I own the Eros MK-II also and according to Roger Sanders, sonically, there is little if any difference between the Mk-II and Mk-III versions. They both use the same crossover/amp but the cosmetics on the Mk-III seem a bit improved. The ESL panel has been updated for ease of manufacturing, but probably sounds about the same.
The Eros easily bests anything from Martin Logan up to 10G's or more. If you think about it all speakers have sweet spots and sound better in the center. I was listening to the Eros way off axis and even in the next room (while folding laundry) and it still sounded great.
I think the people who frown on this and other speakers for having a narrow sweet spot are really missing out on some terrific speakers. The Eros Mk-II and Mk-III models are not merely good competent speakers -- they are exceptional in my book, and unsurpassed in many aspects in my 30+ years as an audiophile. Set up correctly with good ancillary gear, they can provide a sonic illusion to die for.
The Eros easily bests anything from Martin Logan up to 10G's or more. If you think about it all speakers have sweet spots and sound better in the center. I was listening to the Eros way off axis and even in the next room (while folding laundry) and it still sounded great.
I think the people who frown on this and other speakers for having a narrow sweet spot are really missing out on some terrific speakers. The Eros Mk-II and Mk-III models are not merely good competent speakers -- they are exceptional in my book, and unsurpassed in many aspects in my 30+ years as an audiophile. Set up correctly with good ancillary gear, they can provide a sonic illusion to die for.