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.


prof
I’m sorry. It is just my opinion.
I don’t like sound of beryllium and new Spendor tweeters. I also don’t like B&W Diamond tweeters.
For me, these kind of tweeters sound artificial.
But I’m not a typical audiophile. I like more vintage sound with more real life details, without highlighting or emphasizing high frequencies and upper mid-range.
I think from 60x, Hi-Fi industry move from real acoustic instruments sound to more spectacular, artificial Hi-Fi-sh sound when JBL invented their bluet tweeters.
And this kind of sound become a standard.
I like Classic Spendor speakers, because they sound like real acoustic instruments and not like modern Hi-Fi .
Not sure about the Graham Audio speakers.  I'm aware of them, but have never seen them locally.  Thanks for the input yeti42!
Graham are very much in the "thin wall" vein of Harbeth and the "classic" Spendor line.  They make a 5/8 and a 5/9.  They are also about to introduce a re-engineered 5/5, with the famous BBC slot, that will use a 3-driver complement similar to the 40.2 or the Classic 100 (prototype pictured here: https://parttimeaudiophile.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Munich-2019-he-graham1.jpg )


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.

Last year I had the opportunity to audition Classic 100's and D7's back to back, in the same system/same room/same afternoon.  My impressions matched yours, though perhaps even more so--a very strong preference for the Classic 100.

I think David Lewis in the Philadelphia area may have some Classic models in house.

I would agree the Classic Spendors are much different and to me better sounding than their more modern A and D series.

As one can see from their recent adverts in the audio press, Spendor has gone "all in" for the narrower-is-better trend in modern speaker design, highlighting this spec over all others.

Ironically, while also semi-clandestinely continuing to produce the Classic series including the 100 and 200 models. Hmmm.

A great read .It seems to me that what many people are wanting is a speaker that sound natural whereas most speakers sound too much like speakers and/or a bit too'hi fi".
On the other hand there are speakers like the Devores,Audio Notes and classic Spendors which sound tonally natural but which rely on the overall acoustic including the sound of the boxes to achieve that sound.Which is not quite right either.From what I have heard for people who crave tonal naturalness and musicality but also want purity and precision the Yamaha NS5000s represent the obvious choice.You reach the point at which you hear what is wrong with speakers above what is right.For people who have arrived at that point I believe they should try to hear the NS5000s.For me hearing them was like a big relief.At last somebody has got it right!

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.


I would not describe the Yamaha speakers as spectacular.Wilsons are spectacular.What the Yamahas are is truthful and quite understated because of that.If you favour listening to natural music and natural recordings that is.The midrange is spectacular in its naturalness I suppose.Certainly the most natural and real sounding midrange I have heard and I have owned every sort  of speaker.People who listen to electronic or heavily engineered /processed music might be better off with something else I suppose.But if real and true and natural is your goal I have not heard anything better than the NS5000.Which is  really what you would expect from a company that has more insight into how real instruments and voices sound than any other speaker maker.It took them a long time to get there though but really believe this new speaker and probably the use of a new material Zylon represents a major breakthrough.



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.
prof

Thank You for keeping this thread current. For the brand(s) that I have auditioned over the years, your assessment and evaluation, are on point.

Happy Listening!
Where did you hear the NS5000, in Canada or have they finally made it across the boarder to the USA?

I am considering these speakers but have them lower on my list (of 3 speakers)  because I have a small room at 12x11x9. The room is treated with acoustic panels. Any feedback as to whether the speaker would work for mid to low volume levels. This is for my home office. My dad heard these in Canada and has seen my room in USA, he told me that I should get them but he may not be taking proper consideration to the small room.
Hi prof,
I am also a Canadian, though from the west coast. I have been following your responses on threads here on the Gon. As you can see I do not respond much. My interest is in the updated PMC Fact.8 signature series. You have heard many speakers from your posts. Do you have any experience with PMC speakers. There is none on demo in my part of the world, Vancouver. 

Regards,
Allan


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.
I’ve been on a similar journey trying to upgrade my speakers which I loved and I was surprised and a little disappointed that buying class a speakers still ended in compromise rather than across the board improvement. One of the things I noticed was how similar different speakers sounded in the listening room.

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.


Hi @prof ,

Thank you for great review of Spendor D7.
It is similar to what I heard from Spendor D9.
I used Spendor 2/3 during 4 years and liked them.
14 years ago I moved to vintage Altec 604E and I still have been using these speakers.
I completely don't understand fashionable modern sound  (Focal, B&W, Wilson,...). It is so far away for natural acoustical, human and musical sound.
And it is sad for me that Spendor are moving to this detection.

Regards,
Alex.
@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.

@allangaard  My current speakers are PMC Twenty/24's.  I went through an extensive search before getting them, and I like them a lot, though I am nonetheless getting a bit antsy again.  When auditioning them, I also heard a similarly sized model in the Fact series, can't remember the number, and I preferred the Twenty, which sounded a little warmer/more forgiving to me.  The Facts sounded pretty darn neutral.  I haven't heard the TwentyFive series, but I read a couple of places that it may have shifted more towards the Fact sound signature.  I wish now, in retrospect, that I'd got the Twenty/26's.  With some extensive experiments in cabling, they could have been long-term keepers.  As it is, at some point I may move to a Spendor Classic 100 or Harbeth 40.2, as I'm still craving something with a little more bass, even more body, and a slightly more forgiving treble.
That is interesting that your friend will be getting the Fact.8 speakers in. I hope that they would be the new “signature” series. None the less, I would be interested in your thoughts of them in a controlled environment, for an extended time.
Also to note that Spendor has upgraded their “D line” of speakers.
There is now the D7.2 and the D 9.2. Interesting that these two English speaker manufacturers have done this upgrade at about the same time. Lastly, twoleftears, I heard that the 25/26 speakers need a bigger room to work in. I would be interested in those speakers but I think that they would be to big for my room. Something about the long transmission line at about 11 feet. So you should be about 10 or 11 feet away.

Allan

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.



Rich, Congratulations on your purchase. Having followed your journey, I'm glad you pulled the trigger. And as a person who has spent a lot of time in front of Perspectives, I'm confident you are going to find they meet your expectations. As I have noted before, I've heard them in several different environments; they seem to shine even in difficult rooms. To me they sound best with no toe in, unless you have to place them close to the sidewalls.
Regards-Al

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).
Nicely done Prof.-  enjoy them!  I have a pair of the original Nines and I'm still amazed at how different amps change the sound of these speakers more so than others I've owned.  I have not heard the Super 9 either.  Best of luck! 

bjesien,
Interesting about amps:  John Devore has said that he designs speakers with an easy load so that they will be more amp agnostic, so it seems to me his speakers should change less with different amplification than others.
I've heard the O series on tubes and solid state and they seemed to retain their character quite well.
But since I'm a tube-head, speakers that work well with tubes are always a good thing.
The Joseph speakers are a purportedly benign load for tube amps as well (though lower sensitivity).

When I was at the stereo shop at the counter purchasing the Joseph Perspectives, the store owner went down to the end of the room where the Perspectives were - and other systems - and turned on some music.I thought it was the Perspectives system he'd turned on and when I paid attention to the sound happening at the other end of the room I thought "uh-oh, that actually doesn't sound so great.  Seemed a bit...pedestrian, a bit dark.  Nothing special at all, not like I remember.  Am I making a mistake?"

But when I finished paying and went to the speakers, turned out it wasn't the Perspectives playing but a pair of Spendor A7 speakers.  Whew! 
I sat for a little bit and listened to the Spendors and, again like my experience of the D7, just didn't find anything particularly compelling in the sound.  Seemed to be a tad dark, but with those slightly steely, wiry higher frequencies similar to what I didn't care for in my D7 audition.  Though the A7 uses a different tweeter than the D7, it seems I don't really get along with the direction Spendor went with their modern tower speakers.   (That may change with a good audition some day, but that's my experience so far).



@prof: I find this quite surprising. I have listened to the previous generation Spendor Classic series in the SP2/3R2 speakers and it looks the same (I'm pretty sure it's actually the same) and to my ears sounded quite the similar to tweeter in the Spendor A4 that I have also listened to, albeit briefly. And I really liked this tweeter: silky, insightful, natural. The D7's tweeter, on the other hand, auditioned in the same system / room / day as the A4, sounded as you described it: steely, even piercing. Some users seem to suggest that burning in helps, but I kind of doubt it would totally change this tweeter's character.
Congratulations prof! It has been quite a ride! I have really enjoyed this thread. You have given us some great insight into the speakers that you have auditioned. You also have a great gift of being able to put your thoughts and impressions in print. I do have a question, are you going to keep the Spendor s3/5's? I just sold a pair,and stepped up to a pair of Graham Chartwell LS3/5's. The Spendors are really special speakers. 
     All the Best,
           Ray
donquichotte
My listen to the A7 was very brief.  It didn't have the same tweeter sound as the D7 I heard, which had a hard quality that made me want to turn the volume down.   Rather, the A7 higher frequencies just sort of sounded a bit, as I said, "wiry" or steely.  Not very natural.

But there's no way I'd put much on such a brief assessment.



rocray
Thank you.
No way I'm giving up my Spendors!  I'll still throw them in the system now and again.
I haven't heard the other iterations of the 3/5s (except the Harbeths, I think, at one point though I don't remember them well).
A very interesting thread. Glad to see that the OP was able to finally acquire a speaker that spoke to him.

Not to muddy the water, i wonder why nobody suggested a listen to some of the Sonus Faber speakers. The new SF Electa Amator 111 really is a special speaker...and I suspect if mated with a decent sub would have been a serious contender. 

The Joseph Perspective Graphene are more expensive than the SF EA111's...but probably do reach deeper into the bass without a sub required. However, i think the purity of the new SF has to be heard. 

BTW, one thought, buying speakers is usually about the synergy with one's room and upstream gear...sometimes not that easy to determine if you don't get to hear the speakers in question in one's own room.

Daveyf,
Thanks for the suggestion.  The SF speakers I've heard never really "spoke" to me.  The older versions were a bit too dark sounding for me, the newer versions seemed to have lightened up the tone, more toward neutral, but the last one I auditioned (I'm forgetting the model) didn't do it for me.  (I bought the original Perspectives, on discount - dealer demo model)

I'm pretty good at assessing whether a speaker will work in my room, but more to the point I've had the Joseph Perspectives in my home for audition before.
Cheers!




I may have missed it,did you sell the Thiels,or will you keep them on hand for a different flavor?

rocray

I sold my Thiel 3.7s a while back, but I'm hanging on to the Thiel 2.7s I've referenced here for, as you say, a different flavor.  It would be very hard to let go of those given I love how they look and their performance is just crazy good for the price I paid (used).


I don't expect the Joseph speakers to be the "be all and end all" of speakers for me, so it will be interesting to see  which speakers end up staying put in my system longest.

I had to sell my MBL 121 speakers to pay for the Joseph speakers, but after 10 years of owning the MBLs I was ok with finally releasing my death-grip on them to say bye-bye :-)

Thanks displayname!
I hope so too.
But I am self-aware enough to realize it's unlikely I have found an "end-game" speaker in the Josephs, simply due to my own proclivity for liking different aspects of different speakers.
I"d say though that of any speaker I've owned, the Thiel 3.7s seemed the most "end-game" for me.  Powered by my CJ tube gear, set up in a nice-sounding room, they just seemed to check off every box for me: Smooth, fatigue-free, clean of coloration yet warm and lush while being super detailed and alive sounding,  dense, palpable sonic images, a total disappearing act from top to bottom and the best soundstaging/imaging I've ever experienced at home.   And totally coherent, impossible to "hear out" the drivers, while having a very wide sweet spot and even tonal balance.   Every time I heard another speaker, including significantly more expensive, I'd come home and the Thiels only impressed me more.
They were just too big visually/ergonomically, for my room.
The smaller Thiel 2.7s I still own carry through the same voice as the bigger model (and I even prefer an element or two of the 2.7s) but listening critically, they are not quite on par with the level of refinement in the 3.7 flagship.
I'm excited, and a bit trepidatious about the Joseph speakers.  Ideally they work out well for me and I'd like to upgrade them to the "Graphene 2" version as soon as I can afford it.
The best way to get "end game" speakers is to go out and buy some speakers you cannot really afford, and then promptly retire.  That way you won't be able to afford to replace them even if you wanted to.
Almost there....

I now have my Joseph Audio Perspective (original) speakers in da house!  All set up.

First of all, wow these speakers are gorgeous! They have the rosewood finish with a beautiful grain structure, and with the fit and finish they just "glow" with a great luster. I can’t remember seeing a more high quality-looking speaker in person. I can just stare at the things with a grin!

When I was about to order a new pair last year, through my dealer, I’d been in touch with Jeff Joseph about ordering a rosewood pair (because I like wood grain) in the browner spectrum to best fit my room decor. He sent me a couple pictures of some finishes that had come in that were more on the brown side, which looked good. (But then...disaster struck and I had to forego ordering).

Well it turns out that Joseph sent that browner pair to my local dealer that summer for their demo model, which are the demo model I just bought, so I ended up with those speakers! They are only a year old and in perfect condition. (So nice, since I’m used to purchasing speakers second hand with inevitable nicks and blemishes here and there).

The black top/face of these speakers are the most prone to picking up/showing any scratches so I have to be careful there (even used cotton gloves to move them around). And on that note: Yesterday was the first day they were set up in my room, and yesterday the cable guy showed up to change our TV boxes to a new wi-fi based streaming system. The Joseph speakers are in my living room which doubles as our home theater, so the cable guy was working in there. At one point I enter the room and the cable guy has placed crap ON TOP of my speakers! (Remotes etc). I hurriedly took the stuff off and placed it on the sofa instead, inspected for scratches..whew...none yet. Then 1/2 hour later (he’s still working) I go in the room again and he’s placed them on the speakers again!!!! Cripes! I wanted to kick him out right there! First day I have the speakers and they are already being abused by some stranger!

It just reminds me of how "normal folk" don’t see speakers the way we do - they are generally used to cheap stuff that was just as good for holding the cigarette tray on top as for anything else. I’ve had similar instances when having big groups of people over watching UFC fights or whatever. It’s always the "friend" someone brought who thinks nothing of leaving his beer on top of my nice speakers!

Anyway, I was all ready to start listening to the speakers last night when...my music server no longer showed up. Aaagh. Of course. The cable guy! He’d changed everything around, new modem, new wi-fi router...my system no longer sees my raspberry Pi/Logitech server. And I"m crap trying to figure this stuff out.

On to trouble-shooting....




Oh my...I cringed through the later half of the above post...Rich, fire that cable guy!
Prof-hope the Josephs fulfill all your expectations-I am sure they will. 
On that topic of others not having a clue, I got conned one year into hosting a Christmas party for our law firm. I knew it would be a mistake. I asked my son-then in high school-to monitor and protect my listening room which adjoins our dining room. Since the caterers were stocking food in the dining room, the listening room was clearly in view. At one point in the evening I came into the listening room and found not one, not two, but three half-filled cold and condensation-soaked beer cans on top of my loudspeakers-at that time modded B&W 805's on stands. Since our staff were invited to bring +1's, I had to assume it was one of the +1's as I know the lawyers in my office or the staff would not have done it unless really drunk. Like you said, non-enthusiasts just don't understand. With a dedicated listening room with fancy acoustic panels everywhere and with huge pieces of electronics, you would think they would realize this is not your typical JC Penney system-in-a-box set-ups but you can't underestimate ignorance or lack of respect or even, dare I say it, flat out resentment. Luckily, I got them off in time to avoid any permanent harm. Those 805's are going to that same son who is now 26 and a budding audiophile. 

fsonicsmith

Ouch!  Maddening.

The hosting a party thing reminds me too: We hosted a party years ago, many parents and kids.  I'd just installed our new home theater in our living room, including one of my prized home theater possessions, a very rare Hales Transcendence Center channel, below the projection screen.Hales was gone as a company and very few of those speakers were ever made.


The partying was being done in the back family room/kitchen of our house so I hoped the room wouldn't be invaded, though I kept a wary eye.

Well, wouldn't you know it, I noticed one little guy (I dunno, maybe 5 years old or something) trundling toward the home theater room on his own.  I followed to see him in the room looking around, hand outstretched to touch the projection screen (VERY hard to get any finger marks off those!).   As politely and firmly and quickly as I could I asked him not to touch the screen.  Suggested he go back and join the others.He was also inches in front of the Hales center speaker, and I asked if he could just step away from that speaker as it could be damaged easily.

The lil' brat grinned at me and then raised back his foot in a kicking position, to kick in the speaker drivers, looking at me grinning.   It was someone else's kid, I wasn't going to physically grab him away to save the speakers, so I was stuck pleading from a distance "please don't, how about just going back to the party?"  The kid makes a swift kicking motion to the speakers, I gasp, he stops his foot just before the speakers touching the grill clothe, grinning, pulls his leg back and does it again, getting a kick out of my panic.  I'm stuck at this point not being able to effectively call to a parent to help as I didn't even know this kid's name or who his parents were.  And if I ran to the back of the house to start asking whose kid he was and for that parent to help, who knows what the kid would do while I was gone?  So for what seemed like far too long, this kid held my hostage with his foot raised to kick in my speaker just because he enjoyed being a little sh*t.

Eventually he got bored and left.

Charming.



JOSEPH AUDIO PERSPECTIVES - OWNER REPORT

Well, I figured after all the pixels spilled on this thread concerning my deliberations I ought to mention how things are going with my purchase of the Joseph Audio Perspective (original) speakers.

I’ve had them up and running for a couple of weeks.

I’ve already written a lot about the things I knew I liked about the Joseph Perspectives ("JPs" for the rest of this post). So I’ll start with some of the concerns I had before buying them. These concerns arose from my own demos at the store, from having an in-home demo a couple years ago, and from reading the original stereophile review.

1. TOO BRIGHT?

The original stereophile review of the Perspective mentioned that they were tipped up enough in the high frequencies to be somewhat ruthless and bright *on some recordings.* I don’t like piercing sounding speakers (who does, really?). And especially in my case, as I’d mentioned I had an exacerbation of my hearing sensitivity (hyperacusis...which I don’t usually suffer from) that I’d been trying to get over, and that makes anything high pitched and sharp absolutely brutal and painful to my ears.I worried that this was perhaps not yet the time to buy the Perspectives.Though, in store demos and at home, I found them smooth sounding for the most part.

2. TOO DARK?

Yeah, sounds like a contradiction right? Yes, sort of. I occasionally heard the JPs to sound a bit on the darker, less airy side than I’d liked.Almost "too smooth" in the high frequencies where the "black background" almost seemed to be part of a shelving down of the airier frequencies.


3. LOOSE BASS?

This was a combo of having heard the JPs sound occasionally a bit loose in the bass in demos, combined with what seemed to be some confirmation in the original stereophile review.

4. NOT DYNAMIC ENOUGH?

In my original at home demo, I sometimes felt I wasn’t hearing the dynamics I thought the speakers were capable of.


5. TOO THIN SOUNDING?

I wondered if the JPs would be the right choice because since the time I’d thought I wanted a pair, I seem to be gravitating towards a thicker, richer sound (hence, all my auditioning of the Devore O speakers).

So, I was somewhat nervous to roll the dice. But since I’d heard the speakers often sound glorious, and since I had a good deal for the pair I wanted, and because they suited my aesthetic/ergonomic listening room requirements particularly well....I pulled the trigger.


On to my user report....

RESULTS SO FAR:


These speakers are GLORIOUSLY GREAT!


Where to start?


First, they are the most gorgeous-looking speakers I’ve ever seen (at least anywhere near their price point).


But beyond that, they certainly do the "disappearing and soundstaging/imaging" thing like mad. But I have to admit I’d be more impressed by this if I hadn’t been so used to most of my speakers having been stellar performers in the same respect. But, it’s nice to have.


I did a quick set up, dialled in the imaging and generally balance using some tracks I always use from Everything But The Girl (Amplified Heart).

Then played a track I remembered loving on the Perspectives, "There He Is" from the Amazing Spiderman 2 soundtrack (not a soundtrack I love, but one that impressed me on the Perspectives in demos). Sure enough there were those timbral and resolution qualities I loved. The track has many very subtle plucking, tinkling, textural elements lightly swirling about that lead up to a big "synth bass drop" moment, and all those elements just sparkled in the air around the speakers wonderfully. It was effortless to hear even the quietest, most subtle sounds. Then the bass synth part swelled up to become a single column of pulsating air right in the middle of the soundstage. And, again, this reminded me of what I really liked about the JPs - they have this meaty, dense, tonally "chewy" midbass-on-down quality. That bass pulsing column of air ends in a lower bass "drop" down and the JPs just sent that wave of low bass rolling along the floors to my chair, filling up the whole room, an a dramatic manner. Which again reminded me: these speakers have a way with soundtracks, with the "drama" of how the music swells with power, retreats to delicacy, suddenly punches out...just the general flexing of dynamics. They are just very engaging in this way.


Then another track from that same soundtrack (I think it might have been "My Enemy") came up. That soundtrack combines orchestral instruments - often delicately used - with often heavy synth intrusions.


This track was nuts on the JPs! It’s going along doing some fairly sedate soundtrack stuff when all of a sudden these synth bursts crack the air like lightning and on the JPs these things just burst in to the room with such power and tonal complexity and SIZE. I remember a review (maybe it was an Art Dudley review of some Spendor speakers) where the speakers were describing as having the surprising capability of suddenly sounding much larger than they’d led you to expect "like a cat suddenly puffing up it’s fur to become bigger." That’s what it was like with the JPs. The amount and quality of bass especially just takes you by surprise, and it’s like they suddenly expand in to bigger speakers at a moments notice. It wasn’t that the synth parts simply sounded of low-bass, but they sounded BIG and authoritative, as if coming from bigger floor standing speakers. And then when the music went quiet again, it was super delicate. That really was the moment where I knew I’d chosen killer speakers given my love of soundtrack music.


As I started playing a variety of music - funk, disco, soundtrack, jazz, electronica and more - the general sense of the sound was an expansive, super-refined clarity and tonal purity, where any scrim of hash was wiped away leaving the exact timbral qualities of any instrument pure and obvious - the metallic ring and bite of brass instruments sounded unequivocally made of metal, wood of wood, subtle synth parts mixed with acoustic instruments were completely discernible. There is a sense of crazy-high resolution, without any hard or grainy analytical tinge. The "clearing away of haze" means that the exact nature of the reverb in any recording is very obvious.


If the recording contains closer mic’d instruments, the sound becomes appropriated huge and life-like "drum set in the room" stuff.


Though I had really liked aspects of the JP bass in demos, I worried about the bass being possibly overwhelming in my room (though my room is generally great for getting good, even bass). But it turns out the bass (and it’s integration up to the upper bass/lower mids) is fantastic!

First, it’s tight, punchy, and every bit as tonally beautiful as the rest of the frequencies. Jaco Pastorius’ bass just appears as a dense instrument between the speakers, and there is more tonal subtlety, beauty and exactness in how his bass is rendered than I’ve heard before. And that’s generally speaking true of most electric bass instruments, and kick drums, through these speakers. Far from one-noting it, they untangle the timbral qualities of drums and bass expertly. Yet with a Big Juicey punchy quality that really drives music.


I’m especially happy with kick drums. One of the reasons I’ve been attracted to the Devore O speakers is how their big, round bass quality made drum sets sound particularly impactful, where I was always aware of what the kick drum was doing. I’m surprised how close the JP speakers have come to that quality. Their bass also has a big, round, hefty quality (though focused!) that makes kick drums send this "punch of air/bass) OUT of the speakers to the listener, so I’m feeling that bass drum’s rhythm.


My Thiel 2.7s (like the bigger 3.7s) still have among the best bass I’ve heard in terms of how focused, dense, controlled and punchy it sounds.

But I’d say the JP speakers add a bit more "fun" in to the mix, in the way their bass has that projection and reach-out-to-the-listener quality.

My legs are often resting on an ottoman and when the JP speakers are doing bass, I can feel it through the ottoman in to my legs, which I don’t remember from the Thiels. (Still love the Thiels though!).


I can crank the JPs quite loud to listen to from a room down the hall, and they really kick ass!


As for the high frequencies, I’ve found positions in which they are very extended and airy, having that "lit up" character which is really nice.



Too bright? NO! Thank goodness! The vast majority of content has been so smooth and so clear that if anything the JPs have allowed me to play at ever higher sound levels. They just never give any impression of sounding harder or grittier or of distortion creeping in, so I can listen somethings a bit "too loud" (louder than I should at the moment). Got to watch that. They also actually sound pretty nice at lower listening volumes, with their combination of rich bass and clarity. Though upping the volume does help give a better sense of dynamics.


I was listening to some soundtracks last night on LP, the original Superman LP I’ve listened to my whole life (not very good recording quality) and a more recent re-issue of the Planet Of The Apes (Goldsmith) and I was marveling at how authentic, precise and beautiful all the instruments sounded. And how natural the dynamic swings all sounded. I certainly heard more from the Superman soundtrack than I ever remembered.


Overall the sonic impression I get from the Joseph speakers is a sense of "luxuriousness." That is, the sound is just so "high quality," smooth and complex.


As against other speakers I own: The little Spendor s3/5s still are the champs at sounding "filled out" and doing voices with a truly human quality. The JPs are very clear and timbrally convincing, but that BBC thing is still something special. The Thiels (which I haven’t actually directly compared yet) are still a bit larger in sonic size and weight and more evenly lush from top to bottom. My little Thiel 02s, which I’ve mentioned as a sort of benchmark sound I can’t let go, actually could sound on some tracks even more palpable and dynamically energized (without the lower bass).


I’d still love to have heard the Devore speakers at my place, and my jones for the Devores isn’t totally gone. But then, hey, I’m a speaker-whore.


But overall, the JP speakers have left me hugely impressed, and in some ways are the best speaker I’ve ever owned (and among the best, in some ways for what I listen for, I’ve heard anywhere).


(Also: I want to hug and kiss my good old Conrad Johnson Premier 12 140W/side tube monoblocks. There’s a reason these things have stayed in my system for 20 years, powering all manner of speakers. They’ve never failed to come through and they are driving the JPs beautifully - I’m getting that organic CJ quality in the mids/highs while also getting excellent bass control and dynamics).