TAD R1 vs. M1 (Model One)

[holik]

Hello everybody,

I'm new one on this forum. Greetings.
Just curious, what is sonical difference between the Refernce 1 and Model 1?

Did someone compare these loudspeakers?

I heard TAD Model 1 in Munich a few years ago together with Wilson Alexandria, Thiel 7.2, JM Lab Grande Utopia Be, AudioPhysic's flagship, Sonus Faber Stradivari . For my ears TAD M1 was the best. Somewhere later I had a pleasure to hear R1. But you know, time is flowing.
Your opinion are very demanded.

 

[LL21]

ahhh...the big shoot out! I have read about that legendary day. I have heard X2, 7.2, SF Strad but not your TADs...trying to hear them later this month.

How did Alexandrias compare with the TAD? Thanks for any insights.

 

[Steve Williams]

IIRC, the X-2 Alexandria won that shoot out

 

[LL21]

IIRC, the X-2 Alexandria won that shoot out

Yes, I have read at least 3 accounts of that event...all of them seemed to suggest the consensus was Alexandria won...but TAD was darned close from what i recall...and then it was a matter of taste after that, with Thiels really not making the grade. I recall SF Strads faring well also.

I look forward to hearing holik's view since its always fun to hear other people's observations.

 

[holik]

In short: TAD M1 were crystalline without fatigue, more dynamic,incisive, without congestion; bigger soundstage than Wilson ; Alexandria were more syrupy with small nasality, darker, playing little deeper behind louspeakers. Some people prefer such voicing of loudspeakers.
regards,
P.s. there was Alexandria 1 not 2.

 

[Steve Williams]

P.s. there was Alexandria 1 not 2

That is indeed something I forgot

I have never heard Wilson speakers described as dark. Typically they are said t be bright

 

[Eli08]

I never got the chance to hear the model 1 or evensee them. They did not go for sell in Europe, but they look fantastic. Are they a 4 way design? In terms of size, were they bigger than the R1 to allow for the extra driver?

Assume sound should be similar. More complex integration of the drivers vs advantadge of the dedicated drve for mid lows. I read the tweeter/mid unit was shipped separated from the speakers and had to be intalled by deaoer user.

 

[holik]

I never got the chance to hear the model 1 or evensee them. They did not go for sell in Europe, but they look fantastic. Are they a 4 way design? In terms of size, were they bigger than the R1 to allow for the extra driver?

Assume sound should be similar. More complex integration of the drivers vs advantadge of the dedicated drve for mid lows. I read the tweeter/mid unit was shipped separated from the speakers and had to be intalled by deaoer user.

google TAD M1;
yes they look fantastic. 4way design, taller than R1, not as deep. Beautiful

Regarding Alexandria- it is fantastic loudspeaker.
I've never said Alexandria sound dark!!! Only darker, more syrupy than TAD M1, which were more vibrant.
CST driver is absolutly marvellous, and then midrange of Alexandria 1 was not in the same league. Much more nasality.

Linn speakers could be described as dark sounding.

 

[LL21]

google TAD M1;
yes they look fantastic. 4way design, taller than R1, not as deep. Beautiful

Regarding Alexandria- it is fantastic loudspeaker.
I've never said Alexandria sound dark!!! Only darker, more syrupy than TAD M1, which were more vibrant.
CST driver is absolutly marvellous, and then midrange of Alexandria 1 was not in the same league. Much more nasality.

Linn speakers could be described as dark sounding.

I am told the Alexandria 2 changed the nasality/midrange dramatically. I have never compared side by side. I am sure its true based on the number of consistent comments about this. That said, Wilsons are transparent, adjustable enough that you can change their sound dramatically by changing the setup of the speakers...and the electronics.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I am by no stretch a Wilson fan. I have however great respect for the X-2. I have heard the X-2 Series 1 and Series -2 at length and the "nasality" wasn't there.. i heard them with three different amplifiers ... ARC 610 T, Lamm 18 Watts and Lamm 32 Watts .. In not one instance were they "nasal" ... Midrange is exceptional, almost ESL-like

I haven't heard the any TAD speakers so I ca't say which one would be better but "nasal" and the X-2 do not live in the same zip code.
My 0.02 Dollars

 

[microstrip]

Hi

I am by no stretch a Wilson fan. I have however great respect for the X-2. I have heard the X-2 Series 1 and Series -2 at length and the "nasality" wasn't there.. i heard them with three different amplifiers ... ARC 610 T, Lamm 18 Watts and Lamm 32 Watts .. In not one instance were they "nasal" ... Midrange is exceptional, almost ESL-like

I haven't heard the any TAD speakers so I ca't say which one would be better but "nasal" and the X-2 do not live in the same zip code.
My 0.02 Dollars

Frantz,

Wait until you listen to the XLF's. I was expecting them to be slightly better than the X2's, but there is a big improvement in the new model. Not just the treble, but the whole range of the speaker seems to delineate much better the performance. I listened for some long time to the XLF's with two different systems with my chosen recordings, and then moved to X2. The difference was hard to believe. Please note I am not saying day and night.

 

[FrantzM]

Frantz,

Wait until you listen to the XLF's. I was expecting them to be slightly better than the X2's, but there is a big improvement in the new model. Not just the treble, but the whole range of the speaker seems to delineate much better the performance. I listened for some long time to the XLF's with two different systems with my chosen recordings, and then moved to X2. The difference was hard to believe. Please note I am not saying day and night.

The improvements from the X-2 Series 1 to the X- Series II were likely of the same nature: Incremental. The treble from the SeriesII was glaringly inferior to the rest of the spectrum especially from the midrange .. The midrange was world class but the treble was merely good .. The Series2 improved on that by a good margin and the first thing to be apparent was the better quality of the treble .. I expect the progression to continue ...

Now I have friend who always loved Silk tweeter ...

 

[holik]

Regarding TAD Model One. Anthony H.Cordesman from TAS had had these loudspeakers. Even review was, I don't know in which issue, marvellous. Suppose there is an improvement in Reference 1. Although there isn't midbass speaker. Does someone remember which issue of TAS?

holik

 

[Alexis]

I am also courious to heare about differences between model one and R1.
I heard a lot of times alexandria x2, imho there is no comparision to TAD's much more cristalline resolving capacities.
The x2 is more "bold" and less resolving, more "thunderouse", more macro dynamic...

 

[LL21]

I am also courious to heare about differences between model one and R1.
I heard a lot of times alexandria x2, imho there is no comparision to TAD's much more cristalline resolving capacities.
The x2 is more "bold" and less resolving, more "thunderouse", more macro dynamic...

I thought i read somewhere that the Ref One was a further refinement of the Model One, no? I have only ever heard the Ref One...so cannot say for myself, but that was my understanding.

 

[Alexis]

.. the forumer "UltimateAudio" is the only one who can answer... hi has both, M1 and R1....
I hope he is online...

 

[PGA]

I owned M1s until they were recalled by Pioneer, with a full refund. TAD is a really stand up company. Then I had Magico Q5s and now as of this weekend I'm back to the R1s. Hard to say because the M1s left my home 3 or 4 years ago, and had they not cracked, I would still have the M1w, but I find nothing wrong with the R1s. They sound wonderful with Constellation monos. Much more musical than the Magico. The M1 was a 4 way, while the R1 is a slightly bigger 3 way. The deep bass is much improved to my ears with the R1s. Perhaps midbass was better in the M1, but I cannot really say for sure. The best thing about TAD, however, is Andrew Jones and the customer service. Andrew is a brilliant engineer and a real pleasure to work with.