Kharma Midi Exquisite vs MBL101E

Dear Fmpnd, this is the crossroad where i am at now. i have owned the 3.2F for a year and have never been satisfied with their bass (my room is 21 x 17 feet). I have heard both the MBL 101E and the Midi exquisite driven by different but equally exorbitant equipment. While impressed by both, i do feel the Midi exquisite is overpriced. I have been thinking of adding the kharma sub to my 3.2 reading those good reviews. Worries about integration problems notwithstanding, psychologically, i feel adding a sub to a system is like a band-aid approach, which then steers me towards the MBL which by itself does things right in the first place.

Alectiong; i owned the Exquisite 1D's for almost 4 years; and then used the Midi Exquisite's for 5 months while waiting for my VR9's to be built. i have listened to the MBL101E's a few times at shows; i don't consider myself an expert on the MBL's but i do know the Midi very well.

i can see what the growing MBL contingent likes about the speakers. there is a wonderful dynamic and fabulous detail retrival. they do deeper bass and more dynamic bass than the Midi Exquisite.

OTOH there are some 'issues'. to sing the MBL's need power; and mid-power tubes and less than high power ss amps really are not ideal. my favorite amps (that are just fine on the Midi Exqusites) would not be good choices on the MBL. there are aspects of the presentation that are different from cone speakers; how one feels about those differences is a matter of opinion. personally, the MBL's imaging is too diffuse for me. but that is just me. also, i don't find that they come alive at low volume levels. there is a naturalness and total top to bottom seamlessness that is missing.......at least compared to what i hear from Kharma's (and my VR9's). it may be the amps i heard the MBL's on; i don't know.

the Midi Exqusites are very special speakers that do everything well; and some things amazingly well. imaging is world class; as is detail retrieval and bass articulation. extention and bass slam is very room dependent. in my very large (29' x 21' x 11') and built-in bass traped room they could only do mid-30's deep bass. but in a more normal room i would expect high 20hz bass but with seamless articulation. the Midi Exquiisite bass will always serve the music and not be prominent. you will have a sense of music as opposed to a speaker.

i don't have a solid opinion on the subwoofer match with the Midi's; i have not been wowed when i heard it at shows.

this choice is more an overall 'system character' choice than which speaker is 'best'. if you can somehow demo the MBL's then that would be ideal. it may be perfect for you.

Thanks Mikelavigne for your opinions. I have heard the MBL, and the Exquisite sans sub in properly set up rooms. I agree the MBL's imaging is not as pinpoint compared to cone speakers, which is a well noted characteric of the MBL sound. But to some listeners, that less than perfect pinpoint imagining is more like what they would hear in a live performance. My mains concerns about the MBL, like you also pointed out are the need for high power high current amps, limiting amp choices, and that they like to be played loud, not a good thing for apartment dwellers like me.

Hi Mike:

I have been lurking intermittently on this forum and would like your honest opinion on whether I should upgrade from my kharma 3.2 to the Midi Exquisite. I already have the subwoofer. I like the subwoofer with the 3.2 very much, running it without any crossover. But I have a smaller room (16'x25'x8') so the subwoofer adds enough base to the room. I am looking for more cohesiveness at high volume and a little slam on rock music. Since I have not listend the the Midi Exquisite myself, would you please comment on the upgrade? Should I just stay with what I have?

Thanks for your opinion.

cchckc

Cchckc, your room is good sized; and you already like what the (i assume Kharma) subwoofer does. the Midi Exquisites will take you further down that (wonderful) road.

my Exquisite 1D's had the same ceramic mid-range and tweeter as your 3.2's......so i have a pretty good feel for the differences between the 3.2 and the Midi Exquisites.

if you replace your 3.2's with the Midi Exquisites; you will get a more refined and detailed mid-range from the new ceramic mid-range driver; the Diamond tweeter will be more open with more a sense of 'air'.......you will have a good deal more extention and energy, and the bass will be a good deal punchier and controlled. the bass is not quite as effortless as the big Exquisite; but it goes lower with more speed and articulation......at a whole different level than the 3.2. the Midi has will portray more a sense of space and scale when the music calls for that.

OTOH that Diamond tweeter will be more particular about amps; anything sterile or edgy (cables, sources, etc.) will not be a good match. the Midi Exquisite (nominal 4 ohm) is a little more needy of power as it's not quite as easy a load as the 3.2.

the Midi Exquisite is just as seamless and has that same sense of disappearing and just leaving the music as the other Kharmas......i really liked them.

the Midi Exquisite will hold together completely at musical peaks (again assuming that the amp is up to it). i pushed the Midi Exquisite very hard in my big room and never felt it got hard or stressed. although it could not quite completely energise my room compared to the VR9's, there would be no problem in your room.

my only recommendation would be to get a second Kharma Sub to really allow things to be properly coherent.......or......just buy the VR9's like i did......and you'll get all the good stuff of the Kharma's and much more.