The key to good sound is all about low noise and distortion.
Agree with Ralph that a major difference and potential advantage of a set is that first watt or so and results will depend on how far you can make that go. |
I'm loving learning from you folks. :-)
And remember Rebbi's Rule (TM): "A thread ain't a thread until it's hit 500 posts."
:-D |
As Rob, Grannyring and I have mentioned previously, our typical listening volume is 75 to 85 db. At this level power required is less than 1 watt (actually fractions of 1 watt) for our speakkers. Distortion is miniscule, resolution/detail retrieval is superb benefitting tone and timbre. No need/desire to listen at louder levels(unless you just want to). Result=excellent sound with preservation of one's precious hearing ability.
Charles, |
Keithr
I tried 3 SETs on my Zu Def IVs. First, an EAR859, then a Yamamoto 08, then a DejaVu 2a3.
I thought the EAR859 to be too sterile. The Yamamoto 08 (45 SET) and DejaVu 2a3 did not have enough oomph. (Caveat: I have very long speaker wire runs - under the floor to the other side of the room.) I am very happy with an Ancient Audio SET using Takatsuki 300b tubes and driven by an Ancient Audio CDP/preamp combination. (There were major differences among 300b tubes.) This combination can fill a large (45' x 22' x 16' high) volume - although the front third - 15' x 22' x 16' high with the speakers on the long wall - is the primary listening space. This is regardless of the music that I play to include full scale chorus and orchestra as well as classical rock. And it does so without sounding overly loud and never strained.
I have heard the SIT monos with the ZuDef IVs at a show, but I have not heard any 845 amp. I have also tried powerful solid state amps, but did not sense any increased output. I think that the built-in amp for the down-firing sub mitigates any weakness of low-power SETs. |
A few comments.
I also listen at lower than typical volumes. I frequently have to fight with salon proprietors to turn it down when I audition new equipment. In my case, those lower volumes represent realistic volumes. Bach cantatas are seldom performed at 105 dB. So, Ralph, no worries! You did not confuse me by presenting the facts as dictated by physics and math. My Coincident Triumph Extreme II monitor pairing with the Coincident Franks is not a perfect in every respect set up, but it achieves my goals better than anything I have yet owned or auditioned. What I loose with reproduction of Mahler, I gain in reproduction of a Beethoven violin sonata.
Rob made an especially astute observation with respect to some of us having true timbre as the number 1 priority. Indeed, for me, if a piece is slightly amiss in this respect it is a non starter. I have quickly rejected very well reviewed equipment on this basis. I can make sacrifices in low frequency extension and dynamics, but not with timbre. I suspect this may also be something Rebbi values, based on his love for his new AN 300B.
In Rebbi's case, I am sympathetic to arguments for very high efficiency speakers. It may well be that given his musical tastes and listening volumes, he can't get what he seeks without getting into the 97-100 dB efficient range. His deCapos can certainly be bettered in that respect, and with a higher efficiency speaker he is likely to realize the improved dynamics he seeks. Also, it is my experience that the deCapos, for all their virtues, don't handle the lower octaves all that well. Both Rob and I noted issues with walking bass reproduction.
The problem is his budget. At $1500, there are going to be trade offs. If there were a $1500 speaker that did everything he wants, we would all own a pair. I would have thought something in the Tekton line might have been his best shot. His brief audition of one of the Lores was disappointing. My fear is that while he can probably find a deCapo replacement that betters their performance in one or two respects, he may find a decrease in what he calls refinement may not be an acceptable long term solution. He is not in a position to run experiments that are not cash neutral.
So Rebbi, sorry if I have spoken as if you are not in the room. I can still remember when cash flow was tight. My advice is to continue to audition everything that you can at minimal cost. Too bad you are so far away from Tennessee. I'd love for you to hear my Coincident TE IIs. The performance gap by comparison to the deCapos is startling. Be careful selling the deCapos to fund something that is a pure experiment. It is going to be easier to deoptimize in a cash neutral transaction.
If you had another $1000, i think you would have more options.
Meanwhile, enjoy what you have. |
If one widely elects to preserve their ears, its a good thing to in general not go louder than low 80s db volume. So that is not a bad limitation in practice necessarily ie one that is good for ones health.
But the flip side is that real music can be much louder than that and when the goal is to reproduce reality higher volumes are often required. This is part of the performance aspect of gear that I always talk about. Performance enables good sound but is not necessarily the same thing.
Unfortunately for me, I occasionally like to go louder when called for. Not often but on occasion. So its a limitation I am not able to live with currently.
Maybe someday as I continue to get older and mellower. :^) |
Zu Essence sounded very thin and lifeless at moderate volumes off a SET with rock music that requires some meat on teh bones to sound good IMHO when I heard them.
Just one audition but by Zu experts who admitted the amp used was underpowered for that kind of music. They were demoing acoustic jazz and such solely until I asked for something more challenging. |
If I were Rebbi, I would try Tekton. Can't say how it will work out, but that is where I would start from what little I know. |
REbbi,
One other thing I can recommend taht might help in any case is go with something where drivers can be/are located closer to teh floor perhaps with slight upward tilt for treble balance at your listening position. That will help get more bass out which is where the challenge will be. To accomplish this I would put the speakers on the floor but on a pair of Isoacoustic pro monitor stands. There are three different sizes for different size monitors to choose from. These will help to keep the bass clean along with the extra floor reinforcement. This was the magic sauce to get my little Triangles to finally perform optimally in my wife's acoustically challenged 12X12 sunroom with lots of windows and a cathedral ceiling. Similarly I put Auralex Subdude isolation platforms under my bottom ported OHM 100s to achieve similar results with those. |
Hifis are like baseball teams. Ideally, you want 9 40 home run power hitters in teh lineup. That's optimal perforamnce. But realistically you will have some poor hitters and some good hitters with decent averages and on base % but not power hitters. They are good baseball players as well, many hall of famers.
So teh reality of things is that we often live quite happily with significant compromise compared to the ideal.
But the ideal is still best.
Oh, and some decent pitching and fielding does not hurt either. |
Rebbi,
I am confused by much of your vacillation and think Brownsfan gave you superb advice; but did you, or did you not, like the sound of the Tekton overall? Do you want a speaker that spotlight in the stage? There are not too many speakers in the $1,700 range that are going to give you absolutely everything you desire, but I believe you know that...that is why in my value system I pushed the Tekton idea, it gets you 90-95% of what the big buck speakers do; that is the aggregate consensus of more than a half-dozen quality Review Mavens from respected publications. You made a stellar decision with regard to an amp, the AN Kit. Perhaps, as Brownsfan suggested, hold on to the DeCapo, live with their bottom end limitation until you can save up for something that give the whole Megillah. Another thought with respect to the Tekton you heard. The limitation you thought you heard in imaging I believe is due to your cabling, interconnect, and perhaps something else not discovered due to your lack of time with said speaker. As I stated previously I do not have that problem with either the M-Lore or Lore. Also, maybe Eric is correct and the Tekton 2.0 is the ticket being that it is 98db efficient, 8 ohm nominal, digs down to 34hz. Plus, being taller. Statically this speaker betters the M-Lore/Lore. I also believed your room was smaller than it actually is, this 2.0 version will not overload your room based on dimension and shape as you recently described. Regardless, best in this pursuit. Rob |
A few comments.
I also listen at lower than typical volumes. I frequently have to fight with salon proprietors to turn it down when I audition new equipment. In my case, those lower volumes represent realistic volumes. Bach cantatas are seldom performed at 105 dB. So, Ralph, no worries! You did not confuse me by presenting the facts as dictated by physics and math. My problem is that I played in several orchestras over the years and my wife was a singer. I've seen her singing in a Bach Cantata and FWIW 105 db is **easy** when the full choir is singing at a double forte (ff)! Having such exposure to the real thing (which is on-going; I operate a recording studio and play in a band), playing with peaks at only 75-80 db is good for background music when I am reading or cleaning up the kitchen but not if I am seriously listening. What if you want to play Wagner (Das Reingold, Decca, Sir George Solti conducting, side 6) or Verdi (Verdi Requiem, RCA Soria series, side one cut 2)?? 80 or 85 db peaks ain't gonna cut it- you need the unrestricted ability to play well past 100db without incurring artificial loudness cues (previously mentioned in prior posts) from the system. With a low powered amp this means high efficiency and make no mistake. If you have 91 db, the is a moderate efficiency and although you may like what you hear, just keep in mind that you are not really hearing what the amp is about and for that matter the speaker as well and it just goes to show. Seems a poor investment to me, unless you are in a fairly small room or office. But that's me- I figure if you are going through the trouble and the cash, might as well be able to really enjoy the music the way it was recorded. Others might differ on that... |
One way to be happy with lower volume levels at home after experiencing what can occur live with an orchestra is to only sit further back in the cheaper seats. or listen to outdoor live concerts only. Not as hard to reproduce those SPL levels experienced at home.
Its all a matter of expectations really.
I went to see John Fogerty live on Monday. It was a fantastic show, great tunes, fantastic musicians, lots of energy, good sound, and loud loud loud. But sound quality was good with distortion well under control. When I go to these things I am always assessing "can I attempt to reproduce this at home" and I leave feeling good about that.
In my case, with only modest efficiency full range speakers, my amps are my power hitters needed to carry the team. In the case of a SET, it would need to be very high efficiency speakers based on what I have heard to date. |
Ralph, I guess I will have to take my dB meter next time I take in a St. Matthew Passion. I favor small ensemble, period instrument, even at times, one voice per part, which I doubt would give anything like 105 dB mid hall. My current set up, with the 94 dB monitors driven by the Coincident Franks, is not the set up I would prefer for Das Reingold. Walala, weiala weia! With apologies to Herr Wagner, the ring gets a couple playings a year. Bach plays night and day around here.
The pairing is, in my opinion, absolutely sublime with the material that garners 95% of my listening time. I could get it all, no doubt, but at what cost? I have $7.5 K in my amp speaker pairing, and for what it does, which addresses 95% of my needs, it outperforms everything I've heard even at 5 x the price. As for the room, it is 15 x 20, with a long wall set up.
I hear what you are saying, but I remain happy where I am. It seems a prudent investment to me. |
I remember HP from TAS talking about sneaking a DB Meter into Carnegie years (decades) ago. If I remember correctly, he was only getting peaks in the mid 90 decibel range. I've seen others talk about doing it and coming up with similar numbers.
Suprising to me, because when you are in a hall and the Orchestra builds to a crescendo, it always seems pretty intense.
There used to be a woman who could sing that worked in my office. She did opera. Every once in awhile, I'd ask her to do a song if we were working late and our area was empty. My god did it seem loud. This was in an office space with me just 10 feet away. She was always definitely louder than I'd ever want to play my stereo. |
Atmastphere,
I respect you greatly, understand what you are saying, yet I fully agree with Brownsfan, my parameters in my home match his. Yes, at times I might go 95db-100db with one of my Various set-ups, but not normally in my home office system in a 14x16x9 room. Hey, I must get some work done on occasion. Plus, I too, prefer/listen to Bach, Beethoven over the Wagner stuff 99% of the time. I'm happy for you that you have found your sweet spot. I'm happy for Charles, Brownsfan, Jet, Granny that they have achieved their sweet spot; now let us help Rebbi get closer to his sweet spot with a smaller budget. Theory is fine, but $$$ speak. The real question is: how far can we push the envelop and get to sound quality of 90-95% of expensive systems for Rebbi and the majority of music lovers who will not or cannot spend $$$$$$$ and upgrade every other month. |
Brownsfan and Seikosha,
You both make excellent points concerning SPL preferences. This is strictly personal and all of us have our comfort levels. Ralph to suggest that just because one chooses moderate/reasonable SPL is somehow missing out on true musical enjoyment, well I disagree.
I listen to live acoustic music very often and sometimes its louder than is comfortable. And at other times the SPL remains in the mid 80-90s db range. Much depends on the musical fare, venue and where you're seated. I've discovered that lower listening levels at home can be and are immensely involving. There's no need to mimic live venue volume levels to achieve deep enjoyment. Brownsfan I have also experienced SPLs at shows and demonstrations that are unnecessarily loud and sounds like crap! Those who feel the SPL must be cranked up, more power to you and again this is merely personal choice. I don't view this as a right or wrong issue. I just believe it's disingenuous to say that preference for moderate SPL means your missing out on true satisfaction, No way.
Charles, |
here's another radical thought.
A lot of pro gear ie monitors are high efficiency out of necessity and tend to offer good sound quality value/$$. Are there any very high quality pro monitors in the price range worth consideration? Tannoy for example is one vendor who does both home and pro speakers/monitors. JBL another. |
Also Decware specializes in "affordable" low power tube amps and makes speakers to match that might be in teh price range. Disclaimer: have never heard these but Decware gets a good rap overall and these are made with that goal in mind. |
FWIW, the best and least compromised sound I have actually heard with affordable speakers run off a low power tube amp was...drum roll Audio Note (do not know the exact model or cost but they start out in Reb's price range I believe and I believe are typically made for corner placement for best results, which I think has to be a big help with moderate sized speakers off just a few watts.
And they sell kits as well. |
Rebbi you might want to look at the Tonian speakers for sale here they have always interested me. Tony builds some really high end stuff too. The Lores sound like the lower price range great choice. Enjoy the journey! |
Ralph- I truly respect your skills, expertise and willingness to share. but I think perhaps your perception is a bit "distorted" (pun intended) because your reality is atypical. You design and build OTLs so you obviously love their sound and the cost to you is a lot less than for most of us (I know that they are not free, but still...). Same is true for speakers. High efficiency speakers are generally large and expensive. If not large, then usually very expensive. I assume that you can purchase them at an industry accommodation price. So in your case, you may not have to make the same compromises some of us have to. You can get realistic live volume levels and very good amplification. Some of us have to give up realistic live volume levels and settle for the special qualities of an SET or other lowered powered tube amp driving moderate efficiency speakers. If you consider a home system as a design problem, it's a trade off among ultimate volume capability, SQ, physical size, and cost. Believe me, I understand why you love your amps driving Audio Classics. In a BIG hotel room, with 60 OTL watts they sound fantastic. And rock!!! So maybe at home, an S-30 will do. But not all of us have $25-30K for speakers. I hope that this does not sound like sour grapes. I'm not whining. But unless you have F U money, we all make compromises. All day, every day. And that's fine. That's reality. |
I've always found the Tonians intriguing. They are a different breed. Have never heard them but they have giant killer potential i suspect. |
"Also, it is my experience that the deCapos, for all their virtues, don't handle the lower octaves all that well"
Out of curiosity Brownsfan, exactly which amplifiers have you listened to with the Decapos? My experience DOES NOT mirror yours at all with all the amps I've tried them with. Maybe you are using both the Dynamo and Franks as a reference and in comparison with the higher efficient Coincident monitors you are using? In which case I wouldn't at all be surprised. My room has been tuned with a spectrum analyzer to maximize the placement of my Decapos. The bass is very defined and clearly resolved, remarkable for a monitor on some program material. |
Swampwalker,
You don't have to spend anywhere near that kind of money to reach the SPLs Ralph prefers. I could do that easily with my former transistor and PP tube amplifiers. I didn't want to listen that loudly. I am able to go 95-100 db easily with my current SET and speakers whenever I choose to do so . I've lack the desire to do this regardless of amp/speaker pairing I've owned. The determining factor is preference rather than equipment limitations. |
Hi, Guys,
People seem interested in my impressions of the Lore Reference, so I'm happy to oblige.
I wasn't super impressed with them when I first connected them. The sound seemed stuck to the speakers and I kind of got this "home theater" vibe. Of course, this was with my friend staring at me expectantly with that "Well? Well?!" look on his face, so it was a little hard to concentrate.
I proceeded to play with toe-in and placement and things got a lot better. With some more pronounced toe-in and adjustment of distance between the Lores, the sound stage became large and immersive. The disappearing act wasn't quite as complete as what I'm used to with the De Capo's, but again, perhaps with more precise placement...
Additionally, the presentation of the Lores and the De Capo's is quite different. The Lore Reference seemed to splash the soundstage all over the front wall. The De Capo's tend to present a deeper, more layered presentation. This is admittedly hard to describe in words.
Instrumental and vocal tonality seemed very good with the speakers a little more dialed in to position. I remember being particularly impressed with the rendering of a tenor sax solo - sorry, I can't remember the track, but it really sounded like a saxophone in full bloom. I this regard I'd describe the Lore Reference as "exciting" speakers to listen to, and I'd describe the De Capo's as more "nuanced."
There were 3 main things about the Lore Reference speakers that, in my 5 or 6 days with them, I came to appreciate. One was that they could "go big" in a way that the De Capo's don't; this is not surprising since they are substantially larger and more efficient than the De Capo's. They seemed to liberate the Kit 1 and help it to sound like some kind of monster amp, allowing those huge output trannies to strut their stuff. For example, on one of my favorite CD's, an orchestral movie soundtrack, they presented the orchestra in a very "big" and convincing fashion.
Second, having a speaker in the room that at least bumps up against the bottom octave is great. And this richness extends into voices as well, bringing substance to alto and bass voices in background vocals very nicely.
Third, as already mentioned, the Lore Reference nailed some instrument tones and textures in a very convincing way. I was particularly impressed with how well controlled the bass was.
Three things about them gave me pause, though:
As I've mentioned, I found the imaging a bit vague. I also noticed that - as opposed to my De Capo's, which present a very stable image, images with the Lore Reference tended to shift noticeably when I moved my head to the left or right. Again and yet again, this may be a placement issue but it was troubling to me.
Second, they needed to be turned up to a decent volume level to sound fully "awake." I asked Eric about this and he told me that while the Lore Reference is more refined than the Lore or Lore 2.0, the Lore and Lore 2.0 sound much better at lower volumes.
Third, I am not certain that they are as refined and resolving as the De Capo's. I literally mean "not certain," as in, "I just don't know." I'd need more time with them.
No matter which speaker I ultimately choose, I'd give the Lore Reference credit for having motivated me to part with my De Capo's. I was pretty blown away by how big and exciting my SET could sound.
I recognize that at my price level, there will be compromises. I had always thought of my self as a "nuance" guy more than a "dynamics" guy, but I found the latter surprisingly compelling, which is why one or another Tekton model is still on my list of possibilities. I also recognize that all the speakers I'm considering provide a trial period, and I'm prepared for some trial and error in getting where I ultimately want to be.
I hope this helps. My De Capo's just sold and so I'm now in a better position to see what I can afford. I'll keep you posted. |
"I had always thought of my self as a "nuance" guy more than a "dynamics" guy, but I found the latter surprisingly compelling, which is why one or another Tekton model is still on my list of possibilities."
I want both! Great post and insight as always Rebbi! |
Charles- I was talking about realistic loudness AND the SQ/nuance/timber/microdynamics, etc, etc, we've come to expect from the best SET/OTL amps, |
The question isnt how loud you can play, but at what distortion is at that volume level. Until i used a SS amp, this was tough to understand. |
Tubegroover said, "My experience DOES NOT mirror yours at all with all the amps I've tried them with."
Me either. I am currently driving mine with an Almarro 318B. Impressive little amp with a shocking grip on the bass. Great synergy with the DeCapos.
Tubegroover, just curious, how large is your room and where within the room are your speakers placed? |
Keithr,
That's why at the end of the day it always reverts to what we like. If you're suggesting that SS amps are less distorted and thus sound better, I just respectfully disagree. Despite the many highly revered SS amps I've heard, none (so far) have the same degree of natural sound character I prefer. Again with all due respect I acknowledge this is pure subjectivity. I'm not knocking your choices in anyway. SS vs tubes is preferring one type of distortion over another it seems to me.
Charles, |
Tubegroover, I have driven the deCapos with the following amps:
Coincident Frankensteins
Coincident Dynamo
Cary SA 500.1 MB (500WPC solid state)
Had Inspire KT77
The performance of the amp speaker pairing was in the order listed, with the dynamo and the Carys pretty close. My assessment of the deCapos with respect to low frequency performance was as compared to both Magnepan 3.7Rs driven by the Carys and Coincident Triumph Extreme IIs driven by all 4 amps. As compared to the other two speakers, the deCapos suffered by comparison.
It is not as if I don't like the deCapos. I've owned them for over a year, and still have plans for using them. Its just that they don't hold up well in my experience with low frequency reproduction. The TEIIs are much faster and much more resolving at low frequency. |
"The question isnt how loud you can play, but at what distortion is at that volume level. "
Its both really in that distortion is a common reason why one might not choose to go louder.
Another way to say it is distortion becomes more of an issue typically at higher volumes often even before clipping sets in.
You might want to hear good things louder but certainly not noise and distortion. Ideally you want to hear none of that, not more as the volume goes up.
Guranteed that in general listening levels can be higher when distortion is lower. |
Smctigue and tubegroover. In another thread initiated by threadmaster Rebbi, we did discuss an apparent high sensitivity of the deCapos to synergy with the amp. In my case, I drove the deCapos with the SS Cary amp, and frankly, I couldn't figure out what all the fuss was over the deCapos. Very disappointing. It was a very different scenario with the Franks. The bass response wasn't bad, but certainly suffered in comparison with the TEIIs. In the current discussion, Rebbi is looking for something that "digs deeper." Sounds to me that he also is not enjoying a favorable amp speaker synergy.
Please don't think I am disparaging of the deCapos. I have in fact encouraged Rebbi to keep them until he has substantially more money. And if I did't like them, I would have sold mine long ago. |
Oh I don't think you're disparaging the Decapos at all Brownsfan, I was just curious is all as our results are quite different.
Smctique my listening room is 18X20X10 opening to an adjacent 8X12X10 area so it is quite good, if not for that open area I think I would have more problems unless I listened strictly nearfield. The speakers are placed approximately 42" from the front wall to the front of the speaker approximately 6' apart at present. Tube traps are in the corners on the front wall, this eliminated an 80 hz peak and smoothed out the FR at the listening position. I am changing things around so I can further experiment with placement which is CRITICAL with these speakers as I've discovered, a 1/4" here or there on toe in can make changes that can be clearly heard. When dialed in they just snap into focus. I am also using some home brewed traps behind the speaker as I was getting a bit of boom when I first installed them. This has taken care of that issue.
The bass on all the amps I've used in house but not all I've heard with the DeCapos include the First Watt, Berning Zh270, Quicksilver Silver 88 w/kt150 outputs and my current fav with these speakers, my pair of recently restored McIntosh MC-60 amps which I have completely retubed. All the amps present bass in a different way with the speakers but the underlying fact is that the bass is very controlled and resolved with all. Room placement with all monitors in particular and speakers in general is critical but maybe just a bit more with these monitors. My dealer really emphasized this point to me when I purchased them and have I found it to be so true!
The points above I make ONLY to absolve some of the comments made above regarding them being used with low/powered SET amplifiers. I don't care for them with the ss amps I've heard them paired with other than the First Watt which is quite nice. |
Any speaker or any amp may or may not work out in any case. What matters is long term success ie how many times users have achieved success with a suitable matching. That separates the winners from the losers over the long term.
Rebbi, one thing I wonder is, in hindsight, do you still think the AN was better with the Decapos than the Manleys prior? That surprised me at teh time. My impression is that you found the new amp to have more appeal at teh time but you discovered the shortcomings in teh mating later on.
There are fine speakers I have gotten rid of over the years (B&W, Magnepan, KEF, others) that I wish I had now to try with my current Class D amps which I have found sound the best I have ever had with any speaker I use them with, large or small. |
Tubegroover, thanks for the info. I am in a large area as well. 21' x 24'. Because it is not a shared space I have been free to try many different configurations, some good results, some awful results but never spectacular.
One day on a whim I plugged my room width into the Cardas Calculator and it spit out numbers that I would never had thought to try, 9.5' off of the front wall and 5.5' off of the side wall. That puts the speakers about 10' apart and I am 10'5" away from them, ear to tweeter. SPECTACULAR. I'll echo what you have said about placement. I suspect many people who are constrained by shared spaces or just don't have enough room for experimentation are not hearing their DCs at their best. |
I do not own the Lore Reference, but the M-Lore and Lore. In general, my Lores, though different from the brief trial Rebbi had with the Lore Reference, DO NOT sound anything like what he described in my long-term experience with my two Lores. I believe they generally have a family sound and presentation.
As stated previously, not one of the many, more than eight Reviewers from respected magazines or Web sites such as Enjoy The Music, Stereo Mojo, 6 Moons (Tim Smith, the writer even piped in here), Stereotimes, Wall-of-Sound, Part-Time-Audiophile, and so on thought the various Lores were in anything like weak in the areas Rebbi described; frankly, quite opposite. Enjoy the Music used the Lore Referece and gave it it's Blue Note Award. No one in any review agrees with Rebbi comments and neither do I. Last night I listened to Roy Orbison, All-Time Greatest Hits on Monument, from the original masters. The soundstage was deeply layered, wall-to-wall wide (14 feet), with very good height, natural organic flow, each instrument and voice properly placed with uncanny realism. Orbison was center, back-up singers came out in proper scale/distance from Orbison, left, right, center, way behind depending on mix. Nuance! You want nuance, this was it! In all my experience with these speakers I have never/ever had a flat soundstage.
Rebbi, your review here is disingenuous to me. Again, it is contrary to the aggregate of respected Reviewers, my experience. To give you a big benefit of doubt I think you were rushed, had the owner of the Reference hovering over you. Plus, you don't seem to have particularly good speaker wire or interconnects. At this juncture I really hope you do not buy Tekton. The Omega's at $3,000 plus will likely get you to where you want to be, or some others speaker. Save your money, make a bigger jump. In the meantime I'll laugh my evil laugh knowing the M-Lore gets 93-96% of the Devore 0/96 ($12,000) for peanuts in comparison. I'll also likely spend that much as I'm as much an audio fool as the next guy. |
Its hard to get perfect results much less be certain of everything in a rushed audition. There are many reasons why one hears what they hear in any particular case.
Apparently whatever Rebbi heard was convincing since the old speakers are gone.
Regarding Tekton delivering much of what one might get for a lot more, I do believe that we become conditioned to have a bias against less expensive products that actually sound quite good as a result of being constantly exposed to bigger, fancier, more expensive alternatives.
Also I think after a while one has to split some hairs to make a determination of what is best whereas the reality is that there no conclusive evidence that indicates ANY audio product offered at any price is truly best.
Time always tells. Be it women speakers amps or whatever whatever tends to stick around the longest is probably the best for you. First impressions can only go so far.
Hey but if not for all that, what would there be left for us all to talk about here? It all serves a purpose I suppose. |
Tubegroover,
Thanks a lot for the nice comments. I appreciate it.
SMcTigue,
I suspect that a great deal of this is, in fact, about the synergy between a particular amplifier and a particular speaker. There are so many variables here, including one's room acoustics, listening habits and preferred musical material. It's been said a million times, but what floats one person's boat may not do anything for another person. I still think the De Capo's are fabulous and wouldn't hesitate to recommend them to others.
Mapman,
Your question about whether I feel differently now about the quality of the Manley Mahi mono-blocks that I used to have is an interesting and useful one. Here's what I would say:
I would say that I have experienced 2 realizations in the course of my equipment changes over the past few months.
The first one is that I love SET amplification. Paired with my Reference 3A's, The Kit 1 smokes the Manley Mahi's in all of the audio parameters that I find the most compelling, personally: tonality, sound staging, imaging and above all, coherence, that sense that I am getting a complete sonic picture that is not chopped up into pieces; a "performance," if you will. Once I heard the kind of music that poured out of the Kit 1, there was no turning back to my old amplifiers. In this regard, I find myself in league with Charles and the Tribe of SET. :-)
The second realization came from listening to the Tekton Lore Reference. As I mentioned previously, I had absolutely no idea that the Kit 1 could sound as big and powerful and, above all, "relaxed" as it did through those Tekton speakers. It opened my eyes to the wisdom of pairing the Kit 1 – or any low powered SET amp – with a more efficient and easy to drive design. That was a real game changer for me and I am grateful to the fellow who lent me his Lore Reference.
Let me make it clear that I still do not believe that the Reference 3A and the Kit 1 are a poor match! I was listening to some Steely Dan last night and stayed up way too late because it sounded so good. But, on the other hand, my experience with the Lore Reference has taught me that the Kit 1 can deliver a bigger, "beefier" and more dynamic presentation than I have been getting with the De Capo. And I learned that I like those qualities more than I realized.
Rob,
Life is short and I don't take these things personally, but I think your use of the word "disingenuous" is a little harsh. In any event, I'm guessing your judgment may have to do with the fact that I sent you a pretty ecstatic personal message after living with the Lore Reference for a few days. I praised their musicality, their large and engulfing soundstage and their ability to dig deeper than the Reference 3A De Capo. That was how I felt about them at that time. "Wow, this is so amazing! These things cream the De Capo's in every way!"
As I'm sure many of us have experienced in the past, it's not unusual in this hobby to make a change and get very excited about something, labeling it as "better." Sometimes, with more experience, we realize that what seemed at first "better" is more "different:" perhaps more pleasing in some ways and not as pleasing in others.
I think that is what, in retrospect, tempered my original, effusive reaction. As a beloved (and sadly no longer with us) graduate school professor of mine used to like to say, "Every situation has the advantages of its deficiencies and the deficiencies of its advantages." There are always trade-offs, and I suspect that is true even if you have the financial wherewithal to throw tens of thousands of dollars at this hobby.
Based on my limited exposure, with my equipment in my room and reflecting my own listening biases and priorities, I believe that the Lore Reference is a terrific bargain and that it does a lot of things – tone, dynamics, low end slam and retrieval of musical information – extraordinarily well. That is to say, it is great in many ways. The Reference 3A De Capo is also great in many ways and deservedly regarded by many as a classic design, but its greatness lies in different areas: resolution at lower volume levels, pinpoint imaging and that elusive quality of "coherence." I don't find myself in a position, at this point, of saying that one is better than the other in every way. YMMV, as they say.
Everyone enjoys being agreed with completely and sometimes we find it aggravating when people don't see things our way. That's not evil – it's just human. I also note that I like making decisions in a slow, thoughtful and deliberate manner and I like sharing my thought processes with other people. I am not looking to troll or bait anyone.
I will close this lengthy comment with one, additional example. I owned a pair of Merlin TSM-mmi monitors for about 18 months. There are many, many fans of Bobby P. and his products. It is not hard to find people who believe that the TSM is the apotheosis of stand mounted speakers. I think Bobby is one of the greatest people in high-end audio – a truly fine and delightful human being. But in the end, the TSM just didn't do it for me. Were I to list the reasons that I eventually sold them, people who revere Merlin would be eager to jump in and tell me all the reasons I was mistaken. What can you do? Ultimately, your system has to please you – it's that simple. |
Rebbi, As I remember I think you heard the Audio Note AN-E's. If so how do they compare to the Lore Reference? |
Jet -
Hey! :-) My soldering gun wielding DIY guru! :-D
I have only heard AN speakers once, at the California Audio Show in the AN room a few years ago, and it was my favorite room! The only room, in fact, that I kept returning to. The dynamics and "realness" of the music pouring out of those puppies was addictive. Of course, AN had them paired with all manner of hyper-expensive AN electronics, but the bottom line was that the sound that day was dreamy.
I don't think I can make a valid comparison with the Lore Reference because it's been too long and I don't trust my sonic memory that far. But if I could afford any current AN speaker I'd jump in a heartbeat, believe me. My only concern is that corner placement's not possible in my current room. |
Reb,
My experience with the AN speakers at Capital Audiofest a couple years back mirrors yours almost to a tee. |
Map,
Yeah, they were REALLY something. If I could get a huge price break from Brian of ANK, I'd jump at the opportunity to build one of the kits. But he buys those direct from AN UK, and by the time they are shipped and imported I don't think he has much wiggle room on price. :-/ |
Rebbi,
Couldn't agree more with most your post, as I always state truthfully, YMMV, you do not have to like what I like; but to be completely honest you must also admit that perhaps you rushed, didn't have the time to properly set-up, plus as stated are using a "mishmash" of power, speaker and interconnect; and your comments about imaging and coherence border on the ridiculous and absurd. Not one respected Reviewer, nor do I agree with you. When I compared the $3,000 DeCapo to primarily the $650 M-Lore, I carefully set them up in my office system where I normally run the M-lore. I used the well-known Sheffield Test CD, which was recorded in a "live" room 32x18x13. From the Sheffield notes: A closely matched pair of classic AKG C24 vacuum tube stereo microphones was used, in a matrixed array, and, if your system can reproduce it, you will find that the special representation is simply phenomenal!
That's the point of the track--to see exactly how well your system can reproduce space.
Doug Sax walks around the room with a pair of claves (wooden "click sticks"), talking and clicking the claves. As he moves, he tells exactly where he is in relation to microphones. When he finally stops in the center of the room (about 6 feet from the microphones) he's joined by Roger Skoff (about 8 feet back) and they both start talking at the same time!
Not only does this track give you a VERIFIABLE check of your System's ability to IMAGE and accurately reproduce a soundstage, unraveling the two voices and BEING ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BOTH ARE SAYING constitutes a supreme test of resolution and Clarity! Quoted from the Sheffield Booklet describing the main test. The Tekton easily flew through the Resolution, Clarity, Coherent, test. The DeCapo did nearly as well as the Tekton on this test; but the Tekton bettered the DeCapo when Sax was on the back wall, more clear and resolved, the claves had more body, louder with more body and weight.
So, I call BS on the imaging, resolution, clarity. Additionally, there is no drift, images is rock solid. |
Rebbi once I heard the AN-e's I saved money and waited for a used pair to become available and snatched them up when they did. I think I paid around 4200 shipped. |
Jet,
The AN-e is a great choice, especially the synergy with the Kit. I had family member in past who owned these--just need find used, Rebbi, you should be in Heaven.
Jet, beside building the AN Kit-1, my wife and I, with my brother's guidance (DIY) since the 60s, are going to modify/upgrade the Coincident Dynamo. Another Audiogon member is doing so and gave some seriously good advice. Plus, I became inspired/motivated by a Jeff Day Blog where a notable builder of 300B and the new SPEC amp, Yazaki-san, recommended a Day modify his beautifully restored amps with certain Capacitor and resistor changes. The Audiogon person is going to go with Jupiter capacitors and some others. I'm going to go with the Arizona capacitors, I think, plus change out the stock IEC connector to Furetech, get rid of the cheap tube connectors and upgrade to something like Woo Teflon, and last, find a real good volume control. Still need a little further research, maybe internal wiring to WE 16ga, but as retirement nears, I think I will overcome my fears and get soldering. Rebbi, you, Grannyring, have been inspirations. Best. Rob |
Jet,
Right now, there is actually a fellow here on audiogon who is selling a pair of Audio Note AN-E/SP's. They come with Audio Note stands and sell for $1500!
I sent the link to Brian at Audio Note Kits. He confirmed that these are an older version of the speaker, back from when they used chipboard cabinets. He also said that this is the "94 dB" version, which he said he does not recommend for the Kit 1. He prefers the "98 dB" version. That's the only reason I haven't taken a stab at them – plus my impression is that they are fairly beaten up.
As I said, I would love to build one of the kit versions of that speaker, but I don't think you can get into that for under $4000, and that's without a special stand.
By the way, are you using corner placement with yours? I have heard conflicting reports about how crucial that actually is. |
Rob, thank you. The upgrades to the Dynamo sound like they will yield nice improvements. I have not heard of Arizona caps. Are you using them for coupling or in the power supply? I can recommend the Goldpoint stepped attenuator for a volume control. Very clean and clear sounding.
Rebbi/Rob I agree, the synergy with the kit one and the E's would obviously be natural. What you heard at the audio show would be pretty close to the kit one paired with ANe Spe HE or ANe LX HE. I did not realize how much you liked the ANE's. If this is the case I can't imagine choosing any other speaker. Since purchasing my E's I have heard many speakers that I like better for some of the things they might do better but once I get home and settle in for some listening I never feel like I need to upgrade. They don't need corners as long as you can put them fairly close to the back walls you should be fine. As I have mentioned already they play all types of music but most importantly they make me feel the heart and soul of that music. I've owned them for four years and have no plans to sell them.
Try to remember how the E's made you feel at the audio show and don't settle until have a set of speakers that do that. Regards Jet |
Mikirob, what is the size of your office? |
