The "other" German Speaker Manufacturers (Canton, Magnat, Heco, Quadral, ...) - Where do they stand?

[dogmamann]

My first was Heco, the second Magnat.
Since then only DIY for over 30 years, except for EC-Living for convenience in the living room and peace with my wife

my previous speaker list goes like this:

1. IQ Trend 2/4180 AT
2. ASW Genius 410
3. ALR Jordan Number 4/ALR Take 5
4. Elac 310/315
5. VIFA ADR Format
6. HGP nightingale
7. Sonics Allegra
8. Canton vento 896/Reference 7K

Want to have in future out :

1.ME Geithains (any model would do)
2. Quadral Aurum Gamma
3. Revel performa f series
4. genelec coaxes
5. Kef blade metas.
6. Canton reference 5K/ new 5.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Most of the members in this forum are English speaking. Hardly few members are Germans here. In germany, revels are sold very very veryless as there is only one dealer around. Anyone who is into hifi in Germany had had atleast one canton in their lifetime at home. It’s that popular. I myself wanted to buy the revel but had to travel around 500 kms to just to have a look at it before getting into my living room. At the end, I ended up getting a KEF which every dealer had on discounts since nobody likes it here. Their ignorance is our benefit. People have no clue about how good sound should be. They all fall for wide sounstage, airy treble, and the large bodied mids from the 7 inch driver. But we know with the Kef with DSP, everything can be improved.

Since REVELS are wide and controlled, and also very low distortion there is no point with cantons. Kef is quite the opposite, quite more narrow but state of the art controlled directivity.
This is the F328, 16K par and now at 13K with discount:
revel-f328be, is REAALLY wide and yet very controlled.

And there is no resonance/high thd in its mid range, cantons are one of the few using a 7'', and mostly is because saving cost.
As you can see, even the subbass is really low distortion. Canton can't do anything agaisnt such a state of the art revels speaker, also one of the weakness of the concentric coaxial midrange is their THD and spl, funny enough canton has higher distortion than the Genelec/Kef coaxial driver. But Revels has very good numbers, so you wanna wide directivity? just pick a safe choise: Revels.
There is also focal sopra stuff, but they have their own signature, sure you can EQ that. Same with kefs.
This is what i do to my R7s for giving me a nice natural and airy sound:
-1dB at 5khz and +4dB 10,500Hz

The thing is, Revels Be series are really good, thats why revels are always in low stock, for example i cannot buy these in my country throught the dealer, they only sells the f208 206 series. I have to import these Be series, also also are very expensive.
Kef sells a lot of their speakers and thats the main reason you can usually get these at good price, no matter where you are there is always stores with KEFs, my problem is the blades should be a lot cheaper. R&Reference woofers aren't that great but the whole industry is the same too, at least the KEF woofers are great in the current market and the solution is just run multichannel and cut the mains to 80hz-20khz and add dualsubwoofers. Since there is no problems in mids-high, and whatever you want you can easily EQ.

As I say, is fine if you not pick a KEF, but a good sounding=measurements speaker.
I talked with a guys who prefer these revel Be instead of his KEF reference, mostly because of the airy wide thing. Also revel make bigger drivers, sadly the good woofer are in the Blades series, when the Reference line launched i said why they didn't improve the woofer because these aren't good for these big money numbers, but the problem is the industry keep making fail design and people talking about imaginary things, we have to look at the performance and measurements and the industry will offer better stuff.

See the power amps? Now there is a lot of really nice power amps at 1-3k with tons of watts.

Germany makes great drivers, Accuton. My problem is these are really expensive. For example, gauder akustisk use Accutton, but the price pfff. Come on.
This Gauder akustisk Cassiano CT BE is 17,000 euros. so kind of 25,000 end price. ;/
Vimberg also German, the same history.. good but out of this world prices. I just wish Canton can catch Accuton performance, because the K is far of that.
Gauder Cassiano CT Black Edition

Gauder Cassiano MK II Black Edition

Roland Gauder již dlouho a rád spoléhá zejména na kouzlo měničů Accuton a originální konstrukce z hliníkových podkov – právě takovými řešeními uspěla značka Gauder , ovšem za cenu…inu, vysoké ceny. Protože se ale Gauder rozhodl potěšit svými kreacemi také méně nekompromisně bohatou část trhu...

www.hifi-voice.com

 

[computer-audiophile]

I would like to listen to Canton's top of the range models to see if they have made significant progress compared to my previous big Canton Ergo, which was fantastic in its day. So far I've always been very happy with what I've had from Canton.

At the moment, however, there is no need for me to take action in this regard.

 

[dogmamann]

I would like to listen to Canton's top of the range models to see if they have made significant progress compared to my previous big Canton Ergo, which was fantastic in its day. So far I've always been very happy with what I've had from Canton.

At the moment, however, there is no need for me to take action in this regard.

I had listened to the ergos before. Compared to that the references are way more room friendly in terms of even bass distribution and open baffle like sound. You don’t hear the cabinets on the references as opposed to the ergos which sounds like a box but a good box. But in several ways the references are a step up.

 

[dogmamann]

Since REVELS are wide and controlled, and also very low distortion there is no point with cantons. Kef is quite the opposite, quite more narrow but state of the art controlled directivity.
This is the F328, 16K par and now at 13K with discount:
revel-f328be, is REAALLY wide and yet very controlled.

And there is no resonance/high thd in its mid range, cantons are one of the few using a 7'', and mostly is because saving cost.
As you can see, even the subbass is really low distortion. Canton can't do anything agaisnt such a state of the art revels speaker, also one of the weakness of the concentric coaxial midrange is their THD and spl, funny enough canton has higher distortion than the Genelec/Kef coaxial driver. But Revels has very good numbers, so you wanna wide directivity? just pick a safe choise: Revels.
There is also focal sopra stuff, but they have their own signature, sure you can EQ that. Same with kefs.
This is what i do to my R7s for giving me a nice natural and airy sound:
-1dB at 5khz and +4dB 10,500Hz
View attachment 311114
The thing is, Revels Be series are really good, thats why revels are always in low stock, for example i cannot buy these in my country throught the dealer, they only sells the f208 206 series. I have to import these Be series, also also are very expensive.
Kef sells a lot of their speakers and thats the main reason you can usually get these at good price, no matter where you are there is always stores with KEFs, my problem is the blades should be a lot cheaper. R&Reference woofers aren't that great but the whole industry is the same too, at least the KEF woofers are great in the current market and the solution is just run multichannel and cut the mains to 80hz-20khz and add dualsubwoofers. Since there is no problems in mids-high, and whatever you want you can easily EQ.

As I say, is fine if you not pick a KEF, but a good sounding=measurements speaker.
I talked with a guys who prefer these revel Be instead of his reference, mostly because of the airy wide thing. Also revel make bigger drivers, sadly the good woofer are in the Blades series, when the Reference line launched i said why they didn't improve the woofer because these aren't good for these big money numbers, but the problem is the industry keep making fail design and people talking about imaginary things, we have to look at the performance and measurements and the industry will offer better stuff.

See the power amps? Now there is a lot of really nice power amps at 1-3k with tons of watts.

Germany makes great drivers, Accuton. My problem is these are really expensive. For example, gauder akustisk use Accutton, but the price pfff. Come on.
This Gauder akustisk Cassiano CT BE is 17,000 euros. so kind of 25,000 end price. ;/
Vimberg also German, the same history.. good but out of this world prices. I just wish Canton can catch Accuton performance, because the K is far of that.
Gauder Cassiano CT Black Edition

Gauder Cassiano MK II Black Edition

Roland Gauder již dlouho a rád spoléhá zejména na kouzlo měničů Accuton a originální konstrukce z hliníkových podkov – právě takovými řešeními uspěla značka Gauder , ovšem za cenu…inu, vysoké ceny. Protože se ale Gauder rozhodl potěšit svými kreacemi také méně nekompromisně bohatou část trhu...

www.hifi-voice.com

I am not going to sell the references to get something double the price of it. Way out of my budget at the moment. Like I said, in Germany there are hardly any dealers for revels. There are not popular either. Even getting a KEF service outside warranty in Germany is pain in the ass as the service center if m not wrong is in Netherlands and you need to send the speakers in cross country.

And there is no resonance/high thd in its mid range, cantons are one of the few using a 7'', and mostly is because saving cost.

how is using 7 inch driver as a mid bass saving money? Larger drivers are less expensive ?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

I am not going to sell the references to get something double the price of it. Way out of my budget at the moment. Like I said, in Germany there are hardly any dealers for revels. There are not popular either. Even getting a KEF service outside warranty in Germany is pain in the ass as the service center if m not wrong is in Netherlands and you need to send the speakers in cross country.

how is using 7 inch driver as a mid bass saving money? Larger drivers are less expensive ?

As far as i know, the technicians must be certificated by kef or something, i used the warranty in the store in my country, the tech guy got the parts and he installed the new parts for free because i was in warranty.

The 7'' mid range has the same dimensions as the bass drivers, in the end is basically make the same driver 2 times, which is cheaper than making a whole different mid range.

Is just weist that the Canton 7 has a 154mm mid-driver and then the Canton 5 has a 174mm mid-range, is just weird. Usually, you don't change the mid ranges across the same line, and for example the canton 9k with the 6.5'' (?) driver had a very little better distortion than the floorstanding at 3khz range


There is no much 174mm mid-ranges in floorstanding 3-way, i mean is a mid-range... not a woofer.., kef is using 165mm for its bass... for example these good accuton floorstanding Guarder/Vimberg are using a 5''mid-range, much more typical for a mid-range.

If they manage to make the 174mm and the 154mm ejemplary like most of the brands who uses a 5''~ mid-range, that will be amazing. But for now, Vimberg, Gauder akustisk and Revel who use Ceramic drivers, use a 5'' driver
This is the 5'' from accuton

Revel use a 5.25'' Deep Ceramic Composite

Let's see how the new driver measures, because at 3 khz~ is where the driver must be faster because is doing these short wavelength, for a 5'' is easier. But as i said, everything i wrote can be bs if the new 174mm measure better than the previous one. , I'm just think that because Guader and Vimberg use a 5''~ mid range ceramic and measures great.
Edit:The gauder wasnt using the 5.25” midrange, is more like 168mm~(?), my bad. Lets wait for the new canton measurements.

 

[dogmamann]

As far as i know, the technicians must be certificated by kef or something, i used the warranty in the store in my country, the tech guy got the parts and he installed the new parts for free because i was in warranty.

The 7'' mid range has the same dimensions as the bass drivers, in the end is basically make the same driver 2 times, which is cheaper than making a whole different mid range.

Is just weist that the Canton 7 has a 154mm mid-driver and then the Canton 5 has a 174mm mid-range, is just weird. Usually, you don't change the mid ranges across the same line, and for example the canton 9k with the 6.5'' (?) driver had a very little better distortion than the floorstanding at 3khz range


There is no much 174mm mid-ranges in floorstanding 3-way, i mean is a mid-range... not a woofer.., kef is using 165mm for its bass... for example these good accuton floorstanding Guarder/Vimberg are using a 5''mid-range, much more typical for a mid-range.

If they manage to make the 174mm and the 154mm ejemplary like most of the brands who uses a 5''~ mid-range, that will be amazing. But for now, Vimberg, Gauder akustisk and Revel who use Ceramic drivers, use a 5'' driver
This is the 5'' from accuton

Revel use a 5.25'' Deep Ceramic Composite

Let's see how the new driver measures, because at 3 khz~ is where the driver must be faster because is doing these short wavelength, for a 5'' is easier. But as i said, everything i wrote can be bs if the new 174mm measure better than the previous one. , I'm just think that because Guader and Vimberg use a 5''~ mid range ceramic and measures great.

The 7 inch midrange and the 7 inch woofers on the canton look the same from outside but they are different drivers.

what happened to the Kef ? Was the problem with bass drivers ?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

The 7 inch midrange and the 7 inch woofers on the canton look the same from outside but they are different drivers.

That's right, outside i can see a difference in the center. But let's wait for the new cantons measurements. its worthless judging without objective data

what happened to the Kef ? Was the problem with bass drivers ?

Nothing, they are very good 165mm drivers, the problem is with drivers that small is very hard to do 20hz with low distortion, blades woofers are very very good
If you see even the specs are very different vs the Reference 5, being the same size woofers and numbers of drivers (x4)
Blades two meta (x4 165mm):
Frequency response (±3dB)
33Hz - 35kHz
Reference 5(x4 165mm):
Frequency response (±3dB)
40Hz – 35kHz


The cheap & great way is running dual subwoofers, way cheaper than have a real full range 20hz floorstanding.
There is some great 12''/15'' subwoofers.

Being realistic, Blades are way out of my range, subwoofers are the way to go, also cut the speakers for only doing 80hz-20khz.
These towers who makes great 20hz without problems are very expensive.
My plan for the future is just buy 2 of these, great 20hz/thd/size.

 

[dogmamann]

That's right, outside i can see a difference in the center. But let's wait for the new cantons measurements. its worthless judging without objective data


Nothing, they are very good 165mm drivers, the problem is with drivers that small is very hard to do 20hz with low distortion, blades woofers are very very good
If you see even the specs are very different vs the Reference 5, being the same size woofers and numbers of drivers (x4)
Blades two meta (x4 165mm):
Frequency response (±3dB)
33Hz - 35kHz
Reference 5(x4 165mm):
Frequency response (±3dB)
40Hz – 35kHz


The cheap & great way is running dual subwoofers, way cheaper than have a real full range 20hz floorstanding.
There is some great 12''/15'' subwoofers.

Being realistic, Blades are way out of my range, subwoofers are the way to go, also cut the speakers for only doing 80hz-20khz.
These towers who makes great 20hz without problems are very expensive.
My plan for the future is just buy 2 of these, great 20hz/thd/size.

I meant you said you had some repair on the Kef with warranty, what exactly was the issue ? My friend had his R3s tweeter blown out even without overdriving and the dealer guy said, that’s the most common issue it had.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

I meant you said you had some repair on the Kef with warranty, what exactly was the issue ? My friend had his R3s tweeter blown out even without overdriving and the dealer guy said, that’s the most common issue it had.

I bought the R7 used but with warranty, i taked the risk but KEF was gently enough to change the UNIQ from one of the speaker for free, it came with a quality control issue.

 

[dogmamann]

I bought the R7 used but with warranty, i taked the risk but KEF was gently enough to change the UNIQ from one of the speaker for free, it came with a quality control issue.

It had any sound issue or cosmetic ?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

It had any sound issue or cosmetic ?

Idk, i just take these and started as soon as possible the warranty thing

 

[Chris-E]

After many years of having been a passive admirer of ASR: Hello world, this is my first post ever on any audio forum / community!

Very subjective listening report on Nubert NuVero speakers: I agree that there's quite a bit of smart marketing and 'paid-for content' going on with regard to German audio magazines and Nubert speakers and electronics -- especially for their entry-level / mass market consumer products. It's a known problem with down-market brand-extensions and the pressure to constantly release the new, more, updated products these market segments demand. Quality suffers. It also scares away upmarket customers when the company's current bestseller is a 300 Euro TV soundbar.

Anyway, I think in the case of Nubert it helps to look at the company's origins, and where they are most likely to having acquired expertise over the decades. For Nubert that's passive mid-market stereo speakers. Thankfully (on average), the more upmarket a product is, the longer its product life-cycle, which in turn allows for more attention to detail and better engineering.

A few years ago I set out to build a new stereo setup from scratch. Thanks to ASR education I wanted components that measured well, sounded neutral, 'true to the source', and not overpriced. Speaker-wise I was looking for transparent, linear, revealing, in the style of the Genelec and Dynaudio active monitors I had the pleasure to encounter a couple of times at a friend's recording studio. I didn't want speakers that would make just any music sound pleasant and nice. Instead I wanted speakers that would be brutally honest when fed with sub-par recordings, mixing, mastering -- bad engineering.

At this point I had never owned or seriously considered Nubert speakers. However, I knew that a friend back from high-school had a pair of Nubert NuLine floorstanders as part of his 5.1 setup. So I gave them a listen, driven by a mid-range Denon 5.1 receiver and CD player with no dedicated DAC. They sounded quite detailed and balanced given the signal chain and price point of about EUR 1200 a pair. But clearly I was looking 1-2 classes above what I had heard. Still, I decided to give the NuVeros a chance, and with the Nubert HQ and showroom only an hour's drive away from my former home town I joined my friend for an acoustic road trip...

This turned out to be time very well spent in retrospect. We strategically chose an off-peak time (9am on a weekday) for our listening session, so we could spend as much time as possible in the studio. We ended up occupying their NuVero studio for almost four hours. The studio featured all NuVero stereo speakers (30 to 170), NuSub subwoofers, and possible 5.1 setups with the NuVero series. We focussed on stereo setups, all driven by Nubert's nuPower A power amp, the nuControl X preamp/DAC/streamer and a NAD CD player/transport. The studio allowed for seamless switching between speaker pairs via remote control, and was (as one would expect) heavily treated with acoustic absorber panels, bass traps, and diffusors. We used our own CDs or streamed via AirPlay 2 (Apple Music, lossless, 44/16) to the nuControl preamp.

We threw quite a variety of genres and levels of audio engineering excellence at the NuVeros over the coming 4 hours: From Eva Cassidy and Miles Davis to German "Schlager" and 90s Eurodance tracks. Metallica and Glenn Gould, Abbey Road classics and Lady Gaga, Wagner's Ring Cycle and Paul van Dyk, Bach's Organ Sonatas and a stunningly beautiful 1959 recital of "O Helga Natt" by Jussi Björling. Just no rap... ;-)

All speakers of the NuVero series share common features regarding linearity, transparency/resolution, and full-bodied bass representation (particularly the bookshelf models impress for their size). Their acoustic ideal is clearly 'neutral' in the style of studio monitors. However, we also experimented with the speakers' built-in eq/room correction switches/crossovers which allow for 'sounding' away from linear mode if desired. As I was in the market for floorstanders I focussed on the differences between the 110, 140, and 170 speakers respectively.

Without going into too much detail, there were some expected and some surprising (subjective) differences across the range: As expected, going up to the 'next bigger' speaker within a category (bookshelf, floorstanding) resulted in consistently higher sound quality. Interestingly, by higher sound quality I don't mean that the next bigger speaker sonically 'added' to the musical representation, rather the other way around: The bigger the speaker, the more the speaker itself seemed to disappear, removing some of the physical constraints of its smaller predecessor, allowing for a more effortless and detailed musical representation.

Among the floorstanders, the relative step up from the 110 to the 140 was much more significant than the step from 140 to 170. Contrary to the 110's excellent measurements discussed earlier in this thread, in our listening setup the 110 constantly sounded 'forced' to play a bit above its sonic abilities. I'd go so far to say that I sonically preferred the biggest bookshelf (60) over the smallest floorstander (110). At half the price of the 110, the 60 sounded more balanced and consistent across genres, while the 110 was always 'trying a little too hard'. As a result I heard the speaker more than the music itself.

Subjective verdict: The NuVero 60 is clearly the best and most balanced of the bookshelves. I also prefer the 60 over the twice as expensive 110. The step to 140 from either the 60 or 110 speakers offered the biggest improvement in sound quality, details, effortlessness. Finally, given a well-engineered recording, the 170 almost completely disappears in what I would describe as music liberated from the physical constraints of the stereo setup it is being reproduced by. We're talking maybe 5% relative improvement from 140 to 170. One has to carefully consider if size, price, and acoustic properties of one's listening space justify this upgrade. Purely from a performance perspective, the 170 is undoubtedly top of the line and 'reveals' music sovereignly and effortlessly.

There's clearly speakers that outclass the NuVero series. I just found myself pushed hard to come up with an obviously superior and well-rounded package from the more widely available brands (Canton, Elac, B&W, KEF, etc.) that wouldn't cost at least 50% more than the respective NuVero... But maybe I've been looking in all the wrong places?

I ended up getting the NuVero 140s in white, driven by a Benchmark ABH2. An RME ADI-2 DAC serves as preamp and gets fed bit-perfect streams via USB from a Raspberry Pi running Moode Audio. I'm quite happy with the sound I'm getting. Next money will be spent on acoustic treatment of my living room.

 

[dogmamann]

After many years of having been a passive admirer of ASR: Hello world, this is my first post ever on any audio forum / community!

Very subjective listening report on Nubert NuVero speakers: I agree that there's quite a bit of smart marketing and 'paid-for content' going on with regard to German audio magazines and Nubert speakers and electronics -- especially for their entry-level / mass market consumer products. It's a known problem with down-market brand-extensions and the pressure to constantly release the new, more, updated products these market segments demand. Quality suffers. It also scares away upmarket customers when the company's current bestseller is a 300 Euro TV soundbar.

Anyway, I think in the case of Nubert it helps to look at the company's origins, and where they are most likely to having acquired expertise over the decades. For Nubert that's passive mid-market stereo speakers. Thankfully (on average), the more upmarket a product is, the longer its product life-cycle, which in turn allows for more attention to detail and better engineering.

A few years ago I set out to build a new stereo setup from scratch. Thanks to ASR education I wanted components that measured well, sounded neutral, 'true to the source', and not overpriced. Speaker-wise I was looking for transparent, linear, revealing, in the style of the Genelec and Dynaudio active monitors I had the pleasure to encounter a couple of times at a friend's recording studio. I didn't want speakers that would make just any music sound pleasant and nice. Instead I wanted speakers that would be brutally honest when fed with sub-par recordings, mixing, mastering -- bad engineering.

At this point I had never owned or seriously considered Nubert speakers. However, I knew that a friend back from high-school had a pair of Nubert NuLine floorstanders as part of his 5.1 setup. So I gave them a listen, driven by a mid-range Denon 5.1 receiver and CD player with no dedicated DAC. They sounded quite detailed and balanced given the signal chain and price point of about EUR 1200 a pair. But clearly I was looking 1-2 classes above what I had heard. Still, I decided to give the NuVeros a chance, and with the Nubert HQ and showroom only an hour's drive away from my former home town I joined my friend for an acoustic road trip...

This turned out to be time very well spent in retrospect. We strategically chose an off-peak time (9am on a weekday) for our listening session, so we could spend as much time as possible in the studio. We ended up occupying their NuVero studio for almost four hours. The studio featured all NuVero stereo speakers (30 to 170), NuSub subwoofers, and possible 5.1 setups with the NuVero series. We focussed on stereo setups, all driven by Nubert's nuPower A power amp, the nuControl X preamp/DAC/streamer and a NAD CD player/transport. The studio allowed for seamless switching between speaker pairs via remote control, and was (as one would expect) heavily treated with acoustic absorber panels, bass traps, and diffusors. We used our own CDs or streamed via AirPlay 2 (Apple Music, lossless, 44/16) to the nuControl preamp.

We threw quite a variety of genres and levels of audio engineering excellence at the NuVeros over the coming 4 hours: From Eva Cassidy and Miles Davis to German "Schlager" and 90s Eurodance tracks. Metallica and Glenn Gould, Abbey Road classics and Lady Gaga, Wagner's Ring Cycle and Paul van Dyk, Bach's Organ Sonatas and a stunningly beautiful 1959 recital of "O Helga Natt" by Jussi Björling. Just no rap... ;-)

All speakers of the NuVero series share common features regarding linearity, transparency/resolution, and full-bodied bass representation (particularly the bookshelf models impress for their size). Their acoustic ideal is clearly 'neutral' in the style of studio monitors. However, we also experimented with the speakers' built-in eq/room correction switches/crossovers which allow for 'sounding' away from linear mode if desired. As I was in the market for floorstanders I focussed on the differences between the 110, 140, and 170 speakers respectively.

Without going into too much detail, there were some expected and some surprising (subjective) differences across the range: As expected, going up to the 'next bigger' speaker within a category (bookshelf, floorstanding) resulted in consistently higher sound quality. Interestingly, by higher sound quality I don't mean that the next bigger speaker sonically 'added' to the musical representation, rather the other way around: The bigger the speaker, the more the speaker itself seemed to disappear, removing some of the physical constraints of its smaller predecessor, allowing for a more effortless and detailed musical representation.

Among the floorstanders, the relative step up from the 110 to the 140 was much more significant than the step from 140 to 170. Contrary to the 110's excellent measurements discussed earlier in this thread, in our listening setup the 110 constantly sounded 'forced' to play a bit above its sonic abilities. I'd go so far to say that I sonically preferred the biggest bookshelf (60) over the smallest floorstander (110). At half the price of the 110, the 60 sounded more balanced and consistent across genres, while the 110 was always 'trying a little too hard'. As a result I heard the speaker more than the music itself.

Subjective verdict: The NuVero 60 is clearly the best and most balanced of the bookshelves. I also prefer the 60 over the twice as expensive 110. The step to 140 from either the 60 or 110 speakers offered the biggest improvement in sound quality, details, effortlessness. Finally, given a well-engineered recording, the 170 almost completely disappears in what I would describe as music liberated from the physical constraints of the stereo setup it is being reproduced by. We're talking maybe 5% relative improvement from 140 to 170. One has to carefully consider if size, price, and acoustic properties of one's listening space justify this upgrade. Purely from a performance perspective, the 170 is undoubtedly top of the line and 'reveals' music sovereignly and effortlessly.

There's clearly speakers that outclass the NuVero series. I just found myself pushed hard to come up with an obviously superior and well-rounded package from the more widely available brands (Canton, Elac, B&W, KEF, etc.) that wouldn't cost at least 50% more than the respective NuVero... But maybe I've been looking in all the wrong places?

I ended up getting the NuVero 140s in white, driven by a Benchmark ABH2. An RME ADI-2 DAC serves as preamp and gets fed bit-perfect streams via USB from a Raspberry Pi running Moode Audio. I'm quite happy with the sound I'm getting. Next money will be spent on acoustic treatment of my living room.

Without Klippen measurements there is no way to believe this. I can see your enthusiasm, but that’s not enough here. Glad that you found something subjectively matching your taste. Obejective finese can be found only via measurements.

 

[Chris-E]

Without Klippen measurements there is no way to believe this. I can see your enthusiasm, but that’s not enough here. Glad that you found something subjectively matching your taste. Obejective finese can be found only via measurements.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. No doubt, measurements would be a most valuable addition here. Also I applaud your enthusiasm for the concept of objectivity, and I agree that striving for objectivity can be both, useful and comforting. To avoid possible misunderstandings, and as my listening report is clearly marked as a subjective contribution to (start) a conversation, I do not claim any kind of "truth" or "generalisability" of my own impressions. I do think, however, one data point to begin with is better than no data at all. I am sorry you don't see value in this; maybe others will.

 

[Salt]

Thanks for sharing your opinion. No doubt, measurements would be a most valuable addition here. Also I applaud your enthusiasm for the concept of objectivity, and I agree that striving for objectivity can be both, useful and comforting. To avoid possible misunderstandings, and as my listening report is clearly marked as a subjective contribution to (start) a conversation, I do not claim any kind of "truth" or "generalisability" of my own impressions. I do think, however, one data point to begin with is better than no data at all. I am sorry you don't see value in this; maybe others will.

For a beginning You might get a Umik (helps with roomEQ too) and report back.

 

[mhardy6647]

Thanks to a combination of circumstances, we're at the moment (and for a short time) "hosting" a pair of Canton model Plus S two-way "minispeakers" (in the 1970s/80s sense of the term). I happened to have a bit of time this morning to listen to them and I must say they sound very fine indeed.

 

[dogmamann]

Thanks to a combination of circumstances, we're at the moment (and for a short time) "hosting" a pair of Canton model Plus S two-way "minispeakers" (in the 1970s/80s sense of the term). I happened to have a bit of time this morning to listen to them and I must say they sound very fine indeed.

“Fine” is subjective. What we strive here is perfection in engineering. Without measurements we cannot judge it. Even trained ears fail to notice flaws on certain devices.

 

[dogmamann]

Thanks for sharing your opinion. No doubt, measurements would be a most valuable addition here. Also I applaud your enthusiasm for the concept of objectivity, and I agree that striving for objectivity can be both, useful and comforting. To avoid possible misunderstandings, and as my listening report is clearly marked as a subjective contribution to (start) a conversation, I do not claim any kind of "truth" or "generalisability" of my own impressions. I do think, however, one data point to begin with is better than no data at all. I am sorry you don't see value in this; maybe others will.

Unfortunately, subjective perfection is sometimes aligned to people’s preferences. But with a speaker you need to have it as transparent as possible to the source recording. Only measurements can tell if it’s able to do that or not.