|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Are these good value for money? Someone mentioned trying the Triangle Antal 202's. At the moment I want to use a 35 watt/channel tube amp. My room is too small for extended bass.
Follow Ups:
While I have not had either in my home and it has been 2 years since I heard the Quads, I can say the DeCappo is one of the best sounding speakers I have ever heard. I listen to them every time I visit my dealer (buying will have to wait a while though). Simply stunning with modest power tube amps (SE or PP). ALthough it may be some time before I can gather the green, I would still consider them a phenomanal value....much better sounding to my ears than many of the exotic, full range speakers (Avantgarde, Dunlavy, Wilson, etc.)I don't envy you with this decsion, Good Luck!
Rob
and you'll be amazed at how much bottom end they'll give you for their size. Feel free to email me with questions or for more info.Jon
Jonathan,
35 years as a musician makes you an old guy like meself. The first thing that struck me about the MM DeCapo's was the dynamics of a kick drum. This is among the best I have heard. Seeing that you are a drummer this must have impressed you as well.The thing is that the DeCapo's are being compared to my stacked Quad 57's (the intent is not to replace the 57's rather to experiment with electronics to drive some dynamic speakers ). The 57's don't have the kick capability of the DeCapo's but the midrange of the Quads appears next to impossible to match. As a DIY'er for years the rest of my system has been designed to support the advantages of the Quads, or at least they are controlled to produce what I like.
The problem is that I have taken my amplifier and CD player to audition the DeCapo's. Although the MM DeCapo's sounded better with my stuff this does not declare that what I am using is best suited to take advantage of the MM DeCapo's strengths.
Technically I like the efficiency of the DeCapo's, particularly as I like tubed gear. The other aspect is that these have a simple driver/crossover compliment and appear to have the impact and clarity in the bass if ever a good subwoofer is connected. It would appear that the subwoofer would have to be exceptional, and the room be able to support the extension of bass, to prevent the sound from deteriorated upon its inclusion.
The things I am primarily concerned about is not so much the absence of frequency extremes, it is the dynamic capability throughout the range, coupled with harmonic richness, spatiality, and particularly coherency through the range. What I didn't like about the DeCapo's was that they appeared to lack some of the midrange clarity and coherency of the 57's. The intent is again not to improve upon every aspect of the reproduction in order to replace the Quads, rather to maximize the advantages of the DeCapo's in what they can do well. Overall the DeCapo's must do things the Quads can't. Given the speed of the DeCapo's in the lower registers this could be a good start. Weight in the lower registers often make the difference between making and breaking a recording.
I can't see getting good bass extension without forking over big bucks. I have built some bass unit towers with 6 - 8" motional feedback drivers per side. These had a frequency response that could still rise at 10 Hz if given the opportunity. These were not as big as some subs out there but still enough to do justice to the helicopter sound on Pink Floyds "The Wall" during the declaration "stand still laddy".
The thing is that I wouldn't mind trying the DeCapo's on top of these subs. I suspect they would sound very good. The problem is that my brother in law has had them so long he has taken permanent possession, and he is bigger than I am. Alas.
Hello,I owned a pair of Quads (57s) for several years in the early 80's. Drove them with Marantz 7C/8B combination. Never heard stacked Quads.
I also have owned a pair of Reference 3a Royal Master Control loudspeakers for the past two years. I purchased used and my pair is perhaps 5 years old. It is supposed to be a "refined" version of the DeCapo (better Quality Control), but appear to use exactly the same componets and cabinet shape/volume.
I do not believe that you will ever find a speaker that betters the Quad for midrange transparency, harmonic accuracy, and speed. Assuming you have the stacking done right, you may have the holy grail in that department. Bass, while limited in output and depth, is very fast and accurate. You know better than I how much weight a stacked pair offers....The impedance load of stacked Quads is more friendly to amps than a single unit -- but it still looks rather demanding. Fine amp(s) are required!!
Reference 3a is a superb small monitor. It uses only a capacitor to filter the tweater. I believe that this is an extremely important aspect of the design -- it minimizes phasing issues and allows for unusually dynamic transient information. It worked well with little single ended 2a3 monoblcoks - very refined, musical, and relaxing sound. When I placed a very good 20wpc push pull tbe amp in the system, the speakers "woke up" and became very dynamic indeed. (The better the amp, the better the speakers sound -- but I do not believe that the speaker is so demanding of amp quality as is the Quad....) The bottom is very solid and musical to 50hz. With them, I used an Audio Pro (B2-40, I think) self powered subwoofer. I ran the Reference 3a speakers full range and filtered the subwoofer at between 40 and 45 hz. I kept the sub's contribution quite dry. Nevertheless, it added much room/ambient information.
The two speakers (Quad / Reference 3a) are each outstanding, but are so different in their presentations that they are difficult to "compare" meaningfully. One might have a strong personal preference. However, both are extraordinary implementations of a particular approach; the Quad is a classic and the Reference 3a may well be regarded as such in another 15 years; and either speaker system should be very easily "lived with" over a long period of time. You could hardly do better.
WTS
I have been reading some of the other posts. Can you comment on the differences between the Merlins and Reference 3a's. Reading the comments it appears that the Reference 3a would lose on all counts?P.S. - stacking appears the only way to go for Quad 57's
I try not to think of myself as old, just well-seasoned. ;-)I can't really address how the sound of the De Capos compares to your Quads because I have never heard Quad speakers. The bottom line for me regarding the De Capos is that even with my very modest system they are so musical and easy to listen to for long periods of time with utterly no fatigue. I agree that they may be lacking at the frequency extremes, but not at the expense of the music. I still hear plenty of detail in the high end. And as far as the bottom end goes, I definitely feel the bass, plus I hear every nuance. No one-note bottom end here, folks. An acoustic bass sounds like an acoustic bass, a Fender Jazz bass like a Fender Jazz. That said, I'm still toying with the idea of adding a sub just to add a bit of air way down below. My previous speakers were the Paradigm Studio 100 v.2. I can't say that I was a huge fan of this speaker overall, but the bottom end definitely rocked and I kind of miss that.
Admittedly, at this point in my hi-fi career, I am no longer in search of perfectly accurate, ruthlessly revealing components. I decided that for me, it's about sitting down and ENJOYING my music collection again, without having to jump up and turn the volume down whenever a less-than-perfect recording is played. Even so, I don't believe that the De Capos are overly euphonic either.Well, good luck whatever you decide to do. As I've said ad-nauseum over here, I believe the De Capo is a wonderful speaker and I believe you would love them if you tried them.
Jon
Jon,
Sorry about the age thing. Take a look at the blues artists on the link to the APO website . You have the youngster "Weepin' Willie" at 73, "Honey Boy Edwards" and "Myra Taylor" at 84, and then "Henry Townsend" at 92 having made recordings in every decade since the 20's. Ah, I'm feeling young again and not even that well-seasoned.I like the way they have short MP3's on this sight to give some insight into the performances and acoustics.
gerrit
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: