DeVore O/93 or PureAudioProject Duet15 for a First Watt SIT-3?

Very different sounding speakers. question do you have the room behind your speakers to accommodate Open Baffles?  OB’s need a good amount of space behind to properly integrate the back and front wave, usually 4’-8'.   

I’ve heard the 0/93’s and they can be very nice indeed. But after going to an OB recently I don’t think I could go back to a box. If you have the room I would give the Pure Audio Project speakers a listen.  

OB’s done well can be very good, if not large. The 0/93’s will integrate easier and fit more room sizes but interact more with the side walls than OB’s do. Where the OB’s will have a smaller sweet spot than the 0/93’s. Mind you the OB’s should have a larger, deeper sound stage than the box speaker. Trade off both ways but for me not hearing the box was the turning point in my journey.

The room is 19‘x12’ and 16' high (part is 8' hight).
There are bookshelves, a big sofa, an armchair and a carpet on wood floor.
Speakers have 5‘-6’ behind.
The listening armchair is 8‘ from the speakers (behind me I have 10’ to the back wall).

For me it is really important to have a warm sound, a wide and deep stage even at low volume.
The Avalon Indra are great, but they sound best at medium-high volume.

I have went through everything you are considering, in the end I went with Volti Audio, talking to Nelson Pass, tons of emails I went with the Sit-4 and I am so glad I did…what ever speaker you get consider the Sit-4. I have been using it since July this year and it really warmed up my system without losing any detail…one good thing about the Pass gear it’s solid and never a problem…it]f this tells you anything I sold all my tube gear and tubes…the Sit-4 is 10 watts of Class A that drives these Volti Horn speakers to a beautiful sound…

I have 2 friends which owned both the O/93 and O/96 DeVores. They replaced them both with speakers which conform more to the current standards of design. First order crossovers, narrow baffles, more inert cabinet construction, etc. It didnt take them long after getting the new speakers to discern exactly how much these DeVores actually missed or got completely wrong. 

+1Glennewdick

I own the SiT3 and Caladan open baffle speakers. This is a wonderful pairing with all the sonic attributes you look for, as long as the room is big enough. I bought the Caladan’s for a 14x15x8 listening room. With room treatments, a near field listening position and multiple amp/preamp combos they sound good but not great. I don’t want near field.   In my larger room 28x20x8 at 5-6 feet from the back and side walls the OB’s are magical. I already have Volti Rivals in the big room, which are also magical, so now I have a first world dilemma.

I have 2 friends which owned both the O/93 and O/96 DeVores. They replaced them both with speakers which conform more to the current standards of design. First order crossovers, narrow baffles, more inert cabinet construction, etc. It didnt take them long after getting the new speakers to discern exactly how much these DeVores actually missed or got completely wrong. 

Before I get to the heart of your post, let's get something straight; it is "DeVORE Fidelity" if referring to the company and John Devore if referring to the person, but there is no "DeVore". But that is a minor thing. 

As to the gist of your post, I happen to own both Devore O/93's and narrow baffle speakers with inert cabinets. "Current standards of design"? Who's standard are you referring to? My O/93's in my room and in my system far-outshine my other set of loudspeakers. No contest. They run circles around them. The other set are Spendor D7.2's which admittedly don't have, to my knowledge, first order crossovers. 

What sets the O/93's apart is more than truth to tone and timbre-those large baffles project a certain sense of physicality and body that are completely missing in the narrow baffled speakers. 

It all boils down to the non-debatable truth that all loudspeaker designs, regardless of price, present compromises. No one loudspeaker can do everything. There is a certain "blemished midrange" with the O/93's that can be heard at times and they are not imaging/soundstage champions. But they are imminently satisfying to those of us who listen for certain things. 

When so many widely respected reviewers have Devore O/93's or 96's and when so few appear on the used market, that has to tell you something. 

And last, for now, there are advantages to high sensitivity easy-load loudspeakers and wide baffled loudspeakers are much more suited to those design characteristics. 

Nope, one more thing. Any post that starts with "I have a friend" or "I have two friends" should immediately alert the rest of us that some disinformation/confusion/distortion is about to follow. 

@ulul 18 Watts (or 30 into 4 Ohms) isn't a great deal of power. From the looks of the distortion curve vs power, if you want the most out of this amp it really should be loafing. I think it will sound fine with any of the speakers you mention, but that won't be the same as sounding its best.

It seems this amp flies in the face of most amps by having actually lower distortion into 4 Ohms, while still having a good harmonic spectrum of the distortion.

The trick is that speakers are measured using 2.83 Volts at 1 meter. So if its a 4 Ohm load, to make 2.83V Volts the amp is making 2 Watts. So a speaker that is 95 dB and 8 Ohms is 3dB more efficient than one that is 95dB and 4 Ohms. For that reason you are looking for a speaker that might be 100 to 103dB and also 4 Ohms, which strikes me as a bit unusual.

In an average room I found with speakers of 97dB that I needed a lot more power than I would have guessed, so as to keep things relaxed at normal listening levels. Good luck with the quest!

Fred,

I thought you were dead!  Sorry but not going to bite. 

I thought you were dead!  Sorry but not going to bite. 

First you post something that is indefensible, and then when I respond you accuse ME of trolling? I think it is safe to say that you can not respond with anything substantive and that it was me who should not have risen to the bait. 

Since I own the O/93 and I has something to say about them, my post was anything but a troll. 

And yes, Fred is dead, but KICK OUT THE JAMS MOTHER ________!

That is the power of telling the truth. You dont care if anyone believes you.

Short of giving you names and addresses how could I prove that I am being honest?

I think you should post proof that you own 0/93s. A copy of the receipt will do.

This is going downhill. I am sorry if my reference to your two friends upset you-that was not necessary on my part. But my point was that you have not owned or apparently listened to the speakers at issue. As to proof of my ownership, just go to my profile. You do know how to do that don't you? 

It is the fashion these days to get upset over the tiniest thing. Sorry that DeVore speakers appear to be a trigger. But your basic premise is wrong and you simply didnt like my comments on a speaker which you adore. Pretty silly. 

I have spent over 100 hours listening to the 0/96s and at least 50 on the 0/93s. Both of these speakers were the mains in 2 houses in which we would hold monthly listening sessions. Each month we would bring a different component, cables, etc.

My take away was that the 0/93s were certainly a better value than the 0/96s and sounded more balanced.

On these speakers we used some less expensive solid state (First Watt most recent production, Parasound, Aragon), P.P. tube amps (VAC and older Zesto), SET (mainly 300B Audio Note both single and parallel) and OTLs. Universally the OTLs were preferred. I am convinced that the 0/96 is not a 96db efficient speaker. 

My point is you could not possibly know if I have listened to the DeVores. Had I gushed all over them you would not have questioned my legitimacy or motive. Therein lies the (your) problem.

these DeVores actually missed or got completely wrong. 

This is incorrect, if so, why so much praise, so many sales, and few resales. This is simply that it didn’t meet a specific person’s preferences.

After demoing many speakers at major audio shows and showrooms, the O/96 are one of the most “musical” speakers. Very surprised to hear of purchasing dissatisfaction after bringing them home, would expect the buyer to know what type of sonic this particular speaker offers. If they were expecting end-to-end linear neutrality, they didn’t do their homework.

So no, these speakers weren’t “wrong”, but rather it’s the insufficient method in which these speakers were chosen.

Not at all. In this case "musical" translates to colored. All you need do is compare this series of speaker with other types of designs to hear exactly what they portray that is not in the original signal. Not to say that this type of sound doesnt have its place and certainly its fans, but if you judge a speaker by how well it recreates the original signal these are a failure on numerous fronts.

What I object to with this series is exactly the appeal to others. This extra body, the thickness and over reaching with a tendency to make Janis Joplin sound like Janis Ian. Designs that pay homage to the speaker designs of the past and dont expose bad recordings. They are much less offensive than other speakers on poor recordings. This too is not a positive attribute. I think that this is the main reason we all preferred the more linear sound of OTLs on these speakers.

The first of the speakers purchased were the 0/96s because this friend wanted a "warm" design which was tube friendly. After discussing several speakers which I thought displayed this attribute, he purchased the DeVores. He was very happy as was the other friend who bought the 0/93 blind based on the 0/96 performance. Both lived happily until I brought over a pair of speakers in the price range of the 0/96s. 

The appeal of the O series is obvious and not without merit. They simply arent a transducer to my taste. That how all this started was me stating an opinion. Do I really need to start playing the game of prefacing everything I say with an "IMO" or similar? To my ears they got many things completely wrong. 

In favor of these speakers. The former owner of the 0/96s when he plays very loud or plays bad recordings misses the speakers. Both pairs sold quickly and at very good prices. All of us miss the looks of the speakers. Support from the company was superb and construction quality was excellent.

So take this as a story  of evolution. After experiencing fine examples of differing speaker designs, my friends choose a direction different from you and the Fred. 

The room

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kbz1r12bfxa544r/IMG_2047.JPG?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/lj3539yjmyhakhay5wimd/IMG_2050.JPG?rlkey=v0hlg0nssyz1mgzbj54mnegwv&dl=0

Well going from what look to be Avalons to DeVores will certainly be an awakening. Completely different DNA. You have a problem with the placement of your speakers. They are far too close to each other. If you could bring them further into the room and put a greater distance between them this would help a great deal. Great looking room just not particularly audio friendly at this point. Something to consider is spending some time and a bit of money on the acoustics before changing speakers or any component. Room treatments are easy to make and there also exist a great many premade items. 

The position seems strange, but it is the result of a year of micro-movements of the speakers. If I increase the distance between them you can hear the music coming from one speaker, whereas this way there is more perspective fusion.
In the past I also had a MiniDSP, but then when I did the acoustic analysis it turned out that the Indra's performance is very linear and there are no holes or emphasis, so I removed the MiniDSP... 

I have the pure audio project duets only 3ft out from fr wall, they are great. Sidewall reflections less of problem also. I had Spatial Audio OB before this, like a gateway to OB. But Pure A P a cut above.

I heard the DeVore 0/96 speakers driven by an 8W 300B amp sounding great. I spent most of my time at the audio show listening to these finding them fun and entertaining. Certainly these can't be accused of 'got completely wrong'

Someone here with an agenda?

Your room appears to need some acoustic treatment.

Can we maybe just say we all like what we like? Some folks like narrow baffle speakers, some like wide and some like open baffles? It’s preference and not a contest folks!

And @ulul I find sensitive speakers in general to be good for lower level listening. I run Audio Note AN-J’s in an admittedly small room and rarely get above 70dbs using 3.5 watt 2a3 monoblocks.

I’ve heard and liked DeVore 0/96s in a friends system and their reference system at CAF. I’ve only heard PAP speakers at CAF and didn’t love them but take that with a grain of salt audio shows being what they are.

They are much less offensive than other speakers on poor recordings. This too is not a positive attribute. I think that this is the main reason we all preferred the more linear sound of OTLs on these speakers.

One of the S'Phile reviewers recently said something worthy of quoting-"If you have to play only great recordings for your system to sound great, it's time to change your system" (or something very close). While I am glad to see you now say that these are your opinions and not fact, your initial post and even the bold-faced sentence come across as statements of fact. 

In this case "musical" translates to colored. All you need do is compare this series of speaker with other types of designs to hear exactly what they portray that is not in the original signal. Not to say that this type of sound doesnt have its place and certainly its fans, but if you judge a speaker by how well it recreates the original signal these are a failure on numerous fronts.

You touched, purposefully or unwittingly, on a subject of much legitimate debate. Classical music fans love to argue that an optimum loudspeaker should be capable of recreating the sound they hear in their favorite row and seat in their favorite music hall but in the real world no transducer or speaker system known to mankind can do that and the very "model/conceit" goes flying out the window when the music was created and preserved for future playback in a studio. 

And then comes the unfortunate truth that speakers with perfectly flat and extended frequency response and dispersion characteristics can (and often do) sound boring. You are giving up your spare time to relax and enjoy, not examine and study as if in a laboratory hunched down over a microscope. Look at it this way-why do headphones which are capable of perfectly flat frequency response, no room interaction, and no cross-overs still implement some variation of the Harmon Curve? The answer, in case you don't know, is that they better enable the BRAIN to perceive a recreation of the real event and they sound better. 

And finally comes the reality (my version of reality?) that every audio system is an amalgamation of compromises from source to transducers. My point is simple; lighten up, relax, and have fun. Does your system make you wish you were young again and wailing on the guitar in front of a crowd? Does it make you want to get up and dance? The O/96's do that, better than my O/93's. I am currently strongly considering a pair of Volti Rival SE's. Talk about having fun, it is Greg Roberts' motto!

...strongly considering a pair of Volti Rival SE's..

@fsonicsmith 

I have the Volti Rival.  At 100db, I plan to start my tube amp journey with flea watt amps. Greg confirmed 2 watt SETs are fine.  

@ulul 

Since the PAP is a more neutral choice, you may want to consider the Volti Razz.  Very efficient, open, fast, dynamic.  A clear window to the warmth of your amplifier.  Many positive reviews.  I heard them a few times at major audio shows.

+1 jond

i heard the PAP at CAF in 2 rooms. I expected the downstairs room with VPI to be amazing but unfortunately it was one of the few rooms i really disliked. 
 

I had a pair of Spatial X5s OBs for a couple of years and largely enjoyed them which is probably why I had the expectations that I had; however to me the PAPs sounded very thin listening to rock. Maybe it was the show and maybe listening to Jazz might have been totally different; maybe it was just me. Others appeared to be enjoying. 
Id certainly recommend listening yourself first.

And for classical? 

@ulul 

Ze'ev of Pure  Audio Project used a Pass Class A integrated (The INT25) with the Duet 15 to excellent effect.  I think the extra watts (up to 80 at 4 ohms) were used well by the PAP speakers.  

I have no reservations with recommending the Duet 15 and the Pass Labs XA25.  Superb sound.  

Are PAPs more difficult to place in the room than DeVores?

Have a look at Coherent Audio from Ontario Canada.  I have the 15s paired with a 45 Tube Amp and a 20 watt Class A amp.  Both with very good results.

I own a pair of DeVore O/93’s and can strongly recommend them. I’ve yet to hear the “what they got wrong” part of them… However, you rarely see them on the used market and there are plenty of reasons for that. As for the, “narrow baffles, more inert cabinet construction” speaker, there’s nothing wrong with that design either. With that said, you can always take your pick of the litter, because there are plenty of them out there on the used market to grab. Good luck and have fun. 

I own a pair of DeVore O/93’s and can strongly recommend them. I’ve yet to hear the “what they got wrong” part of them… However, you rarely see them on the used market and there are plenty of reasons for that. As for the, “narrow baffles, more inert cabinet construction” speaker, there’s nothing wrong with that design either. With that said, you can always take your pick of the litter, because there are plenty of them out there on the used market to grab. Good luck and have fun. 

  I have a virtually unused pair of Spendor D7.2's with IsoAcoustic footers for anyone interested. Original owner, boxes. They do nothing wrong. They are boring. 

I do hear the little midrange discontinuity/woody-notch in the O/93's but it does not phase me. But I often find myself attracted to women with slightly beaked noses. Character.