@corelli I rarely get into Audiogon so I only now read your question:
"I read your post on AudioCircle where you upgraded your Spatials to the TM’s. If I read you correctly you seemed to be a bit underwhelmed and were ready to go "back to the drawing board."So I am assuming your last two posts represent that effort.
Now you seem very taken with the TM’s despite using the same PL electronics you had before. So was it by way of comparison you realized just how good the TM’s really are? Not being at all critical here--just trying to understand what changed your opinion.
Lastly, it would be helpful if you could comment on imaging/sound stage of the DI’s vs the TM’s. While I won’t be parting with my DI’s, I have a second system that I have considered the TM’s for. They would be driven by a PL HP integrated. In particular, how does the height of the stage compare to the DI’s. Thanks. "
Yes, you are spot on, my last two posts here represented the "effort" to find a sound particular to my needs. To put some perspective on this, given that this thread is specific to DI, my comments should be read strictly as one man’s (along with the others who were involved in the demos) opinion about how DIs compared to TMs, MLs, B&W, Polks, etc. in my room/my chain/etc.
There never was a moment when I "realized just how ’good’ the TM’s really are". What I realized is how important room configuration/treatment/speaker placement is to achieving a sound that suited my aural goals. "Aural goals" is a moving target though, I learned that it’s always going to be on a spectrum because content delivered was/is never identical from song to song, artist to artist, playback unit to playback unit.
I also learned that there is no holy grail, i.e. one speaker/amp/etc. that will "nail it" or do it all. That’s why now when I read manufacturing marketing or post claims that imply this, I know that it’s complete and utter rubbish. Some of it is well-intentioned yet perspectiveless, most of it is PT Barnum fabrication in its purest form.
To put it another way, if I listened only to Beatles vinyl I would have bought B&W. Vocals presented via the 702s were the most articulate in my space. But I’d have to give up some of the previously described warble in exchange. B&W couldn’t pressurize (warble-ize) my room consistently with other content. Thus the TM’s represented the best compromise among all of the gear demoed across all of the type of content I listen to.
To more specifically answer your first question, the key was speaker placement. Changing placement changed what I previously found to be a lackluster not-so-emotionally grabbing aural experience into one that turned out to be a game changer for me. I didn’t care which speaker would have done it, it just so happened that it turned out to be the Spatial Audio brand/model. The others couldn’t offer what the TMs do. We tried to get them to, but couldn’t. The "do" to which I refer is a certain aural sound/experience that appeals to me (and appealed to the others who were with me during the demos). I would never assert that anyone else should/would prefer what I happen to like.
So maybe it begs the question -- could I have saved myself all of the time and effort I put into this quest if I had simply more thoroughly experimented with TM speaker placement/treatment at the onset? Possibly yes, although I know myself well enough to know that I would have still had that lingering nagging question, "What if (with other gear)?" I needed to scratch that itch once and for all. And I figured why not do it with a speaker in the demo chain that some people were calling a "giant killer". Well I learned that for me it’s not a giant killer after all. It’s just another nice sounding speaker among many many other nice sounding speakers. They all had benefits and limitations. But the DIs cannot pressurize my room the way the TMs do. They simply cannot do it. The TMs it turns out, with the baffleless rear design, do something that I found unique and that I personally like.
With respect to "how does the height compare"? The question implies that "height" is a variable that gets rendered consistently across all content, all delivery platforms, which I found not to be my experience. I can say that, looking at my notes and recalling our demo sessions, there was no appreciable difference TM vs DI, otherwise we would have noted it.
Again, as I’ve mentioned in prior posts, if anyone is flying by Philly and wants to hear what I’ve built, send me a PM and I’ll try to arrange a private listening session so that others can hear what I hear/experience.
After re-reading my posts, I see that the discussion has become somewhat academic. If anyone learns anything from my experience it's that there's no substitute for bringing in multiple gear into one's listening space and taking the time to experiment. I found it to be an enjoyable experience, for the most part. The big downer for me was some of the experiences I had when speaking with various manufacturers. I will never again separate a marketing claim from one's self-interest.
