@kevinkwann You’ve been quite generous about sharing your experiences with various other loudspeakers and systems. Why won’t you do the same with the Magico system? I am doing the same with Magico. Do you see associated equipment in any of the speaker posts? I understand you aren’t a Magico fan boy, so I wonder why you seem fixated on the magico post given I hadn’t detailed associated equipment in all the previous speaker impression posts? The reason I didn’t include all the associated equipment is that: I could never recount all the associated gear for all these speakers. Never kept track. That includes the Magico. I can only relay that the A3s were driven by solid state amplification, set up by a very experienced Magico dealer. Presumably he wasn’t out to sabatoge his own sale and was able to present me with a fairly representative example of that speaker’s performance. But, hey, it’s an in store (on that case, in house) audition so as I’ve said: caveats apply. I’ve simply set out to describe my own experience on my recent speaker quest - in case anyone enjoys reading it (apparently many have). And it seems that despite a lack of equipment lists, many have felt I accurately conveyed the character of many speakers on the list, so that’s fun to hear. But if you are after lists of all the associated gear I’m afraid you’ll remain disappointed and this thread clearly won’t satisfy you. There’s always Stereophile for lists of associated gear. Here you get wut yous pays for :-) |
murphythecat,
No I haven't heard the ATC speakers. I'm not looking for active speakers and on looks alone I don't think I could place those in my living room.
And I always mix ATC up with PMC speakers.
And as I've just brought up PMC speakers, I did actually demo some because I've heard their giant monitors do some incredible things at shows (though always way too loud for me to stay in the room very long).I listened to the "20" series PMC speakers, which are fairly elegant floor standing speakers in terms of shape. But in terms of fit/finish they are well below the level of quality of most of the other speakers I looked at, especially given their price.
I didn't include the PMCs in my demo descriptions because the demo environment was the most hilariously ill suited place I've ever experienced to demoing speakers. Imagine one of those cheap speakers stores in Hong Kong, the ones with a narrow hallway and speakers stacked side by side, separated only by inches, lining the entire store. That's what it was like, and the PMCs (at least one of the pairs I listened to) were literally still just stacked in among all the other speakers, and, like 4 feet apart. Almost a mono listening experience.It was...really something!
Though I did hear one pair pulled out from the stack of speakers at one point. I found them just kind of boring to listen to.
|
Yeah, that's a plus with the Devore, vs the much less efficient (84dB I think) Joseph speakers. Although the Josephs are supposed to play well with tube amps given their impedance. The Josephs sounded nice on my CJ amps at home.
I have an old Eico HF-81 that I treasure and I'm sure that would be fun on the Devores. But aside from that, playing amps - tube amps of the quality I generally prefer - can be as expensive as playing with speakers, and I only have so much money for this obsession :-)
I continue to be amazed how well my CJ 140W tube monos drive whatever speaker I put on them. My current Thiel 2.7s have such grip and impact from the bass upward with the CJs.
That said, VAC amps have been on my radar for a long time. I'd love to try some VAC amps some day.
|
I don't have a second wife; maybe that's why I can afford to audition these speakers ;-)
|
^^^^ (btw...the post removed above was just a duplicate post).
|
So with a bit of time off work, I'm deciding on my speaker purchase this month, hopefully within the next 2 weeks.
Tomorrow or Friday I intend to re-visit the Joseph Perspectives which I haven't heard in a long time now. Then it will probably be another listen to the Devores, and I'll decide if I'm buying which one....or neither and just selling my big Thiel 3.7s and sticking with what I have.
Of course I'll report in this thread what I hear with the Joseph Perspectives. I'm curious if they will still beguile me, or if some of the shine will have worn off with all the speaker auditions since I heard them.
|
Well I really put the Joseph Audio Perspectives through their paces today!
It had been over a year since I heard them and I wondered if my memory was still accurate regarding their sound. Turns out: yes!
They are the most tonally ravishing speaker I’ve ever heard.
Just a clear, clear almost uniquely grain-free sound that allows such tonal purity and saturation.
There wasn’t a single cut I played on them that didn’t make me want to just keep listening to the whole track. That’s always a good sign.
The nuances of metal, skin, various cymbals etc these speakers bring out in drums are amazing. Every new instrument or voice that appears on a track just sounds so tonally beautiful and individual, it just keeps me pinned to my seat mesmerized.
They image and disappear really well, very deep wide soundstage.
Hesitations are that the bass isn’t as controlled as my Thiels. The Thiels really spoil me in that regard. Also the sound is a bit smaller than the Thiels, and they lose a bit of heft in the upper registers. The Thiels are more consistently "thick and rich" from top to bottom, from sax, violins, woodwinds etc in the upper registers. I’d say the Thiels are more cohesive, coherent and "invisible" top to bottom over all. The Thiels also image with greater precision and produce more densely palpable images. Every time I come back from any speaker audition the Thiels never fail to impress me again.
The Josephs are very neutral, even with a slightly rising top end (as per Stereophile measurements). But their absolute freedom from etch or grain make them easy to listen to, so you get the benefit of a super clearsound without the ouch factor. On the Josephs, acoustic guitars have more sparkle and individual character, even the character of every guitar string seems more individual. The Perspectives are phenomenal for voices but especially so for female voice. I think this is due to the lack of grain factor. Female voices are often more breathy (and I’m especially thinking of some Julie London, almost whisper-singing that I played).And breathy, upper range voice sounds tend to bring forth any grain or electronic artifacts in reproduced sound. When that scrim of whitening hash is cleared away, you get what sounds more like real breath from the singer, and female singers sound less hard, less mechanical. I had the same impressions last time I heard the Josephs. Female voices sound more particularly "female," the timbral difference from male voices being that much more exact.
This also goes for massed strings. With no hash at all, you can hear "in between" all the strings playing so that each slightly different tone becomes audible, yet smooth. The effect is that when string sections soar, especially if the different sections are playing complex and evolving patterns rather than mirroring each other, there is a luxurious complexity and luxury to the sound that is ravishing. Although orchestras don’t sound as large as on the Thiels, I don’t know that I’ve ever experienced sound that was so close, tonally, to what I hear when attending live orchestras, just in terms of tonal nuance, delicacy, ease and bang on tonality. They are very special speakers IMO in this regard.
If I can fault the Josephs a bit tonally, it's that they don't have that last bit of "texture" to the sound - the raspy bow on string, finger tips on guitar strings stuff. It's just, in a very subtle way, a bit glazed over. (Interesting as this very same combination of ravishing tonality with slightly reduced texture occurs on my older Hales speakers, which use similar SEAS drivers). The Thiels are somewhat better here. The Devores even better (in fact I remember that sense of texture on the Devores really sticking out).
Bass is alive, big, rich and fun on the Perspectives. Sometimes it even reminded me of the bass from the Devore speakers - taught for the most part, but becomes bigger, bloomier and room filling when there’s bass down low.
The Josephs have a bit more thin and reductive sound, so for instance electric guitar lines will be a bit thinner, less gutsy than on the Thiels.Though, tonally, more revealing and beautiful. The slightly more laid back sound of the Thiels makes it easier to crank rock. But the tonality of individual elements in a mix is more nuanced on the Josephs.
Hmmm...things to ponder until I hear the Devore 93s again tomorrow....
|
shadorne,
The ATCs were mentioned a bit earlier in the thread, a few posts up.They don't fit the bill for what I'm looking for, unfortunately.
|
dspringham,
I had been meaning to do an update. Yup, my Thiel 3.7s are up for sale.Here’s the story:
I went back and listened to the Devore 93s again at length.
When I first started playing tracks on the 93s it sounded really nice, but it wasn’t doing that special thing the JA speakers do with tone. The 93s had that average layer of just detectable grain that most speakers seem to show, that seems absent in the JAs, and I was missing the incredible timbral beauty and precision of the JAs. (This lack of grain/quietness and timbral precision is almost always remarked upon in reviews and reports of JA speakers).
So I was thinking "Well, I guess I’m going with the JA speakers."
But as I listened more and more, I started falling back under the spell of the Devores. That richness, combined with that open and sparkly sound, is it’s own claim to a "special" sound. I played the opening track from Basil Poledouris’ famously "muscular" Conan The Barbarian soundtrack, which opens with thundering kettle drums driving an augmented french horn section with piercing, souring lines over the percussion. The Devores just lived for this stuff - the horns blazing bright, but not hurting the ears, and that reach out and bloom quality of the bass put me among the kettle drums. It was very affecting.
As some reviews have stated, the Devores seem to "let go" of the music easily, so every line being played in a piece seems to come forth out of the mix with enthusiasm. I was often becoming aware on the Devores of how various lines of rhythm and melody where being played and handed off from one section to another (e.g. hand off from horns to strings, etc). The Devores make a lot of musical sense, of what is happening in a piece.
The openness and clarity in the upper mids/treble means the Devores always let a drum snare and cymbal pop through everything, and hence the Devores always dig out what the drums are doing, which makes them so rythmically engaging.
The 93s produced the most realistic version of Joe Morello’s drum solo in St Luis Blues (Brubeck live in NYC) that I’ve heard. The 93s just nail that papery drum skin sound, and the drums sounded bigger, fatter, more substantially real-sized, with great timbral accuracy. The 93s once again pulled everything closer to me, making me feel more "among" the drums being played right in front of me, vs many speakers that produce that drum solo with more distance.
Finally, the 93s just killed it on Rush’s 2112. They had tremendous - party-in-the-dorm punch with the opening guitar/bass/drum attacks.A real "wall of sound" with THICK layered waves of Alex Lifeson’s multi-tracked guitar textures. They dug out everything Niel Peart was doing on his kit really well.
One thing that really left an impression was the "discovery of the guitar in the cave" section of 2112, where you hear Lifeson start gently tuning and tentatively playing the guitar, until the pace picks up into strumming the tune. What the Devores did there was give that distant guitar-in-cave sound actual heft. The texture, and the minute bits of effort between each note and strum, really struck a convincing, authentic impression of someone playing a guitar in front of me. And the 93s have just enough sparkle to make various picked notes stick out in a rewarding, shimmering fashion as you get with a real guitar.
2112 sound incredible on my Thiel 2.7s as well. in comparison it’s a bigger sonic picture on the Thiels, more cinematically scaled in terms of soundstaging, even if the sonic images within that soundstage are squeezed a bit smaller and tighter than the Devores give. So with the Thiels it feels a bit more like "I’ve entered the cave" to hear the performance, which is cool. The Devores give more sparkle, heft and a sense of "that’s a guitar playing right in front of me" sensation, though with less cinematic imaging, more foreshortened.
I do wonder how big the soundstage might be if I could place the Devores where I have the Thiels.
Also, while I really do prefer the aesthetics of the larger 0/96s (the 93s, though nicely veneered, strike me as more of a plain box), I think I may prefer the 93s over all, at least for my application. The bass generally seems more integrated and controlled, whereas the 96s can get more unruly, more often, needing more set up care. And the 93s seem to give essentially the same tonal attributes as the 96s otherwise.
Anyway....after hearing the Devores again, and coming way confused again, I whipped back to give the Joseph Perspectives another quick spin to hear some of the tracks that really had impressed me on the Devores.
And right away...I fell under the spell of the Perspectives again! (Dammit!)That TONE!
And the Perspectives aren’t just a one trick pony doing timbral delicacy. That sophisticated upper frequency is allied to a juicy, punch, rich midrange and bass that really know how to party. They have a reach-out-and-grab you sense of dynamics, of drama. And their clarity also allows for drum snares, cymbals etc to pop through the mix with great clarity, to drive the sound. In fact I was very surprised when I played some Talk Talk again on the Josephs. The Devores just made those drums sound like a drum set right in front of me. But the Josephs had surprising punch and heft right in to the upper mids, so not only was the kick drum huge, the snare had great weight and punch too. So in it’s own way, the drums were super convincing on the Josephs too.
Rush’s 2112 had plenty of great slam and enthusiasm on the Perspectives as well. They untangled Lifeson’s layers of electric (often paired with acoustic) guitars beautifully and timbrally, and even more spatially than the Devores. Though they could not match the thickness of the the Devores with the guitars. And while the Josephs gave a timbrally super clear, clean rendering of the guitar in the cave, it was a thinner version than I heard from the Devores. The Devores are just so good at maintaining instrumental size from the bottom all the way to the top of the frequency range.
Something of a cincher for the Josephs was when I put on on Emilie Claire Barlow’s album Clear Day - that title song. (This is a fantastic album both musically and sonically - super rich in orchestration, big sonic images, her voice present and natural, some bombastic arrangements).
It starts with xylophones playing a rythmic line, then a string section adding rythm, piano, bass, a horn blast, then the drums kick in. I was just utterly taken aback by the sound - the exactness of the xylophones, the beauty of the strings, the way the horns blasted with such perfect metallic ringing tone and every bit of reverb ringing off with no grain. The clarity of the dums, cymbals, the tonal authenticity of the piano. It was really a rainbow of tones that I couldn’t tear myself away from.
So...I left pretty much back in to the JA camp. Pretty much settled on the Perspectives. In a way the Devores would be the safer bet - I think they just sound good with everything. The JA’s sound good with almost everything, spectacular on many things, and reveal weakness’s occasionally here and there. Plus they are more expensive. And I get trade in for my Thiels with the Devores. Plus I’d guess the Devores would be easier to re-sell if they didn’t work out. BUT...I’ve been chasing the JAs for so long, saving for them, and I’m under their spell every time I audition them, so I’m willing to roll the dice.
And JUST when I was to push "go" on getting the Perspectives...
...I get some utterly depressing financial news slipped through my mail slot. Which throws all my plans in to disarray. :-(
Such is life...
|
@shardorne, I was never a fan of the B&W sound, especially back in the 90’s when they started their lower lines with those hideous kevlar drivers. If any speaker could define the derisive term "hi-fi" those would be it, IMO. So I was very surprised when I encountered a good listening session with some of the Nautilus speakers, which sounded to my ears surprisingly, tonally rich. But I would never buy a pair for various reasons - aesthetics, ergonomics in my room, price, and I’ve heard other speakers I like better. I’ve listened to Vivid speakers at shows and briefly demoed the Vivid Oval speakers (B1s I think). Very impressive on the audiophile checkmarks of detail, transparency etc. But the overall tone left me somewhat cold. (Though I’ve heard their larger speakers sound phenomenal at some shows). I notice that you are heavily influenced by certain tracks. It depends what you mean. I’ve emphasized some tracks here because I can’t write about all the songs I listened to in each audition. But when I audition a speaker I listen for a long while. At a minimum, I bring 12 CDs along with me burned with a large variety of music - funk, metal, prog rock, disco, classic jazz, fusion, folk, crooner music, Blue Note R&B, lounge music, classical, classical and acoustic guitar, a wide variety of movie soundtrack music, pop music from 60’s, 70’s, 80’s to contemporary, alt-pop, alt-rock, a wide variety of electronica/dance, etc. At the end the shop owners usually say something along the lines of "I’ve never seen someone play such a crazy and entertaining variety of music to demo speakers! That was awesome!" And inevitably they make lists of some of the stuff I played. I also make sure I play sources that go from audiophile-recording quality to crap, even distorted, and in between, to see how a speaker handles a wide range of source quality.I also have my own recordings I’ve made of instruments I own being played, my kids playing their instruments (sax, trombone), and familiar voices (e.g. wife). Though in these cases I didn’t bring them along. I used to use those to do modest live vs reproduced comparisons when I’d have a new speaker at my place. That was always quite revealing. As an obsessive, I’ve been doin’ this a long time :-) (Though if you look at threads in which I’ve said I’m more cautious about, say, cable differences etc, some people there are convinced it must be because I have ears made of cloth and I’m not good at discerning sonic differences). But yes there are some dear-to-me tracks that I adore not only as demo material but which I am crazy about. And if a speaker doesn’t make me feel those tracks, like other speakers I’ve loved have, then it’s not going to be the speaker for me. I’m happy with my Conrad Johnson Premier 16LS 2 tube pre-amp and plan to keep it, along with my CJ Premier 12 tube monoblocks. As to a speaker with a specific sonic character, I find all speakers have a specific sonic character. It matters to me what they are capable of *within that given sonic character.* The Devore speakers have a thicker-than-most sonic character, but then that is an aspect of real acoustic sounds that I find to be accurate - most speakers/sound systems tend to sound more reductive to me. The Joseph Audio speakers have a super smooth crystalline clarity character. But within that character, they produce just about the widest and most surprising range of timbral shadings and colors that I’ve heard. Thanks for your comments! |
dspringham,
Yup, I'm known among my audiophile buddies as being able to out obsess them all, particularly when it comes to replacing speakers.(Not so much other gear). I experiment buying used speakers over the years, but when I'm really serious I go all out. I remember years ago when I was going to replace my Quad ESL 63/Gradient subwoofers, I went on a Speaker Odyssey, listening to speakers across north America!Some of my audio friends accompanying me on road trips.
The Thiel 3.7s have been so good they were as close to an "end game" speaker as I've owned. Since I have to replace them, they put a lot of pressure on the other candidates. The Joseph Audio speakers were the only ones after long auditions (previous to this thread) that stood out, but were significantly expensive for me...and once I was getting close to being able to purchase them, well, then I had to leave no stone upturned to make sure I was going to not regret spending that money.
I know myself, though, and whatever speakers I get, I'll notice the flaws over time. That's the "no perfect speaker" problem (though exacerbated by one's own criteria or mindset; if you have a different mindset, any old speaker can satisfy forever). And it's why I tend to own more than one speaker. Though the more I can get from one speaker, the less I have to bother setting up the other speakers.
I've fallen for "beautiful tone" in a speaker before. But after a while you identify the character a speaker places on the sound, and then ask "ok, what's missing?" In the former case some old speakers with superlative tone (Hales Transcendence 5s) were missing some texture and palpability. The Thiels are a sort of long-range reaction to that - they have good texture, great palpability. And very good tone. The Devores go perhaps even a bit further than the Thiels in some respects, a step or two back on others.
A worry could be that the Joseph speakers only beguile with beautiful timbre and tone...but once the shine of that wears off, are they still "fun?" Will they communicate the punch, drive, rhythm of all the music I like? Hopefully. They seem to to well there too. If not...the Devores are always waiting in the wings.
And, wow, those spatial audio speakers look intriguing. Quite a departure from your Harbeths. And Harbeths are supposed to be a "destination" speaker that get people off the speaker merry-go-round.That's why I never believe accounts that any speaker is a destination speaker in any general sense; we all have our different criteria and experience. A lot of people think Quad ESL 57s got them off the merry-go-round and have settled with them. For others, the 57s were their starting point, not end point. I had the Harbeth SuperHL5 Plus and really enjoyed them, totally understanding why people love them. But, they weren't an end point speaker for me. (Though I can always sit down in front of a Harbeth speaker and swoon to the presentation).
I like the funky looks of the Spatial X2. I'd go for a nice wood finish, personally.
|
markalarsen,
Ok, now I have to know: what music did you listen to that I might hate?
I can think of only one type of music that I hate :-)
|
Random thoughts....
Was over at a pal’s house listening to his Martin Logan ESLs (hybrids).
I started with Quad ESL 63s, and early listening to Quad ESL 57s were formative in my younger days. I still love the 57s, and if there’s a set of electrostatic speakers around I have to sit down and listen. Nothing else quite sounds like an ESL.
Whenever I’m at my friend’s place I listen to his Martin Logans because they are so musical, open, airy, transparent...with that interesting tonally warm color I hear from Martin Logan.
That said, every time I listen to an ESL, especially a Martin Logan, especially any of the Martin Logan hybrids, I’m reminded again why I don’t care to go back to ESLs. It’s that wispy, ghostly sound. They are palpable in the sense of seeing right through the speakers into very detailed musical images. But they are not palpable in the sense of actual solidity and air moving density to those sonic images. It makes me impatient after a while as I want to feel the presence of the music, not just listen as if it’s in another room, or another dimension from me.
I find that most attempts to mate dynamic woofers, especially every Martin Logan hybrid I’ve ever heard, only exacerbates this problem. When music with low end plays, I heard the presence created by the dynamic woofers, but moving up the frequency range the sound just becomes wispy, see-through, insubstantial and ghostly. Hearing dynamic drivers join the sound only emphasizes what the panels are not doing, and I always find it incoherent.
If you are not particularly sensitive to this mismatch, I can see why dynamic woofers mated to an electrostatic can sound just fine. Some low drum and bass line kicks in and you feel the bass, so then it’s "yeah, this has punch!" But for me it’s just so unconvincing.
I replayed a bunch of the same music on my system at home and for me it was so much more realistic and involving, the greater dimensionality, the roundness and solidity of the sonic images, the palpable air-moving energy from top to bottom. I can’t give that stuff up. And the Thiels sound essentially as boxless as the Martin Logans, but with more beef (better overall, actually, as I found the Martin Logans boxy/speakerly in the bass).
I also paid attention to the tonal/timbral quality of voices and instruments on the Martin Logans and as usual I find them generally to "get things right" to quite a degree; clarity with warmth of timber. Some John Zorn had nice ringing, shining guitar lines, with percussion that popped nicely out of the mix around the guitars. Overall, though, I did find the MLs had something of a persistent tonal signature to where I was no longer surprised by how any voice or instrument sounded through them. To my ears, the Joseph speakers have a wider and more convincing tonal pallet, and with at least as much incisiveness and clarity.
But aside from that, since I don’t own the speakers myself, I find them a wonderful place to visit, and always enjoy a listening session.
|
atmasphere,
Thanks for the input and info. I read the link; really interesting.
I admit I remain skeptical about an ESL that doesn’t exhibit the ghostly quality I mention, just because I’ve been listening to them since the 90’s - I’ve heard the soundlabs (the hybrids and the giant full range model),
Quads of all sorts, powered by all sorts of amplification, Martin Logans a million times, and I’ve never not heard the issue.
Perception seems to change with the listener and what he is focusing on. I asked my friend if he missed anything from dynamic speakers in terms of the palpability and punch, and he said "no not at all, I think these things slam." But for me I think he was mostly reacting to feeling the powered dynamic subwoofers in his hybrid ESLs, where I can’t help focusing on the lack of body in the mids upward.
This is one reason I’ve been quite curious to hear the Janszen electrostatics. I wonder if the sealed version of an electrostatic, as they use in their design, would finally "fix" that issue for me.
|
fsconicsmith,
That’s a great description of the Devore speakers, thanks!
That’s pretty much what I heard. They pull off the tricky combo of being thick and rich, but not dark, but rather light, airy and fast in the upper mids.
And boy I love synth stuff, so I’m sure the Devores would rock (and I did of course demo some synth stuff on them). I really like how the top end on the Devores can "pop" somewhat with excitement, yet without an ear-piercing quality. So as a synth for instance goes through an envelope and evolves from darker to having a brighter quality, the Devores really show that beautiful tonal brilliance and evolution of a synth line.
The Joseph Perspective also have that same quality. The top end is so beautiful and sparkly. And they do synth really nice too, as they have a really juicy lower mid to bass region, and their crystal clear top end allows that sparkle. I put on one fun synth/dance track last time I heard the Perspectives - Korean Style from the Collateral soundtrack - and it completely blew me away. It sounded super rich and punchy, but the way the Perspectives combined an exquisite top end and midrange, the quality of the synths where like a churning rainbow of timbral colors.
I played that track on the Thiels and while they are generally awesome for synth music (punch, focus, palpability, smoothness) they don’t have the timbral finesse of the Josephs. The Josephs in that respect sound more like a step forward, in terms of upgrading to a newer level of realism.
But, yeah, I know what you mean about the Devores sometimes sounding like sound coming at you from speakers. Rush’s 2112 had that vibe - the layers of guitar were thick and satisfying, though somewhat stacked up much closer more coming-from-the-speakers, which gave me an old school listening to big honkin’ speakers in a dorm party vibe. 2112 on the Josephs showed more spatially layered separation of the guitar tracks. In the upper midrange the JA speakers sort of show more "new things" in the recording - I haven’t heard 2112 sound quite like that, and it would be in danger of being deconstructed into audiophile wispiness, if it weren’t for the generally very dynamic punchy quality the JA speakers also posses. Though if I had to choose which speaker ultimately nails the gestalt of that type of music, I’d hand it to the Devores.
I’m being a bit thick at the moment and don’t catch your meaning about "audit" with the Perspectives.
BTY, I’m certainly in to vinyl. In fact that’s mostly what I listen to, since I bought my Transrotor Fat Bob S w. Benz Micro Ebony cartridge. I’m bankrupting myself buying vinyl.
As to the type of speakers I like; I like plenty of different speakers. But always with beautiful tone. Life sound sources have been my benchmark, because I can listen to someone sing, or play almost anything if it’s a live acoustic source - it’s just naturally beautiful and compelling. Both the JA and the Devores capture to my ears separate, very elusive qualities of real instruments; the purity and timbral spectrum of the JAs, the richness, body and upper frequency texture from the Devores.
I figured by now I may have ordered my speakers (figuring the Josephs). But then then I just got a surprising immediate drain on my finances, AND I have to sell my Thiels. Selling can be such a bummer when buyers get flaky, express intent to buy, disappear etc. (I have numerous out of city offers, but I’m still trying to avoid shipping them if I can).
Anyway, thanks again: your input is always welcome!
|
mapman,
Thanks for the Ohm Walsh comment, and audition offer. I know I've heard Ohm Walsh speakers once before, a looong time ago, so it's just a vague memory.
My MBL 121 omnis do a similar kind of thing - the MBLs are spectacular within their frequency range! (They still have the best tweeter I think I've heard in terms of combining incredible resolution in a natural way).
|
Apropos of my speaker blathering, Stereophile actually has binaural recordings for both the Devore and the Joseph speakers. I’ve always been intrigued at how even video camera microphones actually capture *some* sense of a speaker’s sound (especially the relative sense, if the same microphone is recording various speakers).I remember first noticing this when I made my own video with the first Sony digital mini-cam with a stereo mic, at a CES show many years ago.I wandered in and out of various rooms at the show. When I played that video back on my computer at home (with decent speakers) I was amazed at how the sound actually captured a sense of what I remember hearing. Especially when the camera wandered from a room with some standard box dynamic speakers into the MBL room and on the video the sound changed in character much like I remembered when I filmed it: even on the video you could hear the sound go from a bit artificial, boxy and bulgy in one room, to sounding utterly open in the MBL room as if the camera had just wandered in to record a live performance. Anyway, along this line, Stereophile has been doing interesting stuff with their binaural recordings trying to "take us there" to hear what the reviewers are hearing. Here’s the links to the binaural videos of the Devore 0/93 speakers and the Joseph Audio Pulsars: https://www.stereophile.com/content/art-dudleys-new-listening-room-binaural-videohttps://www.stereophile.com/content/bed-stuy-ci%C2%B7n%C3%A9%C2%B7ma-v%C3%A9%C2%B7ri%C2%B7t%C3%A9Although I’ve listened to them with headphones, even without headphones and just listening through the speakers of my iMac, I can perceive the character of each speaker is making some of it’s way in to the recording: from the Devore, that big, sparkly tone allied to warmth: guitars where you can sense the weight of someone actually picking and playing. From the Joseph speakers, that crystalline, smooth, purity and separation of instrumental and vocal tone. |
trelja,
I already have delayed selling the thiels. I've had intentions to sell them for almost a year, and kept them this long....just in case. But as the 2.7s have done wonderfully over that time, I've weaned myself from the 3.7s and, really, they simply are too big. I only ever meant to keep them if I could come up with a way to wheel them in and out of my room, and that never worked out. And each time I have to deal with them - e.g. moving them around recently to take photos for my ad, I think "Ok, I'm done with speakers this large!"
So although they are probably the best speakers I've had, I have no issue selling them at this point.
|
Thanks keithr,
I can see what you mean.
However, I believe my dealer does not stock the 9s. And I think if I were going Devore I’d prefer the extra richness of the O series.
|
rothwea,
You may well be right.
Looking at the Super 9 specs, they are almost the same size exactly as the Joseph speakers, are spec'd a bit lower in the bass, and use bigger woofers. It's possible the Super 9's would strike just the right balance between what I like about the Joseph and Devore O speakers. Or...they could end up sounding like a neither here nor there compromise.
I liked what I heard with the Gibbon X but found the bass overbearing.
At this point I'd be frankly shy about asking to audition Super 9's given I feel I've taken enough of my dealer's time.
|
No real update as an unexpected financial situation put a kink in my plans to purchase the new speakers immediately. Hopefully I can buy a pair within the next month or two.
I’m still inclined toward the Joseph speakers, but I can drive myself crazy by making seemingly just as good a case in my mind for either the Josephs or Devores! Stupid brain!
BTW, recently I heard some Mcintosh speakers. The dealer for one of the speakers I’ve been auditioning also sells Mcintosh and I immediately recognized them (in this case the XR100 speakers) from the array of tiny midrange drivers all around the tweeter (very Tekton-like design, before Tekton).
I remember hearing a really big flagship pair of Mcintosh speakers at a high end emporium in the late 90’s or early 2000s. I was fascinated to hear a speaker taking such an odd many-little-drivers approach. I still vividly remember how they sounded: Awful. Just awful. Whitish, devoid of any tonal color, detailed but like viewing music through a grey metallic scrim. The epitome of "hi-fi" and uninvolving (for me).
But this was a newer, smaller model. It was set up so I asked if they wouldn’t mind if I played a few songs on them. They happily obliged. Result: They sounded exactly like I remembered from the previous pair. Just awful. In the same way. I could barely wait to just get out of the listening chair and start doing something else interesting.
Who buys those things?
(And why do so many guys who buy Mcintosh seem obsessed with having to show the Mcintosh logo blaring in every possible way in their system - plaques, labels, even bloody screen-savers on their TV!)
|
Wish I could update the thread with impressions of my new speaker.
But still got nuthin'.
As I indicated previous, I had finally decided after my last listening comparison that I'd go for the Joseph speakers. I had saved up partially for them over the last year, then just finished (arduously) selling and shipping my big Thiels. With money now in hand I was ready to pull the trigger on the Josephs and...bam!...had an issue come out of nowhere and took a huge unexpected hit to my finances. Put me back almost at square one, saving again. It's a cursed project.
Meanwhile, the dealer for the Devore speakers is occasionally giving me updates, sweetening the pot with ever better prices on his demo model 0/93s for me. At this point I'd get the Devores for almost 1/2 of what I'd pay for the Joseph speakers!
What an audiophile dilemma. Do you go for the speakers you finally figure you really wanted...though at more financial pain/longer wait? Or go for the better deal on the second place speakers that were also terrific?
|
HEADS UP for Devore Fans:
From the Devore Fidelity Facebook page, it looks like Devore will be showing the new "all out" upgrade of the 0/96 speakers at the upcoming Rocky Mountain Audio Fest.
Looks like a new tweeter, as well as what looks like a super tweeter, have been added, and some other interesting stuff going on at the backside in terms of weird-looking exhaust-pipe style ports. I’d love to hear that speaker! |
I noticed a pair of JM Reynaud Offrande Supreme 2 speakers for sale on Audiogon. And at an excellent price.
I have to admit that created a little tug of "should I?" That was one of the speakers that I still found intriguing after auditioning them and sometimes wondered how they would fair in my listening room. Also, I really don't like the normal light beachwood of the JM Reynaud Offrande speakers and those ones are stained darker, which I prefer.
They are a promising combination of timbral warmth, clarity and liveliness.
But...for various reasons...I must resist. Ultimately, they didn't leave as great an impression on me as the Devore and Joseph speakers. The Reynauds struck me as a bit bright and forward. Also, though the bass was very generous for a stand mounted speaker, I don't think it produced the quality of bass that I like. My Thiels 2.7s for instance, though larger and a three-way, have similar low frequency specs, but sound more authoritative, solid and controlled in the lower bass from what I heard during the Reynaud auditions.
Still...if I had the time and money, it would be tempting to roll the dice on a good price for a second had pair like the ones on Audiogon.
I do wonder about the re-sale issues. On one hand, a brand like JM Reynaud is fairly under the radar so doesn't have broad appeal for re-sale. On the other hand, those fans of that brand are very dedicated and enthusiastic, so perhaps they would sell reasonably quickly. It will be interesting to watch this sale and how it goes.
|
BTW, Really cool binaural video report of the new Devore flagship prototype "O" speakers - a double system, two speakers per side with one doing the lower bass (presumably). I found the sound through the binaural recording on my headphones sounded really fantastic (relative to plenty of other binaural speaker recordings I've heard). A bit of bass bloom, but aside from that amazing. Link here: https://darko.audio/2018/10/earspace-w-devore-orangutan-reference-four-piece-system/ |
I'd guess the Reynauds can't be too bright, or owners may have complained (though I've heard another report or two from people who thought they were a bit too bright).
I used to heard all the JM Reynaud speakers at a local store including the floor standers. Always liked, never loved. But that was quite a few years back now.
I did spend quite a bit of time with the Offrande's, two separate auditions, going through all my music. I think they are going to be shown at the upcoming Toronto show so maybe I'll hear them again there.
|
The D7s were burned in. I heard the A7s and they had a similar off-putting top end.
I never auditioned the D9s, only heard them very briefly at a show. They simply made a quick impression on me of a vivid, realistic sound playing some Jazz/R&B. So I really wasn't in a position to take stock of how they sounded with familiar music.
|
Given there was a discussion earlier in this thread about one of my reference discs, Everything But The Girl’s Amplified Heart from ’94, I’m thrilled to find out, and report, that the album is FINALLY coming to vinyl! This album is such a timeless melding of acoustic instruments and folk sensibility tastefully melded with subtle electronica influences, that it’s probably been my number one "I Want This On Vinyl!" album. And even better, the new vinyl is an all out affair, 1/2 speed mastered at Abbey Road! https://unmaderoad.com/products/everything-but-the-girl-amplified-heart-vinyl-lpSo for anyone who may have been turned on to this album in this thread, and who also spins vinyl, this may be of interest. I’ve pre-ordered! |
Coupla things....
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I was about to buy the Joseph Audio Perspectives when some financial issues struck hard, sinking those plans. So...back to saving up money again...and the newly updated Perspective 2 Graphene versions look just the ticket (eventually).
Meanwhile I've been cycling through some of the speakers I own. As I do occasionally I took my little Spendor S 3/5 monitors, which are usually doing duty for our family room TV, and hooked them up to my main two channel rig.
Every time I do this, it's an occasion to shake my head in amazement.
First, as I mentioned earlier I had the Harbeth SuperHL5Plus for a little while. Loved them, but like my Thiels better and sold the Harbeths. The main thing I occasionally miss about the Harbeths were their way with vocals - so rich, smooth, rounded and human-sounding.
Well I'll be a catfish's uncle if these little Spendors don't do essentially the same thing for vocals. Just incredibly human, rich, smooth and natural, an uncanny sense of a person singing vs the sibilant-spitting electronic "voices" that come out of so many speakers.
And what a crazy disappearing and soundstaging act. They can sound just huge. And the imaging is palpable, thick, air-moving, not "see-through" in the super-clinical way many other speakers produce detailed imaging.
They are too small to kick ass dynamically, and though they have a surprisingly big sound, I do notice the bass limitations on some tracks.
But...the TONE from these speakers! It is so gorgeous. Sax, drums, strings, you name it, all have a convincingly organic warm tone. Just a tad into the "smoother than life" but still good transient sparkle and life.There is something about the illuminated "amber tone" that seems to make all the notes in a guitar chord, or the various notes held by a string section, or vocal harmonies, come to the forefront so the harmony of the chord sounds particularly musical and melodic. It's hard to describe, but it's like I "get" the melody, the notes and chord changes that are being played on these speakers more effortlessly than through many other speakers.
And I've been building a jones for speakers that manage to "hold it all together"musically. Lots of high end speakers can present a sort of ghostly see-through quality, and can separate instruments so much that it's like one is hyper-aware of the different things going on, and it "pulls apart" the music rather than melds the playing into the whole it's supposed to be. It can even happen with the way a drum set is presented. On some systems I can hear every bit of the drum kit separately and clearly. But it's pulled apart. But on others, somehow some speakers put me in tune with what the drummer is actually doing.I don't just hear separate pieces of a drum kit being hit, but rather " a drummer playing a set of drums, and the beats he is laying down." More performative, than sonically descriptive. (The Devore speakers were very good at this).
The Spendors have this way of both sounding ridiculously spacious and doing the imaging stuff, yet somehow it's all tied together. When another instrument suddenly shows up by one speaker, it's musically informative, and makes sense, rather than merely a magician trick of imaging.In other words, they do audiophile-like stuff, while managing to constantly have the music making sense: they seem to be giving the musical message.
Now, like any speaker when I listen long enough I'll pine for what other speakers can do. But, wow, am I ever enjoying these for now. They are, amazingly enough for their teeny size, fantastic with classical music. The gorgeous sheen of strings, the bronze glow of the horns, the shiny silvery triangles, the particular clarinetness of a clarinet...these things just love making classical music and soundtracks sound as gorgeous as possible.
There's something to be said about how some old-school speakers really got some things right.
Over 'n out for now...
|
Keith,
Yeah I'd have loved that remix to be included. Of course the ad spins it as "we've presented the album as it appeared authentically in the original CD." Which really means "we know people would have wanted us to include the famous remix, but fitting that on the same vinyl album would be a b*tch.*
I've only heard the new Spendors briefly at an audio show and they really impressed me as sounding super clear, neutral, musical and dynamic. One of the best sounds I heard at that show. (I forget if it was TAVES or the Montreal show a couple years ago).
|
Its rare to have analog mastered 90s albums, so gotta take what you can get.
Yeah, that's for sure! And it's not just a quickie "throw it out on vinyl" release, but a best possible scenario mastering at Abbey Road.I can't wait! |
Keithr,
I presume you are talking about the vinyl of EBTG's Amplified Heart?You got your copy? Mine's been shipped and I can't wait.
BTW, as per your previous question: I believe I'll be auditioning the Spendor A7 soon. As you can see I am smitten with the Spendor sound at the moment. I've actually been investigating where I could hear Spendor 1/2s, which sound like they'd preserve the classic sound I seem to like, but update it somewhat. Some say the floor standing "D" series speakers retain Spendor midrange magic, but I'll have to hear for myself if they end up departing too much from what I seem to like.
|
UPDATE:
Listened to the Devore O/93 and O/96 speakers again.
I’m STILL saving up for a speaker purchase (as mentioned earlier in the thread I was ready to purchase the Joseph Perspectives when my finances took an unexpected hit, which I’m still digging out from).
Not actively auditioning speakers but if the opportunity arises I will take it.
To that end I’ve been loving my little Spendor S3/5s which has put the bigger classic Spendor models on my radar - especially the 1/2.Very hard to audition though.
It turned out on a recent trip that a local dealer had the Spendor 1/2s for sale, second hand, so I wanted to check them out. As it happened, they also had the Devore speakers. I ended up listening to the Devores, not the Spendors, as they were essentially "set up ready to listen."
It was a big listening space, well suited to the Devore speakers (which like space around them). First off I zipped through a bunch of stuff I know and love on Tidal, through the 0/93s (both speakers driven by a Leben tube amp). I’m not going to re-describe their sound as I have elsewhere, except to modify to this extent: They did all that great Devore stuff with fullness and rich bottom end, and nice clarity. Made tons of the zany old funky Library music tracks I like (e.g. stuff by Alan Hawkshaw, Brian Bennett) really groove! But after a while, to pick some nits, two things started to dawn on me: 1. The tone, while very, very nice and to my ears preferable to much of the competition, was a bit shelved off in terms of high frequency extension. They didn’t sound "dead" at all, actually quite open and often very clear! But things like drum cymbals, horn sections etc just seemed to lack that last bit of airy "shine," and I began to feel a bit of a limit in the tonal character of the speaker.
Secondly, the imaging/soundstaging, while a really fun wall-of-sound, was a bit too obviously foreshortened. All my speakers at home have always imaged and soundstaged well, but I think I’m particularly smitten at the moment by the "disappearing" and soundstaging of the Spendors.They somehow do it in a way that feels musically meaningful, and I did think listening to the o/93s that I’d start to miss that aspect of the listening experience a bit too much.
Then the 0/93s were replaced with the bigger O/96s, same amp, same space. Oh mamma! Ok, NOW we are talking! This is the first time I was able to compare them back to back in the same conditions and it was really telling. The O/96s just sounded to me like the better overall speaker. It sounded more neutral, more extended in the high end, even bigger, and interestingly it images/soundstaged significantly better than the O/93s. Suddenly the same tracks became richly 3-D, with more depth and space around the sonic images, and the speakers disappeared more. in the bass, I felt the O/96s were, on most tracks just as controlled or maybe better than the O/93s. But those occasionally moments of bass overload were MORE obvious on the O/96s because of their bass extension.
Tonally, moving from the O/93s to O/96s was - using the images they conjured in my mind’s eye - moving from the 93’s slightly darker grayish/brownish tone, a bit more homogenized - to the 96’s more open, extended lighter "amber-wood" tone almost exactly like that of my little, magical Spendor speakers! Drum cymbals took on a brassier more open, sparkling tone, as did horn sections. Bongos, drums etc all sounded a bit more present, airy and real. And of course the sound was smooth and rich. Like the Spendors on steroids, and with greater resolution and impact.
As usual, I was constantly aware of how a drummer was playing in each track. There were dynamic ebb-and-flows that often made tracks I knew sound fresh again.
Also...a real surprise (as it was the first time I heard them) was the sense of fine resolution! There seems to be a division - some people hear the Devore O series as being somewhat smoothed over "not for you resolution freaks, more music lover speaker" as the cliche goes. Others find they hear new things on the Devores. Put me in the second camp!I’ve heard these tracks on everything from my own speakers, to the latest Magico, Focal, Raidho, Joseph Audio, Paradigm Persona...you name it. The Devores still blew me away with what I kept hearing - little things, bells or cymbal add-ins etc, I truly have never noticed over all these years. And even Herbie Hancock’s piano in "Lullaby" seemed to sound so substantial...it had a sounding board...yet the top end trail of the keys seemed to just float and go on and on, with such subtle resolution.
Once I noted the issues with the O/93 and then heard the O/96, I finally removed the O/93s from my list. They remain among my very favourite speakers, but I think the Joseph Perspectives edge them out with a big punchy sound of their own, but with a finer sense of timbral beauty and variety, and state-of-the-art imagining/soundstaging.
So are the Devore O/96s for me?
Yes and no.
Yes:
They do almost everything I seem to enjoy: They give back the heft and richness in voices and instruments that go missing in most speakers. They give a life-sized sense of imaging. They "disappear" and image quite well. They have that magic "woody organic" tone that flatters so many acoustic instruments, and that upper "golden tone" and airiness that I love that makes bells, cymbal etc shimmer beautifully.They have a sense of palpable texture which allows bows on strings, hands on percussion, etc to cut through the air like the real thing rather than having that slightly glazed, canned quality of most sound reproduction. And they groove like heck in showing how musicians do their work. All this, and with an ear-friendly tone that doesn’t bite.
No:
Sonically, they are generally wonderful. But to pick nits, they certainly do have a specific bass quality engineered in to them - that big, round, warm bass (though still able to be rythmically quick). The O/96s did remind me more often than certain other speakers, and my home speakers, that I was "listening to a speaker." (Though held against this is their ability to sound more "live" and less speaker-like with lots of material). And I did feel that the rich foundation of the speaker may be a tad over-bearing over the long haul. I don’t really know - maybe I’d dial them in so it wasn’t the case. But they do seem to present a challenge to controlling the bottom end.
The two most important things that make me have to put the O/96s "on the shelf" at this point is: The Devores REALLY DO need at least 8 feet listening distance in order to sound the way I’ve described them - the way I like them to sound. I once again measured with a tape measure my head distance from the speakers, testing between 8 1/2 feet down to about 7 feet, and as soon as my head got closer than 8 feet, the sound started to lose top end air, sparkle, snap, image focus etc, and become more rolled off and sonically "glazed over" sounding. Pull my head back and all the qualities I’ve described snapped back in to focus. This has been the same every single time I’ve done this experiment, in every Devore set up I heard.
Problem for me is I’m limited by the ergonomics of my room at the moment. Speakers have to be able to be placed closer - 7 1/2 feet at the furthers, but more like 7 feet from my listening position. I can’t figure out how I’d get the Devores to work at this point.
So...that keeps the Joseph Perspectives in first place.
EXCEPT...the new update to the "Perspective 2 Graphene" version has raised the price in Canada to beyond my reach (now $20,000!). The horror! That means my only hope will be buying a used pair of the originals and at some point paying for the upgrade to the "2" version if I want (which I’m sure I do). It’s killing me because right now people are selling their Perspectives, including my own JA dealer selling his older floor models of the Perspectives, due to the newer models coming out.Normally I could just grab them but...don’t have the funds yet! Dang!
So...that’s it for now. Still have my sights set on the JA Perspectives and if I can ever audition the Spendor 1/2s (or even 2/3s) I’ll be doing that along the way. Maybe I’ll even check out the Spendor D7/D9s.
Oh, forgot to mention: The other speakers now on my radar are the Devore Super Nines! About the same size as the Josephs, similar frequency response, and I’m wondering if they maintain some of that Devore tone. No one has them to audition, though.
|
I asked my local dealer about the Super Nines. He said he's sold a couple to customers who are very happy with them, but he doesn't have them for audition. That's been the same of other Devore dealers I've encountered.
I think I have a gist of how the Nines would sound, having heard the big Gibbon X. Definitely more "modern/neutral" but with a nice Devore tone.Though I found them a bit uneven with different material.
I was blasting music on my big Thiel 2.7s last night and boy those are a terrific speaker. Great tone, so even, controlled, yet lush (with my CJ amps). What I miss is a bit more nuance in the upper frequencies and some more "sparkle" to the sound. I listened to a new LP that combined synths and acoustic guitar, bells etc on both the Thiel and the Spendor S3/5s. It was terrific on the Thiels, but the Spendors were tonally a bit more seductive and beautiful in the upper frequencies, the way the air was "lit up" and the acoustic guitar, and high pitched twinkles from synths and bells seemed to pop out in a beautiful manner.
The Joseph Speakers also have this quality in the high frequencies. Though they are not as explicitly "light toned" overall as the Spendors.
Agreed about the paucity of dealers who can audition the Classic Spendor speakers. Unfortunately. I have a feeling I'd really like them.I still should be able to audition the D7s, if not the D9s, at some point.
|
Yeah, I know. It's killin' me. By the time I can buy I bet the second hand perspective market will be dried up as everyone who wanted to sell or upgrade will have done so during this "new model turnover"
|
fsonicsmith
I may have left the wrong impression. I don’t find the 93’s "dark" per se. I don’t like speakers that sound too dark so I would have written them off early if they sounded that way. They could sound quite vivid, and sounded very clear, and vivid with impressive sparkle with some tracks.
But they do have a different tone from what I heard on the 96s (both at this location, and at the other location I auditioned them numerous times). I do hear the lighter overall timbre with the 96s that appeals to me.
I’ve just preferred the tone of the 96 each time I’ve heard it.
My room is not very big so the 96s could be a challenge sonically. Except for the fact it’s well designed, well treated and has a large opening to a hallway, so I’ve yet to have bass problems with big speakers. But if ANY speaker is going to challenge the room, the particularly rich bass quality of the 96s would do it.
I think there’s a fairly good chance I’d go for the 96s if my room were better suited, both in terms of allowing me the right listening distance and if it didn’t do double duty as a home theater. The 96s are wide and tall enough to start interfering with the view of the screen and possibly block the L/R theater speakers in my room.
For size, shape, ergonomics the Joseph would be ideal. Both Joseph and Devore have an "it" factor for me - each one is hard to forget once I experienced them.
BTW: How far do you sit from the 93s?
As I've said, I find they need 8 feet at least to keep that aliveness and snap and coherency. I originally thought that maybe this was due to the way the wave-guide limited horizontal dispersion of the tweeter more than other designs (and as noted by Stereophile), hence moving closer to the speakers would be moving slightly less on-axis, which could be why they loose the high frequency texture. But I did remember one time to also aim the speakers more toward me to compensate as I moved closer during one audition, and the same "smoothing over" of the highs seemed to occur. Leading me to infer it's something to do with the crossover or general design the requires a bit of distance to come together. (But...wha-do-I-know?)
|
Goodness, that's a strong opinion!
I've seen other opinions that go the other way, quite happy with the D-series top end. I'll have to hear them myself.
|
Alex,
Funny enough I think it may have been that Montreal show where I heard the D9 and was quite impressed. It seemed to be portraying a more realistic version of sax/drums etc than most of the systems at the show.
I didn't stay long just due to all the exhibits to see.
|
Hi Alex,
I went to a couple of Montreal shows in a row (or maybe 3, though not this year). I'm pretty sure I was at the 2017 show and remember hearing those speakers you liked as well.
I remember it was one of the Montreal shows where I first heard Joseph Pearl speakers playing some music, an aCapella group that blew my mind. Which led me to search out the Pulsars and then land on the Perspectives as perhaps my most wanted speaker at this point.
|
Not sure about the Graham Audio speakers. I'm aware of them, but have never seen them locally. Thanks for the input yeti42!
|
Interesting to hear twoleftears. Thanks for that feedback.
|
TIME TO ADD ANOTHER SPEAKER AUDITION:
SPENDOR D7.
Well, as detailed in earlier posts, last year I’d settled on the Joseph Perspectives and was about to purchase when life took a rough turn making it impossible.
I’ve been crawling out of that hole all year and noticing that Joseph dealers are now selling off their demo-model Perspectives (due to the introduction of the Perspective 2 Graphene version), if I could swing it I was thinking of grabbing a pair.
BUT....in the meantime as I mentioned earlier I’d been LOVING the sound of my tiny little Spendor S3//5s. They have a combination of a rich organic tone for vocals, a sparkly high end, an amazingly balanced presentation with rhythmic drive, total disappearing/soundstaging act, and a warm amber tonal quality that just sounds so "right" to my ear.
So I wondered if I should look at upgrading along the Spendor line.Read about the newer Spendor Classic series and became interested in the Spendor Classic 1/2s and 2/3s. I think I’m attracted to that type of old-school richness (though the classic line has been updated in design). The problem is no dealer stocks the Classic line. They are special order.
Well, that leaves the fact the newer more modern Spendor floor-standers like the D7 and D9 have been well reviewed, and have good owner reports (for the most part). I figured I’d see what was around and a local dealer had the D7s on display, so I brought along my music to check them out.
I knew that the D series was a more updated, more modern take on the Spendor sound, and I’d briefly heard either the D9 or D7 at a show. But they are also supposed to carry over some degree of the classic Spendor sound. "Great midrange" and all that. (They were hooked up to solid state amps...I never remember SS amp brands! And I was playing CDs).
Ok, the result?
Nope.
Not for me.
I can say that they were certainly updated in the upper frequencies in terms of a more immediate sense of clarity. Hard transients sounded very clear. And the midrange on down sounded a tiny bit like the classic spendors tonally. But just a tiny bit.
Unlike my S3/5s, to my ear the D7s were tonally a bit on the darker side.I don’t mean "not bright" because to my mind a darker speaker sound doesn’t entail necessarily being shelved down in the higher frequencies. It’s just that some speakers evoke in my mind’s eye darker-coloured tonalities, so classical guitars, woodwinds, acoustic guitars, strings etc, on the D7 didn’t have that warm, lit up amber glow quality I like in the 3/5s, but more of a...yes...I’m going to say it!...darker "chocolaty" midrange. BUT....with a modern high frequency sheen on top.
And it turned out the main turn off over time I had with the D7 were the upper frequencies. It was Spendor sound turned "Hi-Fi" in the derogatory sense that phrase is often used. I found the upper frequencies to have a somewhat steely sheen, a hardened quality, and a hint of grit. So every time I started to turn the speakers up I just wanted to turn them down again. This made almost all vocals sound harder-edged and more mechanical/reproduced, than I get on my speakers at home, or through other speakers I’ve liked. (For instance, the Joseph speakers have an amazing upper frequency clarity, but it’s utterly smooth and more natural sounding).Once I latched on to the voice of the D7s, they felt...to my surprise...somewhat homogenized. My music didn’t have the range of tonal colour, texture, warmth I hear on my favorite speakers.
And they were just ok in terms of "boogie factor." They just seemed competent, but unremarkable all around.
All that sound pretty damning, but though I’m trying to describe the sound it really includes my subjective reaction. This may seem odd to say after the above, but I think they are a generally good sounding speaker and I can understand other people liking them. They do have *some* richness in the midrange that gave some voices substance, they sound evenly balanced, and they present a clear incisive sound.I know some people here have D series Spendors and I have no doubt they’ve managed to get fantastic sound at home with them.
They just didn’t have an "it" factor FOR ME that made me want to keep listening very long, and as I said I found the high frequencies had something of a too-hard fatiguing quality.
Perhaps this could be tamed in my own room, powered by my CJ tube amps. But in any case, I need to hear something truly promising in a speaker to move beyond an audition. Almost every speaker that sounded good to me upon giving them a good listen, maintained that character in other rooms. And I’ve yet to hear a speaker that left me cold suddenly change character enough to grab me later on in other conditions.
This audition re-enforced how I absolutely must hear a speaker before buying. You know how you can get kind of hyped when you start following the trail of a speaker you might be interested in? Reading positive reports and descriptions? For me I’m so sensitive to speaker tone that if a speaker doesn’t have it, I’ll know almost immediately.
I was briefly considering ordering a pair of the Spendor classics, a bit on faith that they maintained a similar enough tonal quality to my 3/5s, but this reminded me why that’s not a good idea. Even a subtle shift in tonal color can leave me cold listening to a speaker, and there’s no way to predict a newer iteration would have a tone that I like.
So...back on the trail and I believe I’m currently on track to grab a pair of Perspectives...if I figure finances correctly. I’m selling one of my speakers, the MBL 121 monitors, to help out.
(If I had the right room for them, the Devore 0/96 could possibly have displaced the Josephs, but at the moment the Josephs make the most sense).
Over ’n out.
|
The Yamaha NS5000 have been used in some fairly spectacular sounding demos at shows I've attended. I just briefly heard them at a shop again, recently (they were on, I didn't "audition them.")
My immediate sense was a very impressive sense of clarity and dynamics, though not sure I could live with their presentation for too long.
But...that's without a true audition of those speakers.
|
One person's "natural" can be another person's "not natural." But the Yamahas did sound really great at shows and I would really enjoy listening to them further to check them out. It's just not worth to me because they are beyond my budget.
|
Allan,
I'm not in a position to give you any useful info on the PMC speakers, given the circumstances in which I heard them.
I've heard the big MB2-A PMC speakers sounding big, powerful, spectacular at audio shows. But usually played so loud it was hard to get comfortable with them.
Still, it led me to seeking out PMC speakers which I found at a local AV shop. I believe it was actually the Fact 8 that I auditioned.
The problem was the auditioning scenario was truly ludicrous. So many speakers in the shop that the PMCs had to be listened to only a few feet apart. All I could do was try to get a general impression of the tone/frequency balance and, at least in that case, they didn't do much for me. No "it" factor like I experience from the other speakers I've raved about.
In fact, I'd say the Spendor speakers I just auditioned sounded much like I remember the PMCs. Competent, clear, just...not very organic and believable to my ears.
But...again...that really is no help to you.
|
steve,
Yeah, I was coming from the Thiel 3.7s. Auditioning many of the latest designs only re-enforced what an accomplishment the Thiels were. Other speakers would do one or another thing really well, but fall down somewhere. I'd come home to the Thiels and they just seemingly did "everything" without breaking a sweat: (for their size) almost state of the art detail and transparency, state of the art imaging precision and density and soundstaging, completely boxless sounding and controlled from head to toe, and not clinical but rich and warm (especially driven by my CJ tube amps). I think they will remain the best speakers I'll ever have owned. I think they can be a true end-game speaker for those lucky to have them, as they were the culmination of a brilliant engineer's long experience in pushing the envelope. Most speakers IMO are still lagging behind in various ways.
But...they were just too big visually/ergonomically for my room.
|
Allan,
I'm pretty positive they will be the latest version.
|
@allangaard
Well, as luck would have it: My buddy will be receiving the PMC Fact 8 floorstanding speakers, so I'll be able to have a good listen in excellent conditions! I'll report on that at some point.
|
Well....
I’m now the owner of a beautiful pair of Joseph Audio Perspectives (original).
Whew! That was a journey!
To recap: I’d previously planned on buying a pair new, a year ago, but lost the finances and also my hearing issue (sensitivity, not hard of hearing...I hear too well!) became exacerbated. So buying the Perspectives was put on the shelf until both financial and health situation improved.The ears have improved a lot (though not all the way there, still sensitive to some sounds) and finances have creaked along to the point where I could contemplate buying used.
I used the last year to occasionally listen to other speakers, and the Devore speakers again, as detailed above. I really fell for the Devore O/96 speakers last time I heard them and if I had the right room situation I may have chosen them over the Josephs. But the combo of sound and form factor of the Josephs ended up making the most sense.
The one single "what if?" speaker that kept sticking in my mind has been the Devore Fidelity Super Nines. They are essentially the same size as the Joseph speakers and they could also have been "The One," insofar as they may have combined the form factor I need with that Devore tone and aliveness I enjoyed. But not having heard them, and no dealers who have them to audition, meant that would be an expensive roll-of-the-dice I couldn’t convince myself to take. I’d heard the Devore Gibbon X with some demo tracks and it initially sounded gorgeous, though less so with a few of my demo tracks. But I still think the Nines hold out a lot of promise that I’d like them, so they can remain hovering in the background down the line.
The Josephs are also a bit of a roll-of-the-dice, being the most expensive audio purchase by far I’ve ever made (even at the cost of a demo model....we Canucks pay through the nose for stuff!). And there may be some issues to work around with those speakers too. But I’ve been wanting to try them for so long, I had to pull the trigger.
I examined the demo models and put a down payment on them, will pick them up later this week or next week. Boy, I have to say that the looks and finish of the Joseph speakers are a class above! Even in an AV store, surrounded with many expensive speakers, the looks, build and finish quality of the Joseph speakers looked classier than anything else there.
If I end up liking what I hear at home, I’m sure I’ll get them upgraded to the new Graphene version.
FWIW: I’ll still use this thread to add any additional speaker "reports" as I encounter other speakers.
|
Thanks Al.
I prefer almost all speakers without toe in, and I found that with the Perspectives as well.
A big plus is their coherence and even dispersion which helps with shorter listening distances, so they sound coherent from close up and maintain a wide sweet spot.
Also, I'm used to speakers that soundstage and disappear really well, so the Devore 0/93 would have been a bit of a step back in that regard. As you know the Joseph speakers disappear with the best of them.
I have subwoofers I can integrate if I find it necessary as well. (I'd do that less for the desire for low bass, and more to fix a bass problem if one arises).
|
