I like your comment on the 6's intimate image and meat on the instruments. I listen near field and value that over large scale drama. Micro dynamics are very important though. In the past, the best systems for meat on the bones have been tube; sounds like the 30.2 does that pretty well though.
Thanks for the info.
~Lary
I listen near field in a small room. But the room is well treated with GIK acoustic panels. The Super 6 Monitors are image kings. Fast and localized, and completely disappear from the room. The soundstage and locations vary based on how the recording was engineered (a good thing -- it means the system is letting the original recording shine through).
The amount of flesh and quality of timbre (how natural instruments / vocals sound) is top notch, especially near field.
30.2 is dead black background. Just like quality Plasma TVs, the blacker the background the better colors (timbre) look. The sound is detailed by not fatiguing. The sound is not like tubes, but not like solid state either. In many ways, considering the cost, IMO the 30.2 is a very good value. Not only does it do well with your handful of audiophile recordings, but you get drawn in to commercial recordings too. In the end, no product is perfect, so it's a matter of personal tastes and what you value most when listening.
Look at some of the old show reviews on RWA's / Omega's sites when RWA and Omega shared a room. They always had a killer combo given the price point. This was before Alnicos which are even better.
I started with Compact Hemps (8" HEMP), now have Super 6s (6" Alnico), and I am 100% sold on Omega's speaker. They are the deal of the century. You will not believe the build quality for the money.
I've never used them in a large room, but given you listen near field, Omega designs will be tough to beat.
My point re. tubes is there are trade offs. You will get warmth, but especially in power amps, bass can be soft / round compared to 30.2 -- which is very tuneful with lots of balls. 30.2 is taunt, but no metallic edge. Nice soundstage IMO. Now that I front the 30.2 with Isabella, which is RWA's tube-based preamp (and I have optional NOS DAC), I get the best of both worlds.
Pick the best you can find and put them side-by-side in your listening room. I did this with a FW F1 and Sig 30 prior to committing to the 30. Another guy on RWA's user forum just went through the same exercise with RWA Isabella and ARC Reference preamp. Search out his thread. He kept questioning how the Isabella could sound better than a preamp costing about twice as much (battery operation is a big factor). In your listening room you will know what's best for you. Return the loser, and rest assured you made a good decision. (Both Omega and RWA have return policies.)
DISCLAIMER: I have owned RWA since the first introduction of Sig 30. AFTER I purchased my RWA gear, I began doing contract work for RWA (rewriting their Web site). But again, I purchased everything including the Isabella long before working for Vinnie. A little over a year ago, I rewrote Omegas Web site. Prior to working with Louis I owned Compact Hemps. While working for Louis I acquired one of the first production pairs of Super 6s. But my name is on this post. If I did not believe what I'm saying, it would not have been written.
