They were the 3.7i's. Did they have the tweeters on the outside or inside when you heard them? I could easily believe the setup was a problem - moreover I get the feeling that the room was way too small for such a large speaker. The 1.7's were better in an area roughly the same width but a bit deeper. However, neither put up the type of sound stage that the HT3's did, not even close, and the HT3's truly disappear whereas it's hard not to notice the big maggies.
Salk HT3, SF Cremona M, Magnepan 3.7 or ML Ethos?
Help! :) I have been getting by with old Panasonic SB6's which are said to have an electrostatic sound for a piston type speaker design. Obviously they are pretty old monitors, but one thing they do well is (pinpoint) image with good width and moderate depth. But alas, I am finally ready to get some real (or at least modern) speakers.
I have heard the HT3's and liked the sound and look of them. They threw up a huge soundstage, but perhaps at the expense of the "pinpoint" imaging I am used to, and seemed exaggerated (e.g. silhouette of singers too large). However, I am not sure if I heard them in the best setup as they were very far from the rear wall (like 15ft) and in a huge room (maybe 35' square or even bigger). This may also have made the image seem entirely behind the plane of the speakers whereas I think a little closer is nicer (to me).
I have also heard the 3.7's in a dealer showroom, presumably properly setup. I felt like the big panels were "blocking" some of the sound and the soundstage was entirely between the panels, which made it compressed without much space between instruments, etc. Highly resolving and detailed, but lacked "air" (which the HT3s did very well). That room was probably 13'x18' or maybe slightly larger. I was somewhat disappointed given the stellar reviews. In fact, I felt the 1.7's (in a different room) in some respects sounded better.
I have not heard the Cremona M but did hear Olympica Monitors briefly at a different dealer. The room was probably 17' square, the Olympica's were maybe 2 feet off the rear wall. Since I only got 5-10mins with them, I barely got a sense but there was something nice about the SF sound that has me curious to hear a used model I might actually afford, hence the Cremona M.
Finally, I have not heard the Ethos but will hopefully get a chance to hear the Summit X in the next few days.
I am after speed, extension, holographic 3D soundstage with pinpoint placement of sounds/instruments/voices, refinement, low-level detail and resolution. Budget is 5K used. Does anyone have some advice? With the HT3's so far from the wall would that have distorted my impression of their imaging and image size? Are the Cremona M's in the same league as these other speakers or no? I am finding this very difficult.
I have heard the HT3's and liked the sound and look of them. They threw up a huge soundstage, but perhaps at the expense of the "pinpoint" imaging I am used to, and seemed exaggerated (e.g. silhouette of singers too large). However, I am not sure if I heard them in the best setup as they were very far from the rear wall (like 15ft) and in a huge room (maybe 35' square or even bigger). This may also have made the image seem entirely behind the plane of the speakers whereas I think a little closer is nicer (to me).
I have also heard the 3.7's in a dealer showroom, presumably properly setup. I felt like the big panels were "blocking" some of the sound and the soundstage was entirely between the panels, which made it compressed without much space between instruments, etc. Highly resolving and detailed, but lacked "air" (which the HT3s did very well). That room was probably 13'x18' or maybe slightly larger. I was somewhat disappointed given the stellar reviews. In fact, I felt the 1.7's (in a different room) in some respects sounded better.
I have not heard the Cremona M but did hear Olympica Monitors briefly at a different dealer. The room was probably 17' square, the Olympica's were maybe 2 feet off the rear wall. Since I only got 5-10mins with them, I barely got a sense but there was something nice about the SF sound that has me curious to hear a used model I might actually afford, hence the Cremona M.
Finally, I have not heard the Ethos but will hopefully get a chance to hear the Summit X in the next few days.
I am after speed, extension, holographic 3D soundstage with pinpoint placement of sounds/instruments/voices, refinement, low-level detail and resolution. Budget is 5K used. Does anyone have some advice? With the HT3's so far from the wall would that have distorted my impression of their imaging and image size? Are the Cremona M's in the same league as these other speakers or no? I am finding this very difficult.
- ...
- 43 posts total
I am not a Magnepan lover but from what you describe as being important to you I would think they fit your bill. I agree that there had to be a problem with the set up. The Sonus Faber tilt towards warm and full. Your description of the Salk's sound made it sound like they are good for your wants. I don't think the Vandersteens would work for you. You are doing the right thing by trying to audition these choices,in the end the best speaker is the one that sounds best to you. Sorry if that seems cliché and overused, but what I ended up liking (Focal Electras now old) doesn't make everyone happy, but I like them. |
Salk has awhole network of owners listed on audiogon where you coulshear them in a more appropriate space. See their huge Audiocircle for comments and a sub circle for used speakers for sale Jim is a great master craftsman, incredible customer relations and all around nice guy. I feel he really does a great job at proviiding steallar sound at reasonable prices. I have Ht3s which do have pinpoint imaging and nice tonal balance. I also have Soundscape 10s which are their flagship model. Good luck in your search and bring lots of different music to demo To |
My dealer placed the tweeters to the inside for both audiitons of the 1.7s. At home I've switched them back and forth a couple of times and always ended up preferring the tweeters to the inside. HOWEVER, I just took another look at the manual and I notice that you *always* have to have the tweeter side pointing directly at the center sweet spot. This means if you put the tweeters to the outside, the panels will be pointed inward more. I'm thinking of trying it that way tomorrow mostly for kicks, because I'm really liking the sound I'm getting now. 3.7i's probably need to be 4 to 5 feet out from the wall behind them and at least 3 feet from the side walls. And you *must* angle them inward. You don't have to spend a fortune on the amplification, but it has to be a good match. You may want to consider the 1.7i's and use the money you save to augment the low end with one or two JL Audio Dominion subs. |
Thanks guys, these are helpful comments and information.. keep it coming :) @Audiotomb, your experience with the HT3's sounds promising to me, can you say a bit about the placement in your room, where the image is and what kind of music you listen to? I did hear a pair of SongTowers locally in a more typical setup (through the owners club) but they are much less performant than the HT3s so I'm not sure how much I could take from them. When I heard the HT3s I also heard the ST's and for me there is still a large difference between the two models (in the HT3's favor). @Johnnyb53, your placement/room size info would be helpful as well. Maybe I will ask the dealer if I can audition one of the models at home.. |
- 43 posts total