Originally Posted by FOH
I've heard the coaxial BMS' drives in Pro Audio Technology's top end offerings (large horn/full active/powered/dsp contoured), and I strongly preferred my Seaton Cats. Sure, apples to oranges but wth. Clearly, the BMS is an outstanding product. But I found them to have an accompanying "edge" of harshness, lack of top octave extension and not at all smooth. I want to make clear I've not heard the JTR Noesis.
Wow, what a great thread!
I have been living with the JTR Noesis 212HT for nearly a year and it is a great speaker with a lot of fantastic attributes. But, as you mention FOH, I have also found it to have a bit of an "edge" with too much content at reference level and above. For quite some time I interpreted this as "pop" and "resolution", but over time I've come to find that quality distracting. At low volumes however, they really are excellent and I think that the two are related. Not a tradeoff I'm willing to accept. So I currently have the Danley sm60f that I'm comparing long term to the Noesis in my room.
The Danley design has some definite advantages over the Noesis. First, the directivity of the Danley is remarkable and immediately noticeable. The reduction in sidewall reflections has a profound impact in my untreated room and is actually taking some getting used to. I have not optimized their setup yet, but I'm really liking this quality. Second, the midbass and "texture"(for lack of a better term) is much better than the Noesis. The Noesis is clinical in comparison. Third, the ability of the Danley to maintain the same tone as volume is increased to insane levels is remarkable. The Noesis goes loud clean, but there is no doubt the tone changes. That was really brought to my attention by the Danley's. I think this has to do with the acoustic filtering of driver harmonics with the horn holes and loading of the drivers in the Danley design. It's definitely not just Danley marketing jibberish, that's for sure.
The negative to the Danley's compared to the Noesis lies only in lower level listening where I find the Danley's don't have that low level "pop" or clarity. I initially thought this might be a result of driver SQ quality differences, but instrad I think it might be related to voicing and the fact that the Danley soundstage is less forward than Noesis. Because once the volume approaches near reference I find the Danley's every bit as detailed as the Noesis, without the edge.
To the OP's quest if he's still following the thread, the output of the Danley is every bit that of the Noesis imo, but does loud better. I've been driving both the Noesis and Danley with 2000 watts per channel, so I know I'm hearing the best they have to offer. What the impact on either of less amplification I can't say, but I think many would argue it's not necessary.
The sm96 looks good as well, but I haven't heard it and it appears to have insignificantly less output than the sm60f, but the option for different coverages depending on orientation.