What is the best speaker you have ever owned ?????

FrantzM said:

HI

Magnepan MG 20.1

Kind of screwed my perspective.. I can't get myself to think about purchasing a speaker for more than what they cost and what the 20. 7 currently cost ... The few speakers that I have heard that surpass it are 5 to 10 times more expensive and even those don't outright surpass it everywhere...

Click to expand...

Although I can certainly understand this sentiment (and in many ways it also applies to the M-L Summit X and the Sanders Electrostat), the growing crop of outstanding ~$30k speakers challenge this opinion.

MrAcoustat said:

I understand you very clearly but Magnepan 20.7 are LESS THAN HALF the 30K crop.

Click to expand...

Please re-read the quote to which I was replying

rbbert said:

Although I can certainly understand this sentiment (and in many ways it also applies to the M-L Summit X and the Sanders Electrostat), the growing crop of outstanding ~$30k speakers challenge this opinion.

Click to expand...

Have heard the Summit X and prefer the 20.1. I have not heard the Sanders ESL. I have however heard great things about them.

Frantz,I have heard the Sanders ESL and IF you like your speaker to beam like a spotlight, then that speaker may be for you. Not as they say: "my cup of tea".

DaveyF said:

Frantz,I have heard the Sanders ESL and IF you like your speaker to beam like a spotlight, then that speaker may be for you. Not as they say: "my cup of tea".

Click to expand...

The Sanders is very much a "sweet spot", near- or almost near-field speaker which also should be bi-amped (making the panels direct drive from the amp, no passive Xover). Used this way, for one listener, they present an astonishingly likelike illusion of real sound. True, very much not everyone's cup of tea (not mine, either), but if you are happy listening that way (Phelonious Ponk?) they are tough to beat no matter what the expense (not impossible, just tough).

rbbert said:

The Sanders is very much a "sweet spot", near- or almost near-field speaker which also should be bi-amped (making the panels direct drive from the amp, no passive Xover). Used this way, for one listener, they present an astonishingly likelike illusion of real sound. True, very much not everyone's cup of tea (not mine, either), but if you are happy listening that way (Phelonious Ponk?) they are tough to beat no matter what the expense (not impossible, just tough).

Click to expand...

I don't want to get in the middle of the discussion about what makes for astonishingly real sound, but I think you need to separate the "sweet spot" attribute from the "direct drive"/no passive crossover arrangement. They are independent variables. The "direct drive" and active crossover helps, but it in no way is the sole factor creating "astonishingly real sound."

My IRS-V has no definitive sweet spot and wide dispersion. It sounds wonderful just about everywhere in the room. It did so when it was powered by amplifiers through its passive crossover between mids and highs, but became even better than I had previously imagined when I added the PassLabs XVR1 three-way active crossover and more channels of amplification and converted the system to "direct drive" from the power amplifier outputs directly to the speaker drivers.

I certainly didn't mean to imply that connection; my comments were more in response to "not my cup of tea". Sweet spot, near-field, and direct drive are all independent variables which are all necessary for the Sanders ESL to show its best. I don't own the Sanders and probably won't, because I don't really like near-field or "sweet spot" listening; for those who do, though, you can get very near SOTA sound at a relatively reasonable price.

rbbert said:

I certainly didn't mean to imply that connection; my comments were more in response to "not my cup of tea". Sweet spot, near-field, and direct drive are all independent variables which are all necessary for the Sanders ESL to show its best. I don't own the Sanders and probably won't, because I don't really like near-field or "sweet spot" listening; for those who do, though, you can get very near SOTA sound at a relatively reasonable price.

Click to expand...

Out of interest, how does the Sanders sound when you are not in the sweet spot? Is it a huge difference, could you have them on in 'the background' and still enjoy the music or would it sound awful

Whatmore said:

Out of interest, how does the Sanders sound when you are not in the sweet spot? Is it a huge difference, could you have them on in 'the background' and still enjoy the music or would it sound awful

Click to expand...

If you optimize the sound for the sweet spot (which means damping all the first-reflection-off-the-walls spots behind and in front of the speakers, the off axis, the 10Cs (I've owned them for many months now) sound quite rolled off in the highs, like you have cotton stuffed in your ears. So set up, you MUST, MUST, MUST listen from the sweet spot. They can never be used as background listening speakers when so set up.

If you take the padding off the walls, the off-axis sound is more or less equivalent to that of fairly directional speakers like the Gradients, if you are familiar with them. Highs are somewhat rolled off, but not oddly so. Still, they are not "room fillers" of the type which are great for casual off axis listening. Vintage Acoustic Research (AR) speakers, like the 4x, 5, and 3a which I also have in other systems are at their considerable best when listened to casually from outside what would ordinarily be the sweet spot.

Hi

We will get back to the scheduled discussion .. I am pleased to see Tom posting again, very much so .. Welcome back Tom!


Now about the sweet spot... In my experience all speakers have a sweet spot... ALL.. I haveheard the IRS V several times.. It did have a sweet spot .. It doesn't beam that much but sweet spot it do have and that applies to all speakers .. There is one slight exception the MBL 101.. It may have a sweet spot but almost anywhere you seat within a reasonable area (bass is omni directional in most speakers anyway so the issue of peaks and null manifest itself in all rooms this side of a concert hall regardless of speakers, so if you seat in a null or a peak then ...) it sounds almost the same ... Down to the stereo image. Imaging is best in a given spot.. true, but doesn't deteriorate grandly in other parts of the room .. Almost spooky .. Still not my favorite speaker by the way..
I prefer directional speakers to omni and believe that constant limited directivity/dispersion should be the goal. Few speakers accomplish such. I always listen to my speakers in the sweet spot unles there are guests.
I have now to seek and audition the Sanders ESL and electronics.

rbbert said:

The Sanders is very much a "sweet spot", near- or almost near-field speaker which also should be bi-amped (making the panels direct drive from the amp, no passive Xover). Used this way, for one listener, they present an astonishingly likelike illusion of real sound. True, very much not everyone's cup of tea (not mine, either), but if you are happy listening that way (Phelonious Ponk?) they are tough to beat no matter what the expense (not impossible, just tough).

Click to expand...

All this is very true. I own the Sanders 10C. I would add that the Sanders is one of those speakers which you intellectually conclude can "present an astonishingly lifelike illusion of real sound," but which is simultaneously somewhat lacking in emotional involvement. I "like" and can get "involved" in the sound of my vintage ARs and Harbeth M40.1s better, sometimes much better. If that makes no sense . . . never mind.

I am much more willing than many to admit that I suffer from "the grass is always greener on the other side" syndrome when it comes to audio equipment, especially speakers. This applies not only to speakers I would like to buy next or would like to buy if I had the money, but most strongly to speakers which I used to own or still own but don't currently have set up in one of my systems. My newest purchase is not always my favorite, at least not after the initial period of infatuation is over. And, believe me, I can get infatuated with a new pair of speakers. With the Sanders, however, there was NO period of infatuation. It was strictly intellectual respect/appreciation right from the start. The "raised hackles" quotient has been very low with these; they just don't get to me at the primal level.

I plan to make one more foray into the current high-end speaker world before "giving up" and concluding that AR got it right enough 40 years ago and relaxing with those for the rest of my time on this planet.

As for more current designs I own or have owned, the Harbeth M40 and M40.1 are probably the best overall for a wide variety of music, but especially classical. If those seem too warm/bloated to you, then the Gradients are a way to go; I've owned/do own those, too. If a bit-more-lively but still quite neutral/natural sound is your cup of tea, try the PSB speakers--even the most expensive ones are only $4k a pair. If you want really loud and clean and like to rock but still want a "natural" tonal balance, try Legacy Audio Focus, Whisper, Helix (I owned the Whispers), or the JBL Pro LSR6332 + JBL LSR6312SP subs, the Volti Audio Vittora or Volti-modded K-Horns, or at bargain-basement prices and with a cheap EQ device added, even the Cerwin Vega XLS-215.

tmallin,

Based on all the positive comments here and on other forums, maybe you should take a look at the new Wilson Alexia.

I couldn't agree more about emotional involvement in the music. A player piano gets the notes right but does not engage the listener.

But don't give up. Keep looking, because you have a lot of experience with various speakers to know what sounds right, and you won't be completely satisfied until you do.

Bastanis Mandala Open Baffle.

My current speakers, Martin Logan Vantage.

The Sanders and the Kings each have their virtues. Those of the Sanders have been well described here. The Kings present a bigger soundstage with a larger sweetspot, and seem to sound a little more "romantic" without giving up any detail; perhaps that's because they give up some macrodynamics without affecting the microdynamics (my hypothesis). The bass of the Kings has that wonderful dipole planar character but also gets a bit tubby when the volume goes up. The Dagogo review will say that that is much lessened by his (Doug S.'s) changes to the panels' power supply and by removing the grill cloths.

I will say that any Acoustat owner/lover needs to hear the latest version of the Kings. Similar sonic character, bigger sweet spot, better bass.

I meant better bass than from an Acoustat, not better than the Sanders. Regardless, I've finally heard a version of the Kings I can be enthusiastic about. I anticipate also reading the upcoming review at Dagogo.com

Best speakers that I have owned are my current Magnepan 20.1's.

I have liked Magnepan's ever since I heard them for the first time @ 30 years ago.