What is going to be your endgame speaker?

[Another Johnson]

As far as 3 channel, what I have heard was impressive and better than stereo IMHO

Rob

At the dawn of the stereo age I had older friends who already had extremely capable mono systems. It was called High Fidelity. Fisher, Scott, Marantz, McIntosh… maybe a Klipsch corner horn. Typically RTR tape as the source. Some of these systems were incredibly good for the day.

When stereo came along, many were angry and complained that it was not better, and that it was a ruse to force you to buy a second amp, stereo preamp, another speaker, and a stereo RTR tape machine.

I suspect that three channel would have been met with even greater resistance.

 

[Ron Resnick]

This is a timely thread as I took delivery of my endgame speakers last year.

My criteria were active, TAD-based, sensibly sized, and minimal compromise except in the lowest bass octave. Lenard Audio is an Australian company that made my speakers over a two-year period of development and testing, bringing to life a concept that John Burnett had been evaluating for many years. The model is the Lenard Symphony Reference. Drivers are 2 x Audio Elegance 12", Audio Elegance 15" for the mid-bass, TAD 4001 & 703.

Heaven! It was worth the very long wait and hassle of bringing them to the UK.

View attachment 110808

Congratulations, mondie!

 

[gadawg58]

Have been enjoying Wilson Alexx’s for the past several years and likely will for several more years to come. I think my end game will likely be the Wilson XVX although I will take a listen to other speakers in a similar price range when the time comes. Should be fun!

George

 

[LL21]

There was perhaps a decade or longer when the answer for me would have been the Rockport Arrakis without doubt.

A decade later there are some intriguing all-out options: Wilson XVX + Subs are the natural place to consider from the XLF...but there is also a huge push in panels...the Alsyvox Raffaello, and also more and more here about horns...and for some reason I keep coming back to the as yet underheard Destination Audio La Malta which is yet a different direction.

Being semi-practical (at least space wise if not budget!) the XVX is a logical place to look given our current system and particularly given that in most respects the XVX is not only physically more svelte than the XLF, it also (unlike the Arrakis) requires only one [quite powerful in low impedance loads below 1.5ohms] ] stereo or set of monoblocks. The only other might be the Divin Majestics...which are even bigger but also more efficient 96db and driven by Audio Exotics by none other than our current electronics.

 

[Gregadd]

Binaural program material is inadequate by other measures (insufficient number of performances compared to availability of stereo performances).
I would not build a stereo system based on the premise that it was a diminished concept because of the existence of a literal handful of true binaural recordings. But we can disagree on that. It is good to have choices. Surround Sound is a related red herring.
FWIW, if you get it right, there is an image with depth and width even in old mono recordings.

I could argue this ad nauseam. I don't think you said anything that is incorrect.Despite it's shortcomings binaural is in a league apart from stereo
I meant imaging as an absolute
The real thing as it were. Binaural as good as it is shows us how gar we have to.Holographs might do it. Who knows. Most of don't have big enough room for a big band or symphony orhestra.

 

[Gregadd]

A decade later there are some intriguing all-out options: Wilson XVX + Subs are the natural place to consider from the XLF...but there is also a huge push in panels...the Alsyvox Raffaello, and also more and more here about horns...and for some reason I keep coming back to the as yet underheard Destination Audio La Malta which is yet a different direction.
[text omitted]

As you go up in price the various genres tend to transcend their stereotypical faults.
I guess we can include open baffles as a subset of panels or vice versa.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

My endgame speakers are 2-way standmounts as well, my current Reference 3A Reflector monitors. These, however, are supplemented with dual JL Audio Fathom 112v2 12-inch subwoofers.

I also love the intimacy of monitors on small-scale music, yet on large-scale music the speaker system can throw a much larger and more spacious soundstage as well.

For my mid-sized room (dimensions, see signature) the speaker system is a great solution, most large speakers would give problems. Everything has its pros and cons. I do have lots of experience with large speakers in friends' rooms, so it's not that I don't know what they can do.

I also supplement My Sonner Legato Unum's with 2 REL T Zeros, just enough low end but not over powering. They match well with the Sonner.

 

[Robh3606]

At the dawn of the stereo age I had older friends who already had extremely capable mono systems. It was called High Fidelity. Fisher, Scott, Marantz, McIntosh… maybe a Klipsch corner horn. Typically RTR tape as the source. Some of these systems were incredibly good for the day.

I suspect that three channel would have been met with even greater resistance.

My dad had a really nice mono system with an Altec 604 C in a Karlson and a 601 in a University utility cabinet. When he went over to stereo the 604 got switched out to a lesser stereo pair. Didn't have room for a pair of 604's.

2 was a change, 3 channel I agree too much and until the advent of modern surround where it was common for 3 across the front. If you have not heard the original 3 channel mixes you should give them a listen. I listened to them on my HT system comparing to the released stereo versions. Quite the difference!

Rob

 

[KeithR]

Bose 901s. Endgame speaker, period.

 

[Al M.]

Bose 901s. Endgame speaker, period.

You are a man of excellent taste.

 

[PeterA]

One never knows for sure, but I think I have my last pair of speakers.

 

[Another Johnson]

2 was a change, 3 channel I agree too much and until the advent of modern surround where it was common for 3 across the front. If you have not heard the original 3 channel mixes you should give them a listen. I listened to them on my HT system comparing to the released stereo versions. Quite the difference!

I occasionally listen to early three channel mixes that have found their way to multichannel CDs on my HT system too. It is interesting. If my HT system were better, I’d probably appreciate them more.

 

[Audio_Karma]

The all new Dali Epikore 11 speakers with Kore Technology for smaller rooms !

DALI KORE Floor-standing Speaker Review – HiFiReport

www.hifireport.com

 

[thomask]

The all new Dali Epikore 11 speakers with Kore Technology for smaller rooms !

DALI KORE Floor-standing Speaker Review – HiFiReport

www.hifireport.com

I had listened to this speaker during Seoul Audio show 2023 on March.

It sounds very clean and nice no serious faults at all.

But I am not sure it could be my end game speaker.

Choice of speaker depends on personal taste.

 

[Audio_Karma]

I had listened to this speaker during Seoul Audio show 2023 on March.

It sounds very clean and nice no serious faults at all.

But I am not sure it could be my end game speaker.

Choice of speaker depends on personal taste.

A friend of mine told me with the right gear these Kore sound really amazing
Lyngdorf MP-40 with two Hegel H30A Amps
He said he's never heard a better stereo system at any price

 

[Gregadd]

Bose 901s. Endgame speaker, period.

I plucked a mint pair from a thrift store. They were designed to create a sense of space in small room (college dorm}.

 

[Another Johnson]

I plucked a mint pair from a thrift store. They were designed to create a sense of space in small room (college dorm}.

When Professor Bose released these, what I remember from advertising and reviews is that they were his literal flagship speakers to provide stereo in the home. Since they required stands, rather than sitting on a desk or bookshelf, I do not remember them as dorm adornments. KLH, Advent, Boston Acoustics, and others were competing for the dorm crowd. Bose was hoping to be more upscale. Home entertainment oriented.
The goal of the 901 design was to try to mimic a point source by putting drivers all over the box. Reviewers hated them. But they sold anyway. Bose accomplished his goal of creating a company to build and market consumer music gear.
Even in those days if you were an engineering or science professor at MIT, you were expected to be active in consulting and research. There were a ton of companies related to acoustics that were started by guys from MIT and/or Harvard. Bose was an EE, but had background and interest in acoustics.

 

[Another Johnson]

Here’s a recent positive take on the Bose 901s.

Bose 901 Saga - Target PC Magazine

A better aim on Technology News, Reviews and Analysis.

www.targetpc.com

It does point out that the speakers were intended to be on their custom stands and that they were originally included with what Bose considered a necessary equalizer.

 

[Gregadd]

Andrew ,as someone who can never remember where I put my smartphone, I am going to lean on my memory. It may have been marketing hype. Legend has it that Dr. Bose was a student at M.I.T. and desired a speaker for his dorm room. The speaker was designed to hang form the sealing. The rear speakers were designed to create a sense of space. Of course, the Eq was to correct the poor frequency response.
If his dorm room was anything lke mine itt was small with cinder block walls. My AR 2ax and Dynaco A-50 did not do well in that environment.

 

[Another Johnson]

Andrew ,as someone who can never remember where I put my smartphone, I am going to lean on my memory. It may have been marketing hype. Legend has it that Dr. Bose was a student at M.I.T. and desired a speaker for his dorm room. The speaker was designed to hang form the sealing. The rear speakers were designed to create a sense of space. Of course, the Eq was to correct the poor frequency response.
If his dorm room was anything lke mine itt was small with cinder block walls. My AR 2ax and Dynaco A-50 did not do well in that environment.

I can’t say anything about when Bose had his inspiration. Perhaps he was a student when he thought of the idea that lead to the 901 design.

The idea of mounting them to the ceiling was from early on. Remembering from those days, the stands and equalizers were the dominant way they were sold. Bose later added s smaller system that was focused on ceiling mounting. That was for kitchens, but also good for dorms.
Reviewers softened and there are many good reviews. In the early 70’s I had colleagues who had been on the MIT faculty and knew Bose who was also identified by them as faculty. I don’t remember a lot of details as it was not important to me.

edit: Here’s a link. He was a professor at the time. That is what I recall first hand.
I was studying acoustics myself at the time, and I was curious about how all those little drivers could be properly coupled to produce full spectrum. The fancy equalizer was a pretty new concept for its day.

Amar Bose - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org