My Journey to find the "perfect" speaker... - Page 7

I would love to do a separate two-channel system and then a 7.1 HT system in a different room, but I just can't put my wife through that. So I need to build a system that will accel at both. And as I stated earlier (I think in the first post), if I need to start it as a two-channel system, I will. Finding a system to portray music well is a lot harder to find than a system that excels at 7.1 movies IMO. I may just have to save a little, get the fronts, then save some more and get the rest. I have no problem doing it that way, but I do need to limit myself to one system. Of course, I'll need something to tide me over until I do actually find that "perfect" speaker for my ears...HAHA, I just found my loophole! LOL...better not let my wife hear this.

The Ultra Theater stuff will tide me over for a while, but as technology changes so will my pre-amp. As far as the amp, that's going to be a harder decision to make, but once I finally chose at least I can keep it for quite a long time without worrying about upgrading. The Emotiva will perform admirably until I find my more "permanent" amp (hopefully with gobs of power ). Oh, and thanks for the brand tips, Curits!


I too feel the Emotiva gear will perform as you said, which is why I am trying out it's little brother.

And yes sir, I did know that. I am an anal retentive A/V freak...shame on me.

I will do just that; thanks bud!

I would love to audition at your home - too cool! We'll have to try to set something up for November. Maybe I can hit your place and Joey's on the same weekend.

WHOA...I just realized: 450 watts per channel? WEEE!

Curtis, no problemo pal. There is a lot of information and long posts in this thread; it's easy to forget what was said only a few pages back, I should know.

Hmm, I did notice that most of them wouldn't work double duty for music and HT. It's cool, I like researching this stuff...but it would take WAY longer without the help from you guys. You guys rock!

Right on bud. The speakers come first, especially since I have the Emotiva UL's to tide me over.

I hear ya about waiting for the dedicated room. I would like it to happen at our current home, but it may have to wait until the next one. We'll see...

I don't know of any Cary dealers around here, but Ultra Fidelis carries Parasound. Hopefully tomorrow will be a very productive day.

But do all the pre/pros include HDMI switching and/or HDMI 1.3? I suppose this is a conversation for another time since I should be concentrating on speakers...

Thanks for the pre/pro and amp discussions; it's certainly helpful.

Audition # 1

So I got to spend some time with a couple of speakers this weekend (finally).

Monitor Audio RS6


The first ones I sat down with were the Monitor Audio RS8 and 6's. I figured I would start cheap and work my way up. This way if I find something I fall in love with, it won't break the bank and I can stop there.

Without getting into a ridiculously long post (again), I preferred the RS6 to the RS8. If I had to pin down a reason, it would due to the difference in bass. The RS8 has an extra bass driver, but it muddies up the mids and gives the tower more of a bloated sound. The lower extension might be great with movies, but it didn't excel with music. As for the RS6, the bass was also a tad boomy, but no where near the RS8. There was more detail in the mids than there was with the RS8's, allowing me to hear some subtle nuances that I couldn't with the RS8's. I also liked the extended highs and their ability to pick out all of the details without becoming harsh or fatiguing. The main negative I had with the MA's was that their soundstage wasn't as tall and wide as I would have liked. When I stood up the soundstage immediately collapsed thus throwing off the imaging and the my ability to pinpoint specific instruments.

The MA RS6's are a fine fine speaker for under $1000, and at this point, I felt they may very well be the best speaker I've heard for the price...well, until my next audition.

Vandersteen 1C


After spending some time with the MA's, I moved over to the Vandersteen 1C's. While I have had plenty of listening time with these speakers, it had been a while and I felt it wold be a fair comparison to the RS6's considering the price was almost the same for the pair. The first thing I noticed was a more smooth, yet equally extended high frequnecy. The details were all still there, perhaps even more prominent, but there was added air and sparkle to the treble. In a word, it was saweeeet. I new I could listen to these speakers for hours (naturally) without worrying about ear fatigue or ringing. The midrange, in comparison to that of the RS6's, sounded less compressed and/or recessed. It was just "there" floating in space - very cool. As for the bass, it now made me change my opinion of the bass of the RS6's, which I now felt was a little more bloated than I initially thought. The 1C's bass was definitely leaner and tighter, but more musical. I assume that the Q tuning of the woofers on the 1C's was lower in order to produce a more musical tightness.

I found two cons with the Vandies: Having owned the 2CE's for just over a year now, I immediately missed the ability of the 1C's to extend lower in the bass department. If I had never heard the 2CE's, the 1C's wouldn't have been quite as lacking in this area, but I still would have been lusting after that extra extension. For some this will not be an issue because you will be using a sub, but for two channel a little extra kick in the chest would be nice. Second: the Vandersteen's seemed a tad softer at the same listening levels of the pre-amp, thus telling me they may not be as dynamic as the MA's. It wasn't a huge difference, but its something to remember when choosing the proper amplifier for this speaker.

Finally, the Vandersteen's were not as forgiving as the MA's with poor recordings. This may be considered a pro or a con depending on the listener. For me, it's was a pro because it means while listening to a good recording I won't be missing anything and it will be that much better. If you listen to a great deal of rock or heavy metal, the MA's may win by a nose.

In the end, my time was too short this weekend and it left me craving to have another day off dedicated to speaker auditioning. I had a blast and came away still preferring the Vandersteen sound in the $1000 or less price class (for the fronts). For HT I would recommend a subwoofer for both speakers, and probably the same for music (though a sealed sub with a lower Q would be best for music IMO). If I had to pick an overall winner, it's the Vandersteen 1C by a hair.

More to come when my journey continues this weekend...I can't wait!

Thanks Tim - good stuff. Where did you find those measurements?

Based on what you mentioned and the measurements, I guess I have trained my ear very well to not miss much.

As for the MA's, they were about 2.5-3' from the back walls and the side walls were many many feet away. The speaker positioning was pretty ideal, but the room wasn't fully treated (that I could see anyway). The setup was a mimic of what one would find in their home.

The Vandersteen's were certainly more open and airy, possibly because of the baffleless design and time and phase accuracy. Though it could have just been the difference in driver material...dunno. But they were, without a doubt, more open and airy with just as much detail (if not more). And I agree with what you said; don't go by measurements alone (you have to listen). Anyway, these speakers had almost no boundaries. I could stand up and move about the room without losing much detail, not to mention the soundstage didn't collapse and the imaging was still pretty pinpoint and precise. For a $899/pair speaker, I was astounded. It had been a while since I had listened to the 1C's and about 6 months since I listened to my 2CE sigs (packed in storage until recently). I really missed their sweet sound, but as mentioned earlier, they don't crank to reference levels when I want them to. For two-channel (well, more like 2.2 channel ), the 2CE's kill! But for home theater they could be easier to drive with a higher sensitivity. I mentioned in my first post that I need to find a speaker that can perform great with both two-channel and HT and that requirement hasn't changed. This is why I want a speaker with the Vandersteen sound but a high sensitivity rating...say 92-95dB. Or at least a speakers who's advertised sensitivity is also the real world sensitivity.

Man, I can't wait to get back out there! I wish I could during the week, but its just not possible.

Edit: I am liking the reviews for the MA Gold series. MA sure knows how to make a good speaker, no matter what price point you are looking at. You aren't the only one who recommended I take a look at their Gold series. I will certainly check it out.

If you are worried about the "too mid-forward" midrange, they have adjustable midrange and treble controls on the back of the speaker. I forgot to look to see if the 1C had them, but I think they do. And the dealer always leaves them at the neutral position (0). However, perhaps these would be more your cup of tea (2CE Signature II's):


Yeah, you are right; 92-95 is asking a lot. I guess 89-91 real world would be right on the money.

I don't feel that you or anyone else is pushing the MA Gold's on me. I seriously want to hear them but would have had to special order them from the dealer that carries the Silver's. I don't want to make a dealer special order them and end up not liking them, thus not buying them. That would just be rude.

P.S. Here is something that Michael Fremer from Stereophile said about the Vandersteen Quatro's:

"I gave the $6495/pair Audio Physic Scorpio a well-deserved positive review in June, and now here I am doing likewise with a $7590/pair speaker featuring sophisticated powered woofers, and imaging and soundstaging capabilities second to no speaker I've heard at any price. Unfortunately, I hadn't heard both before reviewing the first."

For those who haven't heard Vandersteen's speakers, that latter part of that statement is just how I feel: "...imaging and soundstaging capabilities second to no speaker I have at any price." Now that's what I am talking about! Too bad they are so ugly!

P.S. # 2 Okay, I just get so excited when I read the full conclusion of Michael Fremer's Quatro review. For those who haven't read it, I urge you to do so and then tell me that it doesn't give you chills of excitement. Check it:
http://www.stereophile.com/floorloud...en/index1.html

I think his comment about being not particularly engaged emotionally has to do with the speakers givng "TMI" or revealing too much of the recording. He said that he'd rather not see the wires, so I don't think too revealing is really a con, if that is in fact what he meant by his comment(s). Who knows, though...


You are right bud; reasons just like this make it darn near impossible to settle on one ultimate set of speakers. And you are correct about the honeymoon effect; we've all been there. But I am not going to repeat...I hope.

I am prepared to eventually want a different set of speakers, but my goal is to make that upgraditis dormant for many years. I don't want a speaker that performs well with Jazz but poor with rock and vice versa. I need something that excels at everything I throw at it, and that is why this journey is going to be so difficult.

Are you implying that I don't?