Monitor Audio Platinum 3G

[Bozon]

use CC and translate to english. Timeline 17:37. But I wont judge them being built in Czech, or even China or Vietnam. Main thing is how good the engineering. Also I have huge respect that they use wooden boxes to transport the components from Czech to Weilrod and these boxes goes back in the truck, Kudos for thinking about avoiding waste that way.

Regarding the woofers I clearly understand that they are connected to the same point in the crossover. But the positioning of them in a box can have different sound coming out of them. When you keep your ears close to them, you can easily notice the upper woofer is more boomy than the lower, I guess it has to do with more free floating situation since the lower woofer is closer to the base and that part is more rigid. I can be wrong too. Anyway, something is weird here on purpose or by lack of engineering. Anyway the finish on the Cantons are really good.

My 7K Cherry pair arrived yesterday. Listened them for about 4 hours (of course without any burn in time). It was impossible for me to hear any difference between the two woofers drivers even putting my ear close. You can't isolate it's sound from the rest of the speaker. If you heard a difference or evident noise I would assume that your tested unit had an evident manufacturing defect.

The mid bass hump was barely noticeable even if you concentrate on finding it. I will perform measurements and I will try to EQ them to make them "flawless" (on quotes because they basically already are). On everything else the sound was perfect and what amazing sound stage. The music seem to float on the air and the speakers completely disappear: I believed that nothing could surpass the sound scape of the Q Acoustics Concept 500. I was wrong! this speakers are clearly the best I have listen in my life. They are a lot better than the 9k bookshelfs. And to my ear easily surpassed the MA Platinum's which I liked very much.

I don't care about all the bullying that Kef's R line lovers throw to me, If you haven't heard this Cantons you know nothing! And that THD numbers at high output are all related to High-Q factor resonance, i.e. not audible at all. I hear with my ears not with overkill measurements techniques that try to isolate "state of the art" science numbers that you can't differentiate on real world. (Yes, I understand that this is ASR but you can't left outside that this products are made to be heard by humans not by measurement instruments. If you can barely hear a SNR of 80db why it would be important for a buyer to have a 140db SNR product? Just for reference. The noise floor of a typical listening room is about 40-45 dB. That alone masks any significant THD number a properly made speaker, like this one, could possibly have.

 

[Bozon]

Just leave Bozon alone so he and his Canton can get a room and have a nice time.

You keep saying false claims like that high quality drivers sound the same that cheap ones. I see brands like Marten laughing at you with their amazing Accuton-sourced ceramic and diamond drivers. Maybe the speakers you sell are made of cheap materials so repeating this stupid phrase will make it true for your potential customers?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

I don't care about all the bullying that Kef's R line lovers throw to me, If you haven't heard this Cantons you know nothing!

We only point the objective graph and the correct way to read them.



You are the guy who came here to compare these with the r/references and bla bla.

..And you are the guy who said this and then delete the comment.

envious liar troll:

You keep saying false claims like that high quality drivers sound the same that cheap ones. I see brands like Marten laughing at you with their amazing Accuton-sourced ceramic and diamond drivers. Maybe the speakers you sell are made of cheap materials so repeating this stupid phrase will make it true for your potential customers?

I guess he want to mean is there is a cheap but good performance drivers that perform similar to the expensive ones.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

And that THD numbers at high output are all related to High-Q factor resonance, i.e. not audible at all.

Ehh, no again...
There is a difference of having a high-q factor resonance and a high-q factor resonances
''

''
This is the case when is hard to be audible at all, because the Q si so high. and it's 1.
The canton have a wide range of that problem.

high-Q resonances in the cones are visible at 3-6kHz 7K*

From the 8K
Even the reviewer point why he thinks the distortion is high like any canton reference series:

Overall, the distortion is at normal, unproblematically low values - however, in the area between 2 and 4 kHz, a "hill" can be seen, where the distortion value attacks 1.5%.

On this exploded graph, it can be seen that the increased distortion is caused by the 3rd harmonic, a bit as if the midrange converter is no longer working within the limits of its optimal capabilities.

 

[Bozon]

We only point the objective graph and the correct way to read them.



You are the guy who came here to compare these with the r/references and bla bla.

..And you are the guy who said this and then delete the comment.


I guess he want to mean is there is a cheap but good performance drivers that perform similar to the expensive ones.

You are misinformed regarding my post. I didn't deleted it. It was the moderator, not me. And It was regarding he was actually doing what I said. contradicting his post on this thread with the one he made on the Canton's:

New review of Canton Reference 7K speaker with measurments...

Just posted today in Stereophile, a mostly positive review. I am not qualified to comment on the measurements, so I'd be interested in any thoughts. It seems like they could sound a touch bright. Has anyone heard them? At a msrp of $6995 per pair USD, does this seem like a reasonable option...

audiosciencereview.com

That reference was also deleted by the admin on my post.

So, as you can see, I wasn't ranting, but pointing to a fact. The Crosstalk guy liked the Cantons more than the Kefs but he had to convince himself that the Kefs where better because of the measurements and that he had to spend 1k over his budget. So he bought the R11 and now he is ranting against the Canton's and myself for telling the same listening-wise that he did on his own listening tests.

 

[Bozon]

Ehh, no again...
There is a difference of having a high-q factor resonance and a high-q factor resonances
''

''
This is the case when is hard to be audible at all, because the Q si so high. and it's 1.
The canton have a wide range of that problem.



From the 8K
Even the reviewer point why he thinks the distortion is high like any canton reference series:

Go to a store that has the Canton's Reference in stock. So you can hear for yourself if the THD is audible. And by addition you will also hear why the Canton's are so much tone accurate and so much faster rhythmically that the Kef's R series.

And finally, I never said that the Cantons where better or even the same than Kef's Reference. I said they where in the "same level" and I also said the Kef's where better (I hear them) by a small audible margin (I theorized a 5%, but that is just my perception, not cold measurements of course).

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

You are misinformed regarding my post. I didn't deleted it. It was the moderator, not me. And It was regarding he was actually doing what I said. contradicting his post on this thread with the one he made on the Canton's:

New review of Canton Reference 7K speaker with measurments...

Just posted today in Stereophile, a mostly positive review. I am not qualified to comment on the measurements, so I'd be interested in any thoughts. It seems like they could sound a touch bright. Has anyone heard them? At a msrp of $6995 per pair USD, does this seem like a reasonable option...

audiosciencereview.com

View attachment 234713

That reference was also deleted by the admin on my post.

So, as you can see, I wasn't ranting, but pointing to a fact. The Crosstalk guy liked the Cantons more than the Kefs but he had to convince himself that the Kefs where better because of the measurements and that he had to spend 1k over his budget. So he bought the R11 and now he is ranting against the Canton's and myself for telling the same listening-wise that he did on his own initial listening test.

The same apply for you..., you are tryng so hard to make the canton references looks similar to the Kef references performance.
Trying to find in his historial every single word in order to convince yourself too.

But, he already talked about this here:
As I know, he is from German, so listen to Cantons is very easy and negotiate their price can be better/easier too.

For me both the speakers were offered at the almost same price at the end, just 100 euros different. I went with the KEF as it had more potential.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Go to a store that has the Canton's Reference in stock. So you can hear for yourself if the THD is audible. And by addition you will also hear why the Canton's are so much tone accurate and so much faster rhythmically that the Kef's R series.

And finally, I never said that the Cantons where better or even the same than Kef's Reference. I said they where in the "same level" and I also said the Kef's where better (I hear them) by a small audible margin (I theorized a 5%, but that is just my perception, not cold measurements of course).

Meh. It's only your experience, you're only trying to convince yourself but fail so hard when somebody like Crosstalk pick the R11 instead your new speaker...

There is brands in Germay doing it better, like Magnat 1109.

Signature 909:

edit: Magnat was using Klippel for these speaker, that explain the good performance .

 

[Bozon]

The same apply for you..., you are tryng so hard to make the canton references looks similar to the Kef references performance.
Trying to find in his historial every single word in order to convince yourself too.

But, he already talked about this here:
As I know, he is from German, so listen to Cantons is very easy and negotiate their price can be better/easier too.

No, It doesn't because he justified himself being caught in his lie saying that 100 EUR difference after I uncovered his intentions on this thread.

I don't have any brand preference. I am brand agnostic. If a product sounds better to me I will buy it. I have evaluated and also owned some Kef's speakers for years now. If the Kefs R where better, I would have purchased it instead. The Kef's R are cheaper by a good amount of money on my country than the Cantons 7k (even the 9k where more expensive than the R3 and R7 when I purchased them) and I value price as 50% of the purchase decision.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

No, It doesn't because he justified himself being caught in his lie saying that 100 EUR difference after I uncovered his intentions on this thread.

I don't have any brand preference. I am brand agnostic. If a product sounds better to me I will buy it. I have evaluated and also owned some Kef's speakers for years now. If the Kefs R where better, I would have purchased it instead. The Kef's R are cheaper by a good amount of money on my country than the Cantons 7k (even the 9k where more expensive than the R3 and R7 when I purchased them) and I value price as 50% of the purchase decision.

The KEFs are objectively better as demonstrated previously.

Sure, if you prefer the Cantons. Go for it.

But Burn In - what is that all about?

 

[Recluse-Animator]

You keep saying false claims like that high quality drivers sound the same that cheap ones. I see brands like Marten laughing at you with their amazing Accuton-sourced ceramic and diamond drivers. Maybe the speakers you sell are made of cheap materials so repeating this stupid phrase will make it true for your potential customers?

I don't manufacture nor sell speakers. In fact I'm a sick unemployed shit.

Here's your Marten Coltrane 3 120000€:

Marten Coltrane 3, anechoic response 5° below tweeter axis at 50", corrected for microphone response, with nearfield responses of woofer (blue), port (red), and complex sum of woofer and port responses (black), respectively plotted below 310Hz, 600Hz, and 300Hz.

Marten Coltrane 3, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in MF's listening room (red); and of Wilson Audio Alexandria XLF (blue).

Now there's something to laugh about.

Polk R700 2200€:

Your move.

 

[Crosstalk]

The same apply for you..., you are tryng so hard to make the canton references looks similar to the Kef references performance.
Trying to find in his historial every single word in order to convince yourself too.

But, he already talked about this here:
As I know, he is from German, so listen to Cantons is very easy and negotiate their price can be better/easier too.

When I posted for the first time, I had just walked into the showroom listen on both and saw the sticker prices. Yes the Cantons were 5200 euros and the KEFs were 4000 as there was a yearly sale on the KEF products back then. Then after couple of hours of listen, I talked to the dealer about he lowest they can quote on both. KEF was 3800(suprised as it was already on discount) and Cantons were 3900(for a white and black pairs). Even though I went with the KEFs there are few interesting things about the Cantons I say I would be missing. They come with a 10 year warranty, in Germany compared to the KEFs 5 year warranty. You can contact Canton directly in case of a failure and get the speakers repaired and reshipped with a week.

But end of the day, no matter whatever we consider, if the product itself has an unacceptable level of engineering flaw I wont be happy to own them. The moment I show it to my friends, some envious guy is going to pull up the 7k thread in audiosciencereview and I will feel insecure. So, I thought, well if I buy, I buy the thing which isnt bashed by anyone.

Glad that I didnt get it as now if I search for 7k in the internet, in the first page of internet shows up discussion about distortion and boomy bass and all. Its hard to eq the Canton unlike the KEF if I am not wrong. even with Eq you cannot change the distortion, as it affects tonality as we raise the volume. I dont want that after spending so much with my hard earned money. For some people this would be just another speaker. I am a person who cannot possibly buy another speaker in 20 years due to my priorities. So my KEF R11 is the most technically flexible speaker at its price to me.

 

[Havocman]

Way overpriced as many other manufacturers.
There's no reason to pick these over Kef if you want passive easy to buy all over the world retail speakers.
And if you live in the US there's many better internet direct options such as Ascend, Salk, Philharmonica or JTR.
Then there's Revel, Polk and Arendal which measures great.

who cares what it's measures like it's what it sounds like you can have speakers that measure great and sound like crap

 

[dfuller]

who cares what it's measures like it's what it sounds like you can have speakers that measure great and sound like crap

There is a pretty good correlation between measuring well and sounding good.

 

[VintageFlanker]

who cares what it's measures like it's what it sounds like you can have speakers that measure great and sound like crap

There is no such things. No speakers measuring great sound like crap. None. That you don't like them is another story...

The other way around is quite common, tho. Coloured speakers may sound pleasant to many people.

Anyway, back to the Platinum, I gave to the PL300 3G a listen in PAVS and was overall disappointed. (Still have to update my posts with impressions for the all day, BTW ).

 

[mj30250]

who cares what it's measures like it's what it sounds like you can have speakers that measure great and sound like crap

Please provide an example.

 

[VintageFlanker]

Please provide an example.

Why even asking? New "member" with two posts: The other one is claiming night & day differences with OCC cables and calling Brad an ignorant. When your first post at ASR is that full of sh*t, then the purpose is pretty clear to me...

Trolling is strong these last weeks. I'm running out of patience.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

I really want and except these 3g to measures well, in paper these looks really good.
Lets wait for measurements the pl 2g wasnt bad, i expect good news about the new gen.

 

[Jukebox]

I really want and except these 3g to measures well, in paper these looks really good.
Lets wait for measurements the pl 2g wasnt bad, i expect good news about the new gen.

You and me also.
Hope to receive them (100 and 200) in the following weeks and I will share my thoughts.

 

[dogmamann]

Canton reference frist need to measure on par of Kef reference if you want to compare. Even the monitor 7G have less distortion in the mid range vs Canton reference 7K, they are a better contender. For now Canton need to work a lot in their directivity, cabinet and distortion if they want to be comparable with Kefs.

Kef reference are one of the best measure speaker, while the canton references not, even the new vento 100's have a little bit better distortion and bit better directivity than these canton reference, the current Reference from Canton are not even near of that kef level. Maybe their measurements are in par with Q series.

Sorry but having high distortion, bad directivity and high Q resonances in the cabinet is not what Kefs are.

Hi, I had these speakers for a month last year in a special situation Honestly I think this issue here is too much blown up. With music playing we do not hear anything wrong with the speaker. Isn’t this distortion harmonic ? I hear nothing out of the place even with high loundness levels. But the bass bump is slightly coloring the mids giving it some artificial body which I think isn’t all that bad. Rest of the sound is very neutral. I am not sure about the KEF Q Series. But I had compared it against the original KEF reference 1 bookshelf’s(as they were in the same price class) and KEF had better imaging without any effort in placement. Cantons go down quite low with the room gain. I don’t think we need to compare these two speakers here. Both are vastly different speakers in real life from what I heard. There is no way I felt one was superior than the other completely.