Audio Physic's "New" Virgo---Better?? How So??

What? The Virgo and the new Virgo III are to close in performance to justify upgrading? I Narrad sure that he/she was comparing the old to the new? The difference is not close what so ever. Top to bottom, the new Virgo III is much better. Also, regarding sub recommendations, both AP subs are sub standard compared to a good Rel sub such as the Virgos with a Stadium III.

I want to thank all who responed. This search for new hi-end speakers(especially related to the Virgo's)has gotten so frustrating I am seriously considering selling the remainder of my system and buying a Kloss table radio. Best regards to all!!! Jimbo

I spent the evening comparing my Virgo III's to the my Kloss table radio. Being a true point source, crossover free design the Kloss was able to throw a very beguiling sound propelling a coherent sound throughout the room. I love that little thing.

In all seriousness and as a past owner of the Virgo II's I can say that the new model far surpasses the old in every regard. The speaker has only been available for about a month. I have heard them in a couple of dealer showrooms one of which was running the above mentioned MF cd player with Classe amps, the room was large and incredibly overdamped and the speakers clearly not broken in. In that situation I was impressed with the transparent midrange and wnderfully extended highs.

At home in my system in a "real" room and broken they sound nothing short of fabulous. The bass is slightly depper than the previous model but with infinately more detail and excellent pitch accuracy. Now I'll be honest I am not a rock listener and I would point those who are to pro-audio PA systems with kilowatt subs. For me with Jazz and Classical and other acoustic music I find the bass response to very honest in represnting the tone and scale of these instruments.

These are very special speakers with astounding detail and soundstaging, but they do not suffer infereior source components nor do they warm things over and boom up the midbass like the II's did.

I would wholeheartedly disagree with above statements that they are extremely thin on the bottom(compared to what, and in what size room? and with what recording) there are many factors which contribute to percieved bass response the most important being the listeners perception valid or not of reality. I also strongly disagree that the II's with a matching mediocre sub like AP's or even one of the great REL's would best the new II's in every regard. In fact the only improvement would be in the deep bass and due to the REL alone.
The search for High=end speakers need not be frustrating, listen for yourself the Virgo III's are untouchable at the price.

I notice a few folks mentioned the use of a sub with the Virgos. I used a REL Strata II with mine and was very disappointed - it just added some bloom to the bottom end. I guess a more expensive REL may work better, but I found the Virgos offered enough bottem end by themselves.

Other equipment is SF Line 3, Blue Circle BC2 monos, YBA CD1a, SPM ICs and FIM Gold Speaker Cable.