Raidho D1/C1.1 vs Dynaudio C1 vs Magico Q1

I have the Dyn C1's driven by an Octave V110 tube integrated with original Nordost Frey. I heard the Raidho's at my dealer. He was running them off a little Naim Uniti with Nordost Tyr2 cables. Then we went to one of his customers that had his Raidho D3's for demo. They were being driven by a Burmester 911 with all Valhalla cables (he traded in his Dyn Sapphires). That system just ruined me. I looked every way I could to upgrade to the D1 for myself but just couldn't find the $$$$$. Anyhow back to your question. I would think the Heimdall's would be just fine but as with any of these systems the more you move up in the cable line the better it sounds. That being said you do have the point of diminishing returns just like the speakers in question. The Nordost Series2 is a very different cable. They retain the same characteristics of the original lineup but add a more liquid sound and do better in the lows. I had the Norse Series2 demo case for about 2 months and as much as I wanted to upgrade my speaker cables I ended up only upgrading my original Frey IC to the Tyr2. So yes if want to get the most out of the speaker the Valhalla would be the way to go but at 6X the price you will probably only get 15 - 20% better. Also in my opinion the Raidho D1 is about 20% better than my C1 signatures. Last my dealer told me that the 'D' series is like taking the speaker grills off when comparing to the C1.1's. And did you catch this??
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/full-range-raidho-d1-diamond-dedicated-stands-walnut-2013-07-26-speakers-07931

I just auditioned the Raidho C1.1 for about an hour at a local dealer. It was paired with Simaudio Evolution integrated with a MAC supplying music through a Synergistic Research DAC. Cabling was all Synergistic Research and the room was heavily treated with an assortment of bass traps and resonators. The room was about 20x15. Enough of the silly details.

I would characterize the sound of the C1.1 as very neutral. I didn't detect any frequency bias. We played a variety of female vocals, strings, and sax. This speaker did a wonderful job of reproducing these instruments in a very realistic manner. It captured the nuance and texture very well. Needless to say the resolution was outstanding. However, the sound was not fatiguing at all. As expected, the bass with these monitors was not that good. I think my SF Auditors had better deeper bass. Overall, these are very good speakers if you listen to mainly music that has a slower pace. When pushed with fasted paced music with plenty of rapidly changing dynamics I felt like the C1.1 struggled a bit. That being said I only auditioned for 1 hour. I need to go back and spend more time listening.

I also wanted to comment about the stands. They do look very cool. But they are also not very stiff. In fact, I could easily make them flex with just the force of one finger. Now I doubt the stands will break but I thought it odd that they were not stiffer. The dealer said the flex was intentional to deal with vibrations. Regardless I didn't like it, especially since the speakers just sit atop of stands. My Auditors actually are screwed into the stands giving me some piece of mind, even if its just perceived.

Xti16 and Tboooe,

Thank you for posting your detailed impressions. The dimensions of the dealer's room is pretty close to my room. I am somewhat discouraged by the fact that Raidho's struggled with fast paced music (especially when compared to SF Auditors that I have owned and listened to extensively).
XTi16--How are the lows of the Raidho compared to your C1 Sigs?
Maybe I will have to take Jwm and some other posters' advice and make plans to travel and audition the Raidhos. The other option would be to save for a used pair of the Raidho D2 to show up on audiogon.
Thanks,

Hello Apdoc2004

In reply to your below question,

To Kiwi_1282001
My room is 17.5 feet (length) X 14 feet (width) X 9 feet (height). I probably would do well with a medium sized floorstander but wonder if a monitor with good bass extension would work well too (it may offer an advantage in terms of less compelling need for extensive room treatments). What is your take on this?

I ran Raidho C-1 loudspeakers in my listening room which is a bit smaller than yours. My room is 16.4ft x 10ft. As you will read in my blog, room loaded the Raidho C-1 produced significant bass down to 36Hz. Incredible really for such a small loudspeaker. And to your second comment, I agree. Monitor speakers are much easier to manage in smaller rooms as they tend to excite room modes less. That said, room treatment should really be treated with the same importance as other audio related purchases - if not more. The problem is our listening environments mask reproduction. Silent spaces between music notes become filled in and spectral balances changes as our rooms emphasize or de-emphasize certain regions of the audio spectrum – which in turn alters timbre (instrumental signatures) and distances us from reality. Room “talk back”, kills spatial cues and as a result we are frequently left with little sense of definable acoustic space.

The above said, as others have expressed, please listen carefully to all product under consideration. No one has your ears.

The D1 has a pretty sharp drop off at 50hz where the Dyn C1 (rated at 45hz) actually goes down to about 38hz. I have a Rel B3 that I crossover at 36hz to add what the Dyns can't do. There are times I will turn off my sub and with the exception of a handful of recordings I don't miss it. Also as great as the Esotar2 tweeter is the Raidho ribbon is slightly better.

I have to say I didn't think the Dyn C1 MKII/Sig could be beat but the Raidho did it (although it does comes with a real hefty price tag).