Yes, I know that choosing (or recommending) a speaker system is ultimately a matter of personal taste, but every now and then I see such diverging opinions on a particular system that "taste" alone seems an insufficient explanation.
Case in point: the Onkyo SKS-HT240 6.1 package. Two venerable members of this forum, both of whom have provided much-appreciated information and reliable guidance to many a questioning poster (and, indirectly, to onlookers like myself), have very different things to say about this system. Matthew Thierren's comments from several threads praise the 240s: "...very, very good. Very detailed, dynamic and crisp." "I can vouch for the very clean and accurate sound produced by this system." "The 240's have extremely good dynamic and transient performance on DVD and audio sources. They are even better on SACD & DVD-A." And, ultimately: "I cannot think of another system which rivals this combination [Onkyo receiver and HT230/240 speakers] for less than $1500."
On the other hand, the ubiquitous Berny puts it this way: "The Onkyo speakers are not very good, I've heard them and they are very weak."
I'm not sure which is harder to picture: Matthew endorsing speakers that are "very weak" or Berny dismissing something with "very clean and accurate sound." Seems like somebody's talking about the wrong speakers, or they heard them in very different environments, or else I really need more audiophile-as-a-second-language training. As a violinist and general enjoyer of music, I consider myself to have a fairly good ear, but I'm just recently trying to decipher the specialized jargon of the hi-fi community, and reading evaluations of "very good" and "very weak" for the same system makes it hard to feel properly calibrated.
From several other threads, both Matthew and Berny strike me as very rational people who speak from actual experience and who value equipment that reproduces sound as faithfully as possible. How, then, can their takes on the same speakers differ so dramatically? This question may be somewhat philosophical, but I'm really not asking it rhetorically, and I certainly don't mean to challenge the validity of either person's opinion. I'm mostly looking for a way to reconcile the apparent conflict (which seems to be more than just an issue of taste--like the taste one may or may not have for Klipsch's distinctive tweeter sound) to help me determine whether or how I can find useful guidance from other people's opinions. Perhaps that's impossible to do--perhaps there's no such thing as a "good" speaker except with reference to a particular individual's tastes--but I'm not quite ready to go that far.
By the way, I'm currently auditioning both the Onkyo HT240 and the Athena Micra 6 at home, and there are differences. The most obvious was the fact that the Athena plays substantially louder than the Onkyo at a given setting of the volume dial--is that all Berny meant by "very weak?" Seriously, though, I would be interested in some elaboration as I try to calibrate what I read to what I hear.
You actually heard what I described as "very weak".
It is very apparent when you listen to music that is meant to be pianissimo or even mezzo-piano
Matthew's views are, of course, his own interpretation of what he hears and will be different from mine as it will be for you. I agree that it does not lack detail and very good in their own right, but compared to the speakers I have auditioned and owned, they are very weak.
Experiment and you will be able to tell which you prefer.
...and no, I am not very rational. This hobby is not for the logical thinker
Touche' on the role of logic in such a subjective and emotion-driven pursuit! Perhaps a word like "considered" would have fit the context better.
In any case, perhaps you (or anybody else with experience here) can help me sort through my main issue with the Micra 6: how much can I expect the "break in" period to change their out-of-the-box sound? I've only been able to listen to them for a few hours, and during that time, they've sounded mostly good but a bit harsh. This is especially noticeable on uncluttered vocals, such as James Taylor and Norah Jones, which end up with a hint of sounding like they're being delivered through a tin can or a distant bullhorn. Distortion, I guess. In contrast, vocals on the Onkyos sound more detailed and natural--on the Norah Jones SACD, for example, my wife's comment was that it sounded like she was right in the room (at least in comparison to the Micras). Is equation likely to change as the Athenas are broken in?
Typically about 60 hours of continuous play will be considered "break-in" period, some require 100 hours, your mileage may vary.
Now, if you are hearing harshness, which I doubt would be distortion, then the Micras are not your cup of tea. The speakers will "mellow out" over time but I suspect that you'd still prefer more mellow speakers. I suggest that you stick with the Onkyo's if you like the sound or you can go with something like the Ascend Acoustics CBM 170. Very detailed and natural, very sweet on vocals without the harshness of the Athena nor the weakness of the Onkyo. Being a James Taylor fan myself, I know exactly what you mean! cheers
