[Danny Richie]

Another consideration are vertical arrays.  Personnally I don't like stretching the vertical image floor to ceiling, but it gives you lots of driver surface area in typically a narrow profile.

Actually guys you can still get very pin point image placement and no exaggerated heights with a well designed line source.

[jose]

The Odyssey Lorelei has my highest recommendation. For opera, I have not heard a better speaker in the price range you quote. (Thousands of opera and orchestral records and CD's here.) The Symphonic Line RG5, which has the same design, has a better mid-bass driver, but it costs about 10,000 euros.

Don't forget that another thing that classical music requires is lots of amplifier watts. Please do yourself a favor and take a look at the Musical Fidelity "sliding rule"; it computes the number of watts needed for accurate reproduction of transients. (A 110 dB peak - say, in Mahler's 2nd or 3rd - may easily take more than 800 watts. Popular music, in contrast, has very, very little dynamic range.)

The MF sliding rule has circulated recently in British audio magazines, but it can be found online here:
http://www.musicalfidelity.com/products/supercharger/diagnostics.html

Respectfully,
Jose

P.S.: As a classical music lover you may already be aware of this, but Maggies are very colored.

[SET Man]

The MF sliding rule has circulated recently in British audio magazines, but it can be found online here:
http://www.musicalfidelity.com/products/supercharger/diagnostics.html

Respectfully,
Jose

Hey!

    Hmmm... I've seen that chart before.

   My system of which made up of a pair 18 watts SET monobloc and 94dB 6" Single Driver is a super low quality and should probably sound like shit according to that chart! 

Take care,
Buddy

[Daygloworange]

Another consideration are vertical arrays.  Personnally I don't like stretching the vertical image floor to ceiling, but it gives you lots of driver surface area in typically a narrow profile.

Actually guys you can still get very pin point image placement and no exaggerated heights with a well designed line source.

Having spent many hours listening to line arrays, I can attest to the amazing pin-point imaging they are capable of. The ultra low distortion and ultra fast transients of numerous drivers working far from their limits, aids tremendously in detail reproduction, thereby noticeably improving the retrieval of spatial cues in recordings. In line arrays designed to do so, you can get low frequency extension and performance that rivals most subwoofers.

There is also no "exaggeration" of vertical heights, as there is no such thing as vertical height in 2 channel recordings. Period. Stop.

Downside is that money goes for a dozen cheaper drivers versus the very nice drivers you currently have.

If money were a guarantee that the most expensive drivers perform the best then that might very well be true.

However, price is no indicator of driver performance. That is a huge misconception in audio for many people. There are many examples of drivers ridiculously overpriced, and their performance can easily be eclipsed by drivers priced many, many times less than them.

Cheers

[stvnharr]

Don't forget that another thing that classical music requires is lots of amplifier watts. Please do yourself a favor and take a look at the Musical Fidelity "sliding rule"; it computes the number of watts needed for accurate reproduction of transients. (A 110 dB peak - say, in Mahler's 2nd or 3rd - may easily take more than 800 watts.

Not so fast with the sliding rule.
Speakers have measured decibel output over the frequency spectrum.  Sure it's simple multiplication to take the 1 watt reading over a band of frequencies in an orchestral peak and calculate some peak power needed.  But so what.  You are never going to listen at a level of discomfort, even for a peak, and 110 db. is way too loud for comfort, even in an orchestral peak.
I've listened to Mahler's 3rd symphony many times at home with my 60 watt amplifier as loud as I wished with no effort and no distortion from the amplifier.  And in concert, I don't think it ever got anywhere near 110db at the climaxes.  But, I don't have an spl meter, so maybe I'm incorrect a bit, hard to know.

Also, this concurrent thread on Audio Central has another perspective on amplifier power: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=49170.0

[Images]

Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!!  There is a lot of commentary here and all of it has value.  I greatly appreciate the input from all of you.  Despite my bias against another two-way designs, that implementation certainly keeps reappearing in these recommendations.  My intuition tells me that richidoo has a valid point (that happens to coincide with my preconceived notions) when he says “large direct coupled bass driver(s) probably in a three way” likely would float my boat.  He also mentions “ Ceramic coated aluminum, ceramic and magnesium SEAS drivers are awesome also, but takes a talented designer to make them into a great speaker, and usually expensive. Selah Audio is next town over from me, he designs with low distortion drivers like SEAS and Accuton.”  When I built my BESL Series 4.5s, it actually was the equivalent magnesium Seas drivers that I wanted.  The designer incorporated them into his speakers about a year later and discontinued the model I have.  Long story short, metal and ceramic transducers, properly implemented, have always made sense to me.  I guess what I really want is an ARTICULATE  rendering of the orchestra.

Then again, articulation don’t mean doo doo with out proper tonality.  This brings us right into the (two-way) Harbeth camp.  Truth is, I am afraid of the “polite” British sound.  I don’t think it would satisfy me, but boy, do these ugly little monkey coffins have a bag full of positive reviews, probably more positive press than anything else mentioned here.  Admittedly though, that must be partly a function of  the “commercial presence” of this line, as compared to the direct marketing approach taken by Rich Craig (Selah) or Jim Salk.  To get a little ahead of myself, I think the Salk HT3s would make me very happy.  It’s just that at about $5200 with a finish that my wife will appreciate, plus shipping to the mid-pacific, we are a minimum of $1500 over budget.  (I just may have to wait for an extra commission check to come in.)  A “compromise”  would be the Veracity QW, as was mentioned by BrianM.  It has the metal driver I like, the ribbon tweet, and the TL.  I don’t have any problem with Transmission Line designs.  I heard a DIY design from Lynn Olsen (Ariels, I believe)  a dozen or so years ago that used a TL, and was pretty darn impressed.

These same recommendation were repeated by stvnharr, with the additional mention of  the Vienna Acoustics Beethoven and the Waveform.  The Waveform was hard to miss, and I even remember feeling disappointed when it was discontinued.  I suppose they come up used once in a while.  I also suppose that is an infrequent event.  Regarding the Vienna Acoustics, I suspect the Beethoven could be just a little “dainty” for my tastes.

So, along with monkey coffins, we also have a huge unforeseen monkey wrench, namely the products from SP Tech.  Don’t know how I have been unaware of these.  (I will use my remote location and limited auditioning opportunities as my excuse.)  OK, for the sake of full disclosure, as a younger man I worked in the entertainment industry for 19 years.  I have heard and seen enough rock-n-roll and legitimate theatre to fill three life times.  I have also heard a few studio monitors.  I remember one that was butt-ugly and had Audax drivers.  It sounded fantastic.  I think there was one other with Focal units that was also noteworthy.  I have often wondered why audiophiles and  mixing/recording engineers couldn’t get on the same page.  (I am sure there are lots of  “opinions” about this.)   It would now seem that has been accomplished by SP tech. Of course, what I like is the Timepiece 3.0 at about $5500/pr, plus shipping.  The design and credentials, plus the buzz, surrounding these products is pretty impressive.  If I were to go with a two-way, these appear to be the most appealing choice.  Then again, the Harbeths are about half the price.  I could “settle” for the Timepiece Mini at under $3K, but I suspect they would lack sufficient chutzpah.  BrianM, and other SP Tech proponents, you may differ with that, and I would  welcome the correction.

I am not considering the  Lorelei because it uses only one of the same two drivers I currently have in my BESLs.  Yes, the crossover and sensitivity may be better, but still,  I probably have a sort of  once-bitten-twice-shy mentality.  Actually, the BESLs are 4ohms and 86 dB sensitive.  I have to play them at rather loud levels to really get the music out of them.  So, I will amend my shopping list by saying I not only want ARTICULATION, but I want excellent LOW LEVEL musical reproduction as well. 

Lastly, so much has been said about the Acoustic Zen Adagios that I don’t know where to begin, so I won’t.  Would be nice to find a pair to audition, however.

At this moment I would have to say the horse race looks like this:
1.   Salk Veracity HT3
2.   Salk Veracity QW
3.   SP Tech Timepiece Mini
4.   Harbeth Compact 7ES-3's
5.   Selah products (yet to be researched)
6.   Acoustic Zen Adagios
7.   VMPS RM30s (surprisingly few fans posting in this thread)

OK, that is more than enough from me.  Any further comments are both welcome and invited. 

Oh, not to have the last word, but here’s a word about dB playback levels.  During those 19 years I mentioned, I frequently walked in front of a lot of amp lines and PA stacks.  Just in front of the stacks the levels required to fill an auditorium were usually between 112-120dB.  More than that was a public health hazard.  To put things in perspective, the stun grenades used by the British Special Air Service output between 170-180 dB.

[lonewolfny42]

At this moment I would have to say the horse race looks like this:
1.   Salk Veracity HT3
2.   Salk Veracity QW
3.   SP Tech Timepiece Mini
4.   Harbeth Compact 7ES-3's
5.   Selah products (yet to be researched)
6.   Acoustic Zen Adagios
7.   VMPS RM30s (surprisingly few fans posting in this thread)

Any further comments are both welcome and invited.

Looks like a good list...

[BrianM]

I could “settle” for the Timepiece Mini at under $3K, but I suspect they would lack sufficient chutzpah.  BrianM, and other SP Tech proponents, you may differ with that, and I would  welcome the correction.

Well, I'm not an SP Tech proponent, was just passing along the buzz, so to speak.  Reportedly the Minis don't lack chutzpah, but that's subjective and no doubt dependent on upstream components and room size.

I *think* you're likely right that the ScanSpeak driver in the Lorelei's would not provide the same level of articulation as the SEAS magnesium driver.  Anyway that's the reason Dave Ellis chose the Seas over the 8545 when designing his 1801 speaker.

Anyways, it doesn't look like you could go far wrong with that list!  If you can save up for the HT3s, and this is a long term purchase, well, you may as well do that and be happy, no?  Good luck...

[woodsyi]

7.   VMPS RM30s (surprisingly few fans posting in this thread)

I have my old RM40s actively bi-amped (discounting the subs) with plenty juice -- 1000W on the woofers and 125W on the ribbons.  I may have to batten down my Scotch bottles, but I never lack for power on dynamic swings.   There is plenty finesse too.  I think they are very good for symphonic orchestra but I know they are right for my Operas. 

[BrianM]

I have often wondered why audiophiles and  mixing/recording engineers couldn’t get on the same page.

Hear hear.

(I am sure there are lots of  “opinions” about this.)   It would now seem that has been accomplished by SP tech.

And since Jim Salk had a long career as a studio engineer, it would certainly apply to his approach, too.  And would be interesting to hear about some direct comparisons between his designs and Bob Smith's.  I think either would likely be well-suited for the avid classical listener, although the thing that keeps coming up with regard to Bob's speakers is how ballsy-dynamic they are.  I don't know if that's supposed to be a rocker's thang or what, but it's certainly not to discount the realism people say they are experiencing.

[Double Ugly]

I have often wondered why audiophiles and  mixing/recording engineers couldn’t get on the same page.  (I am sure there are lots of  “opinions” about this.)   It would now seem that has been accomplished by SP tech.

Correct.

Of course, what I like is the Timepiece 3.0 at about $5500/pr, plus shipping.  The design and credentials, plus the buzz, surrounding these products is pretty impressive.  If I were to go with a two-way, these appear to be the most appealing choice.  Then again, the Harbeths are about half the price.  I could “settle” for the Timepiece Mini at under $3K, but I suspect they would lack sufficient chutzpah.  BrianM, and other SP Tech proponents, you may differ with that, and I would  welcome the correction.

I own the Timepiece 3.0s predecessor (both of 'em, actually ), and I'm quite sure the Timepiece 3.0 would serve your needs.

That said, after speaking with Bob Smith yesterday, I think you may be mistaken on the Timepiece Mini's ability to provide "chutzpah."  Further, should you decide you want even more at some point, the addition of Bob's proprietary T-line-based Infra-Wave subwoofer would provide substantial energy well into the middle teens, and offer the best, most accurate and articulate bass I and several others have ever heard (same as that found in the Revelations).

Oh, not to have the last word, but here’s a word about dB playback levels.  During those 19 years I mentioned, I frequently walked in front of a lot of amp lines and PA stacks.  Just in front of the stacks the levels required to fill an auditorium were usually between 112-120dB.  More than that was a public health hazard.  To put things in perspective, the stun grenades used by the British Special Air Service output between 170-180 dB.

Wow... you *definitely* need to consider SP Tech speakers!  After perusing your post again in its entirety, I'm not sure I've ever seen a list of 'wants' that more clearly describes the attributes SP Technology speakers offer in spades.  At your desired price point, I strongly encourage you to consider the Timepiece Minis, and have plenty left over for the addition of the Infra-Wave if you desire scary-accurate reproduction of the deepest organ notes.

Oh... and in case it isn't patently obvious by now, *I* am the SP Tech proponent you referenced earlier. 

[Wally King]

Well, I don't live on a Pacific island, but I do love orchestral music (and small chamber groups, too) , and owned Maggie 1.6s for years before replacing them with the Salk HT-3s. Buying the Salks has been, by far, the best hi fi purchase I've ever made.

Compared to the Maggies, the Salks are smoother, more detailed, have a wider and deeper soundstage and a much larger sweet spot. Music has reproduced by the Salks has greater body than did the Maggies, but is never ponderous or slow. And, there is simply no comparison in the bass reproduction. The Salks are powerful and go deep, but only when the low frequency information is in the recording.

The Salks make me want to listen to music.

And yes, the Salks are beautifully made, though a couple of friends have noted their coffin-like shape, at least when viewed from the rear.

Re. WAF issue: while the Salks may not be as tall as the Maggies, the cabinets are deep, so the Salks' footprint is not small.  Plus, they are hefty, so once the perfect spot is found for them, you won't want to be moving them around. On the other hand, with the HT3s, there will be no need for a subwoofer occupying additional floor space.

My advice: save up a little more money and spring for the HT3s.  You won't look back.

[BrianM]

...It is by now clear that you need to lay aside around $11,000 so as to buy both the HT3s and the SP Tech Timepiece 3.0s, compare them, and get back to everybody.  Good luck.

(Both are speakers I have yet to hear anything negative about, which says a lot.  The Timepieces are standmounts but are large and play very low -- with an extraordinarily low crossover to the tweeter -- so it should be a pretty fair match-up, price & performance-wise, i.e. not completely an apples-oranges comparison, in spite of the 2-way vs. 3-way.)

[PMAT]

I still think the VMPS RM-30's are the way to go. Do look, however, at the current RM-40 special that Brian has going for $2995. Seems like alot more speaker than any on your list for the money. Big speaker though. The 30's and 40's will not congest when you put the current to them. It's amazing how much better classical sounds when the bottom end is tight and dynamic. Polite speakers just sound anemic with classical. Also' being able to adjust the mids and tweets to your individual taste is a huge deal to me. Again, they are flat out beautiful.

[BrianM]

I still think the VMPS RM-30's are the way to go. Do look, however, at the current RM-40 special that Brian has going for $2995. Seems like alot more speaker than any on your list for the money. Big speaker though. The 30's and 40's will not congest when you put the current to them. It's amazing how much better classical sounds when the bottom end is tight and dynamic. Polite speakers just sound anemic with classical. Also' being able to adjust the mids and tweets to your individual taste is a huge deal to me. Again, they are flat out beautiful.

Grist for the mill:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=17129.0

[stvnharr]

Images,
That's a nice list you have thus far.
My personal listening experiences have found that I tend to prefer speakers with hard cones, such as the Seas Mags and Accutons, over softer coned speakers, but not necessarily exclusively.
The HT3's will do you nicely.  But there are options within your preferred price range from Selah Audio, the Galena and the RC5.  I mentioned the VA Beethoven as it's neutral in coloration and in your price range, and inspite of the 5 inch drivers, does put out a lot of sound.  The VA Strauss and Mahlers are more expensive, and use the SS 8545 driver, which colors the sound of the violin.
The few designs with Accuton drivers tend to be a bit pricey, unless you can go diy.  And if you've been pleased with your BESL's, Phil's new design certainly deserve a look.
It always helps to be able to have a listen before buying if possible, but that's often not possible.
You'll do well with whatever way you go here.

Steve

[Images]

...It is by now clear that you need to lay aside around $11,000 so as to buy both the HT3s and the SP Tech Timepiece 3.0s, compare them, and get back to everybody.  Good luck.

Yup, BrianM, I think you are quite correct!!  I dump my pocket change into a glass bottle on my dresser every night.  I'll empty that out and likely have enough for both.  I'll be sure to let you know how they compare.

All kidding aside, these two offerings seem, at least to me, to be the contenders. 

[Double Ugly]

I still think the VMPS RM-30's are the way to go. Do look, however, at the current RM-40 special that Brian has going for $2995. Seems like alot more speaker than any on your list for the money.

How many of the speakers on Images' list have you heard?

I've heard most of them, and have spent a fair amount of time with VMPS RM-30s, RM-40s, the RM/X and the V60.  Suffice it to say I don't agree with your assertion.

[JLM]

Not from AC, but as I reread your wants, a different/cheaper option is Lowthers (extended range drivers) in mass loaded transmission lines from Bob Brines (the LT-2000):

http://www.geocities.com/rbrines1/

Lowthers are extremely detailed and efficient.  They've been around for over 70 years with a variety of drivers to choose from and tons of web based information about them.  Bob's site gets into the advantages of MLTL and single driver designs.  Bob does good work and was a pleasure to deal with.  Each speaker is built one at a time, so appearance/veneering is purely up to the customer.

BTW, I comissioned the first FTA-2000.

[Images]

Not from AC, but as I reread your wants, a different/cheaper option is Lowthers (extended range drivers) in mass loaded transmission lines from Bob Brines (the LT-2000):
Lowthers are extremely detailed and efficient.  They've been around for over 70 years with a variety of drivers to choose from and tons of web based information about them. 

Now this will sound like a rather glib response, and for that I apologize.  To my ears Lowthers sound like indeed, they have been around for 70 years.  In other words, they are "yestertech."  They seem a 1930s design that speaker builders keep trying to finesse into a current and competitive product.  Sorry.  Of the designs I've heard they always have seemed tonally inaccurate as well.  When I look at a Seas mag. driver and a Lowther paper cone, I confess to my eyes there is a huge disparity, and performance, response curves, etc. cause me to look on the Seas with much greater favor.

My apologies to all the Lowther advocates out there.  Certainly there are many and they are highly qualified audiophiles with excellent ears.  The Lowthers just aren't my cup of tea.  Maybe this will help.  I drive a pickup truck.  I could drive a much more expensive "refined" automobile.  I choose not to because I value durability and dependability over appearance or stylish trends.  That truck just keeps going and going and going.  I think of the Lowther cones to be more like an older british sports car.  They are light weight and fast, but you better never have a heavy load you need to carry.  I think of orchestral reproduction as a "heavy load."

Maybe I could have said this better, but I have to get to work.  I appreciate your suggestion, but  this speaker flavor doesn't appeal to my appetite, at least not in the designs in which I have heard them.