Dynaudio Owner's Thread - Page 110

Its size looks far from physically imposing. But try and lift one up, and one will quickly find that it means business.

Hello to the Dyn's fans club,

I was wondering if anyone hadd compared the Halcro mc20 with the Parasound A21 on 3.4's or any other Dynaudio's?

Both have a good reputation but which one would be more transparent and natural sounding. I'm not looking for sheer power but rather emotion.

Thanx

Probably not parasound.. Sunfire amps sounded much warmer,involving than the parasound i heard.

I've read some think bryston are not the most stable into 4ohms. But these where older amps.

Could I get some opinions on the 2 configurations I list below ?
Any and all suggestions/configurations welcome.

Great Room about 30x20x9, wood floors, 8x10 wool rug between me and main speakers (about 9-11 feet), and surrounds need to be in ceiling because of no walls (dining room & kitchen)

---------------------------
Main speakers = Contour 2.8 (not ported i.e. passive radiator)
Center = Contour Center (stand how high?) TV is 30" above floor.
Surrounds = IC17 (x2)

OR

Main speakers = Contour 2.8 (not ported i.e. passive radiator)
Center = Contour 1.1 (vertical or horizontal ?) I have 2.
Surrounds = IC17 (x2)
---------------------------

If I wanted a 7.1 instead of a 5.1, would I add 2 more IC17 ?
I don't own any IC17 speakers yet, but I have the rest.

Sub is an M&K with BFD and a custom external crossover.


Bruce

I have owned a 3BST and 4BST, mated them with Dynaudio's and NEVER had an issue. They are beasts from the ST series forward....

You certainly would not want to use 2 1.1's as a center channel. Using more than one speaker as a center causes lots of issues. I would suggest going with the Contour center channel.

Yes, if you want to go 7.1 then you woul pick up 2 pairs of the IC17's.

David,

I didn't mean to imply I would use qty=2, Contour 1.1 as center channels. I own both the Contour Center and 2 Contour 1.1 speakers.

I meant which would I prefer to use as a center channel, the Contour Center, or 1 of the Contour 1.1.

And since I have 30 inches to the base of my TV, I could put either center channel selection on a stand. I'm guessing my best option is to get the center channel speaker as close to height level of the tweeters in my mains without blocking the view to the TV.

Bruce

Ok, gotcha. I would still suggest using the Contour center as your center channel.

I would agree you want the tweeter as close to ear height as possible. Or at least angle it upwards at the appropriate angle.

Thanks rydenfan.

Did you check out the old link to my "Current System" where I discuss the use of ETF acoustic measurement software to optimize the speaker/room interface ?

Does anybody here utilize ETF or similiar software to help with optimum speaker, acoustic treatment, and listening position ?

I hired Jeff (UMR on the forum) to do a full ISF and audio calibration. He has far more advanced microphones and software than I do. He gets my highest recommendation

http://www.accucalhd.com/

Thanks guys. I do appreciate the info. I found out today that a friend of mine has a few Rotel RB1080's to unload. I could get a REALLY good deal on one........would this match up well for the contour 3.4s? If not, then I won't go this direction, but just wondering. I know Rotel's not my top choice, but if it's a good match, I could eventually move up to a better 2 channel, and move the rotel to center duty with my 1.4.

Bad idea?

Let me know your honest thoughts. I want an amp that will definitely do these speakers justice....

If you can bring the amps into your house and demo them as they are owned by a friend, why not put forth the effort, connect them and listen for yourself? Many times people are influenced by other opinions (me included) on these forums but personal experience with the product/s is the best answer to your question. You seem to have a very desirable situation for a demo. Why not take advantage of it?

I've never owned Rotel products so I am unaware of their output/quality, but from what I've read, they are a very good performer for their price. Some people will write all amps sound the same. I would suggest to purchase the best amp/s that you can afford, without breaking your budget.

The other consensus on most forums is you should drive your front 3 speakers with the same type of amplification if possible.

I have had a few weeks to spend with the C1s and can say that small changes in placement have really helped. As Mick had suggested before it is best to start with no toe in at all and go from there. My room is not the best as far as speaker placement the biggest issue is that one side of my room is open to a woodstove hearth and a set of stairs.

I sit dead center about 8' from the speakers. I had the C1s a little over 7' apart trying to follow the equal distance formula. The issue with this placement was that the left speaker was fairly close to the couch so I toed both speakers in slightly. With this placement I felt the SQ was very good. But the soundstage seemed to be somewhat narrow, not extending outside of the speakers.

So today I decided to move the speakers closer together moving each one in about 6". I then took Mick's advice and set the C1s with no toe in at all. I played some of my favorite CDs of late Mark Knoflers: Kill To Get Crimson, Steely Dans: Gaucho (remastered) and Dire Straits: Love Over Gold (remastered). To me the placement change was quite helpful in that the soundstage now extends a bit further outside of the speakers. The imaging is very good with vocals dead center. I can honestly say now with this placement the speakers do truly disappear. I listened for almost two hours kicked back in my Lazy Boy with my eyes closed and was smiling from ear to ear.

Since I have had the C1s a few times I have had buyers remorse as I went a little (well a lot) over my budget. But after today I am very glad I took the plunge. One of the other HUGE benefits of the C1s is with movies. I have watched several blockbuster movies on Bluray, Hell Boy II just last night and the SQ is amazing. I thought the biggest improvement (over the 140s) would be with 2 CH SQ but should have known movie soundtracks would improve as well. The big problem now is I am going to have to replace my Focus 200 with a Contour SCX. That will have to wait till next year, January is next year.....right.

Bill

Bill -

Even though I'm not a Dynaudio owner, I have always been a fan, and I'm sure that those C1's are very special. Even though you may be feeling the pinch a bit right now, those speakers are an investment that will pay off in the long run, hopefully keeping you from having gone through several less expensive speakers to only get to the point that you are at now.

I hope that they bring you many, many years of enjoyment.

BTW - The Hell Boy soundtrack is supposed to be one of the best out right now. I can't wait to hear it myself soon.

Tim,

Thanks for the kind words. I have not followed what has transpired with your amp/processor issues. How are you making out? I hope everything is corrected as soon as possible.

Take care, Bill

Will,what other Ayre equipment do you have?

I've found the most amazing amplifier that mates perfectly with the voicing of the 3.4. I was previously using a Krell KAV2250 and I was perfectly happy with the sound when mated to a Contour 1.4.

Then i upgraded to a 3.4 and suddenly things started getting murky or rather sterile and uninvolving on two fronts. One was a lack of midbass punch, the other was a slowly dawning sterility with the music.

When the Krell was driving the 1.4 the mid-bass was full and punchy and music was satisfying, with the more bass accurate 3.4 the mid-bass ironically sounded leaner ( the deep bass though increased considerably ), while it was interesting at first eventually i started craving more and even considered adding a subwoofer, I even have an earlier thread here asking about subs but luckily decided to wait.

The midrange of the 3.4 as well wasn't the best match for the Krell in the long run, at first I found the monitor-ish quality interesting but after a while started noticing more electronic artifacts particularly a midrange leaness and lack of warmth, transients as well could be harsh.

What really drove this point home was when i attended a local hi-fi show and heard all the set-ups, one thing i noticed was that they were all analog and many of them were tube driven. I knew then i wanted a little more warmth and organic feel. more emotion as you put it because the 3.4 can be revealing and boderline ruthless. ( This may be heresy to some but i think the 3.4 may well be the most neutral speaker or revealing speaker in the Contour line in terms of tonality or timbre if not detail, I've heard the 5.4 and found it sweeter in timbre but more revealing of detail, same with the Confidence line, the 3.4 for me actually deviates a bit from the traditional Dynaudio voicing )

Anyway getting back to the point, I found an amp for the 3.4. I'm super happy with it, it's sweet, it's warm, it's organic, it for me is a speaker match made in heaven, it's powerful, has great bass, reproduces winds with terrific accuracy, has very little edge transient harshness. It's very very good. The midrange is rich and full, no solid state sterility here. It drives the 3.4 to 100+ db peaks in my medium sized room, it can be converted into monoblocks, it looks like a million bucks. It can run in balanced mode or single ended, it is NOT a traditional pairing with Dynes since it's ta-dah TUBE based!!! I'm sure a few of you can guess what it is : )

After reading through the 100 posts in this thread so far, I'm trying to get a feel for where my Contour 2.8 speakers fit in the model hierarchy.

How many of you have heard them ?

How did they compare to the Contour 3.0, 3.3?

I didn't like the Contour 1.8, as I thought the bass was a little too boomy no matter where they got placed in the room. Since the 2.8 doesn't have a port, but a passive radiator instead, it was more to my liking.

I also think the 2.8 was built with a relative of the Confidence tweeter, but I'm not sure, anybody know?

I'll take a guess... Audio Research?

Bruce,
I am sorry that their is some confusion about where the Contour 2.8 fit in the old Contour line up, some time has passed since it was in production and in fact shortly after we stated importing into the U.S. the 2.8 was discontinued. The 2.8 used the original Esotar tweeter which was the predecessor to the current Esotar2 tweeter and was used in the original Confidence 3's and 5's. The 2.8 was a two way with an 8 inch bass driver and 8 inch passive radiator, it was an incredibly detailed and musical speaker but limited in dynamics when compared to the 3.0 and 3.3. The 2.8 was at the time a marriage of the Contour and Confidence technology, kind of a crossover speaker but the 2.8 did not stay in production as long as the 1.3,1.8. 3.0 and 3.3 as I think it was a little misunderstood. I have included a link to the information in our archives regarding the 2.8.

http://www.dynaudio.com/eng/archive/...contour2_8.php

I thought the Krell 2250 unit I brought home for auditioning 3 years ago was defective, sounded monotonous and congested. Same experiences as you've noted.
Tubes amps are very nice. ASL?

Bill, Have you tried using sound panels and bass traps? Good to hear your C1s keeping you happy.

Unfortunately, that's all the Ayre I've got. I'd like to try Sim next.

VAC Phi 300.1???

Is it this?

I've tried the VAC pa-160 on Dynes and found them amazing but never in my system. As for this new amp I'm seriously eating my words on this because i previously heard other amps in this line with the Confidence C2 and came away unimpressed with the pairing and said so here on this forum.

But man this amp on the 3.4, total synergy, I even heard this same amp mated to the Watt Puppy 8 in full demo and everyone was bowled away by the sound ( granted the front end was a Scarlatti dcs )

I cannot believe I'm loving this amp so much since I thought it was the Bose of the high end but the Mcintosh 275 is the best amp I've ever heard in my system and for me has transformed the full potential of the 3.4 into a real world class reference speaker that's not only accurate but more importantly truly musical.

Vin,

I have thought of that but my HT/Audio system is in our livingroom. So I am not sure if I want to put a number of panels in the room. But if done tastefully I would give it a try. I will try to post some pictures of my room to get advice on treatment options. My digital camera skills are limited at best.

Bill

The Mcintosh 275 when mated to the 3.4 produces a very lifelike authentic sound that is very musical. I actually didn't think it was possible to combine the two in such a modest system but it's there. I've tried being critical about it and tried breaking it down. And for me it came down to three main things it did better than my previous amp.
The soundstaging depth increases significantly, lateral spread extends beyond horizontal boundaries of the speaker and goes further back, I'm hearing spatial cues a few feet behind and to the left of the speaker,of course it isn't, it's all illusion and the 3.4's and the Mac nailed it.
A bigger change is in the midrange, inserting the Mac into the chain resulted in natural full bodied vocals and instrumentation, imagine the notes before being written with a hard brittle no 3 pencil and then suddenly switching to a soft dark No 1 pencil, that's what it sounded like.
Third are the high frequency transients, with the other amp I heard the leading edge of transients with a sharp cut off which could be tiresome.
It's a lot like digital photography, when you shoot something thats white, at some point it just clips from light light grey directly to white, the change is abrupt and not gentle which is why digital photography for all it's color accuracy has a disadvantage when it comes to film in the highlight department.
Same thing here, when it hits a high frequency it just splashes white sound and i can picture a very sharp edge to the sound. The mac on the other hand is much gentler, it doesnt roll off mind you, the extension is there but the transition is gentler, if the leading of a transient in the SS amp was an abrupt sharp black on white edge the mac was a softly dithered. It was the difference between Alias and anti-alias type on the computer, sure the detail was there on the SS amp but where was the lovin? The result, amazing piano reproduction, sweetly intimate vocals and horns. The saxophone in particular takes on a new sound to my experience. I never realized how velvety these things could sound and how sweetly these virtuosos played.
On the musicality side was the bass, rich and plump and very tuneful, quite a surprise since I heard tube amps didn't do bass, apparently you can't believe everything you read. The bass between the two was differently portrayed, my older amp had a tight tuneful bass which was satisfying when i wanted a cold hard look at the music. The Mac on the other hand had a wonderfully musical soul satisfying bass that really cemented the music and gave a solid thumping vibration which helped the cadence of the music flow uninterrupted. A bass that's too lean can be distracting as well since you have this nagging thought something is missing.
Finally the x factor, listing all these points about why this amp is so good i guess can be helpful but the main thing i can really say is that there simply is a you are there-ness quality to the music now which was kept at bay before. I've heard the Mcintosh described as having SET like qualities, I'm a believer, I hear it myself. i can honestly say that I've never heard my set-up sound so good and would proudly put it up against any of the audio showrooms in town, seriously. Musicality-wise it is a beauty.

System is:
Primare cd31
Jeff rowland Capri Pre-amp
Mcintosh 275 Power amp
DH Labs Silversonic interconnects and q10 speaker cables
Dynaudio Contour 3.4

Ahh, my guess of the 275 was correct, i should of posted it.

I would love to try one, but price is just too high for 75 watts of love. I took the poor man's route and have a SS 120w mac amp. It's nice, very musical, but at high levels it kind of runs out of gas. I'm not afraid to dump it if i hear something better.