In 2006, I started my high-end audio journey. While I had spent several years enjoying music from mass-market electronics (Denon) and speakers (Klipsch), I wanted to see how much better my sound could get.
I started with a better CD player (Eastern Electric Minimax) and DAC (CI Audio VDA-2). Then I went from a receiver to an integrated amplifier (Simaudio i5.3). The next step was to upgrade the speakers (Merlin VSM-MX). I thought I was set for a long time to come.
It lasted just over a year.
Then the upgrade bug bit me again. I went all out for a digital solution (Wadia 581i SE). I went to a higher-power integrated amp (GamuT DI-150). I upgraded the Wadia to the top-of-the-line 781i.
And yet, I kept wondering if there was more.
So, I went to the RMAF in 2009, intending to decide what I wanted from my system, and what I could do to achieve it. I ended up discovering that I preferred the omnidirectional speakers that were being showcased there (MBL and German Physiks). I had an idea of what I wanted: the MBL Noble line of speakers and electronics.
I grabbed a pair of 111E speakers from a local seller. My plan was in motion.
But there was a problem.
As I deliberated for countless hours over which components I wanted, one thing became abundantly clear: I was driving myself crazy. I was spending more time thinking about how to improve my stereo than I was spending sleeping. Even when I did sleep, my dreams were riddled with this obsession.
I realized that if I wanted to preserve any modicum of sanity, I would need to put together a system that I couldn't improve upon. I needed a system so well-built that any thought of upgrading would be met with immediate dismissal. After speaking with some MBL aficionados, I realized that the Noble line wasn't going to satisfice. If I truly wanted to put this insanity behind me for good, I was going to need to venture into the Reference line.
First, I acquired the 1621A transport and 1611F DAC. Next, I got the 9007 monoblock amps. Then, I got the 6010D pre-amp. Within the space of a few months, I had totally re-done my system. I hadn't hooked any of it up yet save for the speakers, but I eagerly awaited the day when I could assemble it all together.
Eventually, I did. And it was good.
So here I am. Four years after my journey began, I have nowhere else to go. The only change I can think to make is to move from the 111E speakers to the 111Fs, but I'm in no rush to do that. Every piece that is in my system was chosen for very specific reasons:
1. I went with an all-MBL system because I wanted to take the issue of synergy completely out of the equation. It seems like 80% of the threads on these audio forums are about system matching, and I didn't want to worry about that. Very few audio companies make both electronics and speakers at a high level, which could have made this a tall task. Fortunately, MBL is one of them, and their sound is impressive.
2. I went all the way to the top-level Reference series components with the exception of the speakers and amps. I stopped at the 111 speakers because my room is too small to handle the 101s, and the 101s are very heavy. I stopped at the 9007 amps as well because of weight. I had a hard enough time picking up those amps; I can't imagine what the 9008s would feel like at twice the weight.
3. The Wireworld cables were chosen for synergy reasons as well. MBL uses Wireworld cable in their internal wiring, so it would seem to make sense to retain that for the external cabling as well. I thought the Eclipse represented the best compromise of performance and value of the series. I am a big fan of OCC copper, and didn't want to spring for the increasingly high prices of the Silver, Gold, or Platinum Eclipse wiring.
4. My choice of power conditioner came from a discussion with a veteran of the power conditioner battles. Having tried nearly every solution out there, he recommended the Bybee.
5. The Rack of Silence was primarily chosen for its weight and adjustability. It's under thirty pounds, the shelves can be easily adjusted to accommodate components of different heights, the whole thing can be easily disassembled, and it provides copious ventilation. Extra-long components can also fit easily on the frame. It takes a completely different view of vibration control from most racks (isolation rather than damping), but it seems to be effective.
6. I chose to go with maple amp stands to keep my amps off the carpet. I was impressed by the look of these amp stands, and the price was quite reasonable.
Having assembled this system, I can once again sleep soundly, confident that the upgrade bug no longer has a place to sink its teeth.
I can assure you if set up properly, they do imaging and soundstage like no other. There is no doubt. Try listening again. SOmetimes people are not able to tune in on how omni speakers work their magic initially if used to conventional box designs only. Even then, they may not be someones cup of tea but that is another story.
I heard mbl 111s set up quite optimally at United Home Audio in the DC metro area. The configuration applied there was similar to what Gallant Diva describes and what I have heard work well in the past with planar speakers like Maggies as well. I have one of my pair of omni OHM Walsh speakers set up somewhat similarly. I'd like to with my other pair as well, but the traffic in that room will not permit it.
Have you heard those mbl's set up well in a larger room with sgnificant open space behind and to the sides? It sounds nothing like most stereo systems using conventional design speakers placed near the rear wall. The soundstage is wide, deep and completely holographic, perhaps to an extent unmatched by anything else I have heard.
If not, make sure you do! That way you will know what what you have is capable of. It might be hard to achieve that in a smaller room with the speaks close to the rear wall.
You should read this and consider giving a setup like this (with more open space to side walls for your omnis than the planars discussed specifically here) a try:
