I understand from a dealer that Sarastro 1 had a very different sound from other Veritys. I never heard except in shows.
Yes Verity is a tad polite, and a bit of bite in the highs needs to be added with a cart or something.
KeithR's "Dream Speaker" Search
- Thread starter KeithR
- Start date
I understand from a dealer that Sarastro 1 had a very different sound from other Veritys. I never heard except in shows.
Yes Verity is a tad polite, and a bit of bite in the highs needs to be added with a cart or something.
as far as headphones, I was totally disappointed by almost everything I heard at the Headphonium. Most of it overpriced, pretty fake sounding stuff around your head. I heard Hifiman, Focal, Audeze, Dan Clark Audio, Sennheiser, and Meze. Mostly TOTL models at that. The only one that sounded somewhat realistic was the Meze Elite. It was in the musical camp, but soundstage was better than some of the others and it wasn't uncomfortable. The Sennheiser kind of plays tricks in soundstage, imaging, etc. but was ultimately lean in tonality. Kind of hifi fireworks. Audeze sounded awful, not sure if it was a bad amp or not.
I left thinking my goal of finding a night rig to coincide with our infant's bedtime a challenge....but then I inked a deal for a used former TOTL Stax w/ 8000 amp. Yes, I know the amp isn't as good as the Blue Hawaii or Carbon, but I wasn't going to spend $15k new on the latest and greatest in this asset class. Boom! The first listenable headphone experience I've had that I would be happy with even perhaps as my only rig.
I left thinking my goal of finding a night rig to coincide with our infant's bedtime a challenge....but then I inked a deal for a used former TOTL Stax w/ 8000 amp. Yes, I know the amp isn't as good as the Blue Hawaii or Carbon, but I wasn't going to spend $15k new on the latest and greatest in this asset class. Boom! The first listenable headphone experience I've had that I would be happy with even perhaps as my only rig.
some of it was the Thrax PP 300b amps imo. would have been more interesting to hear both on Vitus.
Verity and Acora were the speakers I liked that day. Acora was shown with ARC/Lampi but in a cavern room so difficult to judge some things. The new Devore on modest Audio Hungary was also a standout.
A friend recently got the Sarastro IIS and loves them, he moved on from Lamhorns with AER drivers with the goal of reproducing larger scale classical with better coherency and he tells me they do that very well.
I've heard the larger version, the Lohengrin, and thought they were the best of show at RMAF 5 or 6 years ago.
I agree they're a bit polite, they are based on custom AudioTechnology drivers which are I believe a polypropylene cone, the ribbon tweeter was designed and built in-house to go with them. But this is good for a lot of folks, some are more sensitive than others and I have one customer with the model down from the Sarastro with the soft dome and these speakers allow him to listen without as much fatigue as many other speakers. Part of the politeness is the use of Cardas wiring, with both folks I've made custom jumpers for the bass to mid/high cabinets which I am told has a major effect on the sound and I hope to get Verity to give some of my wire a shot as I believe it will be a great match. I have heard of some folks replacing all of the internal wire and binding posts with something more neutral vs Cardas wire used to achieve a more neutral presentation.
There's lots of speakers that sound more forward, if that's what you want anything with hard-cone drivers like Accuton or brands like YG, Focal, Revel, etc. might be more suitable. Verity are relatively easy to drive though, makes amp choices more flexible. Lots of great speakers available these days...
As much as I agree that Cardas has a unique personality and by some it can be perceived as being polite, I would venture to say that the Verity speakers are a perceived by some as being polite because of their intentional decision to allow the midrange driver to play to a relatively very high frequency before the tweeter takes over from the mids. The power response of these speakers will most likely underscores this approach. The upside of this response is superb coherence in the critical mid and upper mid spectrum that would appeal to many, including me. More presence and less politeness can be achieved by bringing the crossover frequency down to the conventional range, perhaps at the cost of coherence.
Yes they are quite coherent. The Thrax 300b are nice amps and they should work well maybe it was a show set up thing. At Munich they sounded great with Zesto, and I have heard them sound very good with Pass class A amps so Vitus should be even better. They are quite flexible to amps, requires some grunt. But class A SS, push pull, all work.
WestminsterLab REI Amplifiers
I listened yesterday with Keith to the WestminsterLab REI amps at Keith’s house. We compared them A/B/A to Keith’s reference amps (which are one of my two favorites in Keith’s system), the Linear Tube Audio push-pull amps. (The other favorite amp of mine in Keith’s system was a (<$4,000) 18 watt all-tube, push-pull amp from China which Phil Ressler brought over last year. But, overall, I definitely prefer the LTA amps in Keith’s system. The low-power, all-tube amp could just be a fun alternative for simple music (like MikeL’s dalliance with the Lamm ML3s).)
These WestminsterLab amps are beautifully and solidly made. There is a gorgeously machined, thick front panel, and a cool carbon fiber piece on top.
I believe that this is one of the two least solid-state sounding amps I have ever heard in my life (the other being Jeff Tyo’s SIT-3). The WestminsterLab’s afforded a fullness to the sound that I did not hear even from the tube LTAs. The sound was on the warm side, but not overly so.
I think the LTAs were a shade more liquid than the WestminsterLabs, and that that is why I have preferred the LTAs over every solid-state competitor. I think that the WestminsterLabs gave up a smidgen of transparency in return for that fullness. I think the WestminsterLabs were just as resolving as the LTAs.
Of course we did not have the darTZeel or the Nagra or any of the other amps we have in the past compared to the LTAs in Keith’s system. So I can’t give any legitimate impression comparing the Westminsters to any of the prior contenders. I can state the illegitimate impression that I preferred the WestminsterLabs to any of the prior solid-state contenders. This is based, vaguely I admit, on my recollection of the spread between the LTAs and the other contenders on certain sonic characteristics on which I focus. I feel the WestminsterLabs were closer to what I like about the LTAs than were the other contenders. In other words the WestminsterLabs retained more of the LTA’s liquidity than did the other solid-state contenders.
If Keith chose to keep the WestminsterLabs alongside the LTAs as a slightly different flavor of amplifier I would understand why. If I had both amplifiers I would definitely prefer the WestminsterLabs on my poorly recorded rock and pop tracks where the REIs’ fullness and warmth would be helpful sonically.
I think these WestminsterLabs are absolutely great-sounding amplifiers! Congratulations to whoever designed this amp, and congratulations to Gary Leeds for discovering them and for promoting them!
I listened yesterday with Keith to the WestminsterLab REI amps at Keith’s house. We compared them A/B/A to Keith’s reference amps (which are one of my two favorites in Keith’s system), the Linear Tube Audio push-pull amps. (The other favorite amp of mine in Keith’s system was a (<$4,000) 18 watt all-tube, push-pull amp from China which Phil Ressler brought over last year. But, overall, I definitely prefer the LTA amps in Keith’s system. The low-power, all-tube amp could just be a fun alternative for simple music (like MikeL’s dalliance with the Lamm ML3s).)
These WestminsterLab amps are beautifully and solidly made. There is a gorgeously machined, thick front panel, and a cool carbon fiber piece on top.
I believe that this is one of the two least solid-state sounding amps I have ever heard in my life (the other being Jeff Tyo’s SIT-3). The WestminsterLab’s afforded a fullness to the sound that I did not hear even from the tube LTAs. The sound was on the warm side, but not overly so.
I think the LTAs were a shade more liquid than the WestminsterLabs, and that that is why I have preferred the LTAs over every solid-state competitor. I think that the WestminsterLabs gave up a smidgen of transparency in return for that fullness. I think the WestminsterLabs were just as resolving as the LTAs.
Of course we did not have the darTZeel or the Nagra or any of the other amps we have in the past compared to the LTAs in Keith’s system. So I can’t give any legitimate impression comparing the Westminsters to any of the prior contenders. I can state the illegitimate impression that I preferred the WestminsterLabs to any of the prior solid-state contenders. This is based, vaguely I admit, on my recollection of the spread between the LTAs and the other contenders on certain sonic characteristics on which I focus. I feel the WestminsterLabs were closer to what I like about the LTAs than were the other contenders. In other words the WestminsterLabs retained more of the LTA’s liquidity than did the other solid-state contenders.
If Keith chose to keep the WestminsterLabs alongside the LTAs as a slightly different flavor of amplifier I would understand why. If I had both amplifiers I would definitely prefer the WestminsterLabs on my poorly recorded rock and pop tracks where the REIs’ fullness and warmth would be helpful sonically.
I think these WestminsterLabs are absolutely great-sounding amplifiers! Congratulations to whoever designed this amp, and congratulations to Gary Leeds for discovering them and for promoting them!
Last edited:
Thanks for sharing your impressions, Ron. Could you expand on the comment that these give up a smidgen of transparency but are just as resolving at the LTAs? I guess I do not understand to what amp you are referring. How can something be less transparent but just as resolving?
Yes; I have been struggling a little bit with this myself. Can two components be equally resolving but one slightly less transparent than the other?
The question plunges us immediately into the morass of defining each of these terms. I know you disagree, and I know you embrace the concept of natural resolution, but I consider resolution to be — in concept — an objective matter, analogous to pixels per square inch in the video context.
I definitely conceive of transparency and resolution as two different sonic attributes.
Transparency, for me, is the seeing through the window concept. Is the glass we are “listening” through perfectly crystal clear, or is it laced with a very thin or not so thin layer of dust? Do I perceive to a greater or lesser extent that there is a live human in front of me singing to me? What is the level of my suspension of disbelief — how easy it is it for me to believe or to imagine — that there is a live person moving his/her mouth in front of me and singing to me.
If a recording is very pure, such as Amanda McBroom’s Growing Up in Hollywood Town, I think I understand more clearly the difference between transparency and resolution. In “The Rose” Amanda’s voice sounds to me to be extremely transparent. But I have always thought she sounded a bit distant for a solo vocal. Because the miking doesn’t seem to me to be terribly close I feel like one is not hearing as much information as one would hear if the miking were very close.
So I perceive “The Rose” recording to be extremely transparent, but not as high in resolution as I would have suspected from the stunning transparency.
I think I heard through the LTAs a touch more transparency. (But I may be confusing this sound with a touch more liquidity). Yet, I think I heard the same level of resolution and specific information and details from both amplifiers.
Live in the concert hall do you hear more “resolution” when you are in the front row then when you are mid-hall? My description of the “The Rose” suggests that I would. But I don’t think the sound would be any less transparent?
Last edited:
Ron, thanks for your additional thoughts. It’s an interesting topic and one that now is touching on presentation. Perhaps best for another thread. I was just looking for some clarification between the two amplifiers. Did Keith indicate a preference? Is he going to keep one over the other or keep searching?
Ron, I'm glad you could get to Keith's to hear the system and greatly appreciate the positive feedback. Angus Leung is the brilliant designer who created the Rei amplifier, and IMO is one of the most forward-thinking engineers in our industry, all I might add, at 37 years of age.
Your comments concerning transparency and resolution are of great interest, and I would love to see this topic covered on a dedicated thread.
Just 3 hours ago, I picked up the Reis from Keith for another demo. We listened together for about 10 minutes. Combined with my listen during the initial setup on Friday, here are my observations:
Keith listens in the nearby field, and the Fyne's are capable of impressive bass output, especially in his modestly sized room. I also noticed a rotary presence knob and another unknown one on the front panel. My early impressions are that Westminster's bass output is more potent than the LTA's. Assuming this proves true, some relatively minor adjustments should bring the Fyne's high frequencies into better balance with the woofers, restoring any diminution in the presence region and rendering the overall presentation, dare I say, more transparent
Keith said he enjoyed the amplifiers, but a more extended listen upon his return to CA in early September would IMO be helpful. Should Keith decide he wants to do that, perhaps you can come by for another visit at that time?
Again, thanks for the positive feedback!
Your comments concerning transparency and resolution are of great interest, and I would love to see this topic covered on a dedicated thread.
Just 3 hours ago, I picked up the Reis from Keith for another demo. We listened together for about 10 minutes. Combined with my listen during the initial setup on Friday, here are my observations:
Keith listens in the nearby field, and the Fyne's are capable of impressive bass output, especially in his modestly sized room. I also noticed a rotary presence knob and another unknown one on the front panel. My early impressions are that Westminster's bass output is more potent than the LTA's. Assuming this proves true, some relatively minor adjustments should bring the Fyne's high frequencies into better balance with the woofers, restoring any diminution in the presence region and rendering the overall presentation, dare I say, more transparent
Keith said he enjoyed the amplifiers, but a more extended listen upon his return to CA in early September would IMO be helpful. Should Keith decide he wants to do that, perhaps you can come by for another visit at that time?
Again, thanks for the positive feedback!
Good morning, folks. for the past few months, listening time has come at a premium as we recently got married. my Stax rig gets over half the time when available which I've really enjoyed as a listening alternative - much to my surprise!
things are slowing down, back to "normal" now and I'm excited to get back to the rig and hear some more stuff. I really enjoyed the Westminster Labs amps, but it was a weekend where a lot was going on and there were many distractions. They seemed to have several of the Nagra qualities (presence, tone) but a wider soundstage and better bass. Perhaps not quite as much detail as the Swiss amps. I will likely hear these amps again. Vitus has also been a consideration, but the cost may be prohibitive unless I pursue the integrated route which is difficult in my room.
I was chatting with a friend about higher efficiency speakers and making some recommendations - and of course Cessaro came to mind. I will have to hear that speaker at some point in the next year for fun. if you've followed this thread over the years, my favs have been:
Fyne Audio F1-12
YG Acoustics Sonja 2.2 (very high level of amplification required)
Avantgarde Duo XD
with an honorable mention to the Sonus Faber Reference line for classical listeners and my "upcoming, interesting brand" in Stenheim
things are slowing down, back to "normal" now and I'm excited to get back to the rig and hear some more stuff. I really enjoyed the Westminster Labs amps, but it was a weekend where a lot was going on and there were many distractions. They seemed to have several of the Nagra qualities (presence, tone) but a wider soundstage and better bass. Perhaps not quite as much detail as the Swiss amps. I will likely hear these amps again. Vitus has also been a consideration, but the cost may be prohibitive unless I pursue the integrated route which is difficult in my room.
I was chatting with a friend about higher efficiency speakers and making some recommendations - and of course Cessaro came to mind. I will have to hear that speaker at some point in the next year for fun. if you've followed this thread over the years, my favs have been:
Fyne Audio F1-12
YG Acoustics Sonja 2.2 (very high level of amplification required)
Avantgarde Duo XD
with an honorable mention to the Sonus Faber Reference line for classical listeners and my "upcoming, interesting brand" in Stenheim
Last edited:
Keith, your speaker journey prompted me to do the same two years ago. It took me a long time to decide but the journey took me from LA to Texas to NY and NJ. I m super happy with what I have and now just waiting on the Horizon to come for icing on the cake. I will continue to follow your journey.
Am I missing something?
I thought Keith first bought the YGs but didn't find amps that satisfied him AND the YGs for a reasonable price and then bought Fyne F1 12.
Are the Fynes interim speakers, then?
My understanding of this thread is that the "Dream" speaker of the long search is the YG Sonja 2.2 but not all dreams come true. At least not yet.
Keith decided that although the YG Sonja 2.2 were the dream speaker, they were more than he wanted to spend and tried to get the "dream" with YG Hailey 2 but YG Sonja sound can't be achieved for less money, even with YG Haileys, no matter what amps were used. Keith is right that YG Sonja 2.2 require suitable amps, IMO $60K or more. Ultimately, the "dream" costs $150K at MSRP.
I'm personally cheering for the fynes to stay. Or be dethroned by a high efficiency design....
Similar threads
