# $3,000 Speaker Evaluation Event - Nominated Speakers Voting Poll



## Sonnie

The *speaker nominations* for the $3,000 two-channel speaker evaluation event has been closed and the voting now begins. Thanks to all who nominated speakers... we certainly have a lot to choose from. 

If you are not familiar with our speaker events, see the links in my signature.

You can vote for up to 6 speakers. We will take the top 6 with the highest votes, provided we can obtain them. We decided to let each poll stand on its own instead of automatically including speakers that had the next highest votes from the previous post, being that there are so many other speakers include this time that were not included last time. There is a chance that someone voting for one of those speakers in the last round might change their mind for this round. 

We have NOT contacted all of these speaker manufacturers to see if they will participate, although we have contacted a few. If a speaker is voted in the top 6 and the manufacturer does not want to participate, we will go to the next highest vote getter. In case of a tie, Scoobie will be the tie breaking vote.

Votes are public and viewable.

Once again, this poll is for deciding which six speakers will be included in the evaluation event. The event is tentatively scheduled for the latter half of February 2014. We want to get the votes in early so that we have time to contact each manufacturer and get the speakers lined up for review. We also want to be able to get them in hand in time enough to check them to make sure there is no shipping damage or other issues, so that we can get replacements sent if necessary... as well as get the speakers broke-in per the manufacturers recommendations.

*Let the voting begin!*

*Voting will end on midnight of 12/31/13*


----------



## Erin H

Sonnie, if the Kef R500 is in the top 6 I've got a set I can bring to you guys (assuming this is done at your place?). So, you're covered there.  

Also, would it be possible for me to participate in this? I'd love to man given in so close. And I'd bring my measurement gear to measure the response at the seated position to post along with the listening results. That would take the subjective evaluations to a level most others don't provide.


----------



## 8086

Why no Paradigm Speakers? The Tribute is $2,999 (MSRP). Signature C6 is $3,200.

http://paradigm.com/products/collection=reference/model=tribute/page=overview


----------



## Sonnie

Erin H said:


> Sonnie, if the Kef R500 is in the top 6 I've got a set I can bring to you guys (assuming this is done at your place?). So, you're covered there.
> 
> Also, would it be possible for me to participate in this? I'd love to man given in so close. And I'd bring my measurement gear to measure the response at the seated position to post along with the listening results. That would take the subjective evaluations to a level most others don't provide.


Have you missed the results of our other two events? We have measurement gear.

Our timing with four panelists and 6 speakers is barely enough to get done now. I honestly am not sure we could fit in another panelist.




8086 said:


> Why no Paradigm Speakers? The Tribute is $2,999 (MSRP). Signature C6 is $3,200.
> 
> http://paradigm.com/products/collection=reference/model=tribute/page=overview


Those prices are EACH... the pricing above is for pairs. These were discussed in the nomination thread.


----------



## 8086

Pesky low contrast fine print. 

The studio 60 are $1,250 each and should be competitive with all the speakers listed above. At $2,800 a pair, I'd also like to See the Bowers and Wilkins PM1 listed. They are said to be 800 series speakers for the working man.


----------



## Sonnie

The 60's were in the last evaluation... and we opted for the CM9. We will only allow one nomination from each manufacturer.


----------



## 100pr00f

I wanna see what Legacy Expression sound like....I know they look cool lol


----------



## RCR

Its a pity the high end JBL speakers are not put up for review; like the K2-S9900, LS series or even the Studio 5 series.


----------



## Erin H

Sonnie said:


> Have you missed the results of our other two events? We have measurement gear.
> 
> Our timing with four panelists and 6 speakers is barely enough to get done now. I honestly am not sure we could fit in another panelist.


Apparently, yes. Trust me, I'd love to have the free time to see all these threads here but work and life don't always permit that. 
I'll check them out, though. I didn't intend to offend... just offering up some measurement gear.

I'll try to stay more fresh on these things so next time I can be included. It is unfortunate to be only 3 hours away and not be able to join you fellas. 

The offer on my Kef R500's still stands. I even have the original boxes should you need them.

I haven't casted my vote yet; I need to research some of the other options I'm not familiar with. But this looks like it's gonna be pretty awesome. 

- Erin


----------



## cobraguy

Hard to limit the picks to just 6 out of that list! Some terrific speakers on there.
Sounds like another great time fellas. Have fun, and can't wait to find out what the results end up being.


----------



## padgman1

Will be interesting to see who makes the final cut.........

For those of you who REALLY want to see if the Tekton Pendragons can "compete" with other companies' wares, this would be the time to vote them in ( I did for this reason - shameless plug).


----------



## Sonnie

B&W is taking the commanding lead early on... probably not a real big surprise.




RCR said:


> Its a pity the high end JBL speakers are not put up for review; like the K2-S9900, LS series or even the Studio 5 series.


Why would be include $30,000 speakers in with $3,000 speakers? That would make absolutely no sense. I think there was a problem finding anything JBL had at this time that would fit in the MSRP pricing range.


----------



## Erin H

Sonnie said:


> B&W is taking the commanding lead early on... probably not a real big surprise.


Agreed. I've heard a few B&W setups myself so I'd be curious to see what your crew's thoughts are on them vs what I've gleaned from my listening sessions. (so, yea, I voted for those as well)


You guys have quite a list of contenders. There's probably only a few of them that I have zero desire in. There are a few that I'm absolutely looking forward to seeing reviewed, and the rest are at the least, quite interesting. So, overall, it's quite an exhaustive list. 

What would be cool to see is a comparison from this round vs the $2500 round. It'll be interesting to see if that $500 makes a subjectively marked improvement or if you guys feel the $2500 round speakers held their own just as well.


----------



## Almadacr

WoW i am really surprised to see that Axiom has so many votes . Is this a updated version of the M100 ?


----------



## Harro

I really am hoping the Ascend towers make it cause I have my eyes set on those but would like to see what others think of them before pulling the trigger.


----------



## SteveCallas

Erin H said:


> There's probably only a few of them that I have zero desire in


Yep, there are a lot of good ones on this list - this price range is the sweet spot.


----------



## jeffreymercado

I have heard the Dynaudios against the Tritons and the B&W CM10 and felt the Dynaudios were better than both with more depth to female vocals. It was not an ideal room setup. So would be curious to hear your take in optimal placement. Tekton Pendragons vs. the before mentioned sounds like an awesome GTG. I CANT WAIT TO HEAR THE RESULTS. 

In the $2500 shoot out was there a speaker that was favored the best.

Zu audio got speaker of the year for the Druids by the audiophiliac on CNET

My perfect list would be Salks, Ascend
B&W vs Dynaudio excite
Tekton vs Zu


----------



## camerio

Hi,

For this pool, I propose to consider DeVore Fidelity 3XL


----------



## Gregr

Yes!!! Wow, a very impressive list of speaker builders and at a price point that allows the engineers and designers to show speakers that are truly representative of their technical abilities. These are not the flagship/cutting edge speaker models but some very fine representations.

This list of speakers speaks well of the interests of HTS members. I would love to have an opportunity to listen to 3/4 of the speakers listed. I wish Canton and Totem could make the final list but it does not look good. Both are phenomenal speaker builders and each have a long list of innovations and speaker models that always receive very high acclaim with reviewers. Of all the speakers listed Totem and Canton are two that just do not seem to receive the "word of mouth" publicity like most other speakers do. Maybe it's just as well I've heard the 6 ohm,Totem Hawk is a difficult speaker to drive effectively because it likes lots of clean power and amplification (200watts recommended in one review) and seems to me Canton has had a few speakers with finicky reputations as well. But you know when these speaker builders use huge capacitors and inductor coils and their speakers can reach down into the 20's (room specific) I would hope I haven't bottle-necked amperage/power and watts anywhere.

I am looking forward to the final list of speakers. Looking at the numbers so far, Wow, the reviewers have got some very fine listening chores ahead but I don't envy the work in getting this job done. I can't wait to read the reviews. 
Thanks for all of your hard work so far...:clap:


----------



## ewardjr69

I'm excited My Triton 2s are doing well so far, I know I'm a little biased but they need to be in there!

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## admranger

I'm hoping for the Von Schweikert's will make the cut. The Vienna Acoustics too. Both are well thought of by the high-end crowd. It'd be nice to have them compete against some of the more well known speakers <cough, B&W, cough>.


----------



## 8086

Sonnie said:


> The 60's were in the last evaluation... and we opted for the CM9. We will only allow one nomination from each manufacturer.


Fair enough. 

(I think the PM1's are better for music. CM9 is probably better for theater use)


----------



## tonyvdb

I would love to vote but I've never heard any of these speakers so I would have no idea what would be the best choice. I'm watching this closely for the final reviews.


----------



## Sonnie

tonyvdb said:


> I would love to vote but I've never heard any of these speakers so I would have no idea what would be the best choice. I'm watching this closely for the final reviews.


You don't have to hear them to vote. Pick the top 6 you would like to know more about.


----------



## mikeaiken

Sorry to be such a cynic here, but if you audio snobs are willing to pay $3000 for speakers, and claim that you can hear a difference from MUCH lower priced speakers available these days, then more power to you. I'll bet that you are the kind of folks that will pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars for interconnect cables claiming that you can hear a difference in those also. As a pro audio studio engineer, I can assure you that no studios are wired with outrageously priced wire or monitor speakers, and that you are not going to get anything better out of your systems than the original input signals. Spend your money how you want, but don't tell me how you can hear a difference between speaker cables held up off the floor and those that are not. I know I got off subject here, but the analogy is the same.


----------



## Sonnie

Sorry Bubba... I think you got confused about which forum you were posting in. Quite a disrespectful attitude there. Time for you to move on. Bye-bye now! :wave:


----------



## Erin H

No. The analogy is not the same. No one here is talking about wires. 

If there's any areas of (legitimate) concern when it comes to a playback system it's the room and the speaker. For all intents and purposes, the signal itself is unaltered from input to the output of the speaker. Meaning, the CD player passes the signal to the amps. The room and the speakers (and the interaction of the two) are the problem areas. 

In any system, the distortion, linear and non linear, are essentially all caused by the speaker. Electronics contribute so little error it's negligible ... You're talking on the order of 1/100th of a percent. On the other hand, speakers can contribute nonlinearities at a much higher level and linear distortion that is very high. Then you factor in the room's influence (ie; those pesky modes that swing the low end response +/-15dB) and you realize just how important the room/speaker evaluation is. 

So, a review such as this, with listening position measurements and analysis of the room through measurement actually does a lot to serve the community.


----------



## english210

8086 said:


> Pesky low contrast fine print.
> 
> The studio 60 are $1,250 each and should be competitive with all the speakers listed above. At $2,800 a pair, I'd also like to See the Bowers and Wilkins PM1 listed. They are said to be 800 series speakers for the working man.


The PM1's are stand-mount, I think these are all towers, and I thought they were $3800/pr. I like them too, though!

You pesky techies stopped me from from voting for 8 or 9 nine like I wanted to!!  I tried to vote for different 'flavors', especially in the tweeters, with the Imagine T2's as the sole speaker I've heard for a reference point. I've never heard the RAAL, but heard lots of good, the Odyssey is using the Be tweeter, which I liked in the Focals I heard, so curious about how the various approaches to tweeters compare to each other. Still couldn't cover all I wanted to, though...Oh well, I'm sure the 6 I picked won't the ones with the most votes anyway, and I'll trust the group to have variety


----------



## 8086

Erin H said:


> No. The analogy is not the same. No one here is talking about wires.
> 
> If there's any areas of (legitimate) concern when it comes to a playback system it's the room and the speaker. For all intents and purposes, the signal itself is unaltered from input to the output of the speaker. Meaning, the CD player passes the signal to the amps. The room and the speakers (and the interaction of the two) are the problem areas.
> 
> In any system, the distortion, linear and non linear, are essentially all caused by the speaker. Electronics contribute so little error it's negligible ... You're talking on the order of 1/100th of a percent. On the other hand, speakers can contribute nonlinearities at a much higher level and linear distortion that is very high. Then you factor in the room's influence (ie; those pesky modes that swing the low end response +/-15dB) and you realize just how important the room/speaker evaluation is.
> 
> So, a review such as this, with listening position measurements and analysis of the room through measurement actually does a lot to serve the community.


Going from Paradigm Monitors to Paradigm Studio's was quite a giant leap in sound. I have also spent time with Paradigm Signatures and those are leaps and bounds above all else which I have owned. Spending more does often get you more but in some cases it does not which is where we get the phrase "sounds better than ___ for $$$" and that especially true for a lot of source players (eh-hem, lexicon BD Player).

After winner has been decided; I'd love to see a $2500 Wild(s) card thrown in the mix. Perhaps it could be the best three speaker(s) from the last round up?



english210 said:


> The PM1's are stand-mount, I think these are all towers, and I thought they were $3800/pr. I like them too, though!
> 
> You pesky techies stopped me from from voting for 8 or 9 nine like I wanted to!!  I tried to vote for different 'flavors', especially in the tweeters, with the Imagine T2's as the sole speaker I've heard for a reference point. I've never heard the RAAL, but heard lots of good, the Odyssey is using the Be tweeter, which I liked in the Focals I heard, so curious about how the various approaches to tweeters compare to each other. Still couldn't cover all I wanted to, though...Oh well, I'm sure the 6 I picked won't the ones with the most votes anyway, and I'll trust the group to have variety


The PM1 sounds a lot like a tower speaker.


----------



## gorb

I voted for these:
Ascend Acoustics Sierra Tower (RAAL Tweeter)
Bamberg Series 2 TMM
KEF R500
Philharmonic Slim Tower
Salk Songtowers SC
Soundfield Audio VSFT-1

Hopefully some of them end up getting picked


----------



## eyecatcher127

I would be very excited to see the Ascend Acoustics Sierra Tower (RAAL Tweeter), Philharmonic Slim Tower and the Salk Songtowers SC in a shootout.


----------



## FJR

gorb said:


> I voted for these: Ascend Acoustics Sierra Tower (RAAL Tweeter) Bamberg Series 2 TMM KEF R500 Philharmonic Slim Tower Salk Songtowers SC Soundfield Audio VSFT-1 Hopefully some of them end up getting picked


I voted for the last four if I remember correct. Great choices.


----------



## admranger

Erin H said:


> No. The analogy is not the same. No one here is talking about wires.
> 
> If there's any areas of (legitimate) concern when it comes to a playback system it's the room and the speaker. For all intents and purposes, the signal itself is unaltered from input to the output of the speaker. Meaning, the CD player passes the signal to the amps. The room and the speakers (and the interaction of the two) are the problem areas.
> 
> In any system, the distortion, linear and non linear, are essentially all caused by the speaker. Electronics contribute so little error it's negligible ... You're talking on the order of 1/100th of a percent. On the other hand, speakers can contribute nonlinearities at a much higher level and linear distortion that is very high. Then you factor in the room's influence (ie; those pesky modes that swing the low end response +/-15dB) and you realize just how important the room/speaker evaluation is.
> 
> So, a review such as this, with listening position measurements and analysis of the room through measurement actually does a lot to serve the community.


:clap:

Well said!

This is as good a time as any to thank Sonnie et al for doing these comparisons. Yeah, from the outside it looks like all fun and games, but I imagine the work involved is off the charts. A labor of love no doubt.

Good stuff going on here.:T


----------



## cobraguy

I guess MartinLogan currently doesn't have anything in this price range - correct?
I know of the ESL's at around 2200.00/pr and the Theos at around 5000.00/pr. but can't think of anything in between.
Too bad................I love me some Logan's.


----------



## prerich

Looks like the "same ol' suspects"  . I would have liked to have seen some new blood break in - but it looks like another B&W, Dynaudio, Ascend, Salk, GE, Kef party. Although I voted for Dynaudio and GE, everything else was a bit different - just to flavor things up a bit. It would be cool to get Legacy, Wharfedale, or even Focal or VS in there to shake things ups a bit. Oh well.....:dontknow:


----------



## english210

The PSB's aren't doing as well as I'd thought...I hope they make it so I have a benchmark, since those are the one of the few I've heard before - plus they're the sweet-spot in the PSB line in terms of bang-for-buck. I've heard the CM9's as well, and they left me cold, but the T2's impressed me. 

I'll keep my hopes up for a nice variety of speaker philosophies to be represented....


----------



## zieglj01

It would be nice to see the Atlantic Technology get thrown in for the fun of it - They
do look nice and seem to measure well - they are said to have some serious bass for
their size.


----------



## billy p

Just thinking maybe next time around the speakers can be divided into 2 groups that fall within that price point. One group would consist of BM speakers and the second will have only ID brands. The ones that tally the highest amounts of votes go H2H from the 2 groups. Most BM brands have a wider customer fan base to draw upon for votes....ID do too...but on a much smaller scale.

Just a thought...

Anyhow....looking forward to reading the results...some really nice speakers in this price class....I voted for 6 of them.


----------



## cobraguy

I agree with some of the above. It would have been nice to see some of the not so popular names get in there. Maybe have a no-name bracket to compete with the winner.

I'm a little surprised that PSB isn't getting more love as well, and I wouldn't exactly call them a no-name.
Same with Definitive Technology.
I've heard the Thiels, the Revels, and the Focal's and they are outstanding speakers. I've also listened to the larger Von Schweikert's and thought they were sweet.

Just too hard to pick 6 out of this group but we can't expect them to demo them all.
Wish the old school Snell was still around. They'd kick some serious butt in this price range.


----------



## Sonnie

I think you guys are forgetting that this is not a shootout or head to head competition. Each review stands on its own. It is merely an evaluation of six speakers.


----------



## Ratamacue

Being the CM9's are so readily available (for sometime now), I'm surprised to see such a large interest? They're nice speakers for sure, but out of this entire list to choose from, wow :huh:. Looking forward to the Dynaudio and a Revel


----------



## FJR

Ratamacue said:


> Being the CM9's are so readily available (for sometime now), I'm surprised to see such a large interest? They're nice speakers for sure, but out of this entire list to choose from, wow :huh:. Looking forward to the Dynaudio and a Revel


I would love to hear a comparison between the CM9s, Kef R500, and Revel F206. Unfortunately the R700s missed the price by $200 so the 5 1/4" version would go against the 6 1/2" versions but still want to know the impressions.


----------



## cobraguy

Sonnie said:


> I think you guys are forgetting that this is not a shootout or head to head competition. Each review stands on its own. It is merely an evaluation of six speakers.


That's true.

And I think people recognize that you guys can only evaluate so many speakers at a time. But with so many good speakers in each price point, instead of going up to the next price level after evaluating 6 speakers, maybe do a evaluation of the next 6 most popular in the same price / category before moving up in price?
Otherwise the big names will be the only speakers that are reviewed (for the most part anyway).

Don't mind me. Just thinking out loud.:dumbcrazy:


----------



## chashint

I voted for speakers I am familiar with.
Some I like a lot, others not so much.
If the panel evaluates six speakers and I have heard none of them, it leaves me without reference in the price bracket.

I was just looking over the bookshelf thread before I came to this one and now I am thinking about the B&W showroom at Modia. They have the 805 bookshelf in the same room with the CM & 600 series speakers.
You know, that 805 more than holds its own against the CM9 (hard to get pricing on B&W 800 series though so I don't know what the current price structure is).
It is way to late at this point to change but going forward why not consider throwing some of the higher end bookshelf speakers into the mix with the lower level towers at those same price points.

I don't know the model but Sonus Fabor has a competing speaker to the B&W 805 (Magnolia Home Theater at the Dallas, TX Park Ln Best Buy) and either of these bookshelf speakers is a seriously good speaker.

These are just random thoughts on a rainy Saturday, if inappropriate for this thread, delete, edit, or move, no need to notify me if you do.


----------



## Sonnie

cobraguy said:


> And I think people recognize that you guys can only evaluate so many speakers at a time. But with so many good speakers in each price point, instead of going up to the next price level after evaluating 6 speakers, maybe do a evaluation of the next 6 most popular in the same price / category before moving up in price?
> Otherwise the big names will be the only speakers that are reviewed (for the most part anyway).


Actually, with this many speakers, it might be a good idea to simply remove the top 6 we take from this group, but then vote again for the next 6. I think it would be more accurate if we voted again. It might be interesting to see if the next highest 6 would still be the same 6 in a new poll.




chashint said:


> I was just looking over the bookshelf thread before I came to this one and now I am thinking about the B&W showroom at Modia. They have the 805 bookshelf in the same room with the CM & 600 series speakers.
> You know, that 805 more than holds its own against the CM9 (hard to get pricing on B&W 800 series though so I don't know what the current price structure is).
> It is way to late at this point to change but going forward why not consider throwing some of the higher end bookshelf speakers into the mix with the lower level towers at those same price points.


That might be a good idea if there were not so many to choose from and trying to figure out which ones to include. It is tough enough when we have 35 floorstanding speakers nominated.


----------



## Pupton

I'm specifically interested in other feedback on the Salks. I have my opinion of them (intentionally not listing it) as a couple friends own them and I'd really value others input to compare/contrast.


----------



## chashint

Sonnie said:


> That might be a good idea if there were not so many to choose from and trying to figure out which ones to include. It is tough enough when we have 35 floorstanding speakers nominated.


That's why you get the big bucks Sonnie :spend: :clap:


----------



## Sonnie

Please please PLEASE help me find those big bucks I am supposed to have. I seem to have lost them. Oh wait... can't lose what I never had. Rats!


----------



## cdunphy

And I think people recognize that you guys can only evaluate so many speakers at a time. But with so many good speakers in each price point, instead of going up to the next price level after evaluating 6 speakers, maybe do a evaluation of the next 6 most popular in the same price / category before moving up in price?
Otherwise the big names will be the only speakers that are reviewed (for the most part anyway). I second the second 6 thing,but I am sure that would get to be to much logistics, time and work to go with but thank you for the evals you guys have done so far much appreciated and fun\ thanks
CD


----------



## WRYKER

I'm a proud American so I voted!! Though being an American really has nothing to do with voting here. :dontknow:


----------



## JWJMC

Good mix of brands worldwide :clap:


----------



## PC509

I voted. Of course, my requirements weren't too scientific. Only based on what I'd like to see reviewed and what I'd probably buy if I had the cash (6 more years to go until the kids move out and I have more spending money!)


----------



## marstedt

None of the above interest me really. For that kind of money I'd be interested in coherent, 'projector' like sound control. 

Something like the Danley SM60F or SM96 or close approximation. Something with high-efficiency and directivity control is a must.

Is there anything in the list like that?


----------



## onemoresheep

Ribbon driver vs electrostatic would be interesting


----------



## turbojr74

Can't wait to see the final list - vote here as well


----------



## jmschnur

As a a very early user of B&W (1981) , it is interesting to see how the company has evolved . I will be interested in the review of these speakers.


----------



## ajinfla

prerich said:


> Looks like the "same ol' suspects"





Ratamacue said:


> Being the CM9's are so readily available (for sometime now), I'm surprised to see such a large interest?


Marketing departments are breathing a sigh of relief. It works!!

As Rankin Fitch said: Gentlemen, speaker trials are too important to be left up to juries

cheers


----------



## highstream

On what basis would I (and probably most of us) vote: close my eyes and point, choose every Nth one in the list, or...?


----------



## jeffreymercado

I voted based on what I heard was the best, to me it was the Dynaudio. Then what I wanted to know more about. Since the Dynaudio are my point of reference I picked other speakers I was curious about like the Zu speakers. The Teton Pentagon's have gotten a lot of buzz so I picked them to see how they would compare. I also picked the ascend, and Salk because I was interested in the tweeters and how they compared to Golden Ear. Since I'm familiar with the B&W I left it out in favor of the Dynaudio which I felt bested it and the Golden Ears


----------



## taloyd

Soundfield Audio might be the closest - the rest are more traditional hi-fi that doesn't pay too much attention to polar response, DI, total sound power, etc. 

cheers,
-Tal




marstedt said:


> None of the above interest me really. For that kind of money I'd be interested in coherent, 'projector' like sound control.
> 
> Something like the Danley SM60F or SM96 or close approximation. Something with high-efficiency and directivity control is a must.
> 
> Is there anything in the list like that?


----------



## chashint

toasterking said:


> Sonnie,
> I don't care to vote, but thanks for the annoying spam, you [email protected]!


What a nice post, and just think this was your first attempt.

If you do not want email or private messages from the site simply turn them off.
Click private messages that is under your user name in the header above, on next screen look at the panel on left...find 'edit options' and uncheck all that apply.


----------



## 8086

toasterking said:


> Sonnie,
> 
> I don't care to vote, but thanks for the annoying spam, you [email protected]!



Just a friendly warning from someone who isn't an admin. 
Show some respect. The last guy who acted up in this thread got a ban.


----------



## JSampson

I see MA is up for vote. The Monitor Audio Silver RX-10's. I didn't know they released a new line yet. I'm having difficulty trying to find it on their website

Nevermind. I found it. Brain lapse moment


----------



## Sonnie

chashint said:


> What a nice post, and just think this was your first attempt.
> 
> If you do not want email or private messages from the site simply turn them off.
> Click private messages that is under your user name in the header above, on next screen look at the panel on left...find 'edit options' and uncheck all that apply.





8086 said:


> Just a friendly warning from someone who isn't an admin.
> Show some respect. The last guy who acted up in this thread got a ban.


Probably a kid... definitely an immature person if nothing else. I don't let it bother me, as I have been called much worse and it never bothered me. He got banned and will be forgotten very quickly. 

We do appreciate everyone voting. I realized earlier today that we had a lot less votes in this poll than we did the last, so I figured we might need to see if we could drum up a few more voters (maybe some forgot or just haven't seen it yet), hence the PM to a few people. We have managed to double the voting from it, so it helped. Ironically though, the top six are still the top six... lol... I guess once it gets started and we begin to see who the leaders are, it seems to stay on that same track through the end of the voting.


----------



## JSampson

Sonnie said:


> Probably a kid... definitely an immature person if nothing else. I don't let it bother me, as I have been called much worse and it never bothered me. He got banned and will be forgotten very quickly.
> 
> We do appreciate everyone voting. I realized earlier today that we had a lot less votes in this poll than we did the last, so I figured we might need to see if we could drum up a few more voters (maybe some forgot or just haven't seen it yet), hence the PM to a few people. We have managed to double the voting from it, so it helped. Ironically though, the top six are still the top six... lol... I guess once it gets started and we begin to see who the leaders are, it seems to stay on that same track through the end of the voting.


The PM got me to vote! Maybe put a link in your signature tab so that when people read your posts, they will see a new speaker pole thread from you. Maybe that will draw up some additional votes. 

I have a question, Sonnie. What do you do with the speakers after the test? Do the manufacturers request them back or do you have to sell them? I haven't had the chance to check out the previous speaker event, but it's bookmarked and I will read up on it as soon as I close out these other 247 tabs on my laptop. 

I'm pulling some serious CPU and RAM over here as I always do. Researching, reading, researching... Went to the end of the internet once. Once that happened, I thought I'd probably ought to get back to work. :innocent:


----------



## Sonnie

I may have been there before... (the end of the Internet)... or at least I think I was close.

Typically we just send them back. Some of the manufacturers prefer we send them back. They don't want to sell them publicly after they have been reviewed/used, particularly if they have dealers. We (staff) could probably buy them at a discount if we wanted them. It is what is referred to as industry accommodations, which is typically offered on review equipment. We do buy some equipment and we trade out some of it for giveaways.

We still have a couple of pair on hand. We have the Emerald Physics still at my office... and the Tekton Model Lores, which I thought at one time Eric might have those sold and would ship them straight to the buyer, but it never happened and I suppose he just hasn't needed these. Then we still have the Paradigm Studio 60 pair, which we may work out a deal to give those away... pending approval of course. Then I purchased the Arx A5 and Martin Logan Motion 12 speakers... and have kept those for myself. I did purchase the Vandersteen speakers and sold those... as did I purchase the Magnepan MG12's... and I just put those up for sale.


----------



## Sean O

I chose my six contestants based on speakers i would like to own in the future. I own some B&W 683 L/C/R, so that was my first pick. My first decent brand of speakers were Tannoy, it would be nice to see how they stack up now.


----------



## NYPete

Sonnie said:


> Probably a kid... definitely an immature person if nothing else. I don't let it bother me, as I have been called much worse and it never bothered me. He got banned and will be forgotten very quickly.
> 
> We do appreciate everyone voting. I realized earlier today that we had a lot less votes in this poll than we did the last, so I figured we might need to see if we could drum up a few more voters (maybe some forgot or just haven't seen it yet), hence the PM to a few people. We have managed to double the voting from it, so it helped. Ironically though, the top six are still the top six... lol... I guess once it gets started and we begin to see who the leaders are, it seems to stay on that same track through the end of the voting.


I received the PM but I had already voted a while ago. Didn't bother me to get the PM. Don't worry about these people that are always negative.

Interesting that the speaker vote hasn't changed, and I think you might be on to something about previous votes affecting the new votes. Maybe causes bias toward the leaders, and at the very least I would think it causes people to not vote for ones that aren't close to being near the top. Once you see a speaker way behind, a vote for it won't do anything so why not cast your votes towards speakers on the bubble trying to get the ones you might prefer in. 

Are you only going to include 6 pair? Right now there is a substantial drop off after the top 7 speakers, and the speakers in 3-7 place are separated by 5 votes by my calculations. It would be a shame to leave out the 7th speaker when a handful more votes could vaunt it to 3rd place. The 8th speaker is way back so top 7 seems like a natural cutoff point.


----------



## ajinfla

marstedt said:


> None of the above interest me really. For that kind of money I'd be interested in coherent, 'projector' like sound control.
> Something like the Danley SM60F or SM96 or close approximation. Something with high-efficiency and directivity control is a must.
> Is there anything in the list like that?


I believe those are $5k and $6k (pr) respectively, so not really "that kind of money". Plus they have way higher WAF than anything here .
I with you on the HE and DI thing in the real world of rooms/systems though.



taloyd said:


> Soundfield Audio might be the closest - the rest are more traditional hi-fi that doesn't pay too much attention to polar response, DI, total sound power, etc.
> cheers,
> -Tal


Hey, where you lernin' all them fancy terms??



highstream said:


> On what basis would I (and probably most of us) vote: close my eyes and point, choose every Nth one in the list, or...?


That's easy, looks! Marketing/looks should dominate http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/04/dishonesty-of-sighted-audio-product.html.
Which one(s) would look best in your abode, for your perceptions?

cheers


----------



## ajinfla

JSampson said:


> The PM got me to vote! Maybe put a link in your signature tab so that when people read your posts, they will see a new speaker pole thread from you. Maybe that will draw up some additional votes.


I didn't procrastinate...I was was waiting for the bribe checks from the big manufacturers that never came!!
(Like Sonnie) They are bad people! (Give toasterking an eggnog and some Christmas cookies, he seemed a tad bit upset).
Plus my payoff mail outs netted me a measly 40 votes :scratch:
Ah well.

cheers


----------



## rhale64

I would like to see the very underrated. Highly unpopular Phase Techs make it. They would never make a popularity contest. But they do sound good.


----------



## mtbdudex

3 of my 6 are in the running.....have fun and I'll check in the actual event.

You guys really do a great job here, and interesting reading for sure.
Helps so many people who can't get out and compare themselves.

Kudos......and you are rats for having all the fun !!!


----------



## yoda13

None of my votes are in the lead. I really really would like the Ventos to be in :sad:


----------



## Blake90

My vote goes to Klipsch Reference RF-7 ii.


----------



## marstedt

ajinfla said:


> I believe those are $5k and $6k (pr) respectively, so not really "that kind of money". Plus they have way higher WAF than anything here .
> I with you on the HE and DI thing in the real world of rooms/systems though.


Ahh, got it. Thought these were $3000 speakers, not $3k/pair.

Well, $3k should pretty much cover a pair of Geddes Nathans. That should be on the list!
http://gedlee.com/Nathan.htm

I guess if there's anything in the list that is comparable to the Nathans then I'd be interested in those too. Suggestions?


----------



## HeartFixr

Sonnie
Thanks for the message to vote but I have absolutely no clue what so ever about these speakers. Any uniformed vote of mine would merely be reflective of advertising or subliminal thought control effort by someone. I do applaud your efforts to tackle this endeavor and look forward to the results. 
Good luck.
Roll Tide and go War Eagles!


----------



## Paradise

rhale64 said:


> I would like to see the very underrated. Highly unpopular Phase Techs make it. They would never make a popularity contest. But they do sound good.


Agreed. An excellent performing product that is still Made in the USA with excellent manufacturer support. There aren't many around, anymore.


----------



## JeffB

I had a really hard time deciding on which six to vote for. This should be an interesting comparison.


----------



## JSampson

No Klipsch speakers are one of the nominated choices. In order for your vote to count, vote from one of the choices in the multiple choice/multiple selection pole.



Blake90 said:


> My vote goes to Klipsch Reference RF-7 ii.


----------



## shinksma

I voted for a couple of brands/models that I have perused previously, but I must admit I am not familiar with the vast majority of the suggestions - so I did some quick googling and select the ones that piqued my interest. There are some really interesting speakers out there, and I think this event will result in two possible outcomes: all of these not-inexpensive speakers will perform well, with only very minor differences that might impact subjectivity; or there will be a small bunch of speakers (one or three models) that perform well above the rest of the crowd, and it might not be obvious why (and may not be the "obvious" brands).

Very curious to see how this plays out.

shinksma


----------



## shinksma

Ratamacue said:


> Being the CM9's are so readily available (for sometime now), I'm surprised to see such a large interest? They're nice speakers for sure, but out of this entire list to choose from, wow :huh:. Looking forward to the Dynaudio and a Revel


Well, I voted for the CM9s partly because B&Ws have always been on my radar, even though I really can't afford the ones I lust after (the 802s for some reason resonate with my inner Dalek  ).

And from another point of view: if folks are familiar with a particular model, including it in the evaluations will provide some sense of baseline performance. Otherwise the evaluator comments might be like a voltage with a floating ground: it is a value, but not relative to anything...

shinksma


----------



## muzz

I'll be very interested to see how the Sierra Tower with RAAL compares to the B+W CM9 that everyone is clamoring for.
Ascend makes good stuff, but B&W is way more well known, and costs $400 more.

My bet is the Sierra holds it's own.


----------



## balor1eye

I was hoping to see more 'interesting' speakers end up with the votes. I suppose that the speakers with the least avant-garde technology will rise to the top in a popularity contest. One can read many, many reviews of the speakers with large marketing budgets on the web, so I'd rather read about those that don't get as much press.

Of course, I'll take the down-to-earth reviews that come out of these threads than on most other sites, any day.


----------



## WWW1000

I'd love to see Ascend in there....


----------



## marstedt

balor1eye said:


> I was hoping to see more 'interesting' speakers end up with the votes. I suppose that the speakers with the least avant-garde technology will rise to the top in a popularity contest. One can read many, many reviews of the speakers with large marketing budgets on the web, so I'd rather read about those that don't get as much press.


I agree with this. I haven't had a chance to chew through the list to see what-is-what yet, but my vote is for Geddes Nathan and anything that might be comparable.


----------



## Sonnie

Maybe for the next round we take the least voted for speakers... or maybe us four panelist pick one each that we personally think is unique and then take the two with the lowest votes.


----------



## Erin H

balor1eye said:


> I was hoping to see more 'interesting' speakers end up with the votes. I suppose that the speakers with the least avant-garde technology will rise to the top in a popularity contest. One can read many, many reviews of the speakers with large marketing budgets on the web, so I'd rather read about those that don't get as much press.
> 
> Of course, I'll take the down-to-earth reviews that come out of these threads than on most other sites, any day.



I can't speak for all the speakers listed but I can say this: the Kef is anything but standard. It's engineering is the best I've come across in all my testing of raw drivers over the last few years. Testing that has covered the gamut of inexpensive Vifa to very expensive Dyn Audio drive units. 

Kef has a white paper on their concentric which the R-series employs numerous design features of that will make anyone who really admires this hobby from the science perspective happy. 
http://www.vegalab.ru/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=86280&d=1274426702

I do agree, it's a shame the Geddes offerings were overlooked. And I mean "overlooked" in the most sincere way. I, too, completely forget about those speakers from time to time. I'd imagine they're just not on most people's minds, other than in the DIY crowd where they're more talked about. 

Given Geddes' and Kefs' drive toward CD performance, it would be interesting to put those head to head.


----------



## Erin H

To Wayne, I appreciate you providing the raw measurement data in the $2500 speaker review thread. Will you be doing that again? I think that would be really great to have.

Also, I CERTAINLY appreciate your measurements so don't take this as anything more than a question/suggestion... Would you also provide quasi-anechoic measurements? I'm assuming you know what I mean here, given your previous testing. Nothing more than 1m, 3ms or so gated response, enough to get you down to 300hz resolution. No need for near field mic'ing, since the room is so dominant here. 

The reason I ask this specifically is to separate the 'anechoic' response from the averaged head-window response you already provide. It may seem like I'm asking just to ask, but the reasons are huge indicators of performance and will better serve to justify why a speaker was subjectively critiqued the way it was. These two together would really paint the picture of what the speaker itself is contributing. In lower end response, this isn't as big of a deal, but it's certainly useful information to have as you go above the Schroeder frequency. And if you could provide a couple off-axis measurements as well that would be a HUGE benefit. It would show us problem areas in sound power (ie; hole in the response due to poor crossover networks), potential issues with modal ringing, etc. I understand it would take a bit more time and you guys are already crunched, but if you can manage to fit that in, I think you'd be providing some of the best information in any review I've seen thus far. The caliber of the testing you guys are going to be doing combined with that information would literally take this review to the level that Stereophile mag has been doing, which is far beyond what most other forum reviewers ever provide. 

Just my $.02 and encouragement to keep on, keepin' on!

Thanks, Wayne.

- Erin


----------



## ajinfla

Sonnie said:


> Maybe for the next round we take the least voted for speakers... or maybe us four panelist pick one each that we personally think is unique and then take the two with the lowest votes.


Or maybe you could declare yourself king, pick whatever pleases his majesty and let the peasants clamor away.

Seriously, the whole process was clear and HTS members have spoken. As a bottom feeder, I don't feel slighted in the least (of course I don't do this for a living either) and I don't think it would be fair for the "mid pack" to get skipped over (receiving 2 to 3 times as many votes), while the the least popular (or not involved, like the Abbeys) got selected, due to maybe paying attention to polars, DI, sound power, compression or whatever, i.e., things that will physically affect the soundfield>ears in real rooms/systems. Luckily it seems the KEF may have made the cut, so some semblance of that will be at the party.
As Olive demonstrated, yellow cones can trump all that. Also as I noted previously, no one dumped their 802s and raced out to buy 360s, after they got punked badly in the Harman controlled tests. That is simply the reality of the market. Give the buyer what they really want.
The needs of the many (should) outweigh the needs of the few. In fairness.

Now did I mention something about being King? 

cheers


----------



## Sonnie

I will just continue being a lowly servant... a happy lowly servant. Okay... a happy hillbilly ******* lowly servant. Honor to our members. :hail:


----------



## Erin H

ajinfla said:


> As Olive demonstrated, yellow cones can trump all that.


good stuff. 


Side note: I really dug your Monitor design using the kef q100 (or q300?) drive unit.


----------



## ajinfla

Erin H said:


> Side note: I really dug your Monitor design using the kef *q100* (or q300?) drive unit.


Thanks. KEF didn't.

I have great deal of respect for what you're doing for the DIY community as well (whence I came from).
All the best


----------



## Erin H

ajinfla said:


> Thanks. KEF didn't.


No joke. Thanks to you, I had to shell out $1500 just to get serial numbers to buy some R500 drivers to put in my car. My _car_?! Yep. LOL.




ajinfla said:


> I have great deal of respect for what you're doing for the DIY community as well (whence I came from).


I appreciate that. It means a lot coming from you.


----------



## ajinfla

Erin H said:


> No joke. Thanks to you, I had to shell out $1500 just to get serial numbers to buy some R500 drivers to put in my car. My _car_?! Yep. LOL.


Hah.
Yeah, but where were _you_ 10 years ago, when I was practically begging Kantor (Tymphany) to make "waveguides" and SEAS to improve there coaxes (using the very methods KEF now has)?
I had to "fashion" my own! (with nary a CNC in sight). The DIY guys have it easy now....there is a "waveguide' maker on practically every street corner.

Well, I did vote for KEF (looks like they're in), but I guess Tannoy won't make it, which would have been interesting vs the yellow cones as well. Or maybe not, given the size and damping in Sonnies room.

cheers


----------



## Erin H

ajinfla said:


> Hah.
> Yeah, but where were _you_ 10 years ago, when I was practically begging Kantor (Tymphany) to make "waveguides" and SEAS to improve there coaxes (using the very methods KEF now has)?
> I had to "fashion" my own! (with nary a CNC in sight). The DIY guys have it easy now....there is a "waveguide' maker on practically every street corner.
> 
> Well, I did vote for KEF (looks like they're in), but I guess Tannoy won't make it, which would have been interesting vs the yellow cones as well. Or maybe not, given the size and damping in Sonnies room.
> 
> cheers


I was just giving you a hard time.

Man, 10 years ago I was still living in bliss, rocking my $20 sony headphones and minidisc player while I rode my BMX. Sometimes I miss that ignorance is bliss period. 

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled topic...


----------



## Sonnie

Hmmmm... one day left and 6th place is separated by ONE vote as of right now!


----------



## skeeter99

I'm liking that my suggestion (Focal Aria) is tied for 3rd right now, looking good!


----------



## english210

At my local BB Magnolia store the other day, and they had a pair of CM10's, open box, at $3600, plus an additional 20% off! Trigger finger got itchy, but I resisted the urge...

I'm glad the CM9's are in as a comparison with something I've heard, but disappointed that some others I wanted to hear about in comparison with other speakers won't be in the mix...oh well, I did my part, I voted


----------



## Sonnie

The poll is now closed... and the top six look like this:

No code has to be inserted here.

Runner ups:

No code has to be inserted here.

A big thanks to all who voted!


----------



## NewHTbuyer

Cool list. I kind of hope one of the top four is unavailable and the GE moves up to join Ascend and Salk. Hae fun with the auditions.


----------



## Tonto

Well two of my choices make the cut:

Ascend Acoustics Sierra Tower (RAAL Tweeter)
Salk Songtowers SC

I am glad to see they will be auditioned by HTS. Really looking forward to the eval results.


----------



## billy p

From the finalized list...are all 6 candidates for this evaluation, confirmed? 

Nice list BTW.....some very well established BM brands and a couple of highly sought out ID brands...should be a very fun time for all.

GL....Bill


----------



## Mike0206

Well at least 1 speaker I voted for made the cut. The KEF's. Honestly I'm a bit disappointed the B&W CM9's made the cut let alone made it in first place! I've heard them many times over and am just not impressed with them much. Who knows though maybe they just need more care in placing them properly and no doubt you guys will do that.


----------



## zieglj01

I think there should be a re-count on the Atlantic Technology AT-1


----------



## Mike0206

zieglj01 said:


> I think there should be a re-count on the Atlantic Technology AT-1


 I voted for those as well. Little disappointed they faired so badly


----------



## ironglen

NewHTbuyer said:


> Cool list. I kind of hope one of the top four is unavailable and the GE moves up to join Ascend and Salk. Hae fun with the auditions.


How dare you! (I'm interested in how the GE performs too. I really hope to see how the different designs fare in an actual listeners setting, side by side, and especially how 'accommodating' each is with the environment.)


----------



## FJR

Mike0206 said:


> Well at least 1 speaker I voted for made the cut. The KEF's. Honestly I'm a bit disappointed the B&W CM9's made the cut let alone made it in first place! I've heard them many times over and am just not impressed with them much. Who knows though maybe they just need more care in placing them properly and no doubt you guys will do that.


 I thought that early but then thought they will make a great reference as many have heard them. I have not heard the 9s but did do an AB with Cm7s (discontinued) with my Kef 103/4s thinking I would replace the Kefs with CM9 and CMC2s. The cM7s were good but not at the level I was looking for so was no longer interested in the CM series.


----------



## Aquarian

I missed to vote 

I'd like to see Boston Acoustics & B&W both


----------



## lcaillo

Mike0206 said:


> Well at least 1 speaker I voted for made the cut. The KEF's. Honestly I'm a bit disappointed the B&W CM9's made the cut let alone made it in first place! I've heard them many times over and am just not impressed with them much. Who knows though maybe they just need more care in placing them properly and no doubt you guys will do that.


I have heard the B&Ws as well and not been as impressed with them as I expected. This is precisely why I voted for them. I have only heard them in dealer showrooms and suspect that with more careful placement they will perform better. I also like to have at least one speaker that I am somewhat familiar with to serve as a baseline. I have worked with quite a few B&W speakers over the past 30 years in actual installations, but not the CM9.


----------



## lcaillo

Sonnie said:


> The poll is now closed... and the top six look like this:
> 
> No code has to be inserted here.
> Runner ups:
> 
> No code has to be inserted here.
> A big thanks to all who voted!


I am happy with the mix. Three of my choices made the top six and two the next tier. For the record my choices were the B&W, Dynaudio, Salk, Monitor, Thiel, and von Schweikert. None of these are favorites, nor well known to me other than the B&W and Thiel brands in general, having sold and installed both brands long ago, and owned a pair of old Thiels. What interested me about the new ones are the concentric drivers.

Everyone should keep in mind that not all of the companies that we chose products from will want to play. Chances are that as least some of the second group will get bumped up. I could have easily voted for either the Golden Ear or the Tannoy, so that is fine with me.


----------



## WWW1000

I have been B&W'd to death.....tired of them myself. 

I choose only 1 out of the top 12? I don't know whether to have my eyes or my ears checked....:dontknow:


----------



## ajinfla

Mike0206 said:


> Well at least 1 speaker I voted for made the cut. The KEF's. Honestly I'm a bit disappointed the B&W CM9's made the cut let alone made it in first place! I've heard them many times over and am just not impressed with them much. Who knows though maybe they just need more care in placing them properly and no doubt you guys will do that.


A big part of why you may have disliked their sound, is that you weren't listening outdoors, but in room, where off axis, DI, sound power, etc have been found to matter...in blind tests.
If you look at the Seaton pics of Sonnies room, it's pretty wide and has large bandages on the sidewalls (aka "first reflection" point absorbers), which will go a long way to mitigate the off axis maladies (of all speakers).
Of course, on the same token, this has been found to work against speakers like the KEF (again, in ears only/soundfield perception listening), so it might prove the great equalizer. We'll see.
Perhaps most remarkably, the company (Harman [Revel]) that is doing 10x the actual acoustic research, of all others combined, so that we know this stuff, didn't make the top 12!!. This despite them sprucing up the line quite a bit in the looks department!
Proving once again, the triumphant power of marketing, over all our perceptions.
On with the show!

cheers


----------



## cobraguy

Well 3 of my 6 made it to the dance and my other 3 picks are in the 2nd cut. Wouldn't mind seeing the Golden Ears get bumped up. I've owned Thiels in the past and think they are a top notch speaker but these (this price range model) may lack a little in the bottom end.
Have fun guys.


----------



## fishinbob

I posted a link to the results of this poll on the Salk site at AC. Jim replied and is on board to furnish a pair of SCSTs. So glad to hear this, as his speakers got the only vote I cast.:clap:


----------



## Tonto

The Golden Ear Triton Two's were my 3rd choice (only voted for 3). I would really like to see them get bumped into the final 6 as well. 

Glad to see Salk confirm. I hope they all choose to participate. Word is getting around about these evals in the web forum community. Everybody seems to really enjoy them. It is such a good way to show off your products...for the cost of shipping!


----------



## Savjac

May I ask where might we be able to listen to your products outside of one of the shows ?
I will be at the Axpona in Chicago this year again, but will also be in Tampa in a month or two.

Thanks




ajinfla said:


> A big part of why you may have disliked their sound, is that you weren't listening outdoors, but in room, where off axis, DI, sound power, etc have been found to matter...in blind tests.
> If you look at the Seaton pics of Sonnies room, it's pretty wide and has large bandages on the sidewalls (aka "first reflection" point absorbers), which will go a long way to mitigate the off axis maladies (of all speakers).
> Of course, on the same token, this has been found to work against speakers like the KEF (again, in ears only/soundfield perception listening), so it might prove the great equalizer. We'll see.
> Perhaps most remarkably, the company (Harman [Revel]) that is doing 10x the actual acoustic research, of all others combined, so that we know this stuff, didn't make the top 12!!. This despite them sprucing up the line quite a bit in the looks department!
> Proving once again, the triumphant power of marketing, over all our perceptions.
> On with the show!
> 
> cheers


----------



## skeeter99

Went and listened to the Focal Aria 926 today. You guys are in for a treat 

Scott


----------



## Sonnie

billy p said:


> From the finalized list...are all 6 candidates for this evaluation, confirmed?


NO... actually I am waiting on Leonard and Joe to confirm (Wayne has confirmed) the date of the event prior to contacting the manufacturer, so that we can get shipping line up for the proper date. They generally like to know the date of the event. As soon as I hear from them, I will begin to contact manufacturers. 

Looks like Salk might be confirmed indirectly (see below).




fishinbob said:


> I posted a link to the results of this poll on the Salk site at AC. Jim replied and is on board to furnish a pair of SCSTs. So glad to hear this, as his speakers got the only vote I cast.:clap:


That is good to hear. I felt like he would be willing.




skeeter99 said:


> Went and listened to the Focal Aria 926 today. You guys are in for a treat


I can't wait to hear all of these... possibly the best group we have had yet... in my opinion.


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> That is good to hear. I felt like he would be willing. I can't wait to hear all of these... possibly the best group we have had yet... in my opinion.


I'm really curious to hear what you all think of them. After listening to them today I have opinions but I don't want to state them and potentially put a prejudice (good or bad) in all your thoughts. 

Scott


----------



## Sonnie

It won't matter. I have read lots of reviews on the various speakers we have evaluated. Not intentionally for the event, just read them because I have read a LOT of reviews over the years. Of course having this forum I read all kinds of things about various products, but I have learned that not every hears things the same, nor does everyone always like the same thing, and the best way to know for sure is listen for yourself. Plus, the way you heard them will not be the same as we will hear them... different environment, unless you copied my HT room. :sarcastic:


----------



## lcaillo

skeeter99 said:


> I'm really curious to hear what you all think of them. After listening to them today I have opinions but I don't want to state them and potentially put a prejudice (good or bad) in all your thoughts.
> 
> Scott


Please post your opinion. Once you get past the notion that any review is objective, it really does not matter. We all take biases into a listening session. They don't last long with the very rigorous listening that we do, but you can't assume anything but that we are all biased in the end. That is why I make it very clear what I expected and what my biases and preferences are when I discuss the speakers.

The nice thing about these events is that we are all so focused on getting the best out of each speaker that we are listening for what they do right. We are very thorough and give all opinions a good test, but try to focus on reporting what we hear. That may have nothing to do with what others hear, but it seems to resonate with others, in general. Having multiple speakers that we are reviewing gives some reference as well, which helps keep perspective, even if we are not doing a shootout.


----------



## english210

skeeter99 said:


> I'm really curious to hear what you all think of them. After listening to them today I have opinions but I don't want to state them and potentially put a prejudice (good or bad) in all your thoughts.
> 
> Scott


Something tells me I'm showing my ignorance here, but you listened to all the speakers that got voted into the top 6 in a day? I'd have to spend thousands in airline tickets to get to all the places necessary to hear all of them, and even then, not in a day!

Or are you referring back to your original post about the Focals?


----------



## bkeeler10

I'm pretty sure he was referring to the Focals he had listened to earlier. Only Sonnie and crew get the luxury of listening to all six in one day. Lucky . . .


----------



## skeeter99

english210 said:


> Something tells me I'm showing my ignorance here, but you listened to all the speakers that got voted into the top 6 in a day? I'd have to spend thousands in airline tickets to get to all the places necessary to hear all of them, and even then, not in a day!
> 
> Or are you referring back to your original post about the Focals?





bkeeler10 said:


> I'm pretty sure he was referring to the Focals he had listened to earlier. Only Sonnie and crew get the luxury of listening to all six in one day. Lucky . . .


Correct, I listed to the Focals. Definitely wouldn't have had time during lunch to go listen to them all. Well, maybe if it was a REALLY long lunch 

Scott


----------



## zieglj01

skeeter99 said:


> Went and listened to the Focal Aria 926 today. You guys are in for a treat
> 
> Scott


The Focal Aria line looks sharp

I am still waiting for a recount on the Atlantic Technology AT-1 speaker.


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> It won't matter. I have read lots of reviews on the various speakers we have evaluated. Not intentionally for the event, just read them because I have read a LOT of reviews over the years. Of course having this forum I read all kinds of things about various products, but I have learned that not every hears things the same, nor does everyone always like the same thing, and the best way to know for sure is listen for yourself. Plus, the way you heard them will not be the same as we will hear them... different environment, unless you copied my HT room. :sarcastic:





lcaillo said:


> Please post your opinion. Once you get past the notion that any review is objective, it really does not matter. We all take biases into a listening session. They don't last long with the very rigorous listening that we do, but you can't assume anything but that we are all biased in the end. That is why I make it very clear what I expected and what my biases and preferences are when I discuss the speakers.
> 
> The nice thing about these events is that we are all so focused on getting the best out of each speaker that we are listening for what they do right. We are very thorough and give all opinions a good test, but try to focus on reporting what we hear. That may have nothing to do with what others hear, but it seems to resonate with others, in general. Having multiple speakers that we are reviewing gives some reference as well, which helps keep perspective, even if we are not doing a shootout.


I'll have to keep this short as its a very busy day/week for me but here goes.

First thing to notice is the looks. They had walnut sides with piano black top along with a leather front baffle and very nice elevated base. Stunning, absolutely beautiful. They are actually smaller than I had pictured them. They physical stats (40-3/4 x 11-9/16 x 14-5/8") don't seem small but in person they didn't feel that big. They would easily fit into place in any contemporary or modern decor with nary a blip on the WAF screen.

I had a couple CD's with me: Mindi Abair: It Just Happens That Way and Live from The Mountain Music Lounge which is a compilation CD put together but a now (unfortunately) disbanded radio station here in Seattle. Very well recorded music and all live/acoustic. Fun stuff. The woman working at the shop had me listen to one last track before I left: Opiuo - Don't Hold Back from the Butternut Slap - Part 2 album.

Mindi is a Jazz Sax player with a full band and is more Jazz Jazz than Smooth Jazz. With the full band as a backdrop the speakers provided a more than excellent sound stage with extremely precise imaging of all the instruments and voices. I've never heard this disc imaged so well. Depth wasn't the deepest on the planet but nothing to scoff at either. As you can see in the pictures, they weren't all that far out into the room though which I'm sure contributed to it. The midrange and high were beautiful. Not too brittle/condemning but not laid back either. A very nice balance. Bass went nice and deep and hit very hard but seemed to have a bit of lingering. That may have been the amp though which was an 87 watt or so Music Fidelity (I think) jobber. It sounded great all the way through the range and up to loud volumes until it came to the deep bass.

The Mountain Music Lounge cd I went through fairly quickly but one thing I noticed with all of the guitar tracks is that they were all very lifelike, almost live sounding which is no doubt in part to it being a live recording instead of studio. 

The last track she played me was specifically played to show off the bass of the speakers and boy did it! It is techno or house or dub step (not my particular style but cool nonetheless) and had incredibly hard hitting and fast bass notes. The cones stopped on a dime with this track which made me second guess the bloatiness I had heard earlier with the Mindi CD as maybe being more the recording than the CD. I'd need more time with more tracks on them to make a firm conclusions.

Overall my impression was that these were VERY VERY nice speakers. I use Mark Audio SuperPensil12's, which are a single driver with 6-1/2" (although they call them 8" but that's to the outside of the bezel) metal cone as my main speakers. They image extremely well, have all that midrange butteryness and coherency that is consistent with single driver speakers along with having extremely accurate highs that don't get muddied and blended when the volume goes up. They dig very deep (into the high 30's I believe) but as with all single driver speakers are volume limited. The Focals bested my Mark Audios in bass authority (as would be expected) and tied in bass depth and midrange/high cohesion and detail. Where they really bested my speakers was in imaging detail, giving a much more precise placement of instruments than my current speakers provide. Now this was in a dedicated room with a nicer amp (I'm only using my Onkyo 805 as my pre/amp currently) than I use so I'm sure some of the detail can be attributed there but I don't believe all of it.

If the rest of the group of speakers come anywhere near the level of the Focals (which I imagine they will), you are in for an AWESOME weekend! 

Scott

(Last pic is of my SuperPensil12's for those who don't know what they are)


----------



## callas01

Looks like a great group to compare. Have all the manufactures confirmed yet?


----------



## Sonnie

skeeter99 said:


>


They would probably sell a lot more if they pulled them out into the room and setup a good listening position. At least they would likely sound better... with more soundstage depth.




callas01 said:


> Looks like a great group to compare. Have all the manufactures confirmed yet?


Not yet... several of the people I need to speak with are at CES this week and it may be next week before I get confirmation.


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> They would probably sell a lot more if they pulled them out into the room and setup a good listening position. At least they would likely sound better... with more soundstage depth.


I agree. Separation was there in SPADES, it was the depth that was lacking. For me, it's not super important but for you guys after reading all your reviews I knew it would be and I immediately noticed that. Like you said, better listening position and the speakers pulled out further would likely garner better results.

Scott


----------



## Sonnie

The soundstage depth is an addiction for me... once I heard it I was immediately addicted and now anything without it seems like it is missing something.


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> The soundstage depth is an addiction for me... once I heard it I was immediately addicted and now anything without it seems like it is missing something.


Don't get me wrong, it wasn't that the image was totally flat, it just wasn't what I would call really deep. 

That said, the deepest soundstage I ever heard was at my buddy Kris Deering's place back when he had his Paradigm S8's. It was probably 5' in front AND in back. It was incredible! I'm guessing that's the kind of depth that's on your pallet Sonnie


----------



## Sonnie

I will not know for sure until next week, but I am told that getting a pair of B&W CM9's might be difficult, because they don't have a pair they can send around for review. Of course I would think a company like B&W would be able to come up with a pair, even if it were a new pair. The PR agency that is in charge of review speakers is at CES and I won't be able to talk in depth with them until next week.


----------



## Sonnie

I have received confirmation from Jim Salk that he will be happy to include his speakers. :T


----------



## skeeter99

Sonnie said:


> I have received confirmation from Jim Salk that he will be happy to include his speakers. :T


Excellent! Really excited to hear all of your thoughts on these. I really like the way Salk speakers sound and they are absolutely GORGEOUS!


----------



## FJR

Sonnie said:


> I have received confirmation from Jim Salk that he will be happy to include his speakers. :T


Fantastic! ?. Hopefully you can get CM9s as I would love to hear the comparison but if not R500s would provide a good benchmark for me as I have heard the R700s. Salk has a very loyal following and my guess it is well deserved. Just have not had the fortune to hear any yet.


----------



## billy p

Good to hear of Salk Audio's confirmation. I know Dave from Ascend mentioned he had not being approached as of yesterday. He went on to say that his next run of cabinets won't be ready for several weeks...with the current timeline for this evaluation being mid to late February...this could open the door for the Ascend Towers...but you'll have to speak with the man in charge...I'd love to see the Sierra Tower included in this very select group of fine speakers.

Cheers, Bill


----------



## Sonnie

billy p said:


> Good to hear of Salk Audio's confirmation. I know Dave from Ascend mentioned he had not being approached as of yesterday. He went on to say that his next run of cabinets won't be ready for several weeks...with the current timeline for this evaluation being mid to late February...this could open the door for the Ascend Towers...but you'll have to speak with the man in charge...I'd love to see the Sierra Tower included in this very select group of fine speakers.
> 
> Cheers, Bill


I called Ascend on Monday evening and was advised that I would need to email Dave, which I did, at 6:09 PM on 1/6/13. As of right now I have NOT heard from him, so I assume he is probably not interested or realizes he can't make the deadline. It looks like we will have to pickup the next two highest voted speaker models, as it is not looking good for B&W or Ascend.

I did hear back from KEF and it looks like they will be participating... although it is not 100% confirmed yet, it sounded like they were very receptive.

I have not heard from Focal, but I did talk with Sandy's wife (Golden Ear) and he is at CES, but I think if he has speakers available he will participate. I have talked with him in the past and he seemed to be receptive to reviews. I have reached out to Tannoy and Polk and am pending response from them.


----------



## alphaiii

Glad to see the Ascend Tower and Salk ST make the cut... but it'd be a bummer if Ascend doesn't want to participate.

Also a shame there was not more interest in the Philharmonic towers... word on them has been stellar so far.


----------



## billy p

alphaiii said:


> Glad to see the Ascend Tower and Salk ST make the cut... but it'd be a bummer if Ascend doesn't want to participate.
> 
> Also a shame there was not more interest in the Philharmonic towers... word on them has been stellar so far.


At the moment Ascend, dose not have any available Towers to send. Next batch of cabinets aren't due until later next month...Ascend dose not build 1 speaker at a time...especially speakers built with the RAAL units. I've ordered several speakers from them in the past and I had to wait for each run of cabinets....unless of course they had inventory of that particular speaker at the time of my order. 

If Ascend can't commit I'd love for DM send a pair of Phils...IMO replace ID with the next highest voted ID mfg...JMO.

Regards, Bill


----------



## Sonnie

You never know with speaker manufacturers what will be in stock and whether they will even participate. We have been fairly fortunate thus far in our previous two events. Of course the first event I purchased some of those because they were on the lower price scale, but that is much harder to do when you get up in the $3K range.

I feel confident that we will have six very high quality speakers participating. If some of the top six miss this round, maybe we can get them in our next round. I am pretty sure we will do two rounds this time with no more voting between the rounds.


----------



## Tonto

Well I for one will be dissappointed if the Ascends can't make it. It is some consolation that they will be offered a second chance...I hope the are at least willing to participate.


----------



## english210

Sonnie said:


> The soundstage depth is an addiction for me... once I heard it I was immediately addicted and now anything without it seems like it is missing something.



Agreed!!


----------



## Greenster

watching all of the speaker evaluations and tests, it amazes me as to how many different speakers there are out there. Keep in mind that we are only looking at the better quality speakers.


----------



## Sonnie

Tonto said:


> Well I for one will be disappointed if the Ascends can't make it. It is some consolation that they will be offered a second chance...I hope the are at least willing to participate.


I am disappointed that I can't even get a response from them. :huh:


----------



## Sonnie

Well... KEF went from being excited about the event and looking forward to participating to being afraid their R500's won't stack up to the other speakers in this event. I suppose they don't fully understand that this is not a shootout, although I emphasized it.

I hate it because those were some I was seriously looking forward to hearing and I thought they would review really well. 

That will end any relations we might would have had with them, as I personally don't want to deal with a company that is scared their product is not up to par with similarly priced products. It doesn't speak too highly of their faith in their own products. 

They will not be included in future nominations, as once we get to the next group, they might do the same thing again depending on what other speakers will be included. I don't want members wasting their votes on an iffy manufacturer.


----------



## B- one

That's too bad glad I didn't vote for them!!


----------



## Mike0206

So the only speaker of the 6 I voted for is nixed cause they are scared their product won't stack up to the competition! Ugh!!!! Im beginning to question my choices in audio!!?? hopefully my next highest pick, I think is the golden ear tritons, pan out. Hopefully sandy steps up to the plate.


----------



## Savjac

Some of these speakers I have not heard of, let alone heard playing back music. I would think that a forum like this would be a very nice platform with which to promote goods. Fair, fast, inexpensive and thousands of readers. 
Not only that but several reviewers with no axe to grind so if one feels let down and the others feel the groove, it reads well. I see Ascend on their website offers shipment in 2-3 business days, I would think they have extras as would KEF, that is a huge group. B&W not sending is just not right, they have some serious reserves and a good product, yes I have owned them for years. 

It is obvious I know nothing about product promotion. :huh:

Oh and please know, my name is Jack and I am a sound space addict, depth is cool.


----------



## JeffB

Only 1 of my 6 picks made the cut. But I don't feel bad about it. I specifically voted for things that were less well known. I am intrigued by the less conventional designs. The majority of speakers are bass-reflex and I have come to feel that this isn't really the best design. Of course, all speaker designs are a compromise of sorts. I am not sure if would be definitely possible to claim some other design, like transmission line would sound definitely better than bass-reflex. But I don't really see anybody attempting to prove/disprove this hypothesis. The Atlantic Technology AT-1 really interested me, because they have a form of loading the company claims to be completely new and unused before. Something they believe to be a superior compromise. But the AT-1s only had about 8% of the vote. Maybe nobody else has heard of them, or they don't believe the hype, or they have been heard and not liked. I really don't know the case. The more popular designs are easier to get a personal audition. For example, B&W is in Best Buy Magnolia stores. Although, one could argue that makes them a great reference to compare the others against.


----------



## zieglj01

Well who knows, maybe the Atlantic Tech AT-1 will sneak in after all.onder:
The reviews and measurements on them have been good.


----------



## bkeeler10

That is too bad that some manufacturers are not interested. KEF says it is because they have reservations about how their product will stack up, which is sad. 

I just wonder if there is a stigma of some sort with forums and if that is part of it when it comes to brick'n'mortar brands. Obviously the ID manufacturers get it since they have been willing to participate thus far. 

Maybe the BM folks don't feel they need forum exposure and print magazines are good enough, while the ID folks know they do. I think that is a mistake on the part of the BM guys. Seems to me that print magazines are on the decline, and especially among younger people. Witness the recent merger of Sound & Vision with Home Theater for evidence.


----------



## lcaillo

Mike0206 said:


> So the only speaker of the 6 I voted for is nixed cause they are scared their product won't stack up to the competition! Ugh!!!! Im beginning to question my choices in audio!!?? hopefully my next highest pick, I think is the golden ear tritons, pan out. Hopefully sandy steps up to the plate.


I won't be surprised if many of the speakers that sell through traditional dealers primarily take this attitude. They feel they have little to gain and much risk in reviews. And many of them do not know us and won't bother to take the time to read what we have been doing.

We try to be fair, but we also won't pull any punches. And many people take comments made in reviews out of context or place too much stock in them.


----------



## billy p

Sonnie said:


> I called Ascend on Monday evening and was advised that I would need to email Dave, which I did, at 6:09 PM on 1/6/13. As of right now I have NOT heard from him, so I assume he is probably not interested or realizes he can't make the deadline. It looks like we will have to pickup the next two highest voted speaker models, as it is not looking good for B&W or Ascend.
> 
> I did hear back from KEF and it looks like they will be participating... although it is not 100% confirmed yet, it sounded like they were very receptive.
> 
> I have not heard from Focal, but I did talk with Sandy's wife (Golden Ear) and he is at CES, but I think if he has speakers available he will participate. I have talked with him in the past and he seemed to be receptive to reviews. I have reached out to Tannoy and Polk and am pending response from them.


than this 



Tonto said:


> Well I for one will be dissappointed if the Ascends can't make it. It is some consolation that they will be offered a second chance...I hope the are at least willing to participate.


and your response is this? 




Sonnie said:


> I am disappointed that I can't even get a response from them. :huh:


So, I'm a bit confused because you said in the above quote "that you heard from him but he is not interested...I know Dave is kind of slow to answer his email but he usually does....I also know they're extremely busy with the new Sierra 2 & just trying to catch up on back orders. I would give them another day or two in hopes hope he'd get back to you...if not, the show must go on!

Re,
Bill...


----------



## SteveCallas

If no Ascends, trade their spot for the Phils - interested to hear comparative impressions of that RAAL.


----------



## Sonnie

Sorry Bill... typo, but if you read it all, I think you realize I meant to say that I have NOT heard from him. That would also be logical based on what I stated later. I have went back and edited that statement to include the "NOT".

I have no problem giving him a few days to respond... that is what I have been doing. At this point I am only replacing one speaker, the R500, with the next highest voted speaker, yet I am still preparing for others that might not participate. Either way we will still have a good group of speakers.


----------



## Sonnie

billy p said:


> So, I'm a bit confused because you said in the above quote "that you heard from him but he is not interested...


For the record, this is not my quote. I never said "he is not interested". What I stated (after the appropriate "NOT" was edited in to the statement, was:

_As of right now I have NOT heard from him, so I assume he is probably not interested or realizes he can't make the deadline._

There are two possibilities I am "assuming", although I am still giving him a few days to respond. :T


----------



## zieglj01

Plus, it is nice/good to wait till after the CES show, for some
people to respond. I sure hope that Focal will be in.


----------



## Sonnie

I did hear back from Dave... twice already today. They are indeed out of the towers, but he is meeting with the cabinet guys tomorrow to see if they can work something out to get us a pair to evaluate.

He definitely seems to be going above and beyond in an attempt to make it happen. He also isn't crying "unfair" because his speaker is among the lowest priced in the group.


----------



## angelod307

Polk audio is my vote


----------



## bkeeler10

See the ID guys seem not only willing but eager to participate and they don't make excuses out of a difficult situation. I wonder if perhaps in 10 years the ratio of ID/BM manufacturers for speakers will flip. Anyway, glad they want to participate.


----------



## billy p

Sonnie said:


> I did hear back from Dave... twice already today. They are indeed out of the towers, but he is meeting with the cabinet guys tomorrow to see if they can work something out to get us a pair to evaluate.
> 
> He definitely seems to be going above and beyond in an attempt to make it happen. He also isn't crying "unfair" because his speaker is among the lowest priced in the group.



Good to hear....I never doubted Ascend not participating...I'm glad Dave has contacted you. I know being a current Ascend owner I had to wait several weeks for the next run of cabinets. 

I'm glad you guys were able to connect & GTG...

Cheers, Bill


----------



## Architect7

Agreed, glad to see the Ascends will be in the comparison, I am very happy to see RAAL represented


----------



## Sonnie

We are not there yet, but should know something by first of next week. Dave is trying hard to make it work out for us though, which is all we can ask.


----------



## Tonto

If he's trying, I bet he can make it happen. I'm feeling much better about it now.


----------



## ksrigg

Being new here I am having a hard time understanding what is going on. I do understand that each member may nominate up to six pairs of speaker in the sub $3k price range to be considered in a speaker evaluation Event. When, where, and how does this work? 

I apologize in advance for my ignorance and I'm sure I am missing the link for the "rules" and conditions, if someone could steer me in the right direction, I'd love to "catch up" on what is actually going on.

Thank you


----------



## Sonnie

We started out with a separate thread where members could nominate speakers in this MSRP price category. There were 35 speakers nominated and then members voted for the six speakers they would like to see evaluated by the panel (4 HTS staff members). The nominations and voting is now closed, and we are now in the process of lining up the top six speakers for the evaluation event that will be held on February 21-22.


----------



## callas01

Kef declined huh? That surprises me, I would think they'd like to know how well they designed their R series. I'm not surprised that B&W wouldn't participate, I heard that before the best buy deal they wouldn't put their speakers in dealers store if they had certain brands. I used to think that was cooler talk but I'm starting to believe it might not have been.


----------



## lcaillo

It is absolutely true, not only of B&W but many other brands. It is not uncommon for manufacturers to want to be in a mix of products that complement the line but do not compete head on with their own products. They would like dealers that prioritize their brand. Some will not put their higher end products in mass market outlets.


----------



## Sonnie

B&W has not declined yet. I did talk with their PR agency today and he is submitting the request to Bowers & Wilkins. Hopefully we will know something in a couple of days.


----------



## callas01

Sonnie said:


> B&W has not declined yet. I did talk with their PR agency today and he is submitting the request to Bowers & Wilkins. Hopefully we will know something in a couple of days.


hopefully they will, werent b&w the highest vote getters? it would be a shame if they werent apart of the gtg.


----------



## Sonnie

That is the message I conveyed, but I have heard they are rather peculiar.


----------



## SteveCallas

Funny because hometheater.com just posted a review of the CM10. At the very least, you know there is a review pair of those floating around.


----------



## Sonnie

Their PR rep actually asked me about those. That may have been why he asked me.


----------



## Sonnie

*UPDATE!*

B&W has declined participation. It is really a bummer that the top two vote getters have declined. Hey... it is their loss, because they will not get another opportunity.

I have still not been able to get in touch with Focal. I have left 3 messages and sent two emails. Not really sure what else I can do.

I have not been able to get Sandy with Golden Ear to call me back. I have explained to his wife on two occasions what we needed, so he should be aware of it, but I guess either he is too busy to worry with it, or just does not care to participate. We will move on... I will not beg.

I also have not been able to get Polk to respond.

Still pending a response from Tannoy... we hope to hear from them by tomorrow.

Dave with Ascend believes they will be able to accommodate a pair, but we are still not 100% just yet. We are holding on to them for as long as we can before letting go.

Dynaudio is definitely in.

Salk is in, but I need to confirm again with Jim since I read he recently had a death in his immediate family. I am not sure if they might hinder the build and delivery.

I got confirmation that PSB is in with the Imagine T2.

With the declines we have had... I think going forward we are going to contact various manufacturers and line up six speakers without any voting. I would like to include members, but apparently some manufacturers are not listening... or they are selling all they want... or simply do not see us as a valuable asset for reviews... or they fear their product will not review well when there are four down to earth honest reviewers involved that are not going to sugarcoat the review in order to tickle their ears.


----------



## yoda13

Too bad! I think that the ones that are declining or ignoring (read not participating) are missing out. It's not like you will be reviewing white van speakers here. All of the manufacturers in question already enjoy tremendous popularity and positive reviews. If anything, they are missing on a chance to elevate their status that much more. One of reason a particular manufacturer finish first in the poll, well it's because there's an interest. I don't think it would negate B&W's reputation if say, they would rank 3rd in this elite group.

Just saying...


----------



## Sonnie

Theil has discontinued their SCS4T speakers and their CS1.7 cost $4,000. So they will not be in either.


----------



## Savjac

Well, I suppose a couple of us could stand center stage and sing John Denver songs for youse guys. How much more real can you get than that ???


----------



## Sonnie

Tom Jones maybe, but not John Denver... that ain't gonna happen.


----------



## zieglj01

Well, there is still hope that Atlantic Technology may sneak in.


----------



## ironglen

SteveCallas said:


> If no Ascends, trade their spot for the Phils - interested to hear comparative impressions of that RAAL.


Am I one of the few, or one of many that are most curious how speakers with different tweeter technologies perform in this event?


----------



## lcaillo

I think many of us have the same interest. I know all of the review team is curious.


----------



## ALMFamily

lcaillo said:


> I think many of us have the same interest. I know all of the review team is curious.


Having heard the RAAL tweeter a number of times in Salk speakers, I would like to hear a different installation to compare. That said, I have heard ribbons in other speakers and I can tell you for certain that there is another speaker with a ribbon that tops my personal two channel speaker list...


----------



## ajinfla

Sonnie said:


> B&W has declined participation.


Did you pitch the whole "Needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" thing to them?
That's a bummer.



Sonnie said:


> Theil has discontinued their SCS4T speakers and their CS1.7...


Whoa, away from their proprietary coax and back to displaced drivers. Jim must be turning in his grave .



ALMFamily said:


> Having heard the RAAL tweeter a number of times in Salk speakers, I would like to hear a different installation to compare. That said, I have heard ribbons in other speakers and I can tell you for certain that there is another speaker with a ribbon that tops my personal two channel speaker list...


Joe, 
Me and the fellas (or "fellas and I" in the Queens English) are chipping in so you can finally see that Otologist later this year. Just sayin....

Ok, fingers crossed for Tannoy to carry the concentric torch...


----------



## bkeeler10

ALMFamily said:


> Having heard the RAAL tweeter a number of times in Salk speakers, I would like to hear a different installation to compare. That said, I have heard ribbons in other speakers and I can tell you for certain that there is another speaker with a ribbon that tops my personal two channel speaker list...


Did I miss it? Don't hold out on me!


----------



## padgman1

Disappointing to see so many manufacturers either flat out refuse to participate or unable to provide product in a timely fashion for this "review".........all of us at HTS look forward to reading the reviews of the speakers the panel IS able to obtain.

" For those about to rock/ We salute you." :clap:


----------



## Savjac

I would I think, more than most other speakers, love to have Vienna Acoustics apply. What a delicious speaker, albeit maybe not one for headbangers, but velvet sound, huge sound field and almost hypnotic at times when paired with the right tunes.


----------



## Sonnie

Talked with Polk again... they are still discussing it and I hope to have an answer this afternoon.

I also just spoke with Sandy at Golden Ear. He is looking over our last event and said he would let me know something in the next day or two.


----------



## fokakis1

It would be nice to see how the Polks would fare. At this rate, though, I might just get to see you guys evaluate the Bambergs I voted for.


----------



## english210

ironglen said:


> Am I one of the few, or one of many that are most curious how speakers with different tweeter technologies perform in this event?



I'm definitely with you on that. I said as much earlier - my voting was based on a speaker I knew, and then different choices for the other speakers that do things differently to see how the panel of esteemed and highly qualified ( :sneeky: ) listeners takes to the various 'flavors' on offer


----------



## Sonnie

Well this was truly a shock... Sandy with Golden Ear declined. 

I suppose he is selling all the speakers he can produce too. :dontknow:


----------



## ALMFamily

ajinfla said:


> Joe,
> Me and the fellas (or "fellas and I" in the Queens English) are chipping in so you can finally see that Otologist later this year. Just sayin....
> 
> Ok, fingers crossed for Tannoy to carry the concentric torch...





bkeeler10 said:


> Did I miss it? Don't hold out on me!


From all the speakers I have heard to this point, my speaker of choice for me personally is AJ's VSFT-1 - although, evidently, I need my ears checked!


----------



## prerich

Come on Legacy!!!!!

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## JeffB

I demoed the Golden Ear Aon3 along with several other bookshelves. I thought the mids/highs were truly stunning. The best of what I demoed. However, the bass just seemed completely wrong to me. So although I was curious if the towers had correct sounding bass, I am getting to the point where I feel that if a manufacturer can't correctly voice a speaker and get it to sound close to what one would expect, I don't feel much like listening to the rest of their lineup. Perhaps, the speaker I heard was defective in some way. Perhaps it is related to the passive radiator. There have been many good reviews of the towers though. This kept them from getting my vote. I am somewhat curious if anybody else has heard what I heard though.


----------



## Greenster

Wow. I am shocked by how many are declining. It makes me wonder why? As for me, I really value these comparison challenges. It gives me a chance to read about several speaker reviews that are as unbiased as can be in the exact same room. This is exactly what i want. 
Thanks for taking the time to do this for the forum.


----------



## Sonnie

Yeah... the sheer number of views these events get are pretty amazing to say the least. We know a LOT of people are reading them... and in a year's time the numbers will be truly phenomenal.

However, I think it is becoming apparent that if a company has enough positive reviews of a particular product... and/or fear their product might not fair well, they will bow out. We already had one admit they did not think the model we were asking for would fit with the others we have as potential candidates.


----------



## admranger

Very disappointing to hear about all the companies that don't want to participate. 

Von Schweikert, while not a top vote getter, seems like a company that isn't afraid of anything. Maybe they'll play? Yes, it's a speaker I'm interested in, though that interest is waning after hearing the ATC SCM40's (more like $3k per speaker instead of $3k per pair though…).

It must be frustrating for you, given all the work you and your team have put into the last two reviews. I found the reviews to be objective and balanced. I don't know what these companies are afraid of...:dontknow:


----------



## alphaiii

I think the number of companies declining to participate just speaks to how much many of them value the advertising-driven reviews in the audio mags... since, let's face it, it's rare that those type of reviews don't at least in some way, praise the product.

Here, with a group that won't sugarcoat things and drown out any criticisms with flowery praises... maybe these companies feel they have more to lose than gain... You'd think they'd have more confidence in their products...

Then again, if you're a company working with high margins and spending alot of advertising... perhaps maybe you wouldn't want your product going against some of the others listed here that invest more in the speakers themselves.

I mean, if you're Golden Ear, with all of the current hype surrounding the products (whether they live up to it or not)... why risk derailing the hype train even a little with this type of event?


----------



## Savjac

ALMFamily said:


> From all the speakers I have heard to this point, my speaker of choice for me personally is AJ's VSFT-1 - although, evidently, I need my ears checked!


They do look tasty don't they ?? I am looking forward to Axpona in Chicago in hopes AJ brings a set along, even the larger models I bet would crush my skull would be cool to see. 

AJ there is your chance, move a pair to Bama, good pr, ohh and a set to Indiana, I like the idea of a smaller monitor with an 8" driver and 5" passive in addition to the tweeter. Three of those across the front stage of a home theater could rock I would bet.


----------



## Greenster

admranger said:


> Very disappointing to hear about all the companies that don't want to participate.
> 
> Von Schweikert, while not a top vote getter, seems like a company that isn't afraid of anything. Maybe they'll play? Yes, it's a speaker I'm interested in, though that interest is waning after hearing the ATC SCM40's (more like $3k per speaker instead of $3k per pair though…).
> 
> It must be frustrating for you, given all the work you and your team have put into the last two reviews. I found the reviews to be objective and balanced. I don't know what these companies are afraid of...:dontknow:


I agree. I feel that all of the reviews on here are very positive yet objective. The Speaker companies should be afraid not having their speakers reviewed. It is free advertising for them. When I don't hear or read a review of a speaker, I don't even consider it.


----------



## Greenster

I think you need to do an on wall/in wall speaker challenge after this event. Please please please.


----------



## ajinfla

ALMFamily said:


> - although, evidently, I need my ears checked!


Joe, you have just proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, your hearing is just fine.
Carry on...


----------



## ajinfla

Savjac said:


> I am looking forward to Axpona in Chicago in hopes AJ brings a set along


I've been wavering about attending, but now it looks like I'm leaning that way. Speaking of which, as nice as it is for folks to read reviews like Sonnie et al are so graciously doing, there is simply no substitute for folks getting off their behinds and hearing these things themselves! Yes, I know not everyone can. But those who are able...should.
The HTS review is nice in that it all occurs in the same room/system (so many variables are held constant). But again, hearing stuff yourself....

Looks like the human voting poll thing isn't working out here either...may need to come up with a playoff system :devil:

cheers


----------



## woogoob

The Pendragon didn't make the cut, but with all these mfgs declining... I would like to see them reviewed.


----------



## Sonnie

I think going forward we are going to simply start contacting manufacturers until we get six that will agree. Eventually we will get to all of them that really want their speakers reviewed... so everyone gets what they want, within what we can get. If we can't get it, we will let our members know and they can complain to the manufacturer.

I think those members that voted for a speaker where the manufacturer declined should email or call the manufacturer and voice their feelings about it. Let them know this is how you want to see the speaker reviewed.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Bummer.

Too much visibility, too little control, I suppose.


----------



## ALMFamily

ajinfla said:


> I've been wavering about attending, but now it looks like I'm leaning that way. Speaking of which, as nice as it is for folks to read reviews like Sonnie et al are so graciously doing, there is simply no substitute for folks getting off their behinds and hearing these things themselves! Yes, I know not everyone can. But those who are able...should.
> The HTS review is nice in that it all occurs in the same room/system (so many variables are held constant). But again, hearing stuff yourself....
> 
> Looks like the human voting poll thing isn't working out here either...may need to come up with a playoff system :devil:
> 
> cheers


Yay - another chance to hear them! Will the rear-firing tweeters be in?


----------



## gorb

I just read through the entire thread. It's fairly ridiculous how many manufacturers are declining participation. I see random bloggers get products to review (and their reviews are purely fluff, with zero actual content). This is an established website/forum with a large membership and presumably even larger amount of people who just read the reviews, and they don't want to send you review samples? Lame.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing the final list of actual participants, whenever it actually gets finalized


----------



## Sonnie

I think control of the review could be part of it. We have some companies who want us to send them the review for preview before we publish it. In a few cases they did not like some of our comments and wanted us to strike them. We refused to do so. With these reviews... the manufacturer is not going to get a chance to preview anything prior to publishing.


----------



## bkeeler10

Some of them really wanted you to modify the review? Is that what it comes down to -- attempted censorship? I suppose, then, that these things go on at print magazines with some manufacturers. Pretty sad that you have to take reviews with a massive grain of salt. All the more reason to listen before you buy if at all possible.

At least we don't have to worry about you guys :T


----------



## Sonnie

We have had requested modification on more than one occasion. It was not until after we had started doing reviews for some time that I realized some of our reviewers were being asked to submit reviews for approval. I have no issue with a review being submitted to check for accuracy, but otherwise, our reviewers are to call it like they see it, within reason of course. If there is a technical issue, we will investigate that farther and make sure it can be duplicated and make sure it is not something else in the chain causing the issue. In one instance we discovered a flaw in a tweeter that led to that company ceasing production until they got it sorted out. We did not hold back, but we did give them a second review. We will be reasonable, but ain't gonna be bullied by any manufacturer, period.


----------



## NewHTbuyer

Hopefully Von Schweikert will agree to send a pair...I would love to see your review of the VR-22s


----------



## Tonto

So what is the current line up that is available?


----------



## Sonnie

Dynaudio
PSB
Salk
Ascend
?


----------



## billy p

Sonnie said:


> Dynaudio
> PSB
> Salk
> Ascend
> ?



Glad to see Dave came through with a set of towers for this event. Of...those four...I voted for 3 of them... the lone exception being the Excite 34's. It's a nice balance list thus far with prominent brands which represent more well established BM & highly touted ID and all of them have loyal following. Just curious as to who'll be the remaining two participants. 

Good work HTS...look forward to the results...


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> Dynaudio
> PSB
> Salk
> Ascend
> ?


That is an impressive lineup already. It is going to be quite a weekend!


----------



## ALMFamily

AudiocRaver said:


> That is an impressive lineup already. It is going to be quite a weekend!


+1 - and having heard three of those already, I am looking forward to hearing them in Sonnie's room!


----------



## gtpsuper24

Did Axiom decline? It would be interesting to see if the DSP LFR really makes a difference in soundstage compared to the standard front firing speakers that use high quality components and thought out design.


----------



## lcaillo

There are so many great speakers out there that whatever group we end up with will be interesting. Of the ones we have so far all are certainly worth a review.

From a manufacturer's point of view, a review can either be a great way to get your product noticed by more people, but it is also a risk. Different reviewers have their biases and you never know what they may think of your product. We also have our biases, and we try to be open about them. As a group we seem to prefer speakers with very low distortion drivers and very good image stability, which requires precision and linearity between the drivers and the two speakers. I suspect manufacturers with similar views will be more likely to send us product. 

It also takes a great deal of confidence in your products and their place in the market. Even though we are not ranking them, having them in the same room and conditions, with the same programming cannot avoid comparisons, and we all end up with our favorites.

I would be curious, however, if any of the speakers that we have reviewed that did not rate at or near the top, or were not favored by us, have been hurt in the market. My guess is that they probably have not, and may still have been helped by getting more attention. Much of the buzz around these reviews is in the discussion for months ahead of time. Name recognition has value in itself.


----------



## Savjac

lcaillo said:


> There are so many great speakers out there that whatever group we end up with will be interesting. Of the ones we have so far all are certainly worth a review.


Absolutely and it will be great to read your findings on the speakers available. :T

As I think about it, I am not sure a negative review has been posted, on occasion some speakers are felt not to be upper tier but that is not so bad.


----------



## Sonnie

I have not reached out to Axiom yet, I was going down the voting list from highest vote to lowest. Several of them have not responded. A lot of the PR companies have to get approval from the manufacturer.

Ascend is still not 100%, but Dave says don't count them out, that they should be ready.


----------



## callas01

Sonnie said:


> Dynaudio
> PSB
> Salk
> Ascend
> ?


that is an impressive set of speakers to audition just on their own. 

I saw, but did not get to hear the X34s yesterday, , they are tiny speakers, but the finish was that tiger stripe rosewood, and it looked very good. 

I have not seen the local psb dealer have the T2s in stock yet, but Id like to hear them. 

I am really interested in hearing youre guys opinions on the salks integration vs the ascends integrations of the RAAL tweeters.


----------



## billy p

Sonnie said:


> I have not reached out to Axiom yet, I was going down the voting list from highest vote to lowest. Several of them have not responded. A lot of the PR companies have to get approval from the manufacturer.
> 
> Ascend is still not 100%, but Dave says don't count them out, that they should be ready.


Oh..ok...getting a bit a ahead of myself...lol. At least with Dave you're talking directly to the CEO, CFO, R&D, head of design & sales team but most importantly you're also talking to companies head of PR....:bigsmile:.


----------



## Sonnie

I just got confirmation that Tannoy will participate.

Dynaudio
PSB
Salk
Ascend
Tannoy
?


----------



## prerich

Sonnie said:


> I just got confirmation that Tannoy will participate. Dynaudio PSB Salk Ascend Tannoy ?


Yea!!!!!!! Tannoy!!!!!! That's one of the speakers I voted for...come on Legacy!!!!!

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## zieglj01

Sonnie said:


> I just got confirmation that Tannoy will participate.
> 
> Dynaudio
> PSB
> Salk
> Ascend
> Tannoy
> ?


I was still hoping for Focal

I have now giving up, on the recount of the Atlantic Tech


----------



## prerich

zieglj01 said:


> I was still hoping for Focal I have now giving up, on the recount of the Atlantic Tech


i think focal already declined.

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## Blacklightning

I will say that if I was a speaker maker, I would find it hard to send one of my speakers into a challenge like this, even with a great product. The internet is getting more and more powerful for creating hype and... you know.

But the flip size is great for some. I'm now looking at Martin Logan and ARX speakers just because of your $1000 challenge. I'm not in the market for speakers but I will be "borrowing" a floor model of ML motion 40 from Future Shop when I get into my new house.


----------



## Sonnie

zieglj01 said:


> I was still hoping for Focal
> 
> I have now giving up, on the recount of the Atlantic Tech


Don't give up on Focal just yet. I finally did speak with the right person yesterday and there is hope. They do have about 6 pairs of those out right now, but he is going to see if he can work it out.


----------



## zieglj01

Sonnie said:


> Don't give up on Focal just yet. I finally did speak with the right person yesterday and there is hope. They do have about 6 pairs of those out right now, but he is going to see if he can work it out.


That would be cool - on the so-called retail side, they and
Tannoy look good. 

The rest of the list, will make for a nice evaluation


----------



## AudiocRaver

Tannoy, cool, I have never heard one before. Looking forward to that one, too.


----------



## fokakis1

If a speaker manufacturer declined participation in an event like this it would not deter me from my interest in their product, nor would it keep me from purchasing. If the manufacturer did participate, but did not fare well, it would raise some concerns and might deter my interest in their product (especially if I respected and valued the observations of the evaluators). If the manufacturer did participate and fared relatively well in the areas I deemed important, it would most certainly peak my interest in their product.

At the very least, I suppose, these events draw lots of views and exposure. I know that I have been thoroughly entertained.


----------



## Sonnie

I just got confirmation that Polk will participate.

Ascend
Dynaudio
Polk
PSB
Salk
Tannoy

Focal could come back and say they are in too. We may do seven, but we may also push them off until the next round. Of course we could always try to get one pair in on Thursday evening. I would really like to hear the new Aria model.

Monitor Audio is also pending, but I will push them off as well.

Ascend is still not 100% confirmed either... there is still a chance they won't make it. I probably need to check with Dave and see how their cabinets are coming along, which was the main thing he was worried about. His cabinet maker said he could make it happen, but apparently they have not always came through on time.


----------



## bkeeler10

Well, I'd say you've got a nice group of speakers either way. I'm all for doing 7, but then again I'm not concerned with how much sleep I will get that weekend  Speaking of which, when will you guys be getting together to do the listening again?

I'm very interested in how the PSB speakers will perform, given the praise they get heaped on them. Interested in most all of them actually.


----------



## fokakis1

Sonnie said:


> I just got confirmation that Polk will participate.
> 
> Ascend
> Dynaudio
> Polk
> PSB
> Salk
> Tannoy
> 
> Focal could come back and say they are in too. We may do seven, but we may also push them off until the next round. Of course we could always try to get one pair in on Thursday evening. I would really like to hear the new Aria model.
> 
> Monitor Audio is also pending, but I will push them off as well.
> 
> Ascend is still not 100% confirmed either... there is still a chance they won't make it. I probably need to check with Dave and see how their cabinets are coming along, which was the main thing he was worried about. His cabinet maker said he could make it happen, but apparently they have not always came through on time.


Wow, that's a nice lineup. I voted for most of them. I'm looking forward to seeing how this plays out.


----------



## ALMFamily

bkeeler10 said:


> Well, I'd say you've got a nice group of speakers either way. I'm all for doing 7, but then again I'm not concerned with how much sleep I will get that weekend  Speaking of which, when will you guys be getting together to do the listening again?
> 
> I'm very interested in how the PSB speakers will perform, given the praise they get heaped on them. Interested in most all of them actually.


Our targeted weekend is February 21-23 although I know both Wayne and I are coming in on the 20th.


----------



## lcaillo

I'll be coming over on the 20th as we'll.


----------



## Sonnie

If you guys think you will get here early enough, we could schedule a 7th speaker for Thursday evening, although I did want you to hear my Montis. :bigsmile:


----------



## padgman1

Sonnie said:


> If you guys think you will get here early enough, we could schedule a 7th speaker for Thursday evening, although I did want you to hear my Montis. :bigsmile:


Looks like a fabulous weekend shaping up.............just don't mess things up Sonnie, and let the others hear the Montis BEFORE the rest of the speakers :rolleyesno:


----------



## ALMFamily

Sonnie said:


> If you guys think you will get here early enough, we could schedule a 7th speaker for Thursday evening, although I did want you to hear my Montis. :bigsmile:


Wayne and I should be in by 1PM....


----------



## JQueen

Can't wait.. You guys do such an amazing job. Thank you in advance for all the hard work that truly goes into this


----------



## Savjac

Umm based on the weather and where the even takes place, should I send a generator ???


----------



## ALMFamily

Savjac said:


> Umm based on the weather and where the even takes place, should I send a generator ???


Nah - Wayne's electric personality will provide plenty of power should we need it!


----------



## Savjac

ALMFamily said:


> Nah - Wayne's electric personality will provide plenty of power should we need it!


:yes:
Perfect, I am sure that will be sufficient.

Besides, mine is not wanting to start... :gulp:


----------



## Sonnie

If not... I have a bicycle generator out back that we can stick Joe on. 

I can't ride a bike, or I would volunteer.


----------



## balor1eye

Sonnie said:


> If not... I have a bicycle generator out back that we can stick Joe on.
> 
> I can't ride a bike, or I would volunteer.


Does it generate bicycles?


----------



## Sonnie

No... but it will generate biceps if you peddle long enough with your arms.


----------



## Tonto

It would sure be nice if Dave can come through. I'm hoping the Ascends & the Salks can be evaluated in the same session. I think their designs offer similar attributes that my be hard to appreciate if not compared directly. This looks to be the best eval yet!


----------



## lcaillo

Sonnie said:


> If you guys think you will get here early enough, we could schedule a 7th speaker for Thursday evening, although I did want you to hear my Montis. :bigsmile:


I will probably leave Gainesville around 4:00, gaining an hour due to the time zone change, and get there around 8:30 or 9:00. If you are going to have ribs again I'll drive straight through and not stop for food.:meal:


----------



## Sonnie

I can probably arrange that... and I think we can all be done listening to the first speaker and waiting on you.


----------



## B- one

lcaillo said:


> I will probably leave Gainesville around 4:00, gaining an hour due to the time zone change, and get there around 8:30 or 9:00. If you are going to have ribs again I'll drive straight through and not stop for food.:meal:


Did somebody say ribs?!?!


----------



## ALMFamily

Sonnie said:


> If not... I have a bicycle generator out back that we can stick Joe on.
> 
> I can't ride a bike, or I would volunteer.


Sigh - this is what I get for being the youngest, isn't it? :bigsmile:



B- one said:


> Did somebody say ribs?!?!


:meal: REEEEEEEEEBBS!


----------



## tusker

Sonnie said:


> Well this was truly a shock... Sandy with Golden Ear declined.
> 
> I suppose he is selling all the speakers he can produce too. :dontknow:


I was seriously considering their speakers. This will probably take them out of the running for me... its like they are afraid of a little competition...


----------



## Sonnie

Contact Sandy and let him know this.


----------



## craigsub

Sonnie - You guys do such a wonderful job with these tests. This $3000 shootout is going to be one for the ages. The audio world needs more tests like what you guys are doing here. So thanks for remembering what this hobby is all about. I will have a box of popcorn and a six pack of coke ready for reading the results when they are in. :rubeyes:


----------



## bkeeler10

^ +1


----------



## Sonnie

Thanks guys... I am soooo looking forward to hearing these speakers.


----------



## Savjac

That really seems like a pretty good list actually, and should cover the bases pretty well. 
I know that the multi driver speakers do push a good amount of air and what have you, but I wonder how they stand up to larger driver more efficient speakers. I am sure the engineers here can tell me, but I just cant get my head around 2 - 5" drivers being able introduce the same musical energy as 1 - 12" say, not counting tweeters of course and yet I know that a couple smaller drives can hit a home run when it comes to playback. I think this is just a mental issue for me having been raised on the big, bigger and biggest drivers back in the day. 

I think this is a thought for a different thread though.


----------



## fokakis1

Savjac said:


> ...I think this is a thought for a different thread though.


Not necessarily. Speakers can either move air or they can't. Since these speakers will be evaluated without a sub, I believe some will be more challenged in this area. Remember when the Dynaudios bottomed out?


----------



## ironglen

I think about the same topic, and whether having full-range speakers will be in my future for music listening sans sub. It seems designers have really pushed the limits of speaker frequency response while minimizing speaker size/footprint, and are constrained only when it comes to the lowest octave or higher dynamics/spl. 

I was hoping the GoldenEar would be reviewed as well because the design appealed to me, and I did not know about the company and its products until after voting.


----------



## Savjac

This is why I am asking, in reality, I think I am not right. 
In about 2000 or so Sandy Gross released the Def Tech Pro Tower 400 and I bought a pair. I was so very surprised at how low they could go and still stay composed, or so was my perception. Ultimately those speakers did not float my boat on the upper mid range so I traded them for my B&W's but I have never forgotten. 
I guess I was thinking that at one time we had large drivers, no or very few subs, and accordingly blending was not a problem, but more often than not, neither was great sound. 

So I had not thought about it when the votes were requested, but I would have loved to have say a set of Klipsch heritage speakers in the lot, although the Zu Audio speakers were which would be a good listen as well.
I am sure there will be many more challenges so we can learn as we go.

I still have the question though so I will have to do some searching.


----------



## Savjac

fokakis1 said:


> Not necessarily. Speakers can either move air or they can't. Since these speakers will be evaluated without a sub, I believe some will be more challenged in this area. Remember when the Dynaudios bottomed out?


I did read this yes. I just see a glut of smaller or smaller driver speakers and maybe Ironglen is correct and this is a change/sign of the times. I don't seem to get the same rush of "You Are There" dynamics from some newer speakers. I noted that even my Tang Band wide range drivers give me more of that snap in your face dynamics. Maybe the smaller drivers are being asked to do too much ?


----------



## bkeeler10

Your view on smaller speakers is in line with that of Bill Dudleston of Legacy Audio. He is a big believer in drastically increasing piston area as frequency goes lower. You can get a feel for his philosophy by looking at his speakers, and he has written some white papers that can be found on their website I think. In short there really is no replacement for displacement as the old combustion engine saying goes.


----------



## padgman1

Sonnie said:


> I just got confirmation that Polk will participate.
> 
> Ascend
> Dynaudio
> Polk
> PSB
> Salk
> Tannoy
> 
> Focal could come back and say they are in too. We may do seven, but we may also push them off until the next round. Of course we could always try to get one pair in on Thursday evening. I would really like to hear the new Aria model.
> 
> Monitor Audio is also pending, but I will push them off as well.
> 
> Ascend is still not 100% confirmed either... there is still a chance they won't make it. I probably need to check with Dave and see how their cabinets are coming along, which was the main thing he was worried about. His cabinet maker said he could make it happen, but apparently they have not always came through on time.



Sonnie,

Will you start another poll before this "experience" to get HTS members' opinion on who will "win" this..........and what will the prize be for the lucky winner (me, I hope :innocent................?


----------



## Sonnie

Well... it isn't a shootout, so we don't choose a winner. We do not rank them and each speaker stands on its own review. :T


----------



## Sonnie

And then there were five.

A rollercoaster of sorts. Dave has confirmed that Ascend simply won't be able to make the cut. Hopefully we can get them in on the next round, if they are not sold out again.

Confirmed:

Dynaudio
Polk
PSB
Salk - received shipping confirmation 2/3/14
Tannoy

Still pending response from two other companies and hope to hear back from them in the next day or two.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Did somebody mention ribs, or was that just a happy dream I was having? If Sonnie fires up the grill, we gotta insist on some of the grilled sausage like he did recently. Zowie!


----------



## AudiocRaver

ALMFamily said:


> Nah - Wayne's electric personality will provide plenty of power should we need it!


Yikes! Now that is downright scary!

Visions of a lab table with huge electrodes and bolts coming out of my neck being shocked to life by a lightning strike. That is how I feel some mornings.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> And then there were five.
> 
> A rollercoaster of sorts. Dave has confirmed that Ascend simply won't be able to make the cut. Hopefully we can get them in on the next round, if they are not sold out again.
> 
> Confirmed:
> 
> Dynaudio
> Polk
> PSB
> Salk - received shipping confirmation 2/3/14
> Tannoy
> 
> Still pending response from two other companies and hope to hear back from them in the next day or two.


I am sooooooooo glad there is still a RAAL tweeter in the mix. And kinda glad to see Polk make the list. Have had a number of nice Polk experiences over the years. Gonna be fun!

And maybe a seventh speaker for Thursday night? Super! Joe & I will get there in the afternoon, so we can get set up, have a listen, and have them waiting for Leonard's ears when he arrives. And still have a decent bed time - like last time. Or am I remembering that wrong? Hmmmmm.


----------



## ALMFamily

AudiocRaver said:


> I am sooooooooo glad there is still a RAAL tweeter in the mix. And kinda glad to see Polk make the list. Have had a number of nice Polk experiences over the years. Gonna be fun!
> 
> And maybe a seventh speaker for Thursday night? Super! Joe & I will get there in the afternoon, so we can get set up, have a listen, and have them waiting for Leonard's ears when he arrives. And still have a decent bed time - like last time. Or am I remembering that wrong? Hmmmmm.


You are DEFINITELY remembering that wrong! I have not stayed up that late for that many nights in a row since my bar hopping days.....more years ago than I care to admit!

Too bad on the Ascends - I had heard them once before and was looking forward to hearing them in Sonnie's Room.


----------



## padgman1

Sonnie said:


> Well... it isn't a shootout, so we don't choose a winner. We do not rank them and each speaker stands on its own review. :T


Understand this is not a competitive event...........

I just read through most of the $2500 speaker evaluations by the esteemed panel. Each speaker had a very detailed review in-and-of itself. Will there be any comparative evaluations included at the end ( i.e. comparisons of the way different tweeters reproduce high-frequency sounds, comparisons of low frequency sounds between speakers with and without radiators, etc.) ............or will I have to "read between the lines" and peruse each review to get some basis of opinion?


----------



## Sonnie

Yes?


----------



## padgman1

Sonnie said:


> Yes?


Very cryptic for a self-professed hillbilly. :blink:


----------



## Sonnie

Indeed.


----------



## Tonto

Wow! That's a shame about the Ascends. Betweent them & the Salks, that was gonna be about bragging rights.

If you get enough speakers, I vote for holding back the Salks if they are willing.


----------



## Sonnie

Lord willing the Salks will be at my office tomorrow.


----------



## ALMFamily

Sonnie said:


> Lord willing the Salks will be at my office tomorrow.


What finish did they send?

One thing I can say - Salks are always works of art - I have not seen a bad finish on one yet. And, I have seen a LOT of Salk speakers...


----------



## Sonnie

I do not know, but he did just build them.


----------



## billy p

To bad about the Ascends...I know all to well about the wait time with regards to the cabinets...I had some custom stain work done by them and I also had to wait for the next run of cabinets. They simply don't build to suit 1 speakers at a time...they're pre-ordered in bunches and most all the cabinets are spoken for. 

As for the Salk...they better not be to Purdy....you know want what eye candy can do to peoples senses...JK.

I love his craftsmanship and attention to detail...imo both him(JS) & Nate(@Funk) have some of the nicest creation I've seen.

Looking forward to this notwithstanding the Ascend omission.

GL gents...keep up the good work...Bill


----------



## Sonnie

I seriously hope we can get Ascend in on the next round. We have carved out a spot for them.


----------



## Savjac

ALMFamily said:


> What finish did they send?
> 
> One thing I can say - Salks are always works of art - I have not seen a bad finish on one yet. And, I have seen a LOT of Salk speakers...




So many good things said about these speakers, this is one I look forward to reading about.


----------



## english210

Looking like a great grouping. The PSB's made the cut, which I'm really happy about because they're on the short list, with some of the others on the 'I'd like to hear them but there's no way to audition them' list.


----------



## fishinbob

ALMFamily said:


> What finish did they send?
> 
> One thing I can say - Salks are always works of art - I have not seen a bad finish on one yet. And, I have seen a LOT of Salk speakers...


These are on the way.


----------



## Savjac

Wow they are beautiful.


----------



## ALMFamily

fishinbob said:


> These are on the way.





Savjac said:


> Wow they are beautiful.


+1 - as expected...


----------



## Savjac

I really love that wood, but I checked and the Bubinga would be radical, and would match the LP. Looking forward to y'alls thoughts.


----------



## ALMFamily

I personally like the fiddleback sycamore - that is what I had my surrounds finished in and it is simply gorgeous...


----------



## gorb

fishinbob said:


> These are on the way.



Those are very pretty (like most Salk products).

Definitely too bad about the Ascends not making it...but there's always next time


----------



## AudiocRaver

padgman1 said:


> Understand this is not a competitive event...........
> 
> I just read through most of the $2500 speaker evaluations by the esteemed panel. Each speaker had a very detailed review in-and-of itself. Will there be any comparative evaluations included at the end ( i.e. comparisons of the way different tweeters reproduce high-frequency sounds, comparisons of low frequency sounds between speakers with and without radiators, etc.) ............or will I have to "read between the lines" and peruse each review to get some basis of opinion?


My understanding is that as long as there is no ranking involved, qualitative comparisons of technology details are not off limits. Must be handled with care and must be very targeted and specific.:bigsmile:


----------



## zieglj01

AudiocRaver said:


> My understanding is that as long as there is no ranking involved, qualitative comparisons of technology details are not off limits. Must be handled with care and must be very targeted and specific.:bigsmile:


Right!
We will see how the discipline is handled - talking about human nature.


----------



## prerich

AudiocRaver said:


> My understanding is that as long as there is no ranking involved, qualitative comparisons of technology details are not off limits. Must be handled with care and must be very targeted and specific.:bigsmile:


Thats what I like about these! Each speaker stands on it's individual merit, no one saying this is better than that, more life this is different and why :T!!!!!

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## lcaillo

zieglj01 said:


> Right!
> We will see how the discipline is handled - talking about human nature.


You can see in the last round of reviews. This one will be very similar.


----------



## Sonnie

What you have to consider is our commitment to the manufacturers. Some of them would not participate in a shootout and you could cut our participants in half or even one-third. Our first event was a shootout, so to speak, but as we went to round two and manufacturers looked at what we were doing in round one, I got several "not interested", so we had no choice but to change it to a non-shootout type event where all speakers stand on their own review, separate from the others being reviewed. In order to get some of these commitments, I have to agree that we will not rank them and we will not compare them, keeping mention of other brands out of each review. Even still we have had some who were not comfortable participating based on the speakers we have lined up. I could not get them to understand it was not a shootout or comparison event. KEF and B&W both wanted us to step up a model, but that would put both above our max MSRP. They bowed out.


----------



## AudiocRaver

It seems a reasonable request, to have all models reviewed independently and avoid comparison. The approach makes our jobs harder, but that's OK. It would be easy to resort to contrasts if allowed to, and lean on them to get the reviews cranked out. The "non-compare" approach really makes us think about each speaker on its own and be more thorough. I believe the reviews end up more useful because of that limitation on our approach.


----------



## prerich

AudiocRaver said:


> It seems a reasonable request, to have all models reviewed independently and avoid comparison. The approach makes our jobs harder, but that's OK. It would be easy to resort to contrasts if allowed to, and lean on them to get the reviews cranked out. The "non-compare" approach really makes us think about each speaker on its own and be more thorough. I believe the reviews end up more useful because of that limitation on our approach.


Agreed! However, the response from B&W and Kef kinda tells me that other speaker manufactures are putting together a better product...at that price point than they are.

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## lcaillo

No manufacturer can build every speaker to be the best in every price category. In the case of B&W I suspect they feel that their most competitive speaker is the CM10, as most people find it is a significant step above the CM9. After hearing both again recently, I agree, but I also think the CM9 would have been reviewed very favorably. When I initially heard it I was not overwhelmed, but the conditions were never very good. Hearing it again and hearing the CM10 for the first time, I can say that there was less difference than I expected and the CM9 was quite good. The irony is that I plan to listen more, but their speakers will never get the treatment of being placed optimally and heard without interuption for long periods, so they are less likely to shine. It will also be hard for me to not compare them to the other products that I hear next weekend, and I will be less likely to avoid such comparisons because they did not want to participate.

The advantage that manufacturers gain from our review sessions is that we spend an incredible amount of time getting the best out of each product and we know the listening conditions so well that they are sure to get a fair shake. Better than that, really, we are actually trying to find what each does right. Also, our crdibility is higher with our readers than that of most salesmen and when we say something, everyone can be sure that it is our actual experience and not modulated by a desire to sell a product. Still, I understand their trepidation, as we are also not going to bite our tongues when there is a deficiency. Just different perspectives, and we can see which manufacturers have a pure love of the craft and which are significantly controlled by marketing.


----------



## ButchP

I voted for 5 speakers which I've never seen, much less heard and 1 with which I am familiar. Why hear about speakers I'm already familiar with when I can broaden my knowledge? I'm looking forward to hearing about some speakers I've been curious of, but have not had the chance to actually compare with speakers I know about. Hopefully, there will be some comparisons made between the speaker I used as a benchmark and the other 5 I voted for.


----------



## padgman1

How many days left until this event??

Will there be a delivery service for the ribs? ( my zip code is 62450)

Looking forward to reading some insightful, comprehensive/detailed comments...........about the speakers!! ( Ribs commentary would also be appreciated.......will Smellavision be activated for us readers??)


----------



## fokakis1

If it were my company and I wasn't feeling good about my chances I guess I'd say I was sold out, rather than than just saying no. I mean, Ascend couldn't come up with one single pair of speakers in 2 months time. I bet if they really wanted to participate they could have come up with a pair. This is all just speculation, of coarse.


----------



## Sonnie

We are about 10 days away.

I firmly believe that Dave with Ascend wanted to be a part of the event. He would have sent me his own if he had them available to send. He says their stock will be replenished by the end of March and he is going to set aside a pair for our next event... which will likely be in May or June.


----------



## Savjac

No matter what speakers or how many different brands are involved, I am sure they will all get the respect they deserve and will provide all of us readers with a very clean sheet of paper from which to glean a good understanding of what the speakers do. I will enjoy the read no matter what.


----------



## ButchP

Well, I just read where this is not a comparison. Why set up 5 pairs of speakers if the intention is not to compare them? When I'm trying to figure out which speaker, or car, washing machine, etc. to purchase I compare one to another in an attempt to get the most bang for the buck. You may not be allowed to make direct comparisons in your evaluations, but you can bet that all of us who read them are going to make them.


----------



## lcaillo

fokakis1 said:


> If it were my company and I wasn't feeling good about my chances I guess I'd say I was sold out, rather than than just saying no. I mean, Ascend couldn't come up with one single pair of speakers in 2 months time. I bet if they really wanted to participate they could have come up with a pair. This is all just speculation, of coarse.


Yes, just speculation. I would also speculate that if you were a small company you would want to provide your customers with product before offering samples for review. If they are in a production gap they likely had them committed before we even asked. From Sonnie's description of their attitude about the event I would conclude differently than you.


----------



## lcaillo

padgman1 said:


> How many days left until this event??
> 
> Will there be a delivery service for the ribs? ( my zip code is 62450)
> 
> Looking forward to reading some insightful, comprehensive/detailed comments...........about the speakers!! ( Ribs commentary would also be appreciated.......will Smellavision be activated for us readers??)


I will be sure to think of you when we are testing them. :neener:


----------



## ALMFamily

ButchP said:


> Well, I just read where this is not a comparison. Why set up 5 pairs of speakers if the intention is not to compare them? When I'm trying to figure out which speaker, or car, washing machine, etc. to purchase I compare one to another in an attempt to get the most bang for the buck. You may not be allowed to make direct comparisons in your evaluations, but you can bet that all of us who read them are going to make them.


Think of it as one speaker review done at a time - with the bonus being that you get 5 reviews in a very short period of time. 

And, I personally fully expect that people will read between the lines to glean which speaker each one of us prefers - but, I will say that there are very few speakers that I have run into so far that I have just flat out not liked at all. In almost all cases, there is something each speaker does well and I like to try to find those things to report on as well as the things that I felt it struggled with. It is then up to each person reading the review to decide what they are looking for and which one best meets that criteria.


----------



## zieglj01

ButchP said:


> Well, I just read where this is not a comparison. Why set up 5 pairs of speakers if the intention is not to compare them? When I'm trying to figure out which speaker, or car, washing machine, etc. to purchase I compare one to another in an attempt to get the most bang for the buck. You may not be allowed to make direct comparisons in your evaluations, but you can bet that all of us who read them are going to make them.


I will try to read between the lines - even then, the comments will
still be subjective >> no one can speak for your ears, or guarantee
you anything - however you will gain some information and insight,
towards what to look for, or may desire for future auditions.


----------



## ButchP

The notion that I do not have to wait months for Stereophile to review 5 similarly priced speakers makes this little get together all the more compelling. Evaluating each speaker system on its own merits without direct comparisons of one to another is pretty much how the review magazines operate. The difference here is we don't have to wait months for the reviews. I use the opinions of others solely for the purpose of narrowing down the number of items on my 'listen to' list. I appreciate the hard work you all have put into making this happen. THANKS!


----------



## Sonnie

I believe it is now official... we will have seven speakers up for review:

Axiom Audio M100
Dynaudio Excite 34
Phase Technology PC9.5
Polk Audio LSiM705
PSB Imagine T2
Salk Songtowers SC
Tannoy Precision 6.4 

We are very excited that Axiom Audio and Phase Tech came thru for us at the last minute and on such short notice. Phase Tech is a brand that does not appear to be all that well known, but we were all impressed with their speakers at RMAF, so we are really looking forward to hearing those. Dennis is working on also reviewing a pair of their bookshelf speakers... and Peter will be reviewing the new Phase Tech soundbar. 

I realize the Axiom speakers were not the ones voted on, but they were nominated along with the LFR660's, we just chose to vote on the 660's instead. However, after talking with Axiom, the 660 does include a separate DSP that would cost around $800, that in reality places the cost of the speakers at closer to $2,400 instead of $3,200 even with the high-powered drivers. Furthermore, you must have a four-channel amp to power the 660's as they are dual active speakers. Therefore, we decided it would be more appropriate to include the M100 in this event. Never fear though... they will also be sending us the 660 speakers with the DSP and one of their four-channel amps for a separate review, after we are done with the event. 

So, not only do we have Phase Tech and Axiom in on this event, we also more products from each of them to look forward to reviewing.

This is a fabulous lineup of speakers... and I am getting really excited about having them all hear in my home. (Even if I do have to put up with Larry, Moe and Curly for a few days)


----------



## lcaillo

Woohoo!

Awesome work boss! I am really happy Axiom is in. That makes a ice mix.


----------



## B- one

lcaillo said:


> Woohoo! Awesome work boss! I am really happy Axiom is in. That makes a ice mix.


Looks like Larry may be drinking already.


----------



## bkeeler10

Sonnie said:


> I believe it is now official... we will have seven speakers up for review:
> 
> Axiom Audio M100
> Dynaudio Excite 34
> Phase Technology PC9.5
> Polk Audio LSiM705
> PSB Imagine T2
> Salk Songtowers SC
> Tannoy Precision 6.4
> .
> .
> .
> 
> This is a fabulous lineup of speakers... and I am getting really excited about having them all hear in my home. (Even if I do have to put up with Larry, Moe and Curly for a few days)


Bravo! This is a great lineup. I'm afraid I don't feel sorry for Sonnie at all -- I would gladly put up with the other three to listen to these things (as long as they can stay quiet ) Looking forward to it.


----------



## lcaillo

If you are referring to me, my name is not Larry. And there is no drinking at these events at all. The only thing that might make us less than lucid are the late nights tinkering and listening to Sonnie's toys. But then I am always the one to fall asleep,


----------



## lcaillo

But now that you mention it, a scotch on a little ice is no off limits here and since I am fighting the flu it might soothe the throat. After a couple you can call me Larry or whatever you like. I won't be as grumpy.


----------



## B- one

Sorry I didn't take you for a Moe or Curly. What about the food high? RIBS mmmm!!


----------



## lcaillo

Now that we have the lineup set, if anyone has any particulars that you would like explored on these speakers, let us know. If you have heard something or have an impression that you want another opinion on, speak up. This is a review session for the members. Don't worry about biasing anyone. With four experienced evaluators, and the skepticism that we all bring, we can listen for something and not have any problem saying, yeah, we get that, or no, you are on another planet. Politely, of course. Then again, we may not all agree. It would be a shame to miss something that others may have experienced, though.

Give it up folks, what do you know about these speakers?


----------



## zieglj01

Sonnie said:


> I believe it is now official... we will have seven speakers up for review:
> 
> Axiom Audio M100
> Dynaudio Excite 34
> Phase Technology PC9.5
> Polk Audio LSiM705
> PSB Imagine T2
> Salk Songtowers SC
> Tannoy Precision 6.4


Glad you were able to complete a speaker list - however, there must have been a lot
of rejection for reviews. As a couple of them had at least 16 speakers voted a head of
them, on the list.

Enjoy the adventure


----------



## JeffB

I must agree that the lineup looks nice. I'm getting very excited.


----------



## Sonnie

After I confirmed Ascend was out, I was pending one other vendor who was trying to get something worked out, and after figuring out we could not make that happen (due to running out of stock), I went to a couple of people we know pretty well and who I felt I could count on to come thru for us on short notice. I did not concern myself with number of votes. It was crunch time. We have done quite a few reviews for Axiom and they have always been very quick to respond when we asked for speakers, but my contact was on vacation. We have come to know Ken and Bryan at Phase Tech pretty well, met them both at RMAF and of course Bryan hangs out here regularly. They had already expressed interest in us reviewing products (some in the works), so I reached out to them and they were very excited to participate. In the meantime, my contact from Axiom surprised me with a call and a "count us in". So both of them came thru for us in a pinch.

However, we did have a backup ready, although he preferred to wait until our next event if at all possible because he hopes to have a new speaker ready.

For our next event, I believe we are going to forgo the voting and simply work with some of the manufacturers we believe will be interested in having their products reviewed. Having some of these lesser known brands is actually more exciting to me because we can make some nice discoveries and get them some deserved exposure.


----------



## fokakis1

I'm pumped. That's a great line up. Nice work pulling it all off.


----------



## ironglen

Sonnie said:


> For our next event, I believe we are going to forgo the voting and simply work with some of the manufacturers we believe will be interested in having their products reviewed. Having some of these lesser known brands is actually more exciting to me because we can make some nice discoveries and get them some deserved exposure.


Sonnie, I certainly don't speak for all members when I say this, but I've had more time to look over the potential speakers for review since the voting closed and that is absolutely one fine list of speakers. There are so many different attributes that are implemented, from driver types and air chamber/port differences to cabinet shapes and finishes. Definitely a list that includes speakers from beginning to end that I would be ecstatic to listen to, much less ever own.

Thank you guys for sharing your experiences evaluating these as its not something we can do yet we still have the opportunity to enjoy it nonetheless.


----------



## bkeeler10

lcaillo said:


> Now that we have the lineup set, if anyone has any particulars that you would like explored on these speakers, let us know. If you have heard something or have an impression that you want another opinion on, speak up. This is a review session for the members. Don't worry about biasing anyone. With four experienced evaluators, and the skepticism that we all bring, we can listen for something and not have any problem saying, yeah, we get that, or no, you are on another planet. Politely, of course. Then again, we may not all agree. It would be a shame to miss something that others may have experienced, though.
> 
> Give it up folks, what do you know about these speakers?


Okay Leonard I will bite. My admittedly limited experience with the Phase Techs is that they have a sweet and pretty detailed yet relaxed and easy-going high end. For this reason (I think), they are very easy to listen to and are not fatiguing. They give a wonderful presence and flattering presentation for the female voice that suits me rather well. So I am interested to see whether the panel agrees with that assessment.

I unfortunately have not heard any of the other speakers but I am quite curious to see what you all think about the PSB since it is very well received in the conventional press.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Sonnie said:


> I believe it is now official... we will have seven speakers up for review:
> 
> Axiom Audio M100
> Dynaudio Excite 34
> Phase Technology PC9.5
> Polk Audio LSiM705
> PSB Imagine T2
> Salk Songtowers SC
> Tannoy Precision 6.4


This lineup is making my mouth water. A veritable speaker / great audio feast! Every model on the list looks like a whopping good time!

Now we start watching the weather for hopefully good uninterrupted flight days!



> (Even if I do have to put up with Larry, Moe and Curly for a few days)


Hey! I represent that remark!


----------



## AudiocRaver

lcaillo said:


> Now that we have the lineup set, if anyone has any particulars that you would like explored on these speakers, let us know. If you have heard something or have an impression that you want another opinion on, speak up. This is a review session for the members. Don't worry about biasing anyone. With four experienced evaluators, and the skepticism that we all bring, we can listen for something and not have any problem saying, yeah, we get that, or no, you are on another planet. Politely, of course. Then again, we may not all agree. It would be a shame to miss something that others may have experienced, though.
> 
> Give it up folks, what do you know about these speakers?


Great idea! Tell us what your points of interest & curiosity might be, or what experience you have had with them.


----------



## Bjski

Sonnie said:


> I believe it is now official... we will have seven speakers up for review: Axiom Audio M100 Dynaudio Excite 34 Phase Technology PC9.5 Polk Audio LSiM705 PSB Imagine T2 Salk Songtowers SC Tannoy Precision 6.4 We are very excited that Axiom Audio and Phase Tech came thru for us at the last minute and on such short notice. Phase Tech is a brand that does not appear to be all that well known, but we were all impressed with their speakers at RMAF, so we are really looking forward to hearing those. Dennis is working on also reviewing a pair of their bookshelf speakers... and Peter will be reviewing the new Phase Tech soundbar. I realize the Axiom speakers were not the ones voted on, but they were nominated along with the LFR660's, we just chose to vote on the 660's instead. However, after talking with Axiom, the 660 does include a separate DSP that would cost around $800, that in reality places the cost of the speakers at closer to $2,400 instead of $3,200 even with the high-powered drivers. Furthermore, you must have a four-channel amp to power the 660's as they are dual active speakers. Therefore, we decided it would be more appropriate to include the M100 in this event. Never fear though... they will also be sending us the 660 speakers with the DSP and one of their four-channel amps for a separate review, after we are done with the event. So, not only do we have Phase Tech and Axiom in on this event, we also more products from each of them to look forward to reviewing. This is a fabulous lineup of speakers... and I am getting really excited about having them all hear in my home. (Even if I do have to put up with Larry, Moe and Curly for a few days)


Didn't I suggest the M100 during the nominating phase? I mentioned why one would want the M100 but for some reason the boss was fixated on the LFR660? I believe you mean the LFR660 is closer to $3400. We even talked about having several amps and you assured me you have plenty of power. The M100 are priced around $2700 and the High Power M80 about $2400.

Good luck in your test and may the best speaker win.


----------



## Bjski

Oops,sorry about the quote. Haven't gotten used to this iPad yet. LOL...


----------



## lcaillo

Bjski said:


> Oops,sorry about the quote. Haven't gotten used to this iPad yet. LOL...


Fixed it for you. Just missed the last bracket.


----------



## Sonnie

Bjski said:


> Didn't I suggest the M100 during the nominating phase?


Yes you did nominate it, thanks!



Bjski said:


> I mentioned why one would want the M100 but for some reason the boss was fixated on the LFR660?


I wasn't fixated on any particular speaker. We generally take the higher priced unit in the mix... I was simply following our typical protocol. As I stated, "if the DSP is built-in", it would not be a problem. I assumed it was, but obviously I assumed wrong, but the decision was based on those considerations.

In my best estimate... if I had to guess without listening to either, I would prefer the LFR660 over the M100 for two-channel. As you stated, "better bass with the m100 and wider soundstage with m660". All of us on the panel are not that concerned with bass since the speakers are generally place out into the room for the best soundstage and imaging, which dipoles seem to do a better job of, from what we have learned. However, that does not mean the M100 will not have great imaging and a perfect soundstage... we will see. 



Bjski said:


> I believe you mean the LFR660 is closer to $3400.


The LFR660 is $3,190.00 (I rounded it up to $3,200), but it is in reality closer to $2,400 if you consider an $800 separate DSP unit. I just did not realize the speaker was dual active. What I thought was that the DSP was for equalization similar to the Emerald Physics, except built-in. There are lots of different DSPs, not all of them perform the same function. Not all have equalization, and not all have crossovers.



Bjski said:


> We even talked about having several amps and you assured me you have plenty of power.


No one ever mentioned several amps. You mentioned "more amplification"... not "more amplifiers" ... thus my initial thought was more power since it was "high-powered", and the XPR-5 produces 500 wpc (8 ohm) or 750 wpc (4 ohm) in 2-channel mode. So I knew we would have more power. Of course we could indeed power it with the XPR-5, no doubt about that.

My comment about requiring 4 channels of amplification was to point out that it is outside the norm of only needing 2 channels, therefore it requires you spend more money outside of the cost of the speaker. If you have a 5 channel amp, sure you can use it, but not at the same time you are using it for a home theater setup, unless you have another amp.

If they had built-in the DSP and added the additional power needed inside the speaker (like the ML Montis), my thinking is that the speaker would probably retail in excess of $4,000. However, without all that you have a $2,400 speaker with no crossover. Either direction it falls outside the range for this event.


Simply put... I did not realize it was dual active, with a separate DSP valued at $800, and required 4 channels of amplification. This all skews the MSRP with too many variables to qualify it as being viable for this particular event. Yet, it is scheduled for review.

I admit it was my bad for not investigating it further. I looked, just not close enough... probably bad timing and in a hurry. Sometimes you have to wave a big red flag at me to get my attention, and no one did that until I spoke with Axiom. It is what it is... but in the end it all worked out. :huh:


----------



## aasenm

Parasound A21 would be a great amp to use if you can get your hands on one

Michael


----------



## aasenm

I would have loved to hear your thoughts between songtower SC and the Goldenear triton 2's


----------



## lcaillo

Two speakers that I am also very curious about. I heard Joe's Songtowers with the old tweeter and they were pretty good. I am hoping with the new tweeter they are very exciting but you never know how a new device will fit in with an previously successful design. I have never heard the Tritons.


----------



## ALMFamily

lcaillo said:


> Two speakers that I am also very curious about. I heard Joe's Songtowers with the old tweeter and they were pretty good. I am hoping with the new tweeter they are very exciting but you never know how a new device will fit in with an previously successful design. I have never heard the Tritons.


You are in for a treat Leonard - I have heard the Songtowers with a RAAL and would take them in a heartbeat.


----------



## lcaillo

That is great news. Changing a tweeter in an existing design is not just a matter of deciding that one is better than the other and swapping them out. You have to either make adjustments in the crossover or get lucky, or more likely both.


----------



## Big Red Machine

lcaillo said:


> That is great news. Changing a tweeter in an existing design is not just a matter of deciding that one is better than the other and swapping them out. You have to either make adjustments in the crossover or get lucky, or more likely both.


As a long time Salk owner I can guarantee you that the implementation of the drivers is always done properly and is representative of the technical capabilites of Jim and Dennis Murphy. So you will have a great experience. The Supercharged version is a real kick in the pants to the standard version, which, BTW, won a 4th straight TAS Editors Choice Award this year. 

Also, I'd like to suggest you start with virtually no toe-in with these. I have typically used about 3 degrees of toe in over the years with the 5 models of Salks I have owned because they have such great imaging that heavy toe-in will collapse the soundstage. Just an FYI and certainly dependent on your seating position.

You guys will have a blast. Wish I could barge my way in.


----------



## lcaillo

I am sure you are correct. I am really looking forward to this round of speakers, including the Salks particularly.

They will get tested in many positions and orientations. If there is one thing we have down pretty well is getting the best position in the room to get the most out of any speaker we review. 

As for TAS, I just can't get excited about their opinion, considering some of the nonsense that I have read there over many years. I place more stock in what I hear from our readers than what I get from TAS in many cases. Some of their work has been good, but much is questionable to me.


----------



## Big Red Machine

Can't argue about TAS but the aha moment is that Jim does not advertise in any mag but still gets the kudos. So in our minds that is a win that the reputation of the speaker has held up. Have fun (it's actually work doing what you guys are about to do, but nonetheless exciting).


----------



## lcaillo

Yes, it is work, and frankly, Wayne does the lion's share, and Sonnie close behind. But even though it can be an exhuasting trip it is a great experience. Working with the team we have is a joy and we all love the music and the hobby. Can't beat that. Except by adding ribs. Now if we can just get some crawfish to boil...I might not want to leave.


----------



## Bjski

Sonnie said:


> Yes you did nominate it, thanks!
> 
> 
> I wasn't fixated on any particular speaker. We generally take the higher priced unit in the mix... I was simply following our typical protocol. As I stated, "if the DSP is built-in", it would not be a problem. I assumed it was, but obviously I assumed wrong, but the decision was based on those considerations.
> 
> In my best estimate... if I had to guess without listening to either, I would prefer the LFR660 over the M100 for two-channel. As you stated, "better bass with the m100 and wider soundstage with m660". All of us on the panel are not that concerned with bass since the speakers are generally place out into the room for the best soundstage and imaging, which dipoles seem to do a better job of, from what we have learned. However, that does not mean the M100 will not have great imaging and a perfect soundstage... we will see.
> 
> 
> The LFR660 is $3,190.00 (I rounded it up to $3,200), but it is in reality closer to $2,400 if you consider an $800 separate DSP unit. I just did not realize the speaker was dual active. What I thought was that the DSP was for equalization similar to the Emerald Physics, except built-in. There are lots of different DSPs, not all of them perform the same function. Not all have equalization, and not all have crossovers.
> 
> 
> No one ever mentioned several amps. You mentioned "more amplification"... not "more amplifiers" ... thus my initial thought was more power since it was "high-powered", and the XPR-5 produces 500 wpc (8 ohm) or 750 wpc (4 ohm) in 2-channel mode. So I knew we would have more power. Of course we could indeed power it with the XPR-5, no doubt about that.
> 
> My comment about requiring 4 channels of amplification was to point out that it is outside the norm of only needing 2 channels, therefore it requires you spend more money outside of the cost of the speaker. If you have a 5 channel amp, sure you can use it, but not at the same time you are using it for a home theater setup, unless you have another amp.
> 
> If they had built-in the DSP and added the additional power needed inside the speaker (like the ML Montis), my thinking is that the speaker would probably retail in excess of $4,000. However, without all that you have a $2,400 speaker with no crossover. Either direction it falls outside the range for this event.
> 
> 
> Simply put... I did not realize it was dual active, with a separate DSP valued at $800, and required 4 channels of amplification. This all skews the MSRP with too many variables to qualify it as being viable for this particular event. Yet, it is scheduled for review.
> 
> I admit it was my bad for not investigating it further. I looked, just not close enough... probably bad timing and in a hurry. Sometimes you have to wave a big red flag at me to get my attention, and no one did that until I spoke with Axiom. It is what it is... but in the end it all worked out. :huh:


I tried the red flag if you read all my post. Sorry if you did not understand what I meant by more amplification verses power or number of amps. I did try to explain the DSP, the new M100 along with a brand new woofer and different crossover. I even mentioned the new HP M80. Sorry I couldn't convey what was required.


----------



## ALMFamily

lcaillo said:


> Yes, it is work, and frankly, Wayne does the lion's share, and Sonnie close behind. But even though it can be an exhuasting trip it is a great experience. Working with the team we have is a joy and we all love the music and the hobby. Can't beat that. Except by adding ribs. Now if we can just get some crawfish to boil...I might not want to leave.


Grits - don't forget the grits!


----------



## lcaillo

I might have to cook up some shrimp and grits just for you, Joe. I don't think you guys from up there could handle crawfish and shrimp n grits in the same weekend, though. You might never go home.


----------



## ALMFamily

Think I am going to have to bring down some real Wisconsin cheese curds for you guys to try!


----------



## AudiocRaver

I am still working on developing a taste for grits. Just have to keep coming back to Alabama as often as possible, increase the exposure level.

As for Sonnie's grilling... I know it is time consuming and circumstances do not always allow for it - the man has irons in many fires, and we certainly do not want to over-burden our host... BUT, it is hard to think about the good times we have had in Alabama without remembering the excellent savory meats from Sonnie's grill... I'm just saying...


----------



## Sonnie

I imagine I can squeeze in a lil sumpin sumpin on the grill. :bigsmile:

Yall need to try some of these grilled chitlins with mountain oysters anyway.


----------



## lcaillo

I would suck crawfish heads before eating that. 

An me being cajun ah eat jus bout anyting, cher.


----------



## chashint

Sonnie said:


> I imagine I can squeeze in a lil sumpin sumpin on the grill. :bigsmile:
> Yall need to try some of these grilled chitlins with mountain oysters anyway.



Surly there will be supplies on hand for grilled cheese sandwiches instead.


----------



## chashint

lcaillo said:


> I would suck crawfish heads before eating that.
> An me being cajun ah eat jus bout anyting, cher.


That's just wrong too.


----------



## lcaillo

You have to have a sense of adventure when you go that far into the South Alabama hills. :help:


----------



## callas01

lcaillo said:


> I would suck crawfish heads before eating that.
> 
> An me being cajun ah eat jus bout anyting, cher.


Likewise, my cousins are from Louisiana and I rather suck crawfish heads and have gator sausage than them kind of oysters!


----------



## zieglj01

Is this as the Food World, or the Speaker World Turns?


----------



## Sonnie

Okay... sorry about that... back to our regularly scheduled thread.

The Salk and Tannoy are in the house. Others on their way!


----------



## lcaillo

Yeah, sorry, just not much more to say until we can get to listen to the speakers and I am terribly excited about this round. I am sure the rest of the team feels the same way.

OK, so I'll say what I expect to happen so everyone is clear on what my biases are going in. I think we are getting to a point in price where the speakers get harder to critique and find things that they don't do well. I think that the RAAL tweeter is likely to be something I like because I am a sucker for extended response with very low distortion. I am guessing that the transitions between drivers is where most of the limitations will be found with most of the speakers, as at this price the drivers should be generally good matches in terms of dynamics.

Beyond that, I really don't know what to expect, because I am not familiar with any of these specifically. I will be prioritizing my typical preferences, spot on image location that does not change with frequency, low distortion revealing great detail, a wide and deep soundstage, and tight well defined mid bass..


----------



## zieglj01

I can tell you based on some experience with Dennis Murphy
modded speakers (2), that his crossover work is real good.

The Orchestra playing speaker designer, and crossover engineer,
tends to really know his stuff.

You folks are in for and interesting experience, with the 7 speakers.


----------



## aasenm

Hard to beat crawfish down here in New Orleans


----------



## fokakis1

lcaillo said:


> ..I will be prioritizing my typical preferences, spot on image location that does not change with frequency, low distortion revealing great detail, a wide and deep soundstage, and tight well defined mid bass..


I share this set of preferences. These were my exact demands when I recently shopped for my current speakers, and have been some of the main priorities for these shootouts. There are lots of great choices out there, but I find surprisingly few accomplish all of these things exceptionally. And if the room/setup isn't optimal then most don't stand a chance.


----------



## lcaillo

As we get closer to the evaluations, I am coming up with more questions about how we can better communicate our experience with the speakers. One thing that requires constant consideration is the choice of terminology. Since most of what we are trying to convey is subjective, it helps to better understand what we mean by certain terms. We have already done this in a couple of places, and Wayne did a good job of defining much of what we mean when we talk about imaging and soundstage. But you can never be too clear about meaning in such discussions.

I welcome questions or suggestions about how we communicate and the terminology that we use. If there are terms that confuse, or things that we don't say that might help convey meaning please mention it to us.

These review sessions are really a community project and depend as much on what our readers want to know as much as what we choose to write. We have an extraordinary team that really tries to tune into how we can share the experience and I think we do a good job. Feedback is always welcome, actually needed to keep doing a better job at it.

We really do welcome suggestions and criticism. We are limited in many ways, by what products we can get, the room, trying to be fair to all products, and time, but we do take what people have to say seriously. The weekend has far less meaning if we just do it to satisfy our own curiosity and "jones" for audio.


----------



## bkeeler10

Leonard

I know you guys are focusing a lot on the soundstaging and imaging qualities of each speaker. I am very interested in that but also in the overall tonal character of each speaker. That doesn't seem to have been an emphasis in past events unless something unfavorable rears it's head. Maybe I need to go back and read. In any event, and however it was in the past, that is something I like to read about.


----------



## lcaillo

Tonal character seems to be harder to pin down in terms of discussion and a starting point. With imaging I can say "I hear the deep bass there and the higher notes on the bass tend to move over there." You can instantly get a picture of what I am hearing because location and the notes that are played are meaningful terms and concepts that are largely shared. When you talk about tonal character, what are you referring to? 

Your question is exactly what I was hoping for. If we can clarify meaning in advance we might have a chance to discuss it in a way that is useful. I just really don't know how to judge tonal character in a way that would mean much.


----------



## fokakis1

lcaillo said:


> As we get closer to the evaluations, I am coming up with more questions about how we can better communicate our experience with the speakers. One thing that requires constant consideration is the choice of terminology. Since most of what we are trying to convey is subjective, it helps to better understand what we mean by certain terms. We have already done this in a couple of places, and Wayne did a good job of defining much of what we mean when we talk about imaging and soundstage. But you can never be too clear about meaning in such discussions.
> 
> I welcome questions or suggestions about how we communicate and the terminology that we use. If there are terms that confuse, or things that we don't say that might help convey meaning please mention it to us.
> 
> These review sessions are really a community project and depend as much on what our readers want to know as much as what we choose to write. We have an extraordinary team that really tries to tune into how we can share the experience and I think we do a good job. Feedback is always welcome, actually needed to keep doing a better job at it.
> 
> We really do welcome suggestions and criticism. We are limited in many ways, by what products we can get, the room, trying to be fair to all products, and time, but we do take what people have to say seriously. The weekend has far less meaning if we just do it to satisfy our own curiosity and "jones" for audio.


This may have been used before or spelled out in a prior event, but I've heard Wayne use "_Depth Acuity_" to describe a speaker pair's ability to extend the soundstage behind the plane of the speakers with accuracy and precision. I liked this term the first time I heard it because I knew exactly what he meant by it. It seems to encompass several qualities into a single result.


----------



## lcaillo

Exactly. We would like to expand the lexicon of our reviews in a way that facilitates this kind of understanding.


----------



## Tonto

Tonality is one of those purely subjective descriptors that, to me, is the rendition of an instrument to closely match what it sounds like in a live arena. Does that finger sliding down the guitar string really come through just right, or does that saxaphone give you that "I'm there moment," or...well..., well you just have to hear it!

I think we all know it exists, but how to describe it is the issue. It would be nice to hear what others think & maybe come up with a way to define it better.


----------



## zieglj01

Will be interesting to see, how close the descriptions will
come/compliment - to these glossary terms
http://www.head-fi.org/a/describing-sound-a-glossary


----------



## bkeeler10

Tonto said:


> Tonality is one of those purely subjective descriptors that, to me, is the rendition of an instrument to closely match what it sounds like in a live arena. Does that finger sliding down the guitar string really come through just right, or does that saxaphone give you that "I'm there moment," or...well..., well you just have to hear it!
> 
> I think we all know it exists, but how to describe it is the issue. It would be nice to hear what others think & maybe come up with a way to define it better.





lcaillo said:


> Tonal character seems to be harder to pin down in terms of discussion and a starting point. With imaging I can say "I hear the deep bass there and the higher notes on the bass tend to move over there." You can instantly get a picture of what I am hearing because location and the notes that are played are meaningful terms and concepts that are largely shared. When you talk about tonal character, what are you referring to?
> 
> Your question is exactly what I was hoping for. If we can clarify meaning in advance we might have a chance to discuss it in a way that is useful. I just really don't know how to judge tonal character in a way that would mean much.


I agree that tonality is a difficult thing to describe. There are dozens of words used to convey something subjective, and each of those words will convey different meanings depending on the context and the person reading them. Words like sweet, forward, shouty, pure, "musical" (love that one . . .), delicate, recessed, dark, open, lively, cupped-hands, reserved, airy, fast, precise, of-a-piece, laid-back, thin, strident, etc. What do all these mean? Well, I think most people that have done a significant amount of listening and/or listened to a number of different loudspeakers in different rooms will get a general idea of what is meant by most of those terms. And still, one might find a speaker to be delicate in the highs, while another might describe that same speaker as recessed. One person might describe a speaker as being detailed and precise, while another might call it bright or etched. So I understand your being hesitant to go there, or unsure of how to put in words what you hear in a way that will convey the same meaning to all who read the review.

Perhaps it is not possible. I think the only way for these terms to mean something to someone is when they are used in comparison to another product, especially one that the reader is familiar with. Speaker A has a musical sound to me, while speaker B is a little more forward. That makes speaker A excellent for the female singing voice, while speaker B can sometimes get shouty on certain notes at higher volume. On the other hand, movie dialogue on speaker B is a little more intelligible, especially in a live room. Speaker A can occasionally be a little harder to understand vocals on in the same live room.

Perhaps that takes you down the road of comparing speakers that you are being careful to not tread. And yet it is one of the biggest benefits of doing these reviews in the manner you are doing them. Who else gets a half dozen speakers in the same room, listened to by the same group of people, driven by the same equipment, and in a concentrated period of time? It's really a one-of-a-kind review format, and it's pretty awesome and very useful.

I guess, for me, comparisons between the speakers under review in this regard could perhaps be approached in a way that highlights the strengths of each speaker and points out to the reader which speaker might be most likely to suit their tonal preferences (assuming they've had enough listening experiences to form those preferences), listening room, associated gear, etc. Hopefully it can be done without raising concerns among manufacturers that you're putting down one speaker in favor of another, or implying to the reader an order of preference or a ranking.

It's a difficult job I know, and I for one certainly appreciate the effort you all put into it. :T It's a lot of fun, but I totally get that it's a lot of work too!


----------



## lcaillo

Tonto said:


> Tonality is one of those purely subjective descriptors that, to me, is the rendition of an instrument to closely match what it sounds like in a live arena. Does that finger sliding down the guitar string really come through just right, or does that saxaphone give you that "I'm there moment," or...well..., well you just have to hear it!
> 
> I think we all know it exists, but how to describe it is the issue. It would be nice to hear what others think & maybe come up with a way to define it better.



I would consider tonality slightly differently. I think it gets to some of the same ideas, but it is not something I would often consider a character of speakers as much as solid state amps. I think the kinds of distortions (that were once more severe in the earlier days of solid state) that are odd order harmonics result in a less "musical" presentation in some notes and chords. Particularly in complex music, what we used to hear that we did not like in solid state compared to tubes has something to do with tonality. I don't know enough of the theory of the construction of music to be more precise, however. Modern solid state amps having very low levels of distortion probably don't suffer from the same significant distortions so perhaps speakers do contribute more of this kind of problem.

Regardless, I don't feel comfortable using the term as I don't know how most will interpret it, and my use of it would be consistent.


----------



## lcaillo

bkeeler10 said:


> ...Words like sweet, forward, shouty, pure, "musical" (love that one . . .), delicate, recessed, dark, open, lively, cupped-hands, reserved, airy, fast, precise, of-a-piece, laid-back, thin, strident, etc. What do all these mean?


OK, I'll go out on a limb and try a few of these...

Delicate, to me, means revealing detail that is very subtle, without any harshness or exaggeration. Many times this is the opposite of harsh to me. Harsh/smooth are opposites, but delicate means smoothness with detail. Perhaps delicate is the balance between the two. An overly smooth system might not reveal detail that I would like to hear.

Recessed, IMO, is a sound where the midrange is set back and is the opposite of presence. I would expect a recessed sound to be characterized by a gentle drop in midrange response compared to treble and lower midrange. 

Two should are a start. Other opinions or descriptions?


----------



## zieglj01

It would not be easy to describe the timbre (tone color) of each
speaker - as they all tend to be different.

The more phrases that are made - the more complex it can get.

I also do not get too caught up, in the word/term Lush sound,
or character.


----------



## lcaillo

Lush is one of my least favorite terms. It implies, to me, a coloration that is obvious yet desirable. I have a bit of a problem with that.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Our descriptions of tonality in the past have also been affected by the off-axis listening angle that has given us the best soundstage and image clarity (imaging). This round, we are planning to simplify our process a bit by quickly setting up the "close to the wall" placement at a standard location, aimed directly at the LP. So the tonality description at that initial location will be more meaningful to some readers than in previous rounds.

As Leonard said, descriptors about soundstage-related qualities benefit from the way our visual and aural senses overlap. With tonality, only the aural (audio) sense is involved in the interpretation, no external frame of reference is involved. That makes it a bit harder to put into words, so we often resort to the way a common instrument sounds - "the saxophone sounds ******, like a duck" (OK, hopefully no speaker we hear will sound THAT bad) may be the best kind of descriptor for tonality we can come up with in some cases.


----------



## Sonnie

Google defines tonality as the character of a piece of music as determined by the key in which it is played or the relations between the notes of a scale or key.

I am certainly not one to know the different keys of music. Someone that know music instruments and can differentiate between notes is more likely to better understand the tonality of speakers. A songwriter would be the perfect person for such.


----------



## zieglj01

bkeeler10 said:


> I agree that tonality is a difficult thing to describe. There are dozens of words used to convey something subjective, and each of those words will convey different meanings depending on the context and the person reading them. Words like sweet, forward, shouty, pure, "musical" (love that one . . .), delicate, recessed, dark, open, lively, cupped-hands, reserved, airy, fast, precise, of-a-piece, laid-back, thin, strident, etc. What do all these mean? Well, I think most people that have done a significant amount of listening and/or listened to a number of different loudspeakers in different rooms will get a general idea of what is meant by most of those terms.


I do not believe in a Fast speaker

precise to me - means good imaging and sound-stage presentation

airy for me - means part of the good overall resolution and sound-stage
or, somewhat holographic sounding

delicate for me - means the speaker is lacking in resolution and for some
> it means the the treble is not hot or sharp/edgy

thin for me - also means the speaker is lacking in resolution, and may have
boosted frequencies to give a sense of more detail

recessed to me - means lacking in midrange resolution and/or, may have
some dips in the frequency response

shouty for me - means un-natural like voice production > also the same
for cupped-hands

shouty also for me - means a blaring, bright/harsh sound with instruments

pure to me - clean, smooth and transparent - having more natural life-like sounds 

dark for me - lacking in detail and definition

lively for me - having good so-called clarity, while at the same time it may
not be accurate.

sweet for me - another way of expressing good midrange production


----------



## lcaillo

I looked up tonality to get an idea of what Sonnie's definition means and still don't really understand any better, but I think I was on the right track. Regardless, it has a very specific meaning in musical terms so I think we best avoid that one, unless someone really understands what it means in that way, and finds a correlate in the sound of the speakers we are reviewing.


----------



## lcaillo

zieglj01 said:


> I do not believe in a Fast speaker


I don't like this term either. A speaker should be as fast as the music, no faster. To me, if a speaker is fast, it is underdamped and would exhibit ringing, i.e. resonant within the audible range. This would not be good to me, but I think many people would read fast as a good thing. I won't be using that one either.


----------



## lcaillo

zieglj01 said:


> I do not believe in a Fast speaker
> 
> precise to me - means good imaging and sound-stage presentation
> 
> airy for me - means part of the good overall resolution and sound-stage
> or, somewhat holographic sounding


I think "precise" works best as a modifier for another characteristic. If I wanted to describe the locations of instruments as not varying, I would describe this as precise imaging. Precision is, after all, the absence of variation.

Airy means that I can sense the space between instruments and silence between notes.


----------



## Sonnie

I would think "fast" to be overdamped... slow would be underdamped because it cannot respond as quick.

Think about electrostatic speakers... they can produce the same sound with a lot less movement than dynamic speakers. There would be less opportunity for ringing... lagging... distortion, etc.


----------



## lcaillo

If more people will chime in with their understandings of the various terms that get thrown around, we may be able to find the ones where there is greater agreement and try to work with those more in the reviews.

We will never get universal understanding of unshared experience, but with clarity in the terminology we ca get closer and hopefully make the reviews more meaningful. If we can come to some agreements, I think we should adopt those in all reviews for HTS.


----------



## bkeeler10

zieglj01 said:


> I do not believe in a Fast speaker
> 
> precise to me - means good imaging and sound-stage presentation
> 
> airy for me - means part of the good overall resolution and sound-stage
> or, somewhat holographic sounding
> 
> delicate for me - means the speaker is lacking in resolution and for some
> > it means the the treble is not hot or sharp/edgy
> 
> thin for me - also means the speaker is lacking in resolution, and may have
> boosted frequencies to give a sense of more detail
> 
> recessed to me - means lacking in midrange resolution and/or, may have
> some dips in the frequency response
> 
> shouty for me - means un-natural like voice production > also the same
> for cupped-hands
> 
> shouty also for me - means a blaring, bright/harsh sound with instruments
> 
> pure to me - clean, smooth and transparent - having more natural life-like sounds
> 
> dark for me - lacking in detail and definition
> 
> lively for me - having good so-called clarity, while at the same time it may
> not be accurate.
> 
> sweet for me - another way of expressing good midrange production


Hmm this post proves the point that these terms are variable depending on the person reading. Because many of those definitions are not how I would define them, and are different from others' recent descriptions. And that it would be wise to have a glossary of terms, if you will, that all reviewers at HTS adhere to when describing subjective characteristics of a speaker.


----------



## lcaillo

That is exactly what I was thinking, Bryan. We should include them in the HTS general glossary and post them with each review thread.


----------



## zieglj01

bkeeler10 said:


> Hmm this post proves the point that these terms are variable depending on the person reading. Because many of those definitions are not how I would define them, and are different from others' recent descriptions.


Welcome to As the Audio World Turns.

Perception also tends to play a part.

Some of us, just describe things different than others - there is
no real right or wrong

I am just going to filter through the reviews, and grasp from it
and get my sense of how the speaker might sound to me.

A lot of people who read the forums, are not into heavy definitions to
begin with.

HTS may come up with their glossary for reviewers - however, some of us
still may perceive it different. I will check their glossary against the one
that I did link earlier.


----------



## lcaillo

If we do, and you want to understand what we mean, then whatever we adopt should be your guide, not your or someone else's idea of that a term means. That does not mean that we are correct, just that we have agreed upon a convention to better communicate what we intend.

Subjective terminology will never be understood the same way by everyone. For that matter, objective terms often are not. There is, however, good reason to attempt to agree on terminology in advance. It is no different than agreed upon axioms in logic. It does not solve every problem because some people just refuse to adopt conventions, but it makes it possible for those who do to get beyond language and begin to share ideas.


----------



## a|F

I'm interested to hear about each speakers dynamics and whether you think their sensitivity is accurate. Also, what about some off-axis comments and measurements? Does the soundstage collapse if you move a foot over? The tannoy's with their coax could prove a winner in this regard. 

I also appreciate your teams' willingness to engage the readers on what they're looking for. Customer service at its finest. Bravo gentlemen.


----------



## a|F

Double post, so I'll add one more: available headroom and ability to reach 105db cleanly. Which component is limiting for overall sq and spl?


----------



## lcaillo

I expect we may spend a little extra time in this round on this issue as it is one of my curiosities. That is why I voted for the Thiel SC4.


----------



## bkeeler10

Don't you wish you could look at a frequency response chart and tell what a speaker will sound like? You can get a very general sense certainly, but not into specifics. Which is why we have to resort to subjective terms. Even two speakers with near-identical frequency responses can sound significantly different. There's still so much we can't measure -- so much going on that we don't have a technical grasp on.


----------



## lcaillo

I believe we can measure much that we don't yet know how to correllate to sound. Better defining subjective terms might make that correllation easier. The tools we use to measure and analyze sound have not kept pace with technology in statistics and signal processing.


----------



## zieglj01

lcaillo said:


> If we do, and you want to understand what we mean, then whatever we adopt should be your guide, not your or someone else's idea of that a term means. That does not mean that we are correct, just that we have agreed upon a convention to better communicate what we intend.


Whatever you come up with, will be a guide for me to understand
the subjective speaker reviews - that/it can be used to help a lot of 
people, who are interested in learning more about the audio world.
This will bring some communication to learn from.


----------



## zieglj01

I have 2 pair of speakers, Plus 1 pair that I did demo recently
All 3 are within a +/- 1.5 db window from 200 hz to 10 khz >
they do not sound the same - their timbre tone-sonic signature
is different. Plus, the resolution is not the same - with 2 of them
it is close - however the third one, is a clear league ahead in the
resolution department.


----------



## AudiocRaver

lcaillo said:


> I looked up tonality to get an idea of what Sonnie's definition means and still don't really understand any better, but I think I was on the right track. Regardless, it has a very specific meaning in musical terms so I think we best avoid that one, unless someone really understands what it means in that way, and finds a correlate in the sound of the speakers we are reviewing.


I am probably the one who uses _tonality_ the most.

_Tone_ has two meanings: (1) Pitch, a specific musical note. (2) The quality or character of sound. We are talking about the second meaning.

_ality_ as a suffix means _state of being._

To me tonality - as I use it - means the state, the sum total, of a speaker's tonal quality. We talk about tone, tone controls, tonal balance, tonal coloration. Middle C is a tone (note). Middle C on a saxophone has a different tone (character) from middle C on a trombone. Tone controls can also change the tone (character) of sound reproduction. Speakers have different tonal character. Tonality. Seems plenty clear, but if the consensus is that readers prefer to avoid it, I will defer to that preference.



lcaillo said:


> I don't like this term either. A speaker should be as fast as the music, no faster. To me, if a speaker is fast, it is underdamped and would exhibit ringing, i.e. resonant within the audible range. This would not be good to me, but I think many people would read fast as a good thing. I won't be using that one either.


Not sure what to do with this one. I think of fast as being _critically_ damped, fastest response without excessive ringing. But I agree that it is not clear what that would sound like. I have heard speakers that _sounded_ fast, but then have heard other speakers that ARE fast and did not SOUND fast. (Does FAST have a sound? You can hear ringing, and that is bad. Fast will be clearer, but is probably more an absence of negatives than an actual _sound._ I wonder if that _fast sound_ is actually due to coloration of some kind.) So on this one I agree that while the term may be descriptive of a sound, it is not really very useful for our purposes.



zieglj01 said:


> I have 2 pair of speakers, Plus 1 pair that I did demo recently
> All 3 are within a +/- 1.5 db window from 200 hz to 10 khz >
> they do not sound the same - their timbre tone-sonic signature
> is different. Plus, the resolution is not the same - with 2 of them
> it is close - however the third one, is a clear league ahead in the
> resolution department.


Precisely. Wait, did I use that word right? I meant "agreement," not "precision."

+/- 1.5 dB can have a lot of different tonal characters, or sounds.

I agree that we should try to find some common ground with our terminology, but also doubt we will ever completely agree on something so subjective. Perhaps we should be happy with weeding out the most confusing / meaningless / misleading terms. That would be a big step. Or have a core set of terms that we have defined what we mean by them, that would be very useful. If we are limited to using only a defined set of terms in our reviews, I think that is going to far. My opinion.


----------



## Big Red Machine

Frequency balance: do any of the low, mid, or high frequencies dominate the sound of the speaker

I agree on tonality: are the sounds true to the live instrument is my take

PRAT: pace, rhythm, and timing

Soundstage: width and depth (heavily influenzed by the room and placement though)

Engagement: I was just listening, or I was totally drawn in by what I heard

WAF: fit and finish, is it furniture or art?

I don't ever try to read any more than these into my evaluations. KISS.


----------



## zieglj01

AudiocRaver said:


> To me tonality - as I use it - means the state, the sum total, of a speaker's tonal quality. We talk about tone, tone controls, tonal balance, tonal coloration. Middle C is a tone (note). Middle C on a saxophone has a different tone (character) from middle C on a trombone. Tone controls can also change the tone (character) of sound reproduction. Speakers have different tonal character.
> 
> I wonder if that fast sound is actually due to coloration of some kind.) So on this one I agree that while the term may be descriptive of a sound, it is not really very useful for our purposes.


For me, timbre - is the tone character of the speaker, and is separate
from loudness, pitch and equalization.

some music info
http://www.dspguide.com/ch22/2.htm

I for the most part, do not believe in a fast speaker - however, some
speakers do sound slower to me, and can/may be due to lesser quality
drivers, crossover problems, phase issues, resonance, a weak cabinet,
and poor cabinet dampening.


----------



## zieglj01

AudiocRaver said:


> Speakers have different tonal character. Tonality. Seems plenty clear, but if the consensus is that readers prefer to avoid it, I will defer to that preference.


I prefer to keep it

Interesting info here
http://www.moultonlabs.com/more/loudspeaker_as_musical_instrument/P2/


----------



## AudiocRaver

zieglj01 said:


> For me, timbre - is the tone character of the speaker, and is separate
> from loudness, pitch and equalization.


Timbre (pronounced *tam*-ber), also known as tone color or tone quality, is actually a pretty good term for what we are talking about. We don't hear it used much in these circles, but we know how to change THAT.


----------



## ButchP

tonality In music, the quality of an instrument's tone, often related to the key in which the music is written. In audio, mistakenly used in place of "tonal quality."

tonal quality The accuracy (correctness) with which reproduced sound replicates the timbres of the original instruments. Compare "tonality." 

timbre The recognizable characteristic sound "signature" of a musical instrument, by which it is possible to tell an oboe, for example, from a flute when both are sounding the same note. 

From stereophile's Audio Glossary at http://http://www.stereophile.com/reference/50


----------



## ButchP

:whistling:


----------



## bkeeler10

ButchP said:


> tonality In music, the quality of an instrument's tone, often related to the key in which the music is written. In audio, mistakenly used in place of "tonal quality."
> 
> tonal quality The accuracy (correctness) with which reproduced sound replicates the timbres of the original instruments. Compare "tonality."
> 
> timbre The recognizable characteristic sound "signature" of a musical instrument, by which it is possible to tell an oboe, for example, from a flute when both are sounding the same note.
> 
> From stereophile's Audio Glossary at http://http://www.stereophile.com/reference/50




I'll go with 'tonal quality' although I also like the term 'tonal character' Obviously the ideal loudspeaker would impart no tonal characteristic of its own, and would render every sound as the source instrument renders it. Also obviously, no speaker yet created can do so (neither, it seems, can a recording do so). So barring the perfect loudspeaker, we want to find speakers that impart minimal colorations that are less obvious, thereby not distracting us from our willing suspense of disbelief that we are present at a live event. A speaker's accuracy at presenting/reproducing various instruments is part of that lack of coloration we seek (as are dynamics, soundstaging and imaging, and other things as well).


----------



## zieglj01

bkeeler10 said:


> I'll go with 'tonal quality' although I also like the term 'tonal character'


Are you from Phase Technology?


----------



## bkeeler10

zieglj01 said:


> Are you from Phase Technology?


I work for MSE Audio, which is the parent company of Phase Technology. Most of my work (90% +) is for SoundTube, which is a commercial audio division of MSE Audio. But I do attend CEDIA for the residential side, and also went to RMAF last year with Phase Tech.

However, I do not represent Phase Technology here or on any other forum. My participation here is purely for personal interest, not to promote or represent a company or product. I am happy to entertain questions or discussion about Phase Tech since I am fairly familiar with their products. Not officially though, unless otherwise stated.

I came up with the term 'tonal character' on my own. onder:


----------



## zieglj01

bkeeler10 said:


> I came up with the term 'tonal character' on my own. onder:


You did well/good on that one.


----------



## ajinfla

zieglj01 said:


> I have 2 pair of speakers, Plus 1 pair that I did demo recently
> All 3 are within a +/- 1.5 db window from 200 hz to 10 khz > they do not sound the same - their timbre tone-sonic signature is different.


Loudspeakers have radiated soundwaves in 3 dimensions for over a century. Why would a consumer express a single pressure point measurement axis/distance/spatial position...as if expected to encapsulate a 3d soundfield?
I guess after a century, the message still hasn't gotten out . 

cheers


----------



## JeffB

There is a quality I search for in a speaker. I suppose one could think of it as a flat frequency response, but I am not at all sure a graph works for this purpose. I most easily identify frequency anomalies when watching TV sitcoms. An example might be that with one speaker you might notice the sound of footsteps on the floor while people are walking together and having a conversation. With a different speaker you would not have noticed the footstep sound. If you were listening for the footstep sound, it would be there, but it wouldn't ordinarily draw your attention to the sound. One does not ordinarily have their attention grabbed by something like footsteps in real life. Upon first hearing this there is a tendency to think, wow, I can hear footsteps with this speaker, it is really bringing out detail like I have never heard before. With more experience, one realizes that these sounds are being over amplified. I can also relate this a bit to my mom's hearing aid. My mom is very hard of hearing and has a hearing aid. She is always asking me what some sound was. She hears all sorts of things that I just completely tune out. The hearing aid is way over-exaggerating some sounds for her. Her hearing is not good enough to figure out what they were, despite them being loud for her. I often can think back and figure out what she heard, but it would be some faint sound that would never have caught my conscious attention. I have hooked up quite a few speakers to my television. They have all failed pretty badly in playing sounds at what I think should be the proper level. I have a pair of 4" single drivers in a sealed box in a bedroom system. These speakers seem to get TV so perfectly right. Everything is in its proper place volume wise. I think almost every speaker I hear is too "bright", where too "bright" means overly loud in some frequency area that is not known to me, but I suspect the 1k to 2k range. I think proper baffle step compensation is crucial. I have often wondered if wider baffles are better, in that it shifts down in frequency where baffle step compensation should start. When listening to music, I think it is harder to tell. One doesn't really know what the original reproduction sounded like. I ask myself, does it seem too bright? Is it fatiguing to my ears? How well can I hear subtle detail? Detail here is tough, but I figure overly loud frequencies will mask other sounds. So that is key, is there something being masked. Rather than the overly loud frequencies bringing something forward. Do I enjoy the sound, or does it grab me in some way?


----------



## zieglj01

ajinfla said:


> Why would a consumer express a single pressure point measurement axis/distance/spatial position...as if expected to encapsulate a 3d soundfield?
> I guess after a century, the message still hasn't gotten out .


I see that you are awake today!

Also, I did hear a rumor that we have passed the Jukebox age.


----------



## ironglen

The glossary idea would be much appreciated as a couple of personal terms to describe a speaker's performance have included 'accuracy' and 'tight', referring to a speaker's ability to reproduce the source throughout its frequency range and accurate representation of dynamics true to the source, again across its full frequency range. My terms and definitions, of course


----------



## JeffB

Perhaps not completely relevant to this shoot-out, but Pro Audio PA speakers have some intriguing sound characteristics. First they normally have horn loaded compression drivers. There are two things that stand out to me with horn loaded compression drivers. They seem to have a faster transient response. There has been some discussion above about what "fast" means. With a horn loaded compression driver, the highs seem to snap. When a snare drum is hit, this creates a near instantaneous rise in sound pressure. I think a horn loaded compression driver more accurately tracks this rise and fall better than a normal tweeter. For lack of a better term they really seem "faster" or perhaps more accurately, they track the proper rise and fall of the pressure wave better. This seems to be accompanied by a particular distortion though. It is as though you also hear a snapping sound that I don't think belongs there. Every snare hit has this snappy sound to it. In some ways it sounds much more alive, but I don't think its exactly real.<p>
<p>
The second thing about PA speakers is the bass response. This weekend I was on an outdoor deck at Snow Summit in Big Bear, CA. They had two JBL PRX-710s playing. The bass from those two 10" drivers really thumps. I looked up their specs and they only play flat down to 63Hz. So while there is no deep bass, one would be hard pressed to say anything other than that the bass from these really kicked. I mean compared to most home speakers, these JBLs would seem to have a ton more bass, even though it wasn't as deep. And the sound really carried. You could easily here them from several hundred feet outdoors. Perhaps this has something to with the 1500 watts that feed each 10" driver.
<p>
The third thing about PA speakers, is that whenever I have auditioned them at Guitar Center, I think they sound awful. It would seem that they only sound good when turned up loud. Whenever I hear this type of speaker in a night club playing dance music they almost always sound great to me. I have especially noticed this phenomenon at concerts. The PA can sound just horrible, but then they turn it way up at some point and it starts to sound good.

I don't know how much your testing takes amplifiers into consideration. It might be worthwhile to have something like a QSC amp cranking 2000 watts to see what happens to the bass.


----------



## lcaillo

This event is not a shootout. Each speaker will be reviewed on its own. What they will share are common conditions and extensive efforts to extract the best sound under the same room and equipment limitations.

PA speakers are built with very different priorities and I don't think they would compete very well in this price range. Asl you go up in price in PA products you get greater output capability but not necessarilly more refinement in the sound. With the products we will be reviewing here, a major priority of most is lowering distortion over a wide bandwidth, not necessarily creating higher output.


----------



## fokakis1

Lol. Disclaimer: This is NOT a shootout.


----------



## AudiocRaver

ajinfla said:


> Loudspeakers have radiated soundwaves in 3 dimensions for over a century. Why would a consumer express a single pressure point measurement axis/distance/spatial position...as if expected to encapsulate a 3d soundfield?
> I guess after a century, the message still hasn't gotten out .
> 
> cheers


All true. And yet, in a given room, it is the little tiny ear (hopefully one of a pair) situated at a fixed Listening Position that provides the perceptual brain all there is to know - at that moment - about that speaker.

Obviously, you are thinking "bigger picture" than that.:bigsmile:



JeffB said:


> Perhaps not completely relevant to this shoot-out, but Pro Audio PA speakers have some intriguing sound characteristics. First they normally have horn loaded compression drivers. There are two things that stand out to me with horn loaded compression drivers. They seem to have a faster transient response. There has been some discussion above about what "fast" means. With a horn loaded compression driver, the highs seem to snap. When a snare drum is hit, this creates a near instantaneous rise in sound pressure. I think a horn loaded compression driver more accurately tracks this rise and fall better than a normal tweeter. For lack of a better term they really seem "faster" or perhaps more accurately, they track the proper rise and fall of the pressure wave better. This seems to be accompanied by a particular distortion though. It is as though you also hear a snapping sound that I don't think belongs there. Every snare hit has this snappy sound to it. In some ways it sounds much more alive, but I don't think its exactly real.


I, too, have been intrigued by that "snappy" sound. Looking at step response and frequency response measurements for speakers we have evaluated that had that sound and some that measured just as fast (step response) but did not have the "snappy sound," I have concluded that it is a combination of some "peaky coloration" and some underdamped HF resonances that contribute to that sound. Would love to hear someone else's explanation.



lcaillo said:


> PA speakers are built with very different priorities and I don't think they would compete very well in this price range. Asl you go up in price in PA products you get greater output capability but not necessarilly more refinement in the sound. With the products we will be reviewing here, a major priority of most is lowering distortion over a wide bandwidth, not necessarily creating higher output.


For sure. There are some that sound better "raw" than others, but the best of them would probably sound pretty unrefined next to anything we will be hearing this weekend.


----------



## padgman1

All us lurkers on HTS wish our esteemed panel of listeners "good ears" and "iron bellies" this weekend. Have fun, folks!


----------



## bkeeler10

+10!


----------



## Mike0206

I just want to know what speakers make you smile with the least amount of effort. If it puts a smile on your face when your listening to them then that's good enough for me. If you have to fuss with them for hours to get good imaging, soundstage etc.....then the smile factor is reduced obviously. To me a speaker can be great at one thing but lack luster in another area. The sum is greater than its parts. Some speakers do everything good and it makes them great. Other speakers do several things great but a few things horrible and it makes the whole experience not as rewarding. Which speakers could you listen to and just enjoy without fussing with them too much. That's what I want to know. Have fun!!


----------



## zieglj01

padgman1 said:


> All us lurkers on HTS wish our esteemed panel of listeners "good ears" and "iron bellies" this weekend. Have fun, folks!


Did you say all?


----------



## english210

AudiocRaver said:


> Timbre (pronounced *tam*-ber), also known as tone color or tone quality, is actually a pretty good term for what we are talking about. We don't hear it used much in these circles, but we know how to change THAT.


This is key to me for music to sound like music. The 'tone' (imho, of course) is the actual note. Played on a saxophone or a piano, the 'tone' is the same. The Timbre determines the 'flavor', which is the interesting stuff.

If I paid 3K for a pair of speakers, and middle C came out sounding like, well, D-flat, then I'd be ticked!! That's tone. Many speakers have trouble with various 'flavors', though, and that's Timbre. I read in another thread elsewhere a discussion of a speaker's ability to convey whether the piano being played was Steinway or Yamaha. I'm not sure I care about that, but I certainly want it to sound like a piano, and a viola to sound like a viola, etc.

Different instruments can evoke different emotions, and I want my speakers/system to convey that. Lay out the instruments in speace relative to each other (staging, imho, as in the instruments are arranged on a stage, 3D), and imaging (relative size of performers, and something I envision in the 2D realm, usually when I'm 'hearing' whether the performer(s) are sitting or standing, moving side to side, etc) - I don't want a 10-foot tall guitarist next to a 2 foot tall vocalist. 

I want my speakers to convey all the inflection and detail available, both in the delicacy of a note on a violin hanging in the air after the bow stops moving, and in the crash of pounding on a piano keyboard. Loosely (and inaccurately) stated, the higher up the ladder you go, the more extremes you can afford. Different people have different prefences, of course, but that's what I want.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Mike0206 said:


> I just want to know what speakers make you smile with the least amount of effort. If it puts a smile on your face when your listening to them then that's good enough for me.


That is key for us, too. We want to come up with as much detail about the speakers as we can, but it all revolves around the simple joy of hearing through them. With some, when our turn to listen is over, we feel like "Enough!" With others, we feel like "More, let me listen some more!" That says a lot right there.


----------



## Sonnie

I received news yesterday that Dynaudio can not get us the speakers in time for the event. Although they could, because Axiom just shipped theirs from Canada today... just got the tracking number and they are scheduled for pickup today. For some reason they have chose not to, despite having assured me on three occasions that they would be here. They tell me the speakers that were going to be sent for the event were sent to a dealer and that they could not get another pair broken in before the event. I highly doubt it would have made a difference, but none the less, it is what it is. We are back down to six.


----------



## padgman1

zieglj01 said:


> Did you say all?


I did say all........including you, Ziegl..........:sn:


----------



## padgman1

Sonnie said:


> I received news yesterday that Dynaudio can not get us the speakers in time for the event. Although they could, because Axiom just shipped theirs from Canada today... just got the tracking number and they are scheduled for pickup today. For some reason they have chose not to, despite having assured me on three occasions that they would be here. They tell me the speakers that were going to be sent for the event were sent to a dealer and that they could not get another pair broken in before the event. I highly doubt it would have made a difference, but none the less, it is what it is. We are back down to six.


Too bad..........hopefully Dynaudio will "agree" to participate in the next round by SENDING SOME SPEAKERS ( please)........

Still, a lot of listening still to be had.....


----------



## fokakis1

padgman1 said:


> Too bad..........hopefully Dynaudio will "agree" to participate in the next round by SENDING SOME SPEAKERS ( please)........
> 
> Still, a lot of listening still to be had.....


At least we got a taste of them in the last event. I believe they would have been solid, but I wasn't quite as curious about them this go round. More focus on the other six!


----------



## zieglj01

Sonnie said:


> I received news yesterday that Dynaudio can not get us the speakers in time for the event. Although they could, because Axiom just shipped theirs from Canada today... We are back down to six.


This is turning into some type of Audio Causality Loop.

Maybe next time - you could try contacting Atlantic Technology.


----------



## lcaillo

I don't really understand what that means, Jim. 

Regardless, I am dissappointed the Dynaudio won't make it. No need to speculate on the reason, but the result is that the missed a good opportunity. In the last round their product was one of my two favorites so I was very interested to see how these would sound.


----------



## zieglj01

lcaillo said:


> I don't really understand what that means, Jim.


It means while the voting seemed like a good idea and was promoted and
marketed > ended up as a somewhat let-down, based on the fact that the
speakers which were the most desired and voted on - did not come to pass.

Then some of the expectations coming from the manufacturers, who were 
close in the polls - did not make it.

However, it should be an interesting event - and there should be some good
reports - I am interested to hear from about 4 of the speakers out of the six,
that did end up making the final goal, of six to be evaluated.

Enjoy the adventure!


----------



## billy p

Been outta loop the last week or so...so to speak....sad about the Dynos ...I read that Axiom is now a possible participant? It may have been situated in a revised post or I've simply missed it but is there an updated list with all the attendees whom are "now" fully committed?

Thanks...


----------



## bkeeler10

The confirmed participating speakers are

1) Axiom M100
2) Polk Audio LSiM705
3) PSB Imagine T2
4) Salk Songtower SC
5) Tannoy Precision 6.4
6) Phase Technology PC9.5


----------



## Sonnie

Axioms arrived a few minutes ago... ALL 6 speakers are here at the house!


----------



## bkeeler10

:clap: :fireworks2: :fireworks1: :fireworks3: :dancebanana:

Okay, who came up with the dancing banana?!


----------



## lcaillo

Home movie from mechman.


----------



## ALMFamily

Oh sure - Sonnie forgot to mention that Wayne and Joe are in the house too!

We are currently listening to the Montis speakers - they sound fantastic...


----------



## bkeeler10

Why does it always have to be about you? ;-)


----------



## ALMFamily

bkeeler10 said:


> Why does it always have to be about you? ;-)


Hey now - I put Wayne first! 

I should really have taken a picture of the spread Sonnie put out for us to eat tonight. If I don't gain 10 pounds by the time I leave, I will be shocked.

We are planning on playing with the Montis speakers tonight as Leonard and I have not had a lot - well, any - time with them to this point.

We will be starting in on our speakers in the morning...


----------



## prerich

Sonnie said:


> Axioms arrived a few minutes ago... ALL 6 speakers are here at the house!


excellent!!!!!!!

Sent from my iPad using HTShack


----------



## admranger

Sonnie said:


> Axioms arrived a few minutes ago... ALL 6 speakers are here at the house!


I was kinda hopin' you'd review 6-pairs of speakers. :R

Should be a fun time listening to some excellent kit.

Kirk


----------



## lcaillo

Montis = very nice! I am impressed. Can't wait to get to the real listening tomorrow.


----------



## Big Red Machine

ALMFamily said:


> Oh sure - Sonnie forgot to mention that Wayne and Joe are in the house too!
> 
> We are currently listening to the Montis speakers - they sound fantastic...


What is a Montis?


----------



## AudiocRaver

MartinLogan Montis - Sonnie's main L & R speakers.


----------



## AudiocRaver

We spent last night experimenting with the reflections off the front wall and seeing how they affect soundstage, especially with the dipole Montis - but also considering how it could affect the speakers we will be listening to today. Part of the discussion centered on the equipment cabinet in front of the room being in the way and limiting our ability to work with the reflections constructively. But I figured removal of the equipment cabinet would not happen until some time in the future.

While we were eating breakfast... SONNIE REMOVED HIS EQUIPMENT CABINET!!!

I am so happy!!!!!:bigsmile:


----------



## bkeeler10

So if the equipment rack is gone, does that mean that Joe will have to get on that bike after all, to drive the speakers?! Steady there Joe, we can't have wow and flutter affecting the sound now :rofl2:


----------



## lcaillo

Naw, Sonnie had the power company replace the half mile line to the transformer with oxygen free, single crystal, teflon litz cable with multi diameter strands in dimensions scaled logarithmically so we should have lots of power.


----------



## bkeeler10

He forgot to have them braid it?! :rant:


----------



## fokakis1

AudiocRaver said:


> We spent last night experimenting with the reflections off the front wall and seeing how they affect soundstage, especially with the dipole Montis - but also considering how it could affect the speakers we will be listening to today. Part of the discussion centered on the equipment cabinet in front of the room being in the way and limiting our ability to work with the reflections constructively. But I figured removal of the equipment cabinet would not happen until some time in the future.
> 
> While we were eating breakfast... SONNIE REMOVED HIS EQUIPMENT CABINET!!!
> 
> I am so happy!!!!!:bigsmile:


What type of experimenting are you guys doing? Are you considering some type of diffusion or absorption on the front wall, or is the equipment breaking up the balance?


----------



## ALMFamily

We think the cabinet was interfering with the rear wave which degrades the imaging. Wayne noticed a difference when he was listening to the ESLs at home in a room with a blank wall behind the speakers so we thought we would experiment with that in Sonnie's room.


----------



## Todd Anderson

How much fun are you guys having?? Sounds like a great time. Enjoy those amazing speakers!


----------



## ALMFamily

Todd Anderson said:


> How much fun are you guys having?? Sounds like a great time. Enjoy those amazing speakers!


Just getting started on the first speaker - took us a bit to get all the measurement equipment setup after we removed the cabinet.

Plus, Sonnie had to roll Wayne and I out of bed...


----------



## lcaillo

Much fun. Every time we tweak our process, and it takes a bit of time to get bearings on the new music selections. We are ready to roll now.


----------



## bkeeler10

I don't recall having seen a list of new music cuts you're using (since the list for the $2500 event). When you get a second, would you post them? Always interesting to find new, good music. Thanks.


----------



## lcaillo

We will try to get that posted today.


----------



## ALMFamily

Wayne and I were talking about music last night, and his son has really started getting involved in listening to various types of music. They have created a google doc with a slew of interesting music - he is hopefully going to add me to the list of people allowed to view it. If you ask, he might do the same for you...


----------



## AudiocRaver

The Official $3,000 Speaker Evaluation / Home Audition Event, 
FOUND HERE, is now ooen and ready for your comments.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Just finishing up with speaker pair number two. Is it really 5:30? Gotta get cracking. Time flies.


----------



## chashint

padgman1 said:


> I did say all........including you, Ziegl..........:sn:


Giggling


----------



## zieglj01

chashint said:


> Giggling


Me too - if they only knew.


----------



## padgman1

^^^^ I obviously don't...........:scratch:


----------



## Big Red Machine

You guys are using the AVA ABX box, correct?


----------



## lcaillo

Big Red Machine said:


> You guys are using the AVA ABX box, correct?


Nope, each speaker gets its own review. No AB comparison.


----------



## Big Red Machine

The device allows you to level match so that each speaker does not have any advantage or disadvantage for loudness, etc. If you set them all up one at a time ahead at one volume setting on the stereo gear then the device could be adjusted to a preset "level" match instantaneously when you play each pair. Orrrrr, you will level match one at a time presumably.

Hurry up, will ya. Sleep is overrated.

Any Gumbo happenin'?


----------



## lcaillo

We are not interested in AB comparisons of speakers. We do extensive detailed listening to each speaker individually and each review is about each speaker. This is not a "shootout" where we are trying to choose a winner. We are learning as much as we can about each speaker and what they do well and what they do not. 

It is unlikely that very many vendors would be willing to send us speakers for a shootout, as only one can win. We already have to deal with manufacturers trepidation with having multiple speakers reviewed at the same time. AB comparisons can be useful when trying to isolate a problem or a specific aspect of performance, but it would be impractical with 6 pairs of speakers. 

We may use the device for amp testing to see if we can hear differences at all consistently, if we have time. The speaker reviews take a lot of time to do correctly, however. Some are more challenging to get placed optimally than others.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Since the $3,000 Speaker Evaluation Event is underway and the Results thread is open for comment, we are going to close this thread.

*This thread is closed.*

*Please post further comments in the Results thread HERE.*


----------

