Devore Fidelity Orangutan O/96


My neighbor had to move some heavy furniture from one room to another so he asked me for help earlier today. Although, we've been neighbors for almost two years I had never been inside his house up until this afternoon. As I walked through the foyer and into his family room, I saw the speakers hooked up to some McIntosh separates. I have to admit that these were one of the most beautiful speakers I had ever seen. He offered to play some music and of course I was not going to say no. They sounded quite decent, although the sound was not as hefty or lush as I was expecting. Don't know if it was his equipment or room (wood floor, no rug, lots of windows), or maybe the Devore's are not quite going after those big, lush, and slightly warmer sound characteristics.

I'm actually saving up money to buy Harbeth SHL5+, or used 40.1, sometime next year. But boy did the Devore Orangutans caught my attention. And yes I know I shouldn't be basing my decision on looks alone, but if they're comparable to Harbeth in terms of sound quality, I'm definitely interested in exploring.

Just wondering if someone has had a chance to compare them directly to the Harbeth speakers I'm considering. Anyone moved from Harbeth to Devore O/6 or vice versa? This will be a system that I'll be building from scratch so I do have the luxury of building the system around my speakers -- total budget is around $15000. I usually buy used equipment whenever I can.

Please note that I'm not soliciting advice for other speakers at this time. Mostly interested in hearing about real world comparisons between the Devore Fidelity Orangutans and Harbeth SHL5+ or 40.1/2.
128x128arafiq

Showing 4 responses by fsonicsmith

@masi61 
I am in Columbus. I own O/93's and not O/96's but if you ever want to hear the O/93's, just let me know. 
Don Better up in Cleveland is likely your nearest dealer. I bought mine from him. 
I heard O/93’s at Command Performance a while ago. They were fine but they really didn’t draw me in; there was no magic. I’ve never heard the O/96’s, but from the name, the price, and what I’ve read about them, I gather they are a step (or two) up. On that same trip I heard 40.2’s at Deja Vu, which are now what I own.
BTW, I was very impressed by Audio Note AN-E’s, which I gather were part of Devore’s inspiration for the O series.
This is a perfectly legitimate take.

So I spent a solid 2 hours demoing the O’96 this past July at In Living Stereo in Manhattan. The room was extremely well treated and the accompanying electronics were Mactone. I don’t remember the cabling.

From my written notes on that day - O’96s throw a wide soundstage, very dynamic. You can feel the instruments, the drums, the bass thumping. These speakers put out a ton of energy but unfortunately this wall of sound is VERY fatiguing and very forward in your face without finesse. Also imaging is a bit vague and smeared.
And this is also a perfectly legitimate take.

I listened to the O/96’s for hours at Axpona ’19 and the O/93’s only slightly less at Axpona (just for the sake of interest even though I own a pair) and at Axpona, the O/96’s were impressive and immersive and the O/93’s were just so-so. The reason is simple-the O/96’s were set up along the long wall of a small room to listen near-field and with better associated equipment. Bottom line-neither speaker is an imagining champion but both are capable of great touch and tone IF you position them with care and stick to complimentary electronics and speaker cable.
mquery,

I was never able to get a lot of depth from the soundstage of the O/93 in auditions (even though they were well away from the back wall). The "wall of sound" seems to be a fairly consistent take on that speaker (though I did find that the imaging was quite good - specific enough to satisfy me).

I've heard the O/96s do nice depth, they they too tend to draw things closer to the listener vs many other more sound-stagey speakers.
Same experience here. Width yes. Depth no. These are my everyday loudspeaker. No loudspeaker does it all. An argument can be made that the O/93 is more refined and balanced than the O/96. A cogent argument at that. If I had a larger room, I would choose the O/96's. To heck with "refined", the O/96's make you want to dance. 

mquery,

I was never able to get a lot of depth from the soundstage of the O/93 in auditions (even though they were well away from the back wall). The "wall of sound" seems to be a fairly consistent take on that speaker (though I did find that the imaging was quite good - specific enough to satisfy me).

I've heard the O/96s do nice depth, they they too tend to draw things closer to the listener vs many other more sound-stagey speakers.
Same experience here. Width yes. Depth no. These are my everyday loudspeaker. No loudspeaker does it all. An argument can be made that the O/93 is more refined and balanced than the O/96. A cogent argument at that. If I had a larger room, I would choose the O/96's. To heck with "refined", the O/96's make you want to dance.

Wasn't this supposed to be a DeVore thread? Well I have an urgent news bulletin-the O/93's DO soundstage depth! Who knew? I thought I had great vinyl rigs that were dialed in. I knew my AMR DP777 was not replicating the SQ of my turntables. So I figured that was that. Yesterday I installed a new DAC, an SW1X DAC II Special with USB to SPDIF converter built in. For those that don't know, it is a non-oversampling 44.1Khz only design not altogether different from Audio Note UK's designs though the proprietor says that there are differences. No mass produced stuff here-this DAC is hand-built to order. But to the point (Prof I hope you see this) I now have soundstage depth and it sounds organic. I take everything I said about the limitations of the O/93 back. Besides depth, the bass has more foundation and imaging is first-rate. It was a matter of source, not loudspeaker limitation. I stand corrected.