Why are folks still responding to a thread where the OP said he was purchasing the week of April 15th and has disappeared since. |
Audiophiles love to argue? haha. |
The discussions are'nt just for the OP, some are of general interest to all of us. |
I agree with David12, I enjoy other`s perspectives and observations on an open forum.These two speakers represent such different designs and sound presentation.I just found it interesting someone would be equally attracted to both.
For instance, do I want a 20 watt tube SET or a 400 watt class D power amplifier, two different worlds.
Regards, |
As I recall, the Tannoys have limited off-axis dispersion due to the large driver. IMHO they are far,far better than Harbeths which had some kind of funky coloration. Like wearing pink tinted glasses or, from what I have read, Exposure amps.
Agree on the Rockports combining the best of both. If you have the power and play relatively loud, Audio Technology drivers kick butt!
How about ATC active 100's? Been a while so can't remember if they were brighter than Tannoys. |
The Tannoys don't really have a "large driver" at all frequencies, though they look like single drivers all models are at least 2-way speakers, horn in the center which is not so obvious, woofer around the horn. As a horn they do have more controlled dispersion than a cone speaker. But that's due to the nature of a horn, really, not the size of driver in the case of Tannoy.
It is very likely that more of your favorite songs on your favorite albums were mastered on Tannoys than any other speaker. They are special.
The ATC are not bright but they do have more extension than the Tannoys, extension up top being limited to 13k or so. |
Kiddman, thoughts on Tannoy Kingdom Royal ? |
Long live this thread!
Tannoy Kensington SE "current-ly" (pun intended) driven by Marantz Reference electronics (2x MA-9S2 monos + SC-7S2 pre) is a stopping point for me.
My wife and I, plucked string junkies - think Jack Johnson, Mark Knopfler - are mesmerized by the music, and expect to keep the Tannoys "forever".
My mother-in-law laid eyes on them, and proclaimed "Those aren't speakers. That's FURNITURE."
We couldn't be happier. |
Two different speaker HELLO!! |
Weird question as the two speakers are nothing alike..If you are using tubes the Tannoy! If you are using high power solid state ...something else. |
Quad-man speaks the truth. |
Bitstream, how do you like the Marantz MA-9S2 monos + SC-7S2 pre?
I have the Marantz SA1 CD player which is an amazing cd player. |
How do the top Vandersteen's compare? |
Aldavis, Kingdom Royal are certainly a very good speaker. But not quite as much my cup of tea as the Westminster. I like the mid-to-top area better on Westminster, the Kingdoms are not as natural to me. This is not due to the fact that they are extended and I somehow prefer rolled off speakers. Far from it, I have other speakers flat to 50khz whose upper mids and highs I prefer to the Kingdom. Rather, for me, something is lost in going to the Kingdom. Just my preference, I like the presentation of the Westminsters better. |
Stringreen, the Vandy 7 is a better speaker than most on this thead, they are truly a state of the art speaker. That's coming from a guy with lots of speakers but not a Vandy owner, so no bias toward them here. I was not really familiar with their sound when I bought most of my speakers and I don't prefer them so I won't be switching out. Since then, I have heard them for extended periods. If my gear was stolen I would very strongly consider them. They are fantastically pure, very true to life in tonal color, and amazingly dynamic (if you feed them plenty of watts) for a speaker this size and this inefficient. The Vandy 7s are one of the best in the world IMO. They do suffer from the fact that Richard does not tell tall stories about being a NASA designer, a rocket scientist, a Bell labs researcher, or any other of the mostly fabricated stories used by many in this industry. He does not do the mystique thing, or luxury goods marketing. They are just real, honest, great sounding, and refined.
Again, I'm not connected in any way, I am not a retailer, I just love great equipment. |
Aldavis, Kingdom Royal are certainly a very good speaker. But not quite as much my cup of tea as the Westminster. I like the mid-to-top area better on Westminster, the Kingdoms are not as natural to me. This is not due to the fact that they are extended and I somehow prefer rolled off speakers. Far from it, I have other speakers flat to 50khz whose upper mids and highs I prefer to the Kingdom. Rather, for me, something is lost in going to the Kingdom. Just my preference, I like the presentation of the Westminsters better. |
I'm surprised that WAF hasn't come up more prominently. Having both seen and heard the Westminster Royal SE, all I can say is make sure your SO is on board.
The Royal SEs are 55" X 39" X 22" and weigh over 300 pounds each. Not much different from putting 2 Victorian Era highboy armoires (or subzero refrigerators) in your living room.
YMMV, but I can safely predict how my GF would react, and it wouldn't be positive or approving...
Sonically, I thought Maggie 20.7s or Wilson Sashas easily beat them. Again, YMMV. |
I know of nobody who has heard my system that would pick either of those speakers over the Wests. Yes, MMDV (my mileage DOES vary!).
As far as the wife factor, it surprises me how huge an issue this can be. My wife loves music, she loves the sound of the Wests, so no problem. But even if neither were true, she considers everything a partnership. If it's important to me, she'll compromise over something that only takes up 1/4 of the room!
I knew a very successful psychologist who provided his wife with a beautiful house in the best town, one of the best roads, and all other creature comforts. They had a living room that was truly never used. Perfect for audio, cathedral ceiling, great dimensions. But he was relegated to the breezeway (room between garage and house) with his prizef system. No portable heat, he'd have to turn on the portable heater an hour or more before listening, but it would still be cold (part of the country with a real winter).
In my experience this is not such an unusual story.
I, personally, would require a more equitable compromise. Apparently, most others in this thread agree!
When I hear the noise about WAF in families where the guy has this one huge hobby and love, which does not include seeing other females and being out at bars, and where he is the bread winner, I shake my head. High end systems are not exactly greasy, smelly motors being brought into the house for a rebuild. What's the beef? I like the acronym "PWF". |
Kiddman Wrote:
I know of nobody who has heard my system that would pick either of those speakers over the Wests. Yes, MMDV (my mileage DOES vary!).
Cool. Please share your pre/amp that's feeding your Westminsters so that we might learn from your experiences.
I heard the Wilson Sashas through a Dan D'agostino pre/mono-amp kit with AR Sources, and the Maggie 20.7 through an AR ss kit.
The Tannoy dealer was running the Westminsters through a Naim kit, which I believe had a Naim 250.2 for the amp. I'm not sure if Naim was the best way to go with the Westminsters, but the dealer specialized in Naim and Rega, and fed the Tannoys with the best he had.
At the end of the day I thought the Sashas through D'agostino were awesome, but at a much higher price point than my own, much more modest, "flat earth" system. |
ARC Ref 2 phono, Ref pre, Ref 150 amp. These are not such out of this world electronics that they are the reason for the magic......but the Basis Debut Vac and Basis Vector arm do help. |
This is such a pointless thread which predictably became a Tannoy love-in, then derailed into side discussions. These are two completely different speakers. The Tannoy fans will swear black and blue the Westminsters kill the Magico's in every metric, the Magico fans will say the Tannoys don't touch the S5's. Pointless, pointless, pointless. |
Pointless? I dont agree, the OP raised the question and people simply responded. Based on your criteria most of the discussion threads would be considered pointless. Vinyl vs digital, tubes vs solid state, big speaker vs small monitor etc. We're just a bunch of folks who enjoy discussing audio topics, that's what these forums are here for. Most people on this thread acknowledge that Magico and Tannoy attract very different types of listeners but it's still fun to talk about. Hobbies are like that, just having fun.
Charles, |
Charles, I disagree with your synopsis of my comments. I have no problem with comparison threads where there is SOME crossover, some area to argue one way or the other. But this thread is completely pointless. If posting in a void is your thing, break a leg, but i'm not retracting my comment. |
Mel of course not, you're as welcome here as me or anyone else. What I was trying to get across is the point that there tends to be a certain degree of redundancy . There are topics that are popular and recurrent and thus generate the familiar repeated dialog and answers. If those are pointless threads then quite a few exist on audiogon or any hobby oriented forum. They just go with the territory and personally that doesn't bother me. |
Mature attitude and post, Charles. |
Charles, I mostly agree with your comments, however in this case it's as pointless as comparing a softball team to a baseball team. In both, you hit a ball but you're talking about two completely different games and teams. I don't doubt AG is chocker block full of such threads, but that doesn't mean they have any or much intrinsic value. |
Hi Mel,
I understand your point about value and agree some threads are more informative and educational than others. I appreciate those but I come to this site primarily to have fun with fellow gon members who share the enjoyment of music and audio components.
Regarding this thread the OP did ask about and was obviously interested in these two very dissimilar speakers.
Charles, |
I was the first respondent to this thread and was a bit abrupt. Having no experience with any of the gear that Aprica asked about, I only felt that the Tannoys would more fit within MY OWN personal likes in a system build. Many great thoughtful posts above... barring the first two:) |
Charles, If you review this thread, 99% of the comments are about Tannoy. I've noticed audiophiles who find gear which gets them off the merry go round do not post endlessly about their gear on forums. It's only really 'aspirational' audiophiles who do that. I did that with Ayon and sold my CD-5, then CD-5s within 2 years. I counted the number of Tannoy speakers up for sale on the 'Gon (21) vs Magico (5). That tells you something. |
Hi Mel,
One point to consider concerning the numder of a brand's used equipment is the company's size. Tannoy has been around a "long time" and sells many more models than Magico. I'd say there are far more owners of Tannoy and thus they'd be expected to have more used speakers in the marketplace. Magico is a much more recently established company relatively speaking. |
Given the many, many, many thousands of Tannoys that have been sold, I would say the number for sale versus the number in the field is extremely low.
I have never seen any brand of speaker that it is so common to have folks own for decades. At least 2 things are required for that: musicality (meaning sounds like music) and repairability. Good luck on that last point for so many boutique manufacturers. |
Good point Charles about sales volumes. It just gets a bit exasperating when comparison threads get disproportionate commentary purely because one manufacturer has been around longer and gained more supporters. In a sense, now I can understand why "Brand names" like Nike get such a large market share. Bigger doesn't always mean better however. But to be clear I think Tannoy make some great speakers. The Westminster Royal SE are tremeandous speakers, but are extremely large and for many audiophiles impractical. Magico speakers are so transparent to source, they demand a lot of upstream equipment and on owners achieving system synergy. That is not for everyone. No doubt Tannoy are more forgiving. There are pro's and con's to both approaches. |
Mel,
My very first post on this thread I said these are vastly different speakers. I was interested in the responses the OP would generate, so I've followed it out of genuine curiosity. |
I find conversations about about the pointlessness of threads to be more pointless...
I find posts about the pointlessness of meta-conversations about pointless threads to be more pointless still...
Eek...would someone please pull me out of this pointless infinite regress...? :^) |
A poster wrote: "Magico speakers are so transparent to source, they demand a lot of upstream equipment"
I will add, after much experience with them, "or, they are edgy enough, due to some particular distortions, that one has to be careful about mating equipment to not push them futher and over the edge."
Nearly all products that have gained reputations for being "so neutral you have to be careful not to use the wrong equipment with them" are in retrospect generally agreed upon to have had their own edginess (which is a very nice word or distortions) which made them so sensitive.
Are Magicos more transparent than the new Maggies, which are so much more trnasparent than they ever were, and lower in distortion than they ever were? NO, the new Maggies are more transparent, more detailed, but the lower distortion makes them far easier with mating equpment. The same can be said for the Martin Logan CLX. Now, you don't need to point out the loudness, bass, dynamic advantages of the Magico. That's not the point. The point is that the assertion about products like them that are "so transparent that you need to be ultra careful about what you hook them up with" is flawed. If they get the tweeter/mid crossover solved at some iteration level, and the tweeter fully under control, everyone will be saying "Wow, now they are so much smoother". But it's always after the fact that folks admit the flaws of their pets products.
I now own none of the above, and have no affiliation with any of them, so this is not about favoritism.
|
I think you may have missed my point Kiddman, I was simply saying the S5's are transparent and revealing of upstream equipment, therefore time should be taken auditioning different amps to see what has good synergy to your ears. Obviously most good ESL's, ribbon or quasi ribbon speakers would have an edge in transparency over a dynamic speaker, but that is only one aspect of it's sound. Tone, timbre, smoothness, balance/coherency, imaging & the ability to scale and realistically convey the full impact of an orchestra (without the need for a sub) are important considerations also.
In general, fast, smooth, tube-like amps sound best with Magico imho. I've had great success running a Vitus amp in Class a which suits my tastes. |
Another point to add is, whilst the S5 is transparent sounding. It is also a bit forgiving (certainly more so than the Q3) of less than reference sources and recordings which is a plus. If anything, running high end ribbons or ESL's would demand even more of your upstream equipment. |
I piled onto the "Tannoy love fest" here a while back. Still have and love my Tannoys; still stand by what I said. However, since then I've heard the Magico S1 in the same setup I'd heard the S5 (and compared to Kensington SE), except this time with a modded VAC integrated (their current 80 Watts/ch model plus "special" factory upgrades).
It was gorgeous. Not as much bass impact as the S5, obviously, but perfectly integrated and coherent from top to bottom. Superb resolution and top-end extension that enhanced musicality rather than detracting from it. No possibility of fatigue. Best sound I've ever heard from that size of speaker. Preferred it easily over the prior S5 setup (S5's bass struck me as unnatural). I was just shy of being blow away. Of course, the VAC amp may have contributed in a not insignificant way.
This is the first non-Tannoy I've auditioned in a while that I walked away thinking I could be very happy with in my main 2ch. It would be somewhat difficult for me to choose between the S1 and my beloved Kensington SE (similar pice-points, though now the SE is discontinued). When it comes to the musical satisfaction yielded in conjunction with a good upstream, these 2 speakers aren't all THAT different.
S1 + upgraded VAC integrated + Clearaudio Innovation compact and a simple Ortofon Cadenza Red. This is all nice stuff, but holy COW that sounded great together. |
I find the tweeter on the Tannoy's not to my liking. Too forward. To me, the S5 is a better speaker and very SOTA. The tweeter on the S5 - despite being beryllium - is as smooth as silk. Very well integrated and the S5's bass is outstanding. Tight. Fast. |
Goodness Mulveling, you weren't the only one to pile on the S5's. That was a group punch on! Moving forward, i'm pleased you gave this series a second chance. As I said in an earlier post "I am not sure which amps you heard those S5's with? however the S5's are best matched with warm, tube-like solid state amps and then they sound magical. I've heard the S5's with both Vitus and Dartzeel which both have excellent synergy. You could also try cables like Jorma Prime which are very well balanced, natural sounding, harmonically rich & have a liquid flow which I think would compliment the S5's very well. Siltech Royal Sig series also work well with Magico. As always, it is a matter of synergy."
Fyi, I asked Jon Baker from Magico if he felt the S5's bass was as well integrated as the S1 and received this reply -
"Both the S1 and S5 bass are equally integrated. The difference between the two is really more of a function of ones acoustic environment.". You need to keep in mind the S5 has BIG 10" long throw bass drivers which require a long time to play in and open up. Most owners report they need a MINIMUM of 250hrs to play in, and i've heard a couple of other owners report like the Q3's the S5's continue to improve right up to 1000hrs. All i'm saying is, consider if your earlier audition of the S5's was optimal before judging those speakers. |
You missed the point Melba. And that point is that there are some significantly more revealing and detailed speakers that are much less sensitive to having the exact right electronics. The reason: those are lower distortion. The point is NOT whether or not the Magicos have deeper bass or play louder. The point is that they are higher distortion and that is the main reason for sensitivity to upstream components, NOT some "great transparency" that makes them so tricky to match. |
Kiddman, this is the first time I've heard Magico speakers described as having "higher distortion". How did you measure this high distortion and what do you think causes it? |
Ok, so finally going to audition S5, but the dealer gave me these option for Electronics.
ARC ref-75 / Dan DÀgostino / krell 402e as amplifiers and ARC Ref.5, CD ARC CD9 / Nagra as Power amps
Devialete / Krell S550i integrated |
Magico S5 high resolution great detail wonderful imaging. |
Kiddman, what can you tel me about the new Westminster GR ? What are the new materials and how does it sound ? |
The S5 are the lowest distortion loudspeakers ever measured by the NRC. In terms of any realistic measures, there is no question that the S5 is a superior speaker then any Tannoy.
I bet you that Kiddman never really heard a Magico. And if he did, there were plenty distortion in that setup for sure, they were just not in the speakers (-; Kiddman has been trolling the Magico threads for some time, spreading the hate, I wouldnt take him too seriously. |
|
I do not view Kiddman as troll in any sense, he simply does not care for Magico, I understand his perspective. Some listeners love them and some do not care for them,it is really just that simple. You like them and that is your choice(which is perfectly fine) why can`t Kiddman state his? I find his posts to be informative and refreshing. |
I'm still waiting for Kiddmann to explain his comment (on 10/22) about why he thinks Magico has "higher distortion". It's just interesting to me because that is a view/opinion that I don't hear very often. Magicos, whether you like them or not, are usually described as being "analytical", sterile, unemotional etc in part because of the rigid cabinet that does not vibrate like so many other speaker cabinets, especially like the Tannoys which are designed to resonate and contribute to the sound of the speaker. |
'
Hi Peterayer,
Where have you found info from Tannoy suggesting the cabinet is meant to resonate?
Not a trick question since as you know, I have modified Tannoy Canterburys and I prefer them to most anything else (no recommendation at all - just what I like).
This would be interesting reading - at least for me.
Best,
Jim
' |
