Strange. There is a regular poster who keeps changing his cone speaker set up and reports it as a 'wow' factor each time. And you put spikes and re-did set up and sound was same. Maybe you can hear the issues with Gryphon and CH and Wilsons.
Moving away from box speakers: Diesis Audio vs Avantgarde Acoustic?
- Thread starter abeidrov
- Start date
I do not have ‘golden’ ears, so I can’t say, if the sound changed dramatically. At the time I had an impression, that the sound had improved. I am now listening to this violin concerto, and it sounds really really good. And it’s not even a Living Stereo, just a regular Japanese Red Seal pressing.
Maybe trying a different tube amp would kill the upgrade bug and I’ll be a happy audiophile again…
Can you elaborate on that comment? I have owned the Nikas and now the Vistas and every speaker has its shortcoming. The Vistas have true horn bass and lacks the discontinuity of hybrid designs like the Nikas (albeit to my ears, my space and system).
and that was with a tubed dac and GM70 tubed amplification? I heard that from time to time with the prototype that I apparently had. It was the Chicago Axpona show speaker. There was beaming and harshness from time to time in the upper frequencies, along with a lack of coordination between the bass and higher frequencies. The Vista speaker on the other hand has no such issues. I am unsure what was done to address these issues with the current generation.
Last edited:
That matches my impression.
It also lacked that certain high-end extra, so to speak. In other words: sometimes you hear a system that has a flaw, but at the same time you hear many positive aspects, so that you think: with a bit of work I'll get it right and it will sound great. I didn't get that impression here. I couldn't recognise any highlights, it seemed rather uninspired to me, as if everything didn't fit together one hundred percent or something like that.
understood. That matches my impression having owned it. that being said, there is listening or psychoacoustic bias, associated equipment, set up, etc. There is unfortunately also listening acuity. People lose acuity as they age and stuff that I thought sounded fantastic, my kids and wife thought sounded like sh—.
I’m enjoying the difference so much I think I need more time before I sell a set!
Two epic loudspeakers of different breeds. I know and love them both! Thanks for sharing.
I heard a version of those at the New York audio show in 2012. They sounded excellent with 14 W tube amplifiers.
Hello, I have owned and I own Avantgarde Duo but going from Wilson Audio to high performance is a 180 degree turn.
35 m2 at a listening distance of 3 metres is enough and it gives a 3D listening experience that is difficult to obtain with other brands.
The advantage of high output is that it's easy to power them with small quality tube amps, and even a 300B (experienced) will do very well.
Nevertheless, in relation to your list, I've fallen in love with the Clarisys Minuet, which is close to high output but with an impression of freedom and ease (be careful when choosing amps).
Your room looks rather narrow, though this may well be an illusion. If it is on the narrow side, an advantage of horn speakers (Avantgarde at least) is that they are far more tolerant of placement near walls or in corners than other types.
Yes the room is round about 6m long and over 4m wide. So ideal for Horns. They probably will not have enough space between the speakers and to the side.
Similar threads
