2. speakers
  3. 135676-2227

Contemplating DEVORE SPEAKERS (and others)....LONG audition report of many speakers

Told you it was long!

I figure what the heck, some people may find all of it interesting, maybe only some, maybe none.  No one forced to read it.  So onward....

Folks,

I've had Thiel 3.7s for several years and love them dearly. As I've mentioned in other threads, I have to downsize simply due to some ergonomic and aesthetic issues in my room - the speakers have to go partially by the entrance and so any big, deep speakers tend to get in the way.

Over the last two years or so I did a whole bunch of auditioning of many speakers over a year ago to find a replacement - Audio Note, Audio Physic, Focal, Raidho monitors, JM Reynaud, Paradigm Persona, various Revel models, Monitor Audio, Proac, Kudos, Harbeth, Joseph Audio...

I was going to give a report on all of them individually, at one point, but it's been a while so I'll just throw out some thumbnail impressions. They aren't meant to be particularly descriptive of the sound so much as brief reasons as to why I enjoyed or moved on from those speakers. I always sought the best set up achievable for an audition, but of course that's still not like being able to tune a speaker in one's own room. So caveats given, on with some brief impressions:

Audio Note:

(I forget which exact model but it was in the "quite expensive but not impossible" zone for me)
Excellent clarity. Good impact. Nice woody tonality (as in does wood instruments like cello, stand up bass etc with a convincing tone). My main issue is that I could really hear the corner loading aspect of the sound, especially in the lower mids down. Not that the bass was incontinent per se, more that I was just aware of the way the illusion of the bigger bass and sound was being created, in terms of using wall re-enforcement.

Also, I'm a real stickler about instrumental tone and timbre. I've always found that the more room you introduce into the sound, especially in the upper frequencies, the more it will tend to cast a scrim of room sound over the timbre of voices and instruments, homogenizing the most delicate aspects of the timbre. As the Audio Notes pretty much require or are meant to use the room, this was an aspect it would seem hard to get around. (That's one reason I tend to like speakers that will work closer to my listening position).

Audio Physic:

I'm very familiar with the AP sound - have had the Virgos, Scorpios and Libra in my home and heard much of the line through the years. The Avanti was terrific, tonally neutral sounding, clear lively treble without ear piercing. And of course their magical disappearing act, which I love.   But didn't have enough of the richness I'd become used to with the bigger Thiels. I suspect the larger Codex woud be killer, but they get in to the too deep/large category.

Focal

I've always found Focal to have a "look at me" sound to their tweeter. Nonetheless I often admired the rich tonality of their large speakers at audio shows. Unfortunately I never found this to transfer to their smaller stand mounted speakers. They struck me as more clinical and left me cold. Recent Audition of the Kanta 2 still had the "check out our TWEETER!" Focal sound, but was smooth and vivid enough.   Unfortunately to my ears sounded too "hi-fi" with disjointed bass.   My Thiels at home sounded far more organic and believable.

Raidho

Listened to the tiny X1s which were remarkable performers for their size. Super clear, clean, open, killer soundstaging, good snap on drums - represented Joe Morello's solos on Brubeck at Carnegie Hall far more convincingly than any tiny speaker has a right to. Ultimately, too small.

Dealer had a killer deal on the larger C 1.2 stand mounted speakers and I had hope there. I have never, ever liked a ribbon tweeter with cones because every time I hear the discontinuity. I'd say the Raidhos are the first time I did not hear that discontinuity. So it was all that air and delicacy without the usual drawback. However, I'm thinking part of the magic for this has to do with their house curve, which isn't flat but has a "concert hall" dip in the upper mids (I think). Ultimately I tended to hear this as a coloration, a recessing of a portion of the sound. I'm used to the Thiels which at my place are phenomenally linear sounding top to bottom. So there would be percussion instruments, piano parts, and other instruments that would be more distant and subdued on the Raidhos, losing some of the realistic liveliness. I didn't really hear more detail than I was used to from my Thiels, found the sound a bit "grayed" tonally, though rich in the mids and upper bass. These things KICK in terms of upper bass presence and sound much bigger than they are. But I also found that a slightly over-bearing.

In fact, that's a problem I often have with monitor speakers. So many of them are engineered to sound bigger than they are so you don't feel like you are missing base, but the goosing of the bass to achieve this can be to my ears a bit obnoxious vs the more linear bass of a good floor standing speaker (though down lower, they can have their room problems...my Thiels do not).

JM Reynaud Offrande Supreme v2

I was very serious about these speakers. I'd been around for the initial JMR hype years ago, and heard most of their models at a local store. Always had nice tone, both incisive and warm, but a bit too far into the ever-present-coloration territory to my ears. Still, I believe the Supremes had been updated since then and I had two separate auditions at a Dealer when I was visiting Montreal.

They certainly had the JMR virtues. Super clear, almost hot high end, lively presence all around, yet somehow allied to a gorgeous warm tone. This brings in one of the things I like in a speaker - a warm tone not necessariily in the sense of a ripe lower midrange, but rather timbrally - warm in the sense that when an acoustic guitar track is played through the speaker, the signature is that of the warmth of wood, instead of the cold, electronic coloration of most systems. The JMR does this with acoustic instruments and voices. Everything with an amber or blond-wood "glow."   And they definitley have a dynamic/transient/open sound that gives a feeling of musicians being right there, playing right now vibe.

Ultimately I found they were a bit biting to my ear in the upper frequencies. While the forwardness was a boon to putting musicians right in front of me, it also tended to fore-shorten depth. An always "they are here" vs "I'm transported to there" vibe. Also, the bass which was really big and deep - they are huge stand mount speakers! - was a bit on the pudgy side. But I get why people love them. If I had the opportunity I'd have liked to try them at home. (Though...maybe not. I actually don't like how they look, and REALLY don't like the JMR wood finishes).

Paradigm Persona

(I believe it was the 3F). Yup, these babies are clear, clear, clear and grain free. They are balanced top to bottom and were, like the Revel, the closest to my Thiel 3.7 speakers in terms of sounding balanced from top to bottom. Drum snares, cymbals, rim hits, percussion, guitar strings etc all had a fairly riveting precision. They had an open-window into the recording studio feel on almost every track. Plus, for their size they sounded BIG, including the image sizes, depth, width of the soundstage. A tremendous speaker for the money. Ultimately I couldn't get on with their looks, at least for my room. But most important, I did find them somewhat fatiguing to listen to after a while, and a bit less organic than my Thiels. (Though I'd bet that could change for the better if set up at my home on my gear).

Revel

I'd repeat most of what I just wrote about the Paradigms. They sounded similar, though the Paradigms seemed to have a next-level sense of purity and transparency vs the Revel. And the Revels tended to sound just a bit more linear and controlled top to bottom. The Revels just sounded like really competent speakers, but didn't grab me.
Again, something about the timbre/tone I get with the Thiels (and some other speakers) have an "it" factor I don't get with the Revels.

Monitor Audio (Gold, I believe - a smaller floor stander)

I've always liked the Monitor Audio sound. My father-in-law uses a HUGE pair of Monitor Audio monitors from the 80's that still strike me as one of the best marriages of believable tone with size and richness I've heard.
I own Monitor Audio bronze monitors for various uses, including home theater surrounds. Though I found once they moved to the Platinum line, with ribbons, the tone became a bit too bleached for my comfort.
The smaller Gold line still was able to do the "golden, bronze" tones in the upper frequencies...just turning toward silver a bit. They were astonishingly clean and clear, with a rainbow of timbral colors coming through. My main gripe is that I realized nothing actually sounded "real" - in the sense of believably organic. Everything sounded a bit hard around the edge - sibilance in vocals for instance being laid bare as processed in a bit too ruthless manner.

Proac - D20R (I believe...)

Love the look of these especially the wood finish in ebony on the model I auditioned. Would really have been a perfect size replacement for the Thiels, and went down about as low. Unfortunately I couldn't get around the extremely obvious character of the ribbon tweeter vs the mids/bass. I was always aware of it, and generally found the sound too cool in the upper frequencies to really get into.  Bass was also not particularly impressive in terms of tone and control.  One of the more disappointing speaker auditions.

Kudos

You really don't hear much about Kudos around here. Lack of dealers and North American presence I guess (as it seems to me a majority of people posting here are from North America...if I am indeed right about that).
Anyway, at a TAVES shows a few years ago I was frankly astonished by the sound coming from a pair of Kudos Super 20 floor standing speakers. It had a brilliant, reach out and grab me "alive" tone that made my brain think "real performance" more than most of what I'd heard that day. A bit forward...but wow what an effect. So they went on to my radar.

Turns out a local dealer carried Kudos, and there I heard some very small floor standing Kudos X3 speakers.
Well, there it was! That tone! Like the bigger model I'd heard at the show, this one had a dialed up upper frequency range that gave liveliness and detail. But it was, somewhat like the JMR speakers, allied to a generally warm tone, with a spectrum of timbral color to trumpet, wood blocks, acoustic guitar etc. If found the sound quite compelling, and so wondered about Kudos higher end models. As it turned out, Kudos in the last year has come out with the Titan range, a trickle down from their flagship. I really liked the design of the Titan 606 speakers, they were a great replacement size for the Thiels from the specs. But...my local dealer didn't want to bring them in so I would never hear them (I certainly did not want him to order them just for my sake, given I couldn't know before hearing them if I'd want to buy them).

But then during a recent trip to Europe I ended up in London for a couple days, so I found a Kudos dealer there.
And not only did he have the 606s for me to hear, but also the literally just introduced stand mounted Titan 505 that had many people raving at a recent British audio show.   Very cool. Both speakers, as with most Kudos speakers, employ isobaric loading for the bass.

Both the 505 and 606 displayed the Kudos house sound which was that lively top end. Great for adding bit to guitar picking, hearing the bow on strings, transient aliveness etc. Even if not strictly neutral, it's fun (so long as timbres to my ears are otherwise organic).   I found the 505 to actually sound a bit less balanced than the floor standing speaker. I suppose this is my allergy to the "tiny speaker trying to sound like a big speaker" tuning, but the bass seemed somewhat over-warm, and the speakers themselves a tad clinical from the mids up. Still, they were spacious, enthusiastic sounding, with great separation of instruments and voices. And certain tracks like Lightfoot's If You Could Read My Mind were actually magical on the 505. A similar warm timbre to the JMR speakers, and the added top end sparkle livened up the guitars and strings which can sound a bit tepid on many other speakers.

The larger 606 speakers sounded more linear, richer, a bit darker, and produced a satisfyingly large sound for their size. Similar to the Revel or Paradigm speakers.   The upper frequency balance was a double edged sword: it could make drum high hats, snares, cymbals, guitars stand out in particularly, and satisfyingly, vivid relief. But could also highlight the studio/microphone/effects on voices making vocals sound a bit more "hi-fi" than most. But naturally recorded vocals were by the same token vivid and clear.   Bass had an interesting character, sort of tight, punchy and big...a sense of the bass "spreading" in the room.   My impression veered between "impressive" on the bass and "hmm...not sure I'm sold on this isobaric bass."  I'll say that Herbie Hancock's Chameleon, one of my test songs on most speakers, was produced in a particularly compelling, vivid manner. The drums were just crystal clear and had that "live drum playing" feeling.   It was one of those "wow" moments that kind of haunt you when you hear a certain track sound different and more realistic than normal.

That said, some other tracks veered into the intolerable territory (e.g. horns too piercing on Earth Wind and F ire live). It's the kind of audition that was very promising in some areas, leaving me thinking "these COULD be awesome if I could tame the problems and keep the good parts." Maybe on tubes, and in my well damped room.   But a one time, not terribly long audition didn't allow me to commit to such an expensive purchase, when I hear some things that leave me with misgivings.I wish these models landed locally because I could further warm up to them, but that was the only shot at them.

Harbeth:

I auditioned the various models - Monitor 30.1, C7ES-3, Super HL5 Plus. (Also listened to the 40s, since they had them set up).

I love the Harbeth sound and there's little need to describe it, since so many are familiar. But wow...their particular magic with voices is something. They somehow capture voices actually being produced by an organic person vs an electronic version of a person. No matter what type of material, jazz, processed pop, R&B, even electronica/dance, they always seem be be able to find the "person" singing in the mix.   And of course they have such a smooth, full, rich sound with acoustic instruments sounding very much themselves.

The Monitor 30.1 had those qualities, but I was a bit too aware of their bass limitations (cut off at the knees), and was also aware of a bit of darkness, lack of "air." In the close my eyes "could I believe that guitar or person is really there" test, a darkening of tone, a shelving of the upper frequencies, are usually a dead giveaway to me of the artifice.   But within it's range....gorgeous.

The C7ES-3 were wonderful. There was that bass extension! Displayed the Harbeth mids if not quite as refined. But over all I found the bass a little less controlled than I'd want.

Super HL5 Plus was the Goldilocks choice of the group. It had the added bass extension I heard from the C7ES, but with better integration and control. It had super refined, open, smooth, rich midrange, but with the added top end openness and extension (addition of the super tweeter?) that made the sound more realistic and believable to me. Though I was still hearing some things that I felt my Thiels did better so I wasn't quite sure yet.
Unfortunately, when I came back to this particular store to audition the HL5 Plus I didn't have a good audition experience.   I've described the experience elsewhere here, so won't repeat it. But suffice it to say, it did not make me want to move forward with this particular store. (I have more recently had very good interactions with this store, so I would say my bad experience probably turned out to be an anomaly at that location).

Anyway, the Harbeths dropped off my radar for over a year until I heard the Super HL5 Plus sounding superb in the Montreal Audio show.   Intriguing. Later on an audio mart I saw a pair in a gorgeous rosewood finish for, by far, the best price I've ever seen for a used Harbeth.   I grabbed them, knowing I could definitely sell them without losing money,  with this thought: They are not in the finish I want. So I'll use them as a "home audition" of the Harbeths and if I love them, I'll sell these ones and go to my local dealer to buy brand new ones in the finish I require.

It turned out I really really liked the Super HL5 Plus, but didn't love. They did all the wonderful Harbeth things, that big rich sound, in this model especially, also with a studio-monitor clarity, and generally organic sound.
However, I simply found my Thiels did essentially everything the Harbeths did, but better. I never could get a satisfying depth to the soundstage of the Harbeths (not usually a problem in my room), always sounding a bit fore-shortened. And it seemed a flip-side of the fullness/lively cabinet design was a certain "filling in the spaces with texture" quality. The Thiels, for instance, separated the Los Angelese Guitar Quartet's guitars more effortlessly, with more precision and realism and tonal density, but without sacrificing any image size or warmth of tone.  Nothing quite sounds like the Harbeth on vocals. But ultimately they could not budge me from the Thiels and I sold them.

That said, I now have a store near me selling Harbeths and I'm in there buying vinyl a lot. Every time I hear the Harbeths playing I just want to sit down and listen, thinking "These are so beautiful. Why don't I own them?" But then I remember, I did...I did the comparisons. Would love them in a second system, though.

Joseph Audio - Pulsar and Perspectives.

As a long time high audio rag reader, I've long been familiar with the Joseph Audio name, but it wasn't until last year in Montreal that I actually heard a JA speaker: the Pearl 3.   Jeff Joseph was playing an acapella group piece and I was just stopped in my tracks. It wasn't just the clarity - tons of high end speakers produce vivid vocals. It was the authenticity of the timbre of the voices! It just sounded bang on. Not cold, gray, steely, silvery, or darkened, or all the "off-timbre" electronic signatures that define for me hi-fi voices vs real. It was that human warmth timbre, that sounded just like the people talking in the room. This was so rare and magical it put the JA speakers immediately on my radar. Upon reading that the stand mounted Pulsars had a similar presentation I found a local dealer and auditioned them. Yup, they did! They were fairly mesmerizing. Even despite my misgivings about small speakers trying to sound big, the Pulsars did this better than almost any other stand mounted speaker I've heard - very rich and satisfying. Though I did note a bit of excess warmth here and there in the lower midrange, upper bass.   And I still wondered if I could end up with a stand mounted speaker after living with big floor standers. At home, I listen not only in front of the speakers for "critical listening" but I'll also crank them to listen just down the hall, in my work office or through the house. And at these times I really start to hear the limitation on the small speaker. It can sound like it's going low, but it becomes sort of "fake bass" in a way, where it just doesn't have the solidity and impact of a big speaker.

So the dealer suggested I listen to the floor standing Joseph Audio Perspective model. I said I don't know, they cost more than I was thinking of spending. But, he persisted and...his up-sell worked ;-)

The Perspectives really grabbed me. They sounded more linear than the Pulsars to my ears through the mids down, had really thick, punchy bass that seemed to make every type of music fun, yet seemed controlled enough to make "audiophile" stuff very realistic.   They really disappeared with a huge soundstage and great imaging. I'm a tone/timbre buy first, but I ultimately want speakers to disappear and soundstage well - it's part of the illusion, the magic show, that I appreciate and that makes me want to sit in front of a high end system in the first place.

But what really grabbed me was the overall tone/timbre of the presentation! I remember playing some Chet Baker and some Julie London mono recordings and being shocked at how clear the sound was - how the Perspectives took a central mono image of voice, guitar, bass, drums etc and seemed to effortlessly unravel the different timbres and individual players. And how realistic the voices were.   Another moment I remember were some tracks from the Bullet soundtrack (I'm a soundtrack fiend). Every instrument that entered the mix - a single sax, a flute, an organ, a group of saxes, horns...sounded incredibly pure, distinct and accurate in timbre!   That's one of the things I always loved about going to the symphony, and sitting close, closing my eyes: that rainbow of different acoustic sources, materials, shiny silvery bells, brassy cymbals, woody reeds, woody cellos, golden hued horns...

The Perspectives (and the Pulsars) were giving me more of this sensation, of "surprise" in how each new instrument sounded, than I typically get from most speakers. And they did it with a particular purity, and lack of hash in any part of the frequency spectrum, making for a less mechanical sound than usual (Fremer nailed this in his Pulsar review).

Plus there was a great sense of "flow" to the Perspectives, the way dynamically the sound would swell dramatically when called fo (again, soundtracks were great on the Perspectives).  All these elements came together to produce a great emotional connection to music through the speakers.

So, they sounded special to me.

I got a home audition and they continued to sound beautiful in my home. But having both the big Thiels and the Josephs meant I could compare, which inevitably gave some ground to the Thiels - the bigger more realistic image size, the slightly better precision in imaging and tonal density, a more linear presentation from top to bottom from the Thiels, where the Perspectives could sound a bit "puffy" in the bass sometimes.
And yet, the Perspectives still had a magic the Thiels couldn't do with tone. I remember playing back Talk Talk's Happiness Is Easy and thinking "I literally don't think reproduced sound gets better than this."

So stuck between A and B I realized this: I couldn't give up the Thiels. After all my auditioning, nothing really did everything as well in the same package and the 3.7s had become very rare on the used market, no longer made, so it could be a big regret to let them go.

BUT...I was also bitten by the Perspectives. Once heard, they were hard to unhear.
So I decided, dammit, I'll have both! I tend to hoard speakers somewhat, so I'd keep the Thiels but buy the Perspectives, and I'd have the Thiels to throw in to the room whenever I wanted the Thiel sound.

But....this meant I'd no longer be selling my Thiels to pay for new speakers. So I'd have to save up for the Perspectives. And this I've been doing.

Then, aha! A pair of Thiel 2.7 speakers in the ebony finish I've always wanted showed up on Audiogon. I grabbed them for a killer price and they have been fantastic! Smaller than the 3.7s, better looking in the room, they have the Thiel attributes. Done...right? Naw...I haven't been a fervent audiophile for decades for nuthin'.
I've been on track toward the Perspectives for so long, it's hard to get off.  So once I got the 2.7s my thinking changed to "Well..now I can sell the big Thiels and have that money to put toward the Perspectives!"

So as I've been readying to sell the big Thiels, and about to spend more than I ever have on a pair of speakers (Perspectives are expensive to us Canucks), I thought "If I'm about to spend this much, I better do some due diligence and make sure I didn't leave another option on the floor."   So I recently checked out a speaker brand that I'd wondered about for a while now. Devore Fidelity.

And that will lead to my next post.


prof

Showing 39 responses by prof

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

ghasley,

I appreciate your latest update.  You are out there in the Devore weeds sending missives from the front lines!

Your description matches my expectations for these speakers.

Though I'm curious: how deep do they seem to go in the bass?  Does the scale of the sound still fill at all big?

Also: as to coherence, what type of listening distance have you tried?  Anything closer than 8 feet?

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@ghasley 

 

Still enjoying your o/babies?  Any change in your impressions over time?

 

Looks like the O/Baby will be shown in Munich.

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Excellent,  ghasley!

 

I'm sure my local dealer will get the o/baby in.  If/when I hear them I'll of course post my impressions here.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

Thanks for the link ghasley.

First positive review.

I admit though, I find it tough to sit through Steve's video reviews.  I find it a lot of verbiage to get through (often unrelated to the speakers) to get the bits of information I'm looking for.

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Thanks for the update ghasley!

I have to hear these o/babys some day!

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

ghasley,

I'm always interested in the listening distance too :-)

 

Still wondering if the O/baby holds up at closer to 8' listening distances (unlike the other O speakers).

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

Thanks ghasley.   Sounds promising.

Oh, and I forgot to mention:  what a listening room!

It looks like you could place practically any speaker in there and it should sound good.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

I just noticed:  this thread at the moment has 62,884 views!

Wow, that's a lot of folks reading these mumblings!   Whoda thunk it?

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

baaach,

 

I love the Thiels.  As I wrote quite clearly I'm not getting rid of them. But I've always enjoyed owning more than one speaker brand because I like the sound of different speakers.   I'm not sure you noticed I actually ended up purchasing the Joseph speakers, years ago?  And love them!. ( Which is why your reply seemed odd).

And...who knows?  One day maybe I'll add some O/Babys to the collection if I like them too.

But...thanks for the advice. 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

baaach,

I'd say they get equal time, tipping toward the Josephs.

However I've actually had the Thiels in the system for a long time now.  The reason is that over the past 6 months or so I'd been doing tons of comparisons of amplifiers in my system, tube rolling, etc.   Since I began that with the Thiels in the system, I have kept them in to keep that as my reference point.

I plan to send my Joseph speakers to upgrade to the graphene version.  Unfortunately I missed the boat for doing that earlier: it's possible (but unknown at this time) that the cost will be going up. (Like everything else...)

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@70seradylan 

 

I'm curious about what other speakers you've compared with the Devore O/baby.

What stuck out about the Devores that you liked best?

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

I went on a gear-selling binge this last couple of years, the funds go in to my "audio equipment account" for future purchases.  I'd sold my last available gear that I would part with, leaving me with some funds.  They have been earmarked for sending my Joseph Perspectives to the factory to upgrade to the graphene version.

The only little voice tugging at me is possibly putting that money towards the o/baby speakers.  On one hand, that would mean I'd have speakers from virtually all my favorite brands - Thiel, Joseph Audio, Devore (and Spendor).  Greedy b*stard that I am!

On the other hand, that doesn't fit as well with my attempt to shed gear :-)

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

fsonicsmith,

Oh yeah, I never indicated I wanted to get anything else.  I've done my search, as this thread attests :-)

It's just a question of whether I upgrade the Josephs vs grab some o/Baby speakers.  My mindset has been mostly upgrading the Josephs as my kind of end-game speaker, with the Thiels to throw in now and again.  Frankly another pair of speakers could be a tough sell in my place, given space constraints.   But the o/babys do sit in the back of my mind.  I have a local Devore dealer so can likely hear them some time.  But if I spend the available money on the Josephs, that would pretty much shut the door on the o/baby, which are still quite expensive here in Canada, especially as one would have to buy new.

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Thanks 70seradylan.

 

Seems like we hear things very similarly.

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

I've always wondered how the Devore Super Nines would compare to my Joseph Audio Perspectives.  They are almost the same size/design.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@disc

 

That’s great to hear! I’m glad my musings were of some help in your search.

I look forward to any impressions you want to share about the Perspectives Graphene.

 

Also, it's good to hear that Jeff Joseph is still interacting with customers.

I saved up the money to have my Perspectives upgraded to the Graphene version and have been ready and willing to send them to Joseph Audio for the upgrade. Unfortunately, despite my many efforts, I have not been able to get a reply from Joseph Audio since mid summer...:-(

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Great, do give us those impressions disc!

Again, good to hear things went smoothly communicating with Jeff Joseph.

I also had good communication with Jeff in the past. But for some reason it’s been a struggle since mid summer. Mid-summer, I’d asked about sending in my Perspectives for the upgrade and Jeff said they were waiting on a shipment of drivers, and also the price of the upgrade MIGHT be going up - to be determined. I’ve been wanting to find out the status of the upgrades, including if there’s any new price or when I can send my Perspectives in. But from then on it’s been radio silence. I tried emailing several times in September and the emails bounced back (the same ones that went through before). I tried contacting through the website. No answer. I tried phoning several times. No answer. I asked my dealer (who sold me the Perspectives) if he could get in contact with questions about the Perspective upgrade. It’s been a month and he has had no response as well. The last time I was able to get a reply from Jeff was in June.  I actually started to worry whether they were still in business (especially with the emails bouncing back).  So it's good to see someone is getting through.

I can certainly understand we are talking about a relatively small business with a small staff, and that supply chain stuff is especially problematic for many businesses including the electronics industry. But the lack of communication has indeed been frustrating. I’d like to put my saved money towards the Perspective upgrade, but if the cost has gone up substantially or it won’t be available for a long time I’d like to know that, maybe I’ll put the money toward something else instead.

 

 

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@ghasley 

Thanks!

I saw that posted on SH forums and to repeat what I wrote there:

Dang. Trying to keep my resolve in putting my saved audio funds to upgrading my Joseph Perspectives rather than buying yet another speaker. My resolve didn't need to read that

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@rsf507 

 

Your frustration and hesitation are understandable.

I've been wondering if I'd actually be able to send my Perspectives for the upgrade due to the radio silence.

Fortunately the local Joseph Audio importer finally got through and got some info.

The upgrade of course has gone up in price by quite a bit.  Sigh. I'd saved up (and sold some stuff) to afford it at the original price.  Now I'll have to figure out if I'm moving forward on this.

 

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

I have to say I’m still disappointed by the choice of finish on the o/baby. I don’t think I could stare at that finish all the time in my listening room - too bright, too bland. I prefer darker wood with a strong sense of grain. And I presume a custom finish would push them in to the prohibitively expensive realm for me at this point.

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@mrdseitzer 

 

I'm glad you found this thread useful!

Thanks for your comments!

Sorry, no I haven't heard the QLN speakers. They certainly are garnering a reputation.  Seems the going impressions are that they sound suave and smooth and rich, with surprising bass depth and impact.

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@arafiq 

 

Not yet.  It's expensive. I probably will but haven't pulled the trigger.

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

As I wrote early in the thread I really like Kudos speakers.

 

My Kudos dealer switched to NEAT speakers - mostly I think because he had to because it was difficult being a Kudos dealer in Canada or something.  Anyway, he made a big pitch about NEAT speakers so I gave them a listen at his store.

I've rarely heard speakers that bad.  They were so utterly bland.  I didn't have the heart to really tell him what I thought, but indicated I was sad to see the Kudos go.

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

I can't remember the NEAT model the dealer demoed for me, but they were one of the higher up models, fairly big as I recall.

It was just one set of speakers, one time, so I can't denounce all NEAT speakers.  But it left me not wanting to seek them out.

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Heads up for this big ol' thread:

I'm finally in a position to upgrade my Perspectives!

I plan to drop my speakers off at my local dealer tomorrow, to be sent to Joseph Audio for the graphene driver/crossover upgrade. 

Obviously I'll report back here my impressions.   I have no idea how long it will take though. 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Thanks boys.  As you can see, some things take a while for me :-)

Speaking of which I couldn't send my speakers out today as planned.  Hopefully within the next week.

I'm actually not going to be doing anything like a direct comparison between the old and new Perspectives, in that I have actually been listening to my Thiel 2.7s for a long time.  That's because I got on to experimenting with all sorts of stuff - from subwoofers to different amplifiers to tube rolling etc, and I wanted to keep the speakers constant as a baseline.   So it's actually been a while since I had the Perspectives in my system.  And since I'm still futzing around with stuff (now some isolation and room treatment) I figure no better time to have the Perspectives off getting upgraded.

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

^^ Did someone wake up sarcastic this morning?  ;-)

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

To finish off the above...

Quite a while ago I'd bought a curved diffusor to play around with:

 

 

I wanted to try diffusion for a sidewall reflection point rather than the absorbtion (heavy velvet) I'd been using.  Turned out I didn't care for the diffussor in front of the speaker at the reflection point on the wall. I found it brightened and hardened the sound from that side too much (probably wasn't optimal use for it anyway).  But I had much better luck placing it in positions behind one or another speaker, where it would make the sound a bit more snappy and focused.

Not long ago I tried it right in between and behind my speakers, sitting on the big center channel speaker I use for my home theater system.  Wow!  This was amazing!  The effect was to sort of make all the sound and imaging become both more textured, and lively and dense sounding.  Everything just became more solid and life-like!  And varying the position slightly gave all sorts of different tweaks to the sound - some more lush, others giving the upper mids more forward presence, etc.  So far I've found the combination of the effect of the Gaia footers and this diffusor to be really something.  The Gaias make the speakers disappear more and do more 3D, and the Diffusor brings back a sense of density and punch to the sound, close to a best of both worlds.

At this point I'm able to get from the Thiels all the qualities I have liked about them, yet added some of the aspects I liked in the Devore speakers, so I'm feeling super satisfied with the set up. 

I have not tried the diffusor or Gaias with the Joseph Audio Perspectives yet, as they are away being upgraded.  I have a feeling the combo might be magic!

Oh, also today I listened to some Audio Note speakers and the new Mo-Fi Source Point 10 speakers.  I'll write about them either here or in the Mo-Fi thread.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Since this thread tends to collect my various speaker impressions, I'm pasting in what I wrote about hearing the new Mo-Fi Source Point 10 speakers here as well:

 

-------------------------

Source Point 10s:

The SP10s were in a dedicated room, I'm guessing maybe 12' wide by maybe 16' deep, set up on the short wall, pulled probably about 4 feet in to the room, mild toe in towards the seating position. Listening sofa was probably 9 feet or so from the speakers. Room had some sidewall treatment - absorption mostly I think, maybe some diffusion.

First impression visually: Everyone who has reviewed these is right. They look "kinda big" for stand mounted speakers in photos and videos, but in person you will let out an involuntary Keannu Reeves level "Whoah!" They are beasts. Big, blocky, imposing in a room. Not something one will sneak past the other half. This is dedicated room type stuff - like the speakers should be paying rent! The finish (walnut) was "nice" though not in to the "lux" category. As for wider baffle design speakers I really like the Devore O/96 which are even wider, but to me the SP10s, while not ugly (I kind of like the design) are more imposing visually, almost brutalist in their presence.

Before I get in to details, my main take away was: I get why people are liking these speakers. I can see how they will become quite popular. I personally found them to have a fairly attractive sound, as a place to visit, but not to live with, if you know what I mean. And a major take away - these beasts are finicky!
Which will come out when I try to describe what I heard.

I listened to various tracks - first selections by the salesman, Addelle, Tracy Champman (fast car), some jazz/pop, some Zeppelin, then some of my usual test tracks.

From a seat on the listening sofa, leaning forward a bit, I was probably around 8 feet from the speakers and the immediate impression was of a big, rich, warm sound with a slight peak in the upper mids/lower highs, and beyond that a slight lack of "air." So for instance a track with stand up bass, female vocals, acoustic guitar, sax, drums etc, the sound was very big, rich, room filling from the upper bass down, the vocals had enough body to sound somewhat natural, and atop that "dark rich bassy" sound there was a sparkle so that the acoustic guitars would pop out in a nice, vivid manner, as would higher vocal transients, drum cymbals, upper register of a sax being played hard. So that richness with sparkle was quite inviting, and I can see how many would like it. It did, as mentioned, seem more rolled off in the highest frequencies lacking that last bit of shimmer or 'air' that makes a cymbal sound like it pops out of the sound and could be in the room with you. So I describe this as being a bit on the "darker" side of neutral. So that immediate impression was that, yeah, these are unlikely to measure as neutral speakers. I wouldn't go so far as to say they are in the Klipsch category, but I did hear a sort of similar sculpting of the sound.

But here's the thing: then I leaned backwards, in to the back seat of the sofa. As I did so, the sound changed and snapped in to focus, brightening, sounding more coherent, but also losing richness. There was now a greater sense of vividness, snap and "realism" to drums, wood blocks, vocals etc. The bass warmth cleared up somewhat. This was a significantly different presentation! So I started experimenting with different listening positions - closer, further, moving side to side, standing up, moving off axis etc.

For imaging, the image shifted fairly quickly to one speaker as I moved off axis. The tonal balance shifted a bit, but less so. Standing up the sound significantly "lightened" in tone, the timbre gaining a bit more edge and vividness, also sounding a bit leaner. (I actually somewhat liked that tone when standing).
Way off axis, the speakers still sounded nice, though things really snapped in in the centre listening position.

This was interesting because most of my experience with coaxially mounted drivers is that they have been very tolerant of off axis listening. But I suppose this is because the ones I've heard most - e.g. the KEF speakers and my Thiels, had the tweeters mounted with much smaller drivers. In the case of my Thiel 2.7s (and the bigger 3.7s I owned), Thiel had gone to lengths to reduce the surrounding mid driver's influence on the tweeter - the mid driver surrounding the tweeter is actually flat (corrugated, actually). I have been constantly amazed at how smooth and regular the sound is from the Thiels, whether I'm closer or further to them, listening off axis, from just inside or outside the room, the general sound character remains very consistent. That's also true of my Joseph speakers. But, man, the SP10s really were sensitive to listener position! If I recall correctly, it is due to the much larger 10" driver surrounding the tweeter, which I think AJ has said act as something of a wave guide. If so, that would help explain what I was experiencing.

Since the SP10s really changed character with listening distance (at least in that room) I tried to find the balance of "rich/warm" but still vivid enough in the highs to not sound obviously rolled off, hence some excitement. I was probably about 9 to 10ish feet or so at this point.

One thing I found is that generally speaking I found the sound to remain somewhat "speakerly." By that I mean, while they did excellent, vivid point-source imaging, TONALLY the speakers didn't totally "disappear" as apparent sound sources - there was a sort of boxy-sounding warmth I was often aware of, with those slightly exaggerated upper mid peak sort of perched on top, that reminded me "I'm hearing the sound from a speaker." I can't say that whether this was a resonance from the speaker, or due to it's particular frequency response design, or if (and I think this might be likely) the way the bass frequencies were interacting with this particular room. This is one reason why I view this as a finicky speaker.

The SP10s did bass! Subjectively with tracks that had low bass they sounded deep and really room filling. However, in this room I felt really low bass, e.g. from some stand up bass and a pop track with low synth/guitar bass, there was a bit too much "bloom." On the other hand, a track I often play, "Missing" by Everything But The Girl, has a bass line that is tough for many speakers to get right - it's a very round sounding pulsing bass line that can sound very ill-defined
on lots of speakers. It sounded really well controlled, dead center in the soundstage not blurring, and tight on the SP10s, so I could hear the distinct articulation from the bass player. The fact the SP10 could sound impressively tight with some bass, but overwarm with other stuff, made me think there was possibly some room interactions not favoring this speaker in the lower regions. I was not able to get a perfect balance in this regard - if I was close enough so the sound filled out, giving warmth to sax, vocals etc the bass could be too rich, if I moved to far back, I found the sound brightened and leaned out more than I cared for.

How about the sense of dynamics? From what I heard, very good but not top tier. I think I may have been expecting a bit too much, for some reason I thought this speaker might combine something more like the dynamic life I hear from horn speakers. But it wasn't really. They sounded fun and engaging and relatively propulsive in how they combined "feel it in the whole room" bass response with those vivid upper frequencies. But when I listened for how things like horns, wood blocks, bongos etc sounded, they didn't have that "holy cow" sense of solidity and propulsion that makes me think "THAT sounds like a wood block being played right in front of me." (I DID get those type of impressions from, for instance, the Klipsche La Scalas my friend had, as well as some other horn based speakers I've heard). I actually think my Thiels give a better impression of a solid/dense object popping out in to the room than what I heard from the SP10s.
(And the Devore O/96 as well).

One of the things that stuck in my mind was hearing Led Zeppelin on the SP10s. Kashmir in this case. The sound was generally punchy and fairly vivid. But Kashmir as any Zep listener would know, doesn't actually have much low bass. It's a pretty lean recording in that regard, which is kind of good to see how a speaker handles this - the recording doesn't have much bass to speak of, but Bonham is bashing away on those drums so a speaker better translate that energy! The SP10s did so quite well. So, yeah, they rock.

But I also heard the same Zep track (and others) on the B&W 803 D4 speakers. And there was definitely a contrast in the presentations. I ultimately find the B&W sound a bit too sculpted for my taste, that rising top end etc. However, damn, they HAVE sort of perfected "that" sound, and while they may not have chosen a perfectly flat frequency response, they have otherwise gone to fairly heroic methods in the design of their drivers/enclosure, emphasis on dynamics etc.
And it shows. Zeppelin on the B&Ws had an utter, open peering-in-to-the-studio sense of clarity from top to bottom. Not a jot of blur or darkness, whether I was focusing on the guitar, super vivid vocals, sparkling clean cymbals, or the tight holographically placed bass and kick drums. The SP10s did not have this type of 'holy cow' sense of clarity and control from top to bottom. (I also find my Thiels better in that regard). The SP10s had a "sweeter" more laid back sound, even WITH their slight peak in the lower treble. Can I see someone preferring the sound of the the SP10s, which can be seen as a very nice combination of richness with some vividness, but not overbearing or "analytical" in the old school parlance. The SP10s were generally more relaxing to listen to than the always-on-the-edge-of-my-seat vivid sound from the B&Ws.

Still, by the end of my listening session with the SP10s I was starting to feel a little ear fatigue! It could be that my ears are in a more sensitive phase (I sometimes get ear sensitivity), but I do think I was reacting somewhat to that slightly peaky sounding response, even if not overtly "bright" sounding to my ears, over time.

So, that's about all I have on these things. It wasn't a long speaker audition. Nor nearly as extensive as the ones I do for a speaker that I seem to really like (where I will play with speaker positioning in a room, not just my listening position, to get to the bottom of things).

To sum up: I found the SP10s to be something of a chameleon depending on where I sat. Closer they sounded rich and warm in the upper bass down with a nice lower highs sparkle but with the highs seemingly rolled off above the attack of drum cymbals etc. Further back they snapped in as more vivid, exciting speakers, they disappeared more, though lost a bit of richness and sounded more "monitor like." But never seemingly fully neutral to my ears.

I can imagine that under the right circumstances I'd like these speakers more, if the set up was dialed in just so. And the flip side of how finicky they are can be that different listeners may be able to realize just the type of presentation they want - from vivid and monitor-like to bigger, richer, smoother and more "comfy" sounding with some attractive sparkle.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Wise words fsonicsmith!

I actually wrote my impressions of the SP10s in another forum.  My fingers are typed out.  I'll get one here (or in the SP10 thread) soon.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

As for the Audio Note speakers I heard:  It was in the same store as the Source Point 10s. 

They were set up in a pretty small room, fairly typical AN style, closer to the back wall, angled towards the listening seat.  Powered by Peach Tree amplification.

I was frankly shocked at the sound.  My previous encounters with AN speakers, including when I auditioned a pair, were that they had a generally warm, organic timbre, though also vivid and present.  Definitely quite close to the sound I like.

These AN speakers sounded TERRIBLE.  The sound was immediately bright and shrill, all steely, silvery upper frequencies, no body to the mids, and the bass had a woofy "wall-reinforced" character.  I couldn't really stand listening to them for more than sampling a few tracks.  I'm not sure even a better set up could bridge the gap between what I heard and how those particular speakers can perform.

I did ask what model they were but frankly I couldn't retain it.  Audio Note changes a wire in a speaker and suddenly it's slapped with a new-but-very-similar model number and new price.  I didn't care enough to remember that model name.

Sorry.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

My upgraded Perspectives have arrived back at my dealer.  Can't pick them up this week so I'll have them early next week.  I have to say, given how great I have the Thiels sounding at this point the Perspectives have their work cut out for them!

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Interesting.  Though I don't play in that snack bracket anymore.  I've used up my audio fun money for the foreseeable future.

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@arafiq

Yes I remember you mentioning the Aavik amp. That’s a pricey bit of gear!

Funny you mention selling your REL subs; I’m actually considering adding a REL sub, just to try at some point - e.g. T9X. The Perspectives are putting out goregous bass, even more so with the KT120 tubes in my system. In fact they sound richer than the Estelon speakers I mentioned. That said, I’m still aware that my Thiels, with their 3-way and 8" woofer design, seem to have a bit more authority in the bass. I haven’t tried adding a sub to the Perspectives (and still might not bother), but with the Thiels I did try JL Audio 110E subs, with their crossover and DSpeaker room correction. In the end I found it more of a headache and more complexity than it was worth in terms of sonic results. So the only attraction with the REL is going another simper route, and if it doesn’t work...easy to sell.

I was thinking of grabbing a solid state amp at some point, just as something different to go to. My preference would be SimAudio gear, since I’ve heard the Perspectives sound spectacular on their amps a number of times. I tried a Bryston 4B3 and got some extra solid state grip and punch, but in terms of richness, tone and finesse I went running back to my tube amps. And, again, adding the KT120 tubes, what they did for bass, doesn’t have me missing SS much even in that department. Still...maybe one day...

 

@riaa_award_collectors_on_facebook

Yes your intuitions are wise.

I had similar cautions about doing the Perspective upgrade. I have sensitive ears and the originals were always smooth, but the promise of even smoother highs was tempting. Though I also worried about getting too laid back in the highs. And I worried about overblown bass. So far the bass, while sometimes tipping a bit over-rich on certain material, much of which I put down to room nodes and using a tube amp, is for the most part beautifully controlled. Moreso than my Thiels. I hear more specific detail going on in bass instruments, and there is a nice "feel it" to the bass which really connects me to the music.

The highs on the Perspective 2s are just as extended and airy and sparkly sounding as the originals. Absolutely gorgeous. Though as a nit pick it’s still the case, as with the originals, that the highs are a bit more laid back, softer, thinner than some other speakers (like my Thiels, or what you’d get from a Focal or B&W or even a Harbeth to a degree). So what I mean is that things like triangles and cymbals sound tonally ravishing and clear and clean, but are a bit more laid back and have slightly less body than some other speakers. The kick drum and snare will tend to drive a track more than the cymbal work. (Though...still...the highs are so clear that it makes cymbal work even more evident, so I’m hearing more of what a drummer is playing than on the thicker, richer sounding Thiels).

So the Devore O series definitely still prevail over the Perspectives in that "giving the sound body from the bottom to the very top." But...you can’t have everything.

Having lived with the disappearing act, massively wide, deep soundstaging and precise imaging of the Perspectives, I think I’d have a hard time stepping back from that to the more constrained imaging of the Devore O speakers. Though, who knows how those would have performed soundstaging-wise in my home.

A few notes from recent listening: I played a mid-80s album (The Velocity Of Love) from the early female electronic music artist Suzanne Ciani. I couldn’t ask for the gently swirling synth pads (in a massive soundscape) and sequencers to be rendered more beautifully: liquid, textured, the changing high frequency character of the envelopes, wonderfully described.

I received an album this week of a rare 70’s soundtrack, The Internecine Project, which, typical of the time and composer Roy Budd’s oeuvre, was full of sparse, slightly jazzy, highly varied instrumentation, in the classic "massive acoustic staging" production. The boundaries of the soundstage just felt endless in my room, instruments popping up close, medium, waaaay off in to the distance, sudden percussion flourishes or a harpsichord flashing in and out vividly.

Also playing Depeche Mode’s album Music For The Masses, the combination of the Perspective’s finesse at digging out the tonal beauty of the synths, every bit of reverb, the panoramic soundstaging, and the richness of the lower mids down, just makes for spectacular sonics. Like the song StrangeLove, which starts with some compact, dense, bright synth hits that are just so clear, and then that industrial-style kick drum and angular synth bass kicks in together, and it’s like this huge column of dense, punchy power in the center which ignites reverb that spreads out melting the walls away. And through the song, the balance of tinkly popping out to grab your attention synth sparkles, along with dense, rich, weighty growling synth parts, is just so satisfying on the Perspectives. I heard the same tracks on the Estelon speakers and while they did a vivid clear thing too, it was nothing like the effect I get with the Perspective in my set up. (The Estelons sound much tighter and more constrained between the speakers...often cited in reviews...where the Joseph speakers seem to image more independent of the speakers, with a more open soundstage).

Whoops...there I go...writing too much again. I’ll stop.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

Still tweaking my Perspectives in to place.  Spread a bit wider apart and slightly angled out a bit more.  As is usually the case with speakers in my room, this helps fatten out the sound somewhat, and also makes the speakers disappear a bit more and enlarge the soundstage, while not losing imaging.

I'm just agog at what these Perspectives are doing in my room at this point.  I'm very used to incredible imaging and soundstaging, but I didn't think I'd ever get more impressive than my previous Thiel 3.7s (or my current 2.7s).   The soundstage for my Thiel 2.7s is huge and deep and wide, though a bit more curved.  Images close to the L or R speaker still glom a little closer to those speakers.  Whereas the Perspectives sound more invisible all around.  At this point it's just wall-melting.  It seems instruments can appear anywhere - up high, down lower, waaayy out to the sides past the speakers.  So orchestral recordings especially have this massive see-way-back-to-the-corners spread.   It really is magical disappearing/imaging act that reminds me of my previous MBL speakers.

And holy cow the bass!  I was playing the latest Polyphia album (progressive math-rock made sort of radio-friendly) and the depth and impact of the bass and drums was just nuts.

As I mentioned earlier I'm still blown away by what can be achieved by playing around with one of these:

https://acousticgeometry.com/products/small-curve-diffusor/

I place it behind and between my speakers, in my case that sits it upon the large center channel for my home theater, and by moving it even inches forward or back it produces such density and in-room presence to the sound.  Makes everything sound more live.  If I push it back a bit it increases the depth of the soundstage while making the images more palpable.  If I pull it forward at bit, it tends to pull the images a little more forward (still with tons of depth) but add even more solidity to the sound.

If you have the itch to see if your speakers...certainly the Perspectives!...can be taken to the next level and you have a place to put one between the speakers, I highly recommend it!

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

update:

Spendor SP 1/2 speakers.

 

I finally got a little listening session in with some Classic Spendor SP 1/2 speakers!

I’ve wanted to hear those for years, but finding them to audition is like hunting the Sasquatch. Turns out the local place where I bought my Joseph speakers sells the classic line, and got that model in the showroom.

It was in a pretty small room, and definitely not an optimal set up, but I got a quick gist of the character of the Spendor s1/2s: They sounded very much like I figured they would: a lot like bigger versions of my little Spendor S3/5s. The 1/2s had that same lit up "blond wood" tonality, illuminated sparkly highs yet warm hued - wood sounded "woody" etc. It had that natural, super balanced rich sound of the classic BBC design speakers, so Steely Dan voices were dense, texturally present, yet had that BBC design sense of human softness and organic quality.

If I closed my eyes and listened the combination of fullness and extended airy high end gave an open window in to the recording room sensation that was very engaging. Drums sounded timbrally very much like hearing through to real drums.

Horns rich, etc.

Quibbles?

As excellent as the 1/2s sounded, I think the Joseph Perspectives have spoiled me in certain regards. First, the Spendors lacked that grain-free purity of the JA speakers, which allows some more refinement and sense of beauty of the real thing. The soundstaging of the Josephs is much bigger. And there is a sense of authority and punch to the midbass down on the Josephs I didn’t hear from the Spendor. In fact though the Spendors were more evenly rich from the midband up, there was overall a sort of "hollow box" quality to the sound - the sense that everything was coming from a hollow box cavity is the best way I can describe it. So a rich-but-soft sensation in terms of impact.

I’m really glad I heard the 1/2s and I’d love to hear them again under better conditions. I have no doubt I’d think even more highly of them. But I think I heard enough to have scratched that itch, and remind myself why I went with the Joseph speakers after hearing so many contenders.

I’ve got my Perspective 2s raised up on granite polished blocks and I’ve tried all sorts of material/footer combinations under them. Basically whatever couples them to the floor and places them lower tends to give a dark, rich sound, with really full punchy bass, which is really addictive. Anything that raises them higher and which decouples them to some degree (e.g. even placing hockey pucks under the spikes, rather than spikes directly in to the floor) tends to have somewhat more lean bass, but also makes the speakers disappear more and seems to expand the size of everything...which is glorious too. So I’ve been playing around looking for some combo where I have that raised, expansive sound and disappearing act, but still have some dark richness and punch. I’ve found variations of this - I’ve heard some pretty astounding sound in my room from these things. The Perspectives can continually surprise with their vividness and timbral complexity and realism.

 

 

 

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

@donquichotte 

Sorry I haven't replied yet!   I'll get back to your question very soon.  Promise!

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

 

@donquichotte 

 

Sorry for the delayed reply.

To your questions:

1. Ultimately it depends on what you want out of your upgrade.  What might you be missing that could be better?  For me Harbeth are probably the most like the Spendor classic speakers, but feel like more of a sideways move because they are that similar.  It's been too long since I heard Audio Note speakers in depth (with the exception I auditioned one of their "cheaper models" this year and it was horrid in the store set up!  Bright, steely, sucked out, nothing like I remember the other ones I heard).  I also haven't heard the Graham speakers though would like to.

So from among the speakers I've heard that are akin to the Spendor classic sound, to me the Devore O/96 sounds most like an "upgraded" Spendor.  Upgraded in the sense of bigger scale, more density to the sound, more impact.   It has that "live" tonality like I describe in the Spendor, but where the Spendor is more subdued dynamically, the Devore is upgraded in it's sense of dynamic life-like sensation of musicians playing before you.  It's that scale and drama and dynamic aliveness that is the upgrade most of all.

They do seem to be fairly finicky speakers though, so I can see someone not hearing how good they are in a bad audition situation.

2. So far from what I've heard, yes every one of the old school wider baffle speakers, in particular the ones where the cabinet is allowed to "sing" do have the "hollow box" sound to one degree or another.   Even the Devore O/93 and O/96 have it.  Less than the Spendors/Harbeth though - the devores can sound more dense and rich and punchy which makes up for a lot of it.  But as I've tried to describe before, the Devores sound alive in a slightly different way than, say, high end speakers known for slam and impact.  For instance I was listening to some of my demo tracks at my friend's house, and he has some $65,000 Estelon speakers at the moment.  For music with heavy kick drum/bass, the lower registers had this focus and solidity, like a sledghammer hitting the floor.  Very authoritative. And, again, I'd emphasize the "solidity/punch" of the lower region.   Whereas the Devore in playing the same type of music sounds more big, rich and bloomy, bass less focused but rolls out and envelopes.  And in ways that can feel more real.  Like the way kick drums on the Devores have that higher "bap" of the peddle hit combined with the billowy wider bass envelope that surrounds it and washes over you...

Both a speaker like the Estelon (or maybe a Wilson) will do something particularly "right" in those frequencies - the Estelon will get that sense of a solid object being struck a bit better, but it will tend to be more controlled and "sit back" in the soundstage in a well-behaved audiophile manner, and in that sense a bit less like the real thing.  Whereas the Devore is designed to engage the room more like a real instrument, and while the hit may not be as authoritive and solid, it has the overall character of engaging the room and making you feel it, like the real thing.

So...depending on the listener, one may seem to "do drums right" more than the other.  For me, I remember the Devores creating the most realistic impression of having drums played in front of me (eyes closed) than I've heard before.  So i guess they better check the boxes that tells my brain "yes, that's how things sound in real life."

But, yes, I've described the Devore sound as both dynamic and gentle, depending on what one keys in on.  They are more dynamic than the typical speaker in that you hear and feel the effort of the musicians more.  But compared to the laser focus of other high end speakers, in a sense the Devores can sound a bit "softer" overall, which is part of the 'hollow box' sound (which again, is less so than I heard with the Spendors).

I hope that helps a bit.

prof OP
3,452 posts
 

Amazing that it's been over 5 years since I started this thread pondering my decision.

Funny enough I still have a HiFiShark alert set up for when the Devore O/96 come up for sale, which I really should turn off since that ship sailed quite a while ago.

If I had a different room I more likely would have done a home trial of the Devores, but ultimately the Joseph speakers have been the right choice all things considered.   It's nice to have upgraded them to the graphene version so that itch is scratched and, wow, priced for these things new...gone up like everything else in audio...are way beyond what I could afford these days. 

In visiting my local dealer I've listened to more speakers lately, such as the Kii Audio 3 active speakers (I've heard/demoed them a number of times).    The Kii 3s always impress me as being very neutral, very evenly balanced, full, rich sound, with a particular ease to the high frequencies.  No ear fatigue.   But sort of to a fault - I find they miss a bit of life, and tonally I don't find anything to sound right or real on those speakers.  But, fun to listen to.

And finally...finally!...I got a chance to hear the Spendor Classic 1/2 speakers, which were on my list of "must hear" someday.  I love the sound of my little Spendor S3/5s so I wanted to see what the newer version of their bigger classic speakers sounded like.   I had just listened to the Kii 3 speakers in the same room and then got to hear the Spendors to compare.  So an active vs passive shoot out.

Well, it sounded like a much bigger, more refined version of the 3/5s.   The same lit up "blonde tone" - more airy and alive vs the Kii speakers, while more warm-toned and organic.  Brass (symphonic) on the Kii speakers sounded very smooth and metallic and blatty, but they sounded warmer hued and more golden "brassy" and vivid on the Spendors, which to my ears reminded me more of the real thing.

Likewise drum snares, drum skins sounded more organic and "right" to my ears on the Spendors.   Where the Kiis gave me the impression of hearing in to a very good recording of drum sets, the Spendors gave me more of a feeling of hearing right past the speakers to a live drum set.

Bass on the Spendors was surprisingly deep and forceful and robust!  Though a bit too much room lift so less tight than the Kii speakers.

Of the two I'd take the Spendors because out of the gate they sounded more live and more right to my ears and of course I'd be able to ply the sound further to taste with tube amps.  I'm too old school for active speakers I think.

But really that's just hypothetical.  I'm not actually in the market to buy new speakers (and my dealer knows that, he's just happy to show me stuff when I'm there).    And at this point I feel somewhat spoiled by the Joseph Speakers.  Spoiled by their level of performance and refinement.  So I could absolutely enjoy many evenings with something like the Spendors playing in my room because they are excellent, comfy, organic.  But they sound a bit opaque relative to the crystal clarity I'm used to from the Joseph speakers, and a bit more crude, vs the grainless purity of the Joseph speakers that allow such tonal color and refinement.  I continually get a "sense of surprise" from the Joseph speakers, which I don't get from most other speakers.  

And man can these little speakers pack some punch!  I'm very happy with my EDM, funk and fusion music with the Joseph speakers!

BTW, I actually have tried driving my Joseph speakers with my Denon AV reciever a couple times.  The Josephs are smooth with any amplification, and there is even more grip and solidity in the bass with solid state, and a super level of cleanliness and detail.  But...every time I switch the CJ amps back in, I feel like I'm home.  The speakers are still really punchy with the 140W of tube monoblock power, but the ease factor, timbral/textural presence and life-like quality for me goes notches higher.

 

 

More to discover