The mistake armchair speaker snobs make too often

Especially Kenjit and a few others who base retail price on parts costs.  Ridiculous.  

I am most interested in upgrading my Legacy original Focus speakers in a high end system with my hopefully final speakers after 50 years of about a dozen speakers (Focus for 20 years, ML Monolith IIIs for about 10 years, Acoustats X, 1+1 and 2+2 for another 10 years prior. 4 other cheap box speakers prior).  

Names I am listening to are Acora Acoustics (great American speaker), Aequo Adamantis, Zellaton Plural Evo (probably the end) and cannot afford Von Schweikert Ultra 7 or Rockport Orion.  Rejected mass produced B&W, dislike Magico, Wilson and YG.

I demand a lot from my speakers now.  They fail in dispersion and box sound (they don't disappear) and ambiance/imaging/soundstaging.  It's going to cost a lot to retain all the benefits of a dynamic, full sounding speaker which is easy to drive and fits into a moderate size custom listening room.  

I don't want horns, stats, ribbons or planars.  I need a speaker which can deliver both intimate and huge sounds, from guitar, vocal, harp, etc. to symphonies, opera, big band and heavy metal.  That's a lot to ask for and the speaker designers I'm interested in listen to and appreciate acoustical music (mostly European manufacturers with a few U.S.).  B&W make great quality speakers at a reasonable price but their tonal balance is just unappealing.  

Small manufacturers can only make a limited quantity of a superior product.  They also cannot afford massive marketing costs and rely on word of mouth. It's a very tough business model and hate the complainers that just total up the parts costs to establish a sales price.  

@soix Your choices are welcome and two of the three that I heard, are excellent speakers for the most part. The Joseph Audio Pearl, Usher TD20, Vandersteen Kento, and Boenicke W13 SE were heard or are known to have the qualities that I am not looking but not in attendance.

The Boenicke’s sounded better than their measurements indicate with excellent analog playback. Not as big and full as I am looking for. The Boenicke is a fine speaker but too small sounding and has a much lower efficiency (86-89 db depending on frequency which is not smooth and usually tests lower) with excellent dispersion (I only heard the non-SE version),

The Vandersteen Kento has built-in woofer amps, reticent highs although measures great (87 db efficiency 3 to 8 ohm impedance) and dispersion is very good but not great off axis. A very listenable speaker though. Vandy’s always sound sweet to me, not a bad thing (early inexpensive ones sounded distorted though).

The Joseph Audio Pearl 2 is has more detail than body, although it is much more pleasant than more expensive Wilsons and superior to B&Ws and has plenty of bass (maybe too much-for a large room). It too has a low 86 db efficiency with a nice 6 ohm low impedance. I have not heard the 20/20 Graphene version or Pearl 3. They look just like Von Schweikert VR series.

I haven’t heard the Usher TD20 and Verity Audio Arindal speakers.

What I am after is an end-game speaker that I can afford for my listening room and my taste in sound. My end game speaker is the VS Ultra 7, I don’t want a low(er) efficiency speaker with a built in woofer amp like the VS VR55.

@kota I absolutely don’t want a surround sound system for mono and stereo recordings. As an amateur recording/mastering "engineer," I only want to hear mono and stereo sound coming from two speakers (three track with a center channel). That’s how the majority of my music was recorded and mastered (my own and most of my 48,000 LP/78s/CDs/R2R). Powered focal speakers do not meet my needs or wants (I want to stick to passive speakers). Thanks though for your suggestion for thrilling sound.

Note that the speakers I'm auditioning are super coherent with mid-range drivers that cover 80-90% of the range of music and are in the low 90 db efficiency that have impedances either of my amps can easily drive.

@kota1  I finally ended my 20 year affair with stat speakers with ML Monolith IIIs and Requests (2nd system).  Despite my former room size of 25X23X11.5 vaulted, the Monolith sucked.  26 years ago, I met my wife who hated the speakers as beamy, lacking true bass, thin and bright.  I should never have purchased MLs and stuck with the Acoustat 2+2s.  I sold the MLs and purchased the Legacy Focus.  She loves the sound and more so the Von Schweikert Ultra speakers which she has only heard in $1+million systems at shows but playing my LPs and CDs in huge ballrooms. 

I will report on the Zellaton Plural Evos in a month in my room.  I just heard the Acora Audio SC2 in a showroom with EAR & Nagra equipment, a mismash of medium to high end cabling (3 or 4 brands).  Amazingly competent sound, lacking in excitement but with zero negatives.  A superior quality sound speaker.  I'm undecided until I hear speakers which are capable of delivery great sound for every genre.  I also heard the Devore Orangutan 96.  Wow, a super lush sound for voices, small instruments(als) but quite awful for full symphonics (made a 1955 Wolff recording sound just old and compressed until the Focus or Acoras which make it sound like the orchestra is in the room with you).  The speakers I'm hearing are boutique and relatively expensive.  Acora speakers have twin 7" paper mid-woofers with tremendous dynamic punch and quite deep bass.  It was a pleasure to experience such sound from a relatively small speaker (good looking too in granite).  

@ditusa  Thank you.  So it is rather rare to build foam core drivers then.  That was my point rather than no one else does it.  Maybe no one does it the same either as Zellaton uses Dr. Podszus method.  

As to why most speaker manufacturers use "off the shelf" drivers is because it is more cost effective and easier.  Some of these drivers are relatively expensive so they aren't "a dime a dozen."  The very popular Accuton ceramic drivers range from about $500 to $2000 each.  I don't think that's cheap.  Imagine a floorstander with 3 2 $2000 Accuton woofers, a $500 Accuton mid and another $500 Accuton tweeter.  That's $5000 just for the raw drivers.  That speaker would retail for $50,000 with the manufacturer getting maybe $30,000.  After their costs, maybe $10,000 in profit.  

@kota1 Absolutely.  The only reason I would need a center channel is if I was able to playback a R2R 3 channel recording, such as a Mercury Living Presence, DGG  classical and a few other labels which put out Blu-ray 3 channel recordings.  Otherwise, two channel stereo sound is all that is required. 

@mijostyn I disagree concerning the statement drivers are a dime a dozen. Sure ,a field coil driver is so cheap everyone can use them. NOT! I’ve been investigating boutique (but not small) speakers which have unique design and fabricated in the shop drivers, such as the Zellaton. Who else makes a foam core driver? Maybe you think their drivers aren’t any better than dime a dozen off the shelf drivers? How about ceramic drivers that are modified by boutique shops, such as Von Schweikert? You think these are off the shelf dime a dozen? Harbeth goes to extremes in his videos in indicating why the proper manufacture of basic drivers has to implemented perfectly or else inferior quality sound results.

As @erik_squires pointed out, labor is not necessarily the highest cost. As to parts, the cabinet can often be the highest cost in design, material and labor but not for many run of the mill, mass production facilities (especially thin wall box speakers). How much of the cost is the box for a Harbeth or Devore speaker? Probably a lot less (price adjusted) than a Vivid, Rockport, Magico, Wilson, Estelon, Von Schweikert, Avante-Garde, etc. The most significant cost of an Acora Acoustics is the stone material and it’s manipulation into a cabinet, not the drivers which are quasi-off the shelf.

@kota1  I disagree.  As to obtaining the true stereophonic sound of a recording based on a stereophonic mastered recording, only two speakers are required and only two speakers are generally used in mastering.  The quality of the speakers, associated equipment and room determine how accurate the stereo image is reproduced.  I have heard fantastic audio systems that present a "live-like" image of the performers.  Why would I want or need more by installing a center speaker?  I don't.  As to dispersion, that is one of the three reasons I want a high end speaker which disappears, retaining imaging and resolution in a wide seating pattern.  You should hear Audio Physics Virgo or any of Von Schweikert Ultra speakers in good setups.  I've heard them and there is no need for a central channel speaker.  Now, when you talk about Duntechs, Dunlevys and my Focus, they are big box, one person listening speakers.  A 3rd center channel Focus would be great.  My Legacy Signature IIIs with their rear tweeter provides a superior open sound and dispersion where everyone in the room enjoys great sound.   

Actually, my friend's high end mini-monitor speakers have fantastic center fill and great imaging/dispersion.  I'm not stuck on thrills but on the reproduction of the recorded event.  

@kota1 Why do you think the boutique (like Paradigm) and high end manufacturers make their own drivers?  For quality control.  When Accuton drivers are ordered by high enders they specify the parameters, have the drivers altered to meet their specifications and often matched as well.  Cheapy off the shelf speakers are a dime a dozen because that's what they are worth.  They should not be used in high end speakers.  Tekton speakers probably use drivers you mention.  Maybe even the Carver Amazing speakers.  Plenty of drivers in each and they aren't ceramic, beryllium or diamond.  Tekton's are cheap and Carver's was expensive.  Talk about dispersion and imaging, the Tekton's bad and Carver was phenomenally good in mids and highs.   My original Focus speakers use cheap Mexican woofers, cheap ribbon tweeter and common cone and Kevlar mid-range drivers.  It's so rare that it does sound so great (huge crossover and excellent heavy cabinet).  It has been superseded by higher end speakers at greater cost.

@ditusa I read the too from 1962. 61 years later, how many companies use foam core drivers? Back then if was a handful. Also, comments concerning smaller boxes result in greater problems reproducing bass. Well, after hearing the Acora Acoustics pair of 7" paper mid-woofers in the low 30’s in a big open room, I was astonished. It’s a box, but made of special granite, not any cellulose product. Back in 1962, there were no computer modeling of speakers (that I know of). Today, it’s standard operating procedure for many functions in developing speakers.  Polystyrene drivers are generally disfavored for quality music reproduction today after scanning Google.  Maybe Zellaton's unique foam based drivers are just as advanced as many paper based drivers are today.  

My own room has built-in activated charcoal bass filtering proposed by J.Gordon Holt. Anyone else comment on this type of bass filtering?

@mijostyn J. Gordon Holt wrote about activated carbon in wall filtering in Stereophile.  I built a custom listening room, four walls and floor (had to keep the ceiling without them due to thin 2X8 rafters).  You can see a description on my profile.  The carbon is contained in a four chamber, wooden 12.5" wide X 48" high compartment lining all walls and both doors.  The wall width is 16".  With 6-12" woofers, I'm not overloading the room with this design and don't require external filtering, including available activated carbon boxes on walls.

From the ad for external boxes:

Carbon technology has the same smooth frequency response starting at 40 – 60 Hz. and going through 6,500 Hz. it is a smooth low-frequency absorbing tool for absorbing unwanted low-frequency energy along the boundary surfaces in small rooms. At a maximum depth of 12″, it won’t take up much wall space and gives you lower frequency absorption down to 40 Hz.

With carbon technology, you achieve a smooth absorption curve that is smooth in rate and level with a special quality of clarity that is not offered with foam or other absorption technologies especially the building insulation types that dominate the industry. If you are looking for a more natural rate and level of absorption that does not over absorb at certain frequencies and under absorbing at others, our carbon and foam technologies will give you that linearity you need.

@erik_squires The wall is sealed shut. Every orifice has sprayed Flex Seal.  The walls are 16" thick (see my profile)  The activated charcoal was recommended by J.Gordon Holt and implemented in a sealed design.  Green glue is silly (2% vibration reduction results at messy and high cost).  Using drywall in a listening room is silly.  I'm not saying my room is perfect or the best, just sensible and effective (since the moment I moved in, everyone says the room is on the slightly lively side but superior to 95+% of listening rooms-mastering engineers and confirmed audiophiles).  

@asvjerry Yes, young and wealthy would have been nice.  My late former wife suffered for 11 years with severe systemic lupus.  I could not avail myself of huge economic growth during my prime earnings years.  I have labored hard and studied harder to become comfortable economically at 67, in the top 15% of income earners in California with even greater net worth.  Music is my real equity other than family.  .  

@kota1  and @lonemountain  Wow, that first video looks like a cheapy build in a bad factory.   The second video looks like the typical high end, high quality build, this from Paradigm.  So glad about the second video.  I saw a video of Cardas cable manufacturing and the first video reminded me of that with no quality control that I could tell and no testing after the cables were manufactured.