Yep.
But you also struggled a bit with their “sturm und drang” presentation I recalled.
Relentless dynamics, edge of seat stuff.
My issue is w Trios’ larger than life imaging on everything.
Like an extra large dose of endorphins on every listen.
Yep.
But you also struggled a bit with their “sturm und drang” presentation I recalled.
Relentless dynamics, edge of seat stuff.
My issue is w Trios’ larger than life imaging on everything.
Like an extra large dose of endorphins on every listen.
Funny how the dynamics are mentioned so much, but there's nothing in the design that would make them any more dynamic vs any other similar speaker. Maybe it's something else you're hearing?
Dave, it’s the immediacy of horns, the (apparent) less impeded flow of signal from driver to ear (and hence to brain and to resultant emotional response), that gives this “impression” of greater dynamics.
Then again, to this listener, vinyl gives the “impression” of greater tonal and timbral accuracy than digital, and tube amps give the “impression” of greater ease and liquidity than SS.
You know the advantage of the only access being 24” wide spiral stairs or a 24” x 12” hatch? The Trios/BHs are too big to get up here.
I say advantage, because I need reasons not to consider them.
Dave, it’s the immediacy of horns, the (apparent) less impeded flow of signal from driver to ear (and hence to brain and to resultant emotional response), that gives this “impression” of greater dynamics.
Then again, to this listener, vinyl gives the “impression” of greater tonal and timbral accuracy than digital, and tube amps give the “impression” of greater ease and liquidity than SS.
Yeah, I'm very familiar with horns, and AG Trios are the only ones I regularly hear about "excessive" dynamics and image size. What I'm saying is, maybe it has nothing to do with the speaker being horns and it's really something else that has nothing to do with their overall design type and everything to do with implementation.
Dave, it’s always about implementation.
I’ve heard Cessaro Liszts three times.
First with Bakoon Class A SS, stellar in lots of ways.
Second in the same room, same sources, but now 700W Class D and AD to DA/room correction, absolutely dire.
Third, in a better room, better sources, tubes, limp and uninspiring.
Right... so with the Trios maybe there's something about their implementation that makes the sound dynamic and larger than life that has little to do with the fact they are horn speakers? Maybe it's something else? And I'm not talking about what amps, etc they are used with or what room they are in.
I really don’t think so Dave.
Even when the Liszts sounded poor, I could still tell they were horns. They were still more direct and faster than the box spkrs I’ve heard. They just came across as insipid tonally in the inferior demos.
—
You’re alluding to something with your comments that razor sharp dynamics in horns may be nothing to do with the fact they’re horns.
Are you genuinely curious and unsure, or alluding to something?
I’ve had continued exposure to Blue58’s AG Duos over 4 years of a steadily evolving system, and I can tell you his sound is totally to do with being horns.
I class immediacy as a subset of dynamics, and Barry’s sound is VERY immediate.
Audioguy, truthfully we really know when we’ve found components, or a blend, that works.
After incessant upgrading over two decades, I haven’t bought a new round of main components since 2015, relying mainly on modding current items, and maxxing system- wide impvts like room acoustics, power grid and vibration isolation.
If you found a competent modder, I highly recommend modding everything. I modded components for 10 years myself, 40 of them. There are deficiencies in nearly every design and poor parts choices. Even Sony equipment needs modding. Go for it, don't be afraid.
Steve, these included top Duelund caps to Zu Definitions 4 high- and low-pass filters and Lundahl transformers to Zu sub amps, caps changes in Nat Audio Utopia tubed preamp, bespoke psus w oversized transformers and chokes to my Straingauge energiser and tt psu, and a multitude of small mechanical changes on the analog rig.
Had a couple of trusted guys sort these.
I started my audio journey in reality when I upgraded a few of my cables. I was extremely frustrated that the improvements were incremental and each step up would be costly and still incremental. Doing research and experimentation I found that star grounding yielded the same SQ improvements. Now with extreme grounding I no longer even entertain expensive cables.
Roger, I have the possibility of a heavyweight bespoke star ground system in my system sometime this year.
Don’t ask who or what, the engineer wants to keep it on the QT.
But his experience is nothing less than stupendous, and I have high hopes.
Tentative atm, but having sorted room acoustics, balanced power, dedicated lines, cables, this star ground and vibration isolation are my final spends in this hobby.
I’m confident of the star ground additionally because of yr words on the subject over the last several months online.
Roger, I have the possibility of a heavyweight bespoke star ground system in my system sometime this year.
Don’t ask who or what, the engineer wants to keep it on the QT.
But his experience is nothing less than stupendous, and I have high hopes.
Tentative atm, but having sorted room acoustics, balanced power, dedicated lines, cables, this star ground and vibration isolation are my final spends in this hobby.
I’m confident of the star ground additionally because of yr words on the subject over the last several months online.
I think I know who it is...not telling. Go for it...if you want to absolutely max out your system,nothing like it.
Ps after I added my final OO cable it took 6 months to settle the 25 pound copper parallel circuit. The SQ was still enjoyable but the clarity which is tied to everything just kept improving.
For the most part, Ked has it right. There are many of us who have been at this for years and who have heard our systems with all levels of cables, both inexpensive and costly. Some experienced users like the great Karmeli and Ki Choi think expensive cables are basically a waste of money. When you hear their systems, you can understand why they believe this is true. Personally, I think you have to make the distinction between speaker cables and interconnect cables. Speaker cables are driving something with a very different impedance than the output amplifiers they are connected to, and as such, the differences between cables can be appreciably different since the cables are critical impedance matching devices where small changes in reactive impedance can have significant sonic effects. IMHO, these differences are generally greater than those found between interconnects. In fact, I have had some incredibly inexpensive interconnects outperform some uber expensive interconnects in some, but not all ways. My guess is that some of these differences might be due to differences in the terminations (i.e gold vs rhodium), and not just in the wire. For example, you might just be very surprised at just how good Mogami 2549 interconnects are with Neutrik gold connectors. You would think that for about $40 they wouldn't be worth a damn. Is it the best interconnect I have ever heard? No, but it is neutral, balanced, musical and damn good. So my question to most folks would be, do you think you have a system where spending far more on interconnects would result in a significant sonic upgrade?
It's worth remembering is that even though there may be differences between interconnects and speaker cables, my guess is that these are relatively small with respect to other factors in one's system, particularly speakers. So if you are looking to spend money to make big effect changes in in your sound, you really have to convince yourself that "cables" are the thing to change as opposed to speakers, or in some cases electronics (ie. SS vs tubes).
