Goldenear Triton Reference vs. One -- Review

I’ve now had my Goldenear Triton Reference speakers for over week and, having put about 25 hours of active listening and 75+ hours of burn-in, I figured I’d put my thoughts down.

First, some tl;dr notes on how I got here.

I discovered audiophile gear in the late 1980’s through my college roommate and spent about 9 months when I first started grad school researching and listening. Being on a my grad student budget, I was out for maximum bang for my buck and after a couple of equipment swaps ended up with a system that remained unchanged for 27 years: Rotel CD player/switched to a Squeezebox streamer after I ripped all my CD’s to ALAC in 2007 -> Kimber PBJ -> Adcom GFA 545 -> Kimber 4TC bi-wire -> Vandersteen 2ci’s on Sound Anchor stands. I loved the open, airy sound of the Vandersteens and, although I knew I was giving up deep, low-end punch compared to other options, I loved the way they reproduced upright bass in the jazz tracks which form the bulk of my listening. I listened to lots of other people’s since then and, for what I spent, I wouldn’t change a thing. I also loved the ultra-simple black monolith look of my system. For years my studio apartment furnishings consisted of nothing but a futon couch and my stereo. My best friend never ceased to mock my taste in interior decor until he went to design school and attended a lecture on Minimalism; afterwards he came over for one of our nightly listening sessions and declared, “OK, now I get it. Negative space. Very cool.” If you are familiar with the appearance of the Triton’s, you probably know where this is headed.

Fast forward to 2016--I kept having trouble with my Squeezebox dropping the signal and ended up buying a Spotify subscription and streaming music off my iPad into my Adcom. Obviously, this led to a serious reduction in sound quality, but I was so mesmerized by having a virtually infinite supply of music selection at my fingertips (funny how the 10,000+ albums on my hard drives suddenly seemed inadequate) and spent so much time on the road for work that I really didn’t care so much about the fidelity loss on my home system.

Well… things changed with work so I didn’t have to travel constantly and, spending more time listening to my degraded sound, I knew it was time for a change. The obvious first step was to replace the iPad’s place in the signal path with an honest-to-god DAC. Frankly, I didn’t do any listening tests before I upgraded. I read a bunch of reviews that made me covet the DAC/preamp/headphone amp functionality of the Benchmark DAC3 and, after discovering that they offered a 30-day no-questions-asked return policy, I immediately placed my order.

The day my DAC3 arrived and I hooked it up to Tidal streaming via USB to a headless Mac mini my mind was blown. I realized there was so much fidelity in my system I had been missing out on for years. The way the 24/96 version Steely Dan’s “Gaslighting Abbie” off Two Against Nature sounded was revelatory: the detail, the space around the notes, the rhythmic drive, the drum and bass articulation: all stunning. I essentially got a new window into music I had been listening to for years.  For the most part it was a very enjoyable, fresh perspective, but a nagging dissatisfaction with excessive energy in the frequency band around 100-400 Hz (especially obvious on male jazz vocals and tenor sax) became quite pronounced. Increased fidelity is the proverbial double-edged sword--enhancing perception of both excellence and imperfection.

I knew my Vandersteens had been supplanted by a 2ce model, so it seemed obvious to move on new speakers. The first thing I checked out were Magnepan 3.7’s. The treble and midrange were fantastic--wonderful detail and imaging; however, they were lacking bass depth and punch. Since I bought my initial system, my listening tastes expanded to more electronic, DJ and heavy metal, so I had decided that this time around I wasn’t going to compromise and serious bass was an absolute requirement. The dealer added a subwoofer into the mix (can’t remember which one) and it certainly sounded better, but the soundscape lacked overall coherence. I read about about a bunch of different Maggie/sub combinations people recommended online, but, given Magnepan’s own website’s caution against pairing with conventional subwoofers and my loathing for a trial-and-error process of subwoofer testing and tweaking, I determined I wanted a tower system that would stand entirely on its own. (That I would have to buy additional power to adequately quench the Maggies’ thirst for current didn’t argue in their favor either, though that wasn’t a decisive factor.)

After more reading I decided to audition Vandersteen 3a, Revel F208 and Goldenear Triton One head-to-head. I went into it thinking I would prefer the Vandersteens given that I’d been listening to their little brothers for almost three decades. In short, I did enjoy them and the Revels also. Frankly, I was pretty skeptical of the Tritons regardless of all the praise I’d read online. Six active drivers + 4 radiators connected to a 1600 watt/channel Class D (which didn’t even exist as a commercial entity when I’d last shopped for gear) subwoofer amp sounded like the equation for a boomy, incoherent mess.

I queued up the Dan’s “Gaslighting Abbie” (my go-to 1st listen track) and I was instantly mesmerized. The coherence of the sound was wonderful, the treble and the midrange sang while the low end was authoritative, but tightly controlled and balanced. The music suddenly had so much drive, detail and ambience. I heard air and distinct harmony parts in the vocals that I’d never noticed. My skepticism about the high number of drivers in each towers was unfounded and the seamlessness of the soundscape was impressive. I could discern no discontinuities up and down the spectrum--everything sounded integrated and coherent. I brought my girlfriend along for this trip (her ears measure better than mine and she doesn’t know anything or give a damn about technology, specs, reviews or brand names) and she was wide-eyed and bobbing her head right along with me. The classic soundstaging demo jazz album Jazz at the Pawnshop by Arne Domnerus transported us into a bustling club with the musicians going at it a few feet away. We spent a couple of hours listening through a wide variety of genres and agreed that the Tritons led the pack. Believe it or not, my girlfriend actually concurred with me that the monolithic black sock look was very cool and even more minimal than my then current Vandersteens (even though the Goldenears are larger, from the listening seat they appears less massive due to their narrower/deeper profile).

Business and pleasure conspired to have me back on the road again for several months so I resisted the temptation to buy the Triton Ones immediately. Shortly thereafter I discovered Goldenear was about to release the Reference model and I was intrigued, but skeptical, as I’m well aware of how the law of diminishing returns flattens out the quality/price curve, especially once individual component prices move north of $1000.

I decided I should at least wait until the Reference speakers hit the retail market and give a pair a thorough listening against the Triton Ones before I made a decision, so, a couple of weeks ago I made my way to the friendly local dealer who had accommodated me previously. When my girlfriend and I arrived as scheduled he simply handed me a USB cable to plug in my laptop into their Macintosh electronics (D1100 -> MC452, if I remember correctly) and the volume control. Away we went.

For two hours I queued up a diverse playlist of jazz, classical, baroque, rock and electronic tracks and we were utterly mesmerized. Mozart’s “Violin Concerto No. 4 In D Major Kv 218 - Allegro” and the “Crux Fidelis” Gregorian chant off 2L: The Nordic Sound were stunning in both tonal and spatial realism. My lady friend commented after the second track finished, “It sounds like we are now in a concert hall!” The Dan’s “Gaslighting Abbie” revealed a deep resolution (my non-native-English-speaking lady understood several of Fagen’s lyrics for the first time) and taut, rhythmic drive that relentlessly cooked. “Artemis” off the Dali’s Car album “The Waking Hour” is one of my favorite bass test tracks as Mick Karn’s thick, slinky, slithering, fretless, overtone-laden, electric line requires more than just power to engagingly reproduce. Generic consumer subwoofers need not apply. The References had me wide-eyed. My girl friend’s comment: “Wow!”

Back in the day I enjoyed reading J. Gordon Holt’s reviews for Stereophile magazine and I was always struck that for all his analytic prowess, he still wouldn’t recommend a component unless it passed his goosebump test. The References passed mine with flying colors on both Bach’s “Toccata and Fugue in D minor” and Wayne Shorter’s “Witch Hunt.”

Well… the two hours of listening convinced me that the References are outstanding speakers, but question remained: “Are they worth 70% more than the Triton Ones?”

I was pretty sure the answer was, “No.”

First off, the References feature piano gloss wood veneers that add probably $1000 to the price tag without making a necessary contribution to sonic performance. Of course, this is a wise marketing, not engineering, decision since the typical person shelling out $8500 for a pair of speakers wants something that looks like furniture, not a a huge, dull sock. Personally, I prefer the monolithic footwear look--too bad there’s not a less expensive option for those with my aesthetic sensibilities.

Second, the law of diminishing returns being what it is, it was impossible that the References were going to provide 70% more illusion of real musicians in a real space than the Triton Ones.

The question remained: would the sonic improvement be sufficient for me to shell out the additional $3500 to make the leap?

The salesmen (who had wisely not tried to sell me on anything whatsoever, leaving me to my own devices other than popping his head in once early on to make sure all was well and bring us a couple of bottles of water) gamely swapped out the References for the Triton Ones and Round Two began.

If you are wondering, I matched sound levels with the NOSH SLM app on my iPhone.

My initial impression of the Ones is that they have the same overall sound signature as the References and are not startlingly less impressive. I’d be happy to have the Ones in my system. There’s no question that the References are superior, however. It would misleadingly precise to try and assign a percentage value to the difference, but I’ll do my best to describe. The most noticeable difference: the bass was more extended and, especially tighter. The Ones sounded somewhat loose and unnaturally fat by comparison, lacking a bit in punch and rhythmic drive. The GE engineers say they put a lot of time into controlling cabinet resonances on the Reference and their efforts have succeeded. You’re going to have to pay a lot more money to get better low end than you find here. Second was the decay of transients, particularly apparent to me with voices and horns. The end of notes presented more ambience and “air,” providing a better illusion of music in real space. Finally, the References provided more detail and a deeper view into complex layers of sound.

A comparative intellectual analysis of the various components of each speaker’s characteristics considered separately don’t yield large differences in and of themselves. However, overall, the References provide a more emotionally engaging experience and a heightened illusion of real musicians playing in real space.

I bought the References on the spot.

As far as speaker pairing goes, these puppies are easy to drive. I have yet to turn the knob on the DAC3 past 12 o’clock. Beyond that I’ll need to repaint the walls.

(My Adcom is long in the tooth and would likely benefit from recapping or replacement, so I just ordered a Benchmark AHB2. I've got 30 days to decide whether it plays nicely with the References and justifies the price tag. I'm curious to hear if there are further sonic revelations these speakers have reserved. I'm as skeptical about $3K amps as I was of 1800 watt/channel class D subs. Maybe I'll be proved wrong again.)

For what it is worth, my decision to spend the hefty premium for the upgraded experience is premised on my own desire to purchase a great system and be done with it. I’m not a tweaker or gear head. I get my enjoyment from the musical experiences I get out of my system, not swapping out kit and noting the subtle differences or pouring over the differences in various measurements and specs. Note well: I’m not throwing shade at those who enjoy the technical side as much as the musical--if it weren’t for gear heads we’d all be limited to listening to player pianos. I doubt I’ll ever buy another pair of speakers in my life, not because I don’t think speakers will improve, but due to the law of diminishing returns and me suspecting that advances in machine/brain interfaces will make transducers like speakers and earphones obsolete within the next 20 years, maybe sooner.

15 years ago I would probably have said “$3500 will buy me a LOT of CD’s,” and bought the Ones, but, Tidal Masters brings me more new music than I can listen to in a lifetime for an inconsequential price.

If I were the sort to upgrade my speakers every couple of years, I might save the extra $3500 and wait for the next great thing to come out. You won’t be unhappy with the Triton Ones if you do.

In any case, whoever strives to beat the quality/price ratio the Reference offers has got their work cut out for them.

For me the diminishing returns curve gets too flat beyond the musical experience the $8500 the fantastic Goldenear Reference buys.