Does anyone have any impressions of Montana Spkrs?

This statement on acoustic reality's home page makes me nervous. Maybe you digital only guys will not be bothered.

"Do you remember how big the improvement was when you did switch from phono LP recordings to Compact Disc recordings? Now it is time to an even much larger step. Let your loudspeakers be controlled in the way they deserve to be controlled."

I also noticed that everything they manufactured was shaped like a pyramid. This apparently occurred after the designer made a trip to Egypt.

I guess that is OK style wise, but not the most efficient work space for electronics.

I just puchased a pair of the Montana EPS's and replaced B&W 802's. Huge difference and great natural sound. For the money they're a bargan. The EPS's are Stereophile Class A rated. What's a better bargan for under $8K---B&w's don't even match the natural quality sound.

I bought a used pair of SP II Signatures a couple of months ago and love 'em. Very substantial cabinet, excellent drivers and crossover components. They aren't the last word at the frequency extremes, but plenty satisfying for me.

Oz

I have a pair of the bottom line DPS and these are a good sounding speaker for the money. I have listened to Martin Logans, Vienna Acoustics, and Magnepans that cost more money but don't sound any better. I owned a pair of Magnepan MGIIIa and these are overall better. The detail is almost as good and they don't freak out on saxaphone parts. The bass is much better.

My only criticism of the speakers are the midbase they use. They use that Scanspeak Kelvar midbase, which i think can sound edgy. I wish Montana would use the Scanspeak revalator midbase or the Scanspeak paper midbase. I think those drivers sound so much smoother then the Scanspeak Kelvar midbase.