Interesting and informative reviews. It sounds like you're saying you like the Ref 3s better than most other speakers, but like the older solos better than the Ref 3s?
Yes. However I should qualify that I didn't care for them at all in my heavily foamed, nearly square room as much as when they were given more space in my living room. I think they need a good 3-4 feet all around at least. I can only imagine how they would sound without being near any room boundaries, but unfortunately I don't have that luxury. Like that guy from Six Moon's review - that gorgeous, open space - I bet they were awesome in there. His rug is as big as my whole room!
Do the solos produce as much bass, or just subjectively better? Like I'm wondering if the Ref 3s are adequate by themselves and if this is true of the Solos as well, or whether you'd need to invest in a sub.
I would say yes, they both could be considered close to full range by themselves, but they fall short of what I am used to with my dual VMPS subs. I have yet to meet any speaker that wasn't helped out with a subwoofer, but it depends on what you are going for. I think the Solos have a bit "better" bass, if not necessarily "more" of it. The IIIs will probably take more power though. Unfortunately they don't make the spheres anymore which I think is a shame. The 3-way tweeter boost\cut switch is VERY subtle, I think I'd have to have two guys stand there while I listen in order to really hear what's going on there. But in any case the CDT tweeter is absolutely awesome. I think they'd be better off with a smaller woofer though.
The idea of a time aligned 3 way with virutally no crossover is a neat one, but I wonder how much is marketing and how much is really ideal design.
Well they told us the Solos had no crossover either, but they do. There's a transformer, a resistor and a cap in there. But that doesn't mean it's automatically a bad thing, those gubbins are there for a reason obviously. (There is a great post on Audio Asylum about a guy who took his Solos apart and he talks about what those things do. It came in handy when I had to take mine apart to fix a loose binding post.) I believe that stuff was there to prevent the amp seeing a 1ohm impedance drop or some such.
I was worried that the MTM arrangement might have more phasey, comb-filtering whatchamacallits going on, but it isn't a problem. The IIIs act just like the Solos do. When you are sitting you get great sound, you stand up you get a different flavor of great sound. But the transition from sitting to standing gives you a weird little shift. I am sure this would be easily revealed on a response plot taken at different angles. But these things don't act like laser beams, or even flash lights. They're nice big, soft, diffuse spheres of sound, just the way I like it. Cripes, you play those killer Mapleshade recordings on these suckers loud enough and there's no doubt the performer is playing in your room. Even walking up to the speaker doesn't diminish the illusion of depth. I guess that's what they call "disappearing".
I thought the ones I heard were very nice in the midrange, but I wasn't able to get a good feel for the bass because of the setup.
Entirely possible. The fact that their subwoofer amp has EQ controls seems to indicate that tweaking is necessary and that by itself the design might not cut the mustard. For me there seems to be a suckout between the upper and lower bass frequencies, but hey I've only been listening to them for a few days so I'm sure my ears will be adapting.
