The best speaker you ever heard?

I have heard the Paragon several times and sought one for almost a year. To be at its best I am told, it needs to be on a very solid platform 18 inches high.

I would not say it was one of the best speakers I have heard. At various times in my life I would say the Infinity ServoStatic 1s and 1As, double Quad ESLs, the Exemplars, and the Beauhorns were. I have also had the Fulton Premiers, the Linn Isobariks, the Sound Lab A1s, the Infinity QLSs, the Altec VOT, the Avantgarde Trios and Duos, and the Duntech Sovereigns and Black Knights.

I just got back from CES where Quad Classics had a double pair of stacked Quad ESL 57s from their new production. It made me wonder why I had sold my double Quads. They had one of the best sounds at CES.

Where is the compression driver advocates? I lust after a complete Ales system, but there are other quick horn and compression driver system, which although expensive have, I suspect, never even been approached by any of the speakers mentioned above. The new JBL K2s may come close, however, for $12,500.

Not that it makes any difference, but I would like to see evidence of nearly 100% using B&W. I would also like to know what they pay for these speakers.

Steve01s$, where did you get to hear them? I guess this is an instance where you really do not want to hear them, because once you have you are hooked. I have the LaCampenellas now and find them outstanding. Furthermore, at only 187 pounds each, they are manageable.

kkbt61, have you also heard the JBL Paragon? Two "experts" have told me it is superior to the K2s.

Well, I have heard a good speaker finally. One that does not have a boxy sound, that has a sharp leading edge, that has the pace of music, that images realistically, that has all frequencies arriving at the same time, and one where the speakers themselves vanish. The only problem is that the LSA Model 10 driven by the LSA/Exemplar components cost $80k.

Now the best I have heard is the LSA Model 10s. I doubt these speakers will ever be produced.

Sphere, I can believe your experience. It suggests that even expensive speakers are substantial compromises. This certainly goes along with my experiences.

I certainly cannot agree that the MBL 101s are even very good speakers, much less "live music." On occasion I have heard them sound okay at shows, never any better than that.

Semi, sorry I haven't been following this thread. Lloyd Walker certainly thinks highly of the Ushers, with his mods of course. I was taken aback by the Pioneers at the RMAF last year, sending many friends to hear them. I do suspect that their bottom end is not a low as the TAD Model 2s or the big Ushers.

Semi, have you heard the Pioneer SX speakers? They use the midrange and tweeter drivers from TAD, owned by Pioneer. I heard them at last year's RMAF and have thought seriously about buying a pair. They cost $9500 per pair!

Tvad, you may be right. Long ago when John was still just redoing existing Hartsfields, I gave serious attention to them. I guess I just like Altecs more and don't like the lens concept. A friend has always insisted that the Paragons if raised 18" off the floor on a solid platform are the best speakers, but to my listening they sound too diffused almost like Boze speakers.

I may have finally heard a good speaker at the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest, but only after the driving electronics had been on for two days. The speaker boxes for it are still a work in progress, but already its strengths are evident. Also already evident is that it is quite expensive. It is the 9" full-range, a believe it, field coil driver from Feastrex.

I have own several versions of the Lowthers and heard more. I know what their limitation are as well as the fact that they are not full-range drivers. They also shout at you unless the horn designer is exceptional, such as Beauhorn.

The Feastrex have none of these problem, and what I heard will get substantially better once they have five or six hundred hours on them.

Their less expensive 5" driver with the Monster Alnico magnet where also quite good, but do need help in the bottom end.

Thesound, the ADAMs seem the philosophical opposites of the Feastrex. They do look like they use folded ribbon tweeters, which seems like a great chose.

Pjl2122, until I heard the Feastrex 9 inchers on Sunday, I would have to say that the Grand Veena had my vote for the best speaker at the RMAF. Of course, the Feastrexs are far more expensive. I very close rival for the Grand Veena, however, was the $2500 LSA1s.

Fla, all that I know is that HP of TAS mentioned it in very positive tones, and I heard it at the RMAF. For the first two days of the show, it was, IMO, the best sounding. It was a little bright but that may be the associated electronics. I know only the Veena and the Grand Veena.

Pjl2122, thanks for the information. I own a pair of the Muratas and have used them with my old Beauhorns and present Acapellas. They do lend a realism to speakers that I recognized in the Grand Veenas. I also liked the simplicity of the crossovers in the GVs and expect that this is part of their success. In my opinion the Grand Veenas were one of three best speakers at the RMAF.

I thought the Feastrex 9 inchers ($30k +)in a temporary cabinet were more integrated and clean but did not have the bass of the GVs. I thought the LSA1s ($2500) imaged better, although this may have been their electronics and fell between the GVs and Feastrex 9" in integration.

Fla, as I said I know nothing about the L'Integrals speakers.

Pjl2122, the MBL is incredible in the bass? If I win one in a contest, I will give it to you. I have been interested in the basic idea since I heard a prototype in the 1970s, but I have heard little improvement.

Mrdecibel, I agree with you about the Jadis. I can find no evidence that they are still made nor find any used ones. I am curious how many were ever made.

Detlof, don't you have the Excalibers by Acapella?

Mrtennis, Quad ESLs are good, but having owned them thirty years ago, I would not consider them the best I have heard. There is so much interaction between front end, amps, cables, and speakers that I think it is hard to say what the best speaker might be.

Alec, long ago I owned the Watson Labs. I sold them to a guy in Dallas. Much before that I had the Dayton Wrights mentioned by Essentialaudio. I thought the Watsons were better but then again the Dayton Wrights were very hard to drive and solid state amps had improved by the time I got the Watsons.

I don't remember why I sold the Watsons, but I have not been very happy with any speakers I have owned.

Guys, I made a response earlier and either somehow forgot to send it or had it blocked. It was primarily a response to Mike, saying why I found all speakers I have listen to to be compromises and that what I want and will never get, is a point source, fully range, no crossover, high efficiency speaker. Until then I have to choose which of the above are more important to me. After years of single drivers with high efficiency, I am back to a two way with a very limited crossover but lacking the efficiency that I would prefer, forcing me to sell my Reimyo PAT777.

I will forego my previous comments about the H-Cat amp other than to say it makes me realize that electronics may be equally compromised as speakers.

Any way, as others have said, I have adjusted to the reality that I have to be happy with great performances and something close to realism.

Mtkhl, yes. Long ago I thought I was pretty close to realism then about 5 years ago I thought wow this is now much closer. Then about 3 years ago, etc. I am running out of life time, but enjoying the rewards of my effort to find the best equipment for realism. It is very fragile as I recently found.

I would list three in no order. Reference 3A Grand Veenas, Sander Sound latest electrostats with their 1000 watt amp, and Acapella LaCampanellas. If could deal with bass below about 38 Hz, I would add the $2500 LSA1 Statement.

If ever there was question with no potential for agreement, this thread's question is it. I was about to add a speaker but realize it is useless.

Geopolitis, I hope you are wrong. I have Contrivas coming in Jan.

Noncondition, don't listen to the Tidals.

Ozarktom, I too heard the first prototypes of the MBL in Chicago long ago. They were very strident but had great promise if they could be mated with other drivers to get some bass. I still think that is true, but they are less strident now.

Dennisboldt, Bob several years ago demoed at CES a pair of monitors with subwoofers. I was quite impressed and then ventured to hear the reference system. I was not impressed but have to say the line voltage where I heard them varied from 106 to 114. I knew nothing of the amps being used.

Then Bob dropped out.

Kwb, all that I know is that I saw readings between 106 and 114 volts, that the amps did not shut down, and that the sound was horrible.

Armyscout, ah, another solution to my old problem-have everything. I decided instead that no speaker was more than a compromise of one aspect or another.

Tidal Contriva Discera SEs, I had concluded that every speaker was a compromise in one way or another, until I got these. And they are well short of the 600 hours of breakin.

My main question now is finding an amp to get the most out of them.

Rellsaesser, I bought Infinity Quantum Line Sources after I could not get Infinity ServoStatic 1As. I had the JBL Ice Cube amp (the first switching amp). I also owned Martin Logan CLSs but it was much later. I know you are happy with what you have so my advice is to never listen to Tidal speakers.

Yes, I couldn't buy them when I had kids in college. Come to think about that I had the QLSs while they were still in public schools. I think I paid $3000 for them.

Or the Tidal Contriva Discera SEs. There is no question in my mind. I was convinced that all speakers were compromises somewhere. I now realize I was wrong. I only wish that I had them for the previous 45 years of my audiophile life.

I have not heard a broken in Sunray and have only heard the Arrakis once at a show, but I have heard the Tidal Contriva Discera SE under comparable circumstances and have always been shocked at their fidelity to the instruments and voices in the recording as well as the realism of the sound stage. I have never heard any other speaker do this.

I now have about 400 hours on my Contrivas and realize how much better they sound here rather than in the shows. Frankly, I don't think any speaker even approaches them. Until these I thought that I had to accept that all speakers were compromises and that you had to choose where you wanted the compromise. I now know that is not true.

Mapman, the best should excel in at least one kind of music. Until my tidals, my other 29 speaker systems had one virtue or another. Some were fast using compression drivers, some had outstanding sound stages, some had excellent midrange, some had great bass, and some had a sweet extended top end, but none did all of these.

I really don't understand the trust that this thread has taken. The ideal speaker would be a reverse of the microphone, namely a point source capable of vast dynamic range and very high efficiency. Technologically this is beyond human technology. Similarly the perfect amplifier would be capable of providing the perfect speaker with all that it needed.

Rather than curse the darkness, I have always sought that which was better. I could have dismayed when my ServoStatics kept breaking down, when my Lowthers were irritating in the top end and had little bass, etc.

Of course, I cannot go back to my system in the '70s and compare it with my system today, but I really think it is far more realistic and thrilling. Don't despair, just enjoy.

I agree about the Contriva DiaCera SEs. When I first heard them, I knew this was the exception to my conclusion that all speakers were compromises somewhere.

Argyro, perhaps you have had better demonstrations than I, but I just cannot hear the benefits of the Sunrays over the Contriva Discera SEs, especially considering the price difference.

Mike_barnett, it is the high point of Richard's speaker development certainly.

Which of John's speakers was that?

I think it was Duntech as set up in Australia with government support. When that support was lost, John moved to Utah and got government support there, becoming Dunlavey. I do know that Duntech for a while continued the Sovereign under a different name. I don't think either company still exists. John died in 2007.

Macrojack, you are probably right.

Weseixas, I have two friends with Duntechs. One has the Sovereigns and the other Princesses. Both have had to have surrounds replaced.

Lrsky, the MBLs have always left me cold. I heard the first efforts back when CES was still in Chicago. I was fascinated by the basic ideas. I do think that in the last several years, their room has gotten much better, but I cannot see giving them serious consideration.

I also could not imagine my ever buying a $70k system, but I did after hearing the Tidal Contriva Discera SEs.

Lrsky, Are you talking about the MBL 101 E Mk II or the 101Extremes? It would be $60k for the 101Es, $24k preamp, $43k amp. I have no idea what the Extremes cost. I add the big MBL amps as I know these speakers are inefficient.

Talk2me, I would agree about the Venture speakers as heard in the Weiss suite at CES, but I don't know how they would compare with my Tidals.

Aronsss, I have known Richard Vandersteen since the '70s. I ran into him at the 2010 CES, and he said that I needed to go hear the 7s. This year, I had a long talk with him. He said that in the 7's he had put his cost no object best he knew of in them. He said he was surprised at how well they were sounding. I told him I was not, that they were by far his best speakers.

I have owned virtually every speaker he has made but have none now. I do have the Tidal Contriva Diacera SEs and would love to hear the Vandersteen 7s directly compared with them. But alas I probably never will get this opportunity.