Speaker Recommendations for Soundstage and Imaging

MBL and other omnidirectional speakers can present huge sound stages. I have spent a fair amount of time with the mbl and would agree completely with mapman's comments as to the overall stage size.

It should be noted though that this is definately a different type of sound stage than most are accustomed to. With this huge and encompassing stage, my experience is that the focus is handled in a much different sense.

So it is an issue of do you want a huge encompassing stage (very appealing) at the expense of focus (ie. seeing/hearing a hard physical location of a specific performer clearly delineated in space). This of course is a personal preference. I love the sound of mbls, but miss the focus of other "good imaging" speakers that present a possibly less enveloping stage but give better (more precise) focus of the individual elements. I am not familiar with the Ohms!

Some would say and I partially agree that when properly set up, the Logans give you a good combination of stage and focus (I have owned logans and agree to some point with this).

I find Wilsons give you a pretty good total overall stage envelopment and very good focus. I know a lot of people claim to not like Wilsons and this is not a straight out plug for them, just a general comment on soundstaging, imaging, focus, etc. . .

The focus of the mbl 111s I heard was exceptional I thought within a wide and deep soundstage. The deep soundstage was at least partly due to the room these were set up in which had a good 12-15 feet of space behind them. With the large ensemble classical pieces I heard (especially sourced from RTR master tape), the individual players were for the most part clearly located within the 3D soundstage much as if they were compressed into that space in front of me.

I've also heard the same mbl 111s set up at a show in a good sized room but with only 5 feet or so of space behind them. The results were still good but more back with the pack in comparison to other very good imaging speakers I have heard.

So, if you have the right room at least, the mbls are absolute top notch imagers in my opinion. Then again, other speakers may also do very well when set up in a manner where they have similarly plentiful room to breathe.

Have to agree, as usual, with Mapman. It's tough to hear the MBL's set up correctly, but done so, they're invisible and wonderful--the best speaker I've ever heard.
The omni thing involves the room (as do all, but usually, less so) so the envronment, usually at show's when I've heard them, is suspect. Not great in Munich a couple of years ago-but remarkable at other venues.
Go MBL for staging AND tonal excellence.
Larry

Have not heard the mbl's but i am sure mapman is correct. i agree with ckoffend's post. i owned Mirage M5s and set up properly they threw a great stage. Lots of depth. And great placement of instruments.

Now i've got a pair of Audio Physic Steps with a REL and they throw an excellent stage also. Depth and width outside of the speakers and focus.

The sound stage is different though with the APs than the Mirage. The stage seems a bit more immediate with the APs. Less so with the Mirage. Not a better or worse difference, just a different presentation.

Corazon, Maybe your last paragraph explains the differences in sense of staging/imaging/focus better than I could, and much more economically (wordwise).

Mapman, I have not had many chances to audition or hear speakers with 12-15 feet behind them (a few times with big horn systems). That must have been and certainly sounds like it was a great experience and peformance.

Maybe if I put my kids up for adoption and knocked down some walls that would be a feasible approach!