Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 1344 times.

Manolo

Greetings. Bit the bullet and got the M4 TM's. Same speaker as my M4 Turbo, even the color, red. Transparency is enhanced a little bit, not a dramatic change there. In all other aspects the differences are more notable. The first thing I noticed is that my First Watt F4 amplifier does not get as hot. I guess it has to do with the more benign load it is seeing now, 12 ohms vs. 4 ohms. Output power is in the middle teens, I suppose, not the 25w rated for 8 ohms.

Although having less power output, I have the suspicion that bass is more powerful and goes deeper, and the most noticeable aspect is its sound-staging capability; broader and deeper, there is much more apparent "air" and refinement in its presentation. What the hell, it now has a back firing tweeter also. I listen to them in a near-field setup, though my listening room is fairly small, 12'x11'. Dynamics are also enhanced; really lightning fast now. I used to have a pair of Quad 988's and the TM's really remind me of their  sound staging presentation in near field mode, more than with the Turbos. And if you are wondering about a comparison between the Spatials and the Quads, well, the Quads
produced sound with the F4's 25w which was not optimal for these speakers, got away with it because of the small room. The Quad's bass was fuller and there was a little bit more transparency but not that much, I am not missing them.

Obnoxious female sibilance, when present in the recording  is also less offensive, though the presentation is smoother. The wiring for the 3 drivers is the 16 GA. Duelund tinned copper which is also impregnated with some kind of oil. Supposedly this wiring is very musical and natural sounding. It looks like this is so. I think these loudspeakers are really special ones that deserve to be with the best out there even at twice or more for their price. KUDOS to Clayton!

Whitestix

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 113
Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #1 on: 9 Mar 2019, 08:03 pm »
Great review.  I went the same route with my TS to the TM's.  You accurately described exactly what I have experience.  I have a tube preamp and drove them with a First Watt F5 amp, but clearly felt the 25 wpc amp did not have a enough power to flesh out the LF very well.  My McCormack DNA .05 amp drives them splendidly as does by new Don Sachs Kootenai tube amp with 65 wpc.  With the addition the tube amp, the soundstage is holographic with tons of "air" surrounding pinpoint accurate-located musicians.  Pity those that haven't had a chance to hear the speakers.... the best I have ever owned in 45 years in audio.

Wind Chaser

Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #2 on: 10 Mar 2019, 09:29 pm »
Pity those that haven't had a chance to hear the speakers.... the best I have ever owned in 45 years in audio.

2 years in and there still isn't anything else I would rather own.  :D :D

Most speakers are different variations of the same recipe that involves a box.

Nobody else makes (1)very efficient (2)point source (3)open baffles combined with (4)controlled directivity, (5)a very low crossover point and (6)the ability to go low (-3 db @ 32 Hz). The end result of this is uniquely innovative approach is something that can't be confused with anything else. The only logical way forward from here is further up the Spatial line.



sumoking

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 138
Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #3 on: 11 Mar 2019, 02:07 pm »
Couldn’t agree more Windchaser! Just had a pair of
Focal Aria speakers which are so called acclaimed.
Although good for box speakers for the money, in comparison
To the M3 S Turbos, they sounded compressed and lifeless.
There is really nothing like the Spatials.

Boxes? Who needs stinking Box enclosures?
 

oskar

Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #4 on: 11 Mar 2019, 07:02 pm »
People that don't have enough stinking room for OB.
That's my problem anyway.

Percheron

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 8
Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #5 on: 23 Mar 2019, 04:32 pm »
Are the M4 TM’s still being made? They’re not on Spatials website.

Manolo

Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #6 on: 23 Mar 2019, 04:42 pm »
Yes they are! The option is kind of part of the M3 TM section.

Manolo

Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #7 on: 24 Mar 2019, 11:43 am »
Go to the Store option.

undertowogt1

Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #8 on: 25 Mar 2019, 03:03 am »

2 years in and there still isn't anything else I would rather own.  :D :D

Most speakers are different variations of the same recipe that involves a box.

Nobody else makes (1)very efficient (2)point source (3)open baffles combined with (4)controlled directivity, (5)a very low crossover point and (6)the ability to go low (-3 db @ 32 Hz). The end result of this is uniquely innovative approach is something that can't be confused with anything else. The only logical way forward from here is further up the Spatial line.
I agree, I hooked my Large Advents up to show my brother a comparison. When I hit play the music shrunk into the Advent Box. There is no going back to boxes now.

Percheron

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 8
Re: Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master vs. M4 Turbo - a comparison
« Reply #9 on: 25 Mar 2019, 08:57 pm »
Go to the Store option.

Got it! Thank you!