|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
1.36.196.101
In Reply to: RE: Preamp shootout posted by A.Wayne on July 08, 2016 at 19:34:12
The Einstein is approaching $20,000 US(maybe $18k). The Audio Note dealer in Hong Kong also carries Einstein and I have heard this preamp several times - it's very nice indeed and it looks nice to boot. I would not mind trying one at home down the line when I have more time. I'm in the market for a preamp right now. It's on my list.
Follow Ups:
The one my friend has was not as expensive new. The prices went up steadily over the years the preamp was produced. His is a MkII and I think they went to MkIII before coming out with an all new preamp (that looks almost the same) a couple of years ago.
It is not a warm sounding preamp so your tendency towards AN might not like that so much.
It comes down to system synergy and not components. You can stick the best tires on the planet onto a Toyota Yaris and a sports car you still don't got. I had a reviewer tell me Shindo was better than Audio Note preamps but in my direct comparisons it was not the case. I also met an owner that is very wealthy owning the Petrus, Vosne Romanee and the M6 and M8. He preferred the AN's. Another fellow had the Petrus on AN monoblocks. Frankly I'd be happy with any of them. This is and always has been for me about enjoying the music not a circle jerk of blathering about equipment all the time. And each month the reviewers come out with something that is some sort of "game changer" and it's much better than the three things I heard the last three months.The AN M3MKIII is looking like my early front runner because it's not crazy priced and includes a full tube phono stage and not a throw in SS card. The Shindo dealer here also went out of business.
Edits: 07/14/16
If only AN made listening shoes and pajamas .... :)
Edits: 07/14/16
Actually - your analogy is almost correct - I think for me it really is like a pair of comfortable old slippers. There is a sort of safety in going with what you know, what you like and what you makes you happy. Diverging from that reference means whatever the new product is that I compare must in essence meet all those "needs" and "wants" and then must be considerably better at those things and/or bring new things to warrant spending more money on them. And often times those improvements seem often to come as skin deep improvements - like a sexier $1,000 case with lots of sexy chrome or 1/2 inch thick casework to weigh the components down to seem more robust.You don't see me saying the AN M3 is the best preamp - because I don't believe there is a best preamp - it's part of an audio chain. It may be the best for me in a particular system but in another system I may prefer the Shindo or Einstein or Melody Audio etc.
Edits: 07/14/16
I haven't heard the highest end AN preamps but the lower ones, up to M5, have an overall warmth to the sound regardless of which system I have heard them in (and no they were not only in all AN systems). It's ok if that is the way your preferrence runs.
The LM219 you own also runs towards the full and warm sound. I have heard this amp driving LM's Western Electric horn replicas. It was quite good and tonally rich. I remember when you were comparing the LM219 to the Melody Platinum 211 amp and commenting that it was the warmer of the two.
So, believe me when I tell you that the Einstein runs in the somewhat leaner/analytical channel relatively speaking. It is fast, dynamic and resolving but if you couple it with an analytical source, amp and/or speakers it will do NOTHING to make that sound more musical. Is it perfect? No, I think it is slightly lean through the mid upper bass and this gives it a slight tonal tilt. The Thiels are a very linear speaker both in FR and time coherence and therefore give gear nowhere to hide. The KR audio amplifier is a very easy load for the preamps (100K input impedance and a decent but not excessive gain) and is also ultra revealing. The characteristics that I heard between my two preamps was the same as at my place but the Puresound was capable of a more dynamic sound at my place...perhaps due to the big difference in the sensitivity of the speakers.
I have heard that the top AN gear is actually somewhat lean...perhaps due to the all C core transformers and silver wire. I do not know having not heard their best stuff.
My latest review project is the Aries Cerat Diana integrated...now this is a really GOOD sounding amplifier. All direct heated and all interstage transformers (between input and driver and driver and output) no caps...like Audio Notes better stuff. However, the power supply is MUCH bigger and more robust and the output transformers are simply huge...probably double the size AN uses. The result is very close to an invisible amplifier. My best recordings simply sound closer to real.
At the end of the day people decide for themselves what they want. I want to sit down and be moved emotionally and I want goosebumps when I listen - if it does that it's a winner and if it doesn't then it won't stay in my system no matter what verbiage is espoused on them or how "accurate" someone claims it to be. Conversely I won't be talked out of buying something because of a frequency plot or because some reviewer doesn't think the treble or bass is extended enough.
I remember listening to some $25k horns that did percussion better than my speakers - a lot better if truth be told - but then when I put Eva Cassidy on the vocals were electrifying and vastly better than the $25k horns. And since more of my music is vocals based - I'll take 9.5/10 on vocals and 8/10 on percussion for $5k than 10/10 SOTA on Percussion but 0/10 (so bad I had to get them to turn Eva Cassidy off) for $25k.
I have no problem if people want the thing they view as more accurate over what they view as warm. I can compare the Einstein directly against the AN preamps - I have not done any A/B comparison directly because the Einstein preamp is with Einstein power amps - the AN's are together. I can say when it's all been AN it has sounded better than the Einstein with AN E speakers or Wilson Benesch $100k speakers. But that could be anything like the CD player or power amps.
Accurate doesn't mean cold , accurate means its truthful to the recording , if the recording is big and warm it should be reproduced as such , electronic and cold , well if recorded as such . If all your recordings sound warm and fuzzy or sterile and cold then its not accurate and nothing more than your favorite coloration , all recordings should sound different , small , large , fast, warm , deep soundstage , narrow focus , etc ...
Regards
agreed. But a lot of people seem to feel that if something sounds bright and tinny that it is accurate. The issue really comes to the latter - the warmer - many speakers that are deemed accurate - never seem to be able to sound warm or lush or full and thick. They can only produce what John Marks noted one speaker as sounding like an X-ray of the music.
I often agree with Morricab but he leans to speakers IMO that can only reproduce the XRay sound - Reference 3a with BE to me is ear bleeding - every albuum I have put through them or the Odeons sounds BRIIIIIGHT and thin and edgy. Stereophile's graph very clearly bears out the Odeon being insanely bright and so were the subjective comments. I can't stomach almost all ribbons for the exact same reasons - they can't reproduce warmth when it is on the recording. Very few horns have that strength in their back pocket. Nothing wrong with that - horns are spectacular on percussion which a silk dome is hardly going to capture.
And since No speaker is accurate or remotely accurate - you choose your poisons. And the poison I choose is the poison where I can listen to my entire music collection and enjoy it. Not some forumer who tells me XYZ is "accurate" and I "should buy it because it is accurate" and then 90% of my recordings sound thin and edgy and I can't listen to it for more than an hour. You'll note that most of those people tend to buy and sell and spend an awful lot of time talking about the next speakers every six months over and over and over again on these forums.
I do not lean at all towards a thin sound...sorry to burst your preconceived notions about me. Also, i do not like an unnaturally rich sound that I have often heard with AN speakers. Once you have heard what pure high frequencies sound like from ribbons, stats, some horns and plasma tweeters then soft domes don't cut it for realism.
"Reference 3a with BE to me is ear bleeding - every albuum I have put through them or the Odeons sounds BRIIIIIGHT and thin and edgy"
Where did you hear Odeons? Which model? With what kind of amps?
Do I like a clear transparent sound? Very much so, do I like box coloration? Not at all. Do I like a rich NATURAL tone for my music...recording willing, yes. Contrast in recordings should obvious but not exaggerated. Really good recordings will sound neither thin nor warm/rich/dark but real and if you don't know what the difference is then go hear more live, unamplified concerts.
Your comments about Ref 3a speakers with Be tweeters is way off. I had the speakers both before and after the Be tweeter (Master Control MMCs). EVERYONE who heard both preferred them with the Be tweeter. A friend of mine had the same model and after hearing the improved transparency and openness he immediately bought Be tweeters too. Bright they are not...in fact the Be has a softness that is almost softdome like but with the clarity of a metal tweeter...I understand why so many top high end speakers went to Be tweeters. Only diamond does this clarity without harshness as well for a conventional dome type tweeter.
Ribbons and stats can reproduce warmth on a recording just fine...provided you use correct electronics with them and the recording has a natural sound. Obviously, not all ribbon speakers are created equal...just like not all boxes or horns are equal so one shouldn't over generalize. They will not exaggerate warmth as a lot of box speakers will do. The box and tuning will enhance this effect. AN speakers actually brag about the box contributing to the overall sound. While this is a pleasant coloration and seems to be low enough that it doesn't completely muddy the picture, it is definitely a coloration as it is an uncontrolled addition to the music signal.
I have heard your LM219ia, both with a good conventional speaker and with a near SOTA WE replica system. It has an inherent warmth to the sound that is its inherent signature. It is not extreme and greatly masking fine details but it is there nonetheless. Overall, it is a very good amp though...one that would likely work well with my Odeons. The AN speakers (at least the moderate priced ones I have heard) lean in the same direction and to me lack the realism I hear live. They might sound pretty and if you put them in a corner they have plenty of bass but ultimate resolution suffers somewhat as a result of the design choice, IMO.
"And the poison I choose is the poison where I can listen to my entire music collection and enjoy it."
I find it interesting that by implication you are saying that I cannot do this with my system. Sure i hear big differences in the quality of the recordings...didn't Peter Q. say that is a good thing?? However, very few become unenjoyable to listen to...a couple perhaps but most are just fine. The really good ones are spooky.
Take care what you say about my preferences. I am definitely not in the "lean and clean" crowd and have said repeatedly that I need the tone of instruments to be correct to be satisfied with a piece of gears performance. To call the Ref 3a Be speakers bright tells me just how far in the other direction you have gone.
I'm on vacation.
're: Odeon. We already discussed this on speakers board. Doesn't need to be repeated.
're ref 3a. I agree with John Marks about the sound of them. The BE doesn't integrate properly which is why it doesn't sound very good to me. I have heard them with ASL and MSB. In the same room MSB was connected to Rossofiorentino and they sounded cheaper for less. Also heard Harbeth sound better with MSB.
And I get you don't like AN E. That's fine. How do you propose you will win. We've been over that again and again for years. Meanwhile Audio Note still sells them with huge waitlists worldwide at $10k to $210k price points. So no matter how much you try and try and try and try....you aren't hurting their sales or changing anyone's mind. But good luck to you.
So, you just thought you would get your slams in without my rebuttal and the best you can do is say "I'm on vacation"?
You are simply a fanboy for AN, you have been for years and everyone here knows it biases your opinions. I won't comment on LM because I like the sound of the gear and a designer I respect says it is very well made.
Whether I like the E or not is immaterial, the speaker has obvious flaws both standard FR issues and cabinet resonance. I hear these clearly when I listen to a pair. You seem to dig these colorations as do some others...at least for a while. I know a few people who moved on from these speakers, which are rather obviously colored and voiced a particular way. After having box less speakers for many years I find these colorations a distraction from real resolution of the music signal.
I heard no such integration issues with my Ref 3as going from soft dome to Be. Maybe my old ones are superior to the new models? Some people who are into the brand think so. My old ones were what built the reputation of the brand.
I won't comment further on Odeon as your lack of experience with the brand means you have no clue what you are talking about. I will say though that since buying mine, two friends bought Odeons and on guy on thus forum and all have told me how happy they were with the sound.
Your "crusade " against planar speakers is probably one of most baffling things about you though. I get Magnepan to some extent as they lack some low level resolution and some ML models, but big ribbons and stats can sound simply amazing and realistic in ways the AN E could only dream of. That you cannot hear this is a disturbing thing as you are a reviewer. Big Apogees were THE reviewer speaker until they went out of business. There is a good reason; besides being very natural and enjoyable to listen to they also reveal differences in gear better than just about anything else. Some stats and some horns do as well.
I don't think it's baffling. If it were truly excellent then it would never go out of business. It's not like there are no equally expensive or large speakers. Way more people trade panels in for AN speakers than the other way around so whatever the weaknesses the strengths more than make up for them.
Soundhounds is probably the biggest magnepan dealer in Canada- ask any of the people working there which they would ra.ther own. You won't like the answer. They also sell Quad, Martin Logan, Finale. You won't like the answer. They used to sell reference 3a. People came in and directly compared them to AN. You won't like the results. Hint: they no longer sell reference 3a. AN is too much competition it seems. And Reference 3a is Canadian in a Canadian market and still could not compete. I guess everyone who walked in and auditioned is wrong.
But I'll wait a year when you find some new speaker to rave about or some new amp.
These things are highly subjective. I'm a fan of things that sound right. Hence I don't mind being called a fanboy. I'm a fan of Bughatti and Bentley. The best makes me a fan.
You have tried this ridiculous argument in the past. There are so many reasons a hifi company can go out of business that have nothing to do with sound quality. Your argument holds no water. Fact is that numerous top reviewers had Apogees and only switched when the company went belly up. Acoustat sold literally tens of thousands of stats over 20+ years most which still work today and still sound great with good gear behind them. Still Acoustat went out of business despite being highly regarded.
Regardless of the conclusions you have drawn from one shop in Canada, I seriously doubt Magnepan is suffering in comparison. I would be very surprised if Magnepan hasn't sold thousands and thousands more speakers than AN, even if Magnepan is on of the cheaper made and poorer sounding planars. My guess is that comparisons with AN and Magnepan were also not with equivalent gear?? Nevemind though, I have never been a fan of Maggie's or ML for that matter.
As for Ref 3a, well they do some things much better and some things less so. They were transparent and imaged/sound staged well. They had some coloration but so do all box speakers. It was less pronounced than AN. For sure Peter Q. has voiced them in a way that is pleasing but it is not terribly accurate. You will notice though I never said Ref 3a were world beaters, just really good affordable speakers...they still are. Big Odeons play in another league where realism is the name of the game.
Well There aren't too many shops that carry AN and the brands you just listed. It's one more than NONE however which is what you have.Audiofederation sold Soundlab and AN - guess which one they still sell and which one didn't sell and got dropped. And it's not like it was a price issue. $30k AN E speakers too.
The AN E/Spx Alnico won product of the year in Asia for a reason.
And by the way - there is a reviewer on virtually every staff of every magazine that ownes an AN E- so if you make the argument - that Apogee was a reviewer darling and therefore by that reason is a great speaker then you are a hypocrite because the EXACT same thing can be argued for the AN E - how many have Reference 3a and Odeons compared to AN E are owned by reviewers. See if you are going to make the "reviewers own X so it is best" then by the same logic AN is doing pretty freaking awesome since Speakers aren't even their main business. And unlike less wealthy reviewers who own Magnepan 1.7s not nearly as many own Acoustats and Soundlabs and Apogees today. A truly GREAT speaker from 1990 should still be GREAT today - how many of those reviewers kept their apogees? They all fall apart? No they heard stuff that sounded better.
Steve Hoffman has been to nmerous audio shows and heard numerous panels and horns and he has two AN E speakers for the home and the studio - the AN E/Spx Alnico which I must admit is on another level than the lower models but nevertheless. So I'll put my ear with his over yours any day of the week - except that I knew this 15 years ago. And back then I was getting ripped for my AN E love - but now 15 years later so so SOOOOOO many expert ears are on board.
Steve "has remastered over 500 Audiophile quality Compact Discs and LP's working with such artists as: The Eagles, The Doors, Paul McCartney, Bob Dylan, The Beach Boys, Nat 'King' Cole, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, Ray Charles, Roy Orbison, Cream, The Cars, Blondie, Jim Croce, Linda Ronstadt, Jethro Tull, The Doobie Brothers, Jackson Browne, Steve Miller Band, Elton John, Van Halen, Bonnie Raitt, Al Green, Joni Mitchell, Paul Simon, Stan Getz, Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Art Pepper, Rod Stewart, Judy Garland, Ella Fitzgerald, Peggy Lee, Wes Montgomery and many, many, others."
And you call me a fanboy and others too - oh that RGA is a reviewer he should be less biased - he should like everything like most reviewers out there.
And yet even a top reviewer from Stereophile is WAY WAY more over the top than I have ever been. The last paragraphs alone indicate that! And the AN E/Spx Alnico sounds a lot better than the speaker he heard! The new tweeter is something else.
See the thing is I really get why people like panels - they do in fact do things I really do like. I have chosen panels as top rooms of audio shows, I have liked numerous models. But what makes no sense to me about you is that you make a bunch of arguments about why your favorite speakers are so GREAT - and when I point out to you that those SAME ARGUMENTS apply DIRECTLY to the AN E you then dismiss them? See that is called picking and choosing your arguments. I am interested in the 2000s not a particular $50,000 speaker that no longer exists for the last 15-20 years. The difference is you IGNORE those reviewers and arguments SOLELY because they don't fit your preferences.
I concede that tons of people like Magnepan - I concede that people love them. Fair enough. Michael Jackson was number one too and I didn't care for him in the least but I don't deny the fact that he was talented or the fact that people felt he was the king of pop. He just ain't for me. You seem to have trouble conceding a point on anything on any topic EVER.
I have not once seen you say - hey even though I don't like Audio Note I must admit that a lot of reviewers love the stuff and a lot of people think they're pretty great. Your arrogance is so massive that you think your opinion is the ONLY opinion on ANY TOPIC and anyone else is absolutely wrong.
These are at the end of the day preferences. I'm not out to convince people to agree with me - because in fact I like dozens of speakers and I like dozens of speakers that I think do things rather better than the AN E. So I can concede the fact that is a person values key hole soundstaging that there are better etc. But that concession isn't in your pockets. You just think everyone who buys AN Es have been duped. And the reason I continually engage in these arguments is because plenty of people who have argued with me over the years - wound up hearing them properly set-up and reversed course and hailed them as one of the best sounding or THE best sounding systems they heard. The oldSchool poster on these boards if you recall had an epiphany moment after similarly engaging me in AN E attacks for years. He was big enough to admit he was wrong. So I'm patient.
Edits: 07/29/16
Blah blah blah. I guess concise is not a word that is in your dictionary. However repetitive sure is...
There are plenty of "2000s" speakers I like just fine. Never forget though ANs are not really 2000s designs, nor are Alnico magnets for that matter, or sing along cabinets or soft dome tweeters for that matter. They are direct descendants of old Snell designs.
One of the better systems I heard recently was a WE replica...circa 1930s. New doesn't often have much to do with better...as someone who loves SETs you should know better.
As to AN buyers being duped, don't put words in my mouth! However, I too have heard them properly set up and driven (Jinro + DAC 4.1) and the result was a distinct MEH. I actually have interest in the Jinro but it does through that interest into serious doubt. Other setups were similarly uninspiring. AN amps with Acapella though is great. One of the best sounds I ever heard from Maggie's was a pair of 3.6 driven by P4 monks. That being said, I have seen firsthand the strong cult like features of the brand, it's dealers and its owners.
I won't go further with planars, your experience is simply too limited to take your views seriously.
Your claims of not trying to influence anyone are very lame. What is the "R" by your name for if not exactly that?? I won't try to hide that I think I can help others find the kind of sound they have been trying to get or in some cases that they didn't know that they were looking for. I have clear ideas and strategies on how to do this, some overlap with AN and some do not.
I think you make my points for me. Yes AN is built on old designs.. .the fact that they sell them from $10k to $200k and have been reviewed very very well by world renowned reviewers at virtually every publication might give you an idea that more than just RGA likes them. I was just further ahead of the times. You just can't admit that something is well liked unless YOU like them.
Are AN speakers well reviewed globally? Yes or no.
I have no issues with what you or anyone else likes, period. I have issues with your way of delivering "information" about AN products. I am definitely not alone with this issue...
I don't think AN speakers are univerally loved, despite your claims to the contrary. I know a lot of audiophiles here who dislike the sound of the speakers...one of them intensely. It is what it is. If you and others are seduced by the voicing of that speaker its fine...but I think this makes for a poor reviewer's tool.
While $10K for an AN E might be ok value, although I can think of a large number of other speakers that are likely better sounding. Can you honestly tell me that the $200K model is really a competitor in the "best in the world" speaker stakes? Think about the options when money is almost no object. Can the AN E really compete there? I think not. Is it good material value at that price? Doubtful.
ANs lower end products are actually offering decent value I think. An integrated like the Oto SE signature or Soro SE signature are fairly priced and deliver good sound. The top end of AN again faces very stiff competition, often for a lot less money.
I never said they were universally loved - Please try to read what I actually say. I said that they are widely liked and have reviewers (not all) on virtually every single magazine staff that owns a set of AN speakers. I don't claim them to be the best and there is absolutely nothing else.
Try to do a thought experiment.
Pretend for a moment that you have NEVER heard an AN speaker in your life - never heard ABOUT them. You have basically landed on earth from the planet Voltron and you are doing some research on speakers. You are now given a list of the biggest speaker brands in the world in terms of sales - B&W, Tannoy, JBL, Magnepan etc on down the list.
Alright so then you notice something interesting. There is this Tube and CD maker called Audio Note that also happens to make some speakers - their tertiary business. B&W and Magnepan's primary business is speakers but for Audio Note it's not primary or even secondary.
Odd there is a reviewer on staff at all of the following magazines that has or had bought Audio Note speakers at between $5k and $73k US dollars.
Stereophile
Soundstage
Dagogo
6Moons
Stereotimes
Hi-Fi Choice
Audiophile
TNT
Part Time Audiophile
Hi-Fi Critic
AVShowrooms
Positive Feedback
Not to mention the Asian magazines
Now as a completely objective outsider who has never auditioned the brand you decide to count up the reviewers who had had/has other brands between those price points. I exclude lower price points because reviewers are regular people too and may not be afford to buy what they really like. So yes there are a lot of reviewers, like me, who own the likes of the Maggie 1.7 or the KEF LS-50 but that's more likely because more money they don't have.
So the "expectation" you should have as an outsider in our thought experiment is gee - there should be a lot more reviewers with B&W, Tannoy, and the like now shouldn't there? I mean that is their "primary" product. In fact given that a B&W or a Focal or a Tannoy are probably 50 times larger than Audio Note - the review press should have 50 times more of those brands should they not?
And as I noted to you before - Peter Bruninger who has attended virtually every show - far more than virtually everyone else on the planet has heard "Everything" including the Munich shows many times. He bought the $73,000 AN E. So when you ask me does it compete with other $70,000 speakers or does it have the materials value - well yes and yes.
Otherwise one of those other $70,000 speakers would be in his home right now - and they're not.
PB , having AN speakers means naught in my books , too many skeletons there to make any determination about their sound from his purchase. I can remember Peter and his Bozak speakers and of course this being Audio , everyone is free to like whatever , well..! Audio Nazi's aside..
Personally ,
72K is alot of coin , it would have to be Sota + Audio to justify and no AN speaker conjure up SOTA audio in my books , so like as you must , im happy for you if you get joy , Joy from AN, i would prefer to have 3 prs of 20.7's ....
No kill joy here ...
But do you take room size into account?
Let's be real - $70k is nuts for any speaker IME - but a very big speaker in a medium or small room doesn't generally work very well - speakers that are 12 feet high with 8 woofers and you sitting 6-12 feet back isn't going to cut it if cohesion remotely matters to you. So yes while the actual speaker is State of the Art - the AN E may still sound VASTLY BETTER in the actual room. And that might hold true for the $5k version over the $1,000,000 Godzilla sized behemoth.
And the AN E isn't SOTA - I never claimed that either. A 2010s Ferrari is way more SOTA than any American car from before the 80s but it doesn't mean a real car guy is going to trade his pride and joy for one. Because there is more to a car than just handling in a corner and absolute maximum speed.
And in audio - one can have a State of the Art speaker that absolutely blows your mind with its treble acuity and you say gosh what a great treble. But never once does the speaker - even with gobsmacking prices - get you emotionally moved. In HK they sum it up well - does it move the heart or the head. I am far far far more impressed with countless other speakers (on a technical coolness factor) than I am with speakers like the AN E or Orangutan or Trenner and Freidl RA - but I'm rarely moved emotionally more by them.
I have heard a lot of $50k+ speakers and it's one of the reasons I became a bit of a hype machine for the AN E because I would directly compare them and say - umm the E sounds better. No it may not have the slam or the treble wetness of the other speaker but it gelled better and had more of something else like tone/timbre decay and that extra sparkle of the other speaker often comes in as extra sibilance on say an Eva Cassidy that completely ruins her.
Indeed, not that long back I auditioned a $20,000 Horn speaker and played Eva and had to have them shut it off it was so irritating. I then went to the AN dealer played the same track on their AX Two speaker $800ish UK and it was fully engaging - I bought em.
But in every technical way - you would have to say that the $20k horn was better - and it IS better on Pink Floyd - the cymbal crashes were VASTLY superior to what the AX Two can put out. So it's a "better" speaker in the raw holy cow listen to the shimmer on the cymbal sort of way. But it was so horrific on Eva (well recorded albums too). And again - I live in a smaller space - I listen to a lot of vocals which I focus on as the primary and the ancillary musicianship as the secondary so it's a really easy choice.
And for $70k I think the things should engage me and give me goosebumps rather than as something I can brag about the waterfall plot or the NASA approved materials on audio forums. I can afford pretty much any $50,000 loudspeaker these days. I'd probably buy the AN E/Spx Alnico Hemp that Steve Hoffman has.
Lastly, and again - in a large room I have an entirely different list of loudspeakers. The thing is though - most people - even most audiophiles on here, do not live in massive homes with large rooms. And most of them don't have the budgets for them. So it's kind of worthless to tell people I like the Acapella High Violoncello II or some MBL or some other massive horn or Soundlab panel or various $60,000 DIY Horns. So what - the thing requires a massive room - the speakers are insanely large - they cost a bomb are SOTA and musical - great. But it's not "practical". An AN E with several models well under $10k is practical. Can be used with 5 watts will give you flat to 25hz in room bass with ease looks nice enough and gives you and your wife a choice of 40 different finishes so wife is happy it will fit decor and stuff them in a corner so they give you a huge amount of your floorspace back. There is very little downside on a practical level.
Oh and they apparently can sound pretty SOTA if you go up the line as
Wes Philips (Stereophile) covering the $51k version of the speakers noted. In a more overthetop review of them than I have ever given.
BTW, my Bespoke 6 ft tall ribbon hybrid can be listened to from 1M away and still very coherent, does need 4-5 ft from back wall and at 1M LD, rear wall and reflections are not an issue...
I think one of the reasons it's generally so easy for the AN rooms to win best sound at audio shows (so very often) is the size of the room and thus the ability to position the massive speakers. It's why people preferred the KEF LS-50 over the Blade. But let's be serious - the only reason the Blade loses to the KEF has nothing to do with the speaker - it loses because it needs a much much bigger room than most hotels provide (and the big rooms at hotels are usually rubbish in terms of quality walls or any sound treatments).
So people walk away thinking the big speakers stink. They mostly don't.
In a big room smaller speakers suffer (which is why there is an AN E versus an AN K). The K is more suitable to an apartment (and not a big one) or a bedroom. Bigger room - AN J - bigger again AN E.
It's a reason why Audio Note is developing two more loudspeakers for larger rooms.
I get ripped for always recommending the E but I have not found another speaker under $10k that sounds as good, that can be driven off of low watt SET amps (which is a must for me) has bass to the low 20s not requiring a sub (as most SETs don't have sub outputs), has some actual colour options, and doesn't reuire 1/3 of your living room to function properly.
People will say to me there are many other better choices without listing a single one. Or they will say - how about the Orangutan - yeah 2.5 times more expensive you get 2 colour choices - must sit well away from all walls. And Rafe Arnott - a reviewer for Part Time Audiophile had the O/96 and now has the AN E. It's a fine speaker but it's getting out there price wise for most people.
Apparently John thought it colored and lacking coherency"In its use of a fairly large woofer in a large cabinet, the Audio Note AN-E Lexus Signature is a somewhat old-fashioned design for a two-way. It didn't measure as badly as I expected it to, its designer obviously having worked hard to produce a neutral balance in-room. But I was disappointed by the very lively cabinet and by the discontinuity at the top of the woofer passband, the effects of both of which I could hear with the sample that I measured. And its specified sensitivity and bass extension are misleadingly optimistic, in my opinion. -John Atkinson
Edits: 09/13/16
Yes - nothing is perfect for everyone.If you ca show me the perfect measuring 100% accurate speaker I will be very pleased to rush out an audition one. And since no speaker (NONE) are wholly accurate then you are then forced into the game of choosing whichever compromise you can live with the most.
On another board I posted a long list of strengths and weaknesses of design types. And each one gives you a limit - the single driver or single panel for instance has no crossover so there is a seamless quality that no other design type no matter how much money can equal. A two way is the next closest thing - close but not equal. A Teresonic Ingenium is more seamless than an AN E - a single driver panel is more seamless than an AN E.
But the two way and multiway - have their advantage - more bass, more volume (usually), more dynamic range (lack of early compression) more tone and body unless the single driver or panel are very large (and then you go back to the big room smaller room issue. In a bog massive room give me a big massive panel or horn. There is a reason I chose King Sound Electrostats as a favorite room at a show. I don't dislike them. I just weigh things like cost and size.
The big fatty Orangutan/Harbeth M40, ATC 100, AN E, Trenner and Freidl RA are from that rectangular school wide baffle 2 way with the ability to sound like a bigger multi-way. NONE of these are as good at seamlessness as a single driver or non hybrid panels. None of them will sound as dynamically at ease as massive horns. But all of these get pretty damn close to the bass of big 5 way speakers but are much more cohesive than those.
They are balanced. And JA noted that about both the E and the O/96. balanced. They are kind of like and 8.5/10 at doing every audible thing. A single driver might get 10/10 on two things but will get 3/10 for dynamics and bass and for rock music. Horns may get 10/10 on dynamics and live scale in the chest sensation where you can feel the spit from the trumpet player on your neck. But on cohesion may get a 3/10 or nuance and subtlety a 3/10. So you choose between SOTA elements of sound at the expense of rather piss poor performance in other areas or you choose the jack of all trades but master of none sorts like the fatty speakers I mentioned.
I think what you want from me is to talk more about the negatives of the things I rave about. This is a fair point. I perhaps tend to gloss over the weaknesses by not stating what other speakers I find do better and at what. I will acknowledge this in my upcoming review of the AN E/Lexus which will be up soon.
This is an aside
And I sometimes get irritated with JA's consistencyNow since you went to the trouble to look up the AN E - my issue is that JA is not very consistent with language. I felt he kind of "went after" Peter (I know they argued on these forums years back about the CD technology so perhaps there is a grudge there) but I dislike the inconsistency. Audio Note's spec sheets for speakers are all "both speakers driven and from a corner" measurements and in room response at the listening chair. It's pretty widely known.
Martin Colloms (who actually has an engineering degree unlike JA and worked for Stereophile as the measurements guy for years) measured the standard 94.5dB AN E and guess what - he got 94.5dB (and incidentally so did Hi-Fi Choice magazine and Audiophile in Germany. MC also got 17hz at -6dB measurement as well. The man who actually designs and writes books on loudspeakers.
Now JA does his standard one speaker in the middle of the room and got 92dB and obviously not the bass - corner loading adds a gain of 18dB two speakers driven.
So there is nothing optimistic or misleading about it - the speakers are designed for and measured in corners. JA didn't bother to ask the manufacturer or check with the manufacturer. Sorry but you pick up the damn phone and you say - hey Peter - wtf your speaker is only getting 92dB in my room what's with that. You let the manufacturer come back and say hey this is the way we do our measurements. Umm Martin Colloms did - then you can say - okay this is where AN is getting their number and you can still report what you got but you can say - yes it's not misleading it's the Brit way (the Brit way is -6dB - the American way is -3dB). JA being a Brit should probably know that.
Now if that were not bad enough - JA lets DeVore do the same damn thing but allow no negative wording - see the Orangutan O/96 - also didn't meet spec (not remotely) but you don't see any negative commentary.
Check this out "The Orangutan O/96 has a very high specified voltage sensitivity of 96dB/w/m. This is both unusual and means that the speaker will play very loudly with very low-powered amplifiers. My estimate of the DeVore's sensitivity was somewhat lower, at 91dB(B)/2.83V/m, though this is still usefully high.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/devore-fidelity-orangutan-o96-loudspeaker-measurements#c4surwLHFTi8XFCI.99So wait - WHAT? The American speaker maker puts out a speaker that is claimed to be 96dB and measures 5dB lower (just like the AN E - but the E is STILL more sensitive than the DeVore) but no "misleading optimistic" remark is made. I wonder WHY that is?
And at least with Audio Note - their claims are made for the corners where they are supposed to be put. That instantly adds 18dB of bass and at least 3dB to the sensitivity. So in fact the AN claim is FAR closer to reality than the DeVore. At worst the AN is off by 2dB but the deVore being designed for free standing is off by 5dB. So if anyone is deserving of stronger negative language it's the DeVore.
Further - the rest of the measurements are no better
And JA still said this about the 0/96 "the side and rear walls were very lively between 130 and 230Hz, and some lower-level modes were audible higher in frequency. Investigating the cabinet's vibrational behavior with a simple plastic-tape accelerometer revealed very strong modes at 148 and 219Hz (fig.2), these coincident with the frequencies of two of the wrinkles in the impedance traces.
Read more at http://www.stereophile.com/content/devore-fidelity-orangutan-o96-loudspeaker-measurements#c4surwLHFTi8XFCI.99
Art Dudley bought both of them and I personally love the DeVore Orangutan. SO I am not knocking what JA says about either - but it's an observation of a rather obvious double standard with the way the commentary was presented.
That's why I much prefer going with level matched blind listening sessions over the measured response. If you really want to identify which sounds better it's probably the only objective standard. But even then - unless you are in the test - you can't know. But what else is there?
In a debate like these - and I have said this to Morricab several times - how are you going to win?
I can't. I can trot out all the reviewers who buy em, musicians who buy em, even now recording studios buying em, order books that can't be filled with 8 month+ wait lists - they've opened new plants to meet demand. And they've been selling for 40 years
So if that can persuade someone to acknowledge that gee maybe they're pretty decent loudspeakers - then nothing will. But it's also far more than what gets presented back to me. The speakers offered up as better are ones that get a bad review in Stereophile that no one bought from a company that can't sell anything in the US. The other speaker is a panel maker that went belly up. Selling high high margin ribbon panels with good reviews and you can't stay in business is not a convincing argument - excuses can be made all day - but it doesn't look good. Three dealers that sold Apogee that I know personally all like Audio Note better - my own editor owned the Duetta Sig 2 and liked the AN E at less than half the retail price a LOT better. He liked it so much that when he spent his $50,000 and could have ANY Apogee or Magnepan or Quad or Soundlab - he bought an AN E.
So I think you can see why when I put arguments on the weighing scale that it seems awfully darn lopsided. I try my best not to be too biased in this - take myself out of it and just look at all the evidence and say gee what am I being presented with. Companies that got bad reviews and or went out of business???
Edits: 09/15/16
I dont get your Beef , are you saying Atkinson is not capable of measuring speakers, surely you jest .. :)Very Unlikely the ANE is -6db at 17 Hz ( as claimed) and speaker sensitivity is usually measured anechoic or GP, if in room its gated and is semi-anechoic. AN Specs are pretty vague to begin with and very mis-leading ala JA, so score one JA. Is their a personal vendetta against AN , i cant tell from the review and yes , agree, there is some wiggle room from SP when it comes to testing and review opinions, IMHO , easily 20Billion times better than opinion only reviews from golden ear ones..
So yeah John can be inconsistent in his eval and prefers to do indoor gated cut and splice measurements , but no one measures indoors against walls as their is no way to do so with any kind of accuracy ..
Regards
Edits: 09/15/16
No I take no issue with the measurement itself - it is what it is. What I am saying though if you look at the Orangutan - the manufacturer claimed 96dB - JA got 91dB - there was no "nasty" slam calling the maker's numbers "misleadingly optimistic"
Meanwhile the AN E claimed 97db and JA got 92dB - it's still a 5dB difference. But AN is misleading and DeVore apparently not.
My issue though is that American makers making free standing loudspeakers measure in the "freestanding" style. pseudo anechoic. So IMO it is FAR worse when a free standing speaker maker claims 96db and only gets 91dB than it is for a speaker that provides in room corner measurements and is then measured free standing.
There is no one more expert on Audio Measuring than Martin Colloms - he formed Monitor Audio and has written several books on speakers AND chaired the AES. He is brought into court cases as an expert witness on audio disputes AND he was the stereophile Measurements person for years.
He measured the AN E in corners in room and got both 17hz AND 94.5dB. Surely you are not suggesting Martin Colloms "is not capable of measuring speakers, surely you jest .. :)"
But actually this last paragraph wasn't the point - the main point is the issue with DeVore. The lack of consistency in the wording is what bothered me - it's not OK for AN's measurements to be off but perfectly fine if the American maker DeVore is off. And considering the DeVore is twice the price of my E/Lexus - I would expect harsher words to be used on the pricier item that takes up more floor space in the room and comes in two colours.
Maybe I am picking nits but I like consistency.
Part of the attraction is a big return to tubes and tube amplification and lack of good, room friendly speakers with reasonable WAF to meet the demand.The other thing is , most people (I'm not excluding myself and reviewers too) have no, to vague idea how to set up the speaker properly in the room ,so speakers which goes into corners and voila no fuss, no pain seem like a safe option.Also Peter is making sure that the company is well funded and will stay on the market no matter what and it's not giving up to a passing trends. It's the thing that simply has to be appreciated and it is , especially in Asia and
Asian market is specific. The pride of ownership and the price paid is a very important feature to the owner of equipment .
That said I do like AN speakers and even more full AN system. It is not a serious sound but it is the sound one can live with comfortably without agony of constant pursuit (although upgrade is the name of the game).
NOW, you tell me how in the world a reviewer of audio magazine which sells in miniscule quantity can afford $70k speakers ;?) He is not a bestseller author of any sort ..
Rgrds. W
One of our reviewers is a lawyer for big oil. Reviewing for most of us is a side job. I'm a teacher in Asia - I can afford $20,000US components (actual price not reviewer discount paying cash). As a teacher in Canada I doubt I could afford a $20k Stereo total. Unless it went on credit cards.So I suppose it depends on what the reviewer's real job is. Reviewing stereo equipment isn't a real job. John Marks was a recording engineer by day. That sort of thing. I seriously doubt they can live on the magazine. Except the editors. Editors make money when they run audio shows, advertising obviously. I don't want to say who does what job as that is their business to disclose and they may under their staff profile. I know we have a doctor but I forget who.
There are review discounts but that applies to all makes. In other words if a reviewer buys a $10k speaker from Tannoy or B&W or Focal or Magnepan - he's probably only paying $6k - but it applies to all of them so the reviewer is STILL going to choose his favorite $10k speaker. Ditto at $50k or $100k.
What I can tell you is that Audio Note's discount is a lot less of a discount than most of the competition. Because Peter doesn't need us. He can't make the stuff fast enough to meet demand.
It's because AN doesn't need reviews. Hi Fi Choice recently noted this on their forum when they were asked why they don't review Audio Note and that's because AN doesn't request or even tell magazines of some new product they have put out. The reviewer there told the forum poster that they have reviewed items but it''s always the reviewer phoning and asking for something. You have to give them credit - they usually provide a sample and so do their dealers. Anyone in California can ask for and get any AN piece of gear for free for an extended try out. None of this pay now and then if you don't like it get your money back pressure. I myself wanted to do but I don't live there.
But Hi-Fi Choice not long back took the HE version of my speakers home and the sig version of my amp. Thanks to this thread - I found another review I missed.
Edits: 09/19/16
Depends on where he keep the server .... :)
Edits: 09/15/16
I thought we were talking in absolute terms , your room size curve ball does change things, not sure i would listen if i had to compromise that much, still i have fairly large monitors ( 3 way ) that were designed for mastering and they work well in a small room , not SOTA but pretty decent and way less than 70K ...
Regards
AN is taking over Canada , well according to RGA ... :)
Really according to me - where did I say this?
Soundhounds has had a lot of competition come and then usually go. Other than the speakers sold as home theater options that is. But in most cases they come in people listen - and the challenger is eventually given the boot. They have added dealers in Canada now with at least three provinces. That's hardly taking over. But it's better than going from 3 down to one.
Best to compare both speakers on the same SS amps and get back with us... :)
Which speakers? I have compared Magnepans versus AN speakers directly with SS amps. I have compared AN to Reference 3A AND Harbeth on AS and Tube amps in the same room. My editor compared his AN E to Apogee in the same room and preferred his AN. Which was the lowest model available. You can read the review from stereotimes AN E/D.
There are only so many direct comparisons that can be done. Soundhounds in Victoria BC is one of the deepest dealers around.
And even if we could compare them all...that would only confirm the listener's tastes...the reader could still disagree. And I have proposed various blind listening challenges in the past to certain objectivists who argue for SS and none of the Floyde Toole and AS is best crowd has ever been willing to put their money where their mouth is. I often point out that AN is the worst in terms of measurements. SET amps are worst. NOS CD replay is worst. Silver wires are bright, and the speakers are wide baffle, lossy etc. Still even with the disadvantages I never get takers. All their bluster goes out the window when they have to put money on it.
Wait, only truly excellent products stay in Business..? you mean like reference 3a and Magnapan..? I'm sure Magnapan has sold way more speakers than AN,
A sure sign of Excellence and superiority .. :)
No sales doesn't indicate quality - see Bose and McDonalds.
But when you are comparing largely an apples to apples product with a similar NICHE target market and for similar dollars then you can somewhat line-up certain things.
So for instance Reference 3a selling a $2500 MM De Capo versus say an AN K for $2500 in the same store with the same tube equipment in the same room back to back properly set-up is a pretty fair comparison. As a fan of Reference 3a for years before morricab even heard of the brand I was ready to BUY the speaker. Then I heard the K and it was pretty much game over after 3 bars of piano. And everyone else who walked in must have felt the same since AN is still being sold there and Reference 3a is not.
Audio Federation carries Audio Note and Soundlab - everyone came in heard both - they no longer sell Soundlab.
Soundhounds - see website - they carry Quad and Magnepan. They used to sell Acoustat, Martin Longan. They all prefer Audio Notes and other boxed speakers.
It is true that boxes have colouration but it is also true that panels lack bass and bass dynamics and none of them generate pressure. Soundhounds carries the biggest Magnepan speaker - I directly compared the same albums against the AN E and 8 watt monoblocks versus top SS 1 ohm capable 1000 watt SS amps on the Magnepan. The album I first compared was NOT a difficult album - Jackson Browne Acoustic Vol 2. This is an acoustic recording of just one vocal and one instrument (either guitar or piano). This is HARDLY difficult.
I looked at the long time 30+ year veteran sales guy with a dumbfounded look after how utterly badly the 20.1 sounded versus a 1/3 the price AN E. He looked at me, smiled, and said "we know" because indeed they do know. Quad sounds vastly better to me - ESL unlike ribbons don't exhibit that fake lower treble sound. After auditioning the Apogee Duetta Sig II (Constanine Soo our editor preferred the AN E/D ($2500) I was not the least impressed direct comparison below.
The upper model I was auditioning blew up within 2 minutes of modest volume playing which is why we auditioned the Duetta Sig II. And the amps were flagship Krell 1 ohm capable amps so no it was not the amp's fault.
I get why people like Magnepan - I also like that people are wildly passionate about them. But I also get why so so many people dislike them and can't stand their very massive limitations. Ditto for all other panels I've heard. They have some strengths that are valid but their weaknesses are too big to stomach - and the best ones are the size of a car so unless you have the room for those - their advantages are moot. And at those sizes - a great horn blows them away IMO. Possibly the top Odeon horn (not heard it).
Yeah and I know one guy in is garage in Australia sells 2 Apogees a year or something - but "still in business" in this scenario is a bit of a laugh. If it was truly good they would present at shows and be selling against other $100k loudspeakers. They're not.
As for sales you kind of have to look at a global market and price. You're going to sell a lot more $2,000 speakers typically than you will sell $8,000 speakers I actually like the 1.7 the most because to me it offers by far the best value for the dollar. It's basically up against a lot of mediocre floorstanders and bass and dynamics shy standmounts. The 1.7 has enough bass to not be beaten by standmounts and floorstanders while they have more bass sound too problematic elsewhere. Still I'd buy the Cerwin Vega CLS 215 over the 1.7 if my music collection had a fair amount of AC/DC or Pink Floyd like stuff in it. And the CV would be half the price.
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/cerwinvega_cls215.htm
Isnt he using a SET amplfier , the reference 3a could sound thin on one , my friends custom 3way Horns with multiple 15 inch woofers sound like doo doo on SS but is subliminal on his custom 5 watt SET , cello's are to die for ...
Regards
Thin Ribbons ? Which ones are thin sounding , maybe they are some that do and your favorite might just run the opposite with too much Box coloration , may sound good on acoustic guitars, but too wooly elsewhere...
The .6 series from Magnepan. The three Apogee models I auditioned had an electrical sounding edge to them. The 1.7 was better I must admit. But they're woefully lacking in dynamics. Granted so is most at the price. Obviously plenty like them...but plenty don't and it seems no one who likes them can understand why other don't. I think it should be pretty obvious as to why people like them and why people don't. I my dealer carries them...I have never been convinced by any of them.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: