|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Hi,I'm thinking of selling my Reference 3A de Capos and moving on to another speaker, but not quite sure what to try next. Prior to the de Capos, I owned Spendors for about 4 yrs., inc. 3/1s, 2/3s, LS3/5s, S3/5s, and 2/3s again. Before that, Meadowlark Kestrals, Linn Tukans, Totem Mites and Model 1s, and in the past, Vandys. I've had the de Capos about a year, as long as I've owned any speaker in the past 7-8 yrs. While I liked the improved dynamics, openness and soundstaging of the de Capos over the Spendors, I missed the "magic" of the Spendor midrange. On the other hand, not sure I want to go back to the Spendors -- really have a desire for a more transparent, dynamic speaker, but not bright, thin sounding. So looking for natural tonal sound, full sounding, transparent and dynamic. Is there such a speaker for 3 grand or under, new or used? Should I be considering a high efficiency, point source speaker? A floorstander in the mid-efficiency range (ie, Thiel, Proac)? A panel speaker? My local options are Spendor, Vandersteen, Tannoy, Thiel, Maggies, B&W, Meadowlark. I appreciate any suggestions you may have.
Follow Ups:
A quick update. I changed one tube -- one -- in the VAC, and now I'm happy. This is a Strange hobby.
... he was gracious enough to let me listen to his de Capos (Naim driven). DEFINITELY a good speaker, with a fabulous soundscape - I could really feel the individual layering of instruments, front to back, and side to side. Very nice, AND addictive. Geez.. he even had store-bought (and DIY!) traps in certain places... a room conducve to good sound.By constast, my Revels are a little dry, but very clean and accurate - not sure if that is what you want OVERALL. Side by side, I would say the 3A has a slight mid-bass emphasis... this could be the result of the room. If your price range includes the Revel F30, I would give them a serious look.
IMO, the Thiel will be a little, (ahem) polite... I DO like the Thiel sound, but, IMO, the results vary too much depending on music selected as well as the room. Great speaker, though.. (the 1.6!) May be a little dainty for your tastes, but VERY nice with vocals... when it comes to R&R, they do not fare so well, IMO...
including you. You said it yourself "your room is not great" - You have tried out a number of top flight speakers and you keep moving on and you will keep moving on as a result.Get a professional dealer to investigate your room and take appropriate steps to increase the quality of the room as a listening environment...great speakers won't be great in bad rooms. The De Capo you say you've had about a year and that's the LONGEST in the past 7-8 years. My Heaven MAN shake your head in shame!!!! There is something wrong there and it isn't the speakers...sure the odd one but several top flight speakers all not good enough.
You seem to want the qualities of the De Capo(Dynamics and transparency) but you want the fuller warmth of the spender(less dynamic and less transparent). One reason I like the HD600 headphone is that it gives me 95% of the electrostatic presentation with dynamics...but the can is analytical...so I match a tube amp with them to fatten up the midrange a bit.
Before you go chasing after every new speaker that gets a good review like a dog chases every new car that rolls down the street - take a step back and determine what the real problem is. You don't have to follow the BUZZ words of transparency and detail etc...what you need to do is enjoy the music. And sometimes a more enjoyable speaker can be obtained with objectively worse numbers. I have had my speakers ten+ years and they have big disadvantages in a number of aspects to most new speakers(in fact my lowly B&W 302s have certain advantages at 1/10 the price)...notably my Wharfedales have a personality. The point though is that I have heard a LOT of speakers that are tempting but are missing certain things I want. You should not take a step back in parts of the sound when buying a new speaker just because it's better in certain things...it should be better in all things.
Speakers above the De Capo I have found to have a significantly high level of diminishing returns for improvements gained. Detail and transparency are fine - some do it better - but if it does not move you then they are valueless IMO.
I am biased because I love the De Capo (i) - I would be looking at your amp your source and most importantly your room/set-up. Wrm up the mid range with tubes if you must...and not all tube amps warm up the sound...I have run across several that sound mre analytical than several Solid state amps from the likes of Sugden and Creek etc. Thiel and B&W if anything make even more analytical speakers and I find Vandersteen, generally, to be lacking life.
Thanks for your comments. I agree that enjoyment of the music is what it is all about. As far as the room, my main complaint is it is simply too small to handle the dynamic range I am looking for. When I had an apt. years ago, it was relatively small but had one large living room, w/ vaulted ceilings. Once I moved to my house, an older home w/ a number of smaller rooms, I was never able to recreate the sound I was getting in the apt. My listening room is 13 X 15 w/ normal ceilings. In fact, I found that almost all decent sized floorstanders overloaded the room; that's why I eventually went to stand-mounted speakers. I am also limited in terms of moving gear around in the room by several factors I simply can't avoid, so that room placement may not be ideal. I'm not in a position to simply tear down the room and build a new one, so I pretty much have to live w/ what I have until I move to another house. I suspect that the Ref 3As, like some of the floorstanders I've had, is testing the limits of my room on LF response. As far has having a dealer look at the room, I've discussed the issue w/ several dealers, but none have offered solutions that I could realistically implement. It may be that I need some acoustical treatment, but I've always been a little suspicious of such treatments, plus I'm not sure that there is a local dealer selling such products, that I feel confortable enough w/ to try the product.
As to the speakers I've tried, for the most part each of the speakers I upgraded to I thought overall was an improvement over the prior speaker. In two cases, after living w/ the speaker for a time, I decided I just didn't like it (Totem/Meadowlark). The other upgrades involved going to a different price point (Linn Tukans/Spendor S3/5s to Spendor 2/3s, Spendor 2/3s to Ref 3A.) I do, however, like the suggestion of an older pair of Quads. However, I've heard the current production Quads, which I found neutral and musical, but not necessarily the most "enjoyable" to listen to, if that makes sense.
Terry
" I suspect that the Ref 3As, like some of the floorstanders I've had, is testing the limits of my room on LF response"?If you mean that the standing wave generated by the longest dimension is too high and that the room won't support lower frequencies so you can't hear low bass in a room the size of yours, you're dead wrong. Take a listen to subwoofer bass in a car - the space does not have to have a dimension equal to or longer than the longest sound wave you want to listen to.
You can get bass as low as you want in your room but the room won't reinforce it and that's actually a good thing since reinforcement is due to standing waves and they aren't desirable. What you are going to get, and what everybody gets, is erratic behaviour below 200 -300 Hz or so due to emphasis of certain frequencies - the room nodes or standing wave frequencies - and cancellation at other frequencies determined by the placement of the speakers and the listening position. The frequency range in which these effects are worse is determined by your room dimensions and where the speakers are placed within the room. These effects can be tamed but not entirely eradicated. I would expect the results in your room with 2 dimensions nearly the same and the other close to half of the longest dimension, to be difficult but things can be done.
A lot of the problem can be solved by careful speaker placement and selection of the listening location. These can be chosen to minimise the effects of the rooms nodal behaviour. Given the size of the room, setting things up for near field listening would make a lot of sense - that means you end up listening to a mix of sound that's predominantly direct sound and the contribution of the reflected sound, which is the sound that has been affected by the room, is minimised. What you hear that way is going to be closer to the speaker's anechoic response than what a microphone would measure because the brain does things with how it perceives sound due to arrival time and level and maximising the direct sound contribution really does help there. Listening in the near field also means you're a bit closer and don't have to turn the volume up to get the same level of sound, so you don't run the same risk of coming up against the issue of simply overloading the room.
Combine that with a bit of DIY acoustic treatment (see Jon Risch's home pages listed in the FAQs here and an Tweaker's Asylum) and you'll smooth out the room response some more. In the end, an uneven room response isn't as bad as you might think and it's surprising how our brain seems to accommodate it and how we don't notice it anywhere near as much as we think we should when we look at measurements of a frequency sweep taken in the room.
If you're changing gear as frequently as you say you do, you have to be chasing something that you can't get with gear changes. Either it is something like the room or a component you haven't looked at, or it's something in what you're looking for that is simply unrealistic and unattainable within your price range or possibly even at any price range. Other possibilities besides the room for areas other than components where you may not have looked are control of vibration and resonances, and cleaning up the power supply to your gear. It's amazing what both of these can do to clean up sound, change the way you perceive some frequency ranges, and let you listen at softer levels since you're no longer including noise in the signal you amplify and you no longer need to turn things up to hear detail that has been masked by noise to some degree. You may well find what you're lacking with your current gear simply by addressing one or more of room acoustics, vibration and power. You'll definitely find a lot that you didn't know was there with your gear and that may be even more satisfying in the long term than what you're currently chasing.
Those are interesting points, and different than what a couple dealers had suggested to me in the past re: LF response. I'm sure that the topic of speaker placement has been covered a number of times here, but do you have any specific suggestions or references that you could point me to? I've tried the "rule of thirds" as I understand it, but find that set-up is not ideal in my room. I've generally preferred the speakers either closer to the wall (warmer, fuller) or pulled out a little more into the room (better image behind speakers, a little cleaner sounding). Also, because of furniture, TV, doors, windows, electrical outlets, etc., I have to place my speakers against the long wall (ie, 15 ft.) rather than the short wall (ie., 13 ft.). Thanks,
Terry
Re low bass in rooms - I think this is one of the areas that is subject to gross misunderstanding. Very low bass can be heard in small spaces - listening to even a normal setup without subwoofer in a small car should be enough to convince anyone of this. If you couldn't hear notes with a wavelength longer than the room's longest dimension, you shouldn't be able to hear notes lower than 75 Hz (a 15 ft wavelength) in your room and that means you couldn't hear the lowest octave on a double bass or bass guitar, or even the bottom octave and a bit of a piano. You also wouldn't be able to hear notes lower than 150-200 Hz in a small car which means you wouldn't even be able to hear the lowest notes of some singers, much less almost any note from a double bass or bass guitar. I can assure you that all of those ranges are audible in your room and in a small car, and ranges even lower than those as well. A bit of listening should convince absolutely everyone of this fact but for some reason this belief never goes away.For what it's worth, I can hear test tones down to 31.5 hz in my room which is where my speakers roll off too far for audibility. The wavelength of a 31.5 Hz note is around 36', far longer than any dimension of my room which is around 17' by 13', not much bigger than yours, with a 10' by 10' extension opening off the long wall on one side so the longest dimension is actually 23', a long way short of the wavelength of a 31.5 Hz note. The low frequency limit in your room is set by the speaker's performance, not the room's dimensions. I also place the speakers on the long side - that isn't a problem.
I use the Audio Physic method with speakers half way between the front and back walls and listen against the wall or rather where the wall would be if my room didn't take a bit of a bend there. My speakers are placed at quarter points from the side walls. You can use this kind of approach and place the speakers a quarter of the way from front to back instead of half way. It works well for me in my room, but speakers in the centre of the room don't work well in a living room. My room serves only as a listening room so speaker placement isn't an issue.
Other grids include a grid of quarters rather than the thirds you've tried.
There are other methods not based on grids like the Cardas which uses a mathematical formula and which I think doesn't come up with useable placements in a small room that is close to a square - it's based on a rectangular room with dimensions ideally related to each other by a factor of approx. 1.61. There's also the Wilson method which involves a process of listening and marking off on a grid pasted to the floor. There are links to all of these in the FAQ. There are also placements along a diagonal which can be good in rooms that are square or almost so, and there's some mention of them in the material on the Harmon Kardon site. I haven't tried that approach but Floyd Toole seems to like it.
What all of these methods are going to do is to reinforce or cancel various room nodes and frequencies to different degrees. One will work best in one room and another will work best in a different room. The dimensions of your room play a huge part in which will work best for you. There's also the issue of which methods are practical in your room - what works in a dedicated listening room may not work in a living room where furniture and other uses dictate that the speakers simply won't go in some locations, regardless of how desirable the sound improvement would be.
There are links to most of these methods in the FAQ.
Also, on the Rives Audio site (don't have a URL but you can do a google search) they have a scaled down version of the CARA software that allows you to experiment with various placements and see what their effect will be on a range of speakers. If your speaker is on their list, you're in luck. Otherwise I'd pick a speaker of a similar physical size and frequency response and play with that to get a rough idea.
Apart from the above and the FAQ, you're going to have to work it out yourself given your room and the uses you make of it.
David Aiken
David,Thanks very much. This is very useful information, and gives me a lot to work with.
Please keep changing equipment often and let us know so that we can pick up the leftovers (cheap).Sounds like you have a serious case of audiophilihtis. You need to love music for the sake of music more. Spend your more of your budget on concert tickets and music appreciation classes. Playback systems are primarily supposed to remind you of "real" music, not perfectly reproduce it.
From what I see some people spending on gear, I thought I was a "budget" guy. I actually shop carefully, buying mainly demo or used gear or closeouts, taking my time, and usually buying though local dealers when they have a deal available, so I can hear the gear first. As a result, I rarely lose much when I sell to trade up. In fact, I created a spreadsheet earlier this year showing what I had spent, and what I had sold gear for when I traded up, over the last 5-6 years. When I looked at the total difference, it was substantially less, divided into a monthly basis, than the $50 + I pay per month for cable. Yet, I get a lot more enjoyment out of my audio system than 250 channels of mainly junk on cable. I call that a deal!I think some people have confused my request. I'm not saying that I think my current system is bad or not enjoyable. In fact, in every way I can think of it is better than anything I've owned before. I've heard a lot of other speakers locally, both in dealers and in private homes, and while some of them in the same price range (Reynaud, Audio Physic, Harbeth, Thiel, Maggys, JM Lab) do some things that the Spendors and Ref 3As don't do quite as well, and all are excellent speakers, I'm not sure that I believe any of them are a clear step up overall over the de Capos or my main alternative in that price, the Spendor 1/2s. I do like the $7000 Living Voice Avatar OBX speakers that my local dealer has, but there is no way I will ever spend that much on speakers, unless I win the lottery (which I don't play). I was mainly soliciting thoughts of ways to upgrade/tweak my system w/out spending a fortune. Also, there was a pair of Ref 3A Integreles (?) on Audiogon for $1995 (maybe still there). I was thinking of selling my de Capos to purchase them, as it would not cost a great deal to make that upgrade, if I could get a fair price for my de Capos.
In retrospect, I think two reasons I'm a little unsatisified right now that I did not fully disclose: (1) I've sold off my analog system, and need to get back into analog, since that has always been my primary source; I was happier w/ my system last winter when I had a Michell Gyro/SME 309 w/ VDH & Clearaudio carts. I sold the Gyro because it was a little frustrating to try to set up properly; every time I thought it was close to just right, I would try to tweak it more, and would throw the set-up off. But when it was right, the combo of the Gyro/Avatar/de Capos was one of the best systems I've heard at any price. I wanted an Orbe, but could not justify to myself spending that much $$$. (2) I've been playing w/ tube rolling in the Avatar, w/ mixed results. As w/ the Gryo, every time I think I'm about "there", I make some more changes and find I am a little disappointed w/ the result. Perhaps these questions are better addressed to the Vinyl and Tube asylums, respectively, where I mainly hang out. Thanks for all your suggestions, particularily the ones about room setup/treatments.
First, with your background of speakers / monitors, I believe you do yourself a disservice by not getting / using a pair of Quad Electrostatics (the original "57s") in your system for a year or two. Get them from a reliable source to assure they are working properly. You will be amazed...most of the speakers you have already owned were just trying to extract a close approximation of the Quad sound out of a dynamic driver in a box.I owned my pair back in the early 80's driven by Marantz 7C/8B combination. Quite a sound.
The other approach is to get a refined, efficient, big monitor. I moved from the Reference 3a Royal Master Controls to Tannoy System DMT 15 MKII studio monitors. Extraordinary loudspeakers. See my "kinda review" I did 18 montha ago at:
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.pl?forum=speakers&n=67810&highlight=tannoy+squid&r=&session=
I'm interested in hearing "vintage" Tannoys -- red and gold series, because the older Alinco magnets are supposed to be "near magical" but I'm hard pressed to imagine a better dynamic speaker than the DMT 15 MK II studio monitors. They're big and heavy. Some folks don't like the way they look (but I do.) They're very efficient so the dynamics are qualitatively different than the "little" speakers you've been using. (I still use a pair of Spendor LS3/5a 15 ohms in my second system, and love them for what they do....) They are just so musical on so many kinds of music, it's hard to describe.
I landed my pair for about $1,900 including shipping. They are regularly available used for $2,500 or less on ebay, audiogon, etc. Check 'em out.
WTS
p.s., don't go with the 12" or 10" models - which use polypro drivers. The 15" uses paper, and that material difference is important.
That's the thing....Is the sound that your missing contingent on the added size and cabinet resonances inherent in floor-standers?
I would take a pair home from your local dealer and see how they stack up to the DeCapos. The DeCapos are a very nice speaker, - they don't have the raw detail that some other bookshelves have, - but are a nice speaker...
What is your room like? Do you have enough room for a floor-stander, - or, - do you need a good floorstander that does well in the near-field....???
Some good floorstanders that I've heard recently are the Silverline Sonatina II and the Triangle Lyrr. But, - you also might like some of the high value Jeff Joseph speakers. (To me, - my favorite is the Triangle, - and if I had your associated equipment, - I would WANT those Lyrrs). However, - if you are easily annoyed by sibilance in the upper treble area, - the Josephs would be a better bet)....
Compared to what you have available locally, - these speakers represent a much higher value, - IMO....
I think that you can have what you are looking for and only spend half the money in your budget. I have been through quite a few pairs of speakers myself. Meadowlark and Audio Physics etc up to $5500 .... I fell in love with the sound of the old quads but there were quite a few concerns that kept me away from them... price, my cat, beaming, bass, dynamics etc...So I troed a pair of Carolina Audio JTM's www.carolinaaudio.com $1500 and I am in heaven. They have a smoother and more extended hogh end out that single full range Jordan driver than any of my other speakers had with ring radiator tweeters etc... and an incredibly natural way of presenting a lot of detail without ever stepping out of the flow of the music.
The midrange is incredibly transparent... zero crossover.. and there is no congestion at all, every instrument or voice has it's own place in the soundstage. Voices float between the speaker...
The bass flows through aquarter wave transmission line and in depth, detail and coherence is unmatched from anything that I have owned. It is incredibly accurate and isn't stuck inside the cabinet like so many other speakers.The JTM's are so wonderfully coherent. The dynamics are great.... on the big scale and also with the microdynamics all the nuance that lets the music move forward.
At $1500 with a 21 day trial they are a must audition if you are shopping at any price. They gave me a quality of sound that I never thought I would be able to have.
Sounds like you've been flipping speakers quite a bit, and you have tried out quite a few that get great reviews. Have you tried changing sources or electronics as well, to see if that gets you a little closer to the sound you want? Just a thought, and appologies if I am off base, but it must be costing you some decent dollars to change speakers every few months.....
Good point. I just upgraded my CD player from a Cambridge Audio to an AVI player, at substantial cost. Demoed it against a Rega Jupiter, Roksan and several others and preferred it. When I first bought it home, I loved it, but after less than a month, I find that I'm not hearing as much difference as I originally thought, although it varies by CD. I need to get back to vinyl; had a very nice analog set-up and sold to go to a "super deck" but then decided I wasn't ready to spend that much $$. I've also been though a number of decent amps in the last 3-4 yrs., though I've had the VAC now for 1 1/2 yrs.
I compared the new DeCappo-i right next to the Living Voice Avatars. To me, the DeCappo-i was a really nice speaker, but when I switched to the Living Voice Avatars, the DeCappo-i sounded very analytical. The amp was the ASL parallel 300B (not sure the model number). I realize its a different price range, but the difference is quite substantial. Worth the stretch in my oppinion. Living Voice is rated at 94db sensitivity.
felt they were a great speaker. The biggest problem I had was having to run 2 sets of bi-wire speaker cables b/c of the outboard crossover. Played in a large room they do need more power than you think but in a small room a 300B with a beefy power supply will work.
Of all the speakers I've owned or carried this was also the hardest to sell, don't know why but just couldn't give them away. Yet I still played them day after day and enjoyed them, they really are great speakers.
Steve
How much of a step up is the OBX over the Avatars? Extra pair of bi-wire cables don't scare me that easily...:)
It is worth the extra $$$ for the OBX but.....these speakers are very revealing so you need good cables. The cables alone can run you another 3K for 2 sets of bi-wires! That is what scared most customers.
Hi,
Living Voice was one of the speakers I was considering, from their reviews in the British press. Do you think that the least expensive model would be a worth-while step from de Capos, or would I need to go to the Avatar? Thanks,
Terry
I haven't heard the Auditorium model, only the Avatar. I liked the Avatar so much, the OBX-R will be my choice. I just think this *is* the speaker for me, it gives me a lot of what I'm looking for with out lacking. It seems like so many products do 1 or 2 things really well and you sacrafice other things. For me these speakers do everything really well.If you have the chance, listen to the Auditorium and let us know what you think.
A local dealer actually has the LV OBX, and I have been very impressed w/ it. I have bugged him about getting in the Auditorium or Avatar, but business is slow, and I don't think he wants to order any more speakers unless he has a buyer lined up.
Terry
I read in a recent UK magazine that the Auditorium has been updated this year and that new revisions are coming for the Avatar and OBX-Rs. I'm not sure what the changes are, but I'm taking a 'wait and see' stance before I order one.
Well, the logical choice and next step is Harbeth. Say, a Compact 7ES. I hear wonderful things about it and it is a bit more dynamic than a spendor.
Thanks. I had been thinking about Harbeth speakers. However, I had a chance to hear the Compact 7ES last Fall, when someone in town was selling a pair. Listened w/ a Belles SS amp, unknown CD player, cables. While it was "nice" sounding, I didn't hear the same sort of "magic" I've heard w/ Spendors. I also didn't find it quite as transparent or dynamic as my Ref 3As, and my goal is to improve on both those qualities. But, that may not have been a fair test. Could have been the amp, the stands, the source, the cabling, the set-up, the music or the room. Planned to take my amp and some CDs over to his house to listen again, but was swamped at work during that time, and the speakers sold before I could get back over there.
Hi.I have a pair of the Harbeth Super HL5s which have a cabinet very similar in size to the Spendor 1/2s. I have owned the Spendor 1/2s in the past and know exactly the pros and cons you are referring to. I'm afraid to say that I have been unable to find the same "magic" midrange in other speakers I have auditioned (and I have auditioned quite a number recently).
I am quite happy with the Harbeth SHL5s now though. I use tube amplification (Audiomat Prelude Reference) and a REL Storm III with them and together they have warmed up the sound in a way that suits my ears quite well. In terms of transparency and dynamics I can't quite understand how you found the Harbeths lacking in these areas. I have not heard the Compact 7s, but they use the same RADIAL material that I have in my SHL5s and M30s and they both exhibit those two traits in spades.
well, that's interesting. Many say they feel the strength of the Harbeth is that it is more transparent than the spendors and more "accurate" (whatever that means!).I actually used to own the Reference 3a De Capo i and I sold them because they did not sound exciting enough for me. Not that they were "neutral". Just that they didnt seem to have any boogie to them.
When I compared them to the Neat Critique standmounts, the Neats were much punchier and more "fun" to listen to. The 3a's had a greater sense of ease to my ears (they are bigger) but sounded like they were being driven by a small tube amp when in fact it was a big solid state model. The bass was a bit flabby (they have that great big port!)
I owned Spendors (2/3 and 1/2) and found both very good, but the 2/3 was a bit too warm for me. The 1/2 was great, but I had a crappy system at the time.
I now have Neat Mystique floorstanders and have been quite satisfied with them. They are not for everyone, being less tonally accurate than Spendors, but they have more "jump" to the sound and seem to carry a tune better.
well, that's interesting. Many say they feel the strength of the Harbeth is that it is more transparent than the spendors and more "accurate" (whatever that means!).I actually used to own the Reference 3a De Capo i and I sold them because they did not sound exciting enough for me. Not that they were "neutral". Just that they didnt seem to have any boogie to them.
When I compared them to the Neat Critique standmounts, the Neats were much punchier and more "fun" to listen to. The 3a's had a greater sense of ease to my ears (they are bigger) but sounded like they were being driven by a small tube amp when in fact it was a big solid state model. The bass was a bit flabby (they have that great big port!)
I owned Spendors (2/3 and 1/2) and found both very good, but the 2/3 was a bit too warm for me. The 1/2 was great, but I had a crappy system at the time.
I now have Neat Mystque floor standers and have been quite satisfied with them. They are not for everyone, being less tonally accurate than Spendors, but they have more "jump" to the sound and seem to carry a tune better.
There's something to be said for the "boogy" factor, and perhaps this is a little of what the de Capos are missing (and the Spendors to a lesser extent). On the other hand, speakers like the Naim/Epos/Linn tend to make some sacrifices as well, to my ear, in tonal accuracy, lushness, fullness, and true dynamics, which I value, so it is always a trade-off. The Living Voice OBXs mentioned above are about as close to doing everything as I've heard, but even they would probably disappoint a true Linn/Naim devotee. A few years ago, just before I got into Spendors and tubes (and after largely giving up on the mainstream Stereophile recommended components), I had a pair of Linn Tukans, and almost bought a Nait and LP12. I sometimes wonder which would have been the best choice. Personally, I have viewed the Spendor or 3A etc./PP tube amp route as one of three choices; the other two being Linn/Naim (perhaps Neat falls into that range), or going head-long into SETs/true high efficiency speakers. If I were to do anything other than try to "tweak" my current system (as discussed above), it would be to choose to go down one of those other two roads.One other option I've considered lately, somewhat between all of those options, is a system my main local dealer set up for another customer: a Sonneteer integrated amp (British SS class A, but bridges the gap between SS and tubes more than any other amp I've heard); Spendor 1/2s, soon to be Living Voice Avatars; and a Roksan Xerxes. I have heard it once at his home, and like a lot. It boogies, but also is rich & lush when the music calls for it, and the Xerxes is incredibly dynamic w/out losing out on PRAT.
Hi,How about a pair of Phy-Hp KM30 (or the SAG, the silver voice-coiil version) coaxial drivers? These have been unanimously praised on either open baffles or in transmission line speaker cabinets.
The drivers themselves cost about $3000 new for the SAG or a bit less for the copper voice coil version.
If you need a turn-key speakers using these drivers, then the cheapest option I know is Hans kortenbach in Holland (http://home.planet.nl/~jmhkort/), who will make a pair of curvaceous solid-wood cabinets using these drivers. The price, including shipping to US was, IIRC, in the mid $4000, which is more than your desired budget.
Just my 2 cents.
Thanks for the recommendation. The turn-key speaker is a little over my budget, and am not really a DIY person. For one thing, I don't have the tools or workspace to make cabinets, and am really not that handy w/ tools. Any suggestions for a bit less $$?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: