Anything similar to ERA or Aerial Speakers?

[csm_274]

I just auditioned the ERA D5 (bookshelfs) and Aerial Model 6 (floorstanding) speakers; they were very, very impressive. I listed to them alongside some B&W CM1's (close in quality to 705s I believe) and there was no comparison. The B&W sound appeared to be much more "processed" - sorta like the Paradigm Studios I recently auditioned. The ERA and Aerial speakers we much more natural sounding (insert correct audio terminology). NOTE: I've heard the Monitor GS10s, but they sounded a bit too bright for me.

Now for my question...are there other manufacturers that sound similar to the ERA and Aerial speakers? I'm still trying to audition the RBHs (probably the 661 SE/Rs or 1044 SEs). How might the RBHs sound in comparison to the ERAs, Aerials and B&Ws?

Thanks in advance for your input. I'm slowly getting closer to finding "my" speakers! It's just so hard to audition them all, but this website helps narrow down the search.

 

[Tomorrow]

I auditioned several dozens of speakers and ended up with Aerial 7B's. I am thinking about an ERA D5 LCR for trial as my home theater center channel speaker...and perhaps later some Design 5 surrounds if the LCR is an acceptable partner to the 7B's. (An Aerial CC3 will physically not fit in my entertainment setup.)

As hard as I've tried, I have not found a set of RBH's to audition...but that may change this Fall...probably too late for your needs.

The closest I came to the Aerials' presentation (actually wasn't all that close) were Sonus Faber Domus Grand Pianos.

All that said, I'm still VERY interested in hearing the Salk HT3's as my potential ultimate speaker preference (as well as the RBH's). That should be remedied in the Fall GTG, as well.

You might want to give Revels a try, but they might suffer the same forwardness that you heard with the MA Golds.

 

[Davemcc]

None of the speakers I've heard seem to have the same "sound" as my Era D5. Call it timbre, voice or whatever, but I haven't heard a speaker that sounds quite the same, maybe Epos or Castle comes the closest. I've heard this described as the "British Sound" if that helps. I don't know if that's accurate or even real term to use.

 

[csm_274]

Davemcc - I noticed you have the Dynaudio 140s...how would you compare these to the ERAs? I've also considered listening to them (in addition to the RBHs).

 

[Davemcc]

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41379

 

[Tomorrow]

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41379

Dave,

I'm thinking the Dyn's come closer to the MA's than to the Aerial/ERA sound the OP says he prefers. Do you agree (or have you not heard MA's)? Smoothness of one (AA/ERA) vs. clarity (Dyn/MA) of the other.

 

[Davemcc]

I've got a set of Monitor B/FX surrounds but I haven't heard their higher lines of speakers. But there certainly is a difference between the Era and the Dyne's.

 

[csm_274]

bttt. Thanks for any and all feedback.

 

[csm_274]

bttt...worth another shot

 

[csm_274]

Still doing my research...

 

[jamie2112]

This one is also mostly great.

Bye Bye Matts on patrol you toolbag.

 

[just listening]

CSM:
To be honest the closest I've heard to the Era sound is Thiel. I agree with a couple of reviewers who mention how neutral the mids are compared to just about anything else in their price range.

 

[Davemcc]

CSM:
To be honest the closest I've heard to the Era sound is Thiel. I agree with a couple of reviewers who mention how neutral the mids are compared to just about anything else in their price range.

I found the Thiel that I listened to to be quite different from the Era but that may be attributed the difference in various models. I heard the CS2.3 IIRC and found the treble to be very light and detailed, at the risk of giving up my man card, I could almost call them delicate. They had some tight bass but really not a lot of bass. I found that in contrast to the Era's strong mid bass and smooth rich treble.

 

[Tomorrow]

I found the Thiel that I listened to to be quite different from the Era but that may be attributed the difference in various models. I heard the CS2.3 IIRC and found the treble to be very light and detailed, at the risk of giving up my man card, I could almost call them delicate. They had some tight bass but really not a lot of bass. I found that in contrast to the Era's strong mid bass and smooth rich treble.

I too heard the CS2.3 and left quite unimpressed. Good description of those, Dave. The Thiel's may be in the same general family (of non-forward presenting speakers) as Aerial Acoustics and ERA...but they'd be the quite distant cousins that turned out to be ne'er-do-wells.

 

[just listening]

Fascinating how different sonics are attributed to the same speaker. I should clarify my comparison to the Thiels. As I said previously most quality budget monitors emphasize the mids to cover the "one note" bass response. The Era's do not do that, with solid bass to 50hz they offer a "two note" bottom-end. This allows the mid frequency to perform without exaggeration or undo warmth. I will completely agree that the tweeter is terrifically smooth for the price point.

Thiel's as lack exaggeration, but expand that into the bass frequencies. I believe it's that area that causes many to find the Thiel's dry sounding. Add to that an amp that isn't free of graininess and you have the recipe for disappointment.

 

[Tomorrow]

Fascinating how different sonics are attributed to the same speaker.

Perhaps I'm just nitpicking linguistics here, but I think people looking to speaker shop should realize that.....

I suspect that if you, Dave, and I were in the same room, simultaneously evaluating (or better yet, DBX'ing) ERA's vs. Thiels, level matched, running on the same equipment, we would not attribute different sonics to the same speakers. We would, however, use different descriptors in our reviews. And therein lies the difficulty in recommending speaker preferences or even presentations to others. Audio lexicon is pretty loosey-goosey and ill-defined.

 

[Davemcc]

Audio lexicon is pretty loosey-goosey and ill-defined.

I think you are correct. I definitely struggle to define what I hear to try to convey my experience.

 

[csm_274]

I for one appreciate each of your descriptions...oddly, reading multiple, different reviews actually helps me develop my own ear (if that makes any sense).

Thanks again.

 

[Tomorrow]

I for one appreciate each of your descriptions...oddly, reading multiple, different reviews actually helps me develop my own ear (if that makes any sense).

Thanks again.

Another brand that shares ERA/Aerial attributes that is well regarded is ACI. I've not heard their top of the line Sapphires, but I had a phalanx of Protege V's here and they definitely belong to the family and produce quality audio.

ACI seems to be in a down-sizing mode during these last few months of economic blahs, but they're hanging in there. Mike Dzurko is a terrific guy whom I would never hesitate dealing with. Check them out. http://www.audioc.com/

EDIT: My 2-channel rig in my office includes a pair of almost 20 year old ACI LX's. They are so clean in their delivery, I can't imagine any speaker that I would dare replace them with.

 

[just listening]

I'm a big fan of Mike Dzurko and ACI. I've had the pleasure of hearing the latest version of the Emerald's just a few months ago, for a couple of hours. IMHO, the Era D5"s aren't in the same league even though they produce a deeper bass by some 20hz. The mid bass, mids and highs are far richer, more detailed with the Emerald's Since I heard them I've read two reviews and I couldn't agree more.