|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.232.160.49
I've been off this board for a long time but I've got the 'itch" again!!A very simple question . . . .then again maybe not so simple?
Putting aside power and source components, which speaker would you choose and why? I would love to hear opinions from someone who is familiar with both Merlin and Sonus. My music taste runs the full gambit from Jazz to Classical to Classic Rock at medium to mediuum/high sound levels. I will replace my pre/amp to best match either of these brands.
Sonus Faber Guarneri Homage
Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor
Merlin TSM Millennium (TSM-M)
Granted the Guarneri would be a stretch but it's not out of the ballpark! For a small room which speaker would be best??
Follow Ups:
I used to sell SF speakers where I worked and I wound up with the VSM at my house back in the day. My manager wound up with Mahlers after listening to the entire Sumiko line up. When listening to the VSM I never preffered the Mahlers.. they did offer more bass which is nice but the Merlins are still more than adequate without a sub. The VSM's are prolly the best speakers made in many respects. In two ways they are undoubtably the best size vs bass output is staggering and the sound for you $ is amazing, not to mention Bobby P really cares and is willing to actually talk to the customer and help them sincerely enjoying doing so. I sorely miss mine and I always will. If you ever hear them with a Berning ZH-270 your audio life as you know it will be over. Thats my dream system now and forever... VSM's with ZH-270.
/cries =(
itch,You captured some great responses and with them, insight.
If you are fond of the 'North American' sound prsentation, (and why shouldn't you be?) - then the Merlins are a no brainer. Easy to buy easy to own, and ultimately... easy to get shot of, just like your regular Ford.
If how ever, you favour smaller scale and intimate natural acoustic/vocal music, then the Guarneris are the must-have point source mini-monitor reference, but be warned: they will reveal, ruthlessly, the limitations of your present upstream components.
As I tap this in I am slapping my balding pate, wanting to wire up my ANE/SEC Silvers off the side wall... but need just a little bit more of the Guarneris - what can I say, other than I am biased of course!
YMMV
and have listened to my buddy's larger Merlins. I personally like th Guarneri best of all. They are the more refined speaker of the group as per timbre and tone. the Electas had a bit more "pace" and the Merlinswere also very good, but................the Guarneri are a very special speaker. I found that they actually liked a larger room and did not have as much success in a small room. Also, they play well with moderate power, but seem to prefer a bit more if you can spare it.
I have heard both the Auditor and the Merlin TSM-MMe in two different but similarly-sized rooms (12 x 20 x 8) with the same source and amps (Rega Apollo and Pathos Classic One mk.iii). I listen to all kinds of music: classical in the morning and jazz at night for concentrated listening sessions, and most all the other genres for drinking wine and marveling at the wife. Here’s what I heard:
The Auditors are nice sounding and present musical lines in a way that is easy to follow. With jazz, there is distance between the players and the soundstage is fairly high and wide. The tonal color is just medium rich.—as they say—not quite warm. The bass is tuneful and ever-present. I had the sense, however, that they were over-energized and working a bit hard. They seem to throw the sound out in your direction.
The Merlin TSM-MMe is somewhat warmer, more relaxed, and more tonally rich. Soundstage is higher and wider with maybe a tad less airiness or space between musicians, though. The bass on the Merlins is less prominent sounding than the Merlins. I don’t think it’s that the Auditors go deeper, it just the way they’ve decided to build the enclosure and do the cross-over, I’m guessing. Partly negative though, as that is partially what makes the Auditors sound over-energized. The Merlins have a very sweet top end that is unfailingly stirring on the right material. Musical lines are not just easy to follow, but instruments like piano retain their character throughout the frequency range. You become acutely aware of all of the notes emanating from each instrument. I think that this is because—importantly--the Merlins are much more coherent than the Auditors. They speak with one voice seemingly. You don’t hear the separation of woofer and tweeter. It may sound oxymoronic, but what the Merlins seem to me to be is “startlingly inert.” They are very composed and non-electronic in character. Rather than throwing the music at you as the Auditors do, music just floats in the space around the speakers. To my ears, this is the formula for a more involving listening session. Where the Auditors are fun, the Merlins are profound.
I ended up buying the Merlins about 6 months ago and I couldn’t be happier. I added a small and cheap 8” Velodyne sub that I had and the bass is great. Sometimes I use it and sometimes I don’t. One of the important aspects that is hard to audition for is long-term usability. That is, do they play all the music that you like to listen to well? Yes, the Merlins sound great with everything I play through them. I’m also discovering some music in my library that never sounded good to me before. My listening room is a mess with LPs and CDs lying all over, and I’m going broke buying new music. I’m happy. The standard YMMV applies, of course, but the Merlins are keepers in my book. Good luck with the search.
Tom
I haven't heard the Auditors or the TSMs, but have heard the Merlin VSM-Ms. Your description of the Merlin sound is pretty dead on with my experience. You did a nice job of summarizing their strengths and limitations. They do sound better with some instruments than others and piano does sound excellent on Merlins. I find the Merlins do have an intoxicating quality that is hard to walk away from, but they certainly have their share of weaknesses and are not for everyone's taste. I thought your post captured the essence of both. Good job! However, it would be nice if you could register and list your system; I find that very helpful whenever anyone has good input on stereo components as it helps assess how one has arrived at those conclusions.
Thanks for the praise. I will register soon. I've been hesitant fearing I'll post more and restart my hopefully cured audio nervosa. Thanks again.
Tom
Itch -First, I think you sumply cannot be "Putting aside power and source components".....that's insane and says that you (may) intend to enter into a "guesswork" system. Mainly becuase, imho, Merlins and SFs are very different sonically.
Second, I own VSM-MXs and currently have them in my office which is 10x15x8. I previously had them in my living room which is 20x26x15. They are only 12" from the wall and they sound great. Remember that VSMs are front-ported.
I hear great things about SFs but I have no experience with them. If you put the right front-end electrobics together, I believe that Merlins are hard to beat.
Choosing between the two is a matter of taste. Some might like to think there is an objective analysis to be made between the two brands. Others might ask "which one is closer to the absolute sound of natural instruments playing in a natural space? (Yecchh!)"I have owned Verity Audio Parsifal Encores for two years. Although I prefer the Verity "sound" to either Sonus Faber or Merlin, I wouldn't want to say the Verity was "better." I thought the Sonus Faber Electa Amator did a better job conveying the timbre, flow and beauty of the music more than the Merlin VSM (yes, with BAM), but I can already hear the howls of disagreement.
Sorry Itch, I can't steer you one way or the other. These are two different versions of the "truth".
And I should add, it's been 5-6 years since I heard either of the brands. I know the Merlin has gone through multiple upgrades and improvements since then and by now the assessment might be different.
Common sense tells me that you should go for one of the Merlins.Bobby is always around to answer your querries.Isnt that very comforting?
Isnt that more important than any small differences in sound?
Cheers
To get back to your updated question Itch, I preferred the Merlin TSMs I owned for some time to the set of Auditors I brought home for a weekend audition. In my system the Merlins had more presence, detail, dynamic range. The Auditors were simply less involving. That said it's darn hard to predict how an individual is going to respond to a couple sets of good speaker in any given system or for that matter how a speaker will blend in the system. Good news is that it would be hard to make a wrong choice with your short list.
Larry
I agree. I auditioned the Cremonas -- not the Auditor version -- a couple of years ago and thought the very same thing. Nothing really wrong from waht I can remember -- just not very involving. If I'm not mistaken, the Sonus Fabers are voiced with what used to be referred to as a "BBC Dip", and slight bump in the mid freqs which gives them a sort of romantic sound that plays well with vocals and instrumentals. I think this is evident on some of the graphs JA publishes from the Stereophile reviews. If you room is conducive to brightness, then the Cremonas may be a better choice.
Itch, I currently own the SF Guarneri's. They are a very hard speaker to beat IMHO. I have heard the MMX's at a friends and they too are a great speaker. In my very small room, 10X11 with a 15'
vault ceiling, the G's are truly amazing. I suspect that the larger
Merlin's will probably be too much for such a small room. I drive my G's with a Rowland model 8 with choke and all my 'phile friends put this system in their top five.
BTW, I feel that the new Mementos are in fact lacking in regards to the original model. Listening in an 'AB' the M's were not as resolving and seemed less accurate than the H's. Many including myself, believe that the new drivers in the M's are in fact inferior to the H drivers. The Esotar is used by Merlin and in the H's. This driver is still SOTA IMHO.
As some of the above posters have said the Auditor's really are not in the same league as the G.My G's replaced the Hales System 2 Sig's
in my system, and these were no slouch.( Most people feel that this was Paul Hales best speaker!)..The G's are far more resolving and have way better palpability than the Hales; along with their superior imaging and better reproduction of timbre they are a major upgrade.
I guess after the revamp of the web page ( which does look better BTW) my new name is 'George Mann'
Web master... please correct, Thanks DaveyF
Or is it jerryjg? Web master!!!....;0)
Or is electrostat..Daveyf
I have heard all three and owned 2 of them at one point. If I had to own any of these it would be the Cremona Auditor. The price is right and remember the Homage is $10,000 and the new one is $12,000 and much improved over the Homage. The Auditor is 98% of the Homage but the new memento is much better then both.If you need to place the speaker close to the back wall then the Sonus might be a better choice over the Merlin. The Sonus can play louder than the Merlin. Merlin is easier to drive.
But the number one thing is the Auditor is the most beautiful speaker built at or even near it's price.
I listened side by side SF guarniere and merlin tsm mm, SF guarniere was better for strings and vocal ( may be the most tonal right speaker, and the beatiful speaker) but the merlin tsm mm was little fast , if I have to choose -> SF guaniere, but in this case you have to use with high power amplifier , I used it with gamut d200mk3( better than AR vt100), and there are others that use with jeff rowland with good results, SF guaniere loves silver cables. Now I sold my SF guarniere and bought a pair of merlins vsm mxe, I think this is better tha SF guarniere in all aspect,more transparent and powerful bass, and I can use it with tubes amplfiers with 30 watts and with fantastic results. Forget cremona auditor, it is not even closer SF guarniere. I do no think your room will make any diference in the sound results of these 3 speakers.
Agreed that the Guarneri are more closely matched to the VSM's both in price and quality. My biggest concern is that I can only place the speakers 12" from the back wall and my sweet spot is 11' away, The speaker seperation would be about 8'. This all being said, I think the VSM's would be too much speaker for the room . . . thus "bookshelf" speakers are in order. I did have the opportunity to hear the Guarneri hooked up to some top shelf AR gear that blew me away. Ableit, it was in a MUCH larger room. I guess my question would be as follows. Are the Guarneri to much speaker for my room? If so which would be better, the TSM's or the Cremona Auditor?
perfect for either the tsm or vsm. using the speakers closer to a wall behind them is ok if it is draped, or a hanging rug or wall hangings are used. just something to break up the reflective surface is a good thing and it can be done in an attrative manner. the tsm is not ported and the vsm is front ported so it is not an issue. the vsm uses bandpass filtering in the bottom end below 30 hz so i doubt you will get any booming with the larger model.
if you want to play either speaker at loud levels, i might consider damping immediate and primary reflection points. it would be a good thing but not absolutely necessary. corner tunes may also be a nice touch if needed. if you have questions about this you can contact me at the plant. be glad to help.
i am wondering why you mentioned the tsm m?
i would think about the tsm mme and mxe.
thank you,
bobby
"Are the Guarneri to much speaker for my room? If so which would be better, the TSM's or the Cremona Auditor?"Forget the Cremona, get the Guarneri lovely, lovely speaker. It has a more refined top-end and sounds exquisite on classical music. On the other hand, the Cremona Auditor has a bigger bottom end and will probably do a better job on rock type music. You pays the money, makes the choice. Not heard the VSM, but looking at the Frequency plots (Stereophile), it will sound more detailed than the Guarneri, however the Guarneri is the more truthful to the source, since the VSM tweeter is balanced about 1-2db higher than the midrange, whereas the Guarneri is flat thru midrange with a slight dip between 5KHz - 10Khz to forestall any treble attack, the balance of both speakers above 10Khz is similar.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
ah,
if you read all of the test data from the original review of the vsm m and look at the early amplitide graphs you will notice that they are taken on axis. the speakers were not desgned to be listened to in this manner. in this case you are correct that the hf response is up 1 to 2db. but if you look at graph 9 which is the waterfall plot and look at 10 degrees off axis which is how the speaker was designed to be listened to (they come with an alignment tool to set them up this way) that plot with the bam in is one of the flatest ever in stereophile. and it shows a very slight roll off in the hf response. figure 10 is bam out. since the speakers are toed 10 degrees out off directly on axis to the ears, the on axis response will occur to the right and left of the head making it sound like the hf response is very extended. michael fremmer's two reviews of the speakers suggest that the speaker is anything but elevated in hf response.
thank you for your thoughts.
bobby at merlin
Thanks for your comments Bobby, I must confess that I did not look at Mikey accompanying reviews until you mentioned them. Nevertheless, he states that the VSM-MX "offered airy, ultradetailed , grain-free high frequencies and electrostatic-like resolution", which more or less concurs with what I said the post and what one will expect from FR plots such as VSM-MX's.regards, TAH.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Let's just say nobody would ever confuse a Merlin speaker with one by Sonus Faber, whatever the preference!
Hi Bob,
From what I've read, you have a vision of Merlins very different from my own experience. With all due respect, I'd like to chime in.
I don't know if you've listened to a very old model from Merlin and/or were unlucky in matching them, but your post is hinting at something I totally disagree with.
The Sonus being famous for being warm, even overly so, your post suggests the Merlins are rather lean/cold.
Well my VSMs are warm, sweet, caressing, full-bodied. Very comparable to my previous JMRs (of which I've owned three pairs, so that tells you what kind of sound I like!) but more neutral, and with a better soundstage and more transparency. But definitely the same kind of immensely musical, rich, inviting sound. A music-lover's speaker before all as opposed to an analytical, dissecting one.
So however different they might be from the Sonus, I don't things they're in opposite camps at all.
Best,
JB
I don't think I expressed a preference in my remarks at all -- actually I set out expressly not to. When you say, "however different they might be from the Sonus, I don't things they're in opposite camps at all," you are already saying a lot more than I did. All I said was that they are very different sounding, not likely to be confused with each other. I don't think anyone in audiophile history has ever confused a Sonus Faber speaker with a Merlin. And I expect Mr. Palkovic and Sr. Serblin would agree with me. I am not talking about camps here, just different sonic presentations.You are reading my history into my remarks. Truth is, I'm not really a fan of either, which has NOTHING to do with their quality, of course, and everything to do with me. And my aural memory, since I've heard either in quite a while now. But if today's Merlins sound like Reynauds, perhaps I'd better find a way to hear the current Merlins. I'll have to say I find that hardly believeable, but who knows? And actually, I don't think it would necessarily be a good thing if Merlins have come to sound like Reynauds. Merlins have made a LOT of people happy for a LONG time sounding like Merlins! And the same goes for Sonus Fabers and Reynauds.
Bob,
I don't mind you expressing any preference at all, that wasn't my point. Each of us is entitled to his/her preferences.
Nor was I reading more in that remark than what was in it. My comments stemmed from OTHER posts I've read from you where you described the Merlin sound as rather lean and analytical, if my memory serves me well. That's just the point I disagree with, not your preferences or your right to express them.
And yes, the VSM MMEs I have at home now remind me of all the things I love about the JMRs. If that surprises you, you haven't heard the Merlins correctly. I respect and love both designers equally, and basically hear the same magic in their speakers. I think their paths run parallel although they use very different solutions.
JB
Since becoming a dealer, I am expected to keep my preferences muted. I don't know what it means to say that speakers run along parallel paths, but if this means something to you, that's fine. If you mean both Merlins and JMR's make you happy, that's also fine...and I commend you for your remarkably catholic taste. I would guess that these parallel paths you speak of have a bit of distance between them. And finally, audiophile opinions ought to have some sort of statute of limitations: I mean I loved my Altec Lansing in 1959 but would just as soon not be held to that opinion now. Experience changes experience, as my cat says. Merlins and Reynauds, eh? Wow. Will wonders never cease.
this has nothing to do with having your hearing corrected but being more balanced and fair. it is true that your original statement didn't make any specific leading comment. but when you consider what you have said in the past and that your leading statement was made directly after audiohobbies' incorrect assumptions based on near field on axis measurements and that he had not ever heard the speakers, you cannot blame jb for bringing it up. the fact is that all merlin speakers were designed with their power response and if used the way they were designed to be used, the top end actually rolls off. again, look at figure 9 of the vsm m review in stereophile. secondly, to assume that all merlins have the same sound, is incorrect. the early versions were designed to be used with softer sounding se triodes and every model from the m to mm/mx and now the mme/mxe sound way more right and bold, even now, with ss. so, to assume a merlin is a merlin is the same thing as saying all chevs are chevs. big difference between a cavalier and a corvette. the last comment about the auditioning older versions could also be made to a few others in this string.
to get a really good indication of what the newer speakers sound like, look at the top of this string at maxwellp's comments of the tsm mme. this man clearly has listened to them and gets it!
bob, you may still not like the newer models but at least give them a chance. take your cat too, he won't run away. my speakers do not chase my cairn terrier out, he actually comes into the room when music is playing.
best regards,
b
"audiohobbies' incorrect assumptions based on near field on axis measurements and that he had not ever heard the speakers"Come on now! Measurements are there for good reason, my comments on the performance on the speaker are echoed by the Micheal Fremer he said that they are 'ultra detailed', so my basic comments based on FR are not incorrect at all.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
that is not all he said. here is all of it.
"The Dynaudio Esotar D330A, which is also used in the Rockport Antares, is one of my favorite tweeters. As implemented in the Merlin, it offered airy, ultradetailed, grain-free high frequencies and electrostatic-like resolution. Like the VSM Millennium, the VSM-MX's low-level resolution and microdynamic presentation were positively mesmerizing, resulting in "cascading reverberant trail-offs extend[ing] into seemingly impossible depths of time and space, exposing new layers of ultra-low detail from even the most familiar recordings," as I wrote in the original review."Despite its awesome resolution of detail, the VSM-MX never sounded mechanical or fatiguing."
and in the original review of the millennium he said, "But what drew me into the VSM first was the smooth, airy, graceful top end, delicate yet detailed. It sounded luxurious without being syrupy or unctuous."
"In terms of overall frequency balance, I found the VSM to be just about ideal. I'll bet John Atkinson's measurements will show the very top end to be slightly rolled off at the recommended 10 degrees off-axis firing line, and perhaps flatter directly on-axis."i have spoken to michael fremmer and he never told me they were bright or implied they were bright either. that is your interpretation of what he wrote and that is fair, i suppose. but as i have said a few times in this string, the speakers were not designed to be listened to near field on axis but 10 degress off directly on axis, far field. soft domes do not disperse energy axially as well as harder domes. so in this case, the tweeter was designed hotter on axis to provide greater axial dispersion. the last thing you want to do imho, is to listen to it on axis. if you look at the power response of the speaker which is a combination of on and off axis measurements, the top end actually rolls off. this is evident in figure 9 of the vsm m review. then we select the smoothest most continuous response to listen to. that is toed out, 10 degrees off directly on axis. i suppose if you had the opportunity to hear the speaker properly set up, you would not feel as you do. and the definition michael speaks of comes from the crossover disign and the components used in the networks and not a rising response.
sorry if i offended you, nothing intended. but i have worked very, very hard to make the speakers as continuous and complete sounding as possible and having a rising top end goes against everything i have worked so hard to do.
sorry foor all this but it needed to be said.
have a nice weekend.
bobby at merlin
did I say that was all he (Fremer) said? These are my precise words."since the VSM tweeter is balanced about 1-2db higher than the midrange, whereas the Guarneri is flat thru midrange with a slight dip between 5KHz - 10Khz to forestall any treble attack"
where did I say that the speaker was bright? That said, it is pretty clear from the measurements that the VSM-MM is sound more detailed and dare I say brighter (as you raised the issue) than the Guarneri, the dip in the treble btw 3-5kHz is balanced at least 1-2dB higher than the lower midrange and it gradually rises from that dip (probably owing Fletcher-Munson loudness compensation) to peak of 2-3dB peak @~7kHz. Contrast that to the Guarneri, where the narrow peak at @6-7kHz is btw +/-2db of the lowest dip in midrange and dip between 3-5Kz is about -2dB wrt to midrange. At any rate, both speakers use soft domes so their dispersion is broadly similar and as I mentioned in my original post, the balance above 10Khz, even 7kHz for both speakers is similar, the top end starts to roll off for both speakers. The critical difference btw them is in midrange and lower treble. And to reiterate my originals comments the Merlin would sound more detailed, but the Guarneri's mellower sound is definitely more accurate.
As per Bob tongue in cheek comments, no one will confuse a VSM-MM for a SF Guarneri, that's for sure.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
to disagree!
i still have no idea what fr plot you are using to make these statements. certainly fletcher-munsons have bearing on the design the more you make it for nearfield aps. the sfs sound great neirfield but the merlins are designed to do something very different and to be listened at 9.5 feet or more away. so, if you did a power response plot of the vsm at 2.5 meters or more away, it would show something quite different than the nearfield ones taken by mr. atkinson. figure 9 just starts to show this.
since what is accurate really depends on personal taste and its intended use, i think, imho should follow "the Merlin would sound more detailed, but the Guarneri's mellower sound is definitely more accurate." you still may not like the merlin sound or the way it is designed to work but do you not think it fairer to pass judgement after you listen to the vsm mme or mxe? will you be in nyc for the stereophile show. if so, come by and say hello and listen for yourself.
regards,
bobby
Yep, we should agree to disagree on this one. I will not be attending Stereophile show as I am not based in the US nor do I intend to visit on account of the show.Well, later
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Well do YOU think your speakers sound like Reynauds?Given the response I've gotten to my note, I can't imagine what the response would have been had I been less guarded and more judgmental!
I have no idea what Merlins sound like these days. All I said was I doubt they sound much like Reynauds. There is room in the world for those who like Merlins and those who like Reynauds, and they needn't sleep together or sand off their differences to get along. There is also room for those who like Audio Notes, which sound unlike both the Merlins I've heard and Reynauds. So I can be catholic when called upon to be.
Anyone who makes as popular a speaker as you do (I expect it gets more mention around here than just about anything else)need not be defensive when he smells an innuendo. To say that two speaker lines (probably) don't sound much alike is not an attack on either, regardless of what opinions I have expressed in the past about models no longer made. And what do you care what I think about Merlins? Hell, I sell Reynauds and Audio Notes. I can't afford to like Merlins! (=:
bob,no i do not think they sound like reynauds but something about the sound or the effect they have on jb, makes him think they do. that is ok with me.
i am not defensive at all. but you are talking in circles and it does not confuse some of us as to what your intentions were.
why not stop all this nonsense and just give them a chance when you can. no biggie if you do not give them a try or do not like them as there is plenty of room in this to like what you like or to sell what you want to sell.there have been no merlin discussions (or certainly very, very few) on this forum about merlin in months. you know that as well as i do and if you don't, do a search. and i pride myself in talking about what i know and nothing else. innuendo? it was plain as hell. now if you would have put your comment at the top of the string, it would not be as obvious as it was after audiohobbie's . and as to your last statement, yes, please continue to sell what you like. all i am asking is for you to be fair and to give them a chance. as i said, you probably still won't like them, just speak or imply from first hand knowledge.
b
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/search.mpl?searchtext=Merlin&b=OR&topic=&topics_only=N&author=&date1=2006-05-03&date2=2007--05-03&slowmessage=&sort=score&sortOrder=DESC&forum=speakersBut there are also that many for Sonus Faber and 186 for Reynaud and 200 for Audio Note, so I am essentially wrong about your getting the most references. But you're certainly getting your share, eh? Weird thing is Thiel got 200 too. Wonder if the Search Engine cuts off at 200? Spendor gets 200, Harbeth gets 200. Oh well.
Hi Bob,Yes, the search engine cuts off at 200 results. You can tighten up the date range to get a better picture. What the heck, I'm sitting at breakfast at the Lone Star Audio Fest in Dallas absorbing CDs into my laptop to demo the Audio Note Kit DAC 2.1's USB input, so I'll redo the search while I sit. . . . .
Keep your ears and your mind open.
In the period 1/1/07 - today, searches on the following terms in the Speaker Forum produced the following number of hits:Merlin 141
Bose 118
Thiel 101
JMR or Reynaud 90
Audio Note* 77* Audio Note was searched for as an exact match to avoid counting posts with audio in one place and note in another having nothing to do with the audio company.
On the other hand, Merlin results may, in some cases, have related to discussions of famous wizards. The search was as rigorous as I could make it without being silly. Silly is, of course something that can never be used to describe the goings on here at the Asylum. (I can hear the inference canon firing up in the distance . . .)
n.t.
nt
No, I meant Dave Cope provided up to date statistics to "back up" my impression that Merlin gets more than its fair share of attention around here.
corrected!
these must be more of an isolated mention in other strings because i watch this site very closely for full discussions to see how they are going. and since the new year there have been very few. i had no idea that merlin was mentioned so many times in embedded discusions. sorry and thank you.
bobby
corrected!
these must be more of an isolated mention in other strings because i watch this site very closely for full discussions to see how they are going. and since the new year there have been very few. i had no idea that merlin was mentioned so many times in embedded discusions. sorry and thank you.
bobby
bob,
maybe so but in the last number of months there have been virtually none. and that is what i meant and should have said specifically.
b
"no i do not think they sound like reynauds..."Good, that's all I said. Oh yeah, I also said they probably don't sound like Sonus Fabers either, which I assume you would also agree with. So as far as what matters to me in this conversation, we have settled it. The rest is all baloney.
All I meant in criticizing jb's remark is that it's not helpful to say that Merlins sound like Sonus Fabers sound like Reynauds. It is talking about what you like and not what things sound like. My goal, usually, is to help people make distinctions, not run stuff together because it all feels good, or whatever.
I'm not a reviewer any longer but there is still some reviewer in me. And that's what reviewers are supposed to do. Make distinctions, not blur them. The fact that Merlins, Sonus Fabers, Reynauds, Audio Notes all "arrive" at the music, all make their respective listening constituencies happy, is very nice. It is all very nice. But frankly I'm a lot more interested in the differences, both among the speaker lines and the constituencies.
bob,
no, i don't think they sound like sfs either.
as to why, that would be best said in private e-mails.
i can see what you mean in your last paragraph but this is hard to do here because of conflicts of interest for both you and me.
musical enjoyment and the emotional connection to it should always be the goal for all of us.
i wish you well.
b
I have never been very good at saying (knowing!) why various speakers lines don't sound like one other, for which Robert E Greene used to take me regularly to task. It might have been interesting at some point in my education to study a bit of audio physics to repair that hole in my knowledge. But the truth is, I have always been more interested in what the differences were as experience. In that sense, I take impressions of speakers (and other gear in conjunction with them) and report them. I think that's what most amateur 'philes do because in the end that's what's the point. What does a Merlin speaker sound like these days? How do the new Signature models of Reynauds sound compared with their immediate forebears? How are Harbeths and Spendors different to our ears? How differently do they strike us? It ain't very intellectual, I concede, but it's damn interesting, especially when you hear well and can get it right, in language. As I said earlier, that has always been my goal.As for Neill and Merlins, we have not had ideal relations over the years. I have never heard them on your preferred (?) Joule amps. I heard them on a very fine but perhaps not ideally suitable pair of Blue Circle BC 2.1's years ago. And I heard them in Montreal a few years back on a Berning. The experiences were similar, but I preferred them on the BC amp, which seemed less severe.
Perhaps I'll get to hear your lastest at RMAF, which I plan to attend next fall representing Reynaud (first appearance of JMR in years) and sharing a room with Blue Circle. If you're to be there, I will make a point of finding you.
Bob,
I didn't say Merlins sounds LIKE Reynauds, this is a shorcut. Not two speakers sound alike. I said that they weren't in opposite camps as you hinted at. In the analytical/hyper detailed vs warm and musical, the Merlins, like Jean-Marie Reynaud, are in the warm and musical category.
There is a common misconception that Merlins sound rather analytical, and your initial post fed that misconception. I don't care if people buy Merlins or JMRs or any other brand. But I will always disagree with any comment stating that the Merlins are cold or lean or analytical, because that's the opposite of what they are. They err on the warm side, they are full-bodied and detail is always presented in a natural, unforced way.
Yes, Merlins and JMRs have more in common than people credit them for. Once more, I'm a fan of JMRs AND Merlins, and there's a reason why. I hate it when my speakers don't convey the natural warmth of music or are clinical/sterile. Well I just described what the Merlins and the JMRs are NOT.
So once more, they have more in common than you hinted at, and are not in opposite categories.
That's all I'm saying.
b,
cardas audio, joule and merlin will attend and show at the rmaf in room 1007 or 1017, not sure which but same room as last year.
this is a good room and perfectly suited to the speakers and the combination. imho, we had sound that i was proud of last year so it should even be better this year with jud's (joule's) new lap 150mk2.
all the gear is wired with cardas and jud and i use each other's gear to design our own. great show and venue too.
see you there.
b
I have been reading this and it seems that Bob - you like several different speakers, Bobby is a manufacturer so you obviously have a preference in sound are trying to get at what you believe is "the best solution" and jb you like different speakers but you believe them to be in a similar sonic landscape (whatever that means - I would surmise a similar signature the way that I feel most multiple stacked slim lines sound alike to me that follow the NRC camp of design) Ala a Paradigm 100 is similar to what Energy puts out).My question is do you guys like speakers from totally different camps. I have looked over some of my favorite loudspeakers and I have liked stuff from complete opposite ends of the spectrum from Panels to horns to transmission lines to dual concentric (umm Tannoy if I got the dsign name wrong) to undamped boxes from Audio Note with their "out-there" theories. (as you all know this is my preference) but I still like these others and understand why people love them.
I'd be interested to know what speakers sound similar to a current Merlin or what camp one would put them into if possible and what would be viewed as a polar opposite.
I would like to hear Merlin and JMR -- I am in Korea -- any representation here. Harbeth seems to do well here as do some smaller brands not generally represented well in BC Canada like ProAc, Tannoy, Ruark etc.
Any speaker that is designed with tubes in mind is probably more right than wrong in my books even if they're not my first choice. If Merlin is doing that then they would probably be something I would like.
nyc, so i am here today. i just have time to say a few things about your post.from the time i have spent around live music and musicians, i have gained a particular appreciation for a continuous/complete sound and the musical center. some of my musician friends have said "i need to hear the middle of that instrument." so i have spent years trying to get rid of mechanical resonances, electrical resonances, distortions and amplitude irregularities which can all draw your attention away from the oneness, that i like to hear. the use of cryogenics and lead free construction have enabled me to get closer to this ideal than ever before (these are the e versions). and interestingly enough, later versions can also sound wonderful imho, with ss. i never thought this possible.
i personally like, quad electros, soundlab electros, rockports, avalons, kharmas and verity products (not in any particular order). i am sure there are others but that is all i have time to mention or to think of now.
i thank you for you thoughts and sorry, but i have to go.
bobby at merlin
nyc, so i am here today. i just have time to say a few things about your post.from the time i have spent around live music and musicians, i have gained a particular appreciation for a continuous/complete sound and the musical center. some of my musician friends have said "i need to hear the middle of that instrument." so i have spent years trying to get rid of mechanical resonances, electrical resonances, distortions and amplitude irregularities which can all draw your attention away from the oneness, that i like to hear. the use of cryogenics and lead free construction have enabled me to get closer to this ideal than ever before (these are the e versions). and interestingly enough, later versions can also sound wonderful imho, with ss. i never thought this possible.
i personally like, quad electros, soundlab electros, rockports, avalons, kharmas and verity products (not in any particular order). i am sure there are others but that is all i have time to mention or to think of now.
i thank you for you thoughts and sorry, but i have to go.
bobby at merlin
I'm butting in here, but I'm sure Bobby or jb will respond..To me, there is no other speaker(s) that sound quite like Merlin. It's difficult to describe because Merlin speakers are transparent but still retain image density. They can sound warm but not syrupy. They can sound full but not bloated. They have high resolution without being analytical.
They are easy to drive. They sound pretty much like whatever the recording sounds like. But just because they are neutral...they are never boring.
I like the 'sound' of many different speakers too. But so far, none that make me want to give up my Merlins. The general 'character' of the TSM is surprisingly similar to the VSM. They both play larger than their size. And with a sense of 'ease'. The VSM takes it all several notches further than the TSM...but the overall presentation is remarkably similar.
They are worth an audition for any music lover who wants music to sound natural and complete in their home.
As for other speakers I know, I also like Avalon, Verity and JMRs, going from the "colder" side of the musical spectrum to the "warmer". I feel all offer that "oneness" Bobby describes.
JB
Just my opinion but, I don't think comparing the Guarneri to the TSM is a fair comparison. The Guarneri are much more aligned with the VSM with regards price and performance. I've only auditioned the Guarneri in-store, but a very good setup and at that time they were the only speakers I'd ever listened to (also IMHO) that compared with what I owned at the time, Quad ESL-63s (Crosby mods with Arcici stands).Having recently upgraded from the TSM-MM to the VSM-MMe, I can say that they are well worth the difference in price and will play classic rock at louder-than-life levels. The TSMs will not.
Hopefully someone who has actually owned both will be able to help better than I.
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: