Merlin VSM-M or VSM-MX vs. Kharma CRM3.2 series

Panorama,I wouldn't sell my Kharma C1.0 if i like it.
As i said that they are fatiguing for MY EARS,not yours or others. If you like them,i'm happy for you.

I haven't heard the Rockport TT.
The price tag for $73,500 and A+ review could be 99.99% great sound,but not 100%.

I never get upset when someone didn't like their components which were coincidently I own or love. I respect their taste.

No hard felling please !!

I cannot comment on the Kharma as i do not own them, but I can comment on the merlin vsm m and bobby so I will. He is a musician and I have had the opportunity to have many interactions with equipment and musicians like Bobby. (Ihave worked in professional music studios and also a few retail hifi stores.) The merlins are not perfect-what is outside of my wife-but they are close for the money. They are accurate and fair, and I only wish that some of the other speaker companies I have dealt with have guy like Bobby in charge.

There are many good products out there-the kharmas are one to be sure-but there are not many guys like Bobby out there;, honest, intelligent and dedicated to the music. We would all be more fortunate if we could have more of him, not less.

I thought we were comparing the Kharma 3.2 focal or diamond which in my opinion is levels above Ceramique 1.0. Do you think the 3.2 is on par with the 1.0? Your statement says Kharma's are fatiguing. You cannot say by hearing one model they all are the same. Think about it.

Bobby, that's a very interesting response.A while back I heard a very well respected horn manufacturer's speaker that was playing a demo of a drum set. At first listen, I was struck by how amazingly like a real drum set they sounded..Then the manufacturer played various other pieces; to everyone's dismay the speakers just totally fell apart and in fact their sound was enough to drive myself and several others out of the room.
While I am not a musician by profession, I do play several instruments and have the opportunity to play live and then listen to the reproduced. One thing that I am fairly certain you will agree with is that when one hears a live instrument it is instantly recognizable as such. The reproduced sound seems to me to be also just as recognizable;and IMHO they are light years apart. The example of the sax player is interesting, maybe it is impossible to reproduce a sax so that one knows immediately that one is hearing a 'live'sax and at the same time have any chance of reproducing say a violin or piano so that again the same would hold true.
You are right, I truly love music and I am hoping that one day my system will be a little more towards what I perceive as sounding more like a real live 'unamplified'
sound.
Perhaps one of my problems is that I have a very high expectation of what I would like to hear from a true 'high-end' system.

I have heard many Kharma's (more than you thougt) from 1999 and the last one i heard was last month at 2004 CES

I heard the 3.2 with focal at least 4 times in a different set up and room. (Haven't heard the Diamond,though)

I had talked and listened with Charles in San Fransisco 2003 when he had the 3.2 in his room.

If soft dome and 3.5" mid made my ears hot,what do you want me to expect from focal and 7" mid ?

Infact,the 3.5" mids were doing better job than 7" to me in the 500Hz-up area.
Top of the line and higher price is not always better !!

Many or most people prefer the Tennor Hybrid over the OTL,but not all.

Think about it !!