Does "competes with much more expensive" actually exist?

[Hear Here]

Glad we agree on the Benchmark

... I'll be much more comfortable buying from a company that says "good value, this is why" than "giant killer, throw your expensive gear and buy this".

Agree with you that this sort of description from a manufacturer , distributor or even dealer is of no help whatsoever.

By the way, the type of reviewer that you describe does not exist in the context that you described, because someone fair minded and good at reviewing audio gear, apart from doing comparisons, chooses his/her words carefully and doesn't say stupid stuff such as giant killer. People that use those kind of terms are usually clueless or shills.

Debatable! I have no problems if a trusted reviewer uses those words or equivalent - if I believe he is being honest. As long as he doesn't identify the "giants" that the review product is killing and is not personally connected to the review product, he HAS chosen his words carefully and shouldn't be accused of undue bias or cluelessness. Some review platforms (HiFi News, etc but not Stereophile) expect their reviewers to provide a "Value for Money" rating. That can be quite useful provided the full review is read carefully too.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Yes of course - I'm listening to my M33 right now. But so is the Benchmark only 2 channels - so a comparison of amp performance is apt.

I appreciate now not possible if you've returned the units unless memory serves you very well, or you recorded your "smile factor" when reviewing these 2 amps!

Thanks. Peter

From my review @ https://www.stereophile.com/content/nad-masters-series-m33-streaming-integrated-amplifier:

The class-AB Benchmark AHB2 amps (footnote 3) were also thrilling. They gave an impression of more detail in the upper midrange and treble; I did not perceive any difference in general balance or soundstage width and depth. When I returned to the M33 in the next session and listened for upper midrange and treble detail, it seemed to me that nothing was missing.

I went through a similar sequence with the class-D Classé Sigma Mono amps. The bass with these 350W (into 8 ohms) monoblocks was really solid, but I felt as if I had taken one or two steps back from the band, and the upper brass and cymbals seemed slightly softened. Again, a return to the M33 suggested that I was being oversensitive to the minor perspective shift caused by a marginal treble change.

Quick A/B comparisons between amplifiers should have made the contrasts among them clear, but they remained elusive. A change in speaker toe-in, a 0.5dB change in the tweeter level, or simply a change in program material could shift the fleeting preference.

 

[Ultrafast69]

I believe the answer to the question is no, but my response is not as straight forward when you break it down.

Performance and sound signature are two separate categories. While performance can be enhanced by proper setup, it does not overcome the signature of sound, the result of the chosen equipment.

 

[DSkip]

North Star DAC's were exceptional values and made Sabre chips sound like nobody else I've heard. They were musical and engaging with weighted images that expanded well beyond the speakers. They were never 'true' end game, but their top dac topped out at $3,000 and for those prices they were king. Unfortunately the company is dead now.

The issue with 'competing' is it depends on the standards you choose. Many high end products I've heard could have competition at much lower prices because they don't open up dimensionally. To me, this is what separates the mid-fi from the true hifi products. I used to think depth was the hardest thing to pull from a system, but I've since learned that projection into the space in front of the speakers is the most difficult, especially when we start talking about FULL bodied images.

This is where Norma and Rosso Fiorentino really shine and its why they are also a bit of a tough sell. Their pricing falls more in line with mid-fi, with Norma integrateds starting at $3,000 and the entry level Elba 2 at $5,000. While the $3,000 Norma is only 75 watts, it has the refinement and dimensionality to not be a hindrance to the performance of a system. The Elba 2 also reach out into the room and wrap around the listener - something I haven't heard from any other brand anywhere near their price. They place full-bodied images anywhere in the room that the recording calls for.

The issue I've had with these brands is that because they do play on a higher level, they are actually tougher to sell. Gear like this takes more dedication to get right and more attention to the gear around them. For the average consumer who is in the market at those price points, putting some of these products in their system will sound good to great, but they will 99% of the time be limited by other aspects of the system. They're just hitting so much quality at such great pricing that its inevitable they are going to hit a brick wall somewhere.

Even at shows its difficult to really capture this magic. At Lone Star Audio Fest 2019, I finally captured this projection and while there were slight issues in tone I wanted to address, the more important aspect was showcasing their ability to disappear and truly transform the room into the venue. Ears I trusted were shaking their heads. One other vendor told me "I'm just going to go pack up my S*** and go home". Another vendor sobered up immediately upon playing music and was completely entranced. Yet another vendor who was getting compliments about staging was telling the attendees if you want to hear good staging, you need to go to Skip's room.

This show was interesting for me though from an attendee standpoint. I found that only 5-10% of attendees could actually pick up on that staging and when they did, they too were completely blown away. The rest of the attendees enjoyed the sound but never made mention of the layering. It was a learning moment for me that even though many of our friends in this hobby have spent decades playing with gear, many have never really experienced that pinnacle.


I have taken this experience and use it to my benefit now. When clients come over, we never start with music they know. I play music I know that makes it easier for them to pick up on the layering and image weights. I tell them what to expect for the first few songs and then I let them tell me after that. Once that introduction is done, we jump on music they know. At this point, they begin listening to the recordings in a completely different manner and derive greater joy from songs they've heard their entire life. Without the introduction, the success rate falls off rather steeply because they get stuck in 'audiophile mode' where they only listen for specific aspects like a top hat at 0:38 in the song.


That was rather wordy, but the background is to reinforce that even though these products DO in fact exist, being able to draw out that potential and showcase WHY the product is a true gem is much harder. The listener has to have the proper approach to listening and the system builder has to understand fully where bottlenecks lie.

 

[Kingrex]

I view it the other way around.

First, as a clarification, there seem to be levels of performance. Kind of like this. Most $3k TT are similar. But at $7k they all jump in performance. Again at $12k And so on. You get the point?

Now here is my other way around. In each price catagory there is an expected level of performance you should "hear". Many pieces of equipment in the price point play around that level. But, some fall short. For whatever reason. It is those not so great choices in the price level that make the expected performance seem exceptional.

 

[nirodha]

No, I think just the opposite.

15+ years ago the quality of many brands was far lower. YG, Wilson, and many other top brands of multi-way cone 'n' dome speakers offered very poor sound quality vs what they offer today. Same with amps. If people think audio shows are bad today, 15+ years ago it was embarrassing and difficult to find anything that wasn't horribly flawed. Single driver speakers were more popular as a result, tons of brands selling Fostex based single drivers, Feastrex and AER got their start, same with Omega. People thought some of shouty/peaky Lowthers were better than dealing with the issues most multi-way speakers exhibited. Now, there are still some excellent single drivers but they're not as popular because multi-way speakers have erased many of their advantages. Horn speakers have become more interesting and mainstream as well. I remember hearing an Oswald Mills speaker at RMAF 15+ years ago or so that was a revelation, so much better than most systems at the show. Then TAD Reference line R1s blew away pretty much everything when they were introduced, but now I'd say many other speakers are at it's level or maybe even past it in some ways.

Of course, there have always been exceptions and some gear from every period of time has been excellent, but as a whole, high end audio has improved by leaps and bounds in the last couple of decades, so I think the value has gotten far better as a result too.

The ten-year-old kef 207/2 still beats KEFs current Reference series.

 

[Hear Here]

The ten-year-old kef 207/2 still beats KEFs current Reference series.

Late 90s I had a KEF Reference 107/2 for a few years. Rare as hen's teeth in their home country, UK.

Great speakers but needed a better amp than I had at the time. Despite high sensitivity, they need a high current amp. My AVI monos rather let the speakers down I think. Changed to ATC 50 Actives - poor move - and later to Avantgarde horns.

PS - Just realised you were taking about the Reference 207. Mine was the earlier and totally different Reference 107 - highly regarded in its day.

 

[Mikem53]

I view it the other way around.

First, as a clarification, there seem to be levels of performance. Kind of like this. Most $3k TT are similar. But at $7k they all jump in performance. Again at $12k And so on. You get the point?

Now here is my other way around. In each price catagory there is an expected level of performance you should "hear". Many pieces of equipment in the price point play around that level. But, some fall short. For whatever reason. It is those not so great choices in the price level that make the expected performance seem exceptional.

Well put.. You make me rethink some of my long term built in prejudices as it applies to upper high end.

 

[DaveC]

The ten-year-old kef 207/2 still beats KEFs current Reference series.

That's not saying much...

My post is still accurate. If you attended some of the first RMAF audio shows it was incredible how bad many of the rooms were. Many of the top brands today have improved a massive amount. The last RMAF was actually impressive and the contrast between 15-20 years ago vs today is profound.

 

[nirodha]

That's not saying much...

My post is still accurate. If you attended some of the first RMAF audio shows it was incredible how bad many of the rooms were. Many of the top brands today have improved a massive amount. The last RMAF was actually impressive and the contrast between 15-20 years ago vs today is profound.

They should not call a new line ‘Reference’ if it is beaten by a 10 year old design by the same name. For the rest I do not disagree with your post

 

[Ron Resnick]

In my opinion the Tannoy Westminster Royal GR competes (on sonics, not on contemporary visual design) with much more expensive loudspeakers. Thanks to JimFord here I have come to have enormous respect for this speaker.

I think the entire WBF Long Beach Audio Group agrees with this view.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Ron, if I get them, I'll also need a lifelong supply of tobacco for my pipe, and as many pairs of comfy slippers as I can fit my feet into Lol.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Yes, but that's the amazing thing. That is merely how they look; it is very, very far from how they can sound.

Properly driven, with thoughtful associated components,* they produce an extremely contemporary wide frequency response sound, with holistically integrated low frequencies (its back horn-loaded and front-firing design may be old-school, but it sounds amazing) puts many much more expensive, complex crossover, multi-way driver speakers to shame.

*The vintage DuKane Ionovac plasma tweeter, or some modern equivalent, should be considered a mandatory associated component.

 

[tima]

In my opinion the Tannoy Westminster Royal GR competes (on sonics, not on contemporary visual design) with much more expensive loudspeakers

Interesting. Can you give some examples so we have some ballpark idea of what you're talking about?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Interesting. Can you give some examples so we have some ballpark idea of what you're talking about?

From the old world, English, vintage style you would anticipate a Shindo-esque glass of bourbon with molasses on chocolate layer cake on a cold winter night.

In the context of an overall warmish total balance, with full and realistic midbass power, the speaker exhibits a wide band frequency response, with contemporary low frequency extension and, with the plasma tweeter, contemporary high frequency extension.

With transparent and resolving associated components, the speaker, which might have a reputation of not exhibiting the last word in transparency, comes off incredibly transparent. On Chopin Concerto No. 1 -- Ballades JimFord and I and an honored reviewer guest heard piano reproduction the realism of which none of us thought the speakers capable. It was the second best reproduction of piano I think I have ever heard, second only to the Tune Audio Avatons in Munich (about which David Chesky said contemporaneously to Herb Reichert that it was the most realistic reproduction of his own recording of his own piano playing that he had ever heard).

Jim had no idea his system was capable of that kind of realistic piano reproduction. Comparing the same track on my reviewer friend's system later that night, we both agreed that the percussive impact of the Tannoy's horn-loaded 15" driver created superior dynamic realism (although ultimately not greater low frequency power and extension), and more believable in-the-room presence and "aliveness."

I think that vocals on planars exhibit a smidgen more transparency and believability, but the fact that I am not sure of this tells you how transparent is Jim's system.

The system could do it all: boy with guitar, power jazz, big symphony orchestra, delicate jazz, classic rock. Just when you wonder if the system is capable of achieving great believability on some particularly difficult track, the system fires a bull's-eye (or at least hits the "9" ring).

Finally the system does this with no hint of fatigue. We could sit there all day and all night long. I think I have visited JimFord about six times now and I literally do sit there all afternoon or all night or both.

The Tannoy does not have the sonic grandeur of vertical scale that the very tall speakers have. It has holistically integrated low frequencies, but it doesn't have the battleship cannon power of a phalanx of four 15" subwoofers per channel.

 

[tima]

From the old world, English, vintage style you would anticipate a Shindo-esque glass of bourbon with molasses on chocolate layer cake on a cold winter night.

In the context of an overall warmish total balance, with full and realistic midbass power, the speaker exhibits a wide band frequency response, with contemporary low frequency extension and, with the plasma tweeter, contemporary high frequency extension.

With transparent and resolving associated components, the speaker, which might have a reputation of not exhibiting the last word in transparency, comes off incredibly transparent. On Chopin Concerto No. 1 -- Ballades JimFord and I and an honored reviewer guest heard piano reproduction the realism of which none of us thought the speakers capable. It was the second best reproduction of piano I think I have ever heard, second only to the Tune Audio Avatons in Munich (about which David Chesky said contemporaneously to Herb Reichert that it was the most realistic reproduction of his own recording of his own piano playing that he had ever heard).

Jim had no idea his system was capable of that kind of realistic piano reproduction. Comparing the same track on my reviewer friend's system later that night, we both agreed that the percussive impact of the Tannoy's horn-loaded 15" driver created superior dynamic realism (although ultimately not greater low frequency power and extension), and more believable in-the-room presence and "aliveness."

I think that vocals on planars exhibit a smidgen more transparency and believability, but the fact that I am not sure of this tells you how transparent is Jim's system.

The system could do it all: boy with guitar, power jazz, big symphony orchestra, delicate jazz, classic rock. Just when you wonder if the system is capable of achieving great believability on some particularly difficult track, the system fires a bull's-eye (or at least hits the "9" ring).

Finally the system does this with no hint of fatigue. We could sit there all day and all night long. I think I have visited JimFord about six times now and I literally do sit there all afternoon or all night or both.

The Tannoy does not have the sonic grandeur of vertical scale that the very tall speakers have. It has holistically integrated low frequencies, but it doesn't have the battleship cannon power of a phalanx of four 15" subwoofers per channel.

Thanks for the write-up, Ron and the time it took to do that. Your enthusiasm comes through. I will try to hear the Tannoy Westminster Royal GR when speakers become public again. At 99dB and 8-ohm nominal, they are a candidate for an amplifier such as the Lamm ML2.2. I gather the speaker is inherently warmish and that character did not come from Jim F's equipment.

Perhaps my question was not clear. What I am interested in learning from you are examples of 'much more expensive loudspeakers' that are competition for the Westminster Royal GR. I see Kevin Deal sells them on-line (!) for $50k a pair; there is also a description of them on his site.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I am sorry I misunderstood your question.

I personally prefer this Tannoy over the Wilson Audio Alexx, which is more than twice the price.

I personally would take the Tannoy over the Magico loudspeakers I have heard.

Yes, it is the loudspeaker which is slightly warmish.

OH, and I forgot to mention that I hear great coherence from this Tannoy. I never for a moment have the sense that I am listening to an array of different drivers connected by complicated crossovers. I don't normally have a sensitivity to driver incoherence in any event, but there is something just noticeably "of a piece" about the sound coming from this giant box, compared to complicated, multi-driver cone systems.

Finally, and, surprisingly, given my general befuddlement about vdH cartridges, the vdH Colibri in JimFord's system adds more to transparency and resolution than it detracts in extreme neutrality (or tipped-up tonal balance, depending on your subjective preference) and slight edginess.

 

[tima]

I personally prefer this Tannoy over the Wilson Audio Alexx, which is more than twice the price.

I personally would take the Tannoy over the Magico loudspeakers I have heard.

Thanks Ron. I gather the Pendragons are safe.

 

[bonzo75]

I am sorry I misunderstood your question.

I personally prefer this Tannoy over the Wilson Audio Alexx, which is more than twice the price.

I personally would take the Tannoy over the Magico loudspeakers I have heard.

Yes, it is the loudspeaker which is slightly warmish.

OH, and I forgot to mention that I hear great coherence from this Tannoy. I never for a moment have the sense that I am listening to an array of different drivers connected by complicated crossovers. I don't normally have a sensitivity to driver incoherence in any event, but there is something just noticeably "of a piece" about the sound coming from this giant box, compared to complicated, multi-driver cone systems.

Finally, and, surprisingly, given my general befuddlement about vdH cartridges, the vdH Colibri in JimFord's system adds more to transparency and resolution than it detracts in extreme neutrality (or tipped-up tonal balance, depending on your subjective preference) and slight edginess.

Vintage tannoy golds and HPDs are also quite superior to all Wilsons and Magico I heard. You are comparing natural sound vs highly synthetic, coherent vs incoherent

 

[Mikem53]

Vintage tannoy golds and HPDs are also quite superior to all Wilsons and Magico I heard. You are comparing natural sound vs highly synthetic, coherent vs incoherent

Nelson Pass and team uses a pair of Tannoy loudspeakers from the 60’s for their amplifier testing and evaluation. They are very revealing to amplifier changes and tonality according to Nelson.