>> That you find the Calisto's not to be bright as
>> described by Drsaid could be 1) that they are not
>> bright, 2) that you have heard them with amplification
>> which was carefully chosen to reveal them at their
>> best, or that you heard them in a room for which they
>> were carefully chosen, or far more likely you just like
>> their sound and find that sound to be ideal.
Newbee: (1) I & whole lot of others are in agreement that Callistos are *not* bright. I feel that Drseid, who is the 1st one to use "bright" for these speakers, is using the wrong adjective to describe its sound. I have a strong hunch that "vivid" is a better adjective in comparison to the Linbrooks. Drseid correct me if I'm wrong.
Even after hearing the speakers using the incorrect adjective can lead people astray!
(2) I don't know if the amplification was chosen to "reveal them at their best". The amp was an EDGE amplifier. it was a very modest box that was *not much bigger* than, say, a Linn Ikemi chassis.
(3) re. the room I can say that it was one of the most humble & inconspicuous type of rooms. This room doubles as the office so there are work desks, computers, printers, faxes in there. the walls were the usual drywall & it had a false ceiling. In an attempt to treat the room a bit, there was 1 ASC tube trap in between the speakers. There were tube traps at the 1st reflection points. There was a large board (MDF or ply, I cannot remember) that was propped against the wall behind the speaker to reduce the drywall moving in-out w/ the bass. This is old contruction & is essentially a warehouse. The speaker sounded superb in this room! That was the most commendable part of the auditioning. I could see no gimmicks in the room to make the speaker sound good.
(4) True, I do like the GMA sound. I also like several speakers in the PBN Montana line & also Selah Audio's Excel Array speakers. The PBN Montana speakers all have a slot transmission front porting yet they seem to be engineered correctly for good sound. The Selah Audio speaker is a sealed box. Some GMAs are sealed & all the present offerings are ported. So, my preferences transcend ported-sealed speakers. In short, when I hear a good sounding speaker, I like it brand not withstanding.
Re. "idiot proofing" one's post: yes, it seems that we have a bunch of people here who are just trigger-happy to fire of a post reading what they want from somebody else's post rather than reading what is *actually* written there.
OK, next time I'll "idiot proof" my posts. |
First off, the GMAs are not "bright" sounding speakers IMO. They are *more* bright than the Linbrooks, however.
The Linbrooks are not "warm tubey sounding" speakers either. They are warmish but they are rare in the way that they don't mask the detail of the music. They are also incredibly fast and dynamic.
As for the question as to whether the guy auditioning with me bought the GMAs... The answer is "no." That said, he definitely liked them plenty (as did I). Like I said, it all comes down to individual tastes.
Good luck,
---Dave |
Bombaywalla,
Sorry I caused you offense, however I thought your statement about the Linbrooks implied that you had heard them and that you found them soft and warm - then tried to create an anology to tube amps from the 70's and 80's. I find it easy to avoid such ambiguity by simply saying right up front, as I did in this post, that I have or haven't listened to a speaker. There are too many folks commenting on stuff they have never heard, let alone hearing it under controlled circumstances where in reasonable conclusions could be drawn.
That you find the Calisto's not to be bright as described by Drsaid could be 1) that they are not bright, 2) that you have heard them with amplification which was carefully chosen to reveal them at their best, or that you heard them in a room for which they were carefully chosen, or far more likely you just like their sound and find that sound to be ideal.
Recommending them based on you personal opinion is fine as well, but IMHO drawing conclusions, whether or not you put a ? mark at the end of your sentence, about what the sound of another speaker may be, is not. It can easily lead folks astray. |
>> 05-17-06: Newbee
>> Contrary to what Bombaywalla sez (and I don't note that
>> he sez he has actually listened to Linbrooks)...
Just to clear the record, Newbee, I "ASKED" - there is a "?" at the end of that statement I wrote in my post. If you missed it, read my orig post again.
If you want to have a discussion (& not an argument!) then quote people the correctly rather than twisting their words to the derogatary. |
Saki70,
Newbee is correct. I'm speaking of the Tyler Taylo Reference Monitors, not the Linbrook. I think this is a fair comparaison as the retail price is similar.
BTW, the tweeter in the DeCapo sure looks a lot like the one in the Tylers. I don't know the brand or model, but the do look similar. The Reference 3A mid/bass driver is proprietary and has gotten excellent reviews over the years. They use this same driver in their $4500+ speakers too. It is basically responsible for the R3A sound. Many would consider it a step up from the driver used in the Tylers.
My room is irregular in shape, but the main part of the room is about 12'X 15' with a ceiling height ranging from 6.5' to 7'. My listening seat is nearly centered in the room and the tweeters are about 7' from my ears. The front of the speaker is 31" from the wall behind the speaker. The speakers are nearly 7' apart measured at the tweeter. Speakers are on 24" stands putting the tweeter at about 3" below ear level in my setup.
I have not heard the Linbrooks or any GMA speakers, so I can't comment on them. I can tell you that the DeCapos can be successfully paired with almost any amplifier in a room the size of yours. They will also have plenty of bass and not require a subwoofer for most people.
The potential saving on amplification, along with the typical price of a pair of used DeCapos makes them a great bargain. Mine are the non-i model which sell for about $1000 for a nice pair.
Enjoy,
TIC |
Saki, I'm posting only because of a couple of comments above might mislead you. FWIW as I have no experience with either the DeCapos or the Calisto's and my experience with the Tylers is the Linbrook Signature 1 piece floor stander's - My point of comparison is the Quad 63's and Paragon Jubilee/Jem, both of which are very neutral and revealing systems.
The Tylers are a tad warmer thru the lower mid-range BUT the bass is tight and the mid-range/highs are very detailed/transparent without being bright.
Contrary to what Bombaywalla sez (and I don't note that he sez he has actually listened to Linbrooks) these speakers are NOT reminiscent of soft/mushy tube stuff from the 70's and 80's NOR are they made artificially bright to give a false impression of detail and transparency.
Note that Rubent is talking about totally different speakers. Different box and drivers. The Linbrooks are a meaningful upgrade from the Reference monitors. The Seas millenium tweeter makes a hugh difference, as does the MTM set up and increased mid-range bass response from having two drivers to cover.
As I said, FWIW. |
I've never heard the Ref. 3a or Tylers, but I own a pair of Callistos. Back when I was auditioning "bookshelf" speakers I went to as many places I could to audition. B&W, Paradym, Von schweikerts, used Revel M20s, a few others I can't remember. All sounded very nice and I'm not trying to rag on any of these companies. I was lucky enough though to have a friend with a pair of GMA Europas, which I had not even heard of before. I don't know much about describing the differences, but it was not subtle. Granted, I listened to them in a home set up, but they were definitely not paired with what I would call great equip, nor set up in well dampened room etc. IMO the audio shops had better amps, sources, and cables etc. than my friend. That sold me on GMA. I found a demo pair of Callistos and haven't looked back. I still feel after a year or so, that I made the right choice. I suggest you try as hard as possible to audition a GMA product before buying anything. You may or may not like them, but they're definitely worth it to try them out! |
This is great guys , thank you .
I will be able to audition the De Capo's , hopefully this weekend . But the others will have to be decided here , probably as compared to the De Capo's .
Bombaywalla ; I feel your pain . It can be rather difficult to get a feel for something with just words .
Ruebent ; That is interesting . I would've thought that the Tyler's would be a tough act to beat due to the components used . I guess implementation is what counts . What size is your room and how close to the speakers are you sitting ? Do they have body and presence at low listening levels ?
Heli_dog ; Good link , thank you .
Chadlinz ; That is an interesting question , I will try to ask the manufacturer .
Drseid ; what components accompanied the Callisto's in the demo that you heard ? Did the other auditioner buy the Callisto's ?
Thanks people , keep them coming . |
I've owned and used Reference 3A MM DeCapos (non-i version) and Tyler Tylo Reference Monitors in my smallish room. They are setup in a nearfield setup. For my room and taste, I easily prefer the DeCapos. The bass is more solid and well defined, the midrange is better developed and the highs are just right. I also like the idea that you can drive them with almost any amp (in a small room). I've used everything from a 1.5 watt/channel 45 amp, 5 watt/ch. 2A3 tube amp, 40 watt "chip amp" and 170 watt HT receiver.
If you can find a pair of DeCapos at a good price, buy them and try them. They are very popular, so you could just re-sell them if you didn't love them.
Enjoy,
TIC |
>> your tastes are a bit more bright (but not overly so)
>> then the Callistos may be what you are looking for...
something is not right here when a person calls the Callisto "bright"!!
I've heard these speakers & would not call them bright in any way, shape or form.
Maybe the Linnbrooks are warm/soft just as some tube amps have that tubey sound from the 1970s & 1980s?
(I'm trying to get a feel for the Linnbrook sound using just words! ;-) ) |
I can't comment on the 3A as I have not heard that one (but I do hear a lot of good things about it)...
As for the Tylers and GMAs, I have heard both of these, and have owned the Signature Monitors (technically I still do, as they are the top half of my Linbrook System two piece floorstanders).
I The GMA Callistos I heard about 3 months back and was quite impressed. They get much lower than one might expect, and they had very nice sounstage depth and detail. Classical music seemed to mesh very well with them in particular, and I could easily be happy with them in my home (save for their looks that just don't do it for me, but did for the other person who auditioned them with me)...
The Linbrooks are warmer speakers than the GMAs and get even lower bass still. Speed of drivers and midrange are both close between the two, but I give the edge to the Linbrooks. Top end is about a draw IMO... I loved them both in that area. Dynamics I would give a slight edge to the Linbrooks...
Bottom line is both speakers are superb and I am sure you would be happy with either of them... If you prefer a bit of a warmer sound then probably the Linbrooks would be a closer fit (but keep in mind they are rear ported, so yo will need some space behind them)... If your tastes are a bit more bright (but not overly so) then the Callistos may be what you are looking for...
---Dave |
^Think #A with no crossover will get most nods.You have menioned for me what is and acid test for speakers.Apt and condo dwellers plus folks who have just goten over Led Zepplin and Who at live listening levels want speakers that have dynamics even at soft volume levels.I got a pair of Audio Physic Sparks for a buddy and kept them a moth.They were so small interms of width and depth it was fun pulling them out for near field listenming listening sessions (why if I get a 2A3 or other flea powered amp am interested in Cain and Cain Abby's because you can order them with "normal " and near field Fostex drivers and for second system, I prefer latter.Anyway wehn asking a sellr of Sparks why ghe didn't get the Tempos for bigger stage and bass at nott much more money he said tempo's needed to be pushed to opedn up.This is why many oldder rev\civers (evenm a recent 90's Mac pre I had used to have loudnes buttons mainly for bass but I think many folks wanmted to hear dynamics).Gingko makes aneat looking $2500 tube on a tube with three 6 and half inch drivers with top mounted tweeter.Wilson Benesch has $8K Discovery with isobaric loading as well.Great for extra bass in small canbinets but in past iosobaric lines have needed to be pushed to open up which is a shame.Like I said have heard 3A's have good dynamic sense at softer listening levels.Other brands mentioned are respected but doen't know enough to comment.But have a buddy who is giving Reference 3A's some serious consideration.
Chazzbo |
with the GMA first order cross-over will it need room to develope its sound? They are truely amazing speakers wich I spent several hours really enjoying them.....just not sure how far you need to be away from them to sound ideal. |
with the GMA first order cross-over will it need room to develope its sound? They are truely amazing speakers wich I spent several hours really enjoying them.....just not sure how far you need to be away from them to sound ideal. |
I'm using the Reference 3a De Capo i speakers on 28" Skylan stands in a small room (11 x 16). These speakers are partnered with a Blue Circle BC-3 tube pre and Simaudio W-3 SS amp. I'm very pleased with the results at both low and high levels. I think that you'll get better results with the De Capos if you have tubes somewhere in your audio chain. I haven't heard the 2 other speakers which you listed. . For more info about the De Capos you might want to also check out Circles -> Owner Circles -> Reference 3A. |
