Need help picking $30k speakers

[Bruce B]

I don't like Wilson..

Why??

 

[skolis]

Take a ride out to riverside and listen to von schweikert - they have a couple models in your price range that will amaze. IMHO.

 

[caesar]

Wolf,

What size is your room?
What kind of music do you listen to?
Do you only listen to pristine recordings, or do you mix in "normal" recordings?

Another thought is that you should bring your amps when you audition the speakers. If you are not upgrading them right away (and they are fine amps), you may not get the sound you heard when originally auditioning. It could be painful running the speakers of your dreams with the wrong amps.

 

[audio.bill]

Another possibility for you in that price range would be the Audio Physic Avantera Plus which list for $28K. They are not as well known as some of your other choices, but are superb performers and actually offer a great value at their price. They also work well with either tube or solid state amplification. You can check out many reviews of the standard Avantera as well as the Plus models at the AP website. If you have access to a dealer with them I think it would be well worth your time to check them out.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I agree that second-hand is a viable option. (Great work on your deal, Christian!)

I have heard the Sevens three times in Optimal Enchantment demos and the Sevens have sounded natural and smooth every time. A used pair of Sevens would be a very nice option, especially since a version two is coming out and the original version should be easy to find used as people upgrade.

Your sonic preference seems to steer away from edgy and bright. I share that preference. I was initially amazed by the realism and dynamics of MBLs but after three hours of listening I could not avoid the conclusion that, to my ears, they are bright. If the MBL designer installed a tweeter attenuator on his speakers he would probably double his sales.

Wilson's soft dome tweeter caused me to reverse my historical view that Wilson speakers were too bright for me and I, too, enthusiastically endorse the Alexias.

Finally, I would be remiss if I did not also suggest Martin-Logan Summit Xs with a pair of BalancedForce 212 subwoofers. That system meets your price requirement and, to my ears, delivers transparency, full-range frequency response and realism.

 

[caesar]

I agree that second-hand is a viable option. (Great work on your deal, Christian!)

I have heard the Sevens three times in Optimal Enchantment demos and the Sevens have sounded natural and smooth every time. A used pair of Sevens would be a very nice option, especially since a version two is coming out and the original version should be easy to find used as people upgrade.

Your sonic preference seems to steer away from edgy and bright. I share that preference. I was initially amazed by the realism and dynamics of MBLs but after three hours of listening I could not avoid the conclusion that, to my ears, they are bright. If the MBL designer installed a tweeter attenuator on his speakers he would probably double his sales.

You should try MBLs with Class A amps. Never bright.

 

[Hew]

I suggest you reduce your budget to 25k and spend the difference for traveling expenses to audition your candidates in as many set-ups as possible. In no time you will come to the right conclusion.

 

[Wolf_d3]

Ah, lots of good advice. Where do I begin? (1) Caesar's view about my desire to avoid edgy and bright is correct. For what it is worth, I have found that most speakers in this price range have good midranges. What distinguishes them for me are bass anomalies and tweeters that don't mate well with the midranges. In the latter category, I have generally found that I don't like listening over long periods to speakers that match exotic tweeters with cone drivers. (Planers are different; there the problem is matching the bass). Having said that, I have consistently found that I like the sound of the YGs at shows, and some of the Magicos. The S5's are on my list, the S7s are above my price range. (2) Keith R is also correct. The YGs and Magicos sound 180 degrees different from Vandersteens and if I like the Vandersteens I have I should probably get a new pair. But I've liked YGs and Magicos at the trade shows and wanted to get feedback from people who have owned either YG's or the Magicos to see how much they like them after an extended period. At this price point, I want to make sure that these will sound great years from now, and not just at a show or a dealer showroom. (3) Amps. That is a good point. I don't know how my Odyssey solid state equipment will sound with any of these speakers. The amp is Class A/AB. A pure class A amp, or one that is Class A for the first 50 watts or so, is going to cost a fair amount (what does a Pass Lab amp go for?) If I have to replace the amp, I can do that, although I've just sent them out for an internal upgrade. I'm resigned to the fact that I will not be able to replicate the sound that my dealer will get, who is running a $100k turntable though $50k of ARC equipment, at my house. (4) My listening room is small. If I were focused just on the present room, and picking something that makes sense for that, the YG Carmel 2s would be right, or the Vandersteen Quatros. But I plan to "upgrade" the listening room soon and want to pick something that will fill a larger space. My music includes a lot of average sounding pop, sprinkled with some high quality recordings when I want to do some serious listening (a free plug here for "Music Matters" reissues of Blue Notes, on 45 vinyl. Get one if you're into vinyl). (5) I may look for a used Vandersteen 7 now that the 7IIs are out. But I think that Vandersteen is offering to upgrade the 7s to 7II for $10k, so I doubt that existing 7 owners will sell them to get a 7II. They will upgrade instead. So a final question to this group. Have you ever bought a pair of speakers (or other expensive component) that sounded good when you bought it, but then you decided later that it had problems that only became apparent after you owned it for a while? If so, any advice on how to audition the components to reduce that risk?

 

[Ron Resnick]

I have never experienced the concern you raise in your final question. I am, for whatever reason, most sensitive to edginess or brightness. So selecting a speaker or other component which, after living with it, I came to find fatiguing would be my greatest risk with respect to buyer's remorse.

 

[Duke LeJeune]

Have you ever bought a pair of speakers (or other expensive component) that sounded good when you bought it, but then you decided later that it had problems that only became apparent after you owned it for a while? If so, any advice on how to audition the components to reduce that risk?

I suggest a technique called Listen In Another Room (L.I.A.R.). You turn the volume level up somewhat louder than normal and walk out of the room. Listen through the open doorway, with no line-of-sight to the speakers.

What you're throwing a spotlight on is the spectral balance of the reverberant field (and to a certain extent the dynamic contrast, but let's just focus on the spectral balance for now). This technique assumes the main room is neither too absorptive nor too reflective. But consider that live unamplified musicians would sound totally convincing from the next room. I believe that the closer a speaker system comes to replicating this, assuming it also does other things well, the less likely it is to become fatiguing over time.

Here's the theory, or at least my version thereof: The ear/brain system is constantly analyzing incoming sounds to see if they are reflections of a recent sound (stored in a short-term memory), or a brand-new sound. (The ear/brain system is looking for new sounds so it can derive their locations, but the reflections are still influencing perceived timbre among other things.) Now the way that the ear/brain system analyzes and categorizes these incoming sounds is primarily by their spectral content. If they have approximately the same spectral content as a recent first-arrival sound (modified perhaps by room acoustics), then they are classified as reflections. If not, then they are classified as new sounds and go into that short-term memory (where they stay for about 40 milliseconds or so). Now, what happens when an incoming sound's spectral balance is skewed somewhat, like if the speaker's off-axis response (the primary source of in-room reflections) has a significant anomaly? In that case - and this is just my opinion - the ear/brain system has to work harder to correctly classify the sound. And over time, this increased CPU usage causes that part of the brain to literally become fatigued - hence the term "listening fatigue". This isn't the only consequence of a significant spectral discrepancy between the first-arrival and reverberant sound, but imo it's arguably the most critical one.

Nyal mentioned the superior off-axis response of the Vivid, YG, and KEF designs. I would expect these designs to do much better than average in a L.I.A.R test. In my experience the big SoundLab fullrange electrostats perform very well on this test, fwiw. Remember, the idea is to detect problems in the reverberant field without having to listen for however long it takes for listening fatigue to set in... or hopefully, not.

 

[Ron Resnick]

That was very interesting, Duke!

 

[LenWhite]

Len

Are you giving up on your Raidho's

Not quite yet Steve - but I'm going to listen carefully to the two speakers I mentioned. The Raidho C3's I currently own have a really good mid range IMO, but large orchestral crescendos can cause "thumps", and just don't produce a really visceral low end. And I prefer not using subwoofers listening to stereo music.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

After having heard recently a vintage and by that I mean an almost 20 years old Genesis 5 that if one is on the market for a circa 30K speaker one must audition the Genesis 5.3. If this iteration better the 5 it is likely one of the best speakers out there.. regardless of price ... There I said it! The Original Genesis 5 was full range by that I mean able to plumb with vigor under 20 Hz and the rest of the spectrum is well served.
I am looking forward to audition the 5.3. Not well known from many audiophiles but worth to audition before making a decision by what is after all a sizable amount of dollars ...

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Hi

After having heard recently a vintage and by that I mean an almost 20 years old Genesis 5 that if one is on the market for a circa 30K speaker one must audition the Genesis 5.3. If this iteration better the 5 it is likely one of the best speakers out there.. regardless of price ... There I said it! The Original Genesis 5 was full range by that I mean able to plumb with vigor under 20 Hz and the rest of the spectrum is well served.
I am looking forward to audition the 5.3. Not well known from many audiophiles but worth to audition before making a decision by what is after all a sizable amount of dollars ...

I haven't auditioned many of the speakers mentioned, but I did hear the Genesis 5.3 and would agree it is one of the best speakers I have heard...and certainly at the price offered. I didn't hesitate to purchase my G7.1's when a pair came up, and after talking with Gary. I wish I could afford the G5.3's, because I'd own a pair for sure.

 

[BlueFox]

I know that I do not find my Magico S5s fatiguing, even at high volume levels for rock. In fact, I find myself getting energized by the music, and sometimes do not want to stop listening. Two weekends ago, I was evaluating my new Shunyata Cyclops v2 power conditioners for the amps. I started at 6 PM on Friday, and ended at 7 PM on Saturday. That was one for the record books. I did something similar a few times when I first got the S5s. I just didn't want to stop.

 

[Nyal Mellor]

? [POST]223865[/POST] => Link from post #14

? [POST]223834[/POST] => Link from post #11

Thanks for those; still not as good as the others I mentioned, look at how the contour lines group together in the 1.5kHz region. Still the audible effect is likely minor. Off axis is not everything

 

[Nyal Mellor]

And I prefer not using subwoofers listening to stereo music.

That may change; it's just because you haven't heard good ones properly integrated

 

[Nyal Mellor]

Why??

I'm sure there are speakers you don't like either Bruce, including some of the ones on my list

I just think at the relative price points of the Wilsons there are any number of much better speakers out there.

Having said that the Alexia is the first one I have heard that I thought sounded ok, but for that price I'd much rather have an ATC, Vivid, Magico or YG.

 

[asindc]

If you haven't heard Tidal speakers, you really ought to, if time allows, before making a decision: http://www.thevoicethatis.com/pages/products_tidal_speakers.html

New or used, they are the most underrated speakers I've heard in recent years. If I was in the market for big speakers, I'd seriously consider buying Tidal over Wilson or Magico.

 

[Bruce B]

I'm sure there are speakers you don't like either Bruce, including some of the ones on my list

I just think at the relative price points of the Wilsons there are any number of much better speakers out there.

Having said that the Alexia is the first one I have heard that I thought sounded ok, but for that price I'd much rather have an ATC, Vivid, Magico or YG.

I just think as you, being an expert in the field of acoustics, could expand on reasons why you think the Wilson's are less than ideal when compared to ATC, Vivid, Magico or YG.

I'm sure the OP would love to know as well, since he's putting down $30k on something he has to live with for a long time, and doesn't want an "OK" speaker. Your opinion does hold a lot of water.