Changes to plan
Just wanted to reopen an old topic. Went for some auditions and dragged the better half alone too
. After lots of fighting I was almost ready to settle for a pair of bookshelves to save my marriage.
My test CD consist of following:
(Eagles) Hotel California
(AC/DC) Hell Bells
(Red Hot Chilly Pepers) The Adventures of Rain Dance Maggie
(Santana) Europa
(Nirvana) The man who sold the world
(Pink Floyd) Comfortably numb
(Rainbow)The temple of the king
(Metallica)Master of puppets
Martin Logan Sources ($900/pair used) were on top of my list and I expected it to be the best speaker money can buy, so we went to Best Buy
1. ML (theos i think what they had on display):
Eagles Hotel California sounded really nice, I was soooo happy but when i got to rock (Red Hots, Metallica) the sound just started falling apart, highs hurt my ears, bass was just jumping all over the place. I felt like a kid that had his candy taken away.
2. B&W 684 ($1,100/pair at BB) worse sound on Hotel California but reasonably good on the rock music. Red Hots bass just shook the speakers like crazy, kinda sloppy boomy bass. Switched to 685 bookshelves in the middle of a song and in that moment wife sad that I can have the towers and she don't want the bookshelves, thanks to super boxy sound of those bookshelves the fight is won
3. B&W CM9 sounded defiantly better, but 3k/pair is out my league
So with Martin Logan of the list and 684 as a possible fit we went to a local NHT dealer (Edge Home Entertainment in Chicago area, very nice sales guy spent an hour on my noob questions and auditions).
1. Classic 3 made me WOW for a bookshelf connected to a Peachtree Audio Decco2 with 40w per channel, it didnt go deep in base or playd loud but I could see the band on the stage when I closed my eyes. It didnt shake playing Red Hots bass part maybe because it just does not go that low in frequency.
2. Absolute tower sounded better than classic 3 but not by much. Sound was really "pollite" not sure if it's even a term, pretty neutral. No base, but that's why I'm getting the sub, right? Mid base was really nice, but if I could define base as 'boom', 'punch' and 'flap' with punch being the best I heard more of the 'flap' where I wanted a 'punch'.
3. Didn't want to listen to Classic 4 because I thought it's a classic 3 on top of a 10" passive sub, or is it? Now I kinda feel sorry I didn't give those a chance. but 6ohms and 250W requirement just scares me.
All speakers played was without sub so maybe comparison is not really fair.
So far NHT Absolute tower is a winner, but it left me wanting more, maybe just because it looks too small or I dint play it loud enough.
So with my hands untied in WAF department and now budget of $800 - $1200 for a front pair (those will define the rest). I'm debating staying with Absolute Tower ($675/pair) or going for KEF Q700 ($1K/pair, maybe less if I hustle around) or Q900 for $1,100 half used.
having troubles finding a dealer with KEF Q series on display, so will have to rely on research.
So the question is how does Absolute tower compare to q700 and q900. Could I get away without using a sub-woofer if I go with q900?, i like my pants shaking from bass but hate a loose, boomy bass or humming sound coming from speakers (which some people claim KEF does).
hope there is an easy answer like NHT kicks Q series *** or the other way around. or is there a better speaker for a $1,000/pair, can be open boxed...
any input is welcome...
thanks