Speakers 10 years old or older that can compete with todays best,

I attend High End Audio Shows whenever I get a chance.  I also regularly visit several of my local High End Audio parlors, so I get to hear quite a few different speaker brands all the time.  And these speakers are also at various price points. Of course, the new speakers with their current technology sound totally incredible. However, I strongly feel that my beloved Revel Salon 2 speakers, which have been around for over ten years, still sound just as good or even better than the vast majority of the newer speakers that I get a chance to hear or audition in todays market.  And that goes for speakers at, or well above the Salon 2s price point. I feel that my Revel Salon 2 speakers (especially for the money) are so incredibly outstanding compared to the current speaker offerings of today, that I will probably never part with them. Are there others who feel that your beloved older speakers compare favorably with todays, newfangled, shinny-penny, obscenely expensive models?



you got my attention. I love my IRS Betas but I’m always looking for improvements. We have corresponded about implementation of DSP before to see if I find improvements (still having issues getting good readings thus process stalled). 

Now, I’m intrigued by the Pre-8 and wouldn’t mind being a Beta tester. I wonder how it could be implemented on my system. If it works, I guess my Allnic pre could be for sale…

is there a specific page for the beta tester program?  I looked with no luck. 

BTW, I have lived with AR3a which were nice for the time, moved into DQ10 which were a massive improvement, DCM TW which were nice, Mirage M3 which gave way to M1, to IRS Beta which were out aside during a stage in a smaller home and replaced with Aerial 8b.  Now back to the Betas and the 8b are on a secondary system  

thanks!  Juan

I was at an estate sale last year where the owner was selling his DCM Time Windows for $60. There wasn't a buyer for them. It seems the brand has been forgotten, unlike the Spendor and Klipsch products. I still have a pair of Spendor BC2's with their crossovers at 3K and 13K. Lovely. But I have no space for them, and listen instead  to what I can afford from KEF.

There are many fine speakers to listen to and many not so fine. However, once you get to listening for a long years those become your reference and that's fine but we can never own the best, why because it's subjective.  There are a lot of fine speakers and even ones you can afford.


I've been trying out a used set of ProAc D25's about 15 years old now. I need a speaker to stand in while i look for something more permanent after selling my Spendor D9.2's. So I'm saving up for a while and thought the D25's would be a fine stand in for a year. They are quite nice if I was honest.

But I also have some vintage ADSL910's ( late 70's early 80's vintage) that have been restored by Richard So. Well after listening to the Proac's for a couple weeks I tossed in the big ADS and if I was honest I think I'd prefer the ADS as a stand in. They have better bass more detailed, deeper, faster. probably due to being sealed and 2x10" drivers. The midrange is actually better as well more presence, detailed and better dispersion. The only places the Proac's take the big ADS is the top end, it's more extended, detailed and the imaging is better but not by as much as you'd expect. I think the dome mids and tweeters in the ADS help quite a bit here.

The Proac's are lovely specially for the used prices but sound a bit boomy or maybe its a lift in the lower mid-bass that I'm hearing, I will say though the downward port is better in my room then rear ported designs. 

I'm on the fence to be honest, but there is some great vintage speakers out there you just need to restore them in most cases to get the most out of them. Also modern measurements can go a long way to bring back the sound specially if your doing a crossover rebuild already. 

@mijostyn wrote:

There is no such thing as a "lossless" digital volume control. Some units may revert to an analog volume control. But, even the best digital volume controls lose bits as the volume goes down. It is just that the really fast processors do not lose enough bits to affect sound quality. 

You're right, there isn't, but I explained what I meant by the "lossless" part in parenthesis, while forgetting the quotation marks. Whether or not the volume control of my DAC/preamp sports a 64-bit floating point (I don't know its specs in this regard, other than it's digital through and through), I can't say, but it trumps the 64-bit floating point VC of my JRiver MC31 playback software (with DAC volume at what equates to 0dB), and that's all I need to know. And bear in mind: my speaker system is ~100 to 111dB sensitive, actively configured, so oftentimes I'm using the lower range of the volume control, which only tests its resolving capabilities here.  

Down the road? I have been tuning my system one Hz at a time for 25 years. Let's say I measure my system and see a 3 dB dip in the left channel at a specific frequency say 358 Hz. I can select 358 Hz and increase it 3 dB. I can also adjust the Q of the filter matching what I see on the measurement exactly. 

That's what I'm doing already and have for a few years now, but what I've learned from measurements and the corresponding, manual frequency corrections is that a frequency peak of, say, 5dB's shouldn't be suppressed with -5dB's, but rather less. Indeed, less is more here, and it's surprising how smaller corrections can have an effect - indeed the proper effect. We measured a peak over my EV horns at just over 13kHz with the left and right horn peak measuring exactly the same down to the single Hertz, and applied a mild suppression here (i.e.: less than the peak indicated) for the best sonic outcome. Decibel increments with the Xilica DSP are adjusted at 0,25dB's, although 0,10 would've been nice. Delay in 0.010ms increments. Single Hz ditto.