[cytoloG35]

Hi all, long time lurker.  Not much of a poster, to be honest most of the answers to my questions can be searched for and I am not much of an authority on speakers and music but I do know what I like.  VSA is definitely what I like.  I have the VR-4 JR MK II and the matching center, surrounds and subwoofer.  Great system in a not so great room, but we all have to make some adjustments, at least some of us, not including Cor, Gavin and Jack.  You guys have some sick setups.   

Much to my wife's dismay, I am getting the urge to upgrade my fronts, I know that doesn't happen much around here.  So I am not actually trying to compare the two per se but wanted to get the opinions of some of the more seasoned veterans in the VSA world.  If money and a wife weren't a factor, I would definitely try to pony up for the anni's.  But since the 4 mk III's are around, I was wondering what percentage the 4 mk III's capture (performance wise) of what the anni's have?  Sorry if this has already been asked.  I mean if I had to "settle" for the 4 mark III's I don't think I would be too far off the mark?  I realize this is somewhat subjective but many of you have the advantage and experience to give a pretty accurate opinion.

Thanks for your help.

Todd

[es347]

Hey there Todd..

Can't give an opinion regarding the MkIIIs as I have not heard them but having owned the MKIIs and now the Annies, that I can wax eloquently on that comparison.  The MkIIs were great...just not as great.  The Annies are more revealing without fatigue, the lower bass is tighter and the midbass has greater slam.  When I bought the Annies I was anxious about pulling the trigger but now that I've lived with them for nearly two years there could be no going back.  Again, can't comment on the MkIIIs but no doubt they are awesome as well.

[JackD201]

Hey there Todd..

Can't give an opinion regarding the MkIIIs as I have not heard them but having owned the MKIIs and now the Annies, that I can wax eloquently on that comparison.  The MkIIs were great...just not as great.  The Annies are more revealing without fatigue, the lower bass is tighter and the midbass has greater slam.  When I bought the Annies I was anxious about pulling the trigger but now that I've lived with them for nearly two years there could be no going back.  Again, can't comment on the MkIIIs but no doubt they are awesome as well.

You forgot to mention the sweeter but at the same time more detailed highs Oh yeah, you did   

Annie's sound great out of the box. My experience with my MkIIIs which I currently have in our HT along with a VisiUN Mk2, is that they have to be broken in long AND hard. Out of the box they can be quite aggressive and lacking in bass punch and drive. Once you get over the hump (you'll definitely know it when it happens) the SR MkIII becomes something quite tough to beat in it's price category.

With them now replaced with the VR-44s, I am now wondering how things have changed for the better. Keith has a pair of 44 Aktives being built so I guess we will know soon enough.

[cytoloG35]

Thanks for the replies.  I expect the annies to be better, they are obviously made to be better.  And you can't have a $10,000 price difference between two speakers and only have a 2% difference in performance and character.  Just wanted to get a feel for how close they are.  Hard to make a decision like that when you can't easily listen to both of them back to back.  And as you elude, Jack, the VR-44 throws in another avenue to follow.  Aside from the awesome performance of the annies, they are one great looking speaker in my opionion, who doesn't love piano black lacquer.  Anyone have a set of each of these in the Houston area?

[es347]

And you can't have a $10,000 price difference between two speakers and only have a 2% difference in performance and character.  Oh yeah...wanna bet?  You've just discovered the nature of this beast called 2ch audio.  It's all up to the buyer where and when the point of diminishing returns sets in.  If you are considering the MkIIIs DO NOT listen to the Annies...seriously 

[kgturner]

Just saw these on Audiogon and thought of this thread. They're VR-5 SE's. I'm not sure what your price range is, but....

http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?spkrfull&1328998933&/Von-Schweikert-VR-5-SE-Zebr

Kevin T

[JackD201]

Now 5 SE and SR MkIII make for an interesting comparison. They sold for about the same retail price new. The 5 SEs have the sweeter highs and better pitched bass but the SR MkIIIs are more transparent in the midband and go a bit deeper. This battle would be one about personal preferences. Those leaning for the warmer sound would go SE and for the clarity crowd the SR MkIII.

Gavin has a point though. If you aren't prepared to pay the Annie bucks, I do not suggest you listen to them back to back. I know a couple of people that went into debt when they did so. Short audiory memory has its benefits but the nagging feeling on this one might be harder to shrug off. They are happy for sure even if they did have to make some adjustments. Cup o Noodles anyone?

The downside of the Annies is that they are a gift that keeps on giving. They will not be a limiting factor once situated in an appropriate room. Better sources and electronics bring more and more to the table.

No offense to Jolida and Audio Space but listening to Annies with the likes of Mac, Lamm and VAC with SOTA sources challenges what might be thought of the platform.

[es347]

I recently listened..extensively I might add..to the Q5s driven by close to $100K in amplification and I would NOT trade the sound I have here in my room for what I heard there.  No doubt many will dismiss what I'm saying, chalking it up to personal bias.  Am I biased?  Darn right I am and rightfully so.  My VR5 Annies driven by the lowly MAC amplification sounds better to these old ears 

#1 VSA fanboy

[kernelbob]

I haven't heard the VR4 SR-III's, but my VR5 Anni's continually amaze me.  They expose every weakness upstream-- not just in the system (amps, DACs, cables, powercords, platforms, power conditioner, etc.), but also in the recordings themselves.  I find that I often listen to Pandora now, with the digital output from my TV fed to my DAC after passing through a Genesis Digital Lens.  Without the Lens, it's unlistenable (I'm looking forward to see if the Mk-II upgrade to my PS-Audio DAC effectively eliminates the need for the Lens).  Setting Pandora on "quick mix" so that a random selection of classical music is presented, I find I can frequently correctly guess which major record label is playing (no fair throwing in a label that you only hear once in a blue moon).  Decca is the most consistently good.  Naxos is good, but always lacking in the really deep bass so the foundation of the music is missing.  Too bad, since I like many of their recordings otherwise.  Philips is painfully smeared and with transients dulled.  DG is often has blurry hall ambience (especially their awful 4D abomination) and also weak on transient detail.  Chandos does a very nice job (try their Percy Grainger recordings).  The point is that the system resolves this level of information and allows you to focus on the music (oh, what they can do with piano music!), not your equipment  On the other hand, you will know if a change in your system, however small a detail, is an improvement, a degradation, or (often) a mixture of both.  When dialed in, the presentation takes on the character of the fictional Star Trek holodeck.  This also means that the details of your system matter.  The higher the resolution, the easier it is to muck it up.  For example, clamping my speaker cables in desktop microphone clamps rolls off the fine filigree of detail.  Suspending them from velcro loops which are then clamped to the stands doesn't cause that problem.  So, listen to the VR5 Annis at your own risk.

[kernelbob]

One other thing.  You HAVE to have the capability of switching absolute phase in the system.  The PS-Audio Perfect Wave DAC has that on the remote.  The difference is immediately apparent.  On most recordings, I can tell if the absolute phase is correct in the first seconds of listening without testing it by reversing it with the remote.  With it set correctly, the bass extends deeper which improves the hall ambience.  With it incorrect, there is almost a nasal character in the upper midrange, yes a congestion which disappears when the correct absolute phase is set.  The correct setting provides better stage depth and a more focused center image.  Pianos are more coherent.  Again, this is the quality of the information you get out of the VR5 Annis.

[cytoloG35]

I understand what you're saying Gavin and I agree.  I should have said, for me, I don't see the "value" of spending an extra $10k for 2% difference but this is a crazy world of AV and some people do.  It definitely is all up to the person and what they are willing to spend.  So it seems the consensus is that I don't listen to the annies unless I'm willing to spend the money because they are that much better than the MK III's.  I will definitely take that into consideration.

Kevin, thanks for the heads up on the 5 SE's.  Those look pretty sweet as well and thanks for the advice on those Jack.

[Delacroix]

I have the 5SEs and while I've toyed with upgrading, I can't face the thought of shipping them back to CA. I'm fascinated by the comments comparing the SEs to the Annis (as always, Jack's the man), and love  the claims of that seller in the A'gon advert that the changes might not have been made entirely for sonic reasons (us older owners would love that to be true, LOL). At the price those SEs are going for, I'd say anyone buying them would be pleased with the results.