Focal Utopia monitors: Diablo vs. Micro Be

I find the direction this thread took so far very funny especially since yesterday night while proof reading the text I wrote I've pushed the submit button instead of the edit button before editing some typos e.g. "interested to here" instead of "interested to hear". (English is not my first language)

Nonetheless, I hope that somebody out there has actually compared these two monitors (preferably in the same room with the same equipment) and can share his/her findings with us.

Thank you in advance.

Maybe I should mention that more than a year ago I have listen the Diablos at a dealer on an all Lyngdorf system. I have liked the audition very much. However, I found it very difficult to judge how much better the Diablos were compared to my Micro Bes. Firstly, the dealer room was definitively better than my room (acoustically), plus the dealer has also dialed in the Lyngdorf room correction system. Secondly, the Lyngdorf house sound was quite different than that of the Musical Fidelity A5 combo I was using back then.

My conclusion back then was that the two speakers had a very similar character. The Diablos seemed a bit faster and also to have a somewhat better control in the low department, however, the improvements were not enough to justify the full retail price (i.e. 9600 euros including the Focal Diablo stands).

Eviukai, obviously my conclusions so far are in disagreement with what you wrote above. Could you please give me more details about the auditions. Also, what do you mean when you say that Diablo will benefit from a subwoofer up to 45 Hz? Do you mean that the Micro Be do not need a subwoofer, or do you mean that the Diablos have nearly perfect output till 45 Hz?

Best wishes
Paul

I do not understand why Nvp didnt like my answer(posiblly he hoped that I will answer that there is no diferencies Micro vs Diablo) but anyway. I havent compare micro vs diablo in the same room, but I used the same recordings I am famillar, diference in midrange openess and speed is quite diferent- Diablo has more "imediacy" and micro more reserved and litle bit brighter on top end. (But still i would not consider micro very polite if i compare it to sonus fabers speakers for example)

I would not judge bass in diferent rooms as its almost unpredictable and very much depends on room physic, but i did quick set of nearfield measurements and micro rooled more gently while Diablo have very strong and solid output to 58Hz or so and then goes down very sharply. overal diablo sounds much bigger in soundstage than micro on some record its sounds almost fullrange. I lived with the Diablo for a while- adding sub tuned to 45hz and this combo realy sounds fullrange-with condition if you do not push Diablo power handling. i would advice you to compare theese two in your home and without any Lingdorf corections or what so ever. good luck.

Dear Elviukai,

Firstly, I should thank you for taking the time to answer my questions.

Secondly, please note that just because I wrote that my impressions were different than yours it does not mean that I do not like what your wrote. To clarify the situation please note that in your 1st post in this thread you have mentioned the Diablo and Micro Be are very different, while in my 3rd post here I have mentioned that after auditioning the Diablos my impressions was that the two speakers have a similar character. Clearly, our two statements are in contradiction, but this is not a bad thing.

On the other hand, I completely agree with you about the immediacy factor of the Diablo speakers compared to the Micros Be. During my audition I have actually told the dealer that the Diablos sound quite a bit like electrostatics. However, even though compare to the MicroBes the Diablos were a bit quicker and created a better and denser stereo image in the dealer room (which of course could be also due to the dealer's better room and due to the Lyngdorf room-correction set-up) the Focal house sound was very evident to me. This is why I've said that the two speakers have similar character. I would call very different speakers Dynaudio C1 vs. MicroBe/Diablo or Sonus Faber vs. MicroBe/Diablo.

So to conclude Elviukai, am I right to assume that going the Diablo route will give me a sound closer to that of electrostatics?

Thanks!
Paul

Hi Paul there is nothing to thank for, you are always welcome. The best advice you can hear there is- go for audiotion in home.If this is not posible I will try to direct to some basic thing you may expect, alsi this may help other Audiogon members as well.
Diferencies. The problem is that in High-end audio there is no strict line betwwen big and small diferencies. One man's small is another man's huge. There is people who claim/hear huge diferencies between two furutech sockets made from the same material. I hear only subtile (if any) diferencies on things like this. Diablo still have Focal school sound- fast,transparent and very detailed and sometimes(with wrong recording or equipment) agressive. But I wouldnt call it sucessor to Micro Be-they are quite diferent. Its not like say.. watt puppy 7vs 8 sonic diferencies(where diferencies between these two I hear difers only in tonality, not primary speaker signature) I heard Diablo with some diferent gear(with my CD records) in 3 diferent places-

1)in my home they sounded best with pass labs xa amplification/Sonic frontiers DAC and Zendo cables- sound was balanced- no forward or laidback, quite "thick"(="fat") with lot of "bloom" in midrange and agressive only in very bad records.Bass tighness, details and "air around intruments" was not best from what diablo is capable but system had some musicality and involvement in sound which hapens rare on focal utopia speakers(IMHO).

2)at dealer show -with very expensive top of the line Ayre/esoteric/ and all nordost valhall'as cabling.(~200 000EUR) - dynamic, transparent ,fast and VERY detailed sound, resoliuton was very good. There can be heard some harshness on trasients on some claiscal works but nothing to worry about too much.

3)at friend's home with mid-to top Ayre /esoteric combo but also with Nordost Valhala cabling (again more expensive than speakers itself) inspite room acoustic problem and speaker placement(far from ideal) system sounded very good , maybe with slight excesive lower midrange which added some "liquidity" and "sweetness" to sound.

Some basic Diablo signature I noticed in all enviroments-

1)Big soundstage both in height and witdh- diablo sounds "bigger" than some floortanders and bigger than Micro for sure.
2) Detailed, open and fast midrange
3)very top end(15-18khz) lacked some energy in big clasical works. this was less noticebale with Nordost Valhalas and Zendo cables(zendo are not so fast as nordost but also transparent while smoother in mids) I would not consider this as flaw as its depends on mucic and speakers you are comparing. The same Sonus faber Auditor M have tons of "air" and are perhaps more enjoyable on clasical works like wind bands but unnatural in vocals(where Diablo is very natural and life-like)

Micro Be have the same tonality in this region ,if you like it, Diablo would not be problem as well. I felt Micro Be is more "right" speaker , while Diablo being slight "off" in exact tonal balance buts Diablo timbre is more enjoyable and "more interesting" to listener- less boring, more exciting.

drawback with Diablo IMHO is that being monitor it does not provide what small speakers should-
1) does not work with small(=cheap) components- I played with cheaper(with is small enoght to place in my bedroom where Diablo was instaled) amplification and I could not live hearing how much music I am missing. Diablo deserve amplification,sources and even cables which is more expensive than itself.
2) require some space from back walls and sounds best when took out of side/back walls quite much.
3) not so cheap (but not so expensive as magico Mini II either)

I did not understand what you mean by saying "Diablo sounded like electrostats" however. The only thing which comes to mind than diablo could smoothly extended in high frequencies and highs are not discract from whole image (like quad's do) and have some speed as well.

hope this helps