Avalon: Eidolon vs Opus vs Opus Ceramique

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.

I think the thec plural of Opus is Opey. At least, that's what Aunt Bee told me, Tireguy. Happy Tunes!

heads up: i have it on very good authority that s2k_dude has NEVER owned an avalon product. -cfb