Jdolgin -
I picked up a pair of Adcom GFA-5200 50WPC amps for $100 each and am using them to biamp & biwire. Even with these little tykes, though, I've got lots more power than I can use in the 12x19x9 living room of my thin-walled apartment. I'm not married to the Adcoms, but I'm all spent out now, so upgrading anything will have to wait at least half a year. I'll keep your amp recommendations in mind, though.
As for the imaging, are you saying that the Aeriuses can create a center image that's as solid as the Spicas'? The Aeriuses sound great when there are lots of performers, because they provide enough room to keep them all separate. But, when it's just one vocalist up-close, the Spicas are more solid. I've got the Aeriuses along a 12' wall, with the center of the panel 36" from the front wall and 24" from the side walls and toed in a bit more than the one-third rule dictates to keep the brightness down and focus the center. Any closer to the front wall than 36" and I get nasty bass resonance. I think the proximity to the side walls is defocusing the image a bit, but my room's too narrow to set up along a long wall, and if I move the speakers closer together, the soundstage starts to feel crowded.
geronimo -
A pair of Adcom GFA-5200s, successors to the highly reviewed GFA-535II, which was considered better-sounding than the popular bigger GFA-555. Small and cheap, but decent quality. At this point, I suspect that placement tweaking will have make a bigger improvement than better electronics. Too, I have to face the fact that my room is just too narrow, and nothing I do will change that. (Sigh.)
What tube or SS amp would you recommend in the $500 (used) ballpark? I'm totally ignorant about tubes. And remember, I don't need much power, as my listening levels are, by necessity, very modest.
Thanks for the feedback. |
MikeJ -
I think you misread my post. I'm not looking for other speakers. I'm very happy with the Aeriuses. I'm curious, though, about what amps, especially tube amps, people have found to work well with these. |
Update:
After tweaking and spiking, the Aeriuses are now sounding really terrific, with central vocals that are as focused, if still not quite as solid, as the Spicas. I pulled the Aeriuses another 3" from the front and side walls (39" & 27"), toed 'em in a tad more, moved the listening position back a bit, and replaced the slider feet with spikes. Man, I was surprised at what a major difference the spikes made. It was not subtle. The imaging, spacious but fuzzy before, became spacious and razor sharp. These babies are cookin' now, and they're equally good on intimate material and big-stage material. I think the Adcom amps are a perfectly good match. But, then, I've always tended to favor a slightly bright sound, a la my Stax Lambda Pros.
All this doesn't make the Spicas any less impressive. But, I'm now very happy to have the Aeriuses and have no regrets about replacing the Spicas with them. |
Thanks, All, for the feedback.
Honest1-
Much as I like and respect the Spicas, I can't keep 'em now that the Aeriuses are imaging well. I don't have room for them, and money's tight. The Spicas have more of a "Wow!" factor on some intimate vocals in near-field listening, and I'll miss that particular thrill, but the Aeriuses paint the entire front wall with sound from farther away, and that's a strength that's enjoyable on a wider range of material. They're very different listening experiences, but I'm finding that although a few CDs work better on the Spicas, most of the time I prefer the Aeriuses. In addition, the extra money spent on the Aeriuses (twice the price) buys more realistic bass and slightly better detail. For under $1,000, the Spicas are incredible. But, the Aeriuses are over $2,000 and worth every penny. (Of course, I bought used and paid only half those figures.) I hesitate to even compare them: it's like putting Sugar Ray Leonard in the ring with Muhammed Ali. They both punched above their weight, but it wouldn't be much of a contest. They're both champs.
I don't know which model of Audio Physics I auditioned, but they were current models retailing for $3k. Serious suckout in the upper bass, and imaging decent but not comparable to the Spicas.
Slikrik-
As they're on hardwood floors, and I'm too cheap and lazy to go out and pay $50 for brass disks, I'm using pennies with tiny dabs of poster putty to stick 'em to the floor and keep 'em from slipping or rattling. Seems to work quite well.
Doncar-
Although I've never heard the larger MLs, I have no doubt you're right about the advantages of larger panels. Unfortunately, I have a brass wallet to go with my golden ears. The Aeriuses are probably the best speakers I'm going to be able to afford for a long time. From here on out, I'm strictly limited to cheap tweaks. The only thing I can see spending more than a couple hundred bucks on in the next year is the front end. As for cables, well, let me confess that I'm a heretic: I've always been skeptical about claims for expensive wire, and after reading the following articles,
http://sound.westhost.com/cablewhitepaper.htm
http://sound.westhost.com/cables.htm
I can't see spending more than $200 to find out if my skepticism is warranted. The first article, by one of the founders of ESL-maker Innersound, seems to indicate that the ESL panel may benefit from low-inductance & low-capacitance coaxial cable, whereas the woofer will benefit from heavy low-impedance solid or braided cable. It makes sense to me, too, that direct biamping would give the amp tighter control over the woofer more than any cable tweak used with passive biamping would. However, direct biamping of the MLs seems to be a complicated endeavor fraught with peril, so I'm content to sit tight and just enjoy the already stellar performance I've got right now. I'm already enjoying sound far better than I dreamed I could afford, so it feels ungrateful to keep pushing for more.
If a $200 set of cables would make a clearly audible improvement over my Monster XP, I'd be tempted though...
No Money & Barnes-
I'm sure the MLs can take more power. I'm just not sure what I'd do with it. Live levels on even low key stuff like Steely Dan is already running the risk of alienating my neighbors in this quiet prewar NYC apartment building, and Little Feat is definitely pushing it.
Thanks, everybody, for the conversation. I'm having fun both listening and learning. Ain't that what it's all about? |
Doncar-
I'm sure you're right about the CDP - it's an H/K CD changer. Although the specs look good on paper (dual 20-bit Burr-Brown A/D converters and HDCD decoding), H/K has never won much praise for its CD players. Probably just competent mid-fi. Not sure where to go from here for $500 or less.
As for analog, I've got an AR table from the early '80s with a Sumiko Premiere MMT arm and a Dynavector DV-10x4 HO MC cartridge that's in need of replacing, but it has sat in a closet up in NH since the mid '80s, when I left the country for most of 14 years. Unfortunately, during that time of inactivity, the weight of the platter deformed the motor bearings, resulting a nasty once-per-rotation "thunk". The motor's gotta be replaced, and as I only ever had about 200 LPs, I'm not sure it's worth the trouble to rent a car (I live in NYC - no car) to drive up and pick it up along with my ancient LPs in unknown but dubious condition. A terrible waste, I know. Haven't decided what to do about it.
BTW, please don't take my skepticism about cables personally. I don't mean to snub anyone, as I'm sure you all have practical experience to back up your advice. It's just a pathology of mine - I don't believe things until I see/hear them for myself, especially when they threaten my tiny puddle of filthy lucre. I'll definitely keep your cable advice in mind, though, as I continue my audiophile education. |
Geronimo, thanks, that's an interesting suggestion. I had always assumed that a product like that would be much more costly. My H/K CD changer does have a coax digital out, so adding an outboard DAC is a possibility. I'm kinda tempted, though, by a Rega Planet 2000, as it's only about $100 more than the CAL Alpha, it seems to have a much nicer transport and all-around build quality than my H/K, and the price is only going to get lower now that Rega's new Apollo is replacing it. Still, a tube DAC is an interesting proposition. Thanks for the heads-up.
As for the Aeriuses, now that I've had 'em for a few days, my feeling about them hasn't changed since my last post - they're great, even with my modest electronics. They still don't give me goosebumps on intimate vocals the way the TC-60s do, but they bring much bigger more open imaging to atmospheric material. Little Feat's "Waiting for Columbus" is absolutely thrilling - the sound from the audience is huge and very, very detailed. I feel like I'm standing on stage with the band. On Miles Davis' "Kind of Blue", the horns and drum kit are equally good on both speakers, but the piano is more life-size on the Aeriuses.
In almost every respect, the Aeriuses are exactly what I wanted. The tonal balance is nearly perfect, needing just a tiny tad more brightness on voices. Bass is very satisfying, if not quite as tight and tuneful as on my friend's Brentworth IIIs. I suspect this would be better in a bigger room with more distance to the front and side walls, and in any case, bass is what I care least about. Detail is right up there with my Stax Lambda Pros - I've never heard better from any speaker. Treble is the way I like it - balanced and open, but not exaggerated. I've heard more extended treble, particularly from the Gallo Reference 3, but I found it not bright but just a bit overwhelming. The only improvement I'd care about would be making the image more solid. If I hadn't had the TC-60s but had gone instead directly from my Mission 772s to the Aeriuses, I'd be in audio heaven right now. The TC-60s, though, showed me what a truly solid, reach-out-and-stick-a-fork-in-it image is. With the Aeriuses, the image is equally well-defined and dimensional, maybe more so, but somewhat insubstantial. I feel like I can see the musicians and instruments, but that if I reached out to touch them, my hand would pass through. I think this is just a product of the dipolar design. The late arrival of the reflected soundwave creates a feeling of space and depth, but also gives the image that ethereal quality.
The Aeriuses are easier to enjoy, though. The TC-60s demand that I really concentrate to appreciate them. The Aeriuses don't care whether I'm paying attention or not. They're just happy to put on a show. And, what a show it is. |
Jdolgin-
That's a good idea. There is a big window in the wall behind the Aeriuses. Perhaps I should replace the Venetian blinds with curtains. Might look a little better, too. Fortunately, my room is long enough to put the back wall a good six feet behind the listening position, and that wall is entirely covered with bookshelves. So, rear wall reflections are not an issue.
Geronimo-
Thanks for the review link. I'll check it out. |
Jdolgin -
"One more point, keep experimenting with placement of the Aerius.......they will create a truly lifelike center image with true portrayal of real bodies in front of you. Don't settle for less. It's in there........I promise."
Thanks for the encouragement. You were absolutely right. Further placement tweaking has made a substantial improvement in image focus. Moved 'em another 1' apart, pulled 'em forward 6", got out a tape measure and got 'em identically positioned relative to front and side walls and degree of toe-in. What had been a spacious but ethereal image suddenly became focused like a laser. They're now as good on center vocal imaging as my Spica TC-60s, and better at most everything else.
An audiophile buddy came over to check out the 'Logans for the first time today. I rewired my biamp kit to put one Adcom GFA-5200 through the 'Logans and the other through the Spicas. Since the 'Logans and Spicas have nearly identical sensitivity, A-B comparisons were as simple as switching amps on and off. After a while, I was getting dismayed, as we were both concluding that the Spicas rendered Boz Scaggs' "But Beautiful" with a more relaxed, natural and rock-solid center image. The 'Logans had more ambience and better image height, but we weren't getting the feeling of being able to reach out and touch Boz. "I just spent a thousand bucks on these 'Logans!" I cried in despair. We tried hanging blankets on the front wall, on the theory that backsplash was confusing the 'Logans imaging. Nope. Finally, I pulled the 'Logans out to 40", slid 'em over to within 15" of the side walls (which are 12' apart), and futzed with the toe-in.
Magic. The center image just went "ZAP!" Suddenly, the Spicas sounded shut-in by comparison.
Conclusion? The 'Logans really benefit from absolutely precise positioning. Having one speaker 1" closer or toed-in just a couple degrees different from the other makes 'em merely very good. Get it exactly right, though, and they suddenly graduate to superb.
You really need a tape measure - a quarter of an inch matters. |
I'm done tweaking and futzing. Maybe I have a tin ear, but I don't hear the "hardness" that some have mentioned as characteristic of the Adcoms. A friend has an all-tube setup with Brentworths, and in many ways our systems sound quite similar. The main difference is that his kit has a slightly smaller but more focused soundstage and brigter presentation of vocals.
Some months ago, I added a Behringer DSP8024 as a DAC/EQ, and this has improved the tonal response tremendously. The 'Logans are fairly warm, and my room has major bass anomalies. The Behringer corrected both of these characteristics beautifully, opening up the upper midrange and treble and smoothing and extending the bass substantially. My only quibble now is that the imaging is still just a tad on the ethereal side. This would doubtless be improved in a bigger room that would allow greater distance to the front and side walls. As they are, the 'Logans are throwing a wide, tall and well-defined soundstage with more ambience and low-level detail than the Spicas could muster. Although my friend's kit retails for at least 4 times what mine does, I prefer my setup. Having auditioned Gallo Reference 3s and some other $3k speakers earlier this year, I still think this is about the best-sounding sub-$10k system I've heard. |
