B & W N802's Vs Revel Studios Vs. Mezzo Utopias

Jazzdude, no way did the Mezzo Utopias have a loose bass. The bass sounded upbeat and tight to me. The Aerial 10Ts and Mezzo Utopias bass response are the best I'v heard. I like the crossover better on the Mezzo Utopias then the Aerial 10ts. A loose bass response is the Legacy Focus.

Goone, the Mezzo is alittle bit warmer. Dont be fooled by the Nautilus using a Kelvar midbase. This midbase sounded warm and articulate. The Montana's on the other hand, which uses a Scanspeak kelvar midbase sounded to edgy to me.

Twilo, I said it was a little loose for my taste. If someone is spending 14k on a speaker then I think ANY overhang or loss of control in the woofer is unacceptable and that is what I have heard when listening to the Mezzo's. I am not saying the bass was REALLY loose, just a little, but more than I expect for a speaker that costs so much. I don't have any qualms with the bass extension of the Mezzo's.

I think Jazzdude's analysis was very helpful. I don't fully agree with his assessment of the Studio's, but not because he is wrong, but because there are other factors, which are so important to what one hears. He pointed out that equipment matching is very important. I agree as are acoustics and cable ect. My studios sound fantastic both detailed and great imaging. I found the midrange to be rather robust and the tweeters allow for adjustment which is really helpful for different settings. They sound better in my application than they did in many of the stores I demod them in. It was important to me to listen to them with different amps and cables. Also many retail outlets don't have adequate acoustics even though you would expect it with this level of product. I heard these paired with spectral amps and mit cable and while I found the sound detailed and quick felt it was two bright and that the midrange tended to do what Jazzdude pointed out.
In one setting I listened to them with Levinson 436's, which seem somewhat muddy. I was surprised and asked the salesperson whether something was wrong with the system and was told the cable and the speakers were just set up in the past day. There has been a lot of threads about the pros and cons of burn/breakin. When I went back a week later after telling the guy to break them in the sound was a world of difference. Where the spectrals were bright the 436s were more involving. Some have called them clinical, but I actually found them quite robust but a bit slower than some other amps. Loved them,but got something else. What's the point? Different equipment and environment are going to impact your speakers. These reviewers are giving you their impression with different equipment than yours and a different environment. Before dumping the speakers you have consider what is going to be the result of the replacement in your environment.

I listened to the Studios again this past weekend. They weren't nearly so clinical this time as they have been in the past. They will always have a little bit of a cool predisposition. The only thing that had changed was that the speakers had been moved apart about a foot and given some toe-in. Coherency issues still exist. I think TacT RCS would do wonders to address this issue.

FWIW, I am normally drawn speakers that are transparent and accurate. So my reaction to the Studios bothers me a little bit and has me searching for a reason. The only thing I can come up with (besides the coherency) is that the Studio's midrange leaves me wanting. I prefer something that is a little forward or has some midrange bloom. That kind of sound is more intimate where the studio's are more distant.

Enough introspection for me. Time for a beer and some tunes.