2017 ‘Keeper’ speakers under - $25K

I think the reason I appreciate the Vandersteen speakers is because stats as well as Maggies have some issues in the bass and are nearly impossible to integrate with any sub.  I know many claim that they use subs and they are just as fast as the panels, but for MY ear, I have never heard any of them integrated properly. That was my biggest problem with the Apogee's back in the day.  they had a couple of more affordable ones that had cone subs and they weren't coherent like a Vandersteen is.  Richard has just figured it out and it's not easy to do.  On certain music though the Maggie's are really special.  I just listen to a lot of different types and need a true full range, coherent, point source sounding speaker that is full range and tonally balanced from top to bottom.  Very few speakers actually can do this and then also disappear in the room and can be put up against a wall.  The tunable bass on the Quatro's (my new ones for those who don't read the whole thread) on up let's you even adjust the bass to your room and smooth it out.

Great article a bit over a year ago in Stereophile.  They interviewed a friend of mine, Billy Drummond.  Billy is a Jazz drummer and teaches music at Juliard I think it is.  He personally owns both Maggies and Vandersteen's.  Neither one are expensive. He goes into a bit of why he has both.  I know that he would kill to own my Quatro's, lol.  And I'm sure the 20's as well.  I'm sure if you Google it you will find it.

Ctsooner > “…Maggies have some issues in the bass and are nearly impossible to integrate with any sub.”

Blindjim > Hi Ctsooner!
Years back, speakers like Maggies, Stats and panels were using Vandy subs as the ‘fashionable’ way to address the bottom octaves. This was in lieu of Velo’s and Rels. I seem to recall Vandy had then a 3 or 4 driver sub in a unique configuration. Forward angled and top firing or so I seem to think.

A number of people I’ve met run Martin Logans with traditional cones doing the low down work. Honestly, this approach works fairly well IMHO. Nearly all or likely all instances of the MLs are pumping out cohesion across the board using a fair variety of power, both higher end SS and with 200 + wpc tube amps.

Sadly, I’ve discovered tons of speakers in the sweet spot ($2K to $10K) of the speaker buying realm, don’t do the lower register from 40 on down very well. Period.

Even when I felt the bass was being deftly presented, engaging a decent sub handed down the real verdict.

Perhaps once one enters the $10 to $20K range it might change. And sure, we can put the room on trial here too. Although, an absence of low end response is just that, an absence and can only be attributed to the speaker system… not the room.

Only when low end response is myred, bloated, discontinuant and or ambiguous can we start pointing fingers at items apart from the setup or environment itself.

The IMP and sensitivity of Vandersteens doesn’t quite fit my needs, but I’ve not revisited any of the latest press in house or public on the Quatro versions.

If you could input a link to the items in your last posting I’d sure appreciate it.

For something completely different…

Devore Gibbon X

Does anyone know of a relatively recent article on Devore Givvon tens or ‘X’ speakers describing their performance, options, and build to some extent?

Or if not, a directly comparable equivalent loudspeaker?

Or, even nice sounding moderately priced horn speakers?

Thanks

Scot Hull of Part-Time Audiophile has just (and finally) released a short review of the Gibbon X... 

Also, to possibly answer you build query, blindjim, about the Gibbons, there is a vid on YouTube somewhere with John D talking about the cabinet structure... Sorry for no links :( 

Jriggy > Part-Time Audiophile has just (and finally) released a short review


Blindjim > huge thanks. No worries on the links bit.
Finding substantial speakers these days with IMP of 8 ohms and higher EFF than 90 – 92db is getting as rare as finding hens teeth.