Dynaudio Focus 140 vs Totem Model 1 Signature


Looking for a comparison of the dynamic capabilities of these two speakers. I've heard the Totems and was impressed by their dynamic snap (as well as their bass and soundstaging). The Dynaudios are quite similar to my understanding (same bass driver) but a bit smoother on top and easier to drive--a possible benefit since I'll be using an NAD C325BEE, at least in the short-term. If the Dynaudios are as dynamic, I'm wondering if they might be my better choice. Also, does anyone know if either plays better at low volumes?

Thanks in advance!
ablang

Showing 6 responses by ablang

Thanks, Rumadian--I was leaning that way myself, except for not having heard them. I may take the leap all the same.
Appreciate this input, guys. Poking around last night I found an ecoustics forum in which some Dynaudio lovers talked about the need for higher current and explained that it helped low volume listening. It's good to have that confirmed here, and it echoes what I experienced when I had a Marantz and Jolida 100W integrateds in my system.

I think I might leap for the speakers first (assuming I can find a used pair) and upgrade the amp a few months down the road. Any sub-1K used amp suggestions that pair well with the Dyns would be great to file away: if I could keep it closer to 600-700, that might make it easier.

That's interesting to know about the drivers, too! I've seen the Hi-Vi drivers but didn't know Totem used them...

Thanks again!
Well, I'll definitely have to start off feeding the new speakers with the C325 and step up later when I have the money. I'd figured the Totems might do better at lower volumes because they have a little more treble emphasis, but I think I might be more satisfied over time with the Dynaudios' balance.

Rumadian--you mention Naim and Simaudio amps. My question, particularly concerning the Naims, is if even with a lower rating in watts, do they supply sufficient current such as you describe doing well for the Dyns? Simaudio's new integrated is 50W, and it would fall in my price range used. Not sure if I'll need to go for more pure power instead. Would a 50W tube integrated with good current like a Prima Luna or Cayin do the job?

After a decade with essentially my starter system, I'm looking to make my first significant upgrades--seeing the path ahead is helpful, so I know what to look for. Looking to put together a setup that's worth holding onto and has synergy. Thanks again for all the help and suggestions.
Thanks again, Rumadian. Looks like I have some strong possibilities that won't break the bank. I've liked what I've heard about Simaudio gear, and I am leaning heavily toward the Dynaudios.
I saw that this thread had been revived recently and thought I might post word on how it all worked out for me. I ended up with the opportunity to buy the original Totem Model One and a pair of the Dynaudio Focus 140s at the same time and do a back-to-back home audition. My previous speakers (of ten years) had been KEF Q15s, and I was looking for something that would provide a substantial upgrade in overall sound quality while providing a lifelike midrange (the KEFs were brilliant at this for the price) and a little more low-end extension.

Prior to looking at the Totems and Dyns, I bought and briefly used a pair of Spendor S3/5s. They had the midrange in spades but not enough low-end for my 14x18 listening room; and, strangely, the highs sounded very tilted-up to my ears, possibly because of a dip they have in the upper mids. The Totems got to me first, and I was struck by three things immediately: first, the above responders were right that my C325BEE didn't have enough juice to get the low-end out of them (and I know they can go pretty convincingly low); second, the midrange was amazing and involving; third, the highs sounded over-accentuated--lip-smackings and breath jumped out of the mix, crowd noise in the background of jazz albums seemed boosted, horns had an edgier-than-real-life quality. For all this, the imaging was INCREDIBLE. They reminded me quite a bit, actually, of some Grado phones I've heard and of my old AKG K501s. I definitely think some of the edginess in the highs had to do with the limits of my amp, but measurements in Stereophile and UHF reviews show a few treble spikes, and I think that's what I was hearing. All in all, even as I found myself dazzled by their performance, I found them fatiguing. But man are they beautiful--and tiny! My wife and I both wanted to love them, but she heard the same things I did, so we set them aside and hooked the KEFs back up till the Dyns arrived.

The Dyns are beautiful speakers, too, and they're such an easy load that the C325BEE was plenty for them. My first reaction to them after having the others in the system was to notice how enormously relaxed I felt listening to them. Their frequency balance tilts toward the warm side, and I found myself able to listen enjoyably at a higher than usual volume to the same recordings that came across as brash and harsh through the Totems. They excel at dynamics, too: I dug through every Art Blakey recording I own, loving how his drum kit snaps out of the mix. And with surprising quantities and quality of bass, too. I initially compared them favorably to my Sennheiser HD600s. The one other thing that was immediately apparent (and very different than the Senns) was that the midrange didn't seem quite as lucid as through the other speakers, including the KEFs. After all the merry-go-rounding I decided to stick with them, but after about a month I found that I was listening to lots of rock but less and less jazz and classical. Putting on some of my favorite albums, I figured out why: the midrange that matters so much for acoustic instruments and voices seemed congested and thick. For rock, where the Dyns dynamics and bass made for a locked-down beat, this wasn't such a big deal, I simply didn't feel I was hearing high-fidelity reproduction--it was too obviously colored by the speaker (and I took a lot of care with placement to check out this conclusion).

To wrap up what's becoming a rather long story, I've finally wound up with something very different than what I was originally looking for, and I couldn't be happier. I decided to audition the Vandersteen 2CE Signature II at Ears Nova in Manhattan when my wife and I were in the city for vacation. Joshua Cohn there set up a listening room for us in a mock-up of our room at home, with inexpensive electronics. (We had a fantastic time with him there, and incredible service: I'd recommend Ears Nova in a heartbeat). When we sat down with our stack of CDs, that was it: it was the sound I'd been looking for. We walked out the door with the floor models at a discount (this makes the service that much more remarkable, as he hardly made a penny on them). Back home, the contrast with the Dyns was clear. Simply put, the Vandersteens do everything well with few compromises in any area--and certainly not in the midrange. They sound good with every kind of music. The two changes I've made since have been: a) to get used to two slabs of Stonehenge in my living room after all those monitors, and b) to upgrade to NAD's C372 (more power I could afford). The C325BEE was good, but just couldn't move the Vandies' low end. With the C372, the speakers have as much bass as I'd want in my room, free of any bloat, and highs more extended than with any of the other speakers I went through, but without any grain or sense of fatigue. I still had the Dyns in house once I got the new amp, and hooking them up to it I still found them lacking in the same areas but had to admit that if I primarily listened to rock, they would be a great pick.

This got a bit windy--but the hunt's been a long one. Thanks again.
Knownothing,

Thanks for these thoughts--and I certainly can believe that you heard the Focus 140 sound good in another context; I'd be interested in hearing the comparison with better gear. Wes Phillips' review was one of the reasons I bought the Dyns, so I checked with the previous owner that he'd put in a lot of time on them, then did the same myself anyhow--first on break-in, and then with 2 or so hours a day of listening over the two months or so I owned them. They didn't seem to change over time, so I do believe they must have been broken in. After much experimentation I wound up with them sounding best just shy of 3' into the room and well away from side walls, so I'm not sure that it could have been boundary reinforcement from the port either--and I'm not sure if that would explain what I was hearing in the mids to upper mids.

Thanks for your input from the start. The Vandersteens are great, and I plan to hold onto them for a good long time.