Spatial M3 Turbo S vs Pure Audio Trio 15B

Freemand · « **Reply #20 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 08:14 pm »

In fairness to Nicoch, from my understanding is from a different country with english not his native language so I take that into considering when I read his post. His post can be a bit trickier to understand but so would mine if was on a Chinese forum.

As the most previous posts wrote, it verifies my opinion that both speakers need to be on same system in the same room to be fair to both. I find little credence in a guy who heard both these speakers and found one to have better bass then the other cause both speakers where on different systems, cables, setups, music and rooms. There are so many variables that can effect the sound.

We also talk about technical issues with the waveguide for example which are important, but for myself, how they sound to my ears can't go ignored and is the final importance. I am not sure about Nicoch concern about the waveguide and how much credibility there is to it. I believe there may be to many varibles when building a waveguide to have a final concrete opinion of its performance.

zybar · « **Reply #21 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 08:25 pm »

Unless you buy both, it is highly unlikely that there will be a direct comparison in the same system.

Not sure what the policy is for Pure Audio Project, but with Spatial you get 60 days to listen in your room and make your own decision.

George

shahed · « **Reply #22 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 08:30 pm »

Does the M3 TS will be more suitable for small-medium room than Trio 15B despite both having 15" woofer? Trio 15B is considerably wider.

jseymour · « **Reply #23 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 08:59 pm »

I have the M3 Turbo S and my room is 17 ft wide X 32 feet long. It fills the room and then some. I have a Class D Audio SDS-470 with 600 watts per channel into 4 ohms. The system can go louder than I can handle with absolutely no distortion. My friends get a kick out of how loud it can get, but always comment on the clarity/clearness of the sound. This speaker is a beast. I heard the Magico Q3s at a friend's house and I enjoy my Spatials more.

shahed · « **Reply #24 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 09:15 pm »

Quote from: jseymour on 8 Aug 2016, 08:59 pm

I have the M3 Turbo S and my room is 17 ft wide X 32 feet long. It fills the room and then some. I have a Class D Audio SDS-470 with 600 watts per channel into 4 ohms. The system can go louder than I can handle with absolutely no distortion. My friends get a kick out of how loud it can get, but always comment on the clarity/clearness of the sound. This speaker is a beast. I heard the Magico Q3s at a friend's house and I enjoy my Spatials more.

Thanks for the feedback! I have heard from other sources too that M3 TS has no issue filling up big space. I was more interested in knowing between M3 and Trio 15, which would be more suitable for small-medium sized room.

nicoch · « **Reply #25 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 09:23 pm »

as OB speaker trio is working in open baffle at last to 7khz a coax work only to 900hz this is a big difference ,really big

nicoch · « **Reply #26 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 09:40 pm »

Quote from: nicoch on 8 Aug 2016, 08:44 am

freemand nice post , we have two really different design , the coax based on an old 50year design ,copy of Tannoy but with cheaper unit ,yes only cheaper unit use a stamped frame , that is crude classic two way xover design with all the problem that all know, Altec have a rich story on coax (sorry Anand but that waveguide is the cone and is not fixed! you forget that little details ..the most important one !)
Howerton audio is here from a lot year and serve diy well if you like compression driver or find the original Tannoy gold unit
On the other side we have a new concept DIY friendly ,a FAST concept with some full range unit ,no xover in sensible zone or no xover at all if you use biamp with a fantastc 15" aluframe ,neo motor with copper ring .

this comment is perfect on topic and tech correct , sorry audioguy213 retry

zybar · « **Reply #27 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 09:41 pm »

Quote from: shahed on 8 Aug 2016, 09:15 pm

Thanks for the feedback! I have heard from other sources too that M3 TS has no issue filling up big space. I was more interested in knowing between M3 and Trio 15, which would be more suitable for small-medium sized room.

What do you consider a small-medium room?

There are tons of great reviews on the M3's from shows in hotel rooms- which I would consider small-medium.

George

shahed · « **Reply #28 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 09:48 pm »

Quote from: zybar on 8 Aug 2016, 09:41 pm

What do you consider a small-medium room?

There are tons of great reviews on the M3's from shows in hotel rooms- which I would consider small-medium.

George

Around 16'Lx12'Wx9'H. I actually heard from Clayton that M3 would be more suitable than M4 for me. I guess, my question is more around the suitability of Trio 15 in a similar sized room.

nicoch · « **Reply #29 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 10:09 pm »

find the difference

Freemand · « **Reply #30 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 10:13 pm »

Quote from: shahed on 8 Aug 2016, 09:48 pm

Around 16'Lx12'Wx9'H. I actually heard from Clayton that M3 would be more suitable than M4 for me. I guess, my question is more around the suitability of Trio 15 in a similar sized room.

Shahed, that may be an important question for some with smaller rooms

It seems to me that they both would be pretty equal because were talking similar driver sizes and open baffle technology. I believe the open baffle design being the same would be the most important factor. We are not comparing a traditional box speaker to a open baffle but two open baffle designs.

zybar · « **Reply #31 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 10:17 pm »

ok, I won't feed the troll anymore.

Again, I look forward to hearing the Pure Audio Project speakers in the future.

George

nicoch · « **Reply #32 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 10:25 pm »

zybar relax what problem you have ? that only the true

PDR · « **Reply #33 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 11:05 pm »

Ok then......how about a comparison of the M3 turbo S and GR Super V ?

I own a pair of Super V and soon the Trio with the TB 1808.....I can compare these two, but
have never heard the Spatial.

I'm sure a few of you have laid ears on the M3/4 and Super V I'd like to know your thoughts.

shahed · « **Reply #34 on:** 8 Aug 2016, 11:17 pm »

Quote from: PDR on 8 Aug 2016, 11:05 pm

Ok then......how about a comparison of the M3 turbo S and GR Super V ?

I own a pair of Super V and soon the Trio with the TB 1808.....I can compare these two, but
have never heard the Spatial.

I'm sure a few of you have laid ears on the M3/4 and Super V I'd like to know your thoughts.

Please keep us posted when you get the Trio.

RoadTripper · « **Reply #35 on:** 9 Aug 2016, 12:56 am »

I'd love to hear that it's a toss-up between these two. I fear the WAF for any of these designs, but the Spatial M3 has the lead there. And I need to be able to claim that electrocution is impossible.

Freemand · « **Reply #36 on:** 9 Aug 2016, 03:03 am »

The spatial M3 certainly looks like a smaller speaker due to the coaxial design and not having to stack 3 drivers in a open baffle design. The WAF may like the smaller Spatial speaker but the audiophile may like the bigger Trio 15 "the bigger is better theory" design.

I personally like the looks of them both as there both different but good.

JackD · « **Reply #37 on:** 9 Aug 2016, 03:51 am »

Well my WAF loves the look of the M3 Turbo S and it is certainly easier and less costly to try and find out if it is for you. All this speculation is in reality pointless since it is unlikely that anyone is going to put down the money to try all of the possibilities so just choose one. To my ears and many others here the M3 Turbo S will be hard to beat and I have tried more than my fair share. If the Pure Audio Trio is 10% better for three times the price then it is up to the individual buyer to decide if that is justified.

nicoch · « **Reply #38 on:** 9 Aug 2016, 07:34 am »

freeman there is a new duet that have more WAf
Btw compare this two speaker is totally wrong ,VonHess cannot be compare a two way compression with fullrange with helper are the opposite side ,coax are for younger more emotional side ,full range is for mature where coherence of a single driver is unbeatable as the frequencies come from the same diaphragm ...

VonHess · « **Reply #39 on:** 9 Aug 2016, 02:20 pm »

I think they can be compared. They are both open baffle, which is out of the norm but a segment with growing interest and for the average listener like me an an area that has not been explored to any extent. They aren't too far apart in price range. They both have received a great deal of attention lately and many rave reviews. I know Spatial and Pure Audio offer more expensive models but these two seem to be the ones most reasonably obtainable by your average purchaser. I did notice on the other thread that Pure Audio has come out with a model closer to the M3 in price but those are new and have not been heard by nearly as many as the two models we are discussing. I'll admit that I don't know much about the technical side of it, which seems to be the reason you think they shouldn't be compared.