[fsimms]

After becoming familiar with them I felt they were very good at depth of soundstage and imaging.

Thanks for the impressions.  I am very greedy.  Could you give me a couple of comments more about the midrange.  I only heard three songs on the Archo's and am still haunted by the sound of them on the Brubeck Time Out song, Strange Meadow Lark.  I was wondering if they sounded great on any other songs!  It was fun seeing Alig's head snap around when the first cord of the piano played. 

Bob

[AliG]

I have lived with the Archos (ribbon G2 tweeter) for 2 weeks while at the same time I own a HT3. I think perhaps Jim's next project can be an Archos II with a deeper bass extension (active woofer??)

From midrange up, the Archos sounded more 'diffused' than the HT3. Some may call the Archos more 'mellow', and more 3-dimensional, it can certainly be more seductive to some people - including me.  Honestly it will be difficult for me to choose between the two.

In the bass region, however, the HT3 goes lower. It may not be obvious if you only listen to the Archos and not the HT3. But if you had the opportunity to swap them around like I did, the difference is larger than I thought.

Bob, I'm sorry that the piano piece continues to 'haunt' you until today . Part of it is due to the more 'mellow' characters of the open-baffle design, the rest is due to the McIntosh MC275 amp with stock tubes 12AX7 

[Jeff B.]

The Archos wouldn't be best for everyone, as the midrange balance will be more dependent on place and room acoustics than for most other speakers. It can be set up, simply by placement, to sound anywhere from forward to slightly laid back in midrange presentation.

No, the Archos does not go as low at the HT3 does. However, what's not stated here is the difference in sensitivity. That's the Iron Law that we must trade-off. For the Archos to be 94dB/2.83V it simply will not have 20Hz extension unless we made the box very large, and that is impractical. The HT3, on the other hand, can reach into the 20's well, but at the expense of sensitivity. I think there is probably 9dB difference between the two speakers and that's a lot. Each speaker is excellent in what it does and may be someone's cup of tea, but there's no doubt they are different kinds of tea.

I have lived with the Archos (ribbon G2 tweeter) for 2 weeks while at the same time I own a HT3. I think perhaps Jim's next project can be an Archos II with a deeper bass extension (active woofer??)

From midrange up, the Archos sounded more 'diffused' than the HT3. Some may call the Archos more 'mellow', and more 3-dimensional, it can certainly be more seductive to some people - including me.  Honestly it will be difficult for me to choose between the two.

In the bass region, however, the HT3 goes lower. It may not be obvious if you only listen to the Archos and not the HT3. But if you had the opportunity to swap them around like I did, the difference is larger than I thought.

Bob, I'm sorry that the piano piece continues to 'haunt' you until today . Part of it is due to the more 'mellow' characters of the open-baffle design, the rest is due to the McIntosh MC275 amp with stock tubes 12AX7