Opinions on why this system is uninvolving

Znak,

Any chance you can get your Snells back? The Type A was a helluva speaker, and a very, very tough act to follow. I've had several customers who tried the Revels and were disappointed in them.

In my opinion the design concept of the Revels is very intelligent. I am all in favor of getting the reverberant field right. However, the Revels somehow don't live up to their potential. I've heard other speakers that also do a good job with the reverberant field, which are much more enjoyable long-term. Much as I'm a fan of Floyd Toole's theories, somehow the Revels just aren't convincing to me.

The Snell Type A's, on the other hand, are brilliant in execution as well as in concept. I'm quite sorry the speaker was discontinued.

I can think of several alternatives to the Revels, but without knowing what your priorities are, I hesitate to make a specific recommendation. Also, I don't know what an "MFA 200C" amplifier is.

Best of luck to you.

Duke

Znak,

Thanks for writing back with so much additional information.

I'm not familiar with your amps, but I am somewhat familiar with the KT-90. That's a helluva tube. Incredibly powerful and dynamic, almost impossible to kill, but a bit on the bright side (that's where rolling the front end tubes comes in). Your amps are rated at 200 watts, and I bet that's conservative. Those tubes could easily crank out well over 300 watts.

I still think you're primarily looking at a speaker problem. But before you go speaker shopping, if feasible try moving the speakers about six feet out into the room. Turn up the rear tweeter a bit. Put a couple of your tube traps (or some other treatment - I use fake ficus trees for diffusion) at the first sidewall reflection points. I suspect you may have too many tube traps around the speakers - see if you can get away with fewer, or move the ones you have farther away.

In the meantime, if you still want to play along, I'd like to ask you a few questions about your personal speaker preferences. The speakers you've chosen and the dissatisfactions you've expressed give me some idea of your personal priorities - I think you want a smooth, forgiving tonal balance; excellent inner detail and articulation; good dynamic contrast (though that's not the top priority); natural timbre and rich textures; fairly deep bass extension (subterranian not necessary); excellent soundstaging characteristics (especially in depth); and last but not least long-term fatigue-free listening. Correct me where I'm wrong, and add anything else you see fit. And if you'd like to play along, I could use a little more information:

Would you prefer very good soundstaging for a single listener, or good soundstaging over a wide listening area?

Would you prefer more of a front-of-the-hall presentation, or a more middle-of-the-hall presentation?

Could you rank by relative importance: Good sound at low volume; good sound at medium volume; and good sound at high volume. What's the loudest (at the listening position) that you normally listen?

How much flexibility do you have in speaker placement?

And finally, are there any other traits you especially want - or do NOT want - in a speaker?

If you want to explore this line of thinking, I'll try to come up with a few potentially useful suggestions. Don't worry - I'm more than willing to suggest something I don't sell if I think that would better meet your needs.

Best wishes,

Duke

Znak -

Thanks for responding to me up above; I haven't had a chance to write you a decent response before now.

By "tube rolling", I mean trying different tubes to get the overall sonic characteristics you want. "Rolling the front end" would mean trying different tubes in the front end, in hopes of enhancing the overall synergy. It's kinda fun.

I appreciate your articulating the requirement for "differentiation of instrumental timbres". I've never heard that expression before, but it's richly descriptive - I'm gonna remember it.

Differentiation of instrumental timbres would be facilitated by natural decay of the notes, so that the harmonic structure isn't blurred or colored. Any resonances will spoil the timbre as the notes decay, because the ear perceives a sound that lasts longer as being louder.

As a side note, when Jon Dahlquist designed the legendary DQ-10, he had to choose between aligning the leading edges of the notes, or the trailing edges of the notes (attack or decay). His listening tests indicated that the ear is more sensitive to what's happening in the trailing edges of the notes, so that's what he optimized in the DQ-10.

Loudspeakers that don't use boxes have an inherent advantage in getting timbre and decay right, because at least three potentially significant problems are neatly sidestepped: internal box resonances, box panel resonances, and re-radiation of the woofer's backwave through the cone. As an example of this breed, the Quad 57 is still celebrated for its clarity and natural timbre.

If you want full-range reproduction with extremely natural instrumental timbre and decay of the notes, there are three speaker lines I suggest: Audio Artistry, Beveridge, and Sound Lab. Audio Artistry uses dynamic drivers and gives you more of a front-of-the-hall presentation; Beveridge gives you more of a middle to rear of the hall presentation; and Sound Lab gives you more of a middle of the hall presentation. I'm a dealer for Sound Lab, but still an admirer of Beveridge (see www.beveridge-audio.com) and Audio Artistry. The two electrostats mentioned here give you a very wide sweet spot, and while the Audio Artistry line gives a more conventional sweet spot, their dynamic impact is phenomenal.

I'm not saying that these three are the only possible solutions - only that they excel in the area you have highlighted; namely, differentiation of instrumental timbres. "Full-range" single-driver systems like the Beauhorn also excel at this, but don't have authority in the bottom two octaves.

I can talk your ear off about either the Beveridges, Audio Artistrys, or Sound Labs, if you'd like to know more.

Best of luck in your quest,

Duke