Advice about speakers

[puiutu62]

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

[Mr Peabody]

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

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

[puiutu62]

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

[basite]

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

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

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

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[RGA]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[puiutu62]

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

[theaudiohobby]

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

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

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

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

I guess these folks do not know what actual instruments sound like, they just record them for a living

[RGA]

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

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

[Mr Peabody]

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

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

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

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

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

[Mr Peabody]

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

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

[theaudiohobby]

I understand some of what you are saying I have the AN 1.1x DAC. It was the first piece of tube gear that I owned.....
The AN 1.1x gives instruments and vocals an organic sound. I heard that adjective used in describing AN gear and didn't understand it until I heard the DAC.

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

[Mr Peabody]

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

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

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

[theaudiohobby]

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

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

[winston]

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

[winston]

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

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

[theaudiohobby]

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

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

[Mr Peabody]

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

http://www.deaudiofabriek.nl/audio_note_cd

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/Magazin...tedac21sig.htm

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazin...anmeetsmsb.htm

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

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

[theaudiohobby]

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

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

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

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

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

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

http://www.deaudiofabriek.nl/audio_note_cd

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/Magazin...tedac21sig.htm

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazin...anmeetsmsb.htm

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

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

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

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

[Florian]

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

[Mr Peabody]

To each their own.

[RGA]

To each their own.

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

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

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

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

[audio amateur]

To each their own.

I think that sums it up nicely

[Feanor]

I think that sums it up nicely

Indeed, a matter of taste.

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

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

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

• Under-damped cabinets
• Close to the wall or corner placement -- which certainly will reinforce bass
• Simple, two-way designs
• High-quality crossovers

For the sake of design simplicity and lower tuning sensitivity, I'll go closed-box rather than vented and provide quite low Qtc. The low Qtc ought to complement close to the wall placement as well as yiekl excellent bass transients as I understand it.

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

[E-Stat]

Indeed, a matter of taste.

Exactly.

[*]Close to the wall or corner placement -- which certainly will reinforce bass...

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

Secondly I'd like to try a non-oversampling DAC. What sounds interesting is one of the designs that parallels multiple DAC chips which as I understand delivers sufficient voltage that output op amps aren't required.

Another op amp avoidance strategy can be found in the Manley Delta Sigma DAC. Somewhat dated, but uses an 18 bit Crystal chip set. Its *line stage* (with analog gain controls) uses a pair of 12au7 dual triodes sufficient to drive amplifiers directly.

Manley DAC

rw

[RGA]

Indeed, a matter of taste.

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

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

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

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

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

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