Also, Zynec, check out the used Thiel 2.7 for 3.6-4.0K on Audiogon. I have never heard this particular Thiel but some people love this brand for soundstage and imaging characteristics. If you have a local dealer it might be worth a trip for a comparison point. You might like them and looks like a good price.
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
@Wardl Thanks, that is very helpful! The Thiels were on my radar originally but then I didn't pursue it any further and I have no idea why - maybe I read something discouraging. However, there is a dealer within an hour from me so hopefully I will get a chance to hear the 2.7's. @Johhnyb53 I suppose my thinking is with electronica it seems the artist/producer can exactly place sound sources anywhere within the overall stage so for such music I don't see how pinpoint imaging can be "wrong", but maybe the Ohm's do that justice if the source warrants it? |
Pinpoint imaging can be fun. What I'm saying is that 1) Pinpoint is sort of a recording contrivance that seldom occurs in live performance and 2) Pursuing pinpoint imaging as the *first* priority often compromises other parameters that are more important to long term satisfaction, things like tonal balance (the most important), soundstage (important for recreating the live experience and having a stable image throughout the room), and power response (energizing the listening area properly and having a listening area devoid of hot spots and suckouts). I don't know if you've considered just how big your listening area is, and what a challenge it would be to energize it for a good soundstage and tonal balance. Your listening area is nearly 5500 cubic feet, The floor plan occupies 400 sq. ft, but the high ceiling increases the total volume considerably compared to having a standard 8' ceiling. Fortunately, your sloped ceiling is probably an advantage by weakening the effect of standing waves. For Magneplanars, the 3.7i or 20.7 would probably be the right size for your room. The 3.7is might well need a sub or two well for good tonal balance. The 1.7i's *might* work out, but you'd probably need a pair of JL e110 subs to fill out the bottom and energize that big room. This panel/sub combo would satisfy your $5-5.K budget. Some recommended the Ohms. Specifically, the Ohm 4000s would be the ideal size for your room and have the dispersion and bass performance to fill it. The price is also right. You would get a room-filling soundstage that would have good tonal balance. You'd get decent imaging, but to get the pinpoint variety you'd probably have to sit closer, almost in a nearfield mode to get it. Another good candidate that has not been mentioned is the GoldenEar Triton One. These go for $5K/pair and have several things in their favor. For one, the front-facing speaker array is a D'Appolito/MTM array, which creates a very tight point source, excellent both for dispersion and imaging. The front baffle is very narrow (5-3/4") and curved, also great for imaging and dispersion. For providing good tonal balance in that big room, the Triton 1's bass is provided by three built-in powered subwoofers augmented by four passive radiators. Power is provided by a 1600 watt internal amp. Reviews: Stereophile and The Absolute Sound |
Zynec, I am on my 7th pair of Salks and can comment on just about all the models. You might be a candidate for a new pair of HT2TL's or Veracity HT's if you prefer new. I have owned electrostats in the past and they are a different animal as others have pointed out. Panel speakers just perform differently than box speakers at this price range. No getting around it. For the money you cannot beat Salk. Call Jim and talk with him. He will not upsell you and will guide you to what fits your budget, gear, and tastes. Plus you might be able to chose the finish you want for a good price. Veneers, paints, dyes, etc. |
@Johnnyb53 Great info, appreciate it - if I see the Triton's at a nearby store I will check them out as well. For the Ohm's and sound staging, is the idea that the soundstage is huge but the exact location of instruments, singer, etc, is "fuzzy" for lack of a better word? I'm trying to make sure I understand what you're saying. I get that you're saying it doesn't make sense to sacrifice all other parameters at the expense of a single parameter, which makes sense to me. If a speaker has good tonal balance, extension, realistic soundstage depth/width/height, I think very "clear" location of instruments/singers is a good thing... this is what I am thinking by pinpoint imaging, hopefully that is the correct interpretation. @Bugredmachine Jim is a nice guy, absolutely. Don't see that as a reason why I should not do my own research though. I have heard the ST's in the same room and same equipment, and it was quite obvious (to me) that the HT3's are at another level. Anything below the HT3's level of performance is really not interesting to me. |
- 43 posts total