Archive through February 14, 2006
|
New member Username: BvanPost Number: 4 Registered: Jun-05 | hi i'm wondering what are the differences in sound between this and the focus 110 (and 52, 52se ans s1.4) any input greatly appreciated as i have no oportunity to demo them myself b. |
|
New member Username: BvanPost Number: 7 Registered: Jun-05 | no one?  |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1033 Registered: Sep-04 | The 110 and 140 are more akin to the older Contour 1.1 and 1.3 respectively. They have a similar presentation, but are more refined and a touch easier to drive. This does not make them easy to drive however! The 140 is a lot bigger and has much more presence than the 110. The 110 is a great little speaker - a lot of fun and very capable, but the 140 is in the next league up. It has far better bass, better expression and better drive. In my view, both the FOCUS models murder the 52SE when driven properly. The 52SE has some of the presence of the 140, but it suffers by having a cabinet which isn't in the same class as the FOCUS models. The FOCUS models have a trapzoidal cabinet which seems to help a lot in terms of cabinet colouration. The 52SE has a more traditional cabinet and you can hear it. Of course the 52SE is still a brilliant speaker, but I would have no hesitation in choosing one of the FOCUS models over the 52SE. This is provided the amp that is driving them is of sufficient quality of course! All Dynaudios need a quality amp to drive them otherwise they come out as a distorted mess. The 52SE is the easiest of the three to drive, so if your amp is a little underpowered then you may need to consider this as a factor. The s1.4 is a beautifully made speaker, but it did not sell well at all in the UK. I don't know how it did elsewhere. It has a lot of presence, a very well constructed cabinet and the stanbds suit it well. Its problem is that it is not very room friendly. It has a very big sound so it can easily set off most room resonances. I'm sure there are rooms where it will work well, but it is the more difficult choice in my view. Regards, Frank. |
|
New member Username: BvanPost Number: 8 Registered: Jun-05 | Thanks very much Frank. I was hoping for your opinion in this matter. I'm running an Arcam A85 (85 watts), do you think this will do the 140 justice in a 5.5x4.5m room up to say 90db? (drives my 52's fine) many thanks b. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1284 Registered: Jun-05 | You will be fine Bvan,not the most exciting amp around,but it gets the fundamentles right and it has plenty of power.The Focus is a great line much better than Audience and even better than the Contour line,if I didnt have the Epos M12.2s I would deffinetly have one of the Focus line.I havent heard the 110 and the 140,but I listened to the 220 for about 3 hours a few weeks ago and was floored by how quick it was for a floostander and how close it was to the Confidence C1,which gets my vote as the best speaker in the world.I found the 220 quite remakable that it had the timing and the agility of the C1 with the power,no it wasnt better than the C1,but it was close, but look at the price this focus line is high end at budget prices. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1036 Registered: Sep-04 | I've been away on holiday which is why I took a while - sorry! Difficult question about the A85. I'm not sure since I haven't tried that particular combination. I can well imagine the A85 can drive the 52s and 52SE fine. I just don't know if it will have enough control for the 140 or even the 110 which is also quite difficult to drive. I wish I could tell you more than that, but I can't! Regards, Frank. |
|
New member Username: BvanPost Number: 9 Registered: Jun-05 | thanks both of you. Frank, you say "even the 110". is the 110 easier to drive even though it has a slighly lower sensitivity rating?(86 vs 85) what would be your ideal choices of amps for the Focus line? i hear Simaudio is good, and I bet the new NAD M3 would be excellent, though a bit beyond what i might consider spending. one last question if i may. what do you guys think of the Dynaudio Sub250, compared to say a Rel Strata? it might come down for me to a choice between the 110+sub250, or the 140, and i cant for the life of me find any reviews or opinions on the sub250. thanks again b. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1286 Registered: Jun-05 | The Moon stuff does work good with Dynaudio,thats what I've been hearing the Dynaudios on as of late, they have plenty of power and peak Currents,the Moon stuff has deep bass and good dynamics,but they are kind of dark in the midrange and they just sound a little to pedestrian for me.The C1 brought the best out of the Monns and the 220s did to,and the Audience line played decent thru them,the Contours sound bland and uninvolving and they didnt time well.I have to admit I dont care for the Contour series very much.Whats your budget for a amp Bvan? |
|
New member Username: BvanPost Number: 10 Registered: Jun-05 | up to $1500 and i dont mind buying used, what aboutusing the arcam as a pre and hooking on a power amp to it? cheers b. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1297 Registered: Jun-05 | Look into some used Brystons,but make sure they are current the model I heard the Epos 12.2s on recently I think its the 4b and it sounded outstanding and the Epos were fresh out of the box.The Epos M line has a similar balance as the Focus line,also look into the new Creek Destiny series intergrated amps,a trade in with your Arcam should get you under $1500 mark,also check out both of the Exposure intergrated amps,both companies amps major on timing and speed as well as the Bryston,which the Focus line does to.Those are the 3 contenders that I am replacing my Musical Fidelity X Rays with,so do a little research,those are the 3 companies to look at in my view,so good luck. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1042 Registered: Sep-04 | Bvan, Although the numbers would have you believe the 110 more difficult to drive than the 140, it is the 140 which needs more control overall. All the Dynaudios require an amplifier that can swing good amounts of juice. I have only heard the Moon kit once or twice and although I can vouch for its power I'm not a big fan, finding them a little too bright for my taste. The brands I use with the Dynaudios are the bigger Arcams, FMJ A32 and above, Naim Audio (oddly the Nait5i combines really well with the 110 even though it's only 50w/ch) and the bigger Cyrus kit (8 and above), as well as more expensive stuff of course. I was thinking about this the other day in fact. If you currently have and enjoy your Dynaudio 52s, you would be better advised to stick with them and beef up the source and amplification for the better musical result. If you came into my shop saying you had Arcam Diva with the 52s but wanted to improve things, I'd certainly let you have a listen to a pair of 140s on the end of the A85, but I'd then show you what you could get out of 52s with an equivalent amplifier behind them, such as a FMJ A32, Naim 112x/150x, AVI Integrated (wow), or Cyrus PreX/Power. And if you came in saying you had a CD73T, I'd probably start there with Naim CD5i, Arcam 192, FMJ CD 33T, Naim CD5x, AVI depending on budget... Although I'm a firm believer in the source first principle I tend to look for an element of balance in the system too. The thing is that the 52s are excellent transducers at their price. You can benefit significantly from better CD/amp combinations up to significant sums of money and they will perform better every time. Then when you do change speakers, the difference will be substantial, but you'll have been running the 52s to their best until then, which is a good way to do it. Regards, Frank. (having thoroughly confused you I bet! Sorry...) |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 11 Registered: Jun-05 | that sounds like good advice. though frank, all the time i spend hanging out at audioholics.com has almost(but not quite) got me convinced that all amps, cd players and cables sound the same. but there are other reasons like me moving overseas next year that make it more sensible for me to upgrade speakers now and amp later. thing is, my arcam has 7.1 preamp board fitted on it, so i might keep it for a multichannel setup and to to power the rears. for the fronts then i'll get an integrated amp. but it does give me the option of getting only a power amp for the fronts. which has me wondering, how much of the sonic characteristics of an amp. say the 'prat' of a naim, is due to the pre amp and how much is due to the power amp? do you not think that sticking a naim or moon power amp onto an arcam pre-amp will suffice? thanks again b. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1050 Registered: Sep-04 | The character is determined just as much by the pre as the power. I think it's due to the basic philosophy of design. Interesting that audioholics.com has convinced you of such a view (incorrect of course)! I should look in sometime, but I'm already contributing too much to too many forums as it is... The 7.1 module and your future plans change things dramatically. Personally, I'd be more tempted to wait until the move to find out what kind of room I'd be in. Of course if you're going to the middle of nowhere, you might want to take out the system with you. If the latter I'd rather have a system which I knew worked well rather than an unbalanced one, so my advice remains. In the 7.1 scenario, adding a very different main amplifier could unbalance the surround soundscape. I find that if I use a very much better 2-channel amp, then this is almost always beneficial, but if I use an amp of similar quality, just different presentation, this may not work as well from a surround point of view. Musically, of course, it would work best if you had the full integrated or pre/power since this bypasses the processor completely. Regards, Frank. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 12 Registered: Jun-05 | thanks for the advice again. i'm starting to get a clearer picture of what i might need. the sub issue still bothers me a bit though. i'm looking at building a 4.0 or 4.1 music only system. do you think the 110+sub(dyn250 or rel) will be as good or better than the 140 by itself. or maybe the 140+sub? any advantage over the 110+sub? i have always thought it a bit of a waste to pay extra for the bass extention of a bigger standmount and then not use that bass when pairing it with a sub. using bass mgnt on a pair of the 140's might let me get away with keeping the arcam i figure.(rel recommend a speaker level connection sans bass mgnt but i like the idea of being able to get a flat freq response from about 90hz down using a parametric eq like the bfd, than only getting a flat response from 40hz down if i run the speakers as large) dont mean to take up all your time frank, but you are an invaluable resource  many thanks b. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1053 Registered: Sep-04 | The 140 is a whole heap better than the 110 as you'd expect. I don't think adding a sub to the 110s would raise the overall performance to beyond that of the 140s simply because you'd still have the limitations of the 110 design, good though it is. The 140 is quite a bit more speaker than the 110. It's not just a question of bass extension, but midrange resolution, treble quality, overall cohesion, timing, you name it... I won't let you take up all my time b, don't worry! If I should suddenly decide I've had enough of the conversation, I'll let you know! Regards, Frank. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Eieiei0101xPost Number: 75 Registered: Jul-05 | I can see Frank and Tawaun have a good knowledge on Dynaudio so here is my question for you I own a pair of Nautilus 805 (Regular series) and after i bought them i listened to the Contour 1.4 which left a hole in my stomach becuase i liked them more, but i could manage it since they are more expensive I have not heard in comparable situation the Audience 52 nor Focus 110 or 140. How would yo compare the Focus and Audience ranges vs the N805? Thanks a lot |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 13 Registered: Jun-05 | i've made up my mind, 140's now and a sub and bigger amp next year if needed. you guys have been a great help. my local shop wont be getting in the focus range any time soon they say(maybe they got contour and audience stock they want to sell first?), but they can order them in. i dont usually buy anything without hearing it first but this time i'm taking a leap of faith. cheers b. |
|
ererererer Unregistered guest | Tawaun and Frank Is any of the Dynausios comparable to the BW N805? Thanks a lot Eduardo |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1058 Registered: Sep-04 | Eduardo, Dynaudio's presentation is quite different to that of B&W. Comparable? I haven't done a direct A/B but I would expect there to be an interesting competition between the two. The 140 is a very good speaker indeed and B&W's N805 was really quite something too. This is assuming that you have suitable electronics since these are very revealing speakers. Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1309 Registered: Jun-05 | the 805s could be magic if you had the right gear on them,but its difficult to find the best balance of combinations for the N 805s,but if you get it right presto.I would prefer the 140s over the N805s,the N805s have kind of grown a long tooth,now the 805s or 805d now thats a different story,then you would need the Confidence C1s to compete with either one of those 2. |
|
ererererer Unregistered guest | I undderstand and may add that they also compete in the same price range Thanks |
|
New member Username: Rolandas_catmanKaunasLithuania Post Number: 1 Registered: Dec-05 | hi I have amp. MARANTZ PM-17 and cd player MARANTZ CD-17 mkII. I lisen progresive rock. My room about 18 sq.m Please help me. My question: Are my Marantz system compatible with Dynaudio speakers? |
|
Unregistered guest | "now the 805s or 805d now thats a different story, then you would need the Confidence C1s to compete with either one of those 2." Wow! Chiming into a new forum here... I'm sorry, but those B&Ws, or ANY smallish B&W is does not approach ANY well done dynaudio in terms of tonal neutrality, driver integration, natural high frequencies, dynamics, and overall neutrality. The B&W 805d/s isn't a bad monitor, but it is not without a host of problems that render it inferior to the dynaudios in engineering and execution. The kevlar driver is relatively dynamic for its size, but frankly is quite noticably colored throughout the midrange. The B&W metal tweeters, yes even the diamonds, never integrate with the midrange driver - You will always notice the tipped up highs chiming away and isolated from the rest of the music. Stick with the Dynaudio. BTW - By "well done Dynaudio," Starting at the Countour series on up. The Audience is nice for what it is - but not without serious limitation. I have no commend on the Focus line because I have not heard them |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1103 Registered: Sep-04 | goatwuss, The FOCUS range is basically a development on the principles of the entry level Contour range of a while ago - the 110 140 and 220 directly replace the 1.1, 1.3 and 1.8. They have better trapezoidal cabinets so they suffer less from cabinet colouration, but their music presentation is very much Contour old school - which was the good stuff of course! I agree to a certain extent about the lack of integhration in B&W speakers. I think this is one thing that is holding them back. However, I am not so sure about the kevlar unit's colouration that you mention. My experience with the 703, which has the kevlar unit dedicated to midrange frequencies, is of a very fine unit with excellent contrast and fine detail. This unit is the 'surroundless' type so it may be that this is why it's so good, but it is VERY good and I am really rather taken with the 703, if not the other 700 series speakers. I personally think cabinetry is the problem, but I'm no expert. Regards, Frank. |
|
New member Username: AsimovPost Number: 3 Registered: May-05 | Dear Inmates Is it possible to use Focus 140 in a small room like 14x11x10 ft.hard wall and floor. The speaker placement will be 18"-24" from rear and side wall. Could you compare Focus 140 with Totem Arro, Totem Rainmaker and Reference 3A Dulcet which I'm considering for my small room. I'm trying very hard to choose a right speaker for my tiny room, now i've B&W602 S3, it's a big standmounter for my room and exibits booming and harsh trible with some recodings but not with all recordings. I need a speaker with extended,sweet and smooth airy treble and a controlled tight bass free from booming(I don't need seismic bass)with non-agresive and neutral midband. I listen mainly to clasic rock, new age and country music. After selecting the right speaker I'll upgrade my source and amp with Cyrus 8x & 8v/Roksan M-series Cd, amp - not yet decided. I wish Frank and Tawaun would be able to show the right path. Thanks |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 773 Registered: Dec-04 | Asimov, if you are hearing boominess in the bass and weak treble, isnt it possible that theBW's are doing the job too well? If your other gear is up to snuff, you may be getting exactly what the recording holds. I have heard the 602 S3 described as accurate before, and if your source is pretty good you may be simply getting the facts. Perhaps audition a slightly less critical speaker, something described as warm? |
|
Rumadian Unregistered guest | Asimov, I am not Frank or Tawaun. Until either of those two see the thread and respond, I will post my own thoughts and impressions. Please note that I have no experience with Reference 3A and cannot comment on the Dulcet. I am currently running a pair of Focus 110 monitors in an ultra near-field application accompanied with a Sun-Fire Signature (true). I bought these from a friend/dealer and purposely stayed away from the 140 due to the small space and the sub. With that said, I cannot directly comment on the 140. Reading up the thread, Frank's comments seemed to echo that of my friends. The highs and mid-range was slightly better than the 110's, but the bass was the major defining difference. Just the same, I find the Focus 110 to carry on the signature I have come to know from Dynaudio products in this range, and that is being on the forward side of neutral. The cool thing about this unique voicing is that you have some room to manipulate the sound to your liking. If your preference is an endless supply of power, great details, with ultimate control, match this speaker with an amp from the likes of Krell and you are well on your way. On the other end, if you want lush sounds that fall under the warm side of things, any good tube/high powered SET will do the trick. This is a luxury Dynaudio affords you the listener. Compared to the Totem's listed, the Focus 110 should maintain the ability to go louder, cleaner. I feel that the integration between the tweeter and the mid-woofer on the Danes is more coherent than any of the Totem's you've listed. Another great thing about the Focus series is that for Danes -- they are actually quite efficient and can work in a smaller room without over-loading it or activating nodes and resonances. So now we have Totem. Totem Acoustic has to be one of my favorite speaker companies out there -- so please know that bias may un-intentionally be pulled into this response. First, lets briefly touch on the Rainmaker. The goal of the Rainmaker was to achieve performance akin to the more expensive floor standing Hawk, all in a small less costly package. It is also one of the few complete failures in the Totem line, as the speaker can't even approach the performance of the Hawk. All the while, the Rainmaker has been a solid seller and has captured many audiophiles hearts. The high's are purposely extended a bit with the mid-lower bass over-done a tad to create a very warm sound that still retains lots of details. The cool thing about the Rainmaker is that it's response is very solid for a speaker its size. This speaker can also work with a plethora of equipment, from an entry level Harman Kardon AVR to whatever your imagination can come up with. While this speaker falls far from neutral, it does something I feel the Dynaudio product is incapable of doing -- capturing timbre and tone to a believable degree. To these ears, the Focus (and old Contours) can suspend believe only to the point hearing something that is clean, detailed, and intelligible. Most Totem's take it to the next level of intimacy. The Rainmaker is a worthy contender but I would set that speaker aside and focus on the Arro. The Arro is just a fantastic speaker when treated right. While it too captures the same spirit most Totem speakers retain, the bass is much quicker than the Rainmakers and the Danes alike. The Arro also sports an incredibly wide and deep sound-stage neither speaker can re-create. This speaker is extended, sweet and smooth (on good tube equipment), with airy high's and very tight bass that digs quite low for a speaker of its diminutive size. The downsides to the Arro is that on less expensive solid state, it can sound very aggressive in the high notes and can become fatiguing over long listening sessions. The Arro's can go quite loud without breaking apart -- but their limit will be reached before a speaker like the Focus 140. When it comes to power and versatility and accuracy, I find Dynaudio has it in spades. When it comes to timbre and emotion, I feel Totem walks away with the upper hand. Chose your poison. Each person has their own opinion and hopefully a good experience to go with it. I am certain a number of people may disagree with the assessments I have drawn today. Just the while, it is how I personally feel about these products. When you are discussing these three respectable brands with products close enough in price range, it is more about taste than what is an inherently 'better' product. Feel fortunate, no matter what you chose, your bringing home a killer set of speakers! Good luck! |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1349 Registered: Jun-05 | The Totem Arro im very fond of if you read back thru some of the threads you will find plenty of Arro imformation,by me and Frank and a few others.I have owned the 602 S3s also,they are quite remarkeble for their price,and arguebly the most consistent speaker at that price for the last 10 years.Go back thru those threads on the Arros and you will see some comments on the Rainmakers as well as the rest Totems,on a side note If I was you,I would check out the Epos M5 for $650,probably the best speaker ever at that price,and they can compete comfortably well beyond that pricetag.Or if you fancey a floorstander the new Epos Els 303 is a very balanced floorstander for $700 and you guessed it competes way out its class.The new Kef iQ5 the product of the year in What HIFI magazine,I recently heard it and certainly merits that award,again both of those are small floorstanders that wont take up any more room than your 602s already do,probably less.A internet speaker called the Odyssey Epiphony one of the best soundstaging and imaging speakers in the world regardless of price for $595,it doesent have the detail as the Epos M series,but they are very smooth,with good mid 40 htz bass,and at that same price our own Alegria Audio Emmas a standmounter that goes down to the mid 30s with a ribbon tweeter,is gonna be reviewd by one our most respected members Jan Vigne here very soon,I would at least wait on that.My ultimate choice with out braking the bank would be the Epos M12.2s a stanmounter just a touch smaller than your 602s.In accuracy and clarity and timing can compete with anything on the planet,with the best midrange driver in the world next to the Harbeths and the Spendors,which all 3 of those companies and designers came from the legendary BBC Branch who produced the Rogers are all from proven stock with a tremendous pedigree not only on paper but in making music which is the most important thing.The M12.2s are one of the best buys on the planet at $895 is just astounding for what they offer,so check all this out along with Focus line and you will be overwhelmed with great sound you will have some tough choices on your hands,so have fun and get yourself a great Christmas gift. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 781 Registered: Dec-04 | Rumadian, TAW, well done lads, well done. I may reconsider the next purchase now. Thanks, and Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukha, seasons greetings and happy holidays. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1352 Registered: Jun-05 | Thanks Nuck,between the Arros,M5s,M12.2,and the Focus line,and the Epiphonys soundstaging is very tough to choose from,especially someone like Asimov coming from a well rounded speaker like the 602 S3. the Arros,Epiphonys,M5,and M12.2s have surreal soundstaging and imaging,from owning 3 out of the four speakers,plus the 602 S3s,it can be very tricky pinning down exactlly which one would be the best for you.Where I feel that the M12.2s take a huge step from the other 3 at are truth of timbre and macrodynamics and microdynamics,and timing although all are at the very top of game when it comes to that aspect.The M5 actually does everything the M12.2s do,just ever so slightly less,but still better than the Epiphonys and the Arros,funny thing is that the Focus series sounds remarkably close to the Epos with their timing and dynamics,but their soundstage deph cant rival any of the others mentioned.I agree with Rumadian somewhat about emotion with the Totems especially the Arros,totem does have a way with that,few speakers can do all the technical aspects good and nail down the most important part the musical emotion,I know many speakers that do all the audiophile things right but come up short on musical emotion,some thats rated very highly and cost thousands of dollars.The Focus series does deliver the emotion in spades,Few audio equipment is known for this feat the Totems and Epos are among them.Here are a few more companies that really do that all to well,Quads,Naim,Exposrure,Creek,Music Hall,Macintosh,Bryston,Linn,Magnapan,Sonous Faber,Vienna Accoustics,Opera,Audio Anologe,Unison,Pathos,Triangle,Rega,Pro-Ject,Thorens,Ohm Accoustics,Odyssey,Cary Audio,Conrad Johnson,JM Lab,Focus,Aerial Accoustics,Wharfedale,Psb,B&W,Montor Audio,PMC,Shanling,Dali,Legacy Audio,Kef,Tannoy,Amphion,Thiel,ATC,Wilson Benich,Pro Ac,Mark Levinston,Copeland,VPI,Musical Fidelity,Usher Audio,Ayre Accoustics,Acoustic Energy,Wilson Audio,Green Mountain,Boulder,Lamm,Tenor,Opera Audio,Nad,Jungson,Sundren,Arcam,Krell,Jolida,Pradigm,Mission,NHT,Cayin,Caryn,Oni x,Cyrus,Vincent,Sumiko,Shure,Goldring,Primare,Accuphase,Edge,Havalon.Again these are the ones that I have come in contact with and it tokk a lot of thinking,because some are more known for other talents that may stand out a little more and the price differences are all over the scale,a price cant be put on it you either have it or you dont.But thats a pretty small number compared with over 20,000 companies in audio around the world,thats a pretty special group to be apart of.Their is no substitute for organicniss,all the technical measurements and technical attributes are useless if its not musical. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 21 Registered: Jun-05 | been enjoying my new rosewood 140's the last week. and i'm very happy. lovely speakers to look at, and a good step up from the audience 52's. impressive highs, very clear and detailed midrange. bass seems to be pretty lean though. havent done much experimenting with possitioning yet, or sweeps, so i'm not doubting its claimed 41hz extention, but there does seem to be less bass(not extention) than the 52's. dont really know which is more acurate between the two, but i suspect its the 140's. soundstaging and imaging is very impressive i think. instruments seem to to float better defined against a quieter background. the picture just seems 'cleaner' and less congested than the 52's. i'm not too good at describing what i'm hearing but those are my thoughts so far. i'm about to start moving them around and playing with the spl meter to see what can be improved upon. happy new year all b. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1130 Registered: Sep-04 | Bvan, what you're hearing is a speaker which hasn't run in yet. The 140s take a long time to really get going. They do have a much tighter and faster bass presentation than the 52s and they may sound a little leaner in the upper bass because they don't suffer the cabinet problems of the 52s, but they go deeper and with more presence than the 52s - when they're run in! Asimov, sorry about the wait. I don't know the Reference3A speakers so won't comment on them. Yes you can run 140s in your room which is about the same size as mine. You may find that the room has a biggish bass resonance in the mid-bass. My Mani-2s set it off easily due to their prodigious bass response. (Mani-2s are about the same size as 140s but are a lot more speaker and a LOT more money). Rumadian has covered most things. The Totems are interesting speakers and worth a listen. I don't think the Arros are in the same ballpark as the 140s. The Arro is a fabulous speaker with great fun and gusto, but it doesn't have the presence, slam and allround sheer scale of the 140s. That said, within their performance envelope Arros are fabulous speakers and if you like them you'll love them. It's actually more difficult to choose between Rainmakers and Arros in my view since the Rainmakers have more presence and scale but the Arros have that groove thing going all the time. Generally speaking, if the Totems have a weakness in comparison to the Dynaudios, it's the quality of the treble. Totem generally use metal dome tweeters better than anyone else out there, but they can sound a little coarse sometimes. The Arros don't use a metal tweeter but even they can sound a little bright sometimes. Dynaudio's treble quality is almost always superior. Their tweeters are very high quality silk domes and the 140 has a very nice one indeed. The boom issue is a combination of the speaker and your room. You could use Arros and get a massive boom and you could do the same with the 140s. You can't really tell until you've got the speakers in place. The only speaker I know of that's almost guaranteed not to boom would be one that works against the wall - the Naim nSat. This is fabulous fun and throws all the rules out the window in terms of HiFi. It's probably one of the most exciting speakers to listen to that is around, but it's relatively limited in the bass and has very patchy distribution. Regards, Frank. |
|
New member Username: EldPost Number: 6 Registered: Dec-05 | Bvan, How is the 140 breaking in? To all: What are your opinions of the 140 compare to the 220? Our local dealer only have the 110 and 220 available for demo. I'm planning to take an hour trip to hear the 140, 220 along with the Totem Arros and Hawk. Power source will be Outlaws mono block. I got a chance to listen to the contour s3.4, and WOW, very nice, wish they weren't $2k more than the 220. |
|
New member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 4 Registered: Dec-05 | I am also curious as to how the 140's are breaking in. I am thinking of getting a pair as well. I've heard the 52SE's and liked them, but I think I would like the 140's better. I also have a concern about having enough power to drive them. (Rotel RX-1052 receiver @ 100 WPC) Unfortunately, the dealer around me does not carry any of the focus line. From what I've heard, I am sure my Rotel would not have the optimal amount of power for the 140's but would it at least be adequate? |
|
Rumadian Unregistered guest | Keith, Rotel amplification will get the job done. Can you do better? Certainly. The bottom of the line is, Rotel will have enough current to drive the 140's with ease. The Focus series is by far one of the more efficient lines released by Dynaudio.. |
|
New member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 5 Registered: Dec-05 | Thank you Rumadian, and I will also add that I enjoyed reading your other posting where you talked about the Focus 110's and Totems. Your posting was informative for me. I've been watching this thread because I have a similar interest as Bvan for the 140's, and was interested in your post because I had also listened to the totem Model 1 and the Rainmakers. Unfortunately, I could not find a dealer with both the totems and dyns. I heard the dyns side by side with comparable B&W's and preferred the sound of the dyns. It's hard for me to tell if I'd prefer the totems over the dyns. I liked the 52 SE's, and then heard the contour SR's and the 52SE's sounded boxy by comparison. I thought the focus 140's would be interesting to hear, only to find out that the dealer does not have any to listen to. I may do as Bvan did, and just order a pair. They are at the top of my price range, and although the 52SE's were nice, I think the build quality of the 140's will probably be better. Thanks again Rumadian for your response. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 22 Registered: Jun-05 | well, i dont feel confident saying i've heard a change, but i have been moving my speakers around a fair bit and concidering small changes in placement are making changes in the order of 10db it would be impossible to pick out any break in changes. but incase i dont sound happy, i'll quicky add that the 140's are jaw-droppingly good. got them about 4' from the back and 6' from the side walls, toed in slightly, 6 1/2' apart and 7 1/2' from me. detailed, neutral, transparent, fast and dynamic. cant recommend them enough. a bit of a double edged sword though as they make my poorer recorded cd's sound disproportionaltely worse than my better ones. dont like my system dictating my listning habbits, but the plus side is that my foray into audiophile lables like chesky and mobile fidelity has exposed me to some very good music that i wouldnt have been exposed to otherwise. (patricia barber, area 31, barbatunde olatunji to name a few) came upon the first professional review of the focus line a few days ago, forget the website, was for a 5.1 package of 220 and 140's. the reviewer said that after a while he moved the 140 to the front to have a listen to them on their own, and 'didnt look back'. he said, if i remember, that barring a bit of scale and impact, the 140's had everything the 140's had. certainly if you were using a sub as well i see no reson what so ever to get the 220's(i've always favoured bookshelves with an equalized sub over floorstanders, unless one has a lot of money to spend on acoustical treatments) btw, my 85w arcam drives them just fine. cheers b |
|
New member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 6 Registered: Dec-05 | Glad to hear your report Bvan and congratulations! I hope you enjoy the 140's. I bit the bullet yesterday and also ordered a pair for myself. They say it'll take about 2 weeks to arrive. I'm very happy to hear your arcam drives them well. Regards, Keith |
|
New member Username: EldPost Number: 8 Registered: Dec-05 | Keith and Bvan, Congratulations on your new 140s! Glad to hear that they are working out great for you Bvan. Keep us updated on how they work for you Keith. Man, I'm envious! Probably be a week or two before I can get down to the dealer for a listen to the 140. I'll try to keep you guys posted on what I end up with. My wife likes the floorstanders, so I'll probably end up with the 220, Totem Hawks, or Spendor S8e. Eld |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 23 Registered: Jun-05 | thanks guys. its nice to have found a pair of speakers i can live with for a very long time. even my girlfriend is enthusiastic about them, sound and looks wise. they really are beautifull to my eyes. but...it has got me thinking about bringing my source up to par. currently using a denon 2900 universal player, but thinking of something like the new rega apollo... Elderion, i'm curious your thoughts on the the spendor compared to dynaudio? cheers b |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1369 Registered: Jun-05 | I,ve had ample time with the Spendor floorstander and I sell the Hawks,and I think that the 220s are head shoulders better than both of them by a long way,in short their awsome! |
|
New member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 8 Registered: Dec-05 | I have a question about break in time. Should the speakers be played at low volumes continuously until the end of the break in period? Or is it OK to do it in divided doses? Will the end result be any different? I still have over a week to wait for my 140's but I figured I'd ask now. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 25 Registered: Jun-05 | keith, i wonder about breaking in myself sometimes. after a lot of reading around and speaking to people i'm going with a pretty concervative regime.(being that one of my wories was over stressing the speaker) i start with an hour or two at barely audible volumes, then gradually turn it up to conversational level by the end of day 1. then over the first week i turn it up gradually to be at low-normal levels (say 70 db) by the end of week one. by the end of the next week i'm at about 80db. and after about 3 weeks/100hours to about 90db. after about 150 hours i might crank it to 95db. thats just how i do it. dont have much of a theory about why, except that i start of slow and gradual just for peece of mind. and believe that you need some pretty loud volumes by the end of the break in pereod to loosen things up properly. if you havent heard of this already, if you have problems with leaving loud music playing all day(and if you dont mind the inconveniece between listning sessions), put the speakers on the floor face to face a few mm apart and wire one out of phase(to cancel out bass). then cover with a blanket. you can then play at '90'db without disturbing even people in the other room.(just know what 90db normally looks like on the dial, cause if your actually reading 90db the speakers will be playing at about 120db or something ridiculous if you know what i mean) cheers b |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 27 Registered: Jun-05 | strange new developments... got the arcam back from my mate before it went back to the shop. this time i did some extensive flicking between it and a denon 2200. i was very surprised to find them extremely close. and this is playing identical tracks on each player and flipping between them at will. kept this up for about 2 hours playing dave matthews, ani difanco, norah jones, diana krall, infested mushroom at al the rega had a hairs more vocal expression and bass/warmth, and the denon did seem to ever so slightly flatten the images, especially vocals, but i'm talking in the order of what felt like about 0.5%. i.e if i had to take the time to swap cables between listning to each player i'm not 100% sure i'd be able to pick the rega in a blind abx test. (maybe i dont have the most golden of ears though, or more likely my misspent youth and its effects on my short-term memory are to blame) always thought the 2200 was better than the 2900. might now settle with the 2200 and put the money towards a sub. all a bit unsettling.....but its always a good thing if you cant hear enough difference to justify extra expence, i recon. b |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 28 Registered: Jun-05 | woops, too many open pages on my browser and i'm typing replies to the wrong thread (hitting myself in the head with a hammer emoticon) |
|
New member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 9 Registered: Dec-05 | Thanks for the reply Bvan. I'll keep your approach in mind. I was at the stereo store, and I have a salesman that I really like working with now. He's really knowledgable about sound waves, speaker enclosures, etc. I am also thinking of a sub eventually, and he recommended a B & W PV-1. It's a spherical sub with 2 8 inch drivers, and a 500 watt amp for $1500 US. I've been reading about it, and in theory it sounds great, but of course, I'll have to do a listen. Just thought I'd throw that out there because you mentioned a sub. Good Luck Bvan, and thanks again. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 31 Registered: Jun-05 | heard good things about that one. apparently good for music, and looks nice. i'd be happy with that myself, or a svs, velodyne or hsu if i was setting up a ht system. for music though i think the rell strata are tough to beat. one bit of advice i'd like to pass on though: behringer 1124 BFD. for $100 you can have ruller flat bass bellow 100hz. it doesnt set itself up though so be warned. let us know how you like the dyns cheers b |
|
New member Username: IsolaRogers, AR Post Number: 1 Registered: Jan-06 | Bvan glad to hear that you love the 140s and Tawaun thinks the 220s are awesome. Bvan - the Dynaudio Focus review that you were talking about http://www.hometheatermag.com/floorloudspeakers/1205dynaudio/ I've made up my mind for my HT speaker set-up. Focus 220 Fs, 200 C, 140 S and SVS PB12-ISD/V Sub (not set on Sub but don't want to spend more than $700-$800) My room is 16x24. 70% Movies 30% Music. Don't know if this is the best place to post this question, but I now need to look at receivers or separates. I have a $3,500 budget. I was thinking about the Outlaw Model 990 for Surround and the Emotiva MPS-1 7 Channel AMP. It fits my budget, but my manager told me that this would be like ordering a ham sandwich at a 5 star restaurant. Plus I can't go anywhere to listen to them. I haven't had time to look over all the amps that Frank suggested and I remember in another post that he stated...you need a quality amp, very clean & fast with good control to drive Dyns. Is there a receiver out there that could drive the Focus Series alone? Not many can drive 4ohm speakers? Can anyone give me any recommendations for receivers or separates for $3,500 that could run this speaker set-up? HDMI or DVI would be a great feature to have. New or Used. Thanks in advance for any advice. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 32 Registered: Jun-05 | another option would be to get a two channel integrated amp (pref 2nd hand) from the likes of bryston, simaudio, krell, arcam or naim. as far as i know all these companies offer their integrated with 'unity gain' functions that allow the amp to be incorporated into an av setup. so the integrated powers the fronts during multichannel use, and for stereo you are using the integrated exclusively. this would give you the least compromised audio in stereo and multichannel i recon. what you fellows say? b p.s if you plan to use the sub for music as well, an option might be to get 110's for the rear and put the difference towards a better sub. i think a $800 sub will surely not be on par with the 220's for music playback |
|
New member Username: EldPost Number: 10 Registered: Dec-05 | Isola, I really like the Dynaudio 250 sub when I heard it with the 220, not sure how the SVS sub would sound. Your setup is what I eventually would like to end up with if I go with the Dynaudios, except with a REL or Dyn sub. The dealer used a Rotel RSP1098 / 1075 for the setup room. So, I think the Outlaws 990/7500 combo would work great with the Dyno's. I'm sure Frank can help us more with this. I did notice that the 220 did need lot of power before they shine. With the Rotel, at low volume, the highs were weak. Have you experience this, Bvan, with the 140? I got a chance to audition the Spendor S8e along with the ProAc Studio 140 today at Audio Concept in Dallas, and wow they are both great! The 220 has better mid's and highs, but much smaller soundstage than the Spendor S8e. I think the Spendor S8e lows and soundstage were the best of the three. I agree with TW that the 220 is the better speaker if you got the juice to power it. The interesting comparison is with the ProAc studio 140, they are both pretty even in my opinion. I like the ProAc highs and bigger soundtage but the 220 have the mids, clarity, and sweeter sound. The ProAc is also a bigger speaker with higher sensitivity, so at low power, it still shine. I'm in a dilemma on which I like more. Going back to listen to the 220 now. Eld |
|
New member Username: IsolaRogers, AR Post Number: 2 Registered: Jan-06 | As you can see this is only my second post, so I'm a newbie to all the audio stuff. I'm going with Dyn Focus because I can get them for a great price. My sis in-law has the 72SEs and they sound great. This thread is what made up my mind. I haven't heard the Focus speakers, but I will when I drive out to Tulsa. I'm thinking of going with a different sub because I felt that the 250 is to small and there isn't much info. about Dyn subs. I know Bvan had the same idea? Are Dyn subs as good as their speakers? I think I want a downward firing sub because I have a 3 year old and I'm having visions of him kicking-in a front firing sub. I've heard great things about SVS, HSU and Velodyne. The SVS PB12-ISD/V isn't a bad sub for the money? I had to re-think a possible rack set-up once I became more knowledgeable about OHMs. $3,500 budget isn't that high for separates, but it's what I have approved by the little lady. That is why I'm looking at Outlaw 990/7500, Emotiva MPS-1 5 Channel w/Outlaw 990 or Adcom, but Adcom doesn't have balanced outputs Are there any other brands that offer "High quality at a great value" that could work well with Dyns? I'm going to have a 5.1 set-up. I was thinking of maybe getting a 7 channel amp for the future. Would it hurt a 7 channel amp if I only used 5 of the channels? Elderion - You said the 220s highs were weak at low volume. How low was low? Average TV volume low or music that you would play in a child's room while it was sleeping? Thanks for starting this thread Bvan! There are only a handful of places out there on the web with info. on the Focus speakers. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 35 Registered: Jun-05 | Elderion, i havent noticed weak highs at low volume. i listen a lot bellow 60db. but i have always thought dynaudios sound better the louder theyre played. the ear is less sensitive to the frequency extremes at low volumes so you should expect to hear less trebble and bass at low volumes. cant blame the speaker for this really. i'd rather less highs at low volume thean a speaker that sounds ballanced at 50db but makes your ear bleed at 90db. regarding the dynasuio subs, i agree about being frustrated about the lack of information and opinion about them on the web. i had the sub250 with some audience 52's untill a few months ago when i sold the package to get the 140's. the sub250 is a very nice sub i think, perfect for me the appartment dwelling music first guy. its fast and acurate and blended seemlesly with the 52's. but its output is limited annd it might struggle in a room bigger than my 25m square lounge. think i agree with you Isola. for movies i would look for something that goes down to at least 20hz. dito for music if i had the 220's. not much point in getting a sub that goes down to around the point of the fronts. if i was living in the states i think i'd go the u.s sub-only-maunufacturer route (svs, velo, hsu) rather than paying premium on imports. (except for rel . |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldPost Number: 12 Registered: Dec-05 | Isola, I agree with Bvan about the 220 having plenty of bass, 12" sub or bigger for HT applications for extended range would be the way to go. I'm planning to get the Outlaw combo for my setup, so I think you are on the right track for the money. What I meant by weak highs at low volume for the 220 is that they were very lay back, the mids was very evident, almost overpowering. Maybe I listened to a bad pair of speakers or I have defective ears , but the Audience 82 or the Contour s3.4 did not have this problem. It seems like the highs were chopped off. Let me know what you think when you get a chance to listen to the Focus in Tulsa, hopefully along with Audience and Contour. I'm really interested in your experience, because this is the only minor thing holding me back from purchasing these great speakers right now. Bvan, Do you have any experience on the ProAc Studio 140? I'm interested on what you think about them if you have. Thanks. |
|
New member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 10 Registered: Dec-05 | ....still waiting for the dyns...... |
|
Bronze Member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 11 Registered: Dec-05 | Well, I picked up my Focus 140's yesterday. I immediately noticed that on the right side of each speaker was a "rough" feeling compared to the rest of the cabinet. I was actually wondering if I should return them, but then tried gently rubbing them with a soft cloth. I was able to smooth out the finish. (cherry finish) The weight of the speakers were a bit lighter than I expected. I hooked them up where my Monitor Audio Silver RS 1's were. I know I have a long break in period ahead of me, but the dealer said the focus series actually sound decent right out of the box. Man, was he right.... I know I need to get good stands for them, and proper interconnects, and my CD player is clearly not in the league of these speakers, but I'm thinking of what I have to look forward to when I make these additions. Even on first listen, these speakers are amazing. The treble is so sweet to my ears and not harsh at all. The presence of the midrange is almost startling at times, and the bass is already making me wonder if I even need a sub. I know that I don't have the experience of listening to different equipment like some of you, and this is my first venture into "mid-fi" components, but I am so happy with what I'm already hearing. Isn't that what it's about? Thanks so much to all of you who answered questions, and also to those of you who asked the right questions. Happy Listening!! |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 1118 Registered: Dec-04 | Keith, that's where it is, baby, right there! Enjoy, and turn it up! |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 14 Registered: Dec-05 | Congratulations, Keith! I just got a chance to listen to the 140 today at a different dealer and they sound wonderful! Definitely a excellent choice; so sweet, clear and warm. The dealer had a Krell driving them and he said that a bright amp is not a bad idea. I also got a chance to listen to the 220 as well and the didn't have the same problem with the highs at low volume. The dealer said it was probably due to the speakers placement with the tweeter aiming too high. In short, I bought a pair with rosenut finish. Can't wait for the delivery! They are such beautiful speakers, both in sounds and look. |
|
Bronze Member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 12 Registered: Dec-05 | Elderion!! Congratulations to you too!! And the Focus 220's no less. I'll bet they're awesome! I'd love to hear that line sometime. They still don't carry any of the focus models at my local dealer. I'm so excited to have finally gotten a pair of dynaudios. I still remember walking into store years ago, and being stopped dead in my tracks by a pair of dynaudio bookshelves. I couldn't believe the sound. They seemed too expensive then, but I remember thinking that someday I would get a pair. Now finally I have. Good luck waiting Mine took almost 2 weeks, and it was difficult... All the best, and happy listening!! |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 36 Registered: Jun-05 | great to hear some happy new additions to the family and good luck getting your electronics up to par keith (did warn ya) ;) |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 15 Registered: Dec-05 | Thanks guys. Can't wait for the delivery. The 140 is so close to the 220, like the review Bvan meantioned earlier, I would be very happy with the 140 and never look back, but my better half like the 220 look. So you are not missing anything Keith. Happy listening! |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1167 Registered: Sep-04 | Hi guys, Sorry I haven't been around much, really busy at work. On the subject of running in, there's no need to treat Dyns with kid gloves. Don't go crazy of course, just play them at normal volumes most of the time. Bvan's method of facing the speakers to each other (real close, but not touching) and wiring one of them out of phase is very effective. You should use a mono signal when you do this, either by using the mono button on your amp or by using an old recording. Turn the volume knob up to the usual listening level and the sound should be fairly muted, you can turn it up a little further too. It works with a stereo signal too, but not as effectively. Isola, the REL subs match Dyns very well indeed. I have used a Dyn sub in the past and although it was good, it was very large for the performance. The newish REL ST range (Stampede, Strata 5, Storm 5) is downward facing, very flexible and very capable indeed. Since you don't like forward facing subs, the Velodyne is out which is a shame since it's also very good indeed. The other excellent performer is M&K. The M&K MX700 is a fantastic sub for the size and money. It fires into the wall and goes down to 20hz flat. One other less likely option is the Naim n-Sub if you can find one! It matches Dynaudio well and fires into the wall again. On the subject of electronics, I know nothing about Outlaw I'm afraid. If you insist on separates, Rotel make a couple that fit the bill. If you can stretch to the bigger processor with the built-in screen, it's a fine processor indeed. I prefer Arcams, but unfortunately the AVR300 is a bit below your budget (but good value) and the new AVP700/P1000 is beyond it. Sound-wise I think the Arcams are the bees knees at the moment due to their most natural presentation. Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1168 Registered: Sep-04 | By the way, it shouldn't hurt a 7 channel amp if only 5 channels are used. That said, it's a shame to spend the lolly on 7 to use 5 - wouldn't it be better to spend the same amount on 5 better channels? Just a thought... regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 1129 Registered: Dec-04 | Frank, you havn't heard the Outlaws, of course, have you looked at the site and read the specs a bit? As much as can be gained from cold numbers on a hard sheet(or screen), these pieces are top drawer. I have recently considered a preamp with monoblock amps. Price is steep in Canada, all imports are. Do tell. Good to see you again |
|
Bronze Member Username: VirtualkeithSan Francisco, CA United States Post Number: 13 Registered: Dec-05 | Speaker Stands for the Focus 140? Any suggestions out there? I'd like something that gives a good value for the money. I don't need the best, but something that would do the speakers justice. (Then I can take them off the wooden stands I found in the street) Also... do good speaker stands help to reduce any room resonances? |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 1134 Registered: Dec-04 | Oops,sorry for the hijack, folks. My bad. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1169 Registered: Sep-04 | Nuck, I appreciate where you're coming from. I see specifications all over the place but find that the performance of the kit has little to do with the numbers. If someone asked me whether the Outlaws could drive the Dyns then I could answer by looking at the specs provided there's enough info on there, but I couldn't vouch for the performance - i.e. whether it's a good match. Therefore I say nothing about them; it would be wrong for me to do otherwise. Keith, we tend to use medium mass stands with Dynaudio. There are Dynaudio stands which are pretty good, although I prefer Partington Super Dreadnoughts under 140s. The Dyn stands are a bit heavy looking too which doesn't go down well with many. Your Dyn dealer will have different options to offer. Stands don't tend to make it very far simply because it's so costly to ship them far. Regards, Frank. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 45 Registered: Jun-05 | howzit again fellow dynaudians. got a question for you. i'm thinking about completing my system before i emmigrate to australia in july as i'm finding out that gear is damn expensive there. to that end i'm looking at a possible choice of either 1) buying some focus 220's and moving my 140's to the rear for a 4.0 music setup, or 2) buying another set of set of 140's plus a rel strata 5 for the fronts, and again, moving my present 140's to the rear. what would you guys choose? cheers b |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 19 Registered: Dec-05 | Bvan, Tough decision! This is my best guess: My gut feeling is that the (4) 140's with a Rel Strata would be the way to go for 4 channel listening. This will save some of your amp power to drive the 140s and all your speakers will be uniform. Also, better placement options, but maybe more tweaking to get the lows to integrate well. Plus, one speaker away from an awesome surround sound system. 220 fronts for 2 channel listening for sure. I'm not sure which setup would give you a bigger bass zone, since I never heard the Strata 5 in action. How do you like the Strata 5, Bvan? I'm looking Strata 3, but I haven't heard any of them yet. Good luck on your move to Australia! Cheers! Eld |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 46 Registered: Jun-05 | thanks havent heard the strata yet, only going on a lot of recomendations. i dont know if i'd be able to judge a sub as part of an unfamiliar setup. would obviously take one home for an audition if i got the chance, but i think even that might not prove meaningfull because i'd have to try equalize it to the dame degree as the last sub i owned to be able to tell if it was a better sub. and parametric eq is more pot-luck for me than a repeatable science, if you know what i mean. i think you might be right about the 140's(though i'll never get a front speaker . gives me more options and latitude with difficult rooms: flexible bass positioning, equalizable bass: future potential upgrade with another strata(maybe i'll even get a stampede and try save up for a 2nd), i dont think the rels have high-pass filters so i'll have to run the fronts as large unfortunately.(swapping my universal for a cd player so loosing bass mgnt capabilities). cheers b |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1185 Registered: Sep-04 | If going for the 140s at the front means you have enough left over for the centre, do that! The 220s are more difficult to drive than the 140s. The 220s interact with the room a lot more than 140s. Placement is easier with the 140s. The Focus centre ain't cheap but it's great. The REL Strata5 is excellent and a great match as is the Stampede if not quite as effective (almost though). AFAIK the RELs have high pass filters, and you can connect up both high and low inputs at the same time - the REL sorts out which one it takes at any time. Regards, Frank. |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 20 Registered: Dec-05 | Frank, Since you meantioned the 200, what do you think about the 200 as L and R speakers compare to the 140's? I have been curious about getting (3) 200 for L, R and Center. Thanks. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 47 Registered: Jun-05 | thanks frank. elderion and frank, what would be the dissadvantage, if any, of using a 140 as a centre speaker(laying it on its side if i get a tv, or if i get a projector then having it verticle behind the screen) b |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 48 Registered: Jun-05 | frank, as long as i've got your attention, i was hoping i might tease a few more words out of you regarding the difference between the strata and stampede. if it only a matter of dbl's or is the strata in any way more 'musical'? in a <25m room would there be any difference between them with music bellow 80db? also, whats your opinion regarding 2 lesser prices subs vs 1 more expensive one eg 2 stampede vs 1 storm? thanks in advance b |
|
New member Username: Trekker720Princeton, Nj Usa Post Number: 1 Registered: Jan-06 | Hi, Im very close to purchasing the Focus 110. They will be driven by the Musical Fidelity A3 85W integ amp and modified version of Music Hall CD-25 cd player with Signal Cables speaker wire and interconnects sitting on high quality 29" stands from Skylan Stands. Will my amp prove to be a great match for the Dynaudio 110? Thank You |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 51 Registered: Jun-05 | will offer you my guess as i havent heard the A3. although not all watts seem to be created equal, and it's not just the watts that matter(current being the other issue), i would guess the A3 would have no problem what so ever driving the 110's. i'm basing this on the fact that my 85W arcam has no problem driving the 140(which are apparently a bit harder to drive than the 110's). frank also recons the naim nait5i at 50 watts has no problem with the 110's. but the most important factor, which you didnt give us, is how big is your room and how loud you like to listen. if you dont listen over say 80db and have a small room i'm guessing you could do well with 15 watts. as always though, try before you buy if its possible. cheers b |
|
New member Username: Trekker720Princeton, Nj Usa Post Number: 2 Registered: Jan-06 | Hi, My living room is 12'10" x 18' with wall to wall carpeting, with the speaker firing into the 12'10" wall. I NEVER turn the volume up pass 1/4. Thoughts?? |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1187 Registered: Sep-04 | Mike, I would imagine that it should not be too big a problem. I haven't heard the A3, but the stories I've heard indicate that it is more powerful than one would expect so it should be able to drive the 140s, especially at the volumes you usually use. Bvan, I wouldn't use a 140 on its side as a centre. First of all, it's not designed as a centre. 2nd, it's pretty wide and would make for a tall centre. The FOCUS centre is a little lower than the 140 on its side. The FOCUS centre is designed specifically for the job and I think that counts for a lot. I accept that the FOCUS centre is very wide though... I have not compared the Stampede to the Storm 5 directly. The Stampede is a remarkably good sub for its size. I think it depends a great deal on the size of the room. If the room is above the 18 feet size it may be better to go with a Storm. As to running two subs instead of one, provided you place the pair correctly, they should always beat the single bigger sub. The Stampede is very good indeed and goes very low (18hz -3db). The Storm does extract a bit more and go a bit deeper (15hz -3db) which will obviously be very nice when playing organ music. Regards, Frank. |
|
New member Username: DynnnnaudioooPost Number: 1 Registered: Feb-06 | Hi Guys! Nice to read your experiences with the Focus series from Dynaudio. I was looking a long time for a new system with stand mount speakers and had NAD equipment with Dynaudio Audience 52's in mind. However, december last year I heard the Focus 110 hooked on Arcam A65 and CD73. It took my breath away, such tiny speakers, so much detail! I could not listen to the Focus 140 because it wasn't on stock at the shop (familiar problem, I noticed). Anyway, I could test the Focus 110 at home with the Arcam amp and cd player. Meantime the shop orderd a Focus 140 and a few weeks later I could test them also at home. They weren't played in yet and came straight out of the box. Compared to a set of 110's which had played several weeks the 140's sounded harsh and not nice. After two weeks I still liked the 110's more. So I returned the demo system to the shop and started thinking. A month later I visited the shop again and compared the 110 and 140 again. This time the 140 had the best results. I've hooked it up to a bit more powerful amp (Arcam A80) and it got better and better. I stayed for a few hours and at the end of the listening session I bought the Dyn's 140 together with Arcam A80/CD73/T61. That was last saturday a week ago. Hopefully I will receive a phone call by the end of this week that I can collect my speakers and equipment!!! Question to everybody: What brand of interlinks and speakercable do you use? |
|
New member Username: DynnnnaudioooZwolleThe Netherlands Post Number: 2 Registered: Feb-06 | Michael, Take your amp and cd player with you to the shop and listen to the 140's. Or ask if you can try the 140's at home? Good luck! Reinder |
|
New member Username: DynnnnaudioooZwolleThe Netherlands Post Number: 3 Registered: Feb-06 | Hi again... I listened several times to a dynaudio/musical fidelity combination (X series) and wasn't realy thrilled about the results. But you should check it with your own ears, that is wat listening is all about! |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 52 Registered: Jun-05 | frank, thanks for your opinion. i'm interested in what you say about the 140's not being designed for use as a centre speaker. while its an obviously true statement given that there is the 200, i was under the impression that multichannel music systems did best with 5 identical speakers. what would be the difference in design objective between the 140's and the dedicated centre speaker do you think? i'm still thinking that given my music priority, if i was to get a centre, i would want all 3 tweeters at the same height. are there stands high enough to put the 200 at ear height i'm wondering? reinder, i'm using qed silver aniversaryspeaker and qed qnect 3 interconnects for what its worth. i'm not much of a beleiver in cable differences. i've a/b'd the qnect2 vs the qnect3(which is 50% more exensive/ and could notice no difference what so ever. this is the only cable test i've done though, but it did involve running both cables at the same time from my universal player which has duel outs. this is the only way i think cable tests should be done. its my humble opinion that if you spend 5 minutes swapping speaker cables you will forget whatever differences there may have been. i would suggest you take home as many cables as the store will let you borrow and get someone to help you with a blind abx test. pick whichever sounds best, and if you cant tell a difference just pick the cheapest and put the money you've saved towards more bass traps! b |
|
New member Username: DynnnnaudioooZwolleThe Netherlands Post Number: 4 Registered: Feb-06 | Bvan, I heard MIT and Audioquest. I heard a small difference. With Audioquest the sound had a bit more space and detail, with MIT it was more laid back. I choose for Audioquest. Have to agree with you that testing cables is about minor differences. |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 21 Registered: Dec-05 | Bvan, 200 is an awesome center, you should definitely go with 200 if you want the best center effect. I think the 140 would do fine as a center as well, but you want to leave it vertical for best equal left/right dispersion. And I would put it slightly below and in front of the projector screen and not behind it, if you go that route. Got my 220 in this weekend, been playing with it, boy do these guys give out bass! I have to move them away from the wall about 3' to cool it down. Still trying to play with placement. My Outlaw mono's are handlingly these guys Great! So Audioquest is good speaker cables for the Focus, Reinder? I not sure what to get either. Was thinking of regular 14 gauge Oxygen free cables of any brand. Eld |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1190 Registered: Sep-04 | Bvan, In fact you are right that from a surround music solution's point of view (DVD-A/SACD), all the speakers should be the same and place on a circle's circumference at 0, 30 and 120 degree points, toed in to face the listener. This is, of course, NOT how you should setup Dynaudios for ordinary music listening. I hate these surround formats and one of the many reasons is this lack of real world understanding that makes them such impractical solutions from both a real and HiFi world point of view. I also dislike them because alkl I hear is processing and no music, although they are getting better nowadays... In real terms, for best results the centre's tweeter should not be more than 30cm height difference to that of the 140s' tweeters. In fact, the correct definition is not the tweeter. It should be the acoustic centre of the centre channel (which is about where the tweeter is) should not be more than 30cm height differential with the acoustic centre of the 140s (which is about halfway between the tweeter and main drive unit). Partington makes good stands and will make special heights of his simpler designs. If you're not in the UK, it should be possible to find a more local manufacturer who can take care of this. Regards, Frank. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 54 Registered: Jun-05 | thanks frank. but you have again given me with more points to ponder how do you recommend setting up dynaudios for stereo(and mc) listening? i'm also intersted in yours views on mc music as i've not met anyone so unimpressed by it as you seem to be. how have you other guys got yours set up? i've got mine on the long wall(domestic conciderations), a bit over 4' out(measured from the front grill), and about 6' from the side wall. 6'6" apart and 7'6" from me. a arrived at these figures mainlt from using an spl meter running sweeps). i've got them toed in so that i see about 2" of the inside edge. i think i read somewhere of a concensus amonst dynaudionites that they did best with little toe-in. i'm forever ajustiing toe-in and am not yet sure what i like best. the manual definitely recommends it but to what degree? any thoughts? |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1192 Registered: Sep-04 | Bvan, With apologies in advance for the lengthiness of this post... It's a bit difficult to recommend exactly where to place any speakers without understanding how your particular room interacts with them. It is true that I subscribe to the 'little toe-in' School of Dynaudio Placement. However, this is associated closely with the 'close-together' School of Dynaudio Placement. That said, we have recently worked some room acoustic magic on our demo room which appears to be a similar size as yours (if perhaps a bit wider). The new abflectors, bass traps and diffuser have changed the room so completely that we have had to rework the placement of ALL our speakers in that room. beforehand, we would place Dyns approximately 5'6" - 6' apart while seated about 7' or so from the speakers. With the reworked room, we place the speakers 8' apart which places them about 8' from our listening space (a perfectly equilateral triangle). At that distance apart, they sounded terrible beforehand (we did try it). The distance out into the room has not changed significantly and we still place them approximately 2' - 2'6" from the rear of the speaker. We ALWAYS remove the speaker grills since we feel they literally veil proceedings. As to toe in, we still (even at 8') start with no toe-in. We usually end up with a smidgin of toe-in of maybe a degree or two. You can only just tell that the speakers are toed-in, and even then only just. The room used to have a huge bass resonance right in the mid-bass so it would kick off like you would not believe. It was also very live in the treble. It was a hopeless room which sounded a lot worse than our customers' abodes so we had to do something about it. The work we had done cost us £1200 which is a snip when you consider that the room is now transformed - it literally sounds like a different room. So, the upshot of this is that I think your speakers are a bit too far apart which is why you're compensating by toeing them in. They're also a bit too far into the room, unless your room has a major bass resonance that is being hit by the speakers. However, I am not necessarily right! The latest Dynaudio rep thinks they should be toed in like B&Ws. Then again, he used to be B&W's rep and none of the guys in the shop agree with him. Ha! I hope this helps, though I doubt it... mc music? I presume you mean high definition multi-channel music currently on media such as DVD-A and SACD. Well, there are others who will disagree vehemently with my view on this subject. As a Saturday lad working in a reasonably specialist HiFi shop (only way to feed the HiFi habit), I suspect I have a different perspective on this than many. I looked forward to the advent of high definition multichannel music very much. For one thing I hoped it would bring digital reproduction as far as, or better than, vinyl reproduction. In my view vinyl reproduction remains the best there is musically, at any price though certainly in the high end. This is not to say it doesn't have its problems! I hate the fact I have to change sides every 20 minutes (a real downer with opera in particular), I'm unhappy that records get worn and develop pops/crackles when you look at them. It's also quite unfortunate that styli wear out and need replacing regularly (though again high end cartridges really only need replacing every 5 years or so with ordinary useage). Also, it's a real pain to record vinyl onto one's iPod since it's a completely manual process that has to be done in real time. In this day and age, where an iPod/Archos/etc can contain all your music at a decent quality sample rate, it seems a shame to restrict one's selection because of the original's medium. So there are many reasons for wanting high definition digital music, and the MC factor gives one a good reason to invest in the discs (rather than pirating off the net). So I looked forward to it. Then there was (is?) the format war. In their infinite stupidity (there is no other word for it), the majors did not agree on a common format. I always backed DVD-A myself since it meant customers could look forward to an uncompromised single format player, and one could see that CD-only mechanisms were going to become obsolete since the DVD player market was already eroding the CD player market. SACD and DVD-A went through protracted delays. SACD came out first to some fanfare and few discs on the market. DVD-A came out much later with even less discs available and even less fanfare. I listened to the offerings, things like the SCD-1 at £4000. I recognised the improvements - the extended frequency extremes, the fantastic resolution, the brilliant definition, the wide bandwidth with improved contrast. All the expected improvements were there, but the music suffered from similar problems to those that hit CD in the early part of its life - it was totally unequivocally disengaging, mechanical, boring. A cheap TEAC mini player replayed more of the feeling of the performance, engaged better, than the high definition players. The multichannel mixes were often more of a distraction than anything else. After all, an ensemble of classical players is never going to sit you in their midst. The music was designed to be listened to from an audience's viewpoint, so all that is required is a true stereoreproduction. If you want multichannel to improve the experience of 'being there', then have the surround channels reproduce theacoustic, but don't place the violinist there! With music designed for the surround situation, it could be an interesting and exciting alternative, but I ahve yet to hear this done really well - it's mainly experimental and that kind of thing takes decades to gain acceptability since it is a social engineering exercise rather than a purely technical one. Since then I've listened to high end and low end. Universal players really show up as the compromise they are. Dedicated DVD/SACD players are a bit better but we're still not talking real musicality. The DVD-A/SACD format war has continued and this has shaken customer confidence. Add to this the dearth of representation of the software in the shops (certainly here in the UK) to the rip-it-off-the-net/CD-is-good-enough-for-me factors and both formats combined account for less sales than new vinyl! We are now at the dawn of another new format war (these guys never learn) between HD-DVD and BluRay (my preference from a technical viewpoint), both of which should show DVD-A and SACD the door technically, having far higher storage capabilities and throughput rates. So what for DVD-A and SACD? Neither has gained significant market traction (under 1% of sales worldwide). Neither appeals to the general marketplace. Neither has the installed base that ensures continued sales that vinyl has. Neither can face off the forthcoming high resolution formats technically. Betamax, anyone? Regards, Frank. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 247 Registered: Nov-05 | I think failure of the hi-res formats to gain a larger share of the music market lies with the record companies (lack of advertising) and with the audio dealers. I recently gave a Hybrid Multichannel channel SACD to my dealer and said, "Now you can tell your customers about SACD and give them a demo." He gave me a raised eyebrow then I let him have it - he sells the gear for pete's sake, but I doubt he barely gives the high res formats a mention. Though there aren't many where I live, I have seen no advertising or signage in any hi-fi or big box store to promote hi-res awareness. Many people still, have never heard of these formats. SACD's in particular are growing in numbers, albeit not at the speed of light, but every week there are new releases with numbers now over 3500. DVD-A was supposed to meld gently with DualDisc but not many of those seems to carry the full resolution mlp tracks if any at all. Then there are the compatabilty problems. Next up, as Frank mentioned, is Blu-Ray and HD-DVD and as I believe it will take quite a while for it to become the success for consumers in general in the video world, it will take longer still before music only availability. Most people can afford only so much for audio to prevent upgrading with every new market fad. While Frank brings up some very valid points, I believe when it comes to value, many universal players do well. Not everyone can afford high end stereo gear (tubes, T/T's or otherwise) and although I'm getting immense enjoyment from my new NAD 2 channel gear, I cannot emphasis enough the enjoyment of good multi-channel hi-res recordings (Stress good). Naturally, this audio game is subjective otherwise choices would be simple - there would only need to be one. |
|
New member Username: Trekker720Princeton, Nj Usa Post Number: 3 Registered: Jan-06 | You know, I have to laugh when I read folks here saying that speakers MUST be 2-3 feet from back wall..they need to "breathe"! Ive always have rear ported monitors in my living room of 12'10" x 18 and they have always stand on 29" rock solid sanded filled spike to floor stands sitting a mere 6" from back wall. They have always sounded FANTASTIC with not boominess at all! Granted, I never blast music or play heavy rock or metal music and I only turn up the volume to about 1/4 up. But still some guys just sound so silly when they make those comments. Speaker sound is so VERY highly subjective...what one guy says is bright, the next guy will hear great detail! |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 23 Registered: Dec-05 | Michael, Where are your manners? Go fish somewhere else. This is a discussion on Dynaudio speakers in general and 140 in particular. No one on this thread stated that speakers "MUST" be 2-3 feet from back wall. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanPost Number: 56 Registered: Jun-05 | thanks frank, no such thing as too long a post! you got me fiddling with my speakers again which is not a bad thing. interesting at least. what you say about the bass traps changing the character of the room and therefore speaker possitioning makes me again think that room dimentions play such an important role, that it is almost impossible to recomend any set distance or degree of toe-in. when i had my 140's on the short wall i prefered them closer together and with less toe-in to what i have now that they are on the long wall. interestingly, now the frequency response is not as flat(a few 9db peaks and dips when before they were about 6db) but it still sounds better none the less. images better cetainly. i thing the extra space does help. and they get down to 30hz without going more than 6db under so i dont think they are too far out. if i had my sub i would probably still have them 6' out which i found did work best in terms of soundstaging (sorry michael). it also seems that the listning possition is as important as the distance of the speakers from the back wall, at least in terms of frequence response. it is also totally room specific and so there cant be any rules of thumb i dont think. i mean if i move my couch 1'6" forward the bass starts rolling off at about 50hz and is m.i.a through the 40's. re, high-res frank, its interesting what you say about them being disengaging. i havent noticed that but the only album that i have listened to in cd and sacd is DSOTM and i must confess that i was probably listning too hard for the tecnical differences between the two formats to notice differences in musical enjoyment. i should compare the redbook layer on my othert sacd's. but one good reason i heard to spend a few dollars extra on sacd (though i dont know how true it is?), is that often there redbook layer is better than the cd version. then there is the high-rez 2-channel mix, which sometimes i prefer to listen to than the surround mix(sometimes i'm just in the mood for the music to be out there in front of me and not all around me) i think i'll keep my universal player and continue to support sacd for as long as its out there. though i am in the process of downgrading my multichannel player(from 2900 to 2200) inorder to upgrade my cd player(to the rega apollo) now thats no short post keep 'em coming! b |
|
New member Username: Trekker720Princeton, Nj Usa Post Number: 4 Registered: Jan-06 | Elderion, Oh so sorry, I posted in the wrong thread about this. Please accept my apologies. |
|
New member Username: Trekker720Princeton, Nj Usa Post Number: 5 Registered: Jan-06 | Elderion, Oh, im so sorry, I posted in the wrong thread about this. Please accept my apologies. I auditioned the Focus 110 today and also the Vienna Acoustics Haydn Grand. Im debating between the two speakers at this time, but leaning more towards the Focus 110. Have anyone here auditioned or own the new VA Haydn Grand monitor? |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 58 Registered: Jun-05 | question for anyone, would the Audience 42's be a close enough match, timber wise, to use as rear speakers with Focus speakers up front? cheers b. |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 25 Registered: Dec-05 | Bvan, I think the 42's will be OK for rears only for HT applications with the Focus 140. Audience tweeter is brighter and more forward than the Focus, thus I don't feel they match well in multi-channel music IMO. Obviously, I feel that the 110 or 52SE will match much better with the 140 in Multi-channel music. Michael, I have no experience with the VA HAyden Grand, but if you are going to the Focus 110, I highly recommend you look at the 140, which I feel is the series best bargain. Happy listening! Eld. |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 27 Registered: Dec-05 | Update on my Focus 220, After listening with the Focus 220 for a week, I find the highs still a little too lay back for me. The dealer was graciuos enough to exchange the Focus 220 out for the Audience 82 at full value. I have the Audience 82 for 2 days now, and I think I like the Audience 82 much better at low to low med listen level, the volume where I listen to the most. Even though I miss the sweet midrange of the Focus 220, I like the bigger soundstage and highs of the Audience 82 at low volume. This is very similar to the ProAc Studio 140, which I like a lot also. I'm really happy with the Audience 82! Cheers! Eld |
|
New member Username: Trekker720Princeton, Nj Usa Post Number: 6 Registered: Jan-06 | Isnt it funny how HIGHLY subjective speaker sound is?! To Elderion's ears, he feels the Focus 220's top end is too laid back. Than, you ask the next guy and he says the Focus line is too forward, lean and cool. Its amazing how two people can have two completely opposite opinions! Its just goes to show you that there really isnt any definitive answer as to which speaker is too bright and which speaker is too warm. For instance, several folks in Audiogon have advised me to be really careful with Dynaudio, as they are "too forward, lean and cool." I guess is all depends on what gear is being used at the time, what position, what music, etc |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 30 Registered: Dec-05 | How true, Michael. Everything is relatively said a great man, once. Listen and listen again is the motto. If you love honesty and clarity at low or high volume, "WOW, awesome!" is the impression of Dynaudios. My opinion of the Focus are that they are warmer than the Audience, and a little warmer than the Contour, forward only in the high mids because the treble is so laid back. Lean, only because of clarity and clean bass? Cool, not the Focus, Audience, yes. Tell us your impressions when you get a chance to listen to the speakers. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 59 Registered: Jun-05 | intersting indeed. elderon, you think you might have been able to get a better tonal balance with the 220's by brightening up the rooms acoustics? i'm not opposed to using tone controlls on bad recordings or even for listning at volume extremes, but i wouldnt put up with having to use them all the time. but if i found my new purchase either a bit bright or a bit dull i would probably try putting up or taking down some wall-hangings or something similar to see if that couldnt fix the problem. what you recon? b |
|
Bronze Member Username: EldTexas Post Number: 32 Registered: Dec-05 | Bvan, I think Dynaudio was very wise in their choice on naming the new line "Focus." Their soundstage is definitely very focus, I like the Audience soundstage much better, especially at low volume listening. The mids in the Focus is very very sweet! I love the mids and clarity, so captivating, way better than the Audience, definitely can lose youreself in the music. Diana Krall at her best on the Focus! When you go over to Sting or the Eagles, the transition between the high mids to low highs, there seems to be a little recessiveness, this could be a crossover problem on the 220 and not on the 140, not sure. I'm very happy with the Audience 82 though, everything I'm asking for in speaker at this price range unless I want to go to the Contour S3.4 I love the Focus 220, just that my taste goes to the Audience 82 with its bigger soundstage and slightly better mid-hi integration, weaker in the mids for sure. Cheers. Eld |
|
New member Username: Trekker720Princeton, Nj Usa Post Number: 7 Registered: Jan-06 | Elderion, I certainly will give my impressions to everyone here once I have the 110's run in a bit. They are on order now and I should have them in about a week. I will be driving them with my Musical Fidelity A3 85 W integrated and my modified Music Hall CD-25 player. However, im thinking about upgrading to the Arcam CD192 cd player in the near future! Yeah man...Sting and Eagles, thats the kinda of music im talking about! |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics