The mistake armchair speaker snobs make too often

@soix Your choices are welcome and two of the three that I heard, are excellent speakers for the most part. The Joseph Audio Pearl, Usher TD20, Vandersteen Kento, and Boenicke W13 SE were heard or are known to have the qualities that I am not looking but not in attendance.

The Boenicke’s sounded better than their measurements indicate with excellent analog playback. Not as big and full as I am looking for. The Boenicke is a fine speaker but too small sounding and has a much lower efficiency (86-89 db depending on frequency which is not smooth and usually tests lower) with excellent dispersion (I only heard the non-SE version),

The Vandersteen Kento has built-in woofer amps, reticent highs although measures great (87 db efficiency 3 to 8 ohm impedance) and dispersion is very good but not great off axis. A very listenable speaker though. Vandy’s always sound sweet to me, not a bad thing (early inexpensive ones sounded distorted though).

The Joseph Audio Pearl 2 is has more detail than body, although it is much more pleasant than more expensive Wilsons and superior to B&Ws and has plenty of bass (maybe too much-for a large room). It too has a low 86 db efficiency with a nice 6 ohm low impedance. I have not heard the 20/20 Graphene version or Pearl 3. They look just like Von Schweikert VR series.

I haven’t heard the Usher TD20 and Verity Audio Arindal speakers.

What I am after is an end-game speaker that I can afford for my listening room and my taste in sound. My end game speaker is the VS Ultra 7, I don’t want a low(er) efficiency speaker with a built in woofer amp like the VS VR55.

@kota I absolutely don’t want a surround sound system for mono and stereo recordings. As an amateur recording/mastering "engineer," I only want to hear mono and stereo sound coming from two speakers (three track with a center channel). That’s how the majority of my music was recorded and mastered (my own and most of my 48,000 LP/78s/CDs/R2R). Powered focal speakers do not meet my needs or wants (I want to stick to passive speakers). Thanks though for your suggestion for thrilling sound.

Note that the speakers I'm auditioning are super coherent with mid-range drivers that cover 80-90% of the range of music and are in the low 90 db efficiency that have impedances either of my amps can easily drive.

@jond

Erik this makes no sense to me why are in house or parts the company makes from scratch inferior

Which is exactly the problem. You are equating cheaper with inferior. I’m not saying in-house drivers are necessarily inferior. I’m saying they are less expensive for the manufacturer to put in. The moment a company can go to in-house drivers the profit margin jumps for the same speaker, and if it isn’t there’s something seriously wrong with your management.

Perhaps a great example that is in the public domain is JM Lab buying Focal (or perhaps it was the other way around). One made speakers, the other drivers. As soon as they purchased the driver maker the cost per driver dropped using the exact same drivers from the same factory built by the same driver technicians.

So when we happen to know off the shelf costs we get our panties in a wad because a manufacturer "only" spent 20% on drivers (which is high and boutique cottage industry size) vs. a mega brand which may have spent 7% and no one says a thing.

@phusis 

Check out old blue eyes, he used a center channel at home too:

@fleschler

What I am after is an end-game speaker that I can afford for my listening room and my taste in sound.

What I posted is totally MY taste, so I get it. If I had a mission like yours the goal is to get the taste in sound YOU want. For an end game that would lead me to three brands, JBL (the M2 if you want to hear your masters as they were recorded, they have an outboard active crossover so you can choose your own amp), Revel, (if you like a little more bloom with your accuracy), or Martin Logan if you want sheer "wall of sound" envelopment.

BUT, I don’t think your mission (every song played through those speakers fits your taste to a T) is going to end no matter what speaker you get unless you get this F360 tube preamp by Black Ice audio, watch the Z review and would love your feedback:

https://youtu.be/noe6GsyYDJc

If there could be only 2 passive speakers in my room I think I would want these ML Neoliths:

@kota1  I finally ended my 20 year affair with stat speakers with ML Monolith IIIs and Requests (2nd system).  Despite my former room size of 25X23X11.5 vaulted, the Monolith sucked.  26 years ago, I met my wife who hated the speakers as beamy, lacking true bass, thin and bright.  I should never have purchased MLs and stuck with the Acoustat 2+2s.  I sold the MLs and purchased the Legacy Focus.  She loves the sound and more so the Von Schweikert Ultra speakers which she has only heard in $1+million systems at shows but playing my LPs and CDs in huge ballrooms. 

I will report on the Zellaton Plural Evos in a month in my room.  I just heard the Acora Audio SC2 in a showroom with EAR & Nagra equipment, a mismash of medium to high end cabling (3 or 4 brands).  Amazingly competent sound, lacking in excitement but with zero negatives.  A superior quality sound speaker.  I'm undecided until I hear speakers which are capable of delivery great sound for every genre.  I also heard the Devore Orangutan 96.  Wow, a super lush sound for voices, small instruments(als) but quite awful for full symphonics (made a 1955 Wolff recording sound just old and compressed until the Focus or Acoras which make it sound like the orchestra is in the room with you).  The speakers I'm hearing are boutique and relatively expensive.  Acora speakers have twin 7" paper mid-woofers with tremendous dynamic punch and quite deep bass.  It was a pleasure to experience such sound from a relatively small speaker (good looking too in granite).