2. speakers
  3. 1027381007

TAS's recommended speakers under 2500

Earlier this year, "The Absolute Sound" magazine began a new feature called "Centerstage", which is their new format for recommended components. The "Centerstage" feature in the current issue contains their recommended speakers under $2500.

Their recommendations are grouped into 5 classes, with Class 1 being the "state-of-the-art" (within the stated price range), and ranging down to Class 5, which "offer a fair taste of high-end sound at the most affordable prices". I have summarized the ratings for those who may be interested (speakers are listed alphabetically, not by ranking within the class).

Class 1 ("state-of-the-art" within the price range):
1. Harbeth HL Compact 7 ES-2 (MSRP $2400)
2. Infinity Intermezzo (MSRP $2200)
3. MartinLogan Scenario (MSRP $2000) -- a "Best Buy" rating
4. Spendor SP-1/2 (MSRP $2495) -- a "Best Buy" rating
5. Thiel CS1.6 (MSRP $2390) -- a "Best Buy" rating

Class 2:
1. Aerial Acoustics Model 5 (MSRP $1800-2200, depending on finish)
2. Audio Physic Yara (MSRP $1500)
3. Magnepan MG 1.6 (MSRP $1495) -- a "Best Buy" rating
4. Sonus Faber Concerto (MSRP $1895)
5. Vandersteen 2Ce (MSRP $1400) -- a "Best Buy" rating

Class 3:
1. Definitive Technology Power Monitor 700 (MSRP $1200) -- a "Best Buy" rating
2. Harbeth HL-P3ES-2 (MSRP $1100)
3. PSB Image 5T (MSRP $800) -- a "Best Buy" rating
4. Polk Audio LSi-15 (MSRP $1740)
5. Spendor S-3/5 (MSRP $895)
6. Snell Acoustics K.5 Mk2 (MSRP $1200)
7. Totem Arro (MSRP $1100) -- a "Best Buy" rating

Class 4:
1. B&W 602.5 S3 (MSRP $700)
2. Dahlquist QX-6 (MSRP $500)
3. Paradigm Monitor 5 (MSRP $520) -- a "Best Buy" rating
4. Snell QBX 20 (MSRP $750)

Class 5:
1. Acoustic Energy Aego 2 (MSRP $399) -- a "Best Buy" rating
2. PSB Alpha B (MSRP $199) -- a "Best Buy" rating
3. Paradigm Atom (MSRP $189) -- a "Best Buy" rating

Comments (pro or con), anyone?

sdcampbell

Showing 2 responses by sdcampbell

sdcampbell OP
2,136 posts
 
Kirk: I like the idea of having a matrix to rate speakers -- rather like the matrix used by Road & Track mag uses to compare cars by class.

If the Audiogon regulars were to design such a rating matrix, we would need to identify the relevant factors (e.g., transient response), and a weighting scale (since some factors may be less important, such as the grade of veneer used on the cabinet exterior).

So, the question for other A-gon readers is: what factors should be included in a rating matrix, and what weighting would you give to each factor? If we can get enough responses to this, I'll be glad to collate the ideas and present a first-cut attempt at a matrix that A-gon members could use when presenting speaker evaluations.
sdcampbell OP
2,136 posts
 
Hi, John:

Thanks for your comments, but I can't let one of them pass without disagreeing. I own Vandersteen 3A Sig's, supplemented with a stereo pair of Vandy 2Wq subs, and I can assure you that this system does NOT lack detail, nor is there anything remotely opaque about the imaging or soundstaging. I am not saying this to attack you personally, so please don't misunderstand my clarification. Over the years, there has been a lot of utter hogwash written about Vandersteen speakers, and it sometimes needs to be challenged because it does a real disservice to people who might/ought to consider buying Vandy products. (This comment applies equally well to other brands of speakers/electronics/etc.)

Over the years, I have owned a number of speakers, including Quad ESL 63's, Acoustat 2's, and several excellent British and American monitors, and I've sold a number of speakers made by respected high-end manufacturers. The Vandersteen 3A Sig's (paired with the right electronics and set up properly in the room) will go toe-to-toe with the best dynamic speakers on the market. The 3A/3A Signature speakers are sufficiently revealing that they readily identify differences between sources, cables, amplification, not to mention the relative quality of recordings.

If nothing else, this discussion points out the need for a much more structured way to compare loudspeakers and their relative performance. One of the hoped-for outcomes would be less "information" based on hearsay being passed along as gospel fact.

Hence, I move the question again: what comparative factors should be included in a matrix rating scheme, and how should each factor be weighted?
More to discover