KeithR's "Dream Speaker" Search

[bonzo75]

Btw, I don't see any Mook footers under his gear, just the discontinued ebony racks.

And the big thing in the middle of the speakers. He hasn't put the footers on coz he is lazy, and the rack is pretty good. Hardly any of us will be able to get the rack now since apart from being very expensive it is no longer made

 

[bonzo75]

I've now heard Mook footers in two systems, mine included, and if anything caused a sameness from one recording to another, it was these.

So Ked, be careful what you criticise in other systems as producing homogeneity if your benchmark is likely doing the same.

Yours was clearly incorrectly placed. Which was the second system? And I assume your stacore and me cables are all fine?

 

[bonzo75]

Why do you not let me compare then

 

[Al M.]

But generally what Ked is saying gets you further than the other way around...I have also been finding that overly complicated horn designs lose something...that is why this BD Swing looks interesting...a two-way three-way (thanks to the coax cd driver). Overdeadening of the drivers, cabinets and energy absorbing crossovers does seem to suck the life out of the sound. It seems to be all in the pursuit of the perfect on/off axis frequency response and 20 to 20 range. Throw the baby out with the bathwater...

My Reference 3A Reflector monitors with their highly inert cabinets have a more lively and more dynamic sound than my previous Reference 3A MM DeCapo BE monitors. I assume a main reason for that, next to better drivers, is that the energy of the impulse propagation by the driver is not attenuated by cabinet resonances that would counteract this driver energy.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Ked, I don't need to do compares. You do.

 

[bonzo75]

My Reference 3A Reflector monitors with their highly inert cabinets have a more lively and more dynamic sound than my previous Reference 3A MM DeCapo BE monitors. I assume a main reason for that, next to better drivers, is that the energy of the impulse propagation by the driver is not attenuated by cabinet resonances that would counteract this driver energy.

Possible. What you have done well is also have monitors in a big space. You will get much more coherence and easy speaker disappearance and large stage. I don't know your speaker but works that way with quite a few monitors.

The smaller tannoy with vintage drivers below was far superior to me than the bigger tannoy, with the same 100w amp. At Derainer's place on Sunday.

On orchestral, Chamber, staging, detail, tone. Clean bass and dynamics, gave rise to easier layering (relative to the other speaker)

 

[spiritofmusic]

So Ked, despite the Tannoys being more coloured in yr words, what do they excel at beyond the Devores?

 

[microstrip]

(...) Constant might be a more extreme word, but I like to hear the different concert hall ambiences. (...)

IMHO more an expertise of the listener than of the audio system. I read classical recording reviews in magazines where very knowledgeable people wisely refer to such aspects with great detail, probably listening in systems that would make any WBF member blush ...

At some point of extreme knowledge we are not listening to concert hall ambiance, but to the techniques used by the sound engineers to capture it and unconsciously associating it with a particular concert hall.

 

[bonzo75]

They go back to the wall. Devore need more space. That's very important to me, as while I like being an intense audiophile on some weekends and like forumming, I don't like being one at home on a daily basis. I like the speaker to fit in, like the tv. should be able to ignore it, or binge watch it. Depending on the mood.

Sonically, both are very natural, and have a great flow and tone. Tannoy have weight, Alexandria like. You can get serious weight and bass through them if you wanted. Both are similar in the mids and highs, just different. Devore more natural recording stage. Tannoy sounds more balanced top to bottom. The horn in the tannoy plays brass similar to what horns do, better than other speakers. For other instruments both are good. Vocals/leider on tannoy is as good as a pure ribbon apogee in terms of melting effect.

So Ked, despite the Tannoys being more coloured in yr words, what do they excel at beyond the Devores?

 

[Al M.]

As a Ref 3A owner (one of the most minimal crossovers in the industry) I am surprised you don't have a position closer to Ked's on this one. As a former owner of Ref3As, I found them to be more transparent compared to any of the big name brands, which is why I went with them. The Master Control MMCs I had (ancestor to what you have) was gobsmacking with a good SET or OTL (I auditioned them with a Graaf 20 watt OTL) was a new reference for a speaker of that type...anything less I wouldn't have gone with...as my ribbon/electrostat past guided me towards transparency and coherence. Now, I have horns that do those things AND the dyanmics the Ref3As couldn't quite muster. Not easy to find horns that are doing that but they exist...

Upper level Magico speakers under the right circumstances (system/room) can be transparent to the recording. They can also be highly transparent to gear changes, including cartridge swaps (an issue brought up by Ked). I know this intimately, having followed closely over the years the changes in friends' systems with Magico speakers. Coherence is also a strong point of upper level Magico speakers.

The minimal crossover of the Ref3A monitors (no crossover for mid-woofer, only a capacitor for the tweeter) seems to bring other advantages.

 

[morricab]

My Reference 3A Reflector monitors with their highly inert cabinets have a more lively and more dynamic sound than my previous Reference 3A MM DeCapo BE monitors. I assume a main reason for that, next to better drivers, is that the energy of the impulse propagation by the driver is not attenuated by cabinet resonances that would counteract this driver energy.

My very old Master control MMCs also had massively better damped cabinets than MMs...it was no comparison really. I also got to hear the Royal Virtuoso, which had corian cabinets (the one I heard was an earlier one where it was really a sandwich of corian and wood...no pure corian like the later edition of the speaker), and was very alive sounding. The MM version is good and lively but the upper models took it quite a bit further. I also had the L'Integrale, which was nearly on the same level as the old two-box reference model (basically an updated MMC and a subwoofer) but not as open sounding as my MMCs once I upgraded to the Be tweeter. I also had a very rare model, the La Veritas, which was made in Holland (the L'Integrale was made in Switzerland and my MMCs in France). As good as these were (and they were good), the La Bohemes from Odeon are playing on another level of sheer realism. It is not that they are so obviously dynamic or less colored or extended (on either end...in fact they are similar in that regard) but instruments simply sound more real and in real space. That micro/macro relationship is held better intact. Both responded well to SETs and PP Class A triode amps or SET hybrids. But Things sound more real...particularly percussive sounds...even the weight on piano keys striking the strings etc.

What I had from Ref 3A though was the 20 year old equivalent to the Reflektor (mine were like 6K back in the early 90s, both the MMCs and the L'Integrales) and I would guess 85-90% the performance of your new kid on the block because frankly not that much has changed.

 

[bonzo75]

IMHO more an expertise of the listener than of the audio system. I read classical recording reviews in magazines where very knowledgeable people wisely refer to such aspects with great detail, probably listening in systems that would make any WBF member blush ...

At some point of extreme knowledge we are not listening to concert hall ambiance, but to the techniques used by the sound engineers to capture it and unconsciously associating it with a particular concert hall.

Sure techniques of the engineer. But if you put in ten LPs, if they tend to a similar sound, that's the system. If they result in ten different sounds, something is right. The same engineer is also not creating the same sound. He is trying his best to give you a realistic representation, and between the recording, mastering, cutting, the good ones are managing to do it well. Which is why some people collect by engineers. Either way, it results in more enjoyable listening, and once you hear it, difficult to go back. I have zero intention of analysing their techniques, just that for me if I let the recording show, they have put all the realism cues on it. Great natural stage, tone, ambience, etc.

I think listening techniques comes from getting access to varied recordings, good ones, and different systems. So sooner or later you hear it on one and not on the other, and you wonder what's wrong. I don't think this needs keen ears, just get good recordings and try on very different systems. If a Magico owner only plays recordings on Wilson or Magico systems with pass or such amps, he will not hear it as that will be his default.

 

[Al M.]

My very old Master control MMCs also had massively better damped cabinets than MMs...it was no comparison really.

My 2016 model of the MM monitors appears to have a more inert cabinet than previous MM iterations. The current MM model again has a somewhat stiffer cabinet than my MM speakers. But it's still no match for the Reflector, and probably no match for the Master control MMCs either.

What I had from Ref 3A though was the 20 year old equivalent to the Reflektor (mine were like 6K back in the early 90s, both the MMCs and the L'Integrales) and I would guess 85-90% the performance of your new kid on the block because frankly not that much has changed.

Not that much has changed: the designer of the Reflector, Tash Goka, might disagree with you .

 

[bazelio]

Actually, transparency comes from simple crossovers and simple circuits. Devore orangutans with SETs like NAF 2a3 or airtight 300b as well as various other SETs are way more transparent to recordings than Magico, Wilson, Lansche, which try to have more inert cabinets. Very easy to hear should one try. Maybe that explains why Caelin moved from Sasha to Devore 5 years ago and is happy

Orangutans transparent. Wait. Wut? Completely different animal timbre-wise from Gibbon X. And Oranguntan is a lot of things, but not the more transparent of the two. I don't think Oranguntan owners buy them for transparency, either. Certainly not the ones I've talked to.

 

[bonzo75]

Orangutans transparent. Wait. Wut? Completely different animal timbre-wise from Gibbon X. And Oranguntan is a lot of things, but not the more transparent of the two. I don't think Oranguntan owners buy them for transparency, either.

I haven't heard Gibbon. I think O's show changes to recordings extremely well

 

[bonzo75]

Btw, this transparency is not same as Martin Logan type transparency

 

[bazelio]

Btw, this transparency is not same as Martin Logan type transparency

Then use a different descriptor.

 

[bonzo75]

Then use a different descriptor.

Yes transparency to recordings

 

[PeterA]

As far as what spending more money on a speaker system gets you... less compromise. If you value a system that can reproduce complex music really well then you need something a bit more complex it's self and for the same component quality it'll cost more. But I've also heard some newer "big" speakers do small scale music really well, imo because their "coherence" is improving, when they do play solo female vocals it sounds "right" in much the same way a good single driver does.

So imo if you're looking to move on and upgrade from a speaker like Devore, the real areas they can be improved on is 1. Resolving complex music, and 2. Bass response/quality.... there's no replacement for displacement in audio as well as autos. If these things don't matter to you then maybe just enjoy what you have until you identify something you really feel would be a worthwhile improvement for you and the music you listen to.

Great post, Dave. It deserves more than a "like" click. I think Keith expressed a willingness to spend up to $50K for this next pair of speakers. For that increase in price, he must be looking for something substantial over what the Devore offers. One can buy a very capable speaker for $50K now, and there are many alternatives. You summarize the areas of improvement quite well. I would add perhaps a sense of ease and scale that comes with a more capable (and expensive) speaker.

 

[bazelio]

Changes to recordings? What changes? Does it mean changes in different masterings of the same recording? Anyhow, Orangutans impart a strong flavor. Some people like it, some don't. This doesn't mean they make everything sound the same, but it's still confusing to say they are "transparent" in my opinion.