Please do not misinterpret my observations as those of an expert. I am not; however, I have owned (and loved) the Avalon Eclipse. On several occasions I have listened to the Avalon Eidolon with both top-of-the-line Spectral and a Spectral digital/Arc Ref1/Arc VT200 setup in a room with over $20,000 in room treatment. And I now own a pair of Kharma Ceramique 1.0's.
Some will call me a heretic, but I actually preferred the sound of my Avalon Eclipse to that of the Avalon Eidolon. The Eidolon's in the room I heard them had a huge holographic stage and were very nimble, particularly with the Spectral gear. However, to me they sounded somewhat thin or light in balance. The ARC gear helped add some body, but ultimately for just musicality and coherence I preferred the Avalon Eclipse (2 way sealed box) with big tube amps.
I recently purchased a pair of Kharma Ceramique 1.0's without auditioning them, partly due to my desire to venture up to a new audio summit and partly due to A-goner's advice (such as Jtinn) who own the Kharma's.
As I wait for my Atma-Sphere MA1 MkII.2's to arrive, I am still amazed at what the Kharma's do. Mind you that I am temporarily using a 60w/ch Marantz integrated amp ($1200 retail), but the density of tone, the size (particularly height and depth) of stage, and even transparency is simply amazing. It is not as refined and detailed as the Eidolons I heard, but let's just say $20 grand in room treatment and tens of thousands of $ in components has just a little to do with that. I cannot wait to hear what they are able to do with my cd player plugged directly into the Atma-sphere amps.
Hope this helps a little on the Kharma/Eidolon differences. As for the Eidolon/Opus debate, I cannot offer any real help as I have not heard the Opus's. I was a little skeptical of the downfiring woofer, but after owning the Eclipses, I have enormous respect for Neil Patel and his designs. Clearly, he and Charles Oosterum (Kharma) bring a certain genius to the design of speakers and particularly crossovers. IMHO, they are more alike than not, which is to say that they are on the summit of my speaker designer mountain. Anyway, FWLIW!
Some will call me a heretic, but I actually preferred the sound of my Avalon Eclipse to that of the Avalon Eidolon. The Eidolon's in the room I heard them had a huge holographic stage and were very nimble, particularly with the Spectral gear. However, to me they sounded somewhat thin or light in balance. The ARC gear helped add some body, but ultimately for just musicality and coherence I preferred the Avalon Eclipse (2 way sealed box) with big tube amps.
I recently purchased a pair of Kharma Ceramique 1.0's without auditioning them, partly due to my desire to venture up to a new audio summit and partly due to A-goner's advice (such as Jtinn) who own the Kharma's.
As I wait for my Atma-Sphere MA1 MkII.2's to arrive, I am still amazed at what the Kharma's do. Mind you that I am temporarily using a 60w/ch Marantz integrated amp ($1200 retail), but the density of tone, the size (particularly height and depth) of stage, and even transparency is simply amazing. It is not as refined and detailed as the Eidolons I heard, but let's just say $20 grand in room treatment and tens of thousands of $ in components has just a little to do with that. I cannot wait to hear what they are able to do with my cd player plugged directly into the Atma-sphere amps.
Hope this helps a little on the Kharma/Eidolon differences. As for the Eidolon/Opus debate, I cannot offer any real help as I have not heard the Opus's. I was a little skeptical of the downfiring woofer, but after owning the Eclipses, I have enormous respect for Neil Patel and his designs. Clearly, he and Charles Oosterum (Kharma) bring a certain genius to the design of speakers and particularly crossovers. IMHO, they are more alike than not, which is to say that they are on the summit of my speaker designer mountain. Anyway, FWLIW!