Avalon: Eidolon vs Opus vs Opus Ceramique


Anyone care to comment on the differences among these three models, particularly the new Opus Ceramique and how its performance compares to the other two outside of the obvious differences in bass response. Please confine your comments to the standard model Eidolon and not the Eidolon Diamond.
linkster
hi,

i own a pair of arcus and have heard most of the other avalons, though not the new opus w/ceramic driver. i'm sure many "higher-end" avalon owners will take offense to this but i'm gonna say it anyways: given decent amplification, most avalons sound VERY similar to one another. this is not a bad thing because the avalon house sound is great. but, i doubt if the sonic differences among those 3 speakers you mentioned will justify even a fraction of their differences in cost. get the regular opus, spend the extra money on better components and be happy. jhmo.
I agree with S2k but I differ on what I would do, since very few opus(i)?(what do you call more then one opus any way?) have been for sale, the new diamonds are out and I am sure a few Eidolon owners are going to dump there current Eidolon's in place of the diamonds, buy a used pair of Eidolon's. Well that's what I would do if I was in the market for new speakers.
Tim
A familial quality among different speakers from a single manufacturer is not a unique trait. These three speakers share the same midrange and tweeter drivers, so one would expect a particularly strong resemblance among among them. I am interested in in comments elaborating on the relative merits among them outside of bass response. I don't think the same can be said of the other speakers in Avalon's current product line (i.e. Eclipse Classic, Arcus, Avatar) as these are 2-way designs with vastly different crossover topologies and drivers.
Linkster: I heard the Eidolon & the Ceramique -- but on two different occasions, and only playing a Burmester test cd on both occasions...
With this limitation in mind, I respectfully submit that my Eidolon "musical experience" was superior to the one with Ceramique. The overall musical / tonal accuracy is what I'm getting at. I particularly found the E's upper register more extended, and the feeling of space more apparent. I can't single out bass performance per se: maybe the differences didn't strike me, or (probably) I missed them.

Let me add, in concluding this inconclusive diatribe, that the equipment on both occasions was mid-range Burmester & the cabling Nordost (valhalla), that I listen to classical & jazz (hence "listening" biases), and that I generally like & enjoy Avalon products anyway! Cheers.