2. speakers
  3. 160589-6055

Devore Fidelity Orangutan O/96

My neighbor had to move some heavy furniture from one room to another so he asked me for help earlier today. Although, we've been neighbors for almost two years I had never been inside his house up until this afternoon. As I walked through the foyer and into his family room, I saw the speakers hooked up to some McIntosh separates. I have to admit that these were one of the most beautiful speakers I had ever seen. He offered to play some music and of course I was not going to say no. They sounded quite decent, although the sound was not as hefty or lush as I was expecting. Don't know if it was his equipment or room (wood floor, no rug, lots of windows), or maybe the Devore's are not quite going after those big, lush, and slightly warmer sound characteristics.

I'm actually saving up money to buy Harbeth SHL5+, or used 40.1, sometime next year. But boy did the Devore Orangutans caught my attention. And yes I know I shouldn't be basing my decision on looks alone, but if they're comparable to Harbeth in terms of sound quality, I'm definitely interested in exploring.

Just wondering if someone has had a chance to compare them directly to the Harbeth speakers I'm considering. Anyone moved from Harbeth to Devore O/6 or vice versa? This will be a system that I'll be building from scratch so I do have the luxury of building the system around my speakers -- total budget is around $15000. I usually buy used equipment whenever I can.

Please note that I'm not soliciting advice for other speakers at this time. Mostly interested in hearing about real world comparisons between the Devore Fidelity Orangutans and Harbeth SHL5+ or 40.1/2.
128x128arafiq
fsonicsmith's avatar
fsonicsmith
962 posts
 

mquery,

I was never able to get a lot of depth from the soundstage of the O/93 in auditions (even though they were well away from the back wall). The "wall of sound" seems to be a fairly consistent take on that speaker (though I did find that the imaging was quite good - specific enough to satisfy me).

I've heard the O/96s do nice depth, they they too tend to draw things closer to the listener vs many other more sound-stagey speakers.
Same experience here. Width yes. Depth no. These are my everyday loudspeaker. No loudspeaker does it all. An argument can be made that the O/93 is more refined and balanced than the O/96. A cogent argument at that. If I had a larger room, I would choose the O/96's. To heck with "refined", the O/96's make you want to dance.
Wasn't this supposed to be a DeVore thread? Well I have an urgent news bulletin-the O/93's DO soundstage depth! Who knew? I thought I had great vinyl rigs that were dialed in. I knew my AMR DP777 was not replicating the SQ of my turntables. So I figured that was that. Yesterday I installed a new DAC, an SW1X DAC II Special with USB to SPDIF converter built in. For those that don't know, it is a non-oversampling 44.1Khz only design not altogether different from Audio Note UK's designs though the proprietor says that there are differences. No mass produced stuff here-this DAC is hand-built to order. But to the point (Prof I hope you see this) I now have soundstage depth and it sounds organic. I take everything I said about the limitations of the O/93 back. Besides depth, the bass has more foundation and imaging is first-rate. It was a matter of source, not loudspeaker limitation. I stand corrected. 
bjesien
1,314 posts
 
The magic of the Devore speaker comes out with careful matching of the amp and ancillary components.  Much more so than the other speakers I've owned.  You don't just throw an amp in your trunk and speed off with these.
prof
3,474 posts
 

Wow, fasonicsmith, now you have it all!  :-)

prof
3,474 posts
 

As to amps and the Devore speakers:

John Devore said his goal in designing speakers was to make them as amplifier agnostic as possible.  Which is why he keeps the impedance an easy load.  He saw this as a competitive advantage in a marketplace where many speakers present difficult loads and might not show their best unless you used just the right amp.   He wanted his speakers to shine with everything from lower powered tubes, to solid state.

This was especially true of the O series.

So the idea that you need just the right amp to make the Devore speaker shine doesn't make too much sense from the very way they are designed.  And anecdotally, as I mentioned, I've heard the O series on a variety of amp topologies and they sounded excellent and similar on each.

I'm sure you can change the flavor to taste re SS vs tubes, but you shouldn't need any heroic search for "just the right amp pairing" to make them sound good.


nquery
103 posts
 
Yes, I think if someone gets a bigger soundstage and/or better imaging after adding a new DAC, its often more about the DAC than the speaker. Particularly with easy to pair speakers like the O’s.

I have a Lampizator DAC and Line Magnetic SET amp that in their own right are very good at these aspects, and in *my* space the O’s didn’t soundstage/image as well *relative* to some other speakers. It just seem like this is not one of their inherent strengths - which is not to say that they can’t pass through strengths/weaknesses in the electronics (as @fsonicsmith heard!).

It’s a bit of an additive process in my mind. DAC A adds 3 points of soundstage vs DAC B, Amp A adds another 2 points, and the speakers add another X points. I don’t think that the O’s contribute a lot given their inherent design though placement seems to help. I think that it’s maybe easier to pair the O’s with amps than it is to pair them with the room. Not that they aren’t otherwise amazing speakers!
More to discover