Talon Khorus with no soundstage?

Heh! another 02: I wouldn't use them to demo other components -- waste of business!

Talons may well be the most debated speakers on this site, regardless of what else they are said to be the "most" of. However, we need to step out of the extreme statements such as "waste of business!". As well, we need to be more careful about doing a little bit of research before making statements such as: "It seems a little dishonest to blame such gross flaws in soundstaging on what is a very capable preamp from EC, perhaps to increase the reputation of a product you do sell at the expense of one that you don't." (explained below).

But first, let's step back and consider this thread in terms of: what the participants are trying to accomplish, the tone of the "negative feedback", and how it is self defeating.

What is the goal of this thread?
Clearly, some people like the sound of these speakers and some don't, both with a passion. Interestingly, this can be said of a certain amplifier company as well, but that's another mess of threads. Some of the members posting "negative feedback" have additional concerns about practical and monetary considerations. Thus, some members are trying to provide feedback from "the field" as to what can be improved in the manufacturing/distribution/retailing of these speakers. The manufacturer/designer has posted a response here and elsewhere in the past, demonstrating that they are paying attention to the feedback, and stating changes they are making. (stated in whatever "politically correct" manner they felt was appropriate for a business)

Tone and methodology of discussion
Consider that most of the posters here essentially "live" at the Audiogon, or at least visit a LOT. That can be said for most of the posters in this thread, except the two business entities that have posted: a dealer and the manufacturer. Now, consider the fact that these business entities may spend limited time at Audiogon, and sometimes feel dragged in to "defend" themselves. No problem so far, until they are forced to defend themselves against silly statements, or even false ones. For example, one of the statements above is "It seems a little dishonest to blame such gross flaws in soundstaging on what is a very capable preamp from EC, perhaps to increase the reputation of a product you do sell at the expense of one that you don't." (apparently in reference to the post by Sos, a dealer). If the reference is indeed to Sos, then a couple of clicks show that Sos is indeed a dealer for the very preamp mentioned.

So what's the point?
The internet is a bizarre dimension for the high end audio community. Some people are addicted to it, some use it a lot, some would prefer to stay away from it, and for some it has been a negative experience overall. Audiogon and its experienced members should be striving to encourage MORE participation by industry members, not LESS. For example, when manufacturer/designer posts a response, only to be followed by several immediate attacks ("waste of business", etc), it makes one think twice about participating in the future, because they don't have the time to counter each and every point on every message board. While this is also true for any user being "attacked", business entities with limited internet time are the most vulnerable to this type of discouragement. They will simply go away, having learned that participating only tightens the constriction they are feeling.

Please understand that this post has nothing to do with Talon speakers (personally, I prefer a different concept). Perhaps it has something to do with commercialism, about which we make no qualms. But it MOST DEFINITELY has to do with Audiogon's goal to use the internet for the BENEFIT of the high end audio community. The discussion forums are one tool that would be far more useful with the participation of more industry "insiders". I propose that it is the DUTY of the experienced posters here, to be more careful with their statements, and keep in mind who they are aimed at. (a few snide comments to cfb might be acceptable :) but careless statements about business entities are not). A little time and patience before posting would go a long way in this thread's goal: to encourage a builder to discuss the good/bad points with the users of that product.

I have a question for the people who bought the Khorus only to sell them a short time later because they now hated the way the speakers perform.
What did you like about the speakers while auditioning them to make you want to spend up to $14,000.00?
What changed in the speakers performance to make now dislike the sound of the Talons?

Bo

Bo,

I am a Talon dealer, so take what I say with a grain of salt ;-)

For whatever it is worth, I know for a fact that the great majority of people selling their Khorus' was/is to upgrade to the new Khorus X. It has nothing to do with the fact that they dislike the speaker, in fact quite the opposite, they like the Khorus to the point of wanting the X version. FYI...The improvement in the X is just not cosmetic as some have stated, the changes are apparent upon first listen, plus the break-in is ~100 hours, much less than the original...As good as the original Khorus is, the X is better, substantially IMHO).

Best Regards...Mike - Father & Son Audio

While this thread is quite old, I think it deserves a current day perspective. The Talon Khorus came out 10 years ago with high praise from many reviewers who claimed it to have superlative performance and extolled its capabilities as one of the best speakers ever made.

In particular, I reference Stuart A. McCreary, Positive Feedback Magazine from Feb. of 2001.

It turns out that the speaker he reviewed was flawed in design, as was ultimately addressed by the manufacturer of the speaker and the subsequent upgrade to the X-version which was designed to overcome major problems with the speaker.

As time progressed and Talon was bought out by Rives, it was further addressed and publicly stated within the pages of Stereophile magazine that there were basic design flaws. Hence the statement in Stereophile by Rives: The company (Talon, my add) sometimes released speakers before perfecting their designs (eg, the Khorus and Khorus X).

In my opinion, what should be taken from all of this are several things.

The first and most important being that "professional" reviewers are, for whatever reason (you fill in the blank) are either incapable of writing an honest review or incapable of recognizing a good product from a flawed product. I am never sure of the truth.

I do know in the Positive Feedback review, the amplifiers used with the Talon Khorus was the Bel Canto digital amps (also claimed by Positive Feedback to be exemplary). Of course, this all goes back to 2001 and an amp design and amp company that certainly seems to report that the digital/switching amps of that genre were not really ready for prime time (my words). And that audiophiles on this site who do proclaim that the digital amps of current (2011) generation are much, much better than those of 10 years ago. Even these fans of the digital amps clearly agree that the digital amps of 10 years ago were lacking in many, many regards. Yet somehow, Positive Feedback found it compelling to state that they were fantastic.

I don't mean to pick on Positive Feedback exclusively, but come on. In one article they have proclaimed two products to be absolutely outstanding products, capable of world class performance (my summary of their statements).

Yet, just a few years later, the manufacturers of both products had come out and stated that both products were flawed in many regards.

I have come to the conclussion that there are "non-professional" audiophiles on this site that are far and away superior at recognizing sound and performance issues that puts the "professional" reviewers to shame.

Are there those on this site that also use the forums to bash product they don't own or the falsely promote product that they do own? Sure, but these are usually identifiable in the forums, and some members have much better reputations than others do.

Unfortunately, the "professional" reviewers should not be extended this same luxury of making false claims, or worse, being tin-eared. I think few of us still have any respect for the "professional" reviewers and take what they say as much for amusement as anything else. buying something based on a review in Positive Feedback or any other publication is no way to assure the best performance for your dollar spent.