What improvements do you perceive comparing the new Ref 9 with the 9k?
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Canton Reference 2023 - is it now Reference grade?
- Thread starter dogmamann
- Start date
We need measurements of both from Klöppel to know what is improved. Perception is very subjective to persons hearing/ preference and room acoustics. You cannot use that opinion to decide whether it would work for you!!
- Thread Starter
- #103
Have you listened to this speaker? This is ridiculousWe need measurements of both from Klöppel to know what is improved. Perception is very subjective to persons hearing/ preference and room acoustics. You cannot use that opinion to decide whether it would work for you!!
I can because I owned the 9Ks. So, I will understand the differences he can perceive.We need measurements of both from Klöppel to know what is improved. Perception is very subjective to persons hearing/ preference and room acoustics. You cannot use that opinion to decide whether it would work for you!!
On the contrary, I have followed measurements blindly on many purchase decisions and had very bad experiences with some "wonderfully transparent" products recommended here so, I favor owners with same product experience as me more valuable than cold measurements.
I find the Ref 9 to be smoother and with more depth. Same stands & very close to the same position. Unfortunately, more than six months since the Ref 9K left, so going by "audio memory". These Ref 9 are very fast, but so were the 9K. I'm very pleased, to say the least. Between the 9K & 9 I've had Triangle Duetto, Devote 0/93 & Magnepan 1.7i. The Ref 9 is the best to my ears.
If you had followed this forum for this long and yet you have not understood how to read the measurements to judge the sound, well your loss.
- Thread Starter
- #108
He has real world experience with the speakers he talks about. Don’t forget that. How many speakers have you owned until now ?
Here we go again. "You young whippersnappers don't know what you are talking about, I've been listening to power cables for 20 years and I know what I'm talking about"
I have owned two ELAC Reference and now KEF R11, but both has potential to be on the SOTA level with EQ. Without knowing the measurements, I would have continued like typical audiophiles with an upgrade of speakers every year due to dissatisfaction. This community helped me deciding the R11 which I am really greatful to. I dont need any other speaker in my life because its SOTA with EQ without argument, Data shows that and I don't have to have be delusional like @dogmamann or @Bozon to listen and imagine things. Data has all what you need to understand about a speaker!
- Thread Starter
- #111
That is almost no amount of experience in terms of real world experience to judge anything in the audio world. You need to listen to more speakers to know how measurements translate in real world. No wonder why are you concluding everything very fast.
For your point of view, If you get a pair speakers that sound like crap but if somebody draws you a beautiful measurement graphic you are in heaven. Doesn't matter if the measurements are real or fake. Music does nothing for you. only the graph makes you happy.
This is the only explanation that I can Infer from a person that disputes two actual owners of a product opinion without ever trying the product by itself.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #114
You have a valid point. If you see the measurement, and if there is a deviation from the ideal, you stil need to listen to that to know how that deviation sounds. For example @Bozon now has monitor audio platinums which has more energy in the treble. He likes it over the cantons he had previoulsly. I got a chance to listen to the same speaker and I liked it a lot over my own Kef. Reference 3. The kef is not half good as the platinums. I had listened to the Kef R11, and to me it’s very dull sounding, and high level details are totally missing on it. Meta version is better but no match for a canton or monitor audio.
Attachments
The hypothetical situation that there is a speaker that sounds horrible and measures great is just boring straw man. Of course you know it, but it's so convenient, especially in a more subjective crowd where these kind of things never get questioned.
But here's one more explanation for the latter part: we have no idea what some random person in the internet likes, where he listens, how he listens, how he puts his experience in words, does he have bias-inducing qualities like being fanboy of the manufacturer or believing in high end fairy dust thingies. We don't even know if the user has really listened to said piece of equipment.
- Thread Starter
- #116
@Bozon has listened to KEF’s and Cantons, I had both in my house. I had both the Kef references and canton references. To me canton sounds more natural than the kefs I own. Both measure flat, yet they sound very different I. The same room. @Crosstalk has no perspective about anything he talks as he had only two kefs in his entire life and he is concluding very fast. Also his is too biased about his own speakers and you can see that from his comments.
Basic Channel
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2024
- Messages
- 296
- Likes
- 274
These are not for me at all. Personally I prefer a slow speaker.
DoctorRobert
Member
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2020
- Messages
- 36
- Likes
- 48
I like the looks of those Cantons. I probably prefer them over my KEF R3s. However, I do not know what 'Reference' means. Maybe neutral, which does not necessarily mean good.
The problem with exchanging speakers (or other audio equipment) experiences is that it is highly subjective. Armin and this forum try to make that as objective as possible with measurements. For most electronic components this is relatively easy to do. With transducers, like speakers, it gets a little more complicated. However, it is possible to predict what most people will prefer in average listening rooms. And -maybe- more importantly, we can establish what a good starting point is for anybody who tries to achieve a good listen in his (or sometimes 'her' ;-)) room. But if you found that your audio nirvana has been achieved by attaching two 2 Klipsch towers upside down to the ceiling of your man cave, more power to you.
If you say that you prefer one make of speaker while comparing it to another make with similar measurements*), then most people here will accept that. It is your experience. If you say that therefore measurements do not tell the full story, then it becomes more complicated. It is true that anechoic measurements of just the speaker do not tell the full story. Also the interaction of the speaker with the room counts, different speaker designs will interact differently. But that also can be measured and can be -mostly- corrected if you want. Once you went through that process, you can probably equalize a good (measuring) speaker to meet you preference and match another good speaker (within reasonable limits).
I would argue that a 'good speaker' is a well-behaved speaker that can be equalized to preference and not necessarily a good sounding speaker in any specific situation. If I want to give any meaning to 'reference' that would be it.
What it comes down to is that it is not very helpful to put one speaker on a stand, listen to it for a while, put another speaker on that same stand, listen again for a while and decide which one is better. At best it is your taste, at worst it is just coincidence. Feel free to compare preferences but to make it relevant for more people than just you, measurements are necessary.
*) Different makes/designs will always measure slightly different when it comes to radiation patterns, distortion spectrum, amplifier load, etc, even if they are good.
The problem with exchanging speakers (or other audio equipment) experiences is that it is highly subjective. Armin and this forum try to make that as objective as possible with measurements. For most electronic components this is relatively easy to do. With transducers, like speakers, it gets a little more complicated. However, it is possible to predict what most people will prefer in average listening rooms. And -maybe- more importantly, we can establish what a good starting point is for anybody who tries to achieve a good listen in his (or sometimes 'her' ;-)) room. But if you found that your audio nirvana has been achieved by attaching two 2 Klipsch towers upside down to the ceiling of your man cave, more power to you.
If you say that you prefer one make of speaker while comparing it to another make with similar measurements*), then most people here will accept that. It is your experience. If you say that therefore measurements do not tell the full story, then it becomes more complicated. It is true that anechoic measurements of just the speaker do not tell the full story. Also the interaction of the speaker with the room counts, different speaker designs will interact differently. But that also can be measured and can be -mostly- corrected if you want. Once you went through that process, you can probably equalize a good (measuring) speaker to meet you preference and match another good speaker (within reasonable limits).
I would argue that a 'good speaker' is a well-behaved speaker that can be equalized to preference and not necessarily a good sounding speaker in any specific situation. If I want to give any meaning to 'reference' that would be it.
What it comes down to is that it is not very helpful to put one speaker on a stand, listen to it for a while, put another speaker on that same stand, listen again for a while and decide which one is better. At best it is your taste, at worst it is just coincidence. Feel free to compare preferences but to make it relevant for more people than just you, measurements are necessary.
*) Different makes/designs will always measure slightly different when it comes to radiation patterns, distortion spectrum, amplifier load, etc, even if they are good.
This is not useful information at all to compare these speakers compared to measurements. We do not know what some other person experiences inside their head.
But for example, based on previous messages we could assume that said person is unaware of subjective bias or does not believe in it, and this further affects the value of review.
Last edited:
Of course it was an Hyperbole post. Regarding the measurement you can't be sure if the random guy who posted them on internet was doing the right job either. For example I owned both the LS50 and the LS50 Meta and never liked them. I measured them at my home and their FR was different from what I saw posted here, specially on the high frequency zone where they had a marked roll off and sounded very dark. They also harden their sound quicky with just a bit of louder volume and have very limited bass response and have marked sibilances on the Uni-Q driver. I sold them to a person that also heard them compared to the Canton's 9K and when I decided to upgrade he insisted on buying them as he loved them way better than the Kefs.
The problem I see on dispute is regarding people that put their preference first to justify his purchase and disregards any other experience without any proper argument than measurement he saw published somewhere. And when they are told to go to a store or a friend's house to hear the speaker he is trying to disregard he gets afraid to discover he might have made the wrong choice.
@dogmamann and I tried the speakers, owned them too for a long term period, compared them side by side with the guy's beloved ones and found to be a lot better. Why actual ownership is not a valid reference? the speakers measure fine too without any real perceivable defects. Maybe don't measure SOTA as the Crosstalk guy wants but sure enough they are better than kefs on real life usage.
Canton's development is pretty serious. They have a lab, an anechoic chamber and they developed their own simulation software too and after the measurements are OK they go on and fine tune the speakers by ear with many man hours involved on the process that is why they sound better. They manufacture in house in Germany. They don't sell you a lower labor cost product made on China at first world prices. They make quality products. And probably they don't measure SOTA because they found that making some objective inaudible sacrifices they archived a better real life sounding product.
Last edited:
