I do agree completely with your assessment of bass quality in a speaker as the most important quality as it influences and enhances anything upwards and gives you a feeling of balance. We're getting a bit OT here, but I was wondering how you used your sub in a 2.1 system? I suppose you were using a low level sub output (and highpass crossover) from your amp? Did you ever try highlevel (or speaker) connection? Because that possibly is, in my experience, the difference between your experience and opinion of a subwoofer being unable to change the character (or shortcomings) of a speaker and mine. My experience (using high level connection, no highpass, speakers running full range) is different. Besides in my own setup, I've heard it 2 times at an audioshow recently too. One setup with (high end) floorstander speakers sounding pretty lean, thin, toothpaste-like (in my opinion). And another setup with the same speakers but a huge subwoofer (Rel, connected high level) added gave those speakers all the body, tone, dynamics and slam they should have. Same experience in another setup/room with different speakers...
Getting a bit "OT" in the obsessive world of an audio forum?! I won't stand for it! I meant to say in my previous reply that my experience of subs was of the REL/Speakon connection variety. But you raise an interesting point that presents a worthwhile qualifier of it's own - and I take your point - if driver radiating area and cabinet volume are - in part - determinants of the "toothpaste" vs easeful sound then that must also hold true for subwoofers right? I only had a relatively small 12" R-505 and I have heard the difference you've described in a properly big subwoofers ability to pressurize a room... it's a whole different ballgame! So as I say... I do take your point. What I merely meant to say earlier was that - in my experience with the various speaker/sub matchings I've personally played with - depending on the individual speakers limits that would allow you to exploit more or less of the subwoofers potential.
Thanks. I was worried that my attempt at a humorous response had fallen flat. I still worry that it has, so I shall endevour to speak more plainly next time. I had a longer reply all typed out, but this sub-thread about the LRS/Magnapan is starting to feel like a bit of a thread crap in a way. So I'll bow out after this. I think I'm trying to get at a level of technical discussion that gets beyond the repetition of audiophile lore. So my responses will likely only get increasingly dryer. I might have to start a separate thread... not about Magnepans, but trying to untangle the relationship between current and watts and when "high current" - as I understand it in reference to amplifier design and loudspeaker demands - is applicable and when not. See if we can exorcise some demons... None of which is meant to detract from your enjoyment of your speakers. Everyone who hears them seems to universally praise a level of transparency that most speakers can't touch.
Thx Toneh, but dont think i will ever buy a speaker with an AMT tweeter…first off, i hate the looks of them ! secondly, ive read that you have to sit in the sweet spot to really enjoy them…i like a speaker that sounds good off axis too - which the Lintons do nicely. I already miss them, but am kind of excited for the next candidate…
If some of the pricing that was floating around the internet a few months ago proves to be correct, think more like four or five times higher. For the Dovedales at least. Maybe the Aston might be double... That does put me off... quite a lot actually. But I should reserve judgement until they come out - perhaps they'll be miraculous and justify the extra cost?
Same. Premium paid for a "Made in..." badge IMO All we can do now is wait and see I guess? As more information about them becomes available maybe we'll learn that the price is justified in other ways? And then make our individual judgements regarding value as we see fit? A little while back I listened to an interview with Peter Comeau on the Darko podcast - they were talking about the Mission 770's - and he said based on them having manufacturing plants in both the UK and China that he'd concluded it cost 3 to 5 times more to manufacturer in the UK. So right off the bat, assuming the fit and finish (loose screws in driver surrounds aside ) and driver quality is similar - and judging by the pictures it may well be - the consumer is losing.
Goodness, your post was taken by me with both respect and humor. Hence my reply noting such. Have no fear, my reading comprehension skills are at least adequate Post content as you wish. My perspective is that speaker comparisons are helpful in terms of defining the characteristics of the featured speaker. Comparisons to the Linton help us better understand the Linton and where they rest in the pantheon.
Of course. And I took your reply in that manner too I just thought maybe the conversation between you and I was morphing into something separate that wasn't of interest to the other contributors. I was merely being considerate to them. Besides - as I said - the conversation I'd really like to have has the potential to turn dry and technical. Agreed, and since this is a thread about alternatives to the Linton's, there is license to discuss other options. But, I've covered off the reasons above already. We're all good
- "Welcome to our shop, beautiful customer! Ah, so you like the Lintons? Then I think I've got something for you! This cute little speaker gives you more or less the sound of the Lintons - sans the bass of course - for only 2800 Euro. What do you think?" - "Erm, 2800 Euro? I think I want the normal Lintons, if you don't mind."
Exactly!! I'm really fascinated to see how this turns out. Perhaps these UK made speakers will be undeniably better in ways we can't predict at this point? Or perhaps some new customers will assume they must (surely?) be better by virtue of being more expensive? I fail to see how one could sell these with a (Linton sized) elephant in the room? Perhaps that means they'll have to kill the Chinese made Linton's off for now until they can launch a UK made "Linton v2" at 4 times the cost of the current one?
Anyone familiar with Steve Hillage? Yesterday evening I streamed his 'Green' album from Amazon and Yes, it's all very puzzling, especially when you know that Peter Comeau keeps referring to them as Lintons: Big Linton, smaller Linton, Linton this, Linton that. That's all very nice but ... where's the deal? The deal you get when buying the normal Lintons? Indeed, as long as the normal Lintons are available, it will be a rather tough sell. It will be interesting to see how the youtube reviewers will be sweet-talking their way out of this.
Yes, it shall be very interesting to read/watch the reviews on the the Dovedales and not least the inevitable comparison to the Lintons.
That's the question I keep asking myself too? I know it's unwise to judge things based on appearances but it's hard to disregard what looks like many commonalities between these and the vastly cheaper Linton's. For once - I'm actually looking forward to one of Danny of GR-Research doing one of his corny videos where he examines (and then decries) the quality of crossover components the speaker shipped with before trying to sell you a $750+ kit to "fix" the factory spec? Because that might be the only determinant of where some of the assumed extra cost goes? Even then - it's hard to hold up a few hundred dollars worth of parts to justify a 4 or 5 times higher retail price even at (in Comeau's words) "3 to 5 times higher production costs" because those production costs - high as they may be - will presumably still only account for a relatively modest portion of the cost the speakers sell for? In any event - hopefully we won't have to wait to long for their release and for the comparisons to start rolling in? Like you guys - that's what I'm waiting for too.
Did you watch his latest video where he is 'improving' the Wharfedale Evo 4.4? Before Danny's meddling, the measurements show there's an early roll-off in the treble (which I've seen in other measurements of the Evo 4.4 as well) so Danny 'corrects' that by creating a huge treble bump right above 10 kHz. This tells me that Danny's idea of a fun speaker is a modern-day bright sounding speaker. To be honest, I think I would prefer the unaltered Evo with a bit of roll-off. And I'm sure that this time even Classicrock agrees with me.
Sooooo.... I finally heard the Harbeth C7ES-3 XD. Perhaps I'll just refer to them as the "C7" or "the Harbeths" for the rest of this post? The demo was "spur of the moment" since I was passing the store and had some time to kill, so I didn't have time to call ahead to ask them to set up a side by side comparison with the Lintons. For reference this is the same place I bought my own Lintons from. The amp and streamer/source were the same unit - a Hegel 590. I was handed an iPad from which to stream what I liked via TIDAL "Hi-Fi" and that's exactly what I did - from the beautifully recorded solo acoustic guitar rendition of "Milonga" performed by Zsófia Boros, to Patricia Barber's slightly aloof take on "Autumn Leaves" off her album entitled "Nightclub" (which features a moody upright bass solo that's a personal favourite), a quirky electronic pop tune called "Pop HD" by Atom TM (aka Uwe Schmidt) followed by more electronic fare by an artist called Yosi Horikawa entitled "Bubbles" from his "Wandering" EP... I had about 40 minutes by myself in a nice quiet room to go through those and a few other familiar recordings too. I'm always cautious about making snap judgements when I hear unfamiliar speakers with unfamiliar ancillaries. I can only assume that the Hegel would be superior to my own amp by a comfortable margin? If retail price is any indication of quality - it's certainly vastly more expensive than my Moon 330a and vastly more powerful than it too. In my estimation it made for a combination with the Harbeth's that would be listenable for hours and hours on end - 100% fatigue free. In any event - the Harbeths immediately impressed with a sound that was natural, resonant (not in terms of colouration... but in terms of fleshing out the body, tone and reverb and decay of notes) and supple too. But given everything I've ever read and been told about these speakers - while it was delightful to hear in person - none of that came as a real surprise. And I could use similar adjectives to describe the Lintons at their best too. In terms of scale and effortlessness again - the C7's impressed... but I remain mindful of the difference an amp as powerful and upmarket as the Hegel can make here. According to HiFi News lab report the 590 meets and marginally exceeds it's 300w/8 Ohms rated output producing 310w and 590w RMS at 8 and 4 Ohms respectively with enough in reserve to produce dynamic peaks of 325W / 640W / 1.24kW / 2.29kW at 8, 4, 2 and 1 Ohms. So the Harbeths had no shortage of both impetus and quality behind them. Take from that what you will... I won't labour the point - I thought the Harbeth's were a better speaker overall than my Lintons are. But remember the caveat that I didn't hear them side by side... so I'll try and explain. The Harbeths pull off a clever trick - while the sound is beguiling, rounded and completely free of any sort of "etch" or grain - it's also deceptively resolving. More so than the Linton's I feel... particularly in the midrange. I think this is an area where they pull ahead of the Linton's a bit. It's hard to say how much exactly. It all just sounded more open and airy... likely the gap is small but it's enough to notice. I feel like the bass was more articulate too - coming back to that bass solo in the Patrica Barber track - there was just enough "thrum" and "give" to articulate the resonant, woody tone of Marc Johnson's bass but also more than sufficient resolution to trace out his fingers sliding on the strings and the micro dynamics of the tighter plucks. Again - I could say similar things about how the Linton's play that track back at home, but this just seemed better. Maybe just a hair dryer, a hair more controlled. Whatever it was, I preferred it. By how much? I'd hesitate to put a figure on it. These differences may only be in the realm of a few percent this way or that, but they're the sort that once you've heard them... well let's just say replaying the same tracks back at home afterwards left me with a few question marks. The final area to discuss is treble. Here is was thinking of @mant1ana - if you read these comments mate, these Harbeths may be worth looking into. The treble is more finely drawn and refined than the Lintons I think, but the treble was also my second biggest reservation based on today's listen for a different reason - in terms of relative level it's lower and less prominent. Which makes the speaker sound ever so slightly rolled off compared to the Linton's. Which is saying something given how most reviewers tend to describe the Lintons themselves as being rolled off? I'll have to revisit that one when I go back and listen to them again. Hopefully this time for a direct comparison with the Wharfedales. And maybe after a second listen I might be able to resolve my biggest reservation of the day - are they worth (what in New Zealand terms amounts to) over four times the asking price of the Linton. Ouch.
I'm sure this goes for the Harbeth C7s as well, but when I listen to music on the Lintons, I don't think about things like 'resolution' or 'resolving'. Nothing about the Lintons takes my attention away from the music. I'm never worried if a recording will sound good on them or not. I guess this is what both the Lintons and the C7s have in common, even though Harbeth fans say you can't compare a nobleman (Harbeth) to a peasant (Linton)? Anyway, the Lintons are able to do this without sounding civilized or polite. I wonder if the same is true for Harbeth (especially after owning them for a longer period of time)? The reason why I'm wondering about this is because some people say the C7 does 'something special' to the music while the Monitor 30 plays the music 'as is'. What if I start to notice that 'special something'?
Very interesting! And if you get to do a direct comparison I'm willing to pay an entry fee. Still, as you also mention, there is that "slight" difference in price to be considered. Also, you do mention their beguiling presentation, but will they offer room filling sound the way the Lintons do? Will they go as loud in larger rooms?
The DT8 is not fatiguing, actually last time I heard them they sounded a bit dull being fed with a Sugden amp. You might find their more expensive 'R' models that use a ribbon tweeter rather brighter but I've never heard a Proac that I would describe as 'bright' sounding. Favourite I've heard still is the original Tablette from the 1990's. British audiophile seems to think his old model Response is better than the current versions.
Interesting topic. My challenge is: every speaker I've owned seems to do something special, and in the end I can always identify it. Even so I have to find a way to be able to keep enjoying the system. Playing new (to me) music instead of familiar tunes seems to help. In the end I always end up changing out the speakers or electronics though.
Yes - there is no question the Harbeths (throughout the line) have a more refined and resolving, non-fatiguing treble. Remember, i owned the more expensive Super HL5+ speakers and they have a sweet top end and beautiful midrange. Yet, the Lintons are special in their own right and do some things the Harbeths do not for a fraction of the price. The Harbeths sound smooth and forgiving with all genres. They have a “sameness” to their presentation whether its rock, pop, jazz, classical. You dont get the jump factor or atmospheric, ethereal quality that sometimes surprise you with the Lintons. You dont get that midrange bump the Lintons provide, which usually delights and occasionally disappoints. One thing you do get with the Lintons is the satisfaction that you didnt get ripped off for many thousands of dollars. You can buy 2 or 3 high quality monitors for the cost of 1 overpriced Harbeth. That’s where my money would go…
