2. speakers
  3. 134846-2137

Incoming ... Joseph Audio Pulsars

WHOOPEE!!!!! Today, I parted finally with my beloved B&W N804s in favor of a pair of JA Pulsars in the Sapele Finish. Using temporarily a pair of Target stands until the Sound Anchors come in. I only have a couple of hours on these speakers, but they image like crazy and the sound is exquisite and non-fatiguing. They are much better suited to my 10x10x8 room than the B&Ws. Will post a more in-depth review after they’re broken in a bit more. This has been SOME St. Patty’s Day!
rlb61
bubinga
108 posts
 
I’ll add my two cents. I have the Pulsar and a single REL T7i sub in a 25’ X 35’ room. This replaced the MBL 116’s. I was very surprised how close the current combo came sonically to the MBL’s in all areas and, in fact, bettered the MBL’s in some areas. Having said that, no speaker I’ve heard can fully "energize" a room like the omni MBL’s.

This is my last speaker system. They do so much so welI in a very small physical footprint. I will be getting the graphene driver upgrade this summer.
soix
9,704 posts
 
@moto_man — what was your experience comparing the Pulsars to the Focals?  Inquiring minds want to know!
prof
3,479 posts
 

@bubinga


I had MBL 121s and now own the Joseph Perspectives.


I’m sure I have a pretty good idea which areas you thought the MBLs exceeded the Pulsars, but I’m curious what parts of the Pulsar sound you liked better than your MBLs?

bubinga
108 posts
 
Hi prof,

Pulsars are better to my ear in speed, imaging and mid / lower bass definition. Caveat is the comparison is based on the MBL's in my previous house experience in a much smaller room versus the Pulsar with sub in my current house which has larger living space. Also, was not willing to optimize the 116’s in my current house because they would be too visually dominating. I wanted something less visually prominent which is why I tried the Pulsars. Really not apples to apples per se.
More to discover