A few impressions from the CES/THE Shows


I went with a friend looking for speakers to replace his Beveridges; they currently operate but he feels one amp is dying (again) and that it’s time. Unfortunately, he STILL hasn’t found a speaker to love. He’s pointed toward high-efficiency designs based on so-called full-range drivers, so we looked at many of them in 2-and-two-half days. We simply didn’t bother listening to MOST speakers as they weren’t interesting.

My friend’s and my taste in speaker voicing is VERY similar and we agreed overall about every system we heard. Both of us need MORE than a ‘neutral’ amount of energy in the orchestra’s power region–those 3 or so octaves from c. 100 to 800Hz–and we both want LESS treble energy than ‘flat’. We both love the spaciousness of dipoles but heard few to listen to.

First--the WORST sound, BY FAR, was the from the Wisdom M-75, priced at $55K/pair. It had so little energy in the power region, it wasn’t ‘thin’, it was clangy. Most disappointing for Dean was the Rethm, which wounded VERY think and bright, even with the horn extenders.

POSSIBLY the combined shows' best sound was produced by a prototype system by Cogent. It’s a 2-way system driven by 2 field-coil-powered compression drivers, horn-loaded of course, plus a monstrous mono-15"-horn-loaded subwoofer, all of which might retail in the $40-thousands. The horns were rectangular and built of birch plywood, painted, and had significant resonances, but both of us felt this system reproduced the sound of the orchestra VERY convincingly. The ‘possibly’ above is because they were in a much-too-small room. WAY over 100dB sensitivity. Maybe next year...

Overall, probably the best sound we heard was from the German-made $6500/pair Audio Physic Scorpio. It’s a rather-conventional-looking back-tilting, 4'-high floorstander that uses one dome tweeter and 2 MRs on the front panel and 4 7" woofers mounted 2 on each side and driven as bipoles. They had plenty of energy in the power region and great bass, extended and well defined. GORGEOUS veneers! Dean felt they were not quite as transparent as he would like; I disagreed, but he’s the GEA, not me.

The Vandersteen Quattros sounded very nice, neutral, spacious, etc., but were too ‘polite’ in the power region and hence uninvolving for both of us. Same for the Gallo Reference 3.1s, which produced probably the biggest and best soundstage of the show in a relatively HUGE room. Those little things were probably 10' from each sidewall.

In substantial contrast to their sound in Denver last September at RMAF, the Zus sounded QUITE good, especially the $2800/pair Druids with the $3K/pair ‘Method’ powered subwoofers. They were too bright for us but sounded VERY fine otherwise. I believe they’re Dean’s current favorites.

One thought both of us had--most of the speaker designers can’t be lovers of classical music--else they wouldn’t be designing speakers that sound, in the treble, little like real orchestras playing in real space. Oh well...
.
128x128jeffreybehr
After further thought, I think my comments about Zu 'fixing' their 'too bright' speakers create a wrong impression. First, the Zus apparently aren't 'too bright' for lots of folk; probably they're rather flat in their upper frequency response. They did have more treble energy than I personally like, but not as much as some speakers I heard. I listened, happily, to these systems for many hours over 4 days. This characteristic of the Druids and the Definitions is NOT a 'defect' that Zu offered to 'fix'.

Zu personnel, I'm sorry if my initial comments were inaccurate.

(PS. Zu personnel did NOT contact me in any way about my initial comments.)
.
I loved the ZU's, what a bang for the buck, also impressed with the ACI Saphires.And MBL had a great display, But what a bunch of dross I heard, But as a first time attendee,It still was a very impressive snakeoil show.
Michael
Art, WRT the Rethms, what subwoofer? I was in the Rethm room on two separate occasions, and there was no subwoofer on either. To be sure, a subwoofer would have been a necessity in order to achieve anything resembling neutral tonality. I've never listened to the Rethms before, so I don't have experience to know how they might have sounded in a different room, but I don't know when in my memory I have ever heard such a skewed tonal balance. For me, this was the most frustrating speaker at the show. It did so many things exceedingly well--transparent, open, dynamic, and probably as close to "live" sounding as anything this side of $50K or more. If I could have been convinced that a subwoofer would have cured all its tonality issues, I would have bought a pair on the spot.
I felt the same way about the Vandersteen Quatros a few years back when they were first shown, at least until we asked them to turn up the volume.

Richard for some reason likes to keep the volume relatively low during the show. When asked to push it, though, he certainly will let his speakers speak out and shine a bit more. And even given my Vandersteen loyalty, I'll gladly admit that they ARE somewhat tame at low volumes.