Auditioned Infinity MTS. Disappointed. Questions..

Just a couple of points Drcio: First, there is likely a "voicing" difference between the audiophile-quality Audio Research tube gear you use and the middle-of-the-road ss electronics that were used to demonstrate the Infinitys.

Secondly, bass is very room-dependent and tweakable to a large degree. As to the imaging, that is room dependent and I suspect, in this case, electronics-dependent, too.

You did a smart thing by using your own reference recordings, but the fact that you are judging a complete system in an unfamiliar acoustic environment effectively negates any serious comparison.

If you are really interested in how the Infinitys compare to your speakers why not see if the store will agree to an in-home trial? If not that, then perhaps they would agree to let you bring your amp and preamp to their store to swap into the system.

Then there's always the possibility that the Infinity's just aren't your cup of tea or that the Merlins have some particular character trait(s) that you really like.

But if you are really serious about doing a fair comparison, as I said before, you need to make some changes in your methodology...

And remember, there are a lot more full-range speakers out there than just the Infinitys. However, if you're really hooked on the character of the Merlins, maybe the best thing for you to do would be to think about adding a good dedicated subwoofer system.

Heard the Prelude MTS with Krell and the sound was nothing like what you mention. Unfortunately, the dealer had hastily set-up the speakers in, of all things, a square room! The bass was impressive, but too much so. I think that properly set-up that issue would probably disappear as very few speakers are designed to integrate the bass properly within a room like these Infinitys are. Insofar as the midrange, I found it to be quite good, open and coherent. The treble seemed to be smooth. The imaging was good, considering the less than ideal placement. Dispersion was god, to the extent that can be judged by moving one's head one side to the other. They were very dynamic. Aside from the very deep bass which should be properly tamed in each individual room, the sound was coherent and quite musical. I did not much care for the sound of the Krell CD player used in the demo, as I found the sound too etched and somewhat tilted up as compared to my Arcam FMJ CD 23. Will not have good resale value because the true blue audiophiles crapped all over this product because it was designed by a no nonsense objective (aka "scientific") person and does not rely on allusion to emotions or references to great long dead composers and such. The Rodney Dangerfield of big chested speakers, a good product that can't get no respect. Did not beat the better speakers I have heard: Vandersteen Fives and JM Labs Utopia, but they are way less money.

>>>I am just amazed to read reaction from Kchahoc. I simply don't understand his reasoning process and attitude (what's your problem?).<<<
Thank you for your clarifications. And if you think that in any way I was heated-up, mad or unreasonable, truly all I did was question the validity or your "review," "audition" or what ever you want to call it. Unless it is because I corrected your writing . . . Perhaps if you had thought well maybe the MTS is more accurate and the Merlin is hot in the treble, or even the other way around. I only wanted . . . Oh forget it. I'll agree that Infinity's tweeter used in all the models from Intermezzo up does sound "dull" compared to some metal dome tweeters. I know I used to have B&W' Nautiluses and a pair of Wilson watt puppy 5's. But go check out the review by Stereophile on the MTS and the itsy-bitsy 2.6's by Mr. Fermer. Or, if I may paraphrase, he said that the tweeter may sound dull untill you realize the amazing resolving power of the hi-frequencies. It is like in the 80's when people first started to get ss amps without crossover distortion and thought they sounded lifeless because all the hi-frequency hash was gone. Maybe not your cup of tea, and if I offended please accept my apologies and get some thicker skin. As an aside I do not understand the whipping boy attitude most "audiophiles" have toward some companies. It is really a shame since it will turn off some potential, innocent buyers:)

Hey Y'all,

I agree that the only way to truly test any piece of audio gear is to hear it in your home or at least with your equipment. And I also realize that there are many different variables, room size and shape, furniture, acoustic treatments or the lack there of, that will effect the performance of a system. That said; I had the same exact experience with the MTS as Drcio. The system was all Krell, CD, Amp and Pre, all current models, as Pbb mentioned, and I, for the life of me, could not understand how a speaker that was so highly touted could sound so mediocre. I'm not trying to stir things up, I just wanted to let every one know that Drcio's impressions were not just his but mine as well. Please don't get me wrong, I grew up on Infinity speakers, RS-400s (?) in the '80s and RS-4s in the '90s and I loved them to death. I guess the MTS is just not my cup of tea either........John

Thank you very much for all your advise and feedbacks!

As you've made many positive comments on Infinity, I am quite convinced now that the set-up at Audio shop might not have been an ideal one. For fair judgement, I think, I have to negotiate with the shop to allow me a loaner, or allow me to test Infinity with my equipments on site.

Altho I don't think I have a very shallow personality, I really liked Infinity's killer look. :) As the listening experience is very personal, however, I have slight concerns that Infinity's sound might not be for my taste even with my gears (or mine is yet an another incorrect set-up. who knows?). Thank you everybody, and thank you Kchahoc for pointing me Mr. Fremer's article. That was very useful for me to understand Infinity.