Hope you are well. The O/Twenty’s are $30,000/pair, twenty pair, deliveries were quoted for Q2 2022. The O/Bronze (or whatever the standard production model will be called) is more likely end of 2022 based on the very unreliable rumor mill LOL.
Contemplating DEVORE SPEAKERS (and others)....LONG audition report of many speakers
Told you it was long!
I figure what the heck, some people may find all of it interesting, maybe only some, maybe none. No one forced to read it. So onward....
Folks,
I've had Thiel 3.7s for several years and love them dearly. As I've mentioned in other threads, I have to downsize simply due to some ergonomic and aesthetic issues in my room - the speakers have to go partially by the entrance and so any big, deep speakers tend to get in the way.
Over the last two years or so I did a whole bunch of auditioning of many speakers over a year ago to find a replacement - Audio Note, Audio Physic, Focal, Raidho monitors, JM Reynaud, Paradigm Persona, various Revel models, Monitor Audio, Proac, Kudos, Harbeth, Joseph Audio...
I was going to give a report on all of them individually, at one point, but it's been a while so I'll just throw out some thumbnail impressions. They aren't meant to be particularly descriptive of the sound so much as brief reasons as to why I enjoyed or moved on from those speakers. I always sought the best set up achievable for an audition, but of course that's still not like being able to tune a speaker in one's own room. So caveats given, on with some brief impressions:
Audio Note:
(I forget which exact model but it was in the "quite expensive but not impossible" zone for me)
Excellent clarity. Good impact. Nice woody tonality (as in does wood instruments like cello, stand up bass etc with a convincing tone). My main issue is that I could really hear the corner loading aspect of the sound, especially in the lower mids down. Not that the bass was incontinent per se, more that I was just aware of the way the illusion of the bigger bass and sound was being created, in terms of using wall re-enforcement.
Also, I'm a real stickler about instrumental tone and timbre. I've always found that the more room you introduce into the sound, especially in the upper frequencies, the more it will tend to cast a scrim of room sound over the timbre of voices and instruments, homogenizing the most delicate aspects of the timbre. As the Audio Notes pretty much require or are meant to use the room, this was an aspect it would seem hard to get around. (That's one reason I tend to like speakers that will work closer to my listening position).
Audio Physic:
I'm very familiar with the AP sound - have had the Virgos, Scorpios and Libra in my home and heard much of the line through the years. The Avanti was terrific, tonally neutral sounding, clear lively treble without ear piercing. And of course their magical disappearing act, which I love. But didn't have enough of the richness I'd become used to with the bigger Thiels. I suspect the larger Codex woud be killer, but they get in to the too deep/large category.
Focal
I've always found Focal to have a "look at me" sound to their tweeter. Nonetheless I often admired the rich tonality of their large speakers at audio shows. Unfortunately I never found this to transfer to their smaller stand mounted speakers. They struck me as more clinical and left me cold. Recent Audition of the Kanta 2 still had the "check out our TWEETER!" Focal sound, but was smooth and vivid enough. Unfortunately to my ears sounded too "hi-fi" with disjointed bass. My Thiels at home sounded far more organic and believable.
Raidho
Listened to the tiny X1s which were remarkable performers for their size. Super clear, clean, open, killer soundstaging, good snap on drums - represented Joe Morello's solos on Brubeck at Carnegie Hall far more convincingly than any tiny speaker has a right to. Ultimately, too small.
Dealer had a killer deal on the larger C 1.2 stand mounted speakers and I had hope there. I have never, ever liked a ribbon tweeter with cones because every time I hear the discontinuity. I'd say the Raidhos are the first time I did not hear that discontinuity. So it was all that air and delicacy without the usual drawback. However, I'm thinking part of the magic for this has to do with their house curve, which isn't flat but has a "concert hall" dip in the upper mids (I think). Ultimately I tended to hear this as a coloration, a recessing of a portion of the sound. I'm used to the Thiels which at my place are phenomenally linear sounding top to bottom. So there would be percussion instruments, piano parts, and other instruments that would be more distant and subdued on the Raidhos, losing some of the realistic liveliness. I didn't really hear more detail than I was used to from my Thiels, found the sound a bit "grayed" tonally, though rich in the mids and upper bass. These things KICK in terms of upper bass presence and sound much bigger than they are. But I also found that a slightly over-bearing.
In fact, that's a problem I often have with monitor speakers. So many of them are engineered to sound bigger than they are so you don't feel like you are missing base, but the goosing of the bass to achieve this can be to my ears a bit obnoxious vs the more linear bass of a good floor standing speaker (though down lower, they can have their room problems...my Thiels do not).
JM Reynaud Offrande Supreme v2
I was very serious about these speakers. I'd been around for the initial JMR hype years ago, and heard most of their models at a local store. Always had nice tone, both incisive and warm, but a bit too far into the ever-present-coloration territory to my ears. Still, I believe the Supremes had been updated since then and I had two separate auditions at a Dealer when I was visiting Montreal.
They certainly had the JMR virtues. Super clear, almost hot high end, lively presence all around, yet somehow allied to a gorgeous warm tone. This brings in one of the things I like in a speaker - a warm tone not necessariily in the sense of a ripe lower midrange, but rather timbrally - warm in the sense that when an acoustic guitar track is played through the speaker, the signature is that of the warmth of wood, instead of the cold, electronic coloration of most systems. The JMR does this with acoustic instruments and voices. Everything with an amber or blond-wood "glow." And they definitley have a dynamic/transient/open sound that gives a feeling of musicians being right there, playing right now vibe.
Ultimately I found they were a bit biting to my ear in the upper frequencies. While the forwardness was a boon to putting musicians right in front of me, it also tended to fore-shorten depth. An always "they are here" vs "I'm transported to there" vibe. Also, the bass which was really big and deep - they are huge stand mount speakers! - was a bit on the pudgy side. But I get why people love them. If I had the opportunity I'd have liked to try them at home. (Though...maybe not. I actually don't like how they look, and REALLY don't like the JMR wood finishes).
Paradigm Persona
(I believe it was the 3F). Yup, these babies are clear, clear, clear and grain free. They are balanced top to bottom and were, like the Revel, the closest to my Thiel 3.7 speakers in terms of sounding balanced from top to bottom. Drum snares, cymbals, rim hits, percussion, guitar strings etc all had a fairly riveting precision. They had an open-window into the recording studio feel on almost every track. Plus, for their size they sounded BIG, including the image sizes, depth, width of the soundstage. A tremendous speaker for the money. Ultimately I couldn't get on with their looks, at least for my room. But most important, I did find them somewhat fatiguing to listen to after a while, and a bit less organic than my Thiels. (Though I'd bet that could change for the better if set up at my home on my gear).
Revel
I'd repeat most of what I just wrote about the Paradigms. They sounded similar, though the Paradigms seemed to have a next-level sense of purity and transparency vs the Revel. And the Revels tended to sound just a bit more linear and controlled top to bottom. The Revels just sounded like really competent speakers, but didn't grab me.
Again, something about the timbre/tone I get with the Thiels (and some other speakers) have an "it" factor I don't get with the Revels.
Monitor Audio (Gold, I believe - a smaller floor stander)
I've always liked the Monitor Audio sound. My father-in-law uses a HUGE pair of Monitor Audio monitors from the 80's that still strike me as one of the best marriages of believable tone with size and richness I've heard.
I own Monitor Audio bronze monitors for various uses, including home theater surrounds. Though I found once they moved to the Platinum line, with ribbons, the tone became a bit too bleached for my comfort.
The smaller Gold line still was able to do the "golden, bronze" tones in the upper frequencies...just turning toward silver a bit. They were astonishingly clean and clear, with a rainbow of timbral colors coming through. My main gripe is that I realized nothing actually sounded "real" - in the sense of believably organic. Everything sounded a bit hard around the edge - sibilance in vocals for instance being laid bare as processed in a bit too ruthless manner.
Proac - D20R (I believe...)
Love the look of these especially the wood finish in ebony on the model I auditioned. Would really have been a perfect size replacement for the Thiels, and went down about as low. Unfortunately I couldn't get around the extremely obvious character of the ribbon tweeter vs the mids/bass. I was always aware of it, and generally found the sound too cool in the upper frequencies to really get into. Bass was also not particularly impressive in terms of tone and control. One of the more disappointing speaker auditions.
Kudos
You really don't hear much about Kudos around here. Lack of dealers and North American presence I guess (as it seems to me a majority of people posting here are from North America...if I am indeed right about that).
Anyway, at a TAVES shows a few years ago I was frankly astonished by the sound coming from a pair of Kudos Super 20 floor standing speakers. It had a brilliant, reach out and grab me "alive" tone that made my brain think "real performance" more than most of what I'd heard that day. A bit forward...but wow what an effect. So they went on to my radar.
Turns out a local dealer carried Kudos, and there I heard some very small floor standing Kudos X3 speakers.
Well, there it was! That tone! Like the bigger model I'd heard at the show, this one had a dialed up upper frequency range that gave liveliness and detail. But it was, somewhat like the JMR speakers, allied to a generally warm tone, with a spectrum of timbral color to trumpet, wood blocks, acoustic guitar etc. If found the sound quite compelling, and so wondered about Kudos higher end models. As it turned out, Kudos in the last year has come out with the Titan range, a trickle down from their flagship. I really liked the design of the Titan 606 speakers, they were a great replacement size for the Thiels from the specs. But...my local dealer didn't want to bring them in so I would never hear them (I certainly did not want him to order them just for my sake, given I couldn't know before hearing them if I'd want to buy them).
But then during a recent trip to Europe I ended up in London for a couple days, so I found a Kudos dealer there.
And not only did he have the 606s for me to hear, but also the literally just introduced stand mounted Titan 505 that had many people raving at a recent British audio show. Very cool. Both speakers, as with most Kudos speakers, employ isobaric loading for the bass.
Both the 505 and 606 displayed the Kudos house sound which was that lively top end. Great for adding bit to guitar picking, hearing the bow on strings, transient aliveness etc. Even if not strictly neutral, it's fun (so long as timbres to my ears are otherwise organic). I found the 505 to actually sound a bit less balanced than the floor standing speaker. I suppose this is my allergy to the "tiny speaker trying to sound like a big speaker" tuning, but the bass seemed somewhat over-warm, and the speakers themselves a tad clinical from the mids up. Still, they were spacious, enthusiastic sounding, with great separation of instruments and voices. And certain tracks like Lightfoot's If You Could Read My Mind were actually magical on the 505. A similar warm timbre to the JMR speakers, and the added top end sparkle livened up the guitars and strings which can sound a bit tepid on many other speakers.
The larger 606 speakers sounded more linear, richer, a bit darker, and produced a satisfyingly large sound for their size. Similar to the Revel or Paradigm speakers. The upper frequency balance was a double edged sword: it could make drum high hats, snares, cymbals, guitars stand out in particularly, and satisfyingly, vivid relief. But could also highlight the studio/microphone/effects on voices making vocals sound a bit more "hi-fi" than most. But naturally recorded vocals were by the same token vivid and clear. Bass had an interesting character, sort of tight, punchy and big...a sense of the bass "spreading" in the room. My impression veered between "impressive" on the bass and "hmm...not sure I'm sold on this isobaric bass." I'll say that Herbie Hancock's Chameleon, one of my test songs on most speakers, was produced in a particularly compelling, vivid manner. The drums were just crystal clear and had that "live drum playing" feeling. It was one of those "wow" moments that kind of haunt you when you hear a certain track sound different and more realistic than normal.
That said, some other tracks veered into the intolerable territory (e.g. horns too piercing on Earth Wind and F ire live). It's the kind of audition that was very promising in some areas, leaving me thinking "these COULD be awesome if I could tame the problems and keep the good parts." Maybe on tubes, and in my well damped room. But a one time, not terribly long audition didn't allow me to commit to such an expensive purchase, when I hear some things that leave me with misgivings.I wish these models landed locally because I could further warm up to them, but that was the only shot at them.
Harbeth:
I auditioned the various models - Monitor 30.1, C7ES-3, Super HL5 Plus. (Also listened to the 40s, since they had them set up).
I love the Harbeth sound and there's little need to describe it, since so many are familiar. But wow...their particular magic with voices is something. They somehow capture voices actually being produced by an organic person vs an electronic version of a person. No matter what type of material, jazz, processed pop, R&B, even electronica/dance, they always seem be be able to find the "person" singing in the mix. And of course they have such a smooth, full, rich sound with acoustic instruments sounding very much themselves.
The Monitor 30.1 had those qualities, but I was a bit too aware of their bass limitations (cut off at the knees), and was also aware of a bit of darkness, lack of "air." In the close my eyes "could I believe that guitar or person is really there" test, a darkening of tone, a shelving of the upper frequencies, are usually a dead giveaway to me of the artifice. But within it's range....gorgeous.
The C7ES-3 were wonderful. There was that bass extension! Displayed the Harbeth mids if not quite as refined. But over all I found the bass a little less controlled than I'd want.
Super HL5 Plus was the Goldilocks choice of the group. It had the added bass extension I heard from the C7ES, but with better integration and control. It had super refined, open, smooth, rich midrange, but with the added top end openness and extension (addition of the super tweeter?) that made the sound more realistic and believable to me. Though I was still hearing some things that I felt my Thiels did better so I wasn't quite sure yet.
Unfortunately, when I came back to this particular store to audition the HL5 Plus I didn't have a good audition experience. I've described the experience elsewhere here, so won't repeat it. But suffice it to say, it did not make me want to move forward with this particular store. (I have more recently had very good interactions with this store, so I would say my bad experience probably turned out to be an anomaly at that location).
Anyway, the Harbeths dropped off my radar for over a year until I heard the Super HL5 Plus sounding superb in the Montreal Audio show. Intriguing. Later on an audio mart I saw a pair in a gorgeous rosewood finish for, by far, the best price I've ever seen for a used Harbeth. I grabbed them, knowing I could definitely sell them without losing money, with this thought: They are not in the finish I want. So I'll use them as a "home audition" of the Harbeths and if I love them, I'll sell these ones and go to my local dealer to buy brand new ones in the finish I require.
It turned out I really really liked the Super HL5 Plus, but didn't love. They did all the wonderful Harbeth things, that big rich sound, in this model especially, also with a studio-monitor clarity, and generally organic sound.
However, I simply found my Thiels did essentially everything the Harbeths did, but better. I never could get a satisfying depth to the soundstage of the Harbeths (not usually a problem in my room), always sounding a bit fore-shortened. And it seemed a flip-side of the fullness/lively cabinet design was a certain "filling in the spaces with texture" quality. The Thiels, for instance, separated the Los Angelese Guitar Quartet's guitars more effortlessly, with more precision and realism and tonal density, but without sacrificing any image size or warmth of tone. Nothing quite sounds like the Harbeth on vocals. But ultimately they could not budge me from the Thiels and I sold them.
That said, I now have a store near me selling Harbeths and I'm in there buying vinyl a lot. Every time I hear the Harbeths playing I just want to sit down and listen, thinking "These are so beautiful. Why don't I own them?" But then I remember, I did...I did the comparisons. Would love them in a second system, though.
Joseph Audio - Pulsar and Perspectives.
As a long time high audio rag reader, I've long been familiar with the Joseph Audio name, but it wasn't until last year in Montreal that I actually heard a JA speaker: the Pearl 3. Jeff Joseph was playing an acapella group piece and I was just stopped in my tracks. It wasn't just the clarity - tons of high end speakers produce vivid vocals. It was the authenticity of the timbre of the voices! It just sounded bang on. Not cold, gray, steely, silvery, or darkened, or all the "off-timbre" electronic signatures that define for me hi-fi voices vs real. It was that human warmth timbre, that sounded just like the people talking in the room. This was so rare and magical it put the JA speakers immediately on my radar. Upon reading that the stand mounted Pulsars had a similar presentation I found a local dealer and auditioned them. Yup, they did! They were fairly mesmerizing. Even despite my misgivings about small speakers trying to sound big, the Pulsars did this better than almost any other stand mounted speaker I've heard - very rich and satisfying. Though I did note a bit of excess warmth here and there in the lower midrange, upper bass. And I still wondered if I could end up with a stand mounted speaker after living with big floor standers. At home, I listen not only in front of the speakers for "critical listening" but I'll also crank them to listen just down the hall, in my work office or through the house. And at these times I really start to hear the limitation on the small speaker. It can sound like it's going low, but it becomes sort of "fake bass" in a way, where it just doesn't have the solidity and impact of a big speaker.
So the dealer suggested I listen to the floor standing Joseph Audio Perspective model. I said I don't know, they cost more than I was thinking of spending. But, he persisted and...his up-sell worked ;-)
The Perspectives really grabbed me. They sounded more linear than the Pulsars to my ears through the mids down, had really thick, punchy bass that seemed to make every type of music fun, yet seemed controlled enough to make "audiophile" stuff very realistic. They really disappeared with a huge soundstage and great imaging. I'm a tone/timbre buy first, but I ultimately want speakers to disappear and soundstage well - it's part of the illusion, the magic show, that I appreciate and that makes me want to sit in front of a high end system in the first place.
But what really grabbed me was the overall tone/timbre of the presentation! I remember playing some Chet Baker and some Julie London mono recordings and being shocked at how clear the sound was - how the Perspectives took a central mono image of voice, guitar, bass, drums etc and seemed to effortlessly unravel the different timbres and individual players. And how realistic the voices were. Another moment I remember were some tracks from the Bullet soundtrack (I'm a soundtrack fiend). Every instrument that entered the mix - a single sax, a flute, an organ, a group of saxes, horns...sounded incredibly pure, distinct and accurate in timbre! That's one of the things I always loved about going to the symphony, and sitting close, closing my eyes: that rainbow of different acoustic sources, materials, shiny silvery bells, brassy cymbals, woody reeds, woody cellos, golden hued horns...
The Perspectives (and the Pulsars) were giving me more of this sensation, of "surprise" in how each new instrument sounded, than I typically get from most speakers. And they did it with a particular purity, and lack of hash in any part of the frequency spectrum, making for a less mechanical sound than usual (Fremer nailed this in his Pulsar review).
Plus there was a great sense of "flow" to the Perspectives, the way dynamically the sound would swell dramatically when called fo (again, soundtracks were great on the Perspectives). All these elements came together to produce a great emotional connection to music through the speakers.
So, they sounded special to me.
I got a home audition and they continued to sound beautiful in my home. But having both the big Thiels and the Josephs meant I could compare, which inevitably gave some ground to the Thiels - the bigger more realistic image size, the slightly better precision in imaging and tonal density, a more linear presentation from top to bottom from the Thiels, where the Perspectives could sound a bit "puffy" in the bass sometimes.
And yet, the Perspectives still had a magic the Thiels couldn't do with tone. I remember playing back Talk Talk's Happiness Is Easy and thinking "I literally don't think reproduced sound gets better than this."
So stuck between A and B I realized this: I couldn't give up the Thiels. After all my auditioning, nothing really did everything as well in the same package and the 3.7s had become very rare on the used market, no longer made, so it could be a big regret to let them go.
BUT...I was also bitten by the Perspectives. Once heard, they were hard to unhear.
So I decided, dammit, I'll have both! I tend to hoard speakers somewhat, so I'd keep the Thiels but buy the Perspectives, and I'd have the Thiels to throw in to the room whenever I wanted the Thiel sound.
But....this meant I'd no longer be selling my Thiels to pay for new speakers. So I'd have to save up for the Perspectives. And this I've been doing.
Then, aha! A pair of Thiel 2.7 speakers in the ebony finish I've always wanted showed up on Audiogon. I grabbed them for a killer price and they have been fantastic! Smaller than the 3.7s, better looking in the room, they have the Thiel attributes. Done...right? Naw...I haven't been a fervent audiophile for decades for nuthin'.
I've been on track toward the Perspectives for so long, it's hard to get off. So once I got the 2.7s my thinking changed to "Well..now I can sell the big Thiels and have that money to put toward the Perspectives!"
So as I've been readying to sell the big Thiels, and about to spend more than I ever have on a pair of speakers (Perspectives are expensive to us Canucks), I thought "If I'm about to spend this much, I better do some due diligence and make sure I didn't leave another option on the floor." So I recently checked out a speaker brand that I'd wondered about for a while now. Devore Fidelity.
And that will lead to my next post.
I figure what the heck, some people may find all of it interesting, maybe only some, maybe none. No one forced to read it. So onward....
Folks,
I've had Thiel 3.7s for several years and love them dearly. As I've mentioned in other threads, I have to downsize simply due to some ergonomic and aesthetic issues in my room - the speakers have to go partially by the entrance and so any big, deep speakers tend to get in the way.
Over the last two years or so I did a whole bunch of auditioning of many speakers over a year ago to find a replacement - Audio Note, Audio Physic, Focal, Raidho monitors, JM Reynaud, Paradigm Persona, various Revel models, Monitor Audio, Proac, Kudos, Harbeth, Joseph Audio...
I was going to give a report on all of them individually, at one point, but it's been a while so I'll just throw out some thumbnail impressions. They aren't meant to be particularly descriptive of the sound so much as brief reasons as to why I enjoyed or moved on from those speakers. I always sought the best set up achievable for an audition, but of course that's still not like being able to tune a speaker in one's own room. So caveats given, on with some brief impressions:
Audio Note:
(I forget which exact model but it was in the "quite expensive but not impossible" zone for me)
Excellent clarity. Good impact. Nice woody tonality (as in does wood instruments like cello, stand up bass etc with a convincing tone). My main issue is that I could really hear the corner loading aspect of the sound, especially in the lower mids down. Not that the bass was incontinent per se, more that I was just aware of the way the illusion of the bigger bass and sound was being created, in terms of using wall re-enforcement.
Also, I'm a real stickler about instrumental tone and timbre. I've always found that the more room you introduce into the sound, especially in the upper frequencies, the more it will tend to cast a scrim of room sound over the timbre of voices and instruments, homogenizing the most delicate aspects of the timbre. As the Audio Notes pretty much require or are meant to use the room, this was an aspect it would seem hard to get around. (That's one reason I tend to like speakers that will work closer to my listening position).
Audio Physic:
I'm very familiar with the AP sound - have had the Virgos, Scorpios and Libra in my home and heard much of the line through the years. The Avanti was terrific, tonally neutral sounding, clear lively treble without ear piercing. And of course their magical disappearing act, which I love. But didn't have enough of the richness I'd become used to with the bigger Thiels. I suspect the larger Codex woud be killer, but they get in to the too deep/large category.
Focal
I've always found Focal to have a "look at me" sound to their tweeter. Nonetheless I often admired the rich tonality of their large speakers at audio shows. Unfortunately I never found this to transfer to their smaller stand mounted speakers. They struck me as more clinical and left me cold. Recent Audition of the Kanta 2 still had the "check out our TWEETER!" Focal sound, but was smooth and vivid enough. Unfortunately to my ears sounded too "hi-fi" with disjointed bass. My Thiels at home sounded far more organic and believable.
Raidho
Listened to the tiny X1s which were remarkable performers for their size. Super clear, clean, open, killer soundstaging, good snap on drums - represented Joe Morello's solos on Brubeck at Carnegie Hall far more convincingly than any tiny speaker has a right to. Ultimately, too small.
Dealer had a killer deal on the larger C 1.2 stand mounted speakers and I had hope there. I have never, ever liked a ribbon tweeter with cones because every time I hear the discontinuity. I'd say the Raidhos are the first time I did not hear that discontinuity. So it was all that air and delicacy without the usual drawback. However, I'm thinking part of the magic for this has to do with their house curve, which isn't flat but has a "concert hall" dip in the upper mids (I think). Ultimately I tended to hear this as a coloration, a recessing of a portion of the sound. I'm used to the Thiels which at my place are phenomenally linear sounding top to bottom. So there would be percussion instruments, piano parts, and other instruments that would be more distant and subdued on the Raidhos, losing some of the realistic liveliness. I didn't really hear more detail than I was used to from my Thiels, found the sound a bit "grayed" tonally, though rich in the mids and upper bass. These things KICK in terms of upper bass presence and sound much bigger than they are. But I also found that a slightly over-bearing.
In fact, that's a problem I often have with monitor speakers. So many of them are engineered to sound bigger than they are so you don't feel like you are missing base, but the goosing of the bass to achieve this can be to my ears a bit obnoxious vs the more linear bass of a good floor standing speaker (though down lower, they can have their room problems...my Thiels do not).
JM Reynaud Offrande Supreme v2
I was very serious about these speakers. I'd been around for the initial JMR hype years ago, and heard most of their models at a local store. Always had nice tone, both incisive and warm, but a bit too far into the ever-present-coloration territory to my ears. Still, I believe the Supremes had been updated since then and I had two separate auditions at a Dealer when I was visiting Montreal.
They certainly had the JMR virtues. Super clear, almost hot high end, lively presence all around, yet somehow allied to a gorgeous warm tone. This brings in one of the things I like in a speaker - a warm tone not necessariily in the sense of a ripe lower midrange, but rather timbrally - warm in the sense that when an acoustic guitar track is played through the speaker, the signature is that of the warmth of wood, instead of the cold, electronic coloration of most systems. The JMR does this with acoustic instruments and voices. Everything with an amber or blond-wood "glow." And they definitley have a dynamic/transient/open sound that gives a feeling of musicians being right there, playing right now vibe.
Ultimately I found they were a bit biting to my ear in the upper frequencies. While the forwardness was a boon to putting musicians right in front of me, it also tended to fore-shorten depth. An always "they are here" vs "I'm transported to there" vibe. Also, the bass which was really big and deep - they are huge stand mount speakers! - was a bit on the pudgy side. But I get why people love them. If I had the opportunity I'd have liked to try them at home. (Though...maybe not. I actually don't like how they look, and REALLY don't like the JMR wood finishes).
Paradigm Persona
(I believe it was the 3F). Yup, these babies are clear, clear, clear and grain free. They are balanced top to bottom and were, like the Revel, the closest to my Thiel 3.7 speakers in terms of sounding balanced from top to bottom. Drum snares, cymbals, rim hits, percussion, guitar strings etc all had a fairly riveting precision. They had an open-window into the recording studio feel on almost every track. Plus, for their size they sounded BIG, including the image sizes, depth, width of the soundstage. A tremendous speaker for the money. Ultimately I couldn't get on with their looks, at least for my room. But most important, I did find them somewhat fatiguing to listen to after a while, and a bit less organic than my Thiels. (Though I'd bet that could change for the better if set up at my home on my gear).
Revel
I'd repeat most of what I just wrote about the Paradigms. They sounded similar, though the Paradigms seemed to have a next-level sense of purity and transparency vs the Revel. And the Revels tended to sound just a bit more linear and controlled top to bottom. The Revels just sounded like really competent speakers, but didn't grab me.
Again, something about the timbre/tone I get with the Thiels (and some other speakers) have an "it" factor I don't get with the Revels.
Monitor Audio (Gold, I believe - a smaller floor stander)
I've always liked the Monitor Audio sound. My father-in-law uses a HUGE pair of Monitor Audio monitors from the 80's that still strike me as one of the best marriages of believable tone with size and richness I've heard.
I own Monitor Audio bronze monitors for various uses, including home theater surrounds. Though I found once they moved to the Platinum line, with ribbons, the tone became a bit too bleached for my comfort.
The smaller Gold line still was able to do the "golden, bronze" tones in the upper frequencies...just turning toward silver a bit. They were astonishingly clean and clear, with a rainbow of timbral colors coming through. My main gripe is that I realized nothing actually sounded "real" - in the sense of believably organic. Everything sounded a bit hard around the edge - sibilance in vocals for instance being laid bare as processed in a bit too ruthless manner.
Proac - D20R (I believe...)
Love the look of these especially the wood finish in ebony on the model I auditioned. Would really have been a perfect size replacement for the Thiels, and went down about as low. Unfortunately I couldn't get around the extremely obvious character of the ribbon tweeter vs the mids/bass. I was always aware of it, and generally found the sound too cool in the upper frequencies to really get into. Bass was also not particularly impressive in terms of tone and control. One of the more disappointing speaker auditions.
Kudos
You really don't hear much about Kudos around here. Lack of dealers and North American presence I guess (as it seems to me a majority of people posting here are from North America...if I am indeed right about that).
Anyway, at a TAVES shows a few years ago I was frankly astonished by the sound coming from a pair of Kudos Super 20 floor standing speakers. It had a brilliant, reach out and grab me "alive" tone that made my brain think "real performance" more than most of what I'd heard that day. A bit forward...but wow what an effect. So they went on to my radar.
Turns out a local dealer carried Kudos, and there I heard some very small floor standing Kudos X3 speakers.
Well, there it was! That tone! Like the bigger model I'd heard at the show, this one had a dialed up upper frequency range that gave liveliness and detail. But it was, somewhat like the JMR speakers, allied to a generally warm tone, with a spectrum of timbral color to trumpet, wood blocks, acoustic guitar etc. If found the sound quite compelling, and so wondered about Kudos higher end models. As it turned out, Kudos in the last year has come out with the Titan range, a trickle down from their flagship. I really liked the design of the Titan 606 speakers, they were a great replacement size for the Thiels from the specs. But...my local dealer didn't want to bring them in so I would never hear them (I certainly did not want him to order them just for my sake, given I couldn't know before hearing them if I'd want to buy them).
But then during a recent trip to Europe I ended up in London for a couple days, so I found a Kudos dealer there.
And not only did he have the 606s for me to hear, but also the literally just introduced stand mounted Titan 505 that had many people raving at a recent British audio show. Very cool. Both speakers, as with most Kudos speakers, employ isobaric loading for the bass.
Both the 505 and 606 displayed the Kudos house sound which was that lively top end. Great for adding bit to guitar picking, hearing the bow on strings, transient aliveness etc. Even if not strictly neutral, it's fun (so long as timbres to my ears are otherwise organic). I found the 505 to actually sound a bit less balanced than the floor standing speaker. I suppose this is my allergy to the "tiny speaker trying to sound like a big speaker" tuning, but the bass seemed somewhat over-warm, and the speakers themselves a tad clinical from the mids up. Still, they were spacious, enthusiastic sounding, with great separation of instruments and voices. And certain tracks like Lightfoot's If You Could Read My Mind were actually magical on the 505. A similar warm timbre to the JMR speakers, and the added top end sparkle livened up the guitars and strings which can sound a bit tepid on many other speakers.
The larger 606 speakers sounded more linear, richer, a bit darker, and produced a satisfyingly large sound for their size. Similar to the Revel or Paradigm speakers. The upper frequency balance was a double edged sword: it could make drum high hats, snares, cymbals, guitars stand out in particularly, and satisfyingly, vivid relief. But could also highlight the studio/microphone/effects on voices making vocals sound a bit more "hi-fi" than most. But naturally recorded vocals were by the same token vivid and clear. Bass had an interesting character, sort of tight, punchy and big...a sense of the bass "spreading" in the room. My impression veered between "impressive" on the bass and "hmm...not sure I'm sold on this isobaric bass." I'll say that Herbie Hancock's Chameleon, one of my test songs on most speakers, was produced in a particularly compelling, vivid manner. The drums were just crystal clear and had that "live drum playing" feeling. It was one of those "wow" moments that kind of haunt you when you hear a certain track sound different and more realistic than normal.
That said, some other tracks veered into the intolerable territory (e.g. horns too piercing on Earth Wind and F ire live). It's the kind of audition that was very promising in some areas, leaving me thinking "these COULD be awesome if I could tame the problems and keep the good parts." Maybe on tubes, and in my well damped room. But a one time, not terribly long audition didn't allow me to commit to such an expensive purchase, when I hear some things that leave me with misgivings.I wish these models landed locally because I could further warm up to them, but that was the only shot at them.
Harbeth:
I auditioned the various models - Monitor 30.1, C7ES-3, Super HL5 Plus. (Also listened to the 40s, since they had them set up).
I love the Harbeth sound and there's little need to describe it, since so many are familiar. But wow...their particular magic with voices is something. They somehow capture voices actually being produced by an organic person vs an electronic version of a person. No matter what type of material, jazz, processed pop, R&B, even electronica/dance, they always seem be be able to find the "person" singing in the mix. And of course they have such a smooth, full, rich sound with acoustic instruments sounding very much themselves.
The Monitor 30.1 had those qualities, but I was a bit too aware of their bass limitations (cut off at the knees), and was also aware of a bit of darkness, lack of "air." In the close my eyes "could I believe that guitar or person is really there" test, a darkening of tone, a shelving of the upper frequencies, are usually a dead giveaway to me of the artifice. But within it's range....gorgeous.
The C7ES-3 were wonderful. There was that bass extension! Displayed the Harbeth mids if not quite as refined. But over all I found the bass a little less controlled than I'd want.
Super HL5 Plus was the Goldilocks choice of the group. It had the added bass extension I heard from the C7ES, but with better integration and control. It had super refined, open, smooth, rich midrange, but with the added top end openness and extension (addition of the super tweeter?) that made the sound more realistic and believable to me. Though I was still hearing some things that I felt my Thiels did better so I wasn't quite sure yet.
Unfortunately, when I came back to this particular store to audition the HL5 Plus I didn't have a good audition experience. I've described the experience elsewhere here, so won't repeat it. But suffice it to say, it did not make me want to move forward with this particular store. (I have more recently had very good interactions with this store, so I would say my bad experience probably turned out to be an anomaly at that location).
Anyway, the Harbeths dropped off my radar for over a year until I heard the Super HL5 Plus sounding superb in the Montreal Audio show. Intriguing. Later on an audio mart I saw a pair in a gorgeous rosewood finish for, by far, the best price I've ever seen for a used Harbeth. I grabbed them, knowing I could definitely sell them without losing money, with this thought: They are not in the finish I want. So I'll use them as a "home audition" of the Harbeths and if I love them, I'll sell these ones and go to my local dealer to buy brand new ones in the finish I require.
It turned out I really really liked the Super HL5 Plus, but didn't love. They did all the wonderful Harbeth things, that big rich sound, in this model especially, also with a studio-monitor clarity, and generally organic sound.
However, I simply found my Thiels did essentially everything the Harbeths did, but better. I never could get a satisfying depth to the soundstage of the Harbeths (not usually a problem in my room), always sounding a bit fore-shortened. And it seemed a flip-side of the fullness/lively cabinet design was a certain "filling in the spaces with texture" quality. The Thiels, for instance, separated the Los Angelese Guitar Quartet's guitars more effortlessly, with more precision and realism and tonal density, but without sacrificing any image size or warmth of tone. Nothing quite sounds like the Harbeth on vocals. But ultimately they could not budge me from the Thiels and I sold them.
That said, I now have a store near me selling Harbeths and I'm in there buying vinyl a lot. Every time I hear the Harbeths playing I just want to sit down and listen, thinking "These are so beautiful. Why don't I own them?" But then I remember, I did...I did the comparisons. Would love them in a second system, though.
Joseph Audio - Pulsar and Perspectives.
As a long time high audio rag reader, I've long been familiar with the Joseph Audio name, but it wasn't until last year in Montreal that I actually heard a JA speaker: the Pearl 3. Jeff Joseph was playing an acapella group piece and I was just stopped in my tracks. It wasn't just the clarity - tons of high end speakers produce vivid vocals. It was the authenticity of the timbre of the voices! It just sounded bang on. Not cold, gray, steely, silvery, or darkened, or all the "off-timbre" electronic signatures that define for me hi-fi voices vs real. It was that human warmth timbre, that sounded just like the people talking in the room. This was so rare and magical it put the JA speakers immediately on my radar. Upon reading that the stand mounted Pulsars had a similar presentation I found a local dealer and auditioned them. Yup, they did! They were fairly mesmerizing. Even despite my misgivings about small speakers trying to sound big, the Pulsars did this better than almost any other stand mounted speaker I've heard - very rich and satisfying. Though I did note a bit of excess warmth here and there in the lower midrange, upper bass. And I still wondered if I could end up with a stand mounted speaker after living with big floor standers. At home, I listen not only in front of the speakers for "critical listening" but I'll also crank them to listen just down the hall, in my work office or through the house. And at these times I really start to hear the limitation on the small speaker. It can sound like it's going low, but it becomes sort of "fake bass" in a way, where it just doesn't have the solidity and impact of a big speaker.
So the dealer suggested I listen to the floor standing Joseph Audio Perspective model. I said I don't know, they cost more than I was thinking of spending. But, he persisted and...his up-sell worked ;-)
The Perspectives really grabbed me. They sounded more linear than the Pulsars to my ears through the mids down, had really thick, punchy bass that seemed to make every type of music fun, yet seemed controlled enough to make "audiophile" stuff very realistic. They really disappeared with a huge soundstage and great imaging. I'm a tone/timbre buy first, but I ultimately want speakers to disappear and soundstage well - it's part of the illusion, the magic show, that I appreciate and that makes me want to sit in front of a high end system in the first place.
But what really grabbed me was the overall tone/timbre of the presentation! I remember playing some Chet Baker and some Julie London mono recordings and being shocked at how clear the sound was - how the Perspectives took a central mono image of voice, guitar, bass, drums etc and seemed to effortlessly unravel the different timbres and individual players. And how realistic the voices were. Another moment I remember were some tracks from the Bullet soundtrack (I'm a soundtrack fiend). Every instrument that entered the mix - a single sax, a flute, an organ, a group of saxes, horns...sounded incredibly pure, distinct and accurate in timbre! That's one of the things I always loved about going to the symphony, and sitting close, closing my eyes: that rainbow of different acoustic sources, materials, shiny silvery bells, brassy cymbals, woody reeds, woody cellos, golden hued horns...
The Perspectives (and the Pulsars) were giving me more of this sensation, of "surprise" in how each new instrument sounded, than I typically get from most speakers. And they did it with a particular purity, and lack of hash in any part of the frequency spectrum, making for a less mechanical sound than usual (Fremer nailed this in his Pulsar review).
Plus there was a great sense of "flow" to the Perspectives, the way dynamically the sound would swell dramatically when called fo (again, soundtracks were great on the Perspectives). All these elements came together to produce a great emotional connection to music through the speakers.
So, they sounded special to me.
I got a home audition and they continued to sound beautiful in my home. But having both the big Thiels and the Josephs meant I could compare, which inevitably gave some ground to the Thiels - the bigger more realistic image size, the slightly better precision in imaging and tonal density, a more linear presentation from top to bottom from the Thiels, where the Perspectives could sound a bit "puffy" in the bass sometimes.
And yet, the Perspectives still had a magic the Thiels couldn't do with tone. I remember playing back Talk Talk's Happiness Is Easy and thinking "I literally don't think reproduced sound gets better than this."
So stuck between A and B I realized this: I couldn't give up the Thiels. After all my auditioning, nothing really did everything as well in the same package and the 3.7s had become very rare on the used market, no longer made, so it could be a big regret to let them go.
BUT...I was also bitten by the Perspectives. Once heard, they were hard to unhear.
So I decided, dammit, I'll have both! I tend to hoard speakers somewhat, so I'd keep the Thiels but buy the Perspectives, and I'd have the Thiels to throw in to the room whenever I wanted the Thiel sound.
But....this meant I'd no longer be selling my Thiels to pay for new speakers. So I'd have to save up for the Perspectives. And this I've been doing.
Then, aha! A pair of Thiel 2.7 speakers in the ebony finish I've always wanted showed up on Audiogon. I grabbed them for a killer price and they have been fantastic! Smaller than the 3.7s, better looking in the room, they have the Thiel attributes. Done...right? Naw...I haven't been a fervent audiophile for decades for nuthin'.
I've been on track toward the Perspectives for so long, it's hard to get off. So once I got the 2.7s my thinking changed to "Well..now I can sell the big Thiels and have that money to put toward the Perspectives!"
So as I've been readying to sell the big Thiels, and about to spend more than I ever have on a pair of speakers (Perspectives are expensive to us Canucks), I thought "If I'm about to spend this much, I better do some due diligence and make sure I didn't leave another option on the floor." So I recently checked out a speaker brand that I'd wondered about for a while now. Devore Fidelity.
And that will lead to my next post.
481 responses Add your response
@prof you must have had a lot of fun doing all this listening... Jealous! |
Much obliged, metaldetektor !!! I'm so happy that this thread actually led you to a satisfying speaker purchase. That's the best case scenario that happens when we audiophiles share our impressions of gear. I was very intrigued by the O/Bronze, but the exclusivity (low production number) and price puts it way out of my financial zone. |
This thread is a treasure chest of pitch perfect speaker descriptions. Thanks @prof -- quite the body of work here! This thread inspired me to audition Devores myself, and I ended up with the Super Nines. I've been very happy with them. If anybody has a chance to listen to the O/Twenty or forthcoming O/Bronze, I'd love to read about it. I believe Common Wave in L.A. will be getting in a pair. No doubt other dealers will as well. I know of at least one guy who has heard an early pair and he spoke well and simply of them. Everything you like about the O/96 -- just more... |
@jcoehler I believe they presently retail for $5,695 or thereabouts although I will admit I don’t recall. I believe Devore is manufacturing in batches for these and the MicrO’s so I guess it depends on the particular dealer and whether they pre-ordered additional sets for stock. I inquired the moment I saw them first mentioned in the press/Devore Fidelity’s facebook. |
These look interesting, I'm a big fan of Devore speakers. What do these retail for? @ghasley what was the lead time from order to ship for your set? |
@prof I have been following this great thread. Thanks! I will be looking to audition the O/babys. Seem a good fit for my room. |
I'm happy to see your opinion on this! Yup, horses for courses. I actually think plenty of light colored speakers look beautiful. But they wouldn't match well in my room, and as I've said I ultimately prefer darker because I don't like being super conscious of speaker drivers producing the sound. (My Thiel 2.7s work well with the grills on, so not a problem. My Joseph Perspectives actually sound better with the grills off. But, fortunately I find the SEAS drivers and the copper-ringed tweeter look particularly classy so don't mind the look during the day. When I listen I usually turn down the portion of lights facing the Joseph speakers - I have a projection screen that lights up with colors behind the speakers - and so I can't see the drivers anymore which allows me to ignore them as sound sources). As long as we can agree that Black Ash finish is unconscionable. If not, we can't be friends. |
Personally, I dislike dark wood whether in speakers or furniture. I would never buy mahogany or similarly colored speakers no matter how good they sounded. I wish more speakers came in lighter colors-at least without an additional charge. I really like the 0/Babys the way they are and would consider buying them. This is purely a matter of taste and, of course, completely arbitrary. Only posting as you are soliciting opinions. |
Hey fsconicsmith! That's good to know. I had a similar situation with Jeff Joseph when I was contemplating ordering some new Joseph Audio Perspectives. I really wanted a darker brown color and Jeff sent me some pictures of speakers in production that had the darker wood finish I might want, and I could select those. A downturn in finances at that moment meant I couldn't buy the Perspectives new as I'd hoped. But about a year later my dealer was selling some recently acquired floor demo Perspectives to make way for the new Graphene model, so I got a good deal on those. It turned out they were the very pair that Jeff sent a photo of, so I got the finish I wanted as well! |
Hi Prof-as I have mentioned here and there previously, you are in my opinion one of the best contributors to this Board so I am glad it has been four years! It is nice to see that John has updated his site as to all of his products. As to the finish, a) I agree with you b) the logical deduction in light of the fact that the more expensive O's offer custom finish options is that the O'Baby does not but c) John is one of the most down to earth guys in the biz and he is likely to say yes to a darker, deeper, more prominent grained mahogany finish if you are willing to wait (just my guess, obviously). When I bought my O/93's Don Better-unasked and just out of good customer service-shot me a pic of the particular pair that was ready to ship at John's warehouse. They too had a lighter, paler finish. I did my best to politely and diplomatically balk and shot Don pics of the pair reviewed by some magazine that had the deeper color I preferred and both Don and John accommodated me. No extra cost and maybe a two week delay. |
Hey folks! Been a while! I can't believe this thread is 4 years old now! Devore is now releasing a scaled down version of the O/96 called the "O/baby." More on that in a moment. I had held on to the idea of possibly getting a pair of second hand O/96s but that never happened. For one thing: the pandemic had quite an impact on my income. For the same reason I hadn't upgraded my Joseph speakers to the graphene version yet. But I did get around to selling lots of equipment that I wasn't using (e.g. subwoofers 'n stuff) and I figured I could put that toward upgrading the Josephs or...since I can't afford the bigger O/96s, I've been very intrigued by the O/baby speakers. Small enough to easily lift in and out of the system, big enough to apparently have some nice scale of sound. I'm really looking forward to reviews and user reports on those speakers. Plus I have good vibes for Devore and wish the company continued success. That said..they've finally updated their website to include the O/baby which I think is starting to ship: https://devorefidelity.com/devore-fidelity-speakers/orangutan-series/o-baby-speakers/ I have to say that I'm personally disappointed with the standard finish. I think they still look nice - Devore always has a good eye and sense of style. But...ugh...light oak! For me that's barely above black ash in terms of woods and finishes that would appeal to me. Aesthetics - that is of course what appeals to me subjectively - is high on my list of priorities and the O/96 is one of my all time favorites in that regard. I love the varieties of wood grain combined with the form. The pictures of earlier O/babys looked great:
I thought "yay, nice wood grain and on the darker side" which I like. I don't really like being super conscious of speaker drivers and prefer a darker front on a speaker, so the above are excellent. But I guess those weren't viable as a standard finish. Here's the new oak finish:
Ah well, I have to say the standard oak finish just isn't doing it for me and a different finish would I presume be a significant upcharge essentially defeating my purpose of getting a cheaper, more affordable O series speaker. If I hear them I may be still seduced enough to consider buying a pair in the future. But,hey, all this is of course subjective and they still look pretty nice. Anyone else have an opinion on the looks of these new speakers? (And if someone gets a listen to the O/babys please report here or elsewhere on the forum. I will certainly do so. The story seems to be from John Devore that he figured out a way to use some of the parts he'd bought for the O/reference, e.g. access to those super tweeters. So the O/baby actually uses a super tweeter as it's tweeter in a slightly horn loaded fashion. I'm really curious how this will work out in terms of the quality of sound. One of the things I love about the big O/96 is that they sound "big" from bottom to top, so sounds in the tweeter region also have substantial body. I wonder if the O/baby can manage to retain that character using the much smaller tweeter).
|
keithr Yeah I was going to guess it would be at least $25k. But who knows?Wouldn't really want to jump the gun on John's pricing. As for the Fyne speakers, they have sort of intrigued me. I heard them briefly I think at the last audio show I attended. I really like the styling but wasn't blown away by what I heard. Also the measurements I've seen thus far weren't too stupendous. |
The Devore O/96 just got a rave review in the April issue of Hi-Fi News. 10 out of 10 (paired with Jadis amps). It's funny how long it took for the english press to get hold of these speakers! Also, in a brief bio/interview with John Devore it turns out he's working on an updated version of the O/96 using "trickle-down" technology from the O Reference speakers. The working name of the new speaker is the O/Bronze. Some of the O Reference components moving down in to the O/Bronze will be the cast bronze woofer basket and horn for the tweeter and super tweeter, and some "new stuff going on inside the cabinet." I find that very exciting, though l'm expecting it to be priced beyond my means. I still have a jones for the Devore O/96 and I'm selling off a bunch of hi-fi stuff I haven't been using. If I accrue enough money to buy new O/96s I would do an in-home audition first. Though other areas I may put the money in to would be upgrading the Joseph Perspectives to the graphene version (unfortunately, now the upgrade is more expensive than it was when originally offered), and I've toyed with upgrading to a Conrad Johnson Art amps. |
I do yoga in my room with the O/93's, and so I listen at all positions. I find them pretty engaging 3 feet into the room and 5-6 feet away. This distance probably removes some of the room reflections from the equation. They do like to be pulled from the corner- for my tastes anyway. Outstanding speaker. |
@goldprintaudio Interesting about getting a closer listening distance out of the Devores.I really tried several times both with the 96 and 93s during auditions, altering listening position, changing position/toe in of speakers etc, and every time I got under 8 feet the sound would darken somewhat, lose some snap, image less well, etc. Yet I note that one reviewer of the 93 said he ended up 5.5 feet from the 93s! I think someone once mentioned that you can play with angling the O series speakers for closer placement (e.g. something under the front, to angle it a bit back?). Is there any particular solution you’ve found? The O/96 seem to need a good size room/breathing space around them. My room is 15’ deep and 13’ wide, though with good acoustic treatment and a wide room opening to the side in to a hallway. My speakers are typically pulled around 4 feet out from the back wall. Thus far I haven’t had any bass problems with a floorstanding speaker in the room, so I’d hope the O/96 could work. I’m loving the Joseph speakers for their combo of relaxed resolution and vividness. But I also love the type of warmth, body and textural presence of the Devores. (I get a tiny version of that from my Spendor S3/5s) BTW, what was your opinion of the Thiels? |
@prof It is extremely fun having both Joseph and DeVore as lines I'm able to sell. I absolutely love both of them (and it helps that Jeff Joseph and John DeVore are all around great guys as well). Funny enough, I was actually also a Thiel dealer up until their unfortunate ending.....so I'm fairly familiar with your 2.7s. The 0/96s really are a nice speaker. With a little playing around on the placement side, you can get them to sound quite good an distances less than 8ft, but that is a good general distance to start with (I run them right around 9' away in my demo area). |
@goldprintaudio Thanks! Geeze, you get to regularly hear among my top 2 speaker brands. Lucky you! I still haven’t let go of the idea of owning the Devore O/96s. One reason I didn’t get them was I feel they need at least an 8 foot listening distance to cohere, and that was tough in my room. However I recently figured out that I could in fact achieve that listening distance, so they are back in the running. I realize I have a bunch of stuff I can sell (e.g. I don’t think I’ll ever get around to using my subwoofers and associated equipment). I still feel like I need more than one speaker around - I like to switch to keep things fresh so I still have the Thiel 2.7s. I figured it was the Thiels that I’d keep permanently as my touchstone speaker. However, the Joseph speakers are starting to become my reference. If I could get an in-home trial of the Devores it could convince me to sell my Thiels as well to afford the Devores. Anyway, that’s just dreaming for now. |
Keithr Thanks for letting me know. "strident and wiry" is exactly what I heard from the D7, and another A model in the Spendor line. I'm a bit dubious that the .2 versions would have totally fixed this since it seemed the more forward sound is a deliberate choice in that Spendor design. Then again, the Joseph Perspectives I own can also a bit hot on the top, depending on positioning. However, even when positioned for the "brightest" sound, the highs are still liquid and smooth, not the slightly wiry/strident sound I heard in the Spendors. |
Hey @prof , I finally heard the Spendor D9.2 this weekend. I too, was bothered by the top end on strings in particular - it was just strident and wiry at times. The speakers had 100 hours of them, so could have needed more time...and were on Levinson integrated which probably isn't the best match. i thought they were beautiful speakers - and on a lot of music with guitars, male vocals, etc. sounded spectacular. the 9s soundstage really well, were very coherent, and disappeared. I also found the bass exceptionally taut, defined, with no overhang. But at the same time, I believe I now know why they typically show with Jadis at shows. As far as comparison to Devore (which I've owned before), couldn't help to think that they weren't as refined. But again, that could be the amp not the speaker. |
Thanks for reading. This thread is sort of like a "get it off my chest" for any thoughts or continued experiences I'm having. Speaking of such things: With the Joseph Perspectives powered up I was playing some loud, thrashing Duran Duran. The sound was absolutely huge, giant life-sized kick drums and bass, massive spacious image. But I did something I normally do with every speaker, even ones I audition, which is feel the cabinet when some meaty bass was being produced. Just out of curiosity to see how much the cabinet is singing along with the music. Even my Thiels, which have a well braced cabinet, can be easily felt to vibrate with bass frequencies. I'd never felt the Josephs because, I think, their finish is so polished that they pick up fingerprints easily. But putting my hand to feel for vibrations with Duran Duran chugging away and I felt...nothing. Like, literally, no vibration! It was fairly shocking because I'm not sure I've felt such an inert cabinet before. And I guess I didn't expect it because the Josephs are a small speaker putting out big bass. And sure, the Joseph literature on the Perspectives claim: "The acoustic design of the cabinet is very complex and rigid, with multiple bracing to keep the box as silent as possible. This structural rigidity translates into clarity and focus of the highest order. " But I took it with a grain of salt until I actually felt it. Wow! No wonder they are so clean sounding from top to bottom. |
This continues to be a great post Prof. I moved from Thiel 2.4 to the Spendor D9 a little over a year ago. Both the Thiels and the D9 are extended on top but capable of becoming bright... My system addressed those propensities with a tube preamp (VAC) and an Ayre poweramp (VX5/20). This combination allows the Spendors to have a presentation that is relaxed and extended with beautiful treble extension. I believe I will always have some tubes in the signal path. |
Nice analysis Prof - isn’t it amazing how we make a change to our system knowing the outcome but still doing it for confirmation! I’ve always had CJ preamps in my system but never amps due to Thiels needing juice although you and many others have had success with tube amps. Have you heard any of the latest CJ tube amps, most notabley the 60 or 120? I’ve heard the ART series at shows with Kharma speakers but too rich for my blood. |
A Tale Of Two Amps: Well. That was quick. As I mentioned I was lent a new Bryston 4B3 amp from a friend while one of my Conrad Johnson monoblocks was being fixed. First time in years that I put a SS amp back in to the main system. I used to own a Bryston 4BST for a while, many years ago, along with my CJ. But it was mostly to have a SS reference when I used to do some speaker reviews. I always preferred the CJs. In went the Bryston and even on the little Spendors I immediately recognized "that sound." Solid state, especially the sound I used to hear from my Bryston amp. "Tight" and "Taught" were the words that immediately came to mind."Squeezed" was another. Bass was firmly in grip, every instrument and voice had excellent solid presence in the soundfield. Buzzing with energy and snap. The scrappy surf guitar parts on B-52s (vinyl) were clean and snappy. Rhythm guitar parts had solidity and energy. This was somewhat promising because if there are any nits to pick with the Joseph Speakers in my system, it’s that from the upper mids upward they can be a bit polite, dynamically. Rock certainly rocks and they are dynamic, but my Thiels are more solid from top to bottom. So I was curious about a beefy SS amp on the Josephs. But still sticking with the Spendors, things I noticed were: the speakers sounded smaller. As if all the energy I’m used to hearing in the bass was tightened and pulled upwards, like putting a girdle on. So it’s like I became acutely aware of a distinct cut off point for the bass frequencies, almost like I could see it as an invisible line appearing just beneath the speakers. "No bass below here." Similarly, the highs were a bit darkened, losing that slight golden airy open glow from the CJs. So, on top, I felt another "line" appear "highs stop here!" Thus I felt like I was "viewing" the sound through a narrower band. I can only surmise this was due to the Bryston putting on a show of control over the speakers. No letting their hair down when Capn’ Bryston is on deck. So the result was a more taught, tight, bouncy, transient-oriented sound.Every instrument sqeezed by the grip of the Bryston in to a slightly smaller space in the soundstage. Though the speakers still disappeared and soundstaged with precision, it didn’t feel as relaxed and natural in doing so. Voices, usually peerless on the Spendors, still sounded good, but to my surprise some of the magic "wow that’s a human being singing right there!" was missing. Voices sounded just harder and tighter, smaller, more obviously a recording. And though I listened for a little while with fascination, it was harder for me to get in to the music. I recognized that sort of "tense" sound that I perceive in typical solid state driven systems vs what I’m used to at home. It was kind of freaking me out that I wasn’t enjoying the Spendors nearly as much as normal, so I switched the Bryston on to the Joseph Perspectives. The Josephs are so suave, so grain free and relaxed, and they disappear so effortlessly, that they didn’t immediately shout "solid state!" with the Bryston. I did notice, again, a particularly solid, tight, punchy feel for the bass, very focused. And guitar parts did take on an added bit of solidity.But as I played more familiar tracks, the SS nature of the sound became more clear. One of my favorite all time albums, Everything But The Girl Amplified Heart, has tracks were distant string sections gently well up in to the song. Here they sounded less beautiful, more grey and steely.The vocals sounded harder, more processed, more electronic in the sibilance. I put on an Italian movie soundtrack that I was listening to just before my CJ died - lots of jazzy funky drumming with surprising horns, vocals, piano, strings etc. The drums were solid with nice kick, snare had pop but not as much as I was expecting..in fact the tonality seemed less "real" than I’m used to, a little too dark. The high hat work though was very vivid and metallic and convincing. The most realistic high hat I’d heard on the system. Then came a part where some luscious strings, distant though very vividly textured, usually appear swelling in from the background, like appearing from behind a curtain. Usually this part just makes me melt it’s so beautiful. But...huh? The strings appeared but not in that uprising tonally gorgeous way. More gray, suppressed, sitting back.The "moment" didn’t happen. Yikes. Then I threw on my new CD, a re-recording of the Conan The Barbarian soundtrack, which has a massive, roaring overture with tons of kettle drums rumbling under your feet. This blew me away when I got it a few weeks ago. Powered by the Bryston, on either the Spendors or the Josephs, the sound was...well...very good but "where is that awe?"What the Bryston did superbly in my system, when it’s precision and grip really paid dividends, was on separating all the instrumental parts especially in the lower mids/upper bass, the power region of the string and lower horn sections. The lines being played by the many different horn sections have never been so clearly rendered. That was really impressive! But I found it just didn’t sound as beautiful and real and natural as I remembered. Anyway, I was able to get my CJ back from repair today and fired them back up. Started with the Spendors. And.... Oh...my....goodness! There it was! I’m NOT crazy! I WAS missing this. The sound was huge, rich, vivid yet relaxed, energetic but not pushy or tense in the least. The speakers just seemed to disappear more. The bass was richer and fuller, the top glowed a bit more. Now the "top" and "bottom" opened up so I was no longer aware of some hard stopping/starting points in the frequency range so the "small speaker" effect was much less pronounced. And...voices! They were back! Now the Spendors were doing that magic - the softness, roundness and richness with voices that made them sound human. Acoustic guitars, drum cymbals, had a luxurious golden harmonic sparkle. Keep in mind, I’m going all audiophile in these descriptions. To the average Joe this may seem like subtle stuff, but the way the sound seemed to expand to fill virtually all my "button pushing" criteria had a profound effect. I could slip in to the sensation of hearing the performer, rather than a recording, in a way that I just couldn’t with the Bryston. I’ve done this comparison many times over the years and it’s always the same. Every time I own, or borrow, a solid state amp I have a hard time sitting in front of my system to listen for very long. It’s like "Yeah, that’s neat...but time to do something else and I’ll just crank it for background music." But with the CJs powering speakers, I’m entranced. It’s luxurious, it does just what I want a high end system to do to keep me in my seat. So, yup, yet another confirmation I’m a tube amp guy and love those darned CJ Premier 12s! (And in no way would I suggest the CJs are some "ultimate" amp. They are like a 25 year old design, maybe older. And no doubt all sorts of attributes can be surpassed by other amps. But they still hold up damned well and have a certain sound that I can’t seem to give up). Cheerio! |
