Acarian Alon II verse Triangle Celeus 202?

Thanks  I have gotten the impression that the Triangles can be a little thin and do not go very low. Worse yet is when I went to go get the Alon IIs to try there was a pair of Soundwave Soliloquys.  The lit said Grand Soliloquy but after lifting them out of the car I realized they were the regular Soliloquy. A very impressive speaker.  Huge stage, very balanced . Worried if they lack weight on bottom but do not know if they have foam or rubber surrounds? Just trying them  Cannot get pairs together to compare.  Then there is the Vandersteen 2CEs that came up.  Had those .  Like them but cannot seem to live with them  I may have to open a new thread.

Triangles are much easier on the eye compared to the Acarians, if that matters much to you at all.

Back in the time when the Alon II first came out I sent three people to my dealer to audition them, along with some other fine speakers (such as Dunlavys), for their first high end system.  All three of them bought the Alons with an Acurus DIA amplifier, which was a very good combination, especially for rock.  The open baffle gives them a very spacious, boxless sound that is very easy to enjoy.  I think they're an excellent speaker, with either tube or solid state amplification.

They have already been refoamed so that is not an issue  Just wish i could get them side by side without having to buy both

I owned Alon IIs years ago. They are voiced with Audio Research tube gear and sound great with tube amps, big airy relaxed sound. Great value at the time, but at this point, they are old enough to possibly need drivers refoamed. Cheers,
Spencer

I've owned a variety of Triangles over the years - Celius, Zerius, and Titus. They've all out-performed their price point. I think the Celius was Stereophile Class A-rated at one point. I've no experience with the Acarian, but Triangles are sensitive (90db+) and revealing speakers who throw a big soundstage and are never clinical.