I will provide a few subjective comments on this speaker. I have moved from Linkwitz 521.4 open-baffles, mixed in there now and again the Dutch & Dutch 8C, then recently to Heissmann DXT-Mon-182 that I built from scratch including passive crossovers, and now to the Cadentia 3 from the DIY kit with CNC parts and completed crossover.
The Linkwitz have a beguilingly open, resonant sound field and an unmatched naturalness of bass. But they are fussy and complex. And they just don't work for me as mains for 2-channel around a TV (which is my compromise main setup in a home we built as our "forever home" in 2023) because dialogue has a shimmery halo that makes it hard to understand as a phantom center. Which is why I did a test-run with the Heissmanns.
The Heissmanns are incredible for their size. Zero complaints. But they are 2-way. Had Audio First not come out with the Cadentia 3, I probably would have settled on the Heissmann, particularly because they're so cute. They also have audibly low distortion and smooth response. The Linkwitz doesn't have the latter so much, and the Dutch 8C, to my ears, audibly distorted in deep bass, or at least did not sound natural. Their superlative is buttery-smooth response, which is nothing to sneeze at.
The Cadentia intrigued me for their promise of greater output and even better midrange and vocals with a first-rate, dedicated midrange. And the DIY price was reasonable for what the design promised. And it delivers in spades. It is by far the cleanest, clearest speaker I have ever owned from bottom to top (though I cross over to subs at 50hz using LR 4th-order). My suspicion is that the designer's focus on low IM distortion translates to an absence of unwanted tones around the ones in the original signal (I'm not an engineer), resulting in what I perceive as clarity. The mids and trebles are the best I've ever had by a clear margin.
The other thing I would say is that, like Amir's big Revels, the Cadentia 3 play very loud without audible stress. I picked up a Hypex 500x stereo amp specifically for these speakers, so I've got ample power on tap. The subs behind them each have a MiniDSP plate amp in mono bridged mode, so lots of power there too.
I'm still evaluating imaging characteristics. The Heissmanns were immediately impressive in that regard, and IMO the Linkwitz are peerless. My initial impression of the Cadentia is of a somewhat drier presentation -- related to how clean they sound? -- but I also have them toed inward. Each is 5' from side walls and, on first positioning, 30" out from the wall behind. I need to listen to more classical recordings before saying much more. I suspect the Cadentia have some similarities to quality studio monitors but not quite so narrow overall in dispersion.
So in a world where you probably can't have everything, so far the Cadentia 3 offer a LOT for the money in kit form as a box-type speaker. They're by no means small, but when put on stands 15" off the floor, they're not monolithic like big Revels or KEFs. If you rock out, look no further. If a reverberant, deep sound field like a dipole is your goal, well, get a dipole. I find the Cadentia superior to Dutch 8C, which I kept thinking would be more satisfying than they actually were.
The Linkwitz have a beguilingly open, resonant sound field and an unmatched naturalness of bass. But they are fussy and complex. And they just don't work for me as mains for 2-channel around a TV (which is my compromise main setup in a home we built as our "forever home" in 2023) because dialogue has a shimmery halo that makes it hard to understand as a phantom center. Which is why I did a test-run with the Heissmanns.
The Heissmanns are incredible for their size. Zero complaints. But they are 2-way. Had Audio First not come out with the Cadentia 3, I probably would have settled on the Heissmann, particularly because they're so cute. They also have audibly low distortion and smooth response. The Linkwitz doesn't have the latter so much, and the Dutch 8C, to my ears, audibly distorted in deep bass, or at least did not sound natural. Their superlative is buttery-smooth response, which is nothing to sneeze at.
The Cadentia intrigued me for their promise of greater output and even better midrange and vocals with a first-rate, dedicated midrange. And the DIY price was reasonable for what the design promised. And it delivers in spades. It is by far the cleanest, clearest speaker I have ever owned from bottom to top (though I cross over to subs at 50hz using LR 4th-order). My suspicion is that the designer's focus on low IM distortion translates to an absence of unwanted tones around the ones in the original signal (I'm not an engineer), resulting in what I perceive as clarity. The mids and trebles are the best I've ever had by a clear margin.
The other thing I would say is that, like Amir's big Revels, the Cadentia 3 play very loud without audible stress. I picked up a Hypex 500x stereo amp specifically for these speakers, so I've got ample power on tap. The subs behind them each have a MiniDSP plate amp in mono bridged mode, so lots of power there too.
I'm still evaluating imaging characteristics. The Heissmanns were immediately impressive in that regard, and IMO the Linkwitz are peerless. My initial impression of the Cadentia is of a somewhat drier presentation -- related to how clean they sound? -- but I also have them toed inward. Each is 5' from side walls and, on first positioning, 30" out from the wall behind. I need to listen to more classical recordings before saying much more. I suspect the Cadentia have some similarities to quality studio monitors but not quite so narrow overall in dispersion.
So in a world where you probably can't have everything, so far the Cadentia 3 offer a LOT for the money in kit form as a box-type speaker. They're by no means small, but when put on stands 15" off the floor, they're not monolithic like big Revels or KEFs. If you rock out, look no further. If a reverberant, deep sound field like a dipole is your goal, well, get a dipole. I find the Cadentia superior to Dutch 8C, which I kept thinking would be more satisfying than they actually were.
