hi Jake, i'm still in Vegas and have had meetings all day.

my original room was 18' x 12' x 10.5'. as much as I love the Exquisite 1D's and DE's (i have not specifically heard the DE......although i had the Midi Exquisite in my room for 5 months with the same mid-range and diamond tweeter)....it is hard to imagine the Kharma being able to better the VR9's in any room considering the assets and adjustability of the VR9. that adjustability allows the VR9's dynamics, bass extension, and treble extention to be under control.

if you only heard the 1D's in my old room you would never feel that you were wanting for anything. also, they would be much simpler to deal with. i must note; that for a small room, my old room sounded very good and natural. it was particularly tall for it's size with a stepped ceiling. the floor to ceiling bookcases damped things nicely, and the bay window did wonders for the soundstage depth. i had the floor braced and the sidewalls damped. even with all those assets, the 1D's got somewhat bloaty in the mid-bass and were soft on top.

in a more typically challenged smaller room the adjustability of the VR9's would be a very big asset and allow one to enjoy a more dynamic and frequency extended sound. if you were considering the DE then you would have a more extended treble compared to the 1D but would still be limited in low bass extension and slam.

the VR9 is also an easier load and more efficient which opens up more amplification choices. in a small room you would have no reason to bi-amp and would simply need to bi-wire with the VR9.

the Kharma's do have a slightly different character in the mids; that ceramic mid-range is not strictly neutral......it has a wonderful shimmer that i still like......the VR9's are slightly warmer in the mids and i think more neutral......so in this 'character' issue it would come down to taste. also; to my EYES the Kharma is far more beautiful. in every other way the VR9's perform better.....and.....as the room gets larger it becomes more in favor of the VR9.

i think you would never regret buying either speaker for a room the size of my old room.

mikelavigne December 07, 2005 01:59

Treemed67; i bought the Tenor 75Wi OTL monoblocks about 5 years ago. then i upgraded to the Tenor 300 Watt hybrid monoblocks two years ago.

for the past 10 months i've been using the darTZeel NHB-108 and a couple of months ago i purchased a pair of Stereo NHB-108's.

at this point i still own my Tenor Hybrids but the wife will likely make me sell them. i love both amps but the darTZeel is likely better with the new darTZeel pre. i have yet to try the Tenors with the darTZeel pre.

so to directly answer your question; i am likely switching from Tenor to darTZeel but that process is not complete at this time (which is the opposite of what you asked).

mikelavigne December 07, 2005 01:33

MIKE,
LAST MAY AT HES I WAS SURPRISED BY THE QUALITY OF SOUND JOHNATHAN COAXED FROM THE VR-9'S IN A VERY SMALL AND CROWDED ROOM!
THOUGH CERTAINLY NOT THE LAST WORD IN ANY OF THE AREAS YOU'VE TOUCHED ON, THEY WERE ABLE TO CONVEY A PROMISE OF THEY'RE POTENTIAL...
MY QUESTION TO YOU, IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR MOST RECENT CONVERSATION; DO YOU FEEL THE VR9'S CAN DELIVER SIMILAR QUALITIES TO THE KHARMA 1D-DE'S IN A MEDIUM TO SMALL LISTENING ENVIORMENT?
IF YOU WERE TO HAVE THE DEMENSIONS OF YOUR ORIGINAL LISTENING ROOM,WOULD THE KHARMAS THEN BE BETTER OVERALL IYO?
THANKS ,
AZJAKE

azjake December 06, 2005 06:37

did you own dartzel before you switched to tenor?

treemed67 December 05, 2005 23:44

i was asked what i liked about the VR9's in another thread......and thought i would post my answer here too. the question was in context of my recommendation of Kharma's.

****************

I loved what the Kharma's did and they remain a speaker that i unconditionally recommend for all but the largest rooms. they are much easier to 'get right' than the VR9's.

the VR9's are an 'open-window'. they will allow your system to go as far as you want to take it. if you scan thru the last 9 months of my system thread you will read about my journey with the VR9's.

i will try to be brief about 'what is good about the VR9's'.

first; i switched from the Kharma's to the VR9's due to building a quite large dedicated room that the Kharma's were not able to synergize in. the Kharmas could not do low bass (below 40hz in the case of the Exquisite 1D, and below 30hz in the case of the Midi Exquisites) in this room. since the room was uncompromised in design it required a speaker which was fully capable of full frequency response. i built the best room the designer could design; and not for any particular speaker.

you need to know my point of reference (the Kharma's) to understand what is good about the VR9's.

i did not want to give up any of the Kharma magic that i had enjoyed for 4 years. that would be a seamless coherence from top to bottom, completely integrated bass, excellent micro-dynamics, amazing detail and textural nuance, a natural clarity and the mids, and a natural musical treble. the Kharma's always got out of the way of the music and disappeared; you had no sense of the speaker but just the musical content. the Kharma's are an easy amplifier load and work well with the amps i most like; mid-power tubes and relatively low power ss.

the Kharmas have a lean character in the mid bass which is off-putting to some (i like it), the Kharma's lack that effortless dynamic grip and need to be played loud to come alive. the Kharma's don't throw as huge a soundstage as some speakers; and the Kharma's don't do really low bass. the Diamond Midi Exquisite does have top end air but the other Kharmas are slightly soft on top.

back to the VR9's.

if you take everything great about the Kharma's, and add all the areas where the Kharma's are lacking; you start to define the VR9's.....but it is only a start. the VR9's match the seamless coherence (even with full low frequency extention flat to below 20hz), match the disappearing act, match the ability to disappear and allow the musical message to come thru. the VR9's have integral 15" subwoofers powered by internal 1000 watt class 'D' amplifiers.......which have adjustment for gain and crossover frequency. the VR9's have three tweeters; which each have attenuators. the VR9's are 94db-96db 8 ohm efficient (depending on gain and crossover settings) so are even an easier load than the Kharma's.

the VR9's have that total effortlessness that allows you to relax into the music no matter what the music demands.

so with my very large room i'm able to retain all the magic i loved about my Kharmas in my previous smaller room; and add all the things i wanted.

but......and this is a big 'but'......there are issues. the VR9's are so adjustable and dynamically capable that there is no place to hide. between my new very live room and these 'open-window' speakers......everything in my system came under scrutiney. the VR9's require either bi-wireing or bi-amping. the VR9's are likely too energetic for some smaller rooms.

it has taken 6 months; new amps, new racks, new power cords......and a very steep learning curve to get these beasties to really sing......but sing they do......on a whole different level than the Kharma's (or any other production speaker i have heard).

i would also add that it has been interesting that there have been times when the VR9's were frustrating; i would assume that i had run into a limitation of the VR9.....only to discover that the problem was elsewhere in my room or system......or a matter of adjustment or speaker placement. every time i changed my system, even the tinyest thing.....the balance of the speaker changed. the whole idea of having the speaker completely compliment your room and system is daunting.....but ultimately rewarding. i now make minor tweeter adjustments for different cartridges. that may sound over-the-top.....but you should hear it.

i have had a few friends that have visited three or four times over the last 6 months that have seen the speakers come together. the Kharma's were never as frustrating; but also not nearly as capable. different friends like different bass balance; when i start a session; i sometimes offer a few choices of bass settings and tweeter settings. it sounds complicated but it's not. i can make the adjustments in a few seconds and they are easily reset. after 6 months of tweaking and having many visitors it is clear that there is more than one viewpoint or taste.

i love where the VR9's take me; the music is intimate and involving; they get out of the way and yet immerse me in musical flow; they have all the 'checklist' virtues but keep me focused on the musical event. there is a listenablity and naturalness that keeps my attention for hours on end.

it is difficult to separate what the VR9's are doing from the rest of my system; but they seem to be a completely 'open-window' to what can happen.

mikelavigne December 03, 2005 16:12

I am 3 hours from Seattle. Maybe after X-mas. I'm sure that my wife would love to shop Seattle. I will find out how much grief the border will be to bring a German Unit into the States. Talk to you soon.

rugyboogie December 01, 2005 08:26

Rugyboogie; thanks; you have quite the system yourself.

i have not heard the Kubala Sosna Emotion speaker cables other than at shows. if someone wants to send me some to try i'd be glad to comment.

others in this thread have also recommended the KS Emotion. as i have just purchased a second set of Opus speaker cables for bi-amping i guess you could safely say that i like what i have......but i am always open. cable comparisons can be tough if the cables are similar sounding.

i would expect that with your ASR amp that the MIT might be a little mechanical sounding......as i assume the ASR has a similar openness to my darTZeels. if you ever have the inclination; i would LOVE to compare your amp/pre with mine. as you are 7 hours from Portland and i am 3 hours from Portland we may not be too far from each other (i am just east of Seattle).

mikelavigne November 30, 2005 05:30

Brie, i have only heard VAC Phi at a show; i liked it but i don't have any strong feelings as at shows it is tough to assign cause and effect. i do think highly of VAC pre's and amps; they are always natural but not overly tubey and rolled off. the Phi gear is quite beautifully made.

i don't think i have heard either the Benz Micro Ruby H3 or the DV Rua......so anything i would say would be general brand comments; which would likely not be very helpful.....and maybe not fair for those particular cartridges.

personally; everything i have was purchased new......except......my tt. i would not hesitate from buying used gear if i had some idea of the way it had been treated. i have bought lots of great vinyl used.

i would say an Avid/SME V will be a combination worthy of the best cartridges......you should truely enjoy that. you made a good decision to put your bucks into a quality table and arm first. then when you do step up to the elite cartridges you will be able to optimize them. sometimes the top cartridges actually sound worse than a mid-range cartridge on a less than very good arm or table.

mikelavigne November 30, 2005 05:12

Hi Mike
Nice room. Wondering if you have had the chance to hear the KUBALA SOSNA Emotion speaker cables. I have heard peolple say good things about them. I am using MIT mh 850 EVO, and Valhallas. Closest dealer to me is in Portland a 7 hr drive. Maybe you can save me the drive.
Thanks for your time
Rugyboogie

rugyboogie November 29, 2005 05:42

Hi Mike,

Have you had any experience with any of the Vac Phi gear? I have heard very good things and was curious if you had any opinions.

I am probably going to be getting an Avid table and SME V arm. I have been istening to suspended tables for the past year or so and really like what they do with the speed and dynamics. And I think the Avid's have a really nice wide soundstage, espcially with the super solid SME V arm. I appreciate your review of the COlibri and Dynavector cart's. Any opinion on the Benz Micro Ruby 3H vs. the Dynavector Te Kaitora Rua? With the upgrade I'm looking at the Colibri and XV-1S are out of my range right now.

Finally, I am very curious as to what amount of gear the people reading this thread have bought new from dealers (paid around retail) and what percent have bought used (off Audiogon, etc..). I'm torn sometimes as I love the service and dedication as well as the fund of knowledge the local dealers can offer - but the cold hard truth is that there are better prices to be had for our hard earned dinero on the 'gon. I was curious what others felt.

-Brie

brieshayna November 26, 2005 17:43

Larry,

thanks. i would enjoy hearing your take on both the Colibri and XV-1s.

i openned another thread here with my post so if there were lots of comments about it it would be easy to access. on that thread i did provide more info on the Colibri.

mikelavigne November 21, 2005 14:58

Kamil,

although i'm woefully short on engineering prowess; i do agree with your theory. i try to focus on the what; not too much on the why.

Andy Payor of Rockport Technologies use to be the vdH importer and i think the Colibri 'might' (i don't know for sure) have been partially developed to take advantage of the unique design of Andy's tt's.

in any case; there is definitly some 'magic' happening in this case.

BTW, as of a few years back, Andy considered the Koetsu RSP to be an ideal cartridge for the Rockport; which speaks to his sonic compass.

mikelavigne November 21, 2005 14:40

.
Mike,
.
Thanks for taking the time to share the comparisons between the Colibri, Universe and XV-1s.
.
You bring some nice insights that will be fun to investigate as soon as the opportunity presents itself.
.
I am looking forward to getting a Colibri and XV-1s in my system and do the same comparison.
.
Rgds,
Larry
.

cello November 20, 2005 23:49

I agree with your observation on the Colibri and Dynavector, having owned both (Colibri XGM) running on Vyger Atlantis and Indian Signature turntables. The Colibri is simply more 'direct' in picking up what is in the groove.

Pino Viola, designer of Vyger told me his view of the theoretical perfect arm/cartridge having infinite mass and zero compliance. Apparently the shorter cantilever of the Colibri has something to do with this. Somehow this works best only with highly rigid parallel tracking tonearms. Apparently, longer cantilevers are necessary to make up for pivot arm geometry, skating force and bearing.

BTW, the other cartridge he suggested is the Dynavector Karat which also has a short, highly rigid cantilever. Any experience with this?

kamil November 20, 2005 16:37

Last Sunday i finally took the time to compare three cartridges; my Dynavector XV-1s (.24mv output), a friends ZYX Universe (.24mv output) and my vdH Colibri (.85mv output) with the darTZeel preamp and phono stage in battery power.

Some background. in a post above i describe the path that brought me to be experimenting with various cartridges. that post also raves about listening to battery power with the darTZeel phono stage. i promised to compare the Dynavector and ZYX to the Colibri on battery power.

so that is what i did.

the darTZeel preamp has plenty of gain (62db in the phono stage and 20 db in the gain stage of the pre itself) so even with the relatively low output of the Dynavector and ZYX there are no gain issues at all, i only needed to go to about 2 o'clock on the volume attenuator for very high volume with the 95db efficient VR9 speakers. in battery mode the darTZeel phono stage is extremely quiet; so the normal advantage the Colibri has over other cartridges with lower gain is considerably reduced.

the darTZeel phono stage is set with 100ohm loading that seemed to work well with all the cartridges but is not ideal. i know that the Colibri likes about 400-500 ohms ideally; and from what i understand the Dynavector and ZYX both are ok (if not ideal) around 100 ohms.

the Dynavector is pretty new and only has maybe 30 hours on it; so it has not yet openned up completely. i am told the ZYX is fully broken in......and my Colibri is most definitly broken in.

i am very familiar with the setup parameters of the Colibri. i run it with the arm slightly down at the back, and track it at 1.45 grams as measured by my ALM-01 Winds Electronic Stylus Pressure Gauge. with the Rockport there is no anti-skate issues.

i ran the Dynavector XV-1s at 2.70 grams and slightly down in the rear of the arm.......and the ZYX Universe at 1.95 grams and the arm level.

i had played around previously with the Dynavector for my 30 hours and had had the Universe in the system for about a week prior to get it dialed in. so i had a reasonably good idea of setup on each cartridge.

the Rockport does make it easy to switch cartridges very quickly as all you need to do is change the counterweight to the proper one for the weight of that particular cartridge. then adjust the arm length for exact stylus position (there is a groove in the platter that you sight the stylus exactly inside for perfect position), rotate the arm for visual azimuth (i can get it very very close to perfect), and set your VTF. in practice about a 20 minute job if you already know the VTF you want.

so i was able to first listen to the Colibri, switch quickly to the Universe, listen again, then switch quickly to the XV-1s, and listen again.

before i get into what i heard on Sunday i want to describe my perceptions of how the Dynavector and ZYX compared when i the Universe first arrived from my friend. for reasons described in the previous post i had purchased the Dynavector as an alternative to my Colibri and it had been in my system for about 6 weeks. i had been using my Lamm LP2 Delux phono stage with the Placette passive RVC and Tenor 300 watt Hybrid monoblocks. i liked the Dynavector; compared to the Colibri it was less exciting, less on the edge, less vivid and immediate and less explosive......OTOH although it had a little color it was fairly neutral, always natural, very involving and had very good detail if not quite like the Colibri. more of my favorite music was enjoyable compared to the Colibri.

when i installed the ZYX Universe my first impression was of slightly less smoothness and naturalness compared to the Dynavector but more of the excitement of the Colibri. i played some of the Lps that had been on the edge with the Colibri and the ZYX was more natural and under control yet considerably more exciting than the Dynavector.

on the Lamm/Placette/Tenor my initial impressions were that these were simply two good cartridges that had different perspectives. as i listened more to the ZYX i could never really get fully involved into the music as i had felt with the Dynavector or especially the Colibri. why? i'm not exactly sure. it was like i wasn't hearing as far into the music as i liked. nothing was missing from the 'checklist' but i wasn't fulfilled.

the Lamm has 57.5 db of gain, has 400 ohm loading, and is extremely quiet. it has a very slight warmth, just to the dark side of neutral; but has a textural richness and refinement that i have not heard from any other phono stage (until dart battery power). it should be an ideal match for the ZYX.

so that was how it was before i tried battery power (as described in my previous post). i hope this makes sense up to this point.

now to the three cartridge comparison.

first the Colibri. the Colibri can be a 'train wreck'. it breaks all the rules. the barrel and canteliver are out of algnment with the cartridge 'body'......so setting asthimuth you ignore the body and just align the cateliver and stylus. i have owned 3 Colibris and they are all different yet all inconsistent. they can have any length canteliver a customer wants, gold windings, copper windings, wood bodies, polycarbonite bodies.......they have such little play in their suspensions that they can 'buzz' on certain edgy types of music. they are the Formula 1 cars of cartridges. the Colibri is so immediate, so explosive, yet so natural and so incisive that if all elsewhere is not about perfect.....you will know it and there will be a problem.

OTOH when all is right the Colibri is magnificent.

long story made short; with the battery powered dart phono stage in my system; the Dynavector and especially the ZYX are not nearly in the class of the Colibri. as the system improves, the lead of the Colibri gets larger.

i used tracks on 7 Lps for this comparison.

1.Muddy Waters 'Folk Singer', 'Good Morning School Girl', Classic reissue.

the Colibri here made the guitar plucks real and there. the whole musical sense was vivid and immediate. there was not a sense of the recording chain.....just some guys doing their thing. totally involving. each note dripped with reality. brilliant colors in the vocals and guitar overtones. ALIVE.

with the Universe it sounded great, nothing missing, satisfying. but; the guitar pluck was not as vivid, the colors were less vivid, there was overall a bit of haze that only compared to the Colibri was evidant. maybe no other cartridge would expose that issue. the decay of notes was reduced which reduced the overall involvement. sounded like a different pressing. NOT ALIVE.

on the Dynavector this was more different. less energy, less edge. transients were softened. smoother and warmer. very nice. a great sense of ease but too buttoned down for me. this track should boggie. excellent bloom and note decay.

2. The Royal Ballet, side one, Classic 33rpm reissue.

Colibri; spooky good. i don't want to stop. an 'oh my god' about every 30 seconds. i try to critically listen but it's hard.....i just want to close my eyes and forget about everything. about the best reproduced strings i have ever heard. such a sense of venue, the 'subway' and 'buses' outside seem real. where am i?

ZYX Universe; a different realm......reproduced music. very good.....but less of everything. very, very good. specifically, less separation of instruments, less delicacy
and less clarity. the effortlessness of the Colibri in sorting out the complex textures is missing.

Dynavector; not the detail or energy of the Colibri but very natural. slightly veiled but warm and inviting. not
wholey real but still much beauty. good flow and pulse of the music.

it's getting late; i will continue tomorrow morning or evening as time permits.

the Dynavector and ZYX are excellent cartridges that by themselves are rightly considered SOTA. just because i hear what i hear doesn't invalidate anyone else's perspectives.

so as not to attract too many flames i want to clearly state that i limit my comments to my specific system and setup choices. there are many varibles i have not or cannot address; arms, cartridge loading, breakin, taste, settleing in. i did not do the tiny tweaking of these cartridges that one does over time to dial them in just right. OTOH the differences that i heard are considerable and not subtle.

it just one guys opinion on one particular system on one particular day.

with that said; flame away.

mikelavigne November 18, 2005 07:41

Thanks Mike, for all of your input and experience.

Until my Firebird Diamond's arrive I can't really do much of anything. But your information and opinions have been VERY helpful. I'll let you know what my experiences are as I progress. I'm going to stick with my incomming Talon's for a while before considering any speaker upgrade. I have loved the sound of the Talons, especially the Firebird every time I have heard them. Plus, the Midi's are a bit out of my price range just now as I would rather spend the extra $$$ on my listening room itself; considering I already have a pretty damn good system I think it's money better spent.

The only concern I have currently is that I don't have a true reference pre-amp to try out the Vac 70/70 and Tenor with to compare to the ASR. I was considering using the pre-outs of the ASR pre-amp section for the Tenor and Vac amps. I do have my Hovland HP100, which is damn good, but not really up to the Tenor/Vac level.

Is your Placette passive upgraded, modified or anything? I don't need balanced inputs/outputs and Placette has the RVC listed as only $1000.00 while you list it as $2500 (with line-stage and bal in/out). You aren't using the Placette line-stage (I think), just the RVC. Considering how infrequently I listen these days (Sigh)I could actually skip the line-stage altogether and just plug in the phono-stage or CD source, when using it, directly to the RVC...

But I must say I have heard the new C.J. ACT 2 and was blown away. I have not heard the Calypso but have also heard great things about it. What a wonderful problem to have!!! :-)

To be honest, until I read your posting I would NEVER have considered a passive pre as I have been unimpressed with them thus far. But you and others have indicated that the inexpensive Placette RVC is a special little unit, and that it works very very well specifically with the Tenor. But you are back to an active line-stage with the DarTzeel.... Maybe I'll try to get my hand son the RVC just for the Tenor.

Hummmm.

Hey, did the Pipedreams or Dali Megaline ever pique your interest? They are a very different speaker then what you are currently running...

mattnshilp November 16, 2005 19:30

Matt; so as not to give the wrong impression, i want to be clear.

regarding the darTZeel/Midi Exquisite comination; my opinion is that the combination of the darTZeel, the Placette, and my Valhalla cables was just not ideal. the Diamond tweeter did not seem to like the dart-Placette combo......and all the Valhalla in my system gave things no place to hide. my opinion is that if i still had the Midi Exquisites now with the new darTZeel preamp and dart amp; THAT would be a glorious combination.

the problem was not with the darTZeel amp or the Placette individually; it was the lack of synergy.

mikelavigne November 16, 2005 04:57

Matt, yes, the pair of darTZeel stereo amps are staying. the darTZeel preamp is a preproduction version; which only has the BNC 'zeel' output connection operational at this time; so i am not able to use RCA or XLR connections to connect the Tenor amps. as a result i cannot compare the Tenor amps to the darTZeel amps when using the darTZeel preamp.

i would expect that the darTZeel preamp will be pretty damn good with any sort of cable interface and about any amps; but at this point i'm just giving a SWAG.

i will be selling the Tenor Hybrid 300's at some point. i hope to still have them when my new 'production' version of the dart pre arrives so i can compare them with normal cables to the dart amps; but i'm not sure the timing for that will allow that to happen.

in the past i did try the Tenors with an ART II, but personally i preferred the Placette RVC. the ART II sounded great with the Tenors; as did quite a few other active pre's.

as i understand it; the Tenors were voiced on resistive based passive pre's and i've always preferred both the Tenor OTL's and Hybrids that way. some others liked a little more of a 'tube' influence; it is just a matter of personal preference....my feeling is always that most preamps add something; i try to have a system that is best left alone; the Placette has always done that best (until the dart).

some other preamps i have tried on the Tenor hybrids include; CTC Blowtorch, Lamm L2, and the Aesthetix Calypso.....all of which worked well (but i still preferred the Placette).

i also compared a number of other preamps to the Placette when i had my Tenor OTL's including a few other passives.

yes, i will be selling the Jena Labs passive switchbox and the Placette RVC. i have promised 'first shot' to someone; if they don't take them i'll let you know.

i would expect the Tenor Hybrid 150's to be just fine on the Midi Exqusites. i loved the synergy between the Tenor Hybrid 300's and the Midi Exquistes in my big (29' x 21' x 11') room. i definitely preferred the Tenors to the darTZeel on the Midi Exquisites particularly with the Placette passive. the dart and the Placette had some impedence issues which reduced the dynamic capacity of the dart. the big Tenors had a great dynamic grip and 'jump' factor. i assume the 150's would be similar in a more normal sized room. the Diamond tweeter on the Midi Exqusite can sound prominent with anything but the most natural amps; the Tenors were a great match.

mikelavigne November 16, 2005 04:21

hi Oleg; i use to own the Levinson #37 and #360S which i liked alot. i then went on to the Linn CD-12 for redbook and the Marantz SA-1 for SACD. the CD-12 is still one of the better Redbook players. then i went to the emmlabs.

originally i had the modified Philips SACD 1000 transport; but last year i upgraded to the new CDSD transport. up through a year ago i had most of the various other SOTA digital players and DAC's in my room for comparison and was quite confident that the emmlabs was best at CD and SACD.

in the last year (as i have been working on new amps, preamps and speakers...as well as sorting out my room) i have not done many comparisons with other digital players so i am not one who can really say what is best at this time. i have only heard the competition at shows and not in my room where i can make clear comparisons. i have heard nothing out there that improves on what i hear from the emmlabs in my room; but my viewpoint is provisional at best since system context at shows is so varible.

i have compared the emmlabs directly to the 5-box Esoteric in my room; i much preferred the emmlabs on both CD and SACD. i have not spent time with the Ayre. IMHO the Linn CD-12 outperforms the Linn Unidisc in Redbook; and i know that the emmlabs with the CDSD transport is quite a bit better than the CD-12. i'm just not a DCS fan personally; let's say a matter of taste.

i don't know if i answered your question or not. in general; i prefer to avoid the whole 'fix it with tubes' approach to digital design; i prefer the emmlabs approach of conversion of PCM to DSD as most life-like; especially the way Ed Meitner does it.

there are others out there that have done more recent comparisons of current SOTA machines. the one thing a do have is a reference of my turntable performance; the emmlabs sounds more like that than any digital i have heard.

mikelavigne November 16, 2005 01:45

Hi Mike

My name is Oleg and I would like to ask your opinion. For my digital I use Levinson 390s. I love it. I used to also have a Sony XA777ES for my SACD playback and sold it to purchase the Ayre C-5xe which I hoped would replace my Levinson for great CD + SACD playback. I found my Levinson blew away the Ayre for CD and I got rid of the Ayre. I do not want to have 2 digital sources. You own the combo from EMM Labs. Have you compared this combo to other Digital drives that play both CD and SACD??? What is your educated opinion on this?
Thank you in advance for your response.
Oleg

[email protected] November 16, 2005 00:16

So I would assume the DarTZeels are staying? Did you happen to try the Tenor amps with the DarT pre-amp? And if you are planning on selling the Jena Labs Passive and Placette RVC let me know as I may be interested. Did you happen to ever try the Tenor's with the C.J. ACT 2 or one of their older Reference Pre-amps?

What pre-amps have you tried with the Tenors?

I am under the working assumption that a single 150 HPs Tenor stereo amp will have no problem with the Midi Exquisite's should they ever happen to grace my listening room???

So are you done now??? :-)

-Matt

mattnshilp November 15, 2005 17:46

hi Matt; yes, my Tenor 300 watt hybrid monoblocks were upgraded by the 'Tenor Guys' in May. i had not had any issues with my Tenors; but prior to upgrade they were not as stable as i would have liked. since the upgrade; they are 'rock-solid' and they sound a little better to my ears.

the Tenors have a unique combination of detail, naturalness and sense of dynamic grip; without either a 'tube' or 'solid state' sound. they have that Tenor 'fire' and clarity in the mids.

i would expect you to enjoy the Tenor 150's.

i wish i could afford to keep both the Tenors and the pair of darTZeels.

mikelavigne November 15, 2005 05:03

Immensely overall. Thank you.

I wasn't really asking for flavor or opinions on the Lamm, Tenor, etc.; just stating that they all have excellent reputations and I am intrigued by them - especially the hybrid design. But your input is always appreciated.

I have spoken further with the gentlemen at RIVES and they have experience with the Firebirds, so I'm good to go.

I have just secured a Tenor 150 HPs for an amazing price and am having it sent to the guys at Tenor (or what's left of them) to have it fully upgraded and revised to current (more reliable) specs. Do your 300 mono's have this new "upgrade" so they don't blow up? :-)

I'll add more later, but thanks again!

-Matt

mattnshilp November 10, 2005 18:20

hi Matt; sorry for the delay in my response, i am waay behind on e-mails and such and this damn system DEMANDS my full concentration.

you do have lots of nice amplifier 'kit' around. i would think that the Talon Firebird Diamonds would sound pretty good with any of the amps you have let alone the ones you are considering. i have not actually heard the ASR amps other than at the RMAF; where the room they were in was not favorable to any of the gear....so impossible for me to have a sense of them.

you present many levels of issues; with each interconnected.

maybe speakers first. considering your current and likely future space; either the Talon Diamond or Kharma Midi Exquisite would work well in those spaces. i have heard the Talon Diamaonds but not in a controlled enough environment to be very helpful with specific feedback. if i were to give a general statement it would be that i am more confident in the performance of the lower priced Talons than the Firebird Diamonds. they may be well worth the money but i just don't know enough to comment.

however good the Talons are; the Kharma Midi Exquisite's are as good a speaker as you can purchase at ANY price for a medium to small room. i had these in my room last spring for 4 months on the Tenor 300 watt hybrids and the darTZeel.

they don't extend much below 30hz but they are seamless and alive sounding. the Midi Exquistes demand the very best amps as the diamond tweeter can sound 'prominent' with an amp that is not totally natural sounding. in addition; the mid-range is very revealing......an amp that has any tendancey to sound 'tubey' will be revealed as just that by the Midi Exqusites.

the Midi Exqusites do benefit from some power in a medium sized room but are fine with moderate powered tube amps. for the small scale music that you prefer most any of the amps you mention would sound special with the Midis.

as far as how Lamms, Tenors and darTZeels sound; there are lots of personal viewpoints to choose from.

these are three versions of amplifier heaven; personally; i prefer the darTZeel and Tenor as more alive sounding than the Lamm in general.....but that is not a universally held opinion.

the Tenor Hybrids (300 watt) have more dynamic 'kick' than the darTZeel although with the new darTZeel preamp and in vertical bi-amp configuration; the dart amps have equal dynamics to the Tenors. the Tenor has a slight amount of tube flavor; but only a slight amount. the Tenor is actually very neutral and detailed. the darTZeel has this wonderful naturalness, continuousness and transparency that is unique.

the darTZeel is more sensitive to it's environment; it must be matched to a pre and speakers that work correctly; whereas the Tenors are 'plug and play' pretty much.

i will try to comment further later. i hope this helps.

mikelavigne November 10, 2005 05:37

I'm still playing around with my ASR Emitter I Exclusive but so far I am very impressed. I have never heard anything else like it from a solid state amplifier. And the pre-amp is dead quiet (thanks to it's battery supply). Yes, the amplifier section has a separate power supply, not battery driven.

I have heard neither the Lamm nor Tenor hybrids, which both intrigue me greatly. As I said, I'm currently playing around with a very "tube" sounding tube amp, the Vac Ren 70/70. I would say the ASR is definitely more versatile, but what the Vac 70/70 does well, it does REALLY well. You just want to melt and die with vocals and chamber music. You know that moment when your muscles go limp and you just ooze into your seat, that's what the Vac can do at times.

I am waiting until I get my new speakers to make any keeper decisions though. And I know that a few more amps will pass my speakers before I'm done...

Since the new Talon Firebird's have a crossover design that now encourages lower powered amps (Mike of Talon is powering his with a 50WPC Wavac MD-805) I am thinking that the 150 WPC stereo Tenor Hybrid may be more then enough for my needs; especially with a smallish room. And I am always thinking about those Kharma Midi Exquisites (one day...). Mike powered 'em with his 300 WPC mono-blocks, but I don't know if they truly needed the extra juice. ANy opinions on less power for the Midi Exquisite's Mike?

mattnshilp November 07, 2005 17:17