Please send all questions to firstname.lastname@example.org. All questions sent to this e-mail address will be replied to online. If you do not wish to share your e-mail with other readers, please do not send it. But if you have a question, chances are others are wondering the same thing. Therefore, you will be helping not only yourself, but other readers as well when your question gets answered here.
To Hans Wetzel,
It was with smile on my face that I read your post-CES article. While I truly admire those companies that push the outer envelopes of audio performance with cost-no-object designs, a good amount of the shit being pushed onto the public is somewhat dubious at best.
If you want to read what happens when you suggest that a $200,000 speaker is overpriced, check out the comments under Stereophile's review of Wilson Audio's Alexandria XLF. I posted two well-though-out comments about how I thought the Wilson XLFs were drastically overpriced and you'd think that I just spat in Pope Francis's face.
Here's my first comment:
Since most of these dopes who were flaming me know as much about speaker design and audio engineering as a shit I take in the morning, I opted out of adding anything else. It did seem that about half the people who posted actually understood what I said.
Take it light,
Jeff, you're fighting an uphill battle against legions of audiophiles, including many reviewers, like Michael Fremer, who penned the review you commented on. Name recognition and rave reviews seem to cement a product's quality in the minds of many folks. Michael Fremer's outgoing speakers were Wilson Audio MAXX 3s. A pair matched with tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of Lamm Industries' electronics behind them were blazing away in one of the rooms at CES, and, without exaggeration, I couldn't listen to the setup for more than a minute or two. The tweeters were old inverted Focal domes that happen to ring like hell when they begin to break up, resulting in a really edgy and sharp top end. I followed two younger guys out of the room, and without provocation, one muttered to the other: "Those sounded terrible." It goes to show you that just because something is expensive -- $68,000 for the MAXX 3s -- it doesn't mean it's any good. Trust your ears, then ask what the price is -- I think you'll be shocked to find that there's more engineering (and better resultant sound) in products costing an order of magnitude less than either of those Wilsons. I would have thought that $200,000 would buy you bespoke drivers, but it looks like that would have pushed them over their intended price point. Maybe next time. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
I've read your opinion of the Benchmark DAC2 HGC, and while I find it very well detailed in putting on the table all the differences when comparing this DAC with the DAC1 USB, I was surprised not to find any comment regarding the possibility that the DAC2 has to play DSD files, since it supports native DSD conversion. I am a glad owner of a DAC1 USB and I was thinking to have someday the possibility to play DSD, partially in order to find if there are improvements in sound quality, and to see (better to say listen!) if, depending on the music, DSD is really better than PCM. Do you have any experience about a comparison between DSD and PCM files on the DAC2 HGC?
Luciano, the DAC1 USB was my reference for the last few years, and I think it's still a terrific piece of gear. The DAC2 would be a noticeable improvement, however, as it offers a more cultured and refined sound than its older sibling. Regarding DSD, I actually did mention that the DAC2 supports DSD. Beyond that, though, I can't provide you with any perspective. I am behind the times in terms of high-resolution formats, with by far the majority of my music collection comprising digital rips of Red Book CDs. This is partly because I am an inherent cheapskate (hence my writing for GoodSound!), and partly because most of the music I like isn't available in high-resolution formats. As more DSD content becomes available, however, we will be sure to review some of these releases and will hopefully be in a better position to then offer a comparison of the two formats. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
I just stumbled across your site. Nice writing. Wondered about your opinion -- are you familiar with New England Audio Resource (NEAR) speakers? I like their bookshelf speakers (yeah their drivers are kind of in your face, but I like that), and have found some old 50Ms that I'm thinking of purchasing. I'm wondering if it makes sense to purchase speakers that are around 15 years old and how they'd stack up against more modern stuff? I used to use a lot of vintage quadraphonic receivers, and am currently running a Denon AVR-3808CI with a Sansui QSD-2 for my legacy quadraphonic vinyl. I use the same setup for video in 5.1, as well.
Matt, I don't think you're crazy for thinking about buying older equipment. In fact, I just purchased a pair of almost 15-year-old Mirage OM-5 loudspeakers because I'd always thought they were pretty cool. I'm not familiar with NEAR (I was learning my multiplication tables when they were new), though I think that the 50Ms would be a pretty neat fit for your vintage rig. But as to how they would fare when compared to more modern designs, I hate to tell you, but not well.
Driver and cabinet design has come a long, long way since the 50Ms were in their prime. Many manufacturers make tower speakers under $2000/pr. that would outperform the 50Ms in just about every way. I would also worry about speakers that old because of normal wear and tear. Driver surrounds may deteriorate, having a deleterious effect on the sound, meaning the vintage towers may have a pretty short lifespan. And if the speakers were abused, you will have a bear of a time trying to find replacement parts. Given your affinity for older gear, I imagine that you're leaning towards buying the 50Ms, and so long as they're in good shape, I think you should jump on them. Worst case, you move them on and take a small hit to the wallet, but with no regrets after having been able to try them out. That's my approach with these Mirages, so I'm practicing what I'm preaching! . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
I enjoyed your review of CES and Vegas. I agree with your take on the place. I'm heading down for four days during spring break, and I'm sure that will be about all I can take. Still nice to get down to some higher temps for a few days.
Just a question: I have a pretty small office and have a secondary system in there. Nice front end (I think, anyway) with a VPI Scoutmaster outfitted with a Signature arm and a Shelter cartridge, an Arcam amp, a Burson DAC and little Silverline Minuet speakers. The Minuets replaced an old set of ProAc Tablettes. I'm sure they are easier to drive and more dynamic and have more bass, but I just feel they don't have magic. My issue is in this small office: they are only about 6’ away. I feel that a small speaker that spoke from the 10th or 15th row would be ideal.
I love the look of Sonus Faber's speakers. Do you think they might give me what I want in a small room? Or is there any other speaker you have auditioned that struck you as a great solution for a small space? Help me narrow down my search.
Sounds like you have a terrific little system, though I can understand what you mean about the speakers. I have several suggestions, though I have not had the chance to formally review any of them.
GoldenEar Technology's $798/pr. Aon 2s would offer a more full-range sound than something like the Silverline, due in large part to the 6" driver on offer, compared to the 3.5" driver in what you currently own. Moreover, it uses the same tweeter as the one used in the Triton Three that I reviewed last December. I found the tweeter to offer broad, even dispersion that allowed for an enormous soundstage, but with a smoothly refined and relaxed quality about it. The "10th row" effect could most easily be found in something like the Aon 2s. While they are larger in every dimension to the Silverlines, they're still relatively compact.
For a more classical styling, I think you're on to something with Sonus Faber. I saw their Venere 1.5 bookshelf speakers out at CES, and heard the 2.0 models playing. They managed to retain the signature Sonus Faber sound -- warm, involving, relaxed -- while also remaining pretty resolving. Add to that the fact that 1.5s can be had for $1198/pr., while also looking fantastic, and I think they're an easy recommendation. I'm hoping to get a pair in for review in the coming months, but until then, I can't really comment any further on these.
My last recommendation would be PSB's Imagine Mini bookshelf speakers, which retail for $760/pr. Roger Kanno reviewed them last year for SoundStage! Hi-Fi, our sister site, and was bowled over by their performance given their diminutive stature -- approximately the same as your Silverlines. I was skeptical until I received a pair of PSB's Alpha PS1 powered loudspeakers a few weeks ago (review forthcoming). Sometimes I can tell how good something sounds within a few hours of background listening, but sometimes it takes much longer to pin down what I'm hearing. With the PSBs, however, which are conceptually very similar to the Imagine Mini (short of the built-in amplifiers), it took seconds. What I hear with these Alpha PS1s roughly mirrors what Roger heard with the Imagine Minis -- they have this "rightness" to the midrange that I haven't heard in this price range before. Given that the Imagine Minis measure crazy-flat and offer 4" woofers, compared to the 3.5" units on your Minuets (and have about the same cabinet size), they would probably be the neatest overall fit of the speakers mentioned here. However, they don't offer quite the relaxed sound that you're looking for. They're not forward, per se, but the GoldenEars and Sonus Fabers are almost certainly going to sound more laid back than the PSBs. Hope this helps. Let us know what direction you wind up going. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
I just read your review of the Benchmark DAC2 HGC. I pay attention to your writings because you're the only reviewer I know of that owns Mirage OMD-28s. I noticed you used KEF speakers for the Benchmark review. Did you sell your Mirage OMD-28s? I ask because I have struggled with the OMD-28s to get them to have good clarity with solid bass in my family room. I still have them, but just replaced them with Dynaudio Focus 340s. But I sort of miss using the OMD-28s, with the open, big soundstage. However, I don't miss the disappointing bass and clarity I experienced with the OMD-28s.
Do you still have them? What cables are you using with the OMD-28s? Are you biwiring, triwiring, or using single wires with jumpers? With my OMD-28s I used JW Audio Cryo Nova single wires with JW Audio Cryo Nova jumpers (this is a custom-twisted magnet-wire cable).
Emerson, I did wind up selling my omnidirectional Mirage OMD-28s, and for reasons that you will likely appreciate. When I first purchased my Mirages -- which was actually before I became a reviewer here at GoodSound! -- I was over the moon with them. They were gorgeous looking, threw out an enormous soundstage, and had prodigious bass. As I began to review more and more equipment, I realized that the bass was overemphasized, resulting in tons of it, but at the expense of ultimate definition. If you are finding a paucity of bass in your room, it's certainly not down to wires. I found the 28s needed a good deal of power and current to sound composed in the bass, and I suspect that might have something to do with it on your end. An amp delivering 100Wpc into 8 ohms would be a minimum suggestion, but I found that they sounded their best with over 200Wpc, which I learned when I partnered them with Hegel's H300 or Musical Fidelity's M6 500i.
Regarding the wires, I found that, given just how bass happy the OMD-28s were, Nordost's Blue Heaven cables were a better match than more traditional cables. The Nordosts have a slightly lean, airy sound that offset the overripe bottom end of the Mirages. When I used the 28s with my other reference speaker wire, Dynamique Audio's Caparo, I originally thought that they were bass heavy. In retrospect, the Caparos are pretty even across the audioband, and just happened to expose the Mirages as being overeager in the lower registers. Oh, and I've always been a single-wire guy. Some claim to hear dramatic differences when biwiring or triwiring, but I happen not to, for what that's worth.
As for the clarity of the OMD-28s, this was the deal-breaker for me. On larger orchestral works, I adored the Mirages. They portrayed recording space like no other loudspeaker I've heard, but with closer-miked stuff, I always felt like their imaging was a bit vague and amorphous. Hardly a flaw, this is a byproduct of the design. When you splay sound in the fashion that the Mirages do, you'll get huge sound, but at the expense of clarity.
When someone was willing to buy the Mirages for nearly what I paid for them, I jumped at the opportunity. They're terrific, and if I had a perfectly symmetrical listening room to set them up in, I may well have kept them. In the end, I decided to go with KEF R900s. They don't reproduce space quite as well as the Mirages, nor do they have quite the bass extension or beautiful high-gloss finish, but in every other respect, the KEFs are the superior loudspeakers in my room.
I'm sure you'll love the Dynaudios -- I used to own a pair, and the Danes know how to design a mean speaker. But if you wind up wanting to further explore your options in the non-direct-radiator department, I highly suggest Definitive Technology's BP-8060ST or BP-8080ST models. These bipolar speakers have built-in powered subwoofers, sound almost as large as the Mirages have, and offer imaging that rivals some of the better direct radiators out there. These towers use what DefTech calls a Forward Focused Bipolar Array, in which the rear-mounted drivers play 6dB down from what the front drivers produce. Their research has shown that this is the best way to preserve the imaging of a direct radiator, while also providing a credible bipolar-type soundstage. I think the results are terrific, and if I didn't need fully passive reference loudspeakers for reviewing purposes, I probably would have replaced the Mirages with the DefTechs. They won't have quite the velvety sound of the OMD-28s; rather, they're a bit more crisp sounding. But they're an easy recommendation for a full-range speaker from my vantage point. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
I am a novice listener and don’t have a lot of experience with audiophile and high-fidelity music. Last year I bought Bowers & Wilkins CM8 front speakers, paired with a Marantz SR7005 receiver. For some reason which I cannot thoroughly explain, I just felt that something was missing. I am in the process of replacing my current setup with either the KEF R700 or R900, a Parasound A23 amplifier and will use the Marantz as a preamp-processor. Would KEF’s R700 or R900 be a good upgrade sonically? If it is, do you have an integrated amplifier -- $5000 or less -- that will match well with either of the KEFs? I know this is a silly question since each person's hearing preferences will vary. Many thanks for your time.
Emmanuel, while your Bowers & Wilkins speakers and Marantz setup have a rich heritage and an equally rich sound, I think you’re on the right track in thinking that there might be more resolving products out there. The KEFs would be at the top of my list, and predictably so -- I made the KEF R900 my personal reference loudspeaker. A review of the R900 is forthcoming on GoodSound!, but know that KEF’s R-series models are some of the best speakers you can buy under $5000. Another reviewer here on GoodSound!, Roger Kanno, has also made a pair of R900s his own, and we’re in agreement about just how good they are. While I haven’t heard the R700s, I suspect they will sound nearly identical to the R900s, short of abbreviated bass extension, and maximum output, the latter of which is a surprisingly high 113dB. If you have space constraints, go with the R700; otherwise, I can heartily recommend the R900. There are a goodly number of very good speakers available for under $5000 that you might consider, but I really do think that the KEFs currently sit at the summit.
As for an integrated amplifier at $5000 or less . . . I have a suggestion, but it will cost you slightly more than you’re looking to spend. Hegel’s H300 is $5500, but for that money you buy a 250Wpc amplifier, one of the quietest preamplifiers I have heard at any price, and a D/A converter that can hold its own with some of the industry’s top names. Try and hear one if you can. I think it’s within a stone’s throw of the best sound available under $10,000, and it retails for barely more than half of that. I wound up purchasing one to serve as my reference for the future, and combined with the KEFs, I’m confident that I own two of the top performers available today, which combine to outperform some of their far more expensive competitors. I think you’ll be shocked by just how much more revealing a KEF R-series and Hegel tandem will prove to be over your current setup. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
Regarding your recent piece on CES 2013, I have to say this insane bullshit has been going on for a long time. Why these shmucks peddle this malarkey is a mystery to me. This nerd-lick hobby is for dumbass schlemiels with deep pockets and no friggin’ brains. The hobby has also gotten so boring that I would rather have a good bowel movement than worry about this absurd baloney.
The sad thing is that, while many a schmuck may wind up being sucked into the malarkey, there are a goodly number of relatively bright people who get sucked into the manure as well. GoodSound! does more than fit a need -- high-fidelity sound at reasonable prices -- it fits an ethos. When someone is offering a piece of audio equipment at exorbitant prices, the reaction shouldn't be "Oh, I bet that sounds good." Rather, it should engender skepticism and the question "Why?" If you get a straight answer that's predicated on engineering principles and cost of manufacturing, that's one thing. If it's some amorphous nonsense about "getting closer to the music" or some such, cast a suspicious gaze before quickly moving on. More aspersions will be cast in my March editorial, so you should check back on March 1st. Oh, and good luck with the bowel movement. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
I enjoyed your review of the Hegel H300 integrated amplifier, and its comparison to the new Musical Fidelity M6 500i. I own Amphion Argon2 and Argon3L speakers, and am looking for a second integrated in addition to my Musical Fidelity A5, whose sound I like very much with both sets of speakers.
Do you know how the above two amps would do with my Amphions? Do you know how the Musical Fidelity M6i or the M6 separates would compare? I care about both large orchestrations -- like Mahler -- which tend to challenge amps under 200Wpc, and human vocals, both singer-songwriters and classical (never mind my Louis Armstrong and other jazz).
Thank you in advance,
It's funny that you mention Amphion, as I am due to review one of their products in the coming months. As for the two integrated amplifiers that you mention, I really enjoyed my time with both, though they are rather different. You sound fond of your current Musical Fidelity A5 integrated. I briefly heard that model a few years ago, and I would imagine you'd be very happy with something like the M6 500i. It looks like it is around $1000 more than the M6PRX and M6PRE separates that Musical Fidelity offers, and that money buys you an integrated chassis, almost double the power, and no need for a pair of interconnects. It also looks like the M6 500i is built to a higher standard than the "regular" M6 line. $6999 is certainly a lot of money to spend, but I can almost guarantee your satisfaction with the British "Super Integrated," as Musical Fidelity calls them.
However, if you have a Hegel dealer within driving distance, I highly suggest making the drive to listen to the H300. It's $1500 less, includes a terrific DAC, and, to my ears, is the slightly more resolving of the two amps. I actually purchased one myself in the last few days, to use as my reference for the near future. It offers a different sound than the Musical Fidelity, for sure, as it's not quite as sweet or warm sounding. It also has half the power rating and a less robust chassis. But remember that doubling power only earns you an extra 3dB of headroom as you crank up the volume. Unless you like listening at deafening levels, the 250Wpc that the H300 provides should more than suffice.
Bottom line, you can't go wrong either way. They're both terrific products. But do try to listen to the Hegel, and let me know in what direction you wind up going. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
Interesting read on your choice of a new reference speaker. I, too, find myself in the same situation as I want to upgrade my speakers. I currently have Axiom M80 V2s with an Axiom center and surround speakers.
I jumped on a set of Energy RC-70s that once sold for $2200/pr., and got them for $800. I have had them for 30 days. Before I decide to keep them, I must say that they are not as bright as the Axioms and I find them three-dimensional. The Axioms are really forward-sounding, with the Energy on the recessed side. I could have gotten the GoldenEar Technology Triton 3 for $2000/pr., as well. I know the Energy speaker is around 2007 technology, and I'll have to live with this upgrade for a while. I also got the Energy Veritas center speaker, regular price $1000, for $500, and the Veritas mini-bookshelf speakers for $250/pr. What's your opinion on this particular upgrade? Sometimes when I listen to both of these models they sound similar and I'm afraid that over the long haul that there's not enough differences to consider the Energy as a huge upgrade.
I don't think you went wrong in your purchases, Gerald. Energy makes some good speakers, just as Axiom does. You may be right that the move from Axioms to Energys was more lateral than anything else, but both companies make overachieving value-oriented products, so it's hardly a damning assessment.
Yes, something like the GoldenEar would probably offer a noticeable upgrade, as would a few other speakers that are newer and incorporate more modern materials. But if it were me, for the moment, I would enjoy the good deals that you got on your Energy speakers. I was able to purchase my now-departed Mirage OMD-28 loudspeakers for $2300/pr., a steal considering they once retailed for $7500/pr. I knew that there were better speakers out there, but I thoroughly enjoyed their company for the two years that I owned them. If you decide in the future that you'd like to go a different direction, GoldenEar Technology would offer a good starting point. You might also check out -- in no particular order -- Paradigm, KEF, Definitive Technology, Aperion Audio, PSB or Sonus Faber. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
I have an older NAD CD changer and it's starting to produce static in one channel. I am thinking of replacing it with another changer to keep the harmony in the house. A while back, I connected a Peachtree DAC to the digital output of the NAD and neither my friend nor I heard much of a difference, if any. We were using the same Kimber Hero analog interconnect into my preamp.
All the CD changers I have seen are entry level at best. I was wondering if you could direct me toward good-sounding player around $1000 CDN.
I'm not sure many companies make CD changers anymore, as Compact Discs are falling out of favor these days. Marantz makes a five-disc changer, the $399.99 CC4403, that could well suit your needs. For what it's worth, while Peachtree makes some pretty good stuff, they wouldn't be my first suggestion for a reasonably priced DAC, and it may well be that if you tried a different DAC, say from Benchmark Media Systems or Musical Fidelity, you'd hear a more substantial difference in the resultant sound. . . . Hans Wetzel
To Hans Wetzel,
I'm French and I will try to write the best English that I can. I'm about to buy one of these amplifiers: Hegel's H300 or Musical Fidelity's M6 500i. I have just read your H300 review on the GoodSound! website.
Their prices are quite close in France, but still very expensive, and the products are a bit different.
The Musical Fidelity is very powerful, while the Hegel has a DAC inside (a very good one?), but with a less powerful 250Wpc power rating. My speakers are Dynaudio's C2. If you had to choose between these two amplifiers, which would you buy? Why? Thanks.
Bruno, if you've narrowed down your search to these two integrated amplifiers, you are in a very fortunate predicament. Both the Musical Fidelity and the Hegel are terrific, albeit different, products.
The $6999 Musical Fidelity M6 500i is a bit of a monster. Weighing in at more than 70 pounds, with a solid, overbuilt chassis, it's the kind of component that should last for more than a decade without any issues. It has a sonic personality that is not quite neutral, and errs on the warm side. While it does not have tube-like warmth, it's on the same continuum. Personally, I found it very engaging, and almost purchased my review sample. With 500W on tap, it's also highly doubtful that you would ever have need of a more powerful amplifier.
The Hegel has a different feature set and personality. Costing $1500 less than the M6 500i, at $5500, the Hegel H300 doesn't look or feel quite as substantial as its British counterpart. It's more sparse and utilitarian than the Musical Fidelity integrated in terms of its design, but also includes a high-quality built-in DAC. It also sounds a bit Scandinavian, in the sense that it's forward, and a little more honest and neutral. At 250Wpc, it sounds like it would be significantly less powerful than 500i, but in reality, doubling power only gets you 3dB in actual output. Unless you like to really pound out music through your Dynaudios, I doubt you'd need the overhead.
In the end, it comes down to what you prefer. The Dynaudio C2s are excellent, and pretty neutral, meaning you'll hear the coloration of the Musical Fidelity as much as you'll hear the forward nature of the Hegel. Personally, I'd lean towards the Hegel, but in an ideal world, I'd own both. . . . Hans Wetzel