The $2500 System Challenge-
- Thread starter Andre Marc
- Start date
wadia - monitor audio
Here we go with my sons supersystem:
Wadia 151/170 sh. 1000$ (we don't count the ipod cost, but that would add 200$)
Merlin Music TSM MMe! sh 1000$
Cabling Cardas GR I suppose this is the catch - the cables would explode the systems cost, but they were laying around, so I just let him have them, but basically it is one digital cable and 3m speaker cable...
This is a great sounding system..
Taking a poll on what you would recommend for a system cost NO MORE than $2500 ALL inclusive.
One catch..it has to be products you have heard.
Here we go with my sons supersystem:
Wadia 151/170 sh. 1000$ (we don't count the ipod cost, but that would add 200$)
Merlin Music TSM MMe! sh 1000$
Cabling Cardas GR I suppose this is the catch - the cables would explode the systems cost, but they were laying around, so I just let him have them, but basically it is one digital cable and 3m speaker cable...
This is a great sounding system..
Good afternoon to you, Tim. I wouldn't make that bet if I were you. I was at an invitation only audio event in which these speakers were debuted to the public. I had a hard time answering what my impressions were when Sandy asked how I liked them. He could have asked me that privately but he just so happened to ask this question in front of everybody that was in the room at the time. That was an uncomfortable position to be in, to say the least. This was a couple of years back, so I wouldn't be able to quote exactly what I said but suffice it to say that I did not lie and even though I was polite in my response.....I'm quite sure that I won't ever be getting a Christmas card from him. With that said, there were many there that seemed to have liked them.
I agree with you about disconnecting the subs for room placement options, That would have been a major improvement for the end result that day. FWIW.
Tom
Hello, Mark. There were many things I was unimpressed with. First off, the room wasn't the best place for a debut....especially for those speakers. The room was built in an old Tweeter model conference room to which the floor was actually raised 3' up above the concrete substrate below. This made for an extremely "boomy" experience, as the lower waves radiated and bounced around considerably beneath the raised floor. Add to that, apparently Sandy's preference that night was to have the bass boosted and not running flat. It wasn't boosted slightly either. It was boosted well beyond that which was acceptable and when you added the raised substrate....the end result was bloated, one note, boom-boom type bass and I personally can't stand boom at the bottom. Full frequency reproduction, yes. Boom, no.
With keeping all of the aforementioned in mind, the speaker didn't seem to blend well at all between the individual drivers. The sub consistently hit harder on the lowest of frequencies than others and one almost had to strain to hear any mis-bass, especially mid bass with any sort of clarity or impact. It reminded me of an improperly implemented car sub with one [low note] bass. The top end was chopped off and what was left was rather tinny and not very detailed. Harsh at times, if you will. I actually made a comment to a friend of mine that I was surprised that Sandy stood beside these speakers with a sense of pride. To be completely honest, I would have been embarassed to stand by these speakers at any price point. Especially in that room that night. I didn't know about any tweeter change with regards to these speakers, so the only comment I say say is that I observed whatever tweeter came out with the speaker when it was introduced to the public.
Basically, I was thouroughly unimpressed with this speaker. It would be a great HT speaker but when Sandy mentioned that it was built for 2-channel, I thought to myself that it would be best to just keep my mouth shut. That's when I went to leave and Sandy asked for my observations. Awkward, to say the least.
Tom
With keeping all of the aforementioned in mind, the speaker didn't seem to blend well at all between the individual drivers. The sub consistently hit harder on the lowest of frequencies than others and one almost had to strain to hear any mis-bass, especially mid bass with any sort of clarity or impact. It reminded me of an improperly implemented car sub with one [low note] bass. The top end was chopped off and what was left was rather tinny and not very detailed. Harsh at times, if you will. I actually made a comment to a friend of mine that I was surprised that Sandy stood beside these speakers with a sense of pride. To be completely honest, I would have been embarassed to stand by these speakers at any price point. Especially in that room that night. I didn't know about any tweeter change with regards to these speakers, so the only comment I say say is that I observed whatever tweeter came out with the speaker when it was introduced to the public.
Basically, I was thouroughly unimpressed with this speaker. It would be a great HT speaker but when Sandy mentioned that it was built for 2-channel, I thought to myself that it would be best to just keep my mouth shut. That's when I went to leave and Sandy asked for my observations. Awkward, to say the least.
Tom
So removing the cables, and replacing them with any number of great cheap cables, it is a nice system.
I believe at the lower the end of overall system cost, the fewer boxes the better. Nice system.
Tom you did the right thing, if you can't handle the answer don't ask the question, i'm the same way you are if you ask me what i think i will tell you what i think NOT what you want to hear, sorry but that's the way i am, but that does not make me right.
I have never heard his new speakers so I have no opinion about how they sound. I believe they did get at least one really good review for whatever that's worth. Apparently Tim didn't care for the tweeters used in the Def Tech speakers. If I only heard the Def Tech speakers in an audio showroom powered by an AVR, I wouldn't like them either. I was at a friend of mine's house the other day and he has the same speakers I do-the BP7000SC. His speakers are powered by a Denon AVR. If I didn't know better, I would have sworn they couldn't possibly be the same speakers.
I've heard Def Techs driven by quite a few amps, Mark, including McIntosh mono blocks. I have a lot of respect for the company for reasons I've stated here before, but, no, I'm not crazy about their tweeters. Hopefully reasonable men can disagree and this one man's opinion won't impact your own enjoyment.
Tim
Tim
I can promise you Tim that it doesn't change my enjoyment one whit. I find the tweeters to be very neutral and their sound depends upon the quality of the source(s) that feed them. With the Yamaha C2a preamp and the PL-400 Series 2 amps, there was almost too much air around cymbals. There was a crazy amount of air happening. Now things seem to be in more proper prospective. The bottom line is that the speakers (and tweeters) are very sensitive to the upstream electronics that feed them. I know from experience that if you feed the Def Techs with digital over an AVR that you will be hearing a crude approximation of what the speakers are truly capable of.
Tim-Call it what you want. All I know is that through my Technics SP-10 MKII table, SME 312S arm, Dynavector XV-1s cartridge feeding into my Krell KPE Ref phono preamp which feeds into my Krell KRC-HR preamp which in turns feeds into my Krell KSA-250 power amp via MIT cables, I have really good sound. You can replace my table with my digital music server playing through my Mytek DSD DAC and you still have really good sound. And then you can substitute my Mytek DAC and the file server and replace it with the Otari MX-55 two track mastering deck feeding into a pair of Ampex 350s and you still have really good sound. Being multi-dimensional is good and it tells you more of the truth compared to listening to a single source. It's good to have choices.
It's ok Bob. But compared to my stereo system, it's a pimple on a elephant's ass.
Similar threads
