Monitor Audio Platnium II
Richerd1, I`m based on Europe so Wilsons and other beautiful US speakers are basically very expensive and hard to find a dealer/demo here. I suppose that you probably prefer Sopra or Utopia to PLII? I live in a log house and I also want the best bang for the buck. Therefore Utopia III is too modern looking (+ overly expensive) in my house. Maybe you have some experience with Alto Utopia? I have a JLf112 sub, but still like to play loud, especially on weekends :=)) I`m familiar with Focal house sound, but I`m really confused what to buy in the 4-10K range (used or demo). I currently use Pass 250.5 and some say Sopra is better and more enjoyable with SS than Utopia 3, that mates better with tube gear. What`s your impressions on Sopra vs Utopia 3 ? Thanks in advance! Plutos |
Plutos, I prefer PL500 to the Sopra and Utopias that I listened to. I can’t recall the Utopias that I heard, but they were between 30K - 50K. I prefer speakers that to my ears are neutral or on the slightly dark side of neutral and that’s why I love the PL500s. You may prefer Focal! There are no absolutes in Audio, only preferences. My advice is to listen to everything in your price range and let your ears decide. My system: PL500 speakers, JL Audio F112 V2, Jeff Rowland(JR) 625 S2 amplifier, JR Corus preamp, JR Aeris DAC, Bryston BDP2, Torus Power Conditioner, Wireworld Platinum Power Cables and Interconnect Cables. I have Wireworld Silver Eclipse 7 Speaker Cables. |
You never should use any Monitor Audio loudspeaker without spikes. The plateau where you put the spikes is especially made for all the loudspeakers of Monitor Audio.
You need to connect the spikes. Without this the music comes a lot less free from the loudspeaker. I have sold all series of Monitor Audio in the last 10 years of time. But a spike is still not the best way to decouple a loudspeaker. I use the Stillpoints Ultra SS under they Pl-500 II. It creates a totally different level in quality. It makes the stage wider and deeper. Voices and instruments a lot more physical tangible. More details and a much better timing. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10158292112975083&set=ms.c.eJxd0ckNAwEIA8COIgyYo~%3B~%3B... https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10158295840090083&set=ms.c.eJxd0ckNAwEIA8COIgyYo~%3B~%3B... https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10158217308945083&set=ms.c.eJxdz9EJBEEMAtCOFs3ExPTf2MHBw... https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10158125089550083&set=a.10153863939765083.1073741831.588... I had a client who owned teh Wilson Audio Sasha 1, but the Pl-200 II outperfromed the Wilson Audio in almost each part. This has nothing to do with personl stage. The facts proofed that the stage of the Pl-200 II was wider and deeper. The realism in sound with classical music was also clear that the Pl-200 II was superior. In timing and layering the Pl-200 II outperformed the Sasha as well. Againa this has nothing to do with personal taste. The Pl-200 II also adds a great level in diversity in height. With the Saha the same recordings played the music at the same height. Again this has nothing to do with personal taste. When a loudspeaker is not able to let you hear the diversity in height of instruments and voices we are talking about an inferior level in this part. There is no discussion possible. The AMT tweeter was more open and had so much more grip and control over the dome tweeter of the Sasha. Who had difficluties with different songs. The same music played on the Pl-200 II the harshness was gone. And again this has nothing to do with personal taste. Each speaker who is less open and natural sounding in the highs with more problems with different recordings is inferior...period!! |
