More Contenders for Best of Show, Part Two: Usual and Unusual Suspects
As it was at CES, the Lotus Group Granada was a model of neutrality. Even though it was digitizing analog sources via its DSP crossover (which not only crosses over the woofers to the Feastrex via fourth-order slopes but also eq's each driver and provides sophisticated room correction), it still managed to reproduce Joan Baez’s voice and guitar on “Gospel Ship” with exceptionally natural timbre. Oh, maybe it was subtracting a little bit of the most delicate tremolo from Joanie’s soprano, but it wasn’t subtracting anything else. What it was doing that so many other speakers weren’t was sounding flat, uncolored, and utterly coherent. This essentially three-driver two-way speaker (using the marvelous Feastrex cone from Japan from 200Hz up, and a couple of Acoustic Elegance woofers from 200Hz down) needs a review in TAS. Robert named it “Best of Show” at RMAF (and I named it a runner-up), and it was a strong contender again at CES.
Speaking of strong contenders doing repeat business, the Electrocompaniet Nordic Tone—another digitally corrected speaker of astonishing quality—sounded very nearly as marvelous in Vegas as it did in Denver. Yeah, it was still a little dark in balance (as it was at RMAF—the electronics, I think), but, oy, the dynamics, the resolution, the bass! This is a potentially great speaker that is consistently revealing details in the music and the mix that others don’t, particularly in the bass and in dynamics. The listening room was too small to tell about soundstaging, but I think it might be great, too. Whether all this adds up to greater realism is an open question, but for those who like their music gorgeous and dynamic and who also want to hear all there is to hear (at least on digital sources), they are already a top contender—and a top contender for Best of Show at CES 2010.
A speaker that took me pleasantly by surprise was the $99k Venture Grand Ultimates--three-way floorstanders with four 8-inch woofers, a 7-inch midrange, and a 2-inch tweeter. The bass and midrange drivers are carbon-fiber/graphite compounds, the tweeter a banana-pulp/graphite mix. The sound the Ultimates produced via a first-rate analog rig (Verdier table, Schroeder arm, London Reference cartridge) was exceptional—detailed and beautiful on the old Pete Townshend standby “Street in the City.” The speakers were, like so many others at this show, just a tad dark in balance but gorgeous in timbre and exceptionally high in textural resolution, reproducing the very light brush of Townshend’s fingers over the strings following a strong crescendo with lifelike clarity.
For the second time in a row at CES, the $54k Scaena 3.2s (driven by McIntosh electronics and fed by my fave, the dCS Scarlatti) sounded exceptionally natural (a rarity at this show). Yeah, the 3.2s were too close together because of the narrow width of the room, but putting those woofers at a distance (as Scaena did last year) does wonders for their blend with the ribbon/cone midrange/tweeter columns. Set up the way they were, the Scaenas generated a soundfield that was exceptionally freed-up from enclosure and drivers. Indeed, their “disappearing act” was, perhaps, the best at CES (alongside that of the M5s). Timbres were unusually lifelike on “Keys to the Highway” and other cuts. There may have been a little bit of added brightness in the upper mids due to the close seating position, but, really, I had the feeling that the only limitations with this speaker were the room. Without doubt this is a top contender for BOS.
We come now to the speaker that won my Best of Show award at RMAF, the fab $46k Vandersteen Model 7, driven in Vegas by Aesthetix electronics. At CES, they sounded just as freed-up and spacious as they did in Denver. The sound was slightly more sibilant and less bloomy with the Aesthetic gear than it was with the ARC Richard used in CO, but every bit as lovely, coherent, and neutral in balance. This is simply a great loudspeaker, no matter what is driving it. On Joan Baez’s “Gospel Ship” texture, color, dynamics, and timbre were entirely lifelike, with superb resolution of Joanie’s characteristic tremolo. On “Misunderstood” Townshend and his guitar sounded so alive it was uncanny. Indeed, I wrote in my notepad: “So alive, so neutral, so present, so there!” It will be hard NOT to give another award to this masterpiece, which will certainly be a runner-up if it isn’t the Best of Show winner.
Comments
The sound of aesthetic gear was sibilant. Everything sounds perfect with ARC gear. Thanks for clearing up for lots of Readers on how important individual taste and preferences are. I cannot imagine people purchasing stuff solely based on reviews. Thank God for auditions. Now If people would only stop chasing the latest and greatest reviews and go listen to gear.
How was the Avalon Time ?
Clavil,
I will post about that shortly.
Jon
Great work JV...when are you reviewing the Vandy's......now this is real value in Audio. Also did you get to hear the Platinum audio AMPS
Vandy's are coming up soon, Zead. I won't be reviewing them, alas, but Robert will.
Jon
Why make such a stink over Best of Show when the conditions are God-awful ?! This leaves out many other contenders. Shouldn't Best at Home be more important ?
Best at Home IS more important, but you probably didn't notice that I wasn't at home. I WAS AT A TRADE SHOW AND I AM REPORTING ON THE BEST I HEARD AT THE TRADE SHOW. Got it, now?
Just one small point of clarification on the Feastrex based speakers....the woofers are NOT made by Feastrex, but rather Acoustic Elegance right here in the US of A. I hate to see a good manufacturer not get their due credit. See here for the "dipole 12 inch" woofers. Cheers.
http://www.aespeakers.com/
Greg
Thanks for the correction, kiddo. I'll change the blog to reflect it.
Best of Show is meaningless - and most audiophiles know this. The rooms and AC sourcing in hotels are terrible. But you deify these designs anyway.
Isn't what sounds best *in your room* more important ? Yes, even you...with your (almost) square room. Something *no* audiophile has.
Until you've heard music played back in my room, you have no opinion about my digs.
More to the point, how things sound at trade shows is NOT meaningless. I wouldn't have heard the Magico M5 in my room if I hadn't FIRST heard it sound so damn good at CES. Same story with just about EVERY other thing I or anyone else at TAS has reviewed.
How do you think we decide on what we're going to review, buckwheat? Just pick names out of a hat? We go to shows precisely so that we can choose what sounds most promising.
Sure, show conditions are dreadful. You think you're telling us something we don't know? Go back and read some of my previous show reports where I rage about how awful hotel room acoustics are and how unreliable the power in Vegas (or, this year, in Denver) is. Moreover, the guys who come to these shows have to throw together entire high-end systems in a day or two, in terrible circumstances, and then SHOW THEM TO THE WORLD, where most of us take weeks or months or years to set up our systems and are VERY careful about whom we invite in to listen (and when). Indeed, tweaking systems is an ongoing process for most audiophiles.
Nobody on this magazine assumes that the sound we hear in a hotel room is "the last word" or close to it about the sound of a given product on display. All we assume is that it's the "first word," the audio equivalent of a first impression. Speaking for myself, first impressions aren't always reliable (e.g., the MBL 101-X), but they are what we have to go on. There is this, as well: In spite of their ridiculous shortcomings, shows are, with some exceptions, even playing fields. Everybody has the same (poor) chance of shine or shine-o-la. You might think, just by chance distribution, this means that everyone will eventually crap out, and yet certain marques CONSISTENTLY show well--while certain others don't or are very hit-or-miss. This means something. It can't be mere luck,for instance, that Magico, Wilson, MBL, TAD, Avalon, Nola, Gershman,Vandersteen, etc. almost always sound great at CES or RMAF.
No, a show report is not a substitute for long listening with a wide variety of music, sources, and electronics, and a considered review. It isn't meant to be. It is just what the words mean: a report on the equipment that sounded better or best at a trade show. It is also one man's opinion of what sounded better or best. It ain't gospel; it's a show report.
But there must have been a *ton* of speakers over the years that were shunned due to bad conditions or poor set-up. Best of Show (to me) means Best First Impression. And in my experience, a system playing acoustic music won't shine until the distractions disappear and the conditions are set-up right.
What you're doing is crowd-pleasing...or at the least, doing what could be done at a mass-market speaker show. High-end is not something to just throw-out into the wind "Best Sound" !! Best sound for what ? In what regard ? A dog show is not a bad comparison - do you ever agree with the winner ?
There are other ways to find designs - by visiting dealers or by direct manufacturer loan. I'm not saying that it's *completely* wasteful to make a list at a show. Only that "best sound" may be a hyped-sound that doesn't always get awards later. Wilson got more Best of Show nods than I can count - yet we rarely saw them in reference systems of folks who value acoustic music......
Look, I'm not disagreeing with you about the hideousness of show conditions. Nor am I disagreeing that show reports are mostly based on first impressions. And it is true that on occasions good products may end up being "missed opportunities." But them's the breaks, buddy. The truth is we have little choice but to go on what we hear in those hotel rooms, and for some unlucky folks that's going to spell disaster, although long or repeated experience with certain products that haven't shown well at some shows but have at others may serve as a corrective, as it did for me with the MBL 101-Xs (which turned out to be great despite a lousy CES performance), the Continuum turntable, and recently the YG Acoustics Anat Reference Ii Pro.
Because I know that trade shows are crap shoots, I try my best to be fair. It may be vexing to some manufacturers, but I haul my own LPs and CDs to each room and I by-God listen to them at length (or at least for as long as it takes to form something more than a quick first impression, something rational rather than purely emotional). If you think it's fun to haul twenty pounds of records from room to room for four straight days and listen intently to the same pieces of music dozens of times...well, it isn't. But I know the music that I play by heart. I know how it is "supposed" to sound at its best. And I want to give every product I listen to the chance to meet or exceed those expectations.
Just as hotel rooms level the playing field, I try to level it even more by giving each speaker the same musical material and the same chance to shine. I don't know any other way to do this that would be as fair.
If listeners know (at this stage in the game) that shows don't matter for sound, then it's silly to exclaim Best of Show !! Best of Show !!
If "finding" speakers is what it's really about, then why not make a list of Speakers with Potential ?
Good heavens! What do you think a show report is, if it isn't a list of speakers with potential?
Best of Show is just the cherry on top, really. It means something (and in some years means more than others), but the bulk of my report (and all of our reports) is about "speakers with potential."
Fine - but it still looks silly (to the seasoned audiophile) to go *beyond* that and exclaim Best Sound. And I aim this not just at you - but to all those who hype this non-award.
I think the issue is just with phrasing or the title of the list. We all know its not fair to many manufacturers and that the room is a huge portion of how a system will sound. I guess Best of the shows hints to some products that may have potential and should be reviewed in a controlled setting. I would certainly not jump to the conclusion that it is THE best and I should go buy it if titled best of the show. The sad part is that a lot of the stuff that people can actually afford doesn't even make the list. If the Ultra equipment is struggling in these terrible rooms then some of the great mid-fi stuff with huge potential gets completely ignored by reviewers selecting products to review. But what else can be done?????? That's how it goes....
The Scaenas were quite a trip. They seemed to project a holofield filled with live musicians back into the larger part of the room. Fascinating and something new under the sun, in my experience.
The NordicTone simply seemed to do pretty much everything exceedingly well in a quite-good sounding exhibit.
Thank you Jonathan and Paul for such a nice comments. We can not wait to get the final version in stock, these demo prototypes we used at RMAF and here at CES are around 95% in performance compared to the final version which is actually being assembled in Norway as we speak.
Cheers
-Peder Beckman-
Electrocompaniet Inc.
Why do people assume that just because the heading is Best of Show it is something more than what it is. it does not mean Best Ever and only best under the circumstance. I think most people realize what the condition at the show is like. JV certainly complains enough about the rooms. There is no need to spell out every single word and criteria, we are not that stupid, you know. To me, Best of Show, basically is just that, those that sounds good under such show condition. Too bad if some manufacturers cannot set up their equipment decently in that environment but that's their problem. Same as dealer's showroom, some are good, some are bad so are residential listening room. So when JV reports on Best of Show, I don't think anyone will automatically assume that it is the best period.
Thank You Jon and Paul for your kind words on our demonstration. As to shows- you might possibly say at most- if you can make it there you can make it anywhere. However one could easily fail at a show and still make it work well in a consumers environs.
Limiting my comments to speaker systems for some degree of brevity -To add to the difficulty the hotel rooms don't level the playing field as the hotel rooms differ in size, layout, dimensions, resonances from varying wall stability, and they present challenges that are more or less favorable, depending on the supplied room. Large systems may be required to fit into a too small room and small speakers into a too large room.Some room furniture cannot be moved at all impacting placement of some speakers more than others and some of the exact size suites are flat and some are split level - greatly reducing and limiting the placement area for the larger systems with the rooms that are divided in half by elevation changes.
The hotel supplied blue mystery electrical box at CES that we are mandated ( under threat of who knows what) to plug everything into puts great strain on all the components that are linked together into that outlet and particularly disadvantages displays that have larger power amplifiers and multiple associated components.
Basically hotel rooms often provide a random venue with multiple variables that no dealer, manufacturer or consumer would ever ignore in choosing to design and set up a high-end, high performance audio system or an acceptable listening room for such a system.To achieve good sound is a result of a recipe concocted from a combination of seniority and room draw, good product, good planning and good luck- and all of these vary from show to show. Having said that, it is quite rewarding to achieve acceptable sonics.
Best,
Alan Eichenbaum
Scaena Loudspeakers
Alan,
As I've already said repeatedly, I agree that hotel rooms are very bad places in which to show high-end audio. But it's not as if these rooms come as complete surprises to you guys. As I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong, you know which room you'll be in well in advance of show dates. I'm also under the impression, perhaps mistaken, that you are sent blueprints of these rooms from which to calculate best setups and possible room resonances. I also thought you knew in advance which furnishing could be removed and which couldn't. The poor electricity is an equalizer for all.
I'm not defending hotel rooms or show conditions, God knows. But I am sticking by my main point, which is that some manufacturers consistently show well in spite of the obstacles that shows throw in everyone's way. This is just an observable fact. It could be these manufacturers are experiencing an incredible run of good luck, but you would think that good luck would eventually peter out over time. Even when they don't show at their very best because of room issues, like both Magico and Wilson this year, they still manage to sound awfully damn good.
In any event, congratulations on an extremely fine CES. FYI, Scaena will be a co-winner of my 2010 BOS "award."
Jonathan
In any event, congratulations on an extremely fine CES. FYI, Scaena will be a co-winner of my 2010 BOS "award."
Jon,
Now that I know that - I take it all back- luck plays no part and BOS is the most important "award" there is. LMAO.
Seriously though, I only meant to convey how difficult it is to reach the level of good sound at a show. First, there is the learning curve-then exhibitor seniority can give an advantage in room selection to older companies, and some rooms - even if the exact same room - benefit certain designs more than others, and luck can play a part.
Of course you are right, consistently repeating good sound is no accident, it is an indicator of a good product, and you certainly can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear- but most products are better than their show performance and few,if any, will ever sound worse.
Lord knows we at Scaena know it.
It was not until CES 2009 that we were able to obtain the larger Bella Suite at the Venetian that afforded us more set up options-bypassing the forced lower tier placement that previously required us to squeeze woofers and towers in a very small area with an extreme nearfield listening position impacted by the "immovable" wall unit. We hope to be lucky enough to obtain a "flat" suite next year as that further adds to our placement options.
When we received Robert Harley's BOS award for RMAF 2008- it was the least expected result we could have imagined when we first set-up. Unbeknown to us the plans for our room at the spillover Hyatt venue failed to indicate the huge concave acoustic relief in the ceiling that acted as a parabolic reflector - perhaps good for round table meetings and aesthetically appealing- but not good for hi-end audio demos. The echo reflection was so bad we almost packed up and left. Coincidentally, and in the most amazing bit of good luck - we had brought a hand painted speaker that had 3 very large matching painted canvas art panels that we were going to display on the wall behind the speakers. Remarkably we were able to fit those panels to span across the 10 foot wide acoustic relief above our seating positions and that saved the day as they hovered above the listening seats blocking heinous reflections for three days. As it turned out the unavailability of the Hyatt venue for RMAF 2009 - leaving only our prior too small room at RMAF 2007 ( low seniority)- precipitated our decision to by-pass RMAF 2009.
In any event, we greatly cherish your accolade as it is not an easy task nor an easy road to achieve good sound at shows.
Best,
Alan Eichenbaum
Scaena Loudspeakers
Post new comment