Thanks, Peter. You did such an amazing job of capturing the overall essence of the speaker, I forgot the other details in your review. I will definitely re-read it.
Let me ask a tougher one. Is it worth it for 101 Mk 1 owners to upgrade? It's a big cash outlay. I remember reading something from one of the members here, DEV, and he did not seem to think so. However, I am not sure he had both models of speakers in the same room.
Personally I feel the changes in the end are debatable, I know I'm in no hurry to change. I'll wait for their new model to replace the MK2 and see, well hear.
1. If you already own the non MK2 version the MK2's are not substantial, differences yes but in no way makes the non MK2's sound broken.
2. I have found the height of performers is lower with the MK2 version, I personally prefer the non MK2's in relation to this but you could always raise the MK2's.
3. The extreme top end is different, I prefer the non MK2's. Possibly something to do with the cross over re-work.
4. Bass is slightly better with the MK2's but add some subs with the non MK2's and well ....
I would not be worrying. Spend that money else where in the chain feeding your speakers or on music, will be more beneficial and just enjoy!
Caesar, No matter whcih way you go, it makes sense to be thinking about which amps you will be using with them. Without great amps, you will be disappointed. Dev is the expert on this subject because he has tested about a dozen combinations. I , like Dev, am using Vac Statement 450's. A nice alternative are the Bryston 28B's which are very reasonably priced.
Well if i had the money & the room for the MBL's 101, i guess i would probably have the money for the MBL's mono blocks, i would keep them in the family this is what it would be.
Heard this system at the Salon Son Image in 2011 - 2012 - and i was impressed and that's no easy task, even the small Corona system sounded awsome, for boxes that is.