooms. Some speakers are simply more room friendly than others so I get that. But at the same time this background that I have also makes me somewhat "less tolerant" of other designs that are grossly room unfriendly. They spend $3500 on a speaker because the $5k speaker I have is too much money. But then down the line they can never get the speaker to work so they invest in $2000 in treatments, $1500 in mods, and make their listening room a mess to accommodate sound that still isn't as good as the $5k speaker without all that extra time effort and money. And then add to all that having to buy a subwoofer or two and possibly and amp to accommodate the subs.

IMO quality loudspeakers ought to be designed for "typical or average" domestic homes which means they should not be designed for walls that are made out of foam treatments but walls that made out of wood and for "typical" home furnishings. Obviously they can't do everything and perhaps you can't get the speakers 100% in such rooms but nor should they sound like completely caca. If a person is spending $1700 on a loudspeaker they should not have to rebuild their room in order to get decent sound.

You can put a Magnepan 1.7 in a CES hotel room, my dealer room, or the "perfect" acoustic room for it and guess what - it is still going to sound like a 1.7 and it still not going to sound like a Quad 2905. It will still have a ribbon tweeter sound and it will still not have deep bass nor will it pressurize a room like a dynamic speaker. So what % gain in "quality" will be achieved or lost. No answer to this because there isn't one. Instead if it gets critical remarks the excuse is - the room was bad, the amp wasn't powerful enough, it wasn't set-up properly. Yes because they can never be set up properly and no amp is good enough and no one has the right treatments. It's a gold mine for the dealer - they sell piles of amps, cd players, cables, subwoofers, and other stuff to these folks. I mean the soundlabs room was raving about these little bells they put on the walls to diffuse sound to get rid of reflections and other such nonsense. They were not inexpensive if I recall either. And all of these things may be fun to play with and all but the time and money to fix something that isn't really working as well as plenty of other speakers that require none of that stuff is what I question.

[musicman1999]

Hey Mr. P

Hows things? As you know I am a big fan of Focal speakers and I have heard the 826's but only briefly and it was in a shop so forming a good opinion was hard. Others in that series that I have spent time with are all solid performers. I have recently added a pair of Focal 1007BE and if you can find a set they are truly outstanding speakers, lush mid-range, tight musical bass and the Beryllium tweeter. They need careful component matching as they are very revealing.

bill

[Geoffcin]

To give Geoff the benefit here - Magnepan and Dipoles in general are noted to be relatively fussy with rooms so I get where he's coming from to a degree.

Please don't feel the need to give me any "benefits" as I'm perfectly happy to debate some of your more absurd remarks without any. Speaking of which, anyone who is interested in dipoles finds out very early on that they are NOT fussy in any way except their placement distance from the front wall.




IMO quality loudspeakers ought to be designed for "typical or average" domestic homes which means they should not be designed for walls that are made out of foam treatments but walls that made out of wood and for "typical" home furnishings. Obviously they can't do everything and perhaps you can't get the speakers 100% in such rooms but nor should they sound like completely caca. If a person is spending $1700 on a loudspeaker they should not have to rebuild their room in order to get decent sound.

Boy am I glad that you aren't designing speakers! In my opinion the best speakers have low distortion, good frequency response, and adequate dispersion. Regardless of design! Designers are always up against these three problems. Some have decided that they can accept higher distortion levels to artificially boost low frequency response, but I for one have a hard time listening to speakers with that kind of floppy distorted "boxy" bass.



You can put a Magnepan 1.7 in a CES hotel room, my dealer room, or the "perfect" acoustic room for it and guess what - it is still going to sound like a 1.7 and it still not going to sound like a Quad 2905. It will still have a ribbon tweeter sound and it will still not have deep bass nor will it pressurize a room like a dynamic speaker. .

Thank god for that! The 1.7 has really taken the audio world by storm. Who would have though that Magnepan could take what was originally thought of as one of the best buys in audio and manage not only to significantly improve it, but keep the cost virtually the same! Jonathan Valin of TAS called it "An Unqualified Triumph!" he also said that driven by the 28b Bryston amps at CES they had "astonishing power in the low end, which seems to extend down to somewhere around 35-40Hz" Were you both describing the same room? Perhaps there were so many punters like yourself at CES that they couldn't give all the wanna-be reviewers the grand tour of what the 1.7 was capable of? Valin also mentions the 1.7 in the same breath as the Magico Q5, one of the best cost-no-object statement speakers on the market for his "Best in show" award. Not bad for a modest budget speaker eh?

[Geoffcin]

Hey Mr. P

Hows things? As you know I am a big fan of Focal speakers and I have heard the 826's but only briefly and it was in a shop so forming a good opinion was hard. Others in that series that I have spent time with are all solid performers. I have recently added a pair of Focal 1007BE and if you can find a set they are truly outstanding speakers, lush mid-range, tight musical bass and the Beryllium tweeter. They need careful component matching as they are very revealing.

bill

I'm a fan of Focal speakers too. I have the discontinued Focal Micron Carats in my computer rig. They use the previous Tioxid version of their inverted dome. I've heard the new Beryllium tweeter in the Utopia's and it's absolutely fantastic!

[Mr Peabody]

Hi Bill, I definitely plan to get out to see what Focal, American carries. A local shop recently picked up Sim Audio. I heard one Sim system drive Sonus Faber, Liuto. The system sounded good but not as impressive as I imagined. That could have been a number of things. I plan to attend a show/party there and look forward to hearing Sim again to see if things are different. Maybe even different music might help.

I picked up a Bryston 3bst not long ago. I have it in a second system. I find the amp surprisingly warm. It seems to be conservatively rated. I thought it would be similar to Krell but only in power, the amp I have doesn't have the grip on the bass Krell displays and as mentioned it's warmer.

[saymir]

Well,my opinion abaut Dynaudio is the same.Bass and the midrange is lacking transparency,while the highs sound clear ,soft and detailed. Sometimes I like such sound,sometimes I don't.That is my opinion abaut contour s1.4 .May be I have to try use diffrent speaker cables and try eliminate that dark sound character
I have Harbeth SHL5 ,which midrange is the best i have heard so far,clear warm and transparent at the same time,highs is more extended than dynaudio and sound more realistic.The bass mainly depends on the amp,might sound powerfull and deep,and with some amps shy,but overall impression -no boominess,well balanced bass and speakers,very musical speakers indeed

[mlsstl]

Geoffcin: "Speaking of which, anyone who is interested in dipoles finds out very early on that they are NOT fussy in any way except their placement distance from the front wall."
Besides small rooms, where it is difficult to get proper distance, dipoles are also problematic where the wall behind the speakers is asymmetical.

I owned a pair of Maggie 1.6QRs for several years and really enjoyed them. When we move 4 1/2 years ago they simply didn't work at this house. The problem is one speaker had solid wall behind it and the other had a door opening behind it to the right. I spent several months trying to get them to work acceptably.

That's how I ended up with my Spendor SP1/2Es. They have well behaved but tight dispersion in the midrange and were not bothered by the rear wall issue. Right now, Bach's Concerto in D minor for Harpsicord sounds pretty dang good...

[RGA]

Geoff

If the only problem with them is positioning as you claim then in a large hotel room with solid walls why did none of them sound any good. So now panels don't need any room treatments just lots of space around them. My dealer carries Magnepan. I stand by my view of their sound whether it is a popular view of them doesn't interest me. McDonald's is popular as well.

The 1.7 were being played with a center channel - guess Valin didn't notice this. He also didn't mention what kind of music was being played. Since they only played 2 cuts under 10 minutes long combined it makes me curious why they played soft strings in my session. Yes some people did love it. bass frequency is contentious but it could not handle anything I throw at them to an acceptable level for the price IME.

People like different things. There are writers at dagogo who like and dislike Magnepan sound so that's fine and John Marks of Stereophile isn't a fan either. I actually tend to like polarizing products because at the very least the supporters are hugely passionate about the sound they like. It's better to be passionate about your system because you'll probably be happier with it. Valin has his supporters but I'm not one.
And I frankly don't trust the guy's hearing ability or ethics. I was sitting beside him in the Legacy room for a time and I didn't love the sound of the Legacy speakers either - and Doug Schroeder of dagogo just bought them as his reference speakers replacing the King Sound panels - I didn't much care for the old Whipsers in the 1990's when a big dealer carried them and I didn't care for them at CES - so not everyone agrees on every product. I actually agreed with Valin on the Technical Brain and Magico room but not on the 1.7/Bryston http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=5093#5093 However, in the summer I can probably borrow a set to take home with me to see if I can coax something better out of them. The bass is actually not a big concern for me - it is the midrange/treble and listening window that bothers me a little. I just don't see the point when King Sound is an electrostat that makes speakers in the same price range as the 3.6 on up.

[Mr Peabody]

If your 1.4's "lacked detail" in the low end, there was an issue. If there is any one thing most agree on about Dynaudio their speakers have one of the best bass responses in the biz. It usually takes an amp that can produce current to bring the response out. One of the better brands of cables with Dyn's are Transparent. When I drove mine with Krell my
t2.5's had quick and powerful transient response. I don't think there's any electronics that will over come the Dyn's dark character but it was less prominent with the Krell. As a trade off, Krell has it's strengths but warmth and sweet isn't it.

[Geoffcin]

I think "lacked detail" in the low end is a euphemism for lacked distortion. A lot of people with less well controlled speakers (Harbeth,and others floppy box speakers) tend to think that the sound of second order bass distortion is beautiful, and as such call it "detail". I prefer to call it what it is; Distortion. Dynaudio, B&W and Focal (among other quality manufacturers) go to great lengths to make their speaker with LESS bass distortion by damping the cabinet effectively. I am a fan of this type of speaker.

[Raj J]

I am sort of looking at speakers, I'd like if possible to keep the high quality of my Dyn's while gaining in transparency and efficiency. Here's what I have in mind if you have actually heard any of these I'd appreciate your opinion and what gear you heard them with.

Sonus Faber, I suspect the Toy tower might be too small for my room and the Liuto will be too difficult to drive. But I could actually get an in home listen.

Focal, 826; the brand in a local big box store

PSB, Synchrony Two; I'm concerned here because of mention of a dark character, this may be a way of saying "lack of transparency". In addition, the Dyn's are sort of dark, I'm trying to find a less damped sound.

Monitor Audio, GX; I know not out yet but any experience with GS?

I've considered the Klipsch Reference RF7II. Although I like Klipsch and find some models I've used fun I'm not convinced they could be my main speaker. In general, they seem not to hold the sound stage together at high volume despite claiming low distortion, not sure what the issue, they also don't have the type of bass I like. The Dyn's play deep and give a full body bass where the Klipsch provide sort of a surface bass. For instance, with Klipsch a Tom Tom sounds like it's being struck on the top but you don't get the sound of the body of the drum. The new Reference is supposed to have trickle down technology from the Paladium so I haven't totally ruled them out.

As I posted on another thread I was all set to bring in a pair of Zu Audio, Soul Superfly but it looks like their high impedance will be a deal breaker. Still investigating this issue. Other suggestions of high efficient speakers that might sound good would be appreciated, well, other recs in general as well.

good day mr. P;
regarding your selection of speakers; I would advise based on your current pre-power combination of conrad johnson gear. I believe you have MV60 in monoblock version and a CT6 preamp - excellent!
the best sound I have achieved with c-j amplification and to be true to the c-j sound because c-j is for TRUE music lovers not for show offs or thunderous blasts;
I would personally go for panel type speakers, list as follows:
Quad 2905 or Quad 2805
Quad 989 (not so much the 988)
Martin Logan CLS IIZ
Martin Logan (older requests or sequel III)
Innersound (i for get the model, but their all very nice), the new stuff is sound by Sanders.
Magnepan either 3.6/R or the new 1.7
the MG 20.1 is definitely better, but requires a huge room!

I personally do not care for dynamic types any more, unless they were the following:
Wilson Alexandria
Sonus Faber stradevari
Proac

these were fantastic speakers compared to other dynamic types, but dam expensive.
another one I would go for considering the c-j combo you have is any Apogee if you can get your hands one. but they are very rare...

I would consider the Quads ESL, they work magic with c-j gear, you have to experience it.
cheers,
Raj J

[Mr Peabody]

Raj, electrostats are a great option with good tube gear, unfortunately, my room space doesn't allow for proper set up. Another thing, I do like a wide variety of music and owning Dyn's for years have me spoiled to a good bass response, so whatever I go with will have to have acceptable bass response.. I haven't heard Quads, none in this area, I'd like to check them out though.

[Ajani]

If your 1.4's "lacked detail" in the low end, there was an issue. If there is any one thing most agree on about Dynaudio their speakers have one of the best bass responses in the biz. It usually takes an amp that can produce current to bring the response out. One of the better brands of cables with Dyn's are Transparent. When I drove mine with Krell my
t2.5's had quick and powerful transient response. I don't think there's any electronics that will over come the Dyn's dark character but it was less prominent with the Krell. As a trade off, Krell has it's strengths but warmth and sweet isn't it.

And I used to think we disagreed on Dyns... Yet that is exaclty how I would describe them... I'm not fond of the dark character but the bass is so good that I'm almost willing to look past it... I would love to hear Dyn bass with my XPA-2...

[Mr Peabody]

I found I have Totem and Harbeth in our area, looks like Harbeth is expensive, a $2k bookshelf with only a 5" driver had better be impressive. They also carry a brand called Divore that I had never heard of, any one know about them?

Totem looks interesting, any one heard them? The Arrow or Hawk look to be in my range.

[RGA]

Mr. P

Everyone will go around the issue without recognizing certain truths about certain speakers. You like bass, you like it to to be able to drive some heavy metal on occasion and it needs to be in a medium sized room and it has to be tube friendly. Certain speakers simply do this a lot better than other speakers. And while all speakers have their faults in some way shape or form, I hold to listening to speakers that are not readily available. Others have made suggestions on those lines as well.

FWIW the Danes I have heard at Soundhounds are about as good dollar for dollar as any of the big name brands and arguably better than most. The thick bass is present arguably because most loudspeakers that use heavy damping store energy longer than some high efficiency designs. The trick is to sound open, fast, clean while also retaining the decay of notes (the sound of the piano box for example - which is a lingering sound), and not interfere with the next note.

Bass is crucial to me. Not the depth - depth is somewhat overrated to me but I want the ability to hear all the different kinds of bass and stay away from one note bass.

Unfortunately, Until you really audition the stuff the suggestions mean very little because I read far too many comments and opinions on things where people have never actually heard the speakers. They read a review, or a forum post and parrot it back over and over. A show may have its faults but a show, coupled with a dealer/home audition will be very telling.

I made a list of the best rooms I heard at CES for example. And it was interesting to note that almost every speaker that made my top 5-10 were speakers owned by other members of the writing staff. And even the speakers they chose as second or third to what they ended up buying, or speakers they owned and traded in, were also on the list. The Cream rises to the top.

The best speakers regardless of price, name brand, or ease of access in no order were
King Sound Prince II
Martin Logan Summit X
Wilson Sophia II
Wilson Sasha
Harbeth Super HL5
Acoustic Zen Crescendo
Usher Be10
Audio Note E/Spe He
Audio Note E/Sec Signature
Gallo 3.5
Reference 3a Grand Veena
Studio Electric
Sony Loudspeakers (model # escapes me)
Magico Q5
JM Labs Utopia
Silbatone Aporia Full Range
Perfect 8 "The Force"
Gershman Acoustics "The Swan"
Acapella High Violoncello II
Trenner and Freidl RA Box
The Devore Loudspeakers in the NFS (Not for Sale room)
Teresonic Ingenium


This is not exactly a list of household name brands and in most cases I preferred virtually every one of these to the stuff that even good dealers like Soundhounds has carried over the years. The only ones the average person has heard of his Martin Logan (thanks to being sold at Future Shop) and Sony loudspeakers just because it has the name Sony on it.

Now you have to delete the high priced ones because as good as they are it gets silly when you have $350,000 in Perfect 8 speakers or whatever they were priced at. Most here are above $10k. Then you want higher sensitivity and to be driven by tubes and in a medium room. The list gets small very fast.

You want a big dynamic sound with terrific bass quality and good depth, you want non -fatiguing sound, highish sensitivity, a speaker that several known panel reviewer owners leave so that you know they have to be very close to or as good as or better in the open fast and clean sounding department, that will fit in a small/medium room, from a relatively small footprint (hence why big speakers don't work) and now you really are asking a LOT of a loudspeaker. I had pretty much the same desire.

I wanted horn-like dynamics and something that sounded as good as or better than Martin Logan Odyssey and 989's in the midrange, but also had a good deal of bass depth and could be driven by a SET. Also, a speakers that was as clear and clean and distortion free as my Sennheiser HD 600s in the listening position of an average living room with no acoustic treatments would be nice. Check, check, check and check. Bottom line is there is very very little out there that can do those things.

The only speakers that cut it IMO are the Devore, Audio Note E/Spe He (although the J is the same thing with 10hz less and a bit easier to drive) Gallo 3.5 and the Harbeths. And of these I don't know that a lower powered amp would work as well with the Gallo or Harbeths for example or that the Devore's would have enough oomph.

[Mr Peabody]

RGA, it sounds like you understood what i was looking for any way :) Now if I could get that in an affordable price then even more the impossible.

Do you remember much about the DeVore? Those are here in town, a bit expensive but a possibility if it got more checks than other brands.

[RGA]

Totem looks interesting, any one heard them? The Arrow or Hawk look to be in my range.

Your Dynaudios are better. Totem is Canadian and used to use Dynaudio Drivers - partly why they were good loudspeakers. They don't use Dane drivers and IMO don't sound as good. You pay a huge premium for their styling. certainly give them a listen - they're not easy to drive typically. The standmounts are better than their floorstanders. Again I would stay with Danes or go with PMC dollar for dollar here where compact speakers are the goal. PMC is probably the speaker I would go with for the "type" of sound desired. The best bang of the lot is the TB1 and 2 which I considered buying way back when. PMC also makes floorstanders that are supposed to be very good but I have not heard the new ones and by new I mean in the last 5 years.

[RGA]

I did not comment too much on the Devore speakers at CES because they were not selling them and I had no idea on the prices. Nor did I "test" them the same as I did with other rooms. I liked the sound and nothing put me off but I also didn't listen to them under duress. I know they have their supporters so it would be worth listening to. I got the impression they were more relaxing kind of laid back speakers but the music choice and the funky green lights very likely influenced my impression.

[harley .guy07]

I found I have Totem and Harbeth in our area, looks like Harbeth is expensive, a $2k bookshelf with only a 5" driver had better be impressive. They also carry a brand called Divore that I had never heard of, any one know about them?

Totem looks interesting, any one heard them? The Arrow or Hawk look to be in my range.

RGA is right on this one for sure. they used to use dynaudio drivers when they were available and now they have switched to a china look a like driver called Hivi which makes a driver that looks just like a dyn driver but I know they don't pack the technology and quality in them that dyn does so basically you are looking at a downgrade in my opinion. In fact Parts express sold them for a while but I have noticed that they still sell hivi but not the Dynaudio lookalikes so it makes me wonder if they got some kind of scrutiny for the look with out the performance

[Geoffcin]

I found I have Totem and Harbeth in our area, looks like Harbeth is expensive, a $2k bookshelf with only a 5" driver had better be impressive. They also carry a brand called Divore that I had never heard of, any one know about them?

Totem looks interesting, any one heard them? The Arrow or Hawk look to be in my range.

I think you will like the Totem sound. They have a similar design concept as Dyns, although Totem uses a special (and expensive) boron silicate damping material in their construction, which also includes a multiple layered cabinet. No "floppy box" here!. I was very impressed with both the Mani-2 sig, and the Rainmaker. IMHO these are some of the best speakers you can get in their respective classes. The Mani-2 Sig in particular has the bass of a full sized floor stander in (large) standmount sized box. It does this by using two woofers in an isobarik configuration. I've never heard faster and clean bass from any coned speaker near it's price point. The only problem with Totems is that they like current. If you amp can't deliver current into a 4 ohm load then you might be disapointed.

[devuonoste]

Hi Mr. P.,

Have you ever auditioned Merlin VSM speakers? I know there are several versions of the VSM but most, if not all reviews of all of the versions have been positive. I know they use a Dynaudio tweeter, but the reviews of these speakers tend to describe them as very detailed, airy speakers that are also smooth and transparent. I know they are not the most efficient but they are supposedly not hard to drive and I think the combination of your CJ system with these speakers would provide amazing sound. These are often found on audiogon for around the $2500-$4000 range. Not sure if you have a dealer near you for auditions but you may get lucky and have someone near your area selling them or someone that owns them and would welcome an audition.

Good Luck

[devuonoste]

Hi Mr. P.,

I also forgot to mention GR Research DIY speakers. Not sure if you have any knowledge of these but Danny Ritchie of GR Research is a very well respected speaker designer. He has a variety of kits available for DIYs. Not sure if you are interested in a DIY project but if you are GR Research speakers have amazing reviews and a very loyal following. If you are not interested in DIY then you can also visit his forum under audiocircle and you'll find someone who will build the speakers for you and all you have to do is pick out what you want and they'll build them. Some amazing work has been done by " Out of the Woods". See his website and see the section for audiocircle and then visit posts from " Out of the Woods" and you'll see some of his work. Also, I think the Skiing Ninja can build some of the projects as well, but you may want to contact them to make sure. The website for the ninja is: http://www.skiingninja.com/

The GR Research website is : http://www.gr-research.com/

You can also contact Danny directly and he can steer you in the right direction in terms of what speaker kit will work best for you and he can also suggest the best builder for you as well. I think his stuff is probably the best bang for your buck gear in the audio industry.

[saymir]

If your 1.4's "lacked detail" in the low end, there was an issue. If there is any one thing most agree on about Dynaudio their speakers have one of the best bass responses in the biz.
No,the bass doesn't lack detail,just transparency,it is tuneful.Sometimes i feel that the bass is cutted,similar feelings of dynaudio c5 owners in reviews in order avoid boominess or something like that;)

[Florian]

Its 2010 and RGA still debates dipoles and monopoles.... geeez you really havent learned anything

[Feanor]

Its 2010 and RGA still debates dipoles and monopoles.... geeez you really havent learned anything
Hi, Flo, good to hear from you! :thumbsup:

Yep, RGA is slow learner but he is making some progress. Today, thanks to his amateur review exploits, he has learned that, indeed, there is good sounding equipment other than Audio Note.

And as for dipoles, well, he even admits that King Sound electrostatics are pretty good.

http://www.kingsaudio.com.hk/img/King-system-Prince-II-intro.jpg

[RGA]

Yes and if panel guys would figure out that there are good boxes and actually get of their couch and listen to the "specific" boxes that i talk about rather than Assume they think they know what they will sound like then we could actually have a conversation on point. I did the work to audition the Soundlabs, Apogee Scintilla, Duetta Sig, All the Magnepans, the King Sound, Prince II and King II, most all of the Martin Logans over the past 15 years, SanderSound, InnerSound, the top Quads. I have attempted to listen to as many such offering as possible. And some of these have sounded quite good.

King Sound was one of my top 5 selections in the under $10k price range at CES and Martin Logan's Summit while not making my final cut in the above $10k group was in the running - they managed to get the driver integration thing done better than any other ML session I have been involved in. And they sounded good with modest Mystere tube amps to boot.

Maybe I am just pickier when it comes to panel sound - but panels were one of the first speakers to get me interested in High End audio in the first place. I am just willing to recognize and discuss their weaknesses where other will simply put blinders on and pretend they're perfect without any sonic weakness. Most reviewers own boxed loudspeakers even though they have the space, experience and money for panels. They have big strengths and big weaknesses which is why they're polarizing. I don't get why people can't admit to those things.

And perhaps when people consider that reviewers who owned famous named panels from Apogee, Quad, Magnepan, like Jack Roberts, Art Dudley, Constantine Soo, Doug Schroeder, Paul Messenger, and others went to boxes of some sort might tell you that there are other options that are just as if not more desirable. But they all must be wrong - not allowed to have their opinion right?

The Prince II may be one of the better bang for buck speakers available. It sounds a LOT better than the 20.1 and has more drive than than the Quad 2905. But the best news is that it's $6,000 and built very well to boot. I prefer the ESL sound to the ribbon sound in general so when one can buy it for less or the same price as a ribbon counterpart then it gets me even more excited. But the Prince II still isn't ideal for those of us who have larger musical appetites. But it does have some bass though the King would be better here but it didn't sound quite as good as the Prince under show conditions.

[Ajani]

Yes and if panel guys would figure out that there are good boxes and actually get of their couch and listen to the "specific" boxes that i talk about rather than Assume they think they know what they will sound like then we could actually have a conversation on point. I did the work to audition the Soundlabs, Apogee Scintilla, Duetta Sig, All the Magnepans, the King Sound, Prince II and King II, most all of the Martin Logans over the past 15 years, SanderSound, InnerSound, the top Quads. I have attempted to listen to as many such offering as possible. And some of these have sounded quite good.

King Sound was one of my top 5 selections in the under $10k price range at CES and Martin Logan's Summit while not making my final cut in the above $10k group was in the running - they managed to get the driver integration thing done better than any other ML session I have been involved in. And they sounded good with modest Mystere tube amps to boot.

Maybe I am just pickier when it comes to panel sound - but panels were one of the first speakers to get me interested in High End audio in the first place. I am just willing to recognize and discuss their weaknesses where other will simply put blinders on and pretend they're perfect without any sonic weakness. Most reviewers own boxed loudspeakers even though they have the space, experience and money for panels. They have big strengths and big weaknesses which is why they're polarizing. I don't get why people can't admit to those things.

And perhaps when people consider that reviewers who owned famous named panels from Apogee, Quad, Magnepan, like Jack Roberts, Art Dudley, Constantine Soo, Doug Schroeder, Paul Messenger, and others went to boxes of some sort might tell you that there are other options that are just as if not more desirable. But they all must be wrong - not allowed to have their opinion right?

The Prince II may be one of the better bang for buck speakers available. It sounds a LOT better than the 20.1 and has more drive than than the Quad 2905. But the best news is that it's $6,000 and built very well to boot. I prefer the ESL sound to the ribbon sound in general so when one can buy it for less or the same price as a ribbon counterpart then it gets me even more excited. But the Prince II still isn't ideal for those of us who have larger musical appetites. But it does have some bass though the King would be better here but it didn't sound quite as good as the Prince under show conditions.
:thumbsup: Very well said...

I really liked the few ESLs I've heard (Final Sound & Martin Logan), whereas I detested the only ribbon I've heard (Magnepan MG12)...

I can't wait to try out some high efficiency speakers... If only Audio Note was easily accessible, then I'd happily try out a pair...

[Florian]

Thats because the MG 12 has no ribbon :idea:

[poppachubby]

Mr P have you considered DIY open baffle or horn style speakers? They are a little of both sides of the coin, and typically the cost is insanely reduced vs. a pair of pre built. Even the flat kits available from places like Madisound represent a great value. You would certainly need a subwoofer but let me tell ya, you NEED to hear the sound from these designs/drivers.

[Ajani]

Thats because the MG 12 has no ribbon :idea:


MG12
Description 2-Way/Quasi Ribbon Planar-Magnetic
Freq. Resp. 45-22kHz ±3dB
Rec Power Read Frequently Asked Questions
Sensitivity 86dB/500Hz /2.83v
Impedance 4 Ohm
Dimensions 17 x 51 x 1.5
Available in cherry, natural or black hardwood trim, off-white, black or grey fabric.

Fine, it has a Quasi Ribbon...

[poppachubby]

They are diet ribbon, ribbon light, they are the Pepsi-Free of ribbon...

[JoeE SP9]

Pepsi Free IMO = free of tatse and flavor. A Quasi Ribbon is the same. They bear no resemblance sound wise to Magnepan's true ribbon. Damning the entire line because of the MG-12 is quite presumptive. The 1.6 and 1.7 are much better and the 3.6 and 20.1 with true ribbons are an order of magnitude better.

FWIW: I don't think to much of the MG-12. The 3.6 and 20.1 are truly something else. I consider my moving from Magnepan's to ESL's an upward move. I must point out that I moved to ESL's without owning a pair of Maggy's with ribbons. I frequently listen to 3.6 and 20.1's that two different friends own. The 3.6's are very very good. The 20.1's are simply world class IMO.

[Ajani]

Pepsi Free IMO = free of tatse and flavor. A Quasi Ribbon is the same. They bear no resemblance sound wise to Magnepan's true ribbon. Damning the entire line because of the MG-12 is quite presumptive. The 1.6 and 1.7 are much better and the 3.6 and 20.1 with true ribbons are an order of magnitude better.

FWIW: I don't think to much of the MG-12. The 3.6 and 20.1 are truly something else. I consider my moving from Magnepan's to ESL's an upward move. I must point out that I moved to ESL's without owning a pair of Maggy's with ribbons. I frequently listen to 3.6 and 20.1's that two different friends own. The 3.6's are very very good. The 20.1's are simply world class IMO.

Interesting... Considering that just about any audiophile hears from forums or review mags that Maggie MMGs, MG12 and MG1.6 (now 1.7) are the Greatest values in all of hifi and once you get a taste of planar crack you will addicted for life, you should be able to see why I'd expect a lot from the MG12... Also this is the first time I've heard someone say that there is a substantial difference in sound between the lower ranges and the higher ones... Generally the impression given is you start with an MMG and just keep moving up the line for more bass and refinement, not that the lower stuff sounds like crap and the higher models are great...

Actually what I've heard is that the great value is in the MMG to 1.7, but by the time you reach 20.1 there is better available for less money...

Anyway, I'm happy to know that I was not alone in my disappointment with the 12s..

[JoeE SP9]

The "no box" sound of Maggy's is what attracted me to them in the beginning. I still have difficulty listening to most box speakers. The ones that go to heroic methods (Wilson etc.) to calm box resonances are the only ones I can listen to.

Although I have some reservations about Maggy's I could live with the true ribbon equipped models . The lower midrange and upper bass have some problems to my ears. Anything the ribbon tweeter produces IMO rivals the best ESL's.

I must point out, even with the problems I hear from Maggy's in general they sound (to me) better than any comparably priced "monkey coffin". I still think the 1.6/1.7 is one of the best buys around. They sound much better than MG-12's.

If I wanted Maggy's and couldn't afford the 1.7's or better I'd buy a pair of MMG's and a sub. IMO the 3.6R's are the ones to have. For the price of the 20.1's you can get some pure ESL's like Quads or King Sound.

I'm beginning to think my dream system is a pair of Acoustat Spectra 44's with two pair of Magneplanar ribbon tweeters and dual 18" TL subs. All of this would be tri-amped with crossover points at 80Hz and 8KHz.

[RGA]

Interesting... Considering that just about any audiophile hears from forums or review mags that Maggie MMGs, MG12 and MG1.6 (now 1.7) are the Greatest values in all of hifi and once you get a taste of planar crack you will addicted for life, you should be able to see why I'd expect a lot from the MG12... Also this is the first time I've heard someone say that there is a substantial difference in sound between the lower ranges and the higher ones... Generally the impression given is you start with an MMG and just keep moving up the line for more bass and refinement, not that the lower stuff sounds like crap and the higher models are great...

Actually what I've heard is that the great value is in the MMG to 1.7, but by the time you reach 20.1 there is better available for less money...

Anyway, I'm happy to know that I was not alone in my disappointment with the 12s..

PM'd message to you.

[Ajani]

The "no box" sound of Maggy's is what attracted me to them in the beginning. I still have difficulty listening to most box speakers. The ones that go to heroic methods (Wilson etc.) to calm box resonances are the only ones I can listen to.

Although I have some reservations about Maggy's I could live with the true ribbon equipped models . The lower midrange and upper bass have some problems to my ears. Anything the ribbon tweeter produces IMO rivals the best ESL's.

I must point out, even with the problems I hear from Maggy's in general they sound (to me) better than any comparably priced "monkey coffin". I still think the 1.6/1.7 is one of the best buys around. They sound much better than MG-12's.

If I wanted Maggy's and couldn't afford the 1.7's or better I'd buy a pair of MMG's and a sub. IMO the 3.6R's are the ones to have. For the price of the 20.1's you can get some pure ESL's like Quads or King Sound.

I'm beginning to think my dream system is a pair of Acoustat Spectra 44's with two pair of Magneplanar ribbon tweeters and dual 18" TL subs. All of this would be tri-amped with crossover points at 80Hz and 8KHz.

If the issue is the 12s being the odd man out, then I really hope to get a chance to audition the other models in the line...

Have you tried Open Baffle speakers? I imagine that should be an interesting alternative to "monkey coffins"...

[JoeE SP9]

After using ESL's for the last 25+ years almost anything with a cone sounds slow and veiled to me. If and when I change speakers it will be another pair of ESL's

[Geoffcin]

This is not the end of the world - Magnepan is a polarizing product - several reviewers like them and some hate them.

You are mistaken. Magnepan speakers are universally liked by professional reviewers, some absolutely love them. The REAL polarizing speakers are the "floppy box" speakers that some people mistake for high fidelity, when in actuality they are highly distorted. Of course some people get attached to the distorted sound and call it "wonderful sounding" but it is still distortion no matter how much you might like it.

[RGA]

You are mistaken. Magnepan speakers are universally liked by professional reviewers, some absolutely love them. The REAL polarizing speakers are the "floppy box" speakers that some people mistake for high fidelity, when in actuality they are highly distorted. Of course some people get attached to the distorted sound and call it "wonderful sounding" but it is still distortion no matter how much you might like it.

Universally liked? Of all the magazines in print and online my question to you is do you believe most reviewers own a Box of some kind or a panel of some kind. Please illustrate that all reviewers prefer panels to boxes or that they all love panels - if it were true they would buy them because MOST positioning requirements of free standing speakers is very much the same for panels. There are a number of writers on my staff that do not like Magnepans. I like Panels more than at least one of them. John Marks of Stereophile does not like Magnepan. Don't know about other panels. Universally means everyone. Sorry there buds but I see a lot of reviewers who have owned premium panels and then buy boxes and don't look back.

And you can insult floppy boxes all you want - I get that you like to insult a speaker you've never heard - because you can't keep to apples to apples - the King Sound stuff is cheaper and miles better. Maybe get off your computer and actually try some stuff. Even Apogee or Acoustat would be a sizable upgrade - granted you'd have to buy used but still.

[Feanor]

....

And you can insult floppy boxes all you want - I get that you like to insult a speaker you've never heard - because you can't keep to apples to apples - the King Sound stuff is cheaper and miles better. Maybe get off your computer and actually try some stuff. Even Apogee or Acoustat would be a sizable upgrade - granted you'd have to buy used but still.
RGA, get back to me when King, Apogee, or Acoustat make a viable $600/pr. speaker.

[RGA]

RGA, get back to me when King, Apogee, or Acoustat make a viable $600/pr. speaker.

But wait - apparently even the maggie guys are saying the non true ribbon ones are no good. Which is it? Now the MG12 down are good with their Quasi ribbons? I would not touch the MMG with a ten foot pole. It's $600 down the drain unless all you listen to is panzy ass music. Oh wait...

And you can buy used Apogee for $600. Soundhounds sold a set not long ago for that price. I have also seen a used Scintilla for $800 that apparently only needed minor work. There are several speakers I would buy over the MMG for around the same price. Wharfedale Diamond 8.1 or 8.2 active pro-monitors (and some of their other models under a grand, Grant Fidelity's LS/3A variant, AN AX Two, PSB Alpha B-1/T1, Paradigm Monitor 5, B&W 600 series, Klipsch Reference 3 (which in Canada was selling for $599 a pair). Some of these can actually play some music with oomph.

And most end up leaving the MMG for more expensive - if it was so great you would have stayed with it but you spend more to get the 1.6 which is IMO the best "bang for buck" speaker in their product line and the one model I recommend for serious consideration. It has enough of everything at the price to make it worthwhile. And it arguably has the strongest press. The 1.7 I can see getting the same kind of press. value for the dollar for the type of music it plays. Above the price point however they're in trouble from much better sounding boxes and much better sounding panels. And the smaller models are hopeless on the most popular forms of music. IMO the 1.7 and the 1.6 are the models to consider because as you point out the better stats do not offer anything in this price range. So at least on this we agree.

[Feanor]

But wait - apparently even the maggie guys are saying the non true ribbon ones are no good. Which is it? Now the MG12 down are good with their Quasi ribbons? I would not touch the MMG with a ten foot pole. It's $600 down the drain unless all you listen to is panzy ass music. Oh wait...
For my part I'm talking about dipoles. ELS, ribbon, quasi-ribbon, magneto-planar, or even dynamic dipole (like Linkwitz Orion). Magnepan has the <$2k market wrapped up. So serioursly, let me know when then there is an full-range ELS or ribbon for the price of the MMG or even an MG 1.7 ...

And, yeah, that's right! Some do listen to pansy-ass music. Not everyone listens to that Electronica, Techo, or Trance, (Trance? WTF?). Hell, I'd same as least as many listen to chamber music.

[JoeE SP9]

The Maggy 1.7's are probably the best buy in audio for <$2K. They are speakers I could probably live with despite their shortcomings. I've already stated the MG-12 and MMG are underwhelming to me. There is a caveat there. As underwhelming as the MMG and MG-12 are (to me) they are both IMO better than any comparably priced speaker in a box.
There are boxes that sound good to me. All of them are considerably more expensive than 1.7's. The lowest priced ones are at least 50% more.

[RGA]

For my part I'm talking about dipoles. ELS, ribbon, quasi-ribbon, magneto-planar, or even dynamic dipole (like Linkwitz Orion). Magnepan has the <$2k market wrapped up. So serioursly, let me know when then there is an full-range ELS or ribbon for the price of the MMG or even an MG 1.7 ...

And, yeah, that's right! Some do listen to pansy-ass music. Not everyone listens to that Electronica, Techo, or Trance, (Trance? WTF?). Hell, I'd same as least as many listen to chamber music.

Yes the MMG is perfect for old geezers with one foot in the grave who listen to violin solos and nothing that approaches a pulse.

I just don't hear anything in them that would make me get excited about them. They're not good at either frequency extreme and they have no ability to push air. So they are essentially a background noise speaker that sound pretty good. But one can buy a $250 set of PSBs or B&Ws to do the same thing.

And you went to the 1.6 because you know you wanted more - or you would not have.

There is plenty of music in the techno/trance/electronica realm - and most young people listen to it than chamber music. The difference is a good loudspeaker that can actually do techno/trance/electronica can also do chamber music so why not have a speaker that can do both sorts of music admirably and also be easier to drive can also play louder and cover more frequency range for around the same price. I would not necessarily say that a B&W 604 for the same money as the 1.6 is outclassed. Depends on what you want. The AZ Two is a quasi horn that will give a solid 35hz doing a credible job on organ, piano, and bass with "fast" drivers in the sense that they are not pistonic motion drivers like most. They're a little coloured but far more dynamic and enveloping and for half the price of the 1.7.

Speakers ought to play everything well - or it's just not a high end/hi-fi loudspeaker.
And the likes of the 20.1 greatly struggle with this kind of stuff let alone the MMG.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1H7vZYBeHc&feature=related

Or just basic Sarah McLachlan for Pete Sake!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx9kksyjjbU&feature=related The midbass here should have it in your chest and rumble the room. A speaker's job is to reproduce what it is being fed to the artist's intent whether the artist is Corelli, Vivaldi or Delerium or DMC, Slayer. A speaker/system that can't do all music is limited on all music, period.

Heaven help them with this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDt9UB2F1E8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjW2P05Mi14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMkD9wXn3BI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYBGYJGO1wo

Buckethead http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPihVXbS79g&feature=related

I consider none of the above even as hard as it could get. I was very disappointed with the 20.1 on the following which "should" be what the 20.1 does well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2CFM4ev-g8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yyh2lSow0uE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aB4gbpBPPqE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kS8eVFq1ZdU&feature=related OR http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51ssHG0MtQg&feature=related

I just strongly recommend that you not solely read technical briefs or reviews because the last two links are basic guitar and piano solo and I'm sorry but direct comparisons really do make a case for themselves. Even those "floppy boxes" at less than half the price - just is no comparison.

[Geoffcin]

The Maggy 1.7's are probably the best buy in audio for <$2K.

Your not going to get much of an argument on this! I wouldn't give up on the less expensive maggies too fast though. My MC1's are perhaps the closest to perfect surround speaker I've ever heard, and the Magnepan CC3 center produces vocals that are true timber like no other center speaker I've heard under $3k. While my 3.6's proved just too revealing for HT service, I am seriously considering getting a pair of 1.7's to replace my current HT mains.

[Feanor]

Yes the MMG is perfect for old geezers with one foot in the grave who listen to violin solos and nothing that approaches a pulse.
...
And you went to the 1.6 because you know you wanted more - or you would not have.
...
Yes, of course, the MG 1.6 is a much better speaker than the MMG. But I would never had bought the 1.6 if I hadn't first owned the MMG.

...
Speakers ought to play everything well - or it's just not a high end/hi-fi loudspeaker.
And the likes of the 20.1 greatly struggle with this kind of stuff let alone the MMG.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1H7vZYBeHc&feature=related

Or just basic Sarah McLachlan for Pete Sake!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx9kksyjjbU&feature=related The midbass here should have it in your chest and rumble the room. A speaker's job is to reproduce what it is being fed to the artist's intent whether the artist is Corelli, Vivaldi or Delerium or DMC, Slayer. A speaker/system that can't do all music is limited on all music, period.
....
Please, I've said this before. If I had the sort of money buy MG 20.1's I might well by something else. I'm not defending that particular Magneplanar. Due to the price differential if for not other reason, it shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as the MG 1.6/1.7.

To humor you, I listened to the Sarah McLachlan (on my computer speakers). I would never listen to such music in the normal course. I find the relentless backbeat to be, at one and the same time, both annoying and boring.

I don't accept your premise that an acceptable speaker must play all sorts of music well. I'm concerned that a speaker play the sort of music I listen to well. What's it to me if a speaker doesn't play Techno well? I'd be nuts to trade of the ability to play, say, chamber or choral or orchestral very well merely to play Techno well.

[Ajani]

So let's sum up the Maggie situation:

1) The MMG - 1.7 are arguably the greatest values in HiFi IF you love the kind of music they reproduce... If you have different tastes in music then they are really bad choices of speakers...

2) Nothing is universally liked... We all have different tastes in music... Even pro reviewers have varying tastes in music... Something I've learned from chatting with pro reviewers on their magazines' forums is that most of them are far more "polite" about their dislike of popular brands than RGA or John Marks are... So in other words, they won't outright bash Maggies in public, but that doesn't meant they like them... The speakers they like are the ones they own and/or rave about in the mags... If they don't like planar's then they simply don't review any...

3) Many (perhaps most) HiFi products are polarizing... Consider the hatred some persons have for tubes or SS, analog or digital... The same applies to box versus planar... Many people love one and despise the other...


Back to point 1: I remember when I went to audition the MG12... I went to the store specifically for that purpose, as I had heard for years how perfect maggies are and wanted to experience the magic for myself... I carried a few of my favourite tracks from Michael Jackson, Luther Vandross, George Michael, the Eagles, etc... I sat in the sweetspot and listened... All I kept thinking was WTF? Everything just sounded disjointed and lacking... That is the ONLY time I have heard an "audiophile" product and thought it sounded terrible... Unlike many other forum members, gear I don't like is usually too boring or too bright, but never terrible... My friend who accompanied me to the demo had the same experience... Probably even more memorable than the sound quality (or lack thereof) was the salesman's quick suggestion (perhaps he saw the pained expression on my face) that I had the wrong type of music for the Maggies... Wrong type of music??? Seriously? I need to change my musical tastes to fit a pair of speakers? Hell No!!! Anyway he quickly spun my listening chair around to face the other side of the room where he had Revel Performa M22s paired with Musical Fidelity A3.5 Int and CDP and the music was glorious...

[Geoffcin]

OK, I think we've beaten this topic to death as well as hi-jacked the OP thread. From now on lets keep it on topic.

[mlsstl]

It's a pity this discussion has deteriorated into the typical denigration of those components not favored by various individuals. As a current owner of a "floppy box" (Spendor SP1/2E) and a past owner of Maggie 1.6QRs and various other speakers in the past, I find great musicality in a variety of speakers. I have no problem accepting that others, due to room acoustics or taste in music, don't look for the same things as I. In fact, I don't think there's ever been a well known audio speaker that wasn't dinged by a certain number of people.

I also find it interesting the variety of music that people use as reference points. For many of the modern forms, there is no reference point beyond one's imagination. Even Sarah McLachlan, while a popular singer, is heavily processed in all of her recordings in my collection.

I find that if the speakers I'm using, in my environment, capture the tonality of real acoustic instruments and naturally recorded voice, then I'm quite happy with what they do with rest of my collection. Once at that point, my bigger wish is not to chase equipment changes, but rather that a higher percentage of the recordings I buy were better.

[RGA]

So let's sum up the Maggie situation:

1) The MMG - 1.7 are arguably the greatest values in HiFi IF you love the kind of music they reproduce... If you have different tastes in music then they are really bad choices of speakers...

Depends what you listen to. I like plenty of boxes better thus far in that price range no matter what the music is - in other words I prefer many others with classical acoustic instruments - per my last post of acoustic instruments that don't cut it IMO.



2) Something I've learned from chatting with pro reviewers on their magazines' forums is that most of them are far more "polite" about their dislike of popular brands than RGA or John Marks are... So in other words, they won't outright bash Maggies in public, but that doesn't meant they like them... If they don't like planar's then they simply don't review any...

And this IMO is the reason there are a lot of expensive gear that should get called out and doesn't. It's unfortunate that the review industry is so worried about being polite that we leave the impression that everything is great when it clearly isn't. I am happy to say that Constantine kept what I said in my CD player in the review because some publications might not have. Incidentally, I respect that the AN E and J are somewhat polarizing speakers. Some things just are. I find value in the 1.6 because there is not panel competitor in the price range. But once you get to the price of an ESL almost without fail they sound better than comparable ribbons.



3) Many (perhaps most) HiFi products are polarizing... Consider the hatred some persons have for tubes or SS, analog or digital... The same applies to box versus planar... Many people love one and despise the other...

The thing is I try to take each product not the manufacturer - I like and dislike products from virtually every maker I have heard to some degree. The 1.6 is fine - it's the only one I would buy. I assume my first two 1.7 experiences were issues with the gear - I'll give them a home trial at some point but work has been a bear lately. Also the panel/box argument doesn't fly - i could own the Prince II on the cheaper end of the price spectrum. The VAC stuff sounds good on it as well.



Back to point 1: I remember when I went to audition the MG12... I went to the store specifically for that purpose, as I had heard for years how perfect maggies are and wanted to experience the magic for myself... I carried a few of my favourite tracks from Michael Jackson, Luther Vandross, George Michael, the Eagles, etc... I sat in the sweetspot and listened... All I kept thinking was WTF? Everything just sounded disjointed and lacking... That is the ONLY time I have heard an "audiophile" product and thought it sounded terrible... Unlike many other forum members, gear I don't like is usually too boring or too bright, but never terrible... My friend who accompanied me to the demo had the same experience... Probably even more memorable than the sound quality (or lack thereof) was the salesman's quick suggestion (perhaps he saw the pained expression on my face) that I had the wrong type of music for the Maggies... Wrong type of music??? Seriously? I need to change my musical tastes to fit a pair of speakers? Hell No!!! Anyway he quickly spun my listening chair around to face the other side of the room where he had Revel Performa M22s paired with Musical Fidelity A3.5 Int and CDP and the music was glorious...

My dealer has all the Magnepans including the MMG (or they did I believe) and the "wrong type of music" comes up a lot. Don't judge panels off of Magnepan. The King Sound is worth checking it out. The Apogee Scintilla if you have the space is worth it provided Morricab is right and a SET amp can make them sing. I heard them with big SS and it was not so great but had potential. And used they would be had for reasonable sums.

[Geoffcin]

It's a pity this discussion has deteriorated into the typical denigration of those components not favored by various individuals.
Which is exactly why I've asked to keep to the topic. There will be no more off topic posts in this thread.

[bluetrain]

Mr.P, I recently got Acoustic Zen Adagios after owning Vandersteen 2 Signatures. Great speakers both visually and sonically. Try to audition them.

[filecat13]

Mr. P

Can I recommend an alternate. Go to an audio Show. Keep your speakers for now and make a trip of it. You can buy and sell speakers but in general it's a big pain in the arse and you are kind of playing the "someone else likes it so I might too" game.

Shows are not perfect but the CAS one Dagogo puts on is open to the public, CES is easy to get into if you create a fake profile and pretend you're in business - they never check.



I know this got some negative play back on page one, but, late to the party as usual, I want to endorse this notion.

In fact, I went to the CAS in 2010 in Emeryville. Yes, the rooms were generally poor, but some vendors tried harder than others to improve the rooms and to make their products shine. IMO, if they sounded good there, there was hope they would sound good in other venues, like my home.

Some that sounded relatively good, like the Magico boxes, definitely were not my cup of tea. In fact, they left me absolutely parched, they were so dry and dusty. Others proved that design and engineering can compensate for a world of sins in a room. At one point, I pulled out my iPhone to check my balance at B of A thinking I might buy the Revel Ultima2 Salons on the spot.

The Salk room was very enticing, too, and gave me a new appreciation of their products.

I managed to keep my bank account intact and left, but one speaker haunted me for days, then weeks afterward, and eventually I made the call to the dealer in SF (I live in LA) and held my breath until he told me there was still a pair available. I wired the money and made the drive halfway, as one of the partners drove the other half to San Luis Obispo, and we loaded the boxes into my Sorento, and off I went.

Half a year later, I still marvel that I have these amazing loudspeakers and that they fulfill everything I want in music reproduction. I like them more, not less, every day, and even my GF is smitten with them. Yay!!

The CAS made it possible for me to hear these for the first time and to compare them with many highly regarded speakers in similar environments. They stood out in a multitude of auditions. They called to me, and eventually, I answered that call thanks to an audio show.

They are the JBL K2 S9900s.

[Geoffcin]

I know this got some negative play back on page one, but, late to the party as usual, I want to endorse this notion.

In fact, I went to the CAS in 2010 in Emeryville. Yes, the rooms were generally poor, but some vendors tried harder than others to improve the rooms and to make their products shine. IMO, if they sounded good there, there was hope they would sound good in other venues, like my home.

Some that sounded relatively good, like the Magico boxes, definitely were not my cup of tea. In fact, they left me absolutely parched, they were so dry and dusty. Others proved that design and engineering can compensate for a world of sins in a room. At one point, I pulled out my iPhone to check my balance at B of A thinking I might buy the Revel Ultima2 Salons on the spot.

The Salk room was very enticing, too, and gave me a new appreciation of their products.

I managed to keep my bank account intact and left, but one speaker haunted me for days, then weeks afterward, and eventually I made the call to the dealer in SF (I live in LA) and held my breath until he told me there was still a pair available. I wired the money and made the drive halfway, as one of the partners drove the other half to San Luis Obispo, and we loaded the boxes into my Sorento, and off I went.

Half a year later, I still marvel that I have these amazing loudspeakers and that they fulfill everything I want in music reproduction. I like them more, not less, every day, and even my GF is smitten with them. Yay!!

The CAS made it possible for me to hear these for the first time and to compare them with many highly regarded speakers in similar environments. They stood out in a multitude of auditions. They called to me, and eventually, I answered that call thanks to an audio show.

They are the JBL K2 S9900s.

I don't think going to a show got bad press, just some cautious words of warning. Certainly when you get to the price range of speakers your looking at, there may be very few other choices to hear them without making several long journeys. I do find it amusing though that you drove your car to pick them up! For the kind of money they are asking for those speakers you usually get white glove delivery with a technician to set them up for you.

[Mr Peabody]

Me wanting to attend an audio show is like a kid hoping to go to Disneyland. Maybe more so.

I only heard one pair of $10k Revels driven by Levinson gear several years back and I really did not like them or think they were worth the money. Several seem to like them I wish they were around to sample again so I can hear if anything has changed. Unfortunately, JBL is a line where the better series seem to be hard to find. Salk is a brand I'm not familiar with and will have to research.

[Ajani]

Me wanting to attend an audio show is like a kid hoping to go to Disneyland. Maybe more so.

I only heard one pair of $10k Revels driven by Levinson gear several years back and I really did not like them or think they were worth the money. Several seem to like them I wish they were around to sample again so I can hear if anything has changed. Unfortunately, JBL is a line where the better series seem to be hard to find. Salk is a brand I'm not familiar with and will have to research.

It would be good to give Revel another chance, even though you may still walk away with the same impression...

Revel is a brand I generally describe as 'spectacularly unspectacular'. So you shouldn't walk away from a Revel audition thinking "wow listen to that bass" or "check out the soundstage depth" or anything like that... The aim is just balanced sound from top to bottom... Which is rather different from the more traditional HiFi approach of focusing on a specific strength and milking it to the last drop... So Revel is a brand you'll either find to have a refreshing balanced sound or you'll think "meh, what's the big deal?"... And either opinion is equally valid rather than contradictory...

[JoeE SP9]

IME the "meh" what's the big deal speakers are in many cases the best ones. Of course that only proves itself under what I call the "LTLT". That's "Long Term Listening Test".

[tube fan]

I went to the CAS, and the two most interesting AND great sounding speakers were the $15,000 Audio Note and the $15,000 Teresonic. Both were driven by tubes. The Audio Note was playing only digital (a HUGE handicap IMO). One of the Audio Note salesmen played all sorts of music at realistic live levels. It all sounded great. NO OTHER room would play at live levels. I don't listen to my stereo as background music!