I know they may not look it, but I think they would be different enough to warrant your time, which I know is in very short supply for this sort of thing.

I had Jon convert one of my existing A2rx-c boxes with the new drivers, tweeter wave guide, and crossover.

Acoustically, I almost didn't recognize it. It was that different (and better).

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

Thanks for the suggestions guys. Unfortunately I can't go dual subs now (monetary constraint) and probably couldn't go dual in the future (WAF constraint lol) so that leads me to believe I might be best suited to go with a PSA V1801 or an equivalent company's capable output sub. Ah, decisions decisions. I hadn't read your review @JimWilson from that original line of product those years ago, but it's comforting (and frankly not surprising from my interactions with him) to know that Jon's high quality of work continues to carry through his product lines.

What that really does is set the table for the upcoming L series line. Very exciting times!

Nice! Wondering if you have tried the speakers a bit farther apart, with some toe-in? I suspect you could get a larger image in that configuration.

@AudioNewGuy
Also, concerning the center speaker...
When I was setting mine up, Jon wrote that he suggests using a vertical orientation when possible.

If my memory is faulty and this suggestion is incorrect, I hope one of you with more technical knowledge will elaborate.

Interesting as I don't believe anyone has compared the old series with the new. Glad to hear that the new arx 1.4 are a step up from the previous version. I am very tempted to try a pair.

They've got free one way shipping now. Just a friendly reminder😉.

@RayGuy Good suggestion, I'll try playing around with that tonight and see if there is any difference. I also need to re-run Audyssey, as the last time I ran that was when they were in a much smaller temporary room. I imagine that in itself could make a noticeable difference.

@glennds Even if having the A2.4 being vertical is/was the preference for a center channel, I wouldn't have the room to do so based on how I've mounted the TV. All the set up I had done was specifically on having the center lay horizontal.

Quick note: Multiway speakers generally 'prefer' the drivers aligned vertically. MTMs can be especially finicky about this although if they are they also tend to simply have poor off-axis behavior.

The A2.4 isn't very notchy off-axis and so it works nicely as a horizontal center. It just happens to work even better as a vertical speaker for whatever implementation it finds itself in.

As far as I can see, point-four is the final version of these models. About all we can do now is keep the value and QC as focused as possible. I'm glad the A2.4's acoustical workings were worth the uptick in price. I hope the team can likewise elevate the A5.4 a smidge, due in Fall.

I am going to be running a 7.1.4 atmos setup. I already own the 7.1 components and all of the speakers are arx. (2 a5's, 1 a2 and 4 a1's)


Now that I am ready to add 4 speakers to the ceiling, any suggestions? Will it even matter? I have 4 speakers from the builder already installed, but I doubt those will be the long term solution.

There has to be some folks running this setup already right?

I'm running A2.4 for LCR, and I used the Atlantic IC6-OBA, and really like them. Great sound quality, good response well below 80 Hz, and priced around $200 each. I got them from JD at AVS. That being said, I don't think you can go too far wrong with any decent "full-range" in-ceiling speaker. They are for effects only, and timbre matching is not real important.

Thanks, those looks really nice. In the literature they even seem to mention object based sound formats as a design consideration, so that is very cool.

I will eventually be looking to expand my 5.1 to 5.1.2. $200 for a ceiling speaker is a bit much though for my tastes. My rears are wall mounted Fluance basically because the main listening position is a couch up against the wall. Didn't make sense to use anything from Chane there for my application but I love them for my LCR.

Probably be looking for something more in the $100/each range for my ceiling since they will be largely unused in most content.

Received my Chane 2.4 L/R today.


Good god.


The clarity is astounding, like nothing I've ever heard. Even my wife was thoroughly impressed, and she could care less about speakers.

If they sound this good day one, I can't imagine what another 30 hours will do.

I'll make some more in-depth comments later, but it's safe to say I'm a huge fan of Chane, and very thankful that Mr. Lane makes such a fine speaker at an affordable price.

Big props to MPK as well for the huge comparison!

Glad you're set up. My wife has always been very vocal that the lack of shrillness in the Chane line, going back to the first gen "Arx" models, has been very preferable to her.

She absolutely HATES the A3RX-C towers I use as surrounds, though. They're so lifelike and natural sounding (and dynamic) that they regularly startle the ever living sh** out of her. Which just makes me love them more! Lol.

In all seriousness, feed them quality, lossless material (FLAC, ALAC, WAV, etc) and they will truly sing.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

On a general note, the A2.4s in 2.0 are acquitting themselves amazingly well with the following 96khz/24bit FLAC album at HDTracks dot com:

http://www.hdtracks.com/holst-the-pl...ch-zarathustra

The Planets, bruh! THE PLANETS!

I'm not sure it's the best recording/rendition I've heard of it. I may still prefer the Dutoit/Montreal version, but that's only available at 44.1/16bit. The above recording, however, really takes advantage of the truly ethereal quality that high bitdepth, high sample rate music can provide. Capturing the sense of space and the orchestral "air" that these planar tweeters provide like few others anywhere near this price point.

My favorites are Mars and Jupiter.

The Planets, by Gustav Holts (a Britain, of Germanic ancestry) was attributed by John Williams as being a direct influence on him as he authored the original Star Wars sound track. Especially the track Mars, for the Imperial March. And you can TOTALLY hear it.

The first track of the actual album, Sehr breit, is the song used famously in likely the best known sequence in Kubrick's A Space Odyssey 2001.

It has SERIOUS low organ bass at the beginning. I'd guess below 25hz. Tread carefully with any 2.0 setup. These Chane midwoofers just don't quit, but the organ had them MOVING. If you have a sub, keep an eye on excursion. As Jon says, don't do stupid stuff, and you'll be fine.

In sum, just an excellent compilation put out by Chandos. Recorded recently, August of 2016, if memory serves.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

I think I read in one of the recent comparison threads that Dennis Murphy ordered a pair of 1.4s to measure break-in. I've been trying to keep an eye out - results aren't posted yet, right?

I think I meant to ask you about yours yesterday...I'm excited for what's in store over there, glad they arrived and are sounding great!

We all hear it different, but my experience was like yours - they sounded fantastic out of the box; their character was very apparent, despite needing some time to stretch.

Almost daily these speakers still surprise with their ability. Pretty amazing. Have fun with yours!

I think that plan has been abandoned, based on Dennis's posts.

Probably for the best, as I'm not sure how many folks would trust Ford to objectively "measure" anything from Chevrolet, or vice versa. I don't really see a role for another speaker manufacturer to suddenly begin acting as if they are a neutral third party observer. Not saying anything bad about Dennis at all. To the absolute contrary, he's a great dude. But this is a human nature issue in my mind.

Frankly, I wouldn't trust Jon to "objectively" test speakers from anybody else, either. No offense to Jon.

I respect Dennis's view that break in isn't a thing, on any speaker. He's said it repeatedly here on AVS. I also respect the observations of the majority of Chane owners, going back past 2010, who speak to the contrary. I'm not really in a position to say who's right. Not sure anybody else is either.

Oh, and the issue has been beaten to absolute death here on AVS alone, with many senior members stating they observed it and many others stating they didn't. I just don't think much was going to get added to the discussion that hadn't already been said a thousand times over.


Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

Gotcha, thanks. Guess I missed those.

Congrats!! Glad you enjoying them and yes they will get better

I'm in a 40x20 concrete basement and the JTR 218 gives the couch TR and it's about 8-10 feet away. I also just tried dual SubM's and learned I prefer ported but there was a very notable difference between the two at times. While I was playing this past weekend, I took some extra liberty w/ the 218. We are in the flight line of a near by reserve unit and they often fly a group CH-47 Chinooks; Terminator Genysis was playing in the basement while my other two family members were outside on the deck, they thought the Chinooks were coming in

The list of good ID subs is growing but IMHO I'm set on sticking w/ the output and sound of vented 18's. I still want to redo my tv space and I hope I can get Jeff on the phone to discuss options when that time comes.

Yeah, if one is going to go sealed, going big pays off. Like dual 21" drivers and at least 4000 watts RMS.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

And I learned that my ears like ported vs sealed at least in my basement. I did like the finesse and SQ of the Seatons but certain sounds were reproduced better w/ the 218 thus my liking.

I know what you mean. There's an effortless, lush, thick quality to "ported bass" that is truly difficult to replicate with sealed.

My wife has described it as the impression of endless headroom for most of the playback envelope, especially at lower output levels.

Those pro drivers used in the 218 are severely under rated. That's an excellent sub.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

I went through a similar comparison. See thread below. It depends a lot on the room. In my case the sealed Seatons beat out the Cap 1400.

Dual Seaton Submersive HP on the way!

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?sha...9&share_type=t


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fascinating thread.

Don't get me wrong as I'm a huge fan of sealed. In fact, I'm having a sealed dual opposed sub built for me that would handily eclipse two Submersive HPs in output and, hopefully, fidelity.

I've found that, with enough output headroom, one can get a sealed sub to have that lushness of a ported. But, especially for difficult rooms, I have at times struggled in getting them to sound right.

I wonder how much of a function this it's of the inherently lower group delay and better impulse response of sealed subs..... Or due to the fact that some contributions of the vent are out of phase with the driver, depending on frequency.

Fantastic thread, sir.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

I am glad you found it interesting. It was a great learning for me and I had great folks helping including @Mark Seaton and @enricoclaudio . That thread is one for the books and I will gladly point folks comparing ported and sealed to have a read of it just to be better informed

Having heard a Cap 1400 in a larger room (it was superb; but it was also dialed-in and "fit" the room well), I know that it is a superb subwoofer. But, as you explored, every room is different and you were facing placement limitations as well as individual room characteristics that may not have favored any vented subwoofer. To have Mark Seaton and Enrico (associated with Rhythmik subs; another fantastic sub maker) helping you had to make the task seem less daunting....but what a journey! Thank you for sharing.

I also liked how you noted that, with respect top how subs interact with rooms, the ported vs vented debated can be become quite convoluted when one considers room (and structure) interactions.

I've bookmarked that for my future review. Simply awesome thread. THAT, dare I say, exemplifies what this forum is for; people helping people.

Just wanted to let the Chane gang know that I finally have "completed" my home theater. I was planning on a DIY HT-18 plus Nu3000dsp. But I started thinking it was extreme overkill for my tiny space, which I wouldn't mind but my neighbors might. Almost jumped on the RBH I-12 before it sold out but then ran across a great deal from a local member; ended up getting a SVS PC-12 NSD for $300. It works great for my space with the small footprint, and is still way more sub than I probably need. It's really amazing finally hearing solid 20hz extension!


I think I'm fine with the KEF center that comes with the KHT 3005se set, as larger centers to me can sometimes sound unatural for dialogue depending on how they were recorded, and the rears for the most part sound great as well. Obviously my a2.4 mains sound amazeballs.


I do wonder about my specific setup, which out of necessity has the rears placed extremely close to us. Imagine a king size bed, with walls right up to the edge of the bed. The headboard is basically built into a nook measuring 3' deep, 6' wide and 6' tall. So the furthest away the rears can be placed is about 2' from each of our heads (RS is 2' from my head, LS is 2' from wife, baffles are about 5.5' apart).

These are turned down about 7db to blend with the fronts, which works great, but the problem is I mostly hear mine and the wife mostly hears hers. I'm wondering if we'd be better off with dipolar rears? I know they're mostly frowned upon these days but I'm wondering if my awkward setup might be one of the rare times when they'd be preferable?

I also have an extra set of matching rears, and a 7.1 reciever. I know no one recommends having 7.1 when you have no room behind the MLP, but I wonder if in this case it might actually help, giving us both more of a stereo, balanced rear soundstage. Maybe just a single rear for 6.1?



Also, off topic, but I may be interested in splitting a set of a1.4's with a forum member; does anyone out there have any interest in a single a1.4? I may run an a1.4 as a center, and just sell the whole KEF set and use the money to fund some rears.

ETA: @Jon Lane , those surrounds that you're working on (the ones that are supposed to go with a1.4/2.4 line, but are smaller in the depth dimension), are you at liberty to say if they'll be using the same planar tweeter? I assume they'll be sealed or front ported for wall placement?

Yes to the planar and yes to not being rear-ported.