Kharma 3.2 to MidiGrand Upgade???


Anyone have experience in upgrading from the 3.2 CRM enigma to the Midi Grand Ceramiques w enigma?

What improvements/benefits can be had and you've experienced? Very interested in what is possible with low powered tube amps, specifically Lamm ML2.1's etc.

On paper the Midis are more efficient. Are they easier to drive than the 3.2's or does their impedance dip more significantly than with the 2 ways? Also interested in feedback regarding room size, bass integration, etc.

I'm interested also in any comments regarding the new ceramique sub and if its necessary / integrates well with the midis. I am seeking to be able to reach realistic symphonic levels with content loaded classical music and heavy electronica.
128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xowl
IMO, the Kharma's can sound fabulous with a variety of less expensive electronics. Of course, if you want to extract EVERYTHING they are capable of you'll have to pay accordingly.

I share the same sentiments although we seem to be the minority. Most people think that SOTA associated gear is a must with speakers as revealing as the 3.2s, but when I first got the speakers, the speakers cost double the combined cost of my associated gear! It sounded pretty good to my ears. Of course hifi is all relative and subsequent upgrades have been upgrades. The Kharmas are speakers that makes you think that speakers are the most important. The 3.2s are suppose to be limited edition though.
I'll add my 2-cents about solid-state amps with 3.2s. I have an Edge NL12 driving them (& the Meitner DCC2/CDSD combo) with, to my ears, wonderfully compelling results. The bass & lower midrange areas that can sound punchy & pushy & fatiguing on many other highly acclaimed speakers I have heard &/or owned have absolute control on the 3.2s in my system. The bass is also completely integrated. It seems that the magic to the bass is the cabinet, which routes the bass to the rear ports, that seem to act like virtual woofers, but with a very natural presentation. There is a lifelike quality rivaled, in my experience, only by Apogee ribbons (my old Stages, in particular). It is a sound that just sinks into your soul. The mids/highs are at once silky but have body & depth. And there is that often-noted Kharma disappearing act that is better, I think, than other transparent speakers like Audio Physic. They make my smallish room sound much bigger & grander than it is. The 3.2s may be one of those miracle design accidents that come along once in a long, long while. (On this solid state tangent, I heard very fine results with larger pair of Kharma Ceramiques at GTT driven by a Nagra solid state amp). So, if you are not into tubes for whatever reason, don't think you cannot enjoy the 3.2s.
Rgs92,very astute points,and well received.As a matter of fact there may, or may not, be a marketing ploy at work biasing some to only use tubes.I have heard GREAT set-ups with both topologies.As for the Kharma stuff,I have a dear friend with a Ceramique model 1 driven by a Rowland 8t.I really have to admit that,even though I have loved these speakers driven by tubed stuff,he REALLY gets a FANTASTIC sound.I,TRULY,would never know whether they were solid state or tubes if I didn't know better.Fuel for thought!By the way,the bass response from this set-up is SOTA,but,there really is something to the sound of those little 3.2's that I can't shake.I guess it's true,"I like it,and like it alot".
Since I have had my 3.2's I have been through a few different sets of electronics. It began with the Hovland preamp, and the CAT JL2.
An excellent system, with all the magic the 3.2's are capable of.
But of course I couldn't leave well enough alone, I replace the Hovland with the CAT Ultimate. Not as musical, and seem to have lost that liquid quality makes the Hovland so special. I then had problems with the JL2, and decided that I couldn't deal with CAT, and a 200lb amp. Which brings me to the Lamm 1.2 amps, and the LL2 preamp. The 1.2's are absolutely amazing. Very tubelike, with the tight bass of a SS amp. I think I'll stay with this system for quite a while to come.
Carl
Sirspeedy, thanks for the good comments. Yes, after a long day of listening at the 2004 Home Ent. show in NY, with rave-reviews posted everywhere & feeling like just about every speaker was an Emperor's New Clothes situation: too forced, tizzy, forward, or just plain abusive, I finally found happiness at the Kharma 3.2 room, which was none of those things.
Yeah, I think solid state has come of age, it just generally costs more for a high quality SS amp than a tube one. One things about the 3.2s is that, when you change an upstream component, cable or whatever, you really hear the difference, no blindfold tests necessary. This is not really a bad thing, as it actually brings out the best in the other parts of the system.